• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

TARP Bailout Mishandled by Bush/Paulson

A

Anonymous

Guest
I watched part of these hearings they replayed today on C-SPAN...Boy are there some P.O.ed Senators (both parties)- at how Bush and Paulson handed out this money- and allegations of favoritism to their Fatcat Buddies...
I even heard Co-Chair Senator Shelby say that Bush/Paulson not only lied to Congress--but changed the way the legislation was written and the intent of Congress....

There WILL be some major regulation coming down the line-- not only on this, and the Banks, but on all Wall Street activities.....

Regulator Says Bailout Fund Is Misleading the Public

By REUTERS
Published: February 5, 2009
WASHINGTON (Reuters) — Watchdogs monitoring the government’s bank bailout called for an overhaul Thursday, with one accusing those running it of misleading the public, while senators slammed the program as chaotic and poorly managed.

Under the $700 billion program meant to stabilize the financial system, the Treasury Department has so far spent nearly $300 billion to bolster financial institutions and automakers in exchange for preferred shares and warrants.

But in buying those securities, Henry M. Paulson Jr., then the Treasury secretary, misled the public about how it was going to price them, said Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard law professor and head of an oversight panel for the bailout, known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP.

“Treasury simply did not do what it said it was doing,” Ms. Warren said at a hearing before the Senate banking committee. Many members of the panel condemned management of the program, which is barely four months old.

The program proceeded “in a chaotic, unorganized and ad hoc manner,” said Daniel K. Akaka, Democrat of Hawaii.

Neil M. Barofsky, another watchdog for the program, told the Senate committee his office was turning to criminal investigations. “That’s going to be a large focus of my office,” he said.

On projections by some analysts that TARP may need more money soon, Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, said, “There will be no additional funding for this program without airtight assurances that it will be better managed.”

The Obama administration plans to unveil a strategy on Monday aimed at reviving the credit markets, helping struggling homeowners and lifting the economy out of recession.

Tighter TARP management is expected to be a part of that package. A preview of that came Wednesday when the White House announced a $500,000 annual cap on executive pay at companies receiving TARP money.

The Bush administration began TARP in response to an alarming slowdown in global capital markets set off by a housing slump that undermined mortgage-backed bonds carried on the books of major financial institutions.

Congress approved the $700 billion program after Mr. Paulson said it would be used to buy broken bonds and clean off banks’ balance sheets. But days after that approval, Mr. Paulson changed the focus to buying preferred shares in banks.

Ms. Warren, head of TARP’s Congressional oversight panel, told the banking committee that after three months on the job, her panel was still not getting enough answers from Treasury. She described the bailout as “an opaque process at best.”

Ms. Warren said she plans to release a report on Friday that calculates Treasury put about $254 billion into financial institutions in 2008, but got only $176 billion in value.

“That’s a shortfall of about $78 billion,” she said, adding that Mr. Paulson “was not entirely candid” in his description of TARP’s bank capital injection program.

Mr. Barofsky, the independent TARP inspector general at Treasury, raised concerns about potential fraud in one of several programs financed by bailout money, the Federal Reserve’s Term Asset-Backed Loan Facility. “Treasury should consider requiring that some baseline fraud prevention standards be imposed,” Mr. Barofsky said in his first report to Congress.

He told the committee the government had collected more than $271 million in dividends from its TARP-financed bank shares and said the department needed a strategy for administering its holdings.

A Treasury spokesman said the department would adopt many of Mr. Barofsky’s recommendations.

Treasury holds $279.2 billion in preferred shares from 319 financial institutions, paying dividends of 5 to 10 percent, according to Mr. Barofsky’s report.

