Sunday, April 25, 2010

American Kleptocracy: How Fears of Socialism and Fascism Hide Naked Theft | CommonDreams.org

American Kleptocracy: How Fears of Socialism and Fascism Hide Naked Theft | CommonDreams.org

by William J. Astore

Kleptocracy -- now, there's a word I was taught to associate with corrupt and exploitative governments that steal ruthlessly and relentlessly from the people. It's a word, in fact, that's usually applied to flawed or failed governments in Africa, Latin America, or the nether regions of Asia. Such governments are typically led by autocratic strong men who shower themselves and their cronies with all the fruits of extracted wealth, whether stolen from the people or squeezed from their country's natural resources. It's not a word you're likely to see associated with a mature republic like the United States led by disinterested public servants and regulated by more-or-less transparent principles and processes.

In fact, when Americans today wish to critique or condemn their government, the typical epithets used are "socialism" or "fascism." When my conservative friends are upset, they send me emails with links to material about "ObamaCare" and the like. These generally warn of a future socialist takeover of the private realm by an intrusive, power-hungry government. When my progressive friends are upset, they send me emails with links pointing to an incipient fascist takeover of our public and private realms, led by that same intrusive, power-hungry government (and, I admit it, I'm hardly innocent when it comes to such "what if" scenarios).

What if, however, instead of looking at where our government might be headed, we took a closer look at where we are -- at the power-brokers who run or influence our government, at those who are profiting and prospering from it? These are, after all, the "winners" in our American world in terms of the power they wield and the wealth they acquire. And shouldn't we be looking as well at those Americans who are losing -- their jobs, their money, their homes, their healthcare, their access to a better way of life -- and asking why?

If we were to take an honest look at America's blasted landscape of "losers" and the far shinier, spiffier world of "winners," we'd have to admit that it wasn't signs of onrushing socialism or fascism that stood out, but of staggeringly self-aggrandizing greed and theft right in the here and now. We'd notice our public coffers being emptied to benefit major corporations and financial institutions working in close alliance with, and passing onremarkable sums of money to, the representatives of "the people." We'd see, in a word, kleptocracy on a scale to dazzle. We would suddenly see an almost magical disappearing act being performed, largely without comment, right before our eyes.

Of Red Herrings and Missing Pallets of Money

Think of socialism and fascism as the red herrings of this moment or, if you're an old time movie fan, as Hitchcockian MacGuffins -- in other words, riveting distractions. Conservatives and tea partiers fear invasive government regulation and excessive taxation, while railing against government takeovers -- even as corporate lobbyists write our public healthcare bills to favor private interests. Similarly, progressives rail against an emergent proto-fascist corps of private guns-for-hire, warrantless wiretapping, and the potential government-approved assassination of U.S. citizens, all sanctioned by a perpetual, and apparently open-ended, state of war.

Yet, if this is socialism, why are private health insurers the government's go-to guys for healthcare coverage? If this is fascism, why haven't the secret police rounded up tea partiers and progressive critics as well and sent them to the lager or the gulag?

Consider this: America is not now, nor has it often been, a hotbed of political radicalism. We have no substantial socialist or workers' party. (Unless you're deluded, please don't count the corporate-friendly "Democrat" party here.) We have no substantial fascist party. (Unless you're deluded, please don't count the cartoonish "tea partiers" here; these predominantly white, graying, and fairly affluent Americans seem most worried that the jackbooted thugs will be coming for them.)

What drives America today is, in fact, business -- just as was true in the days of Calvin Coolidge. But it's not the fair-minded "free enterprise" system touted in those freshly revised Texas guidelines for American history textbooks; rather, it's a rigged system of crony capitalism that increasingly ends in what, if we were looking at some other country, we would recognize as an unabashed kleptocracy.

Recall, if you care to, those pallets stacked with hundreds of millions of dollars that the Bush administration sent to Iraq and which, Houdini-like, simply disappeared. Think of the ever-rising cost of our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, now in excess of a trillion dollars, and just whose pockets are full, thanks to them. ...

FEMA Flood Insurance Program Primarily Benefits The Wealthy: Study

FEMA Flood Insurance Program Primarily Benefits The Wealthy: Study

A policy research group study has found that the National Flood Insurance Program, a division of FEMA, primarily benefits wealthy homeowners who build in high-risk coastal areas at the expense of U.S. taxpayers.

According to the Institute for Policy Integrity'sanalysis, "Flooding the Market", the flood insurance program's subsidies help wealthy Americans with large beachfront properties or vacation homes in a typical year, and low-income individuals only during severe catastrophes. According to the study, middle-income areas are the least likely to benefit from the program in any given year.

"NFIP sometimes works like a backwards Robin Hood -- using taxpayer dollars to provide subsidies for environmentally questionable development in high income areas," said Michael Livermore, executive director of Policy Integrity. "As currently structured, the program is not well-designed to target support to the people most in need."

The way the program currently works is that the federal government steps in and provides discounted flood insurance rates for people who build in areas that are too risky to be covered by the private insurance market. Then when disaster strikes, the government (and, ultimately, taxpayers) foots the bill, which effectively redistributes wealth across income groups in ways that may not have been intended.

"This program has built up a pretty significant deficit that's unlikely to be paid off, so taxpayers will have to come in and eat a significant portion of that," Livermore said. "The folks who are least likely to benefit are people in the middle of the country and [in the middle of] the income distribution." ...

A Coal Miner's Catastrophe: Big Coal--Big Lies | CommonDreams.org

A Coal Miner's Catastrophe: Big Coal--Big Lies | CommonDreams.org

by Tom Turnipseed

The worship of money is the will of God according to Don Blankenship, CEO of Massey Energy Company that owns and operates the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia where 29 miners were killed on April 5 in a mining explosion. Blankenship is a member of the US Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors and a rabid, right-wing Republican. Blankenship calls public officials concerned about climate change "greeniacs", says "greeniacs are taking over the world," and that Al Gore, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are "crazy". He accuses his critics of communism and atheism.

President Barack Obama says the pattern of management and oversight failures led to the mining disaster and called the company's safety record troubling. He instructed Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) Chief Joe Main to immediately send more inspectors to check a number of mines the agency believes are dangerous to ensure against conditions that might cause another disaster. On April 15, Obama said, "We all understand that underground mining is by its very nature dangerous. But we know what can cause mine explosions and we know how to prevent them. I refuse to accept any number of miner deaths as simply a cost of doing business,'' he continued, vowing to step up scrutiny of coal-mine safety standards. Obama pointed out that mining regulations are riddled with loopholes that allow companies to continually put miners in harm's way. The president has demanded that MSHA "streamline the rules" for a pattern of violations orders and take steps to eliminate the backlog of appeals by mine operators.

Gov. Joe Manchin has ordered the immediate inspection of all underground coal mines in West Virginia. He also asked for the state's more than 200 underground coal mines to cease production to mourn the victims of the nation's worst coal mining disaster in 40 years. The order tells state regulators to check mines that have repeatedly had combustion risks over the last year which will be partially evacuated or closed. In the past 18 months the Upper Big Branch mine was cited for over 600 safety violations, with 124 this year. Several citations were for the two chief causes of mine explosions, inadequate ventilation of explosive methane gas and illegal concentrations of coal, according to Federal records. They reveal that up to 2 million cubic feet of methane gas enter the Upper Big Branch mine every 24 hours. The ventilation system circulates less than half the volume of air needed to keep levels of combustible coal dust and methane within a safe range.

Pat McGinley, of West Virginia University law school and coal industry expert, said, "When a mine's ventilation system isn't working properly or there is an unacceptable accumulation of coal dust even for an hour, miners' lives are put at risk." It appears the giant explosion was caused by a buildup of methane gas, with high levels of coal dust. MSHA ordered the mine to temporarily cease operations at least 60 times in the last 16 months. The mine was cited for 458 violations in 2008 and 50 were "unwarrantable failures to comply." ...

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Ex-CIA boss OKd destroying interrogation tapes

Ex-CIA boss OKd destroying interrogation tapes

Porter J. Goss, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, in 2005 approved of the decision by one of his top aides to destroy dozens of videotapes documenting the brutal interrogation of two detainees, according to an internal CIA document released Thursday.

Shortly after the tapes were destroyed at the order of Jose Rodriguez Jr., then the head of the CIA's clandestine service, Goss told Rodriguez that he "agreed" with the decision, according to the document. He even joked after Rodriguez offered to "take the heat" for destroying the tapes.

"PG laughed and said that actually, it would be he, PG, who would take the heat," according to the document, an internal CIA e-mail message.

According to current and former intelligence officials, Goss did not approve the destruction before it happened, and was displeased that Rodriguez did not consult him or the CIA's top lawyer before giving the order for the tapes to be destroyed.

It was previously known that Goss had been told by his aides in November 2005 that the tapes had been destroyed. But a number of documents released Thursday provide the most detailed glimpse yet of the deliberations inside the CIA surrounding the destroyed tapes, and of the concern that the decision might put the CIA in legal jeopardy.

The documents detailing those deliberations, including two e-mail messages from a CIA official whose name has been excised, were released as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.



Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/16/MNC81CVMRO.DTL&feed=rss.news#ixzz0m1TrVC6N

Friday, April 23, 2010

nashville_brook's Journal - It's the Corporate Feudalism, Stupid

nashville_brook's Journal - It's the Corporate Feudalism, Stupid

What the teabaggers need to understand: we're all serfs under the new feudalism their beloved leaders have created.

One thing I'd like to ask a teabagger: How are things where you work, these days? My work fucking sucks right now. Compared to 5, 10, 15 years ago, the stress level is off the charts. On the best days there's just a mopey resignation wafting about our cubicles. On bad days it's like we're all suicidal gerbils running for our lives in sharp, rusty wheels, terrified that we'll be the next rat kicked out of the cage.

We're exhausted and the positive reinforcements (raises, bonuses, vacations) that used to mitigate burnout are vague memories. And the kicker is, as much as work sucks it really sucks to be unemployed right now.
...
The New Serfdom
Serfs have no "right" to work. Instead we serve at the pleasure of our lords who bestow certain protections upon us (such as living in a house, and seeing a doctor). We enjoy these "protections" only for as long as we please our lords. There is no check on the power that's exercised in the workplace. You either suck it up or get the hell out. Often you suck up as much as possible, and you still get shit-canned. Fail to impress the wrong person at work and you face Depression-era hardships that may include homelessness, and without insurance, dying from readily curable diseases. If there's a better description of the Shock Doctrine I'd like to hear it.

The economic crisis was engineered by the lords of finance who gamed our corrupt system with transactions opaque enough to hide their looting, and the fallout from this has changed the nature of employment. There's no "free market" of labor anymore. We used to have the illusion of a free market during the dot-com bubble when you could quit your job on Tuesday and have a couple of better offers by Thursday. When there's no option other than the grave conditions at your current workplace, then you don't have a choice -- your labor is coerced, and you'll accept longer hours and less pay because there's no alternative. I believe this is fueling much of the rank-and-file teabagger anger. And it's pissing me off too.

Corporate Klepto-Feudalism
Imagine you're a new feudal lord. How valuable do you think our serfdom is? They're balancing their books on our desperation and declining salaries because they know our fealty and productivity are proportional to our level of insecurity. Things aren't going to improve for us without a fight, and right now, the only people riled up are bruising for the wrong side. The elite haven't seen this kind of power since the beginning of the industrial revolution. In a declining economy, our enslavement is jealously guarded with obscene amounts of money thrown at swarms of lawyers and lobbyists...and teabaggers themselves.

So, this is modern feudalism: the tyranny of the quarterly report. The nihilism of free-for-all capitalism has finally trickled down to your cubicle like you always knew it would. Those 29 miners died because their feudal lord was long ago awarded his own Divine Right of Kings by the kleptocracy that protects only those who pay. The judges, lawmakers and regulators whose job it was to keep those miners alive are still more interested in begging for crumbs from Massey's table, and kissing his ring than they are in doing their stated job, which is supposed to be looking after us, their constituents, and the engine of the economy. Massey can do no wrong because lords are not subject to earthly laws, that's what the Divine Right of Kings means. Ironically, this was the fundamental outrage of the original tea party: pushback against King George's divine right to our wealth and labor. ...

Monday, April 19, 2010

Madfloridian's Journal - Teach for America. A way to replace experienced, higher-salaried teachers?

Madfloridian's Journal - Teach for America. A way to replace experienced, higher-salaried teachers?

Mon Apr 19th 2010, 08:36 PM From the University of Oklahoma student paper, there is an interesting point of view.

Teach for America not as good an idea as some graduates believe

The article presents it from a point of view of a social consciousness.

Those who are thinking of participating in Teach for America with a social justice mission in mind should consider this. Although a far more daunting task for sure, those really interested in social justice should consider ways of solving problems like unavoidable unemployment and low-wage jobs.

On top of failing to make a dent in poverty, Teach for America actually detracts from social justice by hurting real teachers. Teach for America students take low, entrance-level pay while also receiving a government subsidy for their salary in the form of Americorps stipends. Schools lay off teachers and then hire Teach for America teachers to fill positions that real teachers would otherwise be filling. Teach for America teachers are undercutting the wage needs of real teachers and causing them to be laid off as a result.

Imagine this: a well-off college student takes a subsidized teaching position at an impossibly low wage and displaces actual teachers who might already be struggling to get by — all for social justice!

For anyone who has any concern for labor rights, this is extremely abusive. Not undercutting wage demands of often unionized workers is rule number one of how to be a serious social justice advocate.


From Rethinking Schools this paragraph about what is happening in St. Louis schools right now. Think about this. The district is paying $2000 to Teach for America for every new trainee they send to the district. They are sending that much money to a non-profit group whose trainees get government subsidies.

Peter Downs, president of the elected school board, summarizes TFA’s role in one word: “privatization.” He says that the mayor, not the district, first invited TFA to St. Louis, in line with reforms such as for-profit charters and the privatization of services in curriculum development, teacher recruitment, maintenance, and food service. As part of its contract with TFA, the district pays $2,000 a year to TFA for each of its recruits. ...

Saturday, April 17, 2010

‘Irate’ Fox execs pull Hannity from Tea Party rally | Raw Story

‘Irate’ Fox execs pull Hannity from Tea Party rally | Raw Story

After learning that Fox News anchor Sean Hannity was set to headline a Tea Party event that was raising money for its coffers by charging admission, angry executives cancelled his appearance Thursday.

Network execs claimed they weren't aware that Hannity was set to be the headliner of the Tea Party event. They told reporters that they'd nixed Hannity's plans to broadcast from the site of the event in Cincinnati when they heard about it Thursday morning.

“Fox News never agreed to allow the Cincinnati Tea Party organizers to use Sean Hannity’s television program to profit from broadcasting his show from the event," Bill Shine, the network’s executive vice president of programming, told a reporter. "When senior executives in New York were made aware of this, we changed our plans for tonight’s show.” ...

Friday, April 16, 2010

A Tax Trick That Forces Companies To Close Factories | OurFuture.org

A Tax Trick That Forces Companies To Close Factories | OurFuture.org

Yesterday was April 15, so I wrote about Tax Tricks. Here's a tax trick to talk about:Offshore Tax Havens for corporations.

Here's one way that offshore tax havens work. You make an item in one country, and sell it at cost to a subsidiary that is based (post office box) in a tax haven country with no or low taxes. So there is no profit to report in the country that it was made in. Then, your company or another subsidiary buys it for import in the US, for a price near to the amount the product will be sold for here. So when it sells, there is no profit to be taxed here. All the profit occurs in the low-or-no tax country. We, the People collect no taxes with which to pay for the schools and roads that make our economy competitive.

This tax trick encourages companies to move offshore, closing factories, laying off workers, kill the local suppliers and force costs onto the community. So not only are we losing the tax base and suffering the loss of the jobs and factory, we're picking up many of the costs. When a company like Whirlpool says they have toclose a plant and destroy a community for competitive reasons, it's because theycan do it, and if they don't their competitors will. If their competitors do and they don't respond they lose out, even to the possible point of going out of business (and closing factories and destroying communities.)

Don't blame the companies. Companies do what we let them do. If you don't take advantage of this your competitors will. If your competitors gain enough advantage and you don't you even face going out of business -- and closing factories, destroying communities, putting the costs on the public etc. So by allowing this, Congress forces companies to do this. The word you hear is "encourages" but really, in a competitive environment, allowing it at all forces not encourages.

It is OUR job to set up the playing field on which these companies compete and to define the rules they will use. Zach Carter writes in 10 Ways to Force the Stinking Rich to Share Their Wealth,

According to the Government Accountability Office, 83 of the 100 largest American corporations (pdf) engage in this kind of tax evasion. All of those companies have lobbyists.

These companies do it because we let them, which means we make them do it.

Congress: FIX IT!

Madfloridian's Journal - Compilation of charter school scandals over the past year.

Madfloridian's Journal - Compilation of charter school scandals over the past year.

Posted by madfloridian in General Discussion
Fri Apr 16th 2010, 12:53 AM
Courtesy of the blogger called The Perimeter Primate.

It is important to keep up with such things as this because these schools get public money while being privately run and mostly deregulated. Tax money is taken from the traditional public schools and sent to the charter school with no expectation it will ever be returned.

The post is quite long, so here are just a few.

COMPILATION OF CHARTER SCHOOL SCANDALS April 2009 to April 2010

Some of the more egregious:

April 2009: In Springfield, Massachusetts, the New Leadership Charter School made national news when one of its 11 year-old students killed himself after severe bullying. In the school's charter renewal, the state cited it for "inconsistent implementation of the character education and leadership elements of its mission.

..."February 2010: In Philadelphia, a former administrator at Community Academy Charter School has filed a whistle-blower suit alleging that she was improperly fired the day after federal agents raided the school in August. She claims that charter school officials retaliated against her because she had filed a complaint with federal investigators detailing "a pattern of criminal misuse of local, state, and federal funds." The charter founder and CEO had five relatives on the charter's payroll and his wife was a consultant to the school.


And more and more we are finding that real estate transactions and profits are involved.

March 2010: In Oakland, California, the Oakland Charter Academy’s executive director was denied confirmation to sit on the California State Board of Education because of financial questions relating to an interlocking series of real estate business arrangements involving him and a close associate, Ben Chavis of Oakland, the former director of the American Indian Public Charter School. These two operate five Oakland charter schools.


And another from New York City: ...

Thursday, April 15, 2010

Mitch McConnell's Homestate Paper Thrashes Him For 'Unabashedly Courting Wall Street Bankers For Political Money'

Mitch McConnell's Homestate Paper Thrashes Him For 'Unabashedly Courting Wall Street Bankers For Political Money'

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is "unabashedly courting Wall Street bankers for political money" and "happy to scratch their backs if they'll scratch his," opines McConnell's hometown newspaper, the Lexington Herald-Leader, in an unusually strong rebuke.

In a staff editorial headlined "McConnell to big banks' rescue," the Herald-Leader decries McConnell's pandering to Wall Street executivesand repeated use of the catch phrases outlined in an anti-financial reform memo written by pollster Frank Luntz. Here's a sample of the Herald-Leader's outrage:

McConnell's statements are perfectly calibrated to inflame the public. He insists the bill would "allow endless taxpayer-funded bailouts for big Wall Street banks."

Their resemblance to the truth is another matter.

...

McConnell, it should be remembered, voted for the bailout of the big investment banks in the fall of 2008, when it was the only alternative to global economic meltdown.

We have read that the Republicans have a plan for financial reform, but McConnell isn't talking up any solutions, just trashing the other side's ideas with no respect for the truth.

While the intricacies of financial regulation are complicated, McConnell's calculus is pretty obvious.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Wonk Room � Rush Ignorantly Wonders ‘Where Was The Union’ At Non-Union Mine Disaster

Wonk Room � Rush Ignorantly Wonders ‘Where Was The Union’ At Non-Union Mine Disaster

Last Friday, Rush Limbaugh asked why a coal miner union didn’t protect the 29 miners who were killed when Massey Energy’s Upper Big Branch Mine in Montcoal, WV, exploded under unsafe conditions:

Was there no union responsibility for improving mine safety? Where was the union here? Where was the union? The union is generally holding these companies up demanding all kinds of safety. Why were these miners continuing to work in what apparently was an unsafe atmosphere?

Listen here:

There’s a simple reason the union didn’t protect the miners: the Upper Big Branch Mine, like nearly all of the mines under Massey CEO Don Blankenship’s control, is non-union. In fact, the United Mine Workers of America (UMW) “tried three times to organize the Upper Big Branch mine, but even with getting nearly 70 percent of workers to sign cards saying they wanted to vote for a union, Blankenship personally met with workers to threaten them with closing down the mine and losing their jobs if they voted for a union.”

Blankenship rose in Massey’s ranks by breaking its union mines in the 1980s. Blankenship said then that busting unions is “invaluable” to profits, as non-union companies can “sell coal cheaper and drive union coal out of business.”

Union mines have a significantly better safety record than non-union mines especially for major disasters, as union miners can refuse unsafe work and report dangerous conditions without fear of retaliation. In addition to preventing Blankenship-style intimidation, the proposed Employee Free Choice Act would increase whistleblower protections for non-union and union workers alike. Under Blankenship’s direction, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Mining Association have spent millions tooppose passage of such legislation for worker rights, comparing it to a “firestorm bordering on Armageddon.”

Immediately following the tragedy, the UMW sent trained support personnel to the disaster site. “We are all brothers and sisters in the coalfields at times like this,” UMW President Cecil Roberts said in a statement offering the assistance, which was refused by Massey company officials.

Was Lack Of Government Transparency A Factor In Mine Deaths?

Was Lack Of Government Transparency A Factor In Mine Deaths?

Back in January, three months before the massive explosion that killed 29 miners at a Massey Energy mine in West Virginia, a federal mine safety inspector got an up-close look at both the mine's flawed ventilation system -- and Massey's cavalier approach to a potentially deadly problem.

The inspector found that the Upper Big Branch Mine's airflow -- key to keeping deadly gases and coal dust from rising to explosive levels -- was going in the wrong direction. And everyone had simply been told not to worry about it.

The mine foreman asked the superintendent "and he was told not to worry about it," the inspector wrote in his official notebook.

Miners, who the inspector pulled aside to talk to privately, "informed me that they questioned management about this condition and they were told it was fine, not to worry about it."

The Charleston Gazette's award-winning mining beat reporter Ken Ward Jr. first reported about the inspector's notes late Tuesday, describing them as being among a "dribble" of documents that the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA, pronounced em-sha) is finally releasing to the public "as federal and state officials begin a long and complex effort to figure out what caused the worst U.S. coal-mining disaster in 40 years."

The violation the inspector described in his notes was fixed later that same day; the company was cited for "unwarrantable failure" to follow safety rules and fined a hefty $70,000.

But the inspector's notes -- a particularly valuable source of information that the government used to routinely make available on request -- weren't released to members of the public or to journalists until more than a week after the mine exploded. ...

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Obstruction: Mine safety hindered� - Editorials - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports -

Obstruction: Mine safety hindered�- Editorials - The Charleston Gazette - West Virginia News and Sports -

What caused last week's Massey Energy coal tragedy, West Virginia's worst disaster since 1968? A possible explanation seems to be emerging:

Federal safety inspectors cited the Raleigh County operation thousands of times for dangerous law violations, including buildup of explosive methane and coal dust. But Massey avoided closure of the profitable mine by snarling the U.S. bureaucracy with endless legal appeals. Lifesaving enforcement apparently was obstructed.

As reporter Ken Ward Jr. outlined Monday, stiffer federal fines were mandated after West Virginia's Sago mine tragedy in 2006. But various coal firms used their high-priced corporate lawyers to dispute two-thirds of new fines. Massey exceeded the industry average by appealing three-fourths of them. Thus many safety actions were stalled.

In February 2008, former mine safety chief Richard Stickler complained that coal owners were clogging the appeals process. In June 2008, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., protested in a Senate hearing that energy firms had dramatically increased their appeal rate. Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., provided more money "to help shorten the amount of time to litigate these fines."

In June 2009, David Akrush of Public Citizen warned the White House: "Every day that these safety violations go unresolved, the chance that this nation will see another tragic mining accident grows." It was a prediction worthy of Nostradamus.

In February of this year, new U.S. mine safety director Joe Main told a House Labor Committee hearing that skyrocketing company appeals still blocked federal safety efforts. ...

Encountering Peace: The disposal of myths

Encountering Peace: The disposal of myths



We have been repeating the same truisms that fit appropriately with our justifications for our positions in this conflict.

Too much of what is commonly known about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is generated by the constant repetition of truisms that fit the justifications of one side’s explanations. Too few of us bother to weigh the possibility that there might be another interpretation of reality. If so, it might also suggest that our own may not be the exclusive version of truth.

I am writing this article on the basis of two pieces that appeared in this newspaper. The first, the article entitled “Proximity? It’s a start” from March 4, and a more recent article by Ben Dror Yemini – “A Fatal Blow to peace” on April 7. Both are filled with peace process truisms that have become cornerstones of Israeli popular thought. I will challenge them.

The March 4 piece states: “...that this time the Palestinians will reconcile themselves to Israel’s existence and negotiate for a viable settlement accordingly...” It is a well-known fact that the Palestinians have never really recognized Israel. Correct? Actually, no. Even in the Palestinian National Conference in November 1988 the PLO accepted the two-state solution as their strategic choice, reconciling themselves to the fact that Palestine would be established on only 22 percent of the land between the river and the sea. In September 13, 1993 Yasser Arafat exchanged letters of mutual recognition with prime minister Yitzhak Rabin. Arafat stated: “The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.”

In return Rabin wrote to Arafat that “the government of Israel has decided to recognize the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people and commence negotiations with the PLO within the Middle East peace process” (hardly a balanced act of mutuality – we received recognition of our state and they received recognition of their leadership).

Surely the editors of The Jerusalem Post and Yemini would claim that the Palestinians never recognized Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, but only the existence of Israel. This is perhaps true, but until the Annapolis summit of November 2007 there was never an Israeli demand that the Palestinians recognize the Jewishness of Israel. Nor has Israel made that demand from any other state that we have diplomatic relations with – not even from Egypt or Jordan.

Most Palestinians view this demand as a new hurdle they are being forced to jump over when they have never received any Israeli assurance regarding their own national rights. They also see it as a trick to remove the refugee issue from the negotiating table, and as a means to facilitate plans from the likes of Avigdor Lieberman to expel the Palestinian citizens of Israel who are living on their own land for generations.

Of course it would be nice if the Palestinians recognized that the State of Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people. It would please me personally, especially if we could say that it is the national-state of the Jewish people and of all of its citizens, but I can also live and make peace with the Palestinian people sufficing with their state-to-state recognition of Israel as neighbors seeking to live side by side in peace. The Jewishness of Israel will be decided by the Jews who are Israelis and not by the Palestinians. ...

Arianna Huffington: The West Virginia Mining Disaster and the Financial Crisis Have the Same Root Cause

Arianna Huffington: The West Virginia Mining Disaster and the Financial Crisis Have the Same Root Cause

Officials say it's too soon to pinpoint the exact cause of the tragic explosion at the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia that took the lives of 29 miners, but we certainly know enough to identify the root cause. It's the same cause that led to the 2007 Crandall Canyon mine disaster in Utah that killed six miners and three rescue workers. It's the same cause that led to the 2006 Sago mine disaster in West Virginia that killed 12 miners. And it's also the same cause that led to the Lehman Brothers disaster, the Citigroup disaster, the bursting of the housing bubble, and the implosion of our financial system: a badly broken regulatory system.

The loss of life at Upper Big Branch happened in one horrific instant. The economic collapse has not killed people, but it has gradually destroyed millions of lives. Both calamities occurred because elected officials who should have been creating a regulatory system that protects working families instead created a system that protects the corporations it was meant to watch over.

Just look at the ways in which the New York Times describes the regulatory agency that so atrociously failed the Upper Big Branch miners:

  • The agency "remains fundamentally weak in several areas, and it does not always use the powers it has."
  • "The fines it levies are relatively small, and many go uncollected for years."
  • "It lacks subpoena power, a basic investigatory tool."
  • "Its investigators are not technically law enforcement officers."
  • "Its criminal sanctions are weak."
  • "Fines remain so low that they are mere rounding errors on the bottom lines" of the companies being regulated.
  • It shows a "reluctance to flex all of its powers."


Sound familiar? Most of these conditions were the same ones that led to the housing bubble, credit default swaps, toxic derivatives -- and, by extension, the bank bailout, long-term unemployment with no end in sight, and the rapid acceleration of the decline of America's middle class.

