Although numerous financial institutions  have already begun repaying money they were loaned by the federal government,  a new report has surfaced questioning the aid that was provided to a  small Hawaiian bank. Check out the following article on the developing  story via the Washington  Post.
Sen. Daniel K. Inouye's staff contacted  federal regulators last fall to ask about the bailout application of  an ailing Hawaii bank that he had helped to establish and where he has  invested the bulk of his personal wealth.
The bank, Central Pacific Financial,  was an unlikely candidate for a program designed by the Treasury Department  to bolster healthy banks. The firm's losses were depleting its capital  reserves. Its primary regulator, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.,  already had decided that it didn't meet the criteria for receiving a  favorable recommendation and had forwarded the application to a council  that reviewed marginal cases, according to agency documents.
 
Two weeks after the inquiry from Inouye's  office, Central Pacific announced that the Treasury would inject $135  million.
Many lawmakers have worked to help home-state  banks get federal money since the Treasury announced in October that  it would invest up to $250 billion in healthy financial firms. But the  Inouye inquiry stands apart because of the senator's ties to Central  Pacific. While at least 33 senators own shares in banks that got federal  aid, a review of financial disclosures and records obtained from regulatory  agencies shows no other instance of the office of a senator intervening  on behalf of a bank in which he owned shares.
Inouye (D-Hawaii) declined a request  for an interview but acknowledged in a statement that an aide had called  the FDIC to ask about Central Pacific's application. Inouye said he  was not attempting to influence the outcome. The statement did not address  Inouye's personal role in the inquiry, including whether he directed  the aide to make the call or knew at the time that it had been made.
 
Even if Inouye were directly involved,  it would not violate the rules the Senate sets for itself, experts said.