Huge Waste Of Taxpayer Dollars no. 842,365
Posted April 15th, 2008 by Da King

When I heard the Senate passed S.2636, The Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008, by a vote of 84-12, I immediately wanted to know who the 12 Senators were who voted against it. Those might be 12 Senators I could support. Those might be 12 Senators interested in doing the right thing, as opposed to the pandering election year thing that actually makes the problem worse. Those 12 Senators might actually be, gasp, fiscally responsible, a notion that almost seems quaint in these days of mutually assured fiscal destruction (spend, spend, spend, borrow, borrow, borrow, tax, tax, tax, prop up the economic house of cards for another day, the future be damned, this Titanic is a really nice ship, what's that sticking out of the water up ahead ? Aw, who cares, I'm too fat and lazy to bother turning the wheel, I'm sure it will all be fine, ooh, did we hit something ?).
It came as no shock to me that all 12 of the Senators who voted 'Nay' on S.2636 were Republicans. Every single Democrat Senator voted for the taxpayer funded boondoggle, except for Obama and Hillary, who didn't vote. Here are the S.2636 'Nay' voters. Kudos to them:
Barrasso (R-WY) Bunning (R-KY) Coburn (R-OK) Corker (R-TN) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Enzi (R-WY) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Inhofe (R-OK) Kyl (R-AZ) Warner (R-VA)
It also came as no shock to me that the fiscally conservative position of these 12 Republicans is the minority position within their own party, a party that gives lip service to fiscal conservatism, but in reality has morphed into something else entirely, especially during these last 7 years (FYI - Senator John McCain supports S.2636, even though he didn't cast a vote. He has given it verbal support, contradicting statements he made against an unwise mortgage bailout only a couple weeks earlier). This bodes very poorly for our future. When Republicans aren't interested in fiscal responsibility, we're in big trouble, because the big spending socialist Democrat foxes sure aren't going to guard the fiscal hen house.
One of the 12 'Nay' voters on S.2636 was Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY). Here are a few of his comments on the Foreclosure bill:
“This is an unusually bad bill, and I have opposed it from the start. The course it has followed almost guarantees that it will be filled with the worst kind of gimmickry. And it is. The Senate may be the world’s greatest deliberative body, but this bill is anything but the product of deliberation. It is a jumble of disjointed ideas, unlikely to solve the crisis at hand, and it’s unpopular.
“It turns out that the American people don’t like the idea of bailing out banks and their neighbors who gambled on home prices. The voters understand what is going on in Washington, better than we do.
“Another provision that deserves far more scrutiny is the $4 billion in community development block grants that will be allocated to state and local governments to buy foreclosed properties. To begin with, this program is very poorly managed. The Wall Street Journal called it among the worst-run programs in Washington, and there is a lot of competition for that title…
Let’s not have any illusions. This extraordinarily unwise grant of taxpayer money is really just a bailout for banks in disguise. It goes to states, but the ultimate beneficiaries will be banks that made risky loans. Instead of selling foreclosed properties on the open market, these banks will have the luxury of selling to local officials with whom they may already have a relationship. These officials will be buying properties not with their own funds, but with ‘O.P.M.’ O.P.M. stands for ‘other people’s money.’ And, in this case, the O.P.M. comes from you and me, the American taxpayer, and millions of unborn Americans that we are saddling with even more debt.
Another provision that could benefit from more thoughtful deliberation is the $100 million of spending on counseling. … We also don’t know all that much about the non-profit groups that will get the money. Are some of these groups funded mostly by credit card companies? If so, they will have a clear conflict of interest. Maybe they will actually advise people to abandon their homes to foreclosure in order to pay credit card debt. That would make the foreclosure situation worse, not better.”
But Mr. Bunning, if Congress actually considered the effects of the bill before they voted on it, they might not get it passed in time to pat themselves on the back for the fall elections. What's important is that Congress DID something, even if it's the wrong thing. That's how they get votes. That's how demagoguery works.
The mortgage crisis can only be resolved by a revaluation of housing prices, which is what this temporary housing problem would have brought about had it been left to run it's course. It is counterproductive in the long run for the government to move in and try to keep property values artificially inflated. Free market capitalism doesn't mean that the market will go up, up, up forever. Sometimes it needs to go down too. Pushing huge new costs onto the taxpayers is NOT the answer here.
As for John McCain, Senator Obama has been going around saying it took McCain three tries to get the correct housing crisis response. I say McCain had it right the first two times, and abandoned the right thing the third time, when he caved and started pandering like the rest. The government (actually the taxpayers) shouldn't be in business of bailing out banks and homeowners who made unwise economic decisions. All this bill accomplishes is to move the Titanic a little closer to the iceberg.



April 15th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Looks like you got some spam.
I noticed that none of the Republicans in tough races this yr voted yes. that is a shame.
April 15th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
The credit card companies really are benefiting here.
Yeah, I don't see this bill fixing the economy and it's hard to argue it's worth the price tag, especially when considering the cumulative effect of each bill that gets passed without any money in the bank to pay for it.
However, just one small thing: the problem isn't just over-valuing of homes. We also collectively thought we were a lot richer than we are (and, as a renter, I think the 'American Dream' of owning a home got just a tad bit overrated there for a sec). It's a credit crunch, not just a housing bubble- though the two are conflated. I presume that's why this thing isn't just a situation where everyone's home is suddenly worth less money. I wouldn't think that'd be such a big deal. The bigger problem is all those mortgages that can't get paid off- which is obviously bad for everyone involved.
April 16th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
King,
Once again I have the the correct view of the issue.
Years ago I was at a party at a Fed. Judges house filled with the Govt. crowd. I asked one of the bureacrats a question and he told me in all seriousness that it is Washington's job to decide how to spend our money(meaning the uneducated hicks) in a manner that is best for us. Since I couldnt embaress my in-laws I told him it was good to know that he had my best interest at heart. I could tell you about my converstaion with a couple that fatted themselves at the UN trough but that is for another time.
April 16th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Interesting post, king. Ben is right, though, and it just goes to show the problems with our congressman and senators worrying more about votes than about this problem.
Nice name dropping, AC, and also nice job of putting words into that judge's mouth. I'm sure all the guilty parties were godless dems, no?
By the way king, and not that you care, but you said:
The mortgage crisis can only be resolved by a revaluation of housing prices, which is what this temporary housing problem would have brought about had it been left to run it's course. It is counterproductive in the long run for the government to move in and try to keep property values artificially inflated.
You are absolutely correct. This is another example (like the steroids hearings???) where the industry should have been left alone and allowed to suffer the consequences created when so many people were given mortgages they never should have gotten. Congress should have passed. Pretty overwhelming vote for it, unfortunately (p.s. sorry I will try to disagree with your next post :-)).
April 16th, 2008 at 4:37 pm
da truth
1. I wasnt name dropping I was a young Ohio hick then now just an old one
2. it wasnt the judge
3. it is an exact quote–something I will always remember
4. didnt do a survey to find out if the rest were godless Dems.
I know the father in-law was a Rep not sure if he was godless
5. Fiscal responsibiltiy only gets in the way of staying in office.
6. It is to bad the bubble couldnt have continued forever. Everbody was winning in the false economy. The banks , the public and the gov, which enjoyed higher revunes. Now when a decision is to be made it comes down to make them happy or do the right thing. It just isnt fair they should have to be put in that position.
April 17th, 2008 at 9:02 am
AC, you're right, it isn't fair, but such is the system we have where politicians have to troll for votes and the general public is more concerned with who to vote off the island or Britney's problems than they are with what's going on in their own neighborhood.
We can all say what we like, and even the posters on here that I disagree with are usually well versed in the points they are making, but we all know elections are popularity contests. And in these contests, the political leanings of each candidate play only a minor role in appealing to the majority of Americans. Which is why, as a D, despite being constantly name called and bashe on this blog, I still read it. At least it's discourse.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:33 am
da truth,
Don't worry, you WILL disagree with my next post.
But I'm glad we agree on this one. It shows that I'm all about hope and change and bringing people together (and so are you)
And you musn't worry about being called names, you godless dem (just kidding). If I stressed about that stuff, I wouldn't be able to write a word. I've been called every name in the book, and I'm proud of it. At least when they hate me, I know they're listening.
April 17th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Ben K,
You wouldn't believe how much spam comes to this blog.
And I'm not just talking about The Reverend's posts either (rimshot). I got a million of 'em, ladies and germs.
But seriously, it does. Usually, the spam software catches them. I don't know how that one got thru.