Sessions Protecting His Assets?
Jeff Sessions backed an amendment that would protect banks from paying billions of royalties for the use of patented technology that converts paper checks to electronic images. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Sessions and his wife own shares in two of the banks that would benefit from the amendment, Compass Bank and Citigroup. The paper also notes that the banking industry has been one of Sessions’ most generous donors. The amendment was added to a larger bill intended to overhaul the country’s patent system that is supposed to come to the Senate floor this fall.
Sessions, of course, says he did nothing unethical.
After queries by The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Sessions this week decided “to seek counsel” on what steps he might take to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest, such as placing his holdings in a blind trust, said his spokesman, Stephen Boyd. Mr. Sessions is willing to do “whatever he needs to do” to “remove even the appearance of impropriety,” Mr. Boyd said.
He’s coming up on the end of his second six-year term in the Senate, and he’s just now figuring this out?
Not that it will make any difference. I doubt Sessions was looking at his stock portfolio when he flogged this amendment. He was too busy looking at his campaign contributions.
****
Side note: Is anyone else surprised that it’s the WSJ reporting this?
October 4th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Another Republican opportunist.
October 4th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
The WSJ news pages have been pretty good — of course they’re working for Rupert Murdoch now. I thought they were rather quick to swallow the excuse that he didn’t realize there could be a conflict of interest. Also, they weren’t exactly standing up for the rights of people who patent processes like the one the banks are using. I got the distinct impression that patents are well and good and enforceable as long as they aren’t worth much, but when you patent something that might net you real money in royalties, forget about it — they’re going to legislate those patent rights away.
October 5th, 2007 at 7:28 am
Yeah, mooncat, I was surprised at the attitude toward the patent holders. I’d think the WSJ would be all about upholding the right of the inventor to profit from his ingenuity. Not when it hurts big corporations, I guess. Or there may be more to the story that I don’t know.
October 5th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Also, re Sessions– has anybody else noticed that in the Birmingham News article regarding Lanny Young’s contributions to Sessions and Bill Pryor, their names aren’t mentioned until paragraph 11 (in the page 7 continuation) of the article, “Lobbyist also gave to GOP”?
Hmm, in yesterday’s (Oct 4) article in Time magazine, “Selective Justice in Alabama?” http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1668220,00.html , Sessions and Pryor’s names appear in the first paragraph.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:08 am
Yeah, I also notice that although there was a blog/newsflash on al.com yesterday detailing the banking story (it’s how I found the WSJ article), there’s no article online in today’s edition. Hmmm.
October 5th, 2007 at 11:27 am
And the contrast between the News and Mobile Press-Register is striking — the P-R has the names in the lead paragraph. Interesting.
October 5th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Yes, but the story is on page 2 of the Metro/Region session, which I found a bit odd, although I suppose you could describe it as a regional issue. Nice big headline, though, and the word “Republican” appears in the lede or whatever that little blurby thing is called just under the headline. Yes, surprising…
although the front page Metro headline reads, “Jeb Bush decries ‘putrid’ political climate.” Apparently he was here speaking at Mobile College. “I can’t watch the news, as a brother who loves my brother,” he said. “The food fight has to stop, and there needs to be a restoration of civility.”
October 5th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
“I can’t watch the news, as a brother who loves my brother,” he said. “The food fight has to stop, and there needs to be a restoration of civility.”
Oh, give me a freakin’ break. I have two words for you, Jeb: Karl Rove.
October 5th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Hey Kathy,
Have you got time to put up a separate blog on the Time article vs. the B’ham News article on the Lanny Young situation? I assume that’s the issue you referred to when you mentioned that the P-R had the names in the lead paragraph (as did Time) whereas the B’ham News doesn’t even mention Sessions & King until half way into the story.
October 5th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
I wonder how much Sessions was promised to sneak in this amendment.
Hope it is a large amount.
He talks about the banks being the victim and that Datatreasury is a so called patent troll. He forgets to mention that Datatreasury has owned these patents long before the enactment of Check 21 and that the banks are saving billions of dollars each year stealing this technology. He also does not mention that the banks are collecting record amounts of revenue on bounced check fees because of this technology. Who is paying these bounced check fees? Senator Sessions ? No, the American public.
He also forgets to say that the most prestigous law firms that money can buy have been trying to break Datatreasury’s patents but could not. If fact proven that the patents are stronger than ever.
Why doesn’t the banks come up with their own systems to clear checks.
The answer is they would rather steal someones hard work and not pay. And then pay one of these senators or congressman to protect their interests. What a shame. I wonder how many patents the banks own that they are charging others for using.
Let’s ask Senator Sessions.
October 5th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
[...] Sansou pointed out in the comments on my previous Sessions post, the Birmingham News ran an article on this story today but didn’t mention either Sessions or [...]