Acknowledging that maybe he isn’t always “doing God’s work,” Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein yesterday took some responsibility for his company’s role in the economic crisis. “We participated in things that were clearly wrong and have reason to regret,” he said. “We apologize.”

And to show us that they really mean it, Goldman is devoting $500 million over the next five years to scholarships for business education and loans to small businesses:

Goldman Sachs said late Tuesday that it would provide $500 million to support small businesses, hours after its CEO Lloyd Blankfein apologized for the group’s role in the global financial crisis…The group said it will provide $100 million a year over the next five years, including a total of $200 million to provide scholarships for business and management educations and $300 million in the form of “loans and philanthropic support” to increase access to capital for small businesses.

Not that I want to in any way discourage big businesses from undertaking such efforts, but, really? As Daniel Indiviglio wrote, “maybe I’m crazy, but I don’t think this initiative, though a pleasant effort, will have many angry Americans putting down their pitchforks currently pointed at Goldman. If Goldman really wants to impress anyone, they’re going to have to do a little better than this.”

For some perspective, Goldman has already set aside $17 billion for bonuses this year, which could climb to $23 billion by year’s end. So the five-year program amounts to 2 percent of this year’s bonus pool. The Financial Times pointed out that “the $100 million annual cost is the equivalent of one good trading day” and that Goldman “had 36 days in the third quarter where it made more than $100 million.” And loans account for part of the $500 million, which presumably have to be paid back, while Goldman will get a write-off for any charitable giving, thus reducing their tax exposure.

And its not just Goldman that’s having a lot of good trading days recently. According to a report from the New York City Comptroller, “Wall Street profits in 2009 are on track to exceed the record set three years ago, at the height of the credit bubble”:

The report noted that the four largest investment firms in Manhattan — Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and the investment banking arm of JPMorgan Chase — earned $22.5 billion in the first nine months…Net revenue at the four firms, which excludes interest expenses, reached a high of $57.7 billion in the second quarter.

Of course, instead of $500 million, Goldman could up its small business program to, say, $23 billion (or whatever the entirety of its bonus pool turns out to be). After all, that money was earned, in large part, by Goldman’s access to cheap money from the Federal Reserve.

Barring that development, Democrats in Congress are reportedly looking quite seriously at a financial transactions tax, which is an excellent idea, unless we want to count on further charity from Blankfein and co. to boost the country towards economic recovery

This post was co-written by Andrew Jakabovics, Associate Director for for Housing and Economics at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, and Pat Garofalo.

Seemingly deliberate noncompliance with the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) may explain why Bank of America has consistently lagged behind the other large servicers in the share of delinquent loans that have been modified under the program. Ever since the Treasury Department began releasing data on the performance of servicers participating in HAMP, Bank of America has always been dead last of the four large servicers.

BofA has been participating in HAMP since its inception in mid-April. As of the end of October, it had active trial modifications on 14 percent of its estimated 991,000 eligible mortgages. This rate is less than half that of Wells Fargo (29 percent), which is third among the big servicers. Even US Bank, which has a much smaller portfolio but only signed up for the program on September 9, has been able to get 15 percent of its borrowers into trial modifications.

The reported percentage of modifications for each servicer is calculated based on the number of active modifications divided by the number of loans that are at least 60 days late and otherwise meet eligibility criteria. But as this recent letter demonstrates (which is available here, courtesy of the Coalition for Mortgage Industry Solutions), BofA is actively soliciting borrowers to participate in its own private mortgage modification program, without first verifying whether or not the borrower is eligible for HAMP. (In the full document, the borrower’s personal information has been blacked out.)

The letter clearly indicates that BofA has no idea whether or not the borrower qualifies for HAMP, yet they are still offering an alternative program. This diversion is an apparent violation of the contract signed with Treasury. The Servicer Participation Agreement stipulates:

Servicer shall perform the Services for all mortgage loans it services, whether it services such mortgage loans for its own account or for the account of another party, including any holders of mortgage-backed securities (each such other party, an “Investor”).

The “Services” referred to in this section are elsewhere in the contract defined as “All services required to be performed by a participating servicer…including, but not limited to, obligations relating to the modification of first lien mortgage loans and the provision of loan modification and foreclosure prevention services relating thereto.”

