Bill Flores Quotes

Obama came in and gave $700 billion to the bankers off the top as opposed to giving $700 billion to the poor.

We really accomplished what we set out to do with the Recovery Act programs, which was to fill the lending gap created by the crisis.

People forget... that we structured it so that the government, or the people, would be repaid with a really good rate of return. And as it turns out, that aspect of TARP, that's what happened.

The public in many countries is understandably concerned by the commitment of substantial government resources to aid the financial industry when other industries receive little or no assistance. This disparate treatment, unappealing as it is, appears unavoidable.

We bailed out the S&Ls. Why can't we bail out my city?

The failure of Lehman may have allowed the government to do more to prop up the economy than it otherwise could.

When Obama was inaugurated, he and his team had an insight - though whether the insight was conscious or not I don't know. But it was this: The TARP $700 billion price tag was a new kind of model.

I opposed the Medicare prescription drug entitlement. I opposed the Wall Street bailout. I opposed the stimulus bill.

The government has become a mechanism for distributing largess, and your census form is your ticket.

On Wall Street, financial crisis destroys jobs. Here in Washington, it creates them. The rest is just details.

I think TARP was the most defining vote since I've been in Congress. It was wrong. You don't nationalize private - it was wrong. It desensitized people to what $700 billion was, which opened the door for a $900 million stimulus, for Obamacare, for all these things. It was wrong. It broke my heart.

The Great Bailout is mostly over for the banks. But for those troubled behemoths of the nation's housing bust, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the lifeline from Washington just keeps getting longer.

And then you might decide that the country can just spend maybe years or decades to regain that credit, or maybe give that county the support, the financial support that the market is not willing not do.

From the takeover of Detroit and the failed stimulus packages to the enactment of Obamacare, the president and congressional Democrats chose to use Americas economic crisis as an excuse to expand government rather than as an opportunity to responsibly shrink it.

No complicated scheme of relief, no plan for government fixing of prices, no resort to the Public Treasury will be of any value …

The economic meltdown that would define every aspect of Obama's economy came to a head well before he became president, of course, and so did the legislation that would be the basis for everything that came after.

I opposed the bailout of banks and car companies.

I supported some very, very objectionable things in terms of bailouts or rescues, but I did it not for Wall Street, but for the American people.

I did not forsee a day where the government had to intervene to bail out basically everybody.

As American citizens, if you believe all banks were bailed out, you would hate banks. I would, too.

You don't set up an implicit promise from the federal government that everybody is getting bailed out.

The passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - or stimulus bill, as it is often called - is a perfect example in which dire circumstances necessitate immediate action. But with such large amounts of taxpayer money at stake, a hastily developed, under-thought-out plan could have been disastrous.

If you think about those bailouts that happened in 2008, that was a situation in which the government gave, at our expense, enormous sums of money to some of the richest people who have ever existed on Earth.

One of the very difficult parts of the decision I made on the financial crisis was to use hardworking people's money to help prevent there to be a crisis.

I think there is need for economic stimulus... and government can help make that up in a very difficult time.