Why did House Rep Diane Watson flip on bailout bill?

When the first bailout bill was proposed, Congresswoman Diane E. Watson was in the minority of both California and fellow Democratic who cast opposing votes. Watson, who largely represents Central Los Angeles, issued a press release saying she was “not convinced that this unprecedented plan is credible, accountable, nor will it work in its current form.”

On October 3rd, when the House was presented with an amended version of the act, she voted yes, stating:

I cannot in good conscience stand by and watch the credit markets contract further. Rather than let the State of California fall to its knees and potentially collapse through inaction, I chose today to vote for legislation, although imperfect, that can potentially restore faith in the markets.

Besides approving of a House vote to extend unemployment benefits, Watson gives no other specifics for what changed her mind, failing even to mention that some “pork” she’d been championing for four years had been tacked on.

The summary from Common Sense:

Sec 502. Provisions related to film and television productions
In an effort to keep film and television productions in the U.S, they would be eligible for a tax incentive program. Under this program, the cost of production of qualifying films would be permitted to be immediately expensed — that is, fully deducted from income for tax purposes — in the year the expenditures occur. This provision also makes permanent other favorable tax treatments for production. Historically Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA) has been a supporter (dating from its creation in the 2004 corporate tax bill). The cost is estimated at $478 million over 10 years.

Which isn’t to say this is bad pork.

Watson is up for re-election in November… her challenger, Republican David Crowley, a 50 year old college student, doesn’t appear to be a threat.


One response to “Why did House Rep Diane Watson flip on bailout bill?

  1. How nice it is to be marginalized by someone who never took the time to talk to me. Maybe things would have been different if Diane Watson had responded to my request for a debate, but why should I expect such niceties from this racist woman who proclaims herself to be a “daughter of Pocahontas” while going after the Cherokee Nation. She has all the time in the world to pursue African-American issues and submit African-Americans for Congressional Resolutions, but where are the resoultions praising people from other ethnicities? Where are the resolutions for the agendas of other ethnic groups? She is “Do-Nothing” Diane except when it benefits her – her constituents don’t even factor into her political decisions. It’s all about her. It’s time to change the 33rd Congressional District and get a representative who truly will represent more than their base.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s