Stimulus Package Contains Strict New Restrictions On Executive Pay

[jefferson_dem]

Congress Trumps Obama by Cuffing Bonuses for CEOs

By Tomoeh Murakami Tse
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 14, 2009; A01

The stimulus package Congress was poised to pass last night imposes new limits on executive compensation that could significantly curb multimillion dollar pay packages on Wall Street and go much further than restrictions imposed by the Obama administration last week.

The bill, which President Obama is expected to sign into law next week, limits bonuses for executives at all financial institutions receiving government funds to no more than a third of their annual compensation. The bonuses must be paid in company stock that can only be redeemed once the government investment has been repaid. The measure seeks to address public outrage over extravagant Wall Street paydays as taxpayers bail out the industry.

Unlike the rules issued by the White House, the limits in the stimulus bill would apply to top executives and the highest-paid employees at all 359 banks that have already received government aid.

"This is a big deal. This is a problem," said Scott Talbott, chief lobbyist for the largest financial services firms. "It undermines the current incentive structure."

Talbott said banking executives expected certain restrictions would be applied to them but are concerned that some of the most highly paid employees, such as top traders, who bring in hefty sums of money for the company, would flee to hedge funds or foreign banks that have not accepted U.S. government funds.

The White House restrictions capped executive pay at $500,000 and allowed companies to award unlimited stock. Those rules applied only to institutions that receive government funds in the future and under limited circumstances.

<SNIP>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/13/AR2009021303288_pf.html

[firedupdem]

1. self delete

[opihimoimoi]

3. No shit...let them go if they be unhappy...there are many out there to take their places and do a

better job

[Hansel]

12. Yep. All of the people whose shoulders they climbed on to get those jobs.

For every one of them there are 100 they stepped on on the way up who are just as qualified, more deserving and who would do a better job. It takes a certain moxie and ruthlessness to make it to the top and rarely is it about being the best.

[bbernardini]

2. I have a better "incentive structure," Mr. Talbott:

Either they accept these terms or we hand them over to a mob of people whose lives they ruined.

[mucifer]

4. Too bad Obama tried to water it down. Doesn't matter now. Obama's gonna sign the bill!

[Pirate Smile]

7. Obama didn't try to water it down. It is just different from the ones they announced earlier.

It is just a shitty article. If Obama didn't want it in there then it probably wouldn't be in there.

[Xipe Totec]

5. How is this trumping President Obama?

He was outraged by the executive compensations, so I don't see why this would "trump" him.

Also note how the M$M refers to President Obama just by his last name, but it was always President Bush this, President Bush that.

What lack of respect for the Office of the President.

[jefferson_dem]

6. Word.

I've changed the subject line here to better reflect objective reality...and the title provided by HuffPost.

[Xipe Totec]

16. Excellent!

I think we need to drive the point home with a sledge hammer:

This is YOUR PRESIDENT!

Treat him with RESPECT!

[Pirate Smile]

8. It is just a piece of sh#$ article trying to create conflict that isn't really there.

[NYC_SKP]

9. That congress went even further, I guess. Huffpost....sheesh.

If their restrictions went beyond what Obama had wanted, then I guess you could say they trumped him, exceeded his restrictions.

Faux journalism, ya know. :shrug:

[Pirate Smile]

10. EXCUSE ME - Did every Republican in the House and all but three in the Senate vote AGAINST

executive pay or bonus limits for the companies that took TARP funds?

Hmmmmm. That might look bad. They also voted against a lot of jobs in their districts and states. Hmmmmm. Not good. :evilgrin:

[Doremus]

14. Yes, but they'll never let their constituents know.

A lot of them are already issuing statements to the folks back home about how they support the local projects/interests in the stimulus that they actually voted AGAINST.

Once a lying MFer, always a lying MFer.

[AtomicKitten]

11. Or maybe Obama got exactly what he wanted after all. n/t

[Lasher]

13. Let them flee.

If half a million dollars in salary for one year is not incentive enough, let them go bankrupt other companies.

[and-justice-for-all]

15. See ya...

If the people want a bank, they can invest in one themselves. Then the people can decide how much the bank executive can make and know just where their money is being used.