House passes bill taxing Wall Street bonuses

[Dos Equis]

What a circus.  In how many ways does this violate the Constitution?   

House passes bill taxing Wall Street bonuses
Posted: 02:47 PM ET
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The House of Representatives passed legislation Thursday to try to recoup bonuses paid to Wall Street executives with taxpayer money.

The measure passed, 328-93; most Democrats supported the measure while Republicans were sharply divided.

A two-thirds majority among all members voting was required for passage.

The measure would tax individuals on any bonuses received in 2009 from companies getting $5 billion or more in money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP.  Bonuses for people with incomes over $250,000 would be taxed at a 90 percent rate.

The measure now moves to the Senate for further consideration.

http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/03/19/house-passes-bill-taxing-wall-street-bonuses/

[Soul Crusher]

What a circus.  In how many ways does this violate the Constitution?   

House passes bill taxing Wall Street bonuses
Posted: 02:47 PM ET
WASHINGTON (CNN) — The House of Representatives passed legislation Thursday to try to recoup bonuses paid to Wall Street executives with taxpayer money.

The measure passed, 328-93; most Democrats supported the measure while Republicans were sharply divided.

A two-thirds majority among all members voting was required for passage.

The measure would tax individuals on any bonuses received in 2009 from companies getting $5 billion or more in money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP.  Bonuses for people with incomes over $250,000 would be taxed at a 90 percent rate.

The measure now moves to the Senate for further consideration.

http://cnnwire.blogs.cnn.com/2009/03/19/house-passes-bill-taxing-wall-street-bonuses/

This is pure nonsense. 

Congress is just shifting the responsibility away from themselves for this disaster.

[tonymctones]

another bill being rushed through without thought of consequence  from what i understand this is unconstitutional and more then likely wont be allowed to stand.

[Soul Crusher]

another bill being rushed through without thought of consequence  from what i understand this is unconstitutional and more then likely wont be allowed to stand.

Of course it wont stand.  The people who got the bonuses wiill succesfully sue as a bill of attainder or an unlawful use of the tax code o rsomething like that and win.

[Dos Equis]

No doubt.  Will never stand up.  They better kill this in the Senate. 

[Soul Crusher]

how?

"Bill of Attainder."

"14th Amendment"

This is wrong on so many levels.  The government really is no different than the mafia.

[Dos Equis]

"Bill of Attainder."

"14th Amendment"

This is wrong on so many levels.  The government really is no different than the mafia.

Yeah.  What he said.  This is pretty much stealing.  It's a forfeiture.  I can't believe what's happening in D.C. . . . .

[Soul Crusher]

Yeah.  What he said.  This is pretty much stealing.  It's a forfeiture.  I can't believe what's happening in D.C. . . . .

These people had a valid employment contract that is being targeted by the congress.  This is scary stuff!

 
Had the criminal congress simply imposed Chapter 11 on AIG, we would not have to deal with this insanity. 

For you simpletons supporting Obama, do some research who is getting the AIG money and connect the dots and why Chapter 11 was not imposed on this organization..

[Dos Equis]

These people had a valid employment contract that is being targeted by the congress.  This is scary stuff!

 
Had the criminal congress simply imposed Chapter 11 on AIG, we would not have to deal with this insanity. 

For you simpletons supporting Obama, do some research who is getting the AIG money and connect the dots and why Chapter 11 was not imposed on this organization..

Completely agree.  I would have let the whole lot of them file bankruptcy and reorganize or close shop. 

[Soul Crusher]

I hope you just now didn't figure that out.  I really hope you're not thinking it wasn't before Obama

Of course not, but it is in hyper mode now.  

I think Obama simply does not have the financial experience or education to realize what is going on.  

[Dos Equis]

BB, you sounded like you had a list of ways this violates the constitution?

I said I agree with 3333.  I'm sure me, you, or anyone else who went through the Constitution could come up other ways that shows how this bill stinks to high heaven.  This is ridiculous. 

[tonymctones]

hey, anytime I said something was unconstitutional under Bush, you challenged it.  Is there a problem with me doing the same?  How and why is this unconstitutional.  details?

the government cannot target specific individuals through taxes as i understand it, this is clearly targeted at one group of specific ppl...Now if they taxed all the ppl who got bonuses who recieved money maybe im not sure

[Dos Equis]

hey, anytime I said something was unconstitutional under Bush, you challenged it.  Is there a problem with me doing the same?  How and why is this unconstitutional.  details?

Although I don't remember what you're talking about, if I ever challenged something you said I probably had a pretty good reason.

Who said I had a problem with you doing anything?   

Sorry, don't have details.  I'll just stick with the broad brush conclusions (and my agreement with 3333) for now.    Maybe he can provide "details" if that's what you want.   

[Soul Crusher]

Although I don't remember what you're talking about, if I ever challenged something you said I probably had a pretty good reason.

Who said I had a problem with you doing anything?   

Sorry, don't have details.  I'll just stick with the broad brush conclusions (and my agreement with 3333) for now.    Maybe he can provide "details" if that's what you want.   

First off, the congress is targeting individual people who already got this money.

Second, these employees had a contract for this money.  Without AIG going bankrupt under Chapter 11, I dont see where the congress or anyone else has the authority for this.

Third, this may constitute an unlawful "taking" since the money was already distributed and they are targeting such a small class of people.  This is especially true considering other firm gots TARP money and paid out bonuses where this insanity was not applied. 

Fourth, This may constitute an illegal "Bill of Attainder" under the constitution.

Fifth, these people may make a claim under the 14th amendement in that they are being treated unfairly as a group of people.

 

[Dos Equis]

First off, the congress is targeting individual people who already got this money.

Second, these employees had a contract for this money.  Without AIG going bankrupt under Chapter 11, I dont see where the congress or anyone else has the authority for this.

Third, this may constitute an unlawful "taking" since the money was already distributed and they are targeting such a small class of people.  This is especially true considering other firm gots TARP money and paid out bonuses where this insanity was not applied. 

Fourth, This may constitute an illegal "Bill of Attainder" under the constitution.

Fifth, these people may make a claim under the 14th amendement in that they are being treated unfairly as a group of people.

 

Hugo I think this qualifies as "details."   

[Dos Equis]

oh come one now, anytime I said constitution, you said how so?

Yeah, I've done that.   

[tonymctones]

They might be onto something but you're not.  groups are targeted for different taxation all the time.  You're probably thinking about targeting based race and shit.

give examples, let me guess religion? did they target one specific religion or all of them? thats my point if they are going to target these executive bonuses they must target all under the tarp or they are targeting specific individuals you see the difference?

[shootfighter1]

I don't know about the constitution but this whole thing stinks.  Thats why the bailouts are a problem.  There's also some uncomfortable money connections between AIG and the politicians.

[BM OUT]

Whats incredible is it was Dodd and the Obama administration that put the bonus stipulation in the bill.It was their fault and now they are outraged.Incredible!!It would be like Bush screaming "how in the hell did we end up in Iraq".

[shootfighter1]

Exactly...and when the media and public caught on, they had to act to correct their major mistake.  Horrible.

[Soul Crusher]

They might be onto something but you're not.  groups are targeted for different taxation all the time.  You're probably thinking about targeting based race and shit.

This is 100% the govt fault for not putting these stipluations in place before giving the tarp money in the first place.

They knew this was going to happen and cannot now act surprised.  Its silly.

I am disgusted with all these bailouts and dont want to see any of these reckless banksters get a dime, but the government created this mess by not making these firms go CHapter 11.

[tonymctones]

give examples, let me guess religion? did they target one specific religion or all of them? thats my point if they are going to target these executive bonuses they must target all under the tarp or they are targeting specific individuals you see the difference?

[tonymctones]

I know this, I couldn't find anyone with a constitutional law background willing to weigh in on this with an absolute statement.  If anyone has a link to someone, post, I'm curious.

wheres decker at maybe he could give us more insight into this.

[tonymctones]

Is that what he does?

well i thought he was a lawyer and would probably have more insight into this then us.

[tonymctones]

not necessarily.  I mean more than us sure but to make a definitive statement maybe not.  I hear lawyers all the time say they're not constitutional lawyers and brush their answer as unqualified.

I could see that but seeing as different judges inturpret the same laws differently the only person really qualified to give a difinitive answer would be the judge/judges overseeing the sure to be pending law suit.