Month: October 2008

Palin versus Biden – Where were the gaffes?

The gaffes didn’t materialize in tonight’s VP debate. Most commentary had Palin winning the debate but Biden and Palin both did well without major problems.
Palin had the most to lose and probably on that basis could be perceived the winner.
Drudge has a poll with over 100,000 votes at this point with Palin over Biden about 75-25.
In a conference call after the debate, Senator Rick Santorum of PA said Palin really connected with voters in ways that she has not since the Republican convention. Santorum said her personal story will connect with social and religious conservatives.
UPDATE: Ace of Spades has a list of 14 errors he asserts were made by Biden in the debate.
Here is the video where Obama said he would meet with Ahmadinejad without precondition.

"Let's not overreact…" Legislators talk about Fannie and Freddie

The Wall Street Journal has done a good service and excerpted comments about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from legislators now leading the effort to fix things.
It is getting increasingly clear that legislators charged with oversight of the GSEs (Government Sponsored Enterprises), were so focused on making housing available that they did not heed warnings of how such manipulations altered the market. We will now pay for this.
Here is a particular telling exchange:

Senate Banking Committee, Feb. 24-25, 2004:
Sen. Thomas Carper (D., Del.): What is the wrong that we’re trying to right here? What is the potential harm that we’re trying to avert?
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan: Well, I think that that is a very good question, senator.
What we’re trying to avert is we have in our financial system right now two very large and growing financial institutions which are very effective and are essentially capable of gaining market shares in a very major market to a large extent as a consequence of what is perceived to be a subsidy that prevents the markets from adjusting appropriately, prevents competition and the normal adjustment processes that we see on a day-by-day basis from functioning in a way that creates stability. . . . And so what we have is a structure here in which a very rapidly growing organization, holding assets and financing them by subsidized debt, is growing in a manner which really does not in and of itself contribute to either home ownership or necessarily liquidity or other aspects of the financial markets. . . .
Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Ala.): [T]he federal government has [an] ambiguous relationship with the GSEs. And how do we actually get rid of that ambiguity is a complicated, tricky thing. I don’t know how we do it.
I mean, you’ve alluded to it a little bit, but how do we define the relationship? It’s important, is it not?
Mr. Greenspan: Yes. Of all the issues that have been discussed today, I think that is the most difficult one. Because you cannot have, in a rational government or a rational society, two fundamentally different views as to what will happen under a certain event. Because it invites crisis, and it invites instability. . .
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D., Conn.): I, just briefly will say, Mr. Chairman, obviously, like most of us here, this is one of the great success stories of all time. And we don’t want to lose sight of that and [what] has been pointed out by all of our witnesses here, obviously, the 70% of Americans who own their own homes today, in no small measure, due because of the work that’s been done here. And that shouldn’t be lost in this debate and discussion. . . .

I wonder how many of those Americans now have lost those homes.
Some of my readers will assume I am posting information which makes Democrats look bad because I am a conservative. While that temptation is there, I am truly hopeful that those responsible will see why the crisis is upon us and learn from it. It is the ideas that are at issue, not the intent. The desire to promote home ownership is a good one, but the manipulation of markets to pursue that aim has been a disaster. If Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Barack Obama, etc., articulated this for the people, this would be hopeful. However, I do not see this; in fact, here is what Barack Obama says about the crisis:

The era of greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has created a financial crisis as profound as any we have faced since the Great Depression.

Whose greed and irresponsibility is he talking about?
Knowing how the mess started is a big part of knowing how to get out of it.

Mental health parity caught up in economic rescue plan

Here is a news release from the American Mental Health Counselors Association regarding the intertwining of mental health parity and the economic rescue debate…

E-News from Washington
Vol. 08-39
October 1, 2008
Parity Legislation Now Part of Bailout Package
Congress remains focused on passage of a major package of measure to relieve the crisis in the financial industry. The House failed in its attempt to pass a bailout package on Tuesday, September 30. This evening, October 1, the Senate will attempt to pass a slightly modified relief package, which also includes mental health and addictive disorder parity legislation and an array of tax policy provisions. The mental health parity language included in the Senate’s bailout package is the same language as was approved by both the House and the Senate last week as part of a larger package of tax policy renewals and extensions. The tax package, including the parity provisions, has been stalled due to disagreements between Democrats in the House and Republicans in the Senate regarding the extent to which tax credits and breaks should be paid for.
Although the Senate is expected to approve the new, expanded bailout package, including the mental health parity and tax extenders provisions, it is unclear how the legislation will be received by House members. AMHCA and ACA will attempt to keep members apprised of developments as they occur. In the meantime, counselors are encouraged to continue contacting their Representatives and Senators to urge the enactment of parity legislation before Congress adjourns for the year.

I have blogged about parity before and am generally in favor of this kind of legislation. I understand that requiring insurers to cover certain conditions may seem like an undue interference in the market. However, I think most opposition comes from a misunderstanding that severe mental and emotional conditions have much of their genesis in the brain as the organ of consciousness.

Rep. Phil English talks to constituents about the economic rescue plan

Earlier this evening, Rep. Phil English met with a group of constituents in downtown Grove City for well over an hour. Rep. English summarized his reasons for voting no on the massive 700 billion package as well as other issues of interest to Western Pennsylvanians.
Rep. English said he wanted to help enact legislation to aid the ailing economy but wanted to get it right rather than do something rapidly. English said he believed the defeated House bill would have established a dangerous precedent for the government. He also wanted to make sure that there were no golden parachutes hidden in the new version of the bill which was voted on in the Senate this evening. On the plus side, he believed the rescue plan could be structured in such a way that profits would go to toward deficit reduction.
Going forward, English called for tax reform and incentives favorable to small business as a part of any rescue package. He pointed out that Republicans called for focused regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back in 2005. However, it was the Democrats in Congress that blocked reform. English also recounted a long list of accomplishments which have benefitted the people of his district.
Tonight, the Senate passed their version of the rescue plan by a 74-25 margin. The bill has become a part of the longstanding effort to pass mental health parity legislation with a variety of tax cuts and other incentives to bring the votes of Representatives in the House.