Econwatch
October 22, 2009 7:47 AM

TARP Watchdog: Execs Can't "Party on Like It's 2007"

(CBS)
Executives at bailed out U.S. firms have to "understand you can't party on like it's 2007" when it comes to compensation, TARP's congressional watchdog said Thursday.

Elizabeth Warren, who chairs the congressional oversight panel for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, told CBS' "The Early Show" that executive compensation has become a "problem in American industry" that must be fixed.

The White House's executive pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg, is expected to announce executive pay cuts at seven of the largest companies receiving significant federal bailout money – cuts that would slash top salaries by 90 percent, reports CBS News correspondent Bill Plante.

Lavish corporate pay packages, even after the taxpayer-funded bailouts, have stoked anger and resentment in Washington D.C. and around the country.

"You know, you really begin to wonder what it's going to take to get the attention of the people in charge of these very large corporations," Warren told "Early Show" co-anchor Harry Smith. "They have taken taxpayer money, unemployment is now running at almost 10 percent. … And yet the executives want to say 'I take your money when I make mistakes and I still want to compensate myself richly because I'm the one who's in charge of this big company.'"

"Being in charge also means being responsible. And I think what that really means is you take the pain when you've had to turn to the taxpayer and asked them for their money for support."

The cuts will target the top 25 earners at each company – AIG, Bank of America, Citigroup, General Motors, GM Financial, Chrysler and Chrysler Financial, reports Plante.

Total executive compensation packages, including bonuses, would be cut in half.

Warren said the corporate pay problem stems from a culture that rewards short-term gains over long-term success.

"When the congressional oversight panel did its regulatory reform report back in January, we made the point that executive compensation right now has got the wrong set of incentives in it so that if a company can pump up profits in one quarter short term … then you get too much money even if that means you could actually be doing a lot of damage to the company long-term and a lot of damage to the economy," she said.

But what kind of hammer is the White House willing to wield in order to enforce a pay cut? Warren doesn't think the government will go so far as to take TARP funds back from the companies, but pressure exists anyway.

"I think the fact that the government has given so much some in TARP money is going to make these executives think and think again before they don't follow the government's instructions here on pay."



Tags:
Elizabeth Warren ,
TARP ,
bailout ,
executive pay
Topics:
Bailouts
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 28 Comments
by vinnyb5 October 22, 2009 4:37 PM EDT
Scary, simply scary. Whats next? If they had any soul, congress would reduce THEIR OWN pay. After all they are running up massive deficits and are a laughing stock. They are doing more to this country over the next 10 - 20 years than any wall street firm ever could.
Reply to this comment
by David_Jack_Smith October 22, 2009 2:14 PM EDT
by anti-global3 October 22, 2009 1:53 PM EDT

Oh like your "anti-global" Pull the other one. You sound like a member of the Socialist Workers Party. Your vile hate speech fits in very nicely with the Marxist-Leninists; they're the real globalists who are all for a global wworker's paradise lead by the "vanguard." Which includes you, of course.

Well, at least you didn't publicly suggest targeting their kids for death. Guess even you aren't that brazen. Yet. Give it time.
Reply to this comment
by jxknowles October 22, 2009 2:14 PM EDT
These are good companies and they are an important part of the U.S. economy. But for ocen they need to put patriotism first and pay back the money they owe. Then they need to abide by the rules and regulations they agreed to when they were helped, including limiting executive pay.

Lawless, unbridled greed (all over the place), led to the economic collapse and the current unemployment of millions of Americans. Do the right thing and help your neighbor. Put America back to work. The rest will take care of itself.
Reply to this comment
by David_Jack_Smith October 22, 2009 2:04 PM EDT
Okay Harry... how about starting by cutting the pay of your BOSS?

LES MOONVES

President and Chief Executive Officer of CBS Corporation.

Salary $67.6 million in 2007 (includes other compensation.

Meanwhile, what about HARRY SMITH of CBS Corp.

Salary: $3,000,000 (last reported)

More do as as say not as I do from the Lear Jet theiving socialists.

