The uphill battle to get a bailout

YOU CAN'T beat politics for entertaining alibis and excuses.

One of my all time favorites is 18th century British parliamentarian Charles James Fox's explanation of why he couldn't have been involved in a 1784 mob attack on the carriage of arch-rival William Pitt the younger: He had been in bed with his mistress at the time.

It's hard to top that, but others have certainly tried.

In 1995, House Speaker Newt Gingrich, explaining the Republican brinksmanship that led to the fall shutdown of the federal government, claimed President Clinton hadn't paid enough attention to him during a trip to Israel for Yitzhak Rabin's funeral. Why, Gingrich had even had to exit Air Force One by the rear door. As large as all that loomed to Newtie, short-sighted voters somehow deemed the government shutdown even more distressing.

This week, House Republican leaders rivaled Gingrich, if not Fox.

The reason more of their members hadn't voted for the Wall Street bailout their own president has labeled vital to preventing economic turmoil is that . . . that nasty Nancy Pelosi had offended their sensibilities with a partisan speech.

Certainly Pelosi could have been more diplomatic. But that's no excuse for neglecting the national interest.

US Representative Barney Frank skewered the GOP's assertion this way: "Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decide to punish the country."

No one is taking the Republicans' explanation seriously, of course, and for a simple reason: It's laughable.

The fact is, the Republican leadership simply hadn't been able to round up the necessary votes - and that's even more telling than Monday's risible rationalization.

No one loves this bailout bill, certainly. It's expensive, the effects are uncertain, it's unpopular with the public, and it might leave taxpayers permanently on the hook for hundreds of billions to help reckless institutions. The mere prospect of that is galling in the extreme.

But Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, President Bush, Pelosi, US Senator Judd Gregg, US Representative Barney Frank, and others are probably right in saying that what will otherwise happen as the result of teetering financial institutions and frozen credit markets will be much worse.

As US Representative Michael Capuano put it yesterday: "The downside of doing something is that we lose taxpayers' dollars. The downside of doing nothing is that the world economy might collapse."

The leadership failures here are manifold, but let's be clear: The lion's share of the blame for the bailout's defeat lies with House Republicans.

Yes, he could have lobbied harder, but in this instance President Bush tried to do the right thing, dropping his ideological aversion to government intervention and making an appeal that, for the good of the economy, the government had to act.

Despite their deep dislike of an unpopular incumbent, most House Democrats rallied round and took a difficult vote. Their leadership had committed to delivering 118 votes; they came up with 140.

All told, 60 percent of Democrats voted yes, with 40 percent voting no.

If a similar percentage of Republicans had rallied to the cause, the bailout would have passed easily.

As it was, the Republican leaders needed to produce a mere 77 votes, but only came up with 65. Two-thirds of Republican members said no, with only one-third backing the bailout.

It's also worth mentioning, however, that at a time when the country needed gutsy leaders willing to take a big, tough, unpopular vote, three Massachusetts congressmen - Steve Lynch, John Tierney, and Bill Delahunt - voted small. Their constituents should take note.

Inaction has consequences - and costs. The package itself carried an initial price tag of up to $700 billion, a goodly portion of which could ultimately be recouped as acquired assets are sold after conditions recover.

On Monday, the market drop cost investors - and that includes 401(k) and IRA owners counting on that money for retirement - $1.2 trillion.

The market made a partial recovery yesterday; exactly where this roller coaster ride will end is impossible to know.

But this much is clear. This problem is not going away. And that means Congress must act.

Scot Lehigh can be reached at lehigh@globe.com.