Dear Mr. Miller,
What about the next $350 Billion the Treasury is asking for to continue to fund the bailout "plan". Are you just going to hand it over, telling us again that the situation is urgent and there is no other option?
You gave the banks $350 billion. It was supposed to get them lending again, which would help companies and consumers get credit. But the credit markets are still frozen and the economy's getting worse. And the banks won't even say what they did with the money!
Now Treasury is asking Congress for the remaining $350 billion in bailout funds. No more oversight. No strings attached. Just $350 billion that could be spent on health care, or green jobs, or more teachers—going instead into the black hole that is our financial system.
Please don't give one more dime to the banks unless they can show they're using it to create jobs and stimulate the economy!
Monday, December 29, 2008
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Don't tell us bank bailout was your only option
Mr. Miller,
Why did you vote to use our taxpayer's money to bail out the banks, instead of insisting that the money should be used to help homeowners who can't pay their mortgages and and also used for job creation programs to stimulate spending? Do you think we are fooled when you tell us that because the government had to act fast, the Paulson bank bailout plan was the ONLY SOLUTION AVAILABLE? We know that there were many eminent economists proposing other solutions that would have directly benefited and protected Main Street instead of Wall Street. Why did you and the rest of the establishment Congressional leadership act as though those Main Street solutions didn't even exist? Why did you dutifully follow the dictates of Paulson, Bernanke, and their biased Wall Street economists to pass their plan for a $700 billion bailout that will only protect Wall Street banks (and their wealthy executives and investors) from the consequences of their greedy and reckless business investments at our great expense?
Congressman Miller, please watch this video clip of a speech by Congressman Brad Sherman , and answer his challenges, if you can! (The full video can be viewed at http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/441.html )
Why did you vote to use our taxpayer's money to bail out the banks, instead of insisting that the money should be used to help homeowners who can't pay their mortgages and and also used for job creation programs to stimulate spending? Do you think we are fooled when you tell us that because the government had to act fast, the Paulson bank bailout plan was the ONLY SOLUTION AVAILABLE? We know that there were many eminent economists proposing other solutions that would have directly benefited and protected Main Street instead of Wall Street. Why did you and the rest of the establishment Congressional leadership act as though those Main Street solutions didn't even exist? Why did you dutifully follow the dictates of Paulson, Bernanke, and their biased Wall Street economists to pass their plan for a $700 billion bailout that will only protect Wall Street banks (and their wealthy executives and investors) from the consequences of their greedy and reckless business investments at our great expense?
Congressman Miller, please watch this video clip of a speech by Congressman Brad Sherman , and answer his challenges, if you can! (The full video can be viewed at http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/441.html )
Friday, October 3, 2008
Questions for George Miller on the Bailout!
What can you be thinking of to dare to spend $700 billion of our taxpayer dollars without holding open hearings on the plan first?
Why haven’t you listened to the advice of independent economists, instead of just listening to the finance industry’s own insider “experts” (people whose policies and actions were complicit in causing this mess, and whose industry cronies will be the main beneficiaries from the bailout).
Why aren’t you questioning the underlying premise, the idea that this credit market crisis and its effects can only be solved by a bailout to the finance industry with tax payer’s money?
Why haven’t you considered any other alternatives?
Why aren’t you forcing the immense wealth on Wall Street to bail its own finance industry out? (Including paying for the government bailouts that have already been enacted at taxpayer’s expense.)
Why aren’t you including regulations and laws to stop the over leveraged banking processes and market speculation and deceit that triggered this?
Why aren’t you taking back the bonuses, fees, and compensations from the financiers who got rich from passing off these dishonest mortgage securities?
Why aren’t you including regulations or insurance to protect the small investors and pension funds from the effects of these dishonest financial schemes?
What controls have you put in place to insure that the government would purchase the bad debt mortgage securities from the banks at an honest price matching their current value?
Why aren’t you directly helping homeowners, providing assistance with their debt burden and helping families faced with bankruptcy (instead of helping the fat-cat banks and hoping that benefit will “trickle down” to homeowners and workers)?
Why aren’t you reducing debts from Main Street (the real economy) instead of Wall Street (the financiers that speculate on the real economy)?
Why aren’t you addressing the structural changes that need to be made in the fundamental processes of our debt-based monetary system, a system that has made it possible for the banks and the Fed to hold this blackmail gun to your heads?
An angry voter from Benicia
Why haven’t you listened to the advice of independent economists, instead of just listening to the finance industry’s own insider “experts” (people whose policies and actions were complicit in causing this mess, and whose industry cronies will be the main beneficiaries from the bailout).
Why aren’t you questioning the underlying premise, the idea that this credit market crisis and its effects can only be solved by a bailout to the finance industry with tax payer’s money?
Why haven’t you considered any other alternatives?
Why aren’t you forcing the immense wealth on Wall Street to bail its own finance industry out? (Including paying for the government bailouts that have already been enacted at taxpayer’s expense.)
Why aren’t you including regulations and laws to stop the over leveraged banking processes and market speculation and deceit that triggered this?
Why aren’t you taking back the bonuses, fees, and compensations from the financiers who got rich from passing off these dishonest mortgage securities?
Why aren’t you including regulations or insurance to protect the small investors and pension funds from the effects of these dishonest financial schemes?
What controls have you put in place to insure that the government would purchase the bad debt mortgage securities from the banks at an honest price matching their current value?
Why aren’t you directly helping homeowners, providing assistance with their debt burden and helping families faced with bankruptcy (instead of helping the fat-cat banks and hoping that benefit will “trickle down” to homeowners and workers)?
Why aren’t you reducing debts from Main Street (the real economy) instead of Wall Street (the financiers that speculate on the real economy)?
Why aren’t you addressing the structural changes that need to be made in the fundamental processes of our debt-based monetary system, a system that has made it possible for the banks and the Fed to hold this blackmail gun to your heads?
An angry voter from Benicia
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Bail Out Main Street, Not Wall Street
Congressman George Miller:
Based on your recent approval of the Wall Street Bailout Plan, it appears that you and the Democratic leadership have now completely abandoned your Democratic roots and values and gone over to the ideology of the Republicans, embracing their discredited trickle-down economic theories. The housing bubble and this credit crisis that we are now in proves that trickle-down ideology doesn’t work—it only benefits the financiers and wealthy investors and speculators. But now when that crowd and their “experts” hold a gun to your head and tell you to jump and bail them out, you jump – even though there is no reason to expect the banks will eagerly start loaning to other banks and businesses as soon as you spend $700 billion of our money to let them unload their bad debts on the government.
The only thing this plan does is trickle down their toxic mortgage securities to us, while ballooning our national debt which we and our grandchildren will have to pay back to those same banks plus interest! It will plunge America into a “disaster capitalism” scenario in which there is no money left over, after payments on our enormous national debt, to pay for infrastructure and basic government services and social safety nets. And what will it do to the value of the dollar and higher prices? This is a financial coup d’etat. Don’t do it!
Please do not vote for another Wall Street bailout plan. We are not fooled by the sugar coating of tax breaks (much of it pork), toothless oversight, and other tweaks. Not one cent of our taxpayer money should be spent assisting Wall Street. Vote only for a Main Street bailout plan. Use our tax money to directly assist homeowners and the real economy on Main Street.
Your constituents are watching. Don’t fail us again.
Sincerely,
Norma Fox, Benicia, CA
Note: If you want specific suggestions from independent economists on what an appropriate bailout plan should look like, please hold some public hearings and invite a few of the 200 economists who wrote to Congress on Sept. 24 regarding dangers in the Treasury Plan.
