Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Center | Site Map | Archive | Subscribe to the newspaper

HomeNewsBig Country

Neugebauer votes against bailout

WASHINGTON -- Two Big Country congressmen reversed their votes on a $700 billion economic rescue plan Friday, and one did not.

U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, voted against revised bailout legislation the House approved 263-171 early Friday afternoon.

U.S. Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Midland, and U.S. Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Clarendon, voted for a proposal designed to save the economy from collapse.

The next step is a signature from Bush.

Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, of the 19th Congressional District, Conaway of the 11th Congressional District and Thornberry of the 13th Congressional District all voted against the bill Monday, the first time the House considered it.

Democratic and Republican leaders added a tax package to sweeten the legislation and made some changes to the bailout, such as upping the amount of federal insurance coverage for customer deposits. Then they sent the bill back to Congress.

U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, and U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, voted for the revised bailout approved in the Senate on Wednesday.

Conaway had one eye on the gyrations of the stock market and the other on revisions that made the financial rescue package more appealing.

The decision to reverse his vote was tough because Conaway, R-Midland, doesn't believe massive government intervention is the answer to the woes on Wall Street, he said in a statement today.

"However, I know that we must act quickly to restore investor and lender confidence and return our great nation to the most thriving economy in the world," the 11th Congressional Representative said.

The modified bailout was more attractive because it raises the amount of insurance coverage available from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. for customer deposits from $100,000 to $250,000.

The increased insurance will calm customers' fears about the safety of their money in banks, Conaway said.

In addition, the tax package the Senate tacked onto the bailout includes a one-year patch to the alternative minimum tax, sales tax deductions and disaster relief for Texas hurricane victims.

But those provisions weren't what persuaded him to change his vote.

"Above all else, I voted for this plan because I believe the threats to our economy are real and grave," Conaway said.

The financial crisis will hit everyone if Congress takes no action, he said.

"And it is my steadfast hope that this legislation will calm the fear and uncertainty that have gripped our lending markets and enable us to implement deeper structural reforms that prevent a crisis of this magnitude from ever reoccurring," Conaway said.

Comments

Posted by benman99 on October 3, 2008 at 4:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"The financial crisis will hit everyone if Congress takes no action." Was this crisis not somewhat caused by Congressional actions? It is tough to give money to people who don't know how to handle money.

The statement about raising the FDIC limit to 250,000 from 100,000 in order to calm bank customers' fears also seems a little silly. I don't think it is necessarily a bad idea, but how many people have $250K in the bank anyway. I wish I had that problem to worry about.

It would have been interesting to see how things would have turned out had congress not voted for the proposal to "save" the economy.

Posted by kelly_41_2000 on October 3, 2008 at 7:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ok.Now if we defeat it on the first vote,then we vote against it on the second? Or are we supposed to vote "for" it on the second vote so G.W. can veto it?
Randy really screwed this up and wasnt being his normal self.Whats up with that?

Posted by dr__dawggy on October 6, 2008 at 5:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

My respect for Randy just went way up. Good for him for voting against this bill, which was a rush to judgment.

I am convinced Something had to be done to avert a deep and long recession. I am not at all convinced the bailout bill was the only or best solution to the liquidity problem in the financial sector. It is even possible that this solution will only make matters worse.

Post your comment
(Requires free registration.)

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.

Username:

Password:
(Forgot your password?)

Your Turn: