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?
“Where in the Constitution does it state that Washington DC is not entitled to have a voting member?”
For those who are Constitutionally challenged…
“Section 2
1: The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States”
#31, I believe there is a law somewhere in which the Commerce Clause voided that.
#32 ROFLMAO!
#31, 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,
That is how effen stoopid you are. I didn’t ask who IS entitled to have a representative in Congress, I asked “Where in the Constitution does it state Washington DC is NOT entitled to have a voting member.
But then reading comprehension from an “expert” is usually better than this. You’re slipping idiot.
People need to stop calling them bonuses they are basically part of the person salary. I think the average American gets the word bonus mixed up with the word commission.
# 34 Mr. Fusion said, “I didn’t ask who IS entitled to have a representative in Congress, I asked “Where in the Constitution does it state Washington DC is NOT entitled to have a voting member. ”
You’re just too funny.
“Not a single United States Senator was willing in broad daylight to stand up and oppose our bipartisan amendment…”
BECAUSE ALL POLITICIANS GET “INCENTIVES” FROM CORPORATIONS AND THEY DON’T BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS THEM UNLESS THEY HAVE TO.
#37, Remove the incentive. Remove the money.
Dodd admitted today to CNN that HE modified the amendment to exempt 2008 bonuses at the request of the White House.
Yesterday he told CNN he didn’t know who did it.
He lied.
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/03/18/dodd-you-know-now-i-remember-adding-that-bonus-language/
Was that a rainbow I just saw crumble?
# 38 LibertyLover said, “#37, Remove the incentive. Remove the money.”
Revert to the original way Senators were chosen. Bye, bye to campaign contributions AND unfunded mandates from the Fed to the States…
# 39 RSweeney said, “He lied.”
He and the rest of the NeoLib scum. They ought to be imprisoned.
30,
contract is broken when the corp has NO MONEY TO GIVE…
Truth in our gov, is getting very scarce..
what a pathetic joke…
the only reason they’re all crying “outrage”
is because they got caught making sure AIG campaign donations were payed off via legislation. that’s it.
-look at Dodd, first he didn’t know anything, then he might of, then he did, -now he thinks
“the republicans made me do it” is a good excuse for allowing it in?? -where is your spine? -what a panzi.
“Dodd: Blame Treasury for AIG loophole”
http://swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/03/dodd_blame_treasury_for_aig_lo.html
ok smart ass, if they did,
start naming names then..
what is he? 8 years old? “barny barny, the
repubicans made me dooooit..waaaaa”
-just affirms that he, his party and the repubs are the spineless lying crap we’ve
always known them to be..
-sad part is almost the whole planet
plays along, -half is lying and the other
half are idiots for believing them.
ban all the bonuses you want..it means
NOTHING. it’s just another touchy-feel good empty ploy in a long line of bull to make you
think they give a F..
they are only addressing a symptom and not the *CAUSE* of AIG’s failure. just like every other
“outrage” of theirs, it’s a hollow gesture.
this administration is no better than bush.
all we get is more misdirection to keep the mass lemmings from ever realizing the ones screaming “outrage are in fact, the complicitous guilty parties.
i say Caveat friggin Emptor on the part of Congress.
let AIG keep the bonuses and make dodd, frank, obama -the whole lot of’em pay out of their own pocket for failing the people (yet again) in writing incompetent legislation and fostering kickbacks.
pass a loophole-proof law that finds all three houses liable out of personal pocket (not deductible) for any losses of government money due to vague, lax or steering language in the laws they write. they do it twice, 10yrs
in jail.
-see if that straightens them up.
otherwise, this whole bonus thing is nothing but an empty feel-good witch hunt.
-they would have made the rule retroactive
in the first place if they were actually serious about it. nobody sees this?
how many times do people need to be taken before they understand the entire system is
compromised and answers only to itself and people outside the government?
AIG is starting to look more and more like
a money laundering/kickback scheme everyday.
-it’s no wonder everyone laughs at us..
-s
just to squelch any comments from the peanut
gallery.. (from the same link above)
–snip–
“Every Republican on the conference committee was left out of the negotiations and consultations entirely,” Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, a member of that negotiating committee, said Wednesday. “The indisputable fact is that the bill the president signed which protected the AIG bonuses and others was written behind closed doors by Democratic leaders of the House and Senate”
–snip–
cronyism at it’s worst.
that about sums up our political system.
you people still believe they give a crap
about us?
-s
#34, Fusion-o-roni
“I didn’t ask who IS entitled to have a representative in Congress, I asked “Where in the Constitution does it state Washington DC is NOT entitled to have a voting member.”
You really are a fucking idiot.
If you purchased a $30,000 car and realized only AFTER you took delivery that an option you mistakenly acquired—a red gear shift knob that cost you an extra $30—was included and didn’t really move you, how bent completely out of shape would you become?
WASTING 1/1000th of the money involved? Would it set your knickers on fire? Would it consume your sense of outrage? Would it just flat out RUIN your entire sense of all that is moral, right and holy?
That’s the money involved here. 1/1000th of the AIG bailout.
Congress morally indignant over a whopping buck in a thousand? BWAAAA HA HA HA HAAAA!
#36, 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’re just too funny.
And you still can’t answer the question.
Now, Dodd and the other idiots are talking about passing a Bill of Attainder. Have NONE of them read the Constitution or, are they all of the same mental capacity as Fusion?
#34, #48
There is nothing in the Constitution that explicitly says my neighbor’s puppy does not get a representative along with Bogata, Puerto Rico, and the 7-11 down the street.
The operative word in the first sentence of Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution is *States*.
Amendment 23:
1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled IF it were a State, …
Does that spell it out for you? Is that sufficiently clear for you to understand why DC does not have representatives in the House and Senate?
Listening to the initial part of the AIG hearings yesterday, one Republican representative said (do not remember who it was) it well. He basically said that this sort fiasco is exactly why the government should not be involved in bailouts. Had AIG be allowed to go into bankruptcy, none of these bonuses would have been paid and the American taxpayers would not be out billions of dollars to save a company that should have failed. Going after the bonuses makes for good press for Joe six pack but does nothing to address the true problem of bleeding money to save a failed company.
#46, SL,
You really are a fucking idiot.
I notice you can only attack the questioner and not answer the question. Why am I not surprised?
Art. I, Sec. 2, Cl. 1 is inclusive, not exclusive. If it were exclusive then under Cl. 3, most of the country would not be represented in Congress.
Starting with Vermont, every State added to the Union has been by Legislative Authority, the same authority that would allow Washington DC to have a voting member.
So get a brain moran.
#39, RSweeny,
From your link it appears Dodd screwed this on.
When he kept saying that an amendment that passed unanimously in the Senate would sink the whole package if it remained sounds pretty disingenuous to me.
Good to see Dodd get caught in his BS.
# 52 Mr. Fusion said, “the same authority that would allow Washington DC to have a voting member.”
Yep, IF DC was made a State.
ROFL! You should go on a stand up tour…
by your logic, Congress can just vote to give Iraq House seats, without making it a state. And some House seats for Australia, England, Mexico, Canada, and those souls on the International Space Shuttle.
Plus, according to the article I linked, the bank was reviewed under the CRA, and were deemed insufficient, which you would know if you could understand what you read.
#56 – Hey! I want my own seat.
#56 Me too! Where do we sign up?
I would LOVE to get a seat in congress. I wonder who I would elect?
I know! Mr. Fusion!
He’s such a fucking idiot he would fit right in to Congress.
Whaddaya say, Mr. F?
* All of these payments, as to AIG’s troubled financial products division, are retention bonuses, not performance bonuses.
* The money is not going to anyone responsible for the implosion of AIG–those people, who were in the credit default swap area, are gone.
* These retention bonuses were promised to AIG employees who are responsible for winding down the company’s financial products division. At the beginning, this division had a potential exposure of $2.7 trillion. Winding down AIG’s book of business in this area was a dead-end job, and there was a great likelihood that the people responsible for the work, who knew the most about the products involved, would take jobs elsewhere.
* In late 2007 or early 2008, AIG made a deal with these employees: if they would stay at AIG until specified conditions were met, i.e., either certain business was wound down or a given period of time had elapsed, they would receive a specified retention bonus.
* As to all of the employees involved, they satisfied the terms of the bonus by wrapping up a portfolio for which they were responsible and/or staying on the job until now. As a result of the efforts of this group, AIG’s financial products exposure is down from $2.7 trillion to $1.6 trillion.
I notice you can only attack the questioner and not answer the question. Why am I not surprised?
Since throwing insults at people with whom you disagree is the preference of you, and a couple others here, I’m not sure why you should be surprised.
“The House of Representatives shall be composed Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States”
“No Person shall be a Representative who shall not … … be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.”
It is pretty clear where the members of that body are to be sourced from.