StanCollender'sCapitalGainsandGames Washington, Wall Street and Everything in Between



Executive Compensation Limits: Obama's Very Strong, Classic Statement

06 Feb 2009
Posted by Stan Collender

Rather than linking to it, reprinted below is the president's full statement on executive compensation from Wednesday.  It's well worth a few minutes of your time because it may well be one of the strongest pro-American statements about the U.S. economic system made by any president in decades.

There are three things I find most striking.

First, you can't help but be impressed by this:

"This is America. We don't disparage wealth. We don't begrudge anybody for achieving success. And we certainly believe that success should be rewarded."

That very succinct (23 words) caputures the American economic dream completely.  My guess is that every small business owner who read or heard it was cheering.

Then there's this, which followed immediately from the three sentences above:

"But what gets people upset -- and rightfully so -- are executives being rewarded for failure..."

Finally, there's this, which ended the sentence above:

"...especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers."

The combination of these three seems to be the definition of what most people would say is...or at least should be...ecoomic life in America.

Here's the whole statement.

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Grand Foyer, The White House
Febuary 4, 2009

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Tim, for your hard work on this issue and on the economic recovery.

The economic crisis we face is unlike any we've seen in our lifetime. It's a crisis of falling confidence and rising debt, of widely distributed risk and narrowly concentrated reward; a crisis written in the fine print of sub-prime mortgages, on the ledger lines of once mighty financial institutions, and on the pink slips that have upended the lives of so many people across this country and cost the economy 2.6 million jobs last year alone.

We know that even if we do everything that we should, this crisis was years in the making, and it will take more than weeks or months to turn things around.

But make no mistake: A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession, a less robust recovery, and a more uncertain future. Millions more jobs will be lost. More businesses will be shuttered. More dreams will be deferred.

And that's why I feel such a sense of urgency about the economic recovery and reinvestment plan that is before Congress today. With it, we can save or create more than three million jobs, doing things that will strengthen our country for years to come. It's not merely a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for long-term economic growth in areas like renewable energy and health care and education.

Now, in the past few days I've heard criticisms that this plan is somehow wanting, and these criticisms echo the very same failed economic theories that led us into this crisis in the first place -- the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems; that we can ignore fundamental challenges like energy independence and the high cost of health care; that we can somehow deal with this in a piecemeal fashion and still expect our economy and our country to thrive.

I reject those theories. And so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change. So I urge members of Congress to act without delay. No plan is perfect, and we should work to make it stronger. No one is more committed to making it stronger than me. But let's not make the perfect the enemy of the essential. Let's show people all over the country who are looking for leadership in this difficult time that we are equal to the task.

At the same time, we know that this recovery and reinvestment plan is only the first part of what we need to do to restore prosperity and secure our future. We also need a strong and viable financial system to keep credit flowing to businesses and families alike. And my administration will do whatever it takes to restore our financial system. Our recovery depends on it. And so in the next week, Secretary Geithner will release a new strategy to get credit moving again -- a strategy that will reflect some of the lessons of past mistakes while laying the foundation of the future.

But in order to restore trust in our financial system, we're going to have to do more than just put forward our plans. In order to restore trust, we've got to make certain that taxpayer funds are not subsidizing excessive compensation packages on Wall Street.

We all need to take responsibility. And this includes executives at major financial firms who turned to the American people, hat in hand, when they were in trouble, even as they paid themselves customary lavish bonuses. As I said last week, this is the height of irresponsibility. It's shameful. And that's exactly the kind of disregard of the costs and consequences of their actions that brought about this crisis: a culture of narrow self-interest and short-term gain at the expense of everything else.

This is America. We don't disparage wealth. We don't begrudge anybody for achieving success. And we certainly believe that success should be rewarded. But what gets people upset -- and rightfully so -- are executives being rewarded for failure, especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers, many of whom are having a tough time themselves.

For top executives to award themselves these kinds of compensation packages in the midst of this economic crisis isn't just bad taste -- it's bad strategy -- and I will not tolerate it as President. We're going to be demanding some restraint in exchange for federal aid -- so that when firms seek new federal dollars, we won't find them up to the same old tricks.

As part of the reforms we're announcing today, top executives at firms receiving extraordinary help from U.S. taxpayers will have their compensation capped at $500,000 -- a fraction of the salaries that have been reported recently. And if these executives receive any additional compensation, it will come in the form of stock that can't be paid up until taxpayers are paid back for their assistance.

Companies receiving federal aid are going to have to disclose publicly all the perks and luxuries bestowed upon senior executives, and provide an explanation to the taxpayers and to shareholders as to why these expenses are justified. And we're putting a stop to these kinds of massive severance packages we've all read about with disgust; we're taking the air out of golden parachutes.

We're asking these firms to take responsibility, to recognize the nature of this crisis and their role in it. We believe that what we've laid out should be viewed as fair and embraced as basic common sense.

And finally, these guidelines we're putting in place are only the beginning of a long-term effort. We're going to examine the ways in which the means and manner of executive compensation have contributed to a reckless culture and a quarter-by-quarter mentality that in turn helped to wrought havoc in our financial system. We're going to be taking a look at broader reforms so that executives are compensated for sound risk management, and rewarded for growth measured over years, not just days or weeks.

We all have to pull together and take our share of responsibility. That's true here in Washington. That's true on Wall Street. The American people are carrying a huge burden as a result of this economic crisis: bearing the brunt of its effects as well as the cost of extraordinary measures we're taking to address them. The American people expect and demand that we pursue policies that reflect the reality of this crisis -- and that will prevent these kinds of crises from occurring again in the future.

Thank you very much.

Why Stop There?

If we are insistent on dictating compensation to companies we are subsidizing, then, hey, let's do it right.

Anyone who gets a federal subsidy, or a government contract, should have their compensation capped.

That includes: Farmers; sugar industry executives; defense contractors; lobbyists; "ministers" who run "community outreach" programs; University presidents; medical school professors and deans; etc. etc.

Somewhere in hell, Lenin must be smiling.


Read the statement again. The

Read the statement again. The plan deals with those who get "extraordinary" help -- i.e., a bailout -- from the government rather than the more routine involvement you mention.


The difference being...?

Respectfully, what's the difference? If a farmer would be out of business but for the government subsidy she receives, how is that different from the bank bailout? The numbers may be greater, but how is the effect any different? "extraordinary" is in the eye of the beholder.

I agree totally with Prof. Samwick that we should have let the banks go through bankruptcy-- that was the mechanism to use.

I understand the outrage at the bankers, I do. But I cannot think of few greater horrors than letting the same people who have run up huge deficits, while at the same time failing to protect the safety of our products, borders, food, water, etc., dictate how business' should be managed.


Difference? The execs are

Difference? The execs are actively making things worse. (Yes, if a farm "subsidy" recipient -- let's say a recipient of soil conservation program money -- started actively seeding the earth with salt, they certainly shouldn't get paid!)

And the execs are just looting. Frankly, if the stockholders were voting on the pay of the execs, many of these guys wouldn't have gotten their ludicrous pay packages, government or no government.


Rich Irony

I agree with Tony, it's the same thing.

And, Obama himself was a big part of the problem at ground zero. Both as a community organizer, and after Harvard Law, as a representative of ACORN in their extortion racket--nice little lending institution you've got here, too bad if something should happen to it; like a bunch of our thugs hanging around your lobby and front door all day long.

Peter Wallison does a good job describing how it worked:

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan/

If Obama wants to place blame, all he has to do is look in the mirror.


Obama ACORN Rezko Ayres Wright Fake Birth Certificate

{begin serious part}

What's the deal with "community organizers" being suddenly a "great evil"? These people volunteer their time or work for often low wages to help people in need, bring food to the homeless or the elderly, sign up people to vote and help make sure they get to the polls, repair old buildings and apartment complexes to make them habitable, work to get the attention of politicians who would otherwise ignore those with no voice, and much, much more. To lump these people together, call them "thugs" who are running an "extortion racket" is the height of ANTI-AMERICAN ANTI-PATRIOTIC ANTI-DEMOCRATIC and ANTI-CHRISTIAN(/BUDDHIST/MUSLIM/HINDU/TAKE YOUR PICK) NONSENSE.

{end serious part}

{begin snarky rant}

OMG, is it possible you folks in your tinfoil hats might JUST SHUT THE HECK UP and listen to something other than Rush Windbag all day long???

ACORN and it's bunch of low-paid and volunteer community organizers caused the Second Great Depression. You better lay off that red kool-aid, buddy. If you don't, then next you know, you'll be spouting off about how the commies will be coming to steal our cows, rape our chickens, and put sand in our gastanks. Just before they make us all stand in line for toilet paper and bread, that is.

Or is it just that because the CRA was aimed at minorities, and ACORN helped make minorities aware of the CRA, and you somehow assume that most minorities are deadbeats, so therefore it's all the poor, dirty brown people's fault that the world came crashing down? And since the crazy people at ACORN and those loonies who created the CRA knew this was going to happen, they put all their stocks in unknown foreign banks who secretly didn't invest a penny in trillions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities so they could weather out the coming economic storm and create the New World Order with the Illuminati running the whole shebang putting 666 on everyone's heads so Satan will know which ones are his?

Hoo, boy! Gotta admit, conservatives are great ones for thinking up these conspiracy theories! Lotta good movies out there, thanks to them. Too bad the padded cells don't have cable.

Oh, nice post though!

{end snarky rant}


PR Sullivan/ Spectator story propagates a lie

Blaming the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) for our current economic predicament seems to be common among some conservatives, even if not factual (that's polite for 'It is a Lie!').
It has been widely debunked, see e.g.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_09/014833.php
or
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/12/more-cra-idiocy/
who points out:
"Indeed, none of the 300+ mortgage originators that imploded were depository banks covered by the CRA."
and
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2008/12/the-wsj-news-pages-weigh-in-dont-b...
and other posts on the Krugman and DeLong blogs.





Recent comments


Advertising


Order from Amazon


Copyright

Creative Commons LicenseThe content of CapitalGainsandGames.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Need permissions beyond the scope of this license? Please submit a request here.