Posted on 03/17/2009 11:19:20 AM PDT by free_us_from_obama
We now have everyone in an uproar over the fact that AIG paid out $165 million in bonuses.
The fact is, they’re obligated to pay. They’re bound by contractual agreements, and they could face lawsuits if they decide otherwise. These agreements were entered into during the first quarter of 2008, and top of that, none of the company’s top 50 executives are recipients of the bonuses. Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think paying out the bonuses is ethically the correct thing to do. But legally, if they’re bound by contracts they could spend a lot of time, energy and money defending the resulting lawsuits if they didn’t meet their obligations.
Now the democrats are pandering to voters, pretending to have their panties in a wad, and in the process, are coming up with all kinds of creative ways to reach into the pockets of AIG employees to get the money back. Keep in mind, most of the bonus money was distributed to AIG employees last Friday.
Sen. Max Baucus, (D-MT), and head of the Senate Finance Committee is going introduce a proposal to recoup some some of the bonuses within in the next 24 hours. Rep. Carolyn Maloney, (D-N.Y.) is proposing legislation that would tax the offending bonuses at 100 percent. And Rep. Gary Peters (D-Mich.) has drafted a bill that would impose a 60 percent surtax on bonuses paid to AIG executives, on top of the normal 35 percent tax rate paid by high-income earners.
(Excerpt) Read more at fortwaynenews.com ...
They got it wrong right out of the box. Mere mortal laws don't bind the Obamessiah.
From page H1412 of the Final Stimulus Bill, ``SEC. 111. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE:
“(iii) The prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a writte employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary.”
This amendment provides an exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009, which exempts the very AIG bonuses Obama is condemning every single chance he gets. The amendment is in the final version and is law.
The Constitution of the United States, Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 provides that: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed."
The definition of Bill of Attainder is a legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial.
Hussein didn’t blunder, he got caught.
Secondly, I think it would be worthwhile for some enterprising reporter to come up with a list of AIG executives that made donations to Dodd and Obama, and then see if any of those people are on the bonus list.
In my mind, the Obama outrage is more likely because he got caught- if he was really against bonuses, he could have addressed the issue before they received the money.
Not to mention Dodd’s amendment to the bailout bill to guarantee the bonuses would be paid.
It is only a problem for the public because they were the one’s paying.
Contractual or not AIG deserves all of the grief they get.
Not for the bonuses, but for the welfare.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if one or several of the execs called a press conference, at which they outlined the Bill of Attainder aspect and told Obambi, Schumer, Maloney et al to shove it, that they damn well were going to keep the dough?
It would take guts, but it WOULD be televised and if they did it right it WOULD hit home.
Maybe they could “claw back” at Bambi this way!
Mind you, I’m not in favor of the bailout of AIG at all. But as has been pointed out repeatedly in this forum, a contract is a contract.
Of course, that's one problem. The other problem was created when congress didn't do their homework...again. They should have known the ins and outs before they signed onto such a huge bill. They accused corporations of not doing their jobs, but neither did they. The buck stops at Obama.
From page H1412 of the Final Stimulus Bill, ``SEC. 111. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE:
“(iii) The prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a writte employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary.”
This amendment provides an exception for contractually obligated bonuses agreed on before Feb. 11, 2009, which exempts the very AIG bonuses Obama is condemning every single chance he gets. The amendment is in the final version and is law.
Like pin the tail on the donkey game, that pins it right on THIS administration! Obama can try to wiggle out of this all he wants but BINGO it’s his. He owns it(bought and paid for) and might I add HE VOTED FOR THE TARP when he was a Senator. Double whammy!
I emailed this little tidbit right back to Sen. Dodd...not that they care but they need to know we are not deaf, dumb & blind to what they do.
Obama is thanking his lucky stars that AIG is paying these bonuses. It gives him something to rant and rave about. Do you think, for a minute, that he cares about the money?
http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/13313756/c_13312353?f=home_todayinfinance
Roll Call Staff - Roll Call
March 17, 2009
House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) called for the government to formally take control of American International Group and sue employees who received bonuses.
Frank said it’s “time for us to take over the company.”
Although taxpayers have an 80 percent stake in the firm, Frank said covenants added during the federal bailouts limited government influence over the its operations. It’s time to exercise that ownership stake, he said.
“We own it,” Frank said.
The government should sue to get the $165 million in AIG bonuses back and would be in a better position if it owned AIG outright rather than simply as a lender and shareholder in AIG, Frank said.
He said he isn’t worried that talented derivatives traders could leave AIG without the bonuses.
“These are the people who caused the problem,” Frank said, adding that replacing them with qualified financial workers shouldn’t be hard. “It is hardly a tough market in hiring people with financial expertise,” he said.
(snip)
The fact... everyone who supports this executive overcompensation...with our tax dollars....are really the big SOCIALISTS.
Using my taxpayer money to pay failed executives bonuses is SOCIALISM.
Their “contracts” guaranteeing payment of bonuses are useless and pretty void....because there would be no bonuses at all if AIG failed (and did not get a taxpayer bailout)
Its sick that we have people “claiming to be conservative” who support the taxpayer funded executive bailout.
$165 million is 1 / 6060th of the $1 Trillion porkulus.
So if you bought a car that cost $6 grand, recouping these AIG bonuses would buy you a paper air freshener.
I’m not happy about the bonuses, but I just wanted to give some perspective.
They push through a trillion $$$ like it aint no thang...then turn around and “fight for the taxpayer” by demanding a company not uphold its contractual obligations.
Obama did not go public with the bonus thingy until after the payout deadline passed.
Obama waits to get outraged until after the bonuses are paid? Smells corrupt, sneaky and impeachable to me.
High school Civics and Government should be required in order to run for Congress. At least that’s where I learned what a Bill of Attainder is. Forty three years ago, no less.
Travis’ fault!
Say it loud, say it PROUD:
O ne
B ig
A ss
M istake
A merica!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.