

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Sarah Anderson, sarah@ips-dc.org or 202 299 4531
There is growing consensus on the need for executive compensation restrictions on corporations that receive emergency coronavirus crisis assistance. The question is how best to structure these restrictions to most effectively prevent taxpayer dollars from padding the pockets of executives instead of mitigating a national economic crisis.
Republican ban on pay raises is extremely weak
The March 19 Republican plan includes pathetically weak restrictions on executive compensation at airlines and other distressed companies that receive emergency financial assistance.
The plan merely bans pay raises for two years for executives who earned more than $425,000 in 2019. In other words, if a CEO made $10 million in 2019, he or she could earn $10 million in 2020 and 2021. Golden parachute payments for these executives would be limited to twice the value of their 2019 compensation. If an executive made $424,999 in 2019, he or she would face no pay limits whatsoever.
"Saying you're going to limit CEO pay at bailed-out corporations and then merely proposing to freeze that pay at pre-virus levels -- the trick the Trump White House is trying to pull off -- is like is like chasing burglars out of your house and then calling them an Uber for their getaway," said Institute for Policy Studies executive pay expert Sarah Anderson.
The Republican plan would do nothing to prevent massive CEO windfalls through their equity-based pay during a taxpayer-funded economic recovery. Say a CEO got a stock grant worth $9 million in 2019. To match that value in 2020, when share prices are very low, the firm would have to award many more shares, which could easily balloon in value in a recovery.
Exec comp should be capped at a level that prevents taxpayer subsidies for excessive pay
Two options:
1. Restrict total executive compensation to no more than 50 times median worker pay
"Linking CEO pay to a multiple of worker pay would prevent taxpayer subsidies from pumping up executive pay and, at the same time, create an incentive to narrow internal pay divides by lifting up the bottom of the wage scale," Anderson noted.
This pay ratio limit should accompany other proposed pro-worker conditions, such as banning layoffs, setting a $15 per hour wage minimum, requiring worker representation on boards, and banning anti-union activity.
As explained in more detail in this IPS Policy Brief, in 2018, the CEOs of the five largest U.S. airlines averaged nearly $10 million in total compensation. The ratio between CEO and median employee pay at these airlines ranged from 80 to 1 at Alaska Air to 195 to 1 at American. If the bailout law restricted CEO pay to no more than 50 times median worker pay, and if these five airlines kept median worker pay at current levels, their CEOs could earn $2.7 million to $4.1 million and still stay below this 50:1 ratio threshold.
2. Cap total executive compensation at a fixed amount
In 2009, the Senate approved an amendment that would have capped total pay for all employees of all bailout companies at no more than the salary of the U.S. President ($400,000). This sent a strong signal that bailout execs were essentially working for taxpayers, who should not have to subsidize excessive compensation. The measure, championed by Senator John McCain, was not included in the final bailout legislation.
Proposed bonus bans could be circumvented
Some lawmakers have proposed a ban on executive bonuses, starting immediately and extending for a few years after the bailout. This raises potential enforcement concerns:
1. Annual cash bonuses make up a small share of total executive compensation packages at the largest corporations. Executives are unlikely to meet criteria for long-term incentive awards in the near future, given low stock prices.
2. Corporations could circumvent this restriction by shifting compensation into other forms, such as salary, pensions, or long-term stock options or restricted stock awards (as President Obama's "Pay Czar" encouraged mega-bailout firms to do). As noted above, equity-based pay could turn into massive windfalls down the road as executives cash in on a taxpayer-funded economic recovery. Large stock-based awards made at a moment when share values are very low could balloon with even a small uptick in the market.
Government must have authority to force renegotiation of compensation contracts
Obama Pay Czar Kenneth Feinberg had limited impact on executive pay at bailout firms after the 2008 crash. One reason: the bailout legislation limited his power over compensation contracts signed before February 11, 2009. This time around, legislators should require bailout recipients to renegotiate employment contracts to meet rigorous bailout restrictions.
Institute for Policy Studies turns Ideas into Action for Peace, Justice and the Environment. We strengthen social movements with independent research, visionary thinking, and links to the grassroots, scholars and elected officials. I.F. Stone once called IPS "the think tank for the rest of us." Since 1963, we have empowered people to build healthy and democratic societies in communities, the US, and the world. Click here to learn more, or read the latest below.
"This is collective punishment," said the president of the National Iranian American Council. "Targeting power plants, nuclear plants, and desalination plants are war crimes."
US President Donald Trump's threat over the weekend to bomb Iranian power plants if the Strait of Hormuz is not fully reopened by Monday night sparked horror around the world and inside Iran, a nation of roughly 90 million people.
