About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Anchoring MSNBC Live, CNBC's Francis says tax legislation to recoup bonuses seems "a little bit ridiculous," "silly"

March 19, 2009 3:57 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Previously:

CNBC anchor Francis: "I know I wouldn't" vote for the recovery act

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by terrapin53 (March 19, 2009 4:03 pm ET)
         
      it is silly and ridiculous, and most likely unconstitutional. Congress needs to move on and quit acting so naive over this.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jim359 (March 19, 2009 4:12 pm ET)
           
        So terrapin, your okay with the idea of paying a king's ransom with OUR money to these people in AIG's financial division? The people who are in part responsible for this mess?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by fairliberal (March 19, 2009 4:58 pm ET)
           
        I think you are probably right, the time to do something was before they were given the money, not after. Both the Bush admin and Obama's were asleep at the switch on this issue. And as much as I dislike Chris Dodd, he tried to include the amendment to prohibit the use of the funds for bonuses . He had it right this time, but I still can't understand why he lied about it.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pros2pros2940 (March 19, 2009 4:06 pm ET)
         
      Hey.........maybe Cramer needs a new co-anchor
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Brishon (March 19, 2009 4:22 pm ET)
         
      All I hear is about how unconstitutional this bill is, yet I never hear reasons why.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 19, 2009 4:44 pm ET)
           
        And you never will.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (March 19, 2009 11:46 pm ET)
           

        Among other things, the equal protection clause.

        The idea that it is retroactive is bogus, because this is merely a tax bill for next year. But the epc is a big stumbling block, and all the case law surrounding it. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by fairliberal (March 19, 2009 7:58 pm ET)
         
      Initially I thought this would be unconstitutional but apparently there is ample precedent for narrow tax bills such as this and even for the retroactive feature of it, so it may stand.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (March 19, 2009 11:48 pm ET)
           
        yeah but govt. can't single out narrow groups of people with special laws designed to apply only to them, in singular instances. Rights must be distributed equally.
        Report Abuse