Ken Berwitz
The hypocrisy level is breathtaking.
As President Obama and the Democratic congress - who voted in favor of giving
out those AIG bonuses - now try to cover it up by literally extorting
the money back, we find out that Mr. Obama's chief of staff glommed onto
over $300,000 of Freddy Mac money for doing next to nothing.
Here is the sorry, dissolute story, excerpted from an
article in today's Chicago Tribune. The bold print is
mine:
Rahm Emanuel's profitable stint at mortgage
giant
Short Freddie Mac stay made him at least
$320,000
By
Bob Secter and Andrew Zajac | Tribune reporters
- March 26, 2009
The White House Chief of Staff
Rahm Emanuel listens as President Barack Obama delivers remarks to open the
White House Forum on Health Reform in the East Room of the White House. (Tribune photo by Zbigniew Bzdak /
March 5, 2009)
Before its portfolio of bad loans helped
trigger the current housing crisis, mortgage giant Freddie Mac was the focus of a major accounting scandal that led to a
management shake-up, huge fines and scalding condemnation of passive directors
by a top federal regulator.
One of those allegedly asleep-at-the-switch
board members was Chicago's Rahm Emanuel—now chief of staff to President Barack Obama—who made at least $320,000 for a 14-month stint at Freddie Mac
that required little effort.
As gatekeeper to Obama, Emanuel now
plays a critical role in addressing the nation's mortgage woes and fulfilling
the administration's pledge to impose responsibility on the financial
world.
Emanuel's Freddie Mac involvement has been a prominent
point on his political résumé, and his healthy payday from the firm has been no
secret either. What is less known, however, is how little he apparently did for
his money and how he benefited from the kind of cozy ties between Washington and
Wall Street that have fueled the nation's current economic
mess.
Though just 49, Emanuel
is a veteran Democratic strategist and fundraiser who served three terms in
the U.S. House after
helping elect Mayor Richard Daley
and former President Bill Clinton. The Freddie Mac money was a small piece of the $16 million he made in a
three-year interlude as an investment banker a decade ago.
In business as
in politics, Emanuel has cultivated an aggressive, take-charge reputation that
made him rich and propelled his rise to the front of the national stage. But
buried deep in corporate and government documents on the Freddie Mac scandal is
a little-known and very different story involving Emanuel.
He was named
to the Freddie Mac board in February 2000 by Clinton, whom Emanuel had served as
White House political
director and vocal defender during the Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky
scandals.
The board met no more than six times a year. Unlike
most fellow directors, Emanuel was not assigned to any of the board's working
committees, according to company proxy statements. Immediately upon joining the
board, Emanuel and other new directors qualified for $380,000 in stock and
options plus a $20,000 annual fee, records indicate.
On
Emanuel's watch, the board was told by executives of a plan to use accounting
tricks to mislead shareholders about outsize profits the government-chartered
firm was then reaping from risky investments. The goal was to push earnings onto
the books in future years, ensuring that Freddie Mac would appear profitable on
paper for years to come and helping maximize annual bonuses for company
brass.
The accounting scandal wasn't the only one that brewed
during Emanuel's tenure.
During his brief time on the board, the
company hatched a plan to enhance its political muscle. That scheme, also
reviewed by the board, led to a record $3.8 million fine from the Federal
Election Commission for illegally using corporate resources to host fundraisers
for politicians. Emanuel was the beneficiary of one of those parties after he
left the board and ran in 2002 for a seat in Congress from the North Side of
Chicago.
The board was throttled for its acquiescence to the
accounting manipulation in a 2003 report by Armando Falcon Jr., head of a
federal oversight agency for Freddie Mac. The scandal forced Freddie Mac to
restate $5 billion in earnings and pay $585 million in fines and legal
settlements. It also foreshadowed even harder times at the
firm.
Many of those same risky investment practices tied to the
accounting scandal eventually brought the firm to the brink of insolvency and
led to its seizure last year by the Bush administration, which pledged
to inject up to $100 billion in new capital to keep the firm afloat. The Obama
administration has doubled that commitment.
Freddie Mac reported recently
that it lost $50 billion in 2008. It so far has tapped $14 billion of the
government's guarantee and said it soon will need an additional $30 billion to
keep operating.
Like its larger government-chartered cousin Fannie Mae, Freddie
Mac was created by Congress to promote home ownership, though both are private
corporations with shares traded on the New York Stock Exchange. The two firms hold stakes in half the nation's residential
mortgages.
Because of Freddie Mac's federal charter, the board in
Emanuel's day was a hybrid of directors elected by shareholders and those
appointed by the president.
In his final year in office, Clinton tapped
three close pals: Emanuel, Washington lobbyist and golfing partner James Free,
and Harold Ickes, a former White House aide instrumental in securing the election of
Hillary Clinton to
the U.S. Senate. Free's appointment was good for four months, and Ickes' only
three months.
Falcon, director of the Office of Federal Housing
Enterprise Oversight, found that presidential appointees played no "meaningful
role" in overseeing the company and recommended that their positions be
eliminated.
John Coffee, a law professor and expert on corporate
governance at Columbia University, said the financial crisis at Freddie Mac was
years in the making and fueled by chronically weak oversight by the firm's
directors. The presence of presidential appointees on the board didn't help, he
added.
"You know there was a patronage system and these people were only
going to serve a short time," Coffee said. "That's why [they] get the stock
upfront."
Will Emanuel give the money back? Since he has gotten immensely rich as
a political hatchetman I'd think that $320,000 or so would be little more than a
drop in the bucket for him.
Will his cronies do the same? Look at what they did to Freddy Mac
(and Fanny Mae) while taking their ill-gotten fortunes from the companies.
Do you think this congress will vote to retroactively tax Mr. Emanuel and the
rest of them at 90%, the way they did with AIG employees?
If you said "yes" to any of those questions I have another one for you:
Are you on drugs?
free` If you said "yes" to any of those questions I have another one for you: Are you on drugs?<<<< LOL (03/26/09)