House GOP Leadership Splits Votes On Bill To Tax Back AIG Bonuses
They split on it.
Three key GOP House leaders — Rep John Boehner, Rep Tom Price, the head of the conservative Republican Study Committee, and Rep Mike Pence, the chair of the House Republican conference — all voted against the House Dem bill today that would have slapped a 90% tax on bonuses paid to AIG execs with family incomes topping $250,000.
But House minority whip Eric Cantor voted for the bill, which passed overwhelmingly.
Boehner’s office explained his vote against it by saying that he supported a Republican alternative that would have directed the Treasury Department within two weeks to recoup 100% of the bonuses.
Price’s explanation for voting against it was more in line with the free market orthodoxy that has driven leading conservative media figures to defend AIG and blast Dem efforts to get the bonuses back. In a statement, he blasted the Dem proposal as “more taxes,” adding: “The government has no business interfering in the private sector.”
Meanwhile, Cantor’s explanation for supporting the measure parted ways with those offered by other GOP leaders. He issued a statement declaring that while he preferred the Republican alternative, “my number one duty is to the taxpayer, and when taxpayer funds have been spent erroneously, we have a duty to recoup the losses.”
You guys figure this one out.
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email Greg here.
In terms of political strategy (which seems to be determinative of almost everything these people are presently doing) there might be an advantage in spreading their votes and statements. I think nobody really knows how this is going to play out in the short or the long term and if the Republicans coalesce in one direction and that turns out to be seen as wrong, they’re in trouble. By holding more than one position, they can later point back to how they got it right.
Here is a safe bet. Those House members from very conservative districts voted no and those from more moderate districts voted yes. I believe their vote was almost split right down the middle wasn’t it? Definitely not a coincidence
Who was it who said this economic situation is the equivalent of war? Warren Buffett? Whomever, I wish people would stop worrying about gamesmanship and try to straighten this out. Big picture and telling details.
I should have noted as well the ideological dilemma that the Republicans are in on this one (as indicated by Norquist’s tap dance)…they’ve got a populist rage building against a particular elite (corrupt financial sector institutions and individuals) but it is, for modern conservative movement ideology with its extremist free-market, pro-unfettered capitalism , the WRONG elite against which outrage ought to be directed.
If we think of it that way, the confusion and scattershot of blame and votes looks more comprehensible.
Greg
.
I have an angle that I am going to pursue on my own but obviously you having more resources might want to ask. Are contracts binding when one company takes over another? Like say when BoA bought Merrill did they have to honor Merrill’s employment contracts after the aquisition went through? Because when you think about it what the government did last year was aquire AIG. We now own 80% of the company, we have removed and replaced the leadership and they are only in business because of bailout money. So if the contracts don’t have to be honored in a regular aquisition why would they have to be honored if the government is the one doing the takeover? And if they don’t have to be honored why hasn’t anyone brought that up.