Category: Fall 2008 Newswire
Low Foreclosure Numbers in Maine Don’t Mean Ease for Homeowners
FORECLOSURE
Bangor Daily News
Guanlei Ren
Boston University Washington News Service
October 10, 2008
WASHINGTON— Maine’s foreclosure rate is low compared with other states. But homeowners facing foreclosure still need help, state officials say.
Of the 435 congressional districts nationally, Maine’s 1st and 2nd congressional districts rank 402nd and 388th respectively on the list of worst rates of foreclosures per household, according to www.hotpads.com, a real estate search engine.
“We are not experiencing the same rate of foreclosure in Maine that other states are experiencing; that is true,” said Will Lund, superintendent of Maine’s Bureau of Consumer Credit Protection. “I think it is a combination of more conservative borrowing and more conservative lending than in other states. Maine consumers tend to be a little bit more traditional in terms of the product they are interested in.”
According to an online marketplace for foreclosure properties–RealtyTrac, which Lund called “the best source of information” on foreclosures–303,879 U.S. properties filed for foreclosures in August, a 12 percent increase from the previous month and a 27 percent increase from August 2007.
In Maine, with one in every 2,966 households filing for foreclosure, the foreclosure rate declined in August. Its foreclosure rate ranked 43rd among the 50 states. In all, 233 properties filed for foreclosure in August, a nine percent decrease from July, but still 61 percent above the level reported for August 2007.
Dan Simpson, public information manager for the Maine State Housing Authority, said: “We have a low foreclosure rate on our own home loans because, while our typical borrowers have below-average incomes, we have not made sub-prime loans and we work with our borrowers to try and avoid foreclosure.”
A study based on 2008 first-quarter numbers by Maine’s Bureau of Financial Institutions also found “foreclosure numbers remain relatively small and do not pose a threat to the stability of state-chartered banks and credit unions.”
The second-quarter figures probably will come out by the end of this month, according to Lloyd P. LaFountain III, superintendent at the Maine Bureau of Financial Institutions.
So far, he said, the national financial crisis hasn’t affected credit unions, and loans are still available.
“However, that is not to say that the situation is not serious in Maine for those people who are affected,” Lund said. “For consumers who are facing foreclosure, it’s not much consolation for them that the overall rate of foreclosure is not as great in Maine as it is in other states.”
According to a national delinquency survey by the Mortgage Bankers Association, there were 4,912 loans in the foreclosure process in Maine out of 143,468 loans as of the second quarter. The Maine’ foreclosure inventory rate for all loans, 2.91 percent, is a little higher than the national average rate of 2.75 percent and significantly higher than Maine’s 2007 rate of 1.77 percent.
Simpson said that the state “also instituted a program at the start of this year called MaineHOPE [Home Ownership Protection against Unemployment] that provides our borrowers with four months’ worth of mortgage payments if they become unemployed through no fault of their own.”
On Sept. 26 and Oct. 1, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development announced two programs aimed to relieve the foreclosure problems.
The $3.92 billion neighborhood stabilization program allocated $19.6 million for Maine to assist local governments in acquiring and redeveloping foreclosed properties.
The HOPE for Homeowners program would help borrowers refinance into more affordable loans to prevent foreclosures.
“I think lenders are anxious to participate,” Lund said. “Lenders do not really benefit from foreclosures.” Bu in many states, he said, such programs are “only reaching less than 5 percent of all the eligible cases.”
“So although there’s been a lot of talk and although I would certainly encourage any program to do whatever it can,” Lund said, “the facts and figures may indicate that only a small percentage of consumers are actually being helped by the programs that are currently in place.”
###
New Regulation to Protect the North Atlantic Right Whales
WHALES
Bangor Daily News
Maite Jullian
Boston University Washington News Service
10/09/08
WASHINGTON – The endangered North Atlantic right whales will soon benefit from greater protection thanks to a new regulation which will reduce the speed at which large commercial ships can travel along the East Coast.
Although the regulations won’t affect ships traveling in Maine waters, the state’s lobstermen’s association welcomed the news as the recognition that both fishing and shipping industries should share responsibility for protection of the right whales.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries, which issued the regulation, said its goal is to reduce collisions between North Atlantic right whales and ships, one of the most common human-related causes of the mammal's death.
"There are only 300 to 400 left in the world," Connie Barclay, spokesperson for NOAA Fisheries, said of the right whales. "They are slow-moving and very vulnerable to ship collision. She said several whales are killed every year as a result of being hit by ships.
Ships will be required to stay at speeds below 10 knots in certain coastal regions. The regulation will take effect in two months and apply to ships of 65 feet or longer within 20 miles of the East Coast from Massachusetts to Florida, an area where the right whales feed, reproduce and migrate.
The new rule is part of NOAA’s ongoing efforts to protect the whales which include aerial whale surveillance and a mandatory ship reporting system.
The North Atlantic right whales have been on the endangered species list since 1973, according to NOAA. That same year, they were also designated as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.
The speed reduction won’t apply to Maine because the concentration of right whales is not great enough in the waters off the state’s coast according to Vicki Cornish, vice-president of the marine wildlife conservation at the Ocean Conservancy.
However, The Maine Lobstermen’s Association supports the passage of the regulation.
For the past 10 years there have been a number of federal rules and restrictions on fishing gear that have applied to Maine fishermen, according to Patrice McCarron, executive president of the Maine Lobstermen’s Association.
These are designed to prevent whales’ entanglement in fishing gear, the other most common cause of whale deaths.
McCarron said the group supports ship speed reduction because the fishing industry should not be singled out for restrictions and both threats should be addressed.
“If the shipping industry is having a negative impact, it should have some restrictions as well,” McCarron said. “The precedent is good. We all need to step up to the plate and do something.”
Both Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe and Democratic Rep. Tom Allen said they were pleased with the rule.
“There is an unquestionable need to reduce the occurrence of right whale ship strikes,” Snowe said in a press release. “For years, Maine lobstermen have made considerable efforts to abide by new fishing gear rules, so it is highly appropriate to address other causes of whales’ mortality.”
The regulation “ensures that all parties, not just lobstermen, are working hard to conserve our natural resources,” Allen said in a press release.
The new NOAA rule will be up for renewal in five years, after scientists assess the effectiveness of the restrictions.
The Humane Society of the United States, Defenders of Wildlife and the Ocean Conservancy who have been pushing for the rule’s implementation, said they were satisfied but disappointed the rule was not made permanent.
“We are very happy that the speed restrictions are in place on the East Coast, the need has been known for seven years,” Cornish said. “But we do feel like the agency made some pretty big compromises by reducing the restriction areas and adding a five year provision. It could cause NOAA to stop the rule early and we are concerned about that.”
Barclay said that the five year provision would allow NOAA scientists to assess how the rule is working.
“It’s a complicated issue,” she said. “It gives us more time and a chance to improve the rule.”
-30-
Gregg’s Bailout Negotiations Earn Him Bipartisan Kudos
GREGG
New Hampshire Union Leader
Jenny Paul
Boston University Washington News Service
10/9/08
WASHINGTON-- New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg is not accustomed to the glare of the national spotlight. The third-term Republican usually flew under the radar of the national media until last month, when party leaders appointed him lead negotiator for the Senate Republicans on the $700 billion Wall Street bailout plan that went into effect last week.
That’s when Gregg began making the rounds of cable news talks shows and holding near-daily press conferences to promote the contentious plan, which underwent numerous revisions as lawmakers tried to assure its passage after its initial defeat in the House on Sept. 29.
Gregg said he felt obligated to “sell the ideas” in the bailout plan to counterbalance the “disinformation and hyperbole” he thought the public was hearing about the plan, which authorizes the federal government to use up to $700 billion in taxpayer money to purchase troubled mortgage-backed securities in an effort to free up the nation’s credit market.
