Utah's federal office holders from Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch to Democratic Rep. Jim Matheson expressed deep reservations about the $700 billion bailout plan that seeks to rid financial firms of toxic mortgage-related debt.

The Treasury Department announced the proposal last Thursday, sending over a sparse three-page draft bill and expecting action by the end of this week, when Congress planned to adjourn for the year.

"Congress has been put in a remarkably awkward position," said Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah.

Wall Street and financial titans worldwide expect Congress to pass what would be the biggest government intervention in the economy since the Great Depression by Friday. Matheson doesn't want the markets to crash due to inaction, but he also doesn't want to back such an expensive bill without some assurances that it will have the desired effect.

He questions whether this proposal will stabilize markets and wants to hear from financial experts who think otherwise.

"When people rush to decisions, sometimes they are not always the right decisions," he said.

Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch said he is also far from impressed with the current plan.

"I am not interested in putting present and future taxpayers' money at risk for the sake of bailing out those who have made greedy or foolish decisions," he said.

Sen. Bob Bennett, as a member of the Senate Banking Committee, is the Utahn most involved in the debate. He is also the one most reserved in his comments about the Treasury plan.

He participated in a banking committee hearing Tuesday where Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke pitched the $700 billion bailout.

He questioned Paulson on the details, pointing out the more the Treasury pays for the bad debt, the more it helps banks, but the more it costs taxpayers.

"My number one concern with the Fed and the Treasury's proposal is that we don't know the details of how it is going to work," said Bennett, who is part of a bipartisan group working on the details of a bill.

Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, said instead of rushing through a quickly crafted bill, Congress should stay in Washington for a few more weeks to flesh out the bailout.

Because as it stands now, Cannon is probably going to vote against the bill.

"I think it is highly unlikely that I would vote for a bill that gives vast authority with no limitations and no descriptions," he said.

Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, worries about the costs to taxpayers and "a permanent shift of power and financial responsibility to the federal government."

But like many members of Congress, he says they must do something. "There aren't any

good options before us, and I don't like the idea of a bailout, but doing nothing might be the worst option," he said.

mcanham@sltrib.com