House members who voted ‘yes’ on bailout received 54 percent more from banks/securities firms

[marmar]

from ThinkProgress:



House members who voted ‘yes’ on bailout received 54 percent more from banks/securities firms.»

According to research produced by MAPLight.org, House members who voted yes on the proposed bailout package received 54 percent more money from banks and securities than members who voted no:

Over the past five years, banks and securities firms gave an average of $231,877 in campaign contributions to each Representative voting in favor of the bailout, compared with an average of $150,982 to each Representative voting against the bailout – 54 percent more money given to those who voted Yes.

Democrats who voted yes received “an average of $212,700 each, about twice as much as those voting No, $107,993.” Republicans who voted yes “received an average of $273,181 each, 50% more than those voting No, $181,688.”


http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/30/banks-contributions-bailout/

[BuyingThyme]

1. Strange how things happen.

[marmar]

4. Yup.

n/t

[Subdivisions]

2. God damn it! n/t

[Solly Mack]

3. Thanks for posting!!

[leftofcool]

5. gee, even Pelosi and company?

[jonnyblitz]

6. k & r. nt

[seafan]

7. The same thing happened with the FISA sellout. I wrote my congressman re: his AYE bailout vote.

Somewhere in DC, a staffer's eyes are burning. You see, my congressman ALSO voted for retroactive immunity for the telecoms in the FISA bill.

Told him in no uncertain terms that as of yesterday's vote, I can no longer support him.

[barbtries]

8. interesting

convinces me even more that the house did the right thing yesterday.

[AzDar]

9. Wow. That is ugly.

:puke:

[Selatius]

10. Money talks, and bullshit walks. The US is truly bought and owned by corporations. nt

[formercia]

11. Quid Pro Quo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quid_pro_quo

Another set of examples arises when an exchange is prohibited by public policy. Where prostitution is illegal, it remains common and lawful to use gifts, expensive meals and so on, as a means of attracting a sexual partner. The distinction is whether sexual favors are directly conditional on receiving gifts and vice-versa. In the absence of such a quid pro quo, there is no prostitution. Similarly, political donors are legally entitled to support candidates that hold positions with which the donors agree, or which will benefit the donors. Such conduct becomes bribery only when there is an identifiable exchange between the contribution and official acts, previous or subsequent, and the term quid pro quo denotes such an exchange.



If it quacks like a duck....

[chill_wind]

12. Oh Barney, Barney, Barney....... you worked so hard to pimp it through.

$1,033,276


Security brokers & investment companies $285,305
Commercial banks & bank holding companies $264,900
Credit agencies & finance companies $105,000
Investment banking $61,200
Credit unions $58,349
Savings banks & Savings and Loans $56,422
Commodity brokers/dealers $50,600
Banks & lending institutions $46,000
Finance, Insurance & Real Estate $39,600
Stock exchanges $19,000
Hedge Funds $16,600
Securities, commodities & investment $16,250
Venture capital $13,050
Private Equity & Investment Firms $1,000

[formercia]

13. It's called bribery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery

Bribery, a form of pecuniary corruption, is an act usually implying money or gift given that alters the behavior of the recipient in ways not consistent with the duties of that person or in breach of law. Bribery constitutes a crime and is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as the offering, giving, receiving, or soliciting of any item of value to influence the actions of an official or other person in discharge of a public or legal duty. The bribe is the gift bestowed to influence the recipient's conduct. It may be any money, good, right in action, property, preferment, privilege, emolument, object of value, advantage, or merely a promise or undertaking to induce or influence the action, vote, or influence of a person in an official or public capacity.


When calls from his constituency are overwhelmingly against the bailout and he legislates in a manner favorable to those who have donated large sums of money... I would call that bribery.