by John McCormick
When President Barack Obama moved into the White House earlier this year, he took several of his fellow Chicago millionaires with him. Newly released disclosure reports show virtually all of the top Chicagoans serving in the West Wing had assets valued at a million dollars or more at the end of 2008.
In several cases, the reports provide the first detailed look at the finances of some of the president's top aides and friends from Chicago who have risen with him. They also show the salary haircut many have taken to be in the White House, at least until they return to the private sector.
Some of the wealth can be attributed to the fact that the top staff members surrounding Obama -- such as Chicagoans Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett -- are from a big city where salaries tend to be higher. Many of the comparable senior staffers with the previous two presidents came from Austin, Texas, and Little Rock, Ark., where salaries for top professionals tend to be the lower than in Chicago.
In contrast to his senior staff, Obama's Cabinet tends to have fewer high-net-worth people. That group includes former senators, governors and others who have spent much of their careers working in the lower-paying public sector.
Like those of his predecessors, Obama's top staff tends toward seasoned professionals, people who have moved up in their respective fields and found private sector wealth. The tTribune's review focused on Chicagoans serving in senior White House jobs.
Obama's personal wealth soared in the past decade. His annual household income fluctuated in the range of about $250,000 during the first half of this decade, before his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004 and millions in book royalties and advances that started rolling in during 2005.
Leading the Chicago pack in investment portfolio size is Emanuel. The White House chief of staff reported 2008 investment income of at least $168,107 on a portfolio worth between $4.5 million and $11 million.
Obama White House advisers David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, Desiree Rogers and Rahm Emanuel are pictured above in a Tribune photo presentation. See the full report on Obama's millionaires in the Tribune and here in the Swamp:
The disclosures, required of senior and deputy-level aides each year, were made public over the weekend. They allow individuals to report across a broad range in values for each investment and corresponding investment income, using categories such as $500,001 to $1 million, so it is impossible to know exact figures.
After leaving the Clinton White House -- and before running for Congress from Chicago's North Side -- Emanuel made more than $16 million in 21/2 years as an investment banker.
Many of his investments are now in municipal bonds, a favored choice of the wealthy because their interest is tax-exempt. Emanuel has dozens of the bonds, whose issuers range from McHenry County to the Northeast Nebraska Solid Waste Coalition.
Chiefs of staff tend to have some wealth, often because they are Washington veterans or have some chief executive experience in business.
Andy Card, for example, the first chief of staff to former President George W. Bush, had worked for General Motors Corp. before moving to the White House. He listed assets worth at least $1.1 million on the first financial disclosure form that he filed in 2001.
White House social secretary Desiree Rogers, a longtime Obama family friend from Chicago, reported $1.8 million in salary from Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas, where she left as president during the middle of 2008.
Rogers also earned $350,000 in salary in 2008 from Allstate Insurance Co., where she was working on a financial social networking program before leaving for Washington. Her service on two corporate boards, Equity Residential and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois, netted her another $170,000. She listed stocks, mutual funds and other investments worth at least $2.1 million.
Rogers was once married to millionaire and Chicago financier John Rogers, the head of Ariel Capital Management and another close Obama friend and fundraiser.
Jarrett, a senior adviser to Obama, reported a money market fund holding between $1 million and $5 million.
Since moving to the White House, Jarrett has resigned her position as chief executive of Habitat Co., one of the Midwest's largest property-management firms.
Her report shows she earned $550,000 in deferred compensation from Habitat Executive Services, plus a salary of $302,000 in 2008.
She also reported $346,687 in income from serving on seven boards, including the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Jarrett's most lucrative fee as a director was $146,643 from Chicago-based USG Corp., a building products maker.
Jarrett is also still receiving compensation from the Chicago Transit Authority, where she was Mayor Richard Daley's handpicked chairwoman from 1995 to 2003. She estimated $35,559 in deferred compensation as part of the CTA's supplemental retirement plan.
For Axelrod, the disclosures also made clear the value of a political consulting firm he built from the ground up starting in 1985, an asset that gained value because of Obama's success.
The senior adviser to the president sold his stake in two firms for $3 million before he moved to the White House in January. Although he no longer has direct financial ties to the companies, he will receive installment payments for his shares over five years.
AKP&D Message and Media was sold for $2 million to John Kupper, John Del Cecato and Larry Grisolano. He also sold his interest in ASK Public Strategies, a firm that has done public policy issue campaigns for such entities as the Chicago 2016 Committee, Commonwealth Edison Co. and the University of Chicago Medical Center, where Michelle Obama worked as an executive.
Axelrod, who worked almost exclusively on Obama's campaign in 2008, collected a salary of roughly $1.5 million from his two firms. His investments, meanwhile, showed a valuation of at least $3.8 million.
The person most equivalent to Axelrod in the Bush White House was top political adviser Karl Rove, who listed at least $2.3 million in stocks, bonds, cash and other assets in 2001.
Another Chicagoan, Christina Tchen, left a lucrative legal career to become the director of Obama's Office of Public Liaison. Her disclosure shows she made $2.2 million last year as a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.
Comments
Rahm Emanuel and the others sure did cash in on their political contacts, didn't they?
Obama surrounds himself with scammers and tax cheats. Al Capone could have learned some lessons from the Obama bunch.
Posted by: Disillusioned Dem | April 9, 2009 9:52 AM
And how many millionaires did George Bush have surrounding him?
This post is an irrelevant cheap shot against our president...
http://www.political-buzz.com/
Posted by: matt | April 9, 2009 9:55 AM
matt, it's the hypocrisy stupid!
Posted by: UnfrozenCavegirlBlogger | April 9, 2009 10:05 AM
Matt!....why is it cheap and irrelevant? Because it's information you do not want to hear? Is the information accurate? You are so used to these types of stories being written about Republicans...it seems as if you do not know how to handle any news that does not paint the current president in a positive light. My guess is...that you are one of the many "suckers" that buy into the class warfare rhetoric that Democrats pawn off on us every election. As a far right wing conservative, if these people earned their money legally...then good for them! Why don't you use financially successful people as an example and learn something from them...Yes, Matt!...if they did it, maybe you can too! Believe in your self, (like Republicans do)..and don't rely on the government to feed and cloth you!!!
Posted by: Joe | April 9, 2009 10:19 AM
Let's try letting a group of homeless uneducated simpletons run the country and figure out the global economy. Good idea.
Posted by: gladys | April 9, 2009 10:58 AM
It's not difficult to become a millionaire these days, but it is a life's work. You're not going to do it watching TV and spending your afternoons at Wrigley Field or Sox Park. Stay in school, study hard, get good grades, make yourself attractive to an employer (which includes studying in a field that results in a marketable skill) so that you can get a good job, save your money, invest wisely, and one day, shazam! you're a millionaire. If any member of any administration, Republican or Democratic, did it legitimately, there's no reason to resent them; only to kick oneself for not following the same course.
Posted by: DaveB | April 9, 2009 11:14 AM
Joe, like most far right wing conservatives, believes that income is directly related to your value as a person. He believes that the more you maker, the better you are. In his mind an executive making $2 million dollars at a failing company is to be respected and valued far more than a public school teacher making $40,000. The CEO of GM must be better than the line worker, beciasue he makes more. If yoiu work hard all day, but aren't rich, Joe and will have no respect for you. If you can't get a job, like 8.5% of the population these days, Joe and his ilk will hate you a a lazy, useless leach on society. Joe and his ilk begrudge every bit of aid the poor get, yet will send the rich cash in truckloads with a smile. They will fight hard against benefit for children in need, and fight equally hard for benefits to major corporations
Money is their God. They worship it to the exclusion of all other things. They believe fully in class warfare.; They believe the rich are fully justified in crushing the middle and lower classes. They believe the rich are the only ones that matter, simply becaause of the fact that they have money.
Posted by: Dorothy Day | April 9, 2009 11:39 AM
Wonder if any will turn out to be new TAX CHEATS?
Posted by: Inky | April 9, 2009 11:57 AM
Interesting that this Tribune "study" falls on the heels of the Politico article last week on the same thing, which took a more critical and objective look. This "report" is basically a whitewash. How did Emanuel make $16 million in just a little over 2 years as an "investment banker." Nowhere does John McCormick note that from 2000-2002, Emanuel worked at Fannie Mae. If these folks legitmately earned their salaries, fine. If they did not profit from their public life, fine. But it's quite funny that many of these folks served in public office, only to cash in with millions in relatively short private careers. If this was a Republican administration, this Obune article would be thrashing and trashing them. Here, John McCormick sugarcoats the whole thing.Why am I not surprised??
Posted by: John D | April 9, 2009 12:07 PM
Forgot to mention economic advisor, Larry Summers (Clinton's former secretary of treasury), who received MILLIONS in fees from AIG.
Rahm Emanuel was also on the board of Freddie Mac. His home in Chicago is not listed in his or his wife's name, but their "charity foundation" so they won't have to pay taxes.
Obama and his crowd take money in from those that they rake over the coals. And more importantly, fail to protect the United States.
Posted by: Money moochers | April 9, 2009 12:10 PM
Dorothy Day:
Charity giving is Down, not up.
The rich GIVE to charities, schools.
Those that work and get rich deserve all they can get.
Those who don't work, don't deserve to take from those that do.
Perhaps, one needs to look at those who use their positions tto acquire wealth. It's not their work ethic, but their corruption level.
Stop picking on the everyday worker who seeks to improve their lives.
Get out and work, like the rest of us.
All of us have had poor grandparents, parents. We understood that to get ahead requires and education, hard work and perserverance.
Americans have succeed because there have been no limits. And with the Obama administration, there are limits and more to come.
There will always be an upper class and lower class. There is no utopia.
Posted by: Charles R | April 9, 2009 1:10 PM
Charles, why do you divide it between theose who wrork and get rich, and those who don't work only? What about those people that work very hard, yet remain poor? What about them? Are they unworthy of the basic necessities of life?
What about those who aren't working, through no fault of their own? Those unemployed in this recession? The disabled? It's not the simple Rich=good, hard worker; Poor=bad lazy bum, picture you paint. There are literally millions of americans out there today who would love a full time job but can't get one. Ignore them and your precious blessed rich will suffer too. We need an economy which benefits all levles, not just the highest.
Posted by: Dorothy Day | April 9, 2009 2:36 PM
Dorthy...most people are wealthy in this country because they have creativity, ingenuity, and a drive to reach the top! How about all of us teaching our youth these valuable characteristics? New wealth is created in this country every day! Don't be afraid of finding a way to get a little bit of it! If you become financially successful....it's up to you to decide what to do with your new found wealth...not the governments.
Posted by: Joe | April 9, 2009 2:41 PM
The good old boy network is alive and well. How about sharing the wealth boys and girls?.
Posted by: Paul | April 9, 2009 5:50 PM
"Dorthy...most people are wealthy in this country because they have creativity, ingenuity, and a drive to reach the top! How about all of us teaching our youth these valuable characteristics"
Joe, you are right as far as you go. What I hope I am hearing you say that we need more teachers and a better "local" education system, that is influenced by the State and Feds.
Now, the skills you mentioned are taught at home, hopefully, and teachers would have a better ablility to further these goals with smaller classes and mor one-on-one time. We need the Feds and States to put Education back at the top of the heap, and not one of the first programs to cut.
Short of this as a good start, that kid should know that all the "creativity, ingenuity, and a drive to reach the top" is nice wonderful touchy, feeley enthusiasm, but leaves out one BIG caveat:
The first big decision a baby makes is to pick the Right Parents
and be born in the Right Family!
Posted by: barkleyg | April 9, 2009 6:03 PM
Dorthy Day: I am familiar with a person who was offered education and stipen while attending classes 3 times, she was trained for 3 different jobs, computers, a healthcare job and another computer job through government programs and they even paid her mileage for her to go to school. To this day she has never worked a day in her life, oh I take that back she drew welfare and worked as a bartender for cash under the table. Some people are offered a way out of poverty and given opportunities but would rather take the easier softer way of having others provide for them. Once her kids were grown and welfare was over she hopped on the disability train.
Posted by: vla | April 9, 2009 6:59 PM
The first big decision a baby makes is to pick the Right Parents
and be born in the Right Family!
Posted by: barkleyg | April 9, 2009 6:03 PM
True, but still an awful lot comes from inside. I give you two examples: Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Both from broken homes, raised by single moms, yet both somehow made it to the top. Yes, it's nice to have been raised in a Donna Reed Show (showing my age here) perfect family, but it's not absolutely necessary.
Posted by: DaveB | April 9, 2009 9:38 PM
Posted by: vla | April 9, 2009 6:59 PM
So, a story about one person you knew and all 8.5% of the unemployed are lazy bums who don't want to work and don't deserve help.
Brilliant. Simply Brilliant. You can't possibly believe that can you?
Well, let's try this. I knew a rich guy once. He was lazy, stupid and never worked a full day in his life. Therefore all rich people are useless fools who don't deserve their money. Is that convincing to you?
Is that the way conservatives really think? Are that devoid of sense?
Posted by: Dorothy Day | April 9, 2009 10:28 PM
DaveB:
" Yes, it's nice to have been raised in a Donna Reed Show (showing my age here) perfect family, but it's not absolutely necessary"
Dave we agree 100%. For all the bootstrap, show initiative crap, YES, you can be an Obama or a Clinton, but this is more of a Possibility than a Probability.
What I am saying, is that if you "pick the right parent", your possibility has a Greater Probability (think Bush), than the possibilities of coming from a poor, common family. Which family would know more people who have the potential to help their child pull up their bootstrap, and have someone of influence know it.
BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER-- something to remember thru life when comparing people who succeed(?) or don't(?)!
Posted by: barkleyg | April 9, 2009 10:54 PM
At least I hope these people did not enrich themselves as the former Vice-President did by arranging no-bid contracts in Iraq for his former Haliburton Company from which he was receiving $200,000 per year. I also hope they did not have a secret meeting with "Big Oil" after which we saw the price of gas soar over $4!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Dan Blattenbauer | April 11, 2009 9:26 PM