Agree Now, Or Your Regulator Will Make You Agree Later

Interesting notes that Judicial Watch has gotten hold of from Paulson/Bernanke’s offer they can’t refuse back in October. It’s the talking points from the meeting… “Strongarm” would be an understatement:

We plan to announce the program tomorrow–and–that your nine firms will be the initial participants….

This is a combined program (bank liability guarantee and capital purchase). Your firms need to agree to both.

  • We don’t believe it is tenable to opt out because doing so would leave you vulnerable and exposed.
  • If a capital infusion is not appealing, you should be aware that your regulator will require it in any circumstance.

I’m left wondering how it could have possibly been worse, but then I came up with a scenario.

Bush could have given the banks to the UAW. At least he didn’t do that!

Hat Tip: Reason

  • http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10132 Vern McKinley

    Lots of authoritarianism in the bailouts…don’t forget Bank of America being required to “swallow” Merrill even though there was a material adverse change that allowed them to get out of the deal. Also lots of shielding of info about why they bailed out the institutions in the first place.

  • southernjames

    Very slightly off topic, but what do you make of the 31 year-old with zero worthwhile or practical experience, being put in some sort of authority position (totally in charge?) of the new Gov. Motors?

    I’m thinking that he must simply be a “front” guy who will do exactly what he is told by someone behind the scenes in the Admin, NOT named and whose identity is not shared with the public.

    “Transparency” indeed.

  • jerryhorse

    The Red Sox didn’t win a WS for 80+ years until they hired a kid GM. Perhaps Obama’s thinking the rookie will hit a home run.
    Beginner’s luck is where we are at. Why not? Isn’t America just an experiment in self-government? Don’t you love being part of this great unveiling? Isn’t that what makes Liberty so wildly exciting?