« Investigation Reveals That Government Regulators Ignored 'Numerous Weaknesses' in Banks' Risk Management Plans | Home | New York Special Election Turns Into Debate Over AIG Bonuses, Stimulus »
Poll: Stop The AIG Bonuses
This new Gallup poll shouldn't be too shocking: An overwhelming majority of Americans don't like the AIG bonuses.
The poll finds that 76% of respondents want the government to block or recover the bonuses, compared to only 17% who say the government shouldn't intervene. Also, 59% described themselves as "outraged," 26% were "bothered," and only 11% were "not particularly bothered."
In the party breakdowns: 83% of Democrats wants the government to block the bonuses and 70% are outraged; 67% of Republicans want to stop the bonuses and 56% are outraged; and 77% of independents want to block the bonuses and 54% are outraged.
Unfortunately, there is no polling out there on Chuck Grassley's comments.
Advertisement
Josh
Elana
Matt
Eric
OK. WTF, Greenwald at Salon is claiming the Obama admin is trying to set up Dodd as the fall guy for the bonus debacle. I know Dodd isn't looking to good so far in the polling in CT for his run in 2010 but I find it really hard to believe Obama would make Dodd the sacrificial lamb.
This sounds fishy if not even a bit right wing conspiricyish.
Now I don't know what to believe anymore on this issue. I'm just going to keep my TV off and stop surfing these sites...no I can't! I'm addicted...ahhh.
March 18, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shocking.. shocking I say!
March 18, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was reading a few posts on Huffington and the NYTimes about these bonuses. What's interesting about this brouhaha is IF (big if is appropriate) the MSM would bother to go back and read their own papers on or about September 2008 timeframe they may be amazed to see they reported that many of the most current vocal GOPer's hounding Obama, demanding Geithner resign or be fired, and trashing both Democrats and the stimulus were all for keeping the government out of the boardroom just to get the ailing companies to mosey up to the TARP feeding trough. In short, the AIG bonus fiasco is because the repuglicans allowed it to happen while they had control ... Bu$h in the White House calling the shots. So if there is anyone to blame, go tell them to go shout at a mirror.
March 18, 2009 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I forgot to close off the bold statement with a / instead of a \. Sorry for the shout.
March 18, 2009 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
What???
March 18, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Dodd has fired right back.
One thing I find very disconcerting is that just 60 days into his administration, there are numerous Dems in Congress openly challenging the White House and calling them out, sometimes even more strongly than the GOP. I don't want congressional Dems to be sheep and do everything Obama wants like the GOP under Bush, but in the early days of this administration, with the next election not until November 2010, can we have a little more party unity here? If you want to complain, try to do it a little more quietly. Again, I don't want sheep but some of the Dems in congress are already treating the WH as if it/Obama is their #1 enemy. Eye on the ball, kids.
March 18, 2009 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
The numbers in this poll are the reason why all of the folks in DC are falling all over themselves in an attempt to show that they hate AIG more than the next guy. This type of crap strikes a chord with the public more than Bill Ayers or earmarks. Fat cats getting fatter on the taxpayers' dime. Easy to understand - easy to hate.
My great hope is that this will be the straw that breaks the camel's back re: deregulation. This should give Obama and Congress the opportunity to greater regulate the markets so that we don't encounter a mess like this in the future. How can the GOP resist after this? I mean, without the repeal of Glass-Steagall (both sides to blame on that one), I doubt AIG would have even been able to get into the CDS business. And we know that the oversight of the mortgage backed security market was minimal and perhaps virtually non-existent. More oversight and more regulation over the last 10 years probably would have prevented a lot of this mess from happening.
But Obama and the Dems have to want it. They have to take the ball and run with it. While this dustup (small potatoes in the bigger scheme of things) has given them the opportunity to be tougher on Wall Street than government has been in recent history, it also could be evidence that maybe they aren't willing to get much tougher.
March 18, 2009 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Limbaugh, Hannity and Co are up in arms about how Obama wants to steal money from these people, how they earned it and it was rightfully owed to them via their contract. The GOP politicians forgot who they are here in order to win the day by putting the screws to Obama. So now when Obama says he wants to fast track new regulations and form a new regulatory board and will use this issue to push it through, what are is the GOP going to do then. He'll have quote after quote to throw back in their face from their grandstanding and faux outrage.
The GOP have sided strongly with what would usually be a Democrat issue of more regulations. I think they're just catching on to that. When Obama gives his prime time presser next Tuesday he can say there is bi-partisan outrage for the bonuses and thus there should be no problem passing new regulations and creating a new regulatory body in congress and that he hopes to have it fast tracked given the bi-partisan outrage.
March 18, 2009 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Liddy and the con artists at AIG don't give a damn what the public thinks. They don't give a damn about the economy or about saving AIG either. All they care about is their own bottom line, and until Obama finds a way to control and punnish them for their anti-social behavior, they will continue bringing down the rest of us with them because that's all they know.
March 18, 2009 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe the stimulus package can be used to buy a pitchfork and torch for every man, woman, and child in America. Except for AIG employees of course.
March 18, 2009 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing that infuriates me is that business never runs around saying contracts are sacred when it's a union contract.
March 18, 2009 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, that's actually not what the poll says. The poll says that 76% of respondents think "the government should take actions to try to block or recover any bonuses paid to AIG executives."
That's not an insignificant difference. Kleefeld's version suggests that respondents want the government to block/recover the bonuses using whatever means necessary, come hell or high water, etc. Gallup's actual question suggests that 76% of respondents want the government to block/recover the bonuses, but would be content as long as the government made some sort of effort.
The press is assuming way more populist outrage over AIG's bonuses than actually exists. Congressional offices haven't received anywhere near as many constituent calls about the AIG bonuses as you'd expect, given the tone and level of press coverage.
March 18, 2009 11:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is one of those moments of clarity type things that can be painful --but also extremely important.
There has been a strong, visceral, emotional reaction to the A(p)IG bonuses. I mean, the facts are stark --these executives are simply terrible. They are greedy, and truly worthless in my opinion. By simply any reading of the situation, they have done huge damage to the world. People have lost their homes, comitted suicide and families have been destroyed.
But it's not clear that they have done anything illegal. Perhaps they have, but we don't know that right now. We do know that there are apparently contractual obligations to pay these sociopaths their blood money.
And that's where the clarity part comes it.
Like so many Americans, I've been emotional and furious about this. In fantasy, I've suggested all sorts of reprisals and revenges --but it's been a few days and as much as I hate to suggest this, we may want to take a deep breath and assess this situation more carefully and with more clarity.
The general plan that seems to be emerging is to use the tax code to right this wrong. But that raises a much more dangerous dragon in my opinion. Simply put, do we really want to politicize the tax code? That is not its purpose and I have long been a critic of using laws for other than their intended purpose.
While I don't for a minute believe that these executives are being paid to retain them, and clearly these are not performance bonuses, they are contractual obligations. Contracts can be broken, but in a society that incessently complains about the proliferation of litigation, do we really want to encourage the notion that contracts don't actually mean anything?
What I am getting at here is, I am not willing to violate my own principals just because it would make it easier (in my mind) to punish these truly unworthy people. When Rush Limbaugh was discovered to be a drug addict, a lot of people I know wanted to see him prosecuted and jailed. As much as I detest Limbaugh, I essentially defended him --because I don't believe drug use should be a criminal offense. Again, as much as I would relish seeing el Rushbo carted off in handcuffs, I was not willing to compromise my ideals for the short term entertainment of seeing Rush destroyed.
If we learned anything during the Bush/Cheney years, it should be that the ends do not justify the means.
It's the same thing here. A couple of hundred million dollars is a lot of money. But it is nothing compared to the honor of our convictions.
March 19, 2009 8:38 AM | Reply | Permalink