In order to end the two-year-old inquiry by New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo into its pension business, the Carlyle Group has agreed to pay $20 million and make broad changes to its practices. Carlyle, one of the world's largest private equity firms, will no longer use intermediaries, known as placement agents, to secure investment business from public pension funds, and it will curb its campaign contributions to elected officials who oversee pension funds.

"This is a revolutionary agreement," Cuomo said Thursday. "I believe it totally changes the way people operate: It ends pay-to-play, it bans the selling of access, it puts the political power brokers out of business."

While former CEOs Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling decompose and pursue appeals respectively, Enron Corp. is sliding off the list of the top 100 campaign contributors of all-time. The 2008 numbers are tallied and Enron has slipped to number 98.

But here's what's pretty impressive: Enron has not given a nickel since the 2002 election cycle and has been in the top 100 campaign contributors since 1989, which is when the data started being collected. The company's influence peaked in the 2000 election where the company gave $1.8 million to Republicans and $0.7 million to Democrats.

Some other notables on the all-time list:

• That National Association of Realtors is number 3. Does that make you question the policies that led to the surge in home prices in the first part of the decade? It should.
  
• Citigroup (NYSE: C) recently received tens of billions of dollars in taxpayer help: and is the 15th biggest contributor of all-time. Just saying. . . In case you're wondering, Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) is number 40 and General Motors (NYSE: GM) is number 73.
• Amway -- whose business model is controversial -- is number 90.

I'm a little bit sad to see Enron fading out of the Hot 100. Maybe someone should resuscitate the name and send in some cash, just to keep it alive as a symbol of in the intersection of fraud and campaign finance.

Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) weighed in on the debate on private equity taxation this afternoon, according to the New York Times [registration required]. And earlier this afternoon, I had my own chance to debate this issue on CNBC with Wall Street Journal Assistant Managing Editor Alan Murray.

Clinton wants private equity firms to pay the same tax rate as working families, rather than the 15% they currently pay. At a rally in Keene, NH, she said, "Our tax code should be valuing hard work and helping middle-class and working families get ahead. It offends our values as a nation when an investment manager making $50 million can pay a lower tax rate on her earned income than a teacher making $50,000 pays on her income."

If she is elected president, Senator Clinton said, she will work to reform the tax code to ensure that carried interest "is recognized for what it is: ordinary income that should be taxed at ordinary income tax rates."

In my CNBC interview, I pointed out that private equity was being singled out because it was flaunting its wealth and its low tax payments -- in other words it was demonstrating that it did not understand how to play politics. Murray suggested that Congress ought to do "what's right" and challenged me to describe a principle for taxing private equity.

I think Crocs Inc. (NASDAQ: CROX) wants you to consider the deeper story behind George W. Bush being photographed wearing Crocs beach shoes. Does he think they're stylish? I don't suppose he gives much thought to style. Does he find them comfortable? If he was after strict comfort, a cross trainer from Nike Inc. (NYSE: NKE) would do a better job on pavement. Is he giving a friendly endorsement opportunity to his buddy Rick Sharp? That's probably the gist of it, but wait, there's more. Think just a little bit deeper to the true message that was sent by President Bush wearing those shoes.

The Crooks and Liars blog reports that President Bush's approval rating is at 29%, its lowest point ever. I don't put much stock in polls, I never did, and I never will. The reason being that no matter how unbiased a polling organization claims to be, poll numbers can be very easily manipulated. Even something as simple as the time of day that opinions are solicited can seriously change outcomes, but that's not what I want to bring to you.

The matter is simply this: If President Bush was as widely disliked as the left-wing, mainstream media would like you to believe he is, do you really think that Rick Sharp would have put those shoes on him? The wearing of Crocs by George W. Bush was as much an endorsement of that man by a hip and young company as it was an endorsement of those shoes. The leftist spin-meisters can tell you all they want about how the nation hates Bush, but the fact of the matter is this: A flourishing retailer doesn't generally present its product with the use of disliked individuals.

You didn't see Crocs on the feet of Jack Kevorkian as he left prison, did you?