A More Conservative Union

A 'National Broadband Plan'

2010-01-20T00:16:00.002-04:00

One more solution in search of a problem.

The Federal Communications Commission recently told Congress that it will miss a February deadline for delivering a "national broadband plan" and requested a one-month extension. If it keeps missing deadlines, nearly everyone in the U.S. might soon have high-speed Internet.
As part of last year's stimulus package, Congress asked the FCC for a plan to ensure that everybody in the country has access to broadband. That's a worthy goal, but the idea of a government plan is based on a false presumption that the spread of broadband is stalled. The reality is that broadband adoption continues apace, as does the quality and speed of Internet connections.
Between 2000 and 2008, residential broadband subscribers grew to 80 million from five million, according to a study by Bret Swanson of Entropy Economics. Broadband penetration among active Internet users at home is 94%, and nearly 99% of U.S. workers connect to the Internet with broadband. A typical cable modem today is 10 times faster than a decade ago. Wireless bandwidth growth per capita has been no less impressive, showing a 500-fold increase since 2000.
Meanwhile, U.S. information and communications technology investment in 2008 alone totalled $455 billion, or 22% of all U.S. capital investment. Nominal capital investment in telecom between 2000 and 2008 was more than $3.5 trillion.
Those who favor more government control of the Internet ignore this private progress and point to international rankings. According to OECD estimates, the U.S. ranks 15th in the world in broadband penetration per capita. But because household sizes differ from country to country, and the U.S. has relatively large households, the per capita figures can be misleading. A better way to gauge wired broadband connections is per household, not per person. By that measure the U.S. ranks somewhere between 8th and 10th.
Such comparisons will soon be moot in any case because broadband penetration is growing rapidly in all OECD countries. The Technology Policy Institute notes that "at the current rates of broadband adoption the U.S. is behind the leaders only by a number of months, and all wealthy OECD countries will reach a saturation point within the next few years."
Even the Obama Justice Department seems to reject the broadband market failure thesis. "In any industry subject to significant technological change, it is important that the evaluation of competition be forward-looking rather than based on static definitions of products and services," said the Antitrust Division in a January 4 filing to the FCC. "In the case of broadband services, it's clear that the market is shifting generally in the direction of faster speeds and additional mobility."
Justice concludes that while "enacting some form of regulation to prevent certain providers from exercising monopoly control may be tempting . . . care must be taken to avoid stifling the infrastructure investments needed to expand broadband access."
No matter, the default position of the Obama Administration is that little useful happens without government, so the FCC is busy planning. Chairman Julius Genachowski is sympathetic to net neutrality regulations that would prevent Internet service providers from using differentiated pricing to manage Web traffic. Liberal interest groups like Public Knowledge and Harvard's Berkman Center for the Internet and Society are urging the agency to reinstitute "open access" mandates that would force cable operators and phone companies to share their infrastructure with rivals at government-set prices.
The irony is that the private investment and innovation of recent years have occurred in the wake of the FCC rolling back similar rules that held back telecom in the 1990s. Consumers continue to have access to more and more broadband services, while Google, YouTube, iTunes, Facebook and Netflix originated in the U.S.
Doesn't the Obama Administration have enough to do than mess with a part of the U.S. economy that is working well?

US accused of 'occupying' Haiti as troops flood in

2010-01-19T00:43:00.002-04:00

France accused the US of "occupying" Haiti on Monday as thousands of American troops flooded into the country to take charge of aid efforts and security.

Bill Clinton helps to unload a delivery of medical supplies in Port-au-Prince Photo: GETTY

The French minister in charge of humanitarian relief called on the UN to "clarify" the American role amid claims the military build up was hampering aid efforts.
Alain Joyandet admitted he had been involved in a scuffle with a US commander in the airport's control tower over the flight plan for a French evacuation flight.

"This is about helping Haiti, not about occupying Haiti," Mr Joyandet said.
Geneva-based charity Medecins Sans Frontieres backed his calls saying hundreds of lives were being put at risk as planes carrying vital medical supplies were being turned away by American air traffic controllers.
But US commanders insisted their forces' focus was on humanitarian work and last night agreed to prioritise aid arrivals to the airport over military flights, after the intervention of the UN.
The diplomatic row came amid heightened frustrations that hundreds of tons of aid was still not getting through. Charities reported violence was also worsening as desperate Haitians took matters into their own hands.
The death toll is now estimated at up to 200,000 lives. Around three million Haitians – a third of the country's population – have been affected by Tuesday's earthquake and two million require food assistance.
While food and water was gradually arriving at the makeshift camps which have sprung up around the city, riots have broken out in other areas where supplies have still not materialised.
Haiti was occupied by the US between 1915 and 1935, and historical sensitivities together with friction with other countries over the relief effort has made the Americans cautious about their role in the operation.
American military commanders have repeatedly stressed that they are not entering the country as an occupying force.
US soldiers in Port-au-Prince said they had been told to be discreet about how they carry their M4 assault rifles.
A paratrooper sergeant said they were authorised to use "deadly force" if they see anyone's life in danger but only as a "last resort".
Capt John Kirby, a spokesman for the joint task force at the airport, said the US recognised it was only one of a number of countries contributing to a UN-led mission.
He also emphasised the US troops, which he said would rise to 10,000 by Wednesday would principally be assisting in humanitarian relief and the evacuation of people needing medical attention.
The main responsibility for security rests with the UN, which is to add a further 3,000 troops to its force of 9,000.
However, it was agreed on Sunday night that the Americans would take over security at the four main food and water distribution points being set up in the city, Capt Kirby said.
"Security here is in a fluid situation," he said. "If the Haitian government asked us to provide security downtown, we would do that." He played down the threat of violence, saying: "What we're seeing is that there are isolated incidents of violence and some pockets where it's been more restive, but overall it's calm."

Fear Factor

2010-01-15T00:52:00.000-04:00

The ideologues in Washington are scaring Americans.

BY Gary Andres

The candidate of hope and change has now become a president of fear and doubt. This is hampering the economy and the American people's sense of security.
The fear factor manifests itself in several ways. Consider what was formerly known as the “war on terror.” Whatever the president wants to call it these days, we’re losing. This is a scary thought. It’s deeply frightening when an al-Qaeda operative nearly blows up an airliner filled with American citizens, over an American city. Yet when that same terrorist gets treated like someone who just robbed a bank, the people's fear becomes widespread doubt – skepticism emerges about this administration’s capacity and commitment to protect its people.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is a terrorist and enemy combatant, not a common criminal. He should not enjoy the constitutional protections belonging to American citizens. Period. Allowing the military to hold and interrogate him could have yielded critical real-time intelligence about persons and plans to kill more Americans. We missed that opportunity and now could pay a catastrophic price.

Unfortunately, Mr. Obama seems like a naïve college professor, more committed to a theoretical ideal of preserving Miranda rights than to defending America.

This perception is growing, and it’s contributing to the fear factor. Writing recently in the Wall Street Journal, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey observes:
What the gaffes, the almost comically strained avoidance of such direct terms as "war" and "Islamist terrorism," and the failure to think of Abdulmutallab as a potential source of intelligence rather than simply as a criminal defendant seem to reflect is that some in the executive branch are focused more on not sounding like their predecessors than they are on finding and neutralizing people who believe it is their religious duty to kill us. That's too bad, because the Constitution vests "the executive power"—not some of it, all of it—in the president. He, and those acting at his direction, are responsible for protecting us.

Mukasey understands the fear factor nexus. He concludes his piece by arguing, "There is much to worry about if they think that the principal challenge of the day is detecting bombs at the airport rather than actively searching out, finding and neutralizing terrorists before they get there."

Fear also hampers the economic recovery. And Mr. Obama’s domestic policies are causing angst here, as well. Growing choruses of economic analysts recognize this point. Larry Kudlow, writing in National Review Online last week, argues the collective weight of all these measures – the “stimulus monster,” cap and trade, government takeover of health care, increases in marginal tax rates and capital gains tax rates – is dragging the economy down. “It’s creating so much uncertainty that even profitable businesses are afraid to hire new workers and expand,” Kudlow writes.

He’s right. Instead of injecting confidence, Mr. Obama seems like a risky gambler, doubling down on doubt.

University of Chicago economists Gary S. Becker, Steven J. Davis, and Kevin M. Murphy make a similar point in last week’s Wall Street Journal. They argue that introducing a host of economic changes on the heels of a recession is a mistake and contributing to our economic woes. "By failing to adopt a measured approach, Congress and the president may be slowing the economic recovery, and thereby prolonging the distress from the recession," they write.

The Democratic leadership is exacerbating the fear factor, hurling the party into a political death spiral. Veteran political analyst Charlie Cook says, "Watching Democrats over the last 6 months is a bit like watching a car wreck in slow motion.”

No one knows all the reasons underlying voter trepidation with Mr. Obama and the Democrats. Americans clearly desired “change” in the 2008 election. So now are they saying “no,” “too much,” or "not this kind of change?" Probably a little of each. The Democrats seek to promote change with a host of party-line votes on everything from the stimulus to cap and trade to health care. Americans are connecting the dots – on everything from fighting terrorism to domestic policy – and the picture emerging from Mr. Obama and the Democrats in Washington is scaring them.

Bottom line: Americans want political leaders to solve problems with common sense, not politicians who act like ideologues on a mission.

D.C. Witness Protection Program

2010-01-15T00:38:00.002-04:00

A financial inquiry hits the bankers, ignores the Fed and Fannie Mae.

Law enforcers normally use the witness protection program to shield people willing to provide testimony. So far, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission seems determined to protect a political class willing to do almost anything to avoid testifying.
That's the message of the commission's first week of hearings, which focused on repeating the Beltway's pet theory of what caused the credit mania and subsequent panic. To wit, the greedy bankers did it, abetted by Bush Administration deregulators and perhaps, a little, by the Clinton Treasury when it agreed to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act. If the commission is merely going to reinforce this laughably narrow and politicized view, this is going to be a waste of money and time.
Created by Congress and due to report by December 15, the commission is chaired by Phil Angelides, a former chairman of California's Democratic Party. His first group of witnesses on Wednesday were the CEOs of Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, plus the Chairman of Morgan Stanley.

View Full Image

Associated Press

Phil Angelides

Mr. Angelides delivered what you would expect of a political hearing, accusing Goldman of "selling a used car with faulty brakes" when it sold mortgage-backed securities. He demanded that the executives accept blame for the crisis and then said he "was troubled by the inability to take responsibility." On day one, Mr. Angelides appeared to have reached his conclusion.

Yesterday, on day two, the commission loaded up on details about "current investigations into the financial crisis" by state, local and federal law enforcers. Attorney General Eric Holder was there, along with Lanny Breuer, head of the Criminal Division, and a lawyer for the Miami-Dade County police department. The theme seemed to be how many banker miscreants will end up in jail.

***

Our point isn't that bankers didn't make stupendous blunders. It is that the roots of the mania and panic are so much larger than any single financial security, compensation practice or regulation. And those roots are found as much in Washington as on Wall Street.
Start with the Federal Reserve, which for years kept interest rates below the rate of inflation and thus created a global subsidy for credit. Bankers and investors had an incentive to sell and take on more debt. A Journal survey of economists this week found that a majority now think Fed policy was a major culprit. Providing a rare source of wisdom at yesterday's hearing was FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair, who explained how the Fed's monetary policy helped inflate the housing bubble.
If the commissioners are looking for historical guidance, they might consult the late Charles Kindleberger's classic, "Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises." On page 10 of the Fifth Edition paperback, the good professor declares that "The thesis of this book is that the cycle of manias and panics results from the pro-cyclical changes in the supply of credit." (Our emphasis.) An inquiry that ignores the sources of credit that fed the mania is like a history of the Civil War that ignores slavery.
Also missing this week was anyone from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage giants that turbocharged the housing boom. With their implicit taxpayer backing, Fan and Fred held or guaranteed more subprime and Alt-A loans than anyone—much more than the combined holdings of the four bankers represented this week.
So long as Fan and Fred kept increasing mortgages to low-income borrowers, the dynamic duo's political protectors kept fighting off efforts to cap the size of Fan and Fred's mortgage portfolios. The pair would ultimately hold or guarantee mortgages amounting to more than $5 trillion. That sum is greater than the annual GDP of Japan, the world's third largest economy, and yes, a whole lot bigger than the balance sheet of Goldman Sachs. A serious inquiry will examine the business practices of Fan and Fred, the long battle to rein them in, and the Members of Congress who blocked reform.
We'll admit we don't have much hope for any inquiry led by Mr. Angelides, who is about as partisan a chairman as one can imagine. As California treasurer and board member at Calpers, the giant pension fund for state employees, Mr. Angelides led the movement to invest to advance political goals. He pushed Calpers to invest in "environmentally screened" funds and helped pressure companies like Safeway and countries like the Philippines to embrace union labor. While at Calpers, he was dogged by questions about investment funds managing Calpers cash whose executives coincidentally were backers of his political campaigns.
Also on the panel is Brooksley Born, who has already been widely portrayed in the media as the lonely regulator who blew the whistle on derivatives but was crushed by other Clinton-era officials. By all means, Ms. Born should be a witness and her story considered. But as heavily invested as she already is in a narrative that blames derivatives and lax regulation, she is another odd choice for a disinterested inquiry.

***

The greatest oddity of the commission may be that its report is set to arrive after Congress and the Administration hope to pass the most far-reaching reform of financial laws since the 1930s. So prescription first, diagnosis later. Perhaps the commission will surprise us, but the evidence of the first week is that this exercise is less about getting to the truth than about reinforcing Democratic theories about whom to blame.

Venezuela plans blackouts in Caracas, oil town

2010-01-13T00:56:00.000-04:00

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela will switch off lights for hours at a time in Caracas and other cities such as oil town Maracaibo in planned blackouts to tackle power shortages that threaten President Hugo Chavez's support.

World

Officials announced the nationwide electricity rationing lasting at least until May on Tuesday and said even schools and small health clinics would be hit in South America's top oil exporter.
Venezuela mostly depends on hydroelectricity for its power and has been hard hit by a drought Chavez blames on the El Nino weather phenomenon.
"The rationing is at a national level and is for four hours every 48 hours," said Javier Alvarado, president of the Caracas Electricity corporation, which was nationalized in 2007 and previously belonged to U.S. company AES.
One of the cities to be hit by the new electricity rationing is Maracaibo, the country's second largest town and the capital of oil heartland Zulia.
Lights went out there on Tuesday from 3 p.m. (2:30 p.m. EST). The blackouts are planned by city district.
However, they should not affect vital oil fields and refineries, which mostly have their own generators. Major city services, like hospitals and trains, will also not be affected.
Venezuelans are already suffering widespread water rationing and increased power cuts and could punish the socialist president for the problems in September elections for lawmakers.
Chavez must navigate a number of issues, including price rises after a devaluation and high crime, if he is to maintain his approval ratings above 50 percent this year.
Venezuela enlisted Cuban help to "bomb" clouds with chemicals last month in an attempt to artificially trigger rainfall over the South American nation's largest reservoir and main power source, the vast Guri Dam.
Alvarado said water levels at the Dam dropped by 9 meters (30 feet) to 261 meters above sea level last year. Energy production is diminished as the water level falls. The dams turbines are located at 240 meters above sea level.
Critics blame the government for not investing enough in the national grid since Chavez took office 11 years ago.
The president say previous government made critical errors by building most of the nations energy infrastructure on one river that is affected by rainfall.
(Reporting by Frank Jack Daniel; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

Devaluation ups stakes in Venezuela election year

2010-01-10T01:55:00.000-04:00

Chavez popularity could suffer after devaluation
* Venezuelans rush to shops anticipating price hikes
* Inflation will jump this year (Recasts with color, adds details, background)
By Frank Jack Daniel and Eyanir Chinea
CARACAS, Jan 9 (Reuters) - Venezuelans rushed to the shops on Saturday, fearful of price rises after a currency devaluation that will let President Hugo Chavez boost government spending ahead of an election but feeds opposition charges of economic mismanagement.
In a bid to jump-start the recession-hit economy of South America's top oil exporter, Chavez on Friday announced a dual system for the fixed rate bolivar.
It devalues the currency to 4.3 and 2.6 against the dollar, from a rate of 2.15 per dollar in place since 2005, giving the better rate for basic goods in an attempt to limit the impact of the measure on consumer prices.
The opposition seized on fears that prices for imported goods will double as shoppers formed lines of more than a hundred people outside some stores in the capital Caracas.
"It was a Black Friday, tinted red," said sales executive Diana Sevillana in reference to the crimson color of Chavez's socialist party. She stood in a line of 30 people outside an electrical goods store in a middle class neighborhood.
The socialist Chavez believes the state should have a weighty role in managing the economy. During his 11 years in office he has nationalized most heavy industry, and business and finance are tightly regulated.
The devaluation is politically risky but means every dollar of oil revenue puts more bolivars in government coffers. That allows Chavez to lavish cash on social projects and fund salary increases ahead of parliamentary elections in September.
Opponents were quick to criticize the socialist, who a year ago promised the global financial crisis would not touch "a hair" of Venezuela's economy. He announced the devaluation on Friday night during an important baseball game.
"By establishing the exchange rate at 4.3 bolivars per dollar, the quality of life for Venezuelans is automatically devalued since we now have half the money we had before," said Caracas Mayor Antonio Ledezma, a Chavez opponent.
BLACKOUTS, WATER SHORTAGES
Opposition parties, emboldened by public dissatisfaction at frequent blackouts and water shortages and a 2.9 percent economic contraction in 2009, hope to strip Chavez of his legislative majority in September.
The devaluation is embarrassing for Chavez, who resisted calls from economists and many government allies to make the move last year when oil prices were at their lowest and elections a long way off.
"Venezuela's decision to devalue the Bolivar culminates an event that the market has been anticipating for a long time," said Walter Molano, an analyst at BCP Securities. "It helps alleviate the country's fiscal woes and puts it on a sounder macroeconomic footing."
The measure is a relief for state oil company PDVSA, which has struggled to pay service providers and meet requirements to fund social projects since crude prices dropped sharply last year. It also makes Venezuelan businesses more competitive.
Holders of Venezuela's foreign debt are also pleased, since the devaluation improves government finances and lessens the need to issue more bonds.
However, Chavez risks taking a blow to his popularity ratings, which are about 50 percent, as prices for many products inevitably will rise in the country of 28 million people, which relies on imports for much of its consumption.
Finance Minister Ali Rodriguez said the devaluation will add 3 percent to 5 percent to inflation, already the highest in the Americas at 25 percent last year.
"The popularity of the government is obviously going to be sharply and negatively affected," said economist Pedro Palma. "The inflationary impact of the measure diminishes the real income of people. People can consume less."
The new two-tiered exchange system offers the 2.6/dollar rate for goods deemed essential including food, medicine and industrial machinery. Other products, including cars and telephones, will be imported at the higher 4.3 rate.
Last month, BMO Capital Markets cut ratings on Colgate-Palmolive Co (CL.N), Avon Products Inc (AVP.N) and Kimberly-Clark Corp (KMB.N) to "market perform" saying a possible devaluation in Venezuela could hurt the U.S. consumer goods makers' profits.
Economist Pavel Gomez of the IESA economic school said the new system will increase opportunities for graft in a country that already is corruption-ridden.
"Multiple exchange schemes are incentives for corruption, more so if they are applied in the Venezuela way," he said. "Those who have good contacts can buy at 2.6 and sell at 4.3."
Chavez, whose popularity usually rises in correlation with public spending, also said on Friday that the Central Bank had transferred $7 billion of foreign reserves to a development fund used to finance investment projects.
(Additional reporting by Hugh Bronstein in Bogota, editing by Vicki Allen)

Venezuela Says Its Jets Intercepted U.S. Plane

2010-01-09T00:50:00.002-04:00

A WSJ NEWS ROUNDUP

CARACAS -- President Hugo Chávez said he ordered two F-16 jets to intercept a U.S. military plane that twice violated Venezuelan airspace on Friday in what he called the latest provocation in the South American nation's skies.
Brandishing a photo of the plane, which he described as a P-3, Mr. Chávez said the overflight was the latest incursion in Venezuelan skies by the U.S. military from its bases on the Netherlands' Caribbean islands and from neighboring Colombia.

Venezuela Devalues Its Currency

There was no immediate response from the U.S. Defense Department or the White House.
Separately, Mr. Chávez announced a currency devaluation for the first time since 2005. The president said Venezuela's currency, the bolivar, will now have two government-set rates depending on the use, either 2.60 to the dollar for transactions deemed priorities by the government or 4.30 to the dollar for other transactions. The currency's official exchange rate has been held by the government at 2.15 bolivars to the dollar.
On the plane interception, Mr. Chávez said the F-16s escorted the U.S. plane away after two incursions lasting 15 and 19 minutes each.
The perceived threat of U.S. intervention has become a central element of Mr. Chávez's political discourse and a rallying cry for his supporters.
Foes say the president is hyping the idea of a foreign threat to distract Venezuelans from domestic problems such as a recession and inadequate public services. Mr. Chávez surprised the diplomatic world in December when he accused the Netherlands of abetting potential offensive action against his government by granting U.S. troops access to its islands close to Venezuela.
The Dutch government says the U.S. presence is only for counternarcotics and surveillance operations over Caribbean smuggling routes.

BIG SIS Wants To See Under Your Clothes

2010-01-08T00:20:00.002-04:00

Thu Jan 7, 5:34 pm ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Janet Napolitano, the U.S. secretary for homeland security, said on Thursday she will travel to Spain this month to meet with her international counterparts to seek tougher international aviation security measures.
She also told reporters during a briefing that the United States is scheduled to deploy 300 additional advanced imaging scanners at U.S. airports in 2010, and may deploy more.
(Editing by Mohammad Zargham)

Unions v. Race to the Top

2010-01-07T00:45:00.002-04:00

States are waiting for Arne Duncan.

Is the Obama Administration going to side with school reformers, or will it reward state and local teachers union affiliates that defend the status quo? This is a question states are asking as they prepare their applications for $4.35 billion in Race to the Top competitive grants. Some guidance from Education Secretary Arne Duncan would be helpful.
Teachers unions in Minnesota and Florida are currently threatening to withhold support for their state Race to the Top applications, which are due later this month. So is the school boards association in Louisiana. This matters because the Administration has placed a premium on states garnering "local school district support" in order to win a grant. Not having union buy-in isn't fatal, but it definitely hurts a state's chances of getting federal funds.
States will be evaluated on a 500-point system, with the largest number of points (138) going to states that improve teacher effectiveness by using student performance to help rate instructors. States are awarded 45 additional points for getting "local education agencies" to sign off on their applications—about the same number of points they get for turning around failing schools.
Unions are mainly opposed to teacher accountability reforms. Both Florida and Minnesota want to implement or expand systems that tie teacher pay to student test scores. The irony is that both President Obama and Secretary Duncan have expressed support for such programs, yet Race to the Top is giving leverage to reform opponents who would eliminate or weaken these policies, and it punishes states that want to expand them over union objections.
Collective-bargaining agreements that protect bad teachers also harm children. Unions, which put the interests of their members above those of students, aren't bothered by this. But state reformers who are trying to correct the problem don't deserve to be penalized on their Race to the Top applications. They deserve some political cover from "the top," meaning Mr. Duncan.
Race to the Top awards are supposed to go to states demonstrating "a coordinated and deep-seated commitment to reform." Letting unions undermine state reform applications is a race to nowhere.

Venezuela begins 2010 with electricity rationing

2010-01-04T00:48:00.002-04:00

Oil-rich Venezuela ushered in 2010 with new measures rationing electricity use in malls, businesses and billboards, as Hugo Chavez's government aimed to save power amid a crippling drought.

The new regulations came into effect January 1, with businesses required to comply with reduced consumption limits and authorities warning of forced power cuts and rate hikes if the measures are not followed.

A decree published on Christmas Eve states that commercial centers may operate from 11:00 am to 9:00 pm on the electricity grid, but beyond that establishments would have to operate off-grid, using their own generators.

Venezuela is flush with oil -- the country's primary export -- and natural gas, but relies mainly on hydroelectric generation to meet domestic energy demand.

With the country in a widespread drought, late last year Chavez announced a sweeping campaign to reduce widespread energy "waste," stressing that rationing was necessary to avoid a systemic "collapse."

Shopping centers in Caracas Saturday opened at the appointed new hour, although industry representatives called for extending the time frame, arguing that night-time energy consumption is less than 10 percent of the total.

The power crunch is expected to have an impact on a wide variety of businesses, including cinemas, casinos and bingo halls.

Establishments failing to comply with the measures could face outages for a period of 24 hours, and up to 72-hour suspensions "in case of recidivism," according to the decree.

The regulation also orders businesses to institute savings plans aimed at shedding consumption by at least 20 percent, a measure that will be evaluated monthly by the newly-created ministry of electricity.

Tariff surcharges of up to 20 percent could be imposed on violators.

Rationing is also to apply to lighted advertisements.

Introductory measures were evident in Caracas last month, with the neon signs that traditionally welcome Christmas left unlit.

The state-controlled aluminum and steel industries halted some of their production lines in order to reduce energy consumption by some 560 megawatts (MW).

Electricity demand in Venezuela is more than 16,500 MW, far higher than what is currently generated. Experts say the power sector requires 18 billion dollars in investment through 2014.

In 2009 there were four nationwide blackouts, with daily failures common in several cities.

Union Baggage Claims

2009-12-30T01:10:00.000-04:00

Flight 253 becomes an excuse to organize airport screeners.

The notion that unionized airport baggage screeners in Detroit could have prevented Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab from boarding a plane in Amsterdam or Lagos doesn't make much sense. But sure enough, some in Congress are using the thwarted Christmas Day terrorist attack to argue that a new leader for the Transportation Security Administration could have saved the day.
Rahm Emanuel's famous declaration that a crisis is a terrible thing to waste seems to have become a way of Washington life.
That's the meaning of the political and media beatdown now being visited on Republican Senator Jim DeMint for the high crime of putting a hold on the nomination of Erroll Southers to head TSA, which runs the 50,000 airport screeners. Mr. DeMint objects because Mr. Southers has refused to say whether he would reverse current policy and back collective bargaining for baggage and passenger screeners, which the Obama Administration and Democrats on Capitol Hill support.
Thus the faux security outrage. "If TSA is to become the kind of nimble, responsive organization the American people deserve in times like this, it will need a Senate-confirmed administrator," said House Homeland Security Chairman Bennie Thompson on Monday. "If nothing else, the events of last week highlighted this lack of leadership."

View Full Image

Associated Press

Transportation Security Administration employees screen passenger bags.

They did? We thought the episode highlighted the dangers of Yemen as a radical Islamist sanctuary and the failure to revoke a visa to Mr. Abdulmutallab despite warnings from his father—neither of which have much to do with TSA.

A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also couldn't resist displaying his boss's union baggage, calling Senator DeMint's actions "disgraceful" and claiming that "Republican obstructionism has prevented TSA from having the leadership in place that the organization deserves." Mr. Reid's 24/7 forced health-care march has made him even crankier than usual.
Neither Democrat mentioned that President Obama didn't bother to nominate Mr. Southers to fill the TSA post until September, nor that Democrats didn't vote the nominee out of committee until the middle of last month. Such a languid pace hardly suggests that they considered the TSA job to be vital to national security.
By contrast, Mr. DeMint's objection is rooted in a substantive concern that union practices and work rules will compromise security. TSA uses a performance pay system that tries to reward ability and effort, with the goal of recruiting and retaining the best employees. Unions prefer seniority-based pay that puts a premium on time served rather than performance.
TSA also needs to be able to change its procedures or move personnel to high-risk locations on short notice. Agency managers now have the ability to do that, but under union work rules they might need to get the permission of union leaders, who won't want to upset the rank-and-file.
In other words, Congressman Thompson has it exactly backwards. If the goal is to have a "nimble, responsive" TSA, a non-union work force makes more sense.
TSA employees already have the right to join the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and the National Treasury Employees Union, but the unions are not allowed to bargain on their behalf. Gale Rossides, the acting head of TSA, has declined to change the policy on collective bargaining, as has every previous TSA leader.
But during last year's Presidential campaign, Mr. Obama sent a letter to the AFGE seeking an endorsement and expressing support for collective bargaining for TSA employees. He got the endorsement, and now he's trying to pay the union back with 50,000 new dues-paying members. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said earlier this year that she was exploring whether she had the legal authority to give TSA workers the right to bargain.
We don't like the practice of Senators putting holds on nominees, preferring up or down votes. But Democrats did this routinely during the Bush years—remember John Bolton—and they hardly have standing to object now that Republicans are returning the favor. And to the extent that Mr. Southers would unionize airport screeners, he'd be the one doing more potential harm to national security.

Fighting Back the Big Spending Socialists in Minnesotah!

2009-12-28T02:19:00.002-04:00

Pawlenty Pushes Caps on Spending

Minnesota Governor Seeks Limits in His State and Amendment to U.S. Constitution

By AMY MERRICK

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, considered a possible 2012 Republican presidential candidate, is calling for strict spending limits as states and the federal government confront enormous deficits.

Associated Press

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty at a GOP fund-raiser in Concord, N.H., this month, when he pushed a constitutional amendment on a balanced budget.

Mr. Pawlenty has proposed an amendment to the Minnesota constitution that would limit spending during any two-year budget period to the amount of revenue collected during the previous budget cycle. At a Republican fund-raiser in New Hampshire on Dec. 16, the governor also pushed the idea of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would force Congress to pass, and the president to sign, a balanced budget.
"Government spending in the country and in many states is progressing at an unsustainable, irresponsible and reckless pace," Mr. Pawlenty said in an interview this week. "The bathtub is overflowing onto the floor, and the first thing we need to do is shut off the faucet."
Although the U.S. economy is showing signs of improvement, states are coping with major revenue shortfalls. States' budgeted general-fund spending for the current fiscal year totaled $627.9 billion, down 5.4% from a year earlier, according to a Dec. 2 report from the National Association of State Budget Officers and the National Governors Association. Even after those cuts, state deficits total $14.8 billion for their current fiscal year, which for most began July 1.
At the federal level, the Senate voted Thursday to temporarily raise the nation's debt limit, currently $12.1 trillion, by $290 billion. The House passed the measure Dec. 16.
All states except Vermont have at least a limited requirement to balance their budgets. The federal government has no such restriction.
Previous efforts to pass a national balanced-budget amendment have foundered in Congress. Many lawmakers believe deficit spending can help boost the U.S. economy during downturns, and calls to balance the budget sometimes fade as other priorities surface.
Changing the U.S. Constitution requires a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress, followed by approval of three-fourths of states. State legislatures have petitioned Congress about a balanced-budget amendment, but they haven't reached the threshold needed to call a constitutional convention.

Mr. Pawlenty's proposal for a federal amendment would include exceptions for war, natural disasters and other emergencies. The U.S. has been at war for most of the past decade.
The proposals could boost Mr. Pawlenty's popularity with conservative interest groups, some of which have been longtime proponents of a balanced-budget amendment. But it is unclear how much support his budget-capping plan will have in Minnesota, where residents historically have supported generous social-service spending.
Mr. Pawlenty's state proposal has some similarities to the Taxpayer Bill of Rights amendment passed in Colorado in 1992. That amendment limited state spending growth to inflation plus population increases. Excess revenue was returned to taxpayers via rebate checks.
The amendment lost support as Colorado began experiencing service cuts, such as declines in the number of children with health insurance. In 2005, voters suspended portions of the amendment for five years.
Because the costs of health care and other services tend to grow faster than overall inflation, Colorado routinely was short "about one or two percentage points of what you need to maintain the same level of services as the previous year," said Iris J. Lav, a senior adviser at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank.
Mr. Pawlenty said that under his plan, Minnesota lawmakers could keep extra revenue and spend it on one-time items such as construction projects.
A change to the Minnesota constitution requires approval by a majority in both legislative chambers. The amendment must then be ratified by voters.
Minnesota state Sen. Tom Bakk, chairman of the Senate Taxes Committee, said he would consider the governor's proposal once he saw more details. He raised concerns that lawmakers could circumvent the amendment by levying a new tax and putting the money in an account outside the state's general fund. "That's a hole big enough to drive a truck through," said Mr. Bakk, a Democratic-Farmer-Labor candidate for governor.
A spokesman for the governor said the amendment could be expanded to cover all funds, not just the general fund.
Mr. Pawlenty has said that he wouldn't seek a third term next year, and that he hadn't made any decision about his political future. He has started a political action committee to raise money, and he recently visited the presidential campaign battleground states of Iowa and New Hampshire.
Some Minnesota residents already are upset with Mr. Pawlenty for spending cuts he made this summer. The governor invoked a rarely used "unallotment" law to unilaterally shrink a $2.7 billion budget deficit. The sharpest criticism has been aimed at his decision to eliminate subsidized medical care for about 30,000 low-income residents.
Minnesota's budget office said this month that the state faces a $1.2 billion deficit over the next 18 months and a $5.4 billion deficit for the two-year budget period beginning July 1, 2011.
Write to Amy Merrick at amy.merrick@wsj.com

Colombia to Chavez: Maybe 'spy plane' was Santa

2009-12-22T01:11:00.000-04:00

The Associated Press
Monday, December 21, 2009; 9:01 PM

BOGOTA -- Colombia's defense chief joked Monday that Venezuelan troops might have mistaken Santa's sleigh for a spy plane, dismissing accusations by President Hugo Chavez about drones flying over Venezuela.
Chavez on Sunday accused the United States of violating Venezuela's airspace with an unmanned spy plane and ordered his military to be on alert and shoot down any such aircraft.
The Pentagon has declined to comment on Chavez's accusations.
Colombian Defense Minister Gabriel Silva and armed forces commander Freddy Padilla told reporters Monday that Colombian aircraft couldn't fly the kind of espionage mission described by Chavez.
"Colombia doesn't have that capability," said Silva. He quipped that perhaps "Venezuelan soldiers mistook Father Christmas' sleigh for a spy plane."
Padilla said Colombia has only small, unmanned surveillance planes that it uses to monitor pipelines and other installations against sabotage by rebel groups.
"They don't have any firepower and what they do is observe to prevent attacks on electrical towers," Padilla said.
Silva and Padilla did not discuss U.S. military capabilities at Colombian bases.
Chavez has accused Colombia of allowing the United States to use its military bases to prepare a possible attack on Venezuela.
Both the U.S. and Colombia have denied such allegations in the past, saying the U.S. military presence is for the sole purpose of giving support to Colombia in combatting drug traffickers and rebels.
Tensions between Venezuela and neighboring Colombia have been high for months amid Chavez's accusations of warmongering and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe's allegations that Venezuela has harbored Colombian rebel leaders.

Flag-Waving Communists and Socialists March

2009-12-18T01:00:00.001-04:00

Putting our economy in the hands of Chavez fans

2009-12-17T00:24:00.002-04:00

Andrew Bolt

Thursday, December 17, 2009 at 10:34am

These maniacs in Copenhagen are voting on your future:

President Chavez brought the house down.
When he said the process in Copenhagen was “not democratic, it is not inclusive, but isn’t that the reality of our world, the world is really and imperial dictatorship…down with imperial dictatorships” he got a rousing round of applause.
When he said there was a “silent and terrible ghost in the room” and that ghost was called capitalism, the applause was deafening.
But then he wound up to his grand conclusion – 20 minutes after his 5 minute speaking time was supposed to have ended and after quoting everyone from Karl Marx to Jesus Christ - “our revolution seeks to help all people…socialism, the other ghost that is probably wandering around this room, that’s the way to save the planet, capitalism is the road to hell....let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.” He won a standing ovation.

UPDATE
And at the end of this first clip, Chavez rouses the rabble with more anti-Americanism, too:

I don’t think Obama is here yet. He got the Nobel Peace Prize almost the same day as he sent 30,000 soldiers to kill innocent people in Afghanistan.

UPDATE 2
And a mass-murderer at Copenhagen lectures us about our crimes:

The anti-capitalist theme was picked up on by Mr Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s veteran President, who is the target of Western sanctions over alleged human rights abuses.
“When these capitalist gods of carbon burp and belch their dangerous emissions, it’s we, the lesser mortals of the developing sphere who gasp and sink and eventually die.”

UPDATE 3
Nothing is real in Copenhagen - not the temperature record, not the predictions, not the agenda, not the “solution”. In fact, here’s how fake it all is:

The lead negotiator for the small island nation of Tuvalu, the bow-tie wearing Ian Fry, broke down as he begged delegates to take tough action.
“I woke up this morning crying,” and that’s not easy for a grown man to admit,” Mr Fry said on Saturday, as his eyes welled with tears.
”The fate of my country rests in your hands,” he concluded, as the audience exploded with wild applause.

So moving. But let’s now learn more from Samantha Maiden about this former Greenpeace official from “Tuvalu”:

But the part-time PhD scholar at the Australian National University actually resides in Queanbeyan, NSW, where he’s not likely to be troubled by rising sea levels because the closest beach at Batemans Bay is a two-hour, 144km drive away. Asked whether he had ever lived in Tuvalu, his wife told The Australian last night she would “rather not comment”....
Still, it’s a long way from the endangered atolls of Tuvalu, with his neighbour Michelle Ormay confirming he’s lived in Queanbeyan for more than a decade, while he has worked his way up to being “very high up in climate change”.

(Thanks to readers captainperi and Observer of Wodonga.)

Socialism in Stages

2009-12-16T01:12:00.000-04:00

Even soft, incremental expansions of government produce poverty.

By Dan Oliver Jr.

America debated three strategies during the Cold War. The Right wanted “roll back” — dreams of Patton driving his tank into Red Square. The Left wanted détente — which is French for “surrender.” The country loosely followed containment, a program outlined by George Kennan in 1946, which argued that the political contradictions of the Soviet state would eventually cause its own demise. America had but to be patient.

Kennan may have been the first to realize that a society based on Communism would not survive politically, but it was Ludwig von Mises, in his 1922 work Socialism, who demonstrated that any such society could not survive economically.

When a collection of free individuals — the market — is willing to pay a price for a product that creates “excess” profits, it signals producers to provide more of that product. If the market does not support a given price, producers are forced to redeploy their assets for more pressing social needs. Similarly, if a factor of production, such as labor or capital, changes in price, producers instantly react, sending signals — through the prices of intermediate goods — down to the consumer. Prices effortlessly allocate society’s assets to reflect consumer preference and adjust to accommodate the ever-changing availability of scarce resources.

Mises argued that governmental interference in prices, through taxation, subsidies, and regulation, complicates this process — affecting not only the consumption of final goods, but also the economic calculations that are necessary to provide intermediate goods and services. Higher-order division of labor fails. Poverty results. For example, while Chinese and Russian central planners were busy setting quotas for steel mills, there was no method for consumers to signal that they preferred food — and millions starved to death.

If the hard socialism of Communism produces economic and societal collapse quickly, Mises theorized, the soft, incremental socialism of the West — popularized again recently as the “Third Way” by Tony Blair and Bill Clinton — would produce poverty in stages. Every bureaucratic intervention in the market reduces long-term wealth creation, even if it provides a temporary boost to the economy. In time, this reduction of wealth is blamed on the inefficiencies of the remaining “unfettered” market, which provokes calls for greater intervention, ad infinitum.

Health care is a perfect example of the incremental socialization process. Government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid began by providing limited assistance to the old and the indigent. As health-care costs rose, these programs were expanded and new ones, such as S-CHIP, were added. The government now pays 32 percent of all non-military health-care bills, up from 6 percent in 1960. The remaining private expenditures are heavily regulated, resulting in the anticipated economic chaos. Under Obamacare, the situation can only grow worse. As P. J. O’Rourke quipped: “If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it’s free.”

Housing provides another example. Today, 71 years after Fannie Mae was founded, the central government provides a stunning 90 percent of the liquidity in the mortgage market, enabled by the Federal Reserve’s repurchase of 85 percent of new mortgages with freshly printed money. Banking is next.

Ronald Reagan’s 1980 election was the zenith of the conservative movement’s attempt to defeat Communism and limit government. Internationally, deployment of Pershing II missiles in Europe and military support of anti-Communist movements gave teeth to containment. Nine years later, the Soviet Union fell. Domestically, Reagan promised to get government off our backs by reducing taxes to starve Leviathan. Instead, politicians made up the shortfall with deficits, which soared as government grew relentlessly under both political parties. Twenty-nine years after Reagan’s election, the federal government spends 37 cents of every dollar in the economy. Operation Rollback as applied to the federal government has failed.

The economic laws described by Mises that brought down Communism apply equally to the American brand of soft socialism. Market forces will soon lay waste to American central planning just as surely as they did to the Soviet version two decades ago. The crises in housing, health care, and banking, the inevitable results of government intervention, are but harbingers of greater instability in our way of life. If Republicans wish to stay relevant, they must return to their conservative roots.

— Dan Oliver Jr. is Founder of Myrmikan Capital, LLC. He has a J.D. from Columbia Law School and an MBA from INSEAD.

You've Got Mail, But the Mailman Hid It

2009-12-15T00:55:00.002-04:00

Getty Images

If your mother-in-law's mail goes through the Waterbury or Wallingford post offices, she might not have received the birthday card you sent in time.

Apparently managers at the post office have been hiding mail, Ray Arcovio, president of the Waterbury area postal worker’s union, told the Waterbury Republican-American. And he wants to sincerely apologize.

Workers have been stuffing mail into closets and unused rooms at mail facilities in Waterbury and Wallingford because they don’t know how to keep up with such a high volume of mail, he told the newspaper.

"They're just pushing it aside for the next day," Arcovio told the paper. "We've had issues with them hiding the mail."

LOOK

Weird News Photos

In an effort to cut back on costs, the postal service now transfers mail processing from Waterbury to Wallingford.

Arcovio says the problem is being handled.

"We have dealt with it and got the assurance it wouldn't happen again," he told the Republican American. "The employees who see it and are aware of it are fearful to speak out about it for fear of repercussions."

In some cases, even first-class letters were pushed aside because there weren't enough workers to handle it.

The USPS offers a different side of the story. There was one incident, said a spokeswoman. It was four months ago and the supervisor made a "poor judgment call about how to handle some late arriving mail and moved it out of the work area," Maureen Marion explained. Appropriate administrative action was taken, she said.

"To suggest this activity is routine is a falsehood," she added in a statement.

What's more, it didn't involve first class mail.

James Cameron Reveals Liberal Propaganda in Avatar

2009-12-14T22:35:00.001-04:00

Feds owe Uncle Sam $3B in unpaid taxes

2009-12-14T13:29:00.002-04:00

WASHINGTON - At a time when the White House is projecting the largest deficit in the nation's history, Uncle Sam is trying to recover billions of dollars in unpaid taxes from its own employees.
Federal workers owe more than $3 billion in income taxes they failed to pay in 2008. According to Internal Revenue Service documents, 276,300 federal employees and retirees owe $3,042,200,000.
The IRS tracks the voluntary compliance rate of federal employees and retirees each year, and each year feds come up short. The one bright spot in this year's report is that after several years of a steady increase, the amount owed by feds is down from the previous year.
Federal employees and retirees owed $3,586,784,725 in unpaid income taxes in 2007.
The documents show delinquent employees from nearly every federal agency with more than 25 employees. Based on percentages, the Department of The Treasury, which includes the IRS, has the best compliance rate. Fewer than 1 percent of Treasury employees didn't pay their taxes in 2008.
The IRS is the only federal agency where employees can be fired for not paying their taxes. The non-compliance rate for IRS employees in 2008 was 0.76 percent -- down from 0.89 percent in 2007.
The agency with the most tax scofflaws is the U.S. Postal Service, with 28,913 employees who owe $297,933,756. But that is still a dramatic improvement from 2007 when more than 54,000 employees owed more than $407 million.
"We urge our employees to comply with all tax laws and are encouraged that many who have been delinquent have agreed to payment plan with the IRS," USPS spokesperson Mark Saunders tells WTOP in a statement.
"It's important to look at the percentage of postal employees who may be delinquent on their federal taxes, not just the number itself. According to IRS figures, the delinquency rate for Postal Service employees is relatively small."
The Postal Service, the largest employer in the federal government aside from the military, has a non-compliance rate of 3.95 percent compared to the federal average of 2.8 percent.
Retired military personnel make up about 33 percent of the money owed with $1,343,538,055 in unpaid taxes for 2008.
The agency with the highest percentage of delinquent employees is the National Capital Planning Commission, where 10.42 percent of its 48 employees owe $26,947.
"NCPC is committed to working closely with the Department of The Treasury to resolve issues of federal income tax delinquency involving its staff," NCPC spokeswoman Lisa MacSpadden said in a statement.
"The agency takes this matter very seriously and recognizes that federal employees must adhere to the highest ethical standards regarding financial matters.
"We remind our employees of this responsibility as part of our mandatory annual ethics training. Upon receipt of an official notice from the IRS about a specific employee's noncompliance, NCPC will take appropriate administrative action."
Other notable agencies on the list:

Executive Office of the President (includes the White House): 50 employees owe $812,917;
U.S. Senate: 231 employees owe $2,469,026;
U.S. House of Representatives: 447 employees owe $5,809,631;
U.S. Tax Court: 3 employees owe $39,752;
Active Duty Military: 27,111 employees $102,474,672.

While some taxpayers may scratch their heads and ask why the federal government doesn't garnish the wages of these employees, the reality is they can't. According to federal tax laws, employees are treated the same as any other taxpayer who doesn't pay their taxes.
The IRS must go through the same procedures and court process with feds as it does with John Q. Public. Once a court awards the IRS a judgment or if the employees enter a voluntary payment plan, the IRS can garnish wages. However, federal employees do jeopardize any security clearance they may have if they don't pay their income taxes.
As for the general public's voluntary compliance rate, the IRS no longer tracks those numbers, so it is impossible to compare. But an IRS report from 2001 (PDF) showed the total tax gap to be about $345 billion. The tax gap is the difference between what is owed each year and what is paid, and includes income, corporate, employment, estate and excise taxes.
(Copyright 2009 by WTOP. All Rights Reserved.)

Exclusive: IRS hires "hundreds" for new wealth unit

2009-12-14T01:13:00.002-04:00

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A new Internal Revenue Service unit set up to catch rich tax cheats hiding their wealth in complex business entities is rapidly taking shape with the hiring of hundreds of employees.
The IRS high wealth unit, part of a broader effort to combat international tax evasion, is focusing on "the entire web of business entities controlled by a high wealth individual," IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman told a tax conference this week.
Another IRS official told Reuters "hundreds" of people have already been hired to staff the new unit, including some from within the agency.
"We have drawn top talent within the IRS that have expertise involving wealthy individuals as well as examination of their related entities," said Mae Lew, an IRS special counsel.
The high-wealth unit is focusing on trusts, real estate investments, privately held companies and other business entities controlled by rich individuals.
While use of sophisticated legal structures can be legal, in other instances they "mask aggressive tax strategies," Shulman said.
Tax authorities in Japan, Germany and the UK have also created similar units.
The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday approved a $387 million boost for the IRS for the fiscal year that started October 1, in part to fund the high-wealth unit. The Senate is expected to vote on the measure on Sunday.
NEW GLOBAL FOCUS, JOINT CORPORATE AUDITS
The IRS is also opening new criminal offices in Beijing, Panama City and Sydney to focus on funds flowing out of Europe and into Asia, in part because of a heightened focus on international enforcement in Europe.
The goal is to get those up and running during this fiscal year, which ends September 30, according to Barry Shott, IRS deputy commissioner for international issues for large and midsized business.
At the center of the agency's offshore effort is its legal cases against Swiss banking giant UBS AG. UBS agreed to turn over nearly 5,000 names of individual American clients and paid $780 million to settle a criminal case for aiding tax evasion.
The IRS has also begun initial steps to join forces with other governments to scrutinize corporate tax filings to prevent "tax arbitrage" by companies seeking the best regime.
President Barack Obama has proposed tightening tax rules for U.S. multinationals, including one in which companies delay paying taxes on income earned offshore, a legal practice known as deferral that officials say is abused.
Some tax practitioners expressed worry about such coordination.
"With any new thing, you never want to be the guinea pig," Mary Lou Fahey, general counsel for the Tax Executive Institute, comprised of business executives, said.
Shott said a likely scenario will likely be two countries getting together and decide to examine a narrow issue. In the beginning it will operate like a pilot program where the corporation examined would agree to take part.
"With rare exception ... the taxpayer will absolutely know they are subject to a simultaneous examination," Shott said.
Still, he said there could be cases where the audit needs to be kept quiet, such as when a criminal probe is ongoing.
Initial partners would likely include Canada, the UK and Australia, Shott said.

Pushing Government Power Too Far

2009-12-11T00:22:00.002-04:00

By Michael Barone

"Knowledge is becoming more specialized and more dispersed, while government power is becoming more concentrated," writes economist Arnold Kling in his new book, "Unchecked and Unbalanced." "This discrepancy creates the potential for government to become increasingly erratic and, as a result, less satisfying to individuals."
"Less satisfying to individuals" is a mild way to put it. In a recent Annenberg focus group, pollster Peter Hart asked Philadelphia suburbanites to write the name that came to mind when they thought of Congress. A retired auto executive and 2008 Obama voter wrote, "Satan." When asked why, he said, "Because I wasn't sure of the correct spelling of 'Beelzebub.'"

<p>&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N3926.ForbesAudienceNetwork/B3761804.5;abr=!ie;sz=300x250;click0=http://www.forbes.com/ads/redirectpause.html?http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story/L27/1951379125/Block/OasDefault_v5/FANST2520717_hpa_rosDma_091123/FANST2520712_hpa_rosDma_091001.html/522f62676c6b7149796f6b4144574259?;ord=1951379125?"&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/SCRIPT&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;NOSCRIPT&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;A HREF="http://www.forbes.com/ads/redirectpause.html?http://ads.forbes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/realclearpolitics.com/story/L27/1951379125/Block/OasDefault_v5/FANST2520717_hpa_rosDma_091123/FANST2520712_hpa_rosDma_091001.html/522f62676c6b7149796f6b4144574259?http://ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N3926.ForbesAudienceNetwork/B3761804.5;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=300x250;ord=1951379125?"&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;IMG SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N3926.ForbesAudienceNetwork/B3761804.5;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=300x250;ord=1951379125?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=300 HEIGHT=250 ALT="Click Here"&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/A&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/NOSCRIPT&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; </p>

Kling's point is that such disenchantment is inevitable when government officeholders make sweeping decisions about matters on which they lack, and only a few specialists have, detailed knowledge. Which is what Congress and the Obama administration have been busy doing these past 11 months.
Consider the 2,000-plus-page health care legislation now before the Senate. There is coherent debate on abortion coverage because it's a discrete issue easily isolated from the rest of the bill that raises concerns among people with conflicting strong moral beliefs.
But any abortion provision would have less effect on real life than dozens of other provisions in the bill. The Congressional Budget Office, drawing on specialist knowledge, tells us the Senate bill would result in 10 million people losing employer-provided insurance and increased premiums for buyers of individual health insurance. And the CBO says the bill would not bend the cost curve downward.
Democratic leaders want to pass something, almost anything, for fear of political damage. They want to give government even more power over one-sixth of the economy, and over ordinary people's health care. To that end, they have been happy to game the CBO's scoring system, misusing specialized knowledge to achieve political ends.
On the issue of carbon emissions, the e-mails hacked from Britain's Climate Research Unit show even leading specialists in climate research have been busy manipulating data and suppressing alternative views in pursuit of political ends. Their goal, and that of the Democrats backing cap-and-trade legislation, is government control over energy production and distribution essential to all of the economy.
The Environmental Protection Agency's designation of carbon dioxide as a pollutant is an attempt to give EPA bureaucrats such control in the likely event that the Senate fails to pass something like the bill the House passed last June.
So politicians are acting either in ignorance of specialist knowledge or by manipulating and misusing it in the conviction that central planners can organize and control human behavior better than individuals can through markets and voluntary action operating under the rule of law.
History provides copious evidence that this conviction is mistaken. Writing in Policy Review, economists Paul Gregory and Kate Zhou compare the success of market reforms in China and their failure in Russia. They point out that reform in China was bottom-up: Peasants started producing food for private sale and, as markets thrived, Communist leader Deng Xiaoping winked at their rule-breaking and changed the rules. The economy mostly thrived.
In contrast, reform in Russia was top-down: Mikhail Gorbachev changed the rules, but that allowed apparatchiks to gobble up state industries and created new monopolies, over which Vladimir Putin's government re-established control. The economy mostly stagnated.
The Democrats' health care and cap-and-trade bills are classic top-down legislation. Many inside players have bought into the changes and are preparing to game the new systems. Far from banishing lobbyists from Washington, Barack Obama has provided them with enormous amounts of new business.
An alternative approach was taken in George W. Bush's major domestic legislation. Tax cuts, the education accountability bill and the Medicare prescription drug benefit law opened up areas where markets and incentives could operate. Costs came in lower and revenues higher than projected. An economy stalled by recession proved capable of creating new jobs without direction from central planners.
Polls have shown that in the last 11 months, as Americans have started to think hard about Democratic proposals, they have become less confident in government's ability to direct society. Underlying the angry responses in focus groups and tea parties is an appreciation that problems can best be addressed by widely dispersed people with specialized knowledge operating in a predictable framework. Not by central planners acting in ignorance of or by manipulating specialized knowledge.

GE chief attacks executive ‘greed’

2009-12-10T00:33:00.002-04:00

Jeffrey Immelt, General Electric’s chief executive, said on Wednesday his generation of business leaders had succumbed to “meanness and greed” that had harmed the US economy and increased the gap between the rich and the poor.
Mr Immelt’s attack on his fellow corporate chiefs – made in a speech at the West Point military academy – is one of the strongest criticisms by a top executive of the compensation and business practices that prevailed before the financial crisis.

EDITOR’S CHOICE

In depth: global financial crisis - Dec-09

GE to gain $8bn from NBCU spin-off - Dec-03

“We are at the end of a difficult generation of business leadership ... tough-mindedness, a good trait, was replaced by meanness and greed, both terrible traits,” said Mr Immelt, who succeeded Jack Welch, one of the toughest leaders of his generation, at the helm of the US conglomerate. “Rewards became perverted. The richest people made the most mistakes with the least accountability.”
Several executives, especially in financial services, have apologised for their companies’ role in the crisis but Mr Immelt’s remarks went further, linking bad leadership to growing inequality.
“The bottom 25 per cent of the American population is poorer than they were 25 years ago. That is just wrong,” he said. “Ethically, leaders do share a common responsibility to narrow the gap between the weak and the strong.”
GE wants to win a large slice of the infrastructure projects funded by governments around the world in an effort to kick-start their economies.
Mr Immelt said business should welcome government as “a catalyst for leadership and change”.
Mr Immelt also issued a mea culpa over his inabilty to foresee the financial turmoil, which slashed GE’s profits and put its financial arm, GE Capital, under pressure, saying he should have been a better listener.
“I felt like I should have done more to anticipate the radical changes that occurred,” he said.
The GE chief now gathers GE’s top 25 executives to twice-monthly Saturday sessions to talk about the company and its future.
In the speech, Mr Immelt indicated GE would continue to shrink GE Capital, which accounted for around half of the company’s profits as reently as two years ago. He said it was wrong for the US economy to have “tilted toward the quicker profits of financial services” at the expense of the manufacturing industry and research and technology investments.

Administration Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions

2009-12-09T14:34:00.002-04:00

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson gestures during a briefing in the U.S. center at the Climate Conference in Copenhagen Dec. 9. (AP Photo)

The Obama administration is warning Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in a way that could hurt business.
The warning, from a top White House economic official who spoke Tuesday on condition of anonymity, came on the eve of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson's address to the international conference on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jackson, however, tried to strike a tone of cooperation in her address Wednesday, explaining that the EPA's new powers to regulate greenhouse gases will be used to complement legislation pending in Congress, not replace it.
"This is not an 'either-or' moment. It's a 'both-and' moment," she said.
But while administration officials have long said they prefer Congress take action on climate change, the economic official who spoke with reporters Tuesday night made clear that the EPA will not wait and is prepared to act on its own.
And it won't be pretty.
"If you don't pass this legislation, then ... the EPA is going to have to regulate in this area," the official said. "And it is not going to be able to regulate on a market-based way, so it's going to have to regulate in a command-and-control way, which will probably generate even more uncertainty."
Climate change legislation that passed the House is stuck in the Senate, but the EPA finding Monday was seen as a boost to the U.S. delegation in Denmark trying to convince other countries that Washington is capable of taking action to follow through with any global commitments.
The economic official explained that congressional action could be better for the economy, since it would provide "compensation" for higher energy prices, especially for small businesses dealing with those higher energy costs. Otherwise, the official warned that the kind of "uncertainty" generated by unilateral EPA action would be a huge "deterrent to investment," in an economy already desperate for jobs.
"So, passing the right kind of legislation with the right kind of compensations seems to us to be the best way to reduce uncertainty and actually to encourage investment," the official said.
Republicans fear that the EPA will ultimately end up stepping in to regulate emissions -- though many oppose the congressional legislation as well. They had urged Jackson to withdraw the finding in light of leaked e-mails from a British research center that appeared to show scientists discussing the manipulation of climate data.
Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., ranking Republican on the House Select Committee for Energy Independence and Global Warming, said Tuesday he is going to attend the Copenhagen conference to inform world leaders that despite any promises made by President Obama, no new laws will be passed in the United States until the "scientific fascism" ends.
"I call it 'scientific fascism,'" Sensenbrenner said during a press conference with fellow climate change skeptics. Sensenbrenner said, "The U.N. should throw a red flag" on scientists who support global warming to the exclusion of dissent.
Administration officials, though, said the e-mails do not change the debate.
Former Vice President Al Gore, a leader in the movement on man-caused climate change, told CNN on Wednesday that the e-mails in questions were 10 years old and taken "out of context."
Fox News' Major Garrett and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The Rabbit-Ear Wars

2009-12-09T14:17:00.002-04:00

Get ready for a rumble over the future of over-the-air TV.

You stupidly built a drive-in theater in the desert just as your customers were all deciding to stay home and watch HBO. Fortunately, the theater turns out to be sitting on a mountain of oil.
With a few asterisks, such is the situation of old-style TV broadcasters, whose viewers have fled to cable or satellite but whose spectrum is lusted after by the wireless industry. According to a much-noted study sponsored by the Consumer Electronics Association, in the hands of the broadcasters, that spectrum is worth a mere $12 billion. In the hands of mobile phone carriers struggling to meet explosive growth for mobile broadband, it would be worth $62 billion.

View Full Image

Corbis

To the Silicon Valley types who people the Obama administration, this suggests a rational policy: Pay broadcasters to give up some or all of the airwaves used to send signals to their dwindling rabbit-ear audience. Turn it over to mobile phone folks at a hefty markup.

Blair Levin, a veteran telecom analyst who heads the FCC's broadband efforts, has floated a Hindenburg of a trial balloon by broaching just such a deal with broadcasters. Virtually all agree that any such "grand bargain," to be politically deliverable, must enlist the willing, nay eager, participation of broadcast station owners. No problem—broadcasters would be the biggest winners, right?
Sadly, remember what happened to the original Hindenburg. Broadcasters, who have a keen sense of political realities, note that their broadcast licenses don't actually confer a property right, so whatever deal the FCC struck with them, Congress would certainly rewrite it to make sure Congress got all the money. Broadcasters would receive squat, and probably be vilified as bandits in the process.
"Pipe dream" was the verdict of Colleen Brown, chief of Fisher Communications, owner of 20 stations in the Pacific Northwest.
"Politically they would fall flat on their face," opined Sinclair Broadcasting's Mark Aitken, estimating the agency's chances selling a cash-for-spectrum deal to Congress.
But, hold on. We mentioned asterisks. The FCC and Mr. Levin are correct (and brave) in pointing out the need for a market mechanism to guide spectrum to its highest and best uses. But the FCC is in no position to know whether mobile broadband is that higher and better use. A reason is the regulatory straitjacket, including ownership limits, that for decades has prevented license holders themselves from exploring new broadcast business models.
For the truth is, broadcast offers impressive economies for distributing rich media content compared to the Internet. An infinity of users can be served by a single bitstream. It doesn't matter how many receivers tune into a TV broadcast. It never gets overloaded.
Consider a small company called Sezmi, now testing in Los Angeles a competitor to cable and satellite TV. Users get a box with a powerful HDTV antenna, allowing them to receive not just traditional over-the-air TV channels but also popular cable networks, broadcast locally using spare capacity leased from TV stations.
A separate broadband connection supplies on-demand movies and even material plucked from YouTube. And to help make the most of limited bandwidth, each also comes with a giant terabyte-sized disk drive capable of storing many hours of programming, automatically downloaded in advance based on a viewer's demonstrated habits and tastes.
All this, of course, would also yield a cornucopia of information with which to deliver the truly individualized advertising that TV ad buyers crave.
Who knows whether Sezmi will pan out technologically, and at the very-much-cheaper-than-cable price the company touts. The FCC quite properly worries about a coming mobile capacity crunch, with all those proliferating iPhones. But throwing spectrum at it won't be the only solution. Greater integration of fixed and wireless will help. Software innovation, cramming more bits into the same frequency, will help. So will usage-based pricing. And as Sezmi shows, local storage can substitute for bandwidth too.
The FCC is looking in the right direction, but we need more than just a "market solution" to liberate spectrum from the current government-approved incumbents. We need a market that can fully explore the potential of all the business models that might contest to find the highest and best use of that resource.
In the meantime, the agency's trial balloon is having a perverse effect, spurring broadcasters to new Potemkin feats to prove they are making full use of their existing spectrum, such as rolling out new digital "subchannels" that nobody watches. Some broadcasters even invoke the 1962 All-Channel Receiver Act and insist a new "golden age of broadcasting" is around the corner—just as soon as the FCC mandates that every smart phone be capable of receiving over-the-air TV signals.
In short, one picture is starting to come in clearly: The spectrum puzzle won't be solved by the clean and simple deal the agency envisioned just a month ago.

FistGate II: High School Students Given Fisting Kits at Kevin Jennings (Obama Safe-School Czar) 2001 GLSEN Conference

2009-12-09T01:18:00.000-04:00

by Jim Hoft
In March 2000 the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) organization of Massachusetts held its 10 Year Anniversary GLSEN/Boston conference at Tufts University. This conference was fully supported by the Massachusetts Department of Education, the Safe Schools Program, the Governor’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, and some of the presenters even received federal money. During the 2000 conference, workshop leaders led a “youth only, ages 14-21″ session that offered lessons in “fisting” a dangerous sexual practice. During another workshop an activist asked 14 year-old students, “Spit or swallow?… Is it rude?” The unbelievable audio clip is posted here. Barack Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar” Kevin Jennings is the founder of GLSEN. He was paid $273,573.96 as its executive director in 2007. Jennings was the keynote speaker at the 2000 GLSEN conference.

Photo: This kit for fisting was distributed by Planned Parenthood at Fistgate II. (Mass News)

Unfortunately for GLSEN, undercover journalists with Mass Resistance recorded these outrageous sessions. The audio was later leaked to a local radio station. This created such an uproar that GLSEN leaders were forced to apologize for their disgusting behavior.
Thanks to Soros-linked Media Matters we now know that GLSEN director, and current Obama Safe Schools Czar, Kevin Jennings was confronted on the vile content discussed at the children’s conference.

“Like the Parents Rights Coalition and the Department of Education, GLSEN is also troubled by some of the content that came up during this workshop,” said Kevin Jennings, national executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.
He said people who run workshops in the future will get clearer guidelines, though Jennings said the network’s annual conference at Tufts University should not be judged on the 30-student seminar “What They Didn’t Tell You About Queer Sex and Sexuality in Health Class.”
“We need to make our expectations and guidelines to outside facilitators much more clear,” said Jennings. “Because we are surprised and troubled by some of the accounts we’ve heard.”

But despite Media Matters’ claims, Kevin Jennings and his GLSEN organization did nothing to clean up their act. In fact in 2001 activists handed out “fisting kits” to the children and teachers who attended the GLSEN conference.
That’s correct. Fisting kits.

At Kevin Jennings’ 2001 GLSEN Conference an estimated 400 student attendees were given their own “fisting kit.”
Mass News reported on the 2001 conference:

Fistgate II was held on Saturday in the same building at Tufts University as last year with the same message about how to practice homosexual sex.
More students attended this year. Out of approximately 650 attendees, about 400 of those were students.
Kits of plastic gloves intended for “fisting” or oral sex were distributed at Planned Parenthood’s table in the lobby.
Public funds were used for the event with at least two school buses being used to transport students, from Methuen High School and Marblehead Public Schools. Adam Glick, Conference Coordinator, said he did not know how the buses were paid for. Other children were transported by public school teachers in private cars.
The private homosexual sponsor, GLSEN, is given state funds for many purposes and does not publicly report on how the money is spent.
There was a heightened sense of security with many Tufts campus police being highly visible in order to stop parents from seeing what occurred at the conference.
Although Tufts University was able to claim ignorance about the event last year, they obviously became complicit this year when they welcomed the conference back and provided the security muscle to keep the strategy sessions and indoctrination of the children running smoothly.

Founding Bloggers has a photo of one of the school buses that brought students to the conference.
Mass News had another article that described the contents of the “fisting kits” given to the students.

Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts distributed kits for fisting and oral sex. They contained a single plastic glove, a package of K-Y lubricant and instructions on how to make a “dental dam” out of the material.
The instructions explained how to cut up the glove with scissors until all that remains is a rubber rectangle with the “thumb” portion protruding from the middle. “Use the thumb space for your tongue,” say the directions.
The label on the ziplocked package says, “protects against STD’s,” and bears the Planned Parenthood logo and phone number.
GLSEN (Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network) got into trouble last year for hosting a workshop that gave young teens explicit how-to instructions on homosexual sex practices such as “fisting.” The ensuing scandal was subsequently dubbed “Fistgate.”
Regarding “dental dams,” Dr. John Diggs, a specialist in internal medicine who lectures about STDs, said that the kits create a false sense of security. “I’ve written a brochure about this whole thing,” he said. “The way I describe it is, I ask ‘How many people want to take a bite of a sandwich without taking the wrapper off?’ ‘How many people want to suck on balloons?’ Nobody does.”

Again, Barack Obama’s Safe Schools Czar organized and sponsored this conference as executive director of GLSEN. His organization later pushed filthy books on America’s children.
Today he’s running the Office of Safe and Drug Free Schools in the US Department of Education.
Do you feel safe now?
There’s more to come.

Chavez: Venezuela acquires thousands of missiles

2009-12-08T00:41:00.003-04:00

Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez salutes upon his arrival to the launching...

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - President Hugo Chavez said Monday that Venezuela has received thousands of Russian-made missiles and rocket launchers as part of his government's military preparations for a possible armed conflict with neighboring Colombia. "They are preparing a war against us," Chavez said during a televised address, repeating a charge he has been making for months. "Preparing is one of the best ways to neutralize it."
Both Colombia and Washington deny having any plans to attack Venezuela, but Chavez argues they are plotting together a military offensive against Venezuela. Chavez says his government is acquiring more weapons as a precaution.
"Thousands of missiles are arriving," Chavez said. The former paratrooper-turned-president did not specify what type of missiles, but said Venezuela's growing arsenal includes Russian-made Igla-1S surface-to-air missiles and rocket-propelled grenades.
Chavez, who has been feuding with Colombia for months, claims an agreement between Bogota and Washington allowing the U.S. military to increase its presence at seven Colombian military bases poses a threat to his country. Colombia says the deal is only to help it fight the war on drugs and insurgents inside its territory.
Chavez also said Monday that Russian tanks, including T-72s, will be arriving "to strengthen our armored divisions."
Venezuela has bought more than $4 billion worth of Russian arms since 2005, including 24 Sukhoi fighter jets, dozens of attack helicopters and 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles. In September, Russia opened a $2.2 billion line of credit for Venezuela to purchase more weapons.

PROMISES, PROMISES: A closed meeting on openness

2009-12-07T00:28:00.002-04:00

By SHARON THEIMER (AP) – 13 hours ago

WASHINGTON — It's hardly the image of transparency the Obama administration wants to project: A workshop on government openness is closed to the public.
The event Monday for federal employees is a fitting symbol of President Barack Obama's uneven record so far on the Freedom of Information Act, a big part of keeping his campaign promise to make his administration the most transparent ever. As Obama's first year in office ends, the government's actions when the public and press seek information are not yet matching up with the president's words.
"The Freedom of Information Act should be administered with a clear presumption: In the face of doubt, openness prevails," Obama told government offices on his first full day as president. "The government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears."
Obama scored points on his pledge by requiring the release of detailed information about $787 billion in economic stimulus spending. It's now available on a Web site, http://www.recovery.gov. Other notable disclosures include waivers that the White House has granted from Obama's conflict-of-interest rules and reports detailing Obama's and top appointees' personal finances.
Yet on some important issues, his administration produced information only after government watchdogs and reporters spent weeks or months pressing, in some cases suing.
Those include what cars people were buying using the $3 billion Cash for Clunkers program (it turned out the most frequent trades involved pickups for pickups with only slightly better gas mileage); how many times airplanes have collided with birds (a lot); whether lobbyists and donors meet with the Obama White House (they do); rules about the interrogation of terror suspects (the FBI and CIA disagreed over what was permitted); and who was speaking in private with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner (he has close relationships with a cadre of Wall Street executives whose multibillion-dollar companies survived the economic crisis with his help).
The administration has refused to turn over important records. Obama signed a law that let the Pentagon refuse to release photographs showing U.S. troops abusing detainees, and Defense Secretary Robert Gates then did so. The Obama administration, like the Bush administration before it, has refused to release details about the CIA's "black site" rendition program. The Federal Aviation Administration wouldn't turn over letters and e-mails among FAA officials about reporters' efforts to learn more about planes that crash into birds.
Just last week, a State Department deputy assistant secretary, Llewellyn Hedgbeth, said at a public conference that "as much as we want to promote transparency," her agency will work just as hard to protect classified materials or information that would put the United States in a bad light.
People who routinely request government records said they don't see much progress on Obama's transparency pledge.
"It's either smoke and mirrors or it was done for the media," said Jeff Stachewicz, founder of Washington-based FOIA Group Inc., which files hundreds of requests every month across the government on behalf of companies, law firms and news organizations. "This administration, when it wants something done, there are no excuses. You just don't see a big movement toward transparency."
The San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group, said it filed 45 requests for records since Obama became president, and that agencies such as NASA and the Energy Department have been mostly cooperative in the spirit of Obama's promises. But the FBI and Justice Department? Not so much, said Nate Cardozo, working for the foundation on a project to expose new government surveillance technologies.
The FBI resisted turning over copies of reports to a White House intelligence oversight board about possible bureau legal violations. The FBI said it's so far behind reviewing other, unrelated requests that it can't turn over the reports until May 2014.
"This administration started with a bang, saying this was going to be a new day, and we had really high expectations," Cardozo said. "We haven't seen much of a change. The Justice Department said there would be a stronger presumption in favor of disclosure, but that hasn't been the case."
Obama has approved startup money for a new office taking part in Monday's closed conference, the Office of Government Information Services. It was created to resolve disputes involving people who ask for records and government agencies. But as evidenced by the open-records event behind closed doors, there is a long way to go.
"We'd like to know, when they're training agencies, are they telling them the same thing they're saying in public, that they're committed to making the Freedom of Information Act work well and make sure that agencies are releasing information whenever possible while protecting important issues like individual privacy and national security," said Rick Blum, coordinator of the Sunshine in Government Initiative, of which The Associated Press is a member.
The closed conference will provide tips for FOIA public liaisons on communicating and negotiating with people who make requests, and introduce the new Office of Government Information Services to them, said Melanie Ann Pustay, director of the Justice Department's Office of Information Policy, which takes the lead on government openness issues.
Pustay said she planned to say the same things at the private workshop that she would say publicly. She offered these reasons to explain why it was closed: She wanted government employees to be able to speak candidly, and the conference would be in an auditorium at the Commerce Department, where she said a government ID was required to be admitted. The AP and others news organizations routinely enter government buildings to cover the government.
Pustay said she is looking for ways to improve how the government responds to information requests, which costs roughly $400 million each year.
The director of the new Office of Government Information Services, Miriam Nisbet, said the event was closed to make sure there would be room for all the government employees attending.
"I can understand skepticism anytime a meeting for government people is not necessarily open to the public," Nisbet said. "However, everything that is discussed there is absolutely available for the public to know about."
Associated Press writer Ted Bridis contributed to this report.

The Welfare State and Military Power

2009-12-04T01:25:00.002-04:00

Europe-style entitlements mean Europe-sized defenses.

For our money, one of the better parts of President Obama's speech at West Point this week was his connection between a healthy economy and U.S. national security. To quote: "Our prosperity provides a foundation for our power. It pays for our military. It underwrites our diplomacy." We only wish Mr. Obama understood the link between the larger welfare state he is trying to build at home and the economic weakness that will undermine our military power.
The proof is right before his eyes in the U.S. struggle to get Europe to contribute more forces to Afghanistan. Mr. Obama has called on NATO to buttress the U.S. surge of 30,000 in Afghanistan with 5,000 or more European troops. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is in Brussels today to round up promissory notes. But except for the usual stalwarts—Britain and Poland—the allies are having trouble meeting even this modest goal. Germany and France are reluctant to contribute anything more to defeat the Taliban.
This is by now a familiar story, and a big part of the problem is the relative lack of military spending. Among the Western Europeans, only France and the U.K. spend more than 2% of GDP on defense, supposedly the NATO-mandated minimum. Nearly everyone else is below that. Germany, the continent's largest economy, stands at 1.3%. U.S. defense spending has been above 4% of GDP since 2004, having fallen to 3% after the Cold War ended.
No amount of pleading and shaming has worked on the continentals. NATO launched the "Defense Capabilities Initiative" in 1999, only to abandon it a few years later. Various attempts to stand up European "rapid reaction" forces have floundered.
Most European countries also commit more than half of what little they do spend on defense to soldier salaries and benefits. Equipment and training are shortchanged. Belgium devotes 74% to personnel; the U.S. 30.6%. Europeans lack cargo planes and helicopters to enable troops to get to, and move within, far-off conflict zones. In 2007, the U.S. deployed 14% of its troops in overseas operations, Europe 4%.

Such relative strategic weakness has made the Europeans more dependent on the American security umbrella, even as they resent it. But it also makes Europeans more disposed to avoid confrontation with adversaries like Saddam Hussein or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. As Henry Kissinger has put it, European leaders are no longer able to ask their people to make major sacrifices.
The overlooked culprit here is the rise of the modern welfare state. Since World War II and especially from the 1960s, Europe has built elaborate domestic income-maintenance programs, with government-run health care, pensions and jobless benefits. These are hugely expensive, requiring high taxes and government spending that is a huge proportion of GDP. The nearby table compares the so-called tax wedge across nations, which is one measure of the relative burdens to finance cradle-to-grave entitlements.
One consequence has been slower growth in Europe, relative to the U.S. and China, with less tax revenue to spend on everything. Another result is that welfare spending has crowded out defense spending. The political imperative of health care and pensions always trumps defense spending, save perhaps in a hot war. Europe may never again be able to muster public support for a defense buildup of the kind the U.S. undertook to end the Cold War in the 1980s, or even the smaller surge after 9/11.
The tragic irony of this year is that Democrats are rushing the U.S. down this same primrose entitlement path. With ObamaCare certain to eat up several more percentage points of GDP as it inevitably expands, we will take a giant step toward European social priorities.

View Full Image

Associated Press

For many Democrats, this is precisely the goal. Many Europeans, such as those at the Financial Times, will also welcome America's relative decline. But we doubt the American people fully understand what such a gilded entitlement cage means for our national vitality, or for our ability to defend U.S. interests at home and abroad.

The chart nearby shows the change in the share of U.S. federal spending on defense and domestic programs across recent decades. The upward blips in defense outlays occurred during Vietnam, the Reagan buildup and post-9/11. But the overall trend has been to spend less of the budget on defense. Add the stimulus, ObamaCare, a new entitlement for college and other Democratic plans, and the defense squeeze will only tighten. Higher taxes and borrowing may allow guns and butter to co-exist for a while. But over time, the welfare state will defeat the Pentagon here, as it has in Europe.
President Obama's domestic agenda may well mean that his successors lack the option to deploy 100,000 troops to Afghanistan, or to some other future trouble spot. This is the way superpowers lose their superiority.

Howard Dean Declares Debate Between Capitalism and Socialism to Be Over

2009-12-02T01:08:00.002-04:00

Russia building arms plants in Venezuela

2009-12-01T00:58:00.001-04:00

VENEZUELA-ARMS/RUSSIA:Russia building arms plants in Venezuela

By Walker Simon
CARACAS (Reuters) - Russia is building arms plants in Venezuela to produce AK-103 automatic rifles and cartridges and is finalizing contracts to send 53 military helicopters to the Andean nation, Moscow's envoy to Venezuela said Monday.
Ambassador Vladmir Zaemskiy told a news conference that Russian engineers and Venezuelan construction firms were building the rifle and cartridge plants which, when operational, would employ more than 1,500 workers.
He gave no completion date for the plants under construction in the central state of Aragua.
Details about Moscow's military shipments and projects have been scarce since socialist President Hugo Chavez's government began signing military agreements with Russia back in 2001.
In recent years, Venezuela has bought over $4 billion in weapons from Russia, including 24 Sukhoi fighter jets. Critics say Caracas is fueling an arms race in Latin America. Chavez says he is modernizing the military for defensive purposes.
When Chavez he returned from his latest trip to Russia in September, he said Russia had agreed to lend Venezuela $2.2 billion to purchase 92 tanks and an S-300 missile system that can shoot down fighter jets and cruise missiles.
Two years ago, Russia agreed to sell the same S-300 system to Iran but has dragged its feet over delivering the weapons amid U.S. and Israeli concerns they will be used to defend Iran's nuclear installations.
Zaemskiy declined to provide details on delivery dates for the tanks and missile system. He could not say if Moscow already disbursed part of the $2.2 billion loan.
But he added that "big contracts" were being finalized to deliver 53 "Mil" helicopters that can be used by the Venezuelan armed forces and for humanitarian missions.
Between 2006 and 2008, Moscow delivered a total of about 59 military helicopters to Venezuela, according to data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
Russia was also providing "a complete range" of military spare parts to Venezuela, Zaemskiy said. It is also transferring technology and building technical maintenance centers.
"As a result of this cooperation, Venezuela's defense capacity has increased considerably, as well as its level of technological independence," the ambassador said.

Chavez threatens to nationalize Venezuelan banks

2009-11-30T10:40:00.002-04:00

By Walker Simon Walker Simon – Sun Nov 29, 6:43 pm ET

CARACAS (Reuters) – Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Sunday he could nationalize private banks unless they comply with the law, adding he had "no problem with that because the banks don't want to extend credit to the poor."
In a broadcast from nationalized farmland in central Venezuela, he said: "To all the country's private bankers ... (I'm saying) he who slips up loses; I'll take over the bank, whatever its size."
"You want me to nationalize the banks?" he said during the broadcast of his weekly TV show "Alo Presidente."
"I have no problem with that because the banks don't want to extend credit to the poor, they don't comply, they don't want to comply with the bank's purpose for existence, and that is the law."
Chavez said the purpose of banks was not to enrich a small group of people but "should be to collect funds and savings to help aid the country's development by making loans, extending credits for housing."
In power for a decade, Chavez has nationalized broad swathes of the economy.
His banking nationalization threats on Sunday appeared to be broader in scope than his well-publicized warnings in recent years to nationalize Spanish-owned banks in Venezuela.
He repeatedly threatened to seize Spanish bank subsidiaries in Venezuela unless Spain's king apologized for telling him to "shut up" in November 2007 at a regional summit where Chavez branded a recent ex-Spanish prime minister a fascist.
But the only major private bank, foreign or Venezuelan, to fall into state hands under Chavez's rule was Spain's Banco Santander unit Banco de Venezuela, sold to Venezuela in July for $1.05 billion.
The government's last banking takeover was on November 20, when it seized four small banks, accounting for about 6 percent of Venezuela's deposits.
Finance Minister Ali Rodriguez then said the move stemmed from concerns about credit portfolios, problems explaining the source of funds and failure to comply with some obligations.
BANKERS NOT IN COMPLIANCE - CHAVEZ
Chavez spoke Sunday from the countryside behind a table strewn with a jumble of books, maps and documents, against the background of farmland growing black beans.
Addressing the banking theme, he said unnamed bankers "are not complying, they do not want to comply with the function for which a bank should exist (such as) that is in the law.
"This is occurring right now with a group of private banks, that's a demonstration that those private banking sectors don't want to learn, they don't want to accept that there is a constitution ... and that there are laws."
Venezuela's banking sector is dominated by 10 banks that control 70 percent of the total funds.
Chavez said he ordered the nation's chief prosecutor to investigate why a state bank, Banfoandes, deposited "a giant amount of resources in private banks."
"How is it that state resources, which belong to the people ... end up being placed in private banks?" he asked in his broadcast. "This is counterrevolutionary."
The four banks seized on November 20 were Banco Confederado, Banco Canarias, Banco Provivienda and bolivar Banco.
On Friday, a court acting on prosecutors' request banned travel abroad of 16 executives -- eight from Confederado, six from Provivienda and two from bolivar Banco.
Chavez said if it were up to him, he would have jailed the 16 executives due to flight risk. "They have (their own) light aircraft and private airports and (can) leave."
Chavez also criticized what he termed as excessive spending by state entities in the private medical sector.
"We have made a gift of millions and millions of bolivares this year to the bourgeoisie, which owns the private clinics, the great insurance companies," he said. "Enough already."
He said those funds should go directly to "the people."
(Reporting by Walker Simon, additional reporting by Fabian Cambero, editing by Matthew Lewis)

'Cap and Trade Is Dead'

2009-11-27T01:57:00.002-04:00

The recently disclosed emails and documents from University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit compromise the integrity of the United Nations' global warming reports.

So declares Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, taking a few minutes away from a Thanksgiving retreat with his family. "Ninety-five percent of the nails were in the coffin prior to this week. Now they are all in."
If any politician might be qualified to offer last rites, it would be Mr. Inhofe. The top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee has spent the past decade in the thick of Washington's climate fight. He's seen the back of three cap-and-trade bills, rode herd on an overweening Environmental Protection Agency, and steadfastly insisted that global researchers were "cooking" the science behind man-made global warming.
This week he's looking prescient. The more than 3,000 emails and documents from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU) that have found their way to the Internet have blown the lid off the "science" of manmade global warming. CRU is a nerve center for many of those researchers who have authored the United Nations' global warming reports and fueled the political movement to regulate carbon.
Their correspondence show a claque of scientists massaging data to make it fit their theories, squelching scientists who disagreed, punishing academic journals that didn't toe the apocalyptic line, and hiding their work from public view. "It's no use pretending that this isn't a major blow," glumly wrote George Monbiot, a U.K. writer who has been among the fiercest warming alarmists. The documents "could scarcely be more damaging." And that's from a believer.

View Full Image

Associated Press

Sen. Jim Inhofe

This scandal has real implications. Mr. Inhofe notes that international and U.S. efforts to regulate carbon were already on the ropes. The growing fear of Democrats and environmentalists is that the CRU uproar will prove a tipping point, and mark a permanent end to those ambitions.

Internationally, world leaders finally acknowledged that the recession has sapped them of their political power to impose devastating new carbon-restrictions. China and India are clear they won't join the West in an economic suicide pact. Next month's summit in Copenhagen is a bust. Instead of producing legally binding agreements, it will be dogged by queries about the legitimacy of the scientists who wrote the reports that form its basis.
The next opportunity to get international agreement is in Mexico City, 2010—a U.S. election year. Democrats were already publicly acknowledging there will be no domestic climate legislation in 2009 and privately acknowledging their great unease at passing a huge energy tax on Americans headed for a midterm vote.
Add to that the CRU scandal, which pivots the focus to potential fraud. Republicans are launching investigations, and the pressure is building on Democrats to hold hearings, since climate scientists were funded with U.S. taxpayer dollars. Mr. Inhofe's office this week sent letters to federal agencies and outside scientists warning them not to delete their own CRU-related emails and documents, which may also be subject to Freedom of Information requests.
Polls show a public already losing belief in the theory of man-made global warming, and skeptics are now on the offense. The Competitive Enterprise Institute's Myron Ebell argues this scandal gives added cover to Blue Dogs and other Democrats who were already reluctant to buck the public's will and vote for climate legislation. And with Republicans set to pick up seats, Mr. Ebell adds, "By 2011 there will hopefully be even fewer members who support this. We may be close to having it permanently stymied." Continued U.S. failure to act makes an international agreement to replace Kyoto (which expires in 2012) a harder sell.
There's still the EPA, which is preparing an "endangerment finding" that would allow it to regulate carbon on the grounds it is a danger to public health. It is here the emails might have the most direct effect. The agency has said repeatedly that it based its finding on the U.N. science—which is now at issue. The scandal puts new pressure on the EPA to accede to growing demands to make public the scientific basis of its actions.
Mr. Inhofe goes so far as to suggest that the agency might not now issue the finding. "The president knows how punitive this will be; he's never wanted to do it through [the EPA] because that's all on him." The EPA was already out on a legal limb with its finding, and Mr. Inhofe argues that if it does go ahead, the CRU disclosure guarantees court limbo. "The way the far left used to stop us is to file lawsuits and stall and stall. We'll do the same thing."
Still, if this Democratic Washington has demonstrated anything, it's that ideology often trumps common sense. Egged on by the left, dug in to their position, Democrats might plow ahead. They'd be better off acknowledging that the only "consensus" right now is that the world needs to start over on climate "science."
Write to kim@wsj.com

In the Shadow of Hoover

2009-11-25T00:58:00.000-04:00

Capitolism

By William Greider

November 23, 2009

In an interview with Fox News, the president said: "It is important to recognize if we keep on adding to the deficit, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point people could lose confidence in the US economy in a double-dip recession." Maybe he didn't mean it. Or was merely nodding to Chinese leaders, our leading creditor, who had scolded him for profligate spending.

