Here is a link that tries to portray the other side of the issue. Figure it might help to hear both sides of the issue before choosing one side.
Wait, when the link says 'elected officials' is it talking about business or congress?
It appears to be pertaining to business, but weren't Republicans decrying the use of government to strong-arm its way into the lands of big business, claiming that a government official could not run things as well as a private company owner?
Or is this somehow better because the public doesn't have to pay taxes to 'bail out' these companies? (An almost moot point in my opinion) If anything, this gives the state government more power over companies than I have seen the federal government implement.
Granted certain aspects are the same, (such as the ability to purge CEO rooms, I think. Couldn't really find sources for it so if someone could correct me, it would be appreciated) but at least with federal control, the companies had a way out. With this system it just seems like government will control the company until such time as they deem appropriate to hand control back over to said company.