The situation makes Americans genuinely angry. It should.

The financial collapse of leading Wall Street financial firms is linked directly to excesses, greed, unbelievable risk-taking and outright irresponsibility. Would you as an individual be in line for some kind of government rescue with such a record?

As much as the answer is clear, there is agreement that something has to be done to prevent a wholesale collapse of companies weighted down under the debt of bad mortgages and other investments. Their collapse takes down very many ordinary Americans, too.

Enter President Bush, under whose administration the federal government failed to provide the necessary regulatory oversight that could have prevented this fiscal crisis. The president is proposing a $700 billion rescue package.

Congress knows it must act but is trying to steer clear of the type of frantic pace that led to approval of the Iraq war. Yes, this is an emergency and time is of the essence, but taking the wrong action could be devastating.

Wrong would be handing over these taxpayer dollars to private firms without stipulations. As much as the Bush team has long pushed for deregulation and the ability of the markets to adjust themselves, they surely must see now that the strategy, at least in this instance, has failed. There must be strings attached to the money.

Notable is the need to ensure that the money does not go simply to excuse the worst of the excesses. The thousands and thousands of people facing foreclosure on their homes by these firms need some kind of guarantee that the squeeze on Wall Street won’t become the bomb dropped on their personal lives compliments of Uncle Sam.

Secondly, there is the matter of the rich getting richer. What about the CEOs and executives who led the big financials down the road to ruin? Do we allow people who drove these firms into bankruptcy to continue profiting from their way of doing business? Give them taxpayer bucks while they earn megabucks in salaries?

Republican U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham from South Carolina says no. So do we.

“Taxpayers should not subsidize multimillion dollar buyouts for CEOs and other top managers who created this problem. If a company participates in a proposed government rescue plan, there should be limits on the executive’s compensation. They should not be rewarded for their massive failures. The last thing we need is an executive of a failed firm walking away with millions,” Graham said.

Maybe the best suggestion is that no exec in a rescue firm be eligible for any more than the top-paid person in the U.S. government. That would limit the CEO to $400,000 annually. Maybe then the top echelon of the firms would know what it’s like to have to give up a home(s).

Republicans are balking at the president’s plan as caving in to the philosophy of government solving problems via the taxpayer. Democrats are demanding increased oversight before any money is provided. Both know they have to act.

House Majority Whip James Clyburn on Tuesday admonished the president to make the case to leaders in his own party and to Americans. “I caution the president that we cannot pass this package without his party’s support. If it’s a crisis – as Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke argue – and we all need to come together, then as leader of this nation, the president needs to take the lead and bring the country together behind his plan.”

In doing so, the Congress must hold steady on its insistence of “no blank check.”

As Graham proposes: “ I do hope ... we give further consideration to the creation of an independent board made up of Republicans, Democrats and independents who would have oversight over any government expenditures on a rescue plan. There is merit in this approach and I hope it would be an essential ingredient in any bailout plan. We need to bring the best minds in our nation together to help solve a very difficult problem.”

You must be logged in to comment.