What Did You Say Is the Name of Your Bank?

I am fantasizing this afternoon about the possibilities. Ahhhhhh, the nearly limitless possibilities.

The Obama administration is going after that big fat Swiss bank, UBS, filing a lawsuit in a Miami federal court forcing the bank to turn over records of wealthy Americans who have been hiding their money over there and in doing so, avoiding paying their share of federal taxes.

Most of us can be quite happy about this because of course, we don't have enough money to make it worthwhile to hide it and attempt to evade taxes. So it's time to smile and let the government chase down these big, fat tax evaders.

The U.S. Attorney General's office, in prosecuting the banker-weasels ("Oh, poor UBS! They lost millions in the mortgage meltdown and now they have this happen?" No, I don't believe anybody is saying that.) expects to recover close to a billion dollars. And that's just the recovered taxes at about $380 Billion; another $400 Billion is penalties. But oh! The loss of face and future business!

The Swiss banking industry has functioned for decades on their reputation for keeping secrets. The UBS case is particularly egregious because apparently, they didn't just look the other way. They actively advised wealthy Americans on how to avoid paying taxes. And they never identified customers. Ever. Absolute secrecy was their promise. They no longer can make that claim. Although they are expected to fight the loss of their neutral status. I mean, seriously, what's next? Having to take a stand against Nazis?

And why did our government let it slide, because apparently, we thought all Americans are honest taxpayers? No, no indeed. "Git 'em!"

An estimated $14.8 Billion in American-owned cash has been stashed in UBS alone. The government is only going to get the names of about 250-300 customers from the bankers. The actual estimate, when the documents were filed forcing the bank to cooperate was that some 20-thousand Americans were hiding money along with other financial gains in the bank. But then a day later, with no explanation, the government more than doubled its estimate.

"At a time when millions of Americans are losing their jobs, their homes, and their health care, it is appalling that more than 52,000 of the wealthiest among us have actively sought to evade their civil and legal duty to pay taxes," the acting assistant attorney general, John DiCicco, said in a statement."

I like that word, "appalling." It's almost adequate, isn't it? One sort of hopes that these 52-thousand Americans are squirming right now, wondering will they be among the 250 unluckiest people in the world... the ones unmasked as being task cheats by the bank that formerly protected them. I like to think of all 52-thousand tossing and turning, at the very least.

My goodness, banking in Switzerland is now almost as dangerous financially as being nominated for high political office in the Obama administration.

Three Strikes... You're OUT? Or Third Time's A Charm?

I've been a little distracted. But in the back of my mind, I've also been busy. I've been counting the bodies dropping out of the sky. (Don't be morbid. This is not about the plane crash in Buffalo.) It seems like they're piling up.

I'm referring to the number of President Obama's nominees that accept, and then back up once the confirmation process starts to look... icky. Or perhaps more properly sticky. Particularly in one federal agency.

Another nominee for the Commerce Secretary position, the Republican Senator from New Hampshire, Judd Gregg, has now withdrawn his nomination. The Senator cited policy differences.

Well, yeah, there's that. It's hard to be bipartisan when you aren't.

"The Senator will remain... a senator."

But look at this track record. Before Gregg, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson was nominated. He backed when an investigation into "pay to play" practices in his administration (Blago II?) was revealed.

Former U.S. Senator Tom Daschle (D-SD) withdrew his name as nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services. You remember him? He was formerly one of the most powerful men in Washington.

But after the people of the Great State of South Dakota voted him out of office, he became forgetful. He forgot that yes, you do look a gift horse in the mouth. If chauffeur-driven limousines are offered as part of the job, you may owe taxes on this "gift." Here's my question: was he doing his own taxes?

Also a nominee for the Obama administration-created created position of budget and government spending reform, Nancy Killefer, withdrew because she had a "tax issue" with the "DC unemployment tax." That's a very generous way to state someone owes back taxes, isn't it?

One of the nominees was in long-term limbo on her confirmation because her husband didn't pay $6400 in taxes on his business. Labor Secretary nominee Hilda Solis' hearing was hastily stalled; rescheduled last week and *poof!* things are now moving forward.

Not to be rude, but um, who wants to be the THIRD person nominated as Commerce Secretary? "Gee, thanks Mr. President! I'm very delighted to be your THIRD pick for this great honor and high office, serving you and the people of the United States. I'll do my best to deserve the honor you've bestowed on me, as your THIRD pick."

Ahhhh, the grandkids will be so proud!

Anyway "batter up," President Obama. We're going to need a Commerce Secretary so that your stimulus plan can get our economy rolling again fast.

Vetting: the process of investigating thoroughly, interviewing carefully, checking and rechecking the tax records and backgrounds of potential candidates for a job in order to eliminate as much as possible the potential for embarrassment in looking like you don't know what you're doing and can't choose honest people to work in your administration.

Approval Ratings?

Let's all take a deep breath. Inhale. Exhale. Inhale. Exhale.

And now let's note that Gallup Pollsters have taken our temperature nationally and after three business days in office, two-thirds of the American people approve the job that Mr. Obama is doing.

That's right. THREE DAYS.

This reminds me of someone who was newly divorced and um, perhaps a little needy told me that his best friend had gotten married one month after his divorce "and they're still really happy and totally in love."

And how long have they been married, I asked?

"A month!" he said, perhaps a little too breathlessly.

I think I giggled at that point. (Do you see the problem my male friends have with me?) A whole entire month? Was that a full 31 days? A shortened 30 day month? Or are we maybe talking about February?

Relax. He's got four years. Keep breathing.