Citizens' Oversight Maryland---Maryland Progressives
CINDY WALSH FOR MAYOR OF BALTIMORE----SOCIAL DEMOCRAT
Citizens Oversight Maryland.com
  • Home
  • Cindy Walsh for Mayor of Baltimore
    • Mayoral Election violations
    • Questionnaires from Community >
      • Education Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Housing Questionnaire
      • Emerging Youth Questionnaire
      • Health Care policy for Baltimore
      • Environmental Questionnaires
      • Livable Baltimore questionnaire
      • Labor Questionnnaire
      • Ending Food Deserts Questionnaire
      • Maryland Out of School Time Network
      • LBGTQ Questionnaire
      • Citizen Artist Baltimore Mayoral Forum on Arts & Culture Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Transit Choices Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Activating Solidarity Economies (BASE)
      • Downtown Partnership Questionnaire
      • The Northeast Baltimore Communities Of BelAir Edison Community Association (BECCA )and Frankford Improvement Association, Inc. (FIA)
      • Streets and Transportation/Neighbood Questionnaire
      • African American Tourism and business questionnaire
      • Baltimore Sun Questionnaire
      • City Paper Mayoral Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Technology Com Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Biker's Questionnair
      • Homewood Friends Meeting Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Historical Collaboration---Anthem Project
      • Tubman City News Mayoral Questionnaire
      • Maryland Public Policy Institute Questionnaire
      • AFRO questionnaire
      • WBAL Candidate's Survey
  • Blog
  • Trans Pacific Pact (TPP)
  • Progressive vs. Third Way Corporate Democrats
    • Third Way Think Tanks
  • Financial Reform/Wall Street Fraud
    • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau >
      • CFPB Actions
    • Voted to Repeal Glass-Steagall
    • Federal Reserve >
      • Federal Reserve Actions
    • Securities and Exchange Commission >
      • SEC Actions
    • Commodity Futures Trading Commission >
      • CFTC Actions
    • Office of the Comptroller of the Currency >
      • OCC Actions
    • Office of Treasury/ Inspector General for the Treasury
    • FINRA >
      • FINRA ACTIONS
  • Federal Healthcare Reform
    • Health Care Fraud in the US
    • Health and Human Services Actions
  • Social Security and Entitlement Reform
    • Medicare/Medicaid/SCHIP Actions
  • Federal Education Reform
    • Education Advocates
  • Government Schedules
    • Baltimore City Council
    • Maryland State Assembly >
      • Budget and Taxation Committee
    • US Congress
  • State and Local Government
    • Baltimore City Government >
      • City Hall Actions
      • Baltimore City Council >
        • Baltimore City Council Actions
      • Baltimore Board of Estimates meeting >
        • Board of Estimates Actions
    • Governor's Office >
      • Telling the World about O'Malley
    • Lt. Governor Brown
    • Maryland General Assembly Committees >
      • Communications with Maryland Assembly
      • Budget and Taxation Committees >
        • Actions
        • Pension news
      • Finance Committees >
        • Schedule
      • Business Licensing and Regulation
      • Judicial, Rules, and Nominations Committee
      • Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee >
        • Committee Actions
    • Maryland State Attorney General >
      • Open Meetings Act
      • Maryland Courts >
        • Maryland Court System
    • States Attorney - Baltimore's Prosecutor
    • State Comptroller's Office >
      • Maryland Business Tax Reform >
        • Business Tax Reform Issues
  • Maryland Committee Actions
    • Board of Public Works >
      • Public Works Actions
    • Maryland Public Service Commission >
      • Public Meetings
    • Maryland Health Care Commission/Maryland Community Health Resources Commission >
      • MHCC/MCHRC Actions
    • Maryland Consumer Rights Coalition
  • Maryland and Baltimore Development Organizations
    • Baltimore/Maryland Development History
    • Committee Actions
    • Maryland Development Organizations
  • Maryland State Department of Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Public Schools
    • Algebra Project Award
  • Baltimore City School Board
    • Charter Schools >
      • Charter Schools---Performance
      • Charter School Issues
    • Public Schools >
      • Public School Issues
  • Progressive Issues
    • Fair and Balanced Elections
    • Labor Issues
    • Rule of Law Issues >
      • Rule of Law
    • Justice issues 2
    • Justice Issues
    • Progressive Tax Reform Issues >
      • Maryland Tax Reform Issues
      • Baltimore Tax Reform Issues
    • Strong Public Education >
      • Corporate education reform organizations
    • Healthcare for All Issues >
      • Universal Care Bill by state
  • Building Strong Media
    • Media with a Progressive Agenda (I'm still checking on that!) >
      • anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com
      • "Talk About It" Radio - WFBR 1590AM Baltimore
      • Promethius Radio Project
      • Clearing the Fog
      • Democracy Now
      • Black Agenda Radio
      • World Truth. TV Your Alternative News Network.
      • Daily Censured
      • Bill Moyers Journal
      • Center for Public Integrity
      • Public Radio International
      • Baltimore Brew
      • Free Press
    • Far Left/Socialist Media
    • Media with a Third Way Agenda >
      • MSNBC
      • Center for Media and Democracy
      • Public Radio and TV >
        • NPR and MPT News
      • TruthOut
  • Progressive Organizations
    • Political Organizations >
      • Progressives United
      • Democracy for America
    • Labor Organizations >
      • United Workers
      • Unite Here Local 7
      • ROC-NY works to build power and win justice
    • Justice Organizations >
      • APC Baltimore
      • Occupy Baltimore
    • Rule of Law Organizations >
      • Bill of Rights Defense Committee
      • National Lawyers Guild
      • National ACLU
    • Tax Reform Organizations
    • Healthcare for All Organizations >
      • Healthcare is a Human Right - Maryland
      • PNHP Physicians for a National Health Program
      • Healthcare NOW- Maryland
    • Public Education Organizations >
      • Parents Across America
      • Philadelphia Public School Notebook thenotebook.org
      • Chicago Teachers Union/Blog
      • Ed Wize Blog
      • Educators for a Democratic Union
      • Big Education Ape
    • Elections Organizations >
      • League of Women Voters
  • Progressive Actions
    • Labor Actions
    • Justice Actions
    • Tax Reform Actions >
      • Baltimore Tax Actions
      • Maryland Tax Reform Actions
    • Healthcare Actions
    • Public Education Actions
    • Rule of Law Actions >
      • Suing Federal and State government
    • Free and Fair Elections Actions
  • Maryland/Baltimore Voting Districts - your politicians and their votes
    • 2014 ELECTION OF STATE OFFICES
    • Maryland Assembly/Baltimore
  • Petitions, Complaints, and Freedom of Information Requests
    • Complaints - Government and Consumer >
      • Sample Complaints
    • Petitions >
      • Sample Petitions
    • Freedom of Information >
      • Sample Letters
  • State of the Democratic Party
  • Misc
    • WBFF TV
    • WBAL TV
    • WJZ TV
    • WMAR TV
    • WOLB Radio---Radio One
    • The Gazette
    • Baltimore Sun Media Group
  • Misc 2
    • Maryland Public Television
    • WYPR
    • WEAA
    • Maryland Reporter
  • Misc 3
    • University of Maryland
    • Morgan State University
  • Misc 4
    • Baltimore Education Coalition
    • BUILD Baltimore
    • Church of the Great Commission
    • Maryland Democratic Party
    • Pennsylvania Avenue AME Zion Church
    • Maryland Municipal League
    • Maryland League of Women Voters
  • Untitled
  • Untitled
  • Standard of Review
  • Untitled
  • WALSH FOR GOVERNOR - CANDIDATE INFORMATION AND PLATFORM
    • Campaign Finance/Campaign donations
    • Speaking Events
    • Why Heather Mizeur is NOT a progressive
    • Campaign responses to Community Organization Questionnaires
    • Cindy Walsh vs Maryland Board of Elections >
      • Leniency from court for self-representing plaintiffs
      • Amended Complaint
      • Plaintiff request for expedited trial date
      • Response to Motion to Dismiss--Brown, Gansler, Mackie, and Lamone
      • Injunction and Mandamus
      • DECISION/APPEAL TO SPECIAL COURT OF APPEALS---Baltimore City Circuit Court response to Cindy Walsh complaint >
        • Brief for Maryland Court of Special Appeals >
          • Cover Page ---yellow
          • Table of Contents
          • Table of Authorities
          • Leniency for Pro Se Representation
          • Statement of Case
          • Questions Presented
          • Statement of Facts
          • Argument
          • Conclusion/Font and Type Size
          • Record Extract
          • Appendix
          • Motion for Reconsideration
          • Response to Defendants Motion to Dismiss
          • Motion to Reconsider Dismissal
      • General Election fraud and recount complaints
    • Cindy Walsh goes to Federal Court for Maryland election violations >
      • Complaints filed with the FCC, the IRS, and the FBI
      • Zapple Doctrine---Media Time for Major Party candidates
      • Complaint filed with the US Justice Department for election fraud and court irregularities.
      • US Attorney General, Maryland Attorney General, and Maryland Board of Elections are charged with enforcing election law
      • Private media has a responsibility to allow access to all candidates in an election race. >
        • Print press accountable to false statement of facts
      • Polling should not determine a candidate's viability especially if the polling is arbitrary
      • Viability of a candidate
      • Public media violates election law regarding do no damage to candidate's campaign
      • 501c3 Organizations violate election law in doing no damage to a candidate in a race >
        • 501c3 violations of election law-----private capital
      • Voter apathy increases when elections are not free and fair
  • Maryland Board of Elections certifies election on July 10, 2014
  • Maryland Elections ---2016

April 29th, 2014

4/29/2014

0 Comments

 
The SEC allowed US banks to leave GAAP accounting principles for an International Accounting Principles that place the protections on shareholder wealth and not the public.  As you see below, so many accounting frauds are happening now.  Accounting is a dry subject but it is behind all of the loss of control in fraud and corruption.  Please take time to glance through these postings, especially the last one!

DO YOU HEAR YOUR POL SHOUTING THAT OBAMA AND NEO-LIBERALS ARE DISMANTLING ACCOUNTING REGULATIONS JUST AS CLINTON DEMANTLED BANK REGULATIONS MAKING IT HARDER FOR THE PUBLIC TO CONVICT IN ACCOUNTING FRAUD?


I want to take a few days to look at the state of US banks several years after the massive frauds were discovered and brought down the US economy.  Bank of America and Citibank were to too largest pushers and processors of subprime mortgage loans and Citibank's CEO Robert Rubin was of course Bill Clinton's finance chief when all of the bank deregulation and breaking of Glass Steagall occurred.  It is reasonable to assume the overall plan to blow up the US real estate market was in full swing as Clinton was creating the structures for what is now global Wall Street.  The reason Citi and BOA are of importance is that they are the ZOMBIE banks....the ones that Rule of Law would have required be nationalized and taken into bankruptcy so that all assets could be sent back to creditors and victims of mortgage fraud. 

THIS IS WHAT RULE OF LAW REQUIRED BECAUSE OF THE UNQUESTIONABLE PROOF OF MASSIVE AND SYSTEMIC FRAUD.

That of course did not happen and we have yet to get justice with these two banks.  Mind you, Wells Fargo and the other big banks are equally guilty but CITI and BOA need to go.  Most economists agree that nationalizing these banks to recover fraud would not have had much more of an effect on the economy than the current stagnant and crippled economy we have today.  The second piece to this of which I've spoken earlier is that the movement of US private and public pensions from the then safety of the bond market to the stock market in 2007-2008 was done to buoy these collapsing banks.  Many of US pension money is still attached to the worst of criminal banks.  Rather than bring these banks into bankruptcy and transfer lost pension wealth to worker's, the pensioners are being told the gains of the BULL market these few years has made up the losses----only, it hasn't.

Below you see that yet another illegal game was played at the time of the crash simply to make these banks appear viable.  The idea was pretend they are OK and they can go overseas to amass new profits.  The idea was to allow the FED policy of QE take trillions of dollars of those bad loans off bank accounts to make them look healthier----the FED with $4 trillion in debt has been heard to say they will pass all that debt from fraudulent loans over to the US Treasury-----AKA, THE TAXPAYER.  The FED has reached its limit of debt that can be sustained, the massive transfer of bundled foreclosures has mostly finished (round two of the massive subprime mortgage fraud) so talk moves to reversing the policies that allowed these banks to hide debt and look healthy.


GOODBYE PENSION GAINS FROM THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS----IT WAS ALL FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION YET AGAIN.  JUST AS THE WALL STREET RATING AGENCIES GOT OFF SCOTT FREE FOR FRAUDULENTLY GIVING 'AAA' RATINGS TO THESE SUBPRIME LOANS---NOW BANK OF AMERICA AND CITIBANK WILL BE ALLOWED TO REVERSE THE ACCOUNTING TRICKS THAT FALSIFIED THEIR VALUE FOR YEARS AFTER THE CRASH-----ALL INVOLVING FRAUD AND CORRUPTION.


'And how did it err? It says that it properly raised its reported capital levels to offset the reported loss caused by unrealized changes in the valuation of the securities it had issued. But it also raised the capital levels to offset losses that had been realized, something it should not have done. The realized changes came when securities issued by the bank were paid at maturity or repurchased at an earlier date.

That mistake improperly increased its reported capital.

Bank of America did not explain how that the error came to happen or how it was repeated year after year. Nor did it explain why the error was discovered when the first-quarter financial statements for this year were being prepared'.


What all the US big banks did-----BOA and CITI especially ----was to leave the GAAP accounting principles method of recording debt and used an accounting model that allowed it to hide all the subprime mortgage loan and other debt making it look healthier than it was.  You then watch TV commercies toting BOA and CITI as strong and profitable banks as they expanded overseas when in fact they had enormous debt.  Again, these banks were allowed to provide false information to investors to attain business just as happened with the subprime loans.

ALL OF THIS IS FRAUD AND ALL OF THIS PLACES THE PEOPLE'S WEALTH AND INVESTMENTS IN CONSTANT RISK.




Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (United States)

From Wikipedia

Accounting standards have historically been set by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) subject to Securities and Exchange Commission regulations.[4] The AICPA first created the Committee on Accounting Procedure in 1939, and replaced that with the Accounting Principles Board in 1959. In 1973, the Accounting Principles Board was replaced by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) under the supervision of the Financial Accounting Foundation with the Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council serving to advise and provide input on the accounting standards.[5] Other organizations involved in determining United States accounting standards include the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB), formed in 1984, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB).

Circa 2008, the FASB issued the FASB Accounting Standards Codification, which reorganized the thousands of US GAAP pronouncements into roughly 90 accounting topics[6]

In 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued a preliminary "roadmap" that may lead the United States to abandon Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the future (to be determined in 2011), and to join more than 100 countries around the world instead in using the London-based International Financial Reporting Standards.[7] As of 2010, the convergence project was underway with the FASB meeting routinely with the IASB.[8] The SEC expressed their aim to fully adopt International Financial Reporting Standards in the U.S. by 2014.[9] With the convergence of the U.S. GAAP and the international IFRS accounting systems, as the highest authority over International Financial Reporting Standards, the International Accounting Standards Board is becoming more important in the United States.

______________________________________________

Just to show how widespread these accounting frauds were----look below at the systemic nature of these frauds.  Remember, Enron and its collapse resulted by massive frauds by its accounting firm and back then----Rule of Law held Enron and the accounting firm accountable.  That hasn't happened since.

DEREGULATION HAS MADE A WILD WEST OF ALL CORPORATE BEHAVIOR AND THIS HAS OUR ECONOMY AT THIRD WORLD LEVELS OF CORRUPTION.


So, Wall Street banks were allowed to hide massive amounts of debt with accounting tricks and when the FED did the 'STRESS TESTS'  that famously allowed banks to exit government control due to BAILOUT in 2009-2010....it was all a lie.


16 Financial Shenanigans That Got Companies Into Tons Of Trouble

Eric Platt and Lucas Kawa Nov. 20, 2012,

Accounting improprieties, disclosure failures, and outright misrepresentations have gotten companies into trouble since the beginning of business. These are the accusations that Hewlett-Packard has made against software company Autonomy.

As the HP story continues to unfold, we are reminded of some past instances when confusing financial and accounting principles got some big companies on the front page for all of the wrong reasons.

In the recent past, companies have been busted for employing questionable accounting tricks, financial engineering, complicated risk metrics, and outright fraud in an effort to hide losses are inflate profits.


Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV)
Definition: An SPV is a legal entity typically used to serve as a counterparty with the main corporation. In finance it often used for securitization, but it has also been used to hide risky corporate behavior/transactions and conceal corporate relationships.

Case: The most notorious case of special purpose entities being used to distort a company's obligations is Enron, which filed for bankruptcy in 2001. Enron used SPVs to lower the appearance of its debt load and overstate earnings and equity. 

Mark to Market (MTM) AP


Definition: MTM is an accounting measure that values accounts to the current environment. Firms use mark-to-market accounting when the value of an asset or liability moves over time.


Case: Bear Stearns, the now defunct investment bank purchased by JP Morgan, reported in June and July of 2007 that its two main hedge funds (the Bear Stearns High-Grade Structured Credit Fund and High-Grade Structured Credit Enhanced Leveraged Fund) had to mark down nearly all their value, sparking concerns of contagion in the financial crisis. Banks across Wall Street suffered huge paper losses thanks to MTM.


Repo 105
AP Images/ Kristy Wigglesworth

Definition: Repo 105 is an accounting trick that defines a short-term loan as a sale. A company can then use that cash to lower liabilities before paying back the loan with interest. Generally in the repo market, companies will not exchange collateral because the time period is very short.

Case: Lehman Brothers masked extensive liabilities right before quarter-end by using this Repo 105 tactic. The company ultimately filed for bankruptcy and was sold off to different institutions (with most U.S. operations going to Barclays). 

Expense Recognition
ABetterBagofGroceries.com

Definition: Under generally accepted accounting principals, expenses should be recognized when incurred — not necessarily when the payment is made. This is known as the expense recognition principle.

Case: Diamond Foods allegedly shifted payments to walnut growers to later periods to offset costs during its fiscal 2011 year, inflating earnings as it entered negotiations with Proctor & Gamble. The stock transaction depended heavily on Diamond's share price.

Revenue Recognition
haccamopooly/flickr

Definition:  Under  generally accepted accounting principals, revenue should be recognized when the company delivers or performs the task it will be paid for — not necessarily when the payment is received. This is known as the revenue recognition principle. However, exceptions do apply.

Case: Xerox settled with the SEC in 2002 for accelerating revenue recognition of equipment sales by more than $3 billion, which increased pre-tax earnings by $1.5 billion. The company, which was supposed to record revenues both upfront and over a period of time (for servicing equipment over its usable life), moved those service revenues to the time of purchase.

Misrepresented Cash Flows
Definition: The statement of cash flows is the third major financial statement, which tallies cash generated and spent by a company during a fiscal period. This portion of the financial statement of an earnings release is one of the best ways to gauge a company's solvency and actual performance.


Case: WorldCom used its cash flows statement to hide expenses by marking operating costs, which should have been booked as expenses, as capital investments. Under that plan, WorldCom inflated cash flow by $3.8 billion and posted quarters of positive performance when it really lost money.

Channel Stuffing
Krispy Kreme

Definition: Channel stuffing is a practice where a distributor ships retailers excess goods that were not ordered to increase the accounts receivable portion of their balance sheet. Generally, the retailers then ship back the goods and the company must mark them as returns.

Case: Krispy Kreme allegedly sent franchises double their usual shipments at the end of financial quarters so the company could meet Wall Street forecasts. In 2005 the company said it would restate past financial statements.

Hiding Losses in Acquisitions
HK-DMZ on flickr

Definition: Companies can pay high prices for financial advice during a merger, and some have used that guise as a method to cover prior losses. 

Case: Japanese technology giant Olympus announced it had been hiding losses on securities investments for years by using the cover of acquisitions. When new CEO Michael Woodford called attention to strange payments made in 2008, he was subsequently fired.

Round Trip Trading alan5o5 via Flickr

Definition: This is practice where a firm trades an asset and then buys it back many times to inflate its transaction volume. However, the market-manipulation has no impact on profit (although it will bolster top line results).

Case: Dynegy was forced to pay the SEC $3 million after it was found conducting round trip trades with special purpose entities. According to the SEC, Dynegy's "overstatement of its energy-trading activity resulting from 'round-trip' or 'wash' trades — simultaneous, pre-arranged buy-sell trades of energy with the same counter-party, at the same price and volume, and over the same term, resulting in neither profit nor loss to either transacting party."

Smoothing Earnings
Definition: This is a practice where a firm smooths net income by using GAAP techniques to level off fluctuations between periods.


Case: Freddie Mac understated earnings by more than $5 billion over three years to keep earnings consistent and investors happy. According to The New York Times, Freddie Mac lost $111 million during a period it announced net income of nearly $1 billion. Freddie Mac only reported half of what it reported it earned during the third quarter of the year, stating that it earned about $1 billion rather than $2 billion.


Churning
Definition: A practice by brokerage houses where they excessively trade securities to generate commission — even when the trades do not benefit the account holder. Similarly, the practice has been conducted by insurance companies by moving clients from one policy to another.

Case: MetLife, just one of a number of insurance companies found guilty of the practice, settled with state regulators and set aside billions for claims that it moved clients from one policy to another, to generate high premiums.

Bartering
Boonsri Dickinson, Business Insider

Definition: A transaction where two companies (or people) agree to trade goods or services with each other without the use of currency. 

Case: AOL was investigated by the SEC and Justice Department for inflating revenue by using barter trades for online advertising and recognizing the trade as a sale in the period leading up to the merger with Time Warner.

Tax Evasion Philly News

Definition: Pretty simple: an illegal practice where a person or company does not pay the correct tax liabilities owed to the government.

Case: Crazy Eddie, a discount electronics retailer, evaded taxes for years before going public by "skimming and under-reporting income." This was just one of the practices the company used to bolster results. 

Back Dating Employee Stock Options Lara604 / Flickr

Definition: The process where a company offers options to an employee at a date before the actual date the option was made. Companies have done this so they can set better exercise prices to the employee (generally pushing the option into the money).

Case: Apple came under scrutiny for back dating options to employees and forced then-CEO Steve Jobs and other Apple executives to pay $14 million, plus attorney fees. 

Goodwill Impairments
Howard Lake

Definition: Although not illegal, companies have come under pressure from investors for overstating goodwill — which bolsters the balance sheet. Goodwill represents a company's intangible assets (its brand, customer relations, etc.) and often arises during a merger or acquisition.

Case: Green Mountain came under fire for its accounting of goodwill during its acquisition of Van Houtte and how its jump in assets was mainly attributable to that line item on the balance sheet. 

Value at Risk (VAR)
Chris McGrath/Getty Images

A sign on the outside of a Chase bank branch in New York City.

Definition: A tool used by financial institutions that estimates probable losses based on historic trends, prices and volatility. Firms generally report VAR data at quarter-end, with confidence intervals, and for periods stretching from one day to two weeks.

Case: JP Morgan is under intense scrutiny after reporting a $2 billion loss after publishing a VAR of just $76 million a quarter earlier for its entire credit portfolio. At that pace, the entire JP Morgan unit could have lost as much as $76 million in value in any given day (to a 95 percent confidence interval).

_____________________________________________

Remember, these pensions were deliberately thrown into the stock market as it crashed just to buoy these big banks.  This is fraud and public malfeasance on the part of public pensions.  What will double-down on these losses if the fact that all the gains from the stock market these few years are masked by hidden debt----no real gains.

Pension fund managers were part of sending these pensions into a crashing market and as of yet very little justice has come from all these massive pension losses.  Below you see movement by pension funds to recover losses but as of yet-----the same small settlements bring nearly nothing back.  When Bank of America is forced to stop using the accounting methods hiding its debt-----stock values will fall once again.
  This article highlights the ongoing fraud as these foreclosure proceedings were handled as badly.

KEEP IN MIND THIS IS NOW HAPPENING IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION AND A DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY IN THE SENATE AS ARE ALL POLITICIANS ARE SILENT.  CAN YOU IMAGINE IF ALL OF CONGRESS SHOUTED LOUDLY TO GIVE CITIZENS JUSTICE ----- THAT IT WOULD HAPPEN.

This is how we know we have corporate pols running as democrats-----NEO-LIBERALS.

Biggest US Pension Funds Get Into Fraudclosure Fray, Demand Banks "Immediately Examine Foreclosure Practices"

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/09/2011 20:13 -0400


  More bad news for the BofA/Wells syndicate. After on Friday two of the biggest mortgage lenders in the world were hit with bad news out of the Massachusetts supreme court, today it is seven of the nation's major pension funds, between them representing nearly half a trillion in capital, which are demanding that "the boards of directors of Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo immediately undertake independent examinations of the banks’ mortgage and foreclosure practices." The coalition of pension funds called for the banks’ Audit Committees to launch independent examinations of their loan modification, foreclosure, and securitization policies and procedures. “This will help to prevent future compliance failures and restore the confidence of shareholders, regulators, legislators and mortgage markets participants,” the coalition advised in its letter. The coalition members’ insistence on immediate action reflects the urgency of their concerns over mishandled mortgages. But Jim Cramer on Friday said there was no urgency, and no reason to be concerned, and that this is nothing but a buying opportunity for the lemmings which jut got one step closer to the cliff.
_____________________________________


Let's be clear----there were trillions of dollars in subprime mortgage fraud.  The number of homes in America involved was massive.  The reason this fraud was allowed to continue and goes without justice is the goal of this entire scheme was to remove the American people from homeownership----

THE EQUITY WE THE PEOPLE GAINED OVER DECADES OF SAVING AND INVESTMENT.

    I want people who are still losing their homes to foreclosure....and Maryland is ground zero for this.....that damages to the US economy from this massive fraud need to extend to families facing long term unemployment and are now losing their homes.


Remember, all US big banks are still responsible for massive fraud but BOA and CITIBANK were the ringleaders.

Bank of America: Too Crooked to Fail The bank has defrauded everyone from investors and insurers to homeowners and the unemployed. So why does the government keep bailing it out?


By Matt Taibbi March 14, 2012 10:55 AM ET

Rolling Stone

At least Bank of America got its name right. The ultimate Too Big to Fail bank really is America, a hypergluttonous ward of the state whose limitless fraud and criminal conspiracies we'll all be paying for until the end of time. Did you hear about the plot to rig global interest rates? The $137 million fine for bilking needy schools and cities? The ingenious plan to suck multiple fees out of the unemployment checks of jobless workers? Take your eyes off them for 10 seconds and guaranteed, they'll be into some shit again: This bank is like the world's worst-behaved teenager, taking your car and running over kittens and fire hydrants on the way to Vegas for the weekend, maxing out your credit cards in the three days you spend at your aunt's funeral. They're out of control, yet they'll never do time or go out of business, because the government remains creepily committed to their survival, like overindulgent parents who refuse to believe their 40-year-old live-at-home son could possibly be responsible for those dead hookers in the backyard.

It's been four years since the government, in the name of preventing a depression, saved this megabank from ruin by pumping $45 billion of taxpayer money into its arm. Since then, the Obama administration has looked the other way as the bank committed an astonishing variety of crimes – some elaborate and brilliant in their conception, some so crude that they'd be beneath your average street thug. Bank of America has systematically ripped off almost everyone with whom it has a significant business relationship, cheating investors, insurers, depositors, homeowners, shareholders, pensioners and taxpayers. It brought tens of thousands of Americans to foreclosure court using bogus, "robo-signed" evidence – a type of mass perjury that it helped pioneer. It hawked worthless mortgages to dozens of unions and state pension funds, draining them of hundreds of millions in value. And when it wasn't ripping off workers and pensioners, it was helping to push insurance giants like AMBAC into bankruptcy by fraudulently inducing them to spend hundreds of millions insuring those same worthless mortgages.

But despite being the very definition of an unaccountable corporate villain, Bank of America is now bigger and more dangerous than ever. It controls more than 12 percent of America's bank deposits (skirting a federal law designed to prohibit any firm from controlling more than 10 percent), as well as 17 percent of all American home mortgages. By looking the other way and rewarding the bank's bad behavior with a massive government bailout, we actually allowed a huge financial company to not just grow so big that its collapse would imperil the whole economy, but to get away with any and all crimes it might commit. Too Big to Fail is one thing; it's also far too corrupt to survive.

All the government bailouts succeeded in doing was to make the bank even more prone to catastrophic failure – and now that catastrophe might finally be at hand. Bank of America's share price has plunged into the single digits, and the bank faces battles in courtrooms all over America to avoid paying back the hundreds of billions it stole from everyone in sight. Its credit rating, already downgraded to a few rungs above junk status, could plummet with the next bad analyst report, causing a frenzied rush to the exits by creditors, investors and stockholders – an institutional run on the bank.

They're in deep trouble, but they won't die, because our current president, like the last one, apparently believes it's better to project a false image of financial soundness than to allow one of our oligarchic banks to collapse under the weight of its own corruption. Last year, the Federal Reserve allowed Bank of America to move a huge portfolio of dangerous bets into a side of the company that happens to be FDIC-insured, putting all of us on the hook for as much as $55 trillion in irresponsible gambles. Then, in February, the Justice Department's so-called foreclosure settlement, which will supposedly provide $26 billion in relief for ripped-off homeowners, actually rewarded the bank with a legal waiver that will allow it to escape untold billions in lawsuits. And this month the Fed will release the results of its annual stress test, in which the bank will once again be permitted to perpetuate its fiction of solvency by grossly overrating the mountains of toxic loans on its books. At this point, the rescue effort is so sweeping and elaborate that it goes far beyond simply gouging the tax dollars of millions of struggling families, many of whom have already been ripped off by the bank – it's making the government, and by extension all of us, full-blown accomplices to the fraud.



