Misplaced Outreage and Unconstitutional Acts.


House OKs 90 Percent Tax on Bonuses
Fox News | http://www.foxnews.com/index.html

March 19, 2009 | Fox News

Breaking news alert from Fox News, the House has approved the 90% tax on bonuses given out by firms that accepted bailout funds.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ... http://www.foxnews.com/index.html




We haven’t had a 90% tax bracket since Truman’s day.

This outrage appears to be a little late. And especially so since the original bill appears to have a clause to authorize the bonuses. There should be so many legal challenges to this law. You can design a law to specifical punish certain people, especially something after the fact.

This violates the US Constitution. Congress should try reading the Constitution, sometime:

Article 1 Section 9 Clause 3: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. [Limits on Congress]

Article 1 Section 10 Clause 1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. [Powers prohibited the States]

A bill of attainder (also known as an act or writ of attainder) is an act of legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial.

Bill of Attainder: "These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment." William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.

Clear enough? The contracts were there, and the pay was based on 2008 performance.And were apparently authorized in the Bailout Bill that no one in Congress bothered to read. Sen Dodd admitted it.

So where is the outrage for:

The $5 Billion “bonus” to ACORN ... that was OK

The bonuses paid to Fannie/Freddie execs ... that was OK.

Congress is not acting in the best interest of the citizens!

Josie06 Josie06
56-60, F
3 Responses Mar 19, 2009

i too believe this is a government inspired and maneuvered crisis ... going back years and years.<br><br />
<br><br />
i too would fault AIG on their business practices however i'm inclined not to on the bonuses. It was stupid yes, but Congress specifically allowed it.<br><br />
<br><br />
The FairTax would go a long way to change that and get the lobbyists out of this picture.<br><br />
<br><br />
sweetcitywoman, you're right. May need to go out an buy scuba gear.

AIG is a fault with the product they issued to cover all those market to market swaps. The government is at fault for not giving the oversight that it should have. Regulations are in place but there is no oversight.<br />
<br />
We also have to remember the Dems and Repbs are in the pockets of the lobbiest on capitol hill. The dems more so due to the fact that they received more money for thier elections.<br />
<br />
The gov is more at fault then anyone else.

The AIG Chairman said that. It was his understanding from Congress and evidently the Administration that it was okay. The original bill written by Reid-Pelosi-Administration authorized the bonuses.<br />
<br />
Should they have done it ... no. Did they do it legally ... i'd have to say yes. Congress is now trying to CYA.<br />
<br />
To me none of these Bailouts should have been done. They should, if they were to be done, with careful thought and individually by requester and need. <br />
<br />
Many should probably been allowed to file bankruptcy cause it appears that after funneling all this money to them ... they still many fail. Apparently AIG was BANKRUPT and it took taxpayer money to bailout their worthless a*ses!<br />
<br />
So they will give back 90% of what the government already gave them, nothing out of theirown pocket. That is using OPM for sure. And they are not harmed in anyway and possibly have a civil suit against AIG for breaking the terms of their contract.<br />
<br />
How long before that 90% tax gets applied to ANY bonus they deem to “large”? Do you get a bonus? <br />
<br />
The American Tax dollars which have been laundered through AIG to failing foreign financial institutions and investments is a far greater crime than these bonuses but nobody seems aware of them.<br />
<br />
This bailout BS is just getting deeper and deeper.