What Wall Street Should Be Required to Do, to Get A Blank Check From Taxpayers

The frame has been set, the dye cast. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, presumably representing the Bush administration but indirectly representing Wall Street, and Fed Chief Ben Bernanke, want a blank check from Congress for $700 billion or possibly a trillion dollars or more to take bad debt off Wall Street’s balance sheets. Never before in the history of American capitalism has so much been asked of so many for (at least in the first instance) so few.Put yourself in the shoes of a member of Congress, including our two presidential candidates. The Treasury Secretary and Fed Chair have told you this is necessary to save the economy. If you don’t agree, you risk a meltdown of the entire global financial system. Your own constituents’ savings could go down with it. An election is six weeks away. Besides, in the last two days of trading, since rumors spread that the Treasury and the Fed were planning something of this sort, stock prices revived.Now – quick — what do you do? You have no choice but to say yes.

But you might also set some conditions on Wall Street.

The public doesn’t like a blank check. They think this whole bailout idea is nuts. They see fat cats on Wall Street who have raked in zillions for years, now extorting in effect $2,000 to $5,000 from every American family to make up for their own nonfeasance, malfeasance, greed, and just plain stupidity. Wall Street’s request for a blank check comes at the same time most of the public is worried about their jobs and declining wages, and having enough money to pay for gas and food and health insurance, meet their car payments and mortgage payments, and save for their retirement and childrens’ college education. And so the public is asking: Why should Wall Street get bailed out by me when I’m getting screwed?

So if you are a member of Congress, you just might be in a position to demand from Wall Street certain conditions in return for the blank check.

My five nominees:

1. The government (i.e. taxpayers) gets an equity stake in every Wall Street financial company proportional to the amount of bad debt that company shoves onto the public. So when and if Wall Street shares rise, taxpayers are rewarded for accepting so much risk.

2. Wall Street executives and directors of Wall Street firms relinquish their current stock options and this year’s other forms of compensation, and agree to future compensation linked to a rolling five-year average of firm profitability. Why should taxpayers feather their already amply-feathered nests?

3. All Wall Street executives immediately cease making campaign contributions to any candidate for public office in this election cycle or next, all Wall Street PACs be closed, and Wall Street lobbyists curtail their activities unless specifically asked for information by policymakers. Why should taxpayers finance Wall Street’s outsized political power – especially when that power is being exercised to get favorable terms from taxpayers?

4. Wall Street firms agree to comply with new regulations over disclosure, capital requirements, conflicts of interest, and market manipulation. The regulations will emerge in ninety days from a bi-partisan working group, to be convened immediately. After all, inadequate regulation and lack of oversight got us into this mess.

5. Wall Street agrees to give bankruptcy judges the authority to modify the terms of primary mortgages, so homeowners have a fighting chance to keep their homes. Why should distressed homeowners lose their homes when Wall Streeters receive taxpayer money that helps them keep their fancy ones?

Wall Streeters may not like these conditions. Well, you should tell them that the public doesn’t like the idea of bailing out Wall Street. So if Wall Street doesn’t accept these conditions, it doesn’t get the blank check.

Originally published at Robert Reich weblog and reproduced here with the author’s permission.

2 Responses to "What Wall Street Should Be Required to Do, to Get A Blank Check From Taxpayers"

  1. Guest   September 22, 2008 at 10:34 am

    Dear Senator Domenici,The way I understand the bailout is that Treasury buys the “bad” assets (oxymoron) to stanch the current deleveraging and then disposes of them. Many critics question whether the Government would have to pay inflated prices for this financial junk to keep its price from tanking causing a de facto deleveraging unfavorable to banks. But if Treasury buys the liabilities too high, what happens to their price down the road when Treasury sells these products – supposably to pay back the taxpayers? Won’t their price just tank again? The buy / sell is then a negative to the taxpayers. This bailout is just another Bush fake to postpone the pain and get this enormous fiscal and policy disaster off his watch.As with the Iraq war Bush kicks the economic can down the road.Paulson’s self appointment as Czar to run his proposed bailout is unconstitutional and puts the fox in charge of the chickenhouse.Please oppose the bailout,

  2. Greg H.   September 22, 2008 at 11:02 am

    Right on Mr. Reich. Your #1 condition for the blank check has been bubbling around in my head since I woke up this morning. Now all we have to do is convince Congress of this. No sweat right?