White House Guts Reform To Protect CEO Pay

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Source: The Huffington Post

The White House is intervening at the last minute to come to the defense of multinational corporations in the unfolding conference committee negotiations over Wall Street reform.

A measure that had been generally agreed to by both the House and Senate, which would have affirmed the SEC's authority to allow investors to have proxy access to the corporate decision-making process, was stripped by the Senate in conference committee votes on Wednesday and Thursday. Five sources with knowledge of the situation said the White House pushed for the measure to be stripped at the behest of the Business Roundtable. The sources -- congressional aides as well as outside advocates -- requested anonymity for fear of White House reprisal. A White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. (UPDATE: A White House aide tells HuffPost that Jarrett has not contacted anyone on the Hill regarding the proxy issue.)

The White House move pits the administration against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who told Barney Frank (D-Mass.) to stand strong against the effort.

"I met with the Speaker today and she said, 'Don't back down. I'll back you up,'" Frank, the lead House conferee, told HuffPost. "Maxine Waters is very upset, as are CalPERS and others."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/17/white-house-guts-reform-t_n_615952.html

[mbperrin]

1. GOT TO protect the monied class!

A near miss on the highway of smallest accountability!

[saigon68]

50. The pukes and their sheep followers will eventually eat this guy for lunch

[dotymed]

102. Meet the new boss,

same as the old boss...........:wtf:

[Tansy_Gold]

2. STAND STRONG, NANCY & BARNEY

I had regained a measure of my lost respect for Obama. He stood up to BP, assembled some form of compensation for those harmed by the Gulf disaster, and seemed to recognize what a wake-up call it was.

But if he turns around and protects the rapacious bastards whose greed has devastated not only US economy but the global economy, then it's almost as if this is his tit for tat on the oil companies.

piss on that noise.


Stand up to him, Nancy. Don't give a inch, Barney




Tansy Gold

[Frank Booth]

31. It's sad, but we really do need Congress to protect us from Obama.

The evidence came quickly and clearly. When a significant portion of the administration is straight off of Wall Street, it's pretty obvious where the allegiances run.

[pundaint]

38. That has always been Congress' job, they should have been protecting us for the last 30 years.

Now then need to protect us from the ongoing abrogation of civil rights

No-bid war contracting

War

Health insurers

Pharmaceutical companies

Foreign threats on American Jobs.

[totodeinhere]

80. You are right. Congress should have an adversarial relationship with the White House even when

they are both controlled by the same party. We are in the mess we are in now in no small measure because the GOP controlled congress always rolled over for Bush.

[pundaint]

91. And then the Democrats won Congress and they also rolled over for the Corporations. It's not the

Republicans, it's the corporations. Democrats or Republicans, if they roll over for the Corporations, they are working against the People's interests. While the Republicans propose most of the bad stuff, the Dems offer insufficient opposition.

By thinking it's about party's the People continue to lose out to the Corporate interests. If a party isn't all about maximizing the general welfare of all the People why would any member of the People group support it.

Our problem is We the People have nobody on our side in Washington, and we keep approving that every two years.

[sandnsea]

3. We also got a fed audit yesterday

Maybe it was a compromise.

[Larkspur]

4. And Obama wants to know why Progressives are pissed at him?

Bankster CEO's don't need their overinflated pay or undeserved bonuses. Make them pay for the millions they have laid off instead.

[Tansy_Gold]

5. What you said.

[fascisthunter]

15. the pathetic thing is, everybody should be appalled

not just a political group.

[glitch]

18. Everybody is, except Corporatists. nt

[Lorien]

25. What's sad is watching the working and middle class corporatists we all know

cheering this crap on. They worship a personality who screws them over.

[glitch]

39. Kafkaesque.

We're moving beyond Orwell and Huxley now.

Reading the Authoritarians helped me understand what they were doing and why and the huge power of fear over them.

I just wish I knew how to snap them out of it.

[liberation]

44. This is not a new phenomenon at all. Divide and conquer depends on people turning on each other

tThere will always be useful idiots who lack not only the most basic of moral fabrics but who always fail to grasp their actual position in the pegging order (i.e. they are not part of the elite even though they work for them).

That is how the tax collectors operated in the middle ages, that is how house negroes came to be, and that is how the kapos help the nazis keep order in concentration camps even though there were hundreds if not thousands of prisoners per each guard. However, neither the tax collectors, the house negroes, nor the kapos ever understood that the brutal logic of the system they were working for and helping thrive would not spare them either. Making them the most tragic of figures in their respective contexts.

What is scary to me is the current mindset in America, which borders brainwashing levels if you ask me, regarding capitalism and its structures as being the only true and possible approach to socioeconomic organization. There is an unwillingness to take an honest stock on our economic system, and point out the massive systemic flaws it has... and that how and why we need to fix them. I am not talking about the need to impose another "ism" (socialism, communism, fascism, whatever). I am simply saying that there a re very serious systemic problems and failures, which makes our current setup not only unsustainable but very unfair for the majority of Americans. So what is the point of keeping this unless if it is only to cater to the interests of those who benefit from it, which are the very very few among us. That does not seem that logical to me, it borders the stupid really. T

[saigon68]

51. They are sheep led by the Judas Goat

[mikita]

71. fantastic post...

you've pointed out what to me is the underlying frustration of it all too .... watching us eat our own. It happens on so many levels, you'd think people would start to connect the dots. But as yet, not much sign of that.

[Divine Discontent]

84. sadly, a few percentage of people defend every action the WH does.

this is really sick what they did. shows whose side they're ultimately on. they repeatedly do crap like this and no one should wonder why the progressive left sees way too many actions that scream 'closed/secretive govt", "status quo", "corporate control", and makes us have zero energy to re-elect him.

[cascadiance]

35. +...

∞∞∞∞∞∞!!!!

Hiring Rahm on day one should have told us this was going to happen!

Sanders/Dean 2012!

[tsuki]

100. Can't. Would like to, but both are from Vermont. nt

[glitch]

118. cool :)

¡∞!

[rateyes]

128. Yes, and I blame

Obama for hiring Rahm. He knew exactly what he was getting, and wanted.


This country is screwed.

[pberq]

42. On top of that, some of them should be in jail

[stranger81]

73. He doesn't want to know why we're pissed at him.

He just wants us to STFU and go away.

[Sherman A1]

103. +1000

:hi:

[awoke_in_2003]

120. we need to STFU

really, what has changed? Nothing

[BrklynLiberal]

6. Those corporate overlords are not to be messed with..by repukes OR dems!!!

[Amerigo Vespucci]

21. And yet, despite it all, I keep believing this stuff won't happen anymore

On a day like today, I ask myself why I cling to that belief. It has no basis in fact, no substance, and yet I desperately want Obama to step up to these guys and say "You know what? Fuck YOU. Party's OVER."

Hasn't happened yet.

May never happen.

Doesn't mean that in the back of my mind I'm not still holding onto that hope.

:patriot:

[Lorien]

24. I think that all of us who worked for his campaign feel the same way

we keep hoping that he'll have an epiphany and make a 180 on policy. That President Obama might possibly begin to resemble candidate Obama, but at this point it's only a pipe dream.

[glitch]

40. I don't think he can.

Even if he did want to (have no idea whether he does or not).
I think our government is captured.

[liberation]

48. Hope is the last thing to die...

... which is how most of us cope with life.

Which is probably why Nietzsche also said that hope is the worst of evils, for it prolongs the torment of man.


Part of the process of enlightenment involves developing the ability to let go...

[defendandprotect]

7. Everyday more disgusting... did Obama make deal on Bush tax cuts in

order to get unemployment extension thru?

A sham deal if that's what happened!!

[glitch]

20. His deals have been pearls for peanuts so far, so probably. nt

[haikugal]

8. WTF?

Here we have elected officials trying to do the right thing and the whitehouse moving against them...can this be happening?

[girl gone mad]

29. Par for the course, sadly.

They've done it time and again.

[Catherina]

131. It's been going on for the last 18 months. Started with the stimulus & bailouts n/t

[HereSince1628]

9. More decisions by Democrats that Love Corporations

I gotta say, this party has been less satisfying recently than the party has been at other times.

[FiveGoodMen]

11. How carefully worded

;)

[Lorien]

23. Perfect description of the DLC/ GOP. nt

[Enthusiast]

46. I noticed that. nt

[Iowa]

10. Despicable...

Worst Democratic president in history.

[placton]

12. worst Democratic president ever

asshole

[emilyg]

16. What you said.

[Donnachaidh]

33. [phone] n/t

[liberation]

47. But as a Republican president he is not that bad...

not great either. But I almost take neutral as a good thing after the 8 years of Bush...

[BolivarianHero]

54. WTF?

I thought the only Democrats could get more right-wing than Clinton is if they were members of a Dixie lynch mob.

[Chulanowa]

74. because every move from "The White House" actually comes from the president personally

Right?

Oh wait... What's this?

The investor-protection language was stripped and replaced by an amendment from Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.)

Dodd? You mean Chris Dodd? The guy who's always been a corporatist shill, anyway? Oh yes, I'm sure Obama personally wrenched his arm around for this!

Wait wait wait... I see more!

Frank said that he wasn't certain the White House was involved.

Frank, as in Barney Frank, the guy who's always rushing to the front when it comes time to accuse the president of something? He's not sure?

The two named administration officials actually are on record supporting proxy access!

So that leaves us with these unnamed sources who are, of course, more trustworthy than Barney Frank or Neal Wolin or Valerie Jarret, and they must be believed when they tell us the bought-and-paid motherfucker that is Chris Dodd earnestly wanted to strike a blow to CEO power, but golly gee, Mean Ol' Obama stopped him!

Of course.

[no limit]

96. Why won't Obama come out and say he supports this and wants it back in the bill?

Your excuses are comical.

[Ignis]

106. I'll second that question.

[RufusTFirefly]

107. Indeed. The bully pulpit is covered with dust and cobwebs. n/t

[Chulanowa]

108. Maybe he doesn't

It's a possibility. However, the article itself gives me no reason to think he's opposed to it, or that he has twisted Chris Dodd's arm to take it out. The article tells you that Chris Dodd removed that portion. You should be asking him the tough questions, instead of screeching about Obama right off the bat.

[no limit]

110. Aside from that part in the article that quote sources as saying Obama admin wanted this out

and they got it out. Now Obama knowing this news isn't forcing it back in? That means he doesn't want it.

Any excuses to the contrary are comical.

[Chulanowa]

112. Who are the sources?

I stopped trusting "anonymous sources" years ago. Time after time, the "anonymous source" turns out to be "writer's opinion." And HuffPo has something of a checkered past when it comes to not fabricating utter bullshit.

I'm not making excuses. I'm blaming Chris Dodd.

[no limit]

114. Yes you are making excuses. Dodd was a tiny player, the senate and the house both passed this

it was the white house that pressured them to get it out through Dodd.

Now if you don't want to trust 5 unnamed sources that is your right. But then you have to explain why Obama won't pressure them to put this back in if he truly wants it. And you have no explaination for that.

[Chulanowa]

116. Five unnamed sources who are not actually quoted

and who's paraphrased statements contradict the rest of the article.

Why hasn't Obama put pressure to put it back in? I don't know. Maybe you should call him up and ask. A little independent confirmation, huh?

[no limit]

117. So your explaination is "get obama on the phone and find out" because you don't know

like I said, comical.

[Chulanowa]

119. I stated from the beginning that I don't know

My point is that I'm not going to fly into a froth over such a shittily sourced article where the meat doesn't fit the title. The White House applied pressure to have the part removed? Okay. I want to see evidence of that claim. There was pressure? What kind of pressure? From whom? If sources are going to be anonymous, they should at least take advantage of their anonymity to give some actual information.

What I see is a corporate shill of a SENATOR who pulled the proxy out, and a committee that went along with it. I simply figure that's where hte torches and pitchforks should be going first.

[no limit]

127. So how many days to you give the Obama administration to put pressure on congress to bring this back

both the house and the senate supported this measure. Why would they then remove it in conference comittee, it makes absolutely no sense. It had to be the white house. If it wasn't them then all it would probably take is a phone call since as you know both the house and the senate already support this measure. How long are you going to give this administration to make that call? What if they haven't done it by Monday, would you blame them for this then?

[Ignis]

124. "screeching about Obama"

:eyes:

I guess that "civility" thing only applies to the little people.

[AzDar]

13. Jesus Wept.

:puke:

[fascisthunter]

14. the White House is owned

[glitch]

19. Or captured. Either way, not on our side. nt

[krabigirl]

43. Pretty much.

[inna]

17. Obscene beyond imagination.

:nuke:

[Lorien]

22. WTF? This truly is a new low for the White House

Where are the fanboys and fangirls on this move?

[boppers]

26. The white house doesn't actually have a vote in conference.

The fanboys and fangirls are quite aware that the "Blame Obama" contingent is quite happy to shift the blame away from their representatives, and onto Obama, for EVERYTHING.

[girl gone mad]

30. Irrelevant.

The White House will bring threats. They've put the screws to congress over and over and over in an effort to weaken these financial reforms and they have been very successful at it.

[depakid]

27. Let's align ourselves with even MORE of the most "popular" folks in America!

Anyone who need more evidence that Obama is in fact and deed a Rockefeller Republican need look no further than here.

[MrMickeysMom]

28. I agree with Max Keiser...

This is financial terrorism.

Look at who they have power over. Reprehensible...

[Donnachaidh]

32. 'CHANGE' we can believe in, right?

un-frigging-believable.

[nc4bo]

36. I guess they figure all that CEO pay will trickle down to us poor slobs

eventually.

This is NOT the change I believed in, this is more of the same.

[BR_Parkway]

34. I keep hoping he changes..

[tomp]

37. obama=fail. get it yet? nt

[tranche]

41. Bookmarked. I'd like to follow this story.

[burnsei sensei]

45. Another Third Way move

from a Third Way president.

[area51]

49. Obama the liberal.

Not.

Why don't nazi party members love him? He's doing a lot of the same things as GW Hoover. Dumbfucks.

[liberation]

61. Well, he is a neo-liberal...

I love how adding just 3 letters to a concept makes it completely different. :-)

[gulfcoastliberal]

52. K&R - Yet more gravy for the oligarchy thanks to Obama... nt

[MissDeeds]

53. Un freaking believable

2012 can't come soon enough. Maybe then we'll elect a Democrat.

[patrice]

55. I want to see a DU tally of who calls to support Pelosi & Frank. nt

[patrice]

57. 202.456.1111 - comment line

[patrice]

59. 202.456.1414 - switchboard

[patrice]

60. 202.456.2461 - fax

[patrice]

64. 202.224.3121 - congress + asked for Pelosi and then Frank, was transferred to each & then switched

to the Finance Committee, where I told them that the SEC's authority to allow investors to have proxy access to corporate decision making, including CEO pay, should be protected and that I WILL be communicating with the President about this issue.

[florida08]

121. thank you patrice

will follow your lead. Hope is dwindling but giving up is not an option. Thanks for the reminder.

[4dsc]

56. The reasons not to vote for President Obama again are adding up

nt

[Deep13]

63. I reluctantly agree. nt

[patrice]

66. . . . after a phone call or two, I'm sure.

:sarcasm:

[Deep13]

Huh? From whom? nt

[patrice]

68. From you, afterall, that's what earns you the right to that opinion. It's called Democracy and if

someone doesn't do their part and yet acts destructively, that someone is a fool.

[Deep13]

70. I have a right to an opinion because of a phone call?

Who do you suppose I'm calling?

And by the way, I'm not the one who is protecting the parasite class at the expense of everyone else.

[Ignis]

125. Democracy requires citizens voting, not calling a phone bank.

[patrice]

65. Did you call WH/Congress/your senator/anyone?

[AngryOldDem]

115. As I just said in an e-mail...

I wish I could cast a vote that I don't wind up regretting later.

[texastoast]

58. Hey, Obama! You don't have the middle-class's back

This is just dreadful.

[Deep13]

62. Reelect Nancy Pelosi--Speaker of the House 2010!! nt

What possible public policy concern could possibly justify the WH's actions on this?

[ProudDad]

67. Surprise, Surprise!!!

[sakabatou]

69. Fucking hell...

[NewJeffCT]

72. If it was accompanied by a push to raise the Income Tax rate & Capital Gains tax rate

on the very wealthy, I could see this.

[Phlem]

75. Hey Obama

I have lost all respect for you. Your legacy will be a joke and yes we're aware that your a lying sack.

Thanks for fucking us over even more than shrub.

Not voting Republican for sure and definitely not voting your crap.

-p

[femrap]

76. Aaaaaaaah yes,

The Business Roundtable. May each one of its members choke on his money.

[Andy823]

77. This is crazy

I have defended the president from day one, I have not been happy about some things, but I have stood by him, but this is getting to be just to damned much! Who the hell in the WH is doing this? If it's president Obama, then I am totally pissed at him for this one. If it's someone else, then the president needs to clean house and get rid of anyone who is giving him this kind of advice! I voted for him to change this country not continue to cater to the same assholes Bush did! :grr:

[Phlem]

79. Stop defending him

He's as crooked as the rest of them except he hides it better.

-p

[Andy823]

81. NO

He is not as crooked at the rest of them. He is by far better than any dumb ass republican! I won't defend this kind of crap, but I won't put him in the same boat as the morons that got us into this mess. I will say that if he wants to get re-elected he needs to stop catering to the corporations and start working for the people or I am afraid his base will be sitting home in 2012 instead of getting out the vote!

[Phlem]

82. No one's going to be sitting at home in 2012

We're all to scared shitless to let the R's in control again.

Yes he's different but his actions don't match the words that come out of his mouth. I don't trust him period and to me that's the same as the rest of them.

-p

[pezDispenser]

87. I won't be sitting at home

but I won't be blindly pulling the 'D' lever either.

[Phlem]

98. That's fine.

Understand however that there is a false sense "choice" in our political system. Money thrives in our politics and one can hire really good actors/liars as a representative of "choice" when electing an official. The R's are blatant whores about it and have capitalized on it for decades to build their infrastructure. Greed runs that party and mega corps fund them. The only other body that can match it and beat it are the D's. While I'd love to vote for any other party, they'd be crushed by the R's and the D's. The coordination and resources it would take to take on the other heavyweights would be astounding for a 3rd party. For me, and I'm saying this for me, I see a better tact, that keeps the infrastructure of the D's and creates a force and voice for the people that affects real change... Vote the f%ckin corp D's out and install progressives. We have R's dressed as D's in our party on top of the D's that are bought and paid for. We need to gut the Democratic Party of it's own corruption. Put real progressives in and change the f*ckin party. That, to me seems more plausible than heaving humongous efforts and resources into a third party.

But hey what do I know.....

signed

Blind Zombie "D" lever puller.
.......................................................................

As if

-p

[pezDispenser]

113. agreed

I'll always go with the more progressive candidate in the primaries, no question this is where real change is going to happen. However when it comes to the general election, if the choice is between a rock and a hard place, I'll vote with my conscience.

This just works for me, I understand other have equally valid reasons for voting the way they do.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RufusTFirefly]

83. Yahoo! Another victory for the 'industrialist capitalist scum-fucks'!

As the late great comedian Bill Hicks once explained it many years ago,

I have this feeling that whoever is elected president, like Clinton was, no matter what you promise on the campaign trail - blah, blah, blah - when you win, you go into this smoke-filled room with the twelve industrialist capitalist scum-fucks who got you in there. And you're in this smoky room, and this little film screen comes down ... and a big guy with a cigar goes, "Roll the film." And it's a shot of the Kennedy assassination from an angle you've never seen before ... that looks suspiciously like it's from the grassy knoll. And then the screen goes up and the lights come up, and they go to the new president, "Any questions?" "Er, just what my agenda is." "First we bomb Baghdad." "You got it ..."

[Divine Discontent]

85. Congress reps who don't protect the people will be voted out. Folks are watching now more than ever

as said in a post elsewhere on DU, 'So when I say that Obama is to the right of Nixon it is not hyperbole. When Obama offers tax credits for business and industry, sorry, Hoover tried that; it didn’t work. When Obama helps corporations break union contracts I am reminded of what Franklin Roosevelt said. “If I went to work in a factory the first thing I'd do is join a union.” When Obama leaves the bankers in charge of the mortgage bailout, guess what: that was Bush's plan so when Obama approves deep water drilling in the Gulf all I hear are echos of "Drill baby Drill!"'




sadly, there's too many actions that scream right-winger coming from this WH (which I guess is being changed to WSH for Wall St)

[tmyers09]

86. That's right, keep on protecting them!

I'm surprised the White House gets ANYTHING done, what with their head being so far up Wall Street's ass that they know what Lloyd Blankfein had for lunch.

