Ethics panel clears 7 on earmarks - washingtonpost.com

Ethics panel clears 7 on earmarks - washingtonpost.com

By Paul Kane and Carol D. Leonnig

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 27, 2010

The House ethics committee ruled Friday that seven lawmakers who steered hundreds of millions of dollars in largely no-bid contracts to clients of a lobbying firm had not violated any rules or laws by also collecting large campaign donations from those contractors.

In a 305-page report, the ethics committee declared that lawmakers are free to raise campaign money from the very companies they are benefiting so long as the deciding factors in granting those "earmarks" are "criteria independent" of the contributions. The report served as a blunt rejection of ethics watchdogs and a different group of congressional investigators, who have contended that in some instances the connection between donations and earmarks was so close that it had to be inappropriate.

"Simply because a member sponsors an earmark for an entity that also happens to be a campaign contributor does not, on these two facts alone, support a claim that a member's actions are being influenced by campaign contributions," the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct said in a unanimous statement.

Ethics watchdogs issued sharp denunciations, citing portions of the report that showed that the private companies thought their donations helped them win earmarks. The lawmakers -- Reps. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Peter J. Visclosky (D-Ind.) and C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) -- claimed vindication.

...

... In fiscal 2008 alone, the seven lawmakers sponsored $112 million worth of earmarks for clients of the PMA Group while accepting more than $350,000 in contributions from the firm's lobbyists and its clients, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group.

The final word on this practice may come from the Justice Department. The PMA Group folded a year ago after an FBI raid on its Arlington offices, part of an investigation into whether its founder and staff directed illegal campaign contributions to lawmakers who helped clients obtain earmarks. Last spring, a federal grand jury issued subpoenas to Visclosky, a former aide and his political committees.

Congress subpoenas thousands of allegedly damaging Toyota documents | Raw Story

Congress subpoenas thousands of allegedly damaging Toyota documents | Raw Story

The head of embattled Toyota has bowed to calls to testify in US Congress as lawmakers demand a whistleblower lawyer hand over potentially damning internal company documents on alleged safety defects.

A key congressional committee has subpoenaed former Toyota lawyer Dimitrios Biller, who has accused the world's biggest car maker of hiding and destroying evidence of safety problems and of "a culture of hypocrisy and deception".

Toyota is recalling more than eight million cars worldwide for defects linked to more than 30 deaths in the United States that have sparked a host of US lawsuits which could cost the company billions of dollars in damages. ...

Payments in question - baltimoresun.com

Payments in question - baltimoresun.com

WASHINGTON — - Former Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele's personal political accounts were billed at least $188,000 by Washington law firms during his first year as chairman of the Republican National Committee, according to state and federal disclosure reports.

Steele used state campaign funds to pay the law firms, but the specific purpose for most of the expenditures wasn't disclosed, in apparent violation of Maryland reporting guidelines.

Some of the costs appear to involve activity that predated his tenure as Republican national chairman. An RNC spokesman declined comment, on grounds that the payments didn't involve national party business.

...

According to elections board guidance, campaign finance reports "are supposed to inform the public on how the campaign funds are being used. Simply recording a large expenditure for 'consultant services' is not sufficiently descriptive."

...

Last summer, the Republican State Central Committee agreed to return $77,500 to Steele's state campaign committee, which improperly spent leftover campaign funds to help settle an old legal bill dating from Steele's service as Maryland Republican chairman.

...

Over the years, Steele has been dogged by questions involving finances.

His decision to continue giving paid speeches while serving as party chairman drew criticism recently from some former RNC chairmen, who said that he should treat the position as a full-time job.

Steele, who is paid $223,500 a year plus benefits, also received undisclosed royalties for a book published last month. His defenders have pointed out that some of his predecessors as Republican chairman also received outside income in addition to their party salary. ...

Washington Times - Stimulus foes see value in seeking cash

Washington Times - Stimulus foes see value in seeking cash
...

Sen. Christopher S. Bond regularly railed against President Obama's economic stimulus plan as irresponsible spending that would drive up the national debt. But behind the scenes, the Missouri Republican quietly sought more than $50 million from a federal agency for two projects in his state.

Mr. Bond was not alone. More than a dozen Republican lawmakers, while denouncing the stimulus to the media and their constituents, privately sent letters to just one of the federal government's many agencies seeking stimulus money for home-state pork projects.

The letters to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, expose the gulf between lawmakers' public criticism of the overall stimulus package and their private lobbying for projects close to home.

"It's not illegal to talk out of both sides of your mouth, but it does seem to be a level of dishonesty troubling to the American public," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

In a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Mr. Bond noted that one project applying to the USDA for stimulus money would "create jobs and ultimately spur economic opportunities."

He and other lawmakers make no apologies for privately seeking stimulus money after they voted against it and continue to criticize the plan: "I strongly opposed the stimulus, but the only thing that could make it worse would be if none of it returned to the taxpayers of Missouri," said Mr. Bond, who is retiring.

But watchdog groups say the lawmakers' public talk and private letters don't square, highlighting a side of government spending largely overshadowed by the "earmarking" process. While members of Congress must disclose their earmarks — or pet projects they slip into broader spending bills — the private funding requests they make in letters to agencies fall outside of the public's view.

"There is a definite disconnect between the public statements and the private letters," said Thomas A. Schatz, president of the nonpartisan Citizens Against Government Waste. "It does seem inconsistent to say you're against the bill but then you want some little piece of it." ...

..

Rep. Joe Wilson, South Carolina Republican who became famous after yelling, "You lie," during Mr. Obama's addresses to Congress in September, voted against the stimulus. Nonetheless, Mr. Wilson elbowed his way into the rush for federal stimulus cash in a letter he sent to Mr. Vilsack on behalf of a foundation seeking funding.

"We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District," he wrote to Mr. Vilsack in the Aug. 26, 2009, letter.

...

Also facing a competitive race, Rep. Pat Tiberi, Ohio Republican, in October called the final Democratic stimulus bill "loaded with [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi's grab bag of big spending wishes" and that it "saddles future generations with mountains of debt."

He struck a different tone in a letter to Mr. Vilsack.

"While this project is intended to expand rural broadband in Alaska, I understand that the project could support businesses and jobs in communities across the country," Mr. Tiberi wrote, citing one such company in his district.

...

Sen. Lamar Alexander, Tennessee Republican, who easily won re-election in 2008, said of the stimulus, "This is spending, not stimulus."

In a letter to Mr. Vilsack for a project applying for stimulus money, Mr. Alexander noted, "It is anticipated that the project will create over 200 jobs in the first year and at least another 40 new jobs in the following years." ...

Daily Kos: Shelby holds Senate hostage to win military contract for European firm

Daily Kos: Shelby holds Senate hostage to win military contract for European firm

by Jed Lewison

Fri Feb 05, 2010

As you may have heard, U.S. Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) has placed a hold on all Obama Administration nominees, effectively holding every Obama appointment hostage to the Senate's filibuster rule.

So what's Shelby's ransom? Basically, he wants the Pentagon contract for aerial refueling tankers to be awarded to Airbus, the European aerospace firm, instead of Boeing, the domestic aerospace giant. Why does Shelby want to award a key military contract to a foreign company? Because portions of the Airbus-built tankers would be assembled in Alabama.

Marcy Wheeler explains:

The key issue is that Shelby wants the Air Force to tweak an RFP for refueling tankers so that Airbus (partnered with Northrup Grumman) would win the bid again over Boeing. The contract had been awarded in 2008, but the GAO found that the Air Force had erred in calculating the award. After the Air Force wrote a new RFP in preparation to rebid the contract, Airbus calculated that it would not win the new bid, and started complaining. Now, Airbus is threatening to withdraw from the competition unless the specs in the RFP are revised.

Essentially, then, Shelby’s threat is primarily about gaming this bidding process to make sure Airbus–and not Boeing–wins the contract (there’s a smaller program he’s complaining about, too, but this is the truly huge potential bounty for his state). ...

Josh Silver: Senator Franken Rips Into Comcast CEO Brian Roberts

Josh Silver: Senator Franken Rips Into Comcast CEO Brian Roberts

Comcast CEO Brian Roberts and NBC President Jeff Zucker testified in front of House and Senate subcommittees Thursday as regulators decide whether to allow the proposed merger of the two media giants. Comcast is the largest cable TV and residential high-speed Internet company in the nation. NBC is one of the largest content providers.

...

"You'll have to excuse me if I don't trust these promises, and that is from experience in this business," Franken said. "It matters who runs our media companies....the media are our source of entertainment, but they're also the way we get our information about the world. So when the same company produces the programs and runs the pipes that bring us those programs, we have a reason to be nervous."

We sure do. Here are 10 more reasons to be very afraid of the proposed Comcast/NBC merger:

1) Comcast Buys Influence
The communications industry is, after all, second only to Big Pharma in Washington influence-peddling. Comcast spent more than $5.5 million in campaign contributions since 2006 alone to have their way in Washington. That's not counting more than $50 million they've spent on lobbying in the past three years!

2) How Much Is Enough?
Comcast earned more than $3.6 billion in profits in 2009 while claiming they didn't have enough money to invest in faster Internet networks ... and while raising rates as much as 50 percent over the past five years in some markets.

3) Fat Cat CEO
In 2008, CEO Brian Roberts was ranked as one of five "Highest Paid Worst Performers" in America. 2008 income: $40.8 million. Sitting on Capitol Hill yesterday, he raked in more than $100,000.

4) Bad Customer Service
Comcast ranked second only to AOL in poor customer service, according to a 2009Zogby/MSM Money poll. Comcast service is so bad they drove a 75-year-old woman named Mona Shaw to wreck one of their stores with a hammer.

5) Comcast Lies and Plays Dirty
In official 2006 testimony, Comcast Vice President David L. Cohen said: "If Comcast were to try to 'deny, delay, or degrade' the Internet experience that our more than 9 million cable Internet customers have paid for, how can we possibly expect to keep them as customers. ... Any provider that does not meet the needs of users will suffer from a serious backlash from consumers and policymakers."

In 2008, after being caught illegally blocking content Cohen admitted: "Comcast may on a limited basis temporarily delay certain P2P traffic." That's the same year Comcast was caught paying for seat fillers at a public FCC hearing into their illegal Internet blocking. Only this year, after being censured by the FCC, did Roberts admit to the company's "mistake."

6) Comcast Censors Political Speech
Comcast prevents ads from running that criticize the company's political friends. They evenfired a newscaster who dared to question an award they were bestowing on Bill O'Reilly.

7) Comcast Blocks Independent Voices
Despite digging up our city streets and enjoying a near-monopoly for decades, Comcast has consistently tried to shirk its community responsibilities - including trying to kick public, educational and government channels into the cable-tier equivalent of Siberia. ...

Sen. Conrad, Deficit Hawk, Brings U.S. Dollars Home to North Dakota - WSJ.com

Sen. Conrad, Deficit Hawk, Brings U.S. Dollars Home to North Dakota - WSJ.com

...

Mr. Conrad has long pushed to curb deficit spending. As a freshman senator, he had a hand in a bruising 1990 budget deal that raised taxes and restrained spending. In 1993 and 1997, he backed legislation that trimmed Medicare and required Congress to pay for all spending hikes or tax cuts.

Those steps helped pave the way for surpluses beginning in 1998. With increased taxes, a booming economy and strict spending restraints, Congress racked up surpluses until 2001, the longest such stretch since the 1920s.

"Those balanced budgets got us to stop borrowing from the Social Security trust fund," Mr. Conrad says. "That was our high-water mark, if you will."

While advocating fiscal responsibility at the national level, the senator has ministered adroitly to one of the most government-dependent states in the country: a vast swath of parched prairie that is home to needy military air bases, Indian reservations, an aging population of 639,000 and thousands of farmers who, over the last decade, have collectively gobbled up an average of $715 million a year in crop subsidies and disaster payments.

"His heart is in the right place," says Doug Holtz-Eakin, a former head of the Congressional Budget Office who now advises Republican campaigns. "But when your party, your colleagues, and even your constituents are all pressuring you to give in to the dark side, it's tough to make real progress." ...

Study: Charter schools promote segregation, perform worse than traditional schools | Minnesota Public Radio NewsQ

Study: Charter schools promote segregation, perform worse than traditional schools | Minnesota Public Radio NewsQ

by Tom Weber, Minnesota Public Radio

November 26, 2008

Nearly 20 years after Minnesota passed the nation's first charter school law, charters in the Twin Cities continue to perform worse, are more segregated than traditional public schools and are forcing those traditional public schools to become more segregated.

Those are the findings of a new report called "Failed Promises" -- from the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota.

But the conclusions are not necessarily swaying those who run charters.

...

Orfield's research team gathered test scores and other data from all traditional public and charter schools in the Twin Cities. That other data included poverty measurements, as a way of lining up schools in similar economic situations.

What they found was charter schools performed worse than traditional public schools.

To read the entire report, click here.

The report also looks at schools' racial make-up, and includes a map that plots all metro area charter schools. It shows segregated schools far outnumber integrated - and in some cases, predominately white schools are surrounded by predominately non-white schools.

To see a map of Twin Cities charter schools, click here.

This is the result of charters locating in poor neighborhoods where kids are having bad experiences in the public schools, Orfield says.

"Parents that have had a bad experience with the public schools will take almost any choice, and they will move to the charter school. This will pull enrollment out of the public school, so you have two schools racing towards more segregated schools - and both types of schools are doing badly," he says. ...

Charter schools' growth promoting segregation, studies say - latimes.com

Charter schools' growth promoting segregation, studies say - latimes.com

A UCLA study is one of two finding that the increasingly popular campuses skew toward racially separate student bodies. Charter advocates criticize the reports.

The growth of charter schools has promoted segregation both in California and nationwide, increasing the odds that black, Latino and white students will attend class with fewer children who look different from themselves, according to two new studies.

Charter school advocates contend that the researchers' presumptions about racial separation are out of date. They said parents -- including low-income minority parents -- are turning to charters for a quality education that traditional schools have not provided.

...

The trend toward segregation was especially notable for African American students. Nationally, 70% of black charter students attend schools where at least 90% of students are minorities. That's double the figure for traditional public schools. The typical black charter-school student attends a campus where nearly three in four students also are black, researchers with the Civil Rights Project at UCLA said Thursday.

The other researchers also focused on economic segregation, looking at private companies that manage schools, in most cases charters. The enrollments at most of these campuses exacerbated income extremes, they concluded. Charters tended to serve higher-income students or lower-income students. Charters also were likely to serve fewer disabled students and fewer English learners. This report, soon to be officially released, was developed by education policy centers at the University of Colorado at Boulder and Arizona State University.

Both research teams, using somewhat different methods and data, questioned the direction of the Obama administration, which has pushed states to authorize more charter schools as a condition for receiving funding through "Race to the Top" grants. That position has proved to be powerful leverage as states struggle with decreased funding.

"We don't want the Race to the Top to become a race to the past," said Gary Orfield, co-director of the Civil Rights Project, alluding to the era of enforced segregation.

Orfield's UCLA team previously documented how court decisions since 1991 had gradually eroded the halting progress in integration. Segregation remains a marker for inequality, just as it was in the 1950s, he said. ...

McConnell Raised Big Bucks From Foreign Defense Contractor Probed For Bribery | TPMMuckraker

McConnell Raised Big Bucks From Foreign Defense Contractor Probed For Bribery | TPMMuckraker

In the wake of the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has been quick to denounce a bid by Democrats to stop foreign corporations from pouring money into U.S. elections, claiming current law already bars such spending. As we've reported before, it's not nearly as simple as that -- but McConnell should know: The GOP Senate leader has raked in campaign cash from a subsidiary of a major foreign defense contractor that's currently being investigated by the Justice Department for bribery.

As we reported yesterday, McConnell, a longtime foe of efforts to get money out of politics, last week took to the Senate floor to pooh-pooh the notion that the court's decision could allow a flood of foreign money to sway our elections, citing an existing law that prevents foreign nationals, including corporations, from spending on U.S. elections. But that ban doesn't cover the U.S. subsidiaries of foreign companies, or to foreign-owned corporations that incorporate in the U.S.

...

Since 2005, McConnell has received $21,000 -- spread between his campaign and his leadership PAC -- from a PAC run by BAE Systems Inc., according to federal campaign disclosure records examined by TPMmuckraker. BAE Systems Inc. is the American subsidiary of BAE Systems, the world's second largest defense contractor, headquartered in Britain.

In addition, United Defense Industries, another defense contractor bought by BAE in 2005, reportedlypledged half a million dollars to the McConnell Center at the University of Louisville, a political science foundation that the senator created.

McConnell has been good to BAE, which owns a facility in Louisville, Kentucky. For fiscal year 2010, the senator requested earmarks for the company worth a combined $17 million.

BAE is hardly a squeaky clean corporate citizen, either. The Justice Department is conducting an ongoing investigation (pdf) into allegations that the company bribed members of the Saudi Royal family, including the Saudi Ambassador to the United States, in support of a mulit-billion dollar, decades-long deal to barter arms for oil.

To be sure, as election lawyer Kenneth Gross points out, the existing law does make it illegal for foreign corporations to "funnel foreign corporate funds through domestic entities or to have foreign officers, directors, or employees direct foreign or domestic funds with regards to federal, state, or local elections."

But in practice, reform advocates argue, this prohibition doesn't get to the root of the issue. Even if a U.S. subsidiary uses its own funds to contribute, and the decision to contribute is made only by Americans, the money nonetheless comes from a subsidiary of a foreign corporation, whose officers can hardly be expected not to act with that interest in mind.

Haitians receive little help despite promises - Mail & Guardian Online: The smart news source

Haitians receive little help despite promises - Mail & Guardian Online: The smart news source

World leaders pledged massive aid programmes to rebuild Haiti but desperate earthquake survivors were still waiting on Sunday for food, water and medicine.

View the Mail & Guardian Online's photo gallery.

Five days after a 7.0 magnitude quake killed up to 200 000 people, international rescue teams clawed away at the rubble of collapsed buildings in the wrecked capital, Port-au-Prince, in a race against time to find more survivors.

But logistical logjams kept major relief from reaching the hundreds of thousands of hungry Haitians waiting for help, many of them sheltering in makeshift camps on streets strewn with debris and decomposing bodies.

"I'm going there with a very heavy heart. This is one of the worst humanitarian crises in decades. The damage, destruction, loss of life is just overwhelming," UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said as he boarded a flight for Haiti on Sunday.

The United Nations was feeding 40 000 people a day and hoped to increase that to one million within two weeks, he said. "The challenge at this time is how to coordinate all of this outpouring of assistance." ...

After Haiti's earthquake: Growing deadlier | The Economist

After Haiti's earthquake: Growing deadlier | The Economist

SIX days after a magnitude 7.0 earthquake struck Haiti, the extent of the damage and suffering is becoming clearer. The misery exceeds even the most pessimistic expectations. There are no reliable estimates of the death toll, but according to Jean-Max Bellerive, the prime minister, the government disposed of 20,000 bodies in the first four days after the tremor, most of them dumped into mass graves without any attempt to determine their identities. Despite these efforts, Port-au-Prince, the capital, is still littered with corpses and survivors have resorted to placing toothpaste or orange peel under their noses to fight the stench. On Sunday January 17th, Mr Bellerive guessed that 70,000 people had died in Port-au-Prince and Leogane (the city closest to the epicentre), before counting those killed in the country’s heavily affected south-western peninsula.

Both Haiti’s endemic misery and the obstacles for rescue workers are in the spotlight. Earthquakes of similar magnitude have struck bigger cities in richer countries and claimed just a few dozen lives. But the absence of building codes in Haiti, as well as a severe wood shortage because of mass deforestation, mean that many structures in urban areas are made of thin, low-quality concrete. Such concrete is both prone to collapse and dangerous for those who are hit by it or buried beneath it. Ironically, some of the country’s poorest benefited from living in tin-roofed shacks, which were much easier to escape from.

SIX days after a magnitude 7.0 earthquake struck Haiti, the extent of the damage and suffering is becoming clearer. The misery exceeds even the most pessimistic expectations. There are no reliable estimates of the death toll, but according to Jean-Max Bellerive, the prime minister, the government disposed of 20,000 bodies in the first four days after the tremor, most of them dumped into mass graves without any attempt to determine their identities. Despite these efforts, Port-au-Prince, the capital, is still littered with corpses and survivors have resorted to placing toothpaste or orange peel under their noses to fight the stench. On Sunday January 17th, Mr Bellerive guessed that 70,000 people had died in Port-au-Prince and Leogane (the city closest to the epicentre), before counting those killed in the country’s heavily affected south-western peninsula.

Both Haiti’s endemic misery and the obstacles for rescue workers are in the spotlight. Earthquakes of similar magnitude have struck bigger cities in richer countries and claimed just a few dozen lives. But the absence of building codes in Haiti, as well as a severe wood shortage because of mass deforestation, mean that many structures in urban areas are made of thin, low-quality concrete. Such concrete is both prone to collapse and dangerous for those who are hit by it or buried beneath it. Ironically, some of the country’s poorest benefited from living in tin-roofed shacks, which were much easier to escape from. ...

US waves white flag in disastrous 'war on drugs' - Americas, World - The Independent

US waves white flag in disastrous 'war on drugs' - Americas, World - The Independent

After 40 years of defeat and failure, America's "war on drugs" is being buried in the same fashion as it was born – amid bloodshed, confusion, corruption and scandal. US agents are being pulled from South America; Washington is putting its narcotics policy under review, and a newly confident region is no longer prepared to swallow its fatal Prohibition error. Indeed, after the expenditure of billions of dollars and the violent deaths of tens of thousands of people, a suitable epitaph for America's longest "war" may well be the plan, in Bolivia, for every family to be given the right to grow coca in its own backyard.

The "war", declared unilaterally throughout the world by Richard Nixon in 1969, is expiring as its strategists start discarding plans that have proved futile over four decades: they are preparing to withdraw their agents from narcotics battlefields from Colombia to Afghanistan and beginning to coach them in the art of trumpeting victory and melting away into anonymous defeat. Not surprisingly, the new strategy is being gingerly aired in the media of the US establishment, from The Wall Street Journal to the Miami Herald.

Prospects in the new decade are thus opening up for vast amounts of useless government expenditure being reassigned to the treatment of addicts instead of their capture and imprisonment. And, no less important, the ever-expanding balloon of corruption that the "war" has brought to heads of government, armies and police forces wherever it has been waged may slowly start to deflate.

Prepare to shed a tear over the loss of revenue that eventual decriminalisation of narcotics could bring to the traffickers, large and small, and to the contractors who have been making good money building and running the new prisons that help to bankrupt governments – in the US in particular, where drug offenders – principally small retailers and seldom the rich and important wholesalers – have helped to push the prison population to 1,600,000; their imprisonment is already straining federal and state budgets. In Mississippi, where drug offenders once had to serve 85 per cent of their sentences, they are now being required to serve less than a quarter. California has been ordered to release 40,000 inmates because its prisons are hugely overcrowded.

At the same time, some in the US are confused and fear that the new commission proposed by Congressman Eliot Engel, a man with a record of hostility to the Cuban and Venezuelan governments, may prove to be a broken reed. As he brought in his bill he added timidly: "Let me be absolutely clear that this bill has not been introduced to support the legalisation of illegal drugs. That is not something that I would like to see."

Part of the reason for the slow US retreat from the "war" is that the strategy of fighting it in foreign lands and not at home has proved valueless. Along the already sensitive frontier with Mexico the effect of US attempts to enforce a hard line by blasting drug dealers away has been bloody. Anxious to keep in check the flood of illegal immigrants into territory that once belonged to Mexico, Washington is building a wall and fence comparable to that which once cut through Berlin and that which is today causing havoc between Israelis and Palestinians.

In the areas of Mexico closest to the US frontier the toll of deaths in drug-related violence exceeded 7,000 people in 2009 (1,000 of them dying in January and February). This takes the death toll over three years to above 16,000, figures far in excess of US fatalities in Afghanistan. The bloodshed has continued despite – or perhaps because of – the intense US pressure on President Felipe Calderon to station a large part of the Mexican army in the region. It is deploying 49,000 men on its own soil in the campaign against drugs, a larger force than the 46,000 Britain sent to take part in the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003. But still the blood flows.

As in Colombia, where a multibillion-dollar US subsidy maintains that country's armed forces, there are well-founded suspicions that military operations are often rendered futile because the miserably paid local commanders and individual soldiers are easily bought off by drug dealers.

The quiet expiry of the "war" has dawned slowly on a world focused on the US's more palpable conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Last month, the US House of Representatives gave unanimous approval to a bill creating an independent commission to reconsider domestic and international drug policies and suggest better ones. Congressman Engel, a Democrat from the Bronx and the sponsor of the bill, declared: "Billions upon billions of US taxpayer dollars have been spent over the years to combat the drug trade in Latin America and the Caribbean. In spite of our efforts, the positive results are few and far between." ...

GOP, Warning Of A 'New EPA', Oppose Independent CFPA

GOP, Warning Of A 'New EPA', Oppose Independent CFPA

Senate Republicans are determined to prevent the creation of an independent Consumer Financial Protection Agency because they consider it as threatening as their current arch-nemesis regulator: the Environmental Protection Agency.

Consumer advocates, meanwhile, say the CFPA must have strong, independent authority to craft and enforce rules. Anything less, they argue, would be too much of a concession to banks that have gotten enough already.

"From the Republican point of view, the idea of a separate agency is still anathema," said Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah, a senior Republican on the banking committee. An independent agency, he said, can go too far in the direction of tight regulation without taking into account the effect of the rules it creates on business and the economy. He said he's seen it happen before.

"Can you say EPA?" he asked, lifting his eyebrows. The Republican Party has regretted for years that President Richard Nixon made the EPA independent. ...

RebelReports - Stunning Statistics About the War Every American Should Know

RebelReports - Stunning Statistics About the War Every American Should Know

Contrary to popular belief, the US actually has 189,000 personnel on the ground in Afghanistan right now—and that number is quickly rising.

By Jeremy Scahill

A hearing in Sen. Claire McCaskill’s Contract Oversight subcommittee on contracting in Afghanistan has highlighted some important statistics that provide a window into the extent to which the Obama administration has picked up the Bush-era war privatization baton and sprinted with it. Overall, contractors now comprise a whopping 69% of the Department of Defense’s total workforce, “the highest ratio of contractors to military personnel in US history.” That’s not in one war zone—that’s the Pentagon in its entirety.

In Afghanistan, the Obama administration blows the Bush administration out of the privatized water. According to a memo [PDF] released by McCaskill’s staff, “From June 2009 to September 2009, there was a 40% increase in Defense Department contractors in Afghanistan. During the same period, the number of armed private security contractors working for the Defense Department in Afghanistan doubled, increasing from approximately 5,000 to more than 10,000.”

At present, there are 104,000 Department of Defense contractors in Afghanistan. According to a report this week from the Congressional Research Service, as a result of the coming surge of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan, there may be up to 56,000 additional contractors deployed. But here is another group of contractors that often goes unmentioned: 3,600 State Department contractors and 14,000 USAID contractors. That means that the current total US force in Afghanistan is approximately 189,000 personnel (68,000 US troops and 121,000 contractors). And remember, that’s right now. And that, according to McCaskill, is a conservative estimate. A year from now, we will likely see more than 220,000 US-funded personnel on the ground in Afghanistan.

The US has spent more than $23 billion on contracts in Afghanistan since 2002. By next year, the number of contractors will have doubled since 2008 when taxpayers funded over $8 billion in Afghanistan-related contracts.

...

As for waste and abuse, the subcommittee says that the Defense Contract Audit Agency identified more than $950 million in questioned and unsupported costs submitted by Defense Department contracts for work in Afghanistan. That’s 16% of the total contract dollars reviewed.

The Washington Monthly

The Washington Monthly

December 29, 2009

ABSTAINING FROM MAKING SENSE.... If there's one thing conservatives claim to hate, it's wasteful federal spending on programs that have been proven not to work.

Unless we're talking about funding for abstinence programs, in which case conservatives lovewasteful federal spending on programs that have been proven not to work.

Proponents of sex education classes that focus on encouraging teenagers to remain virgins until marriage are hoping that the rescue plan for the nation's health-care system will also save their programs, which are facing extinction because of a cutoff of federal funding.

The health-care reform legislation pending in the Senate includes $50 million for programs that states could use to try to reduce pregnancies and sexually transmitted disease among adolescents by teaching to them to delay when they start having sex.

Under the federal budget signed by President Obama, such programs would no longer have funds targeted for them.

"We're optimistic," said Valerie Huber of the National Abstinence Education Association, which is lobbying to maintain funding for the programs. "Nothing is certain, but we're hopeful."

Bush/Cheney spent about $150 million a year on abstinence programs that failed miserably. Obama's budget directs funds to "teenage pregnancy prevention" for programs that have been "proven effective through rigorous evaluation." The right objected, arguing that limiting funding to effective programs would exclude their preferred initiatives. Obama didn't budge.

But abstinence proponents believe health care reform might offer new opportunities, in large part because Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) pushed a measure to provide $50 million to states to use for abstinence programs. It was approved in committee thanks to the support of a couple of conservative Democrats, and for some reason, the provision ended up as part of the legislation passed by the Senate. (Hatch described himself as being "as surprised as anyone" to see the provision remain in the bill.)

Reality has been stubborn on the question of abstinence effectiveness, and policymakers shaping the final health care bill would be wise to acknowledge it. The nonpartisan National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy found that abstinence programs do not affect teenager sexual behavior. A congressionally-mandated study, which was not only comprehensive but also included long-term follow-up, found the exact same thing. Researchers keep conducting studies, and the results are always the same.

This isn't complicated. Simply telling teenagers not to have sex doesn't affect behavior, doesn't prevent unwanted pregnancies, and doesn't stop the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases. Teens who receive comprehensive lessons of sexual health, with reliable, accurate information, are more likely to engage in safer, more responsible behavior. ...

Sandy Rosenthal: Recent Ruling Shows True Tragedy of Katrina was Federal Government's Creation of the Disaster Itself

Sandy Rosenthal: Recent Ruling Shows True Tragedy of Katrina was Federal Government's Creation of the Disaster Itself

Few paid attention two years ago when U.S. District Judge Stanwood Duval found the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Government squarely responsible for the flooding destruction in New Orleans during Katrina.

Even though the judge thundered over how the Corps squandered millions on building a levee system "... known to be inadequate by the Corps' own calculations..," few people paid much attention.



Because the judge had to dismiss the case.


Though judged responsible for the failure of its flood control structures, the Corps, nonetheless, was protected from any financial liability due to the Flood Control Act of 1928.

The American people, conditioned to believe that if there is no financial liability then the case has no merit, went on with their lives.


Even though over 600 died directly due to the floodwall collapses, and billions upon billions of dollars damage were documented, most Americans ignored the ruling and its significance.


But on November 18, 2009, Judge Duval ruled again, this time finding the Corps directly and financially responsible for the destruction of most of New Orleans and wrote, "...the Corps' lassitude and failure to fulfill its duties resulted in a catastrophic loss of human life and property in unprecedented proportions...."

This time the issue was the failure of a navigation structure, not a flood control structure. 

And now, the American people are sitting up and taking note.

The media is reporting and focusing on how the ruling would "open the floodgates" to more than 100,000 claims pending against the Army for its defective engineering and poor planning.

Americans are now paying attention, and so it's important that they receive accurate information before they become distracted again.

The last time the nation's people were listening they were handed a great deal of disinformation.

When the Corps-built levees broke on August 29, 2005, retired spokespersons for the Corps quickly fanned out to talk to national reporters about why New Orleans flooded so horrifically.

Using a technique documented by Georgianne Nienaber, these spokespersons gave out crafted misinformation with help from the Corps' public relations companies designed to shift responsibility for the flooding away from the federal agency. The myths and misinformation was then pedaled by an often understaffed news media satisfying an American public thirsting for details.





By the time the media attention abated, household opinion was that the people of south Louisiana were reckless for living in their own homes and stupid for rebuilding, even though many lived in family homes that have been in place for generations, even centuries.



The single most common diffusion technique the Corps used to shift responsibility for its broken levees away from itself was in claiming that New Orleans locals blocked the Corps' grand plans for perimeter barrier structures that would have kept water out of the city. This implied that the locals were to blame for the catastrophic flooding during Katrina four years ago. ...

.....

Here is what really happened according to the Decision-Making Chronology for the Lake Pontchartrain & Vicinity Hurricane Protection Project by Douglas Woolley and Leonard Shabman, both water resources planning and policy experts.

...

Conclusion:
The issue with changing of the law was a matter of cost share. Furthermore, this 70-30 cost share is the same in all fifty states for USACE built water protects, and is not unique to New Orleans. For the Corps to blame the locals for the Lakeview flooding because they successfully changed the cost share arrangement is disingenuous.

......

And there is no evidence of the Corps being coerced to do anything outside its will.

The literature and internet are filled with verbal statements from Corps of Engineers spokespersons during the years 2005 and 2006 saying that they were "forced" to abandon their grand plans for peripheral barrier structures for both the outfall canals and the barrier structures. But none of this literature contains references to the necessary documentation or other evidence. And all of it is refuted in 2007 and later.



....

And hopefully, it will lead to a re-examinination of an archaic law, the Flood Control Act of 1928, that provides no incentive to the Army Corps of Engineers to build flood protection properly nor mete out professional consequences should it fail.

Former head of CDC lands lucrative job as president of Merck vaccine division (opinion)

Former head of CDC lands lucrative job as president of Merck vaccine division (opinion)

You've heard it before, how the pharmaceutical industry has a giant "revolving door" through which corporations and government agencies frequently exchange key employees. That reality was driven home in a huge way today when news broke that Dr. Julie Gerberding, who headed the CDC from 2002 through 2009, landed a top job with Merck, one of the largest drug companies in the world. Her job there? She's the new president of the vaccine division.

How convenient. That means the former head of the CDC was very likely cultivating a relationship with Merck all these years, and now comes the big payoff: Heading up a $5 billion division that sells cervical cancer vaccines (like Gardasil), chickenpox vaccines and of course H1N1 swine flu vaccines, too.

So what's the problem with all this? The problem is that private industry and government health offices such as the CDC or FDA should never be so cozy. When they are, it creates an environment of collusion between Big Government and Big Pharma. We've already seen this with the government-led push for swine flu vaccines that are manufactured (and sold) by drug companies like Merck.

You might even say that the CDC already functions as the marketing division of the pharmaceutical industry. It was the CDC that pushed so hard for swine flu vaccines, even amid the obvious realization that swine flu was no more dangerous than seasonal flu. To this day, the CDC still hasn't bothered to recommend vitamin D for the prevention of either seasonal flu or swine flu. It remains heavily invested in the lucrative vaccine approach -- an approach that just happens to financially benefit the very corporations that are hiring ex-CDC employees like Dr. Gerberding.

How to triple your salary ...

Getting a job offer from Big Pharma, by the way, is one of the most-desired career paths for many CDC employees (and FDA workers, for that matter). It's easy to accomplish it, too: Just operate in your government position as if you were a Big Pharma lackey. If you produce enough good business for the drug industry, sooner or later they'll offer you a lucrative position that doubles or triples your government salary (or even better).

Now, I don't want to lump all CDC employees in this same pathetic group, because there are indeed a great many bright, honest scientists working at the CDC who do excellent work tracking pandemics and trying to save lives. They are overshadowed, however, by those ambitious profit seekers who see their CDC job as merely a stepping stone for a far better-paying job at a major drug companies. And by any measure, Dr. Gerberding just cashed in big. ...

Feds investigating Stanford ties to lawmakers: report | Reuters

Feds investigating Stanford ties to lawmakers: report | Reuters

MIAMI (Reuters) - U.S. federal authorities are investigating millions of dollars contributed by accused fraudster Allen Stanford and his staff to U.S. lawmakers over the past decade, the Miami Herald reported on Sunday.

U.S.

The newspaper said the Justice Department investigation aimed to determine whether the banker received special favors from politicians while he was operating his alleged $7 billion Ponzi scheme centered on fraudulent certificates of deposit issued by his offshore bank in Antigua and Barbuda.

The Miami Herald said an email sent to Stanford by Texas Republican Representative Pete Sessions on the day authorities announced fraud charges against the billionaire financier, as well as $2.3 million in contributions he made to Sessions and other U.S. lawmakers, were "part of the government's inquiry."

It said Stanford, who has pleaded not guilty and is awaiting a trial set for January 2011, also spent $5 million on lobbying since 2001, and successfully lobbied in 2001 to kill a bill that would have exposed the flow of millions into his secretive offshore bank on the Caribbean island of Antigua.

The following year he helped block legislation that would have led to more government scrutiny of his now disgraced Antigua bank, the newspaper said. ...

...

It said Stanford also funded Caribbean trips for a group of U.S. lawmakers known as the Caribbean Caucus, including Sessions and Democrats Gregory Meeks of New York and Donald Payne of New Jersey.

The newspaper said most of the members of Congress contacted it contacted about their ties to Stanford declined to discuss them, other than to say they had returned the contributions.

Prosecutors say Stanford paid tens of thousands of dollars in bribes for years to a top financial regulator in Antigua and Barbuda to shield his Ponzi scheme from U.S. investigators. ...

A Whistle-Blower at Deutsche Bank Building Is Now an Outcast - NYTimes.com

A Whistle-Blower at Deutsche Bank Building Is Now an Outcast - NYTimes.com

Marshal Greenberg is an odd, unlikely whistle-blower.The son of an accused organized crime associate, he earned more than $100,000 a year operating the elevator that ferried workers and supplies up and down the exterior of the former Deutsche Bank building during its troubled demolition.

He was hefty and heavily tattooed, a middle-aged man with a cushy job, a powerful father and a host of compelling reasons to keep his head down and his mouth shut.

Instead Mr. Greenberg embraced his job with a Barney Fife kind of zeal. He photographed unsafe conditions at the Manhattan building. He reported dangerous practices to supervisors and safety inspectors.

Smoking near compressors. Shot glasses left behind at a work station. Drug use. Stealing.

“Everybody has a right to work in a safe environment,” Mr. Greenberg said. “I was careful. That’s my job.”

For his efforts, Mr. Greenberg says, union co-workers and construction supervisors threatened and abused him, ridiculed his size, his skin condition and his chatty way with government regulators.

And after a fire at the building in 2007 killed two firefighters, someone even fingered him as an arsonist. For days, investigators treated him like the prime suspect.

Actually, the blaze was caused by careless smoking, like the kind Mr. Greenberg had reported, investigators concluded, and the firefighters’ deaths were blamed on unsafe conditions, like a standpipe that was dismantled. Two construction supervisors have been accused of criminal negligence in the deaths.

But Mr. Greenberg says he does not feel vindicated, only shunned.

Long a member of the Operating Engineers Local 14, who is credited with saving a woman on the day of the fire, Mr. Greenberg says he is now an outcast: unwelcome at his old job, unable to find work at any other.

“I’m treated like public enemy No. 1, all because I did the right thing,” Mr. Greenberg, 39, said.

He is suing the contractors who employed him, Bovis Lend Lease and the John Galt Corporation, accusing them of retaliating against him for telling the truth. Bovis, in court papers, has denied his claims. Galt has yet to file its court papers, and declined comment. ...

Baucus Nominated Melodee Hanes, His Girlfriend, For U.S. Attorney

Baucus Nominated Melodee Hanes, His Girlfriend, For U.S. Attorney

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus was romantically involved with a former staffer when he recommended her earlier this year to become the next U.S. attorney for Montana, a spokesman said.

The Montana Democrat and his former state office director Melodee Hanes began their relationship in the summer of 2008 after Baucus separated from his wife, Ty Matsdorf told The Associated Press late Friday.

Baucus nominated Hanes for the U.S. attorney post in March. But she later withdrew, saying she had been presented with other opportunities she couldn't pass up.

,,,

Most recently Baucus has been at the center of an effort to move sweeping health care legislation through the Senate with a bill aimed at meeting Obama's goal of overhauling the nation's health care system to cover 30 million more Americans over the next decade.

On Friday, Baucus went against his party and backed a Republican effort to eliminate a long-term care insurance program to help seniors and the disabled. Republicans argued that the new plan would be a drain on the federal budget.

The Democrat has also been in the middle of other congressional battles: He played a key role in 2003 legislation adding a prescription-drug benefit to the Medicare program and enactment of President George W. Bush's tax cuts in 2001.

Senator Ben Nelson and His Connections to the Health Care Industry | Public Campaign Action Fund

Senator Ben Nelson and His Connections to the Health Care Industry | Public Campaign Action Fund

On May 1, 2009 Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson came out against including a public health insurance plan option as part of this year’s health care reform legislation. Sen. Nelson called the inclusion of a public plan a “deal-breaker,” according to Congressional Quarterly.1
...

Before entering politics, Ben Nelson spent his career as an insurance executive, insurance company lawyer and, early in his career, Nebraska’s state insurance regulator. He was chief executive officer of an insurance company and has sided with and received political support from business groups opposed to a public health plan as part of health reform.

• “Nelson enjoyed a successful career in insurance law,” says his Senate website. “He has served as CEO of the Central National Insurance Group, as chief of staff and executive vice president of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, and as director of the Nebraska Department of Insurance.”3
  
  
• In his 2006 re-election campaign, Nelson received endorsements from the National Federation of Independent Business, the Business-Industry Political Action Committee, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. According to the Lincoln Journal Star, “NFIB jointed BIPAC (Business-Industry Political Action Committee) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in handing the Democratic senator strong business support.”4 These lobbies are either publicly opposed to a public insurance option, or are expected to be.
  

CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS

Sen. Nelson has depended on the insurance and health care industries to pay for his campaigns for public office.5

• According to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Sen. Nelson has raised more than $2 million from insurance and health care interests in his three campaigns for federal office.
  
  
• Sen. Nelson has received $1,195,299 from insurance interests, $399,345 from health professionals, $258,483 from the pharmaceutical industry, and $195,138 from hospital and nursing home interests.
  
  
• Of Sen. Nelson’s campaign contributions from the insurance and health care industries, 83.4% have come from out of state sources, according to our analysis of data downloaded from the Center for Responsive Politics.
• 
  

Lehman, Bear Stearns Execs Cashed In As Their Firms Failed: Study

Lehman, Bear Stearns Execs Cashed In As Their Firms Failed: Study

If you thought that the executives at Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns paid dearly in when their firms famously imploded last year, think again.

A new study by three professors at the Program for Corporate Governance at Harvard Law School reexamines the "standard narrative" of the loss of wealth suffered by top leaders at Bear and Lehman. The top five executives at Bear and Lehman were able to sell billions in stock holdings from 200-2008, the study notes, while most shareholders saw their investments in the two firms decimated.

During the same period, the study notes, "the shareholder payoffs these teams produced were indisputably poor." From the study:

Overall, we estimate that the top executive teams of Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers derived cash flows of about $1.4 billion and $1 billion respectively from cash bonuses and equity sales during 2000-2008. These cash flows substantially exceeded the value of the executives' initial holdings in the beginning of the period, and the executives' net payoffs for the period were thus decidedly positive. The divergence between how the top executives and their shareholders fared implies that it is not possible to rule out, as standard narratives suggest, that the executives' pay arrangements provided them with excessive risk-taking incentives.

...

The study arrives a conclusion long-held by critics of the financial industry. In short, Wall Street pay was specifically structured to encourage short-term gains:

"...the executives were the able to obtain large amounts of bonus compensation based on high earnings in the years preceding the financial crisis, but did not have to return any of those bonuses when the earnings subsequently evaporated and turned into massive losses. Such a design of bonus compensation provides executives with incentives to seek improvements in short-term earnings figures even at the cost of maintaining an excessively high risk of large losses down the road."

Interestingly, the study suggests that Wall Street's bonus culture may not be the largest cause of the excessive risks taken by the industry. Fixing compensation isn't merely an issue of increasing stock awards and limiting bonuses; in fact, the study steers clear of suggestions that pay should be capped. Instead, the study argues that the failure of Bear and Lehman suggest that compensation clawbacks should be considered.

READ the report here: ...

BCS-Wages-of-Failure-Nov09 -