« | »

Obama To Limit Bank Exec Pay, Bonuses

From a delighted Associated Press:

U.S. President Barack Obama (R) meets with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, January 29, 2009.

Feds may limit execs’ pay at banks that get aid

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer Jim Kuhnhenn, Associated Press Writer – Tue Feb 3,

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration is tackling the bailout of the battered financial sector on two tracks: overhauling how the government spends the money while devising new executive compensation restrictions for banks that get it.

Administration officials said the pay limits could be announced this week, but said the more complicated task of setting up a new framework for rescuing the nation’s ailing banks would have to wait until early next week.

President Barack Obama, in a grim assessment of the financial industry, said Monday he would probably need more money to bail out troubled institutions to ease a suffocating credit crunch. Still, he added, "some banks won’t make it."

The Treasury Department is expected to announce new rules that limit executive pay for companies that receive "exceptional assistance" under the bailout program

Administration officials say rules under consideration would prohibit institutions receiving "exceptional assistance" from giving severance payments to their top 55 executives. Their bonus pools would be reduced by about 40 percent from the 2007 level. Such companies would include Citigroup Inc., insurance giant American International Group Inc. and automakers General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, all of whom received bailouts under the Bush administration…

Neither Obama nor other administration officials said how much a renewed rescue plan might cost. It is possible that additional help could come from the Federal Reserve, not from Congress…

Officials are considering setting up a government-run "bad bank" to take on the bad debts and investments of financial institutions. In addition, the Treasury could seek help from the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to provide banks with guarantees against losses on assets backed by residential and commercial real estate loans, as it did with Citigroup in November…

Why shouldn’t Mr. Obama decide how much bank executives should make in salaries and bonuses? After all, he “won” with a whopping 52% of the vote.

We all know that the President and the federal government should decide everything. That is what this country is all about.

The framers wrote our Constitution as a blueprint for such a command economy. Nothing was ever meant to be beyond the clutches of the federal government.

Oh, never mind that Mr. Obama’s recovery plans are starting to sound more like Mr. Hitler’s than Mr. Roosevelt’s.

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, February 3rd, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

20 Responses to “Obama To Limit Bank Exec Pay, Bonuses”

  1. Reality Bytes says:

    OK – Reality Sometimes Does Byte!

    Either we have elected leadership that is either totally ignorant, or the biggest liar/fascists in our country’s history. They either know that history proves lowering government’s taking of taxes stimulates an economy & are lying to Americans because they are so invested in their Surge in Class Warfare, or they are ignorant of it.

    They either know that government spending HAS NEVER recovered an economy, in fact doing so has historically stymied growth & lying about it in order to consolidate their own power base for generations, or they are ignorant of it.

    Perhaps if more Americans took a minute to see that their neighbor making more money isn’t the problem, it is the nationalization of our free enterprise, which Is Immoral At Best, National Suicide At Its Worse, then there is what these chumps call Hope.

    If more Americans realized that the while the government continues with its “Pay Me Today – Pay Right Away” excessive taxation of its citizens (Obama cabinet secretaries excepted of course) & businesses (by other industrial nations’ standards) while simultaneously printing trillions of dollars & borrowing trillions more with the promise of pay back sometime past tomorrow, Is Immoral At Best, National Suicide At Its Worse, then perhaps there is Hope.

    If Americans took the time to study the hundreds of years of examples that cutting taxes is not a tilt toward the rich, but a declaration by government that its hording of citizens’ monies through taxation produces a bigger bureaucracy while whittling personal liberty with a smaller economy Is Immoral At Best, National Suicide At Its Worse, then perhaps there is Hope.

    If more Americans would stop to consider that declaring higher taxes is not compassionate but Immoral At Best, National Suicide At Its Worse, then perhaps there is Hope.

    Instead, while our feckless leaders point their crooked fingers at free enterprise while they rape future American generations of their liberty & free enterprise with a multi trillion dollar spending bill that further cements their future as the New American Elite Ruling Class, it is we Americans’ patriotic duty to roll over & accept what has been historically A Failure .

    It seems the knuckle draggers are on the far left of this issue & from the look of things; it seems fitting if everyone wore the same government issued brown shirt accordingly. That would suit them just fine. They’d probably even call it another stimulus plan.

    • wardmama4 says:

      These are the same losers who are/voted for:
      1) Joe Biden (during the early primary) calling The One ™ ‘clean and articulate’ now his VP. . .
      2) The One’s ™ Opening salvo – ‘America is the greatest country in the World, now join with me to change it.’
      3) Joe Biden (gotta love this particular species of moobat) – saying ‘Paying taxes is patriotic’ – now giving a pass Administration position to one tax cheat after another.
      4) The One ™ promising to take Public Financing and then backing out to ‘protect himself from the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy that was going to attack him’
      5) ACORN being implicated in 14 different state election frauds – being given money in the stimulus

      These people no longer care about honesty, transparency, logic, the rule of law, the Constitution or America.

  2. standup408 says:

    President Barack Obama, in a grim assessment of the financial industry, said Monday he would probably need more money to bail out troubled institutions to ease a suffocating credit crunch. Still, he added, “some banks won’t make it.”

    If things are so dire why don’t those idiots up there spend the 350 billion left from the 1st stimulust package? All we heard was the importance of President Bush having this 2nd package on his desk so he could sign it so so the messiah could put it where it was needed.

    All through the election the demoncrats told us, just elect us we can fix the problem. Hell they can’t even pay their taxes.

    • caligirl9 says:

      standup, there’s a difference between “can’t” and “don’t/won’t.” Can’t may mean they don’t have the money to pay the taxes.

      Don’t and won’t means they were hoping to get away without paying—but they were always able to pay, because when confronted they write out a check and say “Sowwy! My bad!”

  3. proreason says:

    Dear Obamy, can Mrs Reason and I eat out next weekend or should we cook at home?

    And I’m thinking about getting new tires for my car. Is that ok? and what brand do I need to buy?

    • 1sttofight says:

      Mr. proreason,

      Thank you for contacting your benevilant Goverment. Fill out ALL the appropriot OFFICIAL US GOVERMENT FORMS and we will tell you exactly what to do .

      Your Great Leader,


      And so it starts…

  4. Colonel1961 says:

    I, for one, am glad to see Mr. Obama, et al., make my decisions for me! Thank you! Now I can go downstairs and watch Oprah and not worry about anything at all… Whee!!

  5. Confucius says:

    I think Obama should have income limits too.

    (1) He benefitted from government assistance as a child in the form of food stamps.
    (2) He benefitted from government assistance as an adult in the form of affirmative action.
    (3) His benefits have been “exceptional,” if not historic.

    Ergo, Obama should have to live with income limits too.

  6. oldswimcoach says:

    Income limits on executive level positions always result in incompetent management.

    Exhibit A the US Congress
    Exhibit B the US Senate

    I rest my case!

  7. aze_216 says:

    yeah – limiting pay for executives.. that should really bring in the talent. On the other hand, it should warn anybody in the finance industry who wants to get their sticky fingers in the money pie of what will happen if they go for a slice.

  8. BillK says:

    I’m still waiting for Barry to limit lawmakers’ pay.

    OK, I’m just kidding but it would be great were it to happen.

  9. brad says:

    I disagree this time with S&L, I think if you accept public assistance like AIG, you have to agree to certain things. And the bailout money was not intended for providing bonuses. If it’s your money, you can do what you want, but it’s not your money, it’s our money—stolen from us, to give to corporations.

    Gay people always said, “What we do in the privacy of our own bedrooms is no one else’s busines.” TRUE!


    You forfeit some of your privacy when you: try to change PUBLIC laws, teach PUBLIC school children you “private” ways of life, engage in PUBLIC street marches, accept PUBLIC money for prevention and educational goals, and demonstrate PUBLICLY about everything you hate.

    Public/Private….there’s a difference.

  10. Steve says:

    “I disagree this time with S&L, I think if you accept public assistance like AIG, you have to agree to certain things.”

    Remember that some of the banks were forced into accepting a government “buy in,” whether they wanted or even needed it or not.

    Paulson Forced Banks To Accept US ‘Buy In’ | Sweetness & Light

  11. Odie44 says:

    The bumbling fool Bamabi cant even get pay right.

    CEO’s and other executives recieve pay based upon Board (public) votes, which is usually stacked with friends, insiders and folks who sit on each others boards for a few million combined each year. Whether or not they receive fed funds, which is a misnomer since all banks must receive overnight Fed funds for deposit – attempting to cap exec salaries is missing the mark and would have a zero net effect on the current financial issues today.

    Maybe the Pittsburgh Pirates can turn their team around, after 20 years of sub .500 ball – by hiring someone for 1/20th of any other managers pay. I am confident this wil solve their problem…

    Bambi is resetting the phrase “one step forward, two steps back” each and every day of his presidency…

    This dolt thinks capping the top end creates value on the bottom – which doesnt friggin happen in a capitalistic financial-driven market. It is also why every attempt from the likes of Marx, Castro, Jong Il, etc have failed miserably.

    Its time for the muslim/Marixst dunce to exit stage left. Now.

    • Colonel1961 says:

      Excellent point about 1/20th the pay, O44. These CEOs can go elsewhere and make many times more – why should they stick around? And, pay trickles down. If the top guy is only making $500k, what are the underlings going to make?

      If you want change/progress, fire them all and let the board/shareholders elect their own people and pay them what the market dictates…

    • Odie44 says:


      Agreed – which ironically are covenants of bankruptcy proceedings – restructure based on ability to perform and repay debt. Results oriented pay scale, led and voted by people not associated with prior failure of leadership and these banks will start making honest money, not on the backs of leveraging 10 times bad debt on existing bad debt.

      While some CEO’s do not and have not justified their ridiculous multi million parachutes (3 Obama econ “experts” come to mind) – most CEO’s earn it, whether in salary and/or performance bonuses.

      And speaking of pay – didn’t Congress just get another pay raise, while performing at a 9% approval rate, during a deep recession on their watch???

    • proreason says:

      Limiting the pay is about 2 things.

      1. Class warfare
      2. Another step towards socialism.

      Victor Davis Hanson has a story about having a gallstone attack when he was visiting Libya. As soon as he discovered the janitor and his surgeon were making the same salary, he decided to get out as fast as he could.

  12. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Disappointment turns into despair. Despair becomes acquiescence. Acquiescence becomes ambivalence. Ambivalence becomes implementation. Implementation becomes obligation. Obligation is responsibility….to uphold the socialist policies and regulations imposed upon the people through the process of the aforementioned.

    If we can break this cycle at any one point in that chain…we can win.

    Disappointment must become disgust
    Despair must become desire
    Acquiescence must become resistance
    Ambivalence must become the need to know the truth.

    That way the individual citizen can keep their rights intact and maintain the responsibility of being a part of a free nation. Not a citizen who’s responsibility has become to uphold a nation.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »