The current bailout politics threaten the Nation

<p></p><i>to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Declaration of Independence, 1775</i>

<p></p><p></p>

I've written before about why the bailout is a bad idea economically. But more significantly, to pass it now threatens the basis of our Republic. A government must be legitimate to function, and for a Republic, legitimacy means the representatives must listen to their constituents. The public outcry against the current bailout has been overwhelming, with 2-1 and 3-1 opposition in polls and virtually 100% opposition in direct contacts to representatives.



Anybody participating in political discussions right now understands the depth of the resentment, not so much at the plan, but at the feeling that we don't matter. From left to right, we Americans are unified against this plan - not necessarily against any intervention, but against <b>this</b> intervention. If the plan passes against this kind of opposition, many will decide the government no longer represents them and no longer has the right to speak for them. Our government will no longer be legitimate.



Why should you care about legitimacy? Well, bluntly, legitimacy is the reason you can get to work in the morning. On every important issue, from abortion to Iraq, there are people on the "wrong" side of the decision who feel very, very deeply that the government's decision is an injustice. We all probably have at least one such issue. The reason that these people, even some of us, aren't out in the street every day bringing things to a halt is that we accept the government as legitimate. We accept that somehow, decisions have to get made, and in order to have a government that can do that we have to accept that sometimes it makes the wrong decisions. Legitimacy is the <b>moral</b> authority of a government that make people willing to accept the occasional wrong decision.



The United States government has tremendous legitimacy, partly by successfully leading us through two World Wars, a Depression, and the Cold War. But more importantly, we have a deep 200+ year tradition that all can participate in the political process and in some sense the government's decisions thus reflect "our" decisions. If a decision of this magnitude - one on which perhaps the future of the world depends - gets made, with us cut out, that legitimacy is lost.



The legitimacy of our government is almost literally a pearl without price. What really stands behind our 10 trillion dollar debt? Our legitimacy. What makes soldiers put their lives at risk at the order of a civilian ten thousand miles away? Our legitimacy. What makes all of us obey laws without police constantly at our shoulders? Our legitimacy. Untangible and unquantifiable, legitimacy is nonetheless the true currency of any government.



And if it is squandered now, we will all profoundly regret its loss. Almost certainly, hard times lie ahead, and we will all have to make sacrifices. How those sacrifices will be apportioned out will be the central question permeating our lives. With legitimacy, a government can allocate those losses and we will accept them. Without legitimacy, any allocation will be opposed by the "losers" with bitter protests and even violence. Often all sides will see themselves as "losers" and a settlement will be nearly impossible. In the months and years to come, we need every drop of legitimacy we can get.



The cost of this bailout, as it is written, is far more than the staggering 700 billion dollar official tag. The cost of this bailout would come in the legitimacy that backs our debt, our army's loyalty, and our mutual trust. To maintain that legitimacy, I would accept a Depression. Our country has survived a depression. It may not survive illegitimacy.



No to taxation without representation.
 
Not directly responsive to your post, but of the 10 e-mails I sent to five representatives (I completely forgot the White House), I have only received any kind of response from Senator Feinstein. I still don't buy in, but thought you might want to see her response.



<blockquote> Thank you for your letter expressing concern about Congress' consideration of a plan to meet our Nation's credit crisis with financial help from the Federal Government. This is a difficult situation for which there are no perfect solutions, and I would like to share my thoughts and concerns about this issue with you.



On September 19, 2008, Secretary of the Treasury Henry M. Paulson, Jr. announced a legislative proposal to use $700 billion to purchase illiquid mortgage-related assets from ailing financial institutions. Secretary Paulson's three-page proposal was a non-starter, and without critical changes it has no chance of approval from Congress.



This proposal would have given a blank check to an economic czar who would have been empowered to spend it without administrative oversight, legal requirements, or legislative review. Decisions made by the Treasury Secretary would be non-reviewable by any court, agency, or Congress. The proposal also lacked a requirement for regular reports to Congress on the status of the program. This was simply untenable.



Since this announcement, my offices have received thousands of comments from Californians like you concerned about how this action will affect them. Yet, I believe prudent action must be taken. The bill should include the following principles: a phase-in of funding; oversight, accountability and transparency; a mechanism allowing the Secretary of the Treasury to modify mortgages to prevent additional foreclosures; and a precise cap on executive compensation.



The current credit crisis affects all Americans. If action is not taken to stem the crisis, Americans risk losing their homes, jobs, personal savings, life insurance and more. Banks will cease to lend to businesses and homeowners, and credit will be increasingly difficult to come by for average Americans. I strongly believe that the consequences of failing to act now would be greater than not acting at all.



Attached please find a statement I recently made on the floor of the Senate expressing my feelings on this issue. Please know that I will keep your thoughts in mind as this situation unfolds.



Once again, thank you for writing. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.



</blockquote>
 
Back
Top