“I’ve never tried to seek a lot of public attention,” he said. “I felt it was important for me to be aggressive in pointing out what was really happening here and how important it was to everyday Americans to get something done and to do it quickly.”
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said he chose Gregg to be the party’s negotiator because he believed Gregg understood the financial and economic nuances involved in crafting the plan and would be able to stand up and represent the Republicans’ position in negotiations with Democratic leaders. He said Gregg also had the courage to stand firmly behind the bailout – even as members of Congress and everyday Americans questioned the plan.
“This was thought to be a pretty dicey issue politically, as you well know, and created a lot of heartburn among various members,” McConnell said.
Gregg’s work on the plan has earned him praise from not only his Republican cohorts, but also from his Democratic counterparts. Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) said Gregg fought for Republicans on policy disputes during bailout negotiations but was constructive about accommodating other views to make sure the package would “make a difference for the country and have a chance of passing.”
Conrad, who chairs the Budget Committee, on which Gregg is the top Republican, said he thinks senators from both parties hold Gregg in high regard because he is always well-prepared and respectful during discussions.
“Judd is no shrinking violet,” Conrad said with a laugh. “He pushes very, very hard for his position, but he does it in a way that people respect. Some of our colleagues are aggressive, but they put everybody off. Judd is aggressive, but people respect him for it because it’s done in a respectful way.”
But the bipartisan back-patting hasn’t translated to New Hampshire, where some constituents have questioned the necessity of the plan or whether it was a wise use of taxpayer money. And Gregg could endure more fallout as the effects of the bailout plan become clearer. After the plan took effect, the stock market continued to bleed last week, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropping below 10,000 points Monday for the first time in four years.
University of New Hampshire political science professor Andrew Smith cautioned against trying to gauge constituents’ perception of the legislation because it is too soon to tell whether the bailout package will positively affect the economy.
“I think it’s way too soon to ask people whether they’re for it or against it, because I don’t think anyone is in a position to judge whether it’s effective,” said Smith, the director of the UNH Survey Center. “Nobody understands it. Nobody knows if it’s going to be effective. The people who wrote it don’t know if it’s going to be effective.”
Even as he pushed the plan to his colleagues in Congress and the American people, Gregg made it clear that the bailout wouldn't be a quick fix, or even a long-term solution to the country’s economic woes. It only part of the solution – a tourniquet to stave off economic bleeding, he told the Union Leader Oct. 1.
“Even if we do act, we’re still going to be in a very slow economy, but it’s going to be something we can manage, hopefully,” he said before the plan passed.
Joel Maiola, who served as Gregg’s chief of staff until April, said he wasn’t surprised that Gregg supported the bailout even when it wasn’t politically prudent to do so.
“He has always taken positions that he feels strongly are the right positions for New Hampshire and the people he represents, and he’ll let the politics play out,” Maiola, who now runs a consulting firm in Concord, said. “He is more concerned with doing the right thing.”
Tom Rath, a Concord attorney and longtime friend of Gregg’s, said he thought Gregg tried to find common ground between Democrats and Republicans during the bailout negotiations. Although Gregg is a conservative Republican, he was able to work with members of both parties because he didn’t enter negotiations with the idea of scoring a partisan victory, Rath said.
“You can be partisan but still act in a nonpartisan way when the good of the country or the good of your state is at stake,” he said. “He’s had that almost from day one.”
Rath said Gregg’s respectful attitude helped him to create political capital with his Senate colleagues, especially the Democratic leadership, that he can use in the future to benefit his New Hampshire constituents.
“It’s been very visible the level of respect and admiration his colleagues have for him,” Rath said. “He has the ability to make sure that his concerns about New Hampshire are heard by any member of that body, and I think that’s a great thing for us.”
