SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : The ENRON Scandal -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: flatsville who wrote (1342)1/28/2002 10:55:48 AM
From: Karen Lawrence  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 5185
 
Cheney refuses to release energy plan documents to Enron investigators GAO may bring rare lawsuit over refusal
By KAREN MASTERSON
Copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- In the face of political pressure to comply with congressional investigators, Vice President Dick Cheney said Sunday he will not release internal documents connected to the development of President Bush's energy plan.

That refusal is expected to fuel political outcries that the administration is hiding information about its relationship with Enron Corp., and may prompt the General Accounting Office -- Congress' nonpartisan investigative arm -- to file a rare lawsuit against the White House.

Cheney, who was asked on Sunday-morning news programs to defend his position, said White House attorneys looked into the matter and concluded that documents gathered by the task force he headed are protected by the rules of executive privilege. The GAO contends that U.S. taxpayers paid for the task force and have a right to the information.

The GAO's jurisdiction "extends to agencies created by statute. That's not me," Cheney said on Fox News Sunday. "I'm a constitutional officer. The authority of the GAO does not extend in that case to my office."

Cheney showed no sign of compromising on the issue, and indicated he was unmoved by recent polls that showed a majority of Americans distrust the administration's relationship with Enron.

Bush's comprehensive energy plan, released in May and subsequently passed by the Republican-controlled House, calls for more oil and gas drilling, particularly in the Alaskan wilderness, and a revival of the nuclear power industry.

Democrats have since charged that the policies promoted in the plan were a payoff to industry executives, including Enron's, who had given generously to Bush's 2000 election campaign. For months, Democrats have demanded more details on who attended the meetings where the plan was forged and what was said.

The collapse of Enron has complicated the administration's refusal to comply, and given Democrats a second opportunity to draw attention to those meetings.

"The General Accounting Office is on solid ground in demanding that these records be turned over," Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said Sunday on CBS' Face the Nation. "The American people have a right to know what the facts are."

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., speaking on CNN's Late Edition, said Cheney's most recent refusal to cooperate "raises more suspicions" and suggests the White House may be hiding something. Lieberman chairs the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, which is investigating certain aspects of the Enron debacle.

Cheney, who was put on the defensive on two nationally televised programs, said the White House has nothing to hide. Rather, he said that by rebuffing the GAO's threat of legal action, the White House hopes to preserve the power of the presidency.

On ABC's This Week, Cheney said that giving in to the GAO would put "a chill over the ability of the president and vice president to receive unvarnished advice. ... It would make it virtually impossible for me to have confidential conversations with anybody."

But one Republican said the appearance of impropriety would grow as a consequence of not cooperating.

"Unfortunately, as a result of Richard Nixon years ago, when anybody hears the term `executive privilege,' they assume something bad was going on," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. "There's no evidence anything bad was going on here; there's not a scintilla of evidence that the administration was doing Enron's bidding."

But polls suggest the public doesn't need a causal link between campaign contributions and pro-Enron policies to distrust the process. In a newly released New York Times/CBS poll, a majority of those surveyed said they see Republicans as far more enmeshed in Enron's problems than Democrats.

Only 17 percent of those polled said they thought the Bush administration was telling the truth; 58 percent said the administration was mostly telling the truth but hiding something, and 9 percent said officials were lying.

In December, Enron, once ranked No. 7 on the Fortune 500 big businesses list, filed for the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. The company's collapse devastated retirement accounts, eliminated thousands of jobs and raised questions about Bush's close ties to the company and its former head, Ken Lay.

And it gave Democrats an issue they hope to use against Republicans in the upcoming midterm elections.

"The issue is not what they took, but what did Enron get," Terry McAuliffe, Democratic Party chairman, said on Late Edition. "It seems clear that what they got is an energy policy, 17 different specific proposals that helped Enron."

McAuliffe was referring to a report issued by the head Democrat on the House Governmental Reform Committee, Rep. Henry Waxman of California, that suggested Enron's influence was evident in 17 measures included in the Bush policies.

But Republicans have called the document a partisan attempt to create a scandal that does not exist. GOP leaders indicated Sunday that they will continue to deflect any hint of scandal by emphasizing that the criminal and congressional investigations of Enron are not yet complete.

"The bottom line is, the president wants to understand all of the facts just as much as anyone else does," Montana Gov. Marc Racicot, Republican Party chairman, said on Late Edition. "The administration does, and clearly Congress does. And I think that is what we ought to be focusing on."



To: flatsville who wrote (1342)1/28/2002 4:05:21 PM
From: Patricia Trinchero  Respond to of 5185
 
Thanks for the link! Good find!!



To: flatsville who wrote (1342)1/28/2002 5:40:36 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 5185
 
"Wendy Graham along with Lay and a number of others
have been named in a lawsuit filed in U.S. District
Court in Houston accusing them of "gross fraud"
and which says they gained more then a billion
dollars in insider trading during the past three
years involving the sale of millions of shares
of Enron stock. The lawsuit seeks an immediate
injunction to freeze the accounts of 29 Enron
officers and directors...


I wondered why their assets had not been frozen.

Cheers,

Mephisto



To: flatsville who wrote (1342)1/28/2002 5:41:24 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 5185
 
Outrage at Enron's $55m bonuses

Paul Murphy in New York
Friday December 7, 2001
The Guardian

Enron, the American energy company which collapsed at the
weekend, has quietly paid bonuses totalling $55m (£38m) to 500
staff members in an attempt to keep trading while it is in
Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

The payments, averaging $110,000 apiece, have caused outrage
among both the 5,000 workers already laid off by Enron and its
creditors,
who are chasing debts of more than $30bn. Those
who have already lost their jobs received payments of just
$4,500 each, while members of the Enron pension fund have
seen their savings slump since much of the fund was invested in
Enron shares.

The handling of the pension fund, where some members have
seen 70% of their retirement assets disappear, is now being
investigated by the US labour department. Separately,
investigators from the House of Representatives energy and
commerce committee in Washington were planning to visit
Enron's headquarters in Houston, Texas, yesterday to quiz
executives.

Billy Tauzin, the Republican chairman of the committee, said
hearings would begin next month and would extend beyond
Enron to issues such as financial regulation and the role of
auditors.

Earlier this week the big five accounting firms, including Enron's
auditor Andersen, put out a joint statement promising a full
review of their own procedures in the wake of the Enron
collapse.

With financial backing from creditor banks such as JP Morgan,
Enron hopes to reconstitute itself as a slimmed-down
commodity trading company. However, speculation is growing
that a number of big insurance companies may be facing
substantial losses due to their heavy involvement with so-called
credit derivatives.

These informally traded instruments allow banks to insure the
risk that a creditor may default and in the case of Enron many of
its creditors are believed to have offset their liabilities by using
credit derivatives. Swiss bank UBS, for example, has said it
insured its entire $74m exposure to the energy company in this
way.

guardian.co.uk



To: flatsville who wrote (1342)2/6/2002 1:32:47 PM
From: DMaA  Respond to of 5185
 
I'm sure you are all interested in knowing all the facts before you make up your minds. In that spirit I present you with this:

Not Guilty
A conservative lawmaker, and a conservative law, get undeserved blame for Enron.

By Ramesh Ponnuru
February 5, 2002 8:55 a.m.

I. Phil Gramm

You may have heard that Phil Gramm, Republican senator from Texas, had done some of Enron's bidding in
2000. Numerous newspapers, relying on a report by the Naderite group Public Citizen, reported that Gramm
had slipped through a provision exempting some of Enron's business from regulation. As New York Times
columnist Bob Herbert put it on January 17, "In December 2000 Mr. Gramm was one of the ringleaders who
engineered the stealthlike approval of a bill that exempted energy commodity trading from government
regulation and public disclosure. It was a gift tied with a bright ribbon for Enron." This was Herbert's first
example in a column dedicated to the proposition that "When Senator Phil Gramm and his wife Wendy
danced, it was most often to Enron's tune."

Public Citizen had Gramm "muscling through" the offending provision. In fact, Gramm had almost nothing to do
with it. He didn't write it: It came to the Senate from the House, where it was part of a bill that passed by a large
margin. He didn't usher it through the Senate: It was considered by the Agriculture Committee, of which he was
not a member, rather than the Banking Committee, which he chaired. Indeed, Gramm blocked the bill that
included the provision for several months because he objected to other provisions. He did, however, eventually
vote for the bill, like most congressmen. It included the offending provision, which had hardly been altered
during the legislative process.

Several publications have had to print corrections for linking Gramm to the provision — notably the
Washington Post, the Philadelphia Inquirer, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Herbert's column has not
been corrected, but the day after it ran the New York Times ran a story by Jeff Gerth and Richard Oppel that
noted the inconvenient truth: "[In late 2000] Senator Gramm, for reasons unrelated to Enron, was
single-handedly blocking a futures trading bill the company had dearly prized."
nationalreview.com