Financial services lobbyists working in ‘hyperdrive’ to soften tax on bailed-out bonuses.
Financial services lobbyists working in ‘hyperdrive’ to soften tax on bailed-out bonuses.
Yesterday, Sens. Max Baucus (D-MT) and Charles Grassley (R-IA) announced a plan to impose a hefty tax on any excessive bonuses being paid to executives of companies that received federal bailout money. But lobbyists for the financial services industry have “moved into hyperdrive” to fight the efforts to recoup the excessive bonuses:
The banks’ main goal is to narrow the breadth of the legislation as much as possible, and they are targeting key players on the House Financial Services Committee and Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.
“All of the TARP recipients are lobbying heavily on the various proposals that have been put in so that they don’t do damage,” said one outside consultant for several Troubled Assets Relief Program recipients.
Financial services trade groups have been working the issue as well, including the Financial Services Roundtable, which opposes the broad bonus legislation.
Though the lobbyists “don’t expect to thwart the legislation entirely,” they do hope to soften them. As Roll Call notes, lobbyists working for bailed-out banks “have a vested interest in seeing the legislation stopped” because most of them “earned well over the $50,000 bonus threshold in the Senate legislation.” Yesterday, a Gallup poll found that 76 percent of Americans want the government to take action to block or recover the bonuses being paid by AIG.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Question: Who is paying these lobbyists? Because if there is money being paid to lobbyists by bailed out banks and financial corporations…
PEACE
March 19th, 2009 at 10:34 amI’m so old, I remember when the government would freeze bank accounts because of criminal action.
Actually, that’s not perfectly pertinent, but it does remind me of the NPR report on “All Things Considered” last week about the guy trying to NOT go bankrupt, whose landlord got a judge to freeze his bank account.
Why can’t they do the same thing? Why can’t Justice go to a judge and claim AIG, et al, are SQUANDERING the money?
Grrr. Then again, this bonus rage is all a distraction. Where’s the change, Barack Obama? You’d better get on this toot sweet, and I’m not talking about making an angry speech.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:37 amThis was so predictable. No one seriously thinks they weren’t going to push back, did they? The rich are not giving up their money and status if they don’t have to! We are dirt under their feet. I say, fight them. They are so greedy, and care nothing about the rest of America, just their own comfortable lives. Don’t tell me about how hard they work, the rest of us work hard as well. Enough is enough!
March 19th, 2009 at 10:41 amHere’s a simple request to Congress. Put the people first.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:43 amThe push back must be working. Just heard on MSNBC that the Republicans are going to vote NO (no surprise there) on a bill to tax bonuses. Good grief, the Republicans are looking ridiculous, yesterday screaming about bonuses today voting NO on a bill to limit the amount of bonuses.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:44 amWikipedia:
Lobbying is the practice of influencing decisions made by government. It includes all attempts to influence legislators and officials, whether by other legislators, constituents or organized groups.[1][2] A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby.
Aptly named due to initially cornering lawmakers in lobbies as they left meetings. Now it’s become a full fledged industry, intent on arm twisting legislators to vote for favorable outcomes to money interests.
Are lobbyists good for our Country?
If we’re tightening up the fiscal fiasco, shouldn’t we be starting here? This shit is what got us into this mess in the first place.
Remember, when it comes to Whoreporations, no profit is enough profit!
March 19th, 2009 at 10:45 amThe bill is being brought up in the house today. The repugs (the Party of NO) say they are all voting against the bill. For all the phony outrage these clowns spouted yesterday, all of a sudden they are OK with the crooks getting there bonuses. Instead they are going to blame the White House and Democrats for allowing the bonuses to go threw.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:46 amThere should be two choices for these illegal bonuses: give the money back, or pay a tax at 100%. It is time to stop the ripoffs of Americans. Unemployed people have paid taxes that go toward rewarding the obvious criminal activities that are being rewarded.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:47 amCorporafornication continues. It’s not execssive compensation, it’s a Skinnerian distorting pay system.
AIG’s bonus system reveals all that is bad with incentive comp otherwise known as pay for performance.
One, it causes riskier behavior as CEO’s swing for the fences. America’s shadow banking system brought us the dangerous financial products. Greed, leverage, and poor quality are all related to P4P, as leaders optimize their pay and suboptimize the company (including customers).
P4P will do the same for education and health care.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:48 amany monies spent on LOBBYING by a financial institution that received taxpayer funds should also be RETURNED TO THE TAXPAYERS.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:49 amI just don’t get it – when millions of Americans are out of work, depleted their savings, dipping into dwindling IRA and 401K accounts, and cutting back on all discretionary spending, the wealthy and connected Americans want their own lavish lifestyles to continue.
I don’t understand their attitude – I don’t understand how they feel they are justified – I don’t understand how their consciences let them sleep at night. I am not just speaking rhetorically — I really don’t understand their level of unconcern for fellow Americans that allows them to feel OK with taking so much personal reward, as they brought their companies and the nation to its knees.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:51 am#5 – acquarius2 —
March 19th, 2009 at 10:53 amWTF? Of course it is expected from repugs – but after their screeching yesterday?! My head is spinning.
Word is that in the Senate most repugs and a handfull of blue dog Democrats will not vote for any retro active tax on any bonuses. The Senate will need a 2/3 vote, and they are not even close.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:54 amI say that ALL lobbyists and lobbying firms should be OUTLAWED.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:54 amThey do NOT represent the people but the corporations and there for are illegal.
The Constitution states that the American people can have someone lobby for them BUT it saying nothing about using lobbyists to push corporate issues.
This is where the rubber hits the road. There’s a HUGE SPOLIGHT now on these lobbyists’ manipulative malfeasance.
The time for change is NOW. Congress has to step up to the plate and STOP THE LOBBYISTS.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:58 amDepleting IRA accounts-President Obama promised a tax break for people trying to save their homes. It didn’t happen, but private equity underwriters got a $25 billion tax break for buying back affiliate debt.
Thank Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) for introducing the corporafornication amendment. He’s reforming healthcare, with a history of taking big for-profit health care donations from firms with no facilities in his state. What surprises does he have in store? Hold onto your wallet.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:59 amCongress can’t and won’t stop lobbyists. It’s their line to big corporate donor support.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:59 amTime to throw them all out or at least in jail.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:00 amIt would seem that our country is not our own.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:01 amBut, But But!! The contracts!
March 19th, 2009 at 11:02 amMarie Says: I don’t understand their attitude – I don’t understand how they feel they are justified – I don’t understand how their consciences let them sleep at night.
Richard Dawkins suggests that there is a type of ‘kin’ gene that causes mammals to feel a level of responsibility for those who share their DNA. This would be a positive evolutionary tool from the stand point of DNA that seeks, albeit unconsiously, to diseminate itself as widekly as possible.
Dawkins also suggests that because humans have a conscious will over their actions that may supercede genetic whims, we ultimately decide who is our ‘kin’.
I think this can be applied to the difference between liberals and conservatives. Liberals have a wide definition of kin, while conservatives have a very narrow scope – usually them and their immediate family. As a result, I believe that they see all other folks as irrelevent, allowing them to not care about us, because we do not fit into tehir definition of ‘kin’.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:07 amThe layers of the Beast run deep.
Control and cash drive it’s insatiable appetite for more profit.
Lobbyists are it’s appetizers and consumers are it’s food source.
Are you tired of being eaten alive by the Beast?
If we eliminate lobbying, corporations will actually have to EARN a profit, not ‘bag it in a hallway’.
Tell your elected officials enough is a enough.
Legislation barring direct influence on bills is long overdue.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:08 amPlease herd all these parasites into a room and lock it.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:09 amThese people are sociopaths, they don’t have consciences. Or, they use their bag loads of money to load up on legal (and likely illegal) narcotics to soothe away the anxiety being a soulless scoundrel creates.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:12 amhey folks…its been a minute and see some recognizable names. hope all is well.
let me tell ya something the americans truly will not be satisfied until these criminals are lead down the green mile…dc is part of the octupus and probably holds some of the players that belong to the arm.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:13 amUnfortunately, I don’t think a bill to tax these people is going to fly, even if it makes it through the House and the Senate. It has to be unconstitutional to create a retroactive tax that targets only a select and specific individuals. The obvious error was not writing the legislation in the TARP for the bailouts from that program AND letting the Fed Reserve just give money away with absolutely no restrictions (and appropriate guidance from the legislature) to entities such as ING. But ING is still expected to received an additional $30 BILLION in funds. If I had anything to say (really) about this issue, I’d say the following should be done. 1) Those bonuses should be deducted from that next pot of money. 2) All expenses incurred by ING for lobbying, executive and client outings and all other related “promotional” costs should be deducted and 3) all the funds distributed by ING to foreign banks when their collateral was called should be deducted. After that, if there’s any of that $30 billion left, it can be distributed to them, but any further distributions either via the Fed OR the Treasury to ING or anyone else absolutely must have all the appropriate controls on them.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:17 am“As Roll Call notes, lobbyists working for bailed-out banks…”
____________________________________________________________
Um…WHY do bailed-out banks have lobbyists? Is having lobbyists some sort of God-given right or something — like water or oxygen? How much of the bail-out money is being paid for these lobbyists?
It’s news like this that makes me start to think that nationalizing these banks until they straighten up and fly right makes some sense.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:19 amThe push back must be working. Just heard on MSNBC that the Republicans are going to vote NO (no surprise there) on a bill to tax bonuses. Good grief, the Republicans are looking ridiculous, yesterday screaming about bonuses today voting NO on a bill to limit the amount of bonuses.
What’s even more confusing is that Eric Cantor has claimed that there were some Dems who voted no to the bill yesterday already? WTH is really going on in Congress…
March 19th, 2009 at 11:22 amPeople who have this worldview also tend to have very fluid rule systems that apply only when they are convenient. These people discard these rules when they no longer further their agendas.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:24 amunbelievable Says:
Dawkins also suggests that because humans have a conscious will over their actions that may supercede genetic whims, we ultimately decide who is our ‘kin’.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:07 am
___________
I prefer Kurt Vonnegut’s term for this – a granfalloon. Things like political parties, voluntary organizations, companies, and countries; whose people claim to have a shared identity or purpose, but whose mutual association is in fact meaningless.
If you wish to study a granfalloon, just remove the skin of a toy balloon.—Bokonon
March 19th, 2009 at 11:24 ammisshusseinmolly Says:
Um…WHY do bailed-out banks have lobbyists? Is having lobbyists some sort of God-given right or something — like water or oxygen? How much of the bail-out money is being paid for these lobbyists?
March 19th, 2009 at 11:19 am
__________
No, but it is a Constitution-given right. Everyone – even a bailed-out bank – has a First Amendment right to petition their government for redress of grievances.
Now, whether they should be paying professional lobbyists with bail-out money to do this petitioning for them is a different story. And I imagine it’s one that was settled in the fine print of the agreement forged between Geithner and Paulson and Summers and AIG.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:27 amlvdragonlady Says:
I say that ALL lobbyists and lobbying firms should be OUTLAWED.
They do NOT represent the people but the corporations and there for are illegal.
The Constitution states that the American people can have someone lobby for them BUT it saying nothing about using lobbyists to push corporate issues.
March 19th, 2009 at 10:54 am
_____________
Corporations are people, too. At least, according to the Supreme Court in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, 118 U.S. 394 (1886). Therefore, it is no more Constitutional to outlaw corporate lobbying than it is to outlaw any other effort to influence public officials.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:40 amThis is due for a change right about now.
March 19th, 2009 at 11:45 amConstitutional amendment defining personhood?
March 19th, 2009 at 11:55 amHell, I’d settle for actual enforcement of existing standards of culpability.
It should not be acceptable for those in charge of corporations performing illegal or unethical behavior to be free of appropriate responsibility.
March 19th, 2009 at 12:00 pmDru P. Says:
Constitutional amendment defining personhood?
March 19th, 2009 at 11:55 am
___________
It’ll never happen. Even if it were remotely politically viable to pass both houses of Congress and get ratified by the states, it would probably be illegal under international trade agreements.
I think a more productive approach would be to work within the system we already have to reduce corporate influence. Campaign finance reform would be a great place to start.
March 19th, 2009 at 12:02 pmAgreed.
March 19th, 2009 at 12:03 pmhussein toasterhead Says
March 19th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Now, whether they should be paying professional lobbyists with bail-out money to do this petitioning for them is a different story.
___________________________________________________________
Yes, yes — that was the part that was enraging me. I think my rant lacked focus.
March 19th, 2009 at 12:06 pmmisshusseinmolly Says:
Yes, yes — that was the part that was enraging me. I think my rant lacked focus.
March 19th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
_________
No, no – your rant was spot-on, as usual. And you also have a good point about nationalizing the banks – it’s a definite possibility.
Whenever the IMF is called in to help a developing country with a financial crisis like this one, one of the first conditions they place on aid is that the country nationalize its banking system to get it under control. I’d assume an IMF alumnus like Tim Geithner is well aware of this.
March 19th, 2009 at 12:17 pmIt’s in ThinkFast you…
March 19th, 2009 at 12:20 pmHere’s a news flash – workers work. professionals spend a large part of their day trying to figure out ways to make more money for themselves off the backs of . . . well, workers. once that fact is understood, everything else comes easy
March 19th, 2009 at 1:00 pmWTF! If these snakes can afford lobbyists, they should be forced to return all bailout money not just the bonuses. They are sick and can’t possibly be human.
March 19th, 2009 at 1:02 pmMethinks lobbyists should look into how we can tax the congress critters who received all sorts of money from AIG, FannieMae, FreddyMac, Bank America, Merrill Lynch, CitiGroup et al. Chris Dodd has some dirty, sticky fingers, for example. Probably there are many others who’ve received ‘gifts’ to look the other way, ignore laws, rewrite laws to suit their friends, etc.
March 19th, 2009 at 2:22 pmCorporations are people, except when it comes to crime. The Justice Department consistently accepts fines with no admission of wrongdoing in lieu of justice.
30% of executives cheated, most of it blatantly illegal under SEC rules, and few paid the legal piper. UBS, HCA, Tenet Health, etc.
Perp walks are few and far between for corporate criminals.
March 19th, 2009 at 2:40 pmIn case anyone hasn’t heard, the legislators in our country have received from the financial lobbyists, more than 50 billion dollars over the last 10 years. That came from Independent Senator Birney Sanders this morning on the Thomm Hartman show on Air America.
This is one reason why nothing is ever seriously considered regarding the financial overhaul in America. Now they are still slithering around the corpse in Congress. Still trying to stop any meaningful reform.
Any reform of anything, will only come with campaign finance reform. Until that is done, our legislators will work for their own re-election and their own enrichment. They are owned. Not by us, but by the thousands of lobbyists that clog the halls where the business of the people is NOT GETTING DONE.
March 19th, 2009 at 4:03 pmThe bribesters are out in force. Let’s start arresting them. The crime of fraud will continue as long as the criminals, the bribesters run free.
March 19th, 2009 at 8:44 pm