December 10, 2008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10845 

school in Worden, MT, was on fire—an 

act of arson. Despite the valiant efforts 

by crews from the Worden, Shepherd, 

Lockwood, and Billings fire departments, the school burned to the 

ground. 

Although sad and angry about the 

fire, teachers, parents, students, and 

the whole community rallied to support the student body. As the Billings 

Gazette reported at the time: 

Huntley Project High was still burning 

when people in the tight-knit community 

vowed that the loss wouldn’t affect their 

spirits. 

Montana’s Superintendent of 

Schools, Linda McCulloch, put out a 

request statewide for schools and businesses to donate school supplies and 

books and backpacks and computers. 

Montana’s business community and 

citizens opened their hearts and their 

wallets, even in this tough economic 

time, to help these students. 

Billings School Superintendent Jack 

Copps arranged for classes to continue 

in the Billings school district at 

Skyview High School and at other facilities to help them get through the 

first days after the fire. Later, temporary trailers were brought to the 

Huntley campus to help during the rebuilding process. The 230 Huntley High 

School students soldiered on in the 

spirit of their homecoming theme— 

that being warriors. They simply refused to give up. I met with Superintendent Dave Mahon last month and 

toured the burned campus. 

The Huntley Project Red Devils have 

long been a power in Class B football. 

After the fire, the whole community 

rallied to cheer the team that symbolized Huntley’s toughness in the face of 

an unbelievable challenge. The principal said it well: ‘‘We’re red and black 

and we’re back,’’ as Huntley beat the 

Townsend Bulldogs in their first game 

after the fire. There would be many 

more victories as the team finished a 

perfect season with a record of 12–0. 

Last month, Huntley beat the powerful 

team from Fairfield 41 to 28 to win the 

Class B State championship in football 

as players from both teams played 

their guts out and left it all out on the 

field. It was the first State championship for the project since 1998. 

I wish to congratulate head coach 

Jay Santy, as well as assistant coaches 

Rick Dees, Mark Wandle, and Lenny 

Brown, all of the players and their parents, their teachers and friends and 

supporters throughout the Huntley 

community. 

America faces some tough challenges 

today. Last month, more than a half a 

million American workers lost their 

jobs. Many parts of the country are 

suffering from the foreclosure crisis in 

the housing market and the domestic 

automobile industry teeters on the 

brink of collapse. As we work here to 

tackle those tough challenges, I suggest we follow the example of perseverance of these tough young Montanans. 

I suggest we lace up our cleats, strap 

on our helmets, and go out and get the 

job done. 

As we approach the Christmas season, I urge the Senate to look at Huntley Project school and the greater community and look to the future with 

hope and grit. 

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, today I 

rise in tribute to the spirit of recovery 

for the Huntley Project High School 

which was destroyed in an early morning fire on Thursday, September 18. 

The bottomless community spirit and 

immediate outpouring of support from 

around Montana has enabled this 

school, its faculty and staff, 230 students, their parents and supporters to 

put their energies and efforts into 

opening its doors. Through the extraordinary leadership of school superintendent Dave Mahon and principal 

Tynie Mader, students gathered in the 

junior high auditorium at 8:15 a.m. on 

Monday, September 22, to receive 

school supplies and restart the school 

year in the wake of the fire. Classes are 

being held in trailers located on the 

practice field west of the burned high 

school. 

The weekend following the fire, families and members of the community 

came together to clean up temporary 

classrooms for use, donate funds to replenish music and sports equipment, 

books and computers lost in the fire. 

Donations have come in from communities across Montana the Malta 

School District sent $500 to help, having experienced a devastating fire in 

1995. The school has received bandstands from Absarokee schools, cleats 

from a major sports corporation, 

backpacks from Billings elementary 

schools, donations from the local banks 

and area businesses and offers from as 

far away as North Carolina. 

The students have taken it upon 

themselves to shoulder part of the burden. They have applied to the television show ‘‘Extreme Makeover’’ to 

get their school rebuilt. They have 

been an integral part of sorting, carrying and cleaning school equipment. 

And their academic and extracurricular activities are getting an 

extra dose of school spirit these days. 

The school and community rallied 

around the athletic teams at Huntley 

Project following the devastating fire. 

This burst of school spirit helped propel the Huntley Project Red Devils to 

the Montana Class B State championship in football on November 22. Huntley Project defeated Fairfield High 41– 

28. The victory in the State title game 

on the Red Devils home field capped off 

a perfect season for coach Jay Santy 

and his players. A sign on the fence encircling the field said ‘‘Devils risen up 

with the flames.’’ Indeed this statement is true of all in the Huntley 

Project community. The Red Devils 

girls volleyball team also rose to the 

occasion to excel this season. After 

being displaced from their gym due to 

the fire, the team was forced to practice and play all their games away 

from home. Despite this added challenge the squad led by coach Iona 

Stookey placed third at the State class 

B volleyball tournament. I would like 

to congratulate these fine student athletes, their coaches and teachers, and 

all in the Huntley Project community 

not only for their achievements on the 

playing field but also for coming together to support each other and working to rebuild the school. 

Much has been done. More will need 

to be done. But we are Montanans, and 

we have that frontier spirit and grit 

that pulls a community together without question and without hesitation in 

times of need. In the meantime, we are 

all pulling for the Huntley Project Red 

Devils until their school is rebuilt. 

Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I 

suggest the absence of a quorum. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 

clerk will call the roll. 

The legislative clerk proceeded to 

call the roll. 

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask 

unanimous consent that the order for 

the quorum call be rescinded. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask 

unanimous consent to speak in morning business and to use as much time 

as I may consume. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

f 

AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE 

INDUSTRY 

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, obviously we have been in negotiations 

with a tremendous amount of work 

going on around the question of the 

American auto industry and the position they find themselves in as a result 

of, first of all and foremost, a global 

credit crisis. So I stand here today on 

behalf of hundreds of thousands of incredibly smart, productive, working 

men and women in Michigan and the 

millions of others around the country 

who design, build, service, finance, and 

sell American-made automobiles and 

have done so now for over a generation—the people who not only build the 

parts that are given to the auto industry but to the vehicles that our brave 

men and women drive right now in Iraq 

and around the globe, those who have 

built America and the American middle class, those who advertise and market and are engaged in so many different ways in the foundation of American manufacturing, which is the 

American auto industry. 

I also wish to speak on behalf of 

Americans today who have benefited 

from a great American middle class, 

built on the notion that we don’t just 

move paper around on Wall Street, we 

actually make things and we grow 

things. I know the distinguished occupant of the chair, from Pennsylvania, 

understands that, coming from a great 

State that makes things, grows things, 

adds value to it, people who work hard 

every day. The shower they may take 

is after work rather than before work, 

but they are just as valuable—and, I 

argue, maybe more valuable—in terms 

S10846 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE December 10, 2008 

of creating economic vitality and 

strength of an American middle class. 

That is why every other country in the 

world looks to us and is rushing to support their auto industry and manufacturing, to create what we have had in 

America as a result of hard-working 

men and women in the auto industry 

and other parts of manufacturing. So 

that is really why we are here. 

I thank our leader for his incredible 

diligence and patience. Senator REID

understands the importance of this 

issue. He understands what is at stake 

in terms of 3 million Americans and 

their jobs and the broader impact on 

the economy. I thank him for his incredible leadership. 

I thank the Speaker of the House for 

coming forward and being willing to 

negotiate and be a part of the solution 

and for the great leadership she is now 

providing and will be providing in the 

House. 

I also thank our chairman, CHRIS

DODD, who has had, as chairman of the 

Banking Committee, so many things he 

has had to confront, from the housing 

crisis, where he was way ahead in calling for action that we now know should 

have been done back when he called for 

it to be done, as well as his willingness 

to work with us now on the other piece 

for Americans. Most Americans invest 

in a home, and they hope they will 

have equity that will help them in retiring or taking care of their children’s 

college education or will be there in an 

emergency. The next thing they buy is 

their automobile to get them to work, 

to get the kids to school, to go on vacation, to be able to enjoy the American 

dream. I thank Chairman DODD because 

he has had crises in both of these incredibly important industries to our 

economy and to American families 

placed at his doorstep. He and his staff 

have done an amazing job. 

I also say that for Chairman BARNEY

FRANK, for the same efforts and willingness to focus on people on Main 

Street—the majority of Americans— 

not just on Wall Street. That is what 

this is really all about. 

I thank the Republican colleagues 

who have been and will continue to be 

involved. Senator MCCONNELL has been 

working and raising legitimate issues 

relating to accountability, transparency, things that are resolved, I believe, in this work that will be coming 

before us. I thank the White House for 

working with us in good faith, and Senator VOINOVICH and Senator KIT BOND— 

all of those who care deeply and have 

come together in what is a bipartisan 

bill that is in front of us. 

Mr. President, how did we get here? 

There are a lot of scenarios. I understand people who are mad at the industry for making the Hummer and are 

mad at decisions made 10, 15, 20 years 

ago, and some think workers get paid 

too much. I don’t agree with them. All 

kinds of perspectives have come together to make this a difficult issue to 

deal with. 

What is lost, unfortunately, in all 

this is the real story of today’s auto industry. This is not your father’s factory. These are people producing the 

marquee vehicles in quality, competing, winning awards, and are highly 

productive. They are the envy of the 

world in productivity. These are companies that have turned the corner and 

are rushing to the fuel efficiency vehicles. We could argue that it is not fast 

enough. I argue it is not fast enough. 

The early decisions should have been 

different, but they now find themselves 

in a situation where they are doing exactly what we want them to do. We 

have passed a 40-percent increase in 

fuel efficiency standards. We put in 

place in the fall funding for a provision, which I was proud to champion, 

in the Energy bill to help keep the jobs 

here in America, poised to take major 

costs off of the industry by the United 

Auto Workers stepping up and being 

willing to take the risk on retiree 

health care, to move it off of the employer, and a major focus on a year 

from now when the new vehicles will be 

coming out and retooling is happening. 

Everything is moving just as we would 

want it to be. 

And then a global credit crisis. We 

know about that because of the major 

debate and what we were asked to do 

by this administration, to step up in an 

unprecedented way to be able to address this crisis. Unfortunately, money 

that was given to the banks has not 

been lent. I have suppliers that I have 

met who are not able to get the financing they need. We know dollars given 

to Wall Street have not made their way 

to the financing arms of the auto industry, to people needing the loans, to 

auto dealers, and so on. We also know 

in a global credit crisis that this is not 

just in America. All around the world 

now, we are in a situation where there 

is the perfect storm that is occurring. 

So we look at a result of the tight credit crisis and low consumer confidence 

right now and the concern, frankly, we 

start seeing that someone may go 

bankrupt and people hold back on buying a car. So the whole debate we are 

having is actually making it worse, unfortunately, even though we have to 

have a debate. 

In November, auto sales dropped 

more than 30 percent—can you imagine 

any business that sees a 30-percent 

drop from a year ago—the worst month 

in 25 years for the second straight 

month. This is not just the domestic 

automakers. Yes, GM sales dropped 41 

percent; Chrysler, 47; Ford, 31. Toyota 

dropped 34 percent, the folks they are 

always compared to, as somehow they 

are magically more efficient, which is 

not true. Toyota dropped 44 percent; 

Honda, 32 percent. The reality is, this 

is a global credit crisis. 

We have a severe global credit crisis, 

consumers unwilling or unable because 

they have lost their job—they are cutting back—to purchase a vehicle, and it 

has hit capital-intensive companies the 

hardest. We can talk to those who 

make washing machines or refrigerators or furniture and so on. These 

are capital-intensive companies. Here 

we go, we can say, we shouldn’t make 

anything anymore. Instead of worrying 

about foreign oil, let’s worry about foreign tanks. See how many folks want 

to give us a tank in the war. Let’s 

worry about foreign furniture, refrigerators, batteries. We are America, the 

greatest country in the world. We don’t 

need to make anything. We can trade 

credit swaps. Obviously, that makes no 

sense. This is about where we go as a 

country in terms of our basic industries. 

