Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Alerts | Electronic edition | Advertise | Subscribe to the paper | Today's Extras

Breaking News:

Subscribe

Bailout oversight? What oversight?

Rocky Mountain News

Published November 15, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Editorials

More stories »

When Congress established the $700 billion bailout fund, it promised strict and thorough oversight. Over a month later, with $290 billion already committed, we have our answer as to what that means: There isn't any.

The legislation called for a special inspector general within the Treasury to audit and investigate the bailout, reporting on what assets the government is acquiring, its reasons for doing so and their value. The special inspector has yet to be named.

Congress has yet to name the members of a special congressional oversight panel. The deadline under the law for the first oversight report by that panel has passed and the panel, when it's finally named, may not be able to make the Jan. 20 deadline for a much more detailed report.

The Treasury Department's regular inspector general, Eric Thorson, told The Washington Post, "It's a mess. I don't think anyone understands right now how we're going to do proper oversight of this thing."

The bailout law also created an entity called the Financial Stability Oversight Board, whose five members include Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who would effectively be doing oversight over themselves. In any case, the board has no staff.

Congress promised the hallmarks of the federal government's massive intervention in the markets would be oversight and transparency. A top priority of its lame duck session must be to make good on that promise.

Comments

  • November 15, 2008

    7:37 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Elwood writes:

    No more money, not even a penny more, until this panel is formed. Can't congress be arrested for breaking the law?

  • November 15, 2008

    10:26 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jkl writes:

    Just another of numerous examples of government not being able to effectively run, supervise or oversee a program it has enacted. Health care is next. Scary!

  • November 15, 2008

    10:58 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    INC writes:

    Whole sale plundering of the federal treasury... dubya and company are trying to abscond with enough money to render the next administration neutered.

    As if they cannot win at the ballot box, then effectively punish everyone for recognizing epic incompetence and failure of republican ideology.

    they should all go to prision.

  • November 15, 2008

    11:17 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    daRock writes:

    The oversight panel is to be named by Congress, not the president. Look at the members of Congress that voted for this white elephant. The Congressional oversight panels that are already in place are all headed by Democrats. Start the finger pointing at Barney Frank.

  • November 15, 2008

    noon

    Suggest removal

    DavidG writes:

    Actually, I think they did name a special oversight inspector general yesterday. How we could have spent even a part of this money without this structure in place is simply insane. Of particular note is the fact that it took all this time to find out that the first idea of buying up these securities was not worth it. Did we really have a crisis? Did we do anything that really helped? Maybe.

    I have a strong hunch that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes, mostly in big wall street offices, than we even know about. Congress must take the lead here and force some transparency and oversight into this business. Maybe they can start with the repeal of the legislation that allowed the mortgage securities bundling to happen in the first place. On top of that, wait until we hear the details about credit card securities. When those assets hit the fan, the big banks are really going to scream for help.

  • November 16, 2008

    6:53 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    NavyChief writes:

    INC,

    Let me bring your attention to the very first paragragh of the story
    "When Congress established the $700 billion bailout fund, it promised strict and thorough oversight. Over a month later, with $290 billion already committed, we have our answer as to what that means: There isn't any".

    I realize it may cause you some confusion, but Bush is not a member of Congress. Let me give you a lesson on government. There are 3 seperate and equal branches of government i this country. They are the Executive (President/Vice President) the Legislative (the House & Senate) and the Judiciary (the Courts).

    It is up to the Legislative Branch, headed by none other that Pelosi and Reid that is responsible for the establishment of law, levy of taxes, funding of government programs etc... It is not the job of the Exectutive branch. So, when we have an issue with a Congressional Program, it is not up to the President to oversee it.

    So, if you want to point a finger at someone not doing their job and appointing an oversight committee to this bailout, look to CONGRESS. This is not an article about the Presdent, but about the failings of Congress, and specifically the failure of the Congressional Leaders: Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

    Not every failing in this country is the fault of the President.

Post your comment

Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.




(Forgotten your password?)




News Tip

Know about something we should be reporting? Tell us about it.

Sponsored links



Reprints