Chuck Kennedy / McClatchy Tribune

WASHINGTON — Top government officials urged Congress on Tuesday to give quick approval to the Bush administration’s $700 billion financial-rescue legislation, but key senators warned that political support for the effort to pass the administration’s bill rapidly and without amendments is waning fast.

“At this juncture, in light of the fast-moving developments in financial markets, it is essential to deal with the crisis at hand,â€Â Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke told the Senate Banking Committee.

“Over the past days, it has become clear that there is bipartisan consensus for an urgent legislative solution,â€Â Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson added. “We need to build upon this spirit to enact this bill quickly and cleanly and avoid slowing it down with provisions that are unrelated and don’t have broad support.â€Â

Republicans oppose expansive plan

Paulson overstated the bipartisan consensus, however. While the Democratic leaders of the Senate and the House of Representatives have pledged to pass a bailout plan within days — with amendments — the Republican leaders and members of both chambers are much less enthusiastic. Whether rebellion among rank-and-file members is growing enough to threaten the passage of any bailout plan was a question hanging over negotiations Tuesday between Congress and the administration.

Vice President Dick Cheney and White House Budget Director Jim Nussle met behind closed doors with House Republican lawmakers. Many conservative Republicans oppose the administration̢۪s plan as too expensive, too large a grant of power to the executive branch and too much intervention by government into free markets.

Banking Committee chairman says plan not detailed enough

Meanwhile, Senate Banking Committee members from both parties took turns venting their anger at the administration’s proposal and what Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., called the “economic maelstromâ€Â that brought things to this point.

Senators described how their constituents are confused and suspicious about the plan and concerned that taxpayers will wind up paying for the failings of big firms and their highly paid executives.

Dodd, who̢۪s spent the past five days trying to broker a deal with administration officials and Republicans, was particularly frustrated Tuesday.

He called Paulson’s plan “stunning and unprecedented in its scope and lack of details.â€Â

Dodd warned that the package “would do nothing to help even a single family save a home. It would do nothing to stop even a single CEO from dumping billions of dollars in toxic assets on the backs of taxpayers — and walking away with a bonus and a golden parachute.â€Â

He said that any plan that passed Congress must include terms to ensure at least three principles: strong oversight of the government effort to bail out troubled firms, a way to keep people facing foreclosure in their homes and terms that give taxpayers “assurance that their hard-earned money is being used correctly and responsibly.â€Â

Senate Democrats also want to limit executive pay at firms aided by the government.

Reservation, not rejection

Some Republicans voiced similar views, and were troubled by the bailout̢۪s potential cost to taxpayers.

“This massive bailout is not the solution. It is financial socialism, and it is un-American,â€Â said Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky.

Added Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., the top Banking Committee Republican, “what troubles me most is that we have been given no credible assurances that this plan will work. We could very well spend $700 billion and not resolve the crisis.â€Â

After their initial statements of reservation about the administration plan, however, most Senate Banking Committee members asked thoughtful questions in respectful tones, suggesting that they remained intent on finding mutually acceptable legislation.

Bernanke, Paulson, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox and Federal Housing Finance Agency Director James Lockhart continued to insist on simple legislation, without the housing, executive-pay and tighter oversight provisions.

Congressional action “urgently required”

Paulson called his plan “a bold approachâ€Â that would stabilize troubled companies. Other changes, he said, could come later.

“We must have that critical debate,â€Â he said, “but we must get through this period first.â€Â

“Action by the Congress is urgently required to stabilize the situation and avert what otherwise could be very serious consequences for our financial markets and for our economy,â€Â Bernanke said.

He enthusiastically backed the idea of having the Treasury buy illiquid assets from financial institutions, saying that removing troubled assets from balance sheets “will help to restore confidence in our financial markets and enable banks and other institutions to raise capital and expand credit to support economic growth.â€Â

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said he still expected Congress to enact a bill by week̢۪s end, but he said that preparations are under way to extend business into the weekend if necessary.

By David Lightman and Margaret Talev / McClatchy Tribune