I think my vote for "tell us!" has more to do with being nosy and curious than necessarily thinking we have a right to know.

as a shareholder in AIG (we all own 80% right?), I want full disclosure. If they didn't want their name published or are "afraid" for their safety (asumating that the threats are real), they shouldn't have taken the money when they knew damn good and well that there would be a backlash.

"We thank AIG for their compliance [after we gave them no choice but to do it]"

Liddy can go suck on a tailpipe.

What is productively accomplished by releasing the names to the public?

Anger might be deserved, but it is best directed at those giving the money, not the employees who were contractually set to receive it.

And the puppet theatre goes on...

Who helped write those contracts? The suddenly outraged government?! Weird.

Dear Corporate Fat-Cats,

Time to pay the piper. Feast or famine...you have to own up to swindling us tax payers.

Too bad it took a real man like Andrew Cuomo to get this mess fixed. Shouldn't this have been prevented at a higher level? I'm not political scientist, but I could have sworn just a few months ago there was a man who campaigned on "Change" and "Oversight" and "transparency." Was I the only person who saw through that crap?

By the way...I was talking about our "savior" Barack Obama. I couldn't be more displeased by 2 months of presidency.

If "we as a country owns the company, then we have full rights to their bookkeeping and payouts. 'nuff said.

""Anger might be deserved, but it is best directed at those giving the money, not the employees who were contractually set to receive it.""

Except perhaps at those employees who were instrumental in the entire AIG meltdown issue. My understanding is that several of the execs recieving bonuses were the same execs who pushed the risky behavior we're all now paying for.

I wish no physical harm to these people, but their friends and (removed) family should be aware of what even their tax dollars are being spent on.

Public shame is one of the few weapons we have in this war. These names need to be released.

@ enm4r:

+1. The fact that we "own the company" is fine and good. In fact, I agree that we have the right to see their book keeping, to an extent. However, me knowing Joe Shmoe's name is going to nothing for me. GREAT! I have it... Now what do I do with it? However, anyone with more... say malicious intent than I could take that info and go the completely wrong way with it. Put simply, if these names are released, the internet community will exploit it to the fullest, finding all information about them and therefore inhibiting their ability to live safely (read: normally.) Let the guvmint keep the stupid names.

@TakingItSeriously: That is valid, but you're mixing two issues. You can be angry at the employees if they had a key role in taking the company and in part the economy. But specifically on the bonus issue, anger should be directed toward those giving (writing the contracts) and those enabling the contracts (the government which was privy to all of this in the fall.)

I understand that people are upset, but what is happening now is that people are angry, they aren't sure why, so they are willing to pitchfork anything that looks bad. Take a minute to unwind the issues and it's not that hard to decide who gets blamed for what.

How about a little skepticism, Consumerist?

"The Attorney General's Office is a law enforcement agency and is experienced in making these assessments."

"The Attorney General's Office will responsibly balance the public's right to know how their tax dollars are spent with individual security, privacy rights, and corporate prerogative."

Please... The AGO is a political body, and Mr. Cuomo is a politician. Does anyone believe the AGO is objectively balancing rights, rather than maximizing Cuomo's political advantage?

No way, the names shouldn't be released. These people work for a private company. How would all of you who work in the private sector like it if your salary and benefits were released publicly?

They're already working to get the money back, and it's a drop in the bucket compared to what's really wrong with the economy right now. I want Congress to stop the grandstanding and move on and deal with some real issues. If they want to go on about inappropriate wastes of federal monies, they should start with themselves. Or maybe they can have congressional hearings on how they changed the laws to let this all happen.

I think a lot of folks that are opposed to this disclosure are missing a big point. This is not about a few goobers that took an outsized check home with them on Monday. This is basically America standing up to Wall Street and demanding accountability.At long last.

AIG went to the governmnet in September and said "give us a shitgob of money or the entire world will blow up". The government stupidly did just that. Now that the payer us demanding that the payee come clean about how it is being spent,"free market" "capitalists" are having a thrombosis that we taxpayers want answers. Well, fuck them. They abandoned capitalism the second that they hoovered that money from we who earned it.This shouldn't even be an issue.

Socialism stinks. It robs people of their ambition every bit as much as a daily dime bag. But thats what Wall Street wanted way back in September and October when it looked like the sky was falling.(Aided and cheered on by a former president that I could name).

I hope that these people become household names. Maybe a little shame and humiliation will bring them back to reality.

@basilray:

Honestly, 2 months of Presidency after 8 years of garbage policies, and you're not happy? Obama isn't an almighty savior, he's a good president, and, in my opinion, he's taking steps to ensure the well being of the country down the road. 2 months is nothing on the whole. It's going to take alot longer than that for any real change to happen.

You can bet lots of that money is gone. Off shore accounts, etc....and many of the employees will be "out of the country" till things cool off.

Wait, before they release, those names, lets make sure the villagers have time to get their torches and pitchforks ready!

Seriously, this whole thing is beginning to sound like CASABLANCA.....

"I am shocked to see gambling in this establishment, Rick"

Yeah, the pressure brought to bear in getting the money back is good, but how much did we spend in doing that?? Taxpayer dollars fund the AG office...

just saying....

The original bailout had a provision in it that would not allow the bonus to be paid. Sen Dodd put a last minute provision that allowed AIG to keep their bonuses at the insistence of the Obama administration. They need to be allowed to keep their bonuses because they took the money and then the government changed its mind. We talked a lot here about how it is wrong for credit card companies to change its terms when it is allowed under contract; I don't know why we don't see outrage over the government taking 90% of what is owed to someone.

@zentex: We don't "own" the company, the Fed is the primary shareholder. AIG is still a private company, not a government entity. That doesn't give you the right to find out whatever you want about the employees of the company. Right now AIG is only accountable to the Fed.

Now, if they'd done it right to start with, and put AIG into receivership so the Fed actually had control- it would be a different story.

@Amir Khan: I agree. He's only been President for two months and he's already reversed quite a few of former President Bush's policies.

With regards to these contracts, there were in place BEFORE Obama took office. So when you say, "Washington knew! Those bastards" Remember that was Bush's administration.

The President has no authority to change contracts made by companies. That's why he had to go to Congress to find a solution. What did they propose? That they get the IRS to tax 90% of those bonuses.

So President Obama is doing everything in his power to fix this.

Unlike the dictatorship we had under President Bush there are only so many LEGAL things that he has the power to do.

I'm so done with this AIG fiasco. Congress has no right to single these people out. If they are upset over stimulus money being used for bonus, then they should have put it into the bill. These employees worked to minimize the damage done to AIG and the money that would have been needed to keep it afloat. It is hypocritical for AIG to then take the money and give it to them, however this is how businesses work and Congress knows that full and well. They cannot go back and make blatantly unconstitutional laws and stand up on a pedestal and condemn AIG over something they were the ultimate cause of. It's political nothing but grandstanding and a desperate attempt to save face among their constituents.

Okay, everyone take a breather here...

These people work in the private sector. All of the people receiving bonuses were promised these bonuses prior to any federal assistance, etc. Not every person working for AIG deserves to be blamed for the crises we are experiencing. Take me for example, I work for a local law firm as a paralegal. I make a meager wage and look forward to any-and-all raises, bonuses, etc. If some lawyer was to do something stupid and get our firm in the news, I wouldn't want the public finding out who I was, blaming me for the issue and demonizing me. We live in a brave new world where the internet is extremely powerful. It is not prudent to release these names.

@enm4r: That it was contractual is a cop-out. If you were in this situation, would you be taking that bonus?

"This is how business works"

For those using that logic in their arguments, that's the problem right there.

Business shouldn't work that way. We need to take a big step back and look at what kind of society we'll become if we continue to blindly support private "free market" businesses with taxpayer money and no oversight!

It seems to me that virtually every area of business in this country needs a serious overhaul. I'm not calling for communist rule, but CLEARLY leaving people alone and trusting them to do the wrong thing DOES NOT WORK.

@ionerox: I don't see how AIG is a private company. It's A) publicly traded, and B) 80% of it is now owned by the U.S. taxpayers. What's private about that?

Start off releasing the figures with "Employee1, Employee2..." a description of the nature of the payment and the dollar amount.

It was taxpayer money, and the taxpayers have a right to see how the money is being spent, unless releasing the names would endanger the lives of the employee. A list of salaries is available for all federal employees except those who work for the FBI, CIA, NSA, CTU, MIB and other similar agencies.

In this case the concern would be that taxpayers would be upset if they saw that an employee received a mitli-million dollar payout while they were shut out in the cold.

@basilray: Was I the only person who saw through that crap?

Wait, who are you talking about?

By the way...I was talking about our "savior" Barack Obama.

Oh, thanks for clearing that up!

Yes, I believe you were the only person who did not like Obama's policies and voted against him. THE ONLY PERSON IN THE WORLD. What foresight!

I'm not political scientist

You should be!

@JusticeDemon:

Aaack, "trusting them to do the RIGHT thing does not work"

@enm4r: We can eat our cake and have it too. I'm angry on both issues.

Congress was lazy, and now we're paying for it (again).

There is an old Chinese proverb that applies here:

"There is no feast in the world that does not end finally".

I think that the safety concern for the employees is very real. As much as the American people have revolted against these bonuses, these employees would be harassed to no end.

As long as the Attorney General deals with the situation properly, I do not care to hear the names.

@friendlynerd: Bring back the pillory!

@SynMonger:

Yes, I would, and so would most people. Just because we can't afford the lifestyle that these men are living doesn't mean that they are ready to give it up so easily when they have a bonus as an alternative.

