Wilson: ‘We’re In Uncharted Waters’
By JOSELYN KINGArticle Photos
WHEELING - U.S. Rep. Charles Wilson has experience in both business and banking - and even he is uncertain of the economy's future a week after Congress passed a $700 billion government bailout of the battered financial industry.
Wilson - a member of the House Financial Services Committee - was among those voting in favor of the so-called rescue package, which was approved by a final House vote of 263-171.
"We're in uncharted waters," Wilson, D-Ohio, said during a visit to Wheeling on Thursday. "This is something we've never done before.
"I have a pretty good feel for business, and it's still difficult to know what it's going to do," he added.
Wilson noted he thinks it's "too early" to gauge whether the actions of Congress will have a positive effect on the nation's economy and financial markets. He hopes that by today - a week after the bailout was approved - stock market numbers that have continued to fall "will start to level off."
"We've got a problem," Wilson acknowledged. "I know I took a lot of heat for my vote, but I believe it was the right thing to do. Doing nothing is not an option."
In addition to owning a local furniture store and chain of funeral homes, Wilson also served on the board of directors for the former Belmont National Bank.
He said he has enough related experience to know that when the nation's banking and financial markets dry up, there is no credit available to the consumer and that the economy subsequently suffers.
Wilson also admitted to feeling uneasy about the additional $150 billion in tax extenders that were added to the relief package. Many of the extenders, he said, were important and necessary but shouldn't have been added to the legislation.
Wilson blamed members of the Senate for adding the extenders to the bill, then leaving Washington prior to the House's vote on the package.
House members were anxious to pass emergency relief for Wall Street before heading back to their districts until after the election, according to Wilson. Thus, they were reluctant to make any changes to the bill that might keep it from being passed for a month.
"Some things that happen here are just political, and I wish they weren't," Wilson said.
Most recent job approval ratings for Congress have been abysmal, with most polls listing them at well below 20 percent.
"I think that after the last election, people thought the Democrats were going to resolve the war," Wilson said. "They're disappointed that that has not been done."
He referenced the fact that while Democrats proposed more than a year ago a 16-month plan to withdraw troops from the Middle East, this idea was not popular with Republicans at the time.
Today, both sides are considering a similar 16-month timeframe for withdrawal, he noted. Wilson was elected to the House in 2006 when Democrats took over the majority in the chamber.
"I see a growing together of the two parties," Wilson said. "Things are more friendly than when I first got here. There were some tough times in the beginning."
|
Katabatic
|
|
|---|---|
|
10-11-08 11:59 AM
|
It's easy Charlie. A.) Stop funding the world. B.) Cut government spending. C.) Take that money and start paying off the national debt. D.) Don't spend more money than you take in. E.) Take the economic affairs of the US back from "the Fed", and return it to the people of the US. Problem solved.
|
|
EllisWyatt
|
|
|
10-11-08 8:33 AM
|
Spinx According to the 10th Amendement, any right not specifically granted to the Federal government by the Constitution does not exist. In other words, if the Founders didn't specifically write a power for the Feds into the document, the Feds cannot exercise that power. The 10th Amendment is the most ignored section of our Constitution.
|
|
SphinxRising58
|
|
|
10-11-08 12:51 AM
|
LTRRTL: " Congress can and does pass laws that are unconstitutional and, when they do that, it is illegal. Getting together with world bankers to manage and/or dictate our economy is a surrender of our national sovereignty. " Please show me in legal terms where Congress has passed any laws that are " illegal ", and how this could be seen as a " surrender of our national sovereignty " ?
|
|
EllisWyatt
|
|
|
10-10-08 10:10 PM
|
Did Wilson vote for this welfare plan? If so, he should be in jail, like the rest of the Congressional scum who voted 'yea'. President Bush should resign, McCain should resign and Obama should resign. This bailout is a rip-off and it is unconstitutional. I can remember one other time when our representatives went against the will of the people and that was their attempt to bring 150 million illegals into our country overnight. Congress felt the wrath of the people then. They will feel it even more now after going against the wishes of 90% of the population. If you voted for this bill, you are crook. You are a piece of*****traitor who should be in prison with a very large and******cell mate. C'mon people, wake up! We are being robbed and our nation is changing for the worse overnight! Write your Congressman and Senators and tell them that, if they voted YES, you will be sure to round up your neighbors to support your representatives' opponent in the next election.
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
10-10-08 7:30 PM
|
Mr. Paulson has announced that the Fed will purchase shares in private banks.But these will be non-voting shares so that the Fed-and public-will have no say in the management or lending practices of those receiving he "gifts."So many of the same people who have caused the problem will be given tax payer money to play with as they choose.Obviously the bank lobby has been very busy. If the public are shareholders then the public needs a say just as the other shareholders perhasp even a seat on the board in some cases. The banks can not be trusted.
