SITE MAP  |  MOBILE  |  EMAILS  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  ARCHIVES  |  CONTACT US  |  ADVERTISE  |  PROMOTIONS  |  SUBMIT EVENTS  |  FEEDBACK  |  PLACE AN AD  |  RSS FEEDS
Home » News » Local/Regional News » Washington: Area lawmakers ...
Saturday, Oct. 4, 2008

Washington: Area lawmakers split on bailout

Included in this article:      4 Comments     Audio     
TimesFreePress Audio
Nathan Deal
Zach Wamp

WASHINGTON — In the end, after a week of talking to pension managers, bankers and anxious constituents, Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., concluded that he had to reluctantly vote in favor of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout that passed Friday afternoon.

“This is a loan, not a bailout and not a grant,” Rep. Wamp said. “Warren Buffett said we should actually make money on this, so the question is, ‘Should we stand behind our economy or should we take the risk of not standing behind it?’ The whole world is watching and waiting.”

By being among the 273 House members voting “yes” on the measure, Rep. Wamp switched his vote from Monday, when the bill was narrowly defeated, 228-205.

He was the only Tennessee member to change his vote and said that defeating the bill would cause more harm to the already weakened economy.

“The correct approach was to vote ‘no’ Monday, send a loud message to the American people that we’re listening (and) send a loud message to Wall Street that we’re not going to take it and bail them out,” he said. “The politically tough vote is to vote ‘yes’ (Friday) because it’s so unpopular, but sometimes you have to do the right thing and not worry about the politics.”

Rep. Nathan Deal, R-Ga., however, remained unconvinced, saying he preferred a more free market-based approach, and was among the 161 House members voting “no.”

He said he is concerned whether the debt to be purchased by the federal government will be priced advantageously for taxpayers in order to limit their liability.

“I’m not convinced that there wasn’t a better way,” he said. “I keep referring back to the fact that, in the 1980s, when we had the savings and loan crisis, it was done in a much more free-market approach, and it ended up costing the taxpayers less than this one potentially will cost us.”

Rep. Lincoln Davis, D-Tenn., also voted “no” but declined to comment beyond the statement he issued after Monday’s vote, when he said he found the bailout “disconcerting.”

Rep. Davis was the lone Democrat in the Tennessee delegation to vote against the package Friday, and Rep. Wamp was the lone Republican to vote for it.

Reps. John Duncan, R-Tenn., and Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., also voted against the bill.

The bill would allow the federal government to purchase up to $700 billion in impaired debt from tottering financial firms to steady the credit markets.

The Senate passed the bill Wednesday, 74-25.

Chattanooga Area Chamber of Commerce members were ambivalent over the bill and its impact of the economic crisis, according to a survey the chamber conducted this week.

Sixty-one percent of the 360 Chamber members who participated in the survey said they supported the bailout bill, with 39 percent opposed.

Almost three-fourths, 71 percent, said the economic crisis has not impacted their company’s ability to obtain loans or lines of credit or refinance existing debt.

Hayes Ledford, the Chamber’s vice president of public affairs, said the results were given to Chattanooga-area lawmakers before Friday’s vote, but the Chamber has not taken a position on the bill.

“This is one of those times where we have to trust our luck to our representatives,” Mr. Ledford said. “It’s obvious that people’s opinions on this are very mixed.”

4 Comments

"The bill would allow the federal government to purchase up to $700 billion in impaired debt from tottering financial firms to steady the credit markets."

"Almost three-fourths, 71 percent, [of the Chattanooga Chamber of Commerce] said the economic crisis has not impacted their company’s ability to obtain loans or lines of credit or refinance existing debt.

And so it goes. Our CoC says the bill was unnecessary for their company's to do business as usual.

But the Wall Street millionaire bankers are again free to make more poorly accessed, sub-prime loans to those unable to repay them, secure in the knowledge that we, the taxpayers, will be forced to bail them out over and over again for the foreseeable future.

We can kiss goodbye to any overhaul of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc due to lack of funds.

Sigh.

Username: rolando | On: October 4, 2008 at 3:58 a.m.
Did you find this comment to be useful? Yes | No
0 of 0 people found this comment useful.

Uh-h-h...three comments? What happened to the second and third? Censorship or erroneous entires??

Username: rolando | On: October 5, 2008 at 5:47 p.m.
Did you find this comment to be useful? Yes | No
0 of 0 people found this comment useful.

Post a comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

Posted comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. To view complete guidelines for submitting content, comments and feedback, click here.

Only In Tomorrow's TimesFreePress
Minimum drinking age gets wide support, even among teens
Featured Business

© Copyright, permissions and privacy policy Copyright ©2008, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.