"As far as I can tell, everyone is extremely worried," a 35-year-old Tehran resident, identified as Ruhollah, told The New York Times via text message late Sunday as the US president's arbitrary deadline approached. "We are sitting and waiting to see what will happen to us in 48 hours. Everyone will suffer: We will lose power, the Arabs will lose power and water."
The Iranian government threatened to retaliate against any US attack on its civilian power infrastructure with a large-scale assault on power plants serving US military installations and other American interests in Gulf nations.
"If you hit electricity, we hit electricity," the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said in response to Trump's threat, which gave Iran until approximately 7:45 pm ET on Monday to reopen the Strait of Hormuz as the global energy crisis sparked by the illegal US-Israeli war intensified.
Mike Waltz, the US ambassador to the United Nations, declined to rule out a strike on nuclear energy plants in Iran, saying in a television appearance on Sunday that he would "never take anything off the table for the president."
"This is absurd and dangerous," responded Kelsey Davenport, director of nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association (ACA). "Bombing a nuclear power plant should be off the table. Period."
Daryl Kimball, the ACA's director, added that "bombing a functioning nuclear power reactor is blatantly illegal."
"Any such order from [the US president] would be illegal and should not be executed by military commanders," Kimball wrote on social media. "Trump and Co. are out of control."
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) warned Sunday that if Trump follows through with his threat to strike Iranian power plants, "it is likely the US, Israel, and Iran enter a full-scale infrastructure warfare, where electricity systems—essential for hospitals, water supply, communications, and daily life—are treated as targets."
"The consequences of such a shift would likely extend far beyond Iran, risking regional blackouts, economic disruption, and large-scale civilian harm for tens of millions of people," the group wrote in a blog post. "Targeting power plants risks severe humanitarian consequences and invites reciprocal attacks across the region. Strikes near nuclear facilities increase the danger of catastrophic escalation, even if unintended."
Jamal Abdi, NIAC's president, said in a statement that "threatening to bomb Iran’s power plants is a threat to millions of civilians—people who rely on electricity for hospitals, water systems, and basic survival."
"This is not a ‘targeted’ strike. This is collective punishment," said Abdi, calling for an urgent diplomatic resolution. "Targeting power plants, nuclear plants, and desalination plants are war crimes. The president’s endorsement of such acts only threatens to escalate the conflict further and provoke attacks on civilian infrastructure across the region."
Early Monday, power outages were reported across Tehran as the Israeli military announced "a wide-scale wave of strikes" on the Iranian capital.
"Al Jazeera Arabic’s correspondent in Tehran, Suhaib al-Asa, reported that the size and volume of the explosions in the Iranian capital were 'unprecedented,' especially in the eastern side of the city," the outlet noted. "The Iranian air defense systems were activated in the eastern part of the city, al-Asa said, which indicated Iran was responding to US-Israeli drones hovering over that part of the city."
"Food is spoiling. Water supply is compromised. Healthcare services are disrupted," said US Rep. Ilhan Omar. "End the blockade now."
Some Cubans got power back on Sunday after another nationwide blackout on Saturday—the second in less than a week and the third time the grid has collapsed this month after the Trump administration intensified the United States' decades-long economic blockade, cutting off the island nation from Venezuelan oil.
"The Cuban Electric Union, which reports to the Ministry of Energy and Mines, reported that the total disconnection of the national energy system was caused by an unexpected shutdown of a generation unit at the Nuevitas thermoelectric plant in Camaguey province, without providing details on the specific cause of the failure," according to The Associated Press.
Critics from around the world have condemned the US siege as "economic warfare," which is notably occurring as President Donald Trump and his allies in Washington, DC repeatedly float a potential takeover of the country located just 90 miles south of Florida.
Saturday's blackout came a day after The Washington Post reported that "the Cuban government this week refused a request by the US Embassy in Havana to import diesel fuel for its generators, calling the ask 'shameless,' given the Trump administration's fuel blockade on the island, according to diplomatic cables" reviewed by the newspaper.
It also followed the arrival of some members of Nuestra América Convoy, which is bringing humanitarian aid to the island. The effort involves hundreds of people from over 30 countries and 120 organizations.
Highlighting the convoy on social media early Saturday afternoon, US Rep. Delia C. Ramirez (D-Ill.) declared that "Trump's oil blockade in Cuba has caused a worsening humanitarian crisis—cutting Cubans off from power, food, healthcare, and clean water."
"I am heartened by the solidarity and bravery of the courageous people on the Nuestra América Convoy, arriving in Cuba to bring critical aid directly to the people," she said. "I stand with the global community demanding that the Department of State and Department of Defense ensure their safety and security."
