Daily Archives: Oct. 3, 2008

House wise to approve bailout

The House wisely approved the financial market rescue plan. Though no one wanted to do this and there were many concerns about the bailout plan, the country and the world are facing a credit crisis that required immediate action. This isn’t about bailing out Wall Street fat cats; it’s about rescuing a credit system that is essential to Main Street business and ultimately all Americans. Once again, Rep. Dennis Moore, D-Lenexa, was the only member of the Kansas delegation to vote for the bill, this time putting Reps. Todd Tiahrt, Jerry Moran and Nancy Boyda on the losing side.

Palin charmed; Biden won on content

Two things stood out immediately about the vice presidential candidates’ strategies for their lone debate Thursday night: Joe Biden had decided to debate not his opponent but rather the top of the GOP ticket, his old friend John McCain. And Sarah Palin had decided that if she didn’t like a question, she’d ignore it and answer a question that hadn’t been asked, our editorial today argues. Palin did well by outperforming the low expectations set by her incoherent interviews over the past few weeks. That appealing personality so on display at the GOP convention was back, too, as the self-described “Main Streeter” punctuated her praise for McCain and her populist talking points with folksy phrases like “bless their hearts” and “darn right.”
But Biden won on content and debate points. A survey of debate viewers by CNN/Opinion Research gave Biden a 51 to 36 percent win, and a CBS poll had him 46 to 21 percent over Palin.

Kansans in Congress should be part of solving crisis

Five of the six members of the Kansas delegation on Capitol Hill have voted against the $700 billion financial bailout, doing what’s popular with constituents short term rather than what’s necessarily best for the U.S. economy and Kansas businesses. The House, which set off the largest single-day stock sell-off in history Monday with its failed vote, now is expected to consider the Senate-passed version of the bailout, even more expensive because of tax credits and other goodies. Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, has said he might support the revised bailout “if it has good enough reforms in it that will change the marketplace.” Changing the marketplace sounds like a worthy goal – but for another day and bill. Tiahrt and other Kansans in the House would do well to remember that they are casting votes in the real world, where credit is fast freezing up and jobs, savings and investments are at unprecedented risk.

Open thread 10/3

Pro-con: Is bankruptcy better option than bailout?

The obvious alternative to a bailout is letting troubled financial institutions declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy means that shareholders typically get wiped out and the creditors own the company. Bankruptcy does not mean the company disappears; it is just owned by someone new. Bankruptcy punishes those who took excessive risks while preserving those aspects of businesses that remain profitable. In contrast, a bailout transfers enormous wealth from taxpayers to those who knowingly engaged in risky subprime lending. Thus, the bailout encourages companies to take large, imprudent risks and count on getting bailed out by government. Talk of Armageddon is scaremongering. – Jeffrey A. Miron, senior lecturer in economics at Harvard University

The crisis is now so pronounced that doing nothing is not really a viable option. And what infuriates me to no end is the refusal by some members of Congress and taxpayers to recognize that the consequences of doing nothing will mean more economic hardship for all Americans. There are a lot of companies that have either already collapsed or are nearing the precipice of failure as a result of the credit crunch . . . and many of them are located far from lower Manhattan. That means many jobs are on the line and they aren’t just the jobs of traders. Fears about more bank collapses have also led to chaos in the credit markets as banks are afraid to lend to each other, which makes them less willing to extend credit to businesses. That, eventually, will be felt by consumers. – Paul R. La Monica, CNNMoney.com editor at large

It could be Obama-Palin or McCain-Biden

Seeing the closeness of the polls, Washburn University professor Bob Beatty wonders if the general election won’t bring about a 270-270 tie in electoral votes for Barack Obama and John McCain. If that happened, Beatty writes in the Topeka Capital-Journal, the House would select the president, with each state’s delegation casting one vote, and the Senate would select the vice president, with each senator casting one vote: “So, yes, it’s possible that on Jan. 20, 2009, the chief justice of the Supreme Court could be swearing in President Barack Obama and Vice President Sarah Palin. Wouldn’t that be something?”