It was pretty funny to read last week about how American International Group donated $50,000 in December 2003 through various subsidiaries to the gubernatorial campaign of New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who certainly went on to bite the hand that fed him!
Of course, in an article appearing in the Sept. 19 edition of The New York Times, the reporter, Mike McIntire, made it clear that the “contributions were made before Mr. Spitzer's office began investigating insurance industry practices, including those of AIG, in mid-2004.”
He also pointed out that “AIG has made no further contributions to the Spitzer campaign since then.” I wonder why.
It must have seemed like a good idea at the time for AIG to curry favor with the person who could be choosing the next superintendent of insurance regulating the giant carrier, but in retrospect, it's incredibly ironic.
I give Mr. Spitzer credit for not allowing the financial contributions of any particular entity influence how he does his job.
On the other hand, it's unfortunate that the crusading AG decided to keep the cash despite all the questionable practices he cited at AIG. “Mr. Spitzer's campaign has said that its policy is not to accept contributions from anyone who is the subject of an investigation” by the AG's office, The Times reported. However, the article added that Mr. Spitzer “will not return contributions made by companies or individuals before they come under investigation.”
As the Church Lady character used to sneer on Saturday Night Live: HOW CONVENIENT!
I think Mr. Clean should come clean himself and donate the money to a restitution fund for policyholders allegedly harmed in bid-rigging schemes, or shareholders who lost money because of alleged balance sheet manipulation on AIG's part involving finite reinsurance deals.
This would seem to be a no-brainer. It's not as if Sir Eliot needs the dough–not with the huge lead he enjoys over his Republican opponent, John Faso. And think of the upside, Mr. AG! You would look like a great statesman if you returned the tainted money. By taking it, however, you look like just another hypocritical political hack!
What's your take on this, folks? Do you think Eliot should give the money back?
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
