Am I The Only One?

Is nobody else thinking that this bailout idea, as currently proposed, is an incredibly bad idea both because it eviscerates the role of the legislative branch and/or institutionalizes socialism into our economy?

The original proposal was preposterous in part because it provided for ZERO oversight. I understand the impulse -- Paulson did a great job wrangling tough conditions from AIG just last week, and the last thing we want is a lawsuit for every deal that does or doesn't get done. But if Mr. Paulson had a change of heart and decided to blow $700,000,000,000.00 on meth and hookers, nobody could say a word. So much for Congress controlling the purse-strings. I have heard that there has been strong pushback on that point, but the suggestions are either weak (have the GAO approve every contract) or foolish (insist on the fed taking equity in each deal).

Indeed, that latter proposal is the one that really scares me. Forget the silliness about limiting executive compensation and helping out "struggling homeowners" (how about us struggling renters?). Those are just election-year brownie points to put in your tv ads. Do we really want our federal government to own an equity stake in all of the nation's largest financial institutions? Will those equity stakes come with control provisions like the ones insisted upon for AIG? How scary is the idea of the executive branch having effective operating control over all the major US banks?

In short, I'm going to need to see a much more compelling case for what will happen if we do NOT rush headlong into this bailout before I'm willing to sign on.

Update: apparently, I'm not alone.