In what could be the first instance of a congressional committee citing reporting by TMZ (or maybe not!), Democrats on the House Financial Services committee, led by Rep. Barney Frank, have sent a letter to the CEO of Northern Trust bank, demanding that the bank re-pay taxpayers for a lavish spending spree -- featuring a Sheryl Crow concert and gifts of Tiffany's trinkets -- surrounding a recent golf tournament it sponsored for clients.

The splurge, which took $1.5 billion in bailout money last fall, was first reported earlier today by TMZ.com, the entertainment site.

TMZ offered a rundown of the trip's highlights:

- Wednesday, Northern Trust hosted a fancy dinner at the Ritz followed by a performance by the group Chicago.

- Thursday, Northern Trust rented a private hangar at the Santa Monica Airport for dinner, followed by a performance by Earth, Wind & Fire.

- Saturday, Northern Trust had the entire House of Blues in West Hollywood shut down for its private party. We got the menu -- guests dined on seared salmon and petite Angus filet. Dinner was followed by a performance by none other than Sheryl Crow.

There was also a fabulous cocktail party at the Loews. And how's this for a nice touch: Female guests at the Chicago concert all got trinkets from ... TIFFANY AND CO.

In the letter, Frank and his colleagues wrote that the spending "demonstrates extraordinary levels of irresponsibility and arrogance," and called on Northern Trust CEO Frederick Waddell to return the money to taxpayers.

In response to the TMZ report, a spokesman for the Chicago-based bank told the Chicago Tribune that the bank had committed to sponsor the golf tournament over a year before it got bailout money. He continued: "The reason Northern Trust sponsors the Open is it's an integral part of its marketing program. It's about client relationships and showing appreciation for clients."

The full letter from the Financial Services committee Democrats follows after the jump ...

Read more »

A nice moment from the hearings...

Barney Frank declares, re: bonuses:

This notion that you need some special incentive to do the right thing troubles me.

Then he asks: What is it you'd do differently if you didn't get a bonus?

It's a question Frank had been previewing all week. He throws it open to any of the CEOs.

Morgan Stanley's John Mack is the only one brave enough to hazard an answer. But all he brief historical digression about how the bonus system became established at investment banks.

But Mack acknowledges:

Without question, given the risks we take today, and the size of our bonuses ... all that has to be looked at again.

Frank's conclusion:

So if there were no bonuses, we'd still get our money's worth.

Sounds about right.

As we said, Barney Frank's committee has posted the CEOs' prepared statements on its website.

We're watching the hearings, which just began, but feel free to look through what the prepared remarks and send us anything good...

The CEOs of the eight banks that received the most bailout money are about to testify before the House Financial Services committee, starting any minute. But the committee has already posted the CEOs' prepared statements on its website.

Here are some highlights:

Bank of America's Ken Lewis will say that executive pay and bonuses are intended "to grow our business, enhance profitability and generate returns for investors." That includes "the investors that are the focus of this hearing: U.S. taxpayers."

Citigroup's Vikram Pandit will say that he "removed the people responsible for Citi's financial distress."

JP Morgan Chase's Jamie Dimon will advocate a new bank regulatory system, which would include a "systemic risk regulator."

On compensation, Dimon will say:

Our employees worked harder than ever and performed admirably for the company and for clients under enormously challenging conditions in 2008. I believe the compensation we paid them was appropriate.

We'll be blogging the hearings as they happen, so stay tuned...

Remember that saying about catching more flies with honey than with vinegar?

Yesterday we wrote that the House Financial Services committee, chaired by Rep. Barney Frank, had invited the CEOs of eight big banks -- including Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citi, and JP Morgan -- to testify. But, we noted, the committee wouldn't say whether any of the CEOs had accepted the invitation -- leaving the possibility that they might just say no. Any thought given to issuing subpoenas, we wondered.

It looks like that won't be necessary. Steve Adamske, a spokesman for the committee, confirmed to TPMmuckraker that all eight CEOs would indeed testify. Adamske said that subpoenas weren't necessary, since the political optics of not showing up would be too harmful for the banks. He said committee staff is working with the banks to schedule the CEOs' appearances.

So it looks like we'll get to hear straight from the horses' mouths about what the banks have been doing with the bailout funds. Sometimes asking nicely gets results.

Barney Frank, the chair of the House Financial Services committee, has invited the heads of the first eight banks that received bailout funds to testify at a hearing next Wednesday on the bailout, reports CNNMoney.com.

Those CEOs are:

Ken Lewis of Bank of America; Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase; Vikram Pandit of Citi; Ronald Logue of State Street; Robert Kelly of Bank of New York; John Stumpf of Wells Fargo; John Mack of Morgan Stanley; and Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs.

But notice that word "invite." It appears that the corporate titans are free to choose not to attend -- even though Frank is seeking crucial information about what their firms did with the hundreds of billions in taxpayer money we gave them.

Indeed, CNNMoney.com adds:

A press secretary declined to comment on whether any of the CEOs have accepted the invitation.

So it sounds like a real possibility that at least some of those CEOs might just go ahead and decline Frank's polite invitation.

We've contacted the committee's press office to ask whether subpoenaing the CEOs was considered, or might still be in the future. We'll let you know what we hear.