Before the Fall, AIG Payouts Went to Washington

[kpete]

Before the Fall, AIG Payouts Went to Washington
Published by Massie Ritsch on March 16, 2009 11:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

As long as everyone's talking today about AIG's payouts to its executives and foreign banks, let's remember the payouts AIG has made over the years to politicians. In the last 20 years American International Group (AIG) has contributed more than $9 million to federal candidates and parties through PAC and individual contributions. That's enough to rank AIG on OpenSecrets.org's Heavy Hitters list, which profiles the top 100 contributors of all time.

Over time, AIG hasn't shown an especially partisan streak, splitting evenly the $9.3 million it has contributed since 1989. In the last election cycle, though, 68 percent of contributions associated with the company went to Democrats. Two senators who chair committees charged with overseeing AIG and the insurance industry, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), are among the top recipients of AIG contributions. Baucus chairs the Senate Finance Committee and has collected more money from AIG in his congressional career than from any other company--$91,000. And with more than $280,000, AIG has been the fourth largest contributor to Dodd, who chairs the Senate's banking committee. President Obama and his rival in last year's election, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), are also high on the list of top recipients.

AIG has been a personal investment for lawmakers, too. Twenty-eight current members of Congress reported owning stock in AIG last year, worth between $2.5 million and $3.3 million. Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), one of the richest members of Congress, was by far the biggest investor in AIG, with stock valued around $2 million.

Last year AIG and its subsidiaries spent about $9.7 million on federal lobbying, or about $53,000 for every day Congress was in session in 2008. The company's spending on advocacy last year was down from an all-time high of $11.4 million spent on lobbying in 2007.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/03/before-the-fall-aig-payouts-we.html

[Stinky The Clown]

1. ......

:popcorn:

[tekisui]

2. That's how to define "too big to fail".

:think:

[Mari333]

3. AIG has them in their pockets

same old shit.
recommend...people need to see the payoffs.

[notesdev]

4. Whaddaya think, folks?

Is $53,000/day more or less influence than you and I have?

[chimpymustgo]

5. Thank you, kpete. Is it starting to set in people? We are being gamed by ALL of them.

[Mari333]

6. Is this whats called the Royal Fuck?

Cause I think thats what it is. The taxpayers must bend over now.

[Supersedeas]

15. our blood for their wars, our labor for their bonuses, salaries, taxes, campaign contributions

[Mari333]

7. kick

[KharmaTrain]

8. The Best Government Money Could Buy...

I expect the rushpublicans to twist this to try to tie every Democrat who got an AIG contribution and totally ignore those in their coven. They wouldn't be rushpublicans and hypocrites if they didn't.

So it's a surprise that a corporation that is "overseen" by the government wasn't spreading its money around? C'mon...that's turnip truck stuff. And how else do these people raise the millions needed to be competitive? Remember, over 1 billion was spent last year on campaigns, that money had to come from somewhere...our $50 donations or even the $2500 bundlers aren't enough. It's corporate money that is all over our political system...both parties, and, yes it pays off big time. Those big checks to PACs and party coffers get a lot of doors opened and pays for a lot of TV commercials during the election.

Doing some quick math...the 9.7 million AIG spent works out to about $18g for each Congresscritter and Senator. That doesn't count money spent on national parties or 527s. 18gs is about the rate of one commercial in the 11pm news in Hartford.

There's no way politicians will reform their system. They'll claim to clean it up, but as long as getting elected costs so much, the doors to K Street and the AIGs will remain wide open.

[Mari333]

9. amen on your last sentence especially. nt

[chimpymustgo]

13. It's truly bi-partisan.

[Mari333]

10. k

[Mari333]

11. k

[chimpymustgo]

12. This is important. Please K & R.

[Mari333]

14. kick

[ProSense]

16. This is rididulous. Kerry doesn't own any AIG stock

That's the problem with these reports they don't go into any details or clarify any inaccuracies.

Everyone is evidently trying to protect AIG by pulling any little link and throwing it out as real news. Kerry addressed this fully in debates with his GOP opponent last year:

"He needs to get his facts straight, that's an important part of being a senator," Kerry said. "We don't own stock in AIG. Briefly my wife had some stock through a company that owned the stock, and she had an interest in that company. She sold it and that company then sold the stock."

"As of this moment," Kerry went on, "and as of the time that we were doing any of this I had zero ownership of AIG stock."

link

He also advocated investigating and prosecuting during that debate.

The other thing is that while Open Secrets do indicate PAC donations, they don't make it clear that that most the other contributions to campaigns are employees personal donations contributed over a two-year cycle, which have nothing to do with the company's finances. Individual employee contributions are limited to a couple of thousand dollars.

That's like finding my employer and claiming the money I and my coworkers donated to candidates collectively over the past two years bought political favors. Wonder why there are no raises this year?

AIG has 116,000 employees. The bonuses when to the top executives.

[chimpymustgo]

17. Kick.

[karynnj]

18. Opensecrets is a good source for contributions - but their analysis is often poor

On campaign contributions, though they have created reports that split PAC contributions from the aggregate contributions from AIG employees, they usually don't do this for articles like the one in the OP. This means that any Presidential candidate who inspired people to send contributions ends up high on this list.

As to the personal holdings, this is ridiculous. AIG in 2007 was a blue chip US company that many people owned either directly or in mutual funds. As to Senator Kerry, he answered this last year - neither he or Teresa had any AIG stock in 2008. In early 2007, when the snapshot of their holdings was done for the Senate disclosure form, Teresa had AIG stock in her portfolio, but it was sold when she changed the company that managed her assets. Considering that Teresa is a billionaire, $2 million was not a huge part of her assets. As Teresa's wealth is included, Senator Kerry is not just "one of the richest", but by far the richest - which will lead to him often being top of these lists. Not to mention, that is Teresa's money, not his - and it will go to her sons - and he has no control over it.

I agree that the amount AIG spent (spends ?) on lobbying is unseemly.

[G_j]

19. kick