How they voted: California roll call vote on the bailout plan

Here's a good link to the roll call vote by which the bailout bill failed in the House today. Here's how the California delegation voted (29 in favor, 24 opposed); the breakdown by party is as follows: Among Democrats, 19 voted for the bailout, 15 against; Among Republicans, 10 voted for the bailout, nine against.

Republicans voting yes:
Wally Herger (Chico)
Dan Lungren (Gold River)
George Radanovich (Mariposa)
Howard "Buck" McKeon (Santa Clarita)
David Dreier (San Dimas)
Jerry Lewis (Redlands)
Gary Miller (Diamond Bar)
Ken Calvert (Corona)
Mary Bono Mack (Palm Springs)
John Campbell (Irvine)

Republicans voting no:
John Doolittle (Roseville)
David Nunes (Tulare)
Kevin McCarthy (Bakersfield)
Elton Gallegly (Simi Valley)
Ed Royce (Fullerton)
Dana Rohrabacher (Huntington Beach)
Darrell Issa (Vista)
Brian Bilbray (Carlsbad)
Duncan Hunter (Alpine)

Democrats voting yes:
Doris Matsui (Sacramento)
George Miller (Martinez)
Nancy Pelosi (San Francisco)
Ellen Tauscher (Alamo)
Jerry McNerney  (Pleasanton)
Jackie Speier (Hillsborough)
Anna Eshoo (Menlo Park)
Mike Honda (San Jose)
Zoe Lofgren (San Jose)
Sam Farr (Carmel)
Dennis Cardoza (Atwater)
Jim Costa (Fresno)
Lois Capps (Santa Barbara)
Howard Berman (Valley Village)
Henry Waxman (Beverly Hills)
Maxine Waters (Los Angeles)
Jane Harman (Venice)
Laura Richardson (Long Beach)
Susan Davis (San Diego)

Democrats voting no:
Mike Thompson (St. Helena)
Lynn Woolsey (Petaluma)
Barbara Lee (Oakland)
Pete Stark (Fremont)
Brad Sherman (Sherman Oaks)
Adam Schiff (Burbank)
Xavier Becerra (Los Angeles)
Hilda Solis (El Monte)
Diane Watson (Los Angeles)
Lucille Roybal-Allard (East Los Angeles)
Grace Napolitano (Norwalk)
Linda Sanchez (Lakewood)
Joe Baca (Rialto)
Loretta Sanchez (Garden Grove)
Bob Filner (Chula Vista)

Your thoughts? Comments? E-mail story tips to Peter Viles

Comments

[smrr]

Henry W,
Get some empty boxes and clean out that office!

[smrr]

Brad,
I'm moving to your district!

[hoping4better]

For JeffS -- The economy is going to tank with or without the Paulson bailout. Some of us think there are better ways to spend 700 billion dollars in the coming crisis than giving it to Henry Paulson and the Bush Crack Team of Incompetents. It's gonna be a rough ride - do the right thing. Don't get stampeded off the cliff like a bunch of lemmings. That's how we got into Iraq.

[JamesW]

JeffS,

The economy is going to suffer short-term regardless if this legislation passed or not. It's going to take time to get all the crap out of the system and get back to sound fundamentals.

I say, lets get the foreclosures rolling faster and get those home prices back to 2000 levels so we can get the economy going again.

[Tim K.]

J - we're not celebrating the fact that our economy is facing recession. We're celebrating the fact that this stupid power grab for money FAILED.

We're returning to "normal" times for the economy, and that's always painful. But giving complete control of at LEAST $700 Billion that is RENEWABLE, basically an infinite supply of money to one of Wall Street's biggest supporters is NOT a fiscally responsible thing to do AT ALL.

And for that we are cheeing - that our local representatives grew a spine and did NOT cave into the Wall Street lobbying machine!

[TakeFive]

The end of the world (again):

1973 oil embargo.

1979 oil shock

1987 stock market crash

1999 Dot Com bust

2001 9/11

2008 Housing bust

Is Warren Buffet dumping all his stock today?

http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE%3ABRK.A

[anonymous]

Tim K,

I agree. The bailout would have helped the irresponsible lenders for the most part. It isn't addressing the criminal jingle mail behavior either. I just cannot agree to rewarding criminal behavior with our tax dollars.

I guess the current golden parachutes are flammable after all.

[BC]

Brad Sherman, all is forgiven (for now) for not responding to a single email that I have sent to you for the last year regarding this mess. Actions speak louder than words...

[Giacomo]

Looks like Pelosi may have tipped the balance by delivering YET ANOTHER Republican-bashing speech. This once I will say "Thank you, Madame Speaker."

And yet...how unfortunate that our nation's first female Speaker had to be this particular woman. What an embarrassment she is.

[Bobsuruncle]

What a mess this is!!!!. Greed got us to where we are now. I think we should make people who own multiple homes pay.

[anon1137]

Let's take this country off credit - cold turkey. Let the rehab begin!