______________________________________

Here you see while Bank of America was known to be in debt of a trillion or more in US fraud....it took its bailout money and expanded overseas where it invests in more high-risk and leverage as much as before the crash.  As this article shows, the Chinese are creating the environment that will hasten a collapse in our US economy this year.


Bank of America advises China default contracts to hedge debt storm Chinese bond yields have already risen to the highest in a decade yet markets remain “complacent” about the implications Bank of America's Bin Yao says markets have underestimated the risk of a monetary squeeze

 Photo: EPA By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

2:15PM GMT 13 Dec 2013



Bank of America has advised clients to take out default insurance against Chinese debt, warning that monetary tightening by China’s central bank risks setting off a bout of serious credit stress in 2014.

Bin Yao, the bank’s credit strategist in Asia, said Chinese bond yields have already risen to the highest in a decade as the authorities seek to rein in rampant growth of the M2 money supply and excess credit, yet markets remain “complacent” about the implications.

He recommends buying credit default swaps (CDS) on five-year Chinese debt as the easiest way to “hedge the China tail risk”. These contracts spiked to 266 after the Lehman crisis and again to 206 during the ‘hard-landing scare’ of late 2011. They have since settled down to stable levels, trading this week near 66.

Bin Yao said the markets have underestimated the risk of a monetary squeeze. The central bank has already raised interest rates by three quarters of a point over the last year. Rising yields are pushing the shadow banking system closer to the brink. “We find trust loans especially troubling,” he said.

Short-term debt issuance by trust companies has jumped to $320bn from almost zero two years ago. A new study by the China Academy of Financial Research warned that the trusts face a redemption shock after promising returns of 10pc to 15pc that may be impossible to deliver.



________________________________________

The American accounting system GAAP is just too burdensome with all of the defined rules that allowed accounting fraud to be easily investigated and prosecuted.  That is why we need to go with this International Accounting Standard.  In order to successfully break from any ability of the public to prosecute fraud as happened with Enron and Aurthur Anderson Accounting, the ability of Americans to file lawsuits for accounting irregularities must be curtailed.


So, they are doing to the accounting sector what was done with the financial deregulation by adopting this International system with much weaker and broadly defined rules.

MIND YOU----THIS IS OBAMA AND A MAJORITY CONTROLLED CONGRESS ALLOWING THIS.  THE SECURITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION IS ACTING WITHOUT ANY THOUGHT OF PUBLIC INTEREST.  THAT IS A NEO-LIBERAL FOR YOU!

DO YOU HEAR YOUR POLS SHOUTING AGAINST THIS????


The Dark Side of Global Accounting Standards

Expect loose standard-setting in the oil and gas industries and a ton of litigation if convergence hurtles down its current track, critics say.

  • David M. Katz    CFO
  If the Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday votes as expected and allows non-U.S. issuers here to report their financials in line with International Financial Reporting Standards without reconciling them with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, the United States will have crossed a point of no return in the movement toward a single set of global accounting standards, some experts feel.

But that doesn’t mean that many key players won’t cross that line without a fair amount of kicking and screaming.

Speaking at a roundtable discussion on global accounting standards at New York University’s Stern School of Business on Monday, Charles Niemeier, a member and former acting chair of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, said that he was “a bit troubled by the speed” of the SEC’s march toward the convergence of U.S. and international accounting standards.
“If we eliminate reconciliation, what have we done? I have some fear that we’re crossing the Rubicon — that we’ve lost leverage in order to get closer [to global uniformity].”

Leverage by U.S. regulators and standard-setters to push for rigor in converged standards could be lost, as well as the clout to hold individual companies to international rules, Niemeier told CFO.com. At the roundtable, the audit firm overseer disputed a basic premise of the proponents of convergence: that if the international standards are adopted in the United States, it would produce a clearer system based on solid principles rather than rule-based minutiae. “Some say Europe is principles-based. I beg to differ. It’s younger,” he said, suggesting that much of the detail in GAAP is justified by long-standing experience. Some speakers said that IFRS lacks the detail provided under GAAP to provide adequate financial reporting in a number of specific industries in the United States, particularly oil and gas and insurance.

By contrast, critics of U.S. GAAP’s complexity, including the SEC’s own advisory committee, consider industry specific guidance to be one of the U.S. accounting system’s major flaws.

At the same time, many roundtable participants worried that the U.S. legal system — also blamed for the complexity of U.S. GAAP — might trip up global accounting standards too. Under the U.S. legal system, they said, auditors feel they must adhere closely to preset rules in order to avoid being sued. In order for IFRS to take hold in the United States, there needs to be “a change in the way we look at litigation in America, where it’s a mark of honor to sue someone,” said Stern accounting professor Seymour Jones at the roundtable.


Even a decision by the SEC to recognize the International Accounting Standards Board (which sets IFRS) as a bona fide standards setter could get tested in a U.S. court, according to Stanley Siegel, an NYU law professor. “Nothing is going to stop an American litigant who has bought shares in an American company or a Brazilian company” issuing stock in the United States from questioning the validity of the SEC’s choice of IASB under Section 108 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, he said. (Sarbox 108 enables the SEC to designate a standard setting body’s accounting principles as “generally accepted.”).

Indeed, many seem to feel that the SEC is moving ahead too swiftly and without adequate planning for what truly looms as a major step in the direction of converged international accounting standards. Even Financial Accounting Standards Board chairman Robert Herz, perhaps convergence’s prime U.S. spear carrier feels that “a national plan” for convergence needs to be in place before target dates are set. “Before you get to a timetable,” the key players need to determine “what are the tasks to be done.” High on the plan’s priority list should be educational and regulatory requirements. Underscoring the point about education, Nieimeier said in an interview that few people at PCAOB understand IFRS.

Nevertheless, convergence seems to be proceeding apace. While the SEC has been promoting the idea of installing a single set of international standards for about 20 years, the notion has gone into high gear in the last year, according to John White, the director of corporation finance at the SEC.

The reconciliation proposal, which White and SEC Chief Accountant Conrad Hewitt will present to the commission on Thursday, would create the unprecedented existence of “two co-existing financial reporting systems in the U.S.,” White said at a Financial Executives International conference in New York earlier this week. In developing the proposal, he said, the commission had three questions to answer:

• Is there a satisfactory convergence process in place?

• Are International Financial Reporting Standards being consistently and faithfully applied?

• Is IASB up to the job of setting global financial accounting strictures?

The commission is apparently satisfied enough with the answers to go ahead with at least the first step. The percentage of public issuers in the United States that will be affected is modest, however. Just 1,100 companies out of the 11,000 entities that report their financials to the SEC are foreign issuers, and only 200 of them use GAAP. Of the remaining 900 foreign companies required to file a GAAP reconcilation report, up to 180 may qualify to take advantage of the proposal if they file their financial reports using the IASB’s version of IFRS.


0 Comments

April 28th, 2014

4/28/2014

0 Comments

 
ALL CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND EXCEPT CINDY WALSH FOR GOVERNOR WILL MOVE THESE KINDS OF POLICIES FORWARD.  HAVE YOU HEARD THEM SHOUT AGAINST ALL OF THIS?


Neo-cons and neo-liberals are working hard to privatize the US military.  Clinton started it and now Obama and Hillary have this on steroids.  Last count it appears that over 70% of US military is private military contractors.  The Defense Department was given the green light by neo-liberals in Congress and Obama to recruit troops overseas who are not citizens but will work as a US military contractor employee in nations around the world.

Remember, a public military is sworn to protect WE THE PEOPLE AND OUR NATION.  A private military contractor employee simply works for that global corporation and falls under no US Rule of Law.  This means that these troops will not look at US citizens as those to be protected but will act in defense of corporations and their profits.

THIS IS WHAT TOTALITARIANISM LOOKS LIKE FOLKS!


An extension of this is the fact that these private military employees are now coming back to the US to work as police and special forces in states across America.   People living in Baltimore know that BAltimore police have gotten brutal in their approach to people they encounter.  People are dying from simple infractions and are jailed as 'resisting arrest' when people pull away from what we know are illegal acts by police.  Cities across the US have as a goal of privatizing police and fire departments as an extension of these military contracting corporations.  We already see in Charles Village ---Baltimore----Bank of America guarded by a global security force.

THIS IS WHAT TOTALITARIANISM LOOKS LIKE FOLKS!!!


Remember, the US has a Constitution that provides Equal Protection under law and that provides a Bill of Rights that protects our civil rights and liberties.  When a rogue government comes in and suspends Rule of Law they are acting illegally.  The Supreme Court is impeachable for rulings that seek to take away the rights of US citizens.  So, all of these policies and rulings CAN BE REVERSED. 

STOP ALLOWING A NEO-LIBERAL DNC CHOOSE YOUR CANDIDATES----RUN AND VOTE FOR LABOR AND JUSTICE IN ALL PRIMARIES.



Below is my blog on the privatization of military and police:



Regarding VoteVets.org as a political PAC for 21st Century Patriots:

Raise your hand if you understand that dismantling the entire public structure of the Veterans Administration and handing it to corporate private non-profits to make veterans beg for charity rather than receive the promised support being a member of the US military awards!!!!!! EVERYONE.

WE NOW HAVE TV COMMERCIALS ASKING AMERICANS TO DONATE TO VETERANS NON-PROFITS BECAUSE THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION IS BEING DISMANTLED.
At the same time we are hearing vets tell us they are getting no help from this private non-profit structure and the public VA has been gutted of staff.

Below you see how far neo-liberals have gone into third world politics. Today, the Maryland people had to listen to what should be public media------but is corporate and captured media-----go so far as to pretend that the group below actually works for veterans. This is an example of a private non-profit pretending to be progressive that is a great big neo-liberal private military contractor group. When you hear the words 21st Century Patriots you know you are listening to the private military complex and no doubt there are veterans of private military corporations. The US military is over 70% mercenary thanks to Bush, Obama, and Hillary. So, do corporate veterans care about the US military public troops? WELL, IT LOOKS NOT!

What this PAC represents is the killing of public sector unions or in this case public sector military and its benefits. Blackwater retirees would be the 21st Century Patriots for example.

Knowing this------it would be understandable that VOTEVETS would be backing Anthony Brown because O'Malley/Brown has been 100% behind privatization of the Veterans Administration in Maryland. See how it sounds different when you know what a private non-profit group is about? Indeed, this PAC is backing the most privatizing of Wall Street candidates because it is heavily invested in this private military complex. The absurdity of Maryland campaign of Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur is that they are all neo-liberals who will work to privatize the VA as well. So, Gansler bashing Brown is like Bush bashing Cheney.

PLEASE KNOW WHAT THESE CAMPAIGN PACs REPRESENT----THEY WILL ALL PRETEND TO BE PROGRESSIVE!

If a PAC supports the most Wall Street global corporation in the race for Governor of Maryland------it is a private mercenary patriot group.


O'MALLEY/BROWN HAS PLACED PRIVATIZATION OF VETERANS ADMINISTRATION ON STEROIDS IN MARYLAND SO WHY WOULD A VET GROUP SUPPORT BROWN?  GANSLER WOULD BE JUST AS BAD.

VOTEVETS DEMANDS APOLOGY FROM GANSLER FOR SLUR AGAINST VETERANS

By VoteVets.org | Press Release
PUBLISHED: April 21, 2014

Annapolis, MD – The largest progressive group of veterans in America, with over 400,000 supporters, VoteVets.org PAC, is demanding an apology from Attorney General Doug Gansler for saying that those troops who served in Iraq didn’t have “real jobs.”

At a forum this morning, Gansler said, “You know I’m running against somebody [Iraq War Veteran, Lt. Gov Anthony Brown] who has never managed anybody, never run anything, you know his ads are about how he was a lawyer in Iraq, and that’s all fine and good but this is a real job.”

In response, Jon Soltz, Iraq War Veteran and Chairman of VoteVets.org said, “Doug Gansler needs to stop smearing those of us who served in Iraq as not having had a ‘real job.’ It’s a horrible insult to all those men and women who put their lives on the line, and especially those who died, in service to this country. Additionally, Mr. Gansler, if he chooses to attack an Iraq War Veteran, ought to at least admit that the person he is attacking has been serving as Maryland’s Lieutenant Governor. This kind of slime ball politics is what turns people off to our democratic process, so Mr. Gansler is doing no favors for Maryland or our democratic electoral system by playing in the gutter like this.”

VoteVets.org PAC endorsed Brown’s campaign.

Founded in 2006, the mission of VoteVets.org Political Action Committee is to elect Veterans to public office, with a focus on Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, and hold public officials accountable for their words and actions that impact America's 21st century troops and veterans. Though VoteVets.org PAC is non-partisan, candidates it backs must support VoteVets.org's core mission and beliefs.

____________________________________________
Maryland is ground zero for surveillance industries.  This is no doubt why our election process is captured because you need to be selective as to who would support this road to totalitarianism.

Johns Hopkins built their own surveillance corporations all from taxpayer money funneled to them by Mikulski, Cardin, and Cummings.  SAIC is one such corporation headquartered in VA and MD now building surveillance systems in cities across America.  Believe me-----this is not about keeping people in poor communities safe or keeping the middle-class safe from crimes of poverty.....it will be used as a tool against citizens living in a first world taken to a second world and now moving to a third world society.  THEY KNOW WE THE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ANGRY.




Combatting the Surveillance Industrial Complex

August 9, 2004

THE PRIVATIZATION OF SURVEILLANCE
The U.S. security establishment is rapidly increasing its ability to monitor average Americans by hiring or compelling private-sector corporations to provide billions of customer records. The explosive growth in surveillance by government and business is creating a "Surveillance-Industrial Complex" (PDF) that threatens all of our privacy.
 

Make a Difference Your support helps the ACLU stand up for human rights and defend civil liberties.

Give Now

ABOUT THE REPORT
This report makes the case that, across a broad variety of areas, the same dynamic of the "privatization of surveillance" is underway. Different dimensions of this trend are examined in depth in four separate sections of the report:


"Recruiting Individuals."
Documents how individuals are being recruited to serve as "eyes and ears" for the authorities even after Congress rejected the infamous TIPS (Terrorism Information and Prevention System) program that would have recruited workers like cable repairmen to spy on their customers.

"Recruiting Companies." Examines how companies are pressured to voluntarily provide consumer information to the government; the many ways security agencies can force companies to turn over sensitive information under federal laws such as the Patriot Act; how the government is forcing companies to participate in watchlist programs and in systems for the automatic scrutiny of individuals' financial transactions.

"Mass Data Use, Public and Private." Focuses on the government's use of private data on a mass scale, either through data mining programs like the MATRIX state information-sharing program, or the purchase of information from private-sector data aggregators.

"Pro-Surveillance Lobbying." Looks at the flip side of the issue: how some companies are pushing the government to adopt surveillance technologies and programs based on private-sector data.


_____________________________

Keep in mind that Egypt has a state structure with the military as the most powerful branch of government and that there are large numbers of 'generals' in Egypt that are billionaires everyone knows are simply extensions of Wall Street.  It is this military structure that is being built in the US now and we must stop it.

Do not sit and allow police brutality to occur in your city or community because it is the canary in the cage.  Baltimore has over 20 citizens killed unjustly with no accountability in just a few years.  This is unheard of in a democracy.  Placing City Hall and police and fire departments with separate benefit plans and wages from other public sector employees is a sign of creating a tiered class surrounding corporate governance.  You see with the dictators toppled this decade it is always this small group of administrative class that fights for the dictator.

These are the things we need to watch for and stop in their tracks.  It is happening in small increments so do not allow it to expand!


A Capitalist System Gone Awry

The Military Industrial Complex has solidified its ties and deeply inserted his long horns into the arteries of the American taxpayers.

By Rev. Richard Skaff

December 10, 2012 "Information Clearing House" -  Creating wars to feed the blood-thirsty and greedy beast of the military industry complex has been a common practice in an allegedly democratic nation. Taxpayers’ have flipped this bill for decades under the guise of self-preservation and protection. As always government has used fear to fashion people’s consent and obedience. Meanwhile, corruption is prevalent, our national debt is skyrocketing, and our parasitic superpower is broke. Parasitic it is, because you can’t become super-rich or super-powerful unless you suck the blood and the life out of someone else. In this case, it is the taxpayers (the proles).

Under the guise of the Private-Public Partnership (PPP) phenomenon, the Military Industrial Complex has solidified its ties and deeply inserted his long horns into the arteries of the American taxpayers. Citizens for responsibility and ethics in Washington (CREW) has recently issued a scathing and disturbing report exposing this unethical and frightening phenomenon where high-ranking generals and admirals earn their stars, their stripes, and then, they earn their the big cash.

The CREW report found that 70 percent (or 76) of the 108 three-and-four star generals and Admirals who retired between 2009 and 2011 took jobs with defense contractors or consultants. In at least a few cases, the retirees have continued to advise the Department of Defense while on the payroll of defense contractors, suggesting the Pentagon may not always be receiving unbiased counsel.

The retired generals and admirals moving into the private sector in general do not appear to be breaking any rules. Nonetheless, their heavily traveled path through the military-industrial complex continues to raise important questions about the intersection of national security and the interests of private companies that stand to make billions of dollars. [1].

A 2010 Boston Globe investigation revealed that the number of retired three-and-four star Generals and admirals moving into lucrative defense industry jobs rose from less than 50 percent between 1994 and 1998 to a stratospheric 80 percent between 2004 and 2008, findings that brought new scrutiny to this unethical revolving door. [2], [1]

CREW’s research shows the number of high-level retirees taking those jobs has since ticked down, though the vast majority of retiring generals and admirals continue to sign on with defense contractors vying for their services.

Every year, the Pentagon awards hundreds of billions of dollars in contracts to the
defense industry. [3], [1] Retired generals, with their strong relationships, robust contact lists, and insider knowledge, are valuable assets in the competition for contracts and can easily make more than their base pay – currently $164,221 per year for a three-star general and $179,700 for a four-star general – by serving on a single corporate board. [4], [1]

A recent study found that when a defense company announced the hiring of a former defense department political appointee, on average, the company’s stock price increased. [5], [1] The relationship was statistically weak but positive, suggesting investors believe such hires bring benefits. [5], [1]

In 2011 alone, the Department of Defense committed to spending nearly $100 billion
with the five largest defense contractors – Lockheed Martin, Boeing, General Dynamics, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman. [3], [1] At least nine of the top-level generals and admirals who retired between 2009 and 2011 took positions with those five companies. In addition, 12 generals who retired during that period have gone on to work for Burdeshaw Associates, a “renta-general” consulting firm specializing in helping companies obtain defense contracts. [2], [1]

Burdeshaw’s clients have included Northrop Grumman. [2], [1]

Further, CREW found some retired generals and admirals work for defense contractors
while they continue to advise the Pentagon. Per example, both Gen. James Cartwright, who retired from the U. S. Marine Corps on September 1, 2011 after serving as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Adm. Gary Roughead, who retired from the Navy in 20119 after serving as the chief of naval operations, were appointed to the Defense Policy Board on October 4, 2011. [6]. [1] The board’s charter mandates that it provide the secretary of defense “with independent, informed advice and opinion concerning major matters of defense policy.” [7], [1]

Gen. Cartwright, shortly after his retirement, was elected to the Raytheon Co. board of
directors. [8], [1]

Raytheon, a public company that reports director compensation, disclosed paying
each of its non-employee directors an $85,000 annual cash retainer in 2011, as well as a $1,500 meeting fee for each board or committee meeting attended in person or by teleconference.[9], [1]

In addition, directors received $120,000 worth of restricted stock grants in 2011. [9], [1] Gen. Cartwright is also on the board of advisors of TASC, Inc., [10], [1] a former subsidiary of Northrop Grumman that advises military agencies, [11], [1] and a member of the U.S. federal advisory board of Accenture Federal Services.[12], [1].

Less than four months after his retirement, Adm. Roughead joined Northrop Grumman’s
board, for which he is paid $115,000 per year. [13], [1] Northrop Grumman, a public company that reports director compensation, will also pay him an additional $10,000 per year for serving on the board’s audit committee, and he receives an annual grant of $130,000 in deferred stock.[13], [1] Adm. Roughead also sits on the strategic advisory council of The SI Organization, [14], [1] a systems engineering and integration company previously owned by Lockheed Martin. [15], [1].

In some cases the revolving door spun quickly, with senior military officers retiring and
almost immediately taking industry jobs related to their military work. The examples are numerous (see CREW report for more details about our generals). In addition, the revolving door doesn’t stop at the generals’ doors but expands its horns to the lobbyists.

CREW’s research shows defense companies also covet lobbyists with backgrounds in appropriations and strong connections on the Hill. CREW analyzed the employment history of in-house lobbyists registered on behalf of Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Dynamics as of the first quarter of 2012 and found at least 68 percent had prior public sector experience. Nearly half of the 84 lobbyists had worked for Congress. In addition, 21 percent, or 18 lobbyists had worked for a federal agency. Of those lobbyists with experience on the Hill, roughly a third – 14 lobbyists – had worked for either the House or Senate Appropriations Committees, the powerful panels responsible for directing billions of dollars in government spending. There were also other connections to the appropriations committees: of the 16 lobbyists who worked directly for members of Congress, seven had worked for members of the appropriations committees. [1]

The five companies spend millions of dollars on federal lobbying every year, and receive
billions of dollars in federal contracts. Lobbying records show their collective spending on lobbying increased by nearly 40 percent between 2007 and 2011, skyrocketing from $44.6 million to $62.3 million. Over the same period, the total amount of dollars committed to them in federal contracts increased by roughly 13 percent, growing from $100.61 billion in fiscal year 2007 to $113.28 billion in fiscal year 2011.[48]

The five companies spent roughly $33 million lobbying during the first half of this year,
indicating a likely overall increase for 2012 as well. As defense contractors step up the fight against planned budget cuts, well-connected lobbyists and senior military personnel are likely to become even more valuable. [1]

Boeing

  • Registered lobbyists as of first quarter 2012: 25

  • Revolving door lobbyists: 21

  • Amount spent on lobbying since 2007: $86.93 million

  • Campaign contributions since 2008 cycle: $7.58 million [2]

  • Top congressional recipients of campaign contributions during the 2012 election cycle:

  • Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA), Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA)

  • Total dollars obligated to Boeing for Defense Department contracts in 2011: $20.49 billion. [1]

General Dynamics

  • Registered lobbyists as of first quarter of 2012: 10

  • Revolving door lobbyists: 2

  • Amount spent on lobbying since 2007: $53.08 million

  • Campaign contributions since 2008 cycle: $4.79 million [2]

  • Top congressional recipients of campaign contributions during the 2012 election cycle: Rep.

  • Buck McKeon (R-CA), Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA), Rep. Jim Langevin (D-RI)

  • Total dollars obligated to General Dynamics for Defense Department contracts in 2011:

  • $17.98 billion. [1]

Lockheed Martin

  • Registered lobbyists as of first quarter 2012: 26

  • Revolving door lobbyists: 18

  • Amount spent on lobbying since 2007: $74.23 million

  • Campaign contributions since 2008 cycle: $ 8.03 million [2]

  • Top congressional recipients of campaign contributions during the 2012 election cycle: Rep.

  • Buck McKeon (R-CA), Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX), Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL)

  • Total dollars obligated to Lockheed Martin for Defense Department contracts in 2011:

  • $35.76 billion. [1]

Northrop Grumman

  • Registered lobbyists as of first quarter 2012: 10

  • Revolving door lobbyists: 7

  • Amount spent on lobbying since 2007: $83.85 million

  • Campaign contributions since 2008 cycle: $6.19 million [2]

  • Top congressional recipients of campaign contributions during the 2012 election cycle: Rep.

  • Buck McKeon (R-CA), Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD)

  • Total dollars obligated to Northrop Grumman for Defense Department contracts in 2011:

  • $11.88 billion. [1]

Raytheon

  • Registered lobbyists as of first quarter 2012: 13

  • Revolving door lobbyists: 9

  • Amount spent on lobbying since 2007: $36.84 million

  • Campaign contributions since 2008 cycle: $5.85 million [2]

  • Top congressional recipients of campaign contributions during the 2012 election cycle: Sen.

  • Scott Brown (R-MA), Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA), Rep. Jim Langevin (D-RI)

  • Total dollars obligated to Raytheon for Defense Department contracts in 2011: $13.57

  • Billion. [1]

Conclusion
Finally, The CREW report titled “Strategic maneuvers, the Revolving Door from the Pentagon to the Private Sector” is a stunning report of immense importance because it clearly exposes a capitalist system that has gone awry. The Defense Industry as well as other global corporations have co-opted and owned everyone in the Federal government under the guise of Public-Private Partnership. All of the watchdogs have been transformed into lap-dogs and sacrificed their integrity and country for few dollars and for ephemeral power. Meanwhile, the public continues its unconscious path by empowering the ten horned beast that has devoured everyone in its path.

The final solution would be to kill this beast by ceasing the cash nexus that perpetuates its strength, and to dethrone the harlot (our public leaders and elected officials) who is riding him and driving the American people and the nation into the abyss.


______________________________________________




Monday, May 25, 2009

Privatizing the Police: A Developing Model in the U.S.A.

By Jody Ray Bennett

Three months after 9/11, The New York Times ran a quiet story that highlighted a developing trend concerning a sudden increase in the number of police officers retiring from their jobs for careers with private security companies (PSCs). “The heightened hunger for private protection in the aftermath of history's worst terrorist attacks is fueling the potentially destabilizing exodus,” the story claimed.

The daily suspected that police officers were being lured by the lucrative salaries and benefits offered by the private sector, finding that within the New York Police Department, a “supervisor who plays matchmaker between retired officers and security firms [was] asked to provide hundreds of names to industry executives.”

Indeed, the article identified what at the time was thought of as a marginal development, but is now almost commonplace:

“In the Sept. 11 disaster that never seems to stop exacting its toll, one of the subtler but more serious losses is a consequence of the booming private security industry, which is draining the [NYPD] of some of its most desirable workers: the serious, smart and experienced senior officers the city needs most in a crisis.”

Fast forward nine years later and one finds a young industry built almost entirely on the backs of former military and police personnel who have provided everything from diplomatic, convoy, embassy, weapon storage and energy infrastructural security to gathering intelligence, conducting interrogations, patrolling borders on land, fighting pirates at sea and transporting goods and personnel by air. It would seem there is nothing these forces cannot do.

On private patrol

Policing some of the most dangerous US cities has quickly become the newest line of business for many of these companies, which have already replaced police officers in cities from Portland to Baltimore.

The phenomenon runs deeper than the normal shopping center or bank security guard. While in many cases private security personnel act more as city cleanup, organization or local ambassadors, some cities are pushing for armed private security personnel to patrol the streets, perform arrests and transport civilians. This is somewhat of a cause for concern, especially because of the more controversial issues surrounding the role of private military and security companies abroad in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Cities are turning to the private sector for a variety of reasons. Some local and state governments are under pressure from budget deficits and are often convinced that privatized industries are more cost-effective than state agencies and bureaucracies. Other cities have an already overstretched force that cannot respond to increases in crime, so private contractors are seen as a quick fix and an easy force multiplier.
 
From Oakland to New Orleans

Oakland, California is the latest city looking to hire private companies to patrol some of its rougher neighborhoods in the wake of record municipal budget deficits. Last April, according to the Wall Street Journal, the city successfully voted to outsource part of its police patrol to International Services Inc, but later retracted after “two of its vice presidents were accused […] by the Los Angeles District Attorney's office of defrauding the state of California out of more thanUS$9 million in workers compensation.”

According to the daily Portland Mercury newspaper, Portland, Oregon’s downtown area is patrolled by armed personnel with arrest powers that are supplied by Portland Patrol, Inc, a company which, according to local media, has repeatedly evaded requests to appear before the city’s oversight committee.

Over 2,000 miles away, Chicago has turned to a company that currently operates in police-like automobiles marked “special patrol,” according to CBS News, and are expected to have their powers expanded as the city combats increased crime rates with an overstretched police force.

Down south in New Orleans, Louisiana, armed private guards patrol wealthy neighborhoods and private schools. According to a report by the Wall Street Journal, “Some areas of New Orleans have used armed private patrols since 1997, when residents in an east New Orleans community petitioned Louisiana's legislature to create a tax on property owners to pay for a private force. About 20 residential tax districts have been established, employing an estimated 100 private guards. This month, seven more neighborhoods voted to create such districts.”

During the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, New Orleans was patrolled by approximately 150 heavily armed Blackwater personnel alongside several other big contractor companies like Dyncorp, Wackenhut and most interestingly, ISI, an Israeli company that flew in former Israeli Special Forces commandos.

Most notably of all of these companies is Capital Special Police, which not only supplies guards and corporate escorts, but also offers “real police officers [that] arrest for felonies and misdemeanors; issue citations for infractions; and enforce local ordinances.”

In January 2007, the Washington Post reported that the company was “one of dozens of private security companies given police powers by the state of North Carolina.”

“The more than 1 million contract security officers, and an equal number of guards estimated to work directly for U.S. corporations, dwarf the nearly 700,000 sworn law enforcement officers in the United States,” the daily wrote.


A 2000 report from American University in Washington, DC, concluded that “The great contemporary challenge confronting public safety in the United States is not primarily about whether privatization and civilianization are good things. It is about how best to serve the public’s need for protection against crime generally and, in particular, how to shape and coordinate our resources and energies to secure the safety of those quarters of society that are least able to afford effective security, public or private.”

Beginning of the boom

To this end, American cities might soon find a large surplus of job-seeking private security personnel when and if President Barack Obama pulls troops and contractors out of Iraq. Indeed, several US cities have already created public-private police associations in an attempt to bridge cooperation between the two forces. Suffice to say, the private policing boom is only just beginning.

The phenomenon transcends the public-private goods debate and indicates a new shift in how security is allocated by the state. Where the monopoly of force once consisted of exclusively state-owned functions, these have now been outsourced, in part or whole, to private entities.

In a post-Cold War age that heralds neoliberalism as a part of an “End of History,” privatization of police and military force should not come as a terribly big surprise. On the other hand, the transfer of security to private power (or the penetration of private power into a state’s monopoly of force) should hold serious implications over how the provision of security is conceptualized, as well as for the forces that create state power.

—————————--

Jody Ray Bennett is a freelance writer and academic researcher.  His areas of analysis include the private military and security industries, the materialization of non-state forces, and the transformation of modern warfare.

This article was originally published at ISN Security Watch (05/18/09).  The International Relations and Security Network (ISN) is a free public service that provides a wide range of high-quality and comprehensive products and resources to encourage the exchange of information among international relations and security professionals worldwide.





____________________________________________
This is the best assessment of the state of affairs regarding the world banking cartel and the capture of world governments.  It also shows the intent of private military buildup in the Western nations and it is indeed what is happening as local governments 'reform' police departments.  You can see once public union leaders being selected to move this privatization forward and the pay structures have the heads of public agencies paid as corporate executives-----because that is what they are intended to be.

The time is now to stop and reverse this process.  IT IS NOT A DONE DEAL WE SIMPLY HAVE TO ENGAGE AS CITIZENS IN POLITICS AND TAKE BACK OUR GOVERNMENT.  IF YOU ARE SILENT AND APATHETIC YOU WILL BE LIVING IN A THIRD WORLD IN A FEW DECADES.



The Road to World War III – The Global Banking Cartel Has One Card Left to Play
September 23rd, 2010 |

Editor’s Note: The following is Part I to David DeGraw’s new book, “The Road Through 2012: Revolution or World War III.” This is the second installment to a new seven-part series that we will be posting throughout the next few weeks. You can read the introduction to the book here. To be notified via email of new postings from this series, subscribe here.


Part One I: Economic Imperial Operations
II: Violence on the Horizon
III: The IMF Riot, Step 3.5
IV: Bang the Drums of War
V: The Chinese Scapegoat: Trade &
—-Currency Wars

VI: Moves Upon the Grand Chessboard
VII: Resource Wars
VIII: Private Military Complex
IX: History Repeats Itself




I: Economic Imperial Operations

When we analyze our current crisis, focusing on the past few years of economic activity blinds us to the history and context that are vital to understanding the root cause. What we have been experiencing is not the result of an unforeseen economic crash that appeared out of the blue with the collapse of the housing market. It was certainly not brought on by people who bought homes they couldn’t afford. To frame this crisis around a debate on economic theory misses the point entirely. To even blame it on greedy bankers, while essentially accurate, also misses the most vital point.

This crisis is the direct result of a strategic economic attack on the existence of a middle class and democracy worldwide. The stock market and economy have become weapons of mass oppression manipulated by an imperial banking cartel to impose order and exploit the masses. This crisis boldly represents the manifest evolution of the fascist spirit reasserting itself as the dominant ideology.

Any fairytale notions of the United States being a democratic republic built on the rule of law have been utterly dispelled. As a nation we have been bred and conditioned to be dangerously naïve to the darker forces which operate beyond the spotlight of the mainstream media. We have been blinded to what has been developing throughout the world.

The economic imperialism that has now blown-back to the United States and Europe has been evolving for decades and can be directly traced back to the end of World War II, to the birth of the CIA, International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank.

For those of us who have been paying attention to economic imperial operations that have been carried out against countries throughout the world, this looks all too familiar. The IMF and global bankers have conquered the second and third world, and they have now moved on to countries within the first world. Western European and American working classes are in the cross-hairs now.

Economic and societal indicators, along with recent G-20 policy decisions, clearly demonstrate that they are carrying out and escalating systemic economic attacks throughout Europe and the US.

To put it in technical terms, the United States government has been taken over by a financial terrorism network. They have bought off leaders of both the Republican and Democratic parties, and have established a dominant role in all three branches of government and throughout the mainstream media. They have complete control of the economy, stock market, US Treasury, Federal Reserve, World Bank, IMF and global banking system. Free market capitalism has collapsed; it’s now a rigged global market. This is an organized criminal operation, an imperial fascist movement that is determined to destroy our very way of life.

A war has already been launched against us.

In just the past three years we have lost an unprecedented amount of national wealth, trillions upon trillions of our tax dollars have been looted by Wall Street, endless wars, enormous subsidies for the most profitable global corporations and tax cuts for the richest one percent of the population. Never before, in the history of civilization, has a nation been so thoroughly and systematically fleeced.

This is all the result of a coordinated economic attack by a global banking cartel against 99 percent of the US population.

Until we can become politically intelligent enough to see this as the reality and root cause of our current crisis, we will not be able to overcome it, our living standards will continue to decline and we will all be sentenced to a slow death in a neo-feudal system built on debt slavery.

The average American is horribly naïve to just how depraved, corrupt and addicted to power this banking cartel is. Through their control and domination of the mass media, they have kept their crimes against humanity out of public consciousness. We have been shielded from the global devastation and death toll that they have already wrought. The result is an unsuspecting population of confused and passive people having their future ripped out from under them, right before their eyes, without any organized defense or resistance.

II: Violence on the Horizon

As the entrenched global banking cartel continues to control domestic political policy, the next phase of this crisis will inevitably feature an escalation into mass violence. As the Army War College stated, the Pentagon is preparing for “violent, strategic dislocation inside the United States” and “widespread civil violence” due to “purposeful domestic resistance.”

In clear signs of what is to come, rioting and violence as a result of economic turmoil has already been experienced in many countries throughout the world. However, civil unrest has not yet occurred within the United States. There are many theories as to why there has been so little resistance from the US population thus far, and several factors play into it. The most significant factor is that social safety net programs have been vital in preventing people from resorting to extreme measures. Currently, a stunning number of Americans, 52 million, are receiving life-sustaining assistance from government “anti-poverty” programs, such as food stamps, unemployment benefits, Medicaid and Medicare. This has already stretched a social safety net system that is designed to handle significantly less people to its limit. This safety net system has now been drained of all reserve resources over the past two years, and is obviously not sustainable under current economic and political conditions.

As social safety net programs have been drained of reserves, many US citizens have also been burning through their personal savings. Over the past few years the percentage of Americans living paycheck to paycheck has dramatically increased. In 2007, 43 percent of Americans were living paycheck to paycheck. In 2008, the percentage increased to 49 percent. In 2009, the number skyrocketed up to 61 percent. The most recent number for 2010 has exploded to a shocking 77 percent. This means in our nation of 310 million citizens, 239 million Americans are one setback away from economic ruin and millions more are in danger of having to rely on government assistance for survival.

So as this prolonged economic crisis continues, these safety nets, that are already overwhelmed, will have to support more and more people and will inevitably break down. As we have just begun to see, budget cuts to vital social programs on the state and federal levels will become increasingly severe right at the point when many more Americans will need them. As the 52 million Americans currently surviving in “anti-poverty” programs are gradually cutoff from life-sustaining government assistance – and as the 239 million people now living paycheck to paycheck, buried in debt, stressing out and working their asses off just to make ends meet realize that things are not going to be getting any better — and are only going to get worse — social unrest and outbursts of violence will eventually start to bubble up to the surface and the ruling elite will no longer be able to maintain power by simply deceiving the masses via mainstream media propaganda.

When an overwhelming majority of the population directly feels negative effects upon their own living standards, the propaganda system collapses. The illusion comes crashing down and people will finally start to get wise to the horrific scam that is being played on them. When they wake from their media-induced American dream state and realize that they are now living in a nightmare, as crazy as it may sound, people will actually stop voting against their own interests. The apathetic majority, that doesn’t vote, will become active in the interests of self-preservation as their survival instincts kick in.

The handwriting is on the wall and the ruling class has to realize that by the time 2012 rolls around, their puppet politicians will be voted out of office, or their heads will roll, quite literally.

Looking at this from a purely technocratic sociological viewpoint, avoiding mass riots and violence while this many desperate people lose life-sustaining programs appears to be an impossible task, and given our current economic and political environment this seems inevitable.

In an article titled “A Planet at the Brink: Will Economic Brushfires Prove Too Virulent to Contain?” Michael T. Klare explained:

“As people lose confidence in the ability of markets and governments to solve the global crisis, they are likely to erupt into violent protests or to assault others they deem responsible for their plight, including government officials, plant managers, landlords, immigrants, and ethnic minorities. (The list could, in the future, prove long and unnerving.) If the present economic disaster turns into what President Obama has referred to as a ‘lost decade,’ the result could be a global landscape filled with economically-fueled upheavals.”

Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski expressed his fears:

“I was worrying about it because we’re going to have millions and millions of unemployed, people really facing dire straits. And we’re going to be having that for some period of time before things hopefully improve. And at the same time there is public awareness of this extraordinary wealth that was transferred to a few individuals at levels without historical precedent in America….

And you sort of say to yourself: what’s going to happen in this society when these people are without jobs, when their families hurt, when they lose their homes, and so forth?”

Outbreaks of civil unrest are something that the US government and Pentagon have been expecting, and preparing for. Former US Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee stating that the greatest threat facing the US is not terrorism, it’s the current economic crisis:

“The primary near-term security concern of the United States is the global economic crisis and its geopolitical implications. The crisis has been ongoing…. Of course, all of us recall the dramatic political consequences wrought by the economic turmoil of the 1920s and 1930s in Europe, the instability, and high levels of violent extremism.”

Intelligence Committee Vice-Chair Christopher Bond said the economic crisis is now “the primary focus of the intelligence community.” As the Army War College has warned, the response to this coming phase of the economic crisis “might include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States. Further, DoD [the Department of Defense] would be, by necessity, an essential enabling hub for the continuity of political authority in a multi-state or nationwide civil conflict or disturbance.”

Journalist Chris Hedges summed up this report:

“The specter of social unrest was raised at the US Army War College in November in a monograph titled ‘Known Unknowns: Unconventional ‘Strategic Shocks’ in Defense Strategy Development.’ …

The ‘widespread civil violence,’ the document said, ‘would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.’

‘An American government and defense establishment lulled into complacency by a long-secure domestic order would be forced to rapidly divest some or most external security commitments in order to address rapidly expanding human insecurity at home,’ it went on….

In plain English, something bureaucrats and the military seem incapable of employing, this translates into the imposition of martial law and a de facto government being run out of the Department of Defense. They are considering it. So should you.”

III: The IMF Riot, Step 3.5

The International Monetary Fund is predicting a “social explosion” due to this crisis. The IMF and World Bank have a long history of creating social upheaval. Leaked documents from within the World Bank refer to the next phase of the crisis as the “IMF riot.”

Journalist Greg Palast obtained classified planning documents, which shed light on the covert economic imperial operations, Structural Adjustment Programs, that the IMF, World Bank and US Treasury have used in the past as a playbook for destabilizing and conquering foreign nations. In the UK newspaper The Observer, Palast interviewed Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, who was a former World Bank Chief Economist and Senior Vice President, turned whistleblower. They revealed the four-step IMF plan. Though the strategy is slightly modified based on the nation being attacked, here in the United States we are currently about to enter a variation of step-three, which is currently being phased in throughout Europe. This step inevitably leads to a significant portion of the population losing the ability to obtain basic necessities essential for survival. Once this happens, riots inevitably occur, or as they put it: step 3.5 is executed.

Here is how Palast and Stiglitz summed it up:

“At this point, according to Stiglitz, the IMF drags the gasping nation to Step Three: market-based pricing – a fancy term for raising prices on food, water and… gas.

This leads, predictably, to Step-Three-and-a-Half: what Stiglitz calls ‘the IMF riot’.

The IMF riot is painfully predictable. When a nation is, ‘down and out, [the IMF] squeezes the last drop of blood out of them. They turn up the heat until, finally, the whole cauldron blows up,’…

What Stiglitz did not know is that Newsnight obtained several documents from inside the World Bank. In one, last year’s Interim Country Assistance Strategy for Ecuador, the Bank several times suggests – with cold accuracy – that the plans could be expected to spark ‘social unrest’.”

To sum up, the interlocked IMF and World Bank set the conditions for ‘social unrest’ and then once it occurs they move to step-four, which is the ultimate in disaster capitalism – they profit off the misery and the civilian population is then buried in a neo-feudal system of severe debt and poverty.

So what is the IMF saying right now about our situation in Europe and the US? A recent Telegraph report reads:

“IMF fears ‘social explosion’ from world jobs crisis

America and Europe face the worst jobs crisis since the 1930s and risk ‘an explosion of social unrest’ unless they tread carefully, the International Monetary Fund has warned….

Olivier Blanchard, the IMF’s chief economist, said the percentage of workers laid off for long stints has been rising with each downturn for decades but the figures have surged this time. ‘Long-term unemployment is alarmingly high: in the US, half the unemployed have been out of work for over six months, something we have not seen since the Great Depression,” he said….

The IMF said there may be a link between rising inequality within Western economies and deflating demand. Historians say the last time that the wealth gap reached such skewed extremes was in 1928-1929…”

To show you how insidious the IMF is, they have recently launched a propaganda campaign to publicly decry deficit budget cuts and austerity measures. However, behind the scenes they have been forcing implementation of them and making their usual demands for cuts in vital social services and public spending, once those cuts are in place, the riots obviously follow.

A recent Washington Post report states:

“IMF issues broad call for US financial prudence
Cut Social Security. Ditch the deduction for interest on home mortgages. Tax gasoline.
The United States recently opened itself to the most intense scrutiny yet by the International Monetary Fund, and on Thursday was offered a bitter pill when the agency criticized some well-defended aspects of American culture — cheap fuel, subsidized housing, and a government retirement check…. “

Economist Dean Baker writes:

“The central bankers and their accomplices at the IMF are dictating policies to democratically elected governments. Their agenda seems to be the same everywhere, cut back retirement benefits, reduce public support for health care, weaken unions and make ordinary workers take pay cuts.”

In another report Baker adds:

“The IMF program calls for cutbacks in government support for healthcare, pensions, and a wide range of other public services. It also calls for weakening labor market regulations that provide workers with job security.

These recommendations are being given in a context where the world economy is suffering from a massive shortfall of demand. In other words, tens of millions of people are unemployed right now because there is not enough spending to keep them employed. The IMF’s program is almost certain to reduce spending further leading to even larger shortfalls in demand and more unemployment….

The IMF’s track record gives us reason not only to question the institution’s competence but also its motivations…. It is possible to see a similar pattern in the IMF’s latest set of policy recommendations to deal with the economic crisis.”

In an article entitled, “The Attack of the Real Black Helicopter Gang: The IMF Is Coming for Your Social Security,” Baker continues:

“Last week, the IMF told the United States that it needs to start getting its budget deficit down. It put cutting Social Security at the top of the steps that the country should take to achieve deficit reduction. This one is more than a bit outrageous for two reasons…

While the IMF has no problem warning about retired workers getting too much in Social Security benefits, it apparently could not find its voice when the issue was the junk securities from Goldman Sachs or Citigroup that helped to fuel the housing bubble.

The collapse of this bubble has not only sank the world economy, it also destroyed most of the savings of the near retirees for whom the IMF wants to cut Social Security. The vast majority of middle-income retirees have most of their wealth in their home equity. This home equity largely disappeared when the bubble burst.”

So the IMF and global banking cartel are setting the conditions for social unrest and pushing for policies that will provoke it, and the Pentagon is preparing for a military response. As scary and unbelievable as all this may sound, we are on a fast track to this scenario.

To Sum Up

The American and global economy have already been looted and destroyed beyond repair. Most serious economists will admit that governments have already exhausted their capital by bailing out the banks and taking on unprecedented amounts of debt. The bailouts and recent return to high profits were just the final phase of the looting and a further consolidation of wealth on an unprecedented scale. There are still tens of trillions of dollars in debt hidden off-the-books and hundreds of trillions of dollars in dark pools of derivative liability. As the downturn continues, there is nothing left to revive the economy, the reserves and safety nets have already been stretched to their limits.

We have a political and economic system that has been overrun by organized corruption and theft. Along with a mass media system that does not inform the populace and has effectively marginalized and isolated the majority of the population. Meanwhile, bubbling just under the surface is a very heavily armed population with a militia movement that has doubled in size over the past year, and their memberships continue to rapidly grow. Without the necessary general political intelligence or infrastructure to organize an effective mass non-violent movement, we are steamrolling toward spontaneous riots and outbursts of armed insurrection.

In other words, as this economic downturn continues, what is now a passive and confused population will eventually devolve into an explosion of violence. Without a coherent non-violent movement to provide a viable alternative, without an outlet for severe and legitimate grievances that provides any chance for urgently affecting necessary political change, people will resort to violence as a last desperate act of vengeance and frustration. As time passes, these forgotten and isolated people, tens of millions of them, are quickly running out of options, and they will act out just as exploited people throughout the world always have.

A man who sparked a revolution against the same banking cartel that has caused our crisis described the general attitude among a population that successfully rebelled through armed insurrection:

“The people are weary of being oppressed, persecuted, exploited to the maximum. They are weary of the wretched selling of their labor-power day after day — faced with the fear of joining the enormous mass of unemployed — so that the greatest profit can be wrung from each human body, profit later squandered in the orgies of the masters of capital….

The feeling of revolt will grow stronger every day among the peoples subjected to various degrees of exploitation, and they will take up arms to gain by force the rights which reason alone has not won them.”

Whatever your preconceptions of the man who said this may be, the voice of Che Guevara can now be clearly understood and related to by the overwhelming majority of people throughout the United States.

Already, despite intensive propaganda, a stunning 80 percent of the US population believes that the government has failed them. The health care and financial reform bills have proven that our politicians are much more concerned about the short-sighted necessity to please the Economic Elite and raise campaign funds, than they are to understand the consequences of millions of Americans being forced into situations where their very survival is threatened. In a system where most elected officials are millionaires, this lack of perspective and understanding is ultimately what will lead to violence. Whether it is by arrogance or ignorance, perhaps both, it appears that our ruling class has suicidal tendencies. Unless they quickly recognize the growing threat posed by the dispossessed masses, our puppet politicians will themselves be in harm’s way.

To show you how incredibly out of touch our current elected officials are, and to give you a clear indication of the prevailing attitude on Capitol Hill, a recent report from the Washington Post summed up their response to the recent news that a record number of Americans are now living in poverty:

“The reluctance of political leaders on both sides of the aisle to directly confront the fact that growing numbers of Americans are slipping into poverty reflects a stubborn reality about the poor: They are not much of a political constituency.

‘We talk to many people on Capitol Hill who do believe poverty is important and is a blight on our nation, but we are also up against a general recognition that poor people don’t vote in great numbers. And they certainly aren’t going to be making campaign contributions. That definitely puts them behind many other people and interests when decisions are being made around here.’”

And that sums up our current crisis, doesn’t it? The “poor people don’t vote” and they don’t make “campaign contributions.”

As the Rage Against the Machine song goes, “The riot be the rhyme of the unheard.”

IV: Bang the Drums of War

How will this imperial fascist banking cartel respond to revolt? How will they maintain their power over an increasingly radicalized and hostile US population?

In an attempt to stave off organized rebellion, they are already escalating their propaganda efforts in attempts to divide and distract the population. The tactics of their divide and conquer strategy are already on full display. Their mainstream media outlets have drastically increased coverage and focused attention on the rhetoric of division – using divisive issues like immigration, racism, religious bigotry, the “lazy unemployed,” “entitlement welfare” and gay marriage to divide and distract the population and prevent the masses from organizing against their true oppressors.

This propaganda effort is only a temporary measure and will not suffice over the long-term. As the economy continues to collapse, the banking elite risk being overthrown as a result of their own greed. So they will then turn to physical, military-based violence to suppress populations that can no longer be controlled through propaganda and economic coercion.

To paraphrase policy analyst Anatol Lieven, the classic strategy of an endangered oligarchy is to divert discontent among the population into nationalistic militarism. It is time, once again, to bang the drums of war and “whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor.” The source of the following quote is unknown, but the evident wisdom of it is something that we have already experienced firsthand in the recent past:

“Beware the leader who bangs the drum of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so.”

An increased external threat will lead to an increased internal crackdown, which creates the pretext and conditions for a police state. As we have already seen in the first phase of the crackdown on civil liberties since the “War on Terror” began, when rioting and outbursts of armed insurrection begin within the US, external threats, real or imagined, will again be presented to justify extreme measures to suppress American citizens, and to further repress and divert internal dissent. Without an external enemy to rally the population against, the population will rally against the pre-existing internal powers.

To put a slight twist on what Guy DeBord insightfully said back in 1988: the banking cartel “constructs its own inconceivable foe, terrorism. Its wish is to be judged by its enemies rather than by its results. The story of terrorism is written by the state and it is therefore highly instructive. But they must always know enough to convince them that, compared with terrorism, everything else must be acceptable, or in any case more rational and democratic.”

V:The Chinese Scapegoat: Trade & Currency Wars

As millions of Americans and the majority of the global population look for vengeance on those responsible for severely declining living standards, the global banking cartel are not going to blame themselves, so they will deflect blame to China, a most convenient target.

As a result of the crisis, national currencies are reeling, and the dollar, although currently one of the strongest paper currencies, is losing power as the crisis escalates. The IMF is working to replace the dollar as the world reserve currency and have begun discussing the possibility of making their Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) the new world reserve currency. A plummeting dollar will obviously put the American population in a severely desperate situation and the US-based banking cartel needs an excuse to divert political backlash. In China, the nation poised to replace the US as the preeminent global superpower, they have the perfect scapegoat.

US-based global corporations have been shifting their business to China and off-shoring millions of jobs to the region due to their extremely low worker wages. So the American population is already pre-disposed to blaming China, as opposed to the companies who are exploiting the cheap labor. US politicians have been conveniently shifting blame for unemployment from themselves to China. Meanwhile, China also owns a significant portion of US national debt. US Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has recently declared that the national debt is the number one security threat. As Mullen stated, “Tax payers will be paying around $600 billion in interest on the national debt by 2012.” A significant portion of this interest will be going to China.

As national governments attempt to survive in an increasingly hostile global economy, trade and currency wars will flare up and escalate. China is in perhaps the strongest position to win these conflicts. China and Japan have just engaged in a fierce currency battle. This currency battle is not to be underestimated. We are talking about the world’s second and third largest economies, after the United States. China has just overtaken Japan for the number two position. The militant rhetoric between these two nations is escalating. US politicians were quick to jump on the situation with calls to classify China as a “currency manipulator” and impose trade tariffs and penalties against them.

International economic reporter Barry Grey recently summed up the situation in an article entitled, “Economic crisis threatens to unleash global currency wars:”

“The eruption of currency exchange conflicts is bound up with mounting signs that the global economic crisis is systemic, rather than merely conjunctural, and growing fears that a genuine recovery is not in the offing. The European sovereign debt crisis and the weakening of US economic growth have led governments around the world to seek to secure a greater share of export markets. Under conditions of slowing growth and stagnant markets, this inevitably heightens trade conflicts between competing capitalist nations.

In particular, the US and the European Union, spearheaded by the export power Germany, have aggressively pursued a cheap currency policy in order to gain a trade advantage against their rivals. Of the major economic powers, Japan has suffered the greatest damage from these policies, as investors and speculators have shifted from dollar- and euro-denominated investments to the yen, driving up the currency’s exchange rate.

This has embittered relations between Japan and both the US and the EU. Japan has also denounced China for artificially keeping its currency low while bidding up the yen by increasing its purchases of Japanese government securities.”

The global banking cartel’s leading puppets on Capitol Hill, Senators Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer and Richard Shelby were all quick to attack China. Barry Grey continued:

“In opening the Senate Banking Committee hearing, Chairman Christopher Dodd declared China a currency manipulator and said its ‘economic and trade policies’ present ‘roadblocks to our recovery.’ He went on to accuse China of stealing intellectual property, violating international trade agreements and dumping goods. He also denounced China for acquiring national resources in developing countries and building up its military.

In his opening statement, the ranking Republican on the committee, Richard Shelby of Alabama, declared, ‘There is no question that China manipulates its currency in order to subsidize Chinese exports. The only question is: Why is the administration protecting China by refusing to designate it as a currency manipulator?’

Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, said, ‘China’s currency manipulation is like a boot on the throat of our recovery and this administration refuses to try to get China to remove that boot.’”

On top of all this, China has now overtaken the US as the world’s top energy consumer. Michael T. Klare reports on China’s new position of power:

“The main point: by becoming the world’s leading energy consumer, China will also become an ever more dominant international actor and so set the pace in shaping our global future.

Because energy is tied to so many aspects of the global economy, and because doubts are growing about the future availability of oil and other vital fuels, the decisions China makes regarding its energy portfolio will have far-reaching consequences. As the leading player in the global energy market, China will significantly determine not only the prices we will be paying for critical fuels but also the type of energy systems we will come to rely on. More importantly, China’s decisions on energy preferences will largely determine whether China and the United States can avoid becoming embroiled in a global struggle over imported oil and whether the world will escape catastrophic climate change.”

China’s rise in power, mixed with the decline of western economies and the need for an external scapegoat sets up a global collision and inevitable confrontation between vying superpowers. Currency and trade wars will likely be a prelude to military confrontation.

VI: Moves Upon the Grand Chessboard

Based on early maneuvering it is evident that the masters of war have already drawn up sides. You may have missed it, but the US, Israel and the NATO Alliance have already put Iran, Lebanon, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Russia and China on notice. And the “withdrawals” from Iraq and the Af-Pak region are over-hyped. The occupation of these countries continues with no end in sight. In fact, they aren’t withdrawing as much as they are repositioning and shifting their forces, preparing for an escalation. In many ways the wars in Iraq and Af-Pak have only been the initial phase of a global attack, positioning forces and building massive military bases in pivotal geo-strategic locations. The operations in this region have essentially been a warm-up for much wider-ranging attacks against much stronger countries. While most of the US population is playing checkers, seeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as one-off battles, the global banking cartel is playing chess, using these wars as only initial geo-strategic moves in a grand strategy toward total world domination.

The intensity of military maneuvering presently occurring is alarming. Read through these recent news reports pulled from the AmpedStatus database, all from just the past few weeks, and let me know if you think I’m being extreme in foreseeing World War III:

- See more at: http://ampedstatus.com/the-road-to-world-war-iii-the-global-banking-cartel-has-one-card-left-to-play/#sthash.U9ibA1cf.dpuf

0 Comments

April 27th, 2014

4/27/2014

0 Comments

 
I will be back Monday with private military complex issues!

I AM BLOGGING THESE WEEKENDS ON THE ELECTION PRIMARY AND THE ELECTION VIOLATIONS AND WALLS BLOCKING FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS IN MARYLAND.  PLEASE KNOW THAT 501C3 ORGANIZATIONS HAVING THESE DEBATES AND FORUMS ARE REQUIRED BY FEDERAL LAW TO INVITE ALL CANDIDATES AND WHERE THAT HAPPENS IN MANY EVENTS ACROSS MARYLAND....THE LARGER DEBATES/FORUMS AND THE LARGEST VOTING DISTRICTS OF PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY AND BALTIMORE IGNORE THESE ELECTION LAWS AND VIOLATIONS ARE RIFE.  MARYLAND MEDIA IS SO CAPTURED IT LAUGHS AS IT PROMOTES ONLY THE THREE CANDIDATES IN THE RACE BEING GLOBAL CORPORATE POLS.  PUBLIC MEDIA IS REQUIRED TO GIVE EQUAL ACCESS TO CANDIDATES IN THEIR CAMPAIGN COVERAGE.


It is the failure of all ability to get name recognition and platform exposure that keeps people from running for office.  Below you see how ridiculous it has become when.....after months of a media blitz on Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur polls show only 25% for Brown, and Gansler and Mizeur around 10% yet, media justifies intensive coverage of these three because they are the 'front-runners'.  I dare say that the 54% undecided are waiting to find Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland campaign platform which is why my campaign is black listed in media.


IF YOU DO NOT ENGAGE AS A CITIZEN IN POLITICS YOU WILL LOSE YOUR STATUS AS CITIZEN!!!



Follow to the end to see my complaint to the Federal Election Commission as I try to rebuild free and fair elections in Maryland.  STOP VOTING FOR CORPORATE POLITICIANS----ALL POLS IN MARYLAND ARE CORPORATE!

Last weekend I took Mizeur to task so I would like to take Gansler on by saying -----how can this man be allowed to run for public office?????



Regarding Doug Gansler and his running mate having an interview on 'progressive' public media in Maryland:

MY QUESTIONS FOR DOUG GANSLER FOR GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND AS A DEMOCRAT:

Given the State of Maryland was ranked at the bottom nationally for fraud, corruption, and lack of transparency by Center for Public Integrity and other government watchdogs.....do you feel that Doug Gansler has done his duties as Maryland Attorney General? Do you think that turning his head to corporate fraud explains why he has a campaign war chest? Given that it is aiding and abetting when a government official charged with protecting the public ignores crimes against the public, do you think Doug Gansler is a qualified candidate for any office in Maryland but especially governor?

What do you think of violations of election law that has Doug Gansler at election events.....debates and forums where 501c3s select who they want to appear rather than sending the required invitation to all candidates? Gansler is after all the one tasked with making the Federal government aware of election violations at the state level.

Why do you think that Maryland media will only allow the candidates chosen by the 1% of Maryland air time during primaries.......the most global corporate of pols continually saying these are the leaders when the polls are saying 54% of democratic voters are undecided? How many time during the election cycle have you heard the name Anthony Brown------Cindy Walsh?

Let's all work to reinstate free and fair elections in Maryland and at least make sure election laws are not openly violated! Global corporate pols should not even be in democratic primaries for goodness sake-----look at the democratic platform!

____________________________
____________
CINDY WALSH FOR GOVERNOR CANNOT GET A PEEK IN THE MEDIA BECAUSE OF THIS CAPTURE ----ALL 3 CANDIDATES BROWN, GANSLER, AND MIZEUR ARE CORPORATE AND CALLED FRONT-RUNNERS WITH 1% OF THE VOTERS POLLED GIVING THEM 10% OF THE VOTE.

'This week, Nomi Prins, a former managing partner at Goldman Sachs wrote about the long history of how the nation’s biggest bankers have controlled presidents throughout the last century. She writes: “With so much power in the hands of an elite few, America operates more as a plutocracy on behalf of the upper caste than a democracy or a republic. Voters are caught in the crossfire of two political parties vying to run Washington in a manner that benefits the banking caste, regardless of whether a Democrat or Republican is sitting in the Oval.”'

___________________________________________

Below you see a poll released that looked at less than a 1,000 democratic voters in a state with 900,000 registered democrats. You see the media says that high undecided means people do not care------it means the media is not showing them my campaign which is what people want!

EVERY MEDIA OUTLET IN MARYLAND CARRIES THE SAME ELECTION COVERAGE.


This is Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland on the democratic labor and justice ticket. When I look at these polls taken on the governor's race I can only wonder-----is that 54% undecided democratic voter simply looking for my campaign?
When I keep seeing only Gansler, Brown, and Mizeur in all media coverage ------when a poll shows the democratic names of the same people with a huge margin of undecided-----is it really an accurate poll and do we really have free and fair elections in Maryland?

I look at the venues with which you partner and I visit them often .....and none of them mention Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland.

Now, I have as much experience in administration and a life connected to politics with activism so none of these candidates have any more ability for the position of governor. So, what determines their constant media coverage? Campaign money. At a time when the entire US is shouting foul about corporate and wealth money in elections do we really need arenas like universities and public media -----and a polling institution -----making election winners and losers from which candidate has the most money? Wouldn't it be conducive to free and fair elections to make the platforms available and allow platforms to determine the winners and losers?

Thank you for your time,

Cindy Walsh


Analysis: New Poll Confirms No One Cares About Race for Md. Governor
Current Stories:



Posted on April 23, 2014

Political Commentary by Todd Eberly, for MarylandReporter.com

Who will live in Government House, the governor’s residence next year?

The inaugural Maryland Poll from St. Mary’s College of Maryland surveyed the political landscape heading into the 2014 primary election and found that most Marylanders have absolutely no preference when it comes to the candidates for governor.

The poll is in line with prior polls for Gonzales Research, The Baltimore Sun, and The Washington Post. Much like those polls, the Maryland Poll finds a very unsettled race for the GOP nomination and a Democratic race where the favorite, the sitting two term lieutenant governor, is being beaten by “No Preference” by a 2 to 1 margin.

The 2014 primary is two months away and yet most voters appear to have no firm commitments to the candidates.

No firm commitments

Specifically, the poll finds Anthony Brown with 27% support, followed by Douglas Gansler at 11% and Heather Mizeur at 8%. But fully 54% expressed no preference.

In a three-way race, Brown is close to the 34% that would be sufficient to win a closely matched election. But much like the other candidates, he has been unable to expand his base of support even after a year of campaigning and advertising.

Gansler has been hammering away at Brown on the issue of Maryland’s failed health exchange, but with 11% support the issue does not appear to be helping him.

Mizeur has been generating a lot of coverage and interest of late owing to her unapologetically progressive campaign. She has embraced a living wage, physician-assisted suicide, a moratorium on fracking, legalization of marijuana, and host of other progressive wish list items. Yet she’s made no noticeable progress in winning over potential voters.

Brown’s to lose

The Democratic primary remains Brown’s to lose and it’s likely that the upcoming debates will present the final opportunities for either Gansler or Mizeur to change that reality.

Interestingly, Gansler seems to have shifted his strategy. Early on, he presented himself as a centrist, pro-business Democrat. Recently, he has de-emphasized those qualities and instead focused on more progressive policy issues. This was a mistake.

In a three way race with two candidates already chasing the progressive vote, the smart move is to target the voters that the other two are ignoring. Gansler needs to pivot back to the center. His only path to victory requires Brown and Mizeur to split the progressive vote while Gansler goes for the moderate and conservative Democrats still in the party.

GOP’s disastrous situation

On the Republican side the poll finds a disastrous situation for the state’s permanent minority party.

More than two-thirds of Maryland Republican voters have no preference. Larry Hogan claims the support of 16%, followed by David Craig at 7.8%. Neither Ron George nor Charles Lollar were able to crack 4%.

Maryland is a very tough nut for Republicans to crack. Democrats enjoy a 2 to 1 voter registration advantage and Republicans are rarely ever able to overcome the Democrats’ advantages in the state’s population centers.

For a Republican to win, the nominee would need several things to break his or her way.

-- The Democratic party must be divided after the primary. That could certainly happen this year.

-- The Democratic electorate must lack passion for the party’s nominee. That could certainly happen this year.

-- It must be a good year for Republicans nationally (like in 1994, 2002, or 2010). That could certainly happen this year.

Beyond those three ingredients, a Republican candidate also needs a unified and passionate Republican party and an electorate frustrated with the direction of the state. Neither of those two ingredients are present.

Not enough dissatisfaction

With regard to the direction of the state: Though the poll found a plurality of 46% agreeing that the state is going in the wrong direction, another 41% said it was going in the right direction. That margin is not sufficient for a Republican to overcome the Democrats’ built in advantages.

Keep in mind, Bob Ehrlich had an approval rating above 50% when he lost the 2006 election by 6 percentage points.

A clear majority of poll respondents supported increasing the minimum wage and reported that the Affordable Care Act either helped their families or had no effect on them, a slim majority supported decriminalizing small amounts of marijuana, and pluralities supported affirmative action, the fracking moratorium and gun control.

In a particularly interesting finding, the survey asked respondents how they were registered and then later asked what party they consider themselves to be a member of. The voter registration numbers essentially match state records – 53% Democrat, 28% Republican, and 18.5% Independent or other.

When asked how they see themselves, the breakdown was 44% Democrat, 25% Republican, and 31% Independent or other. The breakdown shows that there is an opportunity for the GOP in the state, but only if the party can broaden its appeal and only if party activists accept that the party cannot win without attracting Independent voters.

No frontrunners in GOP

Several months ago, as I was arguing that David Craig represented the GOP’s best chance at reclaiming the governor’s mansion, many Republican activists challenged my assertion. Both privately and via social media these activists suggested a much stronger candidate existed and would soon enter the race and energize the party. They were referring to Larry Hogan.

Well, Hogan’s in the race and he is the “frontrunner.” But in a race where 64% of potential primary voters have no preference, there are no frontrunners. Hogan has not lit the fire that many were expecting.

Likewise, Craig has not run the experienced, well managed campaign that I was expecting. Craig sought to shore up the GOP base by taking a distinct right turn (thereby harming his ability to win in November) and Hogan has adopted a play it safe strategy by skipping forum after forum (thereby harming his credibility).

And no GOP candidate has any real success raising money. All four candidates combined could barely reach $1 million - meanwhile, Gansler and Brown are each sitting on multiple millions.

As things stand today, it’s hard to see the GOP reclaiming the keys to Government House.

Todd Eberly is associate professor of political science and Coordinator of Public Policy Studies at St. Mary’s College of Maryland. He is currently on sabbatical writing a book, and had no involvement in the new poll.

___________________
Mind you, I am a professional every bit as qualified as these candidates....in fact as regards administration of which much of being a governor is about.....I am probably more qualified.   So, making my campaign sound marginal right off the bat tells you there is a push to keep my platform silent.



To:
Federal Elections Commission
From:
Cindy Walsh

RE:
Violations of the election law requiring 501c3 organizations to invite all candidates to debates or forums as the only way to eliminate bias or showing opposition to another candidate.


What Does "Participating in a Political Campaign" Mean?
Organizations with 501(c)(3) status cannot participate in political campaigns.

What is a political campaign? In general, the IRS rule refers to campaigns between people who are running for offices in public elections. These can include: candidates running for president of the U.S.; candidates running for governor; candidates running for mayor; and also candidates for lower elected offices such as school board officials, city supervisors, and county trustees.

What is "participating?" Your organization cannot participate in a campaign, directly or indirectly, on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate. If your organization takes a stand in any campaign, supporting or opposing one or another candidate, this violates the prohibition.


University of Maryland College Park
Bowie State University
Morgan State University
Baltimore Education Coalition
Baltimore NAACP
WYPR
Maryland Public Television


Below you see a list of forums/debates that failed to invite my campaign and following these examples are the complaints my campaign is filing with Federal Elections Commission. At first, I only heard about some of these events afterwards and could not attempt to correct these violations and now, I am notifying coming events of my intent to participate and I am waiting for a response. I am including these events yet to happen because this is a systemic problem and these venues need to be approached this pattern of violations.
*******************************************


‘The first televised debate in Maryland's Democratic primary for governor will be May 7, followed by a second debate on June 2, according to the stations that will broadcast them.
The first TV debate matching Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown, Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler and Del. Heather R. Mizeur is scheduled for 7 p.m. May 7 at the University of Maryland, College Park and will be broadcast on Washington's NBC affiliate. According to NBC4, "Meet the Press" host David Gregory will moderate'.
******************************************

Justin Schall, campaign manager for Brown, confirmed the plan and said the three candidates are still working out details. The Gansler and Mizeur campaigns declined to comment.
Maryland Public Television said Thursday it will host and air the second debate with the three Democratic contenders on June 2, a co-production with WBAL-TV’.
********************************************

Baltimore Education Coalition Forum: MD Gubernatorial Candidates on Education

03/07/14 Marc Steiner
March 6, 2014 – Segment 2
We listen back to the Non-Partisan Gubernatorial Forum on Education in Baltimore City, organized by the Baltimore Education Coalition, which I co-moderated with Sue Fothergill, Karen DeCamp, and Zuri Battle Wednesday night at City Springs Elementary/Middle School.
Democratic Gubernatorial candidates Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown, Attorney General Doug Gansler, and Delegate Heather Mizeur share their visions for education in Maryland.

************************************
Democratic candidates woo NAACP crowd in Baltimore
Erin Cox The Baltimore Sun
6:00 a.m. EDT, April 18, 2014

During a forum hosted by the Baltimore City branch of the NAACP and a chapter of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority at the Forest Park Senior Center. The three top candidates vying for the Democratic nomination in the June 24 primary election spoke separately at the forum and did not interact.
*****************************************

Democratic gubernatorial candidates clash on assessment of Maryland's economic policy needs
By NICK TABOR Associated Press
April 17, 2014 - 10:35 pm EDT

The Greater Baltimore Economic Forum arranged a panel of business and nonprofit leaders to question the candidates Thursday. They focused on plans to stimulate economic growth and make Maryland more attractive to businesses.
******************************


2014 Maryland Gubernatorial Candidates Forum

Posted by Alana Williams , April 14, 2014 at 08:44 PM
The event is sponsored by Bowie High School NJROTC (Navy Junior ROTC), Bowie High School Student Government Association, the Prince George’s Chamber of Commerce and Prince George’s County Social Innovation Fund.

The following candidates for governor have accepted the Alliance’s invitation to participate in the forum — The Honorable Anthony Brown, Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, The Honorable David Craig, Harford County Executive, The Honorable Douglas Gansler, Attorney General of Maryland, Mr. Charles Lollar, and The Honorable Heather Mizeur, Delegate, District 20, and The Honorable Ron George, Delegate, District 30.
*******************************************
uppermarlboro.patch.com/groups/events/p/2014-maryland... Cached
The Prince George’s County Women’s Alliance is hosting a Gubernatorial Candidates Forum, Monday, April 28, 2014, beginning at 7:00 PM
_________________________________________________



MY COMPLAINT TO THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION:


Above you see a list of events already past and a few to come. In every case my campaign was not included in the invitation list sent and therefor when these events indicate the candidates attending were the ones replying to an invitation…..they are covering the fact that not all candidates were invited. There is a huge problem with free and fair elections in Maryland. Baltimore and Prince George’s County are the worst offenders. My campaign has received plenty of invitations across Maryland but it is in large voting districts like these two counties where election violations are rampant. When a campaign cannot even get their name mentioned in these large venues you have deliberate attempts to steal an election. It is no coincidence that my platform embraces issues that are counter to policies presented by current politicians at state level. To silence the voice of a candidate because of the political issues they put forward is an assault to democracy and it taints the ability of the citizens of Maryland to know their candidates.
I cannot control private media outlets and their coverage, but 501c3 organizations are not allowed to select winners and losers.
‘If your organization takes a stand in any campaign, supporting or opposing one or another candidate, this violates the prohibition’.
Obviously, the exclusion of my campaign is a detriment to my viability in this election and this cannot be understood in any other light. The forums above have operated in this fashion for years and I had the Chair of Maryland Assembly Elections Committee Jon Cardin tell me that ‘this is how we do it’. I write extensively to public media outlets in Baltimore WYPR and WEAA to explain that they cannot keep having candidates on their programs and exclude others. My campaign has been completely excluded from all public media and as you see above, the Maryland Public Television event is excluding me as well. This has made Maryland elections crony and the citizens have reached a point of apathy in voting because none of the candidates given the spotlight speaks to their interests. This is why Baltimore has a 20% voter turnout and why this coming governor’s election sees 54% of democrats as undecided……I will project that number higher if the poll was actually performed correctly. That 54% undecided could very well be waiting to hear my platform!
I want to emphasize this is a systemic problem in these two counties……Prince George’s and Baltimore. In Baltimore it is driven by the city power structure that controls all media and events. I would also like to suggest that targeting candidates who run as labor and justice in cities and counties with the highest labor and justice problems is clearly designed to suppress free and fair elections.
Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland is requesting the Federal Election Commission investigate and correct this problem immediately because this primary season is in full swing and if my campaign is allowed to be sidelined we will be contesting the primary winner in court. This is a clear case of election violations and the systemic nature of the problem requires Federal intervention into Maryland State Election process.
I want to make one more point. When media in Maryland and these event organizers who discriminate in candidates who attend use the terms ‘top three democratic candidates’ over and again to describe Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur, you have statements that are misleading. Clearly, when a poll is taken with Brown receiving 25% of democratic support, Gansler and Mizeur around 10% of support-----you clearly do not have top candidates. I dare say even those voters would change if given alternatives. What Maryland media prefaces its claim to ‘top three democratic candidates’ is which candidate is receiving campaign funds. It has nothing to do with platform and voter support. This is not what elections are about. This misuse of ‘leading’ gives false impressions designed to taint the voting process. It is deliberate. The polls we have to endure take fewer than 2,000 representative voters out of 900,000 democratic voters to come to these percentages. No one knows how skewed these polls can be. We need an investigation of Maryland’s election process and my case in particular.
0 Comments

April 26th, 2014

4/26/2014

0 Comments

 
DO YOU HEAR YOUR MARYLAND POLITICIANS SHOUTING OUT AGAINST ELECTION VIOLATIONS AND SUSPENDED FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS IN MARYLAND?  ARE THEY INCUMBENTS FOR LIFE?  YOU BETCHA.....THAT IS NOT WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE!!!!!




I am using the weekends to talk about the Maryland election process and my run for Governor of Maryland.  As all Maryland citizens know the entire election process is captured and closed and this is why for example election turnout in Balitmore is at 20% and why turnout across Maryland is falling.....apathy because there are no candidates running for which people want to vote.

We had polling from Maryland polling groups that said of 900,000 registered democrats in Maryland those 2,000 polled stood as such:

Brown at around 25%
Gansler and Mizeur around 10%
Undecided at 54%

The conclusion of the media shouted----Maryland citizens don't care who is elected Governor of Maryland!  I suggested that Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland is the candidate that those 54% is looking and actually even more would come my way if my campaign exposure was the same as the 'front-runners'.

THE ONLY CANDIDATES GETTING MEDIA COVERAGE AND FORUM COVERAGE ARE THE 3 GLOBAL CORPORATE POLS DECLARED THE 'FRONTRUNNERS' WITH 10% OF THE VOTE.


This is critical folks....the election process in Maryland is so captured as to end free and fair elections and assure that Trans Pacific Trade Pact and the current move to dismantle democratic structures and increase the move to third world status. 

GANSLER, BROWN, AND MIZEUR WILL ALL CONTINUE PARTNERING WITH WALL STREET IN THIS TRANSITION FROM NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY TO GLOBAL CORPORATE TRIBUNAL AND COLONIALISM.
  This is why only they get the air time.

Let's look at what a campaign for governor who is qualified but not connected must do for a little exposure:

The Montgomery College presented a fine candidate's forum that was professional and inclusive
.  I thank them for allowing all candidates to participate without attempts to exclude.  Look below to what happens after.  Montgomery College has a great video of the three Gansler, Brown, and Mizeur at a debate over Transportation on You Tube.  It's simple to create.....any college audio-video department can make this video easily with little cost.  Yet, for the forum I attended......no video.  The reference to NBC's channel 4 broadcast had no exposure and no issues.  The Channel 4 reporter said 'no one wants to hear that' when I said that my platform was about reinstating accountability and oversight of corporations and government and keeping the public's voice in policy-making strong. 

NO ONE WANTS TO HEAR THAT SAYS CHANNEL 4.....AND SO THEY DID NOT HEAR ME.





On Friday, April 25, 2014 5:10 PM, Candidates Forum <mdcandidatesforum@gmail.com> wrote:

Unfortunately, Montgomery County Cable did not have sufficient staff to record the entire event.  The only footage that we have is from NBC's broadcast.  I am trying to see if they have any raw footage that they can share.  I sent the link for the NBC broadcast to you in my prior email.



________________________________________________


I have the private media ignoring my campaign but one can only hold 501c3/4 responsible for equal opportunity in election coverage.  Montgomery College did a fine job meeting this requirement but several schools are ground zero to election violations.  Now, students are involved in these election events and they are being shown that it is alright to ignore candidates and select who is invited to attend.  Several schools around Maryland followed the letter of election law and did invite all candidates.  It is Prince George's and Baltimore that fails to meet these requirements and indeed, these are the counties/cities with the most voters wanting to hear the platforms of candidates.

Below you see several events often at schools that failed to include my candidacy.  Remember, I am not a far-left radical, I am a basic labor and justice candidate......80% of the democratic party.





Message to the principal of Bowie High School sponsoring a Governor's forum:

Hello Dr. Bey,


I am Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland contacting you regarding the failure of the Bowie High Student Government and the organizations partnering for the Governor's forum event at your school to include the invitation to my campaign.  Election laws require 501c3s-----all of which are involved in sponsoring and hosting this event----that an invitation be extended to all candidates in a race.  It violates election laws and it harms free and fair elections to do otherwise.  Many forums across Maryland follow these rules, but some are not.  I am requesting that Bowie High take this opportunity to meet the standards set for such forums.  It is great to have students involved in politics....this is the focus of my campaign....but let's teach them to meet the spirit of free and fair elections and inclusiveness in political discussion!

I have notified Prince George's NAACP and 100 Women that I intend to be at this event as a participant and wish to have acknowledgement that I am in the program. 


Thank you,
Cindy Walsh

________________________________________
I called both of these organizations as well since the event was less than a week away.  Note that Baltimore NAACP also excluded my campaign:


Message to Prince George's NAACP:



To info@pgnaacp.org Apr 25 at 11:36 AM

Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland did not receive an invitation to the Governor's Forum event sponsored by NAACP and the
Prince George's County Women Alliance.  I will attend and would like an acknowledgement of my inclusion in this event.
Thank you,
Cindy Walsh


________________________________________


Message to the national 100 Women organization:

Hello,
This is Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland contacting you with a concern.  Your Maryland chapters are failing to invite my campaign to political forum events in the spirit of election law that has 501c3s required to invite all candidates in an election to these events.  I have notified the Prince George's Chapter sponsoring an event on April 28 in Bowie that I will be attending, asking for confirmation of my participation.
Sadly, I am the labor and justice candidate that has as its campaign platform strong protections of civil rights and liberties and the protection of public programs that lifted the largest number on underserved from poverty in the 20th century.  So, omitting the voice so relevant to most of the people of color in Prince George's and Baltimore seems counter to what a political forum would represent.  These are violations of election laws and when an organization promotes voter registration and voter turnout but fails to allow an educated voter to go to the polls.....it is a missed opportunity for justice.
I will be taking these transgressions to the Federal Election Board and possibly to court as my campaign is about rebuild free and fair elections in Maryland.  I write to you because this is probably happening across the country.  Thank you for listening and please direct your Maryland chapters to include my campaign.

Yours,

Cindy Walsh

_________________________________________________

In Maryland, WYPR controls several public media stations across Maryland and they are run by Johns Hopkins University.  They only allow neo-liberal and neo-con policy talk and are absolutely captured during elections.  They will not allow a word from a challenger that is not global corporate and have no shame in promoting their own candidate in elections....in this case Anthony Brown.  NONE OF THIS IS LEGAL.  WYPR even went so far as to say of the polling of Anthony Brown at 25% after tons and tons of media coverage of Brown........

CLINTON IS COMING TO CAMPAIGN FOR BROWN IN MARYLAND AND HE WILL BRING MONEY.


WYPR has made clear that Maryland is Clinton country-----neo-liberalism all the way-----and Brown is the corporate pol that will do what he is told!

Needless to say WYPR has not invited my campaign on the program and neither has WEAA, Morgan State University's public media.  THIS IS ILLEGAL.  PUBLIC MEDIA IS REQUIRED TO GIVE ACCESS TO ALL CANDIDATES FOR ELECTION.

Below you see Maryland Public Television sponsoring a large forum on broadcast TV and my campaign is not included-----only Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur.....more and more of what people do not want to hear!  That 54% is going to have to give up and not vote say corporations!!!!





President of the Maryland Public Television -----sponsoring the Governor's Forum at the University of Maryland College Park


To:  Larry D. Unger
From:  Cindy Walsh

RE:
Participation in the upcoming Maryland governor's race forum

Mr. Unger,

Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland on the democratic ticket awaits your invitation to participate in the governor's forum hosted by MPT June 2, 2014.  Please acknowledge that my campaign is indeed to be included as all forums and debates with 501c3 hosts must include all candidates for an office....you cannot be selective.

I am in the process of filing a complaint with the FEC for violations of election law in the regard having already occurred so would appreciate a expedited response.

Thank you,

Cindy Walsh


_________________________________________

Here is the co-sponsor of this televised event----a university must include all candidates in these forums and yet, my campaign was very publicly not invited.




University of Maryland College Park representative for the Governor's Forum

Hello Ms Lawson,

This is Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland in the democratic race.  I want to remind the University of Maryland that election laws require that all 501c3/4 organizations send invitations to all candidates in these races and not only a selected few.  I do plan to attend and would appreciate acknowledgement of my participation.

Thank you,

Cindy Walsh


_____________________________________________

All the news journals follow this path.  Reading an election piece that again repeated Brown, Gansler, Mizeur......WAMU has has these candidates on the air but my invitation is still waiting......McCartney says only the people who can win are covered.......

W
HO IS TO SAY CINDY WALSH FOR GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND CANNOT WIN?  I AM THE 99% AFTER ALL!


This is critical folks.  This happens in all primaries at all levels and what is meant to happen is breaking the will of people to run for office and of voters to want to vote.  Think of it as the defunding of public transportation allowing this public service to get so bad that people do not want to use it. 


THIS IS WHAT THEY ARE DOING TO ELECTIONS AND WE NEED TO STAND UP AND FIGHT BACK.  THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION IS TASKED WITH PROTECTING THESE ELECTION LAWS----LET THEM KNOW YOU WANT ELECTION VIOLATIONS TO STOP.




To McCartney, Robert J
Washington Post journalist covering elections in Maryland

Mr. McCarthy,

After reading your article regarding the Maryland governor's race and how it may be a beltway race to win I feel I need to reach out and ask journalists to consider how best to make free and fair elections a priority starting with this 2014 election.  I received a candidates invitation from WAMU----I assume it comes from your program---and I am hoping that all candidates will be included in this event/forum.  I want to point to the fact that the Gazette, which features your column asked for the same participation and I have not seen any mention of my campaign or responses to the election questions.  As I note below, the constant media barrage that Gansler, Brown, and Mizeur are the front-runners or have achieved some sort of moniker of top candidates in this governor's election is pure propaganda.  As the latest polls showed fully 56% of democratic voters are undecided and I would venture to say this is higher.  Did that poll include Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland or did it simply list the same three candidates shown over and again on media in Maryland?  I dare say that even with no publicity Cindy Walsh for Governor is as close to being the top candidate in the governor's race that either Brown, Gansler, or Mizeur and yet------THEY ARE GETTING BILLED AS THE FRONT-RUNNERS AND THE ONLY ONES NEEDING MEDIA COVERAGE.  Everyone knows these are violations to our election laws.  We cannot have free and fair elections filled with propaganda and exclusion of the very candidate these 56% of voters may very well be looking.

I hope you will indeed feature my campaign on WAMU-----I look forward to sharing my platform with your listeners.

Additional response:


Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland


Apr 25 at 1:01 PM

Let me make one more point and I'll leave you.  Who is to say these are front runners or the ones who actually would win if election coverage met FEC guidelines?  Brown having 25% and Gansler and Mizeur around 10%----that gives them front runner status and viability?  I assure you that 54% undecided democratic voters are looking for my platform.....which is why I am blacklisted by media.

I want to attach my complaint to the FEC for you as a journalist to educate the public.....thank you, Cindy

________________________________________________


HERE IS MY COMPLAINT TO THE FEC AND I WILL SEND COPIES TO MARYLAND ELECTION BOARD, MARYLAND ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND MARYLAND ACLU.....ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR UPHOLDING FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS.




To:
Federal Elections Commission
From:
Cindy Walsh

RE:
Violations of the election law requiring 501c3 organizations to invite all candidates to debates or forums as the only way to eliminate bias or showing opposition to another candidate.

What Does "Participating in a Political Campaign" Mean?
Organizations with 501(c)(3) status cannot participate in political campaigns.

What is a political campaign? In general, the IRS rule refers to campaigns between people who are running for offices in public elections. These can include: candidates running for president of the U.S.; candidates running for governor; candidates running for mayor; and also candidates for lower elected offices such as school board officials, city supervisors, and county trustees.

What is "participating?" Your organization cannot participate in a campaign, directly or indirectly, on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate. If your organization takes a stand in any campaign, supporting or opposing one or another candidate, this violates the prohibition.

University of Maryland College Park
Bowie State University
Morgan State University
Baltimore Education Coalition
Baltimore NAACP
WYPR
Maryland Public Television

Below you see a list of forums/debates that failed to invite my campaign and following these examples are the complaints my campaign is filing with Federal Elections Commission. At first, I only heard about some of these events afterwards and could not attempt to correct these violations and now, I am notifying coming events of my intent to participate and I am waiting for a response. I am including these events yet to happen because this is a systemic problem and these venues need to be approached this pattern of violations.
*******************************************

‘The first televised debate in Maryland's Democratic primary for governor will be May 7, followed by a second debate on June 2, according to the stations that will broadcast them.
The first TV debate matching Lt. Gov. Anthony G. Brown, Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler and Del. Heather R. Mizeur is scheduled for 7 p.m. May 7 at the University of Maryland, College Park and will be broadcast on Washington's NBC affiliate. According to NBC4, "Meet the Press" host David Gregory will moderate'.
******************************************

Justin Schall, campaign manager for Brown, confirmed the plan and said the three candidates are still working out details. The Gansler and Mizeur campaigns declined to comment.
Maryland Public Television said Thursday it will host and air the second debate with the three Democratic contenders on June 2, a co-production with WBAL-TV’.
********************************************

Baltimore Education Coalition Forum: MD Gubernatorial Candidates on Education

03/07/14 Marc Steiner
March 6, 2014 – Segment 2
We listen back to the Non-Partisan Gubernatorial Forum on Education in Baltimore City, organized by the Baltimore Education Coalition, which I co-moderated with Sue Fothergill, Karen DeCamp, and Zuri Battle Wednesday night at City Springs Elementary/Middle School.
Democratic Gubernatorial candidates Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown, Attorney General Doug Gansler, and Delegate Heather Mizeur share their visions for education in Maryland.

************************************
Democratic candidates woo NAACP crowd in Baltimore

Erin Cox The Baltimore Sun
6:00 a.m. EDT, April 18, 2014

During a forum hosted by the Baltimore City branch of the NAACP and a chapter of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority at the Forest Park Senior Center. The three top candidates vying for the Democratic nomination in the June 24 primary election spoke separately at the forum and did not interact.
*****************************************

Democratic gubernatorial candidates clash on assessment of Maryland's economic policy needs
By NICK TABOR Associated Press
April 17, 2014 - 10:35 pm EDT

The Greater Baltimore Economic Forum arranged a panel of business and nonprofit leaders to question the candidates Thursday. They focused on plans to stimulate economic growth and make Maryland more attractive to businesses.
******************************

2014 Maryland Gubernatorial Candidates Forum

Posted by Alana Williams , April 14, 2014 at 08:44 PM


The event is sponsored by Bowie High School NJROTC (Navy Junior ROTC), Bowie High School Student Government Association, the Prince George’s Chamber of Commerce and Prince George’s County Social Innovation Fund.

The following candidates for governor have accepted the Alliance’s invitation to participate in the forum — The Honorable Anthony Brown, Lieutenant Governor of Maryland, The Honorable David Craig, Harford County Executive, The Honorable Douglas Gansler, Attorney General of Maryland, Mr. Charles Lollar, and The Honorable Heather Mizeur, Delegate, District 20, and The Honorable Ron George, Delegate, District 30.
*******************************************
uppermarlboro.patch.com/groups/events/p/2014-maryland... Cached

The Prince George’s County Women’s Alliance is hosting a Gubernatorial Candidates Forum, Monday, April 28, 2014, beginning at 7:00 PM
_________________________________________________

Above you see a list of events already past and a few to come. In every case my campaign was not included in the invitation list sent and therefor when these events indicate the candidates attending were the ones replying to an invitation…..they are covering the fact that not all candidates were invited. There is a huge problem with free and fair elections in Maryland. Baltimore and Prince George’s County are the worst offenders. My campaign has received plenty of invitations across Maryland but it is in large voting districts like these two counties where election violations are rampant. When a campaign cannot even get their name mentioned in these large venues you have deliberate attempts to steal an election. It is no coincidence that my platform embraces issues that are counter to policies presented by current politicians at state level. To silence the voice of a candidate because of the political issues they put forward is an assault to democracy and it taints the ability of the citizens of Maryland to know their candidates.
I cannot control private media outlets and their coverage, but 501c3 organizations are not allowed to select winners and losers.
‘If your organization takes a stand in any campaign, supporting or opposing one or another candidate, this violates the prohibition’.
Obviously, the exclusion of my campaign is a detriment to my viability in this election and this cannot be understood in any other light. The forums above have operated in this fashion for years and I had the Chair of Maryland Assembly Elections Committee Jon Cardin tell me that ‘this is how we do it’. I write extensively to public media outlets in Baltimore WYPR and WEAA to explain that they cannot keep having candidates on their programs and exclude others. My campaign has been completely excluded from all public media and as you see above, the Maryland Public Television event is excluding me as well. This has made Maryland elections crony and the citizens have reached a point of apathy in voting because none of the candidates given the spotlight speaks to their interests. This is why Baltimore has a 20% voter turnout and why this coming governor’s election sees 54% of democrats as undecided……I will project that number higher if the poll was actually performed correctly. That 54% undecided could very well be waiting to hear my platform!
I want to emphasize this is a systemic problem in these two counties……Prince George’s and Baltimore. In Baltimore it is driven by the city power structure that controls all media and events. I would also like to suggest that targeting candidates who run as labor and justice in cities and counties with the highest labor and justice problems is clearly designed to suppress free and fair elections.
Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland is requesting the Federal Election Commission investigate and correct this problem immediately because this primary season is in full swing and if my campaign is allowed to be sidelined we will be contesting the primary winner in court. This is a clear case of election violations and the systemic nature of the problem requires Federal intervention into Maryland State Election process.
I want to make one more point. When media in Maryland and these event organizers who discriminate in candidates who attend use the terms ‘top three democratic candidates’ over and again to describe Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur, you have statements that are misleading. Clearly, when a poll is taken with Brown receiving 25% of democratic support, Gansler and Mizeur around 10% of support-----you clearly do not have top candidates. I dare say even those voters would change if given alternatives. What Maryland media prefaces its claim to ‘top three democratic candidates’ is which candidate is receiving campaign funds. It has nothing to do with platform and voter support. This is not what elections are about. This misuse of ‘leading’ gives false impressions designed to taint the voting process. It is deliberate. The polls we have to endure take fewer than 2,000 representative voters out of 900,000 democratic voters to come to these percentages. No one knows how skewed these polls can be. We need an investigation of Maryland’s election process and my case in particular.

0 Comments

April 25th, 2014

4/25/2014

0 Comments

 
I OCCASIONALLY MISS A DAY OF BLOGGING WHEN ATTENDING SYMPOSIUMS OR RALLIES....PLEASE COME BACK.  I BLOG ON WEEKDAYS.....

CORPORATE POLS ARE DISMANTLING EVERY AVENUE FOR COMMUNICATIONS FOR WHAT WILL BE 90% OF AMERICANS.  IF YOU DO NOT SHOUT OUT TO SAVE NET NEUTRALITY AND THE POST OFFICE-----ALL COMMUNICATIONS WILL BE CONTROLLED BY CORPORATIONS AND LIMITED TO A FEW PEOPLE.



I attended a rally yesterday of Postal workers fighting to keep the US Post Office public.  The USPS is the only method of communication left that is public and that will always work in the public interest in providing quality service and make communications accessible to all.  Allowing neo-liberals and neo-cons to privatize USPS will open the door to millions of people having no means of communication.

CORPORATE POLITICIANS IN BOTH PARTIES ARE DISMANTLING THE POST OFFICE PIECE BY PIECE IN HANDING ALL REVENUE-GENERATING OPERATIONS TO PRIVATE CORPORATIONS.  THEY HAVE CREATED POLICY THAT DELIBERATELY TAKES REVENUE THAT WOULD MAKE THE USPS A PROFITABLE AGENCY
-----PRE-FUNDING OF PENSIONS DECADES IN ADVANCE----JUST TO STARVE THE POST OFFICE BUDGET.  REMEMBER, THE USPS TAKES NO TAXPAYER MONEY.  IT IS SELF-FUNDING.

Let's look at the goal of neo-liberal/neo-con policy as regards communications.  Think what is needed to take a nation of 300 million people from a first world society to a third world society ------kill education, control communication, and create a surveillance society.  This has been the recipe of totalitarianism for centuries.

How are your cell phone plans going?  Lot's of free phones and each member of the family using them.  Not missing the $15 phone bill with unlimited local calls when we had our public utility.  Wall Street intends to end the compartmentalization of services and go with an everything or nothing plan.   Just as we are forced to pay for 100 cable channels in order to watch a half dozen......they are going to require people to buy unlimited/shared plans that will price many people out of the market. A few hundred a month for phone and internet will keep many families away. There goes the phone for everyone in the family.  What is happening at the same time is a culture of robo-calls hitting our phones.  Collection agencies and marketing firms
are now filling the time we have bought with daily calls sometimes two and three firms each day.  So, the public is now paying to receive more calls it does not want and having smaller amounts of time to use in communicating.  CALL TO STOP THESE HARASSING MESSAGES YOU SAY!  The phone services have allowed these businesses the ability to over-ride MUTING......to over-ride CALL ENDING.....AND phones are being built so people cannot block calls from numbers they do not want.  Imagine if you pay $30 for hundred minutes of time and half of this is taken in robo-calls.      THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW TO LOW-INCOME PEOPLE AND IT IS GETTING WORSE.  WHY BUY TIME FOR A PHONE THAT WILL BE LOST TO CORPORATE ROBO-CALLS.  There goes that means of communication.  This is 'de-phoning' the working class but you can bet the middle-class is not far behind in seeing phone bills eating too much of disposable income.  People are being left to count the minutes they can get to talk so forget making calls that require long wait times----you know, customer service.

DE-PHONING.....DE-BANKING.....what is next?

It was announced that the Obama Administration is moving forward with ending net neutrality after making this issue central in his election in 2008.  PROTECTING PEOPLE ACCESS TO WHAT HAS BECOME AS ESSENTIAL AS ELECTRICITY AND FUEL IN LIVING LIFE IN AMERICA.  There's profit to be made say neo-liberals!  So, rather than appoint an FCC head that moved forward with declaring the internet a UTILITY so rates would be controlled as electricity and water is now....everyone paying the same for the same products...Neo-liberals are going to create a tiered system of accessing the internet with corporations taking all of the high speed capability and you and I being able to afford what will be ever slower and limited access to much information on the internet.  Remember, email is considered data and as the charges for data climb as it will with the end of net neutrality......you will be counting the words you send.   Video streaming will become too expensive to afford and as you know, most of the websites we open are now full of video/graphics that will make costs soar.  MOST PEOPLE WILL NO LONGER HAVE ACCESS TO MUCH ON THE INTERNET AND EMAIL WILL BECOME RATIONED. 

THIS IS THE TOTALITY OF OUR COMMUNICATIONS FOLKS.  PHONES AND EMAIL BECOME TOO EXPENSIVE WHAT DO YOU HAVE?  You write a letter.  But wait.......there is no mail service because the USPS was privatized and mail delivery is not a profitable business.  Prices for stamps are high now because of the privatization and loss of revenue ----think what the price will become when  global corporations control the stamp!

What the Post Office privatizers are now doing is eliminating the Post Office as a place and door-to-door delivery and centralizing where you will go every day to pick up mail.  STAPLES has just been awarded the ability to receive letters you want to send, ending the protections of mail traveling in public hands.  FED-X and UPS do a great job you say!

FED-X AND UPS DO NOT WANT THE MAIL BUSINESS BECAUSE IT IS NOT PROFITABLE......LETTER HANDLING WILL END.



WE THE PEOPLE WILL BE LEFT TO SEND SMOKE SIGNALS IF YOU ALLOW CORPORATIONS TO END OUR LAST PUBLIC METHOD OF COMMUNICATIONS.



AT&T Puts an End to Unlimited Data Plans


By Liane CassavoyJune 2, 2010


AT&T has rolled out new mobile data plans for users of its smartphones and tablets. Starting next Monday -- the same day that Apple is widely expected to unveil a new iPhone -- AT&T will no longer offer its $30-per-month unlimited data plan to new users. Instead, customers will have to pick between plans that allow them a certain amount of data access each month.

In a statement announcing the new plans, AT&T says the new options will "make it more affordable for more people to enjoy the benefits of the mobile Internet." The new data plans include three options:

- DataPlus: This $15-per-month plan allows users to access 200MB of data per month. If customers go over the 200MB limit, they will receive another 200MB for an additional $15 per month. AT&T says that 65 percent of its smartphone customers currently use less than 200MB of data per month on average, so this plan should save them money.

- DataPro: This $25-per-month plan allows users to access 2GB of data per month. If you go over that limit, each additional GB of data will cost $10. AT&T says that 98 percent of its smartphone customers user less than 2GB of data a month.

- Tethering: If you choose to use your smartphone as tethered modem, you'll have to spring for the tethering plan in addition to the DataPro plan. Tethering costs an extra $20 per month. AT&T says that tethering for iPhones will be available this summer, when Apple releases the iPhone OS 4 update.

Current AT&T smartphone customers will be able to keep their unlimited data plans, for now, at least. But users of the iPad 3G may see a change in their plan: iPad users who currently subscribe to the $29.99-per-month unlimited plan will be switched to the DataPro plan.

__________________________________________

For those not wanting or needing all the bells and whistles you are being forced out of buying what you need because of predatory marketing and credit collection.  If a family cannot afford internet connection they will not be able to switch to unlimited/shared option plans....they will be de-phoned. 

BETTER THE MASSES NOT COMMUNICATE IN AN AUTOCRATIC SOCIETY!

If 70% of Americans are at the poverty line and the percentage will rise if Trans Pacific Trade Pact TPP is ended....most Americans will not be able to afford ordinary communications.


Even the middle-class needs to be concerned as ending net neutrality will mean prices for what are now ordinary downloads....like movie streaming.....will skyrocket.  These shared plans will rise from $99 to well over a few hundred dollars a month if you are to retain the quality you have now.
  With health care costs rising, just when does that disposable income disappear?  Communications will go before food, health, and shelter!

APSeptember 17, 2012, 3:12 PM

Robocall complaints up despite do-not-call list

(Skip Peterson/AP, file)

(AP) WASHINGTON - So much for silence from telemarketers at the cherished dinner hour, or any other hour of the day.

Complaints to the government are up sharply about unwanted phone solicitations, raising questions about how well the federal "do-not-call" registry is working. The biggest category of complaint: those annoying prerecorded pitches called robocalls that hawk everything from lower credit card interest rates to new windows for your home.

Robert Madison, 43, of Shawnee, Kan., says he gets automated calls almost daily from "Ann, with credit services," offering to lower his interest rates.


"I am completely fed up," Madison said in an interview. "I've repeatedly asked them to take me off their call list." When he challenges their right to call, the solicitors become combative, he said. "There's just nothing that they won't do."

Madison, who works for a software company, says his phone number has been on the do-not-call list for years. Since he hasn't made any progress getting "Ann" to stop calling, Madison has started to file complaints about her to the Federal Trade Commission, which oversees the list.

Amid fanfare from consumer advocates, the federal do-not-call list was put in place nearly a decade ago as a tool to limit telemarketing sales calls to people who didn't want to be bothered. The registry has more than 209 million phone numbers on it. That's a significant chunk of the country, considering that there are about 84 million residential customers with traditional landline phones and plenty more people with cellphone numbers, which can also be placed on the list.

Telemarketers are supposed to check the list at least every 31 days for numbers they can't call. But some are calling anyway, and complaints about phone pitches are climbing even as the number of telemarketers checking the registry has dropped dramatically.

Government figures show monthly robocall complaints have climbed from about 65,000 in October 2010 to more than 212,000 this April. More general complaints from people asking a telemarketer to stop calling them also rose during that period, from about 71,000 to 182,000.

At the same time, fewer telemarketers are checking the FTC list to see which numbers are off limits. In 2007, more than 65,000 telemarketers checked the list. Last year, only about 34,000 did so.


Despite those numbers, the FTC says the registry is doing an effective job fighting unwanted sales calls.

"It's absolutely working," Lois Greisman, associate director of the agency's marketing practices division, said in an interview with The Associated Press. But, she said, "the proliferation of robocalls creates a challenge for us."

Greisman said prerecorded messages weren't used as a major marketing tool in 2003, when the registry began. "In part because of technology and in part because of greater competitiveness in the marketplace, they have become the marketing vehicle of choice for fraudsters," she said.

For people trying to scam people out of their money, it's an attractive option. Robocalls are hard to trace and cheap to make.

With an autodialer, millions of calls can be blasted out in a matter of hours, bombarding people in a struggling economy with promises of debt assistance and cheap loans. Even if a consumer does not have a phone number on the do-not-call list, robocalls are illegal. A 2009 rule specifically banned this type of phone sales pitch unless a consumer has given written permission to a company to call.

Political robocalls and automated calls from charities, or informational robocalls, such as an airline calling about a flight delay, are exempt from the ban. But those exemptions are being abused, too, with consumers complaining of getting calls that begin as a legitimate call, say from a charity or survey, but then eventually switch to an illegal telemarketing sales pitch.

Robocalls can be highly annoying to consumers because they're hard to stop. Fraudsters use caller-ID spoofing so that when a person tries to call back the robocaller, they get a disconnected number or something other than the source of the original call.

The best thing people can do when they get an illegal robocall is to hang up.
Do not press "1'' to speak to a live operator to get off the call list. If you do, the FTC says, it will probably just lead to more robocalls. The caller will know you're there and willing to answer, and may continue to call.

The FTC says people can also contact their phone providers to ask them to block the number. But be sure to ask whether they charge for that. Telemarketers change caller-ID information often, so it might not be worth paying a fee to block a number that will soon change.

The industry says most legitimate telemarketers don't utilize robocalls to generate sales.

"They give a bad name to telemarketers and hurt everybody," says Jerry Cerasale, senior vice president of government affairs at Direct Marketing Association, a trade group.

Cerasale says the do-not-call list has resulted in telemarketers making far fewer cold calls to random people. Instead, he says, marketers have shifted to other methods of reaching people, such as mail, email or targeted advertisements on websites. That, he said, could be one of the reasons that the number of telemarketers checking the registry has dropped so sharply.

In light of the increased complaints, the FTC is stepping up efforts to combat robocalls. It recently released two consumer videos to explain what robocalls are and what to do about them. It also announced an October summit to examine the problem and explore the possibility of emerging technology that might help trace robocalls and prevent scammers from spoofing their caller ID.

Enforcement is another tool. The FTC has brought cases against about a dozen companies since 2009, including Talbots, DirecTV and Dish Network. The cases have yielded $5.6 million in penalties.

The agency said this month that it was mailing refund checks to more than 4,000 consumers nationwide who were caught up in a scam where the telemarketer used robocalls from names like "Heather from card services" to pitch worthless credit card rate reduction programs for an up-front fee. Checks to consumers range from $31 to $1,300 depending on how much was lost.

_______________________________________

When ATT ends unlimited data-----the most widely used option----you know the market is on the way to creating conditions you don't want or need to one that is most profitable.  That is what this shared packaging will be......paying for the 100 cable stations for a few wanted channels.

As the prices for SMART PHONE and technology rise, the tech industries are filling our schools with processes that require more and more operational exposure.  Society is being built around the need to access more of this and the ability to afford it is growing for most people.  THIS IS WHAT BEING WINNERS AND LOSERS IS ABOUT.

REMEMBER, HAVING PUBLIC UTILITIES IS WHAT MADE ALL CITIZENS EQUALLY ABLE TO BUILD THEIR FUTURES AND RISE IN ANY DIRECTION.  THIS MASS-PRIVATIZATION OF ALL THAT IS PUBLIC WILL IMPOVERISH AND DISENFRANCHISE MOST IN AMERICAN SOCIETY.

Ending net neutrality will give large corporations the ability to access ever faster and larger data packages while the employee has no access and computers at work protected against private use. 

ERGO------MOST AMERICANS WILL NOT KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON AS IS TRUE IN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES!


Opinion: It’s a trap! Beware carriers’ new unlimited talk and text plans


By Brad Chacos  —   July 20, 2012 6 44 23 12 2 The most effective chains are the ones you don’t realize bind you.

After AT&T unveiled its own version of a shared data plan on Wednesday, dozens upon dozens of posts hit the Web heralding the news and weighing Mobile Share against both traditional data plans and Verizon’s Share Everything. (Even yours truly got in on the frenzy.)

Most posts considered the deal’s advantages for the consumer. But how do shared data plans benefit the carriers? Ah, that’s where things get a bit more devious.

Pooled data is the bait on the trap AT&T and Verizon have structured shared data to give themselves several advantages. The plans meet customer demands for a family data pool. Low subscription prices for tablets should drive more consumers to connect their slates to cellular networks. And both Mobile Share and Share Everything include unlimited talk and text minutes.

Wait! That last one’s a consumer benefit, not a carrier benefit. Isn’t it?

Not quite.

Analysts who have studied the plans agree: If you aren’t already on an unlimited talk and texting plan, shared data plans will actually cost you more money — often, a lot more money. Being for-profit businesses, carriers of course love pulling down more dough, but even more than that, they like the idea of getting you used to paying for unlimited talk and text.

That’s because talk and text deliver insane profit margins. It is a cash cow for carriers, and the cow’s milk is running dry.

Data killed the voice plan star Don’t take my word for it, though. Back in June, the Wall Street Journal reported that cellular subscribers have spent less time talking on the phone ever since the iPhone launched in 2007. That follows several years of an upward usage trend prior to the arrival of smartphones.

You never hear anybody complaining about their rollover minutes any more, do you? Now you know why.

Carriers have been keen to the mass migration for a while now, which helps explain why Skype had to fight a terrible struggle to even land on the original iPhone. (AT&T only caved in after both consumers and the FCC complained heavily.) That griping isn’t a thing of the past, either; this past May, Nokia tried to blame its Lumia struggles on Skype’s Windows Phone app.

In a 2011 New York Times report, Verizon vice president Brian Higgins conceded that as Internet speeds and availability increase, “Eventually, everything migrates to a data channel. We’re moving away from silos of communication to one where everything is combined together.”

That worries carriers, who see much more profit from voice subscriptions than data subscriptions.

After Apple announced that FaceTime would begin working over cellular networks in iOS 6, GigaOm and 9to5Mac examined the situation and found that chatting over FaceTime uses 3MB of data per minute. On a 2GB plan, that’s good for 666 minutes; a 3GB bumps that to an even 1,000. Comparable minutes on a voice plan cost significantly more than those on data plans — sometimes more than twice as much, the publications found.

Surprise! It’s rumored that AT&T might charge iPhone users an additional fee if they want to use FaceTime over Cellular. (Sprint definitely won’t, though.)

Data also killed the SMS star Carrier profits are even more gargantuan when it comes to text messages. In the wake of Apple’s iMessage service, CNET’s Steve Shankland did the math and found that on per-text SMS plans, which normally charge 20 cents per text, carriers receive the equivalent of $1,250 for every MB — not GB — of data — a 8,333 percent markup over the $30/2GB data plan Verizon had available at the time.

Shankland said the $20/month unlimited texting plan was “a better deal if you send and receive more than 100 messages a month.” No matter which way you cut it, though, carriers make a ton of money on texting.

That’s why iMessage and services like Kik (which send texts via data networks) have the carriers worked up. Data-based texting services were estimated to cost carriers $13.9 billion (with a “B”) in lost revenue in 2011.

“You lie awake at night worrying about what is that will disrupt your business model,” AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson said in May. “Apple iMessage is a classic example. If you’re using iMessage, you’re not using one of our messaging services, right? That’s disruptive to our messaging revenue stream.”

People who talk and text less often drop down to lower-priced limited service plans. But carriers won’t have to lose revenue or leave their messaging services lying dormant if they can convince you to pay for unlimited talk and text as part of a shared data plan.

Coincidentally, shared data plans began appearing shortly after Stephenson made his comments.

Can you escape the trap? If you don’t chat on the phone very often and don’t want to pay a premium for a service you don’t use — things are looking grim.

After introducing its Share Everything plans, Verizon did away with all the rest of its individual offerings. Unlimited talk and text is now the only way to fly on the nation’s largest 4G LTE network. Existing subscribers can keep their current plans, but be prepared to say sayonara to your low-cost limited voice minutes when you upgrade to a new handset.

AT&T’s a better option for tentative talkers and texters. It is still offering its traditional individual and family plans alongside Mobile Share — at least for now. Don’t expect that to last forever, though. As AT&T Mobility honcho Ralph de la Vega said in the aforementioned June WSJ article:

“The industry’s definitely moving towards unlimited… . Especially as more people adopt smartphones that have voice capabilities over the Internet, segmented voice plans will become less relevant.”

In other words, the talk and text cash cow isn’t dead. If shared data plans give us a glimpse of the future, we’ll be paying for its life support for a long, long time.
__________________________________________

We want to be clear-----Obama is not forced to do this.  He understands that the only way to have net neutrality was to declare it an utility.  His FCC refused to do that and sent the the Supreme Court policy they knew would be refused and now use this as an excuse to move forward with ending net neutrality.

When we have politicians who campaign on issue stances and then ignore them----we have not had free and fair elections.  One cannot vote for a politician if you have to guess if they will or won't do what they say.  That is politics in Iran or Nigeria.....


THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST INCREDIBLE POLICIES AS REGARDS MOVING TO A THIRD WORLD SOCIETY AND YOU DO NOT HEAR IT DISCUSSED AT ALL ON MEDIA.....DO YOU HEAR YOUR PUBLIC MEDIA DISCUSSING THESE POLICIES?  THEN, SHAKE THEM OUT!  THEY SHOULD NOT BE RECEIVING TAXPAYER MONEY IF THEIR GOAL IS TO KEEP YOU UNINFORMED!



April 24, 2014
Goodbye, Net Neutrality; Hello, Net Discrimination
Posted by Tim Wu  The New Yorker

In 2007, at a public forum at Coe College, in Iowa, Presidential candidate Barack Obama was asked about net neutrality. Specifically, “Would you make it a priority in your first year of office to reinstate net neutrality as the law of the land? And would you pledge to only appoint F.C.C. commissioners that support open Internet principles like net neutrality?”

“The answer is yes,” Obama replied. “I am a strong supporter of net neutrality.”
Explaining, he said, “What you’ve been seeing is some lobbying that says that the servers and the various portals through which you’re getting information over the Internet should be able to be gatekeepers and to charge different rates to different Web sites…. And that I think destroys one of the best things about the Internet—which is that there is this incredible equality there.”

If reports in the Wall Street Journal are correct, Obama’s chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Thomas Wheeler, has proposed a new rule that is an explicit and blatant violation of this promise. In fact, it permits and encourages exactly what Obama warned against: broadband carriers acting as gatekeepers and charging Web sites a payola payment to reach customers through a “fast lane.”

Late last night Wheeler released a statement accusing the Wall Street Journal of being “flat-out wrong.” Yet the Washington Post has confirmed, based on inside sources, that the new rule gives broadband providers “the ability to enter into individual negotiations with content providers … in a commercially reasonable matter.” That’s telecom-speak for payola payments, and a clear violation of Obama’s promise.

This is what one might call a net-discrimination rule, and, if enacted, it will profoundly change the Internet as a platform for free speech and small-scale innovation. It threatens to make the Internet just like everything else in American society: unequal in a way that deeply threatens our long-term prosperity.

Some history may help explain the situation. The new rule gives broadband providers what they’ve wanted for about a decade now: the right to speed up some traffic and degrade others. (With broadband, there is no such thing as accelerating some traffic without degrading other traffic.) We take it for granted that bloggers, start-ups, or nonprofits on an open Internet reach their audiences roughly the same way as everyone else. Now they won’t. They’ll be behind in the queue, watching as companies that can pay tolls to the cable companies speed ahead. The motivation is not complicated. The broadband carriers want to make more money for doing what they already do. Never mind that American carriers already charge some of the world’s highest prices, around sixty dollars or more per month for broadband, a service that costs less than five dollars to provide. To put it mildly, the cable and telephone companies don’t need more money.

In 2007, Obama understood all of this. Without net neutrality, the result would be “much better quality from the Fox News site and you’d be getting rotten service from the mom and pop sites.” That year, he swore to me personally that he was committed to defending net neutrality. Unfortunately, his F.C.C. chairman is in the process of violating a core promise to innovators, to the technology sector, and, really, to all of us who use the Internet.

_______________________________________

Since the goal of privatization is busting public sector unions and send more taxpayer money to corporate profit....what is this mantra from neo-liberals shouting they are working to build the middle-class?

IT IS A COMPLETE LIE!  NEO-LIBERALS ARE THE ONES WHO KILLED THE MIDDLE-CLASS WITH CLINTON AND HIS EMPIRE-BUILDING GLOBAL CORPORATIONS SCHEMES.

Right now sending a letter is getting more and more problematic because the Post Office is being defunded and losing control of avenues of delivery.  Closing sorting facilities because hundreds of billions of dollars in pre-paid pensions is taken from annual revenues is a deliberate move to make the USPS unable to provide competitive service.  Where is all those billions in pension pre-payments going?  Well, as you know, the US Treasury is broke......these pensions are being spent as with our payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare to build and maintain the NSA spying and Homeland Security.

WE NEED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO BE OUTRAGED!!!!!!  STOP ALLOWING THESE POSTAL EMPLOYEES TO FIGHT FOR WHAT IS ESSENTIAL IN A DEMOCRACY-----COMMUNICATIONS!



AlterNet / By Jodie Gummow

  Post Office Privatization Deal in the Works: Activists Take to the Streets The Postal Service plans to replace well-paid postal workers with low-wage Staples employees.

American Postal Workers Union protest in New York.
Photo Credit: Jodie Gummow

April 24, 2014  |     “U.S. mail is not for sale!” This was the hard-hitting message of hundreds of local activists who joined forces across the country in a national day of action protesting a privatization deal between the U.S. Postal Services and Staples.  

The USPS pilot program establishing unsecured postal counters in more than 80 Staples stores in four geographic areas began late last year.  


In response, American Postal Workers Union (APWU) members and associates rallied outside Staples stores around the country demanding an end to the deal which they say is aimed at replacing good, living-wage postal jobs with low-wage, high-turnover jobs filled with untrained Staples employees.  They say it may eventually lead to layoffs and the closing of post offices.

In New York, members of the New York Metro Area Postal Workers Union (APWU) joined forces outside the 5 th Avenue Staples store to deliver a clear message to the American people:

“What we’re trying to do is send a message to the U.S. Postal Service and Staples that the U.S. mail is not for sale,” Jonathan Smith, president of the New York APWU who led the New York charge explained to AlterNet. “We will not allow them to hire employees with no minimum wage, with no benefits and who are not trained to do the job properly.  With all the concern about privacy and identity theft, that’s just not the right way to handle the U.S. mail.  The mail needs to be handled by experienced postal employees who swear an oath and who are accountable to the American people. This is a disservice to the American people and the constitution,” he said.

While Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe has denied the USPS-Staples scheme is privatization, the APWU recently obtained a copy of the heavily redacted  USPS agreement, which reveals the true goal of the program is to replace jobs held by USPS employees with low-wage jobs in the private sector, as well as expand the program to 1,500 Staples stores nationwide.

Smith explained to AlterNet how this directly comprises the quality, security and reliability that consumers expect and deserve in the handling of their mail as the struggling U.S postal service looks for ways to cut costs and boost revenue.

“Donahoe is trying to turn the postal service into a for-profit organization. We are here to tell the American people that we will not allow the Postal Service to take our work away and give it to people that are not trained. We are the 99 percent and if we don't fight for our rights, they will take it away.”

Likewise, Bobby Blum, Vice President of the  National Postal Mail Handlers Union spoke of the importance of unions to join together in postal alliance to fight against global corporations and privatization. 

 “We’re here today to stop the transfer of middle-class jobs to low-wage jobs and to stop the transfer of union jobs to non-union jobs,” he said. “We stand shoulder to shoulder to stop the privatization of the people’s postal service.   The CEO of Staples averages a $15 million a year salary, while the average Staples employee makes less than $9 an hour…We must stand together to fight. We can’t let postal employment go to the corporate elite and the cronies in congress dismantle the people’s service.  An injury to one is an injury to all – we stand with you today and say, ‘Stop staples! Stop staples now!” he said.

Fuelling further outage is the recent Staples announcement that it will close 225 stores by 2015, which has many furious employees wondering how such an important public asset could be turned over to a struggling private company, as Times Square postal worker Diane Erlanger explained to AlterNet at the protest.





0 Comments

April 23rd, 2014

4/23/2014

0 Comments

 
Regarding Baltimore City Hall and Jack Young feeling security guard's pain:

Let's look at the definition of Enterprise Zone.  Federal, state, and local taxpayer money goes into development that will lift an underserved community by making the residents of that community small business owners who hire residents from the community creating an 'enterprise zone' lifting the community and residents out of poverty.


Let's look at Baltimore City Enterprise Zones.  Development heavily funded by taxpayer money that lifts wealthy corporations and developers from being rich to being filthy rich using national and global corporations never from the city and allowing them to hire people into a condition of wage theft, workplace abuse, and often these workers are not even from Baltimore.  For doing all of this.....these same corporations receive so much in corporate tax break that they actually use public money for profit.  THAT IS BALTIMORE CITY ENTERPRISE ZONES.  NONE OF THIS IS LEGAL.

First, we need to understand that Baltimore City Hall works for Baltimore Development Corporation and Johns Hopkins so all of these bad policies and the fraud and corruption involved originate from the top.  City Hall is told to send the money, to turn their heads to abuse, and create contracts that have absolutely nothing to do with public interest!  

What this story tells us is that we need to elect politicians who work for the citizens of Baltimore so that taxpayer money will be used appropriately and residents of the city can work as though  they have rights as citizens or if immigrant, they are protected in a Rule of Law nation.

What we see with these Harbor East security guards is the same thing we saw with the Harbor hotels like Hyatt and Hilton........only these hotels City Hall as landlords.  Baltimore City Hall is deliberately allowing Enterprise Zone contract requirements to be ignored as regards public funding and helping local communities and residents.  So, when Jack Young feels these worker's pain------he and City Hall create the pain and have allowed it to go on for years as has happened with the hotels.  When Rule of Law is ignored........especially around labor and justice laws......then it does not matter what new laws come around.  Organizing must be allowed but when these unions win.....who is enforcing these laws?  No one currently in City Hall!  Next, we see City Hall requiring labor unions that organize to give up their rights by having to make Peace Agreements and submit to arbitration....all meant to weaken these unions.  Jack Young is not a friend of unions.....he simply comes out of the woodwork when things get hot.

We thank our unions for stepping up action in the most repressive of states and cities as far as labor and justice go!  We need unions to use their legal teams to fight for enforcement of labor laws until the citizens of Maryland can reinstate Rule of Law and public justice to protect their rights as citizens!

____________________________________________


You will notice that all of the articles below come from other parts of the country because Maryland has no public media that provides journalism holding power accountable to labor and justice.  The problems outlined below exist in Baltimore and Maryland and are in fact super-sized because of the level of dismantled public oversight.

When you hear a news report that has a City Hall official feeling the pain of the citizen or worker-----realize these same officials create these conditions and that these problems have continued for years.  So, workers have wages that need to be recovered, taxpayers have government funds that need to be recovered, and labor unions need politician who are going to proactively support all union rights in awarding contracts.



Corporate Tax Loopholes: The REAL Waste, Fraud and Abuse in California’s Budget


Posted on 08 May 2012


By Rebecca Band
California Labor Federation

One BILLION Dollars. That’s how much California gives away every year to big corporations, thanks to a wasteful tax loophole that actually incentivizes companies to close up shop in California and move those jobs elsewhere.

According to LA Times columnist George Skelton:

    You might think a tax law that rewards companies for killing California jobs and resurrecting them in another state would be dumped. Very quickly. Especially if it also rewards them for selling off property here and rebuilding elsewhere. Or, put another way, if the law provides a tax incentive not to hire or invest in California in the first place. You'd repeal it. A no-brainer.


    Makes no sense, except for the companies using the loophole while profiting from selling their products here in the nation's largest consumer market. You wouldn't even have voted to pass such a mind-boggling law. But then you aren't a member of the California Legislature — especially a Republican who believes that any corporate tax loophole is good, any loophole closure is an evil tax increase.

    Well, yes, closing the loophole would raise taxes for some out-of-state outfits — but only to the level already paid by California companies that hire and invest here heavily, and contribute substantially to our economy.

As if a billion-dollar giveaway to out-of-state corporations isn’t bad enough, the “single sales factor” loophole is just one of several corporate tax breaks California is wasting big money on, while at the same time slashing funding for schools, health care, public safety, vital services, assistance for the poor, roads, bridges, parks and just about everything else that makes California a great place to live and work.

While the rest of us are struggling in the face of high unemployment and draconian budget cuts, corporations are actually being paid to shed California jobs, and it’s all thanks to their high-powered corporate lobbyists in Sacramento who know just how to sneak these loopholes into budget negotiations. In addition to the “single sales factor” loophole, corporations also benefit hugely from the “enterprise zone” tax loophole, which doles out $37k to employers for every worker they fire and replace in a “targeted” part of the state.  According to the California Budget Project, enterprise zones have cost the state $3.6 billion since the program began – that’s money that could have gone to funding schools, rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, keeping firefighters and cops on the job… it’s almost overwhelming to think about the cuts that could have been avoided if not for these excessive and abusive tax breaks.

With California unemployment hovering around 11 percent, we ought to be investing in creating jobs, not rewarding companies that lay off hard-working Californians for no other reason except to boost their bottom line. That’s why Governor Jerry Brown has voiced his strong opposition to enterprise zones and other wasteful tax breaks for corporations.

The Governor isn’t alone on this. Economists, legislators, labor unions and working families have been fighting for years to expose the waste, fraud and abuse in our state’s corporate tax loopholes. Even some members of the 1% recognize the need to close these loopholes. Investor and philanthropist Thomas Steyer told the LA Times:

    How is it possible we could have this kind of tax loophole that's so bad for the state and for the people? It's just crazy. It's so nuts that I got exasperated.

We’re exasperated too Mr. Steyer. That’s why closing these tax loopholes is a top priority and integral part of the “Invest in California” jobs plan. Because that’s where the waste, fraud and abuse in our budget really lies, and it’s time to put a stop to it.

___________________________________________



Can you imagine how much money is lost to Baltimore Public Schools with all of these corporate tax breaks bringing national and global corporations into downtown that most people do not want.  

OH, IT DOESN'T AFFECT SCHOOL FUNDING SAY CITY HALL!  OH, REALLY?????

Not if you like your school funding to come as selective donations from corporations that should be paying taxes just so they can control what your schools will look like and how they will operate.  These Chicago teacher's unions and parents are sick and tired of it and have organized effect campaigns against these corporate politicians and the corporations for which they work.  IT IS TIME TO DO THIS IN BALTIMORE AND MARYLAND.


ENTERPRISE ZONES ARE PUBLIC POLICY THAT WAS GOOD AND IS NOW CORRUPTED.




Why your tax money keeps going down the TIF portal hole
Mayor Emanuel would rather fire 1,000 teachers than give up his biggest slush fund.



By Ben Joravsky @joravben




Andrew A. Nelles (Emanuel), Stacie Scott (Lewis)/Sun-Times Media

I was all set to give a little love to Mayor Rahm Emanuel for finally getting around to making good on his long-delayed promise to create an easy-to-search TIF portal on the city's website.

That's a place you can go to find all of the 160-something TIF districts in the city and track which ones have doled out how much to whom for what. The hope, of course, is that we can start to track the bang we're getting for the buck—adding up to $5.5 billion over the last 26 years—from the slush fund known as tax increment financing.

As you've probably heard me mention before, if it weren't for the TIF program, more than half that money would go to the public schools—which, the mayor claims, are so broke he had to close 50 of them a few weeks ago.

The mayor sent out a press release Friday morning congratulating himself for creating the portal and claiming it "will help the city focus programs on job creation and economic development."

Right on, Mr. Mayor—jobs are good!

Alas, within hours of the good news, word broke that the mayor was firing about 2,100 CPS employees—including more than 1,000 teachers—in the latest, largest round of budget cuts. That's on top of the 600 teachers he fired last month as part of the school closings.

So much for job creation. You know, Mr. Mayor, you make it hard for anyone to be a cheerleader.

In the meantime, the mayor's moving full steam ahead on his plans to spend $55 million in property tax funds for a basketball arena for DePaul and a new hotel.

So the private university gets the money and the public schools get the pink slips.

My guess is that Mayor Emanuel deliberately timed the release of the TIF portal announcement to gain a little positive PR on the day he was firing a couple thousand of school employees, in part because of the millions of TIF dollars he's hoarding.

It doesn't get much more cynical than that.

Just so you know—it wasn't the mayor who broke the news of the latest firings. No, it seems the mayor's never around when the bad news has to be announced.

He was skiing in Utah when CPS announced which schools were being closed. And he was vacationing in Europe when the early round of budget cuts were announced this summer. For all I know, he was skinny-dipping in the Bahamas when word broke of Friday's firings.

He wasn't seen in public that day. Most of the teachers got the bad news in calls from central office bureaucrats who were reading from scripts.

Now that the cuts are official, Emanuel is blaming them on the teachers—or at least the $400 million contribution he has to make to the teachers' dastardly pension system. Speaking of cynicism.

As pretty much everyone concedes, the major cause of the so-called pension crisis is that neither Mayor Emanuel nor Mayor Daley before him made payments to the pension fund that they're contractually bound to make.

    Only Dr. Freud himself can tell us why Mayor Emanuel is so eager to crush the Chicago Teachers Union.

In the good old days, state law required CPS to make its annual contribution by directly depositing property taxes into the pension fund. As part of the school reform law of 1995, though, Mayor Daley convinced the General Assembly to get rid of that requirement. He began spending money that was supposed to go to the pensions for basic obligations.

I'm telling you, we really have to stop using the word "reform" quite so much around here.

Thanks to that version of school reform, Mayor Daley was freed to use pension fund money to "balance" the budget while building new schools and winning praise from civic leaders and editorial writers as a fiduciary wizard.

As you can see, TIFs were not the only scam Mayor Daley got away with.

At some point, to rectify the pension crisis—as opposed to using it as a justification to fire teachers and close schools—Mayor Emanuel is going to have to start negotiating with Karen Lewis, president of the Chicago Teachers Union.

That would be the same Karen Lewis the mayor hasn't talked to since 2011, when he told her "Fuck you." It's the same Karen Lewis he's tried to intimidate with school closings, teacher firings, charter school investments, and various threats and bluster since he walked into office.

Only Dr. Freud himself can tell us why Mayor Emanuel is so eager to fight Lewis and crush her union. Whatever his motives, it's not only disastrous for public education—it's also bad politics. Unless he wants to alienate every parent in every school—or send the middle class off to the suburbs—he's got to hire back some teachers and restore the classroom cuts.

And that brings us back to the TIF honey pot.


There's so much money flowing into the TIF accounts—$457 million this year alone—that even two all-powerful mayors couldn't spend it all. And so the surplus sits in bank accounts.

I can't say for certain exactly how much is in those accounts because the city's information on the subject is either incomplete, impossible to decipher, or contradictory.

The city prepares an annual report for each TIF district and then posts it online—in a different spot from the TIF portal.

The annual reports include calculations of each district's fund balance. In the Near South TIF district, for instance, the annual report says there's a fund balance of $171 million. You could hire back a lot of teachers with just a fraction of that money.

But just below that line item, the report claims $142 million has been "committed for future redevelopment project costs." It doesn't specify where that total comes from, and the redevelopment projects it lists don't add up to anything near $142 million.

The portal is even less help. It doesn't provide a fund balance for any of the TIF districts. It does say how much each district is committed to spending, but the numbers don't match the ones in the annual reports. For instance, on the portal, the Near South TIF has $49 million in "council approved TIF projects"—a mere $93 million difference from what's "committed" in the report.

Good luck making sense of any of this, Chicago.

I wouldn't say the portal's worthless. But it's certainly no help in ascertaining what most people really want to know: how much money is in the TIF accounts.

In fact, on Monday morning a group of independent aldermen led by Robert Fioretti and Scott Waguespack called on Mayor Emanuel to disclose what the surplus is and release the funds for use by the schools, city, and county. "Stop siphoning it off from investing in our children," Fioretti said.

Look for a big fight on this issue in the coming weeks. Every time parents, teachers, or students demand that Mayor Emanuel tap the TIF reserves, you can expect that he'll claim most of the money is already committed to something else.

As with Mayor Daley, he's come to view TIF money as his precious hoard, and he'll be damned if anyone's going to tell him how to spend it.

___________________________________________________
_


Not only are the jobs created in these Enterprise Zones poverty jobs, throughout workers are openly fleeced of their wages, denied basic workplace rights, and employee turnover so great as to be ineffective in any measure in reducing poverty.

THE WAY ENTERPRISE ZONES OPERATE IN IMPOVERISHING AND TAKING AWAY ALL CONTROL OF COMMUNITIES IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO ACCORDING TO GOVERNMENT FUNDING.

If your politicians are not demanding that public money come back to government coffers and individual's pockets from all this fraud and corruption and Rule of Law for white collar crime reinstated-----then those politicians are not FEELING OUR PAIN!


Keep in mind as you read that Enterprise Zones do not work------THE ORIGINAL POLICY THAT MADE ENTERPRISE ZONES WORKED JUST FINE------IT HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO BE CORRUPTED JUST AS WITH FEDERAL HOUSING LOANS AND FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN AGENCIES.  Get rid of the fraud and corruption and not the

How Enterprise Zones Are Killing the California Dream



By: Gary Cohn Wednesday May 29, 2013 10:14 am     


The following story is part of California Exposé, an investigative series from Frying Pan News.

John Thomas and Hans Burkhardt have a lot in common. For more than 17 years each man had a good paying union job, with health and pension benefits, near San Francisco Bay. Thomas worked as a warehouseman for VWR International, a medical supply company with a warehouse in Brisbane, south of Candlestick Park. Burkhardt also worked as a warehouseman, for BlueLinx, a building products company with a facility across the bay in Newark.

The similarities don’t end there. Both Thomas and Burkhardt are now collecting unemployment, having lost their $22-an-hour jobs after their employers moved to take advantage of California’s enterprise zone plan, a controversial state program that is supposed to create jobs.

The enterprise program, established in 1984, provides $700 million in tax breaks for companies that set up business or move to one of 40 zones within the state. It is operated by the state but administered by local governments. The program gives companies tax credits of up to $37,440 per person hired in one of the zones, which are intended to create jobs and spark investment in economically distressed areas. Yet interviews and public documents reviewed by Frying Pan News reveal that some of these zones are located in relatively well-off areas, including San Francisco’s Financial District and the city’s hipster-packed SoMa neighborhood, which is home to many software and technology firms. In Southern California, enterprise zone areas encompass parts of Hollywood and the corporate center of downtown Los Angeles.

The program has been under fire for years from critics who say that it simply rewards employers for moving jobs from one location to another — and who echo the charge that several of the so-called enterprise zones aren’t really in economically distressed regions.  According to sources with knowledge of the program, other businesses that have applied for enterprise zone credits include two strip clubs, Gold Club Centerfolds and Déjà Vu Showgirls.

The two gentlemen’s clubs are located in Rancho Cordova, a largely middle-class suburb just east of the state’s capitol, Sacramento. Gold Club Centerfolds advertises itself as “Sacramento’s All Nude Adult Entertainment,” while Déjà Vu Showgirls, which is part of a national chain of clubs, offers “1000’s of Beautiful Girls and 3 Ugly Ones.” It isn’t known whether the applications were approved because, like so much of the program, the names of recipients aren’t public information. (The two clubs have not responded to requests for comment; neither have VWR or BlueLinx.)

[Update, May 28 7:26 p.m.: Documents received by Frying Pan News today show that Gold Club Centerfolds did receive approval of its application.]

In fact, because the program falls under the purview of tax codes, much of its day to day workings, including the names of businesses that receive the enterprise zone tax credits, aren’t publicly available. Overall, 61 percent of enterprise zone tax credits were claimed by corporations with more than $1 billion in assets. People familiar with the program say that recipients include huge retailers such as Walmart. The total amount of enterprise tax credits received by Walmart is one of those facts cloaked in the program’s tax secrecy.

Numerous studies have raised questions about the value of the enterprise zone program. The nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California concluded in 2009 that enterprise zones had no effect on job creation.

“On average, enterprise zones have no statistically significant effect on either business creation or employment growth rates,” the study said. “The absence of evidence of a beneficial effect of California’s enterprise zones on job and business creation clearly calls into question whether the state should continue to grant enterprise zone tax incentives.”

Other critics say that the worst thing about the program is the human toll it takes on workers. Both John Thomas and Hans arwere willing to move with their companies, but under the provisions of the enterprise zone program the companies cannot take their current workers and still claim the tax credits.

“They should have taken people with them who wanted to go,” says Burkhardt. “I would have gone.”  The union jobs that Burkhardt and Thomas and their fellow workers had at the BlueLinx and VWR locations paid, on average, about $20 an hour, plus benefits. They were replaced with non-union positions that paid about one-half of that, with non-existent or substantially reduced benefits.

“I’ve been up here four years, and this is the most abused program I’ve seen,” says state Senator Jerry Hill, (D-San Mateo), whose district includes Brisbane, where VWR had its warehouse.

“This [the enterprise zone program] is not creating jobs at all,” Hill says. “This is a big-industry, big-business tax grab.” The move by VWR, owned by private equity firm Madison Dearborn Partners, cost Brisbane about $2.1 million a year in tax revenue while saving the company more than $1.5 million annually through the enterprise zone program, according to Hill’s office.

Hill has introduced Senate Bill 434 to reform the program by specifying that employers must create net new jobs to claim the hiring credit and that the jobs pay at least $16 an hour. The legislation also calls for the creation of a public database of companies that get the tax breaks and the number of jobs they created. The bill was approved by the state Senate Appropriations Committee this week, and is expected to go to the full Senate later this year.

Governor Jerry Brown has previously tried unsuccessfully to get rid of the enterprise zone program, claiming that it doesn’t create new jobs and unfairly benefits companies moving from one location to another. Last week he proposed that the zones be replaced by a sales tax credit for firms that buy manufacturing or biotech equipment.  Like his proposal to eliminate the program, Brown’s new initiative is likely to be opposed by legislators whose districts include enterprise zones.

Craig Johnson, president of the California Association of Enterprise Zones, vehemently defends the current program.

“The program does work and it has been successful,” he says in an interview. “It does create jobs. In 2012, the enterprise zone program was responsible for 25,000 new jobs in California and responsible for the retention of 115,000 jobs. By every metric used to evaluate a program like this, it has been very successful.”

Former workers at BlueLinx and VWR, who were represented by Teamsters Local 853, hold a different opinion.

“I’ve been angry. I’ve been upset. It’s not good for the state,” says Thomas, who was among about 75 warehouseman and drivers who lost their jobs when VWR moved its Brisbane facility to Visalia, located 235 miles away in the San Joaquin Valley. “People like me, if we lose our jobs the people of the state of California have to pick up the tab on unemployment.”

Even though he has worked only part-time jobs since then and is currently on unemployment, Thomas feels fortunate that he still has health insurance coverage through his wife’s job.

Burkhardt recalls that, early on, BlueLinx told its workers that they could move with it to a new location. Later, an employee found through an Internet search that the company was actually moving to Stockton, and that workers would not be allowed to transfer with the company.

Doug Bloch, Teamsters political director for the Central Valley and Northern California, says that the situation involving VWR and BlueLinx epitomizes all that is wrong with the enterprise zone program.

“Our union is all for programs that create jobs in economically distressed areas,” Bloch says. “This program doesn’t create jobs.”

The situation involving the layoffs of existing workers when VWR and BlueLinx moved to enterprise zones, he says, “was really perverse. Their tax dollars were given to their employers to replace their jobs.”

“I lost my job and a lot of people got devastated.” says Thomas, now 62. “They pirated jobs from the people at Brisbane and moved to Visalia – and [the company] got paid for it.”

Burkhardt, 58, who has been out work since BlueLinx closed its Newark warehouse, agrees. “You’re taking some people off unemployment and putting some on unemployment.”
0 Comments

April 22nd, 2014

4/22/2014

0 Comments

 
PLEASE CHECK BELOW MY BLURB ON PUBLIC MEDIA'S ATTACK ON FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS AND ELECTION VIOLATIONS!  I WILL SPEAK TODAY ON BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON AS GLOBAL CORPORATE CHAMPIONS REEKING HAVOC ON THE WORLD WITH ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER AND IMPOVERISHMENT!


Below you see that WYPR is about to block my campaign from speaking about the issues of this election. Mind you, my comments are always factual where the comments of the politicians given media coverage are not. This violates Federal Election laws. As you heard this morning, WYPR is no longer stating where a governor's forum was held because, as I state, all 501c3/4 political debates and forums must invite all candidates for office. At a time when elections are being bought.....at a time when candidates running for office are working for corporations in pay-to-play, it is critical that America has a public media that is not involved in this corporate corruption. I will be contacting all businesses that advertize with WYPR to ask why they support this suspension of Rule of Law and free and fair elections!




'Congratulations on your decision to run for the office of governor of Maryland . WYPR always supports diverse opinions and we wish you well in your campaign.
By the rules of the Public Broadcasting Act and by WYPR policies, the use of WYPR's airways, website, or social media outlets by ANY political candidate during an election campaign is strictly prohibited. We very much appreciate your cooperation with these restrictions AND you are welcome to contact our general manager who would be happy to provide further explanations. Therefore, we ask that you not make further postings as we are required to remove all of your posting to date and in the future so long as you are a candidate for public office.
Thank you for understanding'.



If a candidate cannot make comments on a public media site and those same candidates are excluded from all election coverage on public media in Maryland then how does that meet with Federal Election Laws requiring all 501c3/4 organizations to give all candidates for election a forum for their campaigns?  Do you think constantly referring to all but the global corporate candidates meets that requirement?  Of course not------I will continue to post my research information on policy as my organization Citizens Oversight Maryland does.  Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland looks forward to WYPR giving all campaigns and platforms access to public media airwaves!




Here in Maryland all the media is preparing to block any comments about Bill and Hillary Clinton as the 2016 will see an onslaught of political advertizing and social media/email campaigning. As a candidate for governor of Maryland I was just told by WYPR that I cannot comment on their facebook page about election issues and at the same time they are refusing my campaign any media coverage.  My campaign is completely blocked.  Meanwhile, the candidates who are going to advance these global corporate policies of Pacific Trade Pact (TPP) and Clinton's global corporate rule has unlimited airtime on public media.  BELOW YOU SEE WHAT BILL AND HILLARY HAVE BEEN UP TO SINCE ENDING GLASS STEAGALL AND PUSHING NAFTA-----THEY ALLOWED DEVELOPING WORLD'S TO BE ENSLAVED BY US CORPORATIONS AND WHEN THOSE NATIONS KICKED OUT THESE US CORPORATIONS NEO-LIBERALS ARE NOW MOVING INTO AFRICA, THE CARIBBEAN, AND IF TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT IS PASSED.,......INTO THE US. It is people of color who are being enslaved whether Asian, black, or Hispanic, but the Trans Pacific Trade Pact will take all Americans to the developing world level.  See why it is so important for WYPR to block my campaign?



Haiti has been made the new sweat shop of the West.  Clinton is bringing US manufacturing from Asia and installing them in the West.....first in the Caribbean and then in the US when TPP is installed.  US labor unions know this is what will happen and they know that all of Maryland candidates for Governor of Maryland except Cindy Walsh for Governor will do this....Brown, Gansler, and Mizeur as well as the republicans.

Bill Clinton: Haiti’s Neo-Colonial Overlord

Tue, 11/16/2010 - 14:03 — Ashley Smith

by Ashley Smith

Bill Clinton is no friend to Haiti. The former president, who inflicted great harm to the Haitian people while in office, now acts as a kind of regent, “promoting sweatshops, tourism, and export-oriented agriculture.” A primary actor in stripping Haiti of its sovereignty, Clinton “is putting Haiti up for sale to multinational capital.”

 

Bill Clinton: Haiti’s Neo-Colonial Overlord

by Ashley Smith

Ashley Smith is a featured speaker at a “Day of Outrage in Harlem” rally and march in support of the people of Haiti, on November 20. The theme of the protest is, “U.S. Out of Haiti – Clinton Out of Harlem.”

“Clinton has betrayed all his humanitarian promises and failed to collect even a fraction of the promised $10 billion for reconstruction.”

The corporate media portrays former President Bill Clinton as a great humanitarian friend of Haiti. The truth could not be more different. He has always supported policies in the interests of multinational corporations and the Haitian ruling class at the expense of the country’s workers, urban poor and peasantry.

After the 1991 coup that toppled Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide, Clinton as President did maintain relatively ineffective sanctions. But he violated his campaign promise and continued George Bush Sr.’s policy of jailing Haitian refugees in Guantanamo. He also pressured Aristide to adopt free market economic policies as the condition of restoring him to power in 1994.

Clinton succeeded in getting Aristide to moderate his program of social reform and drop tariffs on rice to the advantage of U.S. Agribusiness. He then compelled Aristide’s successor, Rene Preval, to further deregulate the economy successfully turning Haiti into the most free market economy in the Western Hemisphere, and consequently its poorest.

“Clinton pressured Aristide to adopt free market economic policies as the condition of restoring him to power in 1994.”

Confronted with this evidence, he recently apologized for impoverishing the lives of peasant farmers in Haiti. But as always with Clinton, his rhetoric could not be more different than his policies. After the second U.S.-backed coup against Aristide in 2004, Clinton has worked with former World Bank employee Paul Collier, multinational corporations and the Haitian elite to impose another free-market plan on Haiti. While U.N. troops have occupied Haiti since 2004, Clinton and Collier toured the country promoting sweatshops, tourism, and export-oriented agriculture.

After the devastating January 2010 earthquake in Port au Prince, Clinton became co-chair of Interim Haiti Recovery Commission. He is now the country’s neo-colonial overlord. He has betrayed all his humanitarian promises and failed to collect even a fraction of the promised $10 billion for reconstruction. And his reconstruction plan is the same free market plan he has been touting since 2004. He is putting Haiti up for sale to multinational capital.

The last thing Haiti needs is more “help” from Bill Clinton and the U.S. Instead, the U.S. and other imperial powers including the U.N. should get out of Haiti and pay reparations so that Haitians can rebuild their country in their own interests.

Ashley Smith can be reached at: ashley05401@yahoo.com. For information on the November 20 “Day of Outrage in Harlem,” contact Nellie Bailey at harlemtenants@gmail.com


__________________________________________

Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP) is a neo-con/neo-liberal effort to end the national sovereignty of all nations signing this pact and handing control of all public policy and law enforcement to global corporate tribunals.  This is all courtesy of Bill and Hillary Clinton who, with Reagan embraced neo-liberalism and took the people's democratic party and handed it to corporations.  This is why labor and justice, 80% of the democratic base has been silenced.  We need labor unions to stop backing these neo-liberals and in Maryland all candidates other than Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland will push TPP.

Below you see the Neo-conservative think tank and the neo-liberal think tank all getting their dander up because the nations around the world being forced into TPP are fighting it and kicking the leaders out who signed this treaty.  Don't think for one minute that any neo-liberal pol will not vote to pass this!  Obama has built the lobby structure to push it through.  Also note that NGOs are included in this TPP stakeholder deal.  NGOs are simply corporations made to be non-profits controlling public policy!

IN THE US THAT WOULD BE OBAMA AND IN MARYLAND ALL OF THE MARYLAND ASSEMBLY AND CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR ARE PASSING LAWS SUPPORTING TPP!



Don't think that because a few democratic Congress people have shouted against Fast Track for TPP that it is not advancing------all of the policies passed during Obama's Administration have been TPP related.  Bush set the stage and Obama is super-sizing it. 

WE ARE AT THE CROSSROADS IN STOPPING TPP-----STOP ELECTING GLOBAL CORPORATE POLS!


Crunch Time for the Trans-Pacific Pact — and for U.S. Leadership in Asia

By Claude Barfield
Thursday, October 10, 2013

Filed under: World Watch, Economic Policy

At a crucial time in U.S.-Asian relations, China is stealing the limelight. America needs to get back in the game. Admittedly, one can overreact to the negative consequences of President Obama’s decision to cancel his trip to Asia and forego participation in the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders’ meeting and the East Asian Summit. But it would also be a mistake to underestimate the blow — at least in the short term — to the ability of the United States to project a confident leadership role in the region. Headlines such as “Obama cancels Asia trip. Is the U.S. ‘pivot’ in jeopardy?” and “As Obama’s Asian ‘pivot’ falters, China steps into the gap” are all too representative of the reaction both within Asia and around the world. 

My AEI colleague Michael Auslin has suggested that the real danger to U.S. leadership does not stem from the past week’s debacles but rather from the fact that the Obama administration is presiding over a decimated defense budget that in future years cannot sustain U.S. security promises and obligations in Asia — let alone around the world. The point is well taken, but my analysis will concentrate on the short and medium term effects relating to soft diplomacy and prestige and, in more detail, to the implications for the major U.S. regional economic initiative, the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP).

Short-Term Losses 

In the immediate future, the image embodied in Hillary Clinton’s robust announcement of an American ‘pivot’ to Asia and her comment that ‘We are back to stay’ will take a credibility beating. In the immediate future, the image embodied in Hillary Clinton’s robust announcement of an American “pivot” to Asia and her comment that “We are back to stay” will take a credibility beating. The White House had planned both practical deliverables in the TPP negotiations and also highly symbolic visits by the president to Malaysia and the Philippines. The picture of President Obama twiddling his thumbs in the White House and haggling over a looming U.S. default while Asian leaders meet in Bali and in Brunei will be hard to erase in the short term. 

Worse, partly by coincidence, Chinese leaders stood ready to fill in the gap. Though long-planned, visits by President Xi Jinping to Malaysia and Indonesia captured headlines around the region, not least from the largesse dispensed along the way — a $15 billion currency swap agreement with Indonesia and a promise to triple trade with Malaysia to $160 billion by 2017. In a tag team display, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang is now off on follow-up official visits to Vietnam, Thailand, and Brunei. Though President Xi was circumspect at the two summit meetings, the Chinese press was euphoric and scornful. Typical was the comment of the Hong Kong-based Communist party newspaper, Ta Kung Pao: “Chinese President Xi Jinping has become the brightest star on the Asian diplomatic platform. . . . The influence of the U.S. is questioned more and more.” 

Looking back over the week, even a former administration official and loyal Obama supporter, Kenneth Lieberthal of the Brookings Institution, was led to conclude: “This is a serious blow to U.S. diplomacy” that will raise doubts about the president’s “ability to deliver on commitments.” 

Moving on, the potential impact of the president’s no-show at TPP negotiations is a likewise negative development but not necessarily a fatal one to the successful conclusion of the agreement. With or without Obama’s presence, the situation with regards to the negotiations stands as follows. Since 2010, when serious bargaining began, there have been 19 negotiating sessions. At this point, most if not all of the technical underbrush has been cleared away by the trade bureaucrats from the 12 member states. What is left is a group of at least a dozen highly sensitive political questions and judgments that must be settled by political leaders. Among the issues outstanding are rules and commitments related to state-owned enterprises (SOEs), the environment, labor, market access and rules of origin, intellectual property (IP), government procurement, services and investment, regulatory coherence and coordination, and data flows and protection, among others. (The list will vary from observer to observer and cannot be conclusive since no actual potential text has been made public). 

Throughout 2013, TPP members have steadfastly maintained the goal of completing the negotiations by the end of the year, even though all knew that this was more a tactic to keep up momentum than a realistic endpoint. Neither President Obama nor other national TPP leaders could be expected to iron out the specific details of all of the aforementioned politically sensitive issues in the single day allotted to the TPP in Brunei. Rather, what Obama missed was the opportunity to push personally for a successful conclusion of the talks soon after the new year — and to weigh in with individual leaders on a limited number of issues where only the highest national leaders can seal the deal.

The Endgame

Neither President Obama nor other national TPP leaders could be expected to iron out the specific details in the single day allotted to the TPP in Brunei. Rather, what Obama missed was the opportunity to push personally for a successful conclusion of the talks. Without crying now over spilt milk, it will be crucial for the president and the administration to turn full attention to the TPP endgame. Trade policy and negotiations have been described by political scientists as a “two-level game.” On the first level, political leaders have to fix their own goals and bargain with their counterparts from other nations. In this case, the White House must decide quickly in coming weeks what its top offensive and defensive priorities will be. Will we demand, for example, quite detailed competition rules for SOEs? Will we push for greater IP protection for biotechnology products? Will the United States want enforceable rules in the environmental chapter and for health and safety provisions? And will the United States at this late date suddenly demand trade rules to curb currency manipulation? Defensively, the White House must make judgments on what we will give in return (and the offensive/defensive moves are linked): for instance, Vietnam has made it clear that it will not move on SOEs without U.S. concession on shoes and textiles. Further, what can the United States give on sugar or cotton? How much continued protection will it defend for the U.S. automobile industry? And what can we concede from our highly protected dairy sector?

Political timing is now crucial. U.S. companies with both offensive and defensive issues at stake are aware that it is crunch time for key decisions on the products and services they hold dear, and they have begun high-powered lobbying campaigns to achieve their disparate goals. While the administration has worked diligently with domestic stakeholders (including NGOs), its own domestic political actions in this two-level game must be redoubled. This means moving forward quickly with Congress to pass new trade promotion authority that sets out congressional trade priorities and guarantees a timely up or down vote for a future TPP agreement. Down the line, it will also mean that the president himself must be willing to spend the political capital to craft a coalition that can assure congressional approval of the TPP (most particularly with congressional Republicans, who will almost certainly provide the majority of the votes).

At a news conference in the wake of the Pacific summits, President Obama ruefully admitted that missing the Asian leaders’ meeting was “almost like not showing up” for his own party, and that this inevitably “created a sense of concern” on the part of U.S. allies and trading partners. But on the larger canvass of U.S. leadership in Asia, the damage is not irreparable. Despite the burst of Chinese triumphalism, Asian nations certainly are aware that Beijing has in reality not backed off it belligerent stands and demands regarding the East and South Chinas seas — nor its bullying of smaller nations such as Vietnam and the Philippines. The ongoing, huge buildup of Chinese military prowess only underscores the perceived necessity for an enduring U.S. defense presence as a counterbalance. 

In addition to committing full diplomatic and political resources to completing and passing the TPP, the president should also move with dispatch to assuage the “sense of concern” in Asia by quickly rescheduling the cancelled trips to Southeast Asia and add on Japan and Korea. For the TPP, there might be a quick payoff for the negotiations, as Korea was widely expected to announce at the Brunei summit that it would join the talks, but apparently backed off when Obama cancelled. A visit to Seoul might just seal that deal and further tip the balance toward the TPP as the lead institution in a new regional economic architecture.

____________________________________________

Right now the only thing saving Americans from this third world agreement is that citizens of other nations are in the streets and kicking their political leaders out of office to stop this Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP).  In the US .......labor and justice leaders are backing the same neo-liberal candidates who will push these policies through.  In Maryland, all the candidates for governor......especially Gansler, Brown, and Mizeur will push TPP through EXCEPT CINDY WALSH FOR GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND!



As you hear, Clinton is stating the lifting of democratic and labor conditions even as ALL INTERNATIONAL LABOR AND JUSTICE ORGANIZATIONS ARE SHOUTING LOUDLY AND STRONGLY AGAINST IT!


Clinton Announces Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement

Clinton Announces Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement Video Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged Vietnam to pursue democracy while announcing details of a a new trans-Pacific trade agreement focused on south Asia, during a visit to Hanoi on Tuesday. (July 10)

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press



Clinton Announces Trans-Pacific Trade Agreement

AssociatedPress
441,355 781 views 14     24 Published on Jul 10, 2012

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton urged Vietnam to pursue democracy while announcing details of a a new trans-Pacific trade agreement focused on south Asia, during a visit to Hanoi on Tuesday. (July 10)



Here in Maryland all media is captured by corporations and we are seeing the Clinton machine locking up all areas of campaigning and election exposure. Public media needs to be the one source of free and fair elections and in Maryland------WYPR and MPT controls most public media and they are completely blocking all candidates that do not support pushing TPP through.


Bill Moyers on why the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade agreement is death for democracy
11/5/2013 10:05am by Gaius Publius

Many of you know
I’ve been covering TPP (the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement) for a while now — for example, here. Obama and the rest of the neoliberal (“free-trade”) Democrats are dying to implement it, and the Republican servants of the same fine CEOs are not far behind.

But the TPP is complicated — at least in appearances — and the public is having a hard time bottom-lining it, in between taking kids to soccer and paying bills in the evening. By comparison, characterizing Keystone is easy — “Want to drink goo from your faucet and watch the earth cook? Support Keystone.”

It’s not really hard to understand TPP though, once you see the pattern — TPP puts the ruling class (and the corporations they control) in charge of most aspects of our economic and regulatory life. It rewrites the laws of every nation that signs it, all to increase the wealth of our pathological betters. We just need more people saying that.

Now comes Bill Moyers with an excellent, listenable primer on what TPP is and why it spells death to democracy (literally) and breathes even more life into the predator 1% of the 1%.

Governments involved with our betters in implementing the TPP “corporate-rule” agreement. These are the perps.

But don’t take my word for it. Listen to Moyers’ great introduction, then to the discussion with Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism and Dean Baker of CEPR. This is one of the best ways to come up to speed on TPP I’ve found — very tight, very clear:

From the video’s introduction at Vimeo:

A US-led trade deal is currently being negotiated that could increase the price of prescription drugs, weaken financial regulations and even allow partner countries to challenge American laws. But few know its substance.

The pact, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), is deliberately shrouded in secrecy, a trade deal powerful people, including President Obama, don’t want you to know about. Over 130 Members of Congress have asked the White House for more transparency about the negotiations and were essentially told to go fly a kite. While most of us are in the dark about the contents of the deal, which Obama aims to seal by year end, corporate lobbyists are in the know about what it contains.

And some vigilant independent watchdogs are tracking the negotiations with sources they trust, including Dean Baker and Yves Smith, who join Moyers & Company this week. Both have written extensively about the TPP and tell Bill the pact actually has very little to do with free trade.

Instead, says Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, “This really is a deal that’s being negotiated by corporations for corporations and any benefit it provides to the bulk of the population of this country will be purely incidental.” Yves Smith, an investment banking expert who runs the Naked Capitalism blog adds: “There would be no reason to keep it so secret if it was in the interest of the public.”

Suitable for sharing with your friends and online associates. Seriously; help to make TPP a household name ahead of the Senate hearings on it and the Fast-Track legislation that will introduce it.

We’ll be following this closely as well. At some point soon, we’ll all need concerted and raucous citizen opposition. As Moyers and company show, this is as big a deal as stopping Big Carbon in its tracks. If we don’t prevent this, TPP will rewrite constitutions across the globe, including here at home.

And believe me, our poor Constitution has taken on a lot of rewriting lately. Save the Constitution. Help kill the TPP “corporate-rule” agreement. (More information here.)


__________________________________________

Bill and Hillary Clinton were the head cheerleaders for Monsanto and are now major shareholders in chief of this global disaster waiting to happen.  Yes, Bill Gates is now partnered with all of this and is behind global PHARMA and killing public health around the world.  You know......public media's 'good billionaire'.


The reason you will see corporate NPR/APM keep all political comment to neo-liberals and neo-cons is that they want only global corporate pols to get airtime even is the only media outlet that should promote free and fair elections and -----PUBLIC MEDIA.   


WYPR IN MARYLAND HAS DELIBERATELY CAPTURED ALL PUBLIC MEDIA AND SILENCES ELECTION RACES NOT COMMITTED TO GLOBAL CORPORATIONS!



Monsanto and Hillary Clinton's Redemptive First Act as Secretary of State
  • By Linn Cohen-Cole
    Op-Ed News, February 9, 2009
    Straight to the Source

For those who hope Obama will bring something different to the world, we must first see clearly what is happening, and make demands of him that are profound, not show.

Liberals are pleased he may appoint a White House farmer to plant an organic garden. That is empty show.

Meanwhile corporations like Monsanto are moving rapidly to take control of food supplies ... and democracies, including ours. www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/1/192127/2714/736/691835


Obama chose Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State. We cannot know what deals were struck to make her stop her destructive campaigning long after it was apparent she had lost. But we do know that Mark Penn, CEO for Burson-Marsteller, one of the world's large PR firms representing Monsanto.
http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=392
advised her for years and ran her campaign. And when she showed up again, by Obama's side, suddenly so did a man named Michael Taylor ... also again.


MIchael Taylor is a Monsanto lawyer Bill Clinton once put in charge of the FDA where he approved Monsanto's rBGH. Hillary was back, andObama was putting Taylor on his transition team. www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15710.cfm

Using the transition team's advice, Obama appointed Tom Vilsack to head the USDA, overriding 20,000 opposing "grassroots" emails. The objection to Vilsack? His deep Monsanto connections.

www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_15573.cfm

Hillary Clinton's connections to Monsanto go way back the Rose Law Firm where she worked. Rose represents Monsanto, Tyson, and Walmart -the world leaders in#genetic engineering, animal production and industrialized food. She received favors there, as did Bill. In office, Bill's USDA immediately and significantly weakened chicken waste and contamination standards, easing Tyson's poultry-factory expansion, www.financialsense.com/editorials/engdahl/2006/0828.html , and his USDA head, Espy, was indicted for bribes, money laundering, and much more, with Tyson was the largest corporate offender.

What happened specifically with Monsanto?
Bill appointed Michael Taylor head of the FDA and put other Monsanto employees in as US Agricultural Trade Representatives, onto International Biotechnology Consultive Forums, and more ...  

Original story, more: http://www.opednews.com/articles/Monsanto-and-Hillary-Cli...




By MBD June 29, 2013
Yes, Monsanto Actually DID Buy the BLACKWATER Mercenary Group!


A report by Jeremy Scahill in The Nation revealed that the largest mercenary army in the world, Blackwater (later called Xe Services and more recently “Academi“) clandestine intelligence services was sold to the multinational Monsanto. Blackwater was renamed in 2009 after becoming famous in the world with numerous reports of abuses in Iraq, including massacres of civilians. It remains the largest private contractor of the U.S. Department of State “security services,” that practices state terrorism by giving the government the opportunity to deny it.

  Many military and former CIA officers work for Blackwater or related companies created to divert attention from their bad reputation and make more profit selling their nefarious services-ranging from information and intelligence to infiltration, political lobbying and paramilitary training – for other governments, banks and multinational corporations. According to Scahill, business with multinationals, like Monsanto, Chevron, and financial giants such as Barclays and Deutsche Bank, are channeled through two companies owned by Erik Prince, owner of Blackwater: Total Intelligence Solutions and Terrorism Research Center. These officers and directors share Blackwater.

One of them, Cofer Black, known for his brutality as one of the directors of the CIA, was the one who made contact with Monsanto in 2008 as director of Total Intelligence, entering into the contract with the company to spy on and infiltrate organizations of animal rights activists, anti-GM and other dirty activities of the biotech giant.

Contacted by Scahill, the Monsanto executive Kevin Wilson declined to comment, but later confirmed to The Nation that they had hired Total Intelligence in 2008 and 2009, according to Monsanto only to keep track of “public disclosure” of its opponents. He also said that Total Intelligence was a “totally separate entity from Blackwater.”

However, Scahill has copies of emails from Cofer Black after the meeting with Wilson for Monsanto, where he explains to other former CIA agents, using their Blackwater e-mails, that the discussion with Wilson was that Total Intelligence had become “Monsanto’s intelligence arm,” spying on activists and other actions, including “our people to legally integrate these groups.” Total Intelligence Monsanto paid $ 127,000 in 2008 and $ 105,000 in 2009.

No wonder that a company engaged in the “science of death” as Monsanto, which has been dedicated from the outset to produce toxic poisons spilling from Agent Orange to PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), pesticides, hormones and genetically modified seeds, is associated with another company of thugs.

Almost simultaneously with the publication of this article in The Nation, the Via Campesina reported the purchase of 500,000 shares of Monsanto, for more than $23 million by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which with this action completed the outing of the mask of “philanthropy.” Another association that is not surprising.

It is a marriage between the two most brutal monopolies in the history of industrialism: Bill Gates controls more than 90 percent of the market share of proprietary computing and Monsanto about 90 percent of the global transgenic seed market and most global commercial seed. There does not exist in any other industrial sector monopolies so vast, whose very existence is a negation of the vaunted principle of “market competition” of capitalism. Both Gates and Monsanto are very aggressive in defending their ill-gotten monopolies.

Although Bill Gates might try to say that the Foundation is not linked to his business, all it proves is the opposite: most of their donations end up favoring the commercial investments of the tycoon, not really “donating” anything, but instead of paying taxes to the state coffers, he invests his profits in where it is favorable to him economically, including propaganda from their supposed good intentions.
On the contrary, their “donations” finance projects as destructive as geoengineering or replacement of natural community medicines for high-tech patented medicines in the poorest areas of the world. What a coincidence, former Secretary of Health Julio Frenk and Ernesto Zedillo are advisers of the Foundation.

Like Monsanto, Gates is also engaged in trying to destroy rural farming worldwide, mainly through the “Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa” (AGRA). It works as a Trojan horse to deprive poor African farmers of their traditional seeds, replacing them with the seeds of their companies first, finally by genetically modified (GM). To this end, the Foundation hired Robert Horsch in 2006, the director of Monsanto. Now Gates, airing major profits, went straight to the source.

Blackwater, Monsanto and Gates are three sides of the same figure: the war machine on the planet and most people who inhabit it, are peasants, indigenous communities, people who want to share information and knowledge or any other who does not want to be in the aegis of profit and the destructiveness of capitalism.




So why were so many media outlets, editorialists and bloggers clamoring to say that the purchase was a “hoax”?

That’s a good question. The more cynical among us might suspect a financial incentive from Monsanto itself to such “journalists.” Monsanto indeed has hired a public relations team to seek out critical blogs and websites reporting on their crimes against both Nature and humankind. We have seen this first hand in comments on PoliticalBlindSpot.com articles on Monsanto. It is not beyond the realm of possibilities that they have created blogs where seemingly legitimate authors write organic thoughts, observations and rebuttals. The public presumes these are real-world people, when in fact they are working PR for the company.

But the core argument of those who claim that the Monsanto purchase of Blackwater is not true lies in the fact that we can only officially document Blackwater being hired by Monsanto for years. Immediately following this extensive work that Blackwater did for Monsanto, they sold the company. Because of the nature of how the sale transpired, it is impossible to document who the sale was to. The obvious and logical conclusion to insiders (particularly in the private security industry), however, is that the sale was in fact to Monsanto who had been employing the group.

Xe (now Academi) has, indeed, been purchased, and while there’s no way of DOCUMENTING who the new owners really are, the logical conclusion would be that Monsanto, who had been employing them prior to the sale are the new owners. This, of course, would also make sense of the secrecy surrounding the deal and the identity of the new owners. The company was bought out by private investors via private equity companies that don’t have to divulge any of their dealings, with Bank of America providing much of the $200 million in financing for the deal.

New York-based USTC Holdings said it will acquire Xe and its core operating subsidiaries, but did not disclose the price or terms of the agreement in a statement.

USTC Holdings is an investor consortium led by private equity firms Forte Capital Advisors and Manhattan Partners.

Various researchers have been trying to document the buy via a paper trail, but so far without much luck. That, of course, is the point…

Keeping it private

One thing that is known: Forte Capital Advisors is the baby of long-time Blackwater ally Jason De Yonker:

DeYonker has unique experience with the Company that dates back to its founding in the late 1990s. He advised the Company through development of its early business plan and expansion of the Moyock training facility as well as supporting negotiations of its first training contracts with U.S. government agencies. Between 1998 and 2002, Mr. DeYonker co-managed Xe founder, Erik Prince’s family office which included management of Mr. Prince’s portfolio companies.

What does that mean? The guy is a glorified accountant.


Prior to joining Forté, Jason co-managed a +$100 million family office. In addition to actively managing various platform companies, Jason was a part of the executive team responsible for family wealth management.

Jason has spent the last 18 years advising on various mergers, acquistions and divestitures with an aggregate transaction value greater than $1 billion. Jason’s experience include: transaction advisory, portfolio management, real estate development, venture capital and cross border dealings. Jason began his career with Arthur Andersen Corporate Finance Group, and was a Director in Deloitte & Touche’s Corporate Finance Group. He also was the Finance Director for the West Family Trust, a venture capital group focused on cross-border transactons.

Jason recieved a Bachelor of Business Administration, with a concentration in finance and accounting, from the Univeristy of Michigan.

The other investor? It looks like the very junior partner will be Manhattan Partners, a private equity company – a shop that gathers money from anonymous rich investors and uses the pool of cash to  leverage buyouts of big companies they wouldn’t have been able to take over on their own.

Manhattan Partners invests in “compelling growth and special situation transactions,” but this will be their first known foray into defense industries – WarIsBusiness.com reports (via Spencer Ackerman):

Manhattan Growth Partners is led by Dean Bosacki and Patrick McBride. Bosacki serves on the board of “the world’s largest commencement photography business,” among other companies. Manhattan Growth Partners, which describes itself as “a progressive thinking private equity firm,” also holds a majority interest in Hugo Naturals, a line of organic, vegan-friendly soaps, lotions, scents and soy candles sold at Whole Foods and other greenwashed retailers.

At the end of the day, it would seem the logical conclusion is that in spite of arguments to the contrary, Monsanto in fact did by the Blackwater mercenary group… or at least the renamed Blackwater Xe (now Academi) Services group. The big question now is why?


__________________________________________

All over the world Monsanto and GMO are tied to massive crop failures as industrial agriculture and Monsanto's patented seed controls all the world's food when a nation allows it to enter their country.  This is why Monsanto has needed to become militarized and it is why Bill and Hillary Clinton has had to make the Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP) about forcing nations to allow industrial farming into nations signing these pacts.  SEE WHY THE CITIZENS OF THE WORLD ARE FIGHTING THESE TRADE DEALS?

 The American people are relying on nations of the world to force these neo-liberal policies down while US media captures all journalism on this fight against global trade agreements!


Scientists Warn EPA Over Monsanto’s GMO Crop Failures, Dangers

by Anthony Gucciardi
March 12th, 2012
Updated 11/04/2012 at 12:07 am

A group of scientists is calling for major federal action in order to deal with the threat posed by Monsanto’s GMO crops, now petitioning the EPA to address the issue head on. The group of 22 academic corn experts are drawing attention to the immense failure of Monsanto’s genetically modified corn, which is developing mutated and resistant insects as a result of its widespread usage. Corn is critical not only as a food staple, but is heavily used in ethanol production, animal feed, and much more. As GM corn becomes the norm, currently taking over 94 percent of the supply, these scientists are seriously concerned about the future of corn production.

Joseph Spencer is one outspoken member of the group, a corn entomologist with the Illinois Natural History Survey, part of the University of Illinois. Spencer states that what is happening is no surprise, instead it is something that needs to be addressed. Warning the EPA over the dangers, the experts sent a letter on March 5th to the agency explaining their worries regarding long-term corn production prospects in light of GMO crops failures. Specifically, the experts are worried about the lack of protection presented by GMO crops against rootworms.

The EPA has already acknowledged that Monsanto’s GMO crops are creating resistant rootworms, which are now ravaging the GMO crops as they mutate to the biopesticide used known as Bacillus thuringiensis (BT). The EPA found that the resistant rootworms, which are evolving to resist the insecticide,  are currently found Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota and Nebraska. After the EPA evaluated documented cases of severe crop damage as well as reports from entomologists, the EPA stated “Monsanto’s program for monitoring suspected cases of resistance is ‘inadequate’”.

Essentially, the GMO crops are doing the opposite of their supposed purpose — leading to more damage from rootworms as they become mutated to resist the defense of the crops. And Monsanto has answered by simply further genetically modifying the Bt, which research shows is extremely ineffective.

“When insecticides overlay transgenic technology, the economic and environmental advantages of rootworm-protected corn quickly disappear,” the scientists wrote.

It’s time for the EPA and other agencies to address the serious threats to nature and human health presented by Monsanto’s genetically modified creations.



0 Comments

April 21st, 2014

4/21/2014

0 Comments

 
RAISE YOUR HANDS IF YOU UNDERSTAND THAT STARVING PEOPLE OF THE ABILITY TO EARN A LIVING IS A TOOL OF AUTOCRACY.  IF THE ONLY JOB PEOPLE CAN HAVE IS PRIVATIZING PUBLIC SCHOOLS----WHETHER AS CHARTER SCHOOL OWNERS OR TEACH FOR AMERICA COLLEGE GRADS-----THE PEOPLE MOST VICTIMIZED BECOME THE PEOPLE PUSHING THE AUTOCRATIC POLICIES.  THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES AND IT IS WHY TEACHERS ARE FEELING UNABLE TO SHOUT OUT IN MANY PLACES LIKE MARYLAND!


STOP ALLOWING A NEO-LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL PARTY CHOOSE YOUR CANDIDATES-----RUN AND VOTE FOR LABOR AND JUSTICE IN ALL PRIMARIES!

As I showed with my blog on higher education in Maryland the structures created for privatizing our public universities have lowered the standards of education for most.  The same is happening in Maryland with the K-12 schools and much of this has to do with Race to the Top policies.  Baltimore's achievement has dropped to such a low status as it seeks to dismantle public education and all that is equal access and opportunity that long-term teachers in schools are starting to shout out about this attack on democratic education in America.

As I said, Maryland has no public media or public universities producing data to support this but we can look across the nation where real data is collected to see how things are working.  The article below shows how Wall Street and Bloomberg is working hard to skew all data for charters and successes that are not real.  Remember, the plan is simply to get these private charters to look like they are doing good so as to expand them.....and then they will be defunded and left to become the same as for-profit higher education.

We need to take a look at what institutions and politicians are supporting these privatization structures and give them the boot!  Stop allowing policy to be captured by Wall Street pols and private non-profits supporting them!


Baltimore residents will see the parallel to NYC and privatization-----the public education money being sent to these schools is completely wasted as money moves to administration and what will be profit.  No quality to be found.  If you are supporting charters because you want to use them for gentrification and/or segregation-----IT WILL COME BACK TO BITE YOU AS WALL STREET EXPECTS TO TAKE ALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS----


Charter Schools: A UFT Research Report

Feb. 4, 2014
5:00 pm
by UFT Research Staff


As charter school proponents go to Albany this week to plead their case, let’s examine the realities behind their claims of stretched resources, unique student demand and stellar academic results.

How poor are charter schools?

While charters maintain they have very thin budgets, and some smaller charters in fact operate close to the margin, others are extremely well-funded.

A review of the most recently available public documents showed that as of 2011-12, the schools in six of the city’s most prominent charter chains had a total of more than $65 million in net assets, including nearly $16 million for the charters which are part of the Uncommon Schools Network and more than $13 million for the Success Academy Network.

What’s more, this supposed poverty doesn’t prevent some charters from paying very large salaries to their executives, as the Daily News recently reported.  The two Harlem Village Academies run by Deborah Kenny pay her a total of half a million dollars a year;  Eva Moskowitz of Success Academies reported a salary only a few thousand less, while David Levin of KIPP got just under $400,000.  All these salaries are dramatically more than those of the city’s mayor and chancellor, who supervise roughly 1,700 schools.

Charters’ opaque bookkeeping methods make it difficult to figure out how much many schools spend on their vendors, but tax filings by the Success Academy schools suggest that management fees charged by that network totaled $3.5 million of their schools’ per-pupil funds in 2011-12. In 2013, the Success Network requested and received a raise in management fees to 15 percent of the per-pupil funding it receives from the state and city.

The total amount of management fees charged by just four of the city’s charter chains in 2011-12 — Success, Uncommon, Achievement First, and KIPP — was over $12 million.  (see table below)

Charter Chain Financial Data, 2011-12

 


Network Name Number of NYC Schools with Audits Total Net Assets of Schools Total Management Fees Top Executive Compensation 2010-11

Achievement First 2

$3,585,931

$2,363,205

$224,200

Success Charter Network 4


$13,563,661

$3,516,362

$475,244

Uncommon Schools 7


$16,820,767

$5,054,626

$252,941

KIPP 1

$1,911,010

$1,089,475

$395,350

Village Academies Network 2

$3,236,767

Not Listed on Audit $499,146

Icahn Charters 4


$26,110,338

$2,236

$280,323

Total 20

$65,228,474

$12,023,668

$2,127,204

All of these figures are based on the schools’ own filings; the lack of publicly available audits for many other chains limits information about what other networks are charging.  Meanwhile, charter proponents led by Success Academy have launched a court fight to prevent an independent expert — the State Comptroller — from auditing charters’ and charter management companies’ books.

A study based on 2010-11 by the city’s Independent Budget Office calculated that as of 2009-10, co-locating a charter school in a public school building in effect gave the charter about $650 per student more in public funding than district schools spend. Their calculations were based on earlier, lower levels of charter per-pupil funding, however; at current rates, that disparity may now be over $2,000 per student.

Charters also get foundation grants — including from right-wing organizations like the Walton Family Foundation, which has given more than $1 million to Achievement First in recent years. In addition, a look at official filings by many charters — in particular the Success Academy network — show that the schools or chains have boards dominated by hedge funders and other financial interests whose contributions could theoretically absorb any reasonable rent charged for public school space; at a gala in 2013, for example, the Success Network raised more than $7 million in one evening.

How unique are charter waiting lists?

Charters make much of the length of their student waiting lists.  But the reality of New York City schools is that tens of thousands of students at all levels end up on waiting lists or completely frozen out of the schools they would like to attend.

More than half of the city’s nearly 64,000 eighth graders did not get into their first choice for high school last year and 7,200 — more than 10 percent of the total — did not get into a single school they applied to.  Approximately 20,000 students who take the test each year for the specialized high schools do not get into one of these schools.

The same is true for thousands of elementary school students who apply for slots in competitive middle schools, and for thousands more families who cannot find space in gifted programs or whose kids end up waitlisted for kindergarten in their neighborhood schools.

Students can and do get off waiting lists in district schools, which generally backfill empty spaces in higher grades if and when students transfer out; most charters, in contrast, almost never accept transfer students off their “waitlists” beyond their early grades.

Does admission to a charter guarantee academic success?

Student scores plummeted across the city last year when the state introduced new tests based on the Common Core standards. But in reading, charters schools as a whole scored under the citywide average (26.4 citywide average, charters 25.1).

Even highly touted charters had classes with significant problems.  Democracy Prep’s Harlem charter had fewer than 4 percent of 6th-graders proficient in reading and fewer than 12 percent passing math.  Fewer than 12 percent of 5th-graders at KIPP Star College Prep were proficient in math and just 16 percent passed the reading test, while 11 percent of their 7th-graders scored proficient in language arts and 14 percent in math.

These results come despite the fact that, as a group, charter schools serve a smaller proportion of the city’s neediest students, including special ed and English language learners.  A 2012 report by the charters’ own association —  the New York City Charter School Center — showed that on average, charter schools had only 6 percent English language learners, compared with 15 percent in district schools.

A recent IBO study showed that an astonishing 80 percent of special education students who start in charter schools in kindergarten are gone by the third grade.

Student attrition is a particular issue for the Success network, whose schools tend to have far higher student suspension rates than their neighborhood schools; they also see their class cohorts shrink as many poor-performing students leave or are counseled out and not replaced.

How can we level the playing field?

If charter schools are serious about playing an important role in New York City education, they should take four immediate steps to level the playing field between them and district schools, as outlined by UFT President Michael Mulgrew below in an article reprinted from the New York Daily News:

For the past 12 years, the Bloomberg administration has singled out charter schools for special treatment, a strategy that embittered many ordinary New York City public school parents and children. Here are four steps charter schools should take now to end that divisive relationship:

Serve the neediest kids

State law requires that charters serve the same percentage of poor and special-needs children, along with English-language learners, as their local district schools do. Unfortunately, many charter schools ignore this requirement. Meanwhile, parents complain that special-needs children and students who struggle academically have been “counseled out” of charters, most of them ending up in local district schools while the charters hold onto students with better scores. A recent report by the city’s Independent Budget Office found that a shocking 80% of special-needs kids who enroll in city charter schools as kindergartners leave their schools by the third grade.

Be good neighbors

The Bloomberg administration often shoehorned charters into public schools. Because some charters didn’t want their children interacting with public school kids, gymnasiums and cafeterias would be limited to charter students at certain hours. Worst of all, students in dilapidated classrooms with outmoded equipment and few supplies watched with envy as the incoming charters spent small fortunes on renovations, paint jobs, new desks and equipment, books and supplies. If they want to be good neighbors, charters should share the wealth — and make sure all students sharing one school building have the same opportunities and environment.

Open their books

If charter operators truly want a new start, they need to abandon the lawsuit they have filed against the state controller seeking to block his ability to audit their books. Parents and taxpayers deserve to know where their money is going.

Stop treating children as profit centers

Charters receive taxpayer dollars. In addition, many get donations from major hedge funders, have millions of dollars in bank accounts and pay their chief executives — who typically oversee a small group of schools — as much as half a million dollars a year, along with lavish benefits. Charters with such resources need to pay rent, as Mayor de Blasio has suggested. And charters should set realistic salary caps for their executives and appropriate limits on payments to consultants.



_________________________________________

You will notice the article coming from UFT in NYC addresses what is the democratic state of New York.  Governor Cuomo and neo-liberals in the New York state legislature are pushing the dismantling of public education as hard as the republicans and pulling the same tax policy bait and switch as we say with Reagan.....soak the middle/working class with taxation and then claim the tax reform that gives the rich the breaks is about helping middle-class families!

REAGAN/CLINTON GAVE CORPORATIONS/RICH THE BIGGEST TAX BREAK IN HISTORY WHILE DOUBLING-DOWN ON TAXATION ON THE MIDDLE-WORKING CLASS.  NEO-LIBERALS ARE NOW DOING IT AGAIN.

Maryland is ground zero for these voucher/private schools getting public funding policies.  I am telling these religious schools that seek support with public money------LOSING OUR DEMOCRATIC EDUCATION SYSTEM WILL NOT BODE WELL FOR YOUR MEMBERSHIP!  In an America currently controlled by global corporations-----totalitarianism does not end well for anyone!

We also see the private donation taking over paying taxes and the loss of tax revenue from writing-off these 'donations'.  The US had the strongest public education system in the world when corporations and the rich were good citizens paying their fair share of taxes.  WE WANT THEM PAYING TAXES AND NOT 'DONATING' TO OUR SCHOOLS!

I am listening as here in Baltimore one school gets air conditioning because of private donations while the others are allowed to operate in the worst of conditions.  It is public funding of schools that allow for equal opportunity and access.

Hurt schools, help rich people


Mar. 27, 2014
2:56 pm
by UFT Editorial Staff


[This editorial originally appeared in the March 27 issue of the New York Teacher.]

A new proposal making its way through the state Legislature is a thinly veiled voucher program that would use taxpayer money to fund religious and other private schools in New York City and across the state.

The proposal, already approved by the state Senate and included in its budget bill, threatens the future funding of public education and must be kept out of the final state budget.


It is misleadingly called the education investment tax credit. It would be more accurate to call it the plan to divest public education and further enrich wealthy donors to private schools.

The program would grant individuals tax credits of up to $1 million for donations to scholarship funds for religious or other private schools.

In other words, money that would go into state coffers to fund public education, affordable housing or infrastructure improvements would instead go into the bank accounts of wealthy people who donate to private scholarship funds.

And the scholarships themselves would benefit children of well-off families, with a generous household income limit of $550,000.


The tax credits would also be available for donors to public schools. But don’t let that fool you. Public schools were added to make the tax credit more widely palatable. This bill would allow wealthy donors to pick which public schools they want to support and which not.

In a cynical attempt by the bill’s writers to win over public school educators and their supporters, teachers would also get a tax credit of at least $100 for buying supplies.

Although the state Senate has passed the bill, which was sponsored by state Sen. Marty Golden, the Assembly leadership, to its credit, is showing less enthusiasm.

But the tax credit proposal has momentum. It is particularly alarming that 17 labor unions, most of them representing uniformed public employees, back the bill on the grounds that it would benefit their members, presumably because many of them send their children to parochial schools.

Have middle-class and working New Yorkers who choose to send their children to private school forgotten the importance of a well-funded public education system?


This proposed massive tax giveaway would hurt working people by increasing the already staggering wealth inequality in New York. By draining money that we need for our public schools, state universities, highways and other vital services, it would threaten the economic future of our state.


_______________________________________________

Chicago is the home of Rahm Emanuel and Arne Duncan------Obama's education-privatization team working for Wall Street.  What Rahm is doing in Chicago is happening in Maryland and especially Baltimore.  The difference is that Chicago, as with New York, has strong labor and justice advocate system.  Maryland and Baltimore has none.  Where Baltimore has organizations supposedly tasked with protecting civil rights and civil liberties working with these privatizers----- across the country parent and teacher groups are successfully fighting off this attack on public education.

Wall Street calculated that hitting underserved communities with this privatization scheme would allow them to create the structure for privatizing all public schools.  As we see in Baltimore it is the opportunity to own a business that drives people of color to play with Wall Street.  These small business charter school owners need to take a look at what happens when Wall Street simply steps in to take those businesses----as is happening today with Baltimore Minority Contractors.

STOP SUPPORTING THE DISMANTLING OF THE BEST PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM IN THE WORLD!





Chicago Teachers Union Advocates for Comprehensive Charter Reform in Illinois


For Immediate Release: April 07, 2014
Contact: Stephanie Gadlin - stephaniegadlin@ctulocal1.com/312-329-6250 CHICAGO –


The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) has been a vocal critic of Illinois charter operations which compete with neighborhood schools for critical resources and often cherry-picks students based on test scores.  The law that sanctions the privately held, publicly funded charters is deeply flawed and in the wake of the UNO scandal the union and taxpayers have continued to lobby lawmakers to do something about it.

Thus, CTU, along with a number of education advocates, parents and others, currently backs several pieces of legislation under consideration in Springfield that will bring significant reforms to unstable charter movement in Illinois, including a bill calling for the elimination of the Illinois State Charter School Commission.

“Tax payers are demanding more accountability from charter operators; they want to know whether the money going to these schools is actually being spent on educating students,” said CTU President Karen Lewis, NBCT. “With all of this talk of school choice there is surprisingly little information about their students’ rates of graduation, drop out or push out from these organizations. The law as its currently written totally undermines the authority of the Illinois State Board of Education and gives it to a shadow commission with little to no oversight. This is unacceptable in the nation’s third largest school district.”

Charter operations not only lack accountability but with little to no innovation in pedagogy they also fail to outperform CPS’s traditional schools, according to research.  Another crucial and little-known element of charter proliferation is the large financial windfall that can flow toward investors such as billionaire political hopeful Bruce Rauner.  The would-be governor has given about $2.5 million to Noble Street, which has 8,850 students, 98 percent of whom are minorities and 89 percent who come from low-income families. A campus bears his name. His family foundation has also given about $4 million to other organizations that operate or support charter schools.

A vocal opponent of public education and unionized teachers, Rauner once floated a scheme that would call for the transferring of public wealth and resources to private hands throughout extreme leverage (debt) similar to financial structures that led to the Great Recession in 2008. In 2010, he instigated a plan that would raise $200 million in equity, borrow $600 million and purchase 100 CPS schools that the investor group would then lease to charter operators. In such a plan, the investor group would reap two benefits: First, they would receive steady streams of revenue from the leases, and second, they could claim tax credits from depreciation on the buildings.  In short, the public would ultimately pay to lease back its own buildings.

Such schemes have made charter proliferation big business in Illinois. While CPS cited budgetary reasons for closing and consolidating scores of neighborhood schools, their own charter proliferation policies have caused unnecessary expenditures.  Here is a look at current legislation pending in the General Assembly of which the CTU supports:

1. SB2627/HB3754: Eliminates the Illinois State Charter School Commission



What this bill does:  Seeks to eliminate the Illinois State Charter School Commission and return its functions to the State Board of Education (ISBE).

Rationale: The State Charter School Commission (SCSC) is an initiative of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to promote the expansion of charter schools, especially in suburban areas where there is little support for charters. The SCSC eliminates local control of schools by providing a second application round for charter schools. Charters whose applications are denied by the local school board can appeal to the SCSC for approval. Two Chicago charter schools linked to the Turkish Gulen movement were approved in this manner, and a Sun-Times investigation found that these schools had significant conflicts of interest regarding contracts and expansion.

2. SB2779/HB4237: Diminishes authority of State Charter School Commission by mandating a referendum



What this bill does: Would require a voter referendum for any charter approved by ISBE or the State Charter Commission. The municipal election would take place in the district where the charter would be approved.

Rationale: The bill provides for voter approval for charter schools that have been approved over the wishes of the local school board. It is an additional mechanism to return control over district policy to local school boards.

3. HB 6005/SB 3030: Charter School Accountability Act

What this bill does:  Requires the charter school authorizer to host charter school lotteries (rather than the school)

· Provides that a charter school waiting list must be centrally administered by the authorizer

· Prohibits a charter school from creating any admissions process subsequent to a lottery

· Requires the authorizer to inform the next parent or guardian on the waiting list in the event that a student transfers from a charter school

· Prohibits future charter schools from contracting with for-profit EMO/CMOs

· Mandates that the physical property of the charter school is owned by charter not EMO/CMO

· Forbids an employee to be employed by both a EMO/CMO and charter school

· Mandates that charters pay pro-rated portion of funding for student who leaves to the new school district

· Prohibits charter schools from spending public funds on marketing

· Charter is subject to an audit by auditor general administrative costs are 20% greater than those of the host district

· Requires a charter assessment report every 5 years

· Includes funding limits if charters are not in compliance with reporting regulations

· Creates a compensation cap for charter school CEOs—compensation cannot be greater than 80% of the compensation of the school district superintendent

· Creates a compensation cap for charter school principals—compensation cannot be greater than 10% more than the average compensation of principals in the district

Rationale: The UNO charter school scandal identified important weaknesses in the current law that have yet to be remedied and provide opportunities for future abuse. These reasonable regulations ensure a level governance playing field between charters and traditional public schools.

4. SB 3303: Limits charter expansion in areas where public schools have been closed



What this bill does:   Provides that no charter can be granted within the same zip code, or neighboring zip code, in which a public school was closed within 10 school years.

· Provides that no charter must be granted unless the General Assembly has appropriated transition impact aid for the school district where the charter school is to be located.

· Provides that CPS designate attendance boundaries for Chicago charter schools.

Rationale: In the wake of the largest mass school closure in US history and the subsequent approval of 18 new charter schools, this law would provide crucial limits on future charter school openings by ensuring that any new campuses opened only where needed and when resources are available.

5. HB3745: Requires all charter high schools to establish vocational academies



What this bill does: Requires all alternative schools and charter high schools to establish vocational academies for students in grades 10-12.

Rationale: True career readiness requires access to experiential job training that only vocational education can provide.

6. HB4655/SB3004: Applies sections of the School Code that pertain to student discipline policies to charter schools



What this bill does: Amends the school code as it pertains to school discipline policies, and seeks to apply sections of the school code disciplinary policy to charter schools. The bill seeks to redefine what school behavior rises to the level of expulsion or suspension, sets limitations on out-of-school suspensions, in-school arrests, and requires behavioral support services and alternative educational services to be provided to certain students. The bill also provides that a student may not be issued a monetary fine or fee as a disciplinary consequence.

Rationale: Charter schools should be held to the same discipline standards as traditional public schools. Fines and harshly punitive discipline measures have resulted in an expulsion rate in Chicago charters that is 12 times the expulsion rate in public schools. These discipline actions have a disproportionate racial impact, as Latino and especially Black students are subject to such discipline at far greater rates than white students.

7. HB4527: Mandates charter school compliance with state and federal SPED and ELL laws



What this bill does: Requires charter schools to comply with all federal and state laws and rules applicable to public schools that pertain to special education and the instruction of English language learners.

8. HB 5328: Mandates Chicago charter schools be administered by a local school council



What this bill does: Requires a school that is initially placed on academic watch status after a fourth annual calculation or that remains on academic watch status after a fifth annual calculation to be approved by the school board and by the school's local school council, if applicable.

Rationale: Parents and community members should have a role in the governance of institutions that receive public money and claim to be public schools. This bill ensures that parents have meaningful roles in charter school operations.

9. HB 5887: Creates restrictions on virtual school options for students



What this bill does: Provides that the State Charter School Commission must require Commission-authorized virtual charter schools to (1) ensure student access to teachers and report to the local school board or boards information regarding teacher accessibility, the teacher/student ratio, and the amount of teacher/student contact time; (2) provide opportunities for peer interaction and collaboration; and (3) adopt protocols to prevent bullying or other inappropriate online behavior. Sets forth requirements and limitations that the Commission must impose with regard to entities proposing virtual charter schools.

· With respect to Commission-authorized virtual charter schools, requires the Commission to limit the withholding of State funds from a school district in proportion to the per pupil expenditure used for building maintenance, classroom supplies, transportation, safety and security, and other costs unique to brick-and-mortar schools.

· With respect to all Commission-authorized charter schools, provides that the Commission must require that proof of continuing enrollment and attendance be submitted quarterly, with prorated refunds to the school district upon withdrawal of students from the charter school.

10. HB4591: Requires funding to follow charter students who transfer to district schools


What this bill does: Provides that if a charter school dismisses a student from the charter school after receiving a quarterly payment from the school district, the charter school must return to the school district on a pro rata basis, for the time the student is not enrolled at the charter school.

Rationale: Because of high dismissal rates, charters are able to keep funds for students they no longer educate. Such funding should follow the student if that student transfers from a charter to another charter school or to a public school.


________________________________________
Common Core was written by corporations and developed during the Bush Administration.  It is simply an attempt by global corporations to capture all information and Race to the Top captures how it is distributed.  We do not need standardization of STEM------STEM is nothing but facts.  We do not need standardization of liberal arts/humanities because the US is a democracy embracing pluralities-----ALLOWING OUR PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM TO BE FUSED WITH DIFFERING OPINIONS IS WHAT MAKES A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY.

The neo-cons and neo-liberals working to make the US an autocratic nation play the republican voters off the labor and justice democrats with these policies.  Republican voters are fighting it because it will take control of what is taught in the classroom but they do not understand that it is their neo-cons that are pushing it.  Labor and justice democrats are being sold that this will raise achievement and get rid of those 'anti-evolution' nuts. 

STOP ALLOWING NEO-CONS AND NEO-LIBERALS KILL PUBLIC EDUCATION.  THIS COMMON CORE POLICY IS BAD FOR EVERYONE.

So, as labor and justice fight the Race to the Top testing and evaluation----charters and Teach for America------the republicans are fighting Common Core AND THEY BOTH NEED TO BE FIGHTING BOTH POLICIES!  Do not allow a need to segregate schools produce the conditions to take away your communities ability to control your own schools.  Don't allow decades of defunding public schools and dismantling education policy with rigor and accountability sell you on the need for privatized schools to get good education.

DEMAND STRONG PUBLIC SCHOOLS WORKING TO SUPPORT INDEPENDENT THOUGHT, LEADERSHIP, AND DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES!



Below you see again that a Wall Street privatization scheme uses the propaganda of 'raising the underserved' just as they used Affordable Care Act as 'raising access to health care for the poor'.  In both cases it has actually done the opposite.  As we see in this article Common Core fails to address the largest problems for the underserved students and it is bringing down the rigor and standards for middle-class students.  Achievement is in decline even as pols skew the data to make it sound as if things are going great.  Maryland is the greatest example of skewing data in the country!

IT IS NOT ABOUT FLAWED IMPLEMENTATION-----IT IS ABOUT ALLOWING WALL STREET TO HAVE OUR PUBLIC EDUCATION AS IT IS TAKING OUR PUBLIC HEALTH!


The Answer Sheet: The Myth of Common Core Equity



Carol C. Burris, Valerie Strauss, Alan A. Aja March 11, 2014
(freepik.com)

The Common Core State Standards were originally promoted as a way of raising academic standards for all children around the country. But is the initiative really about equitable outcomes? Here’s a post that takes on that question, by award-winning New York Principal Carol Burris and Alan A. Aja, assistant  professor and deputy chair in the Department of Puerto Rican & Latino Studies at Brooklyn College (City University of New York). In 2012, he was a recipient of a Whiting Fellowship Award for Excellence in Teaching. Burris has been writing about the flawed Core implementation in New York on this blog.

Burris, principal of South Side High School, has been chronicling the flawed implementation of school reform and the Common Core State Standards across the state for some time (here, and here and here and here, for example). She was named New York’s 2013 High School Principal of the Year by the School Administrators Association of New York and the National Association of Secondary School Principals, and in 2010, tapped as the 2010 New York State Outstanding Educator by the School Administrators Association of New York State. She is the co-author of the New York Principals letter of concern regarding the evaluation of teachers by student test scores. It has been signed by thousands of principals teachers, parents, professors, administrators and citizens. You can read the letter by clicking here.  Her new book is “On The Same Track: How Schools Can Join the Twenty-First-Century Struggle Against Resegregation.”

By Carol Burris and Alan A. Aja

When the Common Core curriculum was promoted in 2009, its creators said unequivocally that principles of equity would be at the center of its eventual implementation. After all, the Bush administration’s test-happy No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandate failed to close the “achievement gap” between whites and minorities. Then the Obama administration inaugurated a A Race to the Top contest among states and districts for federal funds and supported a new set of higher standards for all states intended to ensure college and career readiness for all students, with specific concern for our most under-served and disadvantaged.

On the surface, this seemed like a telling moment in a so-called post-racial, color-blind era, one where racism and institutionalized discrimination are viewed less and less as predictors of life chances. At last it appeared that policymakers were acknowledging the disparate effects of previous federal education policy toward marginalized communities, recommending instead to “raise the standards” through a rich curriculum and equitable teaching practices states could voluntarily adopt.

Five years and 47 states later, Race to the Top reforms are doing anything but to the communities that have been under-served. A barrage of news reports from states across the country underscore the growing discontent by students, parents, unions and legislators over the initial rollout of the Common Core, with a range of grievances from poorly constructed and confusing texts/materials, excessive testing preparation and concerns of children’s data-based privacy and security. But lost amidst the protests, town halls, so-called “delays” and potential “moratoriums” is the issue of equity all over again, making us wonder if “achievement gaps” were truly a primary concern of the Common Core architects at all.


In New York for example, one of the first states to roll out the new curriculum, scores from Common Core tests dropped like a stone—and the achievement gaps dramatically widened. In 2012, prior to the Core’s implementation, the state reported a 12-point black/white achievement gap between average third-grade English Language Arts scores, and a 14-point gap in eighth-grade English Language Arts (ELA) scores.  A year later enter the Common Core-aligned tests: the respective gaps grew to 19 and 25 points respectively (for Latino students the eighth grade ELA gap grew from 3 to 22 points). The same expansion of the gap occurred in math as well. In 2012, there was an 8-point gap between black/white third-grade math scores and a 13-point gap between eighth-grade math scores. In 2013, the respective gaps from the Common Core tests expanded to 14 and 18 points.

The problem however, is more than just a gap in average scores. Using another indicator, the percentage of black students who scored “Below Standard” in third-grade English Language Arts tests rose from 15.5 percent to a shocking 50 percent post-Common Core implementation. In seventh-grade math, black students labeled “Below Standard” jumped from 16.5 percent to a staggering 70 percent. Students with disabilities of all backgrounds saw their scores plummet– 75 percent of students with disabilities scored “Below Standard” on the Grade 5 ELA Common Core tests and 78 percent scored “Below Standard” on the 7th grade math test.  Also, 84 percent of English Language learners score “Below Standard” on the ELA test while 78 percent scored the same on the 7th grade math exam.

When a student scores in the Below Standard category of 1, there is a good chance that her or his answers were mere guesses, or that the test was so difficult, they simply gave up.  How do such tests help nine year olds who are struggling to learn English, or poor students starting school without the advantages of pre-school and the enriched experiences that affluence brings?  How do we advance the cause of equity by giving them the message: You are “below standard” and not on the road to be ready for college?

Rather than heeding the warning that something is very wrong, New York’s Board of Regents adds the highest of stakes for students—their very ability to graduate high school.  In February, the New York State Board of Regents established the college-ready scores that students will need for graduation, beginning with the class that enters high school in four years. These scores, which up until now have been known as “aspirational” measures, have been reported by the state in the aggregate and by sub-group for the past several years. If these scores were used last year, the New York four-year graduation rate would have plummeted to 35 percent. This low rate masks even worse outcomes for students with disabilities (5 percent), as well as black (12 percent), Latino (16 percent) and English Language learners (7 percent). New York Education Commissioner John King even told reporters that he was disappointed that the scores were not phased in sooner because the delay means more students would leave high school “unprepared.” He need not worry. With his preferred cut scores, most students—especially students of color, poverty and disability–will not leave high school at all.

We need not wait until graduation, however, for our most vulnerable students to feel the consequences. The designers and supporters of the Common Core never considered how the test outcomes would affect the school opportunities of disadvantaged students within the context of the competitive design of the American public education system.

For instance, in many school districts state tests are used to make decisions about promotion as well to assign students into “honors,” “enrichment,” and other “accelerated” programs. State scores are used as well for admissions to competitive middle schools and high schools. Given the disturbing evidence that the score gap has widened, if these scores are used for these purposes, many of our students of color, poverty, disability and our English language learners will have doors of opportunity shut as they compete using these very scores. This, in our opinion, is a discriminatory practice.

Research has already established that holding back students unnecessarily can have detrimental impacts down the road, and that by design and impact high-stakes testing disadvantages English language learners, special education, minority and low-income children. The research of Claude Steele, Joshua Aronson, and Aaron Spencer demonstrates that outcomes on high-stakes standardized tests underestimate the achievement and college readiness of children stigmatized as cognitively inferior by stereotype, while exaggerating the scores for individuals from groups whom society deems cognitively superior. Needless to say, we are baffled as to why education reformers continue to deny the evidence that standardized tests are invalid measurements of learning, and would instead “up the ante”’ with Common Core testing.

In the meantime, the Common Core aligned-tests will be used to justify the continuance of market-based education reforms.
This means firing teachers and principals based on test scores, closing urban schools with higher low-income populations and the proliferation of charters as punishment (which ironically scored worse in language arts and the same in math as New York City public schools in the latest round of Common Core-aligned tests).
These strategies, straight from what economist Naomi Klein calls the “shock doctrine” school of economics, lead to further gutting and pseudo-privatization of the most necessary of our public goods, while continuing the false narratives that teachers and their unions are the problem or that racism, poverty and inequitable resource distribution are merely excuses.

In the coming months and years ahead, the debate will continue over the role and efficacy of the Common Core. In some states and localities, that conversation will focus on local control and federal intrusion, while in others it will concern the dubious marriage between business and government.  Some will debate simply how to delay implementation, as though the reforms themselves are not the problem.  They will ignore the evidence that is right before their eyes.

It is time for those who fight for equity to question the very assumptions of reform. If a goal of public education is to expand the life chances of all students, why are we pursuing punitive policies and practices that push the opportunities of our most vulnerable students even further behind?







0 Comments

April 20th, 2014

4/20/2014

0 Comments

 
If you were surprised when democratic voters elected Obama because he ran to the left of Hillary and is now serving to the right of Bush-------you see what neo-liberals are doing.  They are now moving to state and local capture to complete the dismantling of democracy in America and installing the policies required by Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP).

Maryland has been global corporate since Reagan/Clinton so we are already well on the way to this neo-liberal/neo-con  capture of Maryland election/public policy.  Just as with the Presidential primary with Obama pretending he was left of Hillary------Heather Mizeur has been chosen to appear left of the two raging Wall Street pols Anthony Brown and Doug Gansler.


As I showed yesterday, while Heather Mizeur pushes a few progressive bones-------she is good on environment, taking care of underserved and seniors.......what a family protecting neo-liberal Heather is according to the policies she pushes.  Throw in the youth vote with marijuana and a few 'holding corporations accountable with taxes'; you have a platform that sounds progressive.  As I showed with the big picture.....her goal is global corporate rule and movement of wealth and profit to the top.  Neo-liberalism = totalitarianism = third world society.


Today, I will do the same taking these policy issues from Mizeur's campaign page.  Please read to the bottom as I include an article on global corporate rule being totalitarianism. 

THIS IS NOT HYPERBOLE....IT IS EXACTLY THE STEPS TAKEN WHEN THESE REGIMES TAKE HOLD OF A SOCIETY.



Heather Mizeur's policies:


Protecting Our Environment

Maryland’s environment is interconnected with every piece of our everyday lives. Clean air and water ensures the safety of our families and communities. Clean energy helps us combat climate change. A healthy Chesapeake Bay fuels local economies and tourism.



No studies, no fracking.


Mizeur is attached to all of the policy stances that are anti-fracking and yet.....none of them really address stopping fracking or exportation of natural gas.  You can see she is putting forward the idea of caution when everything behind the scenes moves global corporations exporting natural gas and Maryland is right in the middle of it.  In fact, Johns Hopkins is heavily invested in natural gas and is the driver of all that is consolidation of the energy industry in Maryland.

When politicians shout that they are calling for studies on the effect of fracking in Maryland it is just a delay tactic as all other legislation allowing it is in place.  We see funding for natural gas pipelines that will carry gas to the export terminal and Port of Baltimore, we see Mike Miller posturing in saying the export terminal will happen. 

WE KNOW THAT AS HEAD OF THE GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION IT WAS O'MALLEY LEADING THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL GAS EXPORTING POLICY.



If you look at media headlines you would think O'Malley and Mizeur were fighting fracking when indeed, both are aligned to move it forward.  STUDIES ON THE EFFECTS OF FRACKING IN MARYLAND AS PROGRESSIVE?????  REALLY????  The first step someone actually fighting fracking would do is demand the funding for baseline study of the Marcellus Aquifer.  This needed to be done a decade ago and only needs a few million dollars to complete, yet it is deliberately neglected so that fracking corporations can operate with impunity.  That baseline data is what was needed for the public to hold corporations accountable for contamination.  With that data a real environmental politician would shake the data at WVA and PA fracking industry and the threats would have them drilling more conservatively.  You know if Mizeur is praising O'Malley for his work in fighting fracking all the while he is leading the way on the Governors Association-----IT IS ALL PROPAGANDA.

FIRST AND FOREMOST IS THE POLICY THAT TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT (TPP) IF PASSED WILL ALLOW GLOBAL CORPORATIONS TO IGNORE ALL US LABOR AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE LAWS AND MIZEUR IS BACKING ALL POLICY MOVING TPP FORWARD.



MIZEUR'S POLICY ON FRACKING IS TO PRETEND WE ARE DOING PROTECTIVE STUDIES AS WE BUILD THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO DO IT!


No studies, no fracking Gas industry is undermining effort to study environmental effects of controversial drilling practice


During this presidential election season, we Americans may not agree on everything. But one thing we do agree on is this: Only through democracy and open debate can we hope to solve our toughest challenges as a nation.

Unfortunately, here in Maryland, that democratic process has been missing in the face of one of the biggest pollution threats our state has ever faced: hydraulic "fracking" for natural gas. Even as tap water catches on fire in neighboring Pennsylvania and earthquakes have been strongly linked to the fracking process in Ohio, the Maryland chapter of the American Petroleum Institute has been winning its efforts to shut down meaningful debate over these threats here at home. Armed with expensive lobbyists, its shocking goal has been to make sure the state does not designate funding to carefully study the potential threats posed to Western Maryland and the rest of the state from fracking.

That's right — with money and backroom access, the oil and gas industry has blocked the General Assembly from even studying the issue. I say: Enough is enough. In January, I will introduce legislation to create a statutory moratorium on all fracking activity in Maryland. This moratorium will stay in place until and unless we have a science-based review of all the safety risks involved. Once those studies are complete, the General Assembly would take a final vote on whether to go forward with this drilling practice.

In short, my legislation would guarantee that debate, facts and democracy determine the fate of fracking in Maryland. That's in contrast to the oil and gas industry approach which, to date, relies on money, lobbying and subverted democracy, all of which lead in the direction of guaranteed pollution.

The gas industry wants you to believe that fracking is perfectly safe. We've been bombarded with slick newspaper and TV ads about "clean natural gas" promising new jobs and greater energy independence. What the ads do not mention — but what the media have revealed — are the broken towns and farms and families left in the wake of this process in every state that has opened the door widely: Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arkansas, Wyoming, West Virginia and others. When you drill a mile deep and inject explosives, water, sand and a cocktail of chemicals into the earth to force up methane gas, there are many consequences. Methane gets into drinking water, toxins get into rivers, industrial-scale well pads get into rural towns, and even the earth itself shakes, according to the latest estimates of the U.S. Geological Survey.

Thankfully, there are no fracking wells yet in Maryland, but the industry is pounding at our door. In 2011, as gas companies rushed in to lease mineral rights to a whopping one-quarter of the surface of Garret County