fduvall
I have not been paying close attention to how the voting has gone...I had assumed it would be more party-line, so I better check and see what is actually happening. Thanks for the tip.
I checked — and I was wrong! The Republicans (allegedly Bush's party) were actually strongly against it, except for a handful of turncoats. Here it is from the House's own website : FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 680
(Democrats in roman; Republicans in italic ; Independents underlined )
H RES 1525 YEA-AND-NAY 3-Oct-2008 10:34 AM
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Resolution
BILL TITLE: Providing for consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 1424, Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
---- YEAS 223 ---
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Butterfield
Calvert
Campbell (CA)
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Castor
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Hastings (FL)
Herger
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
King (NY)
Klein (FL)
LaHood
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pomeroy
Price (NC)
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Speier
Spratt
Stupak
Sutton
Tauscher
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Visclosky
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
---- NAYS 205 ---
Abercrombie
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Boozman
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Camp (MI)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Carney
Carter
Castle
Cazayoux
Chabot
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Costello
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Emerson
English (PA)
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Graves
Hall (TX)
Harman
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herseth Sandlin
Hirono
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hulshof
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kaptur
Keller
Kind
King (IA)
Kingston
Kirk
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (KY)
Linder
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mitchell
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Porter
Price (GA)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Scalise
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shays
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Space
Stark
Stearns
Sullivan
Tanner
Taylor
Terry
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
---- NOT VOTING 5 ---
Cubin
Gilchrest
Obey
Tancredo
Thompson (MS)
Here's evidence that marshal law was threatened if Congress didn't hurry up and pass the bailout bill:
That's a heavy allegation - a threat of a coup d'etat. I often wonder if a coup d'etat already happened without anyone noticing.
BTW, that man is (was) my congressman. But notice he voted to pass the bill.
Nice to see that my former Ohio rep, Kucinich didn't vote for it.
Very scary, that cspan video, being threatened with martial law. I wonder if it was being used only as a scare mongering tactic, or if there were serious plans to implement it. After all, there's apparently a military presence (not national guard) on US soil for this eventuality that was put in place recently. Of course, against all laws and regulations as far as I'm aware.
Confirms what I already knew. Just shy of six years after moving to Switzerland, I made the totally correct decision.
...and it didn't happen, either. He was talking about what was threatened if they didn't pass the Monday version and, well, they didn't pass it, and four days later most of what was threatened (including marshal law) still hadn't happened, but they voted again and passed the Friday (porked-up) version anyway.
Yeah, the plausibility is definitely there.
Wishing I had done the same.
More interesting commentary on Americans' response to the bailout, excerpted from a column by Geoffrey Pike : "This last week, Americans awoke from a deep sleep. Or maybe they were already awake, but we didn’t know it yet. Congress got flooded with calls opposing the bailout. One Congressman said that the calls to his office were running 50–50; 50% no and 50% hell no. Although the majority of Americans still don’t understand inflation and the boom/bust cycle very well, they instinctively understood that Americans were being ripped off with this bailout and that the government officials were simply rewarding their friends on Wall Street who had failed. Even as far as rising prices, many more Americans are realizing that the cause is monetary inflation, although we probably don’t have a majority that understand this yet.
"We have a lot to be positive about. Now you may think that is crazy because Congress still passed the bailout bill, despite strong opposition from constituents. Now don’t expect all of these people to be voted out of office next month who voted "yes" on the bill, but this cannot go on forever. First of all, the empire is coming crashing down. Even if this weren’t the case, it won’t matter over time. Americans are becoming far more well informed than in the past. The internet allows us to communicate to each other quickly and effectively and expose many of the lies of the politicians. When a large number of Americans finally withdraw their consent, the government will no longer function as it does. It will come crashing down, much like the Soviet empire did.
"Americans are realizing in large numbers that the government is not their friend. With Congress defying the will of the people, it made people angrier. It basically shows the whole system as a sham and that we don’t have representative government.
"It has also been fun watching the news the last few weeks. I heard one commentator after another saying that they have to pass this bill, despite strong opposition by the people. Some were more direct than others in saying that "the people just don’t understand." But this time, the people understood all too clearly. No matter which way it was spun, the people understood that their own government was taking advantage of them. And on top of that, it exposed the elitist and out-of-touch mentality in the mainstream media (both Republican and Democrat)."
So were you here? It was a good speech. The auditorium was packed and they had to open up a second one.
And...? care to share? Haven't found anything online yet.
P.
Was his speech anything like this column ? Otherwise, would you care to provide a brief synopsis?
That column covers probably a quarter of the speech. I am in the process of writing an excerpt but given market conditions it's been pushed a bit on the back-burner.
Some thread housekeeping.
See thread:
Because Art is sometimes more truthful:
Prof. Stiglitz also spoke in Zurich at a conference which swx Swiss Exchange organized. You can video all 55 minutes of his speech at
Bretton Woods is not working, other models are available based on self sufficient communities. They just need the work of neuroeconomists to make them palatable.
This lecture seems to me to be a toned down, paid for, lecture for bankers. It seems as if Stiglitz learnt his lesson about being outspoken when he got fired from the world bank for his support of the world trade protest movement in 2000. Then in 2000 he writes a book in defence of these establishments http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BEK/is_/ai_94764304
St.Gallen is a conservative establishment. Bankers and hedge fund managers are beating their heads against a wall trying to figure out how to convince ‘ambiguity- averse investors’ to have confidence and reinvest. They are flogging a dead horse, or a dead head, because no-one is buying it. All such people will take away from this lecture is that the law of supply and demand always stays the same, and anyone who says that they have a new economic model is just masking something like the housing bubble. So they will create a new bubble, perhaps futures in new technologies, or energy, built on clay. They will package them nicely, backed them with skewed research from universities departments eager for funds.
More interesting to me are Stigler’s views on a return to local and self-sufficient communities and the importance neuroeconomics. I am also very happy that he is recommending Paul Voelker for the Obama team, but Voelker is 80 years old.
I hope that the attempts that initiatives at the grass roots level like non- for profit banks will eventually diffuse up. Multinationals cannot work without a public (law of supply and demand?) They will probably take two- pronged strategy; supporting parochial community projects and seeking opportunities abroad like the opening up of a quasi-Halliburton office in Tehran. St Gallen based bankers are in an ideal position to do both, if they can disentangle themselves from their present commitments.
If St Gallen hosted Stiglitz in 2000 when he was causing problems for the World Bank then I will eat humble pie.
What is remarkable to me about St Gallen is OIKOS founded in 1987. It started as a student based intitiative that has spread worldwide and to me is the way of the future.
Maybe other countries should follow the lead of the new King of Bhutan, who assesses his country's progress as his father did; in terms of Gross National Happiness.
The US jobless figures have been revised 525,000 in the last month- I wonder how they will stabilize the markets after that hits!