[Nelcisco]

For a time I thought that all our posts were falling on deaf ears, or is it blind eyes?, but in a weird way I feel vindicated that our comments is a representation of how the rest of main street felt about this whole bailout, what did you all think of Paulson's brief press conference? He looked like he was in a panic.

hang on to your hats, there's more to come.

[annoyed]

What about the $630Billion that the Fed just gave to the banks today? Missed that story Peter. Or I should write made available.

When we weren't looking.

What does this mean for the stock market? Does it keep falling???

[I Live in L.A., Too!]

I've been to several news sites and watched coverage on CNBC and MSNBC. Everyone agrees this should have passed, and even the Republicans are blaming Republicans.

Meanwhile, back in L.A. Land, or SanityLand, this is the only site I've found that is largely against any bailout.

On the other hand, who says we don't have bipartisanship? Dennis Kucinich and Dana Rohrabache both voted against the same bill!

[jbunniii]

Congratulations and THANK YOU to the courageous members of the House who voted AGAINST this disastrous bailout package. Unfortunately, my Congresswoman voted in favor of it; therefore, I shall be voting against her in November, regardless of who her opponent is.

[NewtoLA]

There's no doubt that the idea of such a mammoth bailout of private errors is disgusting. But, what exactly is there to celebrate today? A nearly 800 drop in the stock market hurts and hurts a lot. I have a feeling this isn't the end either. And for what? The chance to buy a house in LA for less money? I'm not sure it's worth it. I think I'd rather have a stable economy and the chance to take all my money to a different city/state than to see how my long term finances deal with current trajectory of this economy.

I'm not accusing any of you of anything. I'm just wondering if this is a case of be careful what you wish for.

[Silverfern]

Something you all might find interesting to read.

Revolting Economists
Christopher Carroll, Sept. 27, 2008
http://www.rgemonitor.com/financemarkets-monitor/253780/revolting_economists

The KEY point that I think is not penetrating from the economists to the Congress is that what sticks in our craw is ONE SPECIFIC ASPECT of the Paulson/Frank plan: Its focus on having the government buy up the toxic subprime securities. This is close to a pure bailout for Wall Street, and there is NO REASON that any of us sees that this has to be the core of the rescue plan. I think you could get near-unanimity from economists, from across the political spectrum, in FAVOR of a simple, easy-to-do alternative that would be both more economically sound and more politically palatable: The Federal government should do, with respect to the banking sector as a whole, what Warren Buffett did last week in his investment in Goldman Sachs.

Buffett did not become the richest man in the world by making bad investments. The money he provided to Goldman was emphatically NOT a bailout. It was a prudent investment – he thinks he will make his money back, and much more. The taxpayer should follow his lead and take a similar stake in the financial industry.

[TIm]

Of Course Richardson voted yes: somebody has to pay for her mortgages!!!

[Lou]

Forget your party, if your Congressman voted for this bailout, vote for the other guy.

[Stop the Housing Bailout]

Here is a link to a spreadsheet with everyone's vote:

http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?hl=en&key=pApPz05jDYTSx21k2R1HNDQ#

You can't sort online, but you can download to excel or excel viewer.

Best. - M.

[sailor7x]

THE SOLUTION

A great story here with all the right stuff on the solution to this mess.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/index.html

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
a bailout transfers enormous wealth from taxpayers to those who knowingly engaged in risky subprime lending. Thus, the bailout encourages companies to take large, imprudent risks and count on getting bailed out by government. This "moral hazard" generates enormous distortions in an economy's allocation of its financial resources.

Rather than a bailout, government should let firms go bankrupt
Talk of economic Armageddon is scare-mongering

Read it if you want to know the truth....it is what we need.

[Keith]

RECALL JANE HARMAN

She voted Yes on the Bailout.

[Jeff S]

I have been an investor in Japan for the last 20 years and have 1st hand experience watching bubble aftermaths.

I agree that economy is going to have trouble no matter what but it is a matter of degree. Japan delayed bailing out the financial system for years because "the public" opposed it and ended up with 13 years of no growth. In Finland they bailed out the banking system quickly and had 2-3 years of no growth.

You cannot have an economy without a functioning financial system. I don't need to be "taught" that.

The plan as originally proposed was not great but the negotiated final plan was as good as it is going to get. Bad banks aren't getting bailed out. We are providing liquidity for loans that no one will buy anymore at any price. We are not going to see 100% defaults so in the end this bailout, like every other one I have seen, is not likely to be as costly as it seems.

Again, be careful what you wish for. A little pain now is better than a lot later.

Housing prices are going to come down, banks are going to fail but we don't need a decade of despair because the public isn't ready to face the truth of the gravity of the situation.

[metin]

Long live the free market economy!!!

Who is Pelosi to talk about 'fiscal irresponsibility' anyway?

This November, let's start with Pelosi, and vote for the challenger in each and every case, on both sides of the aisle.

Unless of course McCain suspends the Elections, and wants Bush to remain in the White House until the bail money is found...

talkturkey.us

[E]

LOL Tim....you beat me to it!

Laura Richardson voted YES.

Well bless her altruistic heart!

LOL!