Bailout Bill

[CincyInDC]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='707490' date='Oct 1 2008, 07:35 PM']I took a shit this morning. Named it Adolph.[/quote]

You must have been very sad to see him go down the drain so quickly.





Unless you saved it or something creepy like that.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='CincyInDC' post='707520' date='Oct 1 2008, 03:50 PM']You must have been very sad to see him go down the drain so quickly.

Unless you saved it or something creepy like that.

[/quote]
I dressed it in lederhosen and set it free on the streets. Gave it explicit instructions to find a fan.

[Go Tory Go!]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='707542' date='Oct 1 2008, 03:38 PM']I dressed it in lederhosen and set it free on the streets. Gave it explicit instructions to find a fan.[/quote]

[Homer_Rice]

[url="http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/01/news/pdf/index.htm"]Senate Bill here.[/url] Not worthy of passage. Section 132 still there.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='bengalrick' post='707499' date='Oct 1 2008, 02:13 PM']I am not sure, and am asking people that would know (You and CHD are tops on my list) to help me figure out what ways to get out of the mess, aside from letting it crash or from charging my unborn grandkids the bill for the BS going on...

In my thinking, it would stimulate the economy, by allowing many people that are scared to invest (mostly the ultra rich) invest in great numbers... Its not something taht will attack the main issue (liquidity) but it would give investors around the world more confidence in their investments in the US...[/quote]
The recent revival of the lower cap gains fantasy comes straight from the slop chutes over at AEI. But put that to the side for a moment, other than to consider that those who put their ideology above solutions at this moment are generally unreliable leaders. I think we've had enough of that in recent years.

Break it down into bite-sized pieces:
What are capital gains?
Who receives capital gains?
What mechanism guarantees that capital freed up by a reduction in cap gains taxes flows in productive directions?

What necessary investments need to be made?
How do we ensure that capital formation is brought to bear in those areas?

See my post re dirigisme.

The best way to hit a target is to actually aim at it, not to give everybody guns, tell them to shoot willy-nilly, and hope that somehow the target gets hit. Furthermore, if we are going to change our fiscal policy to address broader economic concerns, then repeating past errors, especially those which helped create the problem in the first place, just doesn't seem smart.

It really is not that complicated. Enact legislation which forces (incents) capital in directions that help industry, create jobs, and improve the lot of all citizens. Simultaneously, enact legislation which inhibits or penalizes behavior which detract from the real economy.

Cap gains taxes in general should be taxed at the same rate as ordinary income, imo. Then offer tax credits which move that capital into productive endeavors. Same result for the investor, better result for the economy.

Or we could just keep giving that 900# gorilla on our backs more bananas.

Like the Senate will try to do tonight.

[url="http://dontclickthis.whatingods.name/american.gif"]Time to go on a diet.[/url] NSFW:Language

[steggyD]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='707490' date='Oct 1 2008, 01:35 PM']I took a shit this morning. Named it Adolph.[/quote]

[Sox]

Well now,this is awesome.

Let's look at a couple of things in the bill.

SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.

SEC. 504. INCOME AVERAGING FOR AMOUNTS RECEIVED IN 20 CONNECTION WITH THE EXXON VALDEZ LITIGATION.

SEC. 316. RAILROAD TRACK MAINTENANCE.

SEC. 317. SEVEN-YEAR COST RECOVERY PERIOD FOR MOTORSPORTS RACING TRACK FACILITY.

SEC. 309. EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CREDIT FOR AMERICAN SAMOA.

SEC. 401. PERMANENT AUTHORITY FOR UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS.


Awesome.Perhaps someone smarter than me can explain what any of these have to do with a bailout.

I just emailed my House representative and promised to vote against him next time if he passes this piece of shit.

[Go Tory Go!]

[quote name='Sox' post='707688' date='Oct 1 2008, 11:10 PM']Well now,this is awesome.

Let's look at a couple of things in the bill.

SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.

SEC. 504. INCOME AVERAGING FOR AMOUNTS RECEIVED IN 20 CONNECTION WITH THE EXXON VALDEZ LITIGATION.

SEC. 316. RAILROAD TRACK MAINTENANCE.

SEC. 317. SEVEN-YEAR COST RECOVERY PERIOD FOR MOTORSPORTS RACING TRACK FACILITY.

SEC. 309. EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CREDIT FOR AMERICAN SAMOA.

SEC. 401. PERMANENT AUTHORITY FOR UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS.


Awesome. [b]Perhaps someone smarter than me can explain what any of these have to do with a bailout.[/b]
I just emailed my House representative and promised to vote against him next time if he passes this piece of shit.[/quote]

Perhaps someone dumber than you can [i]try[/i] to explain...

"That's why I say, I like every American I'm speaking with we're ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out, but ultimately what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, um, helping the, oh, it's gotta be all about job creation too, shoring up our economy, and putting it back on the right track. So healthcare reform and reducing taxes and reigning in spending has [sic] got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans, and trade, we hvnwslkj we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, a competitive, um scary thing, but 1 in 5 jobs being created, uh, in the trade sector today, we-w-w-we've got to look at that as more opportunity, all those things under the umbrella of job creation, this bailout is a part of that."

Oddly, her answer is more appropriate for your question than for the one she was asked - not that it makes sense or explains shit, or is appropriate for any question I can imagine... Go figure.

[CincyInDC]

It will be interesting to see what the House does Friday.


[url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/01/AR2008100101530.html?hpid=topnews"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews[/url]


[quote][size=5][b]Senate Approves Bailout[/b][/size]

House to Take Up Bill With Added Tax Breaks, Higher FDIC Limits

By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, October 2, 2008; Page A01

The Senate last night easily approved a massive plan to shore up the U.S. financial system, but the measure faces a tougher test tomorrow in the House, where leaders will try to reverse the stunning defeat the legislation suffered earlier this week.

As the Bush administration issued fresh warnings that Congress's failure to act would have dire consequences for the economy, the Senate revived the package the House defeated Monday and voted to approve it, 74 to 25.

The proposal -- which calls for spending up to $700 billion to buy bad assets from faltering financial institutions -- was heavily revised to attract wider support. The bill passed last night would extend an array of tax breaks worth $108 billion to businesses and families next year. It would also temporarily increase the limit on federal insurance for bank deposits to $250,000 from $100,000.

Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, acknowledged last night that it was tempting to oppose a bailout and "stick a finger in the eye of the bankers and the tycoons whose greed brought us to this crisis."

"But after the rush of righteousness fades, what then?" said Dodd, an architect of the package. "We can take a cut at Wall Street, but Wall Street won't feel the brunt of the pain."

Nine Democrats, 15 Republicans, and one independent opposed the plan. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), who is ailing, was not present for the vote.

The provisions added to the original bill infuriated fiscally conservative Democrats in the House, who have argued for months that the tax breaks should not be extended at the expense of increasing the federal deficit. Yet some congressmen who opposed the bailout Monday were newly interested in it yesterday.

Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.), an influential conservative, said the new bill was "materially better" than the one that failed in the House, sending the Dow Jones industrial average plummeting a record 778 points.

"Much as I would like to see much more dramatic changes, there comes a point in time where we've got to send the signal to the U.S. markets, U.S. consumers and world markets that we're dealing with this," Shadegg said. "I'm inclined to hold my nose and vote yes."

House Republicans said the new package could attract as many as 100 GOP votes -- enough to put it over the top if Democrats can garner as many votes as they did on Monday. House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said he and other fiscal conservatives are "angry" about the addition of the tax provisions but unlikely to abandon the package.

"Frankly, we really don't have much flexibility, and this is important to do," Hoyer said.

Across Washington yesterday, politicians and interest groups worked frantically to build support for the bailout, which seeks to prop up U.S. financial institutions and calm investors.

Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. also worked the phones, participating in conference calls with banking groups and business associations. Other organizations joined the campaign, including the AARP, whose members have inundated lawmakers with more than 110,000 e-mails in recent days.

"People's nest eggs are disappearing," AARP chief executive Bill Novelli said. "It's no secret that people are angry about bailing out Wall Street. But Wall Street is us. These are our stocks, our retirement funds and our futures."

House leaders, meanwhile, leaned on rank-and-file members to fall in line behind the new plan, plucking out provisions to sell to specific constituencies. Party leaders hoped to lure African American lawmakers, who voted "no" on Monday in surprisingly large numbers, with a new property tax deduction of up to $1,000 for homeowners who do not currently itemize deductions on their federal income taxes. Advocates say 30 million people would be eligible for the benefit.

The homeowners' deduction is part of a massive tax package that has been batted back and forth between the House and Senate for months and was tacked onto the bailout legislation. That package includes new tax breaks for renewable energy and a much longer list of expired tax cuts that would be extended for two years. The largest, which would be extended for one year, would restrain the growth of the alternative minimum tax, a parallel tax structure that would add thousands of dollars to the tax bills of more than 20 million families next year without congressional action.

The tax package also would extend federal deductions for sales taxes in states that do not levy an income tax, as well as for tuition and for teachers who spend their own money on classroom supplies. There are also tax breaks worth nearly $40 billion for businesses over the next 10 years, including incentives for conducting research and development domestically, for opening new restaurants and for doing business in the District.

The measure also would require insurance companies to provide the same level of coverage for mental illnesses as for other heath problems, a long-sought priority for Democrats.

The cost of the package would be offset somewhat by new taxes on hedge-fund managers who avoid taxes by transferring income offshore, as well as by a new reporting requirement for stock brokers that would make it easier to tax capital gains on stock sales. Still, those provisions would come nowhere near covering the cost of the package, which the Joint Committee on Taxation yesterday estimated at $110 billion over the next decade.

The new bill was assembled behind closed doors on Tuesday. In an unusual bipartisan power play, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) collaborated to produce a package that could easily pass the Senate and build momentum in the more reluctant House.

They also saw an opportunity to force through the Senate-drafted tax package, even though House leaders earlier had insisted it be accompanied by other tax increases to avoid adding to the deficit. Reid's main priority was securing the renewable energy tax credits, which would benefit his home state. The provisions reward investments in wind and solar energy and the purchase of plug-in electric cars.

Senior Democratic aides who were involved in the negotiations said Reid kept Hoyer informed but did not engage him because Hoyer led the House opposition to the Senate tax package. But Reid spoke with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) at least three times Tuesday, aides said.

Negotiators said Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) played a minor but important role in courting Democratic holdouts, contacting individual lawmakers from the campaign trail. He also announced his support for an increase in the FDIC insurance limit; his opponent in the presidential race, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) did so as well.

During Senate debate yesterday, Obama echoed President Franklin D. Roosevelt's first fireside chat to the nation during the Great Depression, calling on the American people to have "confidence and courage" through what is likely to be an extended period of economic turmoil.

"This is not just a Wall Street crisis. It's an American crisis," Obama said. "Passing this bill can't be the end of our efforts to support the economy; it must be the beginning."

McCain was elsewhere in the Capitol and did not speak during the debate. He later supported the measure.

Minutes before the vote started, senior aides predicted the "yeas" could be as few as 60, the minimum needed to pass. But when the moment arrived, senators sat at their desks, appearing grave and intent, and the "no" votes were surprisingly few. Only three senators who face tough re-election battles -- GOP Sens. Elizabeth Dole (N.C.) and Roger Wicker (Miss.), and Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu (La.) -- were opposed.

Bush issued a statement last night applauding the Senate for passing the bill. The White House said the president planned to remain in Washington until after the House vote on Friday, then depart for a previously scheduled trip for the weekend.

Despite some grumbling, Democratic proponents of the bailout package said they did not expect many lawmakers who supported the bailout plan Monday to switch their votes tomorrow. "How do you say, if you voted yes already, now that it has tax cuts and FDIC insurance, that you're going to vote against it? That just doesn't make sense," noted one senior Democratic lawmaker, speaking on condition of anonymity so he could speak candidly.

Conservative Republicans remained among the most fervent opponents. But Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Tex.), chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, sent a letter alerting members that the new measure "contains far more tax relief than tax increases" and is not considered "a taxpayer pledge violation" by the anti-tax group Americans for Tax Reform.

Meanwhile, a handful of more moderate House Republicans yesterday signaled that they were at least studying the changes in the bill. Reps. Charles Boustany Jr. (R-La.), Pat Tiberi (R-Ohio) and Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) all voted against the measure Monday, but their aides said yesterday that they were undecided on the latest version.

House lawmakers said that calls and letters to their offices yesterday remained overwhelmingly against the bailout but that there had been a shift since Monday's gut-wrenching drop in the stock market. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), who cheered on the House floor as the bill went down, said her office was hearing from slightly more people who support it.

"There's been more media attention," she said. "People are talking. People are getting more educated."

Staff writers Jonathan Weisman and Dan Eggen contributed to this report.[/quote]

[Chris Henrys Dealer]

[quote name='Sox' post='707688' date='Oct 1 2008, 11:10 PM']Well now,this is awesome.

Let's look at a couple of things in the bill.

SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.

SEC. 504. INCOME AVERAGING FOR AMOUNTS RECEIVED IN 20 CONNECTION WITH THE EXXON VALDEZ LITIGATION.

SEC. 316. RAILROAD TRACK MAINTENANCE.

SEC. 317. SEVEN-YEAR COST RECOVERY PERIOD FOR MOTORSPORTS RACING TRACK FACILITY.

SEC. 309. EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CREDIT FOR AMERICAN SAMOA.

SEC. 401. PERMANENT AUTHORITY FOR UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS.


Awesome.Perhaps someone smarter than me can explain what any of these have to do with a bailout.

I just emailed my House representative and promised to vote against him next time if he passes this piece of shit.[/quote]


Have you seen the add on about excise and taxes on rum from Puerto Rico? How could they take a serious bill and just make a complete joke out it. Damn, I almost hope it gets voted down now. (I think it would be hell on the US economy, but still, this is a total joke of the legislative process)

[sois]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='707557' date='Oct 1 2008, 04:04 PM']It really is not that complicated. Enact legislation which forces (incents) capital in directions that help industry, create jobs, and improve the lot of all citizens. Simultaneously, enact legislation which inhibits or penalizes behavior which detract from the real economy.[/quote]

I like this. I will use this next time I suggest an 80% cap gains tax on sale of second homes and someone thinks I am crazy. The behaviour of flipping houses helped cause some of this mess.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Chris Henrys Dealer' post='707744' date='Oct 2 2008, 08:47 AM']Have you seen the add on about excise and taxes on rum from Puerto Rico? How could they take a serious bill and just make a complete joke out it. Damn, I almost hope it gets voted down now. (I think it would be hell on the US economy, but still, this is a total joke of the legislative process)[/quote]
There's a bit of legislative sleight of hand going on here. In order to move the process rapidly, the Senate wrapped the bill within a previous one. Now, as it goes back to the House, there is one less step of back and forth between the houses of Congress. Most of the of wrapper has already garnered a lot of support from the House.

BTW, the bill still robs taxpayers, offers no real long-term solutions, and should be defeated. There are plenty of ways to recapitalize and add liquidity that would do better for long-term economic prospects as well as protect the liabilities of the citizenry.

In a worst case scenario, i.e. this bill, it needs to be amended to drop the authority to potentially suspend "mark to market" accounting, and I think that we ought to wait for actual failures, then take majority equity stakes in those resurrected/bailed out.

Folks listen to the analysts meeting I posted? If so, you'll notice that very early on, Treasury said that the purpose of this is to grease the wheels for currently well-capitalized and sound institutions as much (if not moreso?) than rescue failed ones.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='sois' post='707797' date='Oct 2 2008, 11:44 AM']I like this. I will use this next time I suggest an 80% cap gains tax on sale of second homes and someone thinks I am crazy. The behaviour of flipping houses helped cause some of this mess.[/quote]
Well, 80% might be a tad high! But I don't oppose that idea generally if applied to economic behavior which tends to "churn" paper. Flipping houses in some cases is more socially useful than trading CDSs.

And don't forget to ruminate about the other half of the proposition. To what kind of behavior would you offer incentives? The main issue is, is to create a reasonable spread between the two kinds of activity. For example, investment in a targetted infrastructure fund gets one a 6-8% tax credit over the top of what one might receive in another type of investment.

[Homer_Rice]

Backer asked about candidates which received the most money from Wall St. Came across this today. Probably not entirely comprehensive, but looks like both do pretty well, Obama a little moreso. Note also that many of the law firms which are part of the political infrastructure are big contributors, too.

[url="http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/1430836-banks-bailout/images"]Contribution pic.[/url]

[sois]

What do you guys feel is the general population's opinion about this? It seems from all I ask, I get negative responses to the bailout bill. If that is the case, we will truly see if the House of "Representatives" does what the people want. If not, they aren't doing what they are elected for. Maybe they should be called the House of Big Brother.

[Homer_Rice]

Commentary from overseas. He's a relative insider on the international banking scene.

[url="http://www.rgemonitor.com/financemarkets-monitor/253850/financial_eugenics__the_paulson_plan_for_survivor_bias"]Financial Eugenics: The Paulson Plan for Survivor Bias[/url]

[Homer_Rice]

Nice explanation to complement the above post.

[url="http://www.slate.com/id/2201428/pagenum/all/"]"No matter what ultrasophisticated betting strategy you adopt, you can't expect to make money in the long run by flipping a fair coin."[/url]

[Chris Henrys Dealer]

What's the deal with John Boehner gents? Is he the man the GOP are grooming for the future? Figured you folks might know as he is an Ohio player...

[CincyInDC]

I used to live in Boehner's district and during the Monika Lewinski mess I sent him (and my two Senators) a brief letter stating that I didn't think infidelity and lying to a witch hunt (Kenneth Starr) about infidelity was grounds for Congress to take action. He sent me back a 9 pager telling me why I was wrong. It's a shame the democrats don't even bother campaigning against the guy.

[Jamie_B]

and the house passes this bill

[Nati Ice]

[quote name='sois' post='707933' date='Oct 2 2008, 03:58 PM']What do you guys feel is the general population's opinion about this? It seems from all I ask, I get negative responses to the bailout bill. If that is the case, we will truly see if the House of "Representatives" does what the people want. If not, they aren't doing what they are elected for. Maybe they should be called the House of Big Brother.[/quote]
the polls show an even split between those who dont like it, like it, and dont care, with the highest numbers against it

[quote name='Chris Henrys Dealer' post='708163' date='Oct 3 2008, 10:16 AM']What's the deal with John Boehner gents? Is he the man the GOP are grooming for the future? Figured you folks might know as he is an Ohio player...[/quote]
he is a massive douche with the safest seat in the world. he could literally kill a pastor with his cock while sniffing a line of coke off of a male protitutes dick and he would still be reelected. at worst he would have the oppourtunity to hand pick his successor from prison while awaiting a pardon.

[quote name='CincyInDC' post='708177' date='Oct 3 2008, 10:36 AM']I used to live in Boehner's district and during the Monika Lewinski mess I sent him (and my two Senators) a brief letter stating that I didn't think infidelity and lying to a witch hunt (Kenneth Starr) about infidelity was grounds for Congress to take action. He sent me back a 9 pager telling me why I was wrong. It's a shame the democrats don't even bother campaigning against the guy.[/quote]
its a waste of resources

[steggyD]

Don't forget to vote against all these treasonous representatives ...

House :
link sucked (edit)

Senate :
[url="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-213"]http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-213[/url]

We are truly not represented as a people anymore.

Sorry, some of the first links are wrong. Clicky here for the house. [url="http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml"]http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml[/url]

[gatorclaws]

[quote name='steggyD' post='708380' date='Oct 3 2008, 09:41 PM']Don't forget to vote against all these treasonous representatives ...

House :
[url="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-101"]http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2008-101[/url]

Senate :
[url="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-213"]http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2008-213[/url]

We are truly not represented as a people anymore.[/quote]

Boehner voted against it.... i thought he was campaigning for it???

[steggyD]

[quote name='gatorclaws' post='708399' date='Oct 3 2008, 10:29 PM']Boehner voted against it.... i thought he was campaigning for it???[/quote]
Yeah, edited the post. Not sure where that website came up with that original selection of yeas and nays. It was off, by a lot. My guy actually voted nay.

[Homer_Rice]

Joke I cribbed from Roubini comments...

***
While walking down the street one day a US senator is tragically hit by a truck and dies. His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance.

"Welcome to heaven," says St. Peter. "Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you."

"No problem, just let me in," says the man.

"Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity."

"Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven," says the senator.

"I'm sorry, but we have our rules."

And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him. Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people. They play a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar, and champagne. Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before he realizes it, it is time to go.

Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises...

The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him.

"Now it's time to visit heaven."

So, 24 hours pass with the senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns.

"Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity."

The senator reflects for a minute, then he answers: "Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think hell is the place for me."

So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. Now the doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage. He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and
putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above. The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulder.

"I don't understand," stammers the senator. "Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time. Now
there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?"

The devil smiles and says, "Yesterday we were campaigning...

Today you voted."

***