Rep. Brad Sherman (CA), a senior Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, told TPMDC today that the Obama administration could have prevented excessive bonuses from being paid out at AIG -- but it missed the chance.Sherman told me in an interview today that the Treasury Department wouldn't have to be withholding $30 billion in aid from AIG until the company restructures its bonus payments, because Congress already had given Treasury the authority to prevent those bonuses from being paid
The obvious question is, why didn’t that happen?
Sherman voted against the bailout, he explained, because he didn't believe that Treasury would use the power given to it by Congress. As it turned out, the department ultimately exercised its executive compensation powers last month, but the final regulations were riddled with loopholes -- and only applied to companies receiving "extraordinary" assistance from the government in the future, a standard that no company has officially met so far.[...]
But Sherman also counseled wariness, as the nation gives in to expend anger over AIG's bonuses and largely ignores the weekend disclosure of the large banks who benefited because of their status as AIG counterparties in credit default swaps deals.
"Arguably, this thing with bonuses is a red herring they're throwing at us [to distract from what AIG] did with the $170 billion" they've received from the U.S. government, Sherman said. "The bonuses are chump change compared with what's going to the uninsured counterparties."
[R] evelations that-billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars were funneled through AIG to Goldman Sachs -- one of Wall Street's most politically connected firms -- and to European banks including Deutsche Bank, France's Societe Generale and the UK's Barclays could stoke further outrage at the entire U.S. bank bailout.
Hmm. Could.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. There may be some delay before your comment is published. It all depends on how much time M has in the day. But please comment!