Instead of bailout agreement, discord at the White House

Today my day began reading the update someone on my team had written. I like it when they do it as one can then read opinions other than mine and it gets more interesting. Also, it is good for me when I am very busy that someone else helps with the blog.
Obviously, at the moment, the economic situation in the USA is not easy or pleasant and if an agreement is not reached soon the chaos that the financial markets will be involved in could hurt many people and not only in the USA. I am not going to pretend I am an expert in what is going on and utter solutions for it. I am even convinced that many of the politicians now involved are posturing and I fear things might turn worse by their involvement. There is something that everybody agrees to and that is that something needs to be done. When it all came out in the front pages of the newspapers, most of us thought Mr Paulson and Mr Bernanke’s ideas and proposals were correct. We were all too anxious for something to be done. But then we began looking more carefully at Mr Paulson’s plan and I remember agreeing totally -as many people appear to have done – with what the American economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote: “Mr. Paulson is demanding extraordinary power for himself — and for his successor — to deploy taxpayers’ money on behalf of a plan that, as far as I can see, doesn’t make sense.”
And of course, being at the end of a presidential election, both candidates, Obama and McCain could not remain silent and they issued a joint statement on Wednesday urging lawmakers to cooperate and reach a U.S. economic bailout agreement to avoid “economic catastrophe”.
By Thursday, things have changed a little: McCain decided to suspend his campaign and return to Washington to help end the financial crisis. President Bush then convened a meeting with congressional leaders and both McCain and Obama. Prior to the meeting, leading lawmakers from both parties announced they had reached an agreement on the Bush administration’s plan aimed at restoring chaotic financial markets. It was not to be. By the time the two presidential candidates were in the meeting, Conservative House Republicans distanced themselves from the bipartisan agreement. The House Republican leader,John A. Boehner surprised many by declaring that his caucus could not support the plan. He presented an alternative that involved a smaller role for the government and said that it would put taxpayers’ money at less risk. Mr. McCain, whose support of the deal is critical if fellow Republicans are to sign on, declined to take a stand. For this he has been blamed for interfering by the democrats. I am not totally sure that he is wrong at balking at the plan if one is to agree with economists as Mr Krugman.
Thus, in a tense situation, what could have ended in a bipartisan agreement, ended with no formal announcements and with signs of deep dissension. And the unusual thing is that it was the party of President Bush, the republicans,who derailed the bailout explaining their reasons as not wanting to hurt the taxpayer while the opposition party, the democrats, seem to agree with Bush!
Today, Friday, a day after House Republicans rejected the proposal brokered by the Treasury secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., the bailout talks have resumed trying to get over the impasse.
At stake is not only the economy of the country, but also the political situation. It is also the day the first presidential debate between Obama and McCain was scheduled. Whether it would take place is, at the moment I am writing this (6pm in France), still uncertain. McCain has indicated he would not attend the debate unless a deal for the bailout has been reached and asked Obama to postpone it but Obama has declined. We will see how this works.