Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Shea Tisdale" <shea AT sheatisdale.com>]

Zman wrote:
> As do I, but I don't want the current administration to take credit for it
> either. Not when they and their cronies are responsible for a large
> portion of the problem. Enron was on of W's largest contributors...

Everyone likes to forget that Enron, Worldcom, Tyco, Global Crossing and all
those scandals happened during the Clinton administration.  The actual
crimes happened during the Clinton administration and they were discovered
during the Bush administration.  So get the facts straight please.

The complete lack of accountability during the Clinton administration in
large part led to the culture in which those frauds, thefts and scandals
took place.  During the Clinton administration the SEC was all but absent in
terms of oversight, investigation and prosecution.  Many, including Lou
Dobbs cited the fact that during the last 3 years of the Clinton
administration the SEC didn't even examine the financial data or reports
filed by Enron.  "You may not know this," Dobbs told WABC Radio's Mark
Simone. "Three years of filings by Enron, the SEC did not even review them
from 1997 to 2000." Further, they failed to examine other scandals which
Dobbs mentioned in the same interview. "For four years fraud charges have
been hanging over two former executives of Cendant as a result of their
acquisition of CUC," Dobbs complained. "Nothing has happened, absolutely
nothing."

And why might you ask did that occur?  Maybe connections to the Clinton
Administrations?

One needs look no further than the so-called Lincoln Bedroom scandal during
the Clinton Administration to see the connection with Enron.  CEO Ken Lay
was one of the guests who was allowed to stay in the Lincoln Bedroom in what
was alleged to be a quid-pro-quo arraignment for large contributors.  Ken
Lay was also a golf partner of Bill Clinton.
 
The Washington Times reported that the Clinton Administration provided more
than $1 billion in subsidized loans to Enron, while receiving nearly $2
million from Enron in contributions.  During the Clinton Administration,
Enron sought 20 loans and was refused only 1.  And many of these were done
during the now famous trade missions undertaken by Clinton Administration
Commerce Chief Ron Brown.  The same Ron Brown who was going to be forced to
resign because of his inside deals, improper relationships with companies,
etc, etc, until his untimely death.  During that time Enron participated in
11 taxpayers funded trade missions and was granted $200 million in insurance
on projects in politically unstable countries.

During the entire Reagan and Bush administrations, Enron received no loans,
participated in no taxpayer funded trade missions, and never was invited to
stay at the White House.

Those scandals contributed to the recession, but in no way were the primary
cause of it.  The recession was a natural and obvious market correction to
what Mr. Greenspan, on December 5th of 1996, so eloquently termed
"Irrational Exuberance and unduly escalating stock prices".  

In that speech Mr. Greenspan posed the following:  "How do we know when
irrational exuberance has unduly escalated asset values which then become
the subject of unexpected and prolonged contractions as they have in Japan
over the past decade. And how do we factor that assessment into monetary
policy?"

So in 1996 Mr. Greenspan and others saw potential for a recession and had
examples, such as Japan, that a recession probably would follow such a
market and in that example it had lasted a decade.

So I ask you, what exactly did the Clinton administration do to prevent said
recession?  I'll tell you - nothing.  They didn't try to calm the market,
they didn't put any policies in place.  They did nothing.  As a matter of
fact, people like DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe took advantage of such market
conditions to enrich themselves at the expense of everyday people.

Anyone who has studied economics knows that changes in economic policy take
more than 6 months to take effect.  Generally it takes two years or more for
the effects of a policy change to take effect and for any results to be
seen.  So if any administration is to be blamed for the recession, it's the
Clinton Administration.