The new bank bailout proposed by the Obama administration seeks to free up lending and help address any doubts about our worsening credit market. Unfortunately, the latest plan has raised as many questions as it answers. The idea behind the Troubled Assets Relief Program sounds great. The government, along with private investors, would buy toxic "legacy" assets. Investors would help banks get these assets off their books and manage them as mortgage-backed securities. Citigroup ( C), Wells Fargo ( WFC) and Bank of America ( BAC) have already benefited from bank bailout aid. Goldman Sachs ( GS) and Morgan Stanley ( MS) changed their corporate statuses just so they could apply. In theory, the government's plan would encourage lending and put the banks back on track. In actuality, taxpayers are taking on almost all the risk. The FDIC would sell the banks' assets to investors and the Treasury would match the amount investors spend. With the FDIC guaranteeing the investment and the Treasury chipping in, investors have little on the line. They stand to reap huge returns if mortgage pools gain value. However, if a pool remains a dud, investors will have only lost their initial down payment. The taxpayer absorbs the rest of the loss. Who are these private investors? They will likely be hedge funds. Many of them are run by the same people who helped create the crisis. So Wall Street would benefit while pinning the risk on average Americans. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner estimated the government would buy $500 billion in troubled assets, but that figure could balloon to $1 trillion. That would cover a fraction of the estimated $5 trillion in bad assets at banks. Even if this idea succeeds, the government will have only put a band aid on the problem. It would become another example of how pouring money on a problem doesn't always make it go away.