I enjoyed the comment by Chris regarding my last post about the power of the czars. Chris is so right when he stated the Keith Feinberg is the Special Master for Executive Compensation and it is his job to keep the bailed out bank executives in line. And Chris is so right when he says I wouldn't want bailout companies to place taxpayer money in the executive pockets. Agreed.
However, the term czar is used by mainstream media in referring to Mr. Feinberg and the presidential advisors. So, yes, they are commonly known as czars. Actually, Mr. Feingberg is quoted in an October 20, 2009 article and refers to himself as "pay czar", although he made it clear he doesn't like the term.
So, my question remains for czars in general. How many of them are supposed to be just advisors? To my knowledge, less than half of the advisors or czars were confirmed by Congress. How much power are they wielding? And why is it that these czars are now in the center of the executive branch and in the news? It seems to me that in the past, when they were talked about in the news, they were described as "presidential advisors" - no matter who the President was at the time.
Is it because I watch the news more now? Or is it because so many of them have pasts that appear, well, appear not so sunny? Just wondering...
Showing posts with label taxpayer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxpayer. Show all posts
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Monday, December 15, 2008
Another Bailout Industry Could be Created-- All in the Name of Free
Note: Setting the stage for a wireless czar?
FCC to Consider Next Entity for Taxpayer Bailout
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- If the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) moves forward with plans to create a government-operated nationwide wireless network provider at an up-coming meeting scheduled for Dec. 18, it will create yet another government-mandated entity at risk for failure and future taxpayer bailout.
The FCC plans to use this week's meeting to vote on a proposal to auction 25 megahertz of spectrum to be used as a free national wireless network operated by a single provider, creating a new government sponsored enterprise in the tradition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
According to the IPI publication, "Should the U.S. Favor a Free Nationwide Wireless Network Provider?"
(http://ipi.org/ipi/IPIPublications.nsf/PublicationLookupFullTextPDF/94BE0 017C8D28CFB862574CE00596D98/$File/NationwideWireless.pdf?OpenElement)
Author and IPI adjunct fellow Solveig Singleton warns the plan is risky.
"This kind of company would not be allowed to fail and therefore sets up a future bailout at taxpayer expense," she says.
The risk of failure is substantial, says Singleton: "The entity will have little flexibility to change business models if it finds itself in trouble."
In the report, Singleton recalls how other failed municipal Wi-Fi plans, including one proposal for the city of Portland, Ore., found the deal uneconomical and unsuccessfully tried to bow out.
Furthermore, in the event the auction winner is headed for bankruptcy and collapse, Singleton warns supporters of the plan if they are prepared to allow the entity to fail.
"Policy makers should keep the federal thumb off the broadband competition scales and stay out of the business of designing broadband business models," Singleton concluded.
The Institute for Policy Innovation is an independent, non-profit public policy organization based in Dallas, Texas. Copies of the publication, "Should the U.S. Favor a Free Nationwide Wireless Network Provider?" are available by visiting www.ipi.org .
FCC to Consider Next Entity for Taxpayer Bailout
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- If the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) moves forward with plans to create a government-operated nationwide wireless network provider at an up-coming meeting scheduled for Dec. 18, it will create yet another government-mandated entity at risk for failure and future taxpayer bailout.
The FCC plans to use this week's meeting to vote on a proposal to auction 25 megahertz of spectrum to be used as a free national wireless network operated by a single provider, creating a new government sponsored enterprise in the tradition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
According to the IPI publication, "Should the U.S. Favor a Free Nationwide Wireless Network Provider?"
(http://ipi.org/ipi/IPIPublications.nsf/PublicationLookupFullTextPDF/94BE0 017C8D28CFB862574CE00596D98/$File/NationwideWireless.pdf?OpenElement)
Author and IPI adjunct fellow Solveig Singleton warns the plan is risky.
"This kind of company would not be allowed to fail and therefore sets up a future bailout at taxpayer expense," she says.
The risk of failure is substantial, says Singleton: "The entity will have little flexibility to change business models if it finds itself in trouble."
In the report, Singleton recalls how other failed municipal Wi-Fi plans, including one proposal for the city of Portland, Ore., found the deal uneconomical and unsuccessfully tried to bow out.
Furthermore, in the event the auction winner is headed for bankruptcy and collapse, Singleton warns supporters of the plan if they are prepared to allow the entity to fail.
"Policy makers should keep the federal thumb off the broadband competition scales and stay out of the business of designing broadband business models," Singleton concluded.
The Institute for Policy Innovation is an independent, non-profit public policy organization based in Dallas, Texas. Copies of the publication, "Should the U.S. Favor a Free Nationwide Wireless Network Provider?" are available by visiting www.ipi.org .
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Beware- Looks Like Obama Plans to Have United Nations Tax America
An email came across today which talks about Senate Bill 2433, which Obama supports. Never did we hear about this during the campaign, but it has serious future financial obligations to the American taxpayer. Have the United Nations tax Americans?
Read on to see the full story
by Larry Petrash
....“I believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change,” Obama has asserted. He also says his faith has led him to question “the idolatry of the free market.” Now it appears that a President Obama’s foreign and domestic policies are much like his previous church’s Afrocentric doctrine he once pledged to uphold. Americans will pay a hefty price.....
Read on to see the full story
by Larry Petrash
....“I believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change,” Obama has asserted. He also says his faith has led him to question “the idolatry of the free market.” Now it appears that a President Obama’s foreign and domestic policies are much like his previous church’s Afrocentric doctrine he once pledged to uphold. Americans will pay a hefty price.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
