voiceofsandiego.org: Slop... Leibham: Bilbray, Filner Don't Care or Don't Understand

As promised, I had a chance to talk to Nick Leibham, the attorney who is trying to oust Brian Bilbray from his congressional seat representing North County and parts of the city of San Diego.

Remember, Bilbray was one of the many members of Congress who were able to kill the massive bailout package for the financial sector.

"The American taxpayers are being asked to assume a $700 billion burden to bailout Wall Street with little more than a promise and a congressional report that this is just a one time deal," Bilbray said in a statement.

So what does Leibham think about that?

"Brian Bilbray put politics and his own party above his country and Main Street. We are sitting on the edge of a fiscal abyss. In very short order, we could very well see a global financial recession that could make the Asian financial crisis of 1998 or the Mexican Peso crisis of 1994 look like a song. He put politics above our families," Leibham told me.

He went on.

"The package that is looking to firm up the capital markets is not perfect. I'll be the first to admit that. But we are bleeding and you have got to cauterize the wound before more damage is done," he said.

But I was curious. If Bilbray put his party and politics above the needs of the country, what did Bob Filner do? The South Bay congressman also voted against the package and used just as strong of language to impugn it.

But he's a Democrat so he could have hardly been trying to put Bilbray's Republican Party above the interests of the "Main Street" (is anyone else as sick of hearing "Main Street" as I am?).

"Anybody who voted against the package either didn't understand the U.S. economy and the effect on Main Street this crisis is having or they put politics first either. You don't understand or you don't care," he said.

There you go. Bilbray and Filner and everyone else who voted against it either didn't understand or didn't care.

Leibham also had two good points I hadn't thought of: There should be protections in place to ensure that anyone crafting or working on the bill now doesn't take advantage of their knowledge of its potential and get a job on Wall Street raking it all in. Obviously, there are conflict of interest laws on the books, but they should be reviewed.

And he wanted to see a discussion of just how the federal government planned to value all of these toxic securities it will be unburdening banks of.

So another natural question arose: These are valid points that would give anyone, say even, a congressman, pause before voting on a massive bailout. Should he be so quick to judge, then, those who couldn't approve it yet?

No, Leibham said.

"The most important thing is to restore some confidence so that they can start lending again," he said.

-- SCOTT LEWIS

Liebham is "playing politics" -- he couldn't respond to your question about why Bob Filner voted against the Bush bailout as Brian Bilbray and Darrell Issa and Duncan Hunter did -- just as Liebham would not be able to comprehend why three Massachusetts liberal democrat Congressmen voted against the bailout, even though their lead Congressman and next door neighbor Barney Frank wanted them to vote for it. The House vote against the bailout Monday was a NONPARTISAN vote by Democrats and Republicans from all four corners of our country, urging caution despite the bleating of the Bush administration for "HELP, I'm drowning". Liebham is clearly not able to play in the big leagues, because he is an amateur who has never held elective office.

Posted by John Ingalls | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 11:35 am

I second that! He's an empty suit.

Posted by Voter in the 50th | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 3:35 pm

Scott could you please tell me, cuz I can't figure it out, is there ANOTHER WAY to restore "financial stability" to the money markets and get credit flowing again? This bailout doesn't sit well with me nor most of the populace but I kinda understand that we need to get credit moving again.

Posted by Jason | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 11:44 am

Part 1. One of the strangest things we ever did was take our nation from basing economic growth from GNP to GDP. Why would I say that? Well it seems that the main difference as far as the fictitious economy goes, is that in GDP debt and the interest on that debt is seen as being a positive contributor to measured economic growth. You see, before that time growth of National Debt, Personal Debt, Private Debt, Corporate debt the then projected value of that debt due to interest charged on the principles… those things were not counted in the rubric Economic Growth. The so-called bailout package, not one private bad debt will be taking off the books of the homeowners, yet billion upon billion of corporate bad debt will be taken off the books of the large money center banks (and all those other corps).

Posted by Gregory | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 12:27 pm

Part 2. This has been a Credit Expansion Economy and had it not been for China floating its currency (in 2006?) it would have reached its limits long ago. Instead of loaning the banks money, save the people who will lose their homes. If our government were to make these loans to the Americans workers and make them truly affordable monthly payments contracts – we may save the American Family as well as the American Banking System. But for some silly reason the ‘Republicans’ seem to think loaning money to the corporations for making poor investment decisions is hunky-dory but loaning money to the working families all across our nations – well it seems to them that is just plan wrong.

Posted by Gregory | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 12:36 pm

Just because you don't support the Bail Out, yes Bail Out doesn't mean you don't care or understand. It's called Bail Out for a reason. I don't agree with the reason. You want to play you gotta pay. Sometimes you have to crash and burn before you can recover. That's life folks, if we bail out this time, does that mean we have to bail out the next time? Probably, so don't start making it a habit. Most of us knew this bubble would burst. Stop being afraid! We got into the Iraq war cause someone made us afraid. Do things because they are the right thing to do not because you want to try (yes, try - no guarantees) to make things better.

Posted by Norman | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 2:51 pm

No fear about it - I just have a sure understanding of the real condition of our economy. The problem is at the bottom - the working class is not being paid enough to live and had to go deeper and deeper into debt just to make ends meet. 40% of those living in San Diego Can not afford to live in San Diego even at current housing prices, 70% of American are living paycheck to paycheck, twice as many homeless as there was 10 years ago and the average age of those homeless has increased by about 10 years over that same amount of time. The reality is that giving money to the wealthiest 10% of Americans with this bailout at the top will not do a single thing to correct the unequal level of economic suffrage that has contributed to the problem.

Posted by Gregory | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 4:12 pm

I'm not surprised that a liberal would want to throw taxpayer money at a bailout that doesn't address real problems but only increases the size of government. Perhaps LIebham needs to have a discussion with Rich Toscano.

Posted by CLB | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 3:32 pm

And we are not surprised that a so-called Christian Conservative would attempt to deny the fact that while her party had "all the toys" they constructed the largest, most invasive, most expensive, most controlling national government in the history of our nation - all while excluding the democratic party for some six years to boot. The reality is that Clinton has the smallest and least expensive national government in more than 20 years, in 1999 and 2000 we have a federal budget surplus of some 250 billion dollars and were actually paying down the principle of our national debt. The Republicans ‘all the toys’ republican (remember how they bragged) created the largest and most spend-happy national government we have ever had. Funny thing about fact – opinions really look like silly self-serving tripe when presented along side of it. Now, go ahead and try to spin that.

Posted by iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 4:21 pm

Mr. Leibham is, to put it as tamely as possible, full of crap. He plays politics, trying in desperation to grab a seat in a heavily Republican district, while hoping that the anti-Bush tsunami will sweep into Rancho. Maybe you will luck-out, Mr. Leibham. Most probably you will not. In either event you have chosen the Nancy Pelosi, lowest form of slime politics approach to this problem: cast aspersions on the politics of your opponent and his party. The re-worked version of this everybody pay for the mistakes of others approach is worse than the original. Does the name "Acorn" ring a bell?Republican congressmen and senators, even with dirt on their hands and caked under their fingernails, are nevertheless far more qualified as surgeons to repair this economy than the feces-flinging howler monkeys that make up the Democrat contingent in Congress.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 4:03 pm

Edgar wrote "Nancy Pelosi, lowest form of slime politics" Funny they protect Palin because they say she is a woman so you cannot dare debate her but they sure feel free to write tripe about and attack Pelosi. Funny how unchristian some Christian Conservatives Republicans - are.

Posted by Iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 4:31 pm

Because Pelosi IS the "lowest form of slime politics!" Sarah is in a completely different class than Pelosi.

Posted by Mary | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 1:31 pm

How ugly - typical republican hate; do as they demand - not as they do. Look above and see the 'ideal' "Christian Conservative Republican."

Posted by Iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 4, 2008 8:11 am

Yeah, she really IS in a class of her own! "ANCHORAGE, Alaska - The state Supreme Court refused Thursday to halt an ethics investigation into Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential nominee." link

Posted by Iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 9, 2008 5:11 pm

An abuse of power - before she even get into the whitehouse, what do you know about that? "ANCHORAGE, Alaska - A legislative committee investigating Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has found she unlawfully abused her authority in firing the state's public safety commissioner." link And on our local news stations - they appear to be reporting that she did not, I wonder who controls the media in San Diego?

Posted by iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 10, 2008 4:47 pm

And, what is even worse - her people created their own report! "ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Trying to head off a potentially embarrassing state ethics report on GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, campaign officials released their own report Thursday that clears her of any wrongdoing." link Is that like making-up data so that our government could attack Iraq?

Posted by Iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 10, 2008 7:11 pm

I'm sorry, why are we having a heated argument over run-of-the-mill campaigning? /This/ is where we draw the line? Wow.

Posted by Augmented Ballot | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 4:39 pm

I am a small business owner and I do not support this bailout; everybody should have a little pain in their lives__next time, you won't use the credit card so quickly! No, I am not a hard nose; we just do not need a spanking with a piece of tissue paper__use a belt and you won't forget. As for banks___let em' sink! I know several small ones that are doing just fine. John Mournian_____Smokesc

Posted by john s. mournian | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 6:19 pm

Very well put, Mr. Mournian. Most of us (but certainly not all) over the age of 45-50 were taught that we each, individually, have to bear the consequences of our own actions. That is something the Congressional leaders of both parties were taught, I am sure. Yet, they certainly are ignoring that principle now. It makes no difference if it is Wachovia Bank or John Q. Public in $150k home in Lincoln, Neb. You don't meet your lawfully contracted obligations, you sink. Too bad for you. Anyhow, you wrapped it all up in just a few words, Mr. Mournian. Maybe you should be running for Congress.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
October 1, 2008 6:46 pm

Editor´s Choice
YES, I'm sick of the "not just Wall Street, but Main Street!" overused symbolism. The media is playing into this as much as anyone -- can't they just say the middle-class, or any number of other things? Not just this particular symbol, but I feel that all media reports are reduced to the lowest-common intelligence factor. So much emphasis on "what we think" instead of "what's happening." Media keeps reporting that the "average citizen is against the bailout but doesn't really understand the situation." Well, it's YOUR JOB to explain the situation to us. Do some research and tell us! I love this column for that reason, and agree with Toscano's earlier post -- why should we believe Bernacke/Paulson now when they have been lying (or stupid) for many months now, denying the economy is in any kind of trouble? Thanks for being here to help.

Posted by Karine | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 8:35 am

I disagree with Mr. Leibham that these legislators voted the wrong way. I would refer readers to: "Third, purchasing bad assets and turning them over to an asset management corporation is not a promising strategy. " link as an investigation into how to resolve what is a crisis more tied to solvency and fraud than anything else. I would also point out to readers that Section 101(e) of both the House bill -which was defeated- and the Senate bill just passed. It exempts institutions such as Goldman, JPMOrgan, BofA, Citi, Barclays and other foreign banks from 'unjust enrichment' in resolving the 'credit crunch'. The REAL disappointment to me is that both Senate and House leadership on BOTH sides of the aisle didn't say to the Bush Administration 'ok, you've scared us deeply and we will undertake legislation to address in our respective chambers' rather than taking Paulson's atrocious bill.

Posted by Bruce Sims | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 9:42 am

Liebham doesn't care or doesn't understand! Brian Bilbray is representing Main Street and always has! I can't say the same for Bob Filner! I don't think we need a bailout to save greedy, stupid homebuyers and Wall Street execs. The market will correct itself. The new bailout has incentives for wooden arrows for children, rum, etc. What does that have to do with Middle America? The Government hasn't learned its lesson about overspending and handing them $700B+ will only make them continue with business as usual. Procedures need to be changed; pork needs to go away and we need to live within our means and stop spending MY tax $ for foolish and unnecessary causes. This is taxation without representation!! Got tea?

Posted by Mary | reply to this comment
October 2, 2008 1:21 pm

This bailout is a lot like funding hopeless addicts who can't put it together. They're always full of promises a new start, until your cash hits their palm and they run off to buy another bottle or nickel bag. The current bailout doesn't even include any meaningful changes in lenders' irresponsible behavior. If there must be a bailout, the people ought to get it. Do the math; 700 bil divides into 300 million Americans some $22,000 times. That's enough to put a down on a condo, buy a car, end your credit card agonies...and if it was done with a direct deposit scheme, the banks would get that infusion directly, too. A three day bank holiday might give them the interest on that money, further bailing their sorry butts. After that, if government wanted to stimulate the econ, they should try a Infrastructure Rebuilding Program like FDR's schemes.

Posted by It's time for outrage, du | reply to this comment
October 3, 2008 8:18 am

How sad is it that the reality is the real buying power of wages paid to the average American worker now buys about one/third the amount of products that is bough just eight short years ago. What is worse is that globally, because of extending every greater amount of Credit (and therefore debt) to the workers of the world, an ever-larger percentage of what little those workers are being pay – is being returned to the wealthy elites in the form of compound interest applied to those debt. Much as the National debt and our State’s debt and our own City’s debt is approaching untenable levels (if not already haven reached that level) the workers of our Nations, as well as around the globe have too reached the limits of Credit accumulation and maintenance. Peace dividends –v- War Debt, no "a concentrating of wealth at the top"

Posted by Iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 5, 2008 7:36 am

It seems the largest and best paying (total compensation) employer in town is the Government ( County, City, National, State) even still some 40% of the people who are living in San Diego can not truly afford to live in our city. The stored wealth lost to our retirement-age Americans, (because of the huge losses in the DOW, S&P, NASDAQ - and other markets) over the last seven years is about 3 trillion dollars. Today the DOW is down some 1500 points, NASDAQ down 3000 points, and S&P down 600 points from their year 2000 highs. Yet no one is talking about these huge losses – and why? Because the lions share of those losses, because these "bad debts", have taken the savings and investments of the American working class investors and in the pension accounts of those people? A Crisis? Yes, a crisis of social responsibility.

