The bailout post has gotten so much play I thought I would pass on what economist think of the deal.

Many of the same economists and opinion-makers who’d provided a bipartisan sheen of consensus to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson‘s  previous moves have quickly begun casting doubts on the wisdom of a policy that would allow Treasury to purchase without oversight hundreds of billions of dollars of difficult-to-price assets from financial institutions.

Under the proposal, Paulson would not have to report to Congress until December, and the only safeguard for taxpayers was a provision that the “Secretary shall take into consideration means for — (1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and (2) protecting the taxpayer.”

Skepticism toward the plan reflected more than the predictable desires of the left to spread the wealth to Main Street or of the right to reject government bailouts, although those sentiments were also expressed.

Former Clinton Secretary of Labor and informal Obama advisor Robert Reich, writing in Politico’s Arena forum, added that “[I]f you are a member of Congress, you just might be in a position to demand from Wall Street certain conditions in return for the blank check,” and suggested that the government take an equity stake in financial institutions, provide homeowner relief, and instill the outlines of a new regulatory regime.

“Wall Streeters may not like these conditions,” Reich went on. “Well, you should tell them that the public doesn’t like the idea of bailing out Wall Street.”