The "fundamentally weak" state of America's watchdogs is the deliberate end product of massive amounts of corporate lobbying. In the case of the mining industry, the amount spent by mine owners on lobbyists intent on weakening regulations and widening loopholes hasskyrocketed from under $2.5 million in 2003 to $14 million today, with predictable results: profits up; dead miners up. ...

Monday, April 12, 2010

Congress Slashed Earmarks In 2009: White House Analysis

Congress Slashed Earmarks In 2009: White House Analysis

WASHINGTON — Members of Congress obtained about 2,000 fewer pet projects for their home states last year, according to a White House analysis released Monday.

Lawmakers stuffed 9,192 so-called earmarks into spending bills last year, at a cost to taxpayers of more than $11 billion, the analysis found. By White House calculations, that's a 17 percent drop in the number of earmarks and a 27 percent reduction in cost.

...

House Republicans have sworn them off this year as they seek an edge in the November elections.

"Abuse of the earmark process is a symbol of how Washington is broken, and Washington Democrats have done far too little to fix it," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Still, budget watchdog groups and the White House itself said the drop in earmarks is not quite that dramatic because accounting for some water projects has changed.

White House budget office spokesman Tom Gavin said that even when those projects are excluded, the cost of last year's earmarks went down by about 14 percent from the year before.

...

Once inserted by the most senior and powerful lawmakers and those on the appropriations and transportation committees, earmarks mushroomed after Republicans took over Congress in 1995.

Then, GOP leaders like Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia and Majority Whip Tom DeLay of Texas, saw earmarks as a way to help endangered Republicans keep their seats and to reward lawmakers loyal to GOP leaders.

When the Bush White House first counted up earmarks for 2005, with Republicans in control of the House and Senate, it discovered about 13,500 earmarks totaling about $19 billion. That's about one-third more than last year, at a 41 percent higher cost.

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Excite News - AP IMPACT: In Toyota cases, evasion becomes tactic

Excite News - AP IMPACT: In Toyota cases, evasion becomes tactic

Apr 11, 1:38 PM (ET)

By CURT ANDERSON and DANNY ROBBINS

MIAMI (AP) - Toyota has routinely engaged in questionable, evasive and deceptive legal tactics when sued, frequently claiming it does not have information it is required to turn over and sometimes even ignoring court orders to produce key documents, an Associated Press investigation shows.

In a review of lawsuits filed around the country involving a wide range of complaints - not just the sudden acceleration problems that have led to millions of Toyotas being recalled - the automaker has hidden the existence of tests that would be harmful to its legal position and claimed key material was difficult to get at its headquarters in Japan. It has withheld potentially damaging documents and refused to release data stored electronically in its vehicles.

For example, in a Colorado product liability lawsuit filed by a man whose young daughter was killed in a 4Runner rollover crash, Toyota withheld documents about internal roof strength tests despite a federal judge's order that such information be produced, according to court records. The attorneys for Jon Kurylowicz now say such documents might have changed the outcome of the case, which ended in a 2005 jury verdict for Toyota.

"Mr. Kurylowicz went to trial without having been given all the relevant evidence and all the evidence the court ordered Toyota to produce," attorney Stuart Ollanik wrote in a new federal lawsuit accusing Toyota of fraud in the earlier case. "The Kurylowicz trial was not a fair trial."

"Automobile manufacturers, in my practice, have been the toughest to deal with when it comes to sharing information, but Toyota has no peer," said attorney Ernest Cannon, who represented the family of 35-year-old Lisa Evans, who died in 2002 in the Houston suburb of Sugar Land.

The AP reviewed numerous cases around the country in which Toyota's actions were evasive, and sometimes even deceptive, in providing answers to questions posed by plaintiffs. Court rules generally allow a person or company who is sued to object to turning over requested information; it's permitted and even expected that defense attorneys play hardball, but it's a violation to claim evidence does not exist when it does.

Similar claims have been lodged by Dimitrios Biller, a former Toyota attorney who sued the company in August, contending it withheld evidence in considerably older rollover cases.

Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y., chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which has subpoenaed some of Biller's still-undisclosed records, says they show possible violations of discovery orders.

...

Additional related lawsuits examined in the AP review found:

_Toyota hid the existence of its roof strength tests in numerous cases. A new potential class-action lawsuit filed in California on behalf of two women left paralyzed by separate Toyota rollover crashes contends that recently uncovered company documents contradict sworn testimony by Toyota officials that the company had no written standard for how far vehicle roofs could be crushed. The long-hidden documents indicate Toyota did have such a standard: roofs could come no closer than a half-millimeter from test dummies' heads in a rollover crash.

"This type of conduct by the Toyota defendants is illegal, immoral and unprofessional," said attorney E. Todd Tracy in a similar recent lawsuit accusing Toyota of fraud in older cases. "The Toyota defendants' cloak and dagger games must be terminated."

