Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

In Wake of Crash, McCain Talks Tough About CEO Pay -- Will Congress Call His Bluff?

By Sam Pizzigati and Sarah Anderson, AlterNet. Posted September 23, 2008.


The candidate is proposing a radical restriction on pay for CEOs of bailed-out firms.  But is he serious or is this just election season populism?

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Atheists, It's Time to Stand Up to Jesus
Russell Blackford, Udo Schuklenk

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Sam Pizzigati Sarah Anderson

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

John McCain, reborn on the campaign trail as an anti-corporate-greed populist, now wants to cap executive pay. No CEO at any business bailed out by our tax dollars, the GOP Presidential nominee is declaring, "should receive any more than the highest-paid person in the federal government."

That high-paid federal employee just happens to be the President of the United States. The President's annual compensation: $400,000, or about 24 times the current take-home of the lowest-paid federal employee.

How radical a step is McCain proposing here? An enormously radical step, at least by Corporate America's existing executive pay standards. Last year, says a new Institute for Policy Studies report, top CEOs in the United States pocketed 344 times more pay than average American workers.

On the other hand, by historical standards, McCain's cap amounts to nothing radical at all. Back in the early 1980s, at the beginnings of America's executive pay explosion, top CEOs took home just 30 to 40 times what their workers were making.

And some people considered that 30 to 40 times way too large a divide. Among the critics: Peter Drucker, the founder of modern management science and the preeminent business thinker of the 20th century. Drucker, as a recent Business Week commentary reminds us, felt that any top-to-bottom pay gap wider than 25-to-1 undermines the teamwork that modern enterprises needs to operate effectively.

Drucker, who died three years ago, never changed his mind about that, and, in the current debate over the bailout, a variety of activists from the progressive side of the political spectrum are keeping his spirit alive. They're calling on lawmakers to deny bailout dollars to any company where the top executive is making over 25 times what the company's lowest-paid worker is making.

John McCain, with his call to link pay for bailed-out executives to the top federal paycheck, is essentially calling for the same thing. His proposal would apply to all the firms that want in on the $700 billion of bailout dollars. That's every big financial institution in the country. And getting a solid executive pay cap in this bailout would set an important precedent that progressives can then fight to have extended to government procurement in general.

Does Senator McCain actually mean it? Is he really serious about reversing Corporate America's generation-long compensation tilt to the top? Or is the Arizona senator just blowing campaign smoke?

Democrats in Congress can easily find out. They can plug into the Senate bailout bill a clause that spells out McCain's CEO pay cap proposal. Let's see if the senator votes for it. If he doesn't, his "populism" would stand revealed as a campaign fraud.

More importantly, if McCain does vote for a serious bailout cap on executive paychecks -- and if enough Democrats join him -- we will have taken a giant step to common sense in corporate compensation. We will be putting the kibosh on the excessive executive pay rewards that have given our nation's CEOs the incentive to behave so recklessly.

So what are Democrats in Congress waiting for? Stand up against greed. Put a real CEO pay cap in the bailout bill. Help make our economy work again. Call John McCain's bluff.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: bush, mccain, ceo pay, paulson, bailout

Sarah Anderson directs the Global Economy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies. Sam Pizzigati, an Institute associate fellow, edits Too Much, an online weekly on excess and inequality.  They are co-authors of the recently released report Executive Excess 2008:  How Average Taxpayers Subsidize Runaway Pay.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
No Chance in Hell
Posted by: edtattom on Sep 23, 2008 6:11 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just watched the Senate Banking hearings today. Paulson's response to all questions concerning executive compensation was always the same: He, too, was "frustrated" over the issue of executive compensation, but there really was nothing that could be done about it. As though it were a matter of natural law, unchangeable, immutable. Then it dawned on me that he was right. No one in this country can or will stand up to these people. They truly are the new Gods. They are entitled to immense fortunes for every year they hold their job titles, successful or not, even when their failures are monumental. The end will be a country of beggers with the God Executives alternating between their hundreds of vaction mansions. It's just a matter of time before they legalize polygamy so they can have the hundreds of wives to which such Gods are entitled. Expect them to demand and receive a constitutional amendment acknowledging their immortal status. I'm not kidding here. At the rate their compensation keeps increasing each year, it's inevitable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Holy cow!!
Posted by: rickiey on Sep 24, 2008 6:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A really good idea coming out of the McCain camp?

Who'd a thunk it?

No shot in hell of it happening. Our democrats are too invertibrate and the republicans aren't interested.

Oh, and if somehow happens?

The companies will evade it by lowering CEO salaries and giving stock options instead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Compensation
Posted by: Purplemule74 on Sep 25, 2008 8:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is fundamentally wrong for the United States government to place caps on compensation in private industry. Yes, I agree that some CEOs for business entities receive unbelievably large compensation packages. However, that choice belongs to an apparently incredibly trusting (foolish?) shareholders and lax/complicit board members, not the U.S. government.

In addition, if we begin creating salary caps for CEOs, are we to begin creating caps for lower paid employees within private industry? Is the government now to dictate that a truck driver should be paid no more than $23,000 a year, since according to some governmental matrix a truck driver is not worth more than $23,000 in annual compensation? A waiter $16,000, a nurse $37,000?

The best part of this is that this suggestion or thought is coming from a republican candidate. Notice a slight rumbling in the ground in Washington D.C.? Someone better put their ear to the ground in a Washington D.C. cemetery, because deceased republicans must be spinning in their graves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Compensation Posted by: mumblefaery
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement