Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Eugene

(61,908 posts)
Thu Jul 25, 2013, 07:44 PM Jul 2013

'No Bailout': Senators look to pre-empt U.S. aid to Detroit

Source: Reuters

'No Bailout': Senators look to pre-empt U.S. aid to Detroit

By Lisa Lambert
WASHINGTON | Thu Jul 25, 2013 4:44pm EDT

(Reuters) - Republicans in the Senate want to make sure the federal government does not become involved in the financial maelstrom hitting Detroit, which filed for the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history last week.

They have proposed at least three "No Bailout" amendments to spending bills that the Senate is currently considering, all of which would limit the U.S. government's ability to help cities in fiscal crisis.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]

Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, on Thursday introduced an amendment to a financial services and general spending bill that would bar the use of federal funds to buy or guarantee a municipal asset or obligation from a locality that has defaulted or is at risk of defaulting.

It also would prohibit the U.S. government from issuing lines of credit to those municipalities or providing other aid to prevent bankruptcy.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/25/us-usa-detroit-congress-idUSBRE96O1DO20130725
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
'No Bailout': Senators look to pre-empt U.S. aid to Detroit (Original Post) Eugene Jul 2013 OP
Fair is fair jmowreader Jul 2013 #1
They're petrified it'll work and Michigan will never vote Republican again. Arkana Jul 2013 #2
Republicans: Proud Liberal Dem Jul 2013 #3
Next Graham will want federal funds for a confederate flag museum. JoePhilly Jul 2013 #4
They are motivated by pure racism. Bunnahabhain Jul 2013 #5
The plan is a firesale davidpdx Jul 2013 #6
Remember when … 1StrongBlackMan Jul 2013 #7
They also said that bankruptcy was the way to go. Igel Jul 2013 #8

jmowreader

(50,560 posts)
1. Fair is fair
Fri Jul 26, 2013, 02:08 AM
Jul 2013

One of the things that killed Detroit is also one of the things that killed the banks: derivatives. If we can bail out the banks we can bail out Detroit.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
7. Remember when …
Sat Jul 27, 2013, 08:22 AM
Jul 2013

During the Housing fix discussions, President Obama (and just about every economist) was talking about helping the American people through principal reduction?
All you heard from the right was how horrible the idea was because of the “Moral Hazard” … “a contract is a contract” … “what would stop everyone from stop paying their mortgages just to get the reduction?”

Well, Pension contract are contracts, too. Why no cries about the “moral hazard” of every city using their pension liability to break those contracts … just like they want to do in D-town?

Igel

(35,320 posts)
8. They also said that bankruptcy was the way to go.
Sat Jul 27, 2013, 09:36 AM
Jul 2013

And lots of pepole did.

So everybody's being consistent. Rather unusual, if you ask me.

One small difference is that many of those who were insolvent or very nearly so went with bankruptcy; probably more should have. "Principal reduction" was a funny kind of thing. When pushed to argue for it, the people it would help were those who were slowly running into the conditions that would lead to bankruptcy except that bankruptcy would hurt their credit and be stressful on them.

But most of the people principal reduction would have helped never actually faced bankruptcy--they were just underwater, having paid the house's previous owners too much in hindsight and on the hook with the banks. In many cases those owners are no longer under water, and if they'd had their principal reduced and sold their houses now it would be a mess to untangle how they'd reimburse the banks or the government for their windfall profits.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»'No Bailout': Senators lo...