Melissa Bean’s backers are key Obama associates
By Kevin Connor  •  Dec 10, 2009 at 13:09 EST

A group of “New Democrats” led by Representative Melissa Bean has reportedly won major concessions in the financial reform fight:

The compromise reached late Wednesday between pro-reform House Democrats and the banker-friendly wing of the party could significantly weaken consumer protection in states where lawmakers support tougher rules against tactics such as predatory lending and excessive ATM fees than historically submissive federal regulators.

Barney Frank chalked up Bean’s intransigence to the lobbying of a generic group of “big banks,” without providing much in the way of details. The Huffington Post has pointed to the amount of campaign cash flowing from Wall Street, and Public Citizen released a report on the subject on Tuesday.

But “big banks” have a human side, after all; Bean draws her support from real, live, human beings.  And a closer look at who these people are suggests that the Representative’s efforts are backed by financial elites tightly linked to President Obama.

Read more…

Chicago 2016 Committee Gave More to Obama than Goldman Sachs
By Matthew Skomarovsky  •  Oct 02, 2009 at 02:37 EST

At around noon Eastern time the International Olympic Committee is set to vote on the host city for the 2016 Summer Olympics. The final candidates are Chicago, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro, and Tokyo. The White House originally stated that President Obama would not attend the Copenhagen vote to lobby for Chicago’s bid, due to pressing work on health care reform, but announced earlier this week that he would attend after all. In recent years major heads of states have successfully lobbied for their country’s cities, and it’s kind of difficult to imagine the IOC disappointing the world’s most powerful man. Update: Chicago was eliminated in the first round of today’s vote.

Read more…

Baucus offers higher subsidies, other changes to healthcare bill
By kyle  •  Sep 23, 2009 at 05:49 EST

The new markup of Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus’s healthcare proposal offers higher subsidies for the financially strapped, and limits penalties and those affected by a new tax. The overhaul is expected to return favor from key Republican Senator Olympia Snowe. (LATimes)

The Massachusetts Senate voted to allow Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick the final vote on the interim replacement for Sen. Ted Kennedy. The replacement Senator is likely to be a democrat, which may help Obama overcome Republican attempts to block health reform. (Reuters)

Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf will add the title of Chairman when Dick Kovacevich retires early next year. (SFGate)

Pacific Gas and Electric Company publicly announced plans to leave the US Chamber of Commerce, citing irreconcilable difference with the “extreme position on climate change” maintained by the latter. (SFGate)

Tribune Co.’s recently-announced plans to sell the Chicago Cubs are likely to be challenged by the IRS. (Chicago Sun-Times)

New PAI report on Obama nominee’s role in PetroChina/Sudan financing
By Kevin Connor  •  Jul 21, 2009 at 14:05 EST

On Sunday I blogged about the key role of Bob Hormats, Obama’s recent nominee for undersecretary of state, in the stock offering of PetroChina, a company linked to Sudan’s genocidal regime.

Hormats’s Goldman Sachs connection has been criticized elsewhere, but his Sudan ties deserve more scrutiny.

This is no insignificant matter: as a Goldman Sachs executive, Hormats threw his weight behind a stock offering that helped to finance Sudan’s genocidal regime. He did so in a deceptive and, as it turned out, illegal manner. And he did so despite the fervent opposition of a broad coalition concerned about the link between oil revenues and the Sudan genocide. This coalition included government officials (including members of the Reagan administration), labor unions, human rights organizations, and religious groups.

The Public Accountability Initiative (PAI, the 501c3 behind LittleSis) will be releasing the Hormats research in the form of a report and circulating it to various stakeholders and Senate offices. The introduction is below, the full report is here.

Read more…

A closer look at a toxic avenger
By Aaron  •  Mar 25, 2009 at 10:36 EST

To paraphrase Paul Krugman, it looks like the zombies have won. Insolvent banks continue to roam the earth, sucking up unfathomable sums of taxpayer capital, provided to hedge fund intermediaries as nonrecourse loans. The scheme is designed to create inflated “auction” prices by incentivizing investors to over-bid on assets which carry almost no downside risk – for them, that is.

Geithner, Summers and company test-marketed the plan with friends and former colleagues on Wall Street thoroughly over the past month to find the formula that would send high finance into the fits of ecstasy we witnessed on Monday. Hedge fund directors were among Treasury’s most coveted focus groups.

Read more…

DeLong has a little brother in this fight
By Kevin Connor  •  Mar 23, 2009 at 07:54 EST

Since the Obama administration leaked details of its toxic asset plan on Friday night, the reaction in the blogosphere has been swift and harshly critical: the zombie plans have won, writes Paul Krugman; it’s a Rube Goldberg device for shifting losses to the Treasury, writes James K Galbraith; really bad ideas, writes Atrios.

There has, however, been one prominent exception: Brad Delong, who defends the Geithner plan in this FAQ posted Saturday. Josh Marshall and Hilzoy have since pointed to DeLong’s stance as evidence that the Treasury plan has not been universally panned by the reality-based community. Krugman saw fit to argue back. Meanwhile, the Obama administration is making a push to build blogger support for the new bank bailout, and DeLong is their highest-profile ally.

But DeLong has a credibility issue. Here at LittleSis, we have a sneaking suspicion that his views have been shaped by family ties: Brad’s brother Chris, a hedge fund manager linked closely to Robert Rubin, is poised to profit handsomely from the toxic asset plan.

Read more…

Privatization advocates led Obama transportation review effort
By Kevin Connor  •  Jan 31, 2009 at 11:21 EST

The privatization of transportation infrastructure was supposed to be a Bush administration goal, but based on my (LittleSis-powered) review of Obama’s transition team, it is a major priority of the new administration, as well.

All three of the Obama transition team leads charged with reviewing the Department of Transportation are privatization advocates. Not only that, but their private sector activities suggest that they stand to profit substantially from further privatization of the nation’s transportation infrastructure (highways, bridges, tunnels, and so on).

On Thursday I profiled Mort Downey, a well-regarded transportation expert, as a “quiet name” – an influential decisionmaker who operates behind the scenes, out of the public spotlight. Downey’s work in the for-profit world – as president and now chairman of PB Consult, a division of engineering giant Parsons Brinckerhoff – has established him as a cheerleader for infrastructure privatization. His decades of work in the public sector give him that much more cred as an industry spokesperson.

The two other leads on the DoT review team were Jane Garvey, former FAA chief, and Michael Huerta, a former DoT official.

As of last May, Garvey is head of public-private partnerships (aphorism for infrastructure privatization) at JP Morgan. The hire garnered quite a bit of press attention, including a writeup in DealBook, the New York Times’ Wall Street blog, which observed: “it marks only the latest high-profile hire amid sharply climbing interest in infrastructure investing, which involves toll roads, airports and the like.”

From the internal memo announcing Garvey’s arrival, published on DealBook:

Today is an exciting day for JPMorgan’s Infrastructure Advisory Group. In addition to our advisory and financing role on the $12.8 billion Pennsylvania Turnpike concession, I’m pleased to announce that Jane Garvey has joined JPMorgan’s as head of U.S. Public Private Partnerships in Transportation, reporting to me. In this role, Jane will advise clients in the transportation sector on how traditional infrastructure financing methods can be improved to facilitate much needed project delivery for governments. As federal funding disappears and state and local fiscal positions weaken, public private partnerships are increasingly used as a tool for delivering much needed projects.

Nowadays, many economists believe that the government needs to make significant investments in infrastructure in order to get the economy back on track. Wall Street, on the other hand, clearly has a lot riding on the continued erosion of federal funding for infrastructure.

So it would be no suprise if people like Garvey, who has been purchased captured hired by a Wall Street bank, opposed funding increases for infrastructure, whether it be part of the stimulus package or the upcoming transportation bill. She stands to gain lots of money, probably millions, as infrastructure privatization continues. Why should we believe that she’s working for the public interest, and not Wall Street interests/gross self-interest?

Michael Huerta, the third and final team lead on Obama’s DoT review, is another very well-respected transportation expert with loads of public sector experience. But like Downey and Garvey, his most recent work has been in the private sector, for ACS, a Fortune 500 company that specializes in business process outsourcing.

The division Huerta heads up, ACS Transportation Solutions, is a member of the National Council for Public-Private Partnerships, like Downey’s PB Consult. When a state or local government outsources the management of a toll road, Huerta’s ACS often steps in. It’s not hard to imagine that Huerta stands to gain substantially from privatization. But we don’t have to imagine it. He says so right here, in this ACS investor call from May 15, 2008 (not available online, published on the Voxant FD Wire):

So what is driving our past growth in the future? Well, you are seeing a lot more privatization here in the U.S. and abroad as public authorities, governments look to get more efficiency out of the transportation system, that trend is very good for us.

So privatization is very good for Michael Huerta. And Jane Garvey. And Mort Downey. Every single Obama DoT review member is a privatization advocate, despite the fact that the American public overwhelmingly supports *public* investment in transportation infrastructure (regardless of political affiliation), despite the fact that this is an extremely controversial issue, despite the fact that this was supposed to be Bush’s agenda, not Obama’s.

The transition selections matter because Obama transition review teams were charged with significant personnel and policy decisions at their respective agencies. The DoT review team’s leadership suggests that the Obama DoT will be chock full of privatization advocates and pushovers, and will embrace policies that favor Wall Street interests. The LaHood pick is a good example of how this will play out, but I suspect there are and will be others.

The fact that this hasn’t gotten much attention demonstrates the dangers of the revolving door: Huerta, Downey, and Garvey have leveraged years of public sector experience for private interests and (exorbitant) personal gain, but because of their public service and their status as experts, no one questions their motivations.

And quietly, through the classic process of regulatory capture, Wall Street has positioned itself to shape and control the future of American transportation infrastructure. Who knows if they will be successful, but if highways are anything like houses, it certainly is a scary prospect.

New Administration, New Feature
By Matthew Skomarovsky  •  Jan 20, 2009 at 19:53 EST

Previously, user-created lists in LittleSis, such as Bush II Administration Officials, had limited value. They basically behaved like meta tags, but clunkier. If you added Paul Wolfowitz to the Bush II list, then the list name would show up on his profile, and someone browsing through members of that list would see Wolfowitz on it — and that’s about it.

But now, in time for the inaugural excitement, list pages have some new tabs: Interlocks, Giving, and Funding:

List pages in LittleSis now have tabs for viewing common affiliations of list members, as well as their donors and favorite candidates

Similar to the tabs that appear on profiles for organizations, they identify common affiliations of list members,  their biggest political donors, and other potentially interesting patterns.

Even though the LittleSis profiles for the new White House are still works in progress, the Obama Administration’s interlocks are already quite interesting.