|
Why
Wall Street Joe Crowley Should Retire at 50
We call on Rep. Crowley to take a hint
from Gary Ackerman and make this his last year in Congress. By
calling on him to retire at 50, we also play on the stereotype of
entrepreneurial success: "making enough money to retire rich at
50", given that Crowley has spent years helping the rich get
richer at the expense of the 99%. We're not trying to suggest
that people in their 50s shouldn't be serving in Congress!
With 96% of his campaign contributions coming from outside
his district1
, Congressman Crowley epitomizes the destructive influence of
corporate campaign money on our legislators and our laws.
To
the disappointment of watchdog groups and in contradiction to the
conclusions of the Office of Congressional Ethics2
(see), the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
unfortunately dismissed the case concerning Crowley's solicitation of
contributions from the financial industry prior to the vote on the
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009. The
fact remains that Crowley actively solicited contributions from the
financial industry via a professional fundraiser in the lead-up to
the vote and held a fundraising event at the home of a lobbyist on
the financial reform bill while amendments to strengthen the bill
were being debated and then returned to vote against these
amendments.
Crowley's top 20 contributors in the 2010 election
included AT&T, Merck, Pfizer, Abbot Laboratories, Bank of
America, GE, and Citigroup3,
all of which are in the leadership of one or both of the two major
corporate lobbying coalitions working for the passage of the
Colombia, Panama, and South Korea Free Trade Agreements he voted on
in 2011 - The Latin America Trade Coalition4
and The US-Korea Business Council5.
For Merck, Abbot, and Pfizer, the trade agreements
promised to extend patent rights, limiting access to generic drugs
and expanding their profits at the expense of people in need of
lifesaving medications.6
Bank of America and Citigroup will benefit from Korea Free
Trade Agreement rules that ban regulations on "too big to fail",
toxic derivatives, and sensible capital controls.7
For
notorious polluters like General Electric (the US' #1 Superfund
polluter8),
the trade agreements include an investment chapter that gives
corporations the right to sue governments in international tribunals
for unlimited sums if they believe environmental protection measures
interfere with their future potential profits.9
10
| 
