Could this pose a problem for Obama’s nominee for Treasury Secretary?

[Tigermike 4,309]

JANUARY 13, 2009, 6:57 P.M. ET

Senators Raise Questions About Geithner's Nomination at Treasury

By JONATHAN WEISMAN

Sen. Charles E. Grassley, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, is raising questions about a housekeeper who worked briefly for Treasury Secretary-nominee Timothy Geithner without proper immigration papers, and multiple years when Mr. Geithner didn't pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for himself.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) has summoned committee members to his office this afternoon to air the matter ahead of any public confirmation hearing.

According to people familiar with the matter, Mr. Geithner employed a housekeeper whose immigration papers expired during her tenure with Mr. Geithner, currently president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The woman went on to get a green card to work legally in the country and federal immigration authorities didn't press charges against her, these people said.

The second issue involved taxes due while Mr. Geithner worked for the International Monetary Fund between 2001 and 2004. As an employee, Mr. Geithner was technically considered self-employed and was required to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for himself as both an employer and an employee.

He apparently failed to do so, resulting in Internal Revenue Service audits his last two years at the IMF. As soon as the IRS brought the issue to his attention, he paid the taxes with interest, these people said.

Are any of Obama's cabinet picks at risk of becoming a liability for the administration? It's unclear how much of an impediment these issues will be to Mr. Geithner's nomination. On its merits, his ascension has been widely praised. Mr. Geithner spent most of his career managing government responses to financial crises, from the 1990s bailouts of Mexico, Indonesia and Korea, to the market meltdown that has brought Wall Street to its knees.

At the same time, similar issues have derailed nominations in the past. President Clinton's first and second choices for attorney general both withdrew amid allegations that they failed to pay taxes for household help. President George W. Bush's first choice for Labor secretary withdrew after it emerged that she had employed an illegal alien.

Obama aides said they didn't believe these issues would present a problem, given the minor nature of the infractions and the gravity of the role he has been nominated to take. (So if I don't pay my taxes are Obama's aides going to take the same opinion and talk to the IRS for me?)

On the tax front, Mr. Geithner's oversight is not uncommon. The IRS has mandated loose rules for U.S.-born IMF employees unaware of their obligations to pay payroll taxes.

Sen. Baucus nonetheless decided to hold a closed-door meeting to allow the two matters to be aired before Mr. Geithner's public confirmation hearing.

"It's important that I talk to senators, which I'm going to be doing," Sen. Baucus said as he went into the meeting.

Democratic senators plan to defend Mr. Geithner, (naturally) saying that the nature of the complaints pale in comparison to the gravity of the crises he has been asked to face, a severe economic recession, turmoil in the financial markets and the collapse of the U.S. auto industry.

Write to Jonathan Weisman at jonathan.weisman@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123187503629378119.html

Let’s say he accidentally forgot to pay the taxes he’s obligated to. In what way does that bode well for a man being put in the role of Secretary of the Treasury? It doesn’t or it shouldn't. But don’t expect Congress to keep that from confirming The One’s choice. Even Republicans can’t be counted on to raise much of an opposition.

[Auburn85 438]

what i dont get is despite the audit in 2006 for the years of 03-04, he didn't initally pay for the taxes of the first 2 years of 2001-2002.

when did he finally come around to paying the taxes for the first two years for those who care about appointing someone to the treasury department ?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/13/tre...axes/index.html

In 2006, the Internal Revenue Service audited Geithner for tax years 2003 and 2004, and he paid $16,732 for the taxes and interest for those years, the statement said. After Obama nominated him for treasury secretary, Geithner voluntarily amended his taxes for 2001 and 2002, paying $25,970 for those taxes and interest, the committee said.

[arnaldoabru 11]

JANUARY 13, 2009, 6:57 P.M. ET

Senators Raise Questions About Geithner's Nomination at Treasury

By JONATHAN WEISMAN

Sen. Charles E. Grassley, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, is raising questions about a housekeeper who worked briefly for Treasury Secretary-nominee Timothy Geithner without proper immigration papers, and multiple years when Mr. Geithner didn't pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for himself.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D., Mont.) has summoned committee members to his office this afternoon to air the matter ahead of any public confirmation hearing.

According to people familiar with the matter, Mr. Geithner employed a housekeeper whose immigration papers expired during her tenure with Mr. Geithner, currently president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The woman went on to get a green card to work legally in the country and federal immigration authorities didn't press charges against her, these people said.

The second issue involved taxes due while Mr. Geithner worked for the International Monetary Fund between 2001 and 2004. As an employee, Mr. Geithner was technically considered self-employed and was required to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for himself as both an employer and an employee.

He apparently failed to do so, resulting in Internal Revenue Service audits his last two years at the IMF. As soon as the IRS brought the issue to his attention, he paid the taxes with interest, these people said.

Are any of Obama's cabinet picks at risk of becoming a liability for the administration? It's unclear how much of an impediment these issues will be to Mr. Geithner's nomination. On its merits, his ascension has been widely praised. Mr. Geithner spent most of his career managing government responses to financial crises, from the 1990s bailouts of Mexico, Indonesia and Korea, to the market meltdown that has brought Wall Street to its knees.

At the same time, similar issues have derailed nominations in the past. President Clinton's first and second choices for attorney general both withdrew amid allegations that they failed to pay taxes for household help. President George W. Bush's first choice for Labor secretary withdrew after it emerged that she had employed an illegal alien.

Obama aides said they didn't believe these issues would present a problem, given the minor nature of the infractions and the gravity of the role he has been nominated to take. (So if I don't pay my taxes are Obama's aides going to take the same opinion and talk to the IRS for me?)

On the tax front, Mr. Geithner's oversight is not uncommon. The IRS has mandated loose rules for U.S.-born IMF employees unaware of their obligations to pay payroll taxes.

Sen. Baucus nonetheless decided to hold a closed-door meeting to allow the two matters to be aired before Mr. Geithner's public confirmation hearing.

"It's important that I talk to senators, which I'm going to be doing," Sen. Baucus said as he went into the meeting.

Democratic senators plan to defend Mr. Geithner, (naturally) saying that the nature of the complaints pale in comparison to the gravity of the crises he has been asked to face, a severe economic recession, turmoil in the financial markets and the collapse of the U.S. auto industry.

Write to Jonathan Weisman at jonathan.weisman@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123187503629378119.html

Let’s say he accidentally forgot to pay the taxes he’s obligated to. In what way does that bode well for a man being put in the role of Secretary of the Treasury? It doesn’t or it shouldn't. But don’t expect Congress to keep that from confirming The One’s choice. Even Republicans can’t be counted on to raise much of an opposition.

"On the tax front, Mr Geithner'd oversight is not uncommon.The IRS has mandated loose rules for U.S. born IMF employees unaware of their obligations to pay payroll tax" Wow this from the liberal Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal.

Maybe you tax guru's could enlighten us on the particulars of this IRS -IMF rule

[Auburn85 438]

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNew...E50C6CW20090114

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary-nominee Timothy Geithner informed a Senate panel that he had made a common tax mistake while working for the International Monetary Fund in 2001-2003, an official with the Obama transition team said on Tuesday.

The official said the error stemmed from an unusual payroll system that U.S. employees of the IMF and other international organizations must use. "This unusual payroll system commonly creates confusion among U.S. employees," the official said.

Geithner realized the error in November during the review process for his nomination and immediately corrected it, the official added. "All of his taxes have now been paid in full, and at no time was there any intention on Mr. Geithner's part to avoid taxes," the official said.

Sen. Charles Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, which has jurisdiction over Geithner's nomination, has raised questions about the tax issue and has also expressed concern about a lack of immigration papers for a housekeeper Geithner once employed, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.

The housekeeper was employed by the Geithners from 2004 to 2005. The official said the Geithners verified that she had proper documentation when she was hired and Geithner was unaware that three months before she stopped working for his family to have a baby that her documents expired.

"Nevertheless, she continued to reside legally in the United States, she was married to a U.S. citizen, and she was granted a green card a few months later," the official said.

The separate issue on taxes involved a requirement that U.S. employees of international institutions file their taxes as if they were self-employed, which involves paying Medicare and Social Security taxes that are normally taken out of an employee's paycheck by the employer.

(Reporting by Caren Bohan; Editing by Dan Grebler)

[BamaGrad03 0]

"On the tax front, Mr Geithner'd oversight is not uncommon.The IRS has mandated loose rules for U.S. born IMF employees unaware of their obligations to pay payroll tax" Wow this from the liberal Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal.

