Is McCain Planning to Vote Against the Bailout?
From Political Insider:
Reports are that negotiations on a compromise bailout package are very close to complete. If McCain swoops in at the last moment and unravels that compromise, the headlines will all read "McCain kills bailout package." Given how unpopular the idea is, that may score McCain a day's worth of good publicity. But when the stock market and credit markets react, it won't be pretty and McCain will have a lot of explaining to do. Not only that, but McCain has based his campaign "suspension" on the claim that the financial crisis is so severe that he has to stop everything else he's doing and fly to Washington immediately to deal with it. His running mate said on national television last night that we're headed toward a second Great Depression if we don't act now.
Given all that, how can McCain vote against a bailout, especially when doing so would likely derail the effort altogether? It doesn't make sense to me.
UPDATE: Okay, the more I think about it, here's the most likely McCain play. He'll swoop in, read through the compromise proposal that's been reached and declare that it's unacceptable in its present form. He'll then demand that something either be added or removed (or both) and use his leverage (his threat to vote no) to get the bill changed. Then he'll vote for the amended bill and take full credit for having made this crucially important change (whatever it is). His surrogates will claim that the whole episode shows McCain's heroic leadership, the way he takes charge of a situation.
Democrats fear this morning that McCain is setting up a scenario in which he will vote against the bill, rally conservatives to his side and, most importantly, distance himself from both President Bush and Congress before the election.I was worried about this scenario last week, but at this point, I'm very skeptical that this is the plan. It just doesn't make sense. If McCain votes against the bailout plan, I don't see how it passes. Republicans will defect in droves and Democrats aren't going to walk all the way out on this limb alone.
Reports are that negotiations on a compromise bailout package are very close to complete. If McCain swoops in at the last moment and unravels that compromise, the headlines will all read "McCain kills bailout package." Given how unpopular the idea is, that may score McCain a day's worth of good publicity. But when the stock market and credit markets react, it won't be pretty and McCain will have a lot of explaining to do. Not only that, but McCain has based his campaign "suspension" on the claim that the financial crisis is so severe that he has to stop everything else he's doing and fly to Washington immediately to deal with it. His running mate said on national television last night that we're headed toward a second Great Depression if we don't act now.
Given all that, how can McCain vote against a bailout, especially when doing so would likely derail the effort altogether? It doesn't make sense to me.
UPDATE: Okay, the more I think about it, here's the most likely McCain play. He'll swoop in, read through the compromise proposal that's been reached and declare that it's unacceptable in its present form. He'll then demand that something either be added or removed (or both) and use his leverage (his threat to vote no) to get the bill changed. Then he'll vote for the amended bill and take full credit for having made this crucially important change (whatever it is). His surrogates will claim that the whole episode shows McCain's heroic leadership, the way he takes charge of a situation.
posted by A.L. at 10:27 AM
10 Comments:
You're thinking two or three moves ahead.
At this point, I don't think McCain is. At this point, I honestly don't think we're seeing politics on display anymore. We're seeing personality, and John McCain's personality chooses at any given moment to do the thing that will draw the most attention, most easily. (He thinks.)
Given that, I still agree with you. My bet is he'll sign on to the bill in order to take credit for it.
Barney Frank will mock him for the absurdity of the claim.
And most people will laugh.
I'd like to think you're right.
However,given the penchant McCain has shown for attention-grabbing stunts in recent weeks, he might see this as a way to burnish his mavericky-ness.
In other words, make a lot of noise about how we need to come together to take action, then sweep in at the last minute and declare that the compromise on the table is too much of a giveaway, too bloated, blah blah blah and vote against it.
It would be more maverick-y (reckless) to torpedo the legislation, and McCain hasn't been making sense for at least a week so that's no argument against him launching the torpedo. And launching the torpedo has more potential to scramble the deck, which is what he seems to think he needs to do. (What I don't get is why he is feeling quite so desperate right now given that there is still quite a lot of time on the clock. You'd think he was down by 15 points with a week to go.)
No, I think if he decides to support the legislation it will be because his financial backers put a gun to his head. Assuming the financial backers win the day, his rationale for backing the legislation will, however, go more or less as you put it in your update.
As of 1:22, both Dodd and Bennett say they have a deal worked out. Assuming the GOP votes to guarantee passage are solid, I'd bet McCain will have a last-minute, gut-wrenching vote against the bill. He can be a Maverick without wrecking the economy, which is the optimum result he can hope for here.
If, however, it's a close thing, and McCain's Maverick-y opposition could kill the bill with potential catastrophic consequences...it'll be a tough spot for the Maverick man...
Country first? Or his campaign?
Well...since in his head a McCain presidency is absolutely necessary to save the republic from the monsters hiding under our bed, I'm guessing he'll risk it, vote no, and give the middle finger to Obama, Bush, and the congressional democrats.
I can't believe the Congressional Republicans aren't equally disgusted with this cheap stunt. I really don't see sitting representative or senator endorsing him with any enthusiasm at all (except maybe wayward Joe Lieberman).
I think you are right. My guess is he'll find some cynical way to pose as having taken action toward regulation (or "reform" as Palin likes to keep saying, which is vague and distinct from regulation). In the details, however, will be things that ensure re-regulation does not occur. That way he can do his populist pandering and also secretly reassure his right wing base through various weasel words. If elected he will not regulate anything, of course, and we'll never hear the word again except as a pejorative.
He wouldn't dare demand the ouster of Chris Cox or the formation of a "commission" to study the situation. I think his objective will be to get cronies on the bailout oversight committee, ostensibly to protect average Americans, but really to gut any fairness or progressive actions. Would he dare recommend Phil Gramm.?
It was extensive government intervention during the Clinton years that got us into this mess: encouraging/requiring banks to give loans to those who couldn't afford it.
No bailouts, please!! No more government intervention! Listen to Ron Paul for a change. That guy has never been wrong.
Please answer a question for a puzzled Canuck. Who gets to vote first on this thing ... McCain or Obama?
Thanks.
The President has gone on TV to say "crisis"!. He has been a lying, two=faced bastard in the past - should he be believed now?
Well, the collapse of Lehman Bros, the takeover of AIG, the slide in house prices, and the sluggish market are more real than fictitious WMD.
Its easy to argue for no deal, but the risk is a cascade of bank collapses and people's savings gone for ever, not to mention jobs and the wider economy.
I think Obama is the one with the cool head in a crisis - if he is saying there should be a bailout, then I'll go with that.
However, I despise the way McCain is clearly manouevring to gain political leverage from the deal. Apparently, its all on a knife-edge. Democrats should call his bluff, and give him a time limit to agree a deal, or scupper the whole process.
Your update scenario is the most likely. The "compromise" bill will not be much different from the original and the ones against it will be persuaded to support it as doing "what is best for the country". I will not support anyone that votes yes to any type of bailout bill, it is just a scam and socialism to the rich. The worst part is that the Federal Reserve will have that much more power to ruin the economy!
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home