U.S. Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., voted for H.R. 1424—the so-called bailout package, or the “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act”—while U.S. Rep. Pete Visclosky, D-1st, once again voted against it on Friday.

Bayh’s statement, in part, released on Wednesday:

“People are angry, and they have a right to be. I am too. We shouldn’t be in this mess, but we are. The question is: What are we going to do?

“Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, our nation’s top economic expert, believes that if swift action is not taken to stabilize our financial system, American’s will face a deep and protracted recession, and millions will lose their jobs, life savings, and businesses. These aren’t just faceless statistics or big shots on Wall Street. Those who will pay the price for inaction are the worker at the canceled construction project, the small business owner who can no longer make payroll, the student who will not be able to attend college because she can’t get a loan, the senior citizen who can no longer make ends meet because her nest egg has been devastated. All will suffer if we do not act. . . .

“(T)he current plan is far better than the original proposal. Executives who have brought their companies to the brink of ruin and now seek public help will be prevented from profiting. There will be no golden parachutes or outrageous executive pay packages. There will be independent oversight to prevent conflicts of interest and outright corruption. The taxpayer will be protected by receiving an ownership interest in any company that receives government assistance. If after five years the government has lost money, the financial industry will be required to pay it back.

“This package has been improved because tax cuts are included to help middle class families. More than 900,000 Hoosier homeowners will be eligible for a property tax cut. Tens of thousands of students will receive a $4,000 college credit. Thousands of middle class Hoosier families will not see their taxes rise due to the Alternative Minimum Tax. . . .

“There are many culpable parties, and all must be held to account. Houses were appraised at above market rates to make ill-advised loans possible. Loans were given to individuals with no verification about their ability to repay. These bad loans were packaged into securities and sold to financial institutions, undermining their financial strength. Rating agencies gave their blessing, saying that these junk securities were ‘AAA’ rated. Financial firms, seeking massive profits, became highly leveraged, greatly exacerbating the harm of any potential mistake. . . . All these items and countless others contributed to the current mess. All must be corrected.

“The current proposal is no panacea. More difficult decisions lie ahead. But it is better than doing nothing, and that is the alternative. This is a distasteful but necessary step to protect millions of innocent people from the malfeasance of a few.”

Visclosky

Visclosky’s statement, released on Friday:

“Earlier this week, I spelled out my opposition to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, better known as the Wall Street bailout.

“To reiterate some of the points I made then, I do not believe it is the responsibility of Congress to bail out financial firms experiencing loss because of a lack of deregulation, a lack of oversight, the greed of financial executives involved who often make sums in excess of 250 times the income of the average American worker, and bad judgment.

“This crisis is a decade in the making. It is the result of cynical exploitation within an unregulated industry, and it should be addressed conscientiously and equitably. We should have considered all the viable alternatives to the bailout and deliberated the merits of each course of action in order to strengthen the banks’ balance sheets.

“At the heart of today’s bill was the same flawed bailout plan I voted against on Monday. I support some of the additions like raising FDIC insurance coverage to $250,000, disaster assistance benefits, and mental health parity. I would also support the energy and business tax extenders and alternative minimum tax relief if they were paid for. However, they are not, and we will have to borrow $150.5 billion over the next 10 years to support them. If they’re worth doing, they’re worth paying for now.

“From my perspective, today’s bill was not improved, and I could not vote for it.”

Posted 10/6/2008