Loading ...
CONGRESSMAN CHANGES MIND, WILL SUPPORT RESCUE LEGISLATION
The only Congressman from South Carolina to vote against the proposed $700 billion bailout bill on Monday now says he will support an altered Senate version when it comes to the floor of the U.S. House tomorrow.
Rep. Gresham Barrett told the Greenville News that he has changed his position, citing “what Warren Buffet called an ‘economic Pearl Harbor’ that includes the ugly reality of an across-the-board credit freeze.”
Some would call that flip-flopping. But Barrett defended the decision.
“The ability for companies to meet payroll and fund activities is threatened, and let’s be clear, I’m not talking about Wall Street businesses, but third-district employers,” Barrett said. “Whether it is a small business that may have to close its doors or major corporations employing thousands of my constituents, jobs are at risk.
“If Congress does not act, the effects will be serious for American small business, families and consumers.”
While I think Barrett is right to get behind this legislation, I’m having difficulty understanding why — based on his rationale — he has just now decided to ditch the soundbites and opt for solutions. And I wonder if his newfound admirers will still be singing his praises tomorrow.
The American public is being blackmailed. There is a problem, and it needs a solution. But a giant step torwards socialism and a bill full of pork is not the solution.
Yesterday Barret was a hero. Today he is just another politician…
And he has one less vote for governor…
Looks like I will have to take back my “thank you for voting against the bill and please do it again” call I did earlier today.
I’ll replace it with “I’m going to do everything in my power to see that you are never re-elected” call.
agree with Randy. This Ahole said this and that but is “just another politicians”. anybody else for gov 2010.
For 15 year the GOP has operated without a moral center. We have shaved the edges off every situation, and in the process lost our way. Our morally bankrupt positions are apparent for all to see.
This election will be historic in the losses we will suffer. In November we will turn over a seriously damages, ailing US to a rag tag bunch of wannabe socialists, and even knowing that I wonder…can they do worse than we did?
I must take my share of responsibility as I donated money to and worked for the GOP. I am embarrassed, and humiliated.
Obama sucks, but so do we.
Greshem goes straight to the ninth circle!
Oscar Lovelace for Governor!
Boooooooooooooooo!
Japan lost a decade of economic growth due government intervention in the finance markets and now we’re gonna lose one too.
McLovin, just throwing this out there, but Stalin and Hitler had solutions to.
That didn’t make them right.
Barrett has joined the rest of the rudderless ships from South Carolina in the ‘people’s house.’
Let’s forget the issue for a moment; rather, let’s address the theme of this article: Flip-Flop. There seems to be something magic in political circles about sticking to a position, period. Supposedly shows strength, resolve, determination. To change means wealness, lack of intelligence and vision, not versed at all on the issues.
If you are a general going into battle, you generally have a battle plan. Suppose you reach the battle zone, get new intelligence from your scout teams, and find that your plan is not sufficient. What do you do? Stick with the plan anyhow? Or create a new plan of attack? The answer is not hard to see. Or you are a business person with 1 year and 5 year plans. Later you find out a competitor is beating you badly in the market place. Or you run into an economy as we have here? What do you do?
So you are a politician, elected to make decisions about everything from the economy to the latest atom smasher. can you know it all? Immediately? Later? Sometimes initial opinions, gut feelings, immediate reactions are not a complete answer, if any part of a solution. As someone delves into an issue, he may find new information that can reshape his opinion and plan of action.
Would i want an elected official that never changed his mind on an issue once he has made a pubic statement? ABSOLUTELY NOT! If his faculties are too weak to recognize need for an opinion change, or his ego far too large, I want him out. We, as everyday citizens, constantly change our opinions and judgments of situations depending on what new and changing information we acquire. As businessmen, we do the same. Why, then, should a politician not change his opinion if he discovers new compelling information?
A politician that will not change (or flip-flop, as the media and opponents label it) in the face of compelling information is a dangerous politician indeed.
Now, back to the issue at hand……..
Joe – He changed positions in the course of a few days without offering a legitimate reason. On Monday he called the bill an unnecessary expenditure and then today he said we must act now. What gives?
Adam he flipped because the new bill has lots of PORK.
The whole argument in favor of the bailout hinges on the mass economic hysteria that would supposedly result because credit will dissapear without such a bailout.