_Toyota claimed in court documents that a 2000 Camry had "no component" to record its speed at the time of a crash. A Texas woman suing the automaker asserted she was injured when the air bag failed to deploy. The case went to trial last September and ended with a jury ruling in Toyota's favor.

The attorney, Stephen Van Gaasbeck of San Antonio, later found documents showing the Camry did record such information and that Toyota had the ability to download it from vehicles as early as 1997, circumstances that now cause him to question the company's honesty.

"If we had the data, and the data said the speed was above what their air bag would have deployed at, then yes, it would have been a different case," said Van Gaasbeck. He added that an appeal based on the new information is unlikely because Texas appellate courts would likely favor Toyota based on previous rulings.

_The attorney for 76-year-old retiree Robert Elmes - hospitalized for five weeks after a 2006 crash in Pennsylvania in which he says his 2002 Camry surged forward unexpectedly - has sought repeatedly and unsuccessfully in federal court to obtain Toyota documents concerning the car's electronic throttle control.

Amnesty International: Hurricane Katrina Victims Had Human Rights Violated

Amnesty International: Hurricane Katrina Victims Had Human Rights Violated

NEW ORLEANS — Amnesty International says the U.S. government and Gulf Coast states have consistently violated the human rights of hurricane victims since Hurricane Katrina killed about 1,800 people and caused widespread devastation after striking in August 2005.

Amnesty's report entitled "Un-Natural Disaster" says government actions in housing, health care and policing prevented poor minority communities from rebuilding and returning to their homes.

The White House and Louisiana and Mississippi officials said they had gone to great lengths to help people recover from Katrina.

Amnesty urged Congress to amend the nation's main disaster response legislation, the Stafford Act, to guarantee the humane and fair treatment of all disaster victims.

U.S. Steps Up Probe of Tech Hiring - WSJ.com

U.S. Steps Up Probe of Tech Hiring - WSJ.com
By THOMAS CATAN And BRENT KENDALL

WASHINGTON—The Justice Department is stepping up its investigation into hiring practices at some of America's biggest companies, including Google Inc., Intel Corp., International Business Machines Corp., Apple Inc. and IAC/InterActiveCorp., people familiar with the matter said.

The inquiry is focused on whether companies, particularly in the technology sector, have agreed not to recruit each others' employees in ways that violate antitrust law. Specifically, the probe is looking into whether the companies' hiring practices are costing skilled computer engineers and other workers opportunities to change jobs for higher pay or better benefits.

After a probe that began more than a year ago, Justice Department investigators have concluded that such agreements do raise significant competitive concerns, according to the people familiar with the matter.

But the leadership of the antitrust division hasn't yet decided whether—or how—to challenge the hiring practices, these people said. About a dozen companies are meeting with top antitrust officials at the Justice Department this week and next, some to defend their practices, others to provide information.

Antitrust experts say the Justice Department could argue that an agreement between competitors that holds down labor costs is as much a violation of antitrust laws as an agreement to fix prices.

Such agreements are "very close to the line," said Melissa Maxman, an antitrust lawyer at the law firm Cozen O'Connor. "They're not agreeing on price, but they're kind of agreeing on costs." Skilled computer scientists with some management responsibilities, for instance, often make base salaries of $180,000 to $210,000. Compensation for the most sought-after workers typically soars far above that and includes bundles of stock options and bonuses.

...

Some tech companies also say the agreements under investigation only stop them from cold calling each other's employees, not from hiring them.

The technology industry makes the case that it would be harder to enter into collaborative ventures with other companies if they fear losing valuable employees.

But Justice Department lawyers could respond that such agreements distort the labor market, theoretically harming the economy by cutting incentives for other people to enter such fields.

"In the long run, this is going to distort and depress the incentives for people to actually develop the talents and skills that are useful in this market," said Salil Mehra, a Temple University law professor who formerly worked in the Justice Department's antitrust division.

Policing the labor markets hasn't been a central focus of antitrust enforcers in recent years. But the Justice Department did act against what it saw as efforts to manipulate the labor market. It brought a civil case against a group of hospitals in Utah in 1994, alleging that they had illegally conspired to hold down nurses' wages by exchanging information about their pay.

A year later, it took action against the American Bar Association for allegedly using its accreditation process to force universities to raise law-school salaries. Both cases were settled.

The current investigation is the latest by antitrust enforcers to take aim at the often close-knit relations between tech companies, particularly in Silicon Valley.

The Federal Trade Commission's ongoing investigation into interlocking boards of tech companies forced Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, to resign from the board of Apple.

Another casualty of the FTC probe was Genentech CEO Arthur Levinson, who stepped down from Google's board. He had been doing double duty as a director for Apple and Google until the FTC started asking questions.

More recently, the decision by legendary venture-capital investor John Doerr to resign from Amazon.com's board was influenced by the FTC investigation, according to a person familiar with the matter. Mr. Doerr—who recently declined to comment — is also on the board of Google.

—Don Clark and Jessica E. Vascellaro contributed to this article