Tweet
Is the transfer of wealth over?
August 27, 2010
Financier’s Largess Shows G.O.P.’s Wall St. Support
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
At a black-tie dinner in April, a politically influential hedge fund manager named Paul Singer offered a blistering critique of the “terrible path” he said Washington politicians were charting on economic issues.
Mr. Singer, professorial and soft-spoken, used a gathering of business and government leaders at the conservative Manhattan Institute to lash out at “indiscriminate attacks by political leaders against anything that moves in the world of finance.” Government efforts to “take over and run” the economy through more regulations, he warned, threatened to ruin the United States’ standing as the world leader in finance.
As the head of a $17 billion hedge fund, Mr. Singer, a self-described Barry Goldwater conservative who is 66, is using his financial might to try to change those policies. He has become one of the biggest bankrollers of Republican causes, giving more than $4 million of his money and raising millions more through fund-raisers he hosts for like-minded candidates who often share his distaste for what they view as governmental over-meddling in the financial industry.
The same day in June that the House gave final approval to the sweeping overhaul of financial regulations, Mr. Singer had a fund-raiser at his Central Park West apartment, netting more than $1 million for seven Republican Senate candidates who had opposed the bill. His hedge fund, Elliott Management, is the biggest source of money to the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
With economic problems weighing heavily as the November elections approach, the divide between Republicans and Democrats in their attitudes toward Wall Street and the economy promises to be a recurring point of attack for both parties, and Mr. Singer is using his money to push conservative causes.
He is not new to fund-raising — he raised money for George W. Bush, Rudolph W. Giuliani, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and, surprisingly, gay rights initiatives — but his prominence has risen lately with his donations as he and other conservatives tap into a rising tide of anger on Wall Street toward Washington. His largess reflects a recent surge in Wall Street money to Republicans.
Generally Democrats have been favored by Wall Street, getting 70 percent of donations from the securities and investment sector just 18 months ago. But by the time Congress took up the financial regulations legislation this June, Republicans were getting 68 percent of the donations, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group.
In the 2010 election cycle, financial industry donors, from brokers to real estate interests, have contributed $180 million to both Republican and Democratic Congressional candidates, the analysis showed.
Dave Levinthal, a spokesman for the center, said: “What this says is that Wall Street is awfully angry with Democrats and sees Republicans as a better bet. They’re making an investment in the prospect of a Republican-controlled Congress that they perceive to be more favorable toward their bottom line.”
For Democrats, the November elections will test their ability to focus public attention away from the country’s poor economy and toward the eye-popping sums that Wall Street is raising for Republicans. Already, Democrats are using the issue in a handful of hotly contested races because they believe many voters are even angrier with Wall Street than they are with Washington.
In Washington State, for instance, a spot broadcast this month by Senator Patty Murray, a Democrat seeking re-election, attacks her Republican opponent, Dino Rossi, as “the best friend Wall Street and big banks can buy.”
Ms. Murray — who has taken significant sums from the financial sector herself — is seeking to tie her opponent’s Wall Street contributions to his call for repealing the toughened financial regulations. Her commercial cites two fund-raisers in particular, including a June 30 event hosted by Mr. Singer that earned the Rossi campaign nearly $135,000, with many executives at his Elliott Management fund contributing personal checks.
Republicans maintain that the strategy has fallen flat.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/28/us...ef=todayspaper
Whew, just business as usual....
August 27, 2010
Mr. Singer, professorial and soft-spoken, used a gathering of business and government leaders at the conservative Manhattan Institute to lash out at “indiscriminate attacks by political leaders against anything that moves in the world of finance.” Government efforts to “take over and run” the economy through more regulations, he warned, threatened to ruin the United States’ standing as the world leader in finance.
As the head of a $17 billion hedge fund, Mr. Singer, a self-described Barry Goldwater conservative who is 66, is using his financial might to try to change those policies. He has become one of the biggest bankrollers of Republican causes, giving more than $4 million of his money and raising millions more through fund-raisers he hosts for like-minded candidates who often share his distaste for what they view as governmental over-meddling in the financial industry.
The same day in June that the House gave final approval to the sweeping overhaul of financial regulations, Mr. Singer had a fund-raiser at his Central Park West apartment, netting more than $1 million for seven Republican Senate candidates who had opposed the bill. His hedge fund, Elliott Management, is the biggest source of money to the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
With economic problems weighing heavily as the November elections approach, the divide between Republicans and Democrats in their attitudes toward Wall Street and the economy promises to be a recurring point of attack for both parties, and Mr. Singer is using his money to push conservative causes.
He is not new to fund-raising — he raised money for George W. Bush, Rudolph W. Giuliani, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and, surprisingly, gay rights initiatives — but his prominence has risen lately with his donations as he and other conservatives tap into a rising tide of anger on Wall Street toward Washington. His largess reflects a recent surge in Wall Street money to Republicans.
Generally Democrats have been favored by Wall Street, getting 70 percent of donations from the securities and investment sector just 18 months ago. But by the time Congress took up the financial regulations legislation this June, Republicans were getting 68 percent of the donations, according to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group.
In the 2010 election cycle, financial industry donors, from brokers to real estate interests, have contributed $180 million to both Republican and Democratic Congressional candidates, the analysis showed.
Dave Levinthal, a spokesman for the center, said: “What this says is that Wall Street is awfully angry with Democrats and sees Republicans as a better bet. They’re making an investment in the prospect of a Republican-controlled Congress that they perceive to be more favorable toward their bottom line.”
For Democrats, the November elections will test their ability to focus public attention away from the country’s poor economy and toward the eye-popping sums that Wall Street is raising for Republicans. Already, Democrats are using the issue in a handful of hotly contested races because they believe many voters are even angrier with Wall Street than they are with Washington.
In Washington State, for instance, a spot broadcast this month by Senator Patty Murray, a Democrat seeking re-election, attacks her Republican opponent, Dino Rossi, as “the best friend Wall Street and big banks can buy.”
Ms. Murray — who has taken significant sums from the financial sector herself — is seeking to tie her opponent’s Wall Street contributions to his call for repealing the toughened financial regulations. Her commercial cites two fund-raisers in particular, including a June 30 event hosted by Mr. Singer that earned the Rossi campaign nearly $135,000, with many executives at his Elliott Management fund contributing personal checks.
Republicans maintain that the strategy has fallen flat.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/28/us...ef=todayspaper
Whew, just business as usual....
Comment