Haste Makes Waste: The Case for Rethinking the Plan

For a literate and interesting take on why taking a little more time to work out a bailout package isn’t disastrous, read this Michael Lewitt column. An excerpt:

The problem with trying to legislate in the middle of a revolution is that you aren’t sure whether you are governing the world that is being destroyed or the one that is coming into being. There can be little question that the Wall Street that existed at the beginning of this year is no longer the industry that Congress is seeking to rescue from its own excesses. The financial world has been permanently altered by the collapse of the debt bubble that inexorably built up over the past three decades. Now Congress is trying to design a rescue plan for a world whose shape is highly contingent and unstable. Such an undertaking requires more than two weeks of work. Conventional thinking tells us that the government must do something to stabilize the markets immediately, and that doing something is better than doing nothing. Once again, conventional thinking is wrong. Congress would be much better advised to take the extra few days or week it would take to structure a plan that the world is going to have to live with for a very long time. As we were completing this newsletter, the House of Representatives voted down the emergency package and the financial markets are panicking. Such panic is unwarranted. The world should take a deep breath and consider whether defeat of a deeply flawed bill should be treated as a catastrophe or a rallying cry to develop a better plan that addressed the underlying issues that need to be fixed.

HCM has been warning for years that all of the king’s horses and all of the king’s men wouldn’t be able to put this mess back together again. It is now time for America to take the pain and figure out how to move forward. Any plan that is adopted must include a sufficient dose of strong medicine to prevent the culture of self-delusion and moral hazard that created the current crisis from further perpetuating itself. The purpose of the Paulson Plan has to be to rebuild confidence in the financial system. The manner in which the plan was presented and debated rendered that more difficult but hopefully not impossible. For any plan that fails to bring confidence back to the market will not work.

And from further on, here is Lewett’s plan principles:

The HCM Bailout Plan

  • The government should announce that it will effectively stand behind the U.S. financial system against failure through some sort of guarantee or insurance program. The government has already done this with respect to money market assets.
  • Mark-to-market accounting for financial institutions should be suspended for an indefinite period. Since nobody knows what these assets are worth, we should not drive the system into insolvency trying to place a value on assets that nobody is willing to purchase at the current time.
  • The Federal Reserve should reduce the overnight interest rate by 75 basis points immediately. This will allow financial institutions to begin to earn more on their assets, which will begin the process of rebuilding their balance sheets.
  • The Securities and Exchange Commission should announce the formation of a study group that will report back no later than December 31, 2008 on a comprehensive regime for regulating the credit default swap market.

I’m sure this won’t please everyone either — the hunt for a perfect plan is a waste, especially in the face of a mob mentality — but it’s worth a read.

Related posts:

  1. The Other Paulson Plan
  2. Paulson’s Project Lifeline: The Non-Plan Plan
  3. Barney Frank: Paulson Plan Gets Newfie Funding
  4. Newsflash: Jim Rogers Doesn’t Like the Paulson Plan
  5. Treasury Plan: Short Housing and Insurance