Automakers in Great Britain, China, 

Japan, Brazil, and the European Union 

have all asked for help and are getting 

it, by the way. They are receiving it. 

French President Sarkozy has introduced a $25 billion strategic investment 

fund because they understand they 

want an automobile industry in France 

and how important it is to their economy, and they want to compete with 

us. The European Investment Bank is 

considering $51 billion in loans. China 

has done the same kind of thing for 

Chery Automobile. Brazil has stepped 

up. Australia has stepped up. You can 

go right around the globe. It seems 

that everybody, but some here understand this is more than just penalizing 

a company you are mad at. This is 

about the underpinnings of our economy and fundamentally whether we are 

going to compete with every other 

country and make things in an advanced manufacturing economy that 

we are in right now. 

Everyone understands we are in a 

race. Everybody else is racing, giving 

hundreds of millions of dollars to their 

companies, government funding for innovation. We don’t do that. We put it 

on the backs of the companies. Every 

other country funds health care differently. Their companies don’t have to 

have health care costs. Our companies 

pay for it. 

We can go right across the board 

when we talk about parity, how we 

need to get parity. I am all for parity, 

if we look at the full picture. Parity includes saying to South Korea that sold 

over 700,000 vehicles to us last year: 

You have to let more than 6,300 American cars into your country. We did 

have a big discussion about parity. I 

welcome it. I have stood on this floor 

more times than I can count to talk 

about parity. But that is not what this 

is about. This is about a global credit 

crisis. 

The question is: Does it matter if we 

have an American auto industry? Is it 

important to make cars in America, 

trucks in America, tanks, the Stryker? 

Is it important to make airplanes? Or 

as long as we can buy them it doesn’t 

matter? I hope the answer is, yes, we 

need in America a manufacturing base, 

an auto industry. 

One out of 10 jobs in this country is 

auto related—1 out of 10. In the middle 

of the biggest recession since the Great 

Depression, can we afford to say: 1 out 

of 10, it doesn’t matter. I certainly 

hope not. 

December 10, 2008 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S10847 

Our country lost 533,000 jobs just in 

November, bringing our unemployment 

rate nationally to 6.7 percent, which, 

by the way, we in Michigan would take 

that 6.7 percent and I bet you would 

too. We are in the heart of where this 

global economic crisis has hit. 

The domestic auto companies provide 

health care and pensions to over a million retirees and their families which, 

by the way, if anybody goes bankrupt, 

open your checkbook because the Federal Government is going to take over 

those payments. 

When we talk about what happens if 

only one of these companies goes bankrupt and the cost to the taxpayers, it 

will make the numbers we are asking 

for in a loan look like pennies, look 

like nothing. That is the reality of 

where we are. 

Motor vehicle parts suppliers provide 

over 780,000 direct employment jobs, 

contributing 4.5 million private industry jobs and 5.5 percent of all manufacturing jobs. When we stop and think 

about it, there is more computer power 

in our automobiles than anything else 

we own. When we talk about Silicon 

Valley, their customers are automation alley—Michigan. Think about 

what is in your automobile—the computer power, the radios, the leather, 

and the cloth for the seats, the tires, 

the glass. I can go on and on. It is all 

connected. 

In fact, the U.S. military relies, for 

instance, on Chrysler Cummins B series engine, which is commonly known 

as the Dodge Ram, for uses as both propulsion and electric generator power. 

This is one example of a production 

line that has to be kept open for our 

national security. Let me give other 

examples for the military. 

Even for my colleagues who don’t 

care about the domestic auto industry 

but care very much about defense and 

national security and what is happening to our brave men and women 

around the world, ArvinMeritor, a 

major supplier to all three automakers, 

has been a major supplier of axles to 

the Army for its 21⁄2 and 5-ton vehicles 

for over 50 years. Axles—it makes 

sense—tank axles, truck axles. It 

makes sense. Do you think their major 

auto customer can go bankrupt and not 

pay them and have them continue to 

do business in this economy. Highly 

unlikely. 

Goodyear Tire, GM’s second largest 

tire supplier, has supplied tires for the 

U.S. military for over 100 years. 

Navis, a key supplier of engine technology to Ford, produces a variety of 

widely deployed military trucks and 

light vehicles, including the MRAP. 