####
Federal Funds Add to New Bedford Efforts to Fight Foreclosures
FORECLOSURE
The New Bedford Standard-Times
Courtney Hime
Boston University Washington News Service
October 8, 2008
WASHINGTON – Two new federal foreclosure relief programs will help New Bedford’s efforts to deal with the home mortgage crisis.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on Sept. 26 allocated $3.92 billion for its Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Five days later, HUD kicked off the Hope for Homeowners program. Both programs aim to alleviate the problems of foreclosures.
Patrick Sullivan, director of the New Bedford Office of Housing and Community Development, said the federal programs will provide resources to continue local efforts and initiatives already in place to fight foreclosures in the New Bedford area.
Foreclosure prevention efforts
The Hope for Homeowners program is a three-year initiative that will allow qualifying homeowners to refinance their mortgages. The new loan, insured by the Federal Housing Administration, would be for 30 years at a fixed rate.
The program aims to prevent foreclosure on up to 400,000 homes nationally over the next three years. Kristine Foye, spokeswoman for the New England region of HUD, said via e-mail that the success of the program depends largely on communication between lenders and borrowers.
Initiatives are already in place in New Bedford to collaborate with lenders, Sullivan said. Along with Fall River, the city began working with lenders two years ago to prevent foreclosures.
“We’ve been a little bit proactive on the local level working with these community banks,” he said. “We’ve formed a nice little collaboration with local lenders [and with] non-profits [on] the prevention side and educating everyone about what’s out there for assistance.”
Still, more work is needed beyond the local level, Sullivan said. Local banks, he said, do not hold a lot of properties facing foreclosure, so working with larger, national banks would be a necessary step.
“That will be a challenge for us to kind of reach out and work with those banks that are not local in trying to implement this new mechanism,” he said.
Sullivan said he hopes the Hope for Homeowners program would help overcome that challenge to allow banks to negotiate for a lower mortgage to help people remain in their homes.
“That’s something that’s beyond the control of local governments,” Sullivan said.
New Bedford Mayor Scott Lang said he believes the program would offer another tool for foreclosure assistance.
“It gives us the ability to rework these mortgages, provided that the lenders are in agreement with that type of approach,” he said. “I would think most lenders would be from the standpoint that they don’t want to end up with a vacant piece of property.”
Nationwide, 50 lenders had signed up for the program as of Wednesday, according to Lemar Wooley, spokesperson for HUD. As far as Sullivan knew, no local banks had signed up for the program.
Aftermath of foreclosures
The Neighborhood Stabilization Program is targeted at acquiring and redeveloping foreclosed homes. HUD allocated $54.8 million for Massachusetts, including $4.2 for Boston, $2.2 million for Brockton, $2.6 for Springfield and $2.44 for Worcester. The remaining $43.4 million will be divided among the rest of the state.
Sullivan said he had hoped his office would receive a direct allocation from HUD instead of vying for its share of the $43 million. As part of the preparation, Sullivan said, 25 properties were located that could be acquired quickly and turned around to be sold as rental properties or even homes for first-time buyers.
“We’ve been anticipatory of this funding and have put some things in place to help us be prepared to spend some of that money,” Sullivan said.
He said his office would be working closely with the state Department of Housing and Community Development “to ensure that we get some direct money.”
Phil Hailer, a spokesman for the state agency, said it is unclear how the funds will be divided. The state must submit an action plan to HUD by Dec. 1 explaining how the funds will be distributed, he said.
####
Household Education a Factor in Children’s Health
HEALTH
New London Day
Dan Levy
Boston University Washington News Service
October 8 2008
WASHINGTON – Connecticut children aren’t as healthy as they should be, according to a national report that shows how family background has an impact on kids’ health.
White, wealthy and educated parents have the healthiest children in Connecticut, but even these kids are ailing more than their counterparts in other states, the report, published Wednesday, finds.
The report was commissioned by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a health and health care philanthropy that in 2007 awarded $480 million in grants, and authored by two researchers at the University of California, San Francisco. Their aim was to “look beyond the medical care system,” according to the report, and explore how social factors affect the health of children.
