Not according to USA Today. It told readers that: "the key reason is that lawmakers are fearful that tough pay curbs might get in the way of the financial services industry helping foster an economic recovery." It's not clear how USA Today was able to make this determination. In the event that members of Congress actually were trying to benefit their Wall Street contributors it is unlikely that they would give the contributions as a reason for their action. As a practical matter, it it highly unlikely that anything Congress did by way of restricting compensation at the banks would have a significant impact on the recovery. Presumably members of Congress know this, so concern for the economy is not a plausible explanation for the failure to restrict executive compensation.
--Dean Baker