Which Conferees Stripped Dodd's Anti-Bonus Language?

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Mar 19, 2009 at 09:15


As is now widely reported, Senator Dodd has included language in the stimulus bill that would have retroactively blocked excessive compensation for employees at financial institutions receiving federal bailout money. However, at the request of the Treasury Department and the Obama administration, that language was stripped during the conference session. Senator Dodd was not in the conference session, but the following ten people were:

Senate:
Harry Reid D
Max Baucus D
Daniel Inouye D
Charles Grassley R
Thad Cochran R

House:
Dave Obey Wisconsin D
Charles Rangel NY D
Henry Waxman Calif D
Jerry Lewis Calif R
Dave Camp Michigan R

Which conferees stripped the language? Given that all three of the four Republicans (Camp was the exception) voted to prevent restrictions on excessive compensation (see here and here), we can pretty much count on them. Given that Charles Rangel was recently publicly opposed to clawing back the bonuses (although he supports it now), we can probably count on him, too. However, that is only four. In order for the language to have been stripped, the support of two other conferees would have been needed.

Unfortunately, until someone fesses up, we will never know who the other supporters were. Right now, admitting to this is pretty dangerous politically, since the bonuses are so wildly unpopular. Really any of the Democrats could have done it, given the Obama administration's current influence with Democratic members of Congress.

It is worth noting that at least three of the conferees, Reid, Baucus and Grassley, are now at the forefront of legislative efforts to get the bonuses back through an AIG-targeted tax. See Baucus and Grassley here, and Reid here. It is highly likely that at least one of those conferees supported stripping Dodd's language, and yet is now making heroic noise about getting the money back via a new tax. Some would call that hypocrisy, but the positive spin would be penance.

Chris Bowers :: Which Conferees Stripped Dodd's Anti-Bonus Language?

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Which Conferees Stripped Dodd's Anti-Bonus Language? | 9 comments
No way it was Obey (0.00 / 0)
Obey is a no nonsense, salt-of-the-earth guy.  As a pragmatist, he may have gone along with it, but he certainly wouldn't support it.  This has Rangel's fingerprints all over it, IMO.
look at AIG's and Wall St.'s contributions to all of them -- that'll tell you -- (0.00 / 0)
follow the money.

I know Baucus and Dodd got tons of money from them. Which others did?

here you go -- it's prob. Baucus -- (4.00 / 1)
Before the Fall, AIG Payouts Went to Washington -- http://www.opensecrets.org/new...

... In the last election cycle, though, 68 percent of contributions associated with the company went to Democrats. Two senators who chair committees charged with overseeing AIG and the insurance industry, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), are among the top recipients of AIG contributions. Baucus chairs the Senate Finance Committee and has collected more money from AIG in his congressional career than from any other company--$91,000. And with more than $280,000, AIG has been the fourth largest contributor to Dodd, who chairs the Senate's banking committee. President Obama and his rival in last year's election, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), are also high on the list of top recipients.

AIG has been a personal investment for lawmakers, too. Twenty-eight current members of Congress reported owning stock in AIG in 2007, worth between $2.5 million and $3.3 million. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), one of the richest members of Congress, was by far the biggest investor in AIG, with stock valued around $2 million.

Last year AIG and its subsidiaries spent about $9.7 million on federal lobbying, or about $53,000 for every day Congress was in session in 2008. The company's spending on advocacy last year was down from an all-time high of $11.4 million spent on lobbying in 2007. ...


[ Parent ]
& here's Goldman (largest recipient of the billions we gave AIG) -- (0.00 / 0)
http://www.opensecrets.org/org...

check all the other "counterparties" and who they've donated to, too.

[ Parent ]
Did Dodd fall on his sword? (0.00 / 0)
But later Wednesday, Dodd told CNN he agreed to change his amendment -- at the request of the Obama administration -- to ensure that previously enacted bonus contracts would be honored, despite billions of dollars that would go to bailout beneficiaries.

"The alternative was losing the amendment entirely," he told the network. Administration officials feared that without the language the bailout measure would be deluged with lawsuits.

From today's Danbury News Times.

So was it stripped out in the conference session, or before it got there?  

i think it still was done in conf -- Dodd or Administration told someone to change it there (0.00 / 0)
--i think, anyway -- it was after the amendment was already approved and in the bill, no?
[ Parent ]
"Because of negotiations with the Treasury Department and the bill Conferees, several modifications were made, including adding the exemption" (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
Really now... (4.00 / 1)
Should we have to guess? Where is the transparency that was promised?
Which Conferees Stripped Dodd's Anti-Bonus Language? | 9 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

blog advertising is good for you


blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox