NPR logo

Senators Skeptical Of Bailout Package

  • Download
  • <iframe src="" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript
Senators Skeptical Of Bailout Package


Senators Skeptical Of Bailout Package

Senators Skeptical Of Bailout Package

  • Download
  • <iframe src="" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player">
  • Transcript

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke testified before the Senate Banking Committee Tuesday about the $700 billion rescue plan for the financial sector. They stressed that it was urgent that lawmakers pass the bill this week. Many committee members were not swayed.


It's Morning Edition from NPR News. I'm Linda Wertheimer in for Renee Montagne.


And I'm Steve Inskeep, good morning. Day by day, Congress is asking more questions about the bailout of the financial industry. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson was hoping for faster action. He says the help is needed immediately. But Congress is hesitating over questions like who exactly gets the power to spend $700 billion. And yesterday, the questions to Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke went on for five hours. NPR's David Welna has this report.

DAVID WELNA: As stock prices went south for the second day since the unveiling of the bad debt bailout plan, Treasury Secretary Paulson pitched his proposal to the Senate banking panel as just the right medicine for what ails the economy.

Secretary HENRY PAULSON (Treasury Department): This troubled asset purchase program on its own is the single most effective thing we can do to help homeowners, the American people, and to stimulate our economy.

WELNA: Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd was not so sure, though. He called the three-page bailout plan "stunning and unprecedented," not only in scope, but also in lack of detail. Fed Chairman Bernanke warned Dodd that financial markets are in what he called a "quite fragile condition" and that absent a plan they would certainly get worse.

Dr. BEN BERNANKE (Chairman, Federal Reserve): I think if this is not done, that it will be of significant adverse consequences for the average person in the United States.

Senator CHRISTOPHER DODD (Democrat, Connecticut; Chairman, Senate Banking Committee): And that's your recommendations, chairman of the Federal Reserve?

Dr. BERNANKE: Yes sir, it is. I do believe we need to act to stabilize the situation which is continuing to be very unpredictable and very worrisome.

WELNA: But that failed to sway conservative Wyoming Republican Mike Enzi. His scathing critique of the plan brought applause from some in the audience, followed by a warning from Chairman Dodd.

Senator MICHAEL ENZI (Republican, Wyoming; Senior Member, Senate Banking Committee): It does not make any sense that we'll reward the banks first who got us in the financial mess and the taxpayers second, many of whom were completely unaware that this kind of financial crisis could...

(Soundbite of audience applause)

Senator DODD: (Unintelligible) I'm going to ask the audience, we'll have to clear this room. I don't want to do that.

WELNA: New York Democrat Charles Schumer then suggested to Paulson that Congress initially approve only a first installment of funding, say $150 billion.

Senator CHARLES SCHUMER (Democrat, New York; Member, Senate Banking Committee): Could this system work if we put in the legislation, say, this is the first tranche and by January 15, say - just pick a date - Congress will come back and re-examine.

Secretary PAULSON: I think that would be a grave mistake.

Senator SCHUMER: And why?

Secretary PAULSON: Because I think what this is about, is about market confidence and having the tools to do the job.

WELNA: Ohio Democrat Sherrod Brown wanted to know something else.

Senator SHERROD BROWN (Democrat, Ohio; Member, Senate Banking Committee): Do you think Wall Street owes the American people an apology?

WELNA: Fed Chairman Bernanke answered first.

Dr. BERNANKE: Wall Street itself is an abstraction. There are many people who made big mistakes and many regulators who made mistakes, so we need to figure out what those were and make sure they don't happen again.

Senator BROWN: Secretary Paulson?

Secretary PAULSON: You know, I share the outrage that people have. It's embarrassing to look at this, and I think it's embarrassing for the United States of America. There's a lot of blame to go around, a lot of blame.

WELNA: But now, Paulson said, is not a time for assigning blame. It's time, he said, for Congress to act.

Secretary PAULSON: So I feel great urgency, and I believe it's got to be done this week or before you leave.

WELNA: Not so fast, said the top Democrat and top Republican on the banking panel, once the hearing was over. Here's what Chairman Dodd told reporters.

Senator DODD: What they have sent to us is not acceptable. This is not going to work. And they're going to have to come back and work with us. And we'll make the decision as to whether or not we're going to send something back to them that can work. I'd like to achieve that result.

WELNA: To which ranking Republican Richard Shelby added, we've got to look at some alternatives.

Senator RICHARD SHELBY (Republican, Alabama; Chairman, Senate Banking Committee): I think the secretary now realizes that what he sent up is not going to be just rubber-stamped.

WELNA: So with both Democrats and conservative Republicans lining up against Paulson's plan, without a different offer, there's little chance Congress will sign off on what would be the biggest financial bailout ever. David Welna, NPR News, the Capitol.

