Bailout passes House, Goode and Goodlatte vote no

The day after the U.S. Senate passed a revised version of the $700 billion bank bailout package, the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly to approve the same measure, 263-171, sending it to the White House for President Bush's signature. Still, not everyone was impressed with the new deal. Two local Republicans–- the Fifth District’s Virgil Goode (R-Rocky Mount, representing Charlottesville, Albemarle, Greene, Nelson) and the Sixth District’s Bob Goodlatte (R-Harrisonburg, representing the Shenandoah Valley)–- voted against the revised bailout. The Seventh District's Eric Cantor (R-Henrico, representing Louisa and Orange) remained steadfast in his support of the deal, having already voted in favor of the original bill on Monday.

28 comments

So McCain and Obama, what has changed in Washington?

I think something had to be done, my problem is I don't trust any of the people involved. And some of that had better be to incarcerate the people responsible. Looking at you Barney Frank.

Goode has my support because he voted no! Ron Paul also voted consistently NO!

The senators and congressmen that voted for this bill clearly showed that they don't care about the American people, this bill is aimed at taking care of those that screwed up. We should be sure to remember their names and make sure we vote them out of office!

I hate to tell everyone but the $700B will do nothing to increase liquidity if the Fed is truly buying the assets at Market Value. Did you notice the pressure to eliminate mark-to-market accounting? What that means is that if you have an asset with no value, instead of marking that asset to the market ($0.00) you can make up any number that you think it will have value for in the future...hmm like $100,000,000! Everybody has seem to forgotten about Enron and how they got there.

The Democrats (Frank, Dodd, Obama, Pelosi, Reid) share a lot of responsibility in this and (Bush, McCain) are also just as bad.

I used to be a big Obama supporter, but Senator Obama lost my vote when he supported this bill.

The Democrats had the votes in the house to create a smart bill that was focused on solving the root of the housing crisis, not to pass $700B worth of welfare for the rich, with $150B sweetner to get the deal done which only goes after the symptoms.

Vote for Ron Paul, the only candidate that is focused on the American People.

I love this commentary. I'm also an older woman who wanted to be a journalist. I do make my living writing, but you're right, my blog lets me pursue my passions. Adapt or die is what Darwin implied. You say in honest, plain-spoken, real language, what's wrong in the newspaper business. Kudos, Mariane.

This is wonderful. I thought you were writing about me. I read For Better of Worse to see if Elizabeth is going to get back with Anthony too. I even asked my husband if he wrote this. Too cute, and too real.
Thanks Mariane.

I liked your essay. In general, newspaper circulation continues to decline but yet my subscription rates continue to go up. I do enjoy my favorite daily comics (especially "For Better or Worse"), the coupons and sales inserts that come in the paper.

This is absolutely revealing! I think every newspaper editor and publisher in the country should read this. They are the hand-tiers! I come from working with or for newspapers, and the only ones I see worth anything,note my political bent, are the New York YTimes and Washington Post. They feel like they tell the truth. Maybe it's the washingtomPpost to you. But you are absolutely right, and it's too bad they stopped you fom working there. But, like me, you wouldn't have gone anywhere because honesty and reality don't. I'm sorry about that, too, but you keep talking. You make sense.
Thanks for that.
ps: I read For Better or Worse, too.)

Hey, there are a lot of reasons why newspapers are in trouble today, but the cost of subscribing is *not* one of them. My morning paper was delivered to my driveway today with 90 oversized pages of new content for 50 cents. Nothing else I purchase today will be so cheap. For someone who subscribes to HBO and XM to say the paper is too expensive is just a little much.

Well said, Mariane. The harder newspapers try to become "relevent" in today's changing world, the more they become dinosaurs. Not only have the prices climbed while subscription numbers declined significanly, the size of the newspapers themselves have become smaller. Hmmm, where's the value in this scenario?

I couldn't disagree with this writer more. I too am a writer (w/a former background in newspapers). Now, I'm just a newspaper reader. I am continually amazed at the great value newspapers are for the money--national and local. There is so much info. packed into those pages, they do a much better job of covering the news than any other medium. TV news can only give the barest of summaries of what's going on. Open the paper and spend five minutes with it, and you'll be amazed at how much you can glean that you didn't know before.

I loved the commentary. We subscribe to the Sunday only edition of our paper and it sometimes sits in it's wrapper until I put it in the recycling. There are too many other things consuming my time - work, housekeeping, laundry and kid's activities. I can get the headlines from TV and then surf for more detailed information if I feel the need. I sometimes feel like that gives me a more balanced view - I can look at both extreme viewpoints rather than feeling like an article might be flavored by the author's bias.

I too am a writer for a weekly TV magazine. I also blog for them several times a week, so I need to know everything and fast. I also work for an LA-based company, but from home on Cape Cod. When I lived in Westchester, commuting to NYC every day, I had time to read the papers, several. Now I don't and they stack up. I read the NY Times online at 7 a.m. and a host of other eletters that aggregate news from all of the newspapers. I have not cut off my newspapers yet, but I was just thinking of it today. I hate recycling and we have tons.

MARIANE, what's WRONG with you, GIRL?? You should keep your subscription to the newspaper for the Store Advertisement Supplements and for the COUPONS. Getting the Advertisment Supplements and the Coupons is a REALLY GOOD service with VALUE that you have with the newspaper. Girl, don't you go shopping at all? You need those advertisements and coupons. What you don't SHOP?? What do you mean you don't shop?? What's WRONG with you, GIRL?? And what about PARADE MAGAZINE that you get in the Sunday newspaper and LIFE MAGAZINE that you get in the Friday newspaper. That's like almost FREE weekly magazines that you get with the newspaper. What's WRONG with you, GIRL?? And what do you wrap your FISH in? You need the newspaper to wrap your FISH in. What? You gave up on eating FISH also?? What's WRONG with you, GIRL??

A newspaper's price-value relationship is outstanding. It's exceptional. 50 cents per issue!!! This is costly? And, what difference does it make that the circultaion has declined; how does that change their cost structure that would allow them to LOWER the price?

However, the author is 100% correct in the time factor. Anyone who has responsibilities today (job, marriage, parenting, care of parents, etc) is so overloaded that it's difficult to set aside the time it takes to read the newspaper . . . in other words, we don't have enough time to capitalize on all the features and benefits the newspaper provides!!

Bottom line? It's not the product; it's the lack of "downtime" to devote to the product

True, the paper isn't that expensive, but when you absolutely have to cut something out of the budget, that $47.50 for 13 weeks of the paper could go on another bill on my desk, and it did.

Although I will concede to "Newspaper Subscriber" that my husband convinced me to keep the Sunday paper for now because I clip coupons, and the paper would pay for itself -- or that was his theory. As long as the Sunday paper continues to come with those Circuit City and Best Buy sales circulars, I still think it is going to cause trouble in my budget. So I gave Sunday 8 more weeks to convince me I need it.

And often, the paper is floating around at work. So there's the opportunity to read it for free.

Mariane, I haven't read your local, but I understand your sentiment. As a resident in South Florida, I subscribed to my local daily, as well as several national dailies, in addition to picking up all the free weeklies on my travels. The result? I huge pile of unread papers being tossed into the rubbish bin at the end of each week. Although nothing beats lying in bed reading the Sunday papers, I don't have the time to read the contents of 4-5 newspapers before work each morning. Yet, I'm still torn, not ready for the final split. I love reading print. I spend more time reading a print article than I do online - somehow I feel that I comprehend more of a printed story than I do skimming - which is exactly what I do online. I get my news from so many different online sources, but I'm not ready to give up the papers just yet. Does anyone else feel the same?

I publish a tabloid, just fun and entertaining to read. What is yout comment about this type of paper?

Tabloids are entertainment. If tht's how people want to be entertained, go for it...

Speaking as a "heavy advertiser" on a national level, I look at value in terms of how many households I can reach through newspapaer distribution. As subscription numbers continue to decline, my ROI increases. This puts my budget into jeopardy. I'm beginning to turn to other distribution methods to get my advertising message out.

Honestly, look at prices for everything in context. A first class stamp cost $.39 and takes your letter 2 days to get across town. The paper is smaller? So measure the content on the major networks and compare relative worth.

The honest truth is too many folks just do not care to get more than a sound bite to make decisions. God help us from ourselves each election. Reading more and vegitating less in front of a TV would make you a more informed person and a better citizen.

Or is it all about self gratification?

30 minutes of TV news or 30 minutes with the newspaper minus the commercials? No question on what is much more informative and alot more relaxing. (Easier to skip the drug ads in the paper).
Drop the netflix and HBO and add "On Demand." Also, drop the guilt of not opening it everyday. Its still a great value, even if you just pull out for later the Food or Home section on the days you don't read it.
To each his/her own.

It amazes me when a person tells me they don't take the local paper. How do they keep up with the details of local news. Without an accurant local source of information how can you make intelligent decisions concerning schools, city and county governments. A blogger can put anything they want on their site without liability to be accurate.

It amazes me when a person tells me they don't take the local paper. How do they keep up with the details of local news. Without an accurant local source of information how can you make intelligent decisions concerning schools, city and county governments. A blogger can put anything they want on their site without liability to be accurate.

My scrapbooks for my children are filled with honor rolls, sports stories, graduation, service news, engagement announcements, weddings, etc. from our local weekly paid newspaper. For $23 per year I also know who went to jail and for what, local deals at local stores and who the candidates are for school board, city council, etc. NEWSPAPERS COME IN DIFFERENT VARIETIES. Don't paint all papers with the same brush. Our local newspaper has no AP wire stories, just local news about local people. I couldn't get along without it.

This is a great time for news consumers. People who don't want to pay for a daily paper can get the news for nothing from TV or online sources that repackage newspaper-generated content. The interesting question is this: How much will that news cost us when newspapers are no longer around to produce it?

IN TODAYS FAST MOVING WORLD SURE IT'S EASIER TO GET SNIPPETS OF INFO FROM MANY DIFFERENT SOURCES. PEOPLE MAKE AND TAKE TIME FOR MANY THINGS THROUGHOUT THEIR DAY AND COULD EASILY MAKE TIME TO READ THEIR LOCAL PAPER, BUT ARE TOO LAZY TO MAKE THE EFFORT. WHY READ WHEN YOU CAN WATCH OR LISTEN - ISN'T THAT WHAT OUR SOCIETY IS ALL ABOUT NOWADAYS??

Hmm. Guess I've been thrashed for not saving coupons in newspapers for stuff I don't need. Hey, I'm still a subscriber, but...

To: Bill Daniel: I love local tabloids. Local local local is the key. I use to write for one and owned my own for 11 years. They're usually free distribution papers, so it's not a matter of value for my dollar.

I did it,

Have not read a newspaper in months, cancelled, read them all on line, now, for free. No more dead trees, less recycling, I am feeling green.

Marianne