Bill Clinton: Current Crisis Proposal "Not Sufficient"

Monday evening I had the privilege to attend a meeting held in New York City for a small group of progressive bloggers by former President Clinton, ostensibly about the work of the Clinton Global Initiative.

But on the eve of the CGI conference, the former President used most of the hour-long meeting to discuss our current economic crisis, calling for a broader, more comprehensive federal response than what has so far been proposed by Bush administration officials.

Clinton pressed several times for progressives to use their leverage to demand more populist assistance and accountability in a larger crisis response - including a moratorium on foreclosures and the creation of a modern-day Home Owners' Loan Corporation, the Depression-era government agency that refinanced mortgages to prevent foreclosure.

To their credit, Clinton said, Paulson and Bernanke have done "about what they were supposed to do." But the current administration proposal doesn't do enough "to deal with the range of 'main street' issues" facing Americans, Clinton said.

Clinton also relayed a story from his wife's recent trip campaigning on behalf of Mitch McConnell challenger Bruce Lunsford: Hillary reported that in Kentucky, people "don't yet see it as a big crisis requiring an urgent response, because they've been in trouble for years."

And while the goal of such measures couldn't be to rescue all mortgage-holders, the former President stressed that keeping many people in their homes would cost society much less than foreclosing.

Besides the protections to safeguard current homeowners, Clinton also echoed calls from Congressional Democrats to add accountability to the huge sum taxpayers would likely invest in the bailout. Lastly, Clinton said the government's response should work to "clean up future risks."

But with President Bush warning Congress that "the whole world is watching to see if we can act quickly" I asked Clinton if there was time to accomplish all this before the crisis ripples further.

Initial efforts to shore-up Wall Street shouldn't be delayed unnecessarily, Clinton told us, but in the long run the government's response must be comprehensive. Clinton even floated the idea of calling a special session of Congress to accomplish such a task.

"We need a plan to do all of it," he said, "otherwise it won't work."

Tags: Bill Clinton (all tags)

Comments

17 Comments

Color me surprised you went to anything...

featuring a Clinton.  Why is Bill OK now but was such a horror show in the past 8 months?

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Color me surprised you went to anything...

Huh?

by Josh Orton 2008-09-23 09:07AM | 0 recs
Remember - he's a racist and was

- as far as Obama supporters were concerned - the worst president in the history of the Democratic Party.  I'm fairly certain that was the sentiment around here not too long ago.

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Remember - he's a racist and was

You might want to get a bit more specific with accusations than "sentiment around here."

by Josh Orton 2008-09-23 09:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Remember - he's a racist and was

Ignore her.  Shazone is one of the many (now banned) CoyoteCreek sockpuppets.  A PUMA moron not worth responding to.

by fogiv 2008-09-23 09:39AM | 0 recs
Special Session of Congress or Delay Action

I think the idea of a special session of Congress is certainly preferable to buying into the administration's "bailout" which to me, looks an awful lot like a Ponzi scheme. (The people who lose in a Ponzi scheme are the investors who come in at the end.. which would be us..)

But any proposal to discuss the idea of any kind of economic restructuring - which can't be done under a gun, it needs to be in a special session - should keep in mind the fact that there is a new administration due in just a few months that will hopefully have a mandate to deal effectively with the speculators and the problems that they have caused us all.

Delaying the "solution" can't be a mistake - because it has the potential of perhaps achieving a real solution, instead of the denial and obfuscation we have seen.

Bush is a lame duck and his political appointees are also tainted with the fact that they are partially responsible for this mess.

They can't be trusted to have the objectiveness needed to solve it. It won't happen.

For example, Poulson used to work at Goldman-Sachs where he was partially responsible for the creation of these toxic mortgage-backed securities.

by architek 2008-09-23 10:28AM | 0 recs
Wellllll - Bill was a racist all through...

the primary - don't you remember?  And who called him that?  Obama supporters.

And Obama had not a kind word to say about the Big Dawd but loved Ronny Reagan unconditionally.

Seems like times have changed.

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:23AM | 0 recs
And, what goes around, comes around.

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:31AM | 0 recs
Re: And, what goes around, comes around.

especially when some are hell bent on revenge at the cost of whatever.

When some want to beat down the hopes and dreams of others because their dreams where set aside.

This isn't about issues, it is about spite and anger so large they want to punish as many people as possible.

by notedgeways 2008-09-23 10:42AM | 0 recs
Clinton is Right

Democrats should hang tough because Bush is desperate to get the bailout. He will compromise quickly and Democrats should get a lot of what they want by Friday. From Bush's point of view, total collapse of the financial system will make him go down in history as the worst president ever.

But getting legislation signed by Friday should only be the first step. Perhaps, a bill should be passed by Friday with conditions that Congress can take further action in a lame duck special session. Perhaps, the first emergency bill can be an outline of what's to be done, and more specifics can be passed in the special session.

by Zzyzzy 2008-09-23 09:19AM | 0 recs
Remember, Harry and Nancy are...

approving Congress' vacation starting later this week because "no one knows what to do".

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:21AM | 0 recs
Silly - they'll be on vacation.

And they don't know what to do, anyway (hey, Harry and Nancy said so...don't blame me!)

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:35AM | 0 recs
A good place to review some facts....

before you repeat that talking point:

http://anglachelg.blogspot.com/2008/09/p olitical-investment.html

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:20AM | 0 recs
Please - read your history.

It was veto proof and Bill forced Dems (you remember them!) into putting safeguards into the measure - they were running over that cliff again like the perverbial lemmings to the sea - before it got signed.  AND, who implemented the measure...the Bush administration.  

One has to wonder how much worse things would be without Bill Clinton's involvement.

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Political Reality 101:

Therefore, if there were Democrats in significant numbers who really opposed this bill, they caved because "they knew Bill Clinton would sign it anyway".  Circular argument anyone and pretty hilarious to boot.

This is exactly like the rush to war in Iraq and the Dems are working on the margins to "improve" a horrendous proposal.  Bill Clinton is right, the Dems are in a unique position to really bring about reform in the financial markets, stop the foreclosures and rework mortgages, pass universal health care (Conyer's bill), institute the HOLC, infuse the alternative energy sector with significant funding, create real job training programs and on and on.  The beauty of this is that you don't have to wait to get a new President to do these proposals.

by anya109 2008-09-23 10:56AM | 0 recs
I'm defending Bill - not sticking...

up for anyone/anything else.

by Shazone 2008-09-23 09:51AM | 0 recs
nice to see

that hillary is campaigning for downticket races as well.

by sepulvedaj3 2008-09-23 10:35AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------