Copyright © 2008 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Why Congress Objects To The Bailout Plan

In Depth

Your questions answered on:

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT, left) and ranking Republican Sen. Richard Shelby (AL) were among the many lawmakers who raised objections to the bailout plan during testimony Tuesday from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd (D-CT, left) and ranking Republican Sen. Richard Shelby (AL) were among the many lawmakers who raised objections to the bailout plan during testimony Tuesday from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

The outrage was palpable Tuesday as the Senate Banking Committee grilled Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on the details of their $700 billion plan to bail out Wall Street with taxpayer funds. But lawmakers are hardly the only ones questioning whether the plan will work. Here's a look at some of the objections being raised on and off Capitol Hill.

It's A Huge Amount Of Power To Invest In The Treasury: The Bush administration's plan would grant the Treasury secretary nearly absolute control of the $700 billion authorized by the bailout measure. The language in the measure sent to Congress would make the Treasury secretary's decisions "non-reviewable" — including by "any court of law or any administrative agency." That would give the Treasury secretary powers that are not only extraordinary but, some would say, also unconstitutional because of the lack of accountability.

Jon Macey, a professor and deputy dean of Yale Law School, says the bill contains the largest transfer of power from Congress to the administration that he has ever seen. Macey says Congress is handing over more power than it did in granting the executive branch leeway in the Patriot Act, and more powers than when authorizing combat through the war powers clause. He says the move amounts to a sidelining of Congress.

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, a Democrat from Connecticut, on Tuesday called the language in the plan "so troubling" and said it "cannot last" as part of the legislation.

It Represents A Fundamental Shift In The Way The U.S. Economy Works: The Bush administration's plan to bail out the nation's financial institutions represents an unprecedented intervention in free markets. If the Wall Street bailout is adopted, Republican Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky said last week, "the free market for all intents and purposes is dead in America."

A fundamental principle of free-market capitalism is that investors take on big risks to reap big rewards — but they also assume any losses that occur. The government's plan would radically alter that model, leaving profits private while making losses public.

It's Not The Only Viable Option For Fixing This Mess: In a nutshell, the Bush administration's plan would authorize up to $700 billion to let Treasury buy up bad mortgages from financial institutions. With these toxic assets off the books for firms, lenders would once again be willing to lend and the money would start flowing freely through the markets, the theory goes. Objections to the plan have come from both sides of the aisle — and from academics and economists who say it amounts to a huge handout to Wall Street without necessarily fixing the problem.

Many economists have proposed alternatives and alterations to the administration's proposal, some of which have been taken up by lawmakers. Details of the plan are still being negotiated, but here are some of the key points of contention:

Equity stakes: Rather than simply buying up bad loans and letting taxpayers assume all the risk, why not take shares in the financial firms in exchange, so that taxpayers could also participate in any potential profits? Banking Committee Chairman Dodd has proposed "contingency shares" that would only be issued if losses are realized on the assets bought up from a firm. In Tuesday's hearing, Paulson rejected the idea of equity shares, saying it would make the bailout program "ineffective" — though he didn't offer details on why that would be the case.

Valuing assets: There are already buyers for these toxic assets out there — they just aren't willing to buy them at prices that financial institutions find palatable. (In some cases, selling at those prices would make firms insolvent.) Many critics argue that the fundamental problem is that the financial markets lack capital, so the only way the government's plan will work is if the Treasury overpays for the assets; otherwise, why not just let investors buy them up?

So, how to price these assets? Technically, assets are only worth what a buyer is willing to pay for them. If no one wants to buy mortgage-backed securities, then right now they are worthless — but that doesn't mean they will always be worthless. Paulson has suggested that one way to set prices would be through what's known as a reverse auction, the goal of which is to drive prices down, rather than up.

But some economists note that reverse auctions work best when the assets being auctioned off are essentially identical. That's not the case with mortgage-backed securities: Some of them may have plenty of healthy, payment-producing mortgages in them, while others may be full of defaulted loans. If the government simply buys the securities with the lowest price, it may end up with $700 billion worth of the worst loans, critics say.

Executive-pay limits: Some lawmakers want any company that participates in the bailout to agree to slash the pay of its executives. After all, they say, those who created the mortgage mess shouldn't be allowed to profit from the bailout. But Paulson has resisted this idea. He argues that pay cuts would discourage firms from using the program and would force thousands of firms to review their executive compensation before participating, a time-consuming process.

Lawmakers Are Being Urged To Act While Staring At The Barrel Of A Gun: Congress is being asked to enact a fundamental restructuring of the U.S. economy — in one week. That's not a lot of time for lawmakers to weigh their options and the repercussions of their actions. In private meetings on the Hill, Paulson and Bernanke have warned lawmakers about the dire consequences of not acting — but these economic Doomsday scenarios have not been spelled out to the public.

Democratic Sen. Jon Tester of Montana told Paulson as much on Tuesday: "I fully feel the urgency ... But the truth is that we have to be given the time to do this right, or it's not going to work and we'll be back here next year or in two years asking for another $700 billion or more."

With additional reporting by Laura Conaway and Adam Davidson.