“Why people stay healthy or get sick in the first place often has little to do with [access to medical care],” Sue Egerter, co-author of the report, said in a conference call Tuesday. “We need to recognize that there is more to health than health care.”
In Connecticut, the report shows that children in poor families are roughly 4.5 times as likely to be unhealthy – as reported by their parents – than children from wealthier families. Similarly, kids in households without a high school graduate are 4.5 times as likely to be unhealthy than those living with someone who went to college.
Education and income are related but separate factors, according to the report. While educated parents can secure better jobs with higher income, they also make better role models for children, lowering their exposure to unhealthy conditions such as secondhand smoke.
“[Education and wealth] are hard to disentangle, but we see independent health effects of both factors,” said Dr. Paula Braveman, who directed the study and co-authored the report.
The researchers rank Connecticut 18th among states based on the gap between the overall rate of unhealthy children – 12.7 percent – and the rate among higher-income families – 6.9 percent. California has the widest gap, while New Hampshire has the narrowest.
The study defines higher-income households as those with incomes four times the federal poverty line. For a family of four, that means families earning roughly $82,500 or more.
But even Connecticut’s higher-income families reported a higher rate of sick children than the “national benchmark” of 3.5 percent. This benchmark refers to the lowest rate of unhealthy kids from high-income families in any state – in this case, Colorado.
The failure of other states to match this benchmark shows that all families need to live healthier, more productive lifestyles, said Dr. David Williams, staff director of the foundation project.
“This is not just a problem for the poor or minorities,” Williams said. “As a society, we are not doing as well on health as we could.”
Obesity and asthma are two prevalent – and often preventable – problems that affect privileged and poor children alike, according to Elizabeth Brown, legislative director for the Connecticut Commission on Children, which helps guide children’s programs in the state.
Brown said the state needs to work with schools and families to develop a more preventive approach to health, citing the nutrition movement in public schools as an example.
“We have a crisis type of health system,” Brown said. “There’s no money in preventative health right now…. We really need to work with parents to inform them how they can help their children grow to their fullest potential in a more holistic manner.”
This spring the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation will recommend strategies to improve the health of Americans based on its children’s health report and other research.
###
President Welcomes Olympians to the White House
OLYMPIANS
Norwalk Hour
Jordan Zappala
Boston University Washington News Service
10/7/08
WASHINGTON – On what he described as a “special day for the White House,” President George Bush Tuesday welcomed more than 500 U.S. Olympic and Paralympic athletes on the South Lawn.
To an audience of roughly 200 friends and family members, President Bush described his August trip to Beijing as “one of the greatest experiences” of his life.
“But more impressive was the decency and character that these Olympics brought on the world stage,” Bush said from a podium nestled among the athletes. “Whether you won a medal or not, it really doesn’t matter in the long run. What really matters is the honor you brought to your sports and to your families and to your country.”
On an unusually brisk morning, the grinning athletes – including medal winners Michael Phelps, Nastia Liukin and Shawn Johnson – stood on the balcony and steps of the White House in a dynamic cascade of blue and red Team USA jackets.
The 597 members of the 2008 summer Olympic team gave one of the best performances in Olympic history – not only earning the top medal count with 110 medals, but also setting a new U.S. record for medal production. During the games – watched by almost 5 billion viewers – 43 world records were broken, 13 of which were by members of Team USA.
Phelps, of course, led the record-breaking charge, earning the most gold medals at a single Olympic Games as well as the most gold medals cumulatively – eight and 14, respectively.
“People say, did you ever get to meet Michael Phelps?” Bush said to a swirl of laughter. “I said I did. So was that the highlight? I said, not really; meeting his mother was more of a highlight.”
The 2008 Paralympic team also had a banner year in Beijing – finishing third overall with a medal count of 99 – and the swimming team led the medal standings for the first time, with 17 gold medals.
After Bush’s remarks, Paralympian Jennifer Armbruster presented the president and Laura Bush with team jackets, naming them both honorary members of the 2008 Olympic team.
As the military band resumed playing, the president and his wife spent 10 minutes shaking hands and posing for photos with the athletes before walking past a dog bowl and toy volleyball, heading back toward the west wing.
After the 15-minute ceremony, Phelps appeared for an informal press conference in the White House driveway amid a flurry of camera flashes – looking like a veteran celebrity in dark sunglasses and a brand new goatee. He described his experience at the White House as “an honor,” and revealed a private exchange he had with the president moments earlier.
“Well, my mom texted me this morning – ‘tell the president I said hi,’ so I did that,” Phelps said to laughter. “He said, ‘your mom’s an amazing lady, just like mine.’ ”
Phelps – famous for his 12,000 calories per day diet during training – also added that since he’s only gotten into the pool three times in the past five weeks, he is back to eating two to three meals a day, like most Americans.
During his address, President Bush said that the Department of Health and Human Services released new physical fitness guidelines Tuesday and held up the athletes as shining examples of the human body’s capability.
“We urge our fellow citizens to look at these guidelines and to take time out of your day to exercise,” the president said. “Not every one of you has to ride a mountain bike, but if you walk just 20 minutes a day, you’ll help America and help yourself.”
The new guidelines were designed to show the American public how easy it is to incorporate physical activity into daily life and to include activities they enjoy. According to the guidelines, two and a half hours each week of moderate aerobic exercise provide substantial health benefits for most adults, and children thrive with an hour of exercise each day.
###
Gregg Bill Would Increase Power of FDA to Recall Tainted Food
FDA
The Keene Sentinel
Joe Vines
Boston University Washington News Service
October 7, 2008
WASHINGTON – Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., is likely to reintroduce legislation at the start of the next Congress that would expand the Food and Drug Administration’s authority to inspect the nation’s food supply and make it easier for the agency to recall contaminated food.
The bill, which Gregg’s spokesperson said the senator has been working on for some time, was first introduced in July in response to a salmonella outbreak in produce. The bill would increase funding for the FDA by instituting fees on domestic and international food suppliers
“When Americans go to the grocery store, the last thing on their mind should be the safety of the foods they are bringing home to serve their families,” Gregg said in a statement in July. “The recent salmonella outbreak highlights the current vulnerability of our food supply and the need to modernize our food safety laws.”
The bill would allow the FDA to recall any food item it deems dangerous when a company declines to do so voluntarily at FDA request. The bill would increase inspections at food plants across the country and establish a program that would easily track produce if testing was needed.
According to the statement by Gregg’s office, food safety experts say that had these provisions been in place, the FDA’s response to the outbreak could have been improved.
Dr. David Acheson, the FDA’s associate commissioner for foods, said that while the FDA continues to push for mandatory recall authority it would not have made a difference in this outbreak. “Following our discovery of contaminated jalapeno peppers at a distribution center in Texas, as soon as we alerted the distribution center, they were right on it and they initiated the recall immediately,” he said.
Nevertheless, Acheson said, the recall authority would be important because distributors can simply ignore FDA warnings and refuse to recall a product. He said the FDA published a food protection plan last November that specifically asked for mandatory recall authority. “We want that,” he said
Currently, the FDA can seize products it deems dangerous, but seizure orders are issued at the local level, so that if the contaminated product is housed in distribution centers across the country, the FDA has to issue separate seizure orders for each center through local courts, which can be time-consuming. Acheson said giving the FDA mandatory recall authority would allow the agency to issue blanket recall orders for the whole country. Currently, the FDA can issue a blanket mandatory recall only for baby formula.
“We don’t believe we would use mandatory recall authority very often,” Acheson said. “Virtually always, a firm, when they hear there’s a problem, want to do the right thing.”
He said that the FDA used a trace-back system to locate the source of the outbreak last summer, but that the process took too long. “Having a trace-back system, mandatory or otherwise, that is more efficient is definitely going to help,” Acheson said.
Since April, 1,438 people have been infected with food-borne salmonella, including six reported cases in New Hampshire, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
###
U.S. House Members Vote for Senate Financial Rescue Bill
HOUSEVOTE
Worcester Telegram and Gazette
Rachel Kolokoff
Boston University Washington News Service
October 3, 2008
WASHINGTON - Members of Congress from central Massachusetts stuck by their “yes” votes on Friday as House members passed the Senate’s version of the financial rescue bill.
All agreed that passing the imperfect bill was better than doing nothing, which they said would only have caused further economic upset.
“The credit markets would further tighten and the people that I represent – even those who want me to vote ‘no,’ would be hurt very badly,” U.S. Rep. James P. McGovern said on the House floor Friday, before the vote.
Mr. McGovern said that he appreciates the sentiment of one of his constituents, who suggested that Wall Street businessmen “take a long walk off a short pier.”
Still, he said, acting based on that anger would not help any struggling homeowners, small business owners, or people desperate for loans.
“I want someone to pay a price – or to at least assume responsibility – for this economic mess before we do anything else,” Mr. McGovern said. “But while that might be good therapy, it’s not good economic policy.”
That is why Mr. McGovern supported the bill, he said, even though he would have preferred it contained strong bankruptcy protection, stricter limits on CEO compensation, an economic stimulus package aimed at helping working families and firmer pay-back provisions.
U.S. Rep. Richard E. Neal also said in an interview on Friday that the bill was necessary, despite its imperfections, because it would bring some stability to the markets.
Mr. Neal said that the bill contained other necessary provisions such as one to shield more than 20 million taxpayers nationwide from the Alternative Minimum Tax..
“The AMT legislation is welcome relief for tens if not hundreds of thousands of people in Massachusetts,” Mr. Neal said.
U.S. Rep. Niki Tsongas said in an interview on Friday that she was persuaded early on by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke that the legislation would help steady the markets.
“I think it’s very fortunate that today we had much larger numbers both on the Democratic and Republican sides, enough to pass the bill,” Ms. Tsongas said.
Mr. McGovern said in an interview on Friday that as late as Thursday night he was uncertain enough people would vote to pass the bill.
Mr. Neal said more people voted for the bill than he had expected.
Unlike the original House bill that failed on Monday, this bill contained sweeteners added by the Senate on Wednesday, including the three key ones:
· An extension of a number of tax breaks including business tax breaks for people using, producing and investing in renewable fuels
· A temporary increase in the limit on federal bank deposit insurance from $100,000 to $250,000
· An adjustment of the Alternative Minimum Tax, an income tax for the wealthy, to reflect inflation.
In a statement on Friday U.S. Rep. John W. Olver said no one is confident that the bill’s passage signals an end to legislation needed help the financial system.
“We will almost certainly be back next year to overhaul our financial regulatory system so the same practices that caused this crisis will not reoccur,” Mr. Olver said.
###
Allen and Michaud Disagree on the Financial Rescue Plan
MAINE VOTE
Bangor Daily News
Maite Jullian
Boston University Washington News Service
10/03/08
WASHINGTON – Maine’s Democratic congressmen Mike Michaud and Tom Allen repeated their Monday votes on Friday as the House approved 263 to 171 the Senate version of the $700 billion financial rescue plan. Michaud, who voted against the House plan that failed on Monday, again cast a no vote while Allen again voted for the government bailout.
“I am not surprised in the vote but I am very disappointed,” Michaud said after the vote. “It’s a travesty. I do believe we had to act swiftly but this bill is deeply flawed. It did little to change the White House plan.”
Michaud said he regretted the House Rules Committee, in charge of deciding how and when a bill comes to the floor, refused to add amendments to the Senate bill, which he said lacks sufficient protection for taxpayers.
“If we were able to have amendments, they would have passed,” he said. “There were some good ideas in the air. Now, we have superficial safeguards and they know it.”
Allen said in a statement that the House “took necessary action.”
“I believe that Congress acted today in the best manner possible to protect Mainers and all Americans from further financial deterioration,” he said. “I am proud to have worked with members from both parties to build consensus and pass this critically important legislation.”
U.S House members cheered with applause as the House approved the Senate version of the bailout plan early Friday afternoon. In a rather unusual fast move, President George Bush signed the bill two hours later.
Allen and Michaud each said the Senate added too many extra provisions to the bill, such as $110 billion in tax breaks.
“The Senate did not provide sufficient offsets for these measures, increasing the deficit even further,” Allen said. “Our national debt has skyrocketed over the past eight years, contributing to the situation we are in today, and it is time to reverse that trend.”
Michaud also underscored the fact that the plan will put the budget debt limit to $11.3 trillion, whereas the country already faces huge trade deficits and high costs with Medicare and Social Security.
“As a nation, we are putting ourselves in a very tough situation,” Michaud said. “People are suffering, they have problems putting oil in their tanks yet we are going to spend $700 billion to bail out these large corporations.”
Both Maine representatives said they hope the new Congress will improve oversight and taxpayer safeguards when it comes to the financial markets.
“We must change the way that Wall Street has been operating so that Main Street can prosper once again,” Allen said. “This bill is just the first step in rebuilding our economy. Congress must continue to evaluate and modernize financial regulations to ensure that a similar situation will not reoccur.”
“It is definitely time for a change,” Michaud said. “I will be looking forward to putting corporate governance on top of the agenda as well as a new trade policy. There is too much greed on Wall Street and K Street. The American people are fed up.”
K Street in Washington is where many lobbyists have their offices.
###
Allen to Vote for Rescue Plan, Michaud Undecided
RESUCE
Bangor Daily News
Maite Jullian
Boston University Washington News Service
10/02/08
WASHINGTON – With the House likely to vote Friday on the financial rescue plan, Democratic Rep. Mike Michaud, who voted against the plan Monday, said Thursday he was undecided about how to vote on the Senate-approved version.
“We have a long way to go,” Michaud said in an interview. “The fact is that this is being rushed. [Treasury Secretary Henry ]Paulson and [Federal Reserve chairman Ben] Bernanke said we have to get things through. Any time we try to move with the fear factor, we don’t get good legislation.”
Democratic Rep. Tom Allen, who voted for the bill on Monday, said he will support the new version, and he urged House approval.
Allen, in a statement on Thursday, said that though he supported many of the changes that the Senate made to the proposal, he regretted so many were added.
“I do not believe it was necessary to laden this particular bill with unrelated measures,” Allen said. “Many of the provisions added by the Senate could have and should have been considered separately on their own merits.”
“It is imperative that Congress act responsibly to prevent any further deterioration to the financial underpinnings of our economy,” he said. “The plan the House rejected on Monday was not perfect, but it was a vast improvement over the proposal President Bush submitted.”
In addition to giving $700 billion to the Treasury secretary to buy troubled assets from banks, establishing an oversight board and authorizing safety measures for taxpayers, the Senate-approved version of the bill includes $111 million in energy-related and other tax breaks and a one-year increase in the cap on government deposit insurance from $100,000 to $250,000 per account.
It also would provide relief from the alternative minimum tax and authorize $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana.
Michaud said he was pleased that the Senate version includes the deposit insurance increase but still had concerns about the overall plan. He criticized the Senate’s move to attach the tax package to the financial rescue plan.
“The tax package should not be included; this has nothing to do with the issue” he said. “These are more unfunded measures that would put a burden on future generations.”
Michaud said he would like to see provisions ensuring that taxpayers would recoup from the financial market and that the government act to address relief for homeowners from the mortgage crunch.
“We have to put that in there,” Michaud said.
He said he was scheduled to meet with the Democratic caucus and with House leaders on Thursday evening to discuss possible changes to the Senate version.
“I am still waiting to hear from the leadership,” Michaud said. “The other question is what bill would it be? The Democratic leadership has not made any comments. It could be the same bill [as the Senate version] or another.”
###
