Opinion

[Print]  [Email]        

Examiner Editorial: Uncovering the bull under the bailout

Examiner Editorial
October 23, 2009

Congress put American taxpayers on the hook for $700 billion last year when it approved the massive bailout to paper over the imprudent lending decisions of nine Wall Street giants: Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, State Street and the Bank of NY Mellon. The bailout was essential to save the nation from a complete economic meltdown. Or so insisted President George W. Bush, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

One year later, however, a little-noted report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office questions whether the bailout -- known officially as the Troubled Asset Relief Program -- saved anything other than the jobs of greedy Wall Street executives and the political hides of their protectors in government.

"Measuring the effectiveness of TARP's programs has been an ongoing challenge," the GAO report said, adding that "any changes attributed to TARP could well be changes that would have occurred anyway" -- due to policy interventions, the actions of financial regulators or even natural market corrections. In other words, a year after Congress burdened present and future taxpayers with a debt of immense magnitude, government auditors still can't say for sure that TARP accomplished anything toward preventing a financial collapse.

At the height of the bailout hysteria, Paulson appeared on "Face the Nation," saying he hoped the federal government would be able to recoup most of the TARP funds. But today, both the GAO's auditors and TARP Inspector General Neil Barofsky say nobody should hold their breath waiting for that repayment.

In his 256-page report to Congress, Barofsky notes that the Treasury Department's failure to implement anti-fraud measures, or even to require TARP recipients to report how they used the billions Congress and the Treasury Department gave them, makes it highly unlikely that the $317 billion outstanding -- nearly half the TARP total -- will ever be returned to taxpayers. Barofsky also threatened to subpoena documents relating to the Treasury Department's "less-than-accurate statements ... concerning TARP's first investments in nine large financial institutions," as well as its subsequent refusal to report what hundreds of other TARP recipients did with the funds.

So there you have it: Treasury officials lied to Congress and the public, and refused to demand even a basic level of accountability from TARP recipients while borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars that taxpayers will eventually have to pay back, plus billions in interest. Incredibly, just Wednesday, President Obama announced a new TARP-like program for small businesses and community banks. The madness in Washington won't stop until the people completely clean house at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.



beltway confidential

In response to the attention we gave him for his old column on how Washington has "anemic winters" because of global warming, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tells NRO's Robert...

By a vote of 52 to 33, the Obama administration nominee to the National Labor Relations Board, Craig Becker, just failed to get the 60 votes needed for his nomination to proceed...

The highest form of flattery! Robert, declare yourself! (ap photo) Beltway Confidential knows a crush when she sees one. How else to explain the relentless mocking and...

You're beautiful, Chuck Todd. I mean that. (ap photo) On a day when many White House reporters (ahem) stayed away from the White House for snow or early-deadline...






Most Popular Headlines





To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

publius

Oct 23, 2009

The bigger scandal is that no one in government has yet recognized that the bipartisan scuttling of Glass Steagall caused much of the problem. When it was in effect, commercial banks were limited to commercial lending - were not allowed to engage in high risk speculation. At present the "genius" economists who urged letting the commercial banksspeculate rather than lend are meddling with executive salaries as a fix - which is like saying an aspirin is a good treatment for cancer. We don'[t just need a complete turnover of the members of Congress - we need a brand new set of economists - beginning with the ones advising Obama.

 

bobc

Oct 23, 2009

If our elite politicians were Bernie Madoff, would they be in prison now?

 

oneofmany

Oct 23, 2009

They hang the man, and flog the woman,
who steals the goose from off the common.
But let the greater villian loose, who steals the common from the goose.

 

Joshua

Oct 23, 2009

The ONLY way things will change in Washington is to establish term limits of no more than eight years for ANY public office. Of course the challenge we face is that in order for this to happen, there must be a constitutional amendment passed which requires a two-thirds majority vote of the House and Senate. Based on the self-serving politicians we have elected, this will not happen. However, ALL is not lost. The "Tea Party" movement has breathed hope in my heart. I believe a groundswell movement targeting a passage of term limits could reach such intensity that any Congressman who attempted to suppress or vote it down would be viewed with such contempt that they could not be re-elected. Who will stand in the gap for the American ideals on which our nation was founded? We DO need a COMPLETE housecleaning of both parties. I'm fed up!

 

ladybug

Oct 23, 2009

Joshua, I respectfully disagree with your assertion that we need term limits to change the players. We have term limits, 2 years for Representatives, 6 years for Senators, and 4 years or 8 years for President. We need to watch elected official's records and find others to run against them when they are not governing in the way we believe we should.

Some lawmakers are ethical and can govern for many years effectively and it would be too bad to lose their institutional knowledge of the country and abilities for the sake of a term limit. Others have stayed far too long in Washington and their constituents need to retire them by finding others to run against them, and then volunteering and contributing to campaign funds.

 

Richard W

Oct 23, 2009

Are these the death rattles of our Republic? Sure seems like it to me.

 

1uncle

Oct 23, 2009

Amendments mat be added by
* The new amendment may be approved by two-thirds of both houses of Congress, then sent to the states for approval.----(want happen
* Two-thirds of the state legislatures may apply to Congress for a constitutional convention to consider amendments, which are then sent to the states for approval. (could happen)
* Congress may require ratification by special convention. The convention method has been used only once, to approve the 21st Amendment (repealing prohibition, 1933). (wont happen)

 

Resolute

Oct 23, 2009

Surely this $700,000,000,000 bank bailout has got to rank as one of the greatest --- if not the greatest-- swindles of all time. Talk about corporate welfare ---- it just makes me sick. How could we be so incredibly stupid? And the wonder of it all that both Dems and the GOP would be complicit to such a monstrosity?

 

Rusty Green

Oct 23, 2009

We, the taxpayers, should demand that all businesses and entities that received any money from or under TARP repay all moneys lent within 7 to 14 days, or do what they should have done contemporaneously: File for bankruptcy protection. Further, everyone who lied to the American people should be booted from office or sued to recover every red cent possible!

 

Soldier4110

Oct 24, 2009

One needs to look only at the money-laundering Paulson forced on AIG to make the case in point. Sure, AIG's Financial Products Division did credit swaps, which was not a good thing. However, they are having to pay the price for Paulson funneling several billion dollars to a whole bunch of banks, national and international, including Goldman Sachs, of which Paulson had been CEO before he became Secy of Treasury. Paulson could not let AIG fail because all his banking buddies and his former company would be in deep doo-doo for having bought AIG credit swaps. I agree.....Paulson's swindle ranks as the greatest one in our nation so far. I can't help remembering that after President Bush signed the TARP bill, it was he that walked over to tell Paulson it was done. Should not Paulson have come to the President's Office? That whole episode shows who was in charge. This whole scheme was Paulson's and Bernanke's and Goldman Sachs.

 

Dennis Kolb Sr.

Oct 24, 2009

If there was ever a reason to throw the baby out with the bath water,this has to be it..To allow The Political tyrants,(politicians),Pass Un-Constitutional Laws against The Republic,and not be accountable and liable for this mess,is Un-American...
At least Bernie Madoff's investors had a Choice Not To Invest With Him!!!!!
Gitmo would Make Great Public Housing For Convicted Politicians..Enjoy the Island..
PS. Your Room-Mates Are There Waiting For You!!!!!!

 

akw

Oct 24, 2009

The most infuriating part of all of this is that TARP was supposed to be a plan to divest the financial institutions of their toxic assets. That has yet to be done. No new legislation has been passed to reverse the damage done in the 90's when Glass Stegall was abolished, and no one has been held accountable for the failure to regulate derivatives, etc. We're still pouring billions into home loans, yet no one has done anything to clean up the mortgage industry related to the Community Reinvestment Act. The big banks are now bigger than ever, and all congress and the feds are doing is regulating the pay of the very people who are supposed to be busting their butts to pay the taxpayers back. What a disgusting mess.

 

depaz

Oct 26, 2009

Meanwhile, we have a Congress that makes all these demands on what CEOs can and cannot earn, while they can vote themselves raises and spend our tax money like it's a bottomless pit. At least with corporate execs, if we don't like what they're doing, we can stop buying their products (for the most part). And you gotta love that they put all this $ out with no checks and balances, then they give ticked off when it's not spent the way they thought it "should" be. Would've been better to give it to small business in the 1st place. . . .

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Your Name:

Comment:




Local

Another snowball fight planned for Dupont Circle

The Official Dupont Circle Snowball Fight facebook fanpage has over 6,000 fans now, and it looks as if snowed in DC'ers will return for another battle. Full story

Politics

GOP winning war over Miranda rights for terrorists

Even as the administration defends its decision to grant accused Detroit bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, the president himself is hinting that things might be done differently in the future. Full story

Local

D.C. region braces for up to 20 more inches of snow

The National Weather Service has the entire D.C. metro area, from Prince William County north, under a winter storm warning for 10 to 20 inches of snow. Forecasters have had their eyes on this storm for days, but the projected snow totals were bumped up late Monday. Full story