Skip to comments.Friends in High Places: Bankrupt Enron Held Sway with Bush Administration!
Posted on 12/10/2001 7:47:51 AM PST by BluH2o
click here to read article
The Enron employee interviewed on GMA had 21 years with the company. He appeared to be in his mid-fifties. He had tried to cash out a large portion of his 401K earlier this year and wasn't permitted to do so.
Then maybe the lesson for future corporations/CEO's is don't give Bush any money.
Your question about Bush/Enron vs. Clinton/Enron is an idiotic one. If this were a Clinton/Enron story then it never would have been investigated by ABC News.
Someone needs to explain to me how the allegation in this story makes any sense. Enron has wielded tremendous influence over George W. Bush since he was governor of Texas, and has used that influence recently to push for energy deregulation. As a result of energy deregulation (as well as an oil agreement that Bush reached with Vladimir Putin last month), Enron is now bankrupt. It sounds to me as if: 1.) Enron had absolutely no influence in the Bush Administration, or 2.) Enron had lots of influence but had no idea what the f#ck they were supposed to do with that influence.
If they are going to start throwing blame around, I'd have have look at the auditors.
Public corporations must subimit independently audited financial statements to the SEC. This requirement grew out of the 1930's stock market crash, when companies regularly "cooked" the books. The false information that investors were relying on was a major factor in the stock market crash.
Either the audiors were very bad or they weren't very independent. By the way, "independent" auditors are paid by the company they are auditing.
I say investigate the company management and the auditors.
That story comes to mind on a regular basis these days.
Remember, these liars know the Nazi mantra of "tell a lie often enough and it becomes the truth".
We need to nip these lies in the bud!
by those in a position to know,
by shorting Enron? Which family members benefited?
That's true. However, since most companies don't match more than dollar for dollar on the first 6% (and that is at the very top end - most offer more in the way of $.50/$1 up to 3% or 4%), the worst it could be was a 50/50 split if one invested only enough to receive the company match and then diversified the remaining assets elsewhere. I have no sympathy for someone who put ALL their retirement assets into one company.
As for the issues regarding employees not being able to sell the stock, it is very common for assets to be "frozen" when a retirement plan is going through a significant change, and plan changes are not unusual. However, the timing of this particular change is very questionable.
Maybe, maybe not. I don't know what Enron's policies were, but it is increasingly common for companies that subsidize 401(k) plans to REQUIRE that a significant portion of the money be invested in the stock of their own companies. This is an artificial way of bolstering stock prices, and what happened at Enron may be an example of why this is such an intellectually (and morally) bankrupt idea.
I followed your link to the self-proclaimed non-partisan, non-profit policy organization Texans for Public Justice. They have a list of donors to Bush's presidential bid, with their allegged faults [icons for pollution, corporate CEO, lobbyist, beneficiary of corporate welfare, etc]. They do not have a similar list for either Al Gore or Ann Richards.
They complain about the quality of life: here are a few excerpts:
Texas education has improved over the past decade but remains mired in mediocrity. Texas ranks No. 36 in teacher salaries, with more than a quarter of Texas teachers holding down second jobs. We are No. 32 in spending per student. ...
(No mention of test scores, percentage of graduates who go on to college, ...)
Just six states have a wider income disparity separating the richest from the poorest fifth of their populations.
With no state income tax, Texas ranks No. 2 in its dependency on sales taxes, which shift a heavy share of the burden to the working poor.
The Lone Star state is the nations leading host of gun shows, which exempt gun buyers from the normal rules requiring criminal background checks.
In other words, that source is raving lunatic liberal, and should not be relied on for any information about an alleged connection between Enron and Bush.
You type weird
Maybe Rep.Waxman should comment on the Belfer family.
[Houston Chronicle, "Enron loyalty costs N.Y. family billions,-Director held on to stock to bitter end," by Leslie Eaton and Geraldine Fabrikant, New York Times , Sunday, Dec 8, 2001, page 2D]
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.