I'm also sure that most of the bonused employees are not of the opinion that they single-handedly ruined the economy, and I am sure that some are skeptical of their involvement at all. Why would they turn that money down?

And while I'm at it, if they were feeling guilty, I'm sure they were also feeling that their jobs were in jeopardy. Just one more reason to take the money and run.

@ionerox: And who owns the Fed? Say it with me now... WE DO.

It really is too bad they didn't take it over outright. I work for a state funded college, my name and salary (along with every other employee here) are freely available to anyone who walks in and asks to see it.

@rachmaninov1: It's a press release, I'm pretty sure someone at the Consumerist didn't write it. There aren't any grammar or spelling mistakes.

If they got "Retention Bonuses" and are no longer with the company, then YES, release their names as you file charges against them for fraud!

@ionerox: Shame is a very powerful tool. The names should come out if they have taken a bonus and aren't planning on returning it.

While it may technically be a private company, the largest shareholder currently is the federal government, which to me makes it a public enterprise and their records are all fair game for freedom of information act requests.

@celticgina: Just because a public office is spending money doesn't make it a bad thing. Spending it on finding out who these people are serves a purpose.

@zentex:

"asumating"?

When a prostitution agency gets busted, standard operating procedure is to release the client list to the public. I suppose to shame* them in the eyes of the community.

Financial Ops at AIG is responsible for a pretty large part of the current state of the economy. People are losing their jobs. People are losing their homes. People are losing their faith.

I would think making the list public will do a much better job of shaming them and exposing them as the villains than if they were on a list of people looking for a little nookie.

Again I ask:

Why are these execs still employed with AIG?

Why have they not been fired already for incompetence?

@TEW: Really? Links or it didn't happen.

How about a bill number? The minutes from the session this happened in?

Where is the beef?

@Applekid: (* shame clearly not applicable to those who are single, aren't pretending to be chaste, or aren't dishonest about their fidelity to their partner)

I can't fathom what reasonable purpose revealing the employees' names would serve. Is it to shame them? To make it easier for lunatics to threaten them? I can't think of any legitimate reason for the public to know.

The public's outrage is not about the $165m in bonuses per se. It's over what that money represents: the very worst of the greed and excess of Wall Street over the past decade.

It's also a pitiful demonstration of the malleability of certain politicians' values depending on, as my great-grandmother would say, "whose ox is being gored." A contract is binding, non-negotiable and unbreakable when wealthy Wall Street bankers benefit, but a contract isn't worth the paper it's written on when it promises union auto workers a certain rate of pay and benefits.

@TEW: If the government hadn't come along, there would be no AIG, and therefore no bonuses. I think the new "owner" of the company can rewrite those terms, given those circumstances.

I'm sorry the government didn't do that at the start. Maybe we've all learned a valuable lesson here: the financial sector of the economy lacks any sense. I was going to add "sense of decency" or "sense of fairness" or "sense of responsibility" -- but just plain "sense" works too.

If these are the people who brought down the company, from a performance standpoint they shouldn't be getting bonuses. If they aren't, but they're the only people who can, for some reason, undo what was done, we've given them a massive incentive to take their sweet time. None of this makes sense.

I don't believe the public has a right to know. I would hope they would be smart enough to return the money...and if not, be taxed at 90% as is proposed.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of whack-job activists that could pose a serious security threat to these people if their names are released.

@SynMonger: Considering my current lack of income as a college level student, Damn right.

I do not care about the employees names at all. I just wish that everyone who is pissed at the employees and AIG would aim some of that anger towards the pandering morons in Congress. They were the enablers in this whole mess, they didn't bother to put in any stipulations over contractually guaranteed bonuses. Now that the public is supremely pissed, the politicians in Congress decide to try and save face by switching sides and getting behind the pitchfork-wielding angry mob. Pelosi and company can go fuck themselves.

(When I say 'Pelosi and Company", I am not explicitly blaming any one party more than the other, so don't fucking bother posting stupid shit about which party deserves more blame. They ALL deserve a fucking boatload of blame.)

@DustoMan: You're kidding of course. It's a subtle joke so I'm sure not everyone will understand the depths of it.

The employees worked to minimize the damage? As Jon Stewart said, "They burned the f-ing house down with our money and walked away rich as hell..."

What "blatently unconstitutional" laws are you talking about? Taxes are within the constitutional powers of Congress. Just because Congress screwed up doesn't mean they have to shrug and say "oh well."

Grandstanding? Maybe, but they are finally doing what we WANT. I've been burning up my congress-critter's e-mail and snail mail boxes with what I want done.

@SynMonger: You've apparently never gotten Press Releases on a regular basis. They sometimes come filled with grammatical and syntax errors. I get dozens of them in my inbox from gaming companies on a daily basis. It can be absolutely hilarious at times.