The program guidelines released in March by Treasury quite plainly state that “participating servicers are required to consider all eligible loans under the program guidelines unless prohibited by the rules of the applicable PSA and/or other investor servicing agreements. Participating servicers are required to use reasonable efforts to remove any prohibitions and obtain waivers or approvals from all necessary parties.”

In case there remains any ambiguity as to whether a servicer can pull borrowers out of the pool to offer them a non-HAMP-compliant modification before determining their status under HAMP, Treasury official Herbert Allison recently testified, “under HAMP’s loan modification guidelines, mortgage servicers are prevented from ‘cherry-picking’ which loans to modify in a manner that might deny assistance to borrowers at greatest risk of foreclosure.”

So BofA can’t simply suggest an alternative program to this homeowner without determining eligibility for HAMP, and by doing so, it is potentially lowering the number of successful HAMP modifications it completes. Given the size of BofA’s portfolio, its compliance with program rules — particularly as it pertains to getting eligible borrowers into the program — directly impacts the public’s perception of the success of HAMP. If BofA were performing as well as CitiMortgage, Treasury would have reported an additional quarter million mortgages in its HAMP totals.

Diverting eligible borrowers from HAMP threatens to undermine support for the program. Treasury should not allow any contractual breaches to continue.

The resistance to reforming our nation’s healthcare system has been fueled by entrenched corporate interests. Their deep pockets are funneling money into generating attack ads, funding lawmakers’ campaigns, and hiring lobbyists. These corporate interests are also funding various front groups to make up their own facts and scare the public.

Among the latest corporate front groups orchestrating a campaign of misinformation against health reform, ThinkProgress has learned, is an outfit called the “Center for Medicine in the Public Interest” (CMPI). CMPI was originally a project of the Pacific Research Institute, an older corporate front established in conjunction with Philip Morris to fabricate academic support for the tobacco industry. Some of CMPI’s recent attacks on health reform have included:

– CMPI produced a series of “US Policymaker” interviews about health reform featuring exclusively Republican lawmakers — such as Reps. Louie Gohmert (TX), Bob Inglis (SC), Jack Kingston (SC), Tom Price (GA), Joe Wilson (SC), Michele Bachmann (MN), Paul Ryan (WI); Sens. Jim DeMint (SC), Jim Bunning (KY), David Vitter (LA) — attacking health reform. CMPI also produced a series of videos mocking health reform and the public option.

– CMPI created various video games distorting health reform. They serve as gimmicks to recruit users to sign up for CMPI’s daily anti-reform talking points.

– CMPI launched a website called “Hands off my Health” showcasing the supposed horrors of universal healthcare programs in Canada and the UK. CMPI officials centered a media campaign around Shona Robertson-Holmes, claiming she had a brain tumor the Canadian system refused to treat. However, the Ottawa Citizen reported that CMPI has been exaggerating Holmes’ case, and that she in fact had a benign cyst.

– CMPI helped sponsor anti-Obama tea party protests.

– CMPI has subcontracted GOP consulting firm Political Media to develop a blizzard of online ads attacking health reform. In the weeks preceding the House vote on reform legislation, CMPI ran ads on sites like the Politico, DrudgeReport, WashingtonPost.com, WashingtonTimes.com with an animated sheep stating that the public option is a “baaaaaad idea.” CMPI plans to run many more ads as the Senate begins debate.

The head of CMPI, Peter Pitts — a former Bush administration FDA communications official and director of marketing at the Washington Times — has a long history of using his CMPI title to hawk the interests of corporate clients. The Bioethics Forum has noted that CMPI, which receives drug company money, aggressively defends almost any practice of the pharmaceutical industry. For instance, as Slate reported, Pitts appeared on an NPR special to downplay fears about the side effects of antidepressants like Prozac, but failed to disclose his position as a VP of the PR firm Manning Selvage & Lee, which at the time represented Eli Lilly Inc. (the maker of Prozac), GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer.

In March of this year, Pitts became the head of international corporate PR firm Porter Novelli’s healthcare division. Despite the fact that CMPI’s latest 990 tax form states that Pitts spends 40 hours a week at CMPI, a representative from Porter Novelli told ThinkProgress that Pitts actually works on a day to day basis in his office at Porter Novelli. Asked about how the firm engages in the health reform debate, ThinkProgress was told by Porter Novelli that Pitts is “pretty much our voice.” Porter Novelli specializes in using social networking and other stealth marketing techniques to help drug companies avoid FDA regulations on marketing pharmaceutical products. Since Pitts joined Porter Novelli, CMPI has continued to shill for drug companies.

Although CMPI refused to tell ThinkProgress about its funders, Pitt’s firm Porter Novelli has a financial stake in blocking reform. Porter Novelli is a subsidiary of the global lobbying and communications giant Omnicom Group. Other Omnicom Group subsidiaries include Frank Luntz’s firm Luntz, Maslansky Strategic Research — which counts insurance companies like Blue Cross Blue Shield and the Health Insurance Plans of New York as clients — and Clark and Weinstock, a major lobbying firm representing healthcare clients like the health insurance company HealthNet.

Porter Novelli has also created front groups for the insurance industry in the past. In 1998, Porter Novelli managed the insurance industry’s “Health Benefits Coalition” group to kill the Patients Bill of Rights. As former insider Wendell Potter explained, Porter Novelli helped the industry form alliances with right-wing groups like the Family Research Council, the Christian Coalition, as well as conservative talk radio. Similar to how CMPI is currently working closely with tea party groups to attack “big government healthcare,” Porter Novelli developed a message that the Patients Bill of Rights was part of a “big government agenda” the “Democrat” party failed to pass 1994.

CMPI is among a constellation of mysterious corporate front groups attacking reform. As the Associated Press reported over the weekend, a secretive group called Americans for Quality and Affordable Healthcare has operatives placing anti-health reform columns, booking anti-reform pundits on talk radio, and organizing anti-reform panel discussions. AQAH also refuses to disclose its backers, but it is apparently being managed in part by the North Carolina law firm Moore & Van Allen.

Yesterday, the House Education and Labor committee took a look at sick leave policies and their contribution to the spread of the H1N1 virus (swine flu). Public health experts have been voicing concerns that H1N1 is going to be transmitted by ill employees attending work, so Rep. George Miller (D-CA) has crafted a bill that would give employees five paid sick days if their employer sends them home due to H1N1.

Earlier this month, the Chamber of Commerce downplayed the extent to which lack of guaranteed paid sick leave could spread disease, saying that “the problem is not nearly as great as some people say.” And now the rest of the big business community is piling on:

Testifying on behalf of the National Association of Manufacturers Tuesday, A. Bruce Clarke, who runs his own 1,000-member business lobby in North Carolina, told Miller’s committee that most businesses already have comparable or more generous paid leave programs, so why bother? “While some employers may not have taken specific action in response to the H1N1 outbreak, these employers are clearly the exception to the widespread practices taking place today,” Clarke said in his prepared testimony.

And its not only business downplaying the extent of the problem. Rep. John Kline (R-MN), the ranking member on the Ed. and Labor committee, also tried to claim that the “vast majority” of workers have paid sick leave:

“With so many workers already having access to a variety of sick leave options, we need to look very carefully at proposals to add a new layer of federal leave mandates,” the 2nd District Republican said in a prepared statement during a House Education and Labor Committee hearing…According to Kline, the vast majority of workers in the United States already have access to paid sick leave.

Actually, nearly half of private sector workers have no paid sick leave. This includes 78 percent of hotel workers and 85 percent of food service workers, even though they are among the most likely to come in contact with other individuals. 68 percent of workers not eligible for paid sick days say that they have gone to work with a contagious illness.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, an employee with H1N1 will infect one in 10 co-workers if he or she attends work. But without any paid sick leave, many workers can’t afford to take a day off, or fear for their job if they request time off to recover.

Miller’s bill, as it is, would address the immediate threat of swine flu, but would continue to give employers the choice regarding whether or not workers receive sick leave. It also doesn’t provide time off to care for a sick child. The Healthy Families Act, sponsored by Rep. Rose DeLauro (D-CT), would guarantee seven paid sick days to all workers at firms with more than 15 employees. Enacting HFA would be an important step to ensuring that workers don’t have to place their job and their co-workers at risk when they come down with an illness.