Benny Dacks | Blog

TAG | congress

President Obama addresses the nation before a joint session of Congress. In his speech focusing on the economy and the promotion of his economic agenda.

, , , Hide

Al Walser and Barack Obama

Image via Wikipedia

WASHINGTON — During last week’s presidential debate, John McCain and Barack Obama sparred over what caused the financial crisis.

“The match that lit this fire,” McCain said, came from the government-sponsored mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which backed risky home loans “with the encouragement of Sen. Obama and his cronies … in Washington.”

Obama shot back: “The biggest problem was the deregulation of the financial system. … Sen. McCain, as recently as March, bragged about the fact that he is a deregulator.”

It was a classic example of Washington finger-pointing. McCain and the GOP blame Fannie and Freddie — which were taken over by the government last month — because the troubled mortgage agencies’ biggest backers were Democrats who said they wanted to increase access to homeownership.

Meanwhile, Obama and other Democrats highlight Republicans‘ longtime focus on limiting regulations for the financial industry.

No single government decision sparked the crisis, but collectively the candidates had a point: Both parties in Congress played important roles in setting the stage for the ongoing financial meltdown.

They did so in moves that reflected not just their ideological priorities, but also the wishes of special interests that have spent millions aggressively lobbying Washington and contributing to lawmakers’ campaigns.

By not reining in increasingly risky investments made by Fannie and Freddie — and by keeping complex financial instruments known as derivatives free from most government oversight — Congress chose not to impose barriers that economists widely agree could have helped stave off the crisis that continues, even after lawmakers approved a $700 billion emergency bailout package for Wall Street.

Here is a look at how Congress’ actions on two key fronts became significant factors in the financial crisis:

Read the rest at USATODAY

, , , , , , , Hide

 

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said he’s confident several countries will take steps comparable to the $700 billion plan he proposed to buy bad mortgage-related securities to address the global financial crisis.

“We are talking very aggressively with other countries around the world and encouraging them to do similar things, and I believe a number of them will,” Paulson said on ABC News‘ “This Week” program.

Paulson yesterday asked Congress for unfettered authority to buy devalued mortgage-related securities from investment firms in an effort to keep the financial system from coming to a standstill. The proposal would prevent courts from reviewing the Treasury’s actions while raising the nation’s debt ceiling.

German Finance Ministry spokesman Stefan Olbermann said members of the Group of Seven industrial nations are in “ongoing talks about the situation on financial markets worldwide.” Finance ministers from the G-7 countries meet in Washington on Oct. 10.

Original 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

, , , , , , , Hide

WASHINGTON — The House on Tuesday night approved a measure that would ease a longstanding ban on offshore oil drilling and try to spur greater use of alternative fuels as Democrats and Republicans engaged in a bitter pre-election clash over America’s energy future.

Under the Democratic legislation, adopted by a vote of 236 to 189, oil companies would lose some tax benefits, utilities would be required to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020 and a ban on developing fuel from Rocky Mountain shale would be lifted.

The legislation, which faces significant hurdles to becoming law before Congress breaks at the end of the month, would allow drilling as close as 50 miles from the coastline if adjacent states agree and 100 miles out no matter a state’s position. It would impose stricter oversight on the agency that handles oil leasing and royalty payments after recent disclosures of improper relationships between its employees and oil industry representatives.

“We are opening up to 400 million acres off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts to drilling and expanding the availability of oil by at least 2 billion barrels,” said Representative Nick J. Rahall II, the West Virginia Democrat who leads the Natural Resources Committee. “And we have done so in a balanced, reasonable and responsible manner.”

Republicans, who have made political gains by portraying Democrats as flatly opposed to new drilling, said the measure was a sham intended to provide Democrats cover from voters furious over gas prices. They faulted it for failing to add incentives for coal and nuclear power and for not limiting environmental suits against drilling proposals. They also criticized Democrats for not negotiating with Republicans in writing the bill.

“We are engaged in exactly what the American people are sick of, and that is political games here in Washington that are intended to be political games and have no outcome,” said Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader.

A Republican effort to sidetrack the measure with a procedural tactic was rebuffed on a vote that generally adhered to party lines. That cleared the way for approval of the proposal, which drew strong support from Democrats including conservatives from states with strong oil and gas industries. On the final vote, 221 Democrats and 15 Republicans supported it; 176 Republicans and 13 Democrats were opposed.

“It represents a critical turning point,” said Representative Dan Boren, Democrat of Oklahoma, who praised the bill for provisions that would encourage greater use of natural gas. “Today is the day we begin to open our domestic opportunities.”

Though Republicans derided the measure, saying it kept too much of the Outer Continental Shelf and the underlying reserves off limits to drilling, the decision to entertain expanded offshore drilling was a stark reversal for Democrats, who have supported a coastal drilling ban since 1982. They were motivated by the Republican attacks and by the view that keeping the stricter ban would be unrealistic this year. Relaxing the ban became the party’s fall-back position.

Democrats said Republicans were left frustrated because the bill robbed them of a chief line of attack in allowing Democrats to vote for new drilling in conjunction with clean energy initiatives.

“This is a classic case where in the interests of doing good politics, we also did good policy,” said Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus.

But Republicans called the entire exercise political, saying Democrats were willing to consider new offshore drilling only because they were certain the bill would not become law.

New York Times:

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

, , , , , , , Hide