About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors
Dean Barker
Laura Clawson
Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe
William Tucker

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
Katrina Swett
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Hodes to Question AIG Execs Tomorrow

by: Dean Barker

Tue Mar 17, 2009 at 19:12:14 PM EDT


Game. On. (email release):
Washington, DC--- Congressman Paul Hodes will attend the hearing of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises tomorrow that will focus on the American Insurance Group (AIG). Congressman Hodes will have the opportunity to question top AIG executives.

When: Wednesday March 18, 2009; 10 a.m.

Where: Rayburn House Office Building, Room 2128

And below the fold, two more releases from our next Senator: one on AIG, the other a letter to Chase.
Dean Barker :: Hodes to Question AIG Execs Tomorrow
Congressman Paul Hodes' Statement on the AIG Executive Bonuses

Washington, DC - Congressman Paul Hodes released the following statement on the news that the American Insurance Group (AIG), which received over $165 billion in taxpayer bailout funds, has paid $450 million in bonuses to top executives.

"After AIG posted record fourth quarter losses, I was deeply concerned that the company did not have a viable plan to continue operation without relying on even more taxpayer bailouts. I wrote to Secretary Geithner asking that he demand a plan from AIG demonstrating that they would stabilize their company without having to take billions more in taxpayer dollars.

We now know what their plan is: take billions of taxpayer dollars, while giving their failed executives millions in taxpayer financed bonuses.  This type of corporate behavior is intolerable.

These executives should do the right thing and return their bonuses. It is wrong when millions of Americans are losing their jobs and struggling to pay their bills that the taxpayers are forced to subsidize AIG's failed corporate executives."

Mr. Jamie Dimon

President/CEO

JP Morgan Chase Bank

2 Bowery

New York, NY 10013

March 17, 2009

Dear Mr. Dimon,

We are outraged by the potential actions of your company to outsource tens of thousands of U.S. jobs as well as your comments made to the United States Chamber of Commerce on Thursday. We would like to remind you that the taxpayers of the United States of America contributed $25 billion to your company to help stabilize our economy not send jobs overseas.

Just yesterday you indicated that the "constant vilification of corporate America" by our public officials is what is hurting our country.  This pronouncement comes less than 72 hours after reports surfaced that your institution plans to spend nearly $400 million on outsourcing of jobs to India-an increase of 25 percent.  JP Morgan Chase is not a victim of constant vilification, but it will be viewed and criticized based on actions like this outsourcing policy.

651,000 Americans lost their jobs in February. 3.8 million American lost their jobs in the last 12 months. Every day an average of 21,000 men and women receive a pink slip and with it the fear of an uncertain economic future. How should these American workers, many of them your consumers, be expected to have hope for a better future when the very companies they contributed to through the Troubled Assets Relief Program outsource the jobs they desperately need?

In your testimony on Feb. 11, 2009 to the House Committee on Financial Services you said that you looked forward to working with the committee "to help find solutions to our current economic problems, to keep American families in their homes and to begin to restore confidence in our financial markets." There is no better way to make your words immediately ring hollow than taking actions to outsource thousands of jobs that Americans could perform.

In the coming days, we expect to hear more about your plans to invest $400 million in the workers of India and the impact your actions will have on communities across America including potential future layoffs.

One source from an article published in the Economic Times of India stated almost enthusiastically that "JP Morgan is one of the first banks in the U.S. to flesh out its outsourcing strategy ever since the banking meltdown..." This is one area where your institution should be ashamed of leading. Your actions will be watched-and possibly followed-by other institutions in the financial sector. Trends of this nature concern us and will be followed closely as well.

Regards,

Paul W. Hodes

Member of Congress

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
I hope (4.00 / 5)
he scare the AIG-zus out of them.

We represent the Lollypop Guild, the Lollypop Guild, the Lollypop guild.

No posing (4.00 / 1)
This thing cannot be used for simple denunciations. People will need to give back bonuses; people will need to be fired; maybe people will need to be prosecuted for fraud.

Or everyone in authority - explicitly including Barack Obama and Paul Hodes - will look complicit.

Last weekend Obama might have been able to dampen this by saying (more eloquently) "Some creeps are getting big bonuses they don't deserve, and that sucks, but we need to let that pass and focus on the bigger problem." When he chose instead to express outrage he signed on to fix it.


BH readers in Congress? (4.00 / 2)
Looks like somebody's been reading elwood, proposing a stiff tax penalty on these here bonuses. Rep. Gary Peters has elwood's rate beat by 15%, and that's on top of the 35% bracket!

Now we're getting somewhere.


[ Parent ]
My own approach (4.00 / 3)
would be to introduce a big hike on the marginal rate for EVERYONE over a certain income level.

If that resulted in the other wealthy throwing AIG execs under the bus, I could live with that.


[ Parent ]
I want to agree with this (0.00 / 0)
When he chose instead to express outrage he signed on to fix it.

But instead I feel like he can always claim he has bigger fish to fry.


[ Parent ]
To clarify - (4.00 / 1)
He didn't make an explicit commitment, and he can indeed make logical claims that this is not a priority.

But politically he put the ball in play. If he makes those claims today he will be painted as weak.


[ Parent ]
I think he saw the signs (0.00 / 0)
And reacted. If he wanted to really commit, he would have made a stronger statement.

(That said, "every legal means" was the phrase, I believe, so maybe I am just taking the "hands are tied" view too literally. In other words, he was on safe ground, because there are no legal means -- but I hope he's not being that slippery.)


[ Parent ]
There are MANY legal means (0.00 / 0)
once it enters the political arena.

  1. Obama puts out a press release listing the names and addresses of the AIG bonus recipients who have refused to turn their bonuses in.
  2. Obama announces that no TARP or stimulus money will go to any firm that hires any of the people on that blacklist.
  3. The government puts AIG into bankruptcy. (I think that would be a bad move, but it would indeed be legal - Obama now has to defend not doing that despite his outrage.)


[ Parent ]
OK (4.00 / 2)
How about legal means that aren't creepy? :-!

[ Parent ]
Do you really think it's creepy (0.00 / 0)
To give the AIG execs who got bonuses worth more than (say) $50,000 two weeks to return the money, with the list made public of those who do not?

If that's too mean, Obama had no business complaining about the bonuses to begin with.


[ Parent ]
No that would be fine (4.00 / 1)
It was step 2 that seemed a bit draconian.

[ Parent ]
The ball was already in play (4.00 / 1)
he just kicked it hard

We represent the Lollypop Guild, the Lollypop Guild, the Lollypop guild.

[ Parent ]
Opportunity for Hodes to Make Meaningful Change (0.00 / 0)
David H. Coltin                 March 15, 2009                                      
44 Tyng Street
Newburyport, Ma. 01950

Representative Paul Hodes                                    
1317 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Representative Hodes:

I appreciate your concerns in forwarding my email and May 23, 2007 letter attachment (to Joseph Laplante) to Representative Carol Shea-Porter.  I am, however, forwarding the enclosed packet to you, as I feel you are most qualified based on your legal background and ethics stance to conduct the initial inquiry.  I will also forward a copy to Representative Shea-Porter.

Certainly the denial of an individual's basic constitutional rights affects all citizens, whether they live in the 1st District, 2nd District, or anywhere else.

Your comments at the Madoff hearing in trying to determine how, despite warnings back to at least 1999, Madoff continued to operate his alleged scheme is relevant to this matter.
How could the State of New Hampshire continue a cover-up dating back to 1994 when the proof is so simple?  

Based on the Professional Conduct Committee's responses to my filing of October 8, 2008, it is clearly evident that the committee itself is involved in a cover-up.  To confirm this, I am asking that you send a representative to the Attorney Discipline Office to determine if the committee conducted a de novo review as required and were any of the documents turned in by the respondents

Your findings will implicate Attorney General Ayotte as she has refused to honor her oath of office since she first became aware of this case five years ago. It underscores her unwillingness to uphold the state's responsibility to provide witness statements when state actors are at fault.  Further it underscores her unwillingness to file both criminal and PCC complaints against these same state actors when the evidence is beyond any reasonable doubt.  

I suggest reviewing the statements made by Governor Lynch and the Congressional Delegation during the Ray Burton fiasco. The fact that Councilor Burton had knowledge
that he hired a convicted sex offender is not a crime.  There was no proof that he knew that his employee had failed to register.  Yet the governor and the Congressional Delegation considered this to be such an egregious judgmental error that they called for
Burton's immediate resignation.  This pales in comparison to the judgmental errors that Attorney General Ayotte has committed with respect to this case.

I will be forwarding additional information, however, due to the impending nomination, I ask that you give this your immediate attention.  The fact that a federal judge has asked the U.S. Attorney in New Hampshire for a review and that there has been no response since November, 2007, further highlights the urgency of this request.

You will find that I have not forwarded all my documents in my October 2008 complaint.
What I have forwarded, however, is more than sufficient to seek action.

I am available at anytime to answer any questions you may have.

Sincerely,

David H. Coltin
davecoltin@netscape.net     978-521-1237 (H)   978-288-8658 work



[ Parent ]
This outsourcing thing (4.00 / 1)
is obscene. I don't care if these jokers only get a tenth of the productivity per dollar from hiring Americans (and yes, I do get that we live in a global economy) to perform these services they plan to outsource, at least every dollar they would spend here stays here (at least until the next trip to Wal-Mart). Every buck sent out never seems to come back anymore. No wonder the Indians are cheering, we're helping their economy with our tax dollars.

We throw the banks life preservers because they are drowning, and they give away the life preservers to someone else. No wonder they're drowning, they're too stupid to swim.

Kinda like those who trade their family's food stamps for cigs and booze.


I was thinking of transfering (0.00 / 0)
a balance from Chase to somewhere else.  This news pretty much decided it for me.

birch, finch, beech

[ Parent ]
The federal government owns 80% of AIG. (0.00 / 0)
Short of political concerns regarding words like "nationalization", why are not 80% of the members of AIG's Board of Directors appointed by the government?

"Notorious A.I.G." (4.00 / 3)
There is no book on a calamity of this monstrous proportion. If it looks like no one knows quite what to do, except to rail like the NY Post headline today...its because we've never been here before.It's bedtime for bonzo time.
http://www.nypost.com/
Not So Fast You Greedy Bastards"

Grassely wants them to committ Hari Kari, Buchannan says we should string them up...the mob's anger must be tempered by the Rule Of Law. Obama better fire Geithner or Bernanke right quick to quell the pitchfork brigades.

We represent the Lollypop Guild, the Lollypop Guild, the Lollypop guild.


[ Parent ]
Looking at the long term, (0.00 / 0)
I don't know about general size, but considering the risky nature of the financial sector, no financial institution should be allowed to be as big and pervasive as AIG is.  We should not have to worry that short of a taxpayer bailout, the failure of a single company's inherently risky derivatives division can bankrupt every major public transportation system in America, or that that would just be the tip of the iceberg.

Looking forward, we should strive to create a system in which bailouts aren't necessary, even if they are necessary in the short term.  There's no incentive to act responsibly when we socialize the risk and privatize the reward.


[ Parent ]
Fire Summers & Geithner (0.00 / 0)
With all due respect to the Congressman, we need to flush the WS types out of the system.  Glenn Greenwald wrote today that Sen. Dodd added a clause to restrict bonuses in the bailout and Summers/Geithner fought to remove the restriction.  Now these two are pointing the blame to Dodd.  We need a few good people with no ties to WS to unravel this mess.  And if we lose a few big companies in the process, we can weather that as we have done in the past.  When I worked for DEC, the prospect of losing the company seemed like the end of the world.  Well, life goes on even after a loss of that size.  We can go on without AIG, Citi Bank and BofA.



It's nothing more then a show (0.00 / 0)
The arguments over the bonus are nothing more then a political show.  The contracts were known about well in advance before the bailout bill was approved and if you take the time to read the bailout bill you'd find this on page 569-570

(i) shall not be construed to prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a written employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the designee of the Secretary.

That was an amendment put into the bill by Chris Dodd and it's that specific amendment that now allows the bonuses everyone is up in arms about.

Of course the show will continue and we'll see calls to tax all that money back.  Most of the suggestions will fail and before anything is accomplished this story will fade out of the media spot light and we'll have all forgotten about it.  Sad really.


[ Parent ]
The Show (0.00 / 0)
I agree on the show piece.  It's the $b's that are flowing out to cover the CDS that are a real problem.  Hence my belief that we should let the companies mired in the swaps to fail.

I'm not a fan of Dodd but I think G&S care more about their WS friends then they do about the rest of us.  We will have to pay for all of this bailout either thru taxes or thru a lower standard of living.  NPR's Fresh Air did a couple of pieces on swaps with Greenberger one of which you can find here:

http://www.npr.org/templates/s...


[ Parent ]
Obama: Yo, I got this! (0.00 / 0)

I know Washington's all in a tizzy, and everybody is pointing fingers at each other, and saying it's their fault, the Democrats' fault, and the Republicans' fault. Listen: I'll take responsibility. I'm the President.

We didn't draft these contracts. We've got a lot on our plate. But it is appropriate when you're in charge to make sure that stuff doesn't happen like this, so we're going to do everything we can to fix it.

So for everybody in Washington who's busy scrambling to try to figure out how to blame somebody else, just go ahead and talk to me, because it's my job to fix these messes even if I don't make them.

But what's just as important is that we make sure we don't find ourselves in this situation again, where taxpayers are on the hook for losses in bad times, and all the wealth that's generated in good times goes to those who are at the very top of the income ladder.


(h/t Jed Lewison)

www.KusterforCongress.com - www.paulhodesforsenate.com

www.nikitsongas.com - www.devalpatrick.com



Connect with BH
     
Powered by: SoapBlox