PORKY'S Bailout

Pelosi: That Bailout package is missing PORK

Comparison of original Paulson bailout to compromise proposal

POSTED September 28, 2008 | 10:15 AM

House Republican Whip Roy Blunt's office provides this side-by-side comparison of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's original Wall Street bailout proposal with the final compromise agreed to over the weekend by congressional and Treasury negotiators:

********************

Side-by-Side Comparison of Rescue Legislation

Issue	Paulson Plan	Frank-Dodd	Final Bill
$	700B	700B – Delivered in 150B traunches that can be delayed by Congressional disapproval (and a Presidential signature)	250B – Immediately available to the Secretary. 100B – Available upon report to Congress. 350B – Available ONLY upon Congressional action.
Insurance (HouseRepublican Mode)			Requirement to establish mandatory insurance/guarantee program at no expense to the taxpayer. “Pay to play” for participating companies, based on risk.
Executive Compensation		Far reaching executive compensation standards that would affect companies not even involved in this financial crisis. Additionally, the bill lowered the deduction on executive pay to $400,000 for ALL companies.	Workable prohibitions on executive compensation to ensure bad actors are not rewarded. In a total takeover (like what happened with AIG), there will be no golden parachutes or severance pay. For equity participation, over $300M total ban for top 5 executives on golden parachutes and tax deduction limit on compensation above $500,000.
Oversight/Transparency		Onerous, unworkable and repetitive reporting and oversight requirements, hindering proper implementation of program.	Establishment of bipartisan oversight commission, split evenly between minority and majority. Practical reporting requirements to ensure proper reports to Congress and the public. If after 5 years the government has a net loss of taxpayer funds as a consequence of the purchase program, the President will be required to submit a legislative proposal to recoup such funds from program beneficiaries.
“Say on Pay” Union Take Over of Corporate Boards		So-called “say on pay” or “proxy access” which propose to mandate a nonbinding shareholder vote on proxy access and other corporate governance issues for all companies in which the Treasury Department buys a direct stake in certain assets.	OUT
Affordable Housing Slush Fund (ACORN Fund)		Included a giveaway that would force taxpayers to bankroll a slush fund for ACORN – an organization fraught with controversy for, among other scandals, its fraudulent voter registration activities on behalf of Democratic candidates.	OUT
Bankruptcy “Cramdown” (aka, trial bar give-away)		Included so-called “cramdown” provisions allowing bankruptcy judges to reduce mortgage principal under the guise of helping those at risk of foreclosure. If enacted into law, the provision would be a bonanza for trial lawyers and undercut the effectiveness of any economic recovery effort by making it even harder to value mortgage-backed securities.	OUT
Mark-to-Market Accounting			GAO study on the impacts of mark-to-market accounting standards and effects on the banking crisis. Restatement of existing authority to suspend mark-to-market.
Equity/Warrants		Mandatory equity interest in all participating firms.	Mandatory equity interests in total takeover scenario. Proportional equity interest based on percentage of assets sold if deemed appropriate Secretary.
Tax benefits for community banks			Ability for community banks to take capital losses on GSE assets against ordinary income.

In July, 2008, a Wall Street Journal article addressed the previous housing bill signed into law:

Provide[d] a stream of billions of dollars for distressed homeowners and communities and the nonprofit groups that serve them. One of the biggest likely beneficiaries, despite Republican objections is ACORN, a housing advocacy group that also helps lead ambitious voter-registration efforts benefiting Democrats. ACORN -- made up of several legally distinct groups under that name -- has become an important player in the Democrats' effort to win the White House. Its voter mobilization arm is co-managing a $15.9 million campaign with the group Project Vote to register 1.2 million low-income Hispanics and African-Americans, who are among those most likely to vote Democratic. Technically nonpartisan, the effort is one of the largest such voter-registration drives on record.

The organization's main advocacy group lobbied hard for passage of the housing bill, which provides nearly $5 billion for affordable housing, financial counseling and mortgage restructuring for people and neighborhoods affected by the housing meltdown. A third ACORN arm, its housing corporation, does a large share of that work on the ground. Acorn's multiple roles show how two fronts of activism -- housing for the poor and voter mobilization -- have converged closely in this election year. The fortunes of both parties will hinge in part on their plans for addressing the fall of the nation's housing market and the painful economic slowdown. . . .

Partly because of the role of ACORN and other housing advocacy groups, the White House and its allies in Congress resisted Democrats' plans to include money for a new affordable-housing trust fund and $4 billion in grants to restore housing in devastated neighborhoods. In the end, the money stayed in the bill; the White House saw little choice. What most riles Republicans about the bill is the symbiotic relationship between the Democratic Party and the housing advocacy groups, of which ACORN is among the biggest. Groups such as the National Council of La Raza and the National Urban League also lobby to secure government-funded services for their members and seek to move them to the voting booth. ACORN has been singled out for criticism because of its reach, its endorsements of Democrats, and past flaws in its bookkeeping and voter-registration efforts that its detractors in Congress have seized upon. . . .

Sen. Obama is especially reliant on registration drives, such as Acorn's with Project Vote, to help him win the White House. The Illinois Democrat draws his strongest support from blacks, Hispanics and young people, groups that are among the least likely to be registered. After law school, Sen. Obama was the director of Project Vote in Chicago. . . .

Democrats on Capitol Hill have helped to steer millions of dollars in housing and other grants from the federal government toward ACORN and groups like it. The groups must qualify and compete for the money, which is typically doled out from the federal government to states and municipalities. The housing package includes a new, permanent source of affordable-housing money that congressional Democrats and grassroots groups have sought for years. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund will be funded by a tax on mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage titans.

That tax eventually will channel upwards of $600 million annually in grants for developing and restoring housing, mostly as low-income rentals, available to ACORN and other groups. Democrats on Capitol Hill and housing groups say the housing-assistance money is vital to helping Americans hit hardest by what some call the largest drop in home values since the Great Depression. But they acknowledge the perception of political conflict in giving federal funds to an organization that does political work. "We are guarding against it," said Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank in an interview. He secured the Affordable Housing Trust from his seat as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. . . .

ACORN describes itself as the nation's largest grassroots community organization, with more than 400,000 families organized into 1,200 neighborhood chapters in 110 cities. Over four decades, ACORN has turned its broad membership into a powerful lobbying tool. Its representatives are well-known in the marble halls of the Capitol, and press local, state and federal governments . .

Let’s use the bailout package to help support the organization that helped to cause the need for a bailout?

Democrats fighting regulations on Fannie and Freddie, pushed to give loans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&feature=related

------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HQWk1Wp3L4