The push for this deal feels inexorable even as more economists leave the urgent camp, but I do think there is a slim chance it can be stopped. I can't quite figure out the strength of the anti-bailout forces in the House. Around 30 members said they would or might vote for the bailout if it included bankruptcy provisions, and would not vote for it if it does include bankruptcy provisions. That does not include 'hard no' votes like Pete Stark, people who will simply vote no for a bailout because they do not think it makes sense to do a ridiculous give-away to Wall Street and want to wait until the election to deal with the liquidity, insolvency, and political crisis.
16 members signed this progressive caucus letter (part two is here) demanding homeowners protections and a transactions tax to force the people who caused the mess to pay for it (or as they call it, a progressive PAYGO). I know there are probably overlaps here, and not every hard no vote is included, so there are probably between 40-50 Democratic members who are a no on this bill without bankruptcy protections. That's a sizeable chunk of the caucus, and that's a rough minimum. Obama's public statement that he doesn't want Bankruptcy Bill revisions in this package has hurt House member organizing on this provision, though his people are trying to walk back his words privately.
You'll note that the progressive caucus has 74 members, and this letter has 16 signatures on it. The ones who put their name down include some real progressive heroes, old warhorses like John Lewis, Barbara Lee, and Pete Stark, and younger fresh voices like Keith Ellison. And yes, that's Donna Edwards on the letter, one of our Better Democrats.
This is the rock we build upon.
|
STATE BLOGS