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
10-10-08 7:03 PM
|
lttr: Taking money from the public-without their consent- and giving control of the money to a few bankers who will then charge interest to the public does not seem quite right does it. If the banks do lend at all, it will be with tax money given to them by the public and they will benefit from the interest. As an example,BA will be given capital at no cost from the US Treasury and will then issue credit cards to the public at 18%-20%.Why not just give the public a piece of the pie directly?
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
10-10-08 5:22 PM
|
A portion of the bailout money should be given back directly to the public as a stimulus.This will enhance deposits and consumption.The plan is much to pro bank at public expense.A blend would be more reasonable. Much of the mortgage problem can be corrected by converting the loans to long term,low interest fixed vs ARMs.ARMs were a bad idea to begin with although OK for home equity.
|
|
SphinxRising58
|
|
|
10-10-08 5:08 PM
|
LTRRTL: I would suggest that you go back and take a few more classes in law, in that Congress has full power to institute any law it see fit so long as said law is not a direct violation of the US Constitution. I always love it when people sart yelling something is " unconstitutional and illegal ", as Congress makes the laws, duh
|
|
nicetry
|
|
|
10-10-08 2:22 PM
|
W has spoken, the crisis is over.
|
|
SphinxRising58
|
|
|
10-10-08 1:40 PM
|
" Uncharted waters " ? I guess Wilson chose to foget the S&L scandal, as well as the Credit Union scandal, both of which took place not all that long ago, & both which cost billions of dollars. You have to love selective recall from politicians.
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
10-10-08 1:14 PM
|
why should the public be forced to pay tribute to the greedy banks to enhance their wealth.It should be noted that the Fed is doing the bail out with yet more Federal debt.So the Fed is borrowing to protect a special class of private business.The banks are using the public's deposits to buy treasury debt vs lending.
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
10-10-08 1:04 PM
|
literate:The programs are all designed to benefit the politically well connected financial companies.Our economy is based on consumption.The only way to enhance the economy is to stimulate consumption by putting money into the hands of the consumers.Enriching banks at public expense is not necessarily going to do this. Bank deposits are not down.They are just hoarding the cash.
|
|
reasoh
|
|
|
10-10-08 8:50 AM
|
Cong.Wilson starting to sound like Sen.Ried.We don't know what to do so we'll throw some many around and go home to campaign and blame the other guy
|
|
Blackrock
|
|
|
10-10-08 8:29 AM
|
And you are claiming that the country will not become socialistic under Obama? You are confused when you suppose that all conservatives agrre with everything Bush has done. Conservatives believe that the government should be in one business and one business only, the defense of it's people from attack and crime. Any government involvement in the private sector results in failure and this is why we are in the current dilemma. The answer is to give even more power to the government? It is very naive to think so.
|
|
wonderwhy
|
|
|
10-10-08 7:14 AM
|
blackrock- why are the right claiming the country will be socialist under obama? don't you think we pretty much are anyways? we have just endured a war, against the people's beliefs, we, as a country just bailed out wall street, against the popular opinion, we, can have our phones tapped into , caseu bush/cheney want to. we, have lost our jobs, casue bush and cheney want to give them to the global economy, since they can profit. just exactly how are things going to change? hopefully for the better! where we can all get a fair shake?
|
|
Blackrock
|
|
|
10-10-08 6:35 AM
|
Charlie says he is uncertain. Baloney. He is aligned with the socialists that will take over this country and run it into the ground. Sorry, Charlie,if you didn't like the legislation you shouldnt have voted for it. You and all your cronies are guilty of deepening the economic crisis. It is hilarious to hear these bimbos say "they had to do something".
|
|
literate
|
|
|
10-10-08 5:05 AM
|
Giving that much money to each household would increase inflation even further. Milk would $50 a gallon. The most important aspect of the bailout plan is the shoring up of companies that hold so many retirment plans, either invested or directly controlled.
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
10-10-08 2:50 AM
|
With the money so far designated for various bailouts of private financial companies,each US household could be given a stimulus check of over $10,000.This would be deposited in banks and avaiable for loans.It would be used to pay debt and consume.Give the people's money to the people. Certainly a portion should go directly to the public.
|
|
atoddh
|
|
|
10-10-08 1:43 AM
|
The stimuus package in which public money was given directy back to the pubic was successful.Many paid down their debt with it;including making mortgage payments.The current plan gives public money to private banks.It is not working as they-the banks-are not really interested in the assisting the public or American business.They will simply buy Treasury notes with the public money given them.The 1 trillion distributed directly to the public to spend and pay down debt would cure the problem.The banks can not be trusted and are not the answer.They are self serving.
|