The problem is this:
People are angry about the bonuses, especially when they are given to people in the same division of the company that was responsible for the problems. I personally think it’s not a great idea for these people to be getting bonuses.
I get the distinct impression many people are confusing “I don’t think these guys should be getting bonuses” with “I think our Marxist representatives should pass an illegal ex post facto law to punish private citizens with confiscatory taxes.” Elmer Fudgepacker even was blathering about wanting names and threatening to subpoena. Great, let’s put these people in personal danger. These people are a grave danger to the country. Is nobody standing up for this? There had to be like 100 Republicans who voted for this.
Are you certain this is true? I believe I heard, either last night or this a.m., that the people getting the bonuses were not the people who caused the meltdown at AIG. Those people are gone.
I agree with your statement about why people are mad, but people are mistaken to call these payments "bonuses".
AIG went to these specialist/executives/employees to get them to stay and try and reduce AIG's $2.6 TRILLION exposure on these derivative's insurance contracts. The employee did that. They reduced the exposure by $1.1 TRILLION dollars. AIG (with the approval of the NY Federal Reserve Bank, under the leadership of Tim Geitner) promised these employees X amount of dollars if they stayed and did what they were asked. These are legitimate payments on legitimate contracts. Period.
This law is IMHO unquestionably unconstitutional. We'll see if anyone sues - I'm guessing not because who wants to out themselves as a recipient of these bonuses and face the public backlash. Sadly, that very well may cement this precedent and allow the DEMS to target other companies or industries they disagree with - Can you hear me OIL EXECUTIVE, PHARMACEUTICAL EXECUTIVES, INSURANCE EXECUTIVES, GUN MANUFACTURES ETC. ETC. ETC???