It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


My Senators response to my Email on Bailout. PLEASE READ!!!

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 07:39 PM

Originally posted by Aleksander
In the future, it is possible that most, if not all, of the taxpayer money invested will be returned once this crisis comes to a close.

Thanks for your post of the email you got from your congresscritter. As for this bit...

How many believe we will see ANY of the money again if the congresscritters let this through? Let's hear from y'all!

*I* say: Not a chance in hell.

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 07:44 PM
reply to post by Amaterasu

Sure we will get all of our money back just as soon as we elect an "honest" politician.

Yea that's the ticket!

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 07:50 PM
reply to post by whatukno

"honest politician"

Well, to be a politician (a successful one anyway) one must join a party.... there goes the honesty part!

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 08:35 PM

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Man ... I just don't trust this guy. When he thought he was getting his hands on a $700 billion check, without oversight, he was grinning from ear to ear. When it got yanked out from under him, he was one cranky dude.

That grin ... something about that grin .... when he thought he was getting the check....

The Secretary of Treasury is appointed by the President.

He either got to get hold of this money now to help his buddies out, or he never probably will, after all, in a couple months, I'm sure he's going to lose his job!

[edit on 10/2/2008 by Keyhole]

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 08:50 PM

Originally posted by Amaterasu
I just checked, and Debbie was one of the few with balls. She voted "Nay."

Yes, Wukky. You might want to recheck her intentions and meaning. I just found this for you and it even explains why she was misunderstood as being supportive of the bill when she, in fact, voted against it.

Edit: And if so, write her back quickly and tell her you WILL be voting for her then before she takes your email to mean you are not voting for her because she opposed the bill.
Poor woman.

[edit on 10/2/2008 by AshleyD]

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 08:54 PM
reply to post by AshleyD

Oh cool, so the plan is to make her switch her vote so I can chastise her for switching her vote and again tell her I won't be voting for her

Hmm, what to do, be evil or be really evil?

Ill choose be evil.

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 08:58 PM
reply to post by whatukno

Yes exactly! Then I will write to her and tell her she is not listening to her constituents!

We have too much time on our hands.

(And just to make sure: Yes, I'm kidding. She's not even my senator. lol)

[edit on 10/2/2008 by AshleyD]

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 09:03 PM

Originally posted by Amaterasu

And I thought things didn't go to the Senate until they were PASSED in the House... That is what I was taught, I'm pretty sure...

That is EXACTLY what I was taught in Civics class as well. The Senate has usurped the WILL of the people and are traitors to the United States.

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:24 AM
My brother informed me he sent an email to Senator Feinsteins' Office to voice his concern over a (domestic issue) Bill that was introduced to Congress a while back.

He received in response an email thanking him for his concern about the situation in Darfur...

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:33 AM
Here's mine from Ken Salazar. It's absolutely stomach churning. I guess what bothers me most is that for some reason our Senators truly believe their job is 'doing what's best for us' rather than representing the will of the people...

Last night, facing one of the most serious economic crises in our nation’s history, I joined 73 of my colleagues in the United States Senate to support an emergency economic rescue package. The bill we passed aims to prevent the failures on Wall Street from plunging our entire economy into a severe and lasting recession.

Many Coloradans are angry and frustrated with this economic rescue plan. They are rightfully asking why middle class families are being asked to tackle a problem that is not of their own making. Many urged me to oppose this bill.

I, too, am angry and frustrated that we have reached this point. But my fundamental responsibility as Colorado’s United States Senator is to do what I believe is best for our state and our nation - and I believe the risks of doing nothing are far too great.

The failures on Wall Street have left pensions and retirement savings hanging in the balance.

Credit for middle class Americans is rapidly drying up. That means that small businesses will soon be unable to make payroll.

It means that when consumers go to the grocery store, the hardware store, or to buy a new car, their credit cards won’t carry enough credit to make the purchases.

With credit drying up, young families won't be able to borrow money for their first home. Students will find it more difficult to extend their college loans.

If this continues, interest rates for farmers and ranchers will skyrocket, making it more difficult to buy seed, fuel, and fertilizer.

Already, construction projects in Colorado are grinding to a halt.

This economic crisis threatens every sector of Colorado’s economy and all 64 of our counties.

The economic rescue package we passed last night is far from perfect, and I respect the positions of my colleagues and my constituents who have expressed principled opposition to this bill. Their voices are important to this debate.

The bill we passed last night, however, is a far cry from the $700 billion blank check that the Administration originally requested.

Under the Senate’s bill, the Treasury Department will be authorized to immediately buy the troubled assets that are at the heart of the problem on Wall Street. Taxpayers will own these assets and, as they regain their value, taxpayers will recover most, all, or perhaps more than they are being asked to commit.

The funds will be dispensed in installments. The Treasury Department will receive $250 billion immediately and another $100 billion contingent on Presidential certification. A final $350 billion would be available subject to a Congressional resolution of disapproval.

The bill also includes strong, independent oversight. It appoints a special Inspector General for the program and a bipartisan oversight panel.

It imposes limits on executive compensation for participating companies and penalizes ‘golden parachutes.’

Importantly, the bill requires the Treasury Department and other federal agencies to help American families keep their homes by working to modify the troubled loans they purchase or control. We need to help Americans facing foreclosure and stem the tide that is sweeping the country.

I am also pleased that the Senate modified the bill to include a set of critical middle class tax cuts and incentives for job creation and renewable energy development. This will help stimulate an economy that is struggling, and will help middle class families weather the storm.

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:35 AM
reply to post by ObamasLoveChild


At the same time, this legislation will help provide Americans peace of mind that their savings are safe. It raises the limits on FDIC insurance so that up to $250,000 of individuals’ savings in the bank will be insured by the federal government. For the last 28 years, this important protection of Americans’ savings has been at the $100,000 level.

This is not a perfect bill but, in my view, it is necessary.

This economic crisis is the final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies, of greed on Wall Street, and of failed regulation.

Middle class Americans did not create these problems. They did not ask for this challenge. But it affects us all. We must put our nation on the path to prosperity and restore our economy to its rightful place as the envy of the world.

Our best days are still ahead

---I find the pawn off of the economic failure onto the Bush admin. very clever for a steeple-fingered mustachioed bad guy---

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 09:51 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Originally posted by Amaterasu

And I thought things didn't go to the Senate until they were PASSED in the House... That is what I was taught, I'm pretty sure...

Just a quick clarification. Bills can originate in either chamber. The stipulation is that bills originating in the Senate cannot have taxation authorizations. Any bill authorizing taxation must originate in the House.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 10:03 AM

Originally posted by FewWorldOrder
My brother informed me he sent an email to Senator Feinsteins' Office to voice his concern over a (domestic issue) Bill that was introduced to Congress a while back.

He received in response an email thanking him for his concern about the situation in Darfur...

That figures. They can't even keep the Emails straight, yet they are voting on a 700billion bailout plan.. Gee, I feel so much better now.
Thats hard proof that our government don't know their a** from their elbows.

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 11:48 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, the power to keep these people in office rests with you. On election day, or when they come up for re-election, know who voted "yea" for this bailout bill and cast a vote for their opponent.

That's how you make your voice heard. That's where real change comes from.

By the way, I wrote my state representative this morning asking for a nay vote. No response yet.

[edit on 3-10-2008 by sos37]

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:13 PM
The only representative in Utah that voted YES to the intial bill presented to the House was Chris Cannon. I can't help but share how disgusted I was by what I found on his website. How much more blatant hypocracy would it even be POSSIBLE to show???

"I Believe"
In a world of photoshop and YouTube, it is hard to know what to believe. The ability to cut and paste a quote, a speech, or a picture is so prevalent today that I thought I would include a section on this website where I can share with you exactly what I believe without any distortion.

I believe...

- The government that governs least, governs best

- That open government, transparency, and reducing the size of government are the only true cures for corruption

- The Congress should never spend more than it takes in

- Taking the fight to terrorists is the only way to keep America safe

- Technology, innovation, and the market are always preferable to government intervention

- Amnesty means being allowed to stay in America without a penalty - I will NEVER support amnesty

- Civility in our public discourse is a good lesson for our kids and a lost component of our dialogue

- Federalism sometimes requires the federal government NOT to act, no matter how painful

more to come...

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:14 PM
reply to post by maudeeb

This was my reply from my Representative:

September 29, 2008

Dear Mr. *****,

Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding the current financial crisis. I appreciate your interest in this important issue.

Over the past two years, we've witnessed the effects of a growing financial crisis. While the Administration has bailed out some companies, others have failed, throwing the market into greater uncertainty. At this point, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG are all essentially owned by the federal government. The federal government may very well end up seeing a positive fiscal contribution from the recent interventions. However, the government may also suffer significant losses, as has also occurred in the past.

The credit markets are frozen. Although this sounds like an issue that only matters to large businesses, the availability of credit affects all of us. We all want to send our children to college, buy a home for our families, and look for opportunities to expand our businesses. Without access to credit and financial institutions, it's just not possible for most of us to be able to afford these things on our own. We all rely upon access to the credit markets and the system has stopped working.

Just a few weeks ago, historic bank failures and worries about the stock market showed further deterioration in the financial sector. The Administration responded by asking Congress for $700 billion in order to allow the Treasury Department to selectively bail out some private companies. This idea came in the form of a 3-page bill, which was simply not enough to address the problem.

The bailout envisioned by the Administration violated the principles of good government. Congress did insist on some important taxpayer protections in comparison to the original bill written by the Administration, which sought to spend $700 billion overnight without any oversight. While I respect the efforts of many leaders of both parties to find the right solution, I was unconvinced that this plan will solve the larger crisis. I joined a majority of my colleagues in voting against the plan, which failed to pass the U.S. House of Representatives.

The current crisis represents a difficult time in U.S. history. I take the situation very seriously and I have concerns about the state of our economy. I am also very concerned about the effect of this crisis on Utahns and the possible long-term effects on all Americans. We cannot just write another blank check that will have to eventually be backed up by money the government will have to borrow.

We need true reform of a financial system that allowed private companies to make such bad business decisions, at the expense of their shareholders and ultimately, of taxpayers. Congress now has the opportunity to reassess the situation.

Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact my office.


Member of Congress

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:51 PM

Originally posted by KaginD

Originally posted by anachryon
Howdy, neighbor!!

Looks like Arlen sent out a form letter; I got the exact same one.
I love how he went ahead and voted YES for the thing even though in this email he appears to disagree with the whole steaming pile and takes a few potshots at Paulson while he's at it!

Well, so much for being excited about getting a response
I should have known that he wouldn't personally send ME an email. Good to know I wasn't the only one that sent the complaint in PA.

Sheesh you're kidding right, you actually thought a senator would personally send only you a 30 paragraph letter when they receive thousands of emails per day if not tens of thousands? Of course the letter was the typical mass produced trash I'm sure he sent to 2000 other people to try to save face for voting FOR the bailout. Despicable.

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 12:52 PM
In fact I should add that I'm almost positive the senator didn't even write that letter, I'm sure some aid, intern, secretary, etc, wrote it and he just signed his name.

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:01 PM
they want to give Secretary Paulson uncheckable powers and $700,000,000,000 which has no actual support of an estimate, it was something that he made up off the top of his head. First of all the Secretary of Treasury isn't even a public office established by the constitution. He is in charge of the federal reserve bank, which proves we don't have a free market. Alexander Hamilton said that if there is a central bank established in the United States then we're stepping into the wrong direction.

Paulson is part of the reason why our economy is so screwed, and they think that he is going to fix. give me a #ing break. it's all part of bush's plan to # us all

posted on Oct, 3 2008 @ 01:03 PM
reply to post by Maxmars

the definition of an honest politician is the same as the definition of an honest cop. One that STAYS bought! Unfortunately we don't have any of these.

<< 1    3 >>

log in