Penny Pritzker: Still unfit for Commerce secretary
President Obama thinks Americans either have a short memory or are stupid or both. Why else would he nominate Penny Pritzker to be the next Commerce secretary?
Five years ago, a newly elected Mr. Obama floated Ms. Pritzker as his top choice to head the Department of Commerce. The backlash was as swift as it was severe; he was forced to shoot down his own trial balloon.
Why? The heir to the Hyatt Hotels chain and Obama's national campaign finance chairwoman previously served as chairwoman of Superior Bank of Chicago, a leading subprime mortgage lender that left lots of folks holding lots of bags.
The FDIC seized Superior in 2001. Its 18 branches closed that July. Family Pritzker agreed to pay $460 million over 15 years to cover some of the losses. Penny Pritzker blamed accounting failures, auditing changes and a challenging economy for the mess while attempting to distance herself from personal involvement.
But the Chicago Tribune reported that as late as May 2001, Pritzker, in a letter, wrote that the family was working to recapitalize Superior and restore its “leadership in subprime lending.”
On Thursday, Obama nominated Pritzker to head Commerce, actually calling her “one of our country's most distinguished business leaders.” Good grief.
It was in July 2008 that then-Sen. Obama, defending her fundraising role in the campaign, said he and Pritzker “share certain core values about how to run organizations, and hopefully that will inform how we manage the government.”
Indeed, they do. And, sadly, it does. Penny Pritzker's nomination must be rejected.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- For U.S. House, Pa.: Re-elect Rothfus, Shuster, Kelly & Barletta
- Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances
- Greensburg Laurels & Lances
- The Paycheck Fairness Act: It’s not needed
- Mass shootings: Cooked numbers
- Monsour’s legacy: A bitter pill
- For U.S. House in Ohio & West Virginia: Bill Johnson and David McKinley
- U.N. Watch: Another ‘rights’ farce
- The case against ‘Father Joe’: Five years too late
- Saturday essay: A box of Halloween