Sirs,
Your editorial on the failed bailout vote in the US House of Representatives claims the bill “could be part of an effective answer” to the financial crisis. Perhaps in the sense that as a 48 year old, out of shape university professor, I “could be” an astronaut. The bailout bill has grown from three pages in Sec. Paulson’s initial “give me $700 billion and I’ll fix it” proposal to the size of a hefty paperback novel. As of Thursday morning the Senate version was 450 pages long. My chances of a moon walk greatly exceed the chance that this bill will be anything other than a massive resource grab -- those extra 447 pages aren’t value added, they’re favors for special interests, like the attempt by Senate Democrats to shovel millions to the radical group ACORN, or total irrelevancies hitching a ride on the crisis atmosphere, like the provision requiring insurance companies provide more money for mental health treatment.Andrew P. Morriss
H. Ross & Helen Workman Professor of Law and Business
University of Illinois
They are probably referring to the "add ons", including extensions for wind and solar energy tax credits, incentives for carbon sequestration projects and a credit for owners of plug-in electric vehicles ($61M), film and TV programs ($344 million tax break), motorsports racing track facilities ($140M tax break), restaurateurs and retailers ($5.8B tax break), Indian reservations ($624M tax break); Washington, D.C., would benefit from $132 million of tax incentives to attract investment to the District.
And so on and so on, Paul Krugman picked on SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN and says
So am I for the bill? Yuk, phooey, I guess so. And I’m very angry at Paulson for putting us in this position.
