House passes bill taxing AIG, other bonuses

[Berkut]

I think Liddy - and other AIG executives - deserve as much of a blame as the politicians, so no problem with me, with stringing them up.

I think AIG deserves to fall either way. Whenever they try to call me these days to offer some sort of private investment scheme, I just laugh in their face.

There is no question of them "falling" - read the damn letter. They are being dismantled even as we speak.

[Admiral Yi]

There is no question of them "falling" - read the damn letter. They are being dismantled even as we speak.

A division is being dismantled.

[Martinus]

I think Liddy - and other AIG executives - deserve as much of a blame as the politicians, so no problem with me, with stringing them up.

I think AIG deserves to fall either way. Whenever they try to call me these days to offer some sort of private investment scheme, I just laugh in their face.

There is no question of them "falling" - read the damn letter. They are being dismantled even as we speak.

Well, I was responding to the posts saying how we really shouldn't pile up on the poor Liddy. I sympathise with ordinary employees, like the guy who wrote the letter, and indeed agree that many of them are getting the shaft, but I don't agree that the politicians are solely to blame for that - people like Liddy and the rest of the AIG CEOs should be shipped to the middle of Atlantic, and drowned.

[Berkut]

I think Liddy - and other AIG executives - deserve as much of a blame as the politicians, so no problem with me, with stringing them up.

I think AIG deserves to fall either way. Whenever they try to call me these days to offer some sort of private investment scheme, I just laugh in their face.

There is no question of them "falling" - read the damn letter. They are being dismantled even as we speak.

Well, I was responding to the posts saying how we really shouldn't pile up on the poor Liddy. I sympathise with ordinary employees, like the guy who wrote the letter, and indeed agree that many of them are getting the shaft, but I don't agree that the politicians are solely to blame for that - people like Liddy and the rest of the AIG CEOs should be shipped to the middle of Atlantic, and drowned.

You do realize that Liddy took over AFTER AIG shit the bed, right?

[Martinus]

I think Liddy - and other AIG executives - deserve as much of a blame as the politicians, so no problem with me, with stringing them up.

I think AIG deserves to fall either way. Whenever they try to call me these days to offer some sort of private investment scheme, I just laugh in their face.

There is no question of them "falling" - read the damn letter. They are being dismantled even as we speak.

Well, I was responding to the posts saying how we really shouldn't pile up on the poor Liddy. I sympathise with ordinary employees, like the guy who wrote the letter, and indeed agree that many of them are getting the shaft, but I don't agree that the politicians are solely to blame for that - people like Liddy and the rest of the AIG CEOs should be shipped to the middle of Atlantic, and drowned.

You do realize that Liddy took over AFTER AIG shit the bed, right?

Of course I do.

[Admiral Yi]

Of course I do.

What exactly has Liddy done that you find objectionable?

[Martinus]

Of course I do.

What exactly has Liddy done that you find objectionable?

The letter offers some examples.

[Admiral Yi]

The letter offers some examples.

By my reading it offers one.  Liddy promised the bonuses, then after the public shitstorm hit he asked his employees to return them.  Keep in mind that AIG is at the moment dependent on public money for its existence.  Do you think that's a hanging offence?

[The Minsky Moment]

Jake heaps a lot of righteous scorn on the AGs and Congress but the letter and the resignation are directed at the CEO of AIG, who's sin is "not being supportive enough."  That's pretty girly-mannish.

It's a literary conceit. 

It's a letter to the editor and the main targets are lawmakers and the AGs.  Having it be in the form of a letter to Liddy is just a framing mechanism.

[The Minsky Moment]

There is no question of them "falling" - read the damn letter. They are being dismantled even as we speak.

A division is being dismantled.

The whole company is being taken apart.  They are busy shopping and selling off pieces (e.g. the entire Asia based insurance operations), and the the government has taken separate stakes in the principal US-based insurance subs.

[The Minsky Moment]

Of course I do.

What next- blame Adenauer for WW2?

[grumbler]

The letter offers some examples.

Quote me some examples, Mr. Lawtalker.

[KRonn]

Hehe... not sure if it really matters, but it seems our esteemed Congress members, you know, some of those railing against AIG in that Kangaroo court like hearing, continue to get campaign donations from corps that received TARP money. Lol. So um, if it's, like, real bad to give bonuses, using taxpayer money, isn't it at least kind of bad to receive donations given with taxpayer money? Just wondering; not trying to open a can of worms or get too controversial here.   

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/03/27/1868569.aspx

The Magic Circle
Posted: Friday, March 27, 2009 2:17 PM by Petra Cahill

From NBC's Chuck Todd

In the midst of the congressional outrage over bonuses and bailouts, many of the very firms who benefitted from TARP funds are still making political donations. And the politicians are still taking them.

According to the latest F.E.C. data for February, several members of Congress who have been critical of the federal government's bailout of U.S. companies have received campaign contributions just in the last six weeks – from the firms they bailed out.

Campaign-finance-reform advocate Fred Wertheimer says the government's been bailing out banks and other major "too-big-to-fail" firms -- as these same companies continue to use their PACs to make contributions. "It all adds up to kind of a magic circle involving the government, TARP recipients, members of Congress, and campaign contributions."  The reality, of course, is that these contributions, individually, aren't a lot of money. But many members of Congress (including Speaker Pelosi and Financial Services Chair Barney Frank) have decided against taking any of the money. The optics of this for both the banks and for the members of Congress is bad, and only feeds the credibility problems both entities have with the American public.

Video: NBC's Chuck Todd reports on the political contributions some politicians are getting from businesses and other organizations receiving bailout money.

So who is getting money and giving it right back to the politicians? Here's a list of companies who received at least $1 billion in TARP funds and in February alone also gave money to members of Congress or national parties:

(Note: more TARP-recipients may have given money in February but not every company PAC reports their contributions monthly, some do it quarterly, meaning we won't know until mid-April if these figures are actually higher)

Citigroup
Bank of America
Goldman Sachs
U.S. Bancorp employee PAC
Chrysler
American Express
KeyCorp
BB&T
Huntington Shares

Now here's a list of House leadership and banking committee members who got money from these bailed-out companies:

(Note: Some members of Congress received contributions directly to their campaign accounts and some received money to their leadership PACs.)

Steve Austria, R-Ohio, $1,000 from Huntington Shares
Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., $5,000 from Bank of America
Melissa Bean, D-Ill., $5,000 from Bank of America
Roy Blunt, R-Mo., $1,500 from U.S. Bancorp employee PAC
John Boehner, R-Ohio, $5,000 from Bank of America; $5,000 from American Express; $1,500 from U.S.
Bancorp employee PAC
Kevin Brady, R-Texas, $1,000 from Citigroup; $1,000 from American Express
Eric Cantor, R-Va., $2,500 from Citigroup; $5,000 from Bank of America; $1,000 from Chrysler; $2,500
from American Express
Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., $1,000 from Bank of America; $5,000 from Bank of America
Joe Crowley, D-N.Y., $5,000 from Bank of American
Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., $1,000 from Chrysler
Vern Ehlers, R-Mich., $1,200 from Huntington Shares
Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas, $1,000 from Citigroup; $5,000 from Bank of America
Steny Hoyer, D-Md., $1,500 from Bank of America; $5,000 from Bank of America
Lynn Jenkins, R-Kan., $1,000 from Citigroup; $1,000 from Bank of America; $1,000 from U.S. Bancorp
Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, $1,000 from Huntington Shares
Mary Jo Kilroy, D-Ohio, $1,000 from Huntington Shares
Leonard Lance, R-N.J., $1,000 from Citigroup; $2,000 from Goldman Sachs
Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., $1,000 from Citigroup; $5,000 from Bank of America
Greg Meeks, D-N.Y., $5,000 from Bank of America
Gary Miller, R-Calif., $1,000 from Bank of America
Gwen Moore, D-Wis., $2,500 from Bank of America
Richard Neal, D-Mass., $4,000 from Citigroup; $5,000 from Bank of America; $1,000 from American
Express
Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas, $1,000 from U.S. Bancorp employee PAC
Devin Nunes, R-Calif., $5,000 from Bank of America
Glenn Nye, D-Va., $250 from BB&T
Mike Pence, R-Ind., $1,000 from Chrysler
Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., $1,000 from Chrysler
Mike Rogers, R-Mich., $1,000 from Chrysler
Pete Sessions, R-Texas, $5,000 from Bank of America
Lamar Smith, R-Texas, $1,000 from American Express
Pat Tiberi, R-Ohio, $1,000 from Huntington Shares
Mel Watt, D-N.C., $1,000 from Bank of America; $1,000 from BB&T; $1,000 from U.S. Bancorp
employee PAC

But Senators also benefitted:

(Note: Both Reid and Shelby say they returned their checks.)

Michael Bennet, D-Colo., $1,000 from U.S. Bancorp employee PAC
Robert Bennett, R-Utah, $1,000 from Chrysler
Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, $1,000 from Chrysler
Richard Burr, R-N.C., $5,000 from Bank of America
Tom Carper, D-Del., $620 from Citigroup; $1,000 from Bank of America; $5,000 from Bank of America
Jim DeMint, R-S.C., $2,000 from Citigroup; $1,000 from Bank of America; $2,000 from BB&T; $1,000
from U.S. Bancorp employee PAC
Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., $1,000 from Citigroup
Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., $1,000 from Bank of America
Bob Menendez, D-N.J., $5,000 from Bank of America
Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., $2,500 from Citigroup; $4,000 from Bank of America
Harry Reid, D-Nev., $1,000 from U.S. Bancorp employee PAC
Richard Shelby, R-Ala., $5,000 from Bank of America
Arlen Specter, R-Pa., $2,000 from Chrysler
George Voinovich, R-Ohio, $5,000 from Bank of America

And so did the Parties.

The Democrats:
(Note: Both the DSCC and the DCCC say they never received the checks Bank of America reported in their March FEC report)

NDCPAC, $5,000 from Citigroup, $5,000 from Bank of America
Blue Dog PAC, $5,000 from Citigroup; $5,000 from Bank of America
DSCC , $15,000 from Bank of America
DCCC,  $15,000 from Bank of America
FourOhDems, $1,000 from Huntington Shares

And the Republicans:

HouseConFund, $5,000 from Bank of America
GOP Main Street, $5,000 from Bank of America
NRSC, $15,000 from Bank of America
NRCC $15,000 from Bank of America

Interestingly, Goldman Sachs actually reported members of Congress who refused to cash their checks, including Rep. Stephanie Herseth, D-S.D., Rep. Pete DeFazio, D-Ore., and then-Congressman and now chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.

Want to know if your Congressman is getting these contributions?
Check out the FEC's reports. http://www.fec.gov/disclosure.shtml (main FEC "Campaign Reports and Data" page)
and http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/disclosure_data_search.shtml (FEC "Disclosure Data Search" - search by donor or politician).
(Note: some companies have multiple PACs, like Bank of America.)

What about whether or not your Congressman's contributors have taken bailout money?
Try here:  http://www.ustreas.gov/initiatives/eesa/docs/transaction_report_03-16-09.pdf (Treasury TARP Transactions List)

[OttoVonBismarck]

This is kind of a non-issue, the Senate isn't going to be on board for this and neither is the President.  It was little more than a populist uproar that quickly subsided.

I'm a little more surprised people haven't been waving pitchforks over how many billions are going overseas right now (and for good reason--but the kneejerk reaction these days would be to bitch and moan.)

Obama was already questioning the constitutionality of the law last week.

[alfred russel]

Jake heaps a lot of righteous scorn on the AGs and Congress but the letter and the resignation are directed at the CEO of AIG, who's sin is "not being supportive enough."  That's pretty girly-mannish.

I disagree--it is a public vote of no-confidence in the CEO of a company that calls into question his integrity. Coming from a senior person at the company, it is unusual.

If you think about the internal situation at AIG, the one technique that management has to keep some sort of morale is to offer an "us vs. them" mentality among the employees. That won't be possible if Jake can convince the rank and file that Liddy is dishonest and willing to sell employees out to avoid the anger of congress.