Opinion

PORKING UP THE RESCUE BILL

The economic rescue bill advanced by the Senate last night is a huge step in the right direction. Too bad it had so many special-interest barnacles attached.

To be sure, the $700 billion package was sailing into a stiff political wind. Constituent opposition to any sort of rescue has been strong and vocal – and lawmakers are running scared.

So, practically speaking, the bill probably needed some sweetening.

Yet, by last night, it had grown from the three-page measure originally proposed to a phone-book-thick 450 pages.

And the sweeteners are pretty pricey.

Many were small – tax breaks for film and TV production, toy wooden arrows, wool research, auto racing tracks, and Indian tribes; relief for litigants in the Exxon Valdez oil spill.

But at least one was huge – a $3.5 billion measure intended to force health-insurance companies to cover mental illness as they do physical sickness.

Now, most of this wasn’t spending – but, instead, targeted tax relief (or social policy disguised as such).

And many weren’t even part of the rescue bill itself. Rather they were included in a tax-relief measure that passed the Senate, 93-2, weeks ago, and which has been attached to the larger measure.

Things are getting out of hand.

Congress is facing an undeniable economic emergency. Legislation before it should have just one purpose: stabilizing the markets and avoiding a credit freeze that would cripple the economy.

Any haggling over the bill should be limited specifically to those areas that directly affect its intent.

That means things like lifting the limit on deposits insured by the FDIC – which, happily, was included.

Or whether to require an equity stake for the government in any troubled banks and companies.

Attaching extraneous measures, even if meant to ensure enough votes for passage, can lead to all sorts of mischief.

Maybe the Senate can be forgiven these minor sins in the name of expediency. But does anybody think the House won’t demand more?

Much more?

There’s too much at stake to be playing special-interest politics as usual.