H.R.1664 - Grayson-Himes Pay For Performance Act of 2009

To amend the executive compensation provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards. view all titles (2)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To amend the executive compensation provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards. as introduced.
  • Popular: Grayson-Himes Pay For Performance Act of 2009 as introduced.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 1-30 of 37 total comments.

wojcickim 03/31/2009 6:53am

“To amend the executive compensation provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards”

Unreasonable and excessive, according to who?

This has got to stop. Capitalism is going down the tubes, and our representatives are in control of the flusher.

mattpileggi 03/31/2009 7:36am

Look at Section 1 e1 regarding Prohibition of compensation. It clearly states ‘[may not] make a compensation payment to any executive or employee’ yet it is titled ‘Prohibition of Executive Compesation’. This is completely fraudulent and misleading in an effort to appeal to public outcry. This section needs to be renamed and the restrictions on executive vs non-exec pay (compensation) needs to be split into separate articles. The American people would not, I hope, stand for such a thing if they knew of its full scope.

I also agree with wojcickim in that the government has no right to determine what is unreasonable and excessive. I hope that no other companies will be foolish enough to accept any other “bailout” (overtaking) money.

lioner2 05/19/2010 6:16am

Seems that Grayson has now showed who he really works for…Luciferian NWO

“Neil Cavuto and Congressman Grayson”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITq19ezj_Xg

“…quietly passing a measure that is expected to be brought to the house floor as early as tomorrow .It’s called the Pay for Performance Act of 2009 ,under the proposal the government would impose pay restrictions on all employees not just top execs…Alan Grayson is the chief sponsor of the bill…that’s getting pretty Big Brotherish…” Grayson is not inadvertantly …he is a mole.

lioner2 05/19/2010 6:21am

BTW… Rand Paul won the Rep Senate nomination in Kentucky…with a message…“I have a message, a message from the Tea Party – a message that is loud and clear and does not mince words – we’ve come to take our government back,” stated Paul to rapturous applause, adding that he would take on the special interests in Washington who treat the federal government as their own personal ATM.

“What you have done and what we can do can transform America,” said Paul, candidly warning that America’s greatness hinges on saving the country.

Paul added that America could be saved from its debt crisis “that is devouring our country and I think could lead to chaos.”
“These petty dictators say that to stop climate change it’s about ending capitalism, they are explicit, and the President by attending Copenhagen gives credibility and credence to these folks and he should not go,” said Paul.

SethSS 03/31/2009 7:18am

The ONLY thing that might be good about this bill is that it may discourage other companies from taking any bailout funds. Even with that point, this cannot become law or it truly is over for capitalism. Yet another power grab from Washington! This is the change half of America voted for back in Nov. Thanks everyone!

jacquemartin 03/31/2009 12:28pm

Would the U.S. House of Representatives please reference where in the U.S. Constituion the right to confiscate private property and determine salaries for private sector company employees, whether they take bail-out money or not, is granted to this august (tongue-in-cheek) body? Every representative who voted for this bill should resign due to violation of their oath of office as specified in Article VI of the Constitution.

Misean 03/31/2009 10:05am
in reply to wojcickim Mar 31, 2009 6:53am

This is why you should always worry about who is contributing to your cause. You don’t want your hated enemy running your company and it’s fairly clear that the left hates those that are running the business world.

Anonymous 04/07/2009 6:30pm
in reply to DianaAmerican Apr 06, 2009 8:06pm

I don’t ask for someone to take care of me. I believe we should abolish ALL tax deductions. Pay your share for the opportunity to live here.

Returning to the tax rates of 1955 would be a good start.

bmwtriton 10/27/2009 5:08pm
in reply to jacquemartin Mar 31, 2009 12:28pm

In fact, the last time I checked, the constitution expressly FORBIDS this. The Fourteenth Amendment states no government shall deprive any citizen of Life, liberty, or PROPERTY without due process of law.

Also, the 5th amendment states property may not be taken for public use WITHOUT JUST COMPENSATION

Anonymous 04/07/2009 6:30pm
in reply to DianaAmerican Apr 06, 2009 8:06pm

I don’t ask for someone to take care of me. I believe we should abolish ALL tax deductions. Pay your share for the opportunity to live here.

Returning to the tax rates of 1955 would be a good start.

Anonymous 04/07/2009 6:33pm
in reply to DianaAmerican Apr 06, 2009 7:55pm

America voted for change in 2008. Accept that or keep complaining. Either way, the Republicans will continue to lose elections. Capitalism did not make this nation great – Mercantilism did.

Everytime this nation is run like a compnay by Republicans, the Democrats have to step in to fix the damage.

I am surprised you think your opinion is still relevant.

Anonymous 04/07/2009 6:41pm
in reply to DianaAmerican Apr 06, 2009 8:21pm

Socialism is what your Faux Noise tells you is the goal. That is a lie, and there is no evidence to support that claim.

The liberal agenda goal is Social Capitalism. Where the need of the people are more important than the support of the corporations. It slows growth to sustainable levels. It takes longer to accumulate and consolidate wealth. It provides for the needs of all of the citizens.

If you want to exist on $600 a month in welfare, good luck with that. I will continue to pay my taxes and make a contribution.

Anonymous 04/07/2009 6:46pm
in reply to DianaAmerican Apr 06, 2009 7:59pm

Read Sec. of Treas. Paulson’s plan. He designed it, and Congress and GWB approved it. The whole plan should be tossed out, but that is not what this narrow bill would accomplish.

Again, read Paulsons plan. It explains why these corporations can not get out of the agreement they signed.

TryCommonSense 08/06/2009 8:00am
in reply to Anonymous Apr 06, 2009 6:06pm

What shouuld be unconstitutional is your ignorance. The government would not impose something onto the private sector that they wouldn’t consider on themselves. Also, representatives vote in favor of the ideologies of their constituents. Try reading some history.
FYI. The Great Depression occurred when there was both a Republican Senate and House Majority. It only took 8 years to have that same majority bring us to the brink of a second Great Depression. Now ignorant individuals like yourself expect a new administration to repair the damage in less than six months. Get an education.
Back to the post. Try reading the article “Performance Pays for Federal Employees Still a Matter of Debate” from the Washingtonpost.com. This article explains that the pentagon will continue to move federal employees into a pay for performance pay scale program called Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel System. Check your facts Dumba$$.

wojcickim 04/01/2009 6:33am

Take a look at HR 450 “To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.” You would think this bill should have been passed quickly and unanimously! But,no,it has stalled since being introduced in January 2009. I wonder why? Do these people represent us or dictate to us?

Our congressmen and president have committed so many gross violations of the Constitution in the last few months through these bailouts and interference in the private sector, it is making me sick. When are Americans going to say “Enough!”?

I’m hopeful that there will be lawsuits filed on behalf of the American people and the private sector challenging these overreaching measures that are pushing us toward socialism and a loss of our freedoms.

This is all completely unconstitutional.

lounap 04/02/2009 4:12am

First passing legislation that enables banks and other companies is not prohibited by the Consitution and neither is putting “conditions” on the acceptance of that money.

On the flip side this is going to far – I feel like the PATRIOT ACT is being passed all over again and I am having flash backs to reading 1984. You either get Republicans who pass bills to strip our civil liberties or democrats to who pass bills to take all our money.

This could be a slipery slope and hopefully our Senate and the President will hit the breaks on this like they did with the original “AIG Tax Bill”.

The financial industry clearly needs to wake up about executive pay and get “religion” but Congress needs to stick with passing laws that protect and empower the people NOT Congress nor the Treasury. Perhaps legislation empowering shareholders to have more say on “executive” comp is more appropriate. Clearly this bill is going in the wrong direction.

wojcickim 04/02/2009 10:06am

Sorry, Lounap, I think this is just what the president and congress wanted. I don’t think they are going to “wake up”: their wide awake and lovin’ what were this is leading. And, God forbid, anyone try to mess with their compensation/pension.

This crisis has created a “Perfect Storm”. Now, as I read today, Geithner is saying he may have to move in replace other CEO’s. If Judge Nepolitano (of Fox News) is to be believed, he has heard from a CEO of a large bank that was NOT involved in the prime mortgage mess, did not request any TARP funds, and has over $275 billion in assets, and was strong-armed by the FED to take TARP money or face a very public, gruelling audit. He resisted but the bank’s BOD caved.
The Fed now owns 2% of the bank and wants to call the shots, and wants say on compensation and employment issues.

Anonymous 04/06/2009 6:10pm
in reply to DianaAmerican Apr 06, 2009 1:21pm

Fortuneately, the majority of Americans disagree with yoou. You will still have the chance to lie, cheat and steal money for people – it will just take longer.

DianaAmerican 04/06/2009 1:19pm

Capitalism, Where Art Thou?
The U.S. Constitution, Where Art Thou?
Freedom & Liberty, Where Art Thou?
Honest Politicians who Aren’t in Violation of their Oath of Office, Where Art Thou?

This Bill is wrong and to go back in time just a little Mr. Secretary of The Treasury, what about bonuses you received from AIG and How Much were they Again?