[mikita]

94. +1000 for content and too funny to boot! n/t

[myrna minx]

88. .

:puke:

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[colsohlibgal]

90. Go Nancy and Barney!

This is going to make the job of the Obama apologists even harder, when will they give it up? I'm so sick of hearing the "chess/checkers" excuse I could scream.

[provis99]

92. More change we can believe in

Looks like Obama's cheerleaders and DLC proxies on DU are being remarkably silent on this thread.

[Blue Owl]

93. IN CORPORATIONS WE TRUST

Just change the goddamn motto already, would ya.

[ooglymoogly]

95. What do you expect? BO is not for the little people in

this place we call a democracy, and ain't that a line of bull, why should he be for the little people in corporate boardrooms where corporate masters are voting themselves billions. Expect lots of finger pointing, lots of grandstanding, lots of denials, even though the deal has already been cut. The "little people" are BO's best bargaining chips, and those chips come so cheaply to him. So he can shower the pugs with barrel fulls of largess, those bargaining chips called you and me. This should be the Washington Kabuki theater con's best performance; Though maybe not as good as "The selling of the nations health to the highest bidder".

[Bluebear]

97. Huffington Post never really loved him!

:cry:

[no limit]

132. I don't think this measure getting killed is the fault of the huffington post. Its the faul of Obama

[avaistheone1]

99. How can anyone say Obama isn't a corporatist?

This is just another of many examples.

[Vinca]

101. Sometimes you read a headline and you just want to vomit.

[sulphurdunn]

104. The political power of the US government

is vested in 535 members of Congress, 9 judges and 1 executive i.e 545 people. The average cost of congressional elections is $2 billion annually. Throw in a presidential election every 4 years and the cost goes up to $5 billion. Most of that money is spent on mass media. Most comes from the wealthiest tier of income. Now you know who Obama works for, and it isn't the huddled masses who voted him into office and froze their huddled masses asses off on the Mall at his inauguration. You also know why CEO compensation will remain unregulated.

[Raster]

109. No shit! And someone has the gal to ask if we can "put the Obama is a corporatist meme to bed..."?

Seriously, you have to fucking ask? Government of the People, for the People and by the People was a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.

[xchrom]

105. how Obama-esque. nt

[Hubert Flottz]

111. They hate unions and they kiss the corporate ass!

Sounds like a republican MO to me, but then I'm one of the "retards" who was stupid enough to expect "Change" when I voted in 2008.

[faceit]

122. We are onto one hundreth dimensional chess - a move so unfathomably bad it must be good.

:sarcasm:

[ironic name]

123. An American politician? Catering to the top 1%? No way

[kath]

126. More change we can believe in!! WOOT!!

[frustrated_lefty]

129. Enough, I've had enough excuses for this guy.

I'd be a happy camper if Dean ran in the '12 primary.

[Hawkowl]

133. Dean 2012!

Sign me up.

[frustrated_lefty]

137. I will bet money Rahm is gonna say

"we don't need no stinking 50 state strategy." And kiss another 8 years goodbye.

[Clear Blue Sky]

130. Payback for campaign money.

[myrna minx]

134. I have to book mark this article for future reference. n/t

[CanSocDem]

135. Hello!!

To all of you "democrats" who feel betrayed:

Been asleep for awhile have we...????

Your 'public service' government controlled by private interests...??? This didn't happen last night. You've clearly been drugged and asleep for years.

But now you're awake and screaming at Ralph Nader for his imagined interference when he was the one who told us this was happening 50 years ago. And it's much worse now.

You can't even trust your election process anymore. Time to move to plan B....

.

[NJmaverick]

136. Huffington Post has less creditability than the National Enquirer these days

so don't be so quick to buy what they are selling.