« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The Obama CYA Act of 2009

By: Brian Darling (Diary)  |  March 19th, 2009 at 01:37 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The House is debating HR 1586, a bill that would tax bonuses given to employees of bailed out businesses.  The bill would tax “90 percent of the TARP bonus received by the taxpayer.”  The TARP recipient’s employer must have received the money from “the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008″ (the TARP bailout), “the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation”, “members of the same affiliated group” (units of the TARP recipients, FNMA and FHLM monies), and affiliated partnerships.  Conservatives in the House and Senate need to use this debate as an opportunity to debate how this provision was placed in the Obama so called Stimulus bill and forbidding future bailouts.

This effort in the House and Senate to tax bonuses is not much more than a cover your backside vote to protect the Obama Administration and liberals in Congress who requested, through Treasury, that the AIG Bonus Protection Amendment be put in the Stimulus.  If conservatives in the Congress want to show some leadership, they need to use the bonus debate to fight the further nationalization of private enterprise.

The debate on how this provision was added to the Stimulus was intensified yesterday when Senator Dodd admitted to FOX News that Treasury had requested the bonus protection language be added to the Stimulus.

In a dramatic reversal Wednesday, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., confessed to adding language to a spending cap in the stimulus bill last month that specifically excluded executive bonuses included in contracts signed before the bill’s passage.  Dodd told FOX News that Treasury officials forced him to make the change.

Congress should investigate who put the language in the Stimulus and how it happened.  Senator Dodd was not a conferee on the Stimulus bill, yet the bonus protection language was added in the secret conference committee on the Stimulus.  The Democrat conferees on the bill were Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), Max Baucus (D-MT) and Daniel Inouye (D-HI).  Which one of these Senators added the language?  Conservatives need to force a debate and possible Amendments setting up a means to investigate who at Treasury requested the change and how the change was added to the Stimulus conference report. 

As I previously posted, Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) argued this week that bailouts are the problem — not bonuses.

The bonuses for thousands of employees of AIG – the huge insurance company to which the government, the taxpayers of the United States, have shoveled $170 billion into to keep afloat – recall the Sessions maxim, announced about 20 years ago when I was U. S. Attorney attempting to faithfully enforce a host of federal regulations. It is stated:  “Oh, what a tangled web we create when first we start to regulate.”

Conservatives are outraged by the bonuses, because taxpayer monies are being used to reward failure.  It seems patently unconsitutional to retroactively tax recipients of these bonuses, yet Congress seems to be putting a legislative Band-Aid over the bailout problem in an effort to do something about the bonuses.  Congress should forget about the bonuses, abolish the TARP and investigate how this controversial provision was added to the Stimulus bill if they want to make this debate productive.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • GT350

    The AIG bonuses stink, but this tax is unconstitutional. The Consititution prohibits Bills of Attainder.

    Republicans need to use the debate to:

    1) Excorciate AIG execs for bad management.
    2) Put the blame for contracts squarely on Geithner. He knew or should have known. He’s a lightweight and out of his depth.
    3) Point directly at Dodd’s interference for tying the taxpayer’s hands. Oh, and remind him of his Countrywide bribe, er, mortgage and AIG contributions.
    4) Remember your principles: Oppose taxation, especially punitive taxation.

    • ColdWarrior

      on constitutional grounds.

      Now, what will McConnell, Kyl and McCain advocate?

      I just called McCain’s Phoenix office — they didn’t know. Couldn’t get through to the DC office.

      This is a “teachable moment” whereby the Repubs (I see below that 85 House Repubs voted for it — sheesh!) leadership could use the talking points above to explain why the Constitution forbids this kind of “law.”

      I’ll keep my fingers crossed for leadership. And expect to be dissappointed.

    • Doc Holliday

      this for political gain and joining the taxation/extortion bandwagon. I realize there is a split here, even among RS’ers and Front pagers. There is a split in the party to, I believe the vote was about 50-50 yea and nay on the R side. I guess some actually are “outraged” at the CEO’s for real…..well, I kinda sorta guess, I will give them that.

      You are right, we need to not let the government get away with the fact THEY are to blame for all of this. The stupid regulations that caused the meltdown, the stupid stimulus bill, and the stupid carve outs for Obama’s and Dodd’s friends.

      I don’t care for populism, scapegoating, and abandoning principles. Excessive taxation is always wrong. If AIG broke the law, prosecute them, if not, then move the freak on and blame the Dems.

  • texas214

    The Bill of Attainder should include Obama’s, Dodd,Frank, Pelosi…. as they have caused more wealth destruction than anyone on earth at this point in time. If these taxes are so good then they should be spread around to onclude all of the culprits.

  • Jingles

    And 85 Republicans voted for it.

  • BlueLandRed

    retroactive tax changes,

    SCOTUS has upheld them in the past, so claiming HR 1586 is patently unconstitutional seems like a bit of hyperbole. While I suspect where bill escapes Congress will face a legal challenge, I don’t think that challenge will get all that far in the courts.

    • randy streu

      It is patently unconstitutional to retroactively tax somebody. And punitively no less.

      • BlueLandRed

        with you.

        AND SCOTUS does a lot of things I disagree with, but they are — by self proclamation, no less — the actually people that get to decide what is and isn’t constitutional and they clearly have permitted this sort of stuff in the past.

      • Lammo

        n/t

    • http://www.criterionchemical.com Chemical Sam

      distributed unevenly. You’d have to tax 90% of all bonuses everywhere in order for this to be legal. So either they drop the idea, or propagate is everywhere.

      • Lammo

        than they probably already have!

    • ehosterman

      While I’m not a lawyer, Mark Levin discussed this several nights ago. The Supreme court ruled many years ago that the ex-post facto provisions of the Constitution only apply to criminal law. Bills of attainder, however, are bills targeted to apply to or punish a narrow population. Whether the tax was retroactive or not would not determine whether it is a Bill of Attainder.

      Now whether the current SCOTUS would rule correctly, if this bill was challenged is another story. However, given that this is a special tax applicable only to people recieving bonuses from companies recieving funds from the bailout clearly make it a Bill of Attainder and therefore unconstitutional.

  • Vladimir

    …regardless of the circumstances.

    Let Mr. Dodd explain how these bonuses were written into law, but now the Guardians of All That Is Good and Decent want to tax 90% of the benefit away.

    These AIG bonuses are the gnat we’re straining at while swallowing a musk ox. At least the $170 million or so might be stimulative; I’d rather see private citizens with their mitts on the dough rather than these irresponsible Congresspeople.

    The real threat is the trillions of dollars that will go to fund new entitlements and to permanently entrench the Dems in power. That’s what we should focus on.

    • janis

      letting a camel get his nose into the tent. If they can shove this 90% tax through this time, then the next time they decide to use it they will have precedent.

      • UpLateAgain

        It would not surprise my paranoid backside to discover this whole thing was propagated by the Dems from the first as a means of getting a test case on a Bill of Attainder that would in the future allow them to pass ex-post-facto legislation (under certain circumstances of course…like when they felt a need to ‘protect’ the taxpayers). Once SCOTUS has allowed them though this door…. watch out. They are attempting to establish a Democratic Thousand Year Reich.

  • randy streu

    They have blatantly chosen politics over integrity, and I sincerely hope they are not rewarded for it as they clearly think they will be.

    • jerry38

      What are they thinking. Do they even have a clue that this argument could someday (possibly tommorrow at the speed with which this administration steals from the American people) be used to retroactively tax any money that anybody has. Clawback as they call it could be used to steal your savings, or anybody’s savings.

      The Republicans should have avoided all outrage directed to AIG and should have solely directed it towards the Dems. They are jumping on a bandwagon that says a private citizen who contracts to perform work for a sum of money is subject to having that money taken from them, if only the government feeeels like it.

      This thing is wrong on so many levels it boggles the mind. I am not suprised that they chose politics over integrity, but joining in the use of the full force of the Government of the United States to attack and steal from a select group of private citizens is outrageous.

      I am disgusted. Again, the leaders of our party are throwing away a perfectly good opportunity to show that they have integrity when it is so obviously lacking on the other side.

      At least this will buffer the rage I will feel next week when they all jump on the bandwagon of fighting the weather with our money.

  • 10ksnooker

    1. Congress doesn’t read the bills.

    2. Congress doesn’t read the Constitution.

    And many of them like Obama, claim to be Constitutional attorneys. Who’s Constitution?

    • Vladimir

      …plus a Constitutional scholar in the White House Executive Mansion.

      Plus which, the Constitution is a living, breathing document, n’est-ce pas?

  • Maggie_in_Indiana

    There was more outrage over the TARP Bailout itself. The Democrats and the moderate republicans have used this to gain public approval more than anything. They care about our tax dollars,right? After all they are concerned our tax dollars were mis-spent on individual employee pay and targeted individual citizens for a 90% tax. I have never heard of any tax at 90%,but it must be a good thing right?

    Of course this would not be just a ploy to distract Americans from the Cap and Trade BS and the taxes soon to follow on every single American . It wouldn’t be to distract Americans while Obama and Pelosi cook up Socialized Medicine legislation,would it? After all Obama went on Leno last night to talk to the folks and let them know he’s a regular guy who likes basket ball and cares about their families and the environment. We must be nuts to think they’d try to hood wink the entire nation with a scheme like this,right?

    All the news coverage and blogging on this surely must have helped them push this bill,right?

    Geesh.

  • Brian Darling

    Just tried to pass the House Obama CYA Act of 2009 bill with a Senate substitute and Kyl objected.

  • Rod_Patrick

    They should have never participated in this bill.

    This is supposed to be the time to honorably vote “PRESENT”.

    The Dems are using taxation of a “few” private individuals as a weapon of control.

    • pilgrim

      Ds who voted Nay
      McMahon D-NY-13
      Minnick D-ID-1
      Mitchell D-AZ-5
      Snyder D-AR-2
      Kissel D-NC-8
      Bean D-IL-8

      non RMSP and non appropriation Rs who voted Aye
      Barton-TX
      Bilirakis
      Blunt
      Boozman
      Brown
      Buchanan
      Cao
      Cassidy
      Davis-KY
      Duncan
      Forbes
      Fleming
      Gallegly
      Goodlatte
      Guthrie
      Heller
      Herger
      Hoekstra
      Jones
      Lee-NY
      Manzullo
      McCaul
      McClintock
      McHugh
      McMorris Rodgers
      Micah
      Moran-KS
      Putnam
      Roe-TN
      Rogers-AL
      Rogers-MI
      Rohrabacher
      RooneyRos-Lehtinen
      Roskam
      Royce
      Ryan-WI
      Schmidt
      Schock
      Shimkus
      Smith-NJ
      Smith-TX
      Stearns
      Wittman
      Young-AK

      • jerry38

        I know Jean a little bit we go to the same church, and have worked w/her a bit on pro-life issues. Her local guy just told me that I was right 1000 times. I could barely get a word in before he told me I was right. And then he explained why she had to do it anyway as a way to “get some of the taxpayer money back.” Oh, by stealing from other tax-payers I guess. Jean knows bettter, or I least I thought she did. Two wrongs still dont make a right – even once you get out of kindergarten.

      • Rod_Patrick

        But it’s too late.

        Boehner and Cantor must show more strength in leadership next time around.

        The Republican lawmakers should be MORE CAREFUL from now on.

        After all, they have taken the lead over the Dems in the Rasmussen polls for the first time since 2006.

        The wind of politics has really shifted against the Dems in just 2 months.

        • pilgrim

          Blunt
          Ryan-WI
          Putnam

          These three I would have thought to line up with Boehner and Cantor. Maybe Blunt is ticked for losing to Cantor.

      • Doc Holliday

        and voting what the polls say. Just think, they have now destroyed contracts, one of the pillars of capitalism.

  • GT350

    I will agree that these AIG bonuses were gross and egregious.

    Some people also think that Hummers are ecological WMD, and they are gross and egregious. They waste precious resources, generate CO2, etc etc.

    We’d like to tax that Hummer at 90%. Please pay Sec. Geithner at the door, thank you for playing.

    Now onto the next sucker, er, taxpayer:
    – Do you sell fast food?
    – Are you involved in the tobacco industry?
    – Do you work for an HMO?
    – Do you live in a large house?

  • JustLeaveMeAlone

    Congress voted for this nonsense. They didn’t bother to read the bill(s) they voted on, which ought to be grounds for impeachment, recall, and treason.

    Now they want an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder to cover up their own mess.

    This public outrage and chest beating is just for show. And we know it.

    Throw all the bums out. Starting with Obama, then Reid and Pelosi, then Dodd and Frank, then all their ilk, including the Republicans who enabled them.

  • aarongardner

    2010 is going to surprise them.

  • Maggie_in_Indiana

    I know some are taking these Tea Parties very seriously but they should be. These folks who taking their time to protest for what they believe and we are saying here are getting more angry. Anger can be a good thing it produces action,but left to itself and there could really be trouble on the rise. Recalls are not that a big of a stretch,considering the stupid bills flying through Congress.

    I have to go bug my Senators now,at least I’ll get the satisfaction to know my email was one more to be deleted.