By Deon Roberts
“Taking fees like this,
particularly from banks that have been bailed out by the taxpayers, it’s
certainly hard to argue to the public that you’re not acting in a self-serving
way.” --Eric Heberlig, political science professor at UNC Charlotte
“Even if well-intentioned and
serving a legitimate business purpose, corporate payments to politicians can
appear unseemly.” --Richard Parsons, former risk executive for Bank of America
who retired from the company in September 2011
Hillary Clinton’s paid
speeches to Goldman Sachs Group have drawn criticism on the campaign trail, but
they’re not the only talks she’s given to big banks.
Bank of America has also paid
the Democratic presidential candidate and her husband more than $1 million
combined to deliver talks to the Charlotte-based bank and its Merrill Lynch
unit.
The Clintons collected the
combined figure from Bank of America over four appearances from 2011 to 2014,
according to financial disclosures posted by the nonpartisan Center for
Responsive Politics. Former President Bill Clinton was the speaker on three
of those occasions, once taking in $500,000 for a 2014 gathering in London.
The large fees raise concerns
about potential conflicts of interest and are likely to remain a hot topic on
the campaign trail, said Eric Heberlig, a political science professor at UNC
Charlotte.
“Taking fees like this,
particularly from banks that have been bailed out by the taxpayers, it’s
certainly hard to argue to the public that you’re not acting in a self-serving
way,” Heberlig said.
Clinton’s campaign did not
respond to a request for comment, but the former secretary of state has said
she favors tough regulation of Wall Street.
All of the Bank of America
talks were given at private events the bank occasionally holds for clients or
the company’s senior executives, the bank told the Observer. Bank of America
said it’s not unusual for it to pay former elected or appointed officials from
the U.S. and elsewhere to speak on key national and global issues at such
gatherings.
Former U.S. Secretary of State
Condoleeza Rice, former U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and former British
Prime Minister Tony Blair have been among speakers at similar Bank of America
events.
Bank of America declined to
disclose specifics on the exact nature of the Clintons’ appearances, for which
the bank paid about $1.1 million.
Combined, the Clintons made
about $1.1 million from Bank of America talks: $900,000 to former President
Bill Clinton, and $225,000 to Hillary Clinton.
In the 2016 presidential race,
Clinton’s speeches to Goldman Sachs have spurred repeated attacks from fellow
Democratic contender Bernie Sanders. Sanders, who calls for big banks to be
busted up, has pointed to Clinton’s hundreds of thousands of dollars in
speaking fees from Goldman as underscoring her ties to Wall Street.
During a debate in Miami this
week, Sanders noted Clinton’s payment of $225,000 per Goldman talk, quipping:
“That speech must have been an extraordinarily wonderful speech.”
Clinton has not released the
transcripts of her speeches, saying she would only do so if all candidates from
both parties did the same. For his part, Sanders has maintained that he hasn’t
given such talks.
Hillary Clinton has said the
Wall Street money has no influence on how she would regulate the industry.
At the Miami debate, Clinton
responded to Sanders’ criticism of her banking connections by reiterating that
she will have “the toughest, most comprehensive plan to go after Wall Street.”
For their Goldman speeches,
the Clintons have received more than $2 million combined. But the pair has also
given talks to other banks, including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and UBS.
Wells Fargo paid Bill Clinton
$200,000 for an Oct. 13, 2011, appearance in New York. The San Francisco-based
bank declined to comment on that sole Wells Fargo event included in the
Clintons’ disclosures.
Of the four Bank of America
speeches, two were listed as being for Merrill Lynch, which the bank bought in
2009, according to the Clintons’ disclosures. Separately, Bill Clinton also
received $175,000 for a 2007 Merrill Lynch appearance in New York.
None of the Bank of America
speeches were in Charlotte, although Hillary Clinton received $225,000 for a
November 2013 event in the town of Bluffton, S.C., near Hilton Head Island.
Bank of America said there are
various events for which it will invite big-name speakers. These include
conferences that bring together companies and investors, as well as meetings of
the bank’s executives.
“We operate across the United
States and around the world, because that’s where our customer and clients
operate. It helps us serve them better to gain the insights and judgments of
people who have been on the world stage.”
--Larry Di Rita, Bank of
America spokesman
While Clinton’s opponents
argue her speaking fees pose a conflict of interest for the candidate, some say
the payments could also hurt the reputation of the bank.
“Even if well-intentioned and
serving a legitimate business purpose, corporate payments to politicians can
appear unseemly,” said Richard Parsons, a former risk executive for Bank of
America who retired from the company in September 2011 and now writes on
risk-management issues.
A review of campaign
contributions shows the bank’s executives have given to Clinton as well as
Republicans in recent years.
Anne Finucane, the bank’s head
of strategy and marketing, contributed $2,700 in August to Clinton’s committee,
Hillary for America.
In June, senior executives
Gary Lynch and Tom Montag contributed $2,700 each to Republican Jeb Bush’s
committee, Jeb 2016. Montag also gave $100,000 last year to Right to Rise USA,
a Super PAC supporting Bush.
Clinton has said that the Wall
Street money has no influence on how she would regulate the industry.
Heberlig, the UNC professor,
predicts Clinton will continue to be assailed for her speaking fees in the 2016
race, including possible GOP opponents, some of whom opposed bank bailouts.
“I think the Republicans will
attack her on it,” Heberlig said. “They need line of attacks that are going to
be effective with the public.”
No comments:
Post a Comment