General Question

Bri_L's avatar

So, regarding this government fixing the economic problem?

Asked by Bri_L (12176points) September 23rd, 2008

Does this statement:

“Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.”
scare the snot out of anyone else? How is something like that even possible. When did we become fricken cuba?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

12 Answers

marissa's avatar

Could you please link to where that quote came from? As for the quote, without reading it in the context it was written, yes, at first it sounds scary. However, given the way things are these days with everything going to court or being subject to review, it may be necessary to include such wording, so that the individual involved can make effective decisions without having their hands tied. It would also be necessary so that they were able to enter into agreements, etc. with another party and the other party be confident that the decision was final. For example, if I want to sell me house and I agree with a buyer to sell my house, the buyer needs to be confident that I am free to make that decision and that someone else (court, review board,etc) won’t decide 6 months later that I was not free to make that decision and now, that someone else (court, review board, etc) decides that I shouldn’t have sold my house and the buyer now has to give back the house, etc, etc.

Bri_L's avatar

I must have deleted more to I see it isn’t in my question up there but this link will explain it.

Judi's avatar

I am really scared of giving the people who caused this mess a blank check with no recourse for malpractice.

marinelife's avatar

I hate the idea. I think we should all contact our Congressmen and tell them not to let this go through.

Haven’t the Bushies done quite enough?

There was a lot of skepticism on the Hill today during the hearings. i hope it keeps up. There was also a demonstration against it in downtown Orlando today.

SuperMouse's avatar

The whole idea of Paulson and Bernanke having a blank check to purchase all the “toxic assets” of any type they would like – on my dime – freaks me right out.

This article made me laugh. Headed for a recession? We have arrived in Recession Land folks, been there a while now.

sacaver's avatar

Aw come on. This only adds around $2,293 to the debt already owed by each and every American.

Just let me find my credit card…

Bri_L's avatar

@ sacaver – you crack me up. That was Bloomcounty’esque

tWrex's avatar

Hey can I get a blank check with no responsibility attached too? I swear I will not waste it!

lapilofu's avatar

Yeah! Give me $700 billion. I’ll fix the ‘conomy, I swear!

Judi's avatar

I am not good with numbers, but is this like a million dollars for every resident of Alaska?

kevbo's avatar

You know, it’s really quite a good thing and a remarkable coincidence that the White House drafted this plan as a contingency only a few months ago.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/28599–1.html?type=printer_friendly

”[White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony] Fratto insisted that the plan was not slapped together and had been drawn up as a contingency over previous months and weeks by administration officials.”

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther