On That Poll: Americans Don't Blame Obama

[Annie]

We'll see in a few months

www.washingtonexaminer.com >> Politics

Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary
By Byron York

It was nearly two weeks ago that the House of Representatives, acting in a near-frenzy after the disclosure of bonuses paid to executives of AIG, passed a bill that would impose a 90 percent retroactive tax on those bonuses. Despite the overwhelming 328-93 vote, support for the measure began to collapse almost immediately. Within days, the Obama White House backed away from it, as did the Senate Democratic leadership. The bill stalled, and the populist storm that spawned it seemed to pass.

But now, in a little-noticed move, the House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009," would impose government controls on the pay of all employees -- not just top executives -- of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies.

The purpose of the legislation is to "prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards," according to the bill's language. That includes regular pay, bonuses -- everything -- paid to employees of companies in whom the government has a capital stake, including those that have received funds through the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP, as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The measure is not limited just to those firms that received the largest sums of money, or just to the top 25 or 50 executives of those companies. It applies to all employees of all companies involved, for as long as the government is invested. And it would not only apply going forward, but also retroactively to existing contracts and pay arrangements of institutions that have already received funds....

 

[Meister]

We'll see in a few months

www.washingtonexaminer.com >> Politics

Beyond AIG: A Bill to let Big Government Set Your Salary
By Byron York

It was nearly two weeks ago that the House of Representatives, acting in a near-frenzy after the disclosure of bonuses paid to executives of AIG, passed a bill that would impose a 90 percent retroactive tax on those bonuses. Despite the overwhelming 328-93 vote, support for the measure began to collapse almost immediately. Within days, the Obama White House backed away from it, as did the Senate Democratic leadership. The bill stalled, and the populist storm that spawned it seemed to pass.

But now, in a little-noticed move, the House Financial Services Committee, led by chairman Barney Frank, has approved a measure that would, in some key ways, go beyond the most draconian features of the original AIG bill. The new legislation, the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009," would impose government controls on the pay of all employees -- not just top executives -- of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies.

The purpose of the legislation is to "prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards," according to the bill's language. That includes regular pay, bonuses -- everything -- paid to employees of companies in whom the government has a capital stake, including those that have received funds through the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP, as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The measure is not limited just to those firms that received the largest sums of money, or just to the top 25 or 50 executives of those companies. It applies to all employees of all companies involved, for as long as the government is invested. And it would not only apply going forward, but also retroactively to existing contracts and pay arrangements of institutions that have already received funds....

Now that's the "Hope and Change" that I can believe in..........that would be coming from the Obama administration.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny that all the right wingers on this board suggest that American workers make too much but they don't complain about the fact that in 1990 CEO pay was 107 times worker pay and in 2005 it was 411 times worker pay.

If CEO pay doesn't go down, then we need to insist our pay goes up.

And I don't feel sorry for any CEO who has to take a 50% pay cut, because chances are, they will still be making more than they did in 1990. And they will still be making 107 times more than us.

 

[Article 15]

Funny that all the right wingers on this board suggest that American workers make too much but they don't complain about the fact that in 1990 CEO pay was 107 times worker pay and in 2005 it was 411 times worker pay.

If CEO pay doesn't go down, then we need to insist our pay goes up.

And I don't feel sorry for any CEO who has to take a 50% pay cut, because chances are, they will still be making more than they did in 1990. And they will still be making 107 times more than us.

That piece of legislation would encompasses all employees not just CEOs and executives.

 

[Annie]

Funny that all the right wingers on this board suggest that American workers make too much but they don't complain about the fact that in 1990 CEO pay was 107 times worker pay and in 2005 it was 411 times worker pay.

If CEO pay doesn't go down, then we need to insist our pay goes up.

And I don't feel sorry for any CEO who has to take a 50% pay cut, because chances are, they will still be making more than they did in 1990. And they will still be making 107 times more than us.

That piece of legislation would encompasses all employees not just CEOs and executives.

bobo has a comprehension problem.

 

[Meister]

Funny that all the right wingers on this board suggest that American workers make too much but they don't complain about the fact that in 1990 CEO pay was 107 times worker pay and in 2005 it was 411 times worker pay.

If CEO pay doesn't go down, then we need to insist our pay goes up.

And I don't feel sorry for any CEO who has to take a 50% pay cut, because chances are, they will still be making more than they did in 1990. And they will still be making 107 times more than us.

Bobo I've never made any comments, nor suggested anything about wages...or in your case wage envy. If people don't like their wages, they should seek employment elsewhere. I did that moving up the food chain. I really don't care how much a CEO makes Bobo. Once again I don't have wage envy like you do. We live in America...not Russia. Please don't blanket your partisan hack ideas on the right wingers....which apparently, you know nothing about...but I didn't expect you to.

 

[WillowTree]

"Pay for Performance Act of 2009," would impose government controls on the pay of all employees -- not just top executives -- of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place.





that will sure put a pucker in the teacher's union me guesses!

 

[Article 15]

Bill text: Click me

And the "standards" get set after the bill passes ...

This is BAD.

 

[Sinatra]

This is yet another example of a consistently disturbing trend of outright statism being implemented by this administration and Democrat Congress.

As America watches the next installment of American Idol or Dancing with the Stars, the very foundations of this nation are broken away beneath their collective feet...

 

[007]

Another step closer to this...

 

[Zoom-boing]

And the agenda is advanced yet another step.

 

[Newby]

Funny how Bobo is the only lib that has anything to say about this, and that's b/c he doesn't know any better. Where are all the others?

 

[sealybobo]

Funny how Bobo is the only lib that has anything to say about this, and that's b/c he doesn't know any better. Where are all the others?

Don't know and don't care.

You right wingers are going to sabotage the Dems at every step.

I'll wait to see if the corporate media picks up on your little story.

Until then, no need to give your stories any credibility.

I don't even know what the story is about really. I can only assume it is bs!!!

 

[elvis]

Funny how Bobo is the only lib that has anything to say about this, and that's b/c he doesn't know any better. Where are all the others?

Don't know and don't care.

You right wingers are going to sabotage the Dems at every step.

I'll wait to see if the corporate media picks up on your little story.

Until then, no need to give your stories any credibility.

I don't even know what the story is about really. I can only assume it is bs!!!

the corporate media that was in bed with obama from day 1?

 

[Newby]

He doesn't even understand the implications that this has, the power that it gives the government never intended by the Constitution. I don't think he's capable.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny that all the right wingers on this board suggest that American workers make too much but they don't complain about the fact that in 1990 CEO pay was 107 times worker pay and in 2005 it was 411 times worker pay.

If CEO pay doesn't go down, then we need to insist our pay goes up.

And I don't feel sorry for any CEO who has to take a 50% pay cut, because chances are, they will still be making more than they did in 1990. And they will still be making 107 times more than us.

That piece of legislation would encompasses all employees not just CEOs and executives.

It isn't just CEO's getting paid out of control. What about the VP's right under them? And the 3rd in line under them? Etc? They are all getting bonus'.

So if they are getting government bailout money, they shouldn't be making more than the president. Or more than industry standard. Lets say $1 million max salary per year.


You know what? This thread is a joke. I totally agree with CEO's only making $1 million a year MAX if they are getting governmetn bailouts.

GOt a problem with that?

 

[elvis]

He doesn't even understand the implications that this has, the power that it gives the government never intended by the Constitution. I don't think he's capable.

oh he might understand. it could be he figures he'll trust the obama admin no matter what.

 

[amrchaos]

If you are trying to figure out how long it will take before the nation fully turns against Obama, try 2 to 3 years.

Unless, he does something to make the problem worst and do nothing to resolve himself from this problem. Kind of unlikely since he is very responsive to outside input. So my best bet is 2-3 years before the nation fully turns on him.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny how Bobo is the only lib that has anything to say about this, and that's b/c he doesn't know any better. Where are all the others?

Don't know and don't care.

You right wingers are going to sabotage the Dems at every step.

I'll wait to see if the corporate media picks up on your little story.

Until then, no need to give your stories any credibility.

I don't even know what the story is about really. I can only assume it is bs!!!

the corporate media that was in bed with obama from day 1?

The richest men in the world bought up all the media after the Media Deregulations Act of 97 and they politicized the media just like Bush did the Justice Department, and you still call it the liberal media. Are you a or ?

I even heard a right winger on CNN this weekend explaining how/why the media is liberal and the host just sat there saying nothing.

Please don't tell us who are liberal representatives are, huh? You have no clue. The media has been purchased by the right wingers and you still think its liberal. What a fool.

PS. If I wanted you to think I was a liberal, all I would have to do is say a few liberal things like, "obama sends shivers up my leg"

Isn't that correct? That's all it takes for people like you. Because you are simple.

Anyways, if i were really a right winger trying to come off as liberal, that's what I would do. I would say a few liberal things.

But pay attention to how Chris Matthews bends over backward for his Republican guests.

The American public is just too stupid. You included, you moron.

Chris Matthews told Delay, "you are welcome on my show anytime"

And Pat Buchanan gets plenty of time on MSNBC.

When Fox puts on a counter opinion to O'Reilly & Hannity, let me know.

And when a liberal radio host like Randi Rhodes gets equal air time to Rush Limbaugh, let me know. Because then maybe the media will be Centrist once again.

 

[elvis]

Don't know and don't care.

You right wingers are going to sabotage the Dems at every step.

I'll wait to see if the corporate media picks up on your little story.

Until then, no need to give your stories any credibility.

I don't even know what the story is about really. I can only assume it is bs!!!

the corporate media that was in bed with obama from day 1?

The richest men in the world bought up all the media after the Media Deregulations Act of 97 and they politicized the media just like Bush did the Justice Department, and you still call it the liberal media. Are you a or ?

I even heard a right winger on CNN this weekend explaining how/why the media is liberal and the host just sat there saying nothing.

Please don't tell us who are liberal representatives are, huh? You have no clue. The media has been purchased by the right wingers and you still think its liberal. What a fool.

PS. If I wanted you to think I was a liberal, all I would have to do is say a few liberal things like, "obama sends shivers up my leg"

Isn't that correct? That's all it takes for people like you. Because you are simple.

Anyways, if i were really a right winger trying to come off as liberal, that's what I would do. I would say a few liberal things.

But pay attention to how Chris Matthews bends over backward for his Republican guests.

The American public is just too stupid. You included, you moron.

Chris Matthews told Delay, "you are welcome on my show anytime"

And Pat Buchanan gets plenty of time on MSNBC.

When Fox puts on a counter opinion to O'Reilly & Hannity, let me know.

And when a liberal radio host like Randi Rhodes gets equal air time to Rush Limbaugh, let me know. Because then maybe the media will be Centrist once again.

fox is one news network out of how many? People talk fairness doctrine, fine. which network would the democrats like to give up?