Where have we heard about the MRAP? 

A key supplier of Ford supplies the 

MRAP, the Mine Resistant Ambush 

Protected Vehicle, the deployment of 

which was, by all accounts, pivotal in 

the Iraq campaign. Ford supplied technology—the joint light tactical vehicle 

and the future tactical truck system. 

Dana Corporation is a leading supplier of highly specialized axles to both 

the American auto industry and the 

military. 

I could go on and on. 

The point is, you don’t shut down one 

piece of this and not have it affect everything else. This is a case of dominos 

going right across the country to every 

single person’s State. 

The failure of our industry would 

have debilitating ramifications for our 

entire industrial base and undermine 

our ability to respond to current and 

future military challenges. 

As I indicated, other countries understand and have been investing huge 

amounts of money to get ahead of us in 

a number of areas, including the battery technology we all want in America for that next generation of hybrid 

vehicle, that electric vehicle about 

which we are all talking. 

Germany has announced the Great 

Battery Alliance which will invest $160 

million in advanced lithium-ion batteries, 

South Korea will spend $700 million; 

China also. India has developed an 

automotive mission plan. We don’t 

even have a manufacturing strategy 

today for America. Our strategy is: 

Hey, they can’t make it on their own, 

we will go buy it somewhere else. That 

is just batteries. That is not all the 

other pieces. 

We could go into health care and 

what is happening in trade and what 

has happened. 

I have heard colleagues—and I am 

sure we are going to hear it again—say: 

Just let them go into bankruptcy. 

They will reorganize, restructure, come 

out a stronger company, and go forward. Unfortunately, in the automobile 

industry, it is not the same as a bankrupt airline. I flew on an airline in 

bankruptcy. You buy a ticket, you 

take one flight. That is it. That is different. This is the second most important purchase a family makes. You 

want to look at whether parts will be 

available, will they be able to meet 

their warranties. It is a whole different 

situation in automobiles. 

The Center for Automotive Research, 

in looking at this very closely, found 

that if one or more of the top three 

automotive companies files for bankruptcy, we can expect about 2.5 million 

lost jobs, direct job losses, as well as a 

number of other industries about which 

I talked. 

How tragic and, I say, outrageous, at 

a time when we have a wonderful visionary new President coming in, carrying all the hopes and dreams of all of 

us, talking about creating 2.5 million 

jobs next year, to have all that wiped 

out by our inability to come together 

and address this situation this week. I 

am optimistic we will come together 

and do that. It would certainly be a 

blow to the hopes and dreams of the 

American public of creating new jobs 

for next year and beyond. 

I talked about the fact that suppliers 

would be affected. I have had very specific conversations with those who indicated very specifically the companies—and I will not name them, but if 

we saw a company go into bankruptcy 

now, the suppliers that would immediately begin to follow suit, suppliers 

that supply the Department of Defense, 

aerospace, other parts of the economy. 

We are seeing that suppliers, particularly with all the talk of bankruptcy 

now, find themselves in a situation 

where matters are even worse, of banks 

not being willing to give loans. The 

questions in the hearings I would like 

to have of the folks who have already 

gotten taxpayer money is where are 

they in trying to be a part of the solution right now, people who have not 

had to go through what this industry 

has had to go through. 

I certainly welcome accountability 

and transparency. It would be nice if it 

was on everybody getting Federal 

money. But the reality is we have suppliers that cannot get their upfront 

funding. They are now having to turn 

to the automakers to ask for prepayment, where in the past they waited 

until the product was shipped and then 

they would have 120 days or longer to 

make the payment. From a cash-flow 

standpoint, suppliers are saying: We 

need the money upfront, which makes 

the situation even worse. 

This is a complicated situation which 

is, in fact, only going to be made worse 

if we cannot provide a short-term 

bridge loan. 

Let me also say, as I wrap up, I mentioned before about taxpayer funding, 

the billions of dollars in liability we 

will assume in pensions, health care, 

unemployment costs, Medicare and 

Medicaid, and the lost taxpayer dollars. Bankruptcy would result in the 

reduction of personal income of $276 

billion—much more than $15 billion in 

a bridge loan we are talking about— 

which would lead to a total Government loss of $108 billion over 3 years, 

not to mention States borrowing. 

