September 25, 2008

             “I have grave concerns about the impact of a rescue plan on my constituents.  I’m listening to them, and if I were to vote today, I would absolutely vote ‘no.’  Someone asked me why I had taken that position, and my answer was, ‘Because I’m planning on going home.’

            “I have great respect for the President, but I have real problems with accepting a figure set forth by one person who worked on Wall Street and lobbied for Wall Street and an economist whom I doubt has ever made a payroll.  They came up immediately with a figure that they felt was necessary to stabilize the economy.  The President accepted it, and now the Congress has not only the right – but the duty – to question this proposal and determine whether this is in the best interests of those we represent. 

             “I’m glad that Senator John McCain suspended his campaign to come back to Washington and help be a part of the decision and/or to give alternatives.  I would personally like to see a bare-bones option based on facts furnished by those other than Wall Street. 

 “I have previously voted against this type of government rescue because of the possibility for severe and unintended consequences.  In July I voted against legislation that gave the government the authority to rescue Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  This was designed to help stabilize the housing crisis.  Instead, this action further increased investors’ concerns, resulting in the government having to take over these institutions and further weakening the financial markets.

             “I also did not support the final Congressional agreement in 1989 that permitted government cleanup of the Savings and Loan crisis by creating the Resolution Trust Corporation.  That crisis cost taxpayers over $100 Billion. 

 “Today, taxpayers are being asked for $700 Billion in purchasing authority for questionable loans – with little explanation for how or whether this money will be paid back.  Congress has a lot of work to do – and we should stay here as long as it takes to analyze this huge request for funds, to probe the adjustment of the request, or to outright deny it.  Many aspects must go into the computer and come back with an answer that prevents the serious consequences threatened and yet is fair with those who have to furnish the funds – the taxpayers. 

 “I am willing to listen, I am willing to wait, and I am willing to make a decision based on input from my district – and not from someone who would benefit directly from such a huge outlay.”