A couple of days ago, I used the term double-speak in an entry when addressing something or other that politico's were talking about. This morning I think I came across what has to be at least triple-speak regarding how bailout fund recipients are paying off their donors and those in office who supported the bailout concept. As usual, the column was buried among others, as if inconsequential.
Here's the first couple of paragraphs of what I read. "Several companies that escaped financial failure two years ago through massive taxpayer-funded bailouts are spending millions of dollars to make donations to political causes and even some candidates' campaigns.
General Motors, Chrysler and Citigroup are just three of the biggest bailout recipients who have continued to remain politically active, through their political action committees, federal lobbying or direct donations to the pet projects of lawmakers."
Now, not all bailoutees are proceeding that way, but seem to have some sense of decency because according to the same article, "The potential public relations disaster for firms spending big dollars on political causes and federal lobbying after being extended a taxpayer lifeline has led some, such as AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to suspend their political activities until they pay the government back in full."
The way the paybacks are being packaged and sold defends them in some cases as simply efforts to form groups whereby employees voluntarily support political causes, or that federal lobbying is needed to keep Congress informed of their mission, and also that donations to pet projects are going to a good cause.
Critics though, doubt the logic. GM for example has spent $4.2 million on federal lobbying efforts so far, and likely to ultimately match its $8.4 million in 2009. Yet taxpayers own 61 percent of GM because the federal government gave the company about $50 billion in aid. GM's paid back $6.7 billion of the money, the balance converted to ownership.
Chrysler, another bailee, spent $1.2 million on lobbying this year, nearly half of the $3.12 million it spent last year. Chrysler has given back $2 billion of the $11 billion it has received from the government.
Citigroup's returned $31 billion of the $45 billion received from government. This year they've spent $3.03 million on federal lobbying, while last year, they laid out $5.56 million.
Now, in the scheme of things, a couple of million dollars laid out by major corporations is practically a non-event. I mean, who cares if these folks spend some bucks on candidates and their causes. But, the key point here is, it's not these corporations money being spent, it's ours. Because, without the taxpayer bailouts, these businesses would no longer exist.
So, what do we have here. As usual government has stepped in and given away taxpayer money to businesses that may or may not deserve to survive, then they've taken back their share in kickbacks disguised as donations to causes. Naturally, at the moment the donations aren't too large, but the way's been paved and future paybacks are certain to grow.
And where does the taxpayer, you and me, stand while all this goes quietly on? On the sidelines as usual, watching our dollars go back and forth over or under the net, because we're not in the actual game at all. Beyond that, not only don't the players want us in their events, they don't even want us to watch what goes on.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment