If WSJ letters and op-eds ever bore you...

...try reading a news article.

Chicago Tuesday, March 17, 2009 11:22 AM

Editors, Wall Street Journal

Gentlepeople:

The Wall Street Journal's Monday, March 16 article "Small Business Loans Criticized" starts out "President Barack Obama is set to release a plan Monday raising the federal guarantee on small-business loans up to 90%..." and ends "...but a study by Congress's watchdog agency contends that insufficient oversight is in place for that program." This is a 37 word euphamism for: The president's found another nail for the Republican Party's coffin, and Congress says make sure you've got enough bureaucrats to do it.

Continuing: "The Small Business Administration... lends to small businesses that can't otherwise get credit, such as ...from private banks." And, the Presdident's plan "... will increase that guarantee... temporarily eliminate many of the loan fees that help pay for the program and cover potential defaults. And Mr. Obama on Monday will instruct the government to purchase small-business loans bundled and sold on the secondary market."

But, wait a minute: "Government watchdogs fear the potential for another debacle, similar to... the mortgage crisis, in which poorly documented loans were granted by mortgage brokers, then shuffled off to banks and hedge funds as securities. "By eliminating the upfront fees for banks and lenders while increasing guarantee levels, watchdogs say, the administration could be creating incentives for banks to rush credit out the door....

"'According to the GAO investigation, I think we have nothing more than a large, unregulated pot of money that lenders are going to scramble to get their hands on,' said one congressional investigator...."

Are the ever-so-sly WSJ suits test-driving a potential satire subsidiary on us here?

Note to the President: A Rush Limbaugh-like brite idea: why not have Congress make a simple change to paragraph 3402 of United States Code Title 26 — 'Internal Revenue Code' Subtitle C 'Employment taxes' Chapter 24 'Collection Of Income Tax At Source On Wages..." to exclude employers meeting the present definition of constituients of the Small Business Administration.

Um, Mr. Presdident, you don't think much of this idea? And you doubt Congress, even the Republicans, will either, since it will reduce federal income?

The small business creature will still be reporting to the employee how much they owe the federal government. You don't have confidence with the backbone of the working populace following the law and paying their fair share?

Arnold H Nelson 5056 North Marine Drive Chicago IL 60640