Now keep that in mind and go to the federal reserve website and look at their weekly published data on the volume and kinds of loans.
Here’s some help in finding it: federalreserve.gov/releases/h8/data.htm
The thing that you notice, is that credit is not drying up. The amount of money being lent is total and in all sorts of categories is even rising despite the last few months of crisis mongering. The diminished credit being offered by big wall street banks is being overwhelmed by well managed small and regional banks rising to the challenge and taking their market share; like BB&T is doing.
The “credit crunch” is a sham, to try and trick us into opening up the vault, and everyone who tolerates it is responsible for the consequences when that vault ends up emptier than it already is.
This is the most “in your face” assult of the taxpayer in American history. And our republican party is in the thick of it.
I will be damned if I will support them. I can and will stay home in November.
I have suffered the GOP crap for 15 years…and I don’t see how we can do worse.
I agree, it has turned out that Gresham Barrett is just another man who went to Washington with good intentions and ideals and has changed into an unprincipled politician. Tell us Congressman; specifically, what is your reason for voting for this bill other than threats from the leadership of the GOP and your consultants telling you this would be best for your Governor’s race? I am no longer one of your supporters.
The fed no longer issues the M3 report that tells how much money they are printing.
Paulson is solely in charge of a lot of funds already.
Noone can say how they came up with the number 700 billion.
People say this will equal 7 trillion before it’s all over.
WE DON”T HAVE THAT do we?
So Barrett climbs on board when the price tag goes up?
Can anyone in America define Republican and what they stand for?
No I do not support bailing out Wall Street, because when this pain is felt, the politicians and bankers will feel pain too. They need to feel the pain, not the love.
Bad bad call Mr. Barrett. People are not represented by Barrett, corporate America is.
Fogle – you left out half his quote and then claimed that today’s voting “yes” today “without offering a legitimate reason.”
If readers see the other half of his quote, they’ll see he says, “Monday’s bill relied purely on government activity failing to consider fundamental free-market principles that I believe must be part of any solution. … This legislation contains proven free-market principles like tax relief and regulatory changes that will move our economy forward, helping to mitigate the pain on Main Street.”
I think many people (maybe not some of the previous commenters) will find that to be a legitimate reason. This may be a bad bill, but it’s not the same bill. If Gresham and a dozen, or so, others hadn’t voted “no” on Monday, we’d have a pretty crappy bill going to the President.
Look, I think this bill is crap, but like you I think it needs to be done. I’m just glad that Members of the House held out long enough to at least make it a better bill than the legislation that was killed Monday. Hopefully readers will go to the article and read the whole quote in context.
Adam (not Fogle)- thanks for pointing that out. I still don’t support the bill, but taking the explanation out of a quote and then demanding an explanation is pretty unethical.
Adam Fogle- you should do better. This goes beyond your usual partisan-skewed logic.
[...] last time Barrett had an opportunity take a stand on a massive bailout package, he balked. He voted against the first package, before going back and voting for it the second time [...]
[...] saying “we’re not supposed to pick winners and losers” is laughable given that he did exactly that the last time Congress decided to, umm, “micromanage companies.” Or perhaps he forgot [...]
[...] one, he was one of “the same folks” who voted to bail out AIG back in October. And it was that taxpayer money which was used by AIG to give out multi-million [...]
[...] that it’s been exactly one year since Congressman Gresham Barrett made one of the most politically obtuse flip-flops in South Carolina history when he chose to vote for a $700 billion bailout bill after voting [...]
[...] why someone who professes to be a staunch anti-bailout crusader is campaigning for a guy who voted for the federal government’s $700 billion bailout bill is rather curious. Who knows… [...]
[...] to stop using taxpayer dollars for the TARP bailout,” wrote Haley. “As you were a supporter of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout, adding your voice to the chorus of conservative opposition [...]
[...] Barrett’s support of federal stimulus legislation and vote in favor of last year’s massive bank bailout could have something to do with the reason Democrats like [...]
[...] the Congressman does show up to vote, he does stuff like vote for a massive $700 federal bank bailout. You can see how that vote worked out for him by clicking here. [...]
[...] pieces of legislation to come before Congress this year offers a little more insight into his flip-flop on a massive federal bank bailout bill and the rest of his atrocious voting record. Posted in 2, [...]