Bill's Lucrative Speaking Engagements Create Potential Conflicts For Hillary

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Bill's Lucrative Speaking Engagements Create Potential Conflicts For Hillary stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 11-20-08 10:59 PM   |   Updated: 12-21-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Bill Clinton

It would be interesting to know how the average New York voter would respond when told that during the past three years their Senator and her spouse personally received $2.1 million from such major banks as Goldman Sachs ($800,000), Lehman Bros. ($300, 000), Citigroup ($425,000) and Deutsche Bank ($300,000).

The money -- honoraria payments to former President Clinton -- demonstrate that the conflicts between Bill Clinton's multi-million dollar financial entanglements and his wife's possible selection as Secretary of State are just as relevant in the case of the elected office Hillary Clinton currently holds, raising to front and center the same glaring conflicts of interest that have gone largely overlooked during Hillary's eight years in the Senate.

Sources close to the Clintons sought to justify the ex-president's speaking fees by noting that wealthy spouses of other Senators, including the wives of John Kerry of Massachusetts and John McCain of Arizona, have multi-million dollar fortunes, often invested in the stocks of companies that stand to gain or lose as a result of tax and regulatory decisions made by Congress.

Still, the Clintons' situation has some particularly egregious aspects. The New York Senator has been as much the beneficiary as her husband of the up to $10 million a year in honoraria Bill has earned. Almost all of the Clintons' assets are held jointly, and they file a joint income tax return.

The potential for conflict of interest in this situation is most easily visible in the case of major legislation presently under consideration in Washington. If Hillary stays in the Senate, the most pressing issue will be the financial crisis. She has already voted for the $700 billion bailout bill, which is likely to be only the first step in federal attempts to pull the economy out of its nosedive.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Senator Clinton has not only received campaign contributions from the investment and securities industries -- industries with huge stakes in the outcome of measures almost certain to be taken up in 2009-10 -- but Bill and Hillary together have also taken as personal income, for their own use, millions of dollars paid to Bill in the form of honoraria, running from $125,000 to $325,000 for a single speech to interest groups directly affected by his wife's legislative position. The Clintons are not alone in the practice, but they have raised the stakes to unprecedented heights. In 2006, for example, Joe Lieberman's wife spoke to the Jewish Community Relations Council in Philadelphia, the Jewish Federation of Central Alabama, and the Junior League of Dayton making a total of $34,000 --- chump change compared to the $10,232,000 (yes, that's ten million+) Bill Clinton made in honoraria the same year.

Looking just at the finance industry over the past three years, in 2007 three major investment banking firms -- Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bros. and Citigroup - already on center stage in the financial downturn, each paid Bill Clinton $150,000, for a total of $450,000, for single speeches to company officials and their guests. The year before that, 2006, the Mortgage Bankers Association, Citigroup and Lehman paid Clinton a total of $600,000. In 2005, Deutsche Bank paid $300,000 for two speeches; Goldman Sachs paid $525,000 for three appearances in Paris, Greensboro, Ga. and Kiawah Island, S.Car. In 2004, Bill Clinton's honoraria included $250,000 from Citigroup and $125,000 from Goldman Sachs.

This $2.25 million does not include payments to Bill Clinton from such closely-related firms as Swedish industrial holding company Investor AB ($325,000), Dutch real estate investment company OVG Rotterdam ($250,000); U.S. real estate developer Cushman and Wakefield ($300,000); General Motors ($200,000) which is pleading for a piece of the bailout; the National Apartment Association ($150.000); the National Association of Realtors ($125,000); the Standard Bank of South Africa ($150,000); and the National Multi-Housing Council ($150,000).

The involvement of the financial and real estate sectors in domestic politics is immense, no matter which way you look at it. So far this year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, the investment and securities industry has given a total of $53 million in campaign contributions to federal candidates; and real estate has put up $51.1 million. The courts have ruled that these contributions do not, except under highly unusual circumstances, constitute bribes or illegal gratuities; instead, they are simply part of the business of serving in public office.

Philippe Reines, Senator Clinton's spokesman, responded to an inquiry regarding any potential conflict of interest between her large income from honoraria paid to her husband by the industries which are subject to regulation (or largesse) noted that the Senator "files an annual personal financial disclosure, which delineates every penny President Clinton receives from speaking, as well as every general income source. The whole point of requiring the 535 members to do that annually is to provide transparency." Asked whether the millions of dollars in direct payments from finance and real estate companies to Bill Clinton pose an ethical dilemma for Senator Clinton when she votes on measures such as the $700 billion bailout bill, which provides subsidies to the same firms which pay her husband, Reines said the "example of the bailout is misleading, in that every member who voted for it benefits in some way from saving the financial system from collapse - unless they keep their life's worth in gold ingots."

