The Times | November 29, 2007 | 'Taxes funded Rudy Giuliani love trysts' | Zahid Hussain
Rudy Giuliani faced fresh questions about his judgment last night amid claims that trysts with his mistress while he was New York’s Mayor cost taxpayers thousands of dollars.
The Republican presidential frontrunner’s record as New York mayor is already facing closer scrutiny after the indictment this month of his close friend Bernard Kerik, whom Mr Giuliani appointed as the city’s police chief. ...
..
Politico reports 11 Long Island trips indicated by credit card receipts. It is not possible to say how many of those visits included official business, but eight of them were not noted on Mr Giuliani’s mayoral schedule. The first trip to Southampton, Long Island, where Ms Nathan had a flat, appear in travel documents running from August 31 to September 1, 1999. Four police officers spent the night in a nearby motel, billing the city $1,016.20. (£485) Mr Giuliani’s schedule listed no events in Long Island that day. ...
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Giuliani billed obscure agencies for trips
Giuliani billed obscure agencies for trips | By: Ben Smith | Nov 28, 2007 02:47 PM EST
As New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons, according to previously undisclosed government records. ...
As New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani billed obscure city agencies for tens of thousands of dollars in security expenses amassed during the time when he was beginning an extramarital relationship with future wife Judith Nathan in the Hamptons, according to previously undisclosed government records. ...
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Corporations that exploit market conditions [price gouging, preditory pricing] to abuse consumers should face huge fines
Policing Corporate Pricing Policies | By Stephen Crockett - Nov 27th, 2007 at 9:06 am EST
Among the top priorities of the current and next Congressional sessions should be new laws to regulate corporate pricing policies. In particular, our nation needs strict new federal laws against price-gouging and predatory pricing.
We all know about price-gouging. We see it everyday when buying gasoline, diesel fuel, home heating oil, prescription drugs and many other products or services. Price-gouging is the result of an “all the market will bare” corporate mentality, as opposed to the more traditional “reasonable rate of return on investment” corporate mentality which prevailed in most corporate boardrooms before the 1980’s Reagan Revolution changed government policies and societal attitudes. This is the truly darkside of the Reagan Era. We are still suffering from the negative impacts as consumers and citizens.
Much of what is wrong with America developed out of the Reagan Era “greed is good doctrine.” It thoroughly corrupted the Republican Party and made serious inroads among elements of the Democratic opposition. It corrupted government policy and negatively influenced many average American citizens.
I believe we should return to the traditional Christian outlook that excessive greed is a serious sin. This is not just a Christian doctrine. Almost every religion and moral code developed around the world agrees that greed is usually an evil thing.
Excessive greed is what price-gouging is all about if you apply even a minimum of common sense to examining the issue. Greed is always present. It is why we have armed robberies, burglaries, piracy and scores of other criminal activities. Economic activities judged by society to be detrimental to most consumers, workers or other businesses are usually outlawed or at least heavily regulated by government. It is clear that price-gouging falls into this category of detrimental economic activity. It should be banned.
Corporations that exploit market conditions to abuse consumers should face huge fines. The fines should be multiples of all profits derived from the price-gouging. Zero profits should be retained by those corporations from the price-gouging activities. There is a legal pattern in much of American government regulation of corporate misbehavior that actually permits the corporations involved to retain large portions of illegally obtained profits. This must be stopped. ...
Among the top priorities of the current and next Congressional sessions should be new laws to regulate corporate pricing policies. In particular, our nation needs strict new federal laws against price-gouging and predatory pricing.
We all know about price-gouging. We see it everyday when buying gasoline, diesel fuel, home heating oil, prescription drugs and many other products or services. Price-gouging is the result of an “all the market will bare” corporate mentality, as opposed to the more traditional “reasonable rate of return on investment” corporate mentality which prevailed in most corporate boardrooms before the 1980’s Reagan Revolution changed government policies and societal attitudes. This is the truly darkside of the Reagan Era. We are still suffering from the negative impacts as consumers and citizens.
Much of what is wrong with America developed out of the Reagan Era “greed is good doctrine.” It thoroughly corrupted the Republican Party and made serious inroads among elements of the Democratic opposition. It corrupted government policy and negatively influenced many average American citizens.
I believe we should return to the traditional Christian outlook that excessive greed is a serious sin. This is not just a Christian doctrine. Almost every religion and moral code developed around the world agrees that greed is usually an evil thing.
Excessive greed is what price-gouging is all about if you apply even a minimum of common sense to examining the issue. Greed is always present. It is why we have armed robberies, burglaries, piracy and scores of other criminal activities. Economic activities judged by society to be detrimental to most consumers, workers or other businesses are usually outlawed or at least heavily regulated by government. It is clear that price-gouging falls into this category of detrimental economic activity. It should be banned.
Corporations that exploit market conditions to abuse consumers should face huge fines. The fines should be multiples of all profits derived from the price-gouging. Zero profits should be retained by those corporations from the price-gouging activities. There is a legal pattern in much of American government regulation of corporate misbehavior that actually permits the corporations involved to retain large portions of illegally obtained profits. This must be stopped. ...
Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott announced retirement ... before new two-year ban on lobbying
Barbour’s Proposed Special Election To Replace Lott May Violate Election Law
Earlier today, Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-MS) announced that he “will be retiring from the Senate by the end of the year.” Soon after the announcement, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) put out a statement declaring that “pursuant to Mississippi law,” he would “call a Special Election for United States Senator to be held on November 4, 2008″: ...
...
If Lott does indeed retire by the end of 2007, as he says he wishes to do, Barbour’s proposed timing for the election might run afoul of state election law. According to the Mississippi secretary of state’s office, Barbour would have to hold the election before Nov. 2008:
While Lott sneaks in under the wire for the extended ban on lobbying Congress by retiring this year, the secretary of state’s office said Monday that state law appears to require a special election within 90 days if he does so.
Conversely, if Lott were to wait and retire in 2008, the law allows for the special election to be held the same day as the general. Of course, he would then be subject to the new two-year ban on lobbying his former colleagues, instead of the current one-year ban. ...
Earlier today, Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-MS) announced that he “will be retiring from the Senate by the end of the year.” Soon after the announcement, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R) put out a statement declaring that “pursuant to Mississippi law,” he would “call a Special Election for United States Senator to be held on November 4, 2008″: ...
...
If Lott does indeed retire by the end of 2007, as he says he wishes to do, Barbour’s proposed timing for the election might run afoul of state election law. According to the Mississippi secretary of state’s office, Barbour would have to hold the election before Nov. 2008:
While Lott sneaks in under the wire for the extended ban on lobbying Congress by retiring this year, the secretary of state’s office said Monday that state law appears to require a special election within 90 days if he does so.
Conversely, if Lott were to wait and retire in 2008, the law allows for the special election to be held the same day as the general. Of course, he would then be subject to the new two-year ban on lobbying his former colleagues, instead of the current one-year ban. ...
Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert resigns ... [before next year's 2 year waiting period for lobbying?]
November 26, 2007 | Hastert formally resigns from Congress, setting special election in motion | Posted by Rick Pearson at 5:05 p.m.
Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert is formally resigning from Congress today.
Hastert said he did so on the advice of attorneys with the aim that a special primary election to replace him could be held on Feb. 5---the same day as the state's regular primary election, which will decide nominees for Hastert's long-term replacement as well.
...
Hastert, the longest serving GOP House speaker, said he had not explored job opportunities because of the potential for conflicts of interest while still a member of Congress.
...................................
Comments
More double talk from Hastert. He says he has no plans to lobby, but didn't he earlier say he would become a "consultant"? Are we really to believe this isn't a prelude to lobbying?
And isn't it also true that the current waiting period for lobbying after serving in Congress is one year, but that only after Jan. 1st does it go to 2 years?
Are we really expected to believe this change in the law has nothing to do with Hastert rushing out before the end of the year? ...
Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert is formally resigning from Congress today.
Hastert said he did so on the advice of attorneys with the aim that a special primary election to replace him could be held on Feb. 5---the same day as the state's regular primary election, which will decide nominees for Hastert's long-term replacement as well.
...
Hastert, the longest serving GOP House speaker, said he had not explored job opportunities because of the potential for conflicts of interest while still a member of Congress.
...................................
Comments
More double talk from Hastert. He says he has no plans to lobby, but didn't he earlier say he would become a "consultant"? Are we really to believe this isn't a prelude to lobbying?
And isn't it also true that the current waiting period for lobbying after serving in Congress is one year, but that only after Jan. 1st does it go to 2 years?
Are we really expected to believe this change in the law has nothing to do with Hastert rushing out before the end of the year? ...
Monday, November 26, 2007
Bush's talent for cronyism: foxes guarding the henhouse
Bush's talent for cronyism: foxes guarding the henhouse | Incompetent at best, dangerous at worst
James Baker: Iraq Debt Envoy ... BUSH appoints James Baker as Iraq debt envoy. Baker is senior counselor to the Carlyle Group, a global investment company that has done business with the Saudi royal family. He is also a partner in Baker Botts, a Houston law firm whose client list includes Halliburton and the Saudi Royal family. Mr. Baker's law firm will most likely represent the Saudi Royals in the suit against them filed by the 9-11 victims families ....
John Snow: Secretary of Treasury ... Under Snow's watch, despite raking in close to a billion dollars in pretax profits since 1998, CSX paid no federal income taxes in three of the past four years – magically making all of its profits "pretax." What's more, thanks to a combination of accounting gimmicks and tax shelters, the company was even able to score a hefty $164 million in tax rebates during that time. Tax rebates on taxes that CSX NEVER PAID....
Mike Leavitt: former EPA administrator current Secretary of Health and Human Services ... As Utah governor he allowed US Magnesium to emit over 42 million tons of Chlorine per year-nine times the Chlorine emissions from all other states. ... Kennecott, Utah has one of the world's largest ground water contamination problems as a result of its mining operations and Leavitt's refuals to do anything about it ... Leavitt struck a back room deal with the bush administration to open six million acres of wild lands in Utah to mining, clearcutting, oil and gas drilling, and bulldozing. ...
Linda Fisher: Deputy administrator at EPA ... Former Mocnsanto V.P. Second in ranking only to EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman. Her appointment was opposed by critics of genetically modified (GM) foods who raised concerns about industry's ability to influence Fisher. ...
Gale A. Norton: Secretary of the Interior (retired) ... Appointed Gale A. Norton, former mining industry lobbyist and current secretary of the interior: She is a proponent of "self-audit" laws, which allow industries to decide on their own whether or not they comply with environmental regulations. ...
...
ETC. ETC
...
Rear Admiral Cristina Beato: Acting Assistant Secretary for Health, Department of Health and Human Services ...(but the curriculum was developed while Beato was still a medical student). ... (but the clinic existed before she was hired, and there was even another medical director before her)
...
Stan Suboleski: Mine Safety and Health Review Commission ... Suboleski is an executive with the A.C. Massey Coal Company which, according to the United Mineworkers, has one of the worst safety records in the industry. ...
James Baker: Iraq Debt Envoy ... BUSH appoints James Baker as Iraq debt envoy. Baker is senior counselor to the Carlyle Group, a global investment company that has done business with the Saudi royal family. He is also a partner in Baker Botts, a Houston law firm whose client list includes Halliburton and the Saudi Royal family. Mr. Baker's law firm will most likely represent the Saudi Royals in the suit against them filed by the 9-11 victims families ....
John Snow: Secretary of Treasury ... Under Snow's watch, despite raking in close to a billion dollars in pretax profits since 1998, CSX paid no federal income taxes in three of the past four years – magically making all of its profits "pretax." What's more, thanks to a combination of accounting gimmicks and tax shelters, the company was even able to score a hefty $164 million in tax rebates during that time. Tax rebates on taxes that CSX NEVER PAID....
Mike Leavitt: former EPA administrator current Secretary of Health and Human Services ... As Utah governor he allowed US Magnesium to emit over 42 million tons of Chlorine per year-nine times the Chlorine emissions from all other states. ... Kennecott, Utah has one of the world's largest ground water contamination problems as a result of its mining operations and Leavitt's refuals to do anything about it ... Leavitt struck a back room deal with the bush administration to open six million acres of wild lands in Utah to mining, clearcutting, oil and gas drilling, and bulldozing. ...
Linda Fisher: Deputy administrator at EPA ... Former Mocnsanto V.P. Second in ranking only to EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman. Her appointment was opposed by critics of genetically modified (GM) foods who raised concerns about industry's ability to influence Fisher. ...
Gale A. Norton: Secretary of the Interior (retired) ... Appointed Gale A. Norton, former mining industry lobbyist and current secretary of the interior: She is a proponent of "self-audit" laws, which allow industries to decide on their own whether or not they comply with environmental regulations. ...
...
ETC. ETC
...
Rear Admiral Cristina Beato: Acting Assistant Secretary for Health, Department of Health and Human Services ...(but the curriculum was developed while Beato was still a medical student). ... (but the clinic existed before she was hired, and there was even another medical director before her)
...
Stan Suboleski: Mine Safety and Health Review Commission ... Suboleski is an executive with the A.C. Massey Coal Company which, according to the United Mineworkers, has one of the worst safety records in the industry. ...
Executives are lavishly rewarded if the companies they run seem successful: $48M, $25M for CEOs ... then collapse ...
Banks Gone Wild | By PAUL KRUGMAN | Published: November 23, 2007
“What were they smoking?” asks the cover of the current issue of Fortune magazine. Underneath the headline are photos of recently deposed Wall Street titans, captioned with the staggering sums they managed to lose.
The answer, of course, is that they were high on the usual drug — greed. And they were encouraged to make socially destructive decisions by a system of executive compensation that should have been reformed after the Enron and WorldCom scandals, but wasn’t.
...
But even as the danger signs multiplied, Wall Street piled into bonds backed by dubious home mortgages. Most of the bad investments now shaking the financial world seem to have been made in the final frenzy of the housing bubble, or even after the bubble began to deflate.
In fact, according to Fortune, Merrill Lynch made its biggest purchases of bad debt in the first half of this year — after the subprime crisis had already become public knowledge.
...
Around 25 years ago, American business — and the American political system — bought into the idea that greed is good. Executives are lavishly rewarded if the companies they run seem successful: last year the chief executives of Merrill and Citigroup were paid $48 million and $25.6 million, respectively.
But if the success turns out to have been an illusion — well, they still get to keep the money. Heads they win, tails we lose.
Not only is this grossly unfair, it encourages bad risk-taking, and sometimes fraud. If an executive can create the appearance of success, even for a couple of years, he will walk away immensely wealthy. Meanwhile, the subsequent revelation that appearances were deceiving is someone else’s problem.
If all this sounds familiar, it should. The huge rewards executives receive if they can fake success are what led to the great corporate scandals of a few years back. ...
“What were they smoking?” asks the cover of the current issue of Fortune magazine. Underneath the headline are photos of recently deposed Wall Street titans, captioned with the staggering sums they managed to lose.
The answer, of course, is that they were high on the usual drug — greed. And they were encouraged to make socially destructive decisions by a system of executive compensation that should have been reformed after the Enron and WorldCom scandals, but wasn’t.
...
But even as the danger signs multiplied, Wall Street piled into bonds backed by dubious home mortgages. Most of the bad investments now shaking the financial world seem to have been made in the final frenzy of the housing bubble, or even after the bubble began to deflate.
In fact, according to Fortune, Merrill Lynch made its biggest purchases of bad debt in the first half of this year — after the subprime crisis had already become public knowledge.
...
Around 25 years ago, American business — and the American political system — bought into the idea that greed is good. Executives are lavishly rewarded if the companies they run seem successful: last year the chief executives of Merrill and Citigroup were paid $48 million and $25.6 million, respectively.
But if the success turns out to have been an illusion — well, they still get to keep the money. Heads they win, tails we lose.
Not only is this grossly unfair, it encourages bad risk-taking, and sometimes fraud. If an executive can create the appearance of success, even for a couple of years, he will walk away immensely wealthy. Meanwhile, the subsequent revelation that appearances were deceiving is someone else’s problem.
If all this sounds familiar, it should. The huge rewards executives receive if they can fake success are what led to the great corporate scandals of a few years back. ...
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
The predator’s mission is to home in on the vulnerable. ... one unaffordable loan following another.
A Swarm of Swindlers | By BOB HERBERT | Published: November 20, 2007
Like vultures, the mortgage lenders began circling the single-family house with the tiny front lawn on Merrill Avenue.
They knew that the woman who owned the house was old and sick and that her two aging daughters were struggling with illness and poverty as well. That was all to the good as far as the lenders were concerned. The predator’s mission is to home in on the vulnerable.
