Disapproval of Obligations under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

Floor Speech

DISAPPROVAL OF OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION ACT OF 2008 -- (House of Representatives - January 22, 2009)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. FOXX. I yield myself, Mr. Speaker, 12 minutes.

I thank Mr. Frank for explaining why we are here this morning, but I would like to say that there is a difference between suggesting to the Obama administration what they should do through Mr. Frank's bill, which he knows is not going to pass the Senate, and that if the Democrats in charge wanted to really have control over how the next batch of money is going to be spent, then they would be serious and put into that bill restrictions. I don't think any of us have ever seen a time when the Congress has let go of so much money to the executive branch with no more restrictions on how it was going to be spent.

I have seen committees argue over minor expenditures, but yet have appropriated $350 billion to the Bush administration and now are going to do the same thing to the Obama administration. I would say that there are a lot of the cliches that can be used in discussing this bill today, but I would say two wrongs don't make a right, that's one, I would say. But, again, I appreciate his taking the time to explain to people why we are here.

In fact, the first legislation, the bailout legislation, as it was called, had within it the mechanism for stopping the money. What I have done is simply used the mechanism that was given to us, to do my best to stop it, and I want to give thanks to my legislative director, Brandon Renz, for his great help in this effort.

It's really unfortunate that we have to meet today to consider this legislation under these circumstances. But since October, when Congress granted the previous administration unfettered access to taxpayer blank checks, we have seen a steady stream of reports outlining mismanagement, waste, and lack of oversight that was all too predictable during the initial consideration of the TARP/megabank bailout. And let me point out again that it was supported by President Obama and by the Democrats in the Congress. So you can't blame all of this on the Bush administration.

The Members of Congress and the public were scared by a doomsday scenario that promised Armageddon if this singular proposal was not approved immediately. Deliberation, patience, prudence, yielded to panic, and the product of those poor decisions has led us to where we are today. Another cliche, "Act in haste, repent at leisure,'' has assumed a new and expensive meaning.

Americans are $350 billion poorer, and their sacrifices are about to double, as the Senate rejected S.J. Res. 5, which is the companion to the measure before us today. What is particularly troublesome is that President Obama was elected on the promise of bringing change, but another $350 billion is not change.

Does President Obama think that if the bailout isn't working he must need a bigger bucket? The reasoning seems to be that since President Bush got his slush fund, it's only fair to grant the same to the incoming administration. But as I say, two wrongs don't make a right. This is just as big a mistake as the original bailout.

The truth is that no administration, Republican or Democrat, should be allowed to nationalize a private company or industry, as we have witnessed with each successive bailout. This failed and expensive approach to trying to stabilize the economy is simply borrowing on the good credit of our children, our grandchildren and our great grandchildren, and now the government has an ownership stake. Now that the government has an ownership stake, the independent decisionmaking of nationalized entities will certainly take a back seat to political correctness and pork-barrel politics.

Given my passionate opposition to the bailout mania, I am often asked what I support instead of more bailouts. At the time TARP was originally considered, I joined a bipartisan working group of Congresswomen in writing to Speaker Pelosi and Republican Leader BOEHNER expressing our concerns and offering reasonable alternatives for consideration.

I also personally delivered proposals offered by President John Allison of BB&T directly to bailout negotiators, and I cosponsored legislation, H.R. 7223, prepared by the Republican Study Committee containing a comprehensive approach to dealing with this crisis.

But at this point it's clear that less is more. The Federal Government has done enough, I would say too much, and even many supporters of the initial TARP/megabank bailout are now saying these efforts should be given time to work. After all, it was unwise Federal policies that prompted the excesses at the root of the financial collapse. In that respect, as George Mason University Professor Russell Roberts has put forward, ``Don't just do something, stand there.''

At the same time reasonable alternatives have been offered up to stimulate our economy by some of the finest minds in our nations. These alternatives have merit that I believe would be recognized if Congress would only pursue prudent deliberation instead of a hasty rush to judgment.

For example, H.R. 470, of which I am a cosponsor, is a broad-based proposal that helps free up private capital that can be used as medicine to heal the ailing economy. Free-market solutions such as this are preferable and more effective than the Keynesian approach being discussed in Congress today.

In fact, many people have compared what's happening now to what happened in the Great Depression, and many people are reading the book, ``The Forgotten Man,'' which talks about the Depression and the failures of the Depression and the failures of the Democrat administration in particular. I want to quote one sentence from it: ``But the deepest problem was the intervention, the lack of faith in the marketplace.'' I think that is the big problem that we are facing in this country today.

We need to trust the marketplace. It is not the government. This is not a failure of capitalism and savior by the government. It's really a failure by the government, and we are doomed to repeat what happened in the Depression, I am afraid.

I am sure, though, that today we are going to hear without the TARP/megabank bailout we would be much worse off than without it. That's what Congressman Frank has already said. But not only is this argument speculative and untrue, it's a real tough sale to those struggling to find a job, credit or means to pay their bills.

As the old adage goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.'' We just seem incapable of learning the lessons of the past and destined to see history repeat itself. I urge our Members to join me today and do the right thing. Support this resolution and send a signal to the Obama administration that the bailout mania has to stop.

And I would add one more thing. I did introduce this bill in the last session, so it would have applied to the Bush administration as well as to the Obama administration.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source