AAACK: Should we panic about the economy yet?

[shalanna]

Well . . . the cupcakes are irritated. The bailout bill that "they" thought they had enough votes to pass just failed in the House. Everyone points at the other side of the aisle and cries, "You! Devils!" But I am conflicted.

I wasn't sure that I wanted the bill to pass, but I had talked to a number of bankers and ex-investment industry types over the weekend, and I had been pretty sure that we needed to do SOMEthing. I couldn't see a way out of it. But I still felt uneasy about committing so much money. Consider this . . . the last website I checked said that according to World Health Organization, there are only about 6 billion people on the PLANET, all told. They want to spend 700 billion dollars (that we don't HAVE yet, as I understand it). It is ridiculously mind-boggling.

Now, WHY did these representatives vote NO? For the most part, I think, it's because of the many, many people who wrote their congressperson to say, "Vote NO or I will vote no on YOU in a couple of months!" The way I understand it, the representative is elected to voice the will of his/her constituency, so that is what is supposed to happen--I mean, they are supposed to vote the way the constituents ask and tell them to, not the way they want to themselves. If the constituency says, "BLUE!" the rep is not supposed to be a nanny and say, "But we know better--so GREEN."

In other words, if this is the reason behind the voting of NO, then that is how it's supposed to work. For once, it worked RIGHT. I am proud, in that sense.

On the other hand, a press conference just got held, and some Republicans said, "The reason there were defections is because Nancy Pelosi insulted us and said that we FINALLY came to the table after being UNPATRIOTIC." Well . . . wait . . . that SHOULD NOT be the reason for you to change your vote! You should still vote what your district says it wants AND your conscience! Just let stuff like that roll off your back; don't react, other than to smile mysteriously and shake your head sadly to indicate that you won't stoop to poking into the other party's cage with a stick of any length. To react like that is to be a little kid saying, "You stuck out your tongue, so now I sulk and don't do what is right because YOU want me to." Aaack! Please, no! Let them have changed their votes for that OTHER reason--because they got faxes, letters, emails, and calls begging them to vote no.

I suppose you could argue that the only reason they listened this time (if that's what happened) is because they come up for re-election SO SOON, and they were afraid they'd get the boot. *SIGH* But that is how it is always supposed to work. Even if YOU and I think that the "YES" vote is the rational and proper vote, if the district of Congresscritter Yahoo-1 says that she/he must vote NO in order to properly represent them, then . . . he/she has to say NO, UNLESS it would be a direct sin against his/her own conscience (for example, it is voting to do something clearly immoral, such as declaring war on some random place *ahem* or taking away rights that should be protected under the Constitution.)

Mama and her Groupies are hysterical. They DO love an uproar, and here's one made to order. Blinky said, "What's gonna happen now?" Mama said, "No one KNOWS what's gonna happen. They didn't even know if this bill was gonna fix it. But doing NOTHING, experts tell us over and over, is the worst thing." Pinky said, "My stocks have gone into the toilet and I'm afraid my kids won't be able to get college loans for the spring semester because money's so tight." They all lived through the Great Depression, and they're afraid we can't all grow Victory Gardens in time.

We don't know how this will shake out. The House will work for a couple of days and then call for another vote on the new version. Who knows? Maybe the public will change its mind and the representatives can vote YES next time. Or the bill will change such that people feel safe voting for it in public. What'll happen to the economy at OUR level? Will it affect us as the "average" grocery shopper and book-buyer? I'm afraid it will, and probably fairly soon.

It IS scary. However, I went outside a few minutes ago. The world is beautiful. The butterflies have hatched out of our passionvine's flower buds and are doing a mating dance all over the side yard. My hanging baskets and potted plants think it's a second springtime and are all budding out again. The squirrels chatter in the trees, the birds sing, and I feel good. I can see, hear, walk, think, and all that good stuff. Everybody's alive and we're all hangin' in here. There's a lot to be said for that.

Comments

[madwriter.livejournal.com]

The Republicans are up against their own history and claims for themselves here. Most of them, I think, see that something like this is required, but the modern Republican party is anti-government intervention and...more importantly to this moment...the majority of their constituents are too, and are thus making the threats that supporting ANY massive bailout will mean their elected reps being booted out of office soon.

Not only that, but if they do indeed vote in favor of this bailout, and it works, they'll never be able to make a credible case against government intervention in the financial markets during a crunch time again, which would gut a huge chunk out of their platform.

I don't know how this will shake out either...but I liked the bailout bill a lot better once they restored oversight and added in taxpayer protections.

[dennismhavens.livejournal.com]

For what it's worth, I think two points were made by the bill's failure to pass. One has to do with the power of the presidency. With a low-rated, lame-duck president in office until 2009, he couldn't bring the kind of pressure that a strong, popular first-termer could have. But, on the other hand, Congress has lower approval ratings than does Mr. Bush. Yes, they're all scared for their jobs and probably the best thing we could do for the country is vote the whole lot of them out on November 4th. Me being me, I would put Nancy Pelosi at the top of the "hang 'em all" list, with Harry Reid not far behind. They were lose . . . SO close! and Ms. Pelosi got up and made what went beyond a mere partsan speech. She P.O.ed enough brittle-egoed Republicans to make them change their votes AGAINST what she was trying to accomplish.

They'll all be back, all too soon, to try again. The Senate will be doing their own voting this coming week, too. Someone on Fox News Channel observed, "The next round will be more expensive." As if $700 billion wasn't money enough!

This may be the perfect time to read the "Shalanna, Jodie and Teddy drive to Esperantujo" in MUKO. It'll take your mind off all that bad stuff.

And next week y'all get captured by the dreaded Mexican bandito, Piso Mojado.

Keep one thing in mind: nothing is remotely as awful as the media would have you believe.

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

I think a representative should vote on their best judgment. You vote someone in that closely approximates your political position, and their judgment is something you would do, if you had all the facts. They are the ones working full-time to stay on top of the issues. Yes, they should pay attention to what attitudes their constituents have. They are elected to Lead. Take a leadership position, and tell us why that is the correct one. We only get information distilled through the media. Tell us what we are missing. But vote your best judgment.

The bailout is insanity to work on just weeks before an election. Political hemlock, if ever there was some.