Q&A with James Tedisco: Part 4
Republican and Conservative congressional candidate James Tedisco sat down recently for an interview with Post-Star reporter Maury Thompson.
In this segment he talks about bipartisanship.
Tedisco, the state Assembly minority leader from Glenville, is running in the March 31 special election for the 20th Congressional District seat vacated when Kirsten Gillibrand, D-Greenport, was appointed to the U.S. Senate.
The Democratic, Independence and Working Families candidate is Scott Murphy, a venture capitalist from Glens Falls.
The Libertarian candidate is Eric Sundwall, an information technology consultant from Kinderhook, in Columbia County.
Q: You talked about cooperation and building bridges. What is one bill or one initiative that the Democrats are championing that you would work across the aisle to try to make happen?
A:” I think I can build a bipartisan base behind in helping make the best legislation they can. When (House Financial Services Committee Chairman) Barney Frank (D-MA) talks about Wall Street, he’s saying some of the same things I’ve said. …
“So what I’d like to see is a holistic approach to how Wall Street’s going to be changed. Not over regulation — because I think the less regulation you could have in this capitalistic society and democracy the better — but enough regulation and adherence to it so we don’t have the type of risky things that were taking place and everybody is adhering to those loan processes and you’re not bundling all these mortgages and selling them to another group. …
“I think I’ve mentioned this before that Moody’s is the rater for credit. But when Moody’s goes in to a bank and rates them, guess who pays them for the credit rating that they give? — the banks and the financial institutions.
“That’s kind of like the student that goes in to the class and takes the test, and they take out a red pen and say, ‘Now grade yourself.’
“ I think you have to oversee those credit raters. And that there’s got to be a government agency behind it. …
“And then I do think that when CEOs and businesses and industries are in a downturn and their clients are losing money, you can’t increase by millions and upon millions of dollars their salaries. I think you’ve got to have a reasonable level and if they show vast amounts of success for their clients and for their stock investors, then I think we can have a plan where they can move up.”
Q: What would you say would be a “reasonable level” for salaries of CEOs of companies who receive TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) assistance?
A: “I think the president has it right. I think a half-a-million dollars is realistic — because when they say, ‘Well you’re not going to get the best and the brightest and the most intelligent’ — look — for a half-a-million dollars I think you’re getting some of the best and the brightest and the hardest working.
“You go up to million, two million and five million — I don’t see where a guy’s brain is that much expanded or bigger in his head because you give him four-and-a-half million dollars instead of a half-million dollars.
“But once again maybe there should be some rewards for those CEOs who are showing vast profits for their investors. I think that could be something — a reward process. “