The reality is this bill, I believe, is a 

fair and reasonable compromise that 

reflects the global credit crisis that allows a short-term bridge loan until the 

end of the first quarter but then sets up 

rigorous oversight and transparency 

with requirements to come to the table 

to make the changes that are being 

talked about by colleagues, legitimate 

issues that have been raised about the 

need to restructure, deal with lower capacity, and continue to deal with costs 

on all sides. That structure is being put 

in place to do just that. The overseer, 

or the person now being dubbed the 

‘‘car czar,’’ can actually recommend 

that the dollars not continue during 

that time period if they are not making progress on all of the areas that 

have been put together in terms of criteria. And no additional dollars would 

be given unless people were satisfied by 

March 31 that in fact there was longterm viability, that restructuring had 

been done. This gives us an opportunity to have the restructuring that is 

needed to create or to sustain an American automotive industry and American manufacturing in this country. It 

makes sense. 

S10848 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE December 10, 2008 

A lot of tough negotiations have gone 

on. This is a tough bill on accountability, it is tough on oversight. It is 

much tougher than anything that anyone on Wall Street has been asked to 

do, that is for sure. At the same time, 

it recognizes that we are in a global 

credit crisis and that the ability for 

them to borrow—to get a loan for a 

short period of time—is essential if we 

are going to have American manufacturing. 

Mr. President, I hope we are going to 

come together. I know the House intends to vote, and we will be coming 

together to vote on this issue. I hope 

we will see a resoundingly bipartisan 

‘‘yes’’ for a commitment to the middle 

class of this country to advance manufacturing for the future and that we 

will make sure people’s feet are kept to 

the fire, that the right things are done, 

but that we will not give up on the 

middle class of this country. We are 

not going to give up on 21⁄2 to 3 million 

people who are watching everything we 

are doing now to determine whether 

they have a future for their families 

that will give them a living wage and 

allow them to continue to be a part of 

this great American dream. I hope we 

are going to come together. I am optimistic that we will come together in 

the next couple of days and say yes and 

allow a whole lot of people to have a 

holiday season, a Christmas, that will 

allow them to know they have a future. 

Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I 

suggest the absence of a quorum. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 

clerk will call the roll. 

The legislative clerk proceeded to 

call the roll. 

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask 

unanimous consent that the order for 

the quorum call be rescinded. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask 

unanimous consent to speak for 20 minutes in morning business. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

f 

THE ECONOMY 

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, all of us 

in this country are nervous and very 

worried about the American economy. 

This is an economic engine that has 

been the wonder of the world. It has 

provided so much good for so many 

people, expanding opportunities for 

jobs and careers, and for people to own 

homes. This is an extraordinary place, 

this place called the United States. We 

have been through tough times and 

good times, and this turns out to be 

one of those pretty difficult times for 

our economy. This ship of state has 

sort of stopped in the water, the engine 

isn’t working very well, and we have a 

lot of trouble. 

Since the first of this year, nearly 2 

million people have lost their jobs. 

That sounds like just a statistic, but in 

a home where one spouse had to tell 

the other that they had lost their job, 

that is a disaster. So almost 2 million 

people have lost their jobs, and the 

question is, How many more will lose 

their jobs before we find a way to provide a foundation for building this 

economy back to an economy of 

strength and opportunity once again? 

We are discussing here in the Senate 

and in the Congress a proposed $15 billion bridge loan for the automobile industry. My colleagues have been speaking about that, and there are a lot of 

jobs at stake, so there is a lot of passion on both sides of this issue. It appears to me that there are somewhere 

around 3 to 4 million jobs at stake with 

the automobile industry. I think the 

question is, at this precarious moment, 

teetering on the edge of a cliff with 

this economy, what would it mean if 

somehow we decide whatever happens 

will happen and we will let it happen, 

watch it happen, but we won’t take action? What would it mean if a couple of 

million American people lost their jobs 

on top of what we have just seen? So I 

don’t think the prospect is for us to sit 

around and be observers. We have to be 

active. We have to be involved, and we 

have to try to find ways to provide confidence that there will be an economic 

recovery. 

