Proposed banking bailout sells out democracy

September 22, 7:36 PMPolitical Issues ExaminerJudah Freed

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Political Issues Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

As one of his final acts before leaving the White House, President George W. Bush proposes resolving America's financial crisis by effectively nationalizing the U.S. banking industry while gutting the U.S. Constitution's balance of powers, making the Secretary of the Treasury more powerful than the Congress, the Courts and the president himself.

Voices across the political spectrum, left and right, are declaring their opposition to the terms of the proposed bailout while Congress hurtles toward approving the Bush sellout of democracy.

You can find plenty of writers online talking about the proposal to add another $700 billion in national debt for the U.S. Government to buy bad mortgage loans. The plan apparently would give the government an ownership stake in the banks being bailed out, which would nationalize those banks, creating neo-socialism that's antithetical to free-market capitalism.

You also can find plenty of writers online calling for protection of homeowners and restrictions on payments to the banking executives asking for bailouts. The individuals and families and small businesses being hurt in this financial crisis, goes this argument, deserve greater government protection.

My focus in this posting and the next series of articles, however, will be to oppose the terms in the Bush plan that fundamentally betray the principles underpinning American democracy.

I object specifically to the following proposed provisions:

* The Treasury Secretary would only report to Congress every three months.

* The Treasury Secretary could take whatever actions he deems are “necessary” to fulfill the act’s purposes.

* The Treasury Secretary could make contracts without congressional approval.

* The Treasury Secretary could make appointments without congressional approval.

* Any decisions by the Treasury Secretary in spending the approved money would be “non-reviewable” by Congress and “may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”

This last provision, in my judgement, is the least tenable and most dangerous, for it waives constitutional checks and balances. All these measures combined give the Treasury Secretary the concentrated powers of a dictator. That's just not acceptable. The potential long-term repercussions frighten me profoundly.

What scares me most about the Bush proposal is that too few Americans truly understand the principles on which the U.S. Constitution is constructed, and so they do not see our peril. This means our choices about the far-reaching bailout proposal may not be wise.

Therefore, starting tomorrow morning, I am going to post a series of excerpts from my book that can serve as a primer on the core principles of democracy and U.S. Constitution. Even if you've studied political philosophy and feel you have nothing more to learn, you may find some surprises in the next series of postings, for I made some startling discoveries while doing the research.

My guess is that you can read all of these upcoming postings in less than an hour, so I invite you to make this investment of your time and intelligence.

I hope these postings help clear any confusion in your thinking as you evaluate the president's bailout plan. Once you are clear in your own mind, I invite you to contact your congressional representatives and let your voice be heard.