While he was in China, Barack Obama made a bizarre declaration that the US government must reduce its budget deficits in order to avoid "a double-dip recession." The remark was alarming because it suggests the president may not fully understand the country's economic predicament. Deficit spending is a cure for our troubles, not the cause. If Obama follows through and actually reduces the red ink, the Great Recession could be born again with new fury.
Still, his backward logic gave me a chill. If Obama acts on it, he will be walking in the footsteps of Herbert Hoover, not Franklin Roosevelt, and I fear his presidency could be doomed as a result. I know that sounds too strong and brutally unfair, given the president's energetic vision for the country and his early efforts to stimulate economic recovery. But history is often unfair to leaders who do not get their priorities straight and fail to deliver what they promise.
Hoover was the Republican president from 1929 to 1933 and faced a far more dramatic unwinding of the economy after the 1929 stock market crash. In popular memory, he was blamed, somewhat unfairly, for causing the Great Depression. People came to loathe him personally for the repeated pep talks--"Prosperity is just around the corner"--and Democrats ran against "Hoover" for many years after.
Barack Obama is a towering political talent by comparison, but also has troubling similarities. In an age of limited government, Hoover preached "volunteerism" and worked earnestly to persuade business to cooperate with labor and "do the right thing." Obama's softball approach to the financial crisis reveals a similar reluctance to use government's powers to compel results. Instead of directing bailed-out banks to lend more aggressively, Obama asked them nicely. The bankers blew him off. His economic stimulus was a good start, yet clearly insufficient.
If Herbert Hoover was guilty of anything, it was ambivalence and confusion of purpose. Hoover was a very intelligent technocrat who sincerely tried various sound measures to relieve the general suffering. But Hoover never found the will to follow through decisively. He was pulled in an opposite direction by failed market orthodoxy that was still influential. To his subsequent regret, Hoover heeded the steely advice of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon: "Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate." In other words, let nature takes its course. Clear away the wreckage and capitalism will heal itself.
In the era of big government, Obama is a far more activist president, but he has followed a less brutal version of the same conservative thinking. Pour billions first into restoring the financial system, then it can revive the real economy. That approach was backwards, as nervous members of Congress are beginning to grasp.
Like Hoover, Obama is pulled between opposing imperatives. Deficit hawks demand he get control over the budget deficits to restore confidence among investors (those Chinese creditors who buy our Treasury bonds). Bleeding-heart politicians, on the other hand, want him to focus on rescuing the folks (who need jobs and foreclosure relief and can renew consumer demand for businesses). Obama would like to do both, but hesitates to choose decisively.
Blaming this on his center-right advisors--Timothy Geithner, Larry Summers, Rahm Emmanuel--is too easy. Obama picked them. He obviously agrees with their reluctance to go full bore in behalf of the real economy. Geither and Summers, meanwhile, are taking victory laps for saving the country. Ordinary citizens wonder what they are talking about. Obama should tell them to shut up with their self-congratulations (better still, he should replace them with more imaginative policy thinkers).
Piling up more government debt is undesirable and involves risk, but it is not as bad as a low-grade depression that would go on for many years without relief. In this crisis, the United States is astride a fundamental disjuncture that only the federal government can repair by borrowing tons of money and spending it--force-feeding recovery, then cleaning up the balance sheet afterward.
The awkward truth about capitalism is the machine does not function unless someone is borrowing money and spending it. The genius of the capitalist system is that it recycles surplus wealth--savings and profits from past economic activity--by lending the wealth for new production and consumption. When nobody in the private economy can borrow and nobody will lend--neither households nor business and finance--government has to step up to the task. In a crisis like this, if the federal government declines to get things moving again by borrowing and spending, as heavily as necessary, then the economy will stumble along far below its potential (that is, higher unemployment, weaker production, more failures). If Obama decides to curtail the deficits now, he is disarming unilaterally.
In history, even FDR wanted to have it both ways, but New Dealers learned from painful error they could not serve both masters. In 1936, they decided the recovery was complete so they reduced federal spending and raised interest rates. The depression was resumed with new viciousness. Obama and advisers now seem to think they are out of the ditch and can safely tilt toward fiscal responsibility.
The truth is, nobody knows what comes next. Just as plausibly, the trouble is not over but may even get worse. Instead of cresting, unemployment could rise further for another year or more, spreading the suffering and loss more widely. If the "recovery" proves to be an illusion, then another stock market break might follow. Uncertainty is still in the saddle.
Liberal-labor forces, in and out of Congress, are mounting a counter-attack on Obama's timidity and demanding major new spending for direct job creation. The president has agreed to a "jobs summit" to consider the problem.
This is an opening for Obama to announce a major "course correction." If he states the gravity of the situation honestly, people will not be angered by his truth-telling. They already see things are worse than officials acknowledge. If Obama opts instead for half-way measures--too little too late--then he will fall squarely under Hoover's shadow.
Herbert Hoover tried to emphasize the positive as the economy continued to unwind. He expressed his deep faith in the country's future and offered helpful suggestions for coping. Americans were at first reassured, then gradually they became angered as they saw the president's optimism contradicted by events. In the end, Hoover's good intentions frightened people. Hearing from the president, again and again, that things were getting better, when they knew otherwise, told them he was indifferent to their plight or, more frightening, he had lost touch with reality.

Amid Calif. Attorney General Investigation, ACORN San Diego office dumps 20k docs in dumpster...

2009-11-24T00:30:00.002-04:00

by Derrick Roach
On October 1st, 2009 California Attorney General Jerry Brown announced that an investigation had been opened into ACORN’s activities in California, resulting from undercover videos showing employees seemingly offering to assist the undercover film makers with human smuggling, child prostitution and even tax advice to boot.
Although ACORN has denied any wrongdoing, some of the employees involved were terminated, and ACORN has publicly stated that they would fully cooperate with any investigations that followed.

Interestingly, the local head ACORN organizer in California, David Lagstein was caught on tape earlier this month speaking to an East County Democratic Club.
Mr. Lagstein stated: “…the attorney general is a political animal, but certainly every bit of the communication we have had with them has suggested that the fault will be found with the people that did the video and not the people with ACORN.”
Continuing, Mr. Lagstein stated: “…we are fully cooperating, some of the investigators visited our office this morning and I think they really understand what’s going on.”

Shockingly, we now learn that the ACORN office in National City (San Diego County) engaged in a massive document dump on the evening of October 9th, containing thousands upon thousands of sensitive documents, just days prior to the Attorney General’s visit.

BigGovernment.com has learned that not only did this document dump occur, but the documents in question were irresponsibly and brazenly dumped in a public dumpster, without considering laws and regulations as to how sensitive information should be treated.

I am a local licensed private investigator. I took it upon myself to keep an eye on what the local ACORN office was up to, in light of the release of the undercover videos. I retrieved these documents from the public dumpster.

Documents shared with BigGovernment.com include information exposing not only the inner workings of ACORN in California, but also personal, sensitive information belonging to employees, members and clients of ACORN. ACORN and its few remaining defenders insist that the “good” ACORN provides outweighs the transgressions exposed in the recent undercover video sting. But, ACORN’s massive dumping of these documents and the cavalier manner in which it betrayed the trust of its supporters betrays that talking point. (Unlike ACORN, we have redacted sensitive and personal information.)

Ex-ACORN official gets probation for voter registration plan

2009-11-24T00:29:00.000-04:00

Justin M. Bowen

Christopher Edwards, former ACORN Las Vegas field director, testifies Sept. 29 during a preliminary hearing regarding a voter registration incentive plan.

By Cara McCoy (contact)

Monday, Nov. 23, 2009 | 10:01 a.m.

Amy Busefink, ACORN's deputy regional director, who authorities allege was involved with an alleged illegal voter registration incentive program, appears in court Sept. 29 in Las Vegas.

A former field director for the political advocacy organization ACORN was sentenced today in district court to up to three years of probation.
Christopher Edwards, who in August pleaded guilty to two counts of conspiracy to commit a crime of compensation for registration of voters, a gross misdemeanor, received a suspended jail sentence and a $500 fine. He has agreed to testify against ACORN and one of its former regional directors, Amy Busefink.
The Nevada attorney general’s office has accused ACORN and Busefink of operating an illegal bonus system. Tying money to or setting quotas for collecting voter registration cards is illegal under Nevada law.
“I take responsibility for what I did,” Edwards told the court. “I’m sorry, I truly am.”
Busefink and ACORN pleaded not guilty on Oct. 27. A trial date is set for April 19.
If convicted, Busefink likely would face probation or less than one year in jail. ACORN could see a $5,000 fine.
The attorney general’s office said Edwards organized and operated a quota system called “blackjack” or “21+” through which the group paid canvassers based on the number of voter registration cards they collected each day. The canvassers were to gather at least 20 completed cards daily and anyone who turned in 21 or more would be given an extra $5.
Busefink, as a manager, is said to have approved the “blackjack” program. But ACORN officials have said Edwards acted alone in developing and carrying it out.
In handing down his sentence, Judge Donald Mosley said he wasn’t pleased with the negotiations but cited Edwards’ agreement to testify in giving him probation. Edwards is also required to complete community service.
Nevada Chief Deputy Attorney General Conrad Hafen is the lead prosecutor in the case. He wasn’t present in court today; David Rickert, a prosecutor in the attorney general’s office, declined comment after the hearing. Edwards and his attorney, Dan Silverstein, declined to speak with the media.
An election task force last year began to investigate ACORN over questionable voter registration tactics. The charges against Edwards, ACORN and Busefink stemmed from information obtained during that investigation.

Cuba: military exercise braces island for US attack

2009-11-23T01:13:00.002-04:00

Nearly 50 years after a botched US-directed invasion of Cuba, the communist nation said Saturday it is holding a military exercise next week to boost preparedness against any future US attack. "It is a necessity of the first order given the political-military situation that now defines relations between Cuba and the empire," Major General Leonardo Andollo warned, referring to the United States.
He told the official Granma newspaper that the "Bastion-2009" exercises will "raise the deterrent capacity to prevent a military confrontation, under the principle that there is no better way to win a war than by avoiding it."
The military exercise, Cuba's largest in five years and the first since Barack Obama's inauguration as US president in January, will be held Thursday through Saturday, followed by Sunday's armed forces day to be marked nationwide.
The government of President Raul Castro, a longtime defense chief, expects that as many as four million Cubans may take part in Sunday's events, in this Caribbean country of 11 million, the Americas' only one-party communist regime.
Major General Ermio Hernandez, head of the military's directorate, said the exercise will involve tactical maneuvers, command of ground troops, artillery practice and military flights.
Washington quickly recognized the new Fidel Castro government after the 1959 Cuban revolution, but by 1961 the United States broke ties with Havana.
In April that year, a 1,400-strong force of CIA-trained Cuban exiles invaded Cuba's Bay of Pigs -- a disastrous venture fatally compromised by leaky intelligence and poor execution.
In its aftermath the Central Intelligence Agency hatched many failed plots to remove the elder Cuban leader, now 83 and still head of the Cuban Communist Party.
A US trade embargo on Cuba begun in 1962 remains in place despite calls by every country in the Americas to have it lifted.
Obama has largely abandoned the confrontational rhetoric with Havana that marked past administrations, and has sought to allow unlimited family travel and financial remittances from the United States to Cuba.
But he has stressed that elimination of the embargo would require Cuba to open up democratically and improve its human rights record.

Engaging Cuba on Human Rights

2009-11-20T15:53:00.000-04:00

The regime should be asked to release political prisoners in exchange for normal relations.

By JORGE G. CASTANEDA

Normalization of U.S. relations with Cuba was widely seen as exactly the kind of high-value, low-hanging fruit that would be ideal for a president elected under the banner of "change." But a scathing new Human Rights Watch (HRW) report, "New Castro, Same Cuba," will make lifting sanctions against the Castro regime—on travel, remittances, trade—more difficult for President Obama.
Sadly, the human-rights situation on the island remains dismal, despite new leadership. According to HRW, the Raúl Castro government has harassed and imprisoned dissidents using an Orwellian provision of the Cuban Criminal Code that punishes "dangerousness." Authorities can lock up individuals on the suspicion that they may commit a crime in the future, or for engaging in behavior that is "antisocial" or contrary to "socialist morality."
Among the activities the government has deemed "dangerous" are: handing out copies of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, failing to attend pro-government rallies, or simply being unemployed. In its report, based on more than 60 interviews carried out in Cuba without official permission or by phone from abroad, HRW documented more than 40 cases of dissidents who have been sentenced for "dangerousness."
Cuban law is replete with laws like the "dangerousness" provision that may be used to punish anyone seen as critical of the government. Human-rights defenders, journalists, political activists and others charged with breaking such laws find themselves at the mercy of a system that violates virtually every due process right.
Political detainees are denied access to legal counsel and family visits. They are subjected to abusive interrogations, and they may be detained for months or even years without being charged. Trials are pure theater, mostly conducted behind closed doors and finished in minutes.
Once in prison, abuse is commonplace. On Dec. 10, 2008—Human Rights Day—a political prisoner tried to read aloud to fellow prisoners from a book his wife had brought him called "Your Rights." In response, a guard came into his cell and told him to eat the book. When the prisoner refused, he was beaten and later sentenced to six more years in prison for "disrespecting authority."
Dissidents are subjected to public "acts of repudiation," in which crowds gather outside of their homes, throwing stones, shouting threats, and sometimes physically assaulting them. Those labeled "counterrevolutionaries" are fired from their jobs, monitored, threatened and prevented from traveling. The beating of dissident blogger Yoani Sánchez by two men she says were Cuban agents in civilian clothes in Havana just two weeks ago is further proof of this regrettable state of affairs.
Without outside pressure, the human-rights situation in Cuba will not improve. But outside pressure—sadly absent today, in the case of Europe or Latin America—has proved insufficient. At the same time, the U.S. embargo policy has been a unmitigated failure.
The logical route to follow is the one HRW and others have suggested: The U.S. should shift from a policy of regime change to a policy of human-rights promotion. The Obama administration should approach the European Union and the Latin American democracies and offer to lift the embargo on the condition that these countries join the U.S. in pressuring Cuba on a single demand: the release of all political prisoners, including those incarcerated for "dangerousness."
Once the U.S. government has secured this commitment and a multilateral coalition is in place, the U.S. should end its failed embargo policy. Cuba should be given a brief and specified period—the report recommends six months—to release all of its political prisoners.
If the government of Raúl Castro complies, it will set in motion a process whose ultimate goal is the full normalization of relations with the U.S. and the EU, as well as compliance with the democratic standards of the Organization of American States. If it does not, this multilateral coalition should enact targeted sanctions directed at the leadership of the Castro government.
The Castro brothers know that nothing would be more threatening to their half-century monopoly on power than the end of the U.S. embargo, which they use as a justification for their ongoing abuses. Indeed, they appear to be deliberately sabotaging normalization by making the human-rights situation worse.
This is why a multilateral approach is crucial. According to the Spanish daily El País, President Obama asked Spanish Prime Minister Rodríguez Zapatero three weeks ago to "Tell the Cubans we are taking steps, but if they don't take them too, it will be very difficult for us to continue." The Obama administration gets it. Now, if only we could get more Latin American countries to stop countenancing Cuba's human-rights violations and play a constructive role.
Mr. Castaneda, a professor at New York University and fellow at the New America Foundation, was Mexico's foreign minister from 2000 to 2003.

As Usual, Holder Undone by Holder

2009-11-20T00:19:00.002-04:00

As I noted in addressing Attorney General Eric Holder's testimony this morning, the heart of his defense of the administration's decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 terrorists in civilian court is the howler that there is no real difference between a civilian trial and a military commission.

Holder absurdly claimed that he believed it would be easier to get a conviction in civilian court — notwithstanding that the more lax evidentiary standards in military commissions make it easier for the government to get its proof admitted. And that's beside the fact that the jihadists wanted to plead guilty and proceed to execution in their military commission. (In Holder-world, conviction in an unpredictable civilian trial two years from now is somehow a surer thing than a military commission in which the defendants asked to plead guilty eleven months ago.)
Holder also claimed that there was no real difference between the protection of classified information in civilian and military courts. I explained in the aforementioned post why this isn't true. But I neglected to mention the most obvious reason why it isn't true: the Justice Department's own "protocols" for sorting out which enemy combatants get military commissions and which get civilan trials with all the rights and privileges of American citizens.
During today's testimony, Holder was especially incoherent in trying to explain the rationale — which has resulted in the worst war criminals getting a civilian trial while lesser war criminals are stuck in military tribunals. He kept falling back on DOJ's newly developed "protocols" for making this judgment. Scott Johnson has an excellent post at Powerline discussing these protocols. There are only three and they are very elastic. But for now, I want to focus on the second one (my italics):

B. Efficiency. The factors to be considered here are protection of intelligence sources and methods; the venue in which the case would be tried; issues related to multiple-defendant trials; foreign policy concerns; legal or evidentiary problems that might attend prosecution in the other jurisdiction: and efficiency and resource concerns.

So here are a couple of questions the Judiciary Committee might want to ask Holder in its follow-up:
1. If, as between civilian trials and military commissions, there is no real difference in the degree to which national defense secrets are protected, why does the Justice Department apply a protocol which asserts that the "protection of intelligence sources and methods" will be different in the two systems?
2. If the evidentiary rules in the two systems are virtual mirror images, why does DOJ apply a protocol that says evidence that is admissible in one system may not be admissible in the other? And, since Holder claims the government has an easier time proving its case in civilian court, can he identify a single category of evidence that is admissible in civilian court but not in a military tribunal?
On number 2, here's a hint: One of the major attacks on the military commissions, advanced by lawyers like those in Holder's firm who volunteered their services to the enemy, was that military commissions permitted too much hearsay and, potentially, evidence obtained by "torture." They argued that the government should be required to prove its case under what they insisted were the more demanding standards that govern civilian trials.

The White House Butler

2009-11-19T01:57:00.002-04:00

A judge twice rejected by voters is nominated by President Obama.

As consolation prizes go, Louis Butler can't complain. After being twice rejected by Wisconsin voters for a place on the state Supreme Court, the former judge has instead been nominated by President Obama to a lifetime seat on the federal district court. If he is confirmed, Wisconsin voters will have years to contend with the decisions of a judge they made clear they would rather live without.
Judge Butler served on the state Supreme Court for four years, enough time to have his judicial temperament grow in infamy. Having first run unsuccessfully in 2000, he was appointed by Democratic Governor Jim Doyle to the seat vacated by Justice Diane Sykes in 2004. But after serving four years, voters had seen enough of his brand of judicial philosophy, making him the first sitting justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court in four decades to lose a retention election last year.
In Ferdon v. Wisconsin Partners, he drew the rage of doctors and others when he dismantled the state's limit on noneconomic damages in medical malpractices cases—the kind of tort reform that had been serving the state well. Business groups were likewise floored by his decision in Thomas v. Mallet, which allowed "collective liability" in lead paint cases—making any company a potential target, regardless of whether they made the paint in question. His nickname as a public defender was "Loophole Louis," a name that stuck when, as a judge, he was considered to be soft on crime.
At his confirmation hearing this month, Mr. Butler was quick to make light of his double rejection by Wisconsin voters, telling the Senate Judiciary Committee that "After 16 years on the bench, I may be a better judge than a politician."
Ahem. That's a coded nod to liberal groups like the George Soros-funded Justice at Stake that are trying to eliminate judicial elections. Rather than letting voters choose judges, they prefer so-called "merit selection" plans whereby judges are selected by committees of lawyers.
State court judges like Mr. Butler are likely to be an important source of nominees for President Obama. Because Democrats have been out of office since the Clinton Administration, many of the liberal judges on the federal district courts are older, an incentive for the White House to comb state courts for new judges—especially for the federal appeals courts.
Mr. Butler's nomination also shows the return to prominence of judicial ratings by the American Bar Association, which traditionally gives extra weight to "judicial experience." The ABA, which was ousted by the Bush Administration in part because of the ABA's notorious liberal bias, is now back in favor in the Obama White House. Mr. Butler served on the ABA's Standing Committee on Judicial Independence, a group that like Justice at Stake critiques how that independence is supposedly compromised by the need to raise money for judicial elections.
Mr. Butler's nomination shows the dominance of liberal ideology in Mr. Obama's judicial selections, and especially a contempt for Wisconsin voters.

Bigger U.S. Role in Broadband Is Likely

2009-11-19T01:51:00.002-04:00

By AMY SCHATZ

WASHINGTON -- The Federal Communications Commission began to lay the groundwork for a bigger federal role in the broadband business Wednesday, outlining the hurdles the U.S. needs to overcome to improve the availability of high-speed Internet access.
The FCC identified a number of issues the government should address, including the high cost of laying new broadband lines in rural areas, a lack of airwaves for wireless Web access and ill-informed consumers.
"This focus on broadband is a reflection of a recognition that the U.S. is lagging behind," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said Wednesday at the agency's monthly meeting.
The FCC is drafting a National Broadband Plan, which will lay out ways the government can improve broadband service in the U.S. The plan is scheduled to come out in February, and it's uncertain how many of its suggestions will ultimately be adopted. Already, some big cable and telecommunications companies are concerned the agency wants to impose rules that could undermine their business strategies and profitability.
FCC officials noted Wednesday that because more Americans are relying on smart phones to access the Internet, more airwaves need to be devoted to wireless broadband service. Agency officials have previously floated a plan to take some airwaves from television broadcasters and use them for wireless devices instead. Broadcasters are unhappy about that plan.
The agency took a step toward expanding wireless Web access by passing a new rule Wednesday to help wireless companies speed up local officials' decisions on new cellphone towers. Wireless companies asked the FCC for help, because they have had problems in the past getting state and local land-use regulators to make decisions on siting new cellphone towers.

Getty Images

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski testifies on Capitol Hill in October.

Of the 3,300 applications for new towers or to put a new antenna up on an existing tower, more than 700 have been pending for more than a year, FCC officials said. The FCC said local communities should have 90 days to consider applications from carriers who want to put an antenna up on an existing tower, and 150 days for new tower applications. The decision means that if local officials don't make a decision in that time, the wireless carriers can appeal to a court.
The FCC's latest broadband moves are part of a multi-stage process mapped out by Mr. Genachowski for examining whether American consumers have suffered from the largely hands-off approach the U.S. has taken on Internet infrastructure.
FCC officials said they are concerned consumers don't know enough about the actual speeds of broadband connections before they sign up with a provider. Often, the speed advertised by an Internet provider is much faster than the actual speed a consumer gets at home, which makes it harder for consumers to compare competing services. FCC officials Wednesday didn't say exactly what they would propose to address this.
The agency is also looking at how to increase the use of broadband among lower-income people and minorities, who subscribe at lower rates than the general population.

Finally, A Congressman With a Solution: Stop Complaining So Much

2009-11-18T21:06:00.000-04:00

by Capitol Confidential
Sure, the economy sucks. Unemployment is at least 10.2% and, yes, if you include part-time workers who would rather have full-time jobs it may be over 17%. The government is showering our cash on Wall Street and burning through piles of our children and grandchildren’s money “saving” phantom jobs in Congressional Districts that don’t exist.
Oh yeah, and Congress is planning for a government take-over of our health care system, legislating higher energy prices and raising taxes. Sheesh, no wonder we’re feeling blue.
Well, not to worry, three-term Congressman Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO) has found a solution: Stop Complaining So Much. Rep. Cleaver is currently circulating a “Dear Colleague” letter, seeking co-sponsors for House Concurrent Resolution 155, designating the day before Thanksgiving as the official “Complaint Free Wednesday.”
You see, as the Congressman explains:

From time to time, we all experience anxiety, frustration, stress, and regret. And often, we respond to these feelings with a criticism or a complaint. Regrettably, complaining keeps people stuck on current problems, inhibiting them from thinking constructively to find solutions. Research has also shown that complaining can be harmful to one’s emotional and physical health; relationships; and can limit professional career success.

Really. Full letter and more after the jump.

We will set aside the question of whether Rep. Cleaver has discovered the risk of too much complaining only because his party’s legislative proposals are tanking in the polls. We do think it is interesting that he believes we should focus on “solutions” and “look forward”, subtle prods to enact new laws and programs.

We are torn on the larger question of whether Congress should even be wasting any time on such silliness as “official” days for this or that. On the one hand, it is surely a waste of taxpayer money and a decidedly unserious response to our challenges. On the other, though, every moment spent on things like this is a moment that isn’t spent re-regulating huge swaths of the economy.

We do know one thing, though: The Age of Pericles this ain’t.

[Ed Note: Cleaver's letter was sent electronically to Hill Offices. To better present the letter to the public, the text has been copied onto House of Representatives letterhead. The text wasn't changed or edited in any way.]

California budget shortfall to top $21 billion

2009-11-18T12:33:00.002-04:00

OAKLAND, Calif., Nov 17 (Reuters) - California faces a budget gap of nearly $21 billion over its current and next fiscal years, according to the state government's budget watchdog agency, the Los Angeles Times reported on Tuesday.
The newspaper said California's Legislative Analyst's Office would issue an official report on Wednesday with its shortfall estimate.
The projection comes less than four months after Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and lawmakers agreed to a budget plan that closed a deficit of more than $24 billion largely with deep spending cuts to respond to plunging revenues amid the worst economic crisis to hit the most populous U.S. state since the Great Depression.
Schwarzenegger said last week he expects a budget gap for the rest of the current fiscal year of between $5 billion to $7 billion. His finance advisors had previously said the state government would see a $7.4 billion gap in the next fiscal year beginning in July.
But next year's budget shortfall will be much larger than initially forecast, the Los Angeles Times said. Citing sources briefed the upcoming report, it said the deficit will be $14.4 billion. (Reporting by Jim Christie; Editing by John O'Callaghan)

Andy Stern Must Go

2009-11-18T01:22:00.001-04:00

AP source: NYC papers' circulation offices raided

2009-11-18T01:12:00.002-04:00

NEW YORK (AP) - Investigators in New York City raided circulation offices at some of the nation's largest newspapers Tuesday as part of a union corruption probe, a law enforcement official said. Police officers working with the Manhattan district attorney's office searched circulation offices of The New York Times in Queens, the New York Post and the Daily News in Manhattan, and El Diario in Brooklyn, the official said, speaking to The Associated Press on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.
Investigators were seeking paperwork related to the Newspaper and Mail Deliverers Union, which packages and delivers newspapers across the region. Calls to the union's headquarters were not answered Tuesday.
Calls to the newspapers seeking information on whether the news operations were involved were not returned. The New York Times issued a statement saying that the office of an employee at its plant in Queens' College Point area had been searched but that its news side was not part of the investigation.
No arrests have been made, and the district attorney's office refused to comment.
The 1,600-member union wields considerable power over news companies that rely on their drivers to deliver hundreds of thousands of papers each day, and allegations of connections to organized crime are not. More than a decade ago, District Attorney Robert Morgenthau charged that the union was under mob control.

Obama Aide Dunn Renews Criticism of Fox, Hails Jon Stewart

2009-11-16T13:07:00.002-04:00

By Hans Nichols

Nov. 14 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama’s outgoing communications director, Anita Dunn, renewed her attacks against Fox News as she praised the “investigative journalism” of Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart and said MSNBC isn’t a biased cable news network.
She criticized Fox for using edited footage of a rally to make it appear that opposition to the president’s health-care plan was bigger than it was.
“The people who exposed this: Jon Stewart of the Daily Show on Comedy Central,” Dunn said yesterday at the Bloomberg Washington Summit. “That’s where you are getting fact-checking and investigative journalism these days.”
She also suggested, when asked, that Obama was aware of the strategy to criticize Fox. “I am not a person who is known for going rogue,” she said.
“We’re under no illusions of what the political agenda of, you know, certain news networks are,” Dunn said of Fox. “We obviously have talked to them before. We’ll talk to them again in the future.”
After the controversy between the White House and Fox News erupted, Karl Rove, former President George W. Bush’s political adviser, said that cable news channel MSNBC had a left-leaning bias. Dunn disputed that contention.
“MSNBC has as a host of their morning program a former Republican congressman who was a member of Newt Gingrich’s revolution,” she said, referring to Joe Scarborough, the former Florida Republican congressman who hosts “Morning Joe.”
Different Network
“I do regard them as different as a network,” Dunn said of MSNBC.
Dunn also criticized Rove and the Bush administration for holding secret meetings in the White House.
“We are running this transparent and very accountable administration,” she said. “That was not the case when Karl Rove was calling the shots in the White House for eight years.”
Responding to criticism that Obama has taken too much time for his review of Afghanistan policy and U.S. troop deployments, she said Americans appreciate a deliberative approach.
The White House is “taking the time to do it correctly, making sure that you’ve asked all the questions, that you’ve challenged all the assumptions,” Dunn said.
She said Obama’s September speech to Congress about health care redefined the debate and was a highlight of her eight-month tenure as the communications director.
Health-Care Momentum
Obama’s congressional address gave the issue “the momentum that you’re seeing today” for overhaul legislation, she said.
She also said she expects the “toughest” financial- industry revisions to be completed this year.
“At the end of the year, there’s going to be the toughest financial reform law signed by President Obama that we have seen in generations,” she said. “And hopefully be able to prevent future meltdowns.”
Dunn will be replaced next month by Dan Pfeiffer, a longtime Obama aide. She assumed her position in April after interim communications director Ellen Moran left the White House to serve as chief of staff to Commerce Secretary Gary Locke.
Her husband, Bob Bauer, will replace Greg Craig as White House counsel, the administration announced yesterday. Dunn will remain a consultant to the White House.
Dunn said the White House could have done a better job in harnessing new technologies to reach the American people, as she said they successfully did during the campaign.
She reserved her sharpest barbs for News Corp.’s Fox and played down the network’s prospects for an interview with Obama while the president is on a four-country, eight-day trip to Asia.
“There are no confirmed television interviews in China,” she said.
“We wish her well in her new position,” said Dana Klinghoffer, a spokeswoman for Fox News.
To contact the reporter on this story: Hans Nichols in Washington at hnichols2@bloomberg.net

Federal oversight of subways proposed

2009-11-16T00:58:00.002-04:00

Red Line crash spurred safety plan Obama administration to push for Congress to change law

By Joe Stephens and Lena H. Sun
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, November 15, 2009

The Obama administration will propose that the federal government take over safety regulation of the nation's subway and light-rail systems, responding to what it says is haphazard and ineffective oversight by state agencies.
Under the proposal, the U.S. Department of Transportation would do for transit what it does for airlines and Amtrak: set and enforce federal regulations to ensure that millions of passengers get to their destinations safely. Administration officials said the plan will be presented in coming weeks to Congress, which must approve a change in the law.
The proposal would affect every subway and light-rail system in the country, including large systems in Washington, New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Administration officials said they are responding to a growing number of collisions, derailments and worker fatalities on subways -- and in particular to the fatal June 22 crash on Metro's Red Line and failures in oversight that have surfaced in its wake. Those failures have been the subject of an ongoing investigative series in The Washington Post.
"After the [Metro] train crash, we were all sitting around here scratching our heads, saying, 'Hey, we've got to do something about this,' " Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in an interview. "And we discovered that there's not much we could do, because the law wouldn't allow us to do it."
Metro spokeswoman Lisa Farbstein said the agency had not seen details of the proposal. "The bottom line is we welcome additional safety oversight with open arms," she said.
LaHood said he expects the proposal to be welcomed on Capitol Hill, but some Republicans said Saturday night that more federal oversight might not be the answer.
"The administration is right to raise this issue, but federal regulation should only apply to systems that cross state lines," said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), who had not been briefed on the plan.
Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.) said the proposal sounded like a credible way to fix a broken oversight system. "Without seeing the details, it would make sense," Wolf said. "Some states have done a good job, while others have not. There needs to be consistent safety enforcement."
Critical details of the plan remain unclear, including how much it would cost, where the money would come from, how the federal government would enforce its rules and whether it is equipped to carry out enhanced oversight. Existing state oversight bodies could remain in place to enforce the new regulations but would need to meet federal standards and gain federal approval.
Safety experts praised the initiative.
"It's long overdue," said Kitty Higgins, a member of the National Transportation Safety Board until August. "I applaud the secretary and his team for recognizing the gap in oversight in the current law. I hope that Congress will act on it swiftly."
An exception to the rule
The federal government long has regulated the safe operation of airplanes, Amtrak and even ferries. But a law passed in 1965 prohibits federal regulation of subways. When that law was put into effect, there were only a handful of subways -- Metro wouldn't open its first line for another 11 years -- and lawmakers reasoned that federal oversight would hamper their growth.
As a result, rail transit operates under two very different federal systems offering disparate levels of safety oversight.
Commuter rail systems, such as MARC and the Virginia Railway Express, are subject to a long list of federal regulations and are regularly inspected by federal safety monitors.
Safety oversight of light-rail and subway systems, on the other hand, is delegated to 27 regional bodies controlled by states. Quality varies widely, as does funding and enforcement power. With a few notable exceptions, those agencies tend to be threadbare, averaging less than one staff person per agency, according to federal statistics.
The state organizations have been criticized for lacking expertise and independence. Some rely on the transit systems they oversee to supply their funding. Many lack the legal authority to force transit agencies to grant them access to equipment and documents, and cannot compel transit agencies to correct any deficiencies they identify.
For Metro, the second-busiest subway system in the nation, the monitoring body is the Tri-State Oversight Committee, which has six members but no employees, office or phone number. It also has no direct regulatory authority over Metro.
As it stands, the Transportation Department also cannot direct subway systems to adopt safety recommendations issued by the National Transportation Safety Board.
Details of the proposal
Under the administration's proposal, states that kept their oversight bodies would have to pass safety certification programs and demonstrate that they had an adequately trained staff, as well as financial independence and authority to compel compliance from systems they oversee.
States running their own programs would receive federal funds to cover salaries, training and other expenses. Federal regulations would ensure that the state programs established standards similar to those set by federal monitors.
The Federal Transit Administration would assume direct oversight for states that opt out of safety monitoring. The agency also would take over for state organizations that the administration determined to be inadequate.
If subway or light-rail systems did not meet the new safety standards, they would risk losing federal funding for capital expenditures, according to an administration official who was briefed on the plan.
Transit systems would be responsible for shouldering the cost of complying with new federal safety requirements.
The plan would also allow the FTA to issue safety regulations for bus transit systems, but officials said early efforts would focus on rail.
In August, The Post reported that Metro's supposedly fail-safe crash avoidance system had failed in March on Capitol Hill, allowing two trains to come perilously close to colliding. A few weeks later, the newspaper reported that the automatic crash avoidance system also failed in 2005, when three trains narrowly escaped what records said would have been "disastrous collisions" in a tunnel under the Potomac River. That system is a focus of the federal investigation into the cause of the June 22 crash, which killed nine people and injured 80, making it the deadliest incident in the history of Metro.
Last week, an article revealed that Metro had barred independent safety monitors from walking along live subway tracks to assess compliance with safety rules. Since the ban began, two track workers have been fatally injured on the rails.
Metro board Chairman Jim Graham said Friday that the agency is increasing supervision of safety chief Alexa Dupigny-Samuels, who denied access to the monitors.
Also last week, Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) called on LaHood to investigate Metro's oversight by the committee. And Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who chairs a transportation subcommittee, said he would hold a hearing in the next few weeks that will look into issues raised as part of the investigation.

Chavez asking Cubans to 'bomb clouds' amid drought

2009-11-16T00:49:00.000-04:00

Source: Reuters

*Cubans to try to seed clouds in South American nation *Government criticized for poor planning in drought CARACAS, Nov 15 (Reuters) - Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez says he will join a team of Cuban scientists on flights to "bomb clouds" to create rain amid a severe drought that has aroused public anger due to water and electricity rationing. Chavez, who has asked Venezuelans to take three-minute showers to save water, said the Cubans had arrived in Venezuela and were preparing to fly specially equipped aircraft above the Orinoco river. "I'm going in a plane; any cloud that crosses me, I'll zap it so that it rains," Chavez said at a ceremony late on Saturday with family members of five Cubans convicted of spying in the United States. Many countries have programs aimed at altering weather patterns, commonly known as cloud seeding, although the effectiveness of such techniques is disputed. Firing silver iodine at clouds is one common method. China uses rockets loaded with the chemical to spur rainfall in arid regions. Chavez did not say what technology the Cubans will use. Venezuela has suffered water and electricity shortages this month after a drought caused by the El Nino weather phenomenon led to critically low water levels at several reservoirs in the oil-exporting nation. The government has been criticized for poor planning after it was forced to impose strict water rationing in the capital Caracas and power rationing in other parts of the country. Venezuela produces much of its electricity from hydroelectric projects, including the giant El Guri dam close to the Orinoco. Chavez provides Cuba with subsidized oil and is a close friend of the communist island's former leader Fidel Castro. Chavez said Castro was in excellent health and invited the Cuban to participate in a trade conference he is hosting next month in Havana. Castro has not been seen in public since undergoing intestinal surgery in 2006. (Reporting by Frank Jack Daniel; Editing by Eric Walsh)

The Chavez Diet: Venezuelans urged to lose weight

2009-11-14T11:20:00.002-04:00

(AP) – 12 hours ago

CARACAS, Venezuela — Call it the Bolivarian battle of the bulge.
President Hugo Chavez said in a televised speech Friday that "there are lots of fat people" in Venezuela and advised his supporters to exercise and eat healthy to trim their waistlines.
"I'm not saying fat women, because they never get fat," he added. "Women sometimes fill out."
The 55-year-old leader said he himself has lost nearly 20 pounds (9 kilograms) by exercising and eating well. But Chavez, who still appears heavier than when he first took office in 1999, acknowledged that he could lose a few more pounds (kilograms).
"Doing sit ups," he said. "Eating well. One has to learn how to eat."
Chavez suggested rice pasta instead of spaghetti made from wheat, and recommended drinking soy milk, saying soy products help fight aging.
Chavez said his diet and exercise have made him feel stronger and "ready to continue commanding the Bolivarian Revolution" — the name he has given his socialist-inspired political movement.

Chavez's policies go from bad to worse

2009-11-14T02:02:00.000-04:00

OUR OPINION: Hugo Chávez's economic policies driving Venezuela to ruin

Castro as commentator on US politics

2009-11-13T12:49:00.002-04:00

By PAUL HAVEN, Associated Press Writer Paul Haven, Associated Press Writer – Fri Nov 13, 3:47 am ET

HAVANA – Think you're obsessed with President Barack Obama and the many challenges he faces at home and abroad?
Well, you're not alone.
Fidel Castro appears to have a fascination with the American leader that would make Obama Girl jealous, writing obsessively not only about his politics, but of his youth and vigor.
And unlike with past American heads-of-state — he slammed President George W. Bush as a genocidal drunk — Castro seems to genuinely like the fresh face in Washington.
Since handing over the Cuban presidency to his brother in February 2008, the 83-year-old has continued to publish his thoughts in essays called "Reflections of Comrade Fidel," which are dutifully printed in state media and read repeatedly on government-controlled radio and television.
Hardly a week goes by without a mention of his nemesis to the north, the most recent on Thursday. In an opinion piece that took up an entire newspaper page, Castro waxed philosophic about everything from Obama's Asia trip to his prospects for re-election.
Last month, Castro pronounced it a good thing that the American president was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. In September, he termed Obama's call-to-action on global warming courageous.
"It really is an obsession," said Ann Louis Bardach, a longtime Cuba observer and author of the recent book, "Without Fidel: A Death Foretold in Miami, Havana and Washington."
She noted that Castro confessed to being riveted by coverage of Obama's January inauguration, which he told visiting Argentine President Cristina Fernandez made him very happy.
Obama Girl, a.k.a. model Amber Lee Ettinger, sang of her crush on the presidential candidate in bit of political satire that went viral on the Internet.
"I think he has genuine appreciation for Obama," Bardach said. "He sees in him a charismatic politician and brilliant strategist, and he admires that. Obama is a guy who came from nowhere and wasn't part of the establishment, just like Castro."
Opining on the actions of U.S. leaders is nothing new for Castro, who came to power when Dwight D. Eisenhower was in the Oval Office and has been on the world stage long enough to see 10 other presidents in the same chair.
But in less than a year of near-constant commentary, Castro has called Obama intelligent, sincere, serene, courageous, honest and well-meaning. He praised his work ethic, pondered the historical nature of his barrier-shattering election and fretted that he might face assassination.
"I really hate to criticize Obama," Castro began apologetically in Thursday's column. "And I realize that that job in the United States is a giant headache."
Castro writes that he is impressed by the scope of Obama's agenda in Asia. The trip is scheduled to take the president to Japan, Singapore, China and South Korea for bilateral meetings with world leaders and to participate in two regional summits.
"Perhaps no other U.S. president would be capable of committing to such an intense schedule," said Castro, who was known in his youth for his extraordinary stamina — particularly when on the stump.
Still, the former Cuban leader can't help scolding Obama for continuing what he says is a U.S. tradition of strong-arm tactics and trickery. Castro criticizes him for maintaining the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay and for a pact with Colombia that allows American soldiers increased access to seven military bases in that country.
Some U.S. officials are skeptical of Castro's motives, noting the Cuban leader cannot be too critical of the first African-American president, who is wildly popular among Cuba's population. He also has had to formulate a fitting response to Obama's change in tone.
The American leader came to office promising to extend a hand of friendship to America's adversaries, but he has moved cautiously so far on Cuba. The administration has softened U.S. rhetoric toward the island and loosened some travel restrictions. But Obama has said he has no plans to lift Washington's 47-year trade embargo unless the single-party, communist state accepts some political, economic and social changes.
Cuba has indicated it has no plans to do anything of the sort, but that hasn't stopped the warm words.
By the end of Thursday's opinion piece, Castro seemed to have made up his mind: Obama is not perfect, but he's a lot better than the alternative.
Meaning to Castro that he won't last long atop the empire.
"Soon, the ultra-right of the United States will try to limit (Obama's) rule to four years," Castro warned, looking to 2012. "A Nixon, a Bush or somebody like Cheney will be the new president, and then the purpose of these unjustifiable military bases that threaten the peoples of South America will be very clear."

Russia's Putin wins respect at hip-hop party

2009-11-13T12:46:00.002-04:00

* Russia's powerful PM Putin meets local rappers
* Rappers chant: "Respect, Vladimir Vladimirovich"

By Darya Korsunskaya
MOSCOW, Nov 13 (Reuters) - Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin rubbed shoulders with rappers and was hailed with "respect" in a television show on Friday that could help boost his flagging ratings.
Putin, wearing a turtleneck sweater and jacket, went on stage to present awards to participants in "Battle for Respect", a hip-hop music contest run by Muz TV, a Russian rival to MTV.
"It would have been cool to record a joint track with Vladimir Putin because he is a legendary man and our idol," sang rapper Zhigan who won the contest. "Let's make so much noise in his honour that the whole world can hear."
A presenter told the audience of about 100 young rappers in a makeshift television studio in an abandoned Moscow factory building that he wanted "smiles to stay on your faces throughout the evening".
Despite hip-hop's violent image, Putin had a stern message for the rappers about healthy living.
"I do not think that 'top-rock' or 'down-rock' breakdance technique is compatible with alcohol or drugs," Putin told cheering hip-hoppers who responded with chants of "Respect, Vladimir Vladimirovich".
Putin's approval ratings last month had the sharpest fall since he stepped down as Kremlin chief in May 2008. His rating fell 6 percentage points to 66 percent on Oct. 24-25, according to leading pollster FOM. [ID:nL2370140]
Putin's aides responded with plans for a flurry of prime ministerial appearances, including a televised question-and-answer session with the Russian people this month.
Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied there was a link between the hip-hop appearance and the ratings fall.
"Putin has a high and stable rating which does not require any support," said Peskov. "The main goal of this event was to contribute to the promotion of a healthy lifestyle."
Putin, who stepped down as president last year, remains Russia's most popular and powerful politician. Most Russians believe he will run for President again in 2012.
Putin's carefully orchestrated image also include bare-chested photos on fishing trips in Siberia, appearances with rare animals such as Siberian tigers, leopards and beluga whales and encounters with fringe social groups like bikers.
"He communicates to all social groups. Hip-hop culture is very popular and youths from all corners of our country are fans of this culture," Peskov said. (Writing by Gleb Bryanski; Editing by Jon Hemming)

ACORN Sues Over 'Unconstitutional' Funding Cuts By Congress

2009-11-13T01:20:00.000-04:00

By Joseph Abrams

FOXNews.com

In an attempt to regain the millions in funding it lost in the wake of a hidden-camera scandal, ACORN is suing the federal government over congressional legislation that cut off funding to the community organizing group.

Representatives for ACORN sued the federal government Thursday morning in an attempt to regain the millions of dollars in funding the community organizing group lost after filmmakers videotaped its workers offering advice on how to commit tax fraud and various other felonies.
The suit charges Congress with violating the Constitution when it passed legislation in September that specifically targeted ACORN to lose federal housing, education and transportation funds.
That qualifies the legislation as bills of attainder, according to the Center for Constitutional Rights, which filed the suit on behalf of ACORN. A bill of attainder punishes a person or group without the benefit of a trial, and is illegal under Article 1 of the Constitution.
Bills of attainder have traditionally been understood to have more serious legal consequences -- including the seizure of private property and even capital punishment -- than Congress' decision to withhold funds that are at its discretion to disseminate. Though members of Congress have accused ACORN of corruption, it is not clear how the exercise of its own prerogative is outside the bounds of legislative power.
Critics of the group in Congress blasted the lawsuit as a last-ditch effort to save the foundering organization's bottom line.
"ACORN's baseless lawsuit is the first public acknowledgement we've seen from ACORN of just how desperate they are to use any mechanism available to subsidize an organization that is teetering on bankruptcy and financial insolvency," said Kurt Bardella, spokesman for Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
Congress began cracking down on its funding to ACORN after its employees were secretly videotaped in a number of cities offering to help a man and woman posing as a pimp and prostitute to lie to the IRS and acquire illegal home loans.
Footage showed staffers advising the "pimp" and "prostitute" on how to falsify tax forms and seek illegal benefits for 13 "very young" girls from El Salvador that the pair said they wanted to bring to the country to work as child prostitutes. The videos set off a firestorm in Congress.
ACORN pledged an internal inquiry and fired the staffers who were caught on tape, but it was only the latest of many legal troubles for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.
State investigators raided ACORN offices in Louisiana last week, seizing computer hard drives and documents in a probe of alleged embezzlement and tax fraud. Staffers in multiple states have been accused of committing voter registration fraud.
Congress took the "prostitute" videos as clear evidence of systematic problems within ACORN and voted with bipartisan support in the House and Senate to freeze funding for the group in appropriations bills in September.
Thursday's lawsuit claims that Congress violated the right to due process enshrined in the Fifth Amendment -- declaring the group guilty of a crime and punishing its members without completing an investigation within the Department of Justice or the IRS.
"It's not the job of Congress to be the judge, jury, and executioner," said Jules Lobel, an attorney representing the Center for Constitutional Rights.
"We have due process in this country, and our Constitution forbids lawmakers from singling out a person or group for punishment without a fair investigation and trial."
The lawsuit itself singles out three defendants -- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner; Director of the Office of Management and the Budget Peter Orszag, and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan.
The three were responsible for facilitating the defunding of ACORN by Congress, according to attorneys for the Center for Constitutional Rights.
ACORN claims it has been badly hurt by the congressional actions, and has had to fire workers and close some of its 1,200 branches around the country.
Though it remains unclear precisely how much money the national organization was receiving from federal sources and aid programs, a lawyer pressing the suit said ACORN has already lost an amount "in the millions" since the freeze took effect.

Perry says Obama taking U.S. toward socialism

2009-11-12T12:35:00.000-04:00

By Jason Embry | Thursday, November 12, 2009, 07:40 AM

Governor uses s-word in front of Midland crowd … State official fired over remarks about Spanish-speakers … Former forensic chairman disagrees with Bradley
Happy birthday to conservative activist Jim Cardle and Jim Hurley of the Texas Youth Commission.
Austin weather from News 8 Austin’s Maureen McCann: Mainly sunny with temps slightly above average. High of 77.
(Send me an e-mail at jembry@statesman.com if you want a link to First Reading when I post it. Let me know if you want the Blackberry-friendly version. It doesn’t have the videos, but it pretty much has everything else.)

Wednesday highlights and the day ahead

Gov. Rick Perry had some pretty strong comments about the Obama administration on Wednesday in Midland, saying, “This is an administration hell-bent on taking America towards a socialist country.”
Here’s the full video, and it’s pretty important, so I suggest you watch:

Find more videos like this on Mywesttexas Chatter
The first part of Perry’s remarks focused on what’s called the Alien Transfer and Exit Program, something that he has been talking about for more than a week. Perry describes it as a plan where illegal immigrants who are captured in Arizona are sent to the small Texas town of Presidio and set free. It’s a sign that the Obama administration is trying to punish Texas, Perry said, adding that members of the state’s congressional delegation, as well as his office, weren’t given any warning of the administration’s plans for Presidio.
But there’s more to the program than Perry described.
According to a story by the CBS affiliate in Odessa, the illegal immigrants are returned to Mexico via secured buses. The station also reported, “last year 4,500 illegals were sent back through Presidio. Now 94 will be bused across this bridge 7 days a week.”
In addition, Brandi Grissom of the Texas Tribune reported last month that Bill Brooks, spokesman for the Border Patrol Marfa Sector, where Presidio is located, said the plan would not create any burden on the local community.
Grissom wrote, “The plan will bring two buses per day to Texas, each with 74 undocumented immigrants. The immigrants will be checked for health problems and will have signed voluntary deportation agreements. The program will not involve immigrants charged with criminal violations, Brooks said. Mexican officials are participating and will provide the immigrants with bus tickets to their hometowns, Brooks said.”
Advocates for the program say the point of transferring the immigrants from Arizona to Texas is to breaking the smuggling cycle that allowed them to enter in the first place, Robert Gilbert, the Tucson sector chief for the U.S. Border Patrol, wrote in a January op-ed. He wrote that in 2008 (during the Bush administration), more than 10,000 illegal immigrants were removed through the program (although it did not go through Texas then). Gilbert wrote, “The largest impact can only be made by breaking the smuggling cycle, by putting up barriers and checkpoints that make the business of smuggling humans and narcotics unprofitable and unattractive. Only as the smuggling cycle is disrupted do we see consistent decreases in arrests and increases in drug seizures.”
• The Statesman’s Gardner Selby has the story this morning of an official in the secretary of state’s office who was fired Wednesday after she made some controversial remarks to a meeting of Democratic and Republican county chairs about helping Spanish-speaking voters. When you click on Gardner’s story, you can hear full audio of those remarks, as well as the response from a member of the audience who didn’t like what she heard.
• Sam Bassett, the former head of the Texas Forensic Science Commission, took objection Wednesday to the panel’s new chairman saying the need to develop rules and procedures could delay the inquiry into the case of Cameron Todd Willingham and the controversial arson investigation that led to Willingham’s execution. “Mr. Bradley stated that he believes that the Commission needs ‘rules and procedures’ before it can move forward,” Bassett said. “I respectfully disagree. Though the Commission might benefit in the long term from development of written standards, I do not believe that this should result in paralysis of Commission activity. The Commission doesn’t need to evolve into a large, bureaucratic State agency to carry out its mission.”
Bradley objected to Bassett’s objection, saying, “Mr. Bassett is changing his story. He clearly told me that he was scared of the hearing getting out of control because the Commission had no plan or rules for the hearing.”
The Statesman’s Mike Ward has more on this over on the Postcards blog.
• Wayne Slater of the Dallas Morning News reported Wednesday that Kay Bailey Hutchison’s campaign has been checking out the availability of TV time over the next couple of months — a sign that the campaign may be thinking of going up with ads soon. Hutchison spokeswoman Jennifer Baker downplayed, saying the campaign has been making such inquiries since August, and that the Perry campaign is doing the same.
• Hutchison is supporting legislation to limit members of the U.S. Senate to two terms, Todd Gillman reports. She also wants to limit the Texas governor (not just the current one) to two terms. Of course, since we’re talking term limits, it’s important to remember that early in her Senate career, Hutchison said she’d only serve two terms, and she’s now on her third.
• Democratic gubernatorial candidate Hank Gilbert laid out his environmental agenda Wednesday on the shores of Lady Bird Lake. Among his proposals: A newly named agency, the Texas Environmental Commission, where all environmental regulations would be consolidated; an elected chairman of the Public Utility Commission; property-tax incentives for homeowners who install solar panels; higher energy efficiency standards for residential and business construction; and a requirement that more of the state’s energy supply comes from renewable sources.
• A second Republican has stepped forward to say he’ll challenge GOP Rep. Fred Brown. This time it’s Rick Davis, a former district judge, according to the Bryan-College Station Eagle. Brown still hasn’t announced whether he’ll run again.

Why communism doesn't make people happy

2009-11-12T10:02:00.003-04:00

Germany's ranking in the Prosperity Index is a validation of those who risked their lives to tear down the Berlin Wall, writes Ryan Streeter.

By Ryan Streeter
Published: 5:14PM GMT 11 Nov 2009
Comments 28 | Comment on this article

Twenty years ago, the Berlin Wall fell. Its collapse marked the beginning of a reunified Germany and the end of the Cold War.
On Monday, Berliners knocked down a wall of Styrofoam “dominoes” - more fanciful than foreboding - to commemorate the moment when East Germans began hammering their way to freedom. Dominoes are quite a fitting symbol indeed.
In 1989, dominoes were toppling all through the Soviet bloc. And in the wake of this unprecedented revolution, new nations were undertaking high-stakes experiments with democracy and free-market capitalism.
Two decades later, the results of those experiments are both striking and exhilarating.
Just look at the Legatum Institute's recently released 2009 Prosperity Index. The study evaluates 104 nations - 90 percent of the world's population - along nine criteria. Our goal was to answer a simple question: What makes people around the world wealthy and happy?
The index demonstrates that countries that most successfully shed the constraints of communism for free markets and political transparency are much more likely to be prosperous today.
Slovenia, once part of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, ranks 20th worldwide in the Index -- outperforming even Italy and Portugal.
Also garnering a place among the top 40 nations are the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Estonia, Slovakia, Croatia, and Latvia - places where freedom was a mere dream just one generation ago.
Countries that have not broken so cleanly from communist ideology, however, are in decay - serving as an indictment of top-down state control. Russia, once the power nucleus of the USSR, has been slower than many of its former satellite countries to embrace capitalism and political reform. Its elections have been widely regarded as rigged. And the 2009 Freedom House Map of Freedom notes that property rights are precarious and the rule of law is too frequently subjugated to politics.
Little wonder that Russia places a lowly 69th on the Prosperity Index. The same goes for Belarus, which ranks a dismal 85th. The country's government maintains excessive control over the economy, reserving the right to control prices, dictate currency exchange rates, and intervene in the operations of private businesses.
The two explicitly communist countries in the index - China and Vietnam - place 75th and 77th respectively.
Our analysts, advised by a panel of academics from leading universities, identified 79 different variables that define prosperity according to measures of economic growth, innovation, quality of life, and the quality of government behavior and policy.
The small, homogenous countries of Scandinavia dominated the top positions in the index due to their sound balance between growth and social stability, while large countries such as Australia and the United States landed in the top 10 because of their combination of free-market capitalism and transparent democracy.
Germany, now a hybrid of its former Western and Eastern halves, came in 14th overall - a validation of those who risked their lives to tear down the Berlin Wall. Today's reunified Germany ranks 8th worldwide for entrepreneurship and 6th for health. Indeed, it's in the top quarter of the world's countries in all nine Prosperity Index categories, from education to personal freedom.
Poland has also flourished since the fall of the Soviet Union - it lands in the top 30. The economic liberalization that swept through the country in 1990 made Poland one of the fastest growing economies in Central Europe. Prior to the current economic downturn, the country's unemployment rate was falling faster than the EU average. And even today, Poland's GDP continues to grow.
Another success story can be found in the Czech Republic, where two decades ago some 300,000 protesters flooded Wenceslas Square, noisily jangling their keys in a symbolic call to throw off communism. Despite memories of the 1968 Prague Spring that had been brutally crushed by Soviet tanks, they refused to be suppressed.
When they prevailed, those jangling keys ultimately unlocked the doors to a free and independent Czech Republic. Today, it's a hub of entrepreneurship and liberty, and lands in the top quarter of countries in the Prosperity Index based on economic fundamentals, democratic institutions, health, and personal freedom.
In only one category did the former Soviet satellites rank lower than average -- social capital, which measures community spirit and how much citizens feel they can trust and rely on their family, friends, and neighbors. Perhaps that result is to be expected in countries where repressive regimes once made use of secret police and urged citizens to inform on one another.
The prosperity challenge of the next generation is to forge stronger community bonds and build interpersonal trust. Succeed at that, and they will have torn down the social walls that are the final lingering remnants of the Cold War.
Ryan Streeter, Ph.D., is a Senior Fellow at the London-based Legatum Institute. The 2009 Legatum Prosperity Index is available at www.prosperity.com.

California Labor Wars

2009-11-12T09:56:00.000-04:00

A rival union charges Andy Stern's SEIU with election fraud.

By MATTHEW KAMINSKI

Oakland, Calif.
Flexing his influence, Service Employees International Union (SEIU) President Andy Stern turned up at the White House 22 times in the first six months of the Obama administration, more than anyone else on the visitor logs released last month.
But the good vibes in Washington contrast with the troubles inside the house of labor itself. Unions are competing for shrinking turf and members, and the most ferocious intramural battle today involves Mr. Stern's union here in California.
For the past 10 months, the SEIU has fought to hold on to 150,000 members in its Union of Healthcare Workers affiliate, or UHW. The challenge comes from a group of former UHW leaders and Stern confidantes. Pushed out by Mr. Stern after a prolonged power struggle, they started a rival outfit, the National Union of Healthcare Workers, or NUHW, in January and immediately moved to build it up by wooing away members from the SEIU's local, UHW.
Now these upstarts charge that the UHW threatened workers with deportation and tampered with secret ballots to narrowly win a pivotal election last summer in Fresno, Calif. The NUHW allegations, contained in a complaint filed last Friday and previously not made public, take the battle to a new level.
The June vote was in a "decertification" election—in which some 10,000 home-care workers were asked to choose between the UHW that already represented them or the NUHW. Old labor hands say they've never seen a decertification vote like this.
The SEIU shipped in 950 or so staff and spent an estimated $10 million on mailings, advertising, phone banks, door-to-door canvassing and the like. The NUHW doesn't have this kind of firepower. At a rally for staff in late May, David Regan, an SEIU executive vice president who took over the UHW in January, roared that, "We gotta give a butt-whipping they will never forget." When the secret ballots were mailed in and counted, the SEIU won that vote by a sliver, 2,938 to 2,705.
The NUHW immediately called for a re-run of the election, challenging voting irregularities. The two unions have traded accusations since. But now, Carlos Martinez, an immigrant from El Salvador who was on the SEIU's staff during the campaign, has come forward—so he says—to blow the whistle on his employer. Mr. Martinez went door-to-door canvassing the home-care workers during the 15-day election. Like him, many of them are native Spanish speakers; some are illiterate.

View Full Image

Associated Press

SEIU President Andy Stern

Speaking in an interview over a sandwich at a hotel in the Bay Area late last month, Mr. Martinez says he was instructed by superiors to tell the workers that if they voted against the SEIU, they could lose their medical benefits, see their green cards or citizenship revoked and possibly be deported. He says he and other staffers were also told to pressure voters to spoil ballots that had been filled out for the NUHW. In other instances he filled ballots out for them. He says he even took some to the post office, as did other SEIU campaign workers.

All of these actions, if true, are a violation of state or federal laws governing union elections. In all, he adds, he visited 550 homes. "We scared people. We took the secret ballot away from these people," he says. "It was wrong."
Mr. Martinez says he raised his concerns directly with Mr. Regan and other superiors. He also says he tried to submit a complaint with two state agencies but was ignored. He then repeated these charges under oath before an NUHW lawyer. Six other Fresno workers confirmed parts of his account in affidavits. For example, Adriana Gomez, a home-care worker, said that Mr. Martinez "took my ballot and made a mark for the SEIU team."
The NUHW last week filed a complaint with the Public Employment Relations Board, which has oversight over the workers in Fresno. The filing has been shared with the SEIU, but not released publicly. Describing himself as a medical case manager who is now in graduate school, Mr. Martinez, who says he fears for his safety, says he has gotten no money or other benefits from the NUHW.
Steve Trossman, a UHW spokesman, calls the allegations involving SEIU "absolutely, patently false." Though Mr. Trossman says he "can't speak to what [Mr. Martinez] says he did illegally," he says "this is a guy who turned on us when we did not give him a job" after the Fresno election ended. Mr. Martinez sent "threatening emails" to UHW officials asking for permanent work, Mr. Trossman adds. Mr. Martinez says he left the union of his own accord to continue his studies.
Considered the most powerful labor figure in the land, Mr. Stern is no stranger to controversy. Four years ago, he led the SEIU out of the AFL-CIO, taking three other unions with him to form a rival federation. In two interviews with me in the past year, Mr. Stern has called his strategy of building a large, integrated international union the path to revive organized labor in America. (Only 12% of the U.S. work force belongs to a union today.) Sal Rosselli, the head of the NUHW, retorts that "Stern's a Machiavellian."
For its part, the SEIU in March filed a civil complaint alleging that Mr. Rosselli and his aides stole member lists, cleaned out union computer files and sought to divert millions in dues in the days before they were ousted from the UHW. Mr. Rosselli says "it's all lies."
Whatever the truth, these scuffles eat up resources and deprive a divided labor movement of a strong leader to push its legislative priorities—most of all, the "card check" bill to ease unionization drives by eliminating secret ballot elections. Judging by the nasty fight in California, Congress might want to think instead how to better protect people from desperate unions and safeguard their right to choose which, if any, they might wish to join.
Mr. Kaminski is a member of the Journal's editorial board.

Cuba orders extreme measures to cut energy use

2009-11-11T23:18:00.002-04:00

11 Nov 2009 21:58:49 GMT
Source: Reuters
* Cuba's energy situation termed "critical"

* Some factories, workshops to be closed through December

* Most other economic activities to be reduced

By Marc Frank

HAVANA, Nov 11 (Reuters) - Cuba has ordered all state enterprises to adopt "extreme measures" to cut energy usage through the end of the year in hopes of avoiding the dreaded blackouts that plagued the country following the 1991 collapse of its then-top ally, the Soviet Union.

In documents seen by Reuters, government officials have been warned that the island is facing a "critical" energy shortage that requires the closing of non-essential factories and workshops and the shutting down of air conditioners and refrigerators not needed to preserve food and medicine.

Cuba has cut government spending and slashed imports after being hit hard by the global financial crisis and the cost of recovering from three hurricanes that struck last year.

"The energy situation we face is critical and if we do not adopt extreme measures we will have to revert to planned blackouts affecting the population," said a recently circulated message from the Council of Ministers.

"Company directors will analyze the activities that will be stopped and others reduced, leaving only those that guarantee exports, substitution of imports and basic services for the population," according to another distributed by the light industry sector.

President Raul Castro is said to be intent on not repeating the experience of the 1990s, when the demise of the Soviet Union and the loss of its steady oil supply caused frequent electricity blackouts and hardship for the Cuban public.

The directives follow government warnings in the summer that too much energy was being used and blackouts would follow if consumption was not reduced.

All provincial governments and most state-run offices and factories, which encompasses 90 percent of Cuba's economic activity, were ordered in June to reduce energy use by a minimum of 12 percent or face mandatory electricity cuts.

The measures appeared to resolve the crisis as state-run press published stories about the amount of energy that had been saved and the dire warnings died down. The only explanation given for the earlier warnings was that Cuba was consuming more fuel than the government had money to pay for.

The situation is not as dire as in the 1990s because Cuba receives 93,000 barrels per day of crude oil, almost two-thirds of what it consumes, from Venezuela. It pays for the oil by providing its energy-rich ally with medical personnel and other professionals.

Cuba has been grappling with the global economic downturn, which has slashed revenues from key exports, dried up credit and reduced foreign investment.

The communist-run Caribbean nation also faces stiff U.S. sanctions that include cutting access to international lending institutions, and it is still rebuilding from last year's trio of hurricanes that caused an estimated $10 billion in damages.

In response, the government has cut spending, slashed imports, suspended many debt payments and frozen bank accounts of foreign businesses. It reported last week that trade was down 36 percent so far this year due mainly to a more than 30 percent reduction in imports.

The U.S. House of Presumptuous Meddlers

2009-11-11T14:31:00.000-04:00

By John Stossel

As an American, I am embarrassed that the U.S. House of Representatives has 220 members who actually believe the government can successfully centrally plan the medical and insurance industries.
I'm embarrassed that my representatives think that government can subsidize the consumption of medical care without increasing the budget deficit or interfering with free choice.

It's a triumph of mindless wishful thinking over logic and experience.
The 1,990-page bill is breathtaking in its bone-headed audacity. The notion that a small group of politicians can know enough to design something so complex and so personal is astounding. That they were advised by "experts" means nothing since no one is expert enough to do that. There are too many tradeoffs faced by unique individuals with infinitely varying needs.
Government cannot do simple things efficiently. The bureaucrats struggle to count votes correctly. They give subsidized loans to "homeowners" who turn out to be 4-year-olds. Yet congressmen want government to manage our medicine and insurance.
Competition is a "discovery procedure," Nobel-prize-winning economist F. A. Hayek taught. Through the competitive market process, we producers and consumers constantly learn things that force us to adjust our behavior if we are to succeed. Central planners fail for two reasons:
First, knowledge about supply, demand, individual preferences and resource availability is scattered -- much of it never articulated -- throughout society. It is not concentrated in a database where a group of planners can access it.
Second, this "data" is dynamic: It changes without notice.
No matter how honorable the central planners' intentions, they will fail because they cannot know the needs and wishes of 300 million different people. And if they somehow did know their needs, they wouldn't know them tomorrow.
Proponents of so-called reform -- it's not really reform unless it makes things better -- have shamefully avoided criticism of their proposals. Often they just dismiss their opponents as greedy corporate apologists or paranoid right-wing loonies. That's easier than answering questions like these:
1) How can the government subsidize the purchase of medical services without driving up prices? Econ 101 teaches -- without controversy -- that when demand goes up, if other things remain equal, price goes up. The politicians want to have their cake and eat it, too.
2) How can the government promise lower medical costs without restricting choices? Medicare already does that. Once the planners' mandatory insurance pushes prices to new heights, they must put even tougher limits on what we may buy -- or their budget will be even deeper in the red than it already is. As economist Thomas Sowell points out, government cannot really reduce costs. All it can do is disguise and shift costs (through taxation) and refuse to pay for some services (rationing).
3) How does government "create choice" by imposing uniformity on insurers? Uniformity limits choice. Under House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's bill and the Senate versions, government would dictate to all insurers what their "minimum" coverage policy must include. Truly basic high-deductible, low-cost catastrophic policies tailored to individual needs would be forbidden.
4) How does it "create choice" by making insurance companies compete against a privileged government-sponsored program? The so-called government option, let's call it Fannie Med, would have implicit government backing and therefore little market discipline. The resulting environment of conformity and government power is not what I mean by choice and competition. Rep. Barney Frank is at least honest enough to say that the public option will bring us a government monopoly.
Advocates of government control want you to believe that the serious shortcomings of our medical and insurance system are failures of the free market. But that's impossible because our market is not free. Each state operates a cozy medical and insurance cartel that restricts competition through licensing and keeps prices higher than they would be in a genuine free market. But the planners won't talk about that. After all, if government is the problem in the first place, how can they justify a government takeover?
Many people are priced out of the medical and insurance markets for one reason: the politicians' refusal to give up power. Allowing them to seize another 16 percent of the economy won't solve our problems.
Freedom will.

Chicago Mayor Daley Blames Ft. Hood Shooting on....America's Love of Guns!

2009-11-11T01:13:00.000-04:00

by Andrew Marcus
On Monday, Chicago Mayor Daley blamed the Ft. Hood Jihad Massacre on America’s love of guns!

“Unfortunately, America loves Guns. We love guns to a point where that uh we see devastation on a daily basis. You don’t blame a group.”

The Mayor is using a straw-man argument that conveniently provides him with an opportunity to politicize the terrorist attack as part and parcel with America’s love of guns.
Mayor Daley, and other politicians, like to blame gun violence on the guns themselves because that is so much easier than admitting any inconvenient (politically incorrect) truths which might be revealed if they were to place blame where it belongs.
Kids murdering each other in the inner city? That’s because of guns, not the War On Drugs which turns poor children into black market drug distributing gang members.

Islamists murdering people while shouting Allah Akbar? That’s because of guns, not the Jihad being perpetrated globally against all so called “infidels”.
They blame guns because guns don’t vote.
Taking Mayor Daley at face value for a moment, is he seriously arguing for increased gun control on a military base? If there had been more guns around, this ticking Jihad bomb could have been put down a lot faster than he was.

Click image to view video

With no pogrom backlash after 9/11, no pogrom backlash after Bali, no pogrom backlash after Madrid, no pogrom backlash after London, no pogrom backlash after Mumbai, no backlash after countless other Jihad attacks, why would there be any reason to believe the reaction would be any different in this case? As we have written before, the West has already passed this particular civility test.

Dunn leaving White House, Pfeiffer takes over

2009-11-10T14:17:00.000-04:00

White House communications director Anita Dunn will step down from her post at the end of the month and Dan Pfeiffer, her deputy, will take over, according to sources familiar with the move.
Dunn, a longtime Democratic media consultant, took over the job on an interim basis earlier this year when Ellen Moran abruptly left the post to take a job at the Commerce Department. Dunn will return to Squier Knapp Dunn, the consulting firm where she is a partner, but will remain as a consultant to the White House on the communications and strategic matters.
The move will be formally announced later today.
Pfeiffer began working for Obama in 2007 following Sen. Evan Bayh's (Ind.) decision not to pursue the presidency. He served a stint as the traveling press secretary for Obama's presidential bid but eventually took a slot overseeing the campaign's communications operation.
Prior to Obama, Pfeiffer worked for Sen. Tim Johnson's (S.D.) re-election race in 2002 and on then Sen. Tom Daschle's (S.D.) unsuccessful bid in 2004.
The passing of the baton from Dunn to Pfeiffer had long been expected within White House circles as she had made clear when she took the job that the "interim" in her title was meant to be taken literally.
Unlike when Moran left, the transition should be somewhat seamless as Dunn and Pfeiffer are longtime confidantes -- having worked closely in Daschle's political orbit for years.
The turnover in the communications director slot is the only change in Obama's senior staff with 10 months (or so) of his presidency having passed.
Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff and former Illinois Congressman, has made clear he would like to return to elected office at some point in the not-too-distant future and, if past presidencies are any guide there will be some further turnover in the senior staff over the next year or so.
Eyebrows were raised recently when David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, was asked in a live chat with the Washington Post about why he had not joined the Administration and responded: "I needed to take a couple years to re-balance and spend time with my family, knowing that perhaps in the future my life will need to get unbalanced again."

Paterson: NYS Will Be Broke Before Christmas

2009-11-09T22:09:00.001-04:00

Delivers Scary News To Legislature, Says Only Way To Fix Problem Is To Have Immediate Cuts To Education, Hospitals

Governor David Paterson called an unusual joint session of the Legislature Monday to implore recalcitrant lawmakers to close the state's huge budget gap before New York runs out of money.

To some lawmakers it's nothing more than a photo op to help Paterson get re-elected. But the governor is dead serious. He said if the Legislature doesn't cut the budget now the state could run out of money by next month.

"We're going to run out of cash in four and a half weeks. We are going to run out of money. Unless we do something about it, (it will) threaten generations," Paterson said.

And so began what is turning out to be a tense tug of war between Gov. Paterson and the Legislature.

The governor says $3.2 billion in cuts must be enacted how -- or else. The cuts range from $500 million in agency spending to over $1 billion in already committed in aid to school districts and hospitals.

"I will mortgage my political career, but I will not mortgage the fate of the State of New York," Paterson said.

But Senate Democrats, with their tenuous 32-30 hold on the upper house, are terrified to make school and hospital cuts because, they said, the cuts could mean increases in local property taxes.

And that could mean suburban Democrats on Long Island, in Westchester and other parts of the state could have trouble getting re-elected next year.

Remember, high property taxes led to the ouster of many suburban Democrats last week, including Westchester County Executive Andy Spano. Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi could also lose once absentee ballots are counted.

"Personally, I do not favor mid-year school cuts," said State Sen. Pedro Espada, D-Bronx.

"Last year, in the midst of this financial crisis, the Senate and the Assembly together with the governor decided to raise spending by $12 billion," added Sen. Andrew Lanza, R-Staten Island.

"I'd rather present 96 or 97 percent of a check to school districts, to hospitals than to have them call up and say where's my check? And the state says, sorry, we didn't have any money," said Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan.

The governor has ordered lawmakers into special session Tuesday to close the budget gap. Right now there is no agreement and he could flex his muscles by keeping them here until there is.

Also on the agenda Tuesday are bills to legalize gay marriage, toughen drunk-driving laws, impose a cap on state spending and reform the state's public authorities.

Venezuela, Russia to boost technology cooperation

2009-11-09T22:06:00.001-04:00

Venezuela's science and technology minister, Jesse Chacon, says the agreements will likely be signed next year.

Russian authorities have presented more than 5,000 technological projects for Venezuela's consideration.

Chacon says the transfer of nuclear technology is not among the projects that were presented at a forum in Venezuela's capital Monday — even through Russia plans to help Venezuela develop nuclear energy to produce electricity.

Exclusive: Police Report on Gladney Beating By SEUI Thugs

2009-11-09T15:59:00.000-04:00

http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/09/exclusive-police-report-on-gladney-beating-by-seiu-thugs/

It has been more than three months since Kenneth Gladney was viciously attacked by SEIU employees. The assault wasn’t an accident, but a deliberate attempt to intimidate and silence tea party activists and town hall protesters. The morning of the Gladney assault, the White House presented to Senate Democrats a ‘battle plan’ to quell the protests. The White House advised Democrats “punch back twice as hard.” Gladney was the first casualty.
The Gladney beating took place at a forum on ‘Aging’, sponsored by Rep. Russ Carnahan. Carnahan had been caught flat-footed by earlier protests. This time he was more prepared; the day before the forum, Sara Howard took over as his communications director. Ms. Howard is a veteran leftist activist, holding senior positions with SEIU.
SEIU and partisan hacks like Media Matters have tried to spin away the Gladney beating. They would have you believe a 130 lb diabetic, recovering luekemia patient, picked a fight with men almost twice his size. The police report puts an end to that lie.

GLADNEY PART 2 –

The police report is unambiguous about what happened on August 6th in St. Louis. The White House, through SEIU, did indeed ‘punch back twice as hard.’ What is ambiguous, however, is why prosecutors haven’t pursued the charges against SEIU. As you will learn, there is a lot to suggest that Bob McCulloch, the St. Louis DA, is trying to cover-up SEIU’s crime. Stay tuned as the truth comes out.

Report: 237 Millionaires in Congress

2009-11-08T23:25:00.000-04:00

: CRP says California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa is the richest lawmaker on Capitol Hill, with a net worth estimated at about $251 million.

Talk about bad timing.

As Washington reels from the news of 10.2 percent unemployment, the Center for Responsive Politics is out with a new report describing the wealth of members of Congress.

Among the highlights: Two-hundred-and-thirty-seven members of Congress are millionaires. That’s 44 percent of the body – compared to about 1 percent of Americans overall.

CRP says California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa is the richest lawmaker on Capitol Hill, with a net worth estimated at about $251 million. Next in line: Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), worth about $244.7 million; Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.), worth about $214.5 million; Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), worth about $209.7 million; and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), worth about $208.8 million.

All told, at least seven lawmakers have net worths greater than $100 million, according to the Center’s 2008 figures.

“Many Americans probably have a sense that members of Congress aren’t hurting, even if their government salary alone is in the six figures, much more than most Americans make,” said CRP spokesman Dave Levinthal. “What we see through these figures is that many of them have riches well beyond that salary, supplemented with securities, stock holdings, property and other investments.”

The CRP numbers are somewhat rough estimates – lawmakers are required to report their financial information in broad ranges of figures, so it’s impossible to pin down their dollars with precision. The CRP uses the mid-point in the ranges to build its estimates.

Senators’ estimated median reportable worth sunk to about $1.79 million from $2.27 million in 2007. The House’s median income was significantly lower and also sank, bottoming out at $622,254 from $724,258 in 2007.

But CRP’s analysis suggests that some lawmakers did well for themselves between 2007 and 2008, even as many Americans lost jobs and saw their savings and their home values plummet.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) gained about $9.2 million. Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) gained about $3 million, Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) had an estimated $2.6 million gain, and Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) gained about $2.8 million.

Some lawmakers have profited from investments in companies that have received federal bailouts; dozens of lawmakers are invested in Wells Fargo, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and Bank of America.

Among executive branch officials, CRP says the richest is Securities and Exchange Commission Chairwoman Mary L. Schapiro, with a net worth estimated at $26 million.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is next, worth an estimated $21 million. President Barack Obama is the sixth-wealthiest, worth about an estimated $4 million. Vice President Joe Biden has often tagged himself as an original blue collar man. The CRP backs him up, putting his net worth at just $27,000.

He’s hardly the worst off.

Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.), freshman Rep. Harry Teague (D-N.M.), Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.), Rep. John Salazar (D-Colo.) and Rep. Sander Levin (D-Mich.) each a net worth of less than zero, CRP says.

One caveat on those numbers: Federal financial disclosure laws don’t require members to list the value of their personal residences. That information could alter the net worth picture for many lawmakers.

Even so, Levinthal said, “It is clear that some members are struggling financially.

“Over a calendar year, one’s wealth can change drastically. Many peoples’ investments took a nose dive over night in the last year,” he said.

A number of lawmakers are estimated to have suffered double-digit percentage lossed in their net worth from 2007 to 2008. The biggest losers include Kerry, who lost a whopping $127.4 million; Warner lost about $28.1 million; Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) lost about $11.8 million; and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) lost about $10.1 million.

Obama and friends in their own world

2009-11-01T23:49:00.002-04:00

By Bill O’Reilly
Sunday, November 1, 2009 - Added 1d 10h ago

In the beginning, there was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a fire-breathing Chicago preacher who believes America is a bad place. The reverend and Barack Obama were friends for 20 years.
Radical Catholic priest Michael Pfleger, another Chicago cleric, was also part of the Obama neighborhood gang. Father Mike was the guy who mocked Hillary Clinton, portraying her as a white woman of entitlement.
Then there was Bill Ayers, a casual acquaintance of Obama’s in Chicago. Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground, is unrepentant to this day about the group’s violent activities in the 1960s.

Barack and Michelle Obama were also friends with Rashid Khalidi, a radical professor who routinely condemns Israel. Obama spoke at Khalidi’s farewell dinner in Chicago, just before the professor took a job at Columbia University.
After being elected president, Obama appointed Carol Browner as director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy. Formerly, Browner was a leader in the Commission for a Sustainable World Society, a group that calls for “global governance.” It is an arm of the Socialist International organization.
The president also hired Kevin Jennings as the safe schools czar. Jennings believes that sexual orientation lessons should begin in kindergarten.
And, of course, there is Van Jones. The president brought him into the White House to be the green jobs czar. Unfortunately, Jones has a radical-left resume that includes support for the convicted cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal. He was forced to resign when the folks found out exactly how far out there the man really is.
Judge Edward Chen might be on a par with Jones. On Aug. 7, the president nominated Chen for a lifetime federal judgeship in San Francisco. Chen used to be a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, and just a few days after 9/11, Chen stated he had a “sickening feeling in (his) stomach about what might happen to race relations and religious tolerance on our own soil.
“One has to wonder whether the seemingly irresistible forces of racism, nativism and scapegoating which has (sic) recurred so often in our history can be effectively restrained.”
Sounds a bit like the Rev. Wright, does it not?
So what does all this tell us about Obama? Some conservatives say it indicates that the president is a committed far-left guy. I’m not so sure. The Obama administration hates to be associated with the far left and will hammer anyone who makes the link.
But it is important to understand the precincts in which the president feels comfortable, and there is no question that he has snuggled up to the far left.
Does that mean he’s Che Guevara in disguise? Not necessarily. But it does mean Obama is somewhat out of step with mainstream America.

Bill O’Reilly is host of the Fox News show “The O’Reilly Factor.”

Showering With Hugo

2009-10-28T14:32:00.000-03:00

Tyranny: In his latest absurdity, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is dictating three-minute showers and no singing. Claiming it's to save water, his act is nothing but a "green" fig leaf to cover his socialist mismanagement.
'Some people sing in the shower, in the shower half an hour," Chavez ranted on his Sunday TV show "Alo Presidente." "No, kids. Three minutes is more than enough. I've counted, three minutes and I don't stink." His words echo those of environmental extremists, blaming shopping malls, El Nino, tourists and sabotage. But the water and electricity shortages are his own doing, and the scope of the crisis signals the systemic shortages of socialism.
There shouldn't be any shortages at all. Green, jungly Venezuela, with some of the world's most spectacular waterfalls, also boasts some of the best hydroelectric capacity in all Latin America.
In 1990, the fast-moving Caroni river created more hydroelectric power than in all of Brazil, home of the mighty Amazon. Today, one of Caroni's six big dams that supply 70% of Venezuela's electricity, the Guri, sits idle. And the others are stressed.
Yes, El Nino has lowered water levels. But the crisis has happened before, in 2002, and Chavez assumed control of five water companies a decade ago. With $600 billion in state oil earnings since, he's had the money to make badly needed investments.
In 2003, his government budgeted $500 million a year for investments to prevent a new crisis. Instead of spending it, Chavez politicized the work force and handed some water distribution over to community organizers. Price controls in 2003 cut revenues to just 80% of water company costs. Maintenance was neglected, leaving broken mains that now waste 62% of water produced .
"Conservation" it's not. The result is that 92% of Venezuelans have running water, but often get just air from their faucets. For the poor, it means buying water off tanker trucks at high prices in shantytowns.
According to Venezuelan newspaper Tal Cual, state engineers warned Chavez in 2002 that unless needed investments were made, the system would crash by 2009 or 2010. It's right on schedule.
Electricity is an even bigger nightmare. Chavez nationalized an electricity company in 2007 and this year Venezuela had five major blackouts and much labor strife over state-dictated wages and safety standards. It's affecting the pumps that supply water and heat.
Chavez' environmental correctness is a cover for state failure. He controls the economy and is its biggest squanderer of resources.
Unaccountable to anyone, he orders citizens to pay for it. They do so not through higher prices, but through coercive means like rationing. What's next, Chavista shower police, patrolling for long showers and aquatic caterwauling?

A More Conservative Union

A 'National Broadband Plan'

One more solution in search of a problem.

US accused of 'occupying' Haiti as troops flood in

France accused the US of "occupying" Haiti on Monday as thousands of American troops flooded into the country to take charge of aid efforts and security.

Related Articles

Haiti earthquake updates

Haiti earthquake: focus turns to rebuilding country

Haiti earthquake: US forces not taking up policing role, Robert Gates says

Haiti: Humanitarian aid prioritised at airport

British man confirmed among the dead in Haiti

Haiti earthquake: 70,000 buried in mass graves

Fear Factor

The ideologues in Washington are scaring Americans.

BY Gary Andres

D.C. Witness Protection Program

A financial inquiry hits the bankers, ignores the Fed and Fannie Mae.

***

***

Venezuela plans blackouts in Caracas, oil town

Devaluation ups stakes in Venezuela election year

Venezuela Says Its Jets Intercepted U.S. Plane

A WSJ NEWS ROUNDUP

Related

BIG SIS Wants To See Under Your Clothes

Unions v. Race to the Top

States are waiting for Arne Duncan.

Venezuela begins 2010 with electricity rationing

Union Baggage Claims

Flight 253 becomes an excuse to organize airport screeners.

Fighting Back the Big Spending Socialists in Minnesotah!

Pawlenty Pushes Caps on Spending

Minnesota Governor Seeks Limits in His State and Amendment to U.S. Constitution

By AMY MERRICK

Colombia to Chavez: Maybe 'spy plane' was Santa

Flag-Waving Communists and Socialists March

Putting our economy in the hands of Chavez fans

Andrew Bolt

Socialism in Stages

You've Got Mail, But the Mailman Hid It

James Cameron Reveals Liberal Propaganda in Avatar

Feds owe Uncle Sam $3B in unpaid taxes

Exclusive: IRS hires "hundreds" for new wealth unit

Pushing Government Power Too Far

GE chief attacks executive ‘greed’

EDITOR’S CHOICE

In depth: global financial crisis - Dec-09

GE to gain $8bn from NBCU spin-off - Dec-03

Administration Warns of 'Command-and-Control' Regulation Over Emissions

The Rabbit-Ear Wars

Get ready for a rumble over the future of over-the-air TV.

FistGate II: High School Students Given Fisting Kits at Kevin Jennings (Obama Safe-School Czar) 2001 GLSEN Conference

Chavez: Venezuela acquires thousands of missiles

PROMISES, PROMISES: A closed meeting on openness

The Welfare State and Military Power

Europe-style entitlements mean Europe-sized defenses.

Howard Dean Declares Debate Between Capitalism and Socialism to Be Over

Russia building arms plants in Venezuela

VENEZUELA-ARMS/RUSSIA:Russia building arms plants in Venezuela

Chavez threatens to nationalize Venezuelan banks

'Cap and Trade Is Dead'

The recently disclosed emails and documents from University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit compromise the integrity of the United Nations' global warming reports.

In the Shadow of Hoover

Capitolism

By William Greider

November 23, 2009

Amid Calif. Attorney General Investigation, ACORN San Diego office dumps 20k docs in dumpster...

Ex-ACORN official gets probation for voter registration plan

Cuba: military exercise braces island for US attack

Engaging Cuba on Human Rights

The regime should be asked to release political prisoners in exchange for normal relations.

By JORGE G. CASTANEDA

As Usual, Holder Undone by Holder

The White House Butler

A judge twice rejected by voters is nominated by President Obama.

Bigger U.S. Role in Broadband Is Likely

By AMY SCHATZ

Finally, A Congressman With a Solution: Stop Complaining So Much

California budget shortfall to top $21 billion

Andy Stern Must Go