$700 Billion or Bust? Why?

The nagging questions are how the Bush Treasury Department arrived at that sacrosanct figure, why it's not negotiable and what's wrong with authorizing it in installments.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, who comes from a tradition of never buying retail when there's an alternative, asked Henry Paulson why it would not make sense to put $150 or so billion into the markets and see what happens but got a bristling rebuke:

"I think that would be a grave mistake," Paulson answered. "This is about market confidence and the tools to do the job," he added, insisting he needed the full amount to deal with unanticipated contingencies.

Unanticipated? That's an apt description of the entire mess that his Treasury Department was slow to recognize but now claims with absolute certitude that it knows how to clean up, but only if taxpayers commit an enormous amount to a lame-duck Administration, no questions asked.

But, to the credit of Congress, members are not responding meekly to the pre-election panic this time as they did to the 2002 resolution to invade Iraq, but are negotiating for oversight and transparency, executive pay limits and equity interest on taxpayers’ behalf as well as a provision to allow bankruptcy judges to revise mortgage terms.

Their constituents should be urging them to adjust the price tag too to keep from tying the hands of the new President and Congress by giving away the store now.

This morning, President Bush will be trying to make his last sale in office to Barack Obama and John McCain but, to the credit of both, there are signs that they won't buy in whole-heartedly.

Paulson has no sure way of knowing how much is needed to calm the credit markets but, like his leader, is stubbornly arguing that he should be the Decider, even though he will be long gone if and when he turns out to be wrong.

Iraq Mousetrap for the Next President

As Democratic candidates make promises to voters about troop withdrawal, George W. Bush is in the Middle East trying to tie the hands of his successor in office.

In November, he joined Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in a declaration of principles to negotiate an agreement to guarantee US troop presence for years. It would replace the existing Security Council mandate authorizing multinational forces in Iraq and become a sworn obligation for the next president. Yesterday, Bush announced in Kuwait that they are moving ahead with the plan.

According to Michael Hirsh of Newsweek, "The target date for concluding the agreement is July, says Gen. Doug Lute, Bush's Iraq coordinator in the White House--in other words, just in time for the Democratic and Republican national conventions."

The intention is to bypass Congress and commit the next president to Bush's agenda. "We don't anticipate now," Gen. Lute has said, "that these negotiations will lead to the status of a formal treaty which would then bring us to formal negotiations or formal inputs from the Congress."

Last month, Hillary Clinton urged Bush not to sign any such agreement without congressional approval since it would be difficult if not impossible for a future president to breach. White House silence has been deafening.

Touting the Surge's success, Bush said yesterday that "long-term success will require active U.S. engagement that outlasts my presidency."

If the Democratic Congress tries to head him off at the pass with legislation, its legality would be challenged and the Bush years would end where they started--in the Supreme Court.