Maybe you tax guru's could enlighten us on the particulars of this IRS -IMF rule

I bet it's uncommon for people who are about to become Treasury Secretary.

[Auburn85 438]

edit:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postparti...p_as_a_chi.html

It’s the sleep-away camp that goes beyond the definition of simple mistake.

The Senate Finance Committee may or may not take Treasury Secretary-designate Tim Geithner’s word that his failure to pay thousands in past Social Security taxes was a mere oversight that shouldn’t stop his confirmation from going through. It’s awfully hard, though, to explain how someone who is supposed to have such financial acumen managed to overlook explicit instructions from the International Monetary Fund, his employer during the period the lapses occurred, to pay. An IMF tax handbook Geithner received describes on multiple pages the Social Security obligations and how its American staff living abroad is expected to meet them, according to a copy released by the committee.

It may be morally harder to explain Geithner’s attempt to claim money spent on his children’s sleep-away camps as a child-care expense. The amount involved is a pittance compared with the larger tab for the back Social Security taxes.

It’s the audacity that’s the problem.

Millions of families do without decent child-care for their children while they’re at work. Millions send their kids to untrained and unlicensed daycare providers. Some put older siblings -- kids who are ten or twelve, sometimes younger -- in charge of younger brothers and sisters. The child-care tax credit is a small and hardly adequate way in which a limited portion of expenses can be recouped, but only if they’re incurred when parents are working or looking for work.

Sleep-away camp sure doesn’t count. It’s a luxury for affluent kids, not a necessity the taxpayers subsidize. Like John Edwards’s expensive haircut and Sarah Palin’s campaign-financed wardrobe, this one reeks of something worse than sloppiness. It’s that sense of entitlement we’ve seen all too often.

and what is this about how he couldn't find the info to pay payroll taxes, but could find the deduction for a sleep away camp for his kids?

[Tigermike 4,309]

"On the tax front, Mr Geithner'd oversight is not uncommon.The IRS has mandated loose rules for U.S. born IMF employees unaware of their obligations to pay payroll tax" Wow this from the liberal Murdoch owned Wall Street Journal.

Maybe you tax guru's could enlighten us on the particulars of this IRS -IMF rule

And who owns the Wall Street Journal, matters how?

A man who failed to pay taxes should be cheered and cleared to be Treasury Secretary, why?

[Auburn85 438]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews

Treasury Pick Misfiled Using Off-the-Shelf Tax Software

By Frank Ahrens

Washington Post Staff Writer

Thursday, January 22, 2009; D01

Millions of Americans might be surprised to learn that the man nominated to be the next Treasury secretary -- New York Fed President Timothy F. Geithner -- did his taxes using the same software they do: TurboTax, a fact revealed in his Senate confirmation hearing yesterday.

Geithner's tax returns from 2001 through 2004 have become an embarrassment, if not a stumbling block to his confirmation. A 2006 IRS audit informed Geithner that he had failed to pay self-employment taxes in '03 and '04, when he directed the International Monetary Fund's policy development and review department. While being vetted for Treasury secretary late last year, he was told he made the same errors on his '01 and '02 returns. He calls them "careless mistakes" that he should have caught and has paid $42,702 in back taxes.

It's an unlikely image: The man charged with leading this nation out of recession -- an architect of the $700 billion financial rescue package -- hunched over a computer, surrounded by stacks of paper, trying to figure out his taxes, just like the 18 million other working stiffs who bought TurboTax last year.

But the disclosures raise another issue: When Geithner found he owed back taxes for '03 and '04, and had probably made the same mistakes on his '01 and '02 returns, why did he wait until confronted by Obama's vetters to check?

That was the question Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) tried to get at yesterday, suggesting that Geithner was hoping to ride out the statute of limitations on audits.

"The question is whether it occurred to you before you were nominated or approached to be nominated that, in point of fact, you didn't have to go beyond 2003 and '04 because of the statute of limitations," Kyl said.

Geithner said: "I did not believe I had the obligation to go back. . . . I had no occasion to think about it, and I might not have thought about it had I not gone through the vetting process."

Then is this TurboTax's fault?

A resounding "no," said Fernando Flores, a research assistant at the U.N. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. Flores is his agency's "local tax focal point" -- the man who volunteers to help his American colleagues figure out the complicated tax issues involved in working for an international agency such as the United Nations, the World Bank and the IMF.

U.S. workers at such agencies are classified as self-employed contractors, not employees.

"I always thought I was an employee of the IMF," not a contactor, Geithner said yesterday, an assumption he now admits was a mistake.

Flores, who has used TurboTax for years, said employees of international agencies are not given W-2 forms. They instead get a statement of earnings and are typically told at hiring that they are responsible for paying their portion of self-employment tax, which Geithner failed to do.

In order to file an error-free return, Flores said, U.S. citizens must delve into the worksheets used in the software. There, he said, filers are able to override the system and force it to calculate the self-employment tax owed.

Once a taxpayer is ready to file, TurboTax will throw up a red flag, asking why the person filed a self-employment schedule when they did not identify themselves as self-employed on TurboTax's initial questionnaire. This red flag, Flores said, prevents a taxpayer from filing electronically. It also, presumably, should remind filers they failed to pay self-employment tax.

Instead, many filers -- mistakenly, carelessly, intentionally -- enter the numbers from their statement of earnings as if they were from a W-2, allowing TurboTax to compute what appears to be an error-free return, Flores said.

"The system is not going to stop and ask you, 'Do you work for an international organization that only paid half of your withholding?' " he said.

Intuit, the company that makes TurboTax, released a statement yesterday, suggesting the fault was Geithner's: "TurboTax, and all software and in-person tax preparation services, base their calculations on the information users provide when completing their returns. TurboTax also has built-in, error-checking tools that routinely catch common taxpayer mistakes."

[SouthLink02 8]

The TurboTax excuse is so laughable i am not sure where to start.

As for the payroll taxes, I do find this case ironic as even before this came out, the IRS had sent out numerous memos wanting to crack down in 2009 on payroll tax frauds which are NOT HARD to prosecute in the high majority of cases

[Auburn85 438]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1232635988...=googlenews_wsj

Senate Panel Approves Geithner for Treasury's Top Post

Geithner Backs Strong Dollar, Says China Manipulates YuanArticle

»By BRIAN BLACKSTONE and COREY BOLES

WASHINGTON -- The Senate Finance Commitee approved the nomination of Timothy Geithner as Treasury secretary, clearing the way for the full Senate to consider Mr. Geithner's confirmation.

Mr. Geithner, who would lead the Treasury Department as U.S. financial markets and the economy are facing the most serious turbulence in decades, was approved by a vote of 18 to 5.

He told members of Congress Thursday that he backs Treasury's longstanding commitment to a strong U.S. dollar, and said the Obama administration believes China manipulates the value of its currency.

"A strong dollar is in America's national interest," Mr. Geithner said in written response to questions from members of the committee. (See the full text of Geithner's responses.)

More

"Maintaining confidence in the longterm strength of the United States economy and the stability of the U.S. financial system is good for America as well as our trading and investing partners," he wrote.

The 100-plus page document touched on a variety of economic and tax policy questions. But it was his answers on foreign exchange that appeared to go further than his testimony on Wednesday, when Mr. Geithner broadly said all countries should adopt flexible, market-based currency regimes.

In response to a question from Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, Mr. Geithner wrote that President Barack Obama, "backed by the conclusions of a broad range of economists -- believes that China is manipulating its currency."

The currency issue is a touchy one with China. U.S. officials have for years urged China to move to a market-based system and has applauded steps China has taken in recent months to allow the yuan to appreciate against the U.S. dollar. At the same time, China's purchases of dollar-denominated assets help keep interest rates low in the U.S. Still, given the massive trade deficit the U.S. runs with China, many in Congress want it to move faster.

"President Obama has pledged as President to use aggressively all the diplomatic avenues open to him to seek change in China's currency practices," Mr. Geithner wrote.

Yet while the yuan is an "important piece" of the economic dialogue with China, Mr. Geithner said the "immediate focus" has to be on spurring domestic demand in both China and the U.S.

"The immediate goal should be for us to convince China to adopt a more aggressive stimulus package as we do our part to try to pass a stimulus package here at home," Mr. Geithner wrote.

In fact he stressed that all of the U.S.'s trading partners would have to inject financial stimulus into their economies.

"If such plans fail to materialize, a slowdown in worldwide demand will ensue, exacerbating the downturn both here in the U.S. and abroad," Mr. Geithner said.

Mr. Geithner said he was "deeply concerned" about the state of regulation and supervision of large financial institutions by the various authorities. He said it was clear the Federal Reserve had failed to adequately oversee the risk that banks like Citigroup were taking on their books.

He pledged that going forward any new taxpayer money injected into banks or other financial institutions would be done only after a full consideration of the risks in not acting. And any financial firms receiving infusions of taxpayer capital would be subject to much greater scrutiny, Mr. Geithner said.

He said the new administration had no "current plans" to request further financial resources under the Troubled Asset Relief Program after the $350 billion released by the Senate last week.

"However if we determine that further resources may become necessary, we will be clear with the Congress as to why these resources are necessary," he said.

Mr. Geithner reiterated Mr. Obama's pledge to cut taxes for 95% of individuals, but wouldn't be drawn out on whether the administration planned to renew the Bush tax cuts when the bulk of them expired in 2010. He said it was "premature" to speculate about the tax cuts.

Sen. Max Baucus, the chairman of the Finance Committee cited an Internal Revenue Service estimate that the tax gap between those owed and those actually paid on time was $345 billion a year. He said the current rate of payment was 83.7%.

Mr. Geithner stated it would be his goal if confirmed to increase the rate of voluntary payment by individuals of taxes within a decade to 90% of that owed.

Mr. Geithner also said the Alternative Minimum Tax "is clearly broken and needs to be fixed." The AMT was created in 1969 as a way to ensure that multimillionaires weren't evading their tax obligation. Since then, however, the tax has grown and encompasses as many as four million taxpayers, many of whom are middle class and live in high-tax states like New York, because the AMT was never indexed for inflation.

As for the fiscal effects of the large-scale fiscal stimulus program that Obama thinks is needed, Mr. Geithner said large deficits in the short run "are needed in order to prevent a much worse deterioration of our economy that would involve more job loss, declining incomes, and lost opportunity."

"It is critically important to balance short-run and long-run objectives," he said, "and I think it is right for us all to worry about whether certain stimulus measures could create another bubble or other detrimental long-run costs."

Mr. Geithner said he disagrees with projections that spending on infrastructure -- a cornerstone of Mr. Obama's strategy -- would work only slowly through the economy.

Mr. Geithner has been under fire, especially from some Senate Republicans, for failing to pay payroll taxes on income received from the International Monetary Fund in 2001 and then repeating his error in three subsequent years. He apologized to the finance committee Wednesday, but said his mistakes were unintentional.

Sen. Jon Kyl, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, cast a notable vote against Mr. Geithner's nomination Thursday. Sen. Kyl called into question Mr. Geithner's forthrightness in answering the committee's questions on his personal tax situation.

"I'm sad to say, because I very much wanted to support his nomination, that at this point I don't think the requisite candor exists to indicate my support for him with an affirmative vote," Sen. Kyl said.

Sen. Baucus maintained that Mr. Geithner had done enough to answer questions about his taxes.

"At a private meeting last week and again [Wednesday], Senators have had ample opportunity to ask Mr. Geithner about errors in his tax returns," Sen. Baucus said. "I believe that Mr. Geithner has taken appropriate steps to remedy what were honest mistakes."

—Patrick Yoest contributed to this article.

Write to Brian Blackstone at brian.blackstone@

[Auburn85 438]

the government is too big to fail. that's why we need to look the other way about his tax problems.

heck, you all remember charlie rangel had problems with the issue of taxes too right? he's already chairman of the tax -writing panel.

[LegalEagle 22]

He ought to be sh*t canned.

[TigerHeat 9]

He ought to be sh*t canned.

It's a no-brainer. Anyone want to bet the Dhimmis confirm him?

[Tigermike 4,309]

He ought to be sh*t canned.

It's a no-brainer. Anyone want to bet the Dhimmis confirm him?

He should be man enough to remove his name from consideration.

For what it's worth, Turbo Tax has never caused me any problems with the IRS. But then I always pay what I am supposed to for my housekeeper's.

[Auburn85 438]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090127/ap_on_...MuAbp5gLmyyFz4D

Roll vote on treasury secretary

The 60-34 roll vote by which the Senate confirmed Timothy Geithner as treasury secretary.

On this vote, a "yes" vote was a vote to confirm and a "no" vote was a vote against confirmation.

Voting "yes" were 49 Democrats, 10 Republicans and 1 independent.

Voting "no" were 3 Democrats, 30 Republicans and 1 independent.

The Senate has two vacancies.

___

Democrats Yes

Akaka, Hawaii; Baucus, Mont.; Bayh, Ind.; Begich, Alaska; Bennet, Colo.; Bingaman, N.M.; Boxer, Calif.; Burris, Ill.; Cantwell, Wash.; Cardin, Md.; Carper, Del.; Casey, Pa.; Conrad, N.D.; Dodd, Conn.; Dorgan, N.D.; Durbin, Ill.; Feinstein, Calif.; Hagan, N.C.; Inouye, Hawaii; Johnson, S.D.; Kaufman, Del.; Kerry, Mass.; Klobuchar, Minn.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Leahy, Vt.; Levin, Mich.; Lincoln, Ark.; McCaskill, Mo.; Menendez, N.J.; Merkley, Ore.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Nelson, Neb.; Pryor, Ark.; Reed, R.I.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Schumer, N.Y.; Shaheen, N.H.; Stabenow, Mich.; Tester, Mont.; Udall, Colo.; Udall, N.M.; Warner, Va.; Webb, Va.; Whitehouse, R.I.

___

Democrats No

Byrd, W.Va.; Feingold, Wis.; Harkin, Iowa.

___

Democrats Not Voting

Brown, Ohio; Kennedy, Mass.; Wyden, Ore.

___

Republicans Yes

Corker, Tenn.; Cornyn, Texas; Crapo, Idaho; Ensign, Nev.; Graham, S.C.; Gregg, N.H.; Hatch, Utah; Shelby, Ala.; Snowe, Maine; Voinovich, Ohio.

___

Republicans No

Alexander, Tenn; Barrasso, Wyo.; Bennett, Utah; Brownback, Kan.; Bunning, Ky.; Burr, N.C.; Chambliss, Ga., Coburn, Okla.; Cochran, Miss.; Collins, Maine; DeMint, S.C.; Enzi, Wyo.; Grassley, Iowa; Hutchison, Texas; Inhofe, Okla.; Isakson, Ga.; Johanns, Neb.; Kyl, Ariz.; Lugar, Ind.; Martinez, Fla.; McCain, Ariz.; McConnell, Ky.; Murkowski, Alaska; Risch, Idaho; Roberts, Kan.; Sessions, Ala.; Specter, Pa.; Thune, S.D.; Vitter, La.; Wicker, Miss.

___

Independents Yes

Lieberman, Ct.

___

Independents No

Sanders, Vt.

___

Republicans Not Voting

Bond, Mo.

[autigeremt 7,551]

Very odd that McCain voted no on this one, and Shelby voted yes. Strange.

[RunInRed 19,668]

I don't understand the No votes on this one. To me, it just reaks of partisanship and that's not me being a homer either. Geithner is obviously a very qualified candidate for the position and every one knew the votes were there for confirmation. So by voting "No", Senators were basically just taking a Dixie so they could go back home and say "I didn't vote for this guy" to their constituency. I know it's politics 101 but it just gets old, especially when we are facing an unprecedented crisis.

Can you imagine if the No votes had of gotten their wish? Then what? Do they have any idea how the street and world would have reacted? The President would have had to most likely nominate a new candidate and it would have drug on and on for months. We could have gone some duration w/o a Secretary of the Treasury when we don't have a single day to waste.

Ok...off my soap box.

[OldNewby 27]

Very odd that McCain voted no on this one, and Shelby voted yes. Strange.

For many years, Shelby was a democrat: http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodi...l?index=s000320

And the first thing McCain must do when he gets up each morning, is decide whether he's playing a republican or a democrat that day.

[Auburn85 438]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1233097022...=googlenews_wsj

Geithner's Chief of Staff Was a Lobbyist

By T.W. FARNAM

WASHINGTON -- The new chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was a top lobbyist for Goldman Sachs Group Inc. until last year, and will have to recuse himself from some government duties under new White House ethics rules.

The appointment of Mark Patterson runs into an executive order President Barack Obama signed to limit the ability of officials to move between industry and government. The order, part of a campaign promise to curb the influence business, allows lobbyists to join the administration as long as they don't work on the subjects they tried to influence for a period of two years.

Before Mr. Patterson left Goldman in April, he was vice president for government relations, and was registered to lobby Congress on legislation including energy tax credits and Indian gaming, according to disclosure forms filed with Congress. Mr. Patterson monitored other issues moving through Congress that Goldman never took a position on, including foreclosure-prevention measures and shareholder votes on executive compensation.

"Mr. Patterson has a long history of public service in the United States Senate. He brings significant expertise to the job of chief of staff, and has agreed to a far-reaching ethics pledge to remove any hint of a conflict of interest," said Treasury spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter. The pledge, outlined in the executive order, requires him to recuse himself from topics he lobbied on.

Last week, the Obama administration issued a waiver of the rules for another high-level staffer, William Lynn, who was appointed to be the deputy secretary at the Department of Defense. Mr. Lynn, formerly a registered lobbyist for Raytheon Co., where he was the senior vice president of government operations, was exempted from the requirement to remove himself from dealings with his former company or the issues that he addressed.

Several recent appointees have lobbied for groups that are close allies of the new president, including Patrick Gaspard, the new White House political director, who was registered by the Service Employees International Union to work on passing an expansion of funding for children's health insurance. A White House spokesman said Mr. Gaspard will recuse himself from matters dealing with that legislation and that a waiver will be granted to another administration employee, Cecilia Munoz, the new director of intergovernmental affairs, who was a lobbyist for The National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic advocacy organization.

Mr. Obama's pick for U.S. trade representative, former Dallas mayor Ron Kirk, was registered to lobby at the state level but not with the federal government. In the past two years, he took in more than $1 million in lobbying revenue from financial and energy firms, according to documents filed with the Texas Ethics Commission. The executive order applies only to lobbyists at the federal level.

Other appointees have worked to sway government but never officially registered to lobby Congress themselves, including Tom Daschle, Mr. Obama's choice to lead Health and Human Services. The former senator served as an adviser to lobbying firm Alston and Bird LLP.

Write to T.W. Farnam at timothy.farnam@wsj.com

[Tigermike 4,309]

I don't understand the No votes on this one. To me, it just reaks of partisanship and that's not me being a homer either. Geithner is obviously a very qualified candidate for the position and every one knew the votes were there for confirmation. So by voting "No", Senators were basically just taking a Dixie so they could go back home and say "I didn't vote for this guy" to their constituency. I know it's politics 101 but it just gets old, especially when we are facing an unprecedented crisis.

Can you imagine if the No votes had of gotten their wish? Then what? Do they have any idea how the street and world would have reacted? The President would have had to most likely nominate a new candidate and it would have drug on and on for months. We could have gone some duration w/o a Secretary of the Treasury when we don't have a single day to waste.

Ok...off my soap box.

So you have no problem with someone leading the treasury department who has not been paying the taxes they were lawfully required to pay?

Basically your whole argument is that it might embarrass your Messiah. How pathetic.

[SouthLink02 8]

So you have no problem with someone leading the treasury department who has not been paying the taxes they were lawfully required to pay?.

I don't have a real problem. As I said above, his mistake was really pathetic but he seems to be a smart man so I don't mind giving him a shot at the position.

[DKW 86 8,236]

Please step back for one moment and think about this about 2-3 years from now. Anyone think at that point that Holder and Geithner are good picks?

Holder bypassed Justice like a cheap mob lawyer on the Rich and other pardons. Does anyone think he wont be just as "Administration Compliant" now that Obama has basically salvaged his career?

Geithner: Where to start? Does anyone buy that this man is too stupid to be able to file his 1040 and still lead Treasury? Byrd called him everything but a crook today. ROBERT BYRD!!!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...easury_man.html

Arlen Specter told reporters early on Monday that he would vote yes, but he changed his mind and voted no. Robert Byrd, by the way, captured the sentiments of John Kyl, Jim Bunning, and many others when he said: "Had [Geithner] not been nominated for Treasury secretary, it's doubtful that he would have ever paid these taxes."

Geithner: Idiot or Crook? Either one is just a horrible choice among so many good ones. There are likley 100 or more people in DC or NY that would have sailed thru either of these nominations and why were they overlooked? All the other nominations were IMHO so good and these two are just Red Flag Warning bad. Why? Treasury and Justice hampered by Idiots or Crooks doesnt benefit anyone but those about to break the law.

Wait till 2-3 years from now and I bet you see one or both ran out of town in some scandal.

Just mindbogglingly bad choices.