Pay for Performance Act of 2009

[chipper]

I'm sorry to have to write this. I sincerely wish this were insignificant.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1664/show (OpenCongress seems to be a wonderful site. They make the voting records and bill details very accessible. Might be a good site to book-mark just in case you ever want to see how your congressman voted on a certain issue).

Under this act, the financial institutions who received bailout funds under TARP will be subject to the federal government's power to:
-limit bank executives' incomes which are deemed "unreasonable or excessive according to standards established by the Secretary of the Treasury."
-require that banks use government-created "performance-based measures" when determining whether the institution "MAY provide a bonus or retention payment."
-require banks to release to the government "both a prospective and retrospective annual report for each subsequent calendar year" regarding the number of upper-tier salaries earned by executives

As if the 90% (bill of attainder) tax on AIG bonuses from a few weeks ago were not enough, this new act has surfaced as the culmination of class warfare against the wealthy who happen to work in the banking industry along with a blatant powergrab of the federal government into the private sector.

In the words of a blogger on the site: "This is why you should always worry about who is contributing to your cause. You don't want your hated enemy running your company and it's fairly clear that the left hates those that are running the business world. "

When did it become constitutional for government to fire CEOs (which Geithner is once-more considering for many banks... some of which apparently resisted TARP money in the first place) and monitor private corporation wages? I'm afraid the government is now viewing the banks as public domain after the bailouts...

Make your judgment. Is an offended sense of moral justness stemming from high bank executive salaries worth setting the precedent of disregarding the Constitution?

p.s. Anyone else find it suspicious that Geithner gets to set the standards for "excessive" salaries when he is the one who orchestrated this mess by knowingly allowing the AIG bonuses to be inserted in the bailout? Seems like someone should be limiting his salary because his performance surely hasn't measured up to the roughly $200,000 taxpayers are paying him...

[J.Q. Citizen]

I'm sorry to have to write this. I sincerely wish this were insignificant.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h1664/show (OpenCongress seems to be a wonderful site. They make the voting records and bill details very accessible. Might be a good site to book-mark just in case you ever want to see how your congressman voted on a certain issue).

Under this act, the financial institutions who received bailout funds under TARP will be subject to the federal government's power to:
-limit bank executives' incomes which are deemed "unreasonable or excessive according to standards established by the Secretary of the Treasury."
-require that banks use government-created "performance-based measures" when determining whether the institution "MAY provide a bonus or retention payment."
-require banks to release to the government "both a prospective and retrospective annual report for each subsequent calendar year" regarding the number of upper-tier salaries earned by executives

As if the 90% (bill of attainder) tax on AIG bonuses from a few weeks ago were not enough, this new act has surfaced as the culmination of class warfare against the wealthy who happen to work in the banking industry along with a blatant powergrab of the federal government into the private sector.

In the words of a blogger on the site: "This is why you should always worry about who is contributing to your cause. You don't want your hated enemy running your company and it's fairly clear that the left hates those that are running the business world. "

When did it become constitutional for government to fire CEOs (which Geithner is once-more considering for many banks... some of which apparently resisted TARP money in the first place) and monitor private corporation wages? I'm afraid the government is now viewing the banks as public domain after the bailouts...

Make your judgment. Is an offended sense of moral justness stemming from high bank executive salaries worth setting the precedent of disregarding the Constitution?

p.s. Anyone else find it suspicious that Geithner gets to set the standards for "excessive" salaries when he is the one who orchestrated this mess by knowingly allowing the AIG bonuses to be inserted in the bailout? Seems like someone should be limiting his salary because his performance surely hasn't measured up to the roughly $200,000 taxpayers are paying him...

I'm very unhappy and uncomfortable with this bill. I intensely dislike our government with coming up with laws that contain words like "unreasonable and excessive". That is as moronic and wrong as creating a law that imposes "fairness" in some way. The terms MUST be defined.

That being said, my previous objection is general in nature. This bill is "attainder" and ex post facto in nature as well as being a severe intrusion of government into the private sector. If they are going to provide this money, which I believe is wrong in the first place, then they should leave it at that. Why? Two reasons. First, we are talking about pennies on the dollar relative to the cost of the bailouts, or whatever provision any of this falls under, relative to the overall cost. Some kind of moral outrage or some kind of concern over the improper use of our tax money? Please, give me a break!!!! The outrage should be over the bailouts and excessive government spending NOT what the companies do with the money. Second, very few of our government officials have a clue as to how to run a business. What gives anyone the confidence that our government has any ability whatsoever to run a business?

As for Turbo Tax Cheat Geithner, I believe he did more than allow the provision to be added, I believe he forced Dodd to add the amendment to the spendulus bill that provided for the pre Feb 11 exemption.