Gibberish Harry.
Reply to this comment
by anti-global3 October 22, 2009 1:53 PM EDT
how about making them pay back the taxpayers?????? At the point of a gun if necessary. We cannot accept the fact that we will not be paid back. If you or I borrowed money form the govt' and then said we were not going to pay it back they would come after us for it.
Who cares if their companies fail, some other group will come in and take over if money is to be made. Who cares about the ecexs abnd their families? If they can't take having to like like the average Joe there are plenty of bridges to jump from.
Reply to this comment
by chonder2 October 22, 2009 12:25 PM EDT
ATTENTION US TAX PAYERS-

This is an announcement from the large US Financial Institutions to US taxpayers:

To streamline and bring more efficiancy to the US Financial System we are requesting that all US Taxpayers do not pull up but keep their pants at their ankles untill advised otherwise.Thank you.

Please remember citizens,it's with your cooperation that we will bring our Financial Institutions to the exactly the same operating status as before this slight oversight happened.Thank you.
Reply to this comment
by olyboy October 22, 2009 12:12 PM EDT
The problem with this whole thing is it's based on simple jealousy and not on what makes sense. The problem with executive comp. in the private sector is that it drives the wrong behaviour. Don't reward short-term success with a lotto-like stock option payout, reward long-term success with a reasonable annual compensation that doesn't involve the multiplier effect of options. Provide a bonus for success over time with a claw-back for negatives (when an investment doesn't pay off) so that we don't see the incentive to manufacture short term gains that drive stock prices and large option payouts at exercise dates. CEOs and others shouldn't be rewarded beyond their true contribution, but if you aren't competitive, you won't get the leadership you need to deal with the complexities of the business. You need to get rid of options, they have proven to drive bad behaviour and are not of benefit to shareholders or customers.
Reply to this comment
by HateChase09 October 22, 2009 12:02 PM EDT
Whay about Chase Home Finance. jamie Dimon sure needs a cut in his bonus too!!!!!!
These are the people who suddenly lost one of my mortgage payments, and after several weeks of panicing, and putting off paying bills to account for this lost payment......It suddenly appears.
No wonder this company needed a bailout, they are the worst company I have ever dealt with.
I would love to talk with someone from this media outlet and send them all 57 pages of the documents I have showing money that was applied, and reversed from my account. 90% of these payments I never even sent to Chase.
Reply to this comment
by g55rumpy October 22, 2009 12:01 PM EDT
but is it constitutional? and by the way the greedest are in congress
Reply to this comment
by David_Jack_Smith October 22, 2009 2:07 PM EDT
NO. It's NOT constitutional. But hey, let's all take up the pitchforks and go after today's target form the Obama Enemies List.

2 MINUTES OF HATE boys and girls. Now all go back to sleep.
by GRgrandma October 22, 2009 10:36 AM EDT
Maybe our illustrious government will think twice before they give out more billions to companies??? Ya think??? They can't think beyond the end of their noses.
Reply to this comment
by mcrider7 October 22, 2009 10:12 AM EDT
What happened to the 90% taxes on the bonuses
Reply to this comment
by starleo146 October 22, 2009 3:00 PM EDT
Do they not pay bonuses in stock instead of cash?
by endurorob_5 October 22, 2009 10:10 AM EDT
Before our leaders in government start telling corporations how to handle finances maybe they better figure out how to handle the finances of the nation. Our idiot leaders just keep spending and spending whent here is nothing to spend and they want to critisize corporate executives. What a bunch of hypocritical, envious, losers.
Reply to this comment
by bubbadubba October 22, 2009 10:09 AM EDT
"TARP Watchdog: Execs Can't "Party on Like It's 2007""

Wanna bet? Well I think she meant they are going to party like it is 2008-2009 with all that free tax money bailouts they got.
I noticed someone on this board seems to think that if you are against execs ripping us off and paying themselves huge salaries and bonuses with our tax money you are a communist.
Well I guess I am a communist.
Reply to this comment
by stn_sage October 22, 2009 10:25 AM EDT
They'll sure try! The only thing that would stop them is regulatory law prohibiting them from getting massive salaries and/or giving them control over distribution of bonuses, too!

Regulation is the other method by which one can earn the title 'Communist'...if one believes in it...as accused by right-wingers.

After eight years of Bush...the vast majority believe in at least some regulation...and by this definition...most of us are now Communists! :)
by keng52 October 22, 2009 12:51 PM EDT
No, nada, nyet, none. No one is "too big to fail".
by mgmfos October 22, 2009 9:08 AM EDT
who cares who set it up, slash the pay of these greedy bastards who should've been thrown out in the first place - weren't they supposed to "lead" these companies - they led them right into the dump - quit quoting the constitution if you don't support support democracy - let's take a vote across the country and see what the people think
Reply to this comment
by stillwaters6 October 22, 2009 12:06 PM EDT
Last time I checked... the government has been borrowing money to finance itself since 1984...and it was broke way back then too...no wonder people were so excited about a budget surplus BEFORE president Bush took office.
by betterusa October 22, 2009 8:38 AM EDT
Tell the mindless sheep what they want to hear, "the Government is 'expected'to announce pay cuts.

Quit talking tough and "just do it"!
Reply to this comment
by Demoserver October 22, 2009 8:29 AM EDT
I am so proud of our president and the people he chose to oversee the corporations who received the
the bailout funds. The CEO's and upper echelon employees of many corporations have been milking the
companies they control for far too long. This is at the expense of their customers and lower paid
employees. I watched it happen in the one I worked for as the company went through years of bankruptcy
but the CEO still had millions in perks as none of the hourly paid people had a raise in pay for all of
those years. There needs to be controls in place for longer than this recession period so that this
I am retired now and am dismayed to find that even though SS could not pay the Cola's to us,
it did not stop the health industry from raising the prescription and health plan costs each year.
what do we do when we run out of money to live on? We can't be bailed out.
Reply to this comment
by ianlou October 22, 2009 8:25 AM EDT
This could be the end of the Manhattan $500 boutique Hamburger.
Reply to this comment
by owlgal October 22, 2009 8:18 AM EDT
How two-faced. The Congress gave themselves a raise but want to cut
Wall Street. Cut the fancy health plan, the private planes (which they didn't want auto execs to have) and all the perks the taxpayers pay for and these jokers get and then talk about Wall Street. Clean up your own house (and Senate) before you look at others.
If they truly represented the people who elected them there never would have been TARP bailouts.
Reply to this comment
by Ms_enza October 22, 2009 8:14 AM EDT
TARP Watchdog: Execs Can't "Party on Like It's 2007"

So you say.

Capitalism -- where profits are privatised and losses are socialized.
Reply to this comment
by Marc_1986 October 22, 2009 8:42 AM EDT
@ms_enza

You'd favor communism?
by sjc_1 October 22, 2009 8:59 AM EDT
Greed or communism are NOT the only two choices. People want fairness and justice in their country, that is NOT too much to ask. When greed runs rampant, it errodes the trust that people need in their system. It is just a distraction to keep screaming "communism" or "socialism".
by mswolfestock October 22, 2009 9:51 AM EDT
The point is - NOBODY believes that these greedy bastards actually EARNED the money. This is no more than corporate welfare - our tax dollars paid people who didn't work for it. And frankly I'm disgusted with it.
by wyodutch October 22, 2009 8:09 AM EDT
Let's not forget who made sure that the banksters could pull mega-bonuses after the TARP charity windfall...
.
December 15, 2008 - The Bush Administration inserted an eleventh-hour provision into the $750 billion bailout bill to protect executive bonuses, a single sentence that will torpedo efforts to reduce bonuses even as companies slash tens of thousands of jobs and use taxpayer money to gobble up other companies at fire-sale prices.
.
Pressured by constituents who worried that companies would take government aid and continue to pay their executives eye-popping bonuses, Congress inserted a provision that would penalize companies who took taxpayer money and shelled out outsized bonuses.
.
But at the last minute, Bush officials insisted on a one-sentence provision that stopped the measure in its tracks, according to congressional aides who spoke to the Washington Post.
.
The change stipulated that the sanction would only apply to firms that sold mortgage backed securities to the government at auction, which the Bush Treasury Department said would be the method they,d use to infuse troubled companies with bailout cash.
.
"Now, however, the small change looks more like a giant loophole, according to lawmakers and legal experts" who spoke to Post reporter Amit Paley. "In a reversal, the Bush administration has not used auctions for any of the $335 billion committed so far from the rescue package, nor does it plan to use them in the future. Lawmakers and legal experts say the change has effectively repealed the only enforcement mechanism in the law dealing with lavish pay for top executives."
.
.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Reply to this comment
See all 28 Comments

About Econwatch

News and analysis on the state of the economy from CBS News.

E-Mail EconWatch

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn