ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate & Securities Law

: Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation

By Jim Hamilton

ADVERTISEMENTS
House Voices Concerns After Defeat of Financial Rescue Bill

By Katalina M. Bianco, Law Analyst, Wolters Kluwer Banking and Finance Group

The House of Representatives defeated the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, popularly known as the ?bailout plan,? by a vote of 228-205 on Monday, Sept. 29, 2008. The Senate expected to take action on Wednesday, October 1, 2008.

The rescue plan has been controversial since its inception, with critics citing lack of oversight, the steep cost of the plan, executive compensation and inadequate protection for taxpayers as drawbacks to the proposal. Congressional leaders responded to some of these criticisms by adding oversight boards to monitor and supervise the spending of the $700 billion, limiting compensation for executives of troubled institutions and providing taxpayers a stake in the troubled institutions in the form of warrants to buy stock from institutions seeking to sell distressed debt, however, resistance to the plan and strong doubts about its viability of the plan remained.

After the measure failed in the House, some legislators spoke of their concerns about the bill. Some Republicans cited ideological objections to the idea of government intervention, while more liberal Democrats voiced their reluctance to provide aid to ?Wall Street tycoons.? Critics also noted that the haste in assembling the measure was troubling.

A number of legislators voted for the measure despite their concerns, taking a ?better than nothing? position to the bill. Rep. Jim Marshall, D-Ga., who voted for the measure, said that he would prefer to see a bill that focuses less on acquiring mortgage-backed securities and more on minimizing foreclosures and home vacancies, two factors in the lowering of property values in communities. Marshall indicated that he would give bankruptcy courts the power to modify mortgage payments. He also would like to limit the pay of traders as well as top executives.

Lawmakers on both sides pointed to the flood of opposition coming from angry constituents just five weeks before every seat in the House is up for election as a fundamental reason that the measure was defeated. Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the Republican whip, said that before the vote on Monday, he had tallied 75 votes in his conference in favor of the bill. By the time the measure was put to a vote, only 65 of those votes were delivered.

Full post as published by Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation on October 01, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0023 secs (from cache 11/06/26 11:35:21)