Now, I am concerned about this recession, which is very deep. It is devastating to American families who 

have lost a substantial part of their assets and their 401(k)s and their retirement accounts. It is devastating to 

those who have lost their jobs. But I 

am concerned about something else as 

well: I am concerned about a government and a constitution that somehow 

seems to have invented a completely 

separate approach to governing. And 

let me describe what I mean. I am perfectly understanding of those that need 

to take and want to take emergency 

action to try to provide opportunities 

for the recovery of this economy. I understand that. I have studied economics. I taught economics briefly. I understand, having studied what happened in 

the Great Depression, the need to take 

aggressive action. But no one, in my 

judgment, has ever suggested that the 

need to take aggressive action should 

somehow obliterate the requirement 

for oversight and for accountability. 

But that is exactly what I think is happening today with an extraordinary 

kind of government outside of the regular process that we understand government to adopt based on our Constitution. 

Let me describe what I mean and my 

concern about it. As I look at what has 

happened with bailout funds, rescue 

funds, all kinds of emergency actions, 

there is about $8.5 trillion in taxpayer 

funds that has now been put at risk. I 

am not talking billions, I am not talking about millions or thousands, I am 

talking about $8.5 trillion of taxpayer 

funds that appears to me to have been 

placed at risk. In almost all cases, this 

was done without the consent of the 

Congress, outside of any vote that occurred here in the Congress. 

Now, I am not suggesting that the 

emergency powers, for example, at the 

Federal Reserve Board that Chairman 

Bernanke is using—should not have 

been a significant part of this effort to 

try to create emergency measures to 

address the economic trouble we face. I 

am not suggesting that at all. What I 

am saying is this: We have people 

huddled in rooms around here for days 

and days and days talking about what 

kinds of conditions should you put on 

the proposal of $15 billion that would 

be a bridge loan for the automobile industry, what kinds of tough conditions 

should they be, spell them out, make 

sure they are there. Well, guess what. 

With almost all of the Wall Street bailout money, there are no conditions, no 

real accountability that I am aware of. 

Nobody was sitting in a room saying: 

You know what, let’s establish tough 

conditions when we open the Fed’s window for the first time in history for the 

investment banks to come and get direct lending from the Federal Reserve 

Board. I didn’t see any conditions attached to that. You go down the list of 

things, and the Federal Reserve programs are $5.55 trillion. 

Now, I am not suggesting the taxpayers are going to lose that money. 

They will perhaps lose some of it for 

sure, but some of it represents mortgages that likely will be good in the 

long term. The guarantee of certain 

kinds of mortgage securities, the funding for certain investment bank operations—you know I am not suggesting 

all of this is going to be lost, but clearly some will be lost. The taxpayers are 

at risk. Did anyone talk about what 

kinds of conditions should exist for 

that? 

As I said, for a week now there have 

been people huddling about what are 

the strict and strong conditions you 

can attach to this $15 billion. I am in 

favor of strict and strong conditions to 

the things we do to move money into 

these circumstances. I am in favor of 

that. But why is it just here? Why not 

the $5.5 trillion? The FDIC program, 

$1.5 trillion, the Treasury Department, 

$1.1 trillion, $700 billion of which is 

called the Troubled Asset Relief Program—that, by the way, is a misnomer. 

That is what the Secretary of the 

Treasury asked for. He asked for $700 

billion to buy troubled assets from financial firms. The Congress gave him 

the $700 billion. I did not vote for that, 

but the Congress gave him $700 billion, 

and very quickly he said: Well, that is 

not what I meant. I have changed my 

mind. We are not going to buy troubled 

assets, we are going to invest in capital 

in banks. So he promptly put $125 billion into nine banks—some of which 

apparently didn’t want it—in order to, 

as the Treasury Secretary said, expand 

lending because the credit markets 

were frozen. 

Well, guess what. That $125 billion 

called troubled asset relief money was 

put into banks instead as capital investments with no requirement at all 

that they expand lending. The purpose