• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Morning Bell: CBO Confirms You're on the Hook for Wall Street Bailout Bill

    President Barack Obama’s favorite rhetorical device is to lecture the American people about what are and are not “legitimate” public policy arguments. So throughout the health care debate, President Obama insisted that it was “not legitimate” to claim that “a public option is somehow a Trojan horse for a single-payer system.” This despite the fact that Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and Nobel Prize winning New York Times columnist Paul Krugman were all caught on video explaining to single-payer advocates that the public option was exactly that.

    Now the President is bringing the same audacity to the financial regulatory debate, telling a handpicked audience at New York’s Cooper Union: “Now, there is a legitimate debate taking place about how best to ensure taxpayers are held harmless in this process. But what is not legitimate is to suggest that we’re enabling or encouraging future taxpayer bailouts, as some have claimed. That may make for a good sound bite, but it’s not factually accurate.”

    Before President Obama continues to go around accusing others of lacking legitimacy, he should read the official cost estimate of the financial regulation bill released by the Congressional Budget Office last Thursday. Assessing the budgetary impact of the $50 billion that “systemically important financial firms” would have to pay in assessments to pay for the bill’s “Orderly Resolution Fund,” the CBO writes:

    The total amount collected from assessments is estimated to be about $58 billion through 2020. But such assessments would become an additional business expense for companies required to pay them. Those additional expenses would result in decreases in taxable income somewhere in the economy, which would produce a loss of government revenue from income and payroll taxes that would partially offset the revenue collected from the assessment itself.

    In other words, these financial firms have to get that $58 billion dollars from somewhere, and that somewhere is you. Now the Obama administration may argue that they actually oppose the creation of the resolution fund. But American taxpayers should be even more frightened when they find out why the Obama administration opposes it. The New York Times reports: “The Obama administration does not support the $50 billion fund, partly out of concern that more money may be needed if one or more big financial firms ever collapse and that creating a fund could make it difficult to authorize more money.” AEI’s Peter Wallison details CBO how this provision could put taxpayer on the hook for much larger sums:

    If the Dodd-Obama resolution plan is ever actually put to use, the direct or indirect costs could be many times greater. For example, the bill authorizes the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to borrow from the Treasury “up to 90 percent of the fair value of assets” of any company the FDIC is resolving. Yet one institution alone—Citigroup—has assets currently valued at about $1.8 trillion. The potential costs of resolving it (not to mention others) would be spectacularly higher than $50 billion. In short, the $50 billion in the resolution fund is a political number—a fraction of what the FDIC is authorized to borrow and spend.

    Why would this vast sum be necessary? The Dodd bill has one answer. It says that the FDIC “may make additional payments,” over and above what a claimant might be entitled to in bankruptcy, if these payments are necessary “to minimize losses” to the FDIC “from the orderly liquidation” of the failing firm.

    In other words, the agency would be able to borrow huge sums so that it could make more generous payments to creditors than they would receive in a bankruptcy. Generous payments to creditors would certainly make unwinding a firm “orderly”—but it would also encourage lending to the too-big-to-fail financial institutions while disadvantaging smaller, less favored institutions. This in itself will have a profound and destructive effect on competition.

    This is the core problem of the Dodd-Obama Wall Street Bailout Bill: it gives the same regulators that missed the beginning of the last crisis the authority to engineer the exact same politically motivated bailouts (see General Motors, Chrsyler) for the next one.

    There is a better way. Congress should modernize bankruptcy laws to create an expedited method to restructure and close large and complex financial firms. Such an approach would not give regulators virtually unlimited powers and would free the process from political interference by giving control to an unbiased court system that already has extensive experience with complex modern firms.

    Quick Hits:

    • Warren Buffet pushes for changes to Obama-Dodd derivative regulations.
    • According to Gallup, 21% of American workers think it is “very” or “fairly” likely that they will lose their jobs or be laid off during the next 12 months, and Americans’ evaluations of their current financial situations is the lowest Gallup has measured in the past decade.
    • Voters in Hungary ousted their governing Socialist Party in elections last weekend.
    • According to Rasmussen Reports, 64% of adults believe the Supreme Court judges’ rulings have been more anti-religious than the Founding Fathers intended.
    • Despite the corporation’s pledge to be more environmentally friendly, the BBC has spent almost £5million on flying its directors, staff and guests around Britain.
    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    50 Responses to Morning Bell: CBO Confirms You're on the Hook for Wall Street Bailout Bill

    1. Joe, CT says:

      "Financial Reform" debate, not Health Care…..it is outrageous and un-Presidential!!

    2. Al Alfonso says:

      The more things change the more they stay the same…smoke and mirrors again since they did not address Freddie and Fannie.

    3. Lloyd Scallan - New says:

      This is not "audacity"! It's the same lies and deceptions that Obama has used since the campaign. The same left-wing media continues to provide cover for Obama's agenda. What is wrong with so many of the people of this country to allow this to continue? Has this country finally reached the socialist pit Obama is determined to reach? Is Obama's lies finally being accepted as truth because the media is telling us so? This country is fast loosing it freedoms and our American ideals.

    4. Ron Derry NH says:

      Worth is based on respecting human value and value comes from people and government being truthful to what they say and do. A man has no value when his worth is based on falsehood or even a false economy.

      We are entering into a phase where money laundering, lying and all matters of destroying human worth are in play to ingratiate the powers that be. Obama is serving money as the lord and single profiteer in the systematic falsifying of human worth, economic worth and political worth by his constant defrauding of his words to his actions.

      I am really not sure what the survival rate of nations are that base all their decisions on lying to themselves and the public when all the policies look as though they are deliberately designed to overburden the ability of the citizenship with worth destroying policies and words to deceive them.

      When people who speak honestly are chastise by our media and our president, when loyalties switch from truths to liars, when defrauding worth becomes the cure and reality becomes the curse, one has to assess whether we are a nation that can really hold on to our value as a people and what lies in store ahead if we continue to bring down the house.

      Even socialism can not save a monetary raping of worth and a destruction of its peoples desire to succeed.

    5. Gloria Utah says:

      ….. is there no end to the madness that these people in power are inflicting on the people of this country? Everyday something. UGH.

    6. Mary.... WI says:

      HF solution to the problem is too easy! There has to be chaos in order for this administration to succedd with it's agenda….take over the country.

    7. Sal Cimilluca, Monro says:

      I recieved the following from my insurance/investment company:

      Rarely in our 87-year history have we turned to USAA members to weigh in with elected representatives on an issue of great importance. But, we are now.

      The U.S. Senate currently is considering legislation (S.3217) that would impose new rules on the nation's financial services industry, including USAA.

      As the leading provider of financial services to America's military community, USAA supports financial services reform.

      However, the current Senate bill would disproportionally impact USAA because we are a unique and fully integrated association. USAA is not like the banks and other companies that helped bring down our economy, and we never took a penny of TARP funds. We do not engage in the harmful practices this legislation seeks to resolve.

      If unchanged, the bill would:

      Prevent USAA from managing the association's portfolio as we have for the past 87 years.

      Jeopardize our ability to continue offering many of our competitive products.

      Limit our ability to return money to our members. Last year, USAA returned $1.2 billion to our members in the form of distributions, dividends, and bank rebates and rewards.*

      So, we are asking all USAA members and employees to urge their U.S. senators to amend a portion of the bill, known as the "Volcker Rule," to eliminate its effect on a company like USAA. Please know that this legislation does not impact individual member's investments.

      Regardless of the outcome of the legislation, USAA will remain a unique and enduring association that's all about you — the military and their families.

      Please take action on this matter by immediately contacting your U.S. senator. You may click here to access a special website that will enable you to quickly send an e-mail message to your senator.

      Thank you for your help and support,

    8. KB Hahn, PA says:

      This is not a comment that needs to be printed for public view … I just wanted to check to see if you really meant "health care debate", in the first sentence of the second paragraph … ? >>> Now the President is bringing the same audacity to the health care debate, <<<

      Did you perhaps mean "[...] the same audacity to the Wall Street Bailout debate" ?

    9. KB Hahn, PA says:

      Oops, never mind … you already fixed it.

    10. Dennis Social Circle says:

      We cab fuss and say what we want, at least for now. This thing all comes down to "power and controll' or better yet "hope and change". We just have to hope that the change is not more than we can live with. We must vote in November by a huge majority, obama and clan must be taken out of office, and then let those that replace them know they work for us.

      I can not believe the way this country is headed and that we the people have sat on our fat butts and be lead like a bunch of sheep to the slaughter.

    11. Turner, Massachusett says:

      but stripping out the derivatives from under the banking structure eliminates the bulk of the risks that would put the FDIC system at risk, correct?

    12. Lin Hodges - Chesape says:

      Banks and financial instutitions deemed "to big to fail," should be split up into smaller entities. Citigroup with assets of over one trillion dollars is definitely in that category. Over the years, many corporations were allowed to merge into mega corporations. Along with the problem of being so big that they could take down the whole U.S. Economy in a failure, they also eliminated many jobs. Splitting up would have a potential of creating more jobs along with eliminating the "to big to fail" problem for our Economy.

    13. Turner, Massachusett says:

      giving Berkshire Hathaway an exemption to derivative oversights is a crime and our corrupt politicians should be called out. just because Buffet has been clean (so far) should not make him above the law.

    14. Jim Roumeliotis - Hu says:

      If I read this "Bailout bill" correctly it would give the government (one B. Obama) the option to name those businesses which are to be annointed "the choosen ones" and protect them from any "failures of business" regardless of the cause or conditions that caused the failure and then allow the same company exectives, who put them in that position to continue on doing business in the same manner as before and in the same downward direction. All the while my business is allowed to "close shop" because it is not deemed "necessary and important". Tell that to the employees that labor for "our" company. Evidently we are not considered to be a needed or vital part of the working force of America. What ever happened to the bankruptcy procedures that allow the inept companies to oust the reckless leadership and restore them with renewed energy and ideas from refreshed individuals. As a business person I don't want handouts from government with strings attached, I want the ability to develope ideas and methods to enhance my profession and business. To create a base for jobs that can be filled by honest, hard working and dedicated Americans. Not a "father figure" that tells me what to eat, what car to drive, when, if and where to go for medical aid, what light bulbs to use in my home and relieves me from many other difficult decisions.

      Those decisions are my right as an American……

    15. okiejim says:

      Simply more evidence that this leftest administration and Liberal Congress are not interested in anything but a complete takeover of every aspect of our life. . .from health-care, to our financial system, to immigration, to elections.

      Keep up the excellent work Heritage in keeping us informed and educated.

    16. bigdave, ocala fl says:

      It is TIME we admitted the DEMOCRAT PARTY has been and is the most corrupt, America-killing band of criminals ever assembled and they continue unabated destroying the very foundation of our country! America is FOR AMERICANS! Not for a horde of ILLEGALS DEMANDING RIGHTS THEY DO NOT HAVE!! Like the very CRIMINALS who seek to give them AMNESTY, THEY ARE CRIMINALS THEMSELVES!!! A WELFARE SOCIETY like we have developed here(democrats of course!) CAN NOT accept millions of illegals! California, the recipient of BILLIONS OF STOLEN TAX DOLLARS(stolen by democrat legislators) is BANKRUPT to the tune of MORE BILLIONS because of ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS ROBBING THE SYSTEM!!! THe time for HONESTY is ALWAYS!! IN '04, when they STOPPED the counting, the loss to the people was $10,400,000,000!!!!! And it doubled EVERY YEAR AFTER!!!! YOU DO THE MATH! NOW the GOLDMAN SACHS lid is blown off and is anyone looking at Clinton and Robert RUBIN?! HUH? And all the other GS boys who colluded with the rascals in the DEMOCRAT party to ROB AMERICA!! With the DEMS destruction of AMERICAN CORPORATIONS WHILE THEY COLLUDE WITH UNION THUGS, DESTROYING PRODUCTION AND THE JOB MARKET…THE DEMOCRAT PARTY SHOULD BE OUTLAWED! REPUBLICANS WANT "MORE TAXPAYERS" WHILE DEMORATS WANT "MORE TAXES"!!! ANY FOOL CAN FIGURE THIS OUT.

    17. randy clayton says:

      Shouldn't the first sentence in the second paragraph refer to "financial reform debate" as opposed the "healthcare debate"?

    18. Carlos Strasse says:

      This article defies logic. for example he says "In other words, these financial firms have to get that $58 billion dollars from somewhere, and that somewhere is you". The same logic, or lack thereof, would say that there should be no tax on any business since in the end the consumer pays the taxes passed along.

      Recently Tim Geither has claimed the total expense of the Bailout is likely to be under 100 billion. Yet the money in play to perform that bailout vastly exceeded that. Assuming Geithner is at least partially correct, it still points out the obvious fact that most of the money employed for a bailout is recovered in the end. Yet the author of this article completely ignores common sense and wants to hamstring this sort of transiently large bailout to a small sum that won't produce the desired effect.

      Finally the logic of the introductory paragraph defeats me. He seems to accuse Obama of rhetorical trickery rather than taking Obama's statement at face value. Perhaps Mr. Obama disagrees with some liberal members of his party? Hardly a daring assumption. Instead the author seems to think that all his readers will believe, like him, that Obama is a closet socialist in centrists' clothing, saying one thing and doing another.

    19. john Arizona says:

      The Obama Administration mantra – "Never waste a good crisis!" – This latest bailout scheme, not called a bailout scheme, is nothing more than a crisis waiting to happen, so big Government can come in and take over and "rescue" us all from those fat cats on Wall Street, who, coincidentally, have given more money to Obama and the Democrats than is imaginable.

    20. Ken Allison, Tyler says:

      I take issue with the statement that begins, "the core of the problem…"

      The core of the problem is not methodology but Constitutionality. There is no legitimate authority for Congress or the President to levy a tax and expend the funds on any group; neither businesses nor individuals.

      "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." James Madison

      If we continue to allow the libs to dictate the terms of the debate, we will lose. Principle demands the discussion be focused on Article 1, Section 8 and the disestablishment of the limitless regulatory bureaucracy of the Administrative branch.

    21. Lee, Kansas says:

      Obama: After a year in office he has created the "Perfect Storm" or is it treason?

    22. William Downey, JD L says:

      Too Big To Fail. Why should the government be permittted to basically circumvent the bankruptcy laws that govern the unwinding of companies that are not worht trillions or billions of dollars. Over the course of the "Great Recession" I have seen many client firms enter liquidation without the benefit of bailouts, special regualtions and other "favors" from the federal government. It disgusts me to know that DC only cares about the orderly transition of these giants; that have caused much of the turbulence present as a result of their greed and and connections.

    23. John, Rhode Island says:

      The best way is for the market and the courts to handle things like this in the future. The problem is that makes too much sense and does not support the consolidation of more power to the legislative and executive branches of gov't.

    24. Eric, Chicago says:

      "handpicked audience" ha, should subject him to a good old fashioned town hall style meeting

    25. Normca says:

      Can the good folks in MS vote Frank out in November ? That would be a god start to minimize the same problem from repeating.

    26. Blair, Franconia, NH says:

      That's right. He has smug, arrogant, holier-than-thou attitude. Something he learned at the foot of Jeremiah Wright and from Sol Olinsky. This is right out of Rules for Radicals. Demonize your opposition and discredit him so the American people think that he's a wingnut. We, the people, will remember in November.

    27. Arthur says:

      I have tried to unsubscribe from your news letter a half dozens times. I have told everyone I know you letter is SPAM, and stay away from it.

      Next thing I'll do if you dont remove me from your mailing list all 100,000 people in thiws town will know about your SPAM.

      PLEASE , remove me from your mailing lists

    28. Drew Page, IL says:

      If his lips are moving, he's lying.

      Most politicians, including Mr. O. are lawyers. As such they've learned to manipulate language so that whatever they say can be explained one way on one day and explained in a totally different way on another day. Mr. O. hasn't invented this political double-speak, but he's gooten awfully good at it. Like many others, he speaks in general terms, deliberately omitting specifics. When he says he not going to raise anyone's taxes that make less than $250,000 a year, he was talking about Federal Income Taxes.

      When the Bush tax cuts expire, he will not continue the tax cuts, thereby increasing taxes without taking any positive action to do so. A classic passive-agressive move. When insurance companies increase their premiums to cover the taxes he imposes on insurance companies and employers who offer "cadillac" health plans; on durable medical equipment like pacemakers; coverage dependent children to age 26; covering mental & nervous conditions the same as any illness; covering pre-existing conditions on individual healh plans; and for covering the "donut hole" of prescription drug expenses for Medicare beneficiaries — these will not be called Federal Income Taxes, but we will pay these costs nonetheless. They will instead be called outrageous examples of insurance company greed.

    29. Arthur says:

      I have tried a half dozen time to be removed from your Spam News letter.

      Please remove me

      Thank You

      Arthur

      Or 100,000 people will learn about your tricks every morning , that ought to do the trick

    30. William Lulias, St. says:

      This should come as no surprise to anyone who believes in this country and the truth. This President is in over his head and has surrounded himself with advisors who have no experience running anything let alone this country. The President has experience running his mouth and that is about it. When he does he spews misinformation, untruths and fabrication. We should be thankful that with his babbling rhetoric he has awaken the sleeping America. This whole American tragety couldn't have been scripted any better than the Hollywood freak show that supports his babble.

    31. Bruce Decker says:

      All of these "fixes" or bailouts are either detrimental or unhelpful over the long term. Until the Congress and Honest Ob address the Social Security/Medicare funding our obligations will dwarf all efforts to stabilize the finances of the country. We need to bring the eligibility age for these programs up to actuarial parity with the 1938 start of SS. If this were done, the certain budget load would be sharply reduced, the Chinese financing would seen more palatable and we could start to think about balanced budgets and no deficits.

      Keynesian economics only makes sense when there are occasional budget surpluses to offset deficits. This use of constant deficits insures only that inflation will steal the financial security of the nation and the people.

    32. Duncan Druhl says:

      When does the pocket of the American taxpayer become too small to fund the largess of its "seeking to line the pockets of my friends at your expense" president?

    33. Pingback: Michelle Malkin » Obama’s financial “reform:” It’s all about the boodle

    34. Mary says:

      Is that a mistake – first sentence, second paragraph – "Now the President is bringing the same audacity to the health care debate…." Should it be "financial regulation debate"?

    35. Leith Wood Richmond, says:

      Why would anyone trust a Dodd-Obama resolution? Lies, lies and more lies. We the people in America have great power to topple these uncaring, self-serving thugs and the dishonest press. Vote them out and don't buy the lousy, lefty newspapers that only print one side of the story……….theirs.

    36. Jim - Ohio says:

      AMERICA ………. PLEASE WAKE UP ……. IN NOVEMBER WE MUST VOTE

      ALL OF THE LIBERALS OUT !!!!! MAKE OBAMA USELESS, AND GET him OUT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. I DON'T BELIEVE HE'S ELIGIBLE TO BE IN

      THE WHITE HOUSE ANYWAY. GOD HELP AMERICA.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    37. ONTIME says:

      Congress ought to use some common sense and streamline the enforcement measures of all the laws already in place to guard against unethical practice on Wall st. and make sure they enforce those laws that apply to themselves for the rule of law and the application of standrds and ethic. But why would this bunch of elite Deemer crooks want to do that?

    38. Pingback: Le Cheval Nouveau Trojan | Clarion Advisory

    39. Lioness, Wisconsin says:

      Straight out, anything with Democratic support and and Obama watermark by definition will be another enslavement act. It's all they do; it's all they know; it's all they know how to do — or want to do.

      This is not a creative, generative, society building think tank; it's a grinding socialist control machine. The Dems should run a cement factory; they're mindset is set in cement.

      That said, can the "better way" people get some "doers" out there ahead of the cement machine, and lead the way — instead of spending all our energy running behind the cement mixer and tearing up the mess left behind!

      How about getting those bills out on the table — yesterday! High promotion of the "Best Way Forward" — pro-reform and avoid the "deform".

      Pass this cement truck and lead.

    40. Lee White Tanks AZ says:

      At the present time everything financial can and is handled within several huge Financial Institutions that each do everything financial for their customers, classic one-stop-shopping.

      We need to back up and correct this mistake, not make it worse through unlimited protection using taxpayer funds.

      Mortgages, Stocks and Bonds, Investments (as in Investment Banking), every day banking (as in personal checking and savings accounts) should be each handled by agencies (companies) whose sole responsibility is one of this list of financial activities. I am sure this list is not exhaustive but I hope you get my drift.

      This would do far more to reduce the impact of an individual "bank" failure than any of the Dodd/Obama plans that I have seen so far.

      Get rid of the One Stop Bank and its' government overseers. Particularly the overweening, all powerful, all knowing congressional committees that are the source of a large part of the problem. They are definitely not part of the solution.

      PC is Thought Control

    41. Pingback: Right-Wing Links (April 26, 2010)

    42. diane koelbel, halet says:

      we're so frustrated with the republican party and conservatives in power. there's so much opportunity to point out all the lies put forward as truth. why cant we put up bulletin boards, runs ads, etc. i've attend town meetings, tea parties, etc and this just doesnt get the public's attention. run ads stating their lies followed by the truth. run bulletins boards everywhere with their lies and the fact that this president is trying to destroy the country from within. what is the matter with our leadership…were so frustrated at every level. even fox news has gone liberal in its reporting. they dont challenge the libs nbd half of our friends watch the local news and believe their lies.and on top of it, have no idea of what oboma is – they never even heard of reverend wright!!!…i want to donate to someone who will change things, but cant seem to find anyone who will fight the libs…di

    43. Jeanne Stotler, wood says:

      We used to have small banks, these were in neighborhoods and the pres. on down knew you on site. Thencame a bigger bank down the street and soon it bought up the smaller bank, then came another bank from the state and gobbled all of them, them came a nat'l.bank. I took my acct's out of Bank America, they are so big and do not care about the average depositor. I did not open my acct' with them, my bank was bought out. I am now with a smaller bank and they know me by name, and a REAL person answers the phone,with no push 1 for spanish. Bank of America caters to hispanics, they make a lot of money shipping funds to Mexico and other SA countries.

    44. Ed Zierlein Coeur d& says:

      Gosh! Obama is going to take care of us, not to worry! He's spent like NO OTHER president in our history! But, now, he is appointing a National Debt Committee! He's "worried about our national debt? You folks out there who put this man in the office of President, are now going to have to pay, along with the rest of us. and pay and pay andpay,andpay………………….

    45. grant croxley baltim says:

      If you fix up the economy by getting professional economist to run it then you won't need any of this. Run the economy like the federal reserve independent from government.

    46. bigdave, ocala, fl says:

      Ron Derry in New Hampshire, thanks for your tremendous insight and for hitting the nail on the head…unfortunately. We, as a country, are in tremendous, onerous times when so many so-called AMERICANS buy into, thrive on, pass on and even invent lies to control people's very lives and then to destroy those who know and tell the TRUTH by calling them all sorts of vile names. I have a question for you folks : The LIBERALS constantly CONDEMN RICH PEOPLE. Why are so many RICH PEOPLE LIBERAL?! They may have a big surprise coming when we attain completely SOCIALIST STATUS.

    47. G Rome Laguna Niguel says:

      I enjoy the posts of Mr. Roumeliotis. I think that he says such things as coming from a background that is applicable — he is Real America. It seems as if he has an understanding of the way business works, even if he is not in one of the Ivory Towers of Big Business. Many pundits and economic sages also agree that small and middle businesses are the backbone of this nation, and in the midst of the discussion for economic recovery, it was the lingua franca to state that small business and developing entrepeneurial ideals would be the ones that present the roots of recovery.

      It was not mentioned that recovery came at the hands of a federal political bailout that usurped the intrinsic ideals of the capitalist system. Never stated by any discerning politico was there the idea that the time to reform correponded to the time to decimate an already devasted economy. The fact was that such institutions of the economic pillars were already "too big to fail," being that they would create tsunami waves across the world markets. The rescue was necessary. The reform, to address the previous crisis, is inevitable.

      If change is necessary, then this is the opportune time to make such change. Like a medical person treating a disease, one must understand the condition, seek the source of infection or defection, and remedy it. Our economic body is most certainly diseased, and any historian or lay-interest will likely equate this period of time to that of the late 1900s. It most certainly was an era of economic advancement for the United States, but it also carried a signifcant cost — one that compelled Theodore Roosevelt to adhere brakes to a runaway system and renew the concept that Capitalism is all-inclusive. Morgan, Carnegie, Rockefeller … all with an edict to break up their stranglehold on their specific field of wealth-acquisition.

      And now?

      What I appreciate about many of the other comments is that such is written by people outside of the intricate circle that makes grand decisions that influence the remaining populace of this swath of varied and multi-cultural land. I enjoy the spirit of debate, and the questioning of government.

      I wonder how long this will exist. I have to question whether the intentions of the U.S. Constitution will continue, and whether the usurpation of it will continue to result in it being overrun, or allow enough discussion so that we might recall that the original intention was to put the immediate power in the hands of the states to govern, then rely upon the federal to back up a worthy cause.

      It has been about fifty-six years since that occurred.

    48. JWD, Oregon says:

      This is just crazy stuff coming from the Whitehouse each day. It seems someone winds the President up each morning and he goes out and does it. Can anyone find out who?

    49. Best you should edit the post subject title Morning Bell: CBO Confirms You’re on the Hook for Wall Street Bailout Bill | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. to more catching for your content you make. I loved the post withal.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×