The bailout package being drafted in Washington will put the screws to ordinary Americans.

The only possible justification for approval is that the damage would be even worse without it.

We’re buying that rationale, even while a voice on our shoulder suggests, “Let’s just pull up a chair and watch the fireworks. Let the geniuses who created this mess pay the price.”

Prudence suggests we should listen to the voice on the other shoulder, which says, “They’re gonna set those fireworks off too close to our tent.”

The only question at this point is how much pain will be inflicted on average taxpayers when the federal government starts turning the bailout screws.

The Journal Star editorial board hopes that the bailout package contains the following elements in the interest of limiting the number of ways that taxpayers could be used and abused when the bailout commences.

* Congress should retain strong oversight, preferably by a panel of experts appointed by Congress. The Bush administration’s original plan gave too many sweeping powers to the secretary of the Treasury. Business writer Steven Pearlstein opined, “There will be more oversight on this thing than a birthday party for 3-year-olds.” That sounds about right.

* Taxpayers are owed transparency and accountability on what is being done in the name of saving the financial system. Taxpayers ought to know how much the government is paying for the securities it’s buying from troubled lenders and the securities’ original value. And, as we suggested in an earlier editorial, the bailout should be structured in a way that allows taxpayers to recoup their investment if possible.

* Executive pay should be capped for firms that accept government help. It would be unconscionable for the bailout – which will cost about $2,000 for every American — to turn into a financial windfall for the same people who created the mess in the first place.

* If the bailout includes help for homeowners facing foreclosure, limits should be put in place. The bailout should not reward borrowers who took on debt they obviously could not afford — such as balloon payment mortgages — with the idea of “flipping” the property with a quick sale after it appreciated.

Even with those provisions there’s little doubt that smart and unscrupulous individuals will find some way to turn this bailout to personal advantage. As H.L. Mencken once said, “The cynics are right nine times out of ten.” Realistically, the best we can hope for is to keep abuse and profiteering to a minimum during the bailout.

If there was any realistic alternative to a massive bailout, we’d take it. Unfortunately, we’re convinced we have no other choice. The predicament is infuriating.