Another progressive in Congress, Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), similarly said later Saturday that "we must lift the US oil blockade on Cuba. This is economic warfare designed to suffocate an island. Food is spoiling. Water supply is compromised. Healthcare services are disrupted. End the blockade now. Grateful to all those helping deliver humanitarian aid!"
Current Affairs editor-in-chief Nathan Robinson is reporting on the convoy from Havana. On Sunday, he wrote that "when the power went, I was watching a concert held at the Pabellon Cuba, a delightfully strange Brutalist outdoor event space... People can live without music if they have to, I suppose. (The Cubans refuse to, though, and as I walked through the streets tonight I saw plenty of dancing in the dark.) What they cannot live without is healthcare, and the blackout is of course hitting hospitals hard. People aren't able to get crucial surgeries, or even get to the hospital, which means Trump is simply killing the sickest Cubans. Late last night, a report came in that patients on ventilators at the Hermanos Ameijeiras Hospital have died."
"It has been tragic and depressing watching the effects of the blockade. This is already a poor country. People didn't have much to start with. But now they can't take buses, they can't afford to run their cars (I have been told gas costs anywhere between 10 dollars a gallon and 40 dollars a gallon, if you can find it—this in a country where a nice meal will cost you about $20)," Robinson explained. "Food in restaurants is starting to run out. Garbage is accumulating in the streets. I had to sprint to get through a city block where the flies were so thick it was a struggle to breathe without ingesting one. The entire supply chain appears to be breaking down. Tourism is drying up—few want to come and experience shortages and sanitation crises. Taxi drivers can't drive their taxis."
"With the evaporation of tourists comes greater despair, since so many depend on this influx of foreign money. Everyone in Cuba is warm and friendly, but you can tell they're desperate. At the large San Jose art market, sellers had booths overflowing with souvenirs, and hardly anyone was there to buy. The merchants were outcompeting each other on pushiness—it was obvious many of them would not make a single sale all day," the American journalist added. "I cannot believe how cruel what my country is doing is."
After Trump threatened to "obliterate" Iranian power plants, one Democratic congressman said that "his worsening instability is a clear and growing threat, not only to the American people but to the world."
Democrats in Congress sounded the alarm over President Donald Trump pledging to commit more war crimes in Iran after he traded threats to energy infrastructure with the Iranian government, with the Republican declaring Saturday that he would take out the country's power plants unless it reopened the Strait of Hormuz to all traffic.
Just a day after Trump claimed that "we are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran," in a post that remains pinned to the top of his Truth Social profile, the president took to the platform with a clear threat Saturday night.
"If Iran doesn't FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!" Trump said at 7:44 pm Eastern time.
Trump's post came after Ali Mousavi, the Iranian representative to the International Maritime Organization, told the Chinese news agency Xinhua on Friday that the Strait of Hormuz—the waterway between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman that is a key shipping route, including for fossil fuels—remains open to all vessels not linked to "Iran's enemies."
It also followed the Israeli military—which is bombing Iran alongside the United States—suggesting that the US was responsible for a Saturday attack on Iran's uranium enrichment complex in Natanz. According to The Associated Press, with his new threat, Trump "may have meant the Bushehr nuclear power plant, Iran's biggest, which was already hit last week, or Damavand, a natural gas plant near Tehran, Iran's capital."
Responding to Trump's Saturday post, US Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said: "It's important not to shy away from candidly discussing the president's increasingly erratic behavior. His worsening instability is a clear and growing threat, not only to the American people but to the world."
Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) was similarly critical: "From 'help is on the way' for Iranian protestors to threatening war crimes against an entire population. The United States is being run by a maniacal tyrant hell-bent on destroying this country and the world along with it."
Other critics also pointed out that Article 56 of the Geneva Convention states in part that "works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes, and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population."
The AP reported that after that strike on the Natanz complex, "Iranian missiles struck two communities in southern Israel late Saturday, leaving buildings shattered and dozens injured in dual attacks not far from Israel's main nuclear research center."
"Israel's military said it was not able to intercept missiles that hit the southern cities of Dimona and Arad, the largest near the center in Israel’s sparsely populated Negev desert," according to the news agency. "It was the first time Iranian missiles penetrated Israel’s air defense systems in the area around the nuclear site."
Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, speaker of Iran's Parliament, said on X Saturday that "if the Israeli regime is unable to intercept missiles in the heavily protected Dimona area, it is, operationally, a sign of entering a new phase of the battle... Israel's skies are defenseless."
After Trump's threat, the speaker added Sunday that "immediately after the power plants and infrastructure in our country are targeted, the critical infrastructure, energy infrastructure, and oil facilities throughout the region will be considered legitimate targets and will be irreversibly destroyed, and the price of oil will remain high for a long time."