« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Socialist Creep (Sprint?) Continues

House Democrats impose limits on what private companies can pay their employees.

UPDATE:  Although the Times article seems to imply (but not directly state) that only companies receiving bailout money will be affected by the legislation, the actual text of the bill is clear that it can apply to any depository institution with at least $1B in assets. The arrogance of this legislation is breathtaking.

The House Democrats must be really feeling their socialist oats, because they have passed a bill that, if enacted, would represent one of the final steps toward socialism in this country. Having already regulated the minimum wage in this country, House Democrats now are seeking to regulate maximum wages for employee of private companies as well: 

WASHINGTON — The House approved a measure Friday that would put new constraints on executive pay, capitalizing on populist outrage over multimillion-dollar bonuses to Wall Street executives whose companies were bailed out by taxpayers.

The measure passed 237 to 185, with most lawmakers voting along party lines. The Senate will consider executive compensation as part of a regulatory overhaul package after its August recess.

The bill, introduced by Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, enables regulators to ban payments that give workers what the legislation calls “perverse incentives” to take risks that could hurt the nation’s financial system.

The bill gives the Securities and Exchange Commission, among other federal regulators, nine months to propose rules for regulating compensation packages at institutions whose assets total more than $1 billion.

There’s at least a theoretical justification for this, in that the government now has at least part ownership in the corporations at issue.  Of course, that is another way of saying that the theoretical justification is that we have already mostly socialized these industries, so we might as well go ahead and do it whole-hog

This radical measure, however, is too much socialism for even the most liberal of Republicans, including Mike Castle of Delaware.  This bill shows that there are fundamental differences between the ways that even the most conservative of Democrats and the most liberal of Republicans view private industry in this country. The vote on this measure illustrates with crystal clarity that no matter hwo conservative a Democrat might talk, once elected, they have no inclination to respect the free market at all.

COMMENTS

  • mbecker908

    Can we primary these guys. They were the only two House Rs to vote for this travesty.

  • The_Rebel

    the word “perverse” in this legislation.

  • http://theadmiralsbridge.blogspot.com/ Stephen Halsey

    “Point Seven. All wages, prices, salaries, dividends, profits, interest rates and forms of income of any nature whatsoever, shall be frozen at their present figures, as of the date of this directive.”

    Ayn Rand sure had a clear vision of the future, didn’t she?

    • mbecker908

      BO’s not “freezing” wages, etc. he’s going to be “reducing” them.

      Which will also have an unintended consequence because currently the top 1% pay more in taxes than the bottom 95%.

  • http://www.redstate.com/tnjim TNJim

    can’t be trusted:

    The vote on this measure illustrates with crystal clarity that no matter how conservative a Democrat might talk, once elected, they have no inclination to respect the free market at all.

    Well said.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

      http://www.redstate.com/gamecock/2009/08/01/a-rece/

      • Leon H. Wolf

        The solution to pretty much every problem in Washington is less Democrats.

  • izoneguy

    And that is the democrats goal. To dis-incentive the marketpalce to the extent that companies just close shop and will go fishing.

    Less taxes, more unemployment.

    The democrats have it all backwards as usual.

    “Employees” will just become their own C-corps.

  • cclive

    and it still wasn’t clear, is this for all corporations or just the ones who took bailout money?

    • Leon H. Wolf

      I read it again and I’m not so sure either. Hrm.

    • http://jeffemanuel.net Jeff Emanuel

      From the bill text:

      2) the term ‘covered financial institution’ means–

      (A) a depository institution or depository institution holding company, as such terms are defined in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813);

      (B) a broker-dealer registered under section 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78o);

      (C) a credit union, as described in section 19(b)(1)(A)(iv) of the Federal Reserve Act;

      D) an investment advisor, as such term is defined in section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-2(a)(11));

      (E) the Federal National Mortgage Association;

      (F) the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation; and

      (G) any other financial institution that the appropriate Federal regulators, jointly, by rule, determine should be treated as a covered financial institution for purposes of this section.

      • cclive

        but it’s not all corporations, sounds like depository institutions and given the added legalese maybe just those that deal with the FDIC? Still a slippery slope though.

  • izoneguy

    Why wouldn’t salary caps apply to them?

    Many of these people get paid insane amounts of money and go around supporting the most liberal of politicians. I wonder how long they will support politicians who want to tax them to death?

    • Ausonius

      Why not taxfiscate the wages of politicians?

      Let’s tax the party in power at 90% to teach them a lesson about success and how unfair it is to the party they defeated!

    • Husker

      athletes and artists are allowed to keep the spoils of their labor. Athletes/artists were held in high social regard in Communist Russia.

      The Socialist Party USA has a plank in their platform under Human Needs stating: We support guaranteed incomes and grants for artists and performers.

  • erp

    Remember Nixon that other socialist disaster for a president. He instituted wage and price controls too and that resulted in the WIN (Whip Inflation Now) buttons that were so popular during the Ford administration. Carter built on that so that by the time he was finished interest rates were 21% and gas lines were miles long.

    Remember what Santana said, “Those who don’t remember history will be forced to repeat it.”

    • Ausonius

      who states this in his book from 1905 “A Life of Reason.”

      “Santana” was at Woodstock ’69! :)

  • DevilDoc

    What article of the Constitution or amendment to the Constitution can Congress point to that explicitly empowers the U.S. Congress–or infers that Congress has the authority–to establish through legislation the pay and compensation of private business?

    They cannot use the excuse of we bailed them out. Refer to first question and Article One, section eight of the Constitution.

    Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

    To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

    To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

    To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

    To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

    To establish post offices and post roads;

    To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

    To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

    To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

    To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

    To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

    To provide and maintain a navy;

    To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

    To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

    To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

    To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;–And

    To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

  • http://www.marklaiminger.org Lammo

    Oh, wait, you’re describing the progress of the Socialist agenda. Oh, well, I still think it’s a good name. If I was any good with Photoshop I think I could make a good poster out of that one (of course it would help if I owned the software :-) ) !