“The people that wanted to put through the loan called me about a hundred times,” said Rosa Dailey, who is 65 and going blind and needs an oxygen tank at times to help her breathe. “I kept telling them no, because I didn’t think we could afford it. But they kept saying how it was to our advantage. So I finally said: ‘All right, let’s see what we can do.’ ”
That was the beginning of a tragic spiral, with one unaffordable loan following another. As Ms. Dailey put it: “I feel like they led me down a dark alley.” ...
Like vultures, the mortgage lenders began circling the single-family house with the tiny front lawn on Merrill Avenue.
They knew that the woman who owned the house was old and sick and that her two aging daughters were struggling with illness and poverty as well. That was all to the good as far as the lenders were concerned. The predator’s mission is to home in on the vulnerable.
“The people that wanted to put through the loan called me about a hundred times,” said Rosa Dailey, who is 65 and going blind and needs an oxygen tank at times to help her breathe. “I kept telling them no, because I didn’t think we could afford it. But they kept saying how it was to our advantage. So I finally said: ‘All right, let’s see what we can do.’ ”
That was the beginning of a tragic spiral, with one unaffordable loan following another. As Ms. Dailey put it: “I feel like they led me down a dark alley.” ...
as Edwards says, the fact that "powerful interests, particularly corporate interests, have literally taken over this government."
November 20, 2007 9:35 AM | "Corporate Interests Have Literally Taken Over This Government"
Some folks have asked me why I have written so much about John Edwards in the past few months. The answer can be seen in this short clip. ... or writing a book that's actually called Hostile Takeover: How Big Money & Corruption Conquered Our Government - And How We Take It Back.
...
John Edwards, as shown by this clip, is speaking out on what I believe is the fundamental issue of our time - an issue that my book shows is at the core of every other issue, whether it is Iraq, wages, health care, retirement security, trade, immigration, global warming, you name it. That issue is what my book is all about - the hostile takeover of our government, or, as Edwards says, the fact that "powerful interests, particularly corporate interests, have literally taken over this government." And Edwards hasn't just been talking about it - he has made a crusade against this, the issue of our day, the centerpiece of his campaign. He has, in short, made it the very reason he is running (which also fits with his impressive career as a plaintiffs attorney going after corporate abusers). ...
Some folks have asked me why I have written so much about John Edwards in the past few months. The answer can be seen in this short clip. ... or writing a book that's actually called Hostile Takeover: How Big Money & Corruption Conquered Our Government - And How We Take It Back.
...
John Edwards, as shown by this clip, is speaking out on what I believe is the fundamental issue of our time - an issue that my book shows is at the core of every other issue, whether it is Iraq, wages, health care, retirement security, trade, immigration, global warming, you name it. That issue is what my book is all about - the hostile takeover of our government, or, as Edwards says, the fact that "powerful interests, particularly corporate interests, have literally taken over this government." And Edwards hasn't just been talking about it - he has made a crusade against this, the issue of our day, the centerpiece of his campaign. He has, in short, made it the very reason he is running (which also fits with his impressive career as a plaintiffs attorney going after corporate abusers). ...
Senators who protected Big Pharma received millions of dollars from drug companies
Senators who protected Big Pharma received millions of dollars from drug companies | Monday, November 19, 2007 by: David Gutierrez | (NewsTarget)
Senators who received substantial donations from pharmaceutical companies were instrumental in making a new drug bill more industry-friendly, according to studies by nonprofit groups and remarks by some of the senators themselves
...
While the institute's recommendation to allow the FDA to monitor the safety of products after approval was included in the final bill, it was significantly weakened at the instigation of Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H.. Gregg has received $168,500 from the pharmaceutical industry since 2001.
Other recommendations fared even less well. A proposal to allow the importation of less expensive drugs from other countries was defeated 49-40. According to research by the Center for Responsive Politics and PoliticalMoneyLine, these 49 senators (less than 50 percent of the Senate) have received nearly 75 percent of the donations made by the drug industry since 2001, a total of $5 million.
In addition, a proposal to ban advertising of high-risk drugs for two years and another to curb conflicts of interest in the drug approval process were defeated by Senators who have received substantial industry contributions. ...
Senators who received substantial donations from pharmaceutical companies were instrumental in making a new drug bill more industry-friendly, according to studies by nonprofit groups and remarks by some of the senators themselves
...
While the institute's recommendation to allow the FDA to monitor the safety of products after approval was included in the final bill, it was significantly weakened at the instigation of Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H.. Gregg has received $168,500 from the pharmaceutical industry since 2001.
Other recommendations fared even less well. A proposal to allow the importation of less expensive drugs from other countries was defeated 49-40. According to research by the Center for Responsive Politics and PoliticalMoneyLine, these 49 senators (less than 50 percent of the Senate) have received nearly 75 percent of the donations made by the drug industry since 2001, a total of $5 million.
In addition, a proposal to ban advertising of high-risk drugs for two years and another to curb conflicts of interest in the drug approval process were defeated by Senators who have received substantial industry contributions. ...
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
They were told depleted uranium was not hazardous ... now workers and residents have cancer ... use of such weapons may be a war crime
November 18, 2007 by The Observer (UK) | ‘Safe’ Uranium That Left a Town Contaminated | by David Rose in Colonie, New York
[NOTE: THOUSANDS OF TONS were used in tank shells in IRAQ ... ed.]
They were told depleted uranium was not hazardous. Now, 23 years after a US arms plant closed, workers and residents have cancer - and experts say their suffering shows the use of such weapons may be a war crime.
...
The US federal government and the firm that ran the factory, National Lead (NL) Industries, have been assuring former workers and residents around the 18-acre site for decades that, although it is true that the plant used to produce unacceptable levels of radioactive pollution, it was not a serious health hazard.
Now, in a development with potentially devastating implications not only for Colonie but also for the future use of some of the West’s most powerful weapon systems, that claim is being challenged. In a paper to be published in the next issue of the scientific journal Science of the Total Environment, a team led by Professor Randall Parrish of Leicester University reports the results of a three-year study of Colonie, funded by Britain’s Ministry of Defense.
Parrish’s team has found that DU contamination, which remains radioactive for millions of years, is in effect impossible to eradicate, not only from the environment but also from the bodies of humans. Twenty-three years after production ceased they tested the urine of five former workers. All are still contaminated with DU. So were 20 per cent of people tested who had spent at least 10 years living near the factory when it was still working, including Ciarfello.
The small sample size precludes the drawing of statistical conclusions, the journal paper says. But to find DU at all after so long a period is ’significant, since no previous study has documented evidence of DU exposure more than 20 years prior… [this] indicates that the body burden of uranium must still be significant, whether retained in lungs, lymphatic system, kidneys or bone’. The team is now testing more individuals. ...
...
TV footage shot in Baghdad in 2003 shows children playing in the remains of tanks coated with thick, black DU oxide, while there have long been claims that the DU shells that destroyed Saddam Hussein’s tanks in the 1991 Gulf war were responsible for high rates of cancer in places such as Basra. ...
[NOTE: THOUSANDS OF TONS were used in tank shells in IRAQ ... ed.]
They were told depleted uranium was not hazardous. Now, 23 years after a US arms plant closed, workers and residents have cancer - and experts say their suffering shows the use of such weapons may be a war crime.
...
The US federal government and the firm that ran the factory, National Lead (NL) Industries, have been assuring former workers and residents around the 18-acre site for decades that, although it is true that the plant used to produce unacceptable levels of radioactive pollution, it was not a serious health hazard.
Now, in a development with potentially devastating implications not only for Colonie but also for the future use of some of the West’s most powerful weapon systems, that claim is being challenged. In a paper to be published in the next issue of the scientific journal Science of the Total Environment, a team led by Professor Randall Parrish of Leicester University reports the results of a three-year study of Colonie, funded by Britain’s Ministry of Defense.
Parrish’s team has found that DU contamination, which remains radioactive for millions of years, is in effect impossible to eradicate, not only from the environment but also from the bodies of humans. Twenty-three years after production ceased they tested the urine of five former workers. All are still contaminated with DU. So were 20 per cent of people tested who had spent at least 10 years living near the factory when it was still working, including Ciarfello.
The small sample size precludes the drawing of statistical conclusions, the journal paper says. But to find DU at all after so long a period is ’significant, since no previous study has documented evidence of DU exposure more than 20 years prior… [this] indicates that the body burden of uranium must still be significant, whether retained in lungs, lymphatic system, kidneys or bone’. The team is now testing more individuals. ...
...
TV footage shot in Baghdad in 2003 shows children playing in the remains of tanks coated with thick, black DU oxide, while there have long been claims that the DU shells that destroyed Saddam Hussein’s tanks in the 1991 Gulf war were responsible for high rates of cancer in places such as Basra. ...
Monday, November 19, 2007
allegations by current and former officials in Krongard's office that the inspector general thwarted probes into waste, fraud and abuse in Iraq
State Dept official asks to cancel Blackwater hearing | Sat Nov 17, 2007 7:35pm EST
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The lawyer for State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard asked on Saturday that he not be called to testify before Congress on discrepancies between his statements and those of his brother over the brother's ties to the Blackwater security firm.
...
The two brothers had differing recollections about whether Alvin "Buzzy" Krongard told Howard Krongard he was taking an advisory board position with Blackwater, which protects U.S. diplomats and other State Department officials in Iraq. Howard recalled Alvin stating he was not taking the position, and Alvin recalled saying he was taking it, the lawyer wrote.
"Alvin does not claim to have ever made any effort to inform Howard of the Blackwater position despite its obvious relevance to Howard's oversight responsibilities," Van Gelder wrote. The letter asked Waxman not to hold the hearing.
Waxman's committee is examining allegations by current and former officials in Krongard's office that the inspector general thwarted probes into waste, fraud and abuse in Iraq, including alleged arms smuggling by Blackwater.
Waxman decided to call Howard and Alvin Krongard to the same hearing after they separately gave the committee conflicting accounts about Buzzy's ties with Blackwater. ...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The lawyer for State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard asked on Saturday that he not be called to testify before Congress on discrepancies between his statements and those of his brother over the brother's ties to the Blackwater security firm.
...
The two brothers had differing recollections about whether Alvin "Buzzy" Krongard told Howard Krongard he was taking an advisory board position with Blackwater, which protects U.S. diplomats and other State Department officials in Iraq. Howard recalled Alvin stating he was not taking the position, and Alvin recalled saying he was taking it, the lawyer wrote.
"Alvin does not claim to have ever made any effort to inform Howard of the Blackwater position despite its obvious relevance to Howard's oversight responsibilities," Van Gelder wrote. The letter asked Waxman not to hold the hearing.
Waxman's committee is examining allegations by current and former officials in Krongard's office that the inspector general thwarted probes into waste, fraud and abuse in Iraq, including alleged arms smuggling by Blackwater.
Waxman decided to call Howard and Alvin Krongard to the same hearing after they separately gave the committee conflicting accounts about Buzzy's ties with Blackwater. ...
massive cash contributions by America’s power companies and [Bush] political arm-twisting in Washington has rarely been put into such sharp relief
November 16, 2007 by The Independent/UK | US Power Company Linked to Bush Is Named in Database As a Top Polluter | by Leonard Doyle
An American power company with close financial links to President George Bush has been named as one of the world’s top producers of global warming pollution.
The first-ever worldwide database of such pollution also reveals the rapid growth in global-warming emissions by power plants in China, South Africa and India. Power plants already produce 40 per cent of US greenhouse gas and 25 per cent of the world’s.
But it is the enormous carbon footprint of Southern Company - among the largest financiers of Republican Party politicians - which has raised eyebrows. Southern’s employees handed George Bush $217,047 to help him get elected, and they and the company have contributed an extraordinary $6.2m to Republican campaigns since 1990.
A single Southern Company plant in Juliette, Georgia already emits more carbon dioxide annually that Brazil’s entire power sector. The company is in the top two of America’s dirtiest utility polluters and sixth worst in the world. ...
...
The link between massive cash contributions by America’s power companies and political arm-twisting in Washington has rarely been put into such sharp relief. Environmentalists have long suspected that President Bush’s dogged refusal to sign up to international agreements to control global warming was linked to campaign contributions.
Yesterday’s report has finally identified the impact these power companies are having on global warming. Southern, which earned $14.4bn in revenues in 2006, is using its influence to block the introduction of wind, solar, biomass and other renewable energy sources on the grounds that it would eat into its profits.
Haley Barbour, one of the main lobbyists for Southern Co when President Bush took office, played a crucial role in persuading him to back away from his original campaign promise to reduce CO2 emissions when he first ran for president in 2000. Mr Barbour is a former chairman of the Republican Party, and was reelected governor of Mississippi last week.
According to FrankO’Donnell of Clean Air Watch, after Mr Bush became president, “he was got at by Haley Barbour, who said, ‘Hey, Mr President we didn’t elect you to have high energy costs’”. ...
An American power company with close financial links to President George Bush has been named as one of the world’s top producers of global warming pollution.
The first-ever worldwide database of such pollution also reveals the rapid growth in global-warming emissions by power plants in China, South Africa and India. Power plants already produce 40 per cent of US greenhouse gas and 25 per cent of the world’s.
But it is the enormous carbon footprint of Southern Company - among the largest financiers of Republican Party politicians - which has raised eyebrows. Southern’s employees handed George Bush $217,047 to help him get elected, and they and the company have contributed an extraordinary $6.2m to Republican campaigns since 1990.
A single Southern Company plant in Juliette, Georgia already emits more carbon dioxide annually that Brazil’s entire power sector. The company is in the top two of America’s dirtiest utility polluters and sixth worst in the world. ...
...
The link between massive cash contributions by America’s power companies and political arm-twisting in Washington has rarely been put into such sharp relief. Environmentalists have long suspected that President Bush’s dogged refusal to sign up to international agreements to control global warming was linked to campaign contributions.
Yesterday’s report has finally identified the impact these power companies are having on global warming. Southern, which earned $14.4bn in revenues in 2006, is using its influence to block the introduction of wind, solar, biomass and other renewable energy sources on the grounds that it would eat into its profits.
Haley Barbour, one of the main lobbyists for Southern Co when President Bush took office, played a crucial role in persuading him to back away from his original campaign promise to reduce CO2 emissions when he first ran for president in 2000. Mr Barbour is a former chairman of the Republican Party, and was reelected governor of Mississippi last week.
According to FrankO’Donnell of Clean Air Watch, after Mr Bush became president, “he was got at by Haley Barbour, who said, ‘Hey, Mr President we didn’t elect you to have high energy costs’”. ...
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Justice Department says it is necessary to make reporting mandatory because "few companies have actually responded" to voluntary disclosure rules.
Federal Contractors Could Be Forced to Self-Report Crimes | By Dana Hedgpeth | Washington Post Staff Writer | Thursday, November 15, 2007; Page D02
The Justice Department has proposed tough new regulations for those who do business with the government, a reflection of the growing number of fraud, bribery and waste cases arising from the multibillion-dollar federal procurement process, say industry experts and regulators.
The new rules would require federal contractors to report themselves if any of their employees -- or subcontractors -- violate a criminal law related to a contract worth more than $5 million while that work is being done. If a contractor is caught not reporting its violations, it could be suspended or barred from doing business with the government for up to three years.
...
Currently, contractors can voluntarily report themselves. But the Justice Department says it is necessary to make reporting mandatory because "few companies have actually responded" to voluntary disclosure rules.
Having companies turn themselves in "hasn't worked" Spivack said, "so now they're saying, 'We're going to force you to turn yourself in, and if you don't and we find out later, we're going to keep you from doing business with the federal government.' That's giving the government the gun and the bullets and asking them not to shoot you." ...
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
So now the critical resource of oil is driven by speculation at ever higher abstract electronic levels of futures trading.
Saturday, November 10, 2007 by CommonDreams.org | The Price of Oil | by Ralph Nader
Question of the day- who and what is determining the price of oil and your gasoline and home heating bills? Don’t ask Uncle Sam, because George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are running a regime marinated in oil that does not issue reports which explain the real determinants of petroleum pricing beyond the conventional supply-demand curves.
...
Today, a third party has moved to the table-the New York Mercantile Exchange, a similar operates in London and a new one in Dubai. There, boisterous traders buy and sell futures contracts on the delivery of oil. But as Ben Mezrich, the author of the new book Rigged said recently, the dollar amounts of these futures contracts are far far larger than the actual oil deliveries they represent as they turn over and over at the Mercantile Exchange.
So now the critical resource of oil is driven by speculation at ever higher abstract electronic levels of futures trading. Increasingly, the distance becomes greater and greater between this abstract trading (fueled by rumors of storms in the Gulf of Mexico, or some possible political turmoil in a region of the world, or some other frightful excuse for bidding up) and the physical supply and demand for oil and its refined products.
These oil gamblers in New York and London try to justify their frenetic daily bidding by saying that these futures markets provide liquidity, and a clear price for oil. Alright, but who benefits when, how and where? ...
...
In recent days, the price of crude oil escalated to over $90 a barrel, fluctuating up to a high of $96 a barrel. Yet the average price of gasoline in the United States-around $3.00 per gallon-is about what it was earlier this year when the price of crude oil was around $60 a barrel. Why the disconnect?
“It’s a big gambling hall,” The Washington Post quotes Fadel Gheit, an oil analyst at Oppenheimer. “This time it’s just speculation,” Peter C. Fusaro, chairman of Global Change Associates, told the Post, adding, “There’s a large bet out there that prices will continue to trend higher. But it’s detached from fundamentals because there’s no shortage of oil.” ...
...
So long as the price of crude oil is set by speculators on trading floors, so long as the oil-indentured politicians are not challenged by new candidates standing tall for people and environments, so long as we do not protest for change and press ourselves to prevent wasteful habits and uses, get ready for higher oil prices.
Question of the day- who and what is determining the price of oil and your gasoline and home heating bills? Don’t ask Uncle Sam, because George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are running a regime marinated in oil that does not issue reports which explain the real determinants of petroleum pricing beyond the conventional supply-demand curves.
...
Today, a third party has moved to the table-the New York Mercantile Exchange, a similar operates in London and a new one in Dubai. There, boisterous traders buy and sell futures contracts on the delivery of oil. But as Ben Mezrich, the author of the new book Rigged said recently, the dollar amounts of these futures contracts are far far larger than the actual oil deliveries they represent as they turn over and over at the Mercantile Exchange.
So now the critical resource of oil is driven by speculation at ever higher abstract electronic levels of futures trading. Increasingly, the distance becomes greater and greater between this abstract trading (fueled by rumors of storms in the Gulf of Mexico, or some possible political turmoil in a region of the world, or some other frightful excuse for bidding up) and the physical supply and demand for oil and its refined products.
These oil gamblers in New York and London try to justify their frenetic daily bidding by saying that these futures markets provide liquidity, and a clear price for oil. Alright, but who benefits when, how and where? ...
...
In recent days, the price of crude oil escalated to over $90 a barrel, fluctuating up to a high of $96 a barrel. Yet the average price of gasoline in the United States-around $3.00 per gallon-is about what it was earlier this year when the price of crude oil was around $60 a barrel. Why the disconnect?
“It’s a big gambling hall,” The Washington Post quotes Fadel Gheit, an oil analyst at Oppenheimer. “This time it’s just speculation,” Peter C. Fusaro, chairman of Global Change Associates, told the Post, adding, “There’s a large bet out there that prices will continue to trend higher. But it’s detached from fundamentals because there’s no shortage of oil.” ...
...
So long as the price of crude oil is set by speculators on trading floors, so long as the oil-indentured politicians are not challenged by new candidates standing tall for people and environments, so long as we do not protest for change and press ourselves to prevent wasteful habits and uses, get ready for higher oil prices.
founder of Help Hospitalized Veterans, pays himself and his wife more than $500,000 a year, ... only 31% of $70M intake went to veterans
ABC investigates veterans charities that mostly enrich their owners | David Edwards and Muriel Kane | Published: Friday November 9, 2007
...
Institute President Daniel Borochoff told ABC, "Under 35% of your budget on actual bona fide charitable programs will get you an F grade." Thirteen out of 27 military and veterans charities reviewed by the Institute did not meet that standard, and one was found to spend as little as 2% of its receipts on program services.
Meanwhile, some of the people running the F-rated charities are getting rich. For example, Roger Chapin, founder of Help Hospitalized Veterans, pays himself and his wife more than $500,000 a year, while only 31% of the $70 million he took in last year actually went to help hospitalized veterans. Chapin, described by Daniel Borochoff as "a charity entrepreneur," has founded more than a dozen such charities over the past three decades. ...
...
Institute President Daniel Borochoff told ABC, "Under 35% of your budget on actual bona fide charitable programs will get you an F grade." Thirteen out of 27 military and veterans charities reviewed by the Institute did not meet that standard, and one was found to spend as little as 2% of its receipts on program services.
Meanwhile, some of the people running the F-rated charities are getting rich. For example, Roger Chapin, founder of Help Hospitalized Veterans, pays himself and his wife more than $500,000 a year, while only 31% of the $70 million he took in last year actually went to help hospitalized veterans. Chapin, described by Daniel Borochoff as "a charity entrepreneur," has founded more than a dozen such charities over the past three decades. ...
Monday, November 12, 2007
Their defense of the industries’ morally indefensible tax breaks is tawdry: private equity contributed $11.8 million to candidates ...
Alternative Tax Showdown | Published: November 8, 2007
...
Under current tax law, 23 million taxpayers will owe the alternative tax for 2007, up from 4 million last year. The tax was originally intended to apply to multimillionaires. But most of this year’s alternative taxpayers make between $100,000 and $500,000 and about a third make less than $100,000. They all have good cause to feel rooked and to expect help from Congress. ...
...
The House tax committee met the challenge, drafting a bill that provides the needed tax relief and plugs the resulting budget gap, mainly by raising taxes on private equity partners and hedge fund managers. The bill is good policy. The tax relief assuages justifiably aggrieved taxpayers. Tax increases on private equity firms and hedge funds rectify outdated rules that have allowed the very wealthiest to enjoy tax rates lower than those paid by middle-income Americans and, in some cases, to defer taxes indefinitely.
...
But key Democratic senators, among them New York’s Charles Schumer, who is the main fund-raiser for Senate Democrats, are balking. They know they must provide alternative tax relief, but they don’t want to tax private equity and hedge funds to pay for it. Their defense of the industries’ morally indefensible tax breaks is tawdry. As The Washington Post reported yesterday, in the first nine months of 2007, as pressure built to dismantle the tax breaks, investment firms and hedge funds contributed $11.8 million to candidates, party committees and leadership political action committees. That’s more than was given in 2005 and 2006 combined. More than two-thirds of that money went to Democrats. ...
...
Under current tax law, 23 million taxpayers will owe the alternative tax for 2007, up from 4 million last year. The tax was originally intended to apply to multimillionaires. But most of this year’s alternative taxpayers make between $100,000 and $500,000 and about a third make less than $100,000. They all have good cause to feel rooked and to expect help from Congress. ...
...
The House tax committee met the challenge, drafting a bill that provides the needed tax relief and plugs the resulting budget gap, mainly by raising taxes on private equity partners and hedge fund managers. The bill is good policy. The tax relief assuages justifiably aggrieved taxpayers. Tax increases on private equity firms and hedge funds rectify outdated rules that have allowed the very wealthiest to enjoy tax rates lower than those paid by middle-income Americans and, in some cases, to defer taxes indefinitely.
...
But key Democratic senators, among them New York’s Charles Schumer, who is the main fund-raiser for Senate Democrats, are balking. They know they must provide alternative tax relief, but they don’t want to tax private equity and hedge funds to pay for it. Their defense of the industries’ morally indefensible tax breaks is tawdry. As The Washington Post reported yesterday, in the first nine months of 2007, as pressure built to dismantle the tax breaks, investment firms and hedge funds contributed $11.8 million to candidates, party committees and leadership political action committees. That’s more than was given in 2005 and 2006 combined. More than two-thirds of that money went to Democrats. ...
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Neil Bush's Firm Under Federal Scrutiny
Neil Bush's Firm Under Federal Scrutiny | November 7, 2007 04:08 PM EST
WASHINGTON — The Education Department's inspector general says he will review whether federal money is inappropriately being spent on programs by a company founded by Neil Bush, the president's brother.
...
The group contends school districts inappropriately are using federal dollars for Ignite! Learning Inc. programs. It says there is no proof the company's products are effective and claims the schools are using the products due to political considerations. ...
WASHINGTON — The Education Department's inspector general says he will review whether federal money is inappropriately being spent on programs by a company founded by Neil Bush, the president's brother.
...
The group contends school districts inappropriately are using federal dollars for Ignite! Learning Inc. programs. It says there is no proof the company's products are effective and claims the schools are using the products due to political considerations. ...
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Traders, Not Political or Supply Concerns, May Be Pushing Fuel [Oil] Toward $100
Oil's Recent Rise Not as Familiar as It Looks | Traders, Not Political or Supply Concerns, May Be Pushing Fuel Toward $100 | By Steven Mufson | Washington Post Staff Writer | Monday, November 5, 2007; Page A01
...
Many veteran oil analysts say this is a bubble. Oil is historically a cyclical business. Modestly higher production by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, a warm winter, slower U.S. economic growth and a flattening of demand in the United States could puncture these lofty prices.
After a week of new records for crude oil prices, the question is: How high can they go?
In the past 10 weeks, the price of crude oil has shot up $25 a barrel, closing at $95.93 in New York on Friday, near an all-time inflation-adjusted peak. Unlike earlier spikes in oil prices, which came on the heels of war in the Middle East, this latest ascent does not appear to be linked to any one conflict or to any physical shortage.
Instead, traders who treat oil like any other commodity are widely thought to be driving prices upward, bolstered by a weak dollar and money flowing out of stock markets and other investment vehicles....
Many veteran oil analysts say this is a bubble. Oil is historically a cyclical business. Modestly higher production by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, a warm winter, slower U.S. economic growth and a flattening of demand in the United States could puncture these lofty prices.
"It just seems that the market is spasming here," said Adam Robinson, an oil analyst at Lehman Brothers. If slowly declining petroleum inventories start to build again, he said, "the radical increase we've seen to the upside can repeat on the way down." Oppenheimer & Sons analyst Fadel Gheit says oil is $30 a barrel overpriced. ...
Chief of CPSC and her predecessor have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children's furniture industries ...they regulate
Industries Paid for Top Regulators' Travel | Two Heads of Product Safety Agency Accepted Trips From Manufacturer Groups | By Elizabeth Williamson | Washington Post Staff Writer | Friday, November 2, 2007; Page A01
...
"This is a blatant violation of the ethics code," said Craig Holman, an expert on governmental ethics law for the nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. The rules allow nonfederal sources to pay for trips, "but not if you're a private party with business pending before the agency," he said.
The chief of the Consumer Product Safety Commission and her predecessor have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children's furniture industries and others they regulate, according to internal records obtained by The Washington Post. Some of the trips were sponsored by lobbying groups and lawyers representing the makers of products linked to consumer hazards.
The records document nearly 30 trips since 2002 by the agency's acting chairman, Nancy Nord, and the previous chairman, Hal Stratton, that were paid for in full or in part by trade associations or manufacturers of products ranging from space heaters to disinfectants. The airfares, hotels and meals totaled nearly $60,000, and the destinations included China, Spain, San Francisco, New Orleans and a golf resort on Hilton Head Island, S.C.
...
"This is a blatant violation of the ethics code," said Craig Holman, an expert on governmental ethics law for the nonprofit consumer advocacy group Public Citizen. The rules allow nonfederal sources to pay for trips, "but not if you're a private party with business pending before the agency," he said.
The agency's travel patterns during the Bush administration, detailed in internal agency documents, differ from those of the Clinton era. Ann Brown, who served as chairman from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls, according to the documents provided. ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)