It would be interesting to know how the average New York voter would respond when told that during the past three years their Senator and her spouse personally received $2.1 million from such major ba...
It would be interesting to know how the average New York voter would respond when told that during the past three years their Senator and her spouse personally received $2.1 million from such major ba...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
77
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 (3 pages total)

"Bill's Speaking Fees Create Potential Conflicts For Hillary"
No it doesn't. Not anymore than Michelle Obama's corporate lawyering precludes her husband from occupying White House.
Next subject...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:13 AM on 11/21/2008
- toypiano I'm a Fan of toypiano 12 fans permalink
photo

Good point. I think they were worried about appearances more than anything. By the way, notice how Michelle O has suddenly become a blank slate? There are no more references to her corporate past, just the happy housemom and wife (nothing wrong with that, of course, but it's not the whole picture of her career). In the case of HRC, how many other potential cabinet members have spouses who are former presidents? It's unique.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:58 AM on 11/21/2008
- jackstpaul I'm a Fan of jackstpaul 9 fans permalink

Yes, it's unique, that's why it's getting special attention.

Michelle Obama hasn't been a corporate lawyer for a long time, not like that necessarily presents an issue.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:05 AM on 11/21/2008
- jackstpaul I'm a Fan of jackstpaul 9 fans permalink

These are small apples and enormous orranges. It isn't merely literally money, scale and expanse is an important issues. BTW, MIchelle is a "corporate lawyer." She works in health care on the non-profit end, not lawyering.

Why don't you people even think these things through?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:03 AM on 11/21/2008
- toypiano I'm a Fan of toypiano 12 fans permalink
photo

Don't need to, we have you to do our thinking for us!

MO's career as a corporate lawyer also encompassed working in marketing and intellectual property law as well as Chicago city law. She was also a paid board member of TreeHouse Foods, a major supplier to WalMart, but she quit that after her husband made some comments critical of WM (I'm glad).

Anyway, she's held some terrific public sector positions, too. None of this was to criticize her, just to point out that we sure don't hear much about any of it.

Interesting that you don't think corporate law involves lawyering.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 AM on 11/22/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

MagisterLudi, I'm laughing.

Selling insider information on American policy to foreign business interests based on his continuing security briefings does not constitute conflict of interest? Living in homes, and enjoying a life style bought with mega millions paid by Middle Eastern oil interests courting favor, isn't a conflct? Voting for the war in Iraq to serve those middle eastern oil interests who want control of the Iraqi oil fields, isnt' a conflict?

IF can see who in the world has paid Bill for his "advice" and where the Clintons amassaed their HUGE fortune, the real and potential conflicts of interest will be equally HUGE.

In these delcate, challenging times, why would we want such great potential for conflict of interest in ta new administration pledged to right wrongs and change the world for the BETTER?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:25 AM on 11/21/2008
photo

It's like watching a twenty-first century version of Macbeth, only the drama is endless.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 AM on 11/21/2008
photo

The problem is, let's face it: Bill, while he CAN command huge fees, is a people person, and will speak anywhere, even where they can only pay him in livestock. This screws up everybody's calculations.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:10 AM on 11/21/2008
- Ugonna I'm a Fan of Ugonna 15 fans permalink
photo

come on, Bill. I'm counting on your "conflict".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 AM on 11/21/2008
photo

After what the Republicans put him through with "Moinicagate", I hope Bill made $ millions. And, apparently he did. :D

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:07 AM on 11/21/2008
photo

What do we the American people get, after his Monicagate cost us the 2000 election and 8 years of terror?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 AM on 11/21/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

and Bill's signing of the financial industry de-gregulation legislation openend the door for the mortgage crisis and Wall Street meltdown. Bill is a gift who keeps on giving.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:33 AM on 11/21/2008
- punkingale I'm a Fan of punkingale 5 fans permalink
photo

Why could George HW Bush give speeches and raise money for charities while his son was president, but Bill Clinton can't earn a living if Hillary is Secretary of State? Someone please explain the difference to me. I'm blonde.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 AM on 11/21/2008
- toypiano I'm a Fan of toypiano 12 fans permalink
photo

LOL. Hmm, considering that Shrub would stand to inherit his father's earnings from those speeches, then I guess I don't see much of a difference. Except a spouse is a much closer relationship with a more direct financial benefit. Well, usually. In the case of the Bushies, though, all bets are off. I mean, since when do rules apply to them anyway?

This Edsall person has an agenda in his editorial, although I appreciated the specific financial information nonetheless. The rest of it is invective meant to persuade us that it's somehow unholy for this particular ex-POTUS to be earning that much money. Oh, the mock outrage!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:14 AM on 11/21/2008
- jackstpaul I'm a Fan of jackstpaul 9 fans permalink

You don't know what W. will inherit, do you? W. might not even know. Every penny Bill earns is as much Hillary's as his--and to use immediately.

Please think people.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:07 AM on 11/21/2008
- partyofone I'm a Fan of partyofone 45 fans permalink

punkingaie, You seem to be saying that we should accept the Clintons because their conflicts of interest are not differnt from the Bushes? Is that change? Shouldn't we be opposing Hillary's appointment because she and Bill have conflicts that are like those of the Bushes?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:31 AM on 11/21/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect