We can pretend it didn’t all come down to 2008 being a heavy election year. But our cynical nature suspects that Monday’s failure of the $700 billion bailout of the nation’s largest lenders was at least in part for just that reason.

Upon the news, stocks took a dive comparable to that of the most elegant — if deadly — of swans, down 778 points, the most ever for a single day. On Tuesday, the market rose somewhat (DJIA up $485.21 at closing) based on the prospect of continued talks. But like a carnival ride, the up and down may make for queasiness before it is time to go home.

Don’t think you are immune because you don’t own any stock. If you have a 401k, you own stock. And regardless of personal ownership or the lack thereof, this is one time that “trickle-down” economics is bound to work.

Just not in a good way.

Our cynical view of motivation further begs the question: Does an elected official most effectively vote by the conscience of his or her constituents or based upon his or her own?

Many of those who voted “no” are up for reelection this year. And several admitted to the AP that fact played a part in their votes. Most characterized it as “the will of the people,” yet one or two, including Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., were honest to a fault. He said to reporters, “Most of us say, ‘I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it, not me,’” speaking for colleagues who “have tougher reelection fights” than his own.

The reason many credited as why they voted down what the Bush administration, leaders in Congress and financial experts have termed the only alternative to a fast failing economy was compensation packages for executives of the companies that will benefit from the bailout. It has been characterizing it as yet one more example of hitting taxpayers unfairly.

But even a scaled-down “reward for incompetence” could not find enough support.

So the next question is: What now?

On Tuesday morning, Bush reiterated that this is “a critical moment” in the economy, and added that the single-day record loss on Monday was considerably more than the cost of the bailout, $1 trillion as opposed to $700 billion. “Our country is not facing a choice between action and the smooth functioning of the free market,” Bush said. “We are facing a choice between action and the real prospect of financial hardship” across the board. “Our economy is depending on decisive action from the government. … This is what elected leaders owe the American people.”

We haven’t found ourselves agreeing with the president in recent days, but in this case, he is right. Those that represent us are charged with the responsibility to draw upon their knowledge, inside knowledge sometimes that the rest of us do not have, to do the right thing, not the politically expedient thing, and not always what the folks back home say they want them to do.

Upon first reflection, it was simple to decry the bailout because “the taxpayers were (as always) picking up the tab.” But the taxpayers will pick up the tab regardless, if not in increased taxes, then in decreased financial prospects and security.

The alternative to a bailout — doing nothing — may provoke an even worse impact.

One can only hope our lawmakers realize that before it is too late.