The Farm Bill: Safe for Now

In the April issue of Cotton Grower that just went to press, there’s an item in our On The Square commentary that reads something like this: “Do you believe companies receiving government funds right now can be forced to take back millions of dollars in bonuses? Well, you’re wrong. Most executive compensation packages are contractual. If by definition an executive fulfills his contract, his in-hand bonus money cannot be taken away ex post facto.”

The reference was to AIG, which paid $165 million in bonuses – some to the very people who got AIG in the mess it’s in. But the AIG bonuses were agreed to before the government takeover and are perfectly legal.

Advertisement

So Congress has stepped in and wants to impose a 90% tax on what it considers excessive bonuses. Well, guess what? That’s not going to work, either. In fact, imposing taxes ex post facto is unconstitutional.

Writes syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer in last Friday’s Commercial Appeal: “There is such a thing as law. The way to break a contract legally is Chapter 11 (bankruptcy). Short of that, a contract is a contract. The common law is pretty clear about impermissibility of ex post facto legislation and bills of attainder. They also happen to be specifically prohibited by the Constitution.”

Congress and the Obama Administration knew, or should have known, about the bonuses before agreeing to a bailout. If in fact they knew, then it’s on them just as much at it is AIG.

Top Articles
Cotton Highlights from April 2024 WASDE Report

Barack Obama is a great orator, but at what point does he stop orating and start leading? (Believe it or not “orating” is actually a word. I looked it up when it got through spell-check and it means exactly what I meant it to mean.) Just lead. Even some Democrats are starting to question his inability to get a grip, and are openly opposing his budget proposals.

And finally, yes, I have a point related to agriculture: As hellish as this mess is, there’s an upside for us. With all that’s going on, Obama has more important things on his plate than reopening the farm bill. He may serve two terms and not have time.

Which leads me to last week’s poll question. We asked whether or not Obama had the clout to open up the current farm bill. Here’s what you told us, and I agree with 63% of you.

This week’s poll question is pretty simple: If you are growing corn this year, have you started planting?

Yes or No.

Click here to answer the question

0

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I am not an attorney but believed the same unconstitutional points you confirmed. Many congressmen are attorneys who do know the law, and this doesn’t speak well for them. Blaming AIG recipients to sway attention away from errors made in the bailout doesn’t totally work, thanks to you and those who voice their insights.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

What does this say about the contracts intered into and those that entered into them. To me this points out the problem. Corporate America (for the most part) seems to be out of touch with the definition of capitalism. What they are in touch with, I do not understand. Is it greed or are they just pure opportunist? Where is the responsibility the we expect from our best and brighest?

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Thanks for your comments. There was an article in the Washington Post recently that read: “The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.” I’m not saying some of the firms don’t deserve it, but right or wrong, it’s not constitutional. If the Administration pulls this off, then the Constitution doesn’t mean much. — HENRY

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I am not an attorney but believed the same unconstitutional points you confirmed. Many congressmen are attorneys who do know the law, and this doesn’t speak well for them. Blaming AIG recipients to sway attention away from errors made in the bailout doesn’t totally work, thanks to you and those who voice their insights.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

What does this say about the contracts intered into and those that entered into them. To me this points out the problem. Corporate America (for the most part) seems to be out of touch with the definition of capitalism. What they are in touch with, I do not understand. Is it greed or are they just pure opportunist? Where is the responsibility the we expect from our best and brighest?

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Thanks for your comments. There was an article in the Washington Post recently that read: “The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document.” I’m not saying some of the firms don’t deserve it, but right or wrong, it’s not constitutional. If the Administration pulls this off, then the Constitution doesn’t mean much. — HENRY