[norton]

Actually, I'd argue that loaning money falls into the right to contract and is not a 'power' - neither specified nor denied to the federal (or any) government.
Besides, the First Bank of the US was established four years after the Constitution was signed, despite arguments sounding much like yours...it's primary goal was commerce (and taxes).

In fact, I think the fed's have sufficient powers to do what's right to keep the place operating, the question is what is or is not right...meaning wall street speculators, wrong, a bridge loan to industry with proper consideration, not so wrong, B of A using bailout money to rescue a union in Chicago, decidedly wrong.

(Government loans money to industry all the time, it's called an R&D contract)

Others here have pointed out two good reasons to oppose this particular loan - for inadequate or improper conditions on the loan itself.

Interestingly, it now appears that the union has effectively killed any loan and speculation can now turn to what Obama will do for his constituencies in 2009.

PS: My own belief is that bankruptcy is most appropriate at least for GM, Ford may now be forced to do something on it's own (with an eye to events at GM), and Chrysler has a broken leg and just might need to be shot.

[Lurker]

PS: My own belief is that bankruptcy is most appropriate at least for GM, Ford may now be forced to do something on it's own (with an eye to events at GM), and Chrysler has a broken leg and just might need to be shot.

We largely concur.

L