Posted by Gregory | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 7:51 am

How many people do you think are even paying any attention to your drivel? And a special shout out to Mr. Iknowtodd: the only one here mentioning ANYTHING about Christian conservatives is you, sir or madam. Give it a rest, please.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 6:37 pm

Sure, and if we paid back all the ‘worthless IOU’s,’ if our government gave back to the workers of our nation all those monies and back into the social security insurance program was was they spent? Right, then we would have more than enough money to keep all those older and retired Americans from living on the streets. The government no only spent all the money they took from our social security insurance program, but it seems they used the future payments into that system as collateral so they could borrow even more money, and spend even more money, and put us deeper into debt.

Posted by Iknowtodd | reply to this comment
October 8, 2008 8:41 pm

"Brian Bilbray put politics and his own party above his country and Main Street. " Actually, Mr. Liebham, Rep. Bilbray was putting his constituents first, as they strongly opposed the bail out program by the government. Would that more congressman would actually listen to their constituents. Thankfully, you won't get the opportunity to represent us here in the 50th.

Posted by Athena | reply to this comment
October 10, 2008 9:17 pm

Hear, hear, Athena. Leibham is just another Francine Busby -- without the lipstick! Let him rant on. He has about as much chance of unseating Bilbray as Busby has of winning the White House. It is, I admit, a small consolation in any otherwise dreary political year. When I am forced to choose between B. Hussein Obama and RINO McCain, something is terribly wrong. The fun will come in watching the winner try to steer the ship of state -- which is sailing headlong into a crash on the rocks -- back out into clear waters. Barry is incapable of doing so. McCain won't.

Posted by Edgar | reply to this comment
October 13, 2008 11:26 am

Leibham: Bilbray, Filner Don't Care or Don't Understand

Published: Wednesday, October 1, 2008 12:16 PM PDT

-- SCOTT LEWIS

Scott Lewis on Politics

The Scott Lewis on Politics blog, abbreviated cleverly as SLOP, is a collection of observations, insights and the occasional scoop on public affairs in San Diego. Please feel free to e-mail Scott at scott.lewis@voiceofsandiego.org.

How many kids are labeled as unlikely to get a diploma, at what ages, and with what disabilities.

Wednesday, October 1 -- 4:54 pm

Research focus: find antibodies that can prevent infection.

Wednesday, October 1 -- 4:37 pm

Updates on the 'fussing' over a crowded classroom.

Wednesday, October 1 -- 4:26 pm

County's figuring out how it will spend $5M in federal foreclosure grants.

Wednesday, October 1 -- 3:58 pm

His metamorphosis came at an opportune time.

Wednesday, October 1 -- 3:38 pm

FreePB.org's Jeremy Malecha discusses the beach alcohol ban.

Wednesday, October 1 -- 12:59 pm

The Democrat throws another D under the bus trying to run his rival over.

Wednesday, October 1 -- 12:16 pm

The various bailout schemes all employ the same flawed analytical framework that got us here to begin with.

Friday, October 3 -- 4:32 pm

'It seems like a convenient way for the school district to provide funding to close the gap on the library.' » Jan. 8 -- 6:51 pm

A Wisconsin veteran takes the helm in the middle of tough bargaining.

Jan. 8 -- 6:06 pm

Frye's proposals will be discussed behind closed doors.

Jan. 8 -- 5:26 pm

San Diego's new city attorney lets AG handle the predatory lending suits.

Jan. 8 -- 5:40 pm

Reporting has become synonymous with creative writing.

Jan. 8 -- 6:51 pm

Here's a look at the tangible results MPAs have yielded.

Jan. 6 -- 4:30 pm

Convicts find freedom, the former city manager of Chula Vista heads to Iraq, and more tidbits.

Jan. 6 -- 7:22 pm

The median-based price indicators closed out a dismal 2008 with another monthly decline.

Jan. 6 -- 4:06 pm