The government also received common stock warrants from 230 institutions, most of which are now out of the money. The largest positions in warrants include the American International Group, Bank of America, Citigroup and General Motors.
 

alice

Well-known member
OT,

To me, mishandling sounds like mistakes were made. Bush/Paulson made NO mistakes...they knew exactly what they were doing! :mad:

Alice
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
alice said:
OT,

To me, mishandling sounds like mistakes were made. Bush/Paulson made NO mistakes...they knew exactly what they were doing! :mad:

Alice

Oh there was plenty of allegations of fraud and corruption by members of both parties on the committee- and money being awarded because of political affiliation- and Good Old Boy friendships....Bush's last way of telling Congress and the American people F... Y.. :(

Especially after Ms. Warren, head of TARP’s Congressional oversight panel- testified that neither Bush, Paulson nor anyone from Treasury had answered her panels written questions to them- on why they changed the direction of the program away from the way the law was written and the intent of Congress- and what was the criteria they then used to hand out money...Especially since the purchases and costs of the purchases was not done using a risk based plan- and its already apparent some of the taxpayer money purchases were hugely overvalued....

She called the Bush/Paulson promised transparency "opaque"...

As many Senators brought forward- and Senator Shelby drummed on- if there are criminal actions some folks need to swing....

Graham told Mr. Barofsky, the independent TARP inspector general at Treasury, that he hoped he had a big backbone- and would take "NO" from no-one in his criminal investigation and auditing of the program so far...He and Dodd both told him that Wall Street has no trust with the American people anymore- and it was up to his investigators to dig out the facts, prosecute all illegal actions, and give trust a chance to return...
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
If the two of you would of been paying attention when this bill was being ramrodded through by Pelosi and Reid, you would of known that there were many that called for oversight, checks, etc...., but Pelosi and Reid wouldn't allow anything other than what was presented. What is happening is the result of them getting the bill they wanted.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
and allegations of favoritism to their Fatcat Buddies...

And now these 'Fat cats", or 'Buddies' are being nominated and confirmed to Cabinet!

Are you going to keep your blinders on for ever, or break stride!

Ask for some action, instead of going down the same path of "Change"

Living in the past, does not improve the future. It's not a conspiracy theory, government has been the same since Christ's birth.

If you are going to vote for change, then at least back it up with some actions and demands!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
If the two of you would of been paying attention when this bill was being ramrodded through by Pelosi and Reid, you would of known that there were many that called for oversight, checks, etc...., but Pelosi and Reid wouldn't allow anything other than what was presented. What is happening is the result of them getting the bill they wanted.

You seem to forget that it was Bush/Paulson that called for a free hand to move with the flow-but promised transparency- and which was supported by the Repubs.....Congress still overrode Bush/Paulson and did stick in some oversight-- but Paulson has told everyone that questions him "F... Y..- and GW has granted immunity from subpeonas or testimony to anyone that worked for him-- so tell me how you do oversight :???:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
and allegations of favoritism to their Fatcat Buddies...

And now these 'Fat cats", or 'Buddies' are being nominated and confirmed to Cabinet!

Are you going to keep your blinders on for ever, or break stride!

Ask for some action, instead of going down the same path of "Change"

Living in the past, does not improve the future. It's not a conspiracy theory, government has been the same since Christ's birth.

If you are going to vote for change, then at least back it up with some actions and demands!

Some of the Republican Senators on the committee brought up the fact that they had a new crew in town now administering the money- and actually seemed thankful and optomistic about it....All agreed that they wanted to work with new administration on putting limits/regulations on how the final 1/2 of the money can be spent-- including limitations on salaries, bonuses, and golden parachutes...

Senator Bunning said he has received over 25,000 calls on how this money was squandered by the Bush Boys....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
If the two of you would of been paying attention when this bill was being ramrodded through by Pelosi and Reid, you would of known that there were many that called for oversight, checks, etc...., but Pelosi and Reid wouldn't allow anything other than what was presented. What is happening is the result of them getting the bill they wanted.

You seem to forget that it was Bush/Paulson that called for a free hand to move with the flow-but promised transparency- and which was supported by the Repubs.....Congress still overrode Bush/Paulson and did stick in some oversight-- but Paulson has told everyone that questions him "F... Y..- and GW has granted immunity from subpeonas or testimony to anyone that worked for him-- so tell me how you do oversight :???:

I'm not going to defend Paulson, but I'm not going to allow anybody to hang any of Reid and Pelosi's fumbles on anybody else, either. The FACTS are that the bill passed was the bill Reid & Pelosi wanted, the bill that they would allow no changes to and limited debate, and the results of that bill are on them.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Some of the Republican Senators on the committee brought up the fact that they had a new crew in town now administering the money- and actually seemed thankful and optomistic about it

Were these the Senators that were kept out of the "old" group of businesses that stole money from the people?

