Udall, Pearce opposed bailout bill; Wilson supported it

This article has been updated.

They haven’t agreed on much during this campaign, but New Mexico’s two U.S. Senate candidates agreed today that the proposed $700 billion bailout bill was a bad idea.

Their reasons might differ, but U.S. Reps. Steve Pearce, R-N.M. and Tom Udall, D-N.M., both voted against the bill. They were among 133 Republicans and 95 Democrats who joined forces to defeat the proposal.

Meanwhile, New Mexico’s third member of the House, Republican Heather Wilson, was among the minority who voted for the bailout bill. For a list of how each member of the House voted, click here.

Udall, in a statement released by his office, said the Bush administration and its allies have spent eight years allowing Wall Street “to gamble with America’s economy, and the results have been devastating for Main Street.” He said the bailout bill “still contains significant flaws” and has “virtually no protections for American taxpayers.”

“Congress made significant changes to the president’s proposal, but I believe we should have taken more time to get this right,” Udall said. “Four hundred of the nation’s leading economists, including three Nobel laureates, have asked Congress to take more time to improve this proposal, and we should have heeded that advice.”

Pearce has not released a statement about today’s vote. Wilson, in a statement released by her office, said, “No one wanted to be in this situation today.”

“I felt it was important for Congress to act to stabilize our financial markets,” Wilson said. “Today’s bill was a ‘work out,’ not a ‘bailout,’ and had protections for taxpayers and homeowners. The bill would have given needed liquidity to the financial industry and let taxpayers share in the profits as mortgage markets recover. … I will continue to work with my colleagues to find a solution and move forward.”

Pearce announced his opposition to the bailout proposal last week, saying it would establish a dangerous precedent and would lead to “dramatic tax increases.”

“The federal government doesn’t bail average Americans out of their school loans, car payments or mortgages. If we expect average Americans to make good decisions and own up to them, we certainly should expect the same of Wall Street,” Pearce said last week.

Udall explains his vote

In the statement his office released today, Udall included a list of what he said were flaws in the proposal:

• “The Treasury is given unprecedented power to spend taxpayer money without adequate oversight or an actual plan for fixing the systemic problems that led America to this crisis.”

• “Corporate executives who ran their companies into the ground can still walk away with millions in taxpayer-funded golden parachutes.”

• “Taxpayer dollars are being spent to bail out foreign companies whose governments are doing nothing.”

• “Little is being done to help responsible homeowners. Tens of thousands of families could lose their homes. More importantly, families who had nothing to do with failed mortgages could lose billions in assets as foreclosures continue to drive down property values.”

“I believe we must take action to protect middle-class families and to make our economy produce jobs again,” Udall said. “But I cannot vote for a Wall Street bailout that does not solve the underlying problems with our economy. I will continue working with my colleagues to reform America’s financial markets so Wall Street is not allowed to make the same mistakes over and over again.”

“I will also continue fighting to support middle-class New Mexico families that find themselves struggling in an economy devastated by the irresponsible acts of others,” Udall said. “They are the true victims of the Bush administration’s reckless neglect of our economy. We must do what’s right for them.”

What happens now is unclear. The House has adjourned and isn’t scheduled to return to work until after the Nov. 4 election, the Washington Post is reporting. House leaders from both parties are in private meetings.

Pearce explains his vote (update, 1:45 p.m.)

Pearce, in a statement released by his office, said New Mexico taxpayers “were not protected under this legislation.”

“I strongly disapprove of putting taxpayers on the hook in order to bailout the Wall Street firms that got us in to this crisis. Those who made risky decisions should own up to them,” Pearce said.

“We still need solutions. This bill was not our only option. We now need to rewrite the bill to incorporate real taxpayer protections, market solutions instead of massive government intervention and correct the abuses that caused the problem,” Pearce said. “Going forward, legislation should include accountability for those who created the mess, transparency so investors can make informed decisions, limitations on leveraging so financial institutions are not allowed to overextend, end ‘naked’ short selling and favor market principles over government intrusion.”

“I have cosponsored an alternative to today’s bill that more closely reflects these principles and truly protects the taxpayer, creates market incentives to create capital and reforms certain investment vehicles so we’re not back here faced with the same problem,” Pearce said.

Comments are closed.