Crimes of Others Wrecked Enron, Ex-Chief Says
If anything, being friends with the Bush family, including the president, has made my situation more difficult, because it's probably a tougher decision not to indict me than to indict me. I take full responsibility for what happened at Enron. But saying that, I know in my mind that I did nothing criminal.
- Kenneth Lay
For years, Enron and Kenneth Lay were happy to parlay their relationship with the Bush family into the gains that accrued to the company. Now that the $&!% has hit the fan, Lay is bemoaning his fate, claiming that he is a victim of politics. Enron always was good at having it's cake and eating it, but this craven attempt to have it both ways is enough to make me ill.
There was a time when Kenneth L. Lay's close relationship with President Bush brought him power and influence in Washington that was virtually unparalleled among his colleagues in corporate America.
Now, Mr. Lay, the former chairman and chief executive of Enron, fears those ties may only serve to bring him criminal charges....
For more than two years, he has been the nation's silent pariah.
Now, on the eve of what may be the government's final decision on whether to charge him with a crime, Mr. Lay is talking for the first time about the company's collapse in 2001 and the scandal that enveloped it. In more than six hours of interviews with The New York Times, Mr. Lay remained steadfast in his expressions of innocence, even as he acknowledged, as head of the company, accountability for the debacle rests rightfully with him....
As Mr. Lay describes it, the Enron collapse was the outgrowth of the wrong-headed and criminal acts of the company's finance organization, and specifically its chief financial officer, Andrew S. Fastow. He says that both he and the board were misled by Mr. Fastow about the activities and true nature of a series of off-the-books partnerships that played the decisive role in the company's collapse.
Yet, Mr. Lay still argues that some of the company's most controversial decisions — including some that set up financial conflicts of interest for Mr. Fastow that could well be unprecedented in corporate America — were made for good reasons, and can be seen as mistakes only in hindsight....
The years since the Enron collapse have transformed Mr. Lay. The changes in his financial status are stunning. At the beginning of 2001, Mr. Lay said, he had a net worth in excess of $400 million — almost all of it in Enron stock. Today, he says his worth is below $20 million, and his total available cash not earmarked for legal fees or repayment of debt is less than $1 million.
Lay's attempts to defend himself are understandle, self-preservation being a basic human instinct and all. Nonetheless, the collapse of Enron did take place while Lay was CEO. As such, Lay ultimately bears responsibility. Does he honestly expect people to believe that he was unaware of the abuses and illegal/unethical/immoral behavior taking place under his nose? Lay, and Enron, did not achieve the "success" that it did by being a loosely-run organization. For Kenneth Lay to now claim ignorance of what was happening is typical of the self-serving arrogance that (and apparently continues to be) the hallmark of Enron upper management.
Most of the people I worked with at Enron really only want one thing: five uninterrupted minutes alone in a locked room with Kenneth Lay, and immunity for whatever takes place within. Hell, you could sell tickets and raise money for charity.
Personally, if I had been exposed as the monumental greedhead that Kenneth Lay is, I'd be so far from Houston you couldn't find me if you tried. Of course, I have a conscience and a pronounced aversion to being considered a pariah. It would seem Lay possesses neither.