And now they want to be involved in the "new" group of businesses that steal money from the people.

CHANGE!

Or don't look at the facts, it's up to you!

Keep blaming Bush, after the debt that was during WWII, the debt actually dropped, they didn't use mis-guided intelligence, as an excuse to borrow more!
 

alice

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
If the two of you would of been paying attention when this bill was being ramrodded through by Pelosi and Reid, you would of known that there were many that called for oversight, checks, etc...., but Pelosi and Reid wouldn't allow anything other than what was presented. What is happening is the result of them getting the bill they wanted.

Ya know what? I did pay attention...I watched the whole thing on C-Span! And, I contacted my congressmen and told them to vote no! And, I was told they would...well, except for Kay Bailey Hutchinson...the lousy sellout that she is... :mad:

So, when you start with that "the two of you" BS....grrrrrrrrrr! I'm just sayin'...

Alice
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
If the two of you would of been paying attention when this bill was being ramrodded through by Pelosi and Reid, you would of known that there were many that called for oversight, checks, etc...., but Pelosi and Reid wouldn't allow anything other than what was presented. What is happening is the result of them getting the bill they wanted.

You seem to forget that it was Bush/Paulson that called for a free hand to move with the flow-but promised transparency- and which was supported by the Repubs.....Congress still overrode Bush/Paulson and did stick in some oversight-- but Paulson has told everyone that questions him "F... Y..- and GW has granted immunity from subpeonas or testimony to anyone that worked for him-- so tell me how you do oversight :???:

I'm not going to defend Paulson, but I'm not going to allow anybody to hang any of Reid and Pelosi's fumbles on anybody else, either. The FACTS are that the bill passed was the bill Reid & Pelosi wanted, the bill that they would allow no changes to and limited debate, and the results of that bill are on them.

Funny- I must have watched a different channel-- I saw bi-partisan meetings and press conferences- announcing they were working on it bipartisanly ...And I remember Republicans standing side by side with Democrats- when they announced they had an agreement....In fact several of those were the same Repub Senators that were in the hearing today.... :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
I remember a Pelosi furious at Republicans for not supporting TARP - after she gave certain Democrats her blessings not to vote for what would be a very unpopular bill in their districts....

How many amendments did Pelosi allow? How much debate did she allow? Do you remember that?
 

alice

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
So, when you start with that "the two of you" BS....grrrrrrrrrr! I'm just sayin'...

Alice, you know, I haven't even started to attack you personally as you have done of me!

Would you like to take this statement back?

In your dreams...I have attacked you personally. In your dreams...you are the know it all you think you are. In your dreams you worry me with your threats. In your dreams...I'd like to take this statement back.

And, you are resorting to threats because?

Alice
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
No threats intended, It just seemed to be an attack! Maybe we just aren't understanding, your language!

In the past you have said you don't attack ( you debate), like you have re-instated in your last post, so I was just wondering if you wanted to take it back.

I was just so hurt by such an insult, as were my conservative friends!

The problem is, we don't have an Alice dictionary, and we don't know what statements like "waaaaah" mean!

Please help us Alice, we'd really like to understand you!
 

alice

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
No threats intended, It just seemed to be an attack! Maybe we just aren't understanding, your language!

In the past you have said you don't attack ( you debate), like you have re-instated in your last post, so I was just wondering if you wanted to take it back.

I was just so hurt by such an insult, as were my conservative friends!

The problem is, we don't have an Alice dictionary, and we don't know what statements like "waaaaah" mean!

Please help us Alice, we'd really like to understand you!

Yeah, sure, right...whatever. BTW, "waaaah" is the cry of a frustrated, tantrum throwing t**** baby...at least in these parts...

Alice
 
Top