Why would they go against the Speaker ?

Nearly half of California’s Democratic House members voted against the $700 billion bailout package, contributing to its stunning defeat and defying the wishes of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Fifteen of the 34 California House Democrats voted “no” - Why would they go against the Speaker ?

Answer #1

fillet, I definitely share your concerns ‘I’m from the Gov’t and I’m here to help you !’ - interesting to see that Democrats in tight races didn’t support this bill. Neither did the Congressional Black Caucus - neither did some members of the Illinois delagation support it - if supported they had they have enough votes to pass without the other side.

Answer #2

They told us:

“I do not see any possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury.”

  • Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) in 2003 assuring the “soundness” of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

“We do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae.”

  • Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), 2004

“There’s nothing wrong with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

  • Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), 2004
Answer #3

Wasnt talking about this vote phrannie, more about republicans standing behind Bush no matter what idiotic decision he made or Republicans standing behind McCain (who they really didnt like in the beginning) and Palin (uhm enough said about that decision)

Answer #4

Congrats… a new record… only two posts in, and this thread has already been rendered pointless.

pumps fist

Answer #5

hmm they have a brain and unlike their republican counter parts are free to disagree with whomever they choose?

Answer #6

Steve Wynn for President!!! Let’s take the politicians out of money…and put people who understand it…IN! :)

p

Answer #7

amblessed, I don’t think the democrats wanted to pass the bill without a majority of republicans also supporting it. It’s called CYA. If the outcome of the bailout is bad they don’t want to be seen as being solely responsible for it. The way to avoid responsibility is to share responsibility.

Answer #8

A lot of “perhaps” there filetofspam. I agree I am ambivalent also, but I don’t think doing nothing and letting everything fall apart is the right answer either.

Answer #9

About 2/3’s of Democrats voted for the bailout and about 2/3’s of Republicans voted against.

I have mixed feelings about the bailout. I hate the way we are rushing to do something. In my experience whenever we rush to do something we usually mess things up.

Part of me worries that by bailing out financial institutions only prolongs the agony. Perhaps we should just let them fail, let the economy hit rock bottom, then move forward. There is talk about the DOW plunging to 8,000. Perhaps that is where it should be. Perhaps it is still overvalued.

Perhaps the government should simply take over insolvent financial institutions, sell off any worthwhile assets to competitors, and only take necessary losses instead of propping the institutions up.

Answer #10

Conservatives are amazing. If all or most dems vote for something, they accuse them of walking in lock step. If Dems aren’t completely united on an issue, they imply they are disloyal.

Many were listening to their consituents. Unfortunately, those constituents don’t realize that voting this bill down will most assuredly affect them in a negative way.

Answer #11

LOL…

Answer #12

THE SENATE AND CONGRESS ARE NOT FOR THE PEOPLE AMERICA DID NOT CALL FOR A BAIL OUT ASK ANY ONE THERE NOT EXEN SURE WHAT THERE DOING AND MOST WASHINGTON BIG WIGG S ARE RICH AND WORK FOR WALL STREET IT S ALL A SCAM TO KEEP THE RICH RICH AND KILL OFF THE POOR you S GOVERNMENT IS OUT OF CONTROL

Answer #13

Understanding the problem phrannie is not enough. There are plenty of economists who understand the problem much better than business people. Just because business people know how to make money, does not mean they know what is best for the economy. That is like saying a bartender is the best person to council alcohololics. They know how to get people drunk, but they sure don’t know how to get them to stop.

Answer #14

And neither did 2/3rds of the house republicans… Why do you keep omitting that in all your posts?

If they had supported the GOP president, we wouldn’t have needed any votes from the Dem side.

Answer #15

What I’m “picking up”, is it’s the constituency of various Representatives who managed to make themselves heard to “vote no”…this happened on both sides of the aisle…Unfortunately, “Main Street” has their head up where the sun don’t shine, and I’m sure when (and IF) they finally figure out that a “bailout” isn’t simply saving the big banks, it’s saving their butts, too…self interest might just save the day.

Check the vote on the bill, Ty…Republicans in the House, didn’t vote for it either…for EXACTLY the same reason…John Q. Public, the constituency…didn’t want them to. This may go down as the first time in history government listened…sheesh what time for THAT to happen!!!

phrannie

More Like This
Ask an advisor one-on-one!
Advisor

Law Writers

Legal Services, Lawyers, Legal Consultation

Advisor

SoloSuit

Legal Services, Debt Collection, Alternative Dispute Resolution

Advisor

DUI Law Firm Denver

Legal Services, DUI Defense, Criminal Defense

Advisor

Recent Legal News

Legal, Criminal Defense, News

Advisor

Storify News

Politics, Entertainment, Science