The bailout that didn't happen
When I'm not sure what's happening, I go to Brad DeLong. It is THIS post that is crucial to read.
"The federal government, in one form or another, is going to be in the business of insuring debt securities against steep declines in value. Securities that are not so insured will simply not be traded....
We have just seen financial markets rife with moral hazard, agency, and adverse selection problems crash spectacularly. Is this a situation in which we should move health care--also rife with moral hazard, agency, and adverse selection problems--toward a free market configuration? No. Market regulation needs to be smart. But first market regulation needs to be....
and I LOVE this:
"There is no more a John Galt or a Jane Galt than there is a Santa Claus. There are no Randites in a financial crisis--or no even quarter-sane Randites. The fact that there is a safety net in a financial crisis is something that has been obvious to everything with a spinal column for at least a century and a half--that's what central banks are for, for Jeebus's sake! The Princes of Wall Street did not earn their fortunes by virtue of their virtue, their intelligence, their nerve, their skill, and their willingness to run great risks, et cetera, et cetera, low animal cunning, glue, money sticks as it blows by."
And finally:
"-the fact that there has always been a safety net for the rich makes it an obvious matter of simple justice that there be a safety net for the poor and the middle class as well."
Personally, I think the Republicans want to stick it to George Bush for destroying the Republican Party.
I also suspect that some Democrats were a bit miffed that it didn't go through the committee structure. There is a process that was missing, even though it might have been for good reason. My impression, through all this, is that most congress people don't even know what is going on, or what is at stake.