And for some very practical specific suggestions for a bailout that would protect and stimulate Main Street, that would mostly employ mechanisms that are already in place, and would not require taxpayers to borrow hundreds of billions, see the WashingtonPost.com op-ed by James K. Galbraith, Sept. 25, “A Bailout We Don’t Need”
Also see the key principles laid out by the Institute for Policy Studies in their Plan to Pay for the Recovery
Based on your recent approval of the Wall Street Bailout Plan, it appears that you and the Democratic leadership have now completely abandoned your Democratic roots and values and gone over to the ideology of the Republicans, embracing their discredited trickle-down economic theories. The housing bubble and this credit crisis that we are now in proves that trickle-down ideology doesn’t work—it only benefits the financiers and wealthy investors and speculators. But now when that crowd and their “experts” hold a gun to your head and tell you to jump and bail them out, you jump – even though there is no reason to expect the banks will eagerly start loaning to other banks and businesses as soon as you spend $700 billion of our money to let them unload their bad debts on the government.
The only thing this plan does is trickle down their toxic mortgage securities to us, while ballooning our national debt which we and our grandchildren will have to pay back to those same banks plus interest! It will plunge America into a “disaster capitalism” scenario in which there is no money left over, after payments on our enormous national debt, to pay for infrastructure and basic government services and social safety nets. And what will it do to the value of the dollar and higher prices? This is a financial coup d’etat. Don’t do it!
Please do not vote for another Wall Street bailout plan. We are not fooled by the sugar coating of tax breaks (much of it pork), toothless oversight, and other tweaks. Not one cent of our taxpayer money should be spent assisting Wall Street. Vote only for a Main Street bailout plan. Use our tax money to directly assist homeowners and the real economy on Main Street.
Your constituents are watching. Don’t fail us again.
Sincerely,
Norma Fox, Benicia, CA
Note: If you want specific suggestions from independent economists on what an appropriate bailout plan should look like, please hold some public hearings and invite a few of the 200 economists who wrote to Congress on Sept. 24 regarding dangers in the Treasury Plan.
And for some very practical specific suggestions for a bailout that would protect and stimulate Main Street, that would mostly employ mechanisms that are already in place, and would not require taxpayers to borrow hundreds of billions, see the WashingtonPost.com op-ed by James K. Galbraith, Sept. 25, “A Bailout We Don’t Need”
Also see the key principles laid out by the Institute for Policy Studies in their Plan to Pay for the Recovery
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Miller spins a response to our question about war funding
Congressman Miller responds to our key question about "why doesn't the Congressional Democratic leadership (Pelosi) simply cut off the purse strings by just not offering any more Supplemental Iraq funding bill at all." (Ending the war now was after all the clear mandate of the American voters when the elected a Democratic majority to Congress in 2006.) Cutting the purse stings by not offering a supplemental funding bill would end the war without the game of trying to round up Republican votes on a bill. With the clear message that there would be no supplemental funding extension, the military would have no choice but to begin an orderly withdrawal of troops, using the plentiful funding they still have in the pipeline from previous funding authorizations. Instead, the Democrats keep offering supplemental funding extensions with "strings attached," knowing full well that the strings will be stripped away in negotiations with the Republicans, or vetoed by the President.
Listen to Miller's response and see whether he actually answered our key question (about not offering a supplemental funding bill to vote on at all) or whether he evaded it (quote from Miller: "as you know, we cannot end the war without Republican votes"), while he throws in the false spectre that the decision to not offer another supplemental funding extension would leave our troops with no funding at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4iFlmIJZNU
Listen to Miller's response and see whether he actually answered our key question (about not offering a supplemental funding bill to vote on at all) or whether he evaded it (quote from Miller: "as you know, we cannot end the war without Republican votes"), while he throws in the false spectre that the decision to not offer another supplemental funding extension would leave our troops with no funding at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4iFlmIJZNU
Friday, July 20, 2007
Impeach to end Iraq war AND prevent IRAN WAR
Dear Representative Miller,
The danger of an expanded war into Iran is imminent. The only way to prevent it is through impeachment of Cheney and Bush. Legislative restraints won't work because they think they are above the law. And in any case, we don't have TIME for your legislative strategy to play out. They have already made all the preparations for an attack on Iran and they are looking for any excuse to launch it.
You know that both Cheney and Bush have committed many impeachable offenses with regard to the war in Iraq. Through the tool of impeachment you have the power not only to end the Iraq war but also to prevent a horrendous expansion of the war into Iran -- will you use that power? Will you cosign H.Res.333 (Articles to Impeach Cheney) and urge Speaker Pelosi to allow the impeachment process back on the table?
The American people will never forgive the Democrats if they allow Bush-Cheney to expand the war into Iran when they could have prevented it through their power (and responsibility) of impeachment. In the context of their intentions for imminent war with Iran, how can you say that impeachment would be a "distraction" from more important business?
Please read this article from Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration and former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Think hard about his urgent warning about Iran. The fate of so many lives, and our democracy, rests on you decision. This is no time for safe political strategy.
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07162007.html
"Impeach Now, Or Face the End of Constitutional Democracy"
Counter Punch, July 16, 2007
Sincerely,
A formerly loyal Democrat,
Benicia, CA
The danger of an expanded war into Iran is imminent. The only way to prevent it is through impeachment of Cheney and Bush. Legislative restraints won't work because they think they are above the law. And in any case, we don't have TIME for your legislative strategy to play out. They have already made all the preparations for an attack on Iran and they are looking for any excuse to launch it.
You know that both Cheney and Bush have committed many impeachable offenses with regard to the war in Iraq. Through the tool of impeachment you have the power not only to end the Iraq war but also to prevent a horrendous expansion of the war into Iran -- will you use that power? Will you cosign H.Res.333 (Articles to Impeach Cheney) and urge Speaker Pelosi to allow the impeachment process back on the table?
The American people will never forgive the Democrats if they allow Bush-Cheney to expand the war into Iran when they could have prevented it through their power (and responsibility) of impeachment. In the context of their intentions for imminent war with Iran, how can you say that impeachment would be a "distraction" from more important business?
Please read this article from Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration and former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Think hard about his urgent warning about Iran. The fate of so many lives, and our democracy, rests on you decision. This is no time for safe political strategy.
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07162007.html
"Impeach Now, Or Face the End of Constitutional Democracy"
Counter Punch, July 16, 2007
Sincerely,
A formerly loyal Democrat,
Benicia, CA
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Cong. Miller: You must change your mind.
The demand for impeachment is growing , you must accede to the will of the people. It is a known fact the only
weapon the electorate has are its legislators. Your refusal to represent us in this matter is a serious detriment to
our demand. M.S. Vallejo
weapon the electorate has are its legislators. Your refusal to represent us in this matter is a serious detriment to
our demand. M.S. Vallejo
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Loyalty to character
Dear George Miller,
Through the years your commitment to follow your conscience and defend Democrat positions has always been appreciated and the fact that you have been continually re-elected is clear testimony to the faith that many of us have in your judgement. In the case of Iraq, a quagmire of Vietnam proportions, I choose to offer my support to any solutions you offer. Good luck and may the force be with you!
Cliff Nelson Sr.
113 Ardmore Way
Benicia, CA 94510
Through the years your commitment to follow your conscience and defend Democrat positions has always been appreciated and the fact that you have been continually re-elected is clear testimony to the faith that many of us have in your judgement. In the case of Iraq, a quagmire of Vietnam proportions, I choose to offer my support to any solutions you offer. Good luck and may the force be with you!
Cliff Nelson Sr.
113 Ardmore Way
Benicia, CA 94510
No Funding! Yes Impeachment!
Dear Representative Miller,
I wish the Democrats sent no military budget at all. That would have called the Administration's bluff and would have forced them to orderly withdraw the troops, since they would have had enough funds to do just that. Why can't the Democrats be more forceful? What are they afraid of? And why don't they want to impeach Bush, who lied to start this illegitimate war?
Respectfully,
Alberto Ramon
El Sobrante
I wish the Democrats sent no military budget at all. That would have called the Administration's bluff and would have forced them to orderly withdraw the troops, since they would have had enough funds to do just that. Why can't the Democrats be more forceful? What are they afraid of? And why don't they want to impeach Bush, who lied to start this illegitimate war?
Respectfully,
Alberto Ramon
El Sobrante
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
I just don't buy it
Honorable George Miller:
I just don't buy your reasoning....the Dems have GOT to take the lead in first, beginning going down the road of starting to remove the troops NOW. We need to force the Republicans to vote yea or nay every day...public pressure is building at an amazing rate...were you surprised at the number of strong feelings at our Benicia Toen Meeting? (ok, we'll ignore the rude loudmouth). But, although I at first could undertand your reasoning (needing to negotiate, get the number of votes needed form the Republicans), I now sincerely believe that we need to force the R's by making unwavering stands that they must vote no on and then have to face their constituents and explain why they want to continue this war. The people across the street from our peace vigil every Thursday here in Benicia have no signs because they cannot say, in all good consciousness, that war is good. As we used to say during the Viet Nam war, "war is not good for children and other living beings". I believe we owe it to the people of Irag to help rebuild, but lets stop destroying their country NOW.
Thank you for the town meeting....you are aptient and wonderful man. Why don't you run for President?
Sincerely,
Susan Street
Benicia
I just don't buy your reasoning....the Dems have GOT to take the lead in first, beginning going down the road of starting to remove the troops NOW. We need to force the Republicans to vote yea or nay every day...public pressure is building at an amazing rate...were you surprised at the number of strong feelings at our Benicia Toen Meeting? (ok, we'll ignore the rude loudmouth). But, although I at first could undertand your reasoning (needing to negotiate, get the number of votes needed form the Republicans), I now sincerely believe that we need to force the R's by making unwavering stands that they must vote no on and then have to face their constituents and explain why they want to continue this war. The people across the street from our peace vigil every Thursday here in Benicia have no signs because they cannot say, in all good consciousness, that war is good. As we used to say during the Viet Nam war, "war is not good for children and other living beings". I believe we owe it to the people of Irag to help rebuild, but lets stop destroying their country NOW.
Thank you for the town meeting....you are aptient and wonderful man. Why don't you run for President?
Sincerely,
Susan Street
Benicia
Monday, July 16, 2007
Impeach!! Why do you believe Bush will honor any of this Iraq legislation you are trying to pass??
Dear Congressman Miller,
1) Why should I have any faith in the Congressional strategy of passing incremental pieces of Iraq legislation as a means to gradually force Bush to end our occupation of Iraq? Hasn't Bush shown us repeatedly that he feels he is above the law and above Congress in his role as Commander in Chief and can just disregard any legislation that you pass? Isn't Congress just agreeing to play the enabling partner in a rigged game by following that strategy?
Both Cheney and Bush have repeatedly violated our laws and the Constitution. They are attempting to vastly expand the power of the Executive, and weaken and destabilize the coequal checks and balances and separation of powers. The Framers of the Constitution established impeachment as a necessary process to be used by Congress in cases of serious Executive overreach such as this. In the context of their contempt for the rule of law and our Constitution, I have come to believe that the only way we will ever end this war, and prevent an expansion of it into Iran, is through the process of impeachment of both Cheney and Bush.
At your recent Town Hall meeting here in Benicia, you stated you would not support calls for impeachment because it "wouldn't succeed, and would be an 18 month distraction from other important business that needs to be addressed, such as ending the Iraq war."
2) Your claim that there wouldn't be enough votes for impeachment is just speculation, isn't it? That is only true if you don't try. If a Congressional leader, such as yourself, with your immense political stature and influence, would cosign H.Res.333 (Articles of Impeachment of Dick Cheney), don't you think it would open the flood gates and suddenly many other legislators would jump on board?
3) And why should we believe your claim that impeachment would be dragged out for 18 months by appeals. Other impeachment campaigns haven't taken that long have they? Furthermore, seeing the handwriting on the wall, the accused might resign (as Nixon did).
Your claim that impeachment would just be a "distraction" from other more important business that needs to be addressed is very disturbing.
4) Why do you consider it a useless "distraction" for Congress to take action to defend the Constitution against this imperial administration's erosion of our Constitutional separation of powers and rule of law? What could be more important?! Even if Congress doesn't "succeed" in impeaching Bush-Cheney, don't you think it's imperative for them to send an all important message to future administrations who might otherwise contemplate a similar overreaching of their Constitutional powers?
I encourage you to view the recent PBS program on Bill Moyer's Journal (particularly the comments by Constitutional scholar Bruce Fein about the need for Statesmen to stand up in this dangerous hour)
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07132007/profile.html
5) I would like you to explain what you think of their arguments for impeachment, and if you disagree with them, why?
I sincerely hope, Congressman Miller, that you will rethink your position on impeachment and resolve to take the courageous stand of the Statesman that I know you are.
1) Why should I have any faith in the Congressional strategy of passing incremental pieces of Iraq legislation as a means to gradually force Bush to end our occupation of Iraq? Hasn't Bush shown us repeatedly that he feels he is above the law and above Congress in his role as Commander in Chief and can just disregard any legislation that you pass? Isn't Congress just agreeing to play the enabling partner in a rigged game by following that strategy?
Both Cheney and Bush have repeatedly violated our laws and the Constitution. They are attempting to vastly expand the power of the Executive, and weaken and destabilize the coequal checks and balances and separation of powers. The Framers of the Constitution established impeachment as a necessary process to be used by Congress in cases of serious Executive overreach such as this. In the context of their contempt for the rule of law and our Constitution, I have come to believe that the only way we will ever end this war, and prevent an expansion of it into Iran, is through the process of impeachment of both Cheney and Bush.
At your recent Town Hall meeting here in Benicia, you stated you would not support calls for impeachment because it "wouldn't succeed, and would be an 18 month distraction from other important business that needs to be addressed, such as ending the Iraq war."
2) Your claim that there wouldn't be enough votes for impeachment is just speculation, isn't it? That is only true if you don't try. If a Congressional leader, such as yourself, with your immense political stature and influence, would cosign H.Res.333 (Articles of Impeachment of Dick Cheney), don't you think it would open the flood gates and suddenly many other legislators would jump on board?
3) And why should we believe your claim that impeachment would be dragged out for 18 months by appeals. Other impeachment campaigns haven't taken that long have they? Furthermore, seeing the handwriting on the wall, the accused might resign (as Nixon did).
Your claim that impeachment would just be a "distraction" from other more important business that needs to be addressed is very disturbing.
4) Why do you consider it a useless "distraction" for Congress to take action to defend the Constitution against this imperial administration's erosion of our Constitutional separation of powers and rule of law? What could be more important?! Even if Congress doesn't "succeed" in impeaching Bush-Cheney, don't you think it's imperative for them to send an all important message to future administrations who might otherwise contemplate a similar overreaching of their Constitutional powers?
I encourage you to view the recent PBS program on Bill Moyer's Journal (particularly the comments by Constitutional scholar Bruce Fein about the need for Statesmen to stand up in this dangerous hour)
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07132007/profile.html
5) I would like you to explain what you think of their arguments for impeachment, and if you disagree with them, why?
I sincerely hope, Congressman Miller, that you will rethink your position on impeachment and resolve to take the courageous stand of the Statesman that I know you are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)