Personal history: Why CEO pay exploded
It happened one day in the Clinton White House
“Grandpa, why did top executives begin to get so rich in the Clinton administration when you were in the Cabinet?”
“For many reasons, sweetie. One of the most important was that most of their pay started to be linked to the price of their company’s shares of stock.”
“But Grandpa, didn’t this encourage executives to do all sorts of bad things to increase their stock prices, such as cutting workers’ pay and benefits and moving jobs overseas?”
“Yes, my sweet, it did.”
“And besides, I thought President Clinton didn’t want top executives to earn so much more than their workers. He said that when he first campaigned for president.”
“You’re right again, pumpkin. But one day early in his administration, several of his economic advisers had a meeting ….”
Robert Rubin (head of the National Economic Council, former chairman of Goldman Sachs): During the campaign, the president said he didn’t want companies to be able to deduct executive pay exceeding $1 million from their taxable earnings. We need to pin this down for the budget and get him a recommendation.
Lloyd Bentsen (Secretary of the Treasury, former senator from Texas): He proposed a lot of things during the campaign. Circumstances change.
Me: It got a lot of press. A lot of people out there think corporate executives are overpaid. He can’t reverse himself without being accused of waffling.
Bentsen: Well, they’re wrong. It takes a lot more than a million dollars to attract a talented CEO these days, and he’s worth every penny if he can make the company more competitive and raise the value of its shares.
Leon Panetta (Chief of Staff, former member of Congress from California): Maybe there’s some way we can do this without actually limiting executive pay.
Me: Look, we’re not limiting executive pay. Companies could still pay their executives whatever they wanted to pay them. We’re just saying that society shouldn’t subsidize through the tax laws any pay over a million bucks.
Laura Tyson (Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, former Berkeley professor): What are we really trying to accomplish with the proposal? Discourage companies from paying their executives more than a million dollars, or making sure that when they do, they’re really acting in the best interest of their shareholders?
Bentsen: We have no business doing either, but the second is more valid.
Rubin: I agree with Lloyd. Why not require that pay over a million dollars be linked to company performance? Executives have to receive it in shares of stock or stock options, that sort of thing. If no linkage, no tax deduction.
Panetta: Good idea. It’s consistent with what the president promised, and it won’t create flak in the business community.
Me: But we’re not just talking about shareholders. The wage gap is widening in this country, and it affects everybody.
Bentsen: Look, Bob. We shouldn’t be social engineering through the tax code. And there’s no reason to declare class warfare. I think we’ve arrived at a good compromise. I propose that we recommend it to the president.
Rubin: Fine. Now to a few other items on the agenda ….
It bothers me that policies that have had such an incredible impact on my and millions of others lives are decided so casually by white men with no real idea of the effects of their pandering to the wealthy. Shame on these assholes. Kind of like abortion, abortion was decided by people that came from money, that have never felt the panicky desperation from unplanned pregnancy. I will be fine, personally, I am making strides in my own life to be economically independent. But everyone else is screwed, and it is so frustrating to watch it happen.
Every time a developer says they cannot build housing or affordable apartments without massive tax abatements, I wonder what exorbitant executive packages they are factoring into their calculations. When the burned out social service workers beg for pay that at least keeps up with inflation, the mission-based gas lighting response that it cannot be done because the priority is helping the children or community flies in the face of too many huge executive director salaries that they can all see in the 990s. Every time a school crumbles, a teacher gets in trouble for a side job, or an injured child can't get the care they need, all I can think is how much money the administrators and healthcare execs are pocketing while the hardest working people struggle through an increasingly difficult existence.
If we had a halfway decent press, this would be a main topic of every broadcast. Every issue, from the struggling air traffic controllers to the military members who don't get the healthcare they need, should cover the people at the top, what they earn, and how it can possibly be justified. As for the notion that pay should be tied to actual performance, most Americans I know stopped believing that lie when the bankers got enormous bonuses when the economy was strong and got enormous bonuses and bailouts when they broke the economy. The only performance that is truly tied to earnings these days is how well one can exploit loopholes, con people, purchase politicians, and extract value from the earth and all that live here.