Should government limit executive pay?
From CNN's Jack Cafferty:
President Obama is promising to take "the air out of golden parachutes” by capping how much executives whose companies are getting bailout money can earn.
The president wants to cap how much executives whose companies received bailout money can earn.
The president set a $500,000 cap on senior executive pay at those institutions that are in the worst shape and get money from the government in the future.
Mr. Obama highlighted last year's handout of $18 billion in Wall Street bonuses – something he called "shameful"... saying that's the kind of disregard that brought about our current crisis.
Under his plan, companies that want to pay their executives more will have to do it through shares of stock that can't be sold until the companies pay back the government.
There's more. The new rules also require that shareholders have more say about how much the executives get paid. And, companies will have to show more transparency when it comes to costs for things like holiday parties and office renovations. The president also promised more reforms to come, as his administration cracks down on a quote "reckless culture."
This all is starting to sound a bit like socialism. We either have a "free enterprise" system or we don't. Granted abuses by certain CEOs have invited this, but where are we going when the government starts dictating how much people are allowed to earn?
Here’s my question to you: Should the government dictate executive compensation at companies that get bailout money?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How to end bitter divide in Washington?
From CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Despite all the lofty talk during the election about change, hope and ushering in a new era in Washington... most people don't think it's happened.
A new Gallup poll shows only 21% of Americans think the tone between Democrats and Republicans in our nation’s capital has gotten better.
A new Gallup poll shows only 21% of Americans think the tone and "level of civility" between Democrats and Republicans in our nation's capital has gotten better since President Obama came into office last month. 23% think things have gotten worse. More than half – 51%– say it's stayed the same.
The poll also found that Democrats are more likely to say the tone has improved, not surprising since they have one of their own in the White House, while Republicans are more likely to say it's gotten worse. Independents are about evenly split.
Last week's party-line vote in the House of Representatives on the economic stimulus package was the nation's first look at how Washington might operate during the Obama administration... and the partisanship looked a lot like what we saw under President Bush. This vote came despite the president's efforts at bipartisanship – a including a stop on Capitol Hill to meet with Republican leaders and hosting a bipartisan Super Bowl party at the White House. The New York Times reports that Republicans have been scoring invitations to the White House nearly as often as Democrats have. One Republican Congressman who attended the Super Bowl Party says such a meeting "humanizes and personalizes" your opponent and that it helps people put politics aside.
Here’s my question to you: What is your prescription for ending the bitter partisanship in Washington?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Pres. Obama’s credibility hurt by tax scandals?
Questions about tax issues have now clouded three nominations. (PHOTO CREDIT: JIM WATSON/AFP/GETTY IMAGES)
From CNN's Jack Cafferty:
President Obama says he "screwed up” when it came to the nomination of Tom Daschle as Health and Human Services Secretary. No kidding.
Daschle dropped out after days of questioning about more than $100,000 in unpaid taxes. President Obama says it's important for his administration to send a message that there aren't two sets of rules when it comes to paying taxes - for prominent people and for ordinary folks. That might prompt one to ask, "Then why do you keep nominating people who haven't paid their taxes for high ranking positions in your administration?"
Questions about tax issues have now clouded three nominations. Besides Daschle, another top appointee, Nancy Killefer, pulled her name from consideration as chief White House Performance officer – because of unpaid taxes for a household employee. And then, of course, there was Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. He was eventually confirmed by the Senate – but only after days of scrutiny and numerous public apologies. The man who will now oversee the IRS failed to pay tens of thousands of dollars in taxes himself.
None of this is good news for the Obama administration. It opens up the White House to a lot of criticism from Republicans and on newspaper editorial pages. They say President Obama preaches one thing – ethics, responsibility, etc. – but practices another. It also raises serious questions about the administration's vetting process. Who keeps submitting the names of tax cheats for high-powered jobs in Obama's administration?
Here’s my question to you: How does nominating three people who didn't pay their taxes affect President Obama's credibility?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments