Senator Ron Wyden says that the furor surrounding AIG’s bonus payments could have been avoided had the Obama White House and members of Congress simply backed legislation that he and Sen. Olympia Snowe introduced more than a month ago.
In an interview with the Huffington Post, the Oregon Democrat noted that during the crafting of the stimulus package, he and his Republican colleague from Maine introduced a provision that would have forced bailout recipients to cap their bonuses at $100,000. Any amount paid above that would have been taxed at 35 percent. The language made it through the Senate, but during conference committee with the House, it was inexplicably removed.
“The reality is, had that legislation been passed it would have been a very strong disincentive to anybody paying out bonuses in the future,” said Wyden. “Earlier, the President had denounced those bonuses that came at the end of the year. And when Senator Snowe and I said it is not enough for those in elected office to say it was wrong, that they have got to have a plan to have them pay it back, we were able to get legislation through the United States Senate. Not a single United States Senator was willing in broad daylight to stand up and oppose our bipartisan amendment… but it died in conference.”
Looking back, Wyden still laments the missed opportunity, saying that it remains unclear who got the language stripped — “it didn’t die by osmosis…”
“I will say that I talked to most of the key members of the Obama team and I was not able to convince them of the value of the amendment that I authored with Senator Snowe,” he recalled. “I think it is unfortunate. I think it was an opportunity to send a careful, well-targeted message, which would have communicated how strongly the administration felt about blocking these excessive bonuses. I wasn’t able to convince them.”
So, any proof in print, yet – who removed the amendment?
#56, Lyin’ Mike,
by your logic, Congress can just vote to give Iraq House seats,
And by what twist are you suggesting I came up with that idea? Again, you wish to deny the American citizens who live in Washington DC the right to vote for a representative?
What gives the citizens of California, Alabama, or Nevada to right to vote? They weren’t even thought of when the Constitution was written? Are you trying to suggest the Constitution is a “Living Document” instead of one that can only be read as the framers wrote it?
*
The article you linked to is stupid and truncated. It only says they were told they need to improve.
Eff, I did it again. Instead of closing the tag in #61, I opened another blockquote. The quote is the first blockquote, my comment is what appears as the second blockquote.
#57, Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath, Retired Mall Rent-A-Cop, Pretend Constitutional Scholar, Fake California Labor Law Expert, Pseudo Military Historian, Phony Climate Scientist, and Real Leading Troll Extraordinare,
You have to be 18 years old to vote in this country and 25 to be elected to the house. That rules you out.
#58, bob,
Whaddaya say, Mr. F?
What do I say? Is that your name or what you do when your head is in your boyfriends lap?
Again, you wish to deny the American citizens who live in Washington DC the right to vote for a representative?
What gives the citizens of California, Alabama, or Nevada to right to vote? They weren’t even thought of when the Constitution was written? Are you trying to suggest the Constitution is not [sic] a “Living Document” instead of one that can only be read as the framers wrote it?
I suppose we could all just wipe our ass with the Constitution and ignore the parts we don’t like as just a “God damned piece of paper.”
The Constitution is pretty clear on who can vote/hold the office for Representatives and who can’t.
Now, if you want to make Washington, D.C. a state, then they can have the same headaches the rest of us get.
#65
Wasn’t there a proposed at one point about making DC a State along with Puerto Rico so that there would be an even number of additions? Imagine the fun comedians would have with that: “well, we’re playing with a full deck now, and a couple of jokers!” :->
#66
“Wasn’t there a proposed…”
A proposal even…