Posted on 10/01/2008 1:18:40 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
White House Won’t Support House GOP’s Alternative Financial Plan Wednesday, October 01, 2008 By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer
White House (CNSNews.com) - With Senate passage of a revised financial bailout in sight, the White House rejected considering a more free market alternative proposed by House Republicans.
The alternative plan, announced Tuesday by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), chairman of the Republican Study Committee (RSC), replaces the $700 billion bailout package aimed at easing the credit crisis with a plan to federally insure mortgages up to 100 percent.
The current plan, supported by President Bush, would allow the Treasury Department to purchase the troubled mortgages and mortgage-backed securities, which are at the heart of the ongoing credit crisis.
Nonetheless, insurance is part of the revised proposal being considered by the Senate Wednesday, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said.
"It is mandated in the bill that if the Treasury puts in place the asset purchase, it must also put in place a guarantee plan," Fratto told CNSNews.com after the White House press briefing Wednesday.
“I know the RSC wants only the insurance option and not the purchase option. We disagree with that and believe that the purchase program needs to be part of the solution here,” Fratto said.
In addition to federally insured mortgages, the Republican Study Committee plan also includes tax cuts for businesses to promote investment and the sale of unwanted assets. There also are provisions in the plan for greater accountability of Government Sponsored Enterprises, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Can McCain support something loaded with pork and maintain any credibility at all?
Presumably this is what Bush chiefly opposes. But without making Fanny and Freddie and the rest accountable, what on earth good will this bailout do? They'll just run out and make more bad loans to Democrat voters, and we'll have it to do all over again.
I saw that.
It's a shame McCain won't take a stand with them.
I am not sure of that. you need to divide the bailout by only the taxpayers who will pay the bill. I bet it its closer to $7000/per taxpayer and it will depend upon tax policy in the next ten years.
The more I read and hear about this, the more convinced I become that this whole financial crisis was a set-up. Obama’s rich friends invest in a down stock market and get rich in the process, the federal government owns most of the private property in this country, and Obama gets elected.
Win-Win for the socialist communists behind the ONe.
Not to oversate the obvious but isn’t insurance on mortgage assets, i.e. credit default swaps, what helped get us to where we are now?
Would the Gov’t be required to post collateral against losses on the underlying mortgages, would this add to the national debt or simply be held off-balance-sheet, an action by the way that would land a CFO in prision.
Bush. (spit)
It sure seems that way. I don't understand why Bush isn't open to alternatives. I feel like I've been had. I always stood up for him every step of the way and I'm beginning to feel sorry that I did, particularly in his second term.
The minute GW voices any support for anything, it’s dead!
It will all be over Nov 5. It is a phoney crisis. It is working for the Dems, however.
Those on FR that have been defending Bush for past year are like Hitler’s SS in the bunker raving about Hitler being betrayed just before ending it.
Well said. A man who had the opportunity to do so much is reduced to limping off into night with almost zero respect. There were three shining moments in his Presidency: WOT, tax reductions and Supreme Court picks.
They were all in his first term. After that there were no more large moments. To be sure, he prevailed on some issues: Funding WOT, retaining tax breaks, Patriot Act and a few others. But there were no more large moments.
You know, i was a supporter of clinton, Algore over Bush, but 911 changed everything for me....I was strongly in favor of Bush’s second term, but in that second term he has been what everyone else has been saying: He is a sitting dud, just terrible....not as bad as Jummy but terrible....
Start tossing around the Hitler analogy and you’ve lost the debate.
Why is it so important to include the bail out of foreign investors that Bush will veto a bill that doesn’t have it? Consider the possibility that Europe/Asia are blackmailing us to bail out their investors.
This is the final straw for me.
NO.
He promised to cut pork...
He promised to name, names...
He has an opportunity to walk the walk right now in front of him.
Mr. President, it is clear where you are coming from, and where you want the country to go - belly up to the New World Order. I know what a Republican is, Sir. And you are no Republican!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.