Education
Assessment Technology, Inc
Social Studies Content Writer Health Care
Rio Salado College
PA's/Online Instructors General
CORT
Warehouse Supervisor Construction
Komatsu Equipment Co
Mechanic General
CORT
WAREHOUSE/DRIVER

We are loath to support the $700 billion financial rescue approved by the U.S. Senate Wednesday evening. The House is expected to take it up today.

We've heard from many readers and understand their concerns that the government is picking the pockets of taxpayers to manage a greed-induced economic crisis forged by investors who made risky decisions.

One reader called it the "reverse Robin Hood" effect — taking from the poor to give to the rich.

Likewise, we acknowledge that this rescue teeters close to nationalization of businesses, as pointed out by several letter writers.

However, this economic-stabilization legislation is necessary.

Congress cannot pass this measure — an imperfect compromise — and consider the United States' economic course righted. This is a first step.

While the economic crisis' epicenter may be Wall Street, its credit crunch tremors are being felt by consumers seeking car and home loans and its impact on the markets is pounding retirement accounts.

Importantly, small businesses that often rely on financing to meet payrolls and buy inventory are getting smacked with credit rejections.

The stabilization plan is not a bailout and probably will not cost U.S. taxpayers $700 billion on the final balance sheet, U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said during a conference call with Arizona reporters Wednesday before Senate debate of the bill.

The bill, which would allow the feds to purchase weak mortgage-related securities and financial institutions' devalued assets, passed by a decisive 74-25 vote in the Senate.

Kyl said the bill would allow the federal government to purchase securities at a price somewhere between their current fire-sale value and their inflated face value. When the economy levels out, the securities will be sold, repaying the government.

There have been substantial changes to the rescue bill that the House rejected Monday. It should be more palatable to the House. These modifications include:

● Increasing the insurance the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. provides on customer deposits from $100,000 to $250,000.

● An estimated $110 billion in tax breaks over 10 years, which include extending the renewable-energy tax credits and a one-year fix to halt the alternative-minimum tax from slamming more taxpayers.

The package, however, does not address paying for the tax breaks.

And it does little to aid those with subprime mortgages and foreclosure looming.

The Star's Josh Brodesky reported Thursday that U.S. Rep. Raúl Grijalva, a Southern Arizona Democrat, predicted that with the changes the rescue plan will probably get enough House votes to pass.

Grijalva won't support it unless there is protection for homeowners and taxpayers, Brodesky reported.

Grijalva wants a bankruptcy provision that would allow the courts to change terms for homeowners facing foreclosure and a pay-as-you-go tax on Wall Street transactions.

We don't foresee those changes happening immediately, but we do hope for future legislation that would allow homeowners with unreasonable adjustable-rate mortgages to renegotiate.

We want the smartest portfolio managers in the room watching the $700 billion worth of assets the federal government buys and sells so that the government not only gets the taxpayers' money back and but assures that taxpayers make a profit. It's what any investor would expect.

Lastly, we want a thorough congressional investigation of this situation. What happened? How will it be prevented in the future? Should there be criminal prosecutions?

The financial industry bailout, stabilization or rescue — pick your favorite term — should clear the House today, but it is only Step 1 toward untangling our nation's economic mess.