No. 37: The A.I.G. Bonuses Mess
March 20th 2009 16:22
The Car is Sputtering
I loathe the size of the bonuses allowed to A.I.G. executives in the Stimulus Bill. It bristles me even more to know that we are all going to pay for them through future taxation. But the reality is that the Stimulus Bill has been passed and now is not the time to start blaming the recipients of these bonuses. It should have been BEFORE the Stimulus Bill was passed.
Before I begin more rantings, please observe just how our major media outlets are playing this one. It is quite revealing.
No matter how much we dislike what has happened with the bonuses, the U.S. Congress, and President, had to have had the opportunity of knowing about them prior to passing the Stimulus Bill. Not reading the Bill prior to passing it, is incompetence in the least, and should be punishable at best. Just as the I.R.S. says ignorance is no excuse, we should proclaim the same to our leaders.
It is clearly unconstitutional for the Congress to single out certain taxpayers for punishment such as this.
For those who may question what I say, please read Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution. After finishing, It would not hurt for us to re-read the following also, borrowed from an article by Bobby Eberle in The Loft today.
"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.
"Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community." James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788.
Each member of Congress, such as Charlie Rangel, who is using this to divert attention away from the misdeeds of our leaders, should be reminded that they took an oath to uphold our Constitution and should be held accountable for violating it.
It now appears that each time Congress is in session, we should put our steel britches on and run for the hills. Our freedoms were never more in danger from our own government than right now.
| 55 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief