Fans of mainstream media news might agree with Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid that McCain's return to Washington was "political theater." When the full story and quotes are collected and analyzed, however, the landscape changes.
It was Harry Reid who said that John McCain must give his approval on the Wall Street bailout. Democrats needed some cover on the issue because it was an unpopular bill with many voters, but it was the same Harry Reid who reversed himself the next day and said that McCain's suspended campaign and return to Washington was a political ploy.
Was it a political ploy? The country was in a crisis mode with the financial world collapsing. I can think of no better reason to return to Washington and assess the issues first hand. That's not to say that everyone agreed on the need for the bailout. McCain followed his conscience and returned at the invitation of the Democratic leaders.
"Fearing a political backlash against Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week's end." [http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/12288264/c_12287342? f=home_todayinfinance]
If there was a ploy, it was by the Democrat leaders. They announced there was an agreement when there was none and they had excluded the Republicans from the negotiations depending on one or two Republican leaders for "agreement." When McCain appeared in Washington, Reid quickly changed his story to "McCain ruined the negotiations."
Republican leaders let McCain know that they were not part of the bargaining process except for a second ranking Banking Committee member Republican Bob Bennet on the Senate side. Ranking Republican Richard Shelby was against the proposal. In short, the deal was one sided without adequate Republican representation.
It does indeed appear that games were being played, but it also appears that John McCain was the butt of the joke as far as Democrats were concerned.
Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi insisted that the bill be passed with a substantive number of Republican votes favoring the bail out. In truth, Democrats could have passed the bill with the Democrats and the few Republicans that were on the side of the bill.
Why did Pelosi ask for a large or substantive vote from Republicans? It's called CMA. Democrats could have passed the bill without the Republicans. She appeared to be trying to protect her party from ramifications of fall out from the bill. That was the stated reason, but others suggest she had no intention of gathering her forces to pass the bill. The first bill was intentionally doomed to throw bad light on John McCain.
Obama kept on campaigning. Campaigning is somewhat like promoting yourself and your position for a new job. In the time of crisis, Obama kept promoting his own interest. On the other hand, if he knew the first bill would be torpedoed, it was in his best interest to stay away from Washington. And he did.
In a sense, McCain did shake up the process.
Investor's Business Daily reports that Democrats tacked on an additional "$56 billion in new spending, including $25 billion in loans for the auto industry, plus extended jobless benefits, increased food stamps, more low-income heating assistance, increased Medicaid payments." Republican protested and got the slush fund for ACORN removed from the bill.
Republicans presented a proposal that would not pay out to Wall Street but would provide an insurance option where the government offers to sell insurance to financial institutions that hold the mortgage based securities. Instead of paying out money to Wall Street, the government would be taking in money, but there are problems with this idea also.
Here's what happened that week:
1. Reid and Pelosi insisted that John McCain had to approve the bail out.
2. Democrats strike a 'so called' deal with one ranking Republican on the Banking Committee.
3. McCain suspends his campaign and returns to Congress and is attacked by Reid calling it as a political ploy.
4. McCain meets privately with Republicans to discuss the bill.
5. Republicans present their own proposal.
6. Republicans and Democrats meet with the President.
6. Harry Reid blames John McCain for messing up the agreement.
7. The bailout is defeated in the House.
Financial institutions agree that many of the mortgages in the mortgage based securities packages include homes that are being paid down and are not at risk, but they're devalued because of the falling prices in the housing market and that creates a problem for main street. Financial institutions bought these MBS (mortgage backed securities) and they frankly don't know the value until they crack them open.
It's a frightening scenario.
The financial nightmare on Wall Street has long-term ramifications if the lawmakers fail to get it right and many of us have litte trust that they will get it right. The amended bill passed the Senate and was sent back to the House where it finally passed.
Three cheers to Democrats and Republicans who did NOT buy into or vote for this bill.