A roundup of the dark tidings from BloggingStocks and elsewhere on the Web:

• CDS holders to push GM into bankruptcy despite salvage efforts? (Financial Times)
• Recession creates first April budget deficit since 1983 (BloggingStocks)
• Biofuels fall off a cliff, hard to find opportunity (Earth2Web)
• Georgia Gulf near bankruptcy (Zack's)
• More home owners unable to sell houses opt to rent them out (BloggingStocks)

Following's Wednesday's 244-188 House vote -- one in which, despite President Obama's efforts to cultivate Republican ideas, every House Republican voted against it -- the focus on the stimulus package shifts to the Senate, where plan revisions are likely.

Assuming Senate passage, any differences between the two versions would have to be resolved in a conference committee.

Republicans are complaining that the bill has too many traditional Democratic-constituency-based programs and 'pork,' while some Democrats are concerned the bill does not contain enough spending - - in particular infrastructure spending, to create jobs the U.S. economy needs. The U.S. economy lost more than 2.6 million jobs in 2008 -- including 1 million in the past two months -- and the nation's unemployment rate has soared to 7.2%.

The Senate is expected today to vote on the revised, second $350 billion TARP allotment, while the House Speaker also indicated she expects the U.S. Congress to approve the measure.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, indicated to ABCNews that Congress would approve President-elect Barack Obama's request for another $350 billion in bailout / rescue funds because this time it will be spent by "a president who will enforce the law." The House vote is expected to be close, however.

To block Obama's request, both the House and Senate must vote to withhold the money, assuming each chamber has the two-thirds vote to override a potential Obama veto.

On Wednesday, Senate Republicans won assurances from Obama administration officials that the administration would use the money for financial institutions, not for aid to auto manufacturers and other industries, Bloomberg News reported. Republicans have criticized the Bush administration's decision to lend $13.4 billion to assist the recovery of General Motors (NYSE: GM) and Chrysler.

Is tracking TARP money feasible?

Both Senate and House lawmakers have called on greater accountability and transparency to 'verify and track' where the money is going, but economist David H. Wang said that isn't feasible.

Conde Nast's magazine empire is storied, full of names that lead their respective empires. Vogue is not only the leading women's fashion title in the world, but also the inspiration for many a book, movie, and TV show. Gourmet is the formidable leader in food magazines; Travel + Leisure is the first/only name in travel; and The New Yorker is a category in and of itself (far exceeding the geographical borders set by its name). House & Garden is what many consider the premier "shelter" magazine, a title that defined the category for a half-century before the category was even named.

But today, Conde Nast announced in a brief missive that the magazine, along with its companion web site, would both be shuttered after the December 2007 issue, a sudden and final blow to a title whose audience, perhaps, had aged out of the market for aspirational goods like Wolf ranges and Vespas (the magazine's readership of nearly six million has a median age of 51, and average income of $124,582). Could the magazine's advertisers have been affected by the sub-prime meltdown? Without a home equity line of credit, you can't afford $1,700 tubular fireplaces, I expect, or anything to be found in Gwyneth Paltrow's abode.

The website still brightly reports that, if you subscribe today, you're guaranteed the Gwyneth Paltrow issue -- her Hamptons home is profiled, along with the Harlem penthouse of Starbucks Corp. (NASDAQ: SBUX) darling Marcus Samuelsson. The sense of doom hasn't yet struck Gwyneth's happy purpleness.

Also from Luxist: Are shelter magazines in trouble?

Last week the House voted a whopping 411-3 to approve HR 1773, the Safe American Roads Act of 2007, which would set strict criteria and additional oversight of the DOT's Mexican pilot program announced in February. The vote attempts to slow the Department of Transportation's proposed pilot plan to a crawl until the DOT inspector general can certify in advance its department has met all 22 conditions Congress set back in 2001, before the U.S. southern border would be opened. The measure would require the DOT to publish detailed plans for its program, including the results of its safety audits of Mexican carriers, as well as giving U.S. truckers access to Mexico when the border opened.

If the U.S. Department of Transportation finds Mexican trucking companies violate U.S. safety regulations, the proposed pilot program would be terminated immediately.

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (Republican, W.Va), a House Transportation Committee member, said "There are serious flaws in the department's pilot program, and this legislation addresses them." One of the new law's provisions, which Capito backs, is the requirement that Mexican truck drivers speak English proficiently. Rep. Capito endorsed the law giving Mexican truckers access to U.S. roads only if they follow U.S. safety rules.

Before the vote, the DOT said it was almost ready to allow trucks from Mexico into the U.S., but the House, and other special interest groups, obviously disagree. Ken Hall, a Teamsters International Vice President, said Mexico has lax or nonexistent trucking laws. Last year, [the Teamsters] hired an independent investigator who found Mexican drivers had bad equipment and routinely used drugs." Jacqueline Gillan, vice president of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, said "The vote was a bipartisan check on a runaway demonstration project that lacked any public input and violated current law."

The DOT now says it could be as late as 2008 before Congress's new criteria are met.

A 25% price decline in home prices is still required to revert back to the mean, according to Tom McManus, chief investment strategist at B of A. McManus said in a conference call yesterday that when compared to rents and household income, a considerable adjustment in home prices is still required, even after the recent price weakness.

If that drop were to occur quickly, it could be very disruptive to the overall economy, but the more likely scenario is for the adjustment between home prices and their affordability to occur over a five-year period.

What was also scary was the relationship between housing prices and investors' buying momentum. Investors sentiment appears to be super high for these stocks despite the poor performance for this group. This compares with energy where the group has performed well, but investor sentiment remains very low. A bullish sign for energy, not for housing.

McManus's point: no need to bottom fish in housing yet.