Justice For All Malaysia

Repercussion in Malaysia?

Posted on: September 30, 2008

ANWAR IBRAHIM: I learned in Economics 101 that those who live by the market must also die by the market.
————————————————————————————————

House rejects $700B bailout in stunning defeat

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer 56 minutes ago
WASHINGTON – In a vote that shook the government, Wall Street and markets around the world, the House on Monday defeated a $700 billion emergency rescue for the nation’s financial system, leaving both parties’ lawmakers and the Bush administration scrambling to pick up the pieces. Dismayed investors sent the Dow Jones industrials plunging 777 points, the most ever for a single day.
“We need to put something back together that works,” a grim-faced Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said after he and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke joined in an emergency strategy session at the White House. On Capitol Hill, Democratic leaders said the House would reconvene Thursday, leaving open the possibility that it could salvage a reworked version.
Senate leaders showed no inclination to try to bring the measure to a vote before they could determine its fate in the House. President Bush, meanwhile, was scheduled to make a statement on the rescue plan Tuesday morning, the White House said.
All sides agreed the effort to bolster beleaguered financial markets, potentially the biggest government intervention since the Great Depression, could not be abandoned.
But in a remarkable display on Monday, a majority of House members slapped aside the best version their leaders and the administration had been able to come up with, bucking presidential speeches, pleading visits from Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and urgent warnings that the economy could nosedive without the legislation.
In the face of thousands of phone calls and e-mails fiercely opposing the measure, many lawmakers were not willing to take the political risk of voting for it just five weeks before the elections.
The bill went down, 228-205.
The House Web site was overwhelmed as millions of people sought information about the measure through the day.
The legislation the administration promoted would have allowed the government to buy bad mortgages and other sour assets held by troubled banks and other financial institutions. Getting those debts off their books should bolster those companies’ balance sheets, making them more inclined to lend and ease one of the biggest choke points in a national credit crisis. If the plan worked, the thinking went, it would help lift a major weight off the national economy, which is already sputtering.
Hoping to pick up enough GOP votes for the next try, Republicans floated several ideas. One would double the $100,000 ceiling on federal deposit insurance. Another would end rules that require companies to devalue assets on their books to reflect the price they could get in the market.
In the meantime, Paulson said he would work with other regulators “to use all the tools available to protect our financial system and our economy.”
“Our tool kit is substantial but insufficient,” he said, indicating the government intended to continue piecemeal fixes while pressing Congress for broader action.
Stocks started plummeting on Wall Street even before Monday’s vote was over, as traders watched the rescue measure going down on television. Meanwhile, lawmakers were watching them back.
As a digital screen in the House chamber recorded a cascade of “no” votes against the bailout, Democratic Rep. Joe Crowley of New York shouted news of the falling Dow Jones industrials. “Six hundred points!” he yelled, jabbing his thumb downward.
The final stock carnage far surpassed the 684-point drop on the first trading day after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
In the House, “no” votes came from both the Democratic and Republican sides of the aisle. More than two-thirds of Republicans and 40 percent of Democrats opposed the bill. Several Democrats in close election fights waited until the last moment, then went against the bill as it became clear the vast majority of Republicans were opposing it.
Thirteen of the 19 most vulnerable Republicans and Democrats in an Associated Press analysis voted against the bill despite the pleas from Bush and their party leaders to pass it.
In all, 65 Republicans joined 140 Democrats in voting “yes,” while 133 Republicans and 95 Democrats voted “no.”
The overriding question was what to do next.
“The legislation may have failed; the crisis is still with us,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in a news conference after the defeat. “What happened today cannot stand.”
Republican leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, the minority leader, said he and other Republicans were pained to back the measure, but in light of the potential consequences for the economy and all Americans, “We need to renew our efforts to find a solution that Congress can support.”
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., said there was scant time to reopen legislation that was the product of hard-fought bipartisan negotiations.
“What happened today was not a failure of a bill, it was a failure of will,” said Dodd, the Banking Committee chairman. “Our hope is that cooler heads will prevail, people will think about what they did today and recognize that this is not just scare tactics — it’s reality.”
A brutal round of partisan finger-pointing followed the vote.
Republicans blamed Pelosi’s scathing speech near the close of the debate — which assailed Bush’s economic policies and a “right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation” of financial markets — for the defeat. It was not much different from her usual tough words against the president and his party.
“We could have gotten there today had it not been for the partisan speech that the speaker gave on the floor of the House,” Boehner said.
Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the whip, estimated that Pelosi’s speech changed the minds of a dozen Republicans who might otherwise have supported the plan.
That amounted to an appalling accusation by Republicans against Republicans, said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., chairman of the Financial Services Committee: “Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decide to punish the country.”
More than a repudiation of Democrats, Frank said, Republicans’ refusal to vote for the bailout was a rejection of their own president.
Indeed, many GOP lawmakers spurned Bush’s urgent calls for action. “We have a gun to our head,” said Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite, R-Fla., who opposed the bill. “This isn’t legislation — it’s extortion.”
The two men campaigning to replace Bush watched the situation closely — from afar — and demanded action.
In Iowa, Republican John McCain said his rival Barack Obama and congressional Democrats “infused unnecessary partisanship into the process. Now is not the time to fix the blame; it’s time to fix the problem.”
Obama said, “Democrats, Republicans, step up to the plate, get it done.”
Lawmakers were under extraordinary pressure from powerful outside groups, which gave notice they considered the legislation a “key vote” — one they would consider when rating members of Congress.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said opponents of the bailout would pay for their stance.
“Make no mistake: When the aftermath of congressional inaction becomes clear, Americans will not tolerate those who stood by and let the calamity happen,” said R. Bruce Josten, the Chamber’s top lobbyist, in a letter to members.
The conservative Club for Growth made a similar threat to supporters of the bailout.
“We’re all worried about losing our jobs,” Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., declared in an impassioned speech in support of the bill before the vote. “Most of us say, ‘I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it — not me.'”
“We’re in this moment, and if we fail to do the right thing, Heaven help us,” he said.
If Congress doesn’t come around on a bailout, more pressure would fall on the Federal Reserve.
The Fed, which has been providing billions in short-term loans to squeezed banks to help them overcome credit stresses, could keep expanding those loans to encourage lending. And, it could keep working with other central banks to inject billions into financial markets overseas.
It also has the power to expand emergency lending to other types of companies and even to individuals if they are unable to secure adequate credit.
___
Associated Press writers Jeannine Aversa, Jim Abrams and Andrew Taylor contributed to this report.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Must Attend Program

Please go to this link: https://justice4allkuantan.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/invitation-public-forum-the-isa-and-the-police-reform-process-whats-next-after-pak-lah/
To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards of people - Emily Cox

Siphoning EPF money

On 'Why should Valuecap borrow from EPF?' Syed Shahir Syed Mohamud: MTUC condemns the government's move to bail out Valuecap to support the local stock market using RM5 billion from EPF, as the provident fund is the custodian of the workers' money and not some sort of ‘automated teller machine' for the government.
If at all the EPF were to lend its money to the government, it has to be under the condition that there be transparency and accountability in the activities for which the money has been purposed. We want to know who is doing what with the money that belongs to the workers. This is the hard-earned money of the workers, their retirement plan. How is this bailout plan going to benefit the workers? We also question the reason for this bailout. If the economic fundamentals in Malaysia are strong and reserves sufficient as has been stated several times by the government, then why is there a need to offer so much money to the GLCs? Second Finance Minister Nor Mohamed Yakcop should prove how the EPF would profit from this loan. Bernama had reported that Nor had given the assurance that the loan given out by EPF would reap profits for the fund judging from Valuecap's past performance. But where is the paperwork and calculations to show that this move will benefit the EPF? MTUC is concerned that the loan might be mismanaged or misused and this, in turn, would affect the returns for the contributors. Mere assurances are not enough. We want to proof that this RM5 billion will not go down the drain. (The writer is president, MTUC). Sharyn: The government wants to use our pension money to prop up the Malaysian stock market which is the playing field of the rich people. If so, the government must ensure that the EPF account holders - who are predominantly the poor to average citizens of Malaysia - be guaranteed all of our pension money with a compound 8% growth (interest). It's so selfish and sick of the government to use the poor's pension money to help the rich to make more money with all the risks taken by the poor/average citizen. We can better use the RM% billion loans to Valuecap for our children's education, shelter, medical bills etc. Why not get those rich people to prop up the share market instead? Why should they park their money overseas and gamble with our EPF money instead? Kumar14: Who is behind this Valuecap organisation? Why suddenly, this separate entity is allowed to access funds from the EPF? Are they capable enough to handle it or is it just another desperate and blind move? It has been a very infamous trend where the people's funds are channeled to a company for investment purposes and suddenly POP! the funds disappear and there is nobody to be held responsible but a RM2 shell company. Charge who? Sue whom? The RM2 company (just a registered name)? We have seen this many times. People in power and with connections allow such things to go through and reap/rob the people's wealth and then blame it on organisations which actually don't exist. What if a lot of EPF funds are looted via such scams and nobody is to be pointed at? Where will the government get the funds to replenish the EPF? The people are very bored, disappointed, angry and frustrated at seeing all these dumb and unaccounted for measures being allowed by the government with lame excuses. Please, somebody verify the true purpose, integrity and capability of anybody attempting to use the people's fund.

Raja Petra

Photobucket Ihsan dari blog Go!Malaysian http://gomalaysian.blogspot.com/

ANWAR IBRAHIM

A prosperous future is indivisible from a firm commitment to the principles of distributive justice, the rule of law and a profound respect for human rights.

Email Address:

justice4allmsia@yahoo.com

Archives

September 2008
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

Blog Stats

  • 117,126 hits
%d bloggers like this: