|
| |
ADVERTISEMENT
|
| |
 |
| CONTACT THE HERALD |
Mike Benbow, Business Editor
benbow@heraldnet.com |
| |
Published: Monday, October 6, 2008
Pork made bailout bill passable but not palatable
By Mike Benbow
It was 25 years ago that I first heard the old adage about never watching sausage or politics being made if I wanted to continue to stomach either of them.
At the time, I was covering Washington's Legislature for The Herald and got big doses of politics every day.
I did manage, however, to steer clear of watching what they put into sausage.
It was a good move.
These days, I still like sausage.
I can't say that about politics and I especially can't say that about the bailout bill approved by Congress last week.
I count myself among the masses who found a lot of things not to like about the bailout.
I didn't like the idea that companies that made bad business decisions largely based on greed could get anything like a bailout.
Some of the nation's financial problems were rooted in the fact that we let people buy homes without a down payment or the ability to pay back their loans. Some borrowers had what have been called liar loans because the lenders didn't require them to prove they had enough income, they just took their word.
When the rates for these loans were boosted during a sputtering economy, many people couldn't pay.
Do I think that the buyers of liar loans should be able to dump them on the government?
No.
Neither do most people.
Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Wash., did a good job of describing public opinion when he talked about his e-mails from constituents. "They were running about 50-50," he said. "Fifty percent said no and 50 percent said hell no."
Larsen was among the yes votes.
Why did he and most of the other members of Congress not follow most voters' opinion? Clearly, they believe our shaky economy needed the bill to help it revive.
I'm willing to support the decision if the members of Congress believe it's the right way to go. I generally think we should vote for people with intelligence and integrity and let them make the decision they think is right.
I'm having trouble with this decision, however, because it's clear that not all the positive votes came from people who thought the decision was right. Undoubtedly, there were a lot of people who cast their votes looking at what was in the bill for them.
How can I say that?
All you have to do is to look at the size of the bill.
A three-page proposal from President Bush became a 110-page bill that was defeated in the House a week ago. The bill the House approved on Friday was more than 400 pages.
That included a number of financial provisions added to win approval. But there was also a lot of pork.
"This is sausage-making, of course," Jade West, a lobbyist for the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors, was quoted as saying by the Associated Press.
The news agency did a good job of writing about that pork. One example of the items added to the bill to gather needed votes was a tax break for rum makers in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
What does that have to do with our financial mess?
Nothing really, but it had everything to do with politics.
Like the old saw says, I'd like this bailout better if I knew less about how it was made.
Mike Benbow: 425-339-3459; benbow@heraldnet.com.
|