DianaAmerican 04/06/2009 1:21pm

Many of the Bills that have been passed since January 20, 2009 are in one way or another in Violation of the U.S. Constitution and need to be repealed immediately! And some of the ones that are sitting there, waiting in Silence, un-noticed, need Never to be Passed!

Our politicians need to Stop passing Un-Constitutional Bills and need to go back through history, Yes, all the way back to 1913 and start repealing those that are Un-Constitutional! They need to do what they were hired by “We The People” to do.

It seems their LOVE OF POWER has over come their sense of Servitude! If there be any of them that have no willingness to fulfill the job they were hired to do “By The People”, and do it According to the Constitution, then I call for their resignation immediately!

Anonymous 04/06/2009 6:06pm
in reply to wojcickim Apr 01, 2009 6:33am

The Constitution can be amended. Passing new laws is the first step, the second is judicial review. On what bench do you sit?

Anonymous 04/06/2009 6:06pm
in reply to wojcickim Apr 01, 2009 6:33am

The Constitution can be amended. Passing new laws is the first step, the second is judicial review. On what bench do you sit?

Anonymous 04/06/2009 5:59pm
in reply to SethSS Mar 31, 2009 7:18am

You are welocome for the change the majority of Americans voted for. Unfettered Capitalism is a failed experiment. It will be replaced by Social Capitalism, where profits are smaller, but the needs of the citizens come before the needs of corporations. We the people, not we the corporations.

Anonymous 04/06/2009 6:04pm
in reply to jacquemartin Mar 31, 2009 12:28pm

Corporations receive government welfare for every deduction the take on their taxes. When they accept a government loan to stay solvent, the lender can set the terms. The terms are being changed. Had the corporations not put a maximized profit before long terms health, they would need a government sponsored loan.

These corporations did pay for the legislators elected to enact deregulation. They got what they paid for, and are now reading the small print.

Anonymous 04/06/2009 6:09pm
in reply to DianaAmerican Apr 06, 2009 1:19pm

Capitalism is a failed experiment. The rest just look different to you because you believe in Capitalism.

DianaAmerican 04/06/2009 7:55pm
in reply to Anonymous Apr 06, 2009 6:09pm

If you would study History, you would know that Socialism CANNOT exist unless there is first Capitalism! And exactly how do you think America became such a Great Country?

I believe in the United States Constitution and The Bill of Rights, perhaps you should read them and then if you do not like Capitalism, Freedom, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, don’t try to change America, there are other countries you will be happier living in.

DianaAmerican 04/06/2009 8:06pm
in reply to Anonymous Apr 06, 2009 5:59pm

Under the Constitution and The Bill of Rights you are guaranteed, Freedom, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

You are Not guaranteed that because someone else becomes wealthy that they have to take care of You!

Just remember no matter how little you have, there will always be someone who has less, which means you now need to take care of them, which leaves you less than you had!

DianaAmerican 04/06/2009 7:59pm
in reply to Anonymous Apr 06, 2009 6:04pm

Would you like to explain then, why many of these Corporations are not being allowed by the government to return the bailouts?

DianaAmerican 04/06/2009 8:21pm
in reply to Anonymous Apr 06, 2009 6:10pm

I am a mother of 5 children, I raised my children by myself for 15 years without money from the government and I worked hard to provide for them. They are now grown and they work hard.

I am still employed, however if your Socialism takes over ths Wonderful Country, I will stop working and let you take care of me, isn’t that what Socialism is all about? No, it doesn’t work that way does it, hmm? In Communist countries, which you are actually talking about because socialism has to exist before before communism can take over, there is absolutely No place for the weak, the disabled, the sick, the elderly, the lazy, basically what they call the non-producers. Hope you don’t fall into one of those categories.

TryCommonSense 08/06/2009 7:48am
in reply to jacquemartin Mar 31, 2009 12:28pm

You, who obviously claims to be so adept at the interpretation of the constitution, are not considering the fact that the U.S. House of Representatives are not promoting the passage of the bill strictly under the capacity of the government. This, as other people who appear to be little more informed than you have mentioned, is a term stipulated by a lender that is forced to react to the greed and irresponsibility of the banking industry that is responsible for the economic collapse of our country. Moreover, the framers of the constitution did not anticipate a country so dependent on the financial sector so your demand for an interpretation would not be found. Rather than spew or regurgitate stubborn, ignorant, archaic, narrow minded conservative ideologies try evaluating the intentions of the representatives and thinking for yourself rather than repeating Hannity, Limbaugh or other racist bigots.


Vote on This Bill

9% Users Support Bill

7 in favor / 69 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments