Comments on: Democrats Who Joined with Republicans to Pass Bean Amendment on TARP Bonuses

By: KayInMaine

KayInMaine — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:39:16 +0000

Exactly and that’s what Grayson was trying to tell the Fox News ding-dong on the link above in the post.

By: Blub

Blub — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:43:41 +0000

wow. that’s an urban district which should be progressive-leaning. btw, wasn’t that Jane Hamsher’s old district.. I mean where she lived?

By: hychka

hychka — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:26:17 +0000

Will wonders never cease??!!

IN isn’t on the &hitlist!!!

By: donnydonny

donnydonny — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:11:32 +0000

It looks to me like the Bean amendment is actually kind of redundant. The bill, as introduced by Grayson and Himes, already stated that one of the standards for deciding whether a company can pay bonus is:

‘(i) the stability of the financial institution and its ability to repay or begin repaying the United States for any capital investment received under this title;

http://www.opencongress.org/bi.....d=t0:eh:18

By: ralphbon

ralphbon — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:59:41 +0000

Sorry to see my Congresswoman, Yvette Clarke, on the list. She’s been a mostly reliably progressive heir to the seat long held by the mostly reliably progressive Major Owens. Because she’s so often so good (eg, she’s a co-sponsor of HR 676), I tend to cut her slack for periodically bowing to the prerogatives of the NY delegation, which I presume was the dynamic here.

By: raisethebar

raisethebar — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:53:20 +0000

I disagree with Jane’s evaluation of Grayson’s bill- that it “would have forced TARP recipients to stop paying “retention bonuses” as long as they were being supported by taxpayer dollars.” Grayson’s bill did not prohibit retention bonuses.

Grayson’s original bill states that the Treasury Secretary shall establish performance-based standards “that a financial institution must apply when determining whether it may provide a bonus or retention payment… “

In other words, Grayson’s bill gives great leeway and has great reliance on the ability and judgement of Secretary Geithner to determine whether TARP recipient’s may provide bonus or RETENTION payments, regardless of ANY REPAYMENTS by recipients.

Therefore, why not also trust Secretary Geithner’s judgement regarding TARP monies being repaid in an appropriate amount in an appropriate manner, with the company being rewarded with bonus and retention payments not being set by the government?

By: Adie

Adie — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:07:05 +0000

I can see the sleaze. But I am NOT one to label elitism as a necessary adjunct to wealth. I have friends and relations who are rich as skunks. It’s not necessarily class elitism, pure and simple, if that’s what you’re driving at.

Both Christy and I went to Smith, FGS.

It’s a kind of blindness. I’ve seen it. I’m sure she has also. I lived and worked beside it, grew up with it and hated it from elementary school on, quietly fought it from inside, outside, beside. Took considerable heat more than once for even the quiet version of “standing up”.

Thank dog our nuclear family are all pretty equally progressive and active, including our “kids”. They made up their own minds and were not coerced. They win over their friends and many many people who used not to understand. Proud of those young fellas? You bet! They have not taken the easy road. They stand up for their beliefs. They’ve educated themselves and do not vote blindly, nor stand idly by and ignore injustices.

Some very “nice, concerned, honest, generous” people are utterly blind to the dark side of class and race issues, and the horrible effects of some of this sort of legislation and policy we just witnessed. It is VERY difficult to talk to a lot of these people, because they just don’t get it. But some DO become very defensive and strike out at anyone who calls them on it. That’s hard to deal with when it even comes from within your family; a situation that is all too real for some people. All I’ll say is I have it easier now psychologically, if not economically, than when I was growing up in the ’40s & ’50s & ’60’s.

We must keep speaking out, and trying every way we can to get the “comfortable” people to look up and out, and to see the pain they have conveniently disregarded in the past.

Thanks to all at the Lake for their various efforts to make things better for all. ;->

By: EMPY

EMPY — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:02:29 +0000

It’s nice to see that the Florida Dems hung with Grayson and said no to this shite.

By: ubetchaiam

ubetchaiam — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 17:56:54 +0000

That’s because NY is too damn dependent on Wall Street monies for it’s budget.

By: EMPY

EMPY — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 17:55:53 +0000

I’m guessing the majority of NY State was looking at having their pay/bonus structured by the Fed, so these reps were just looking out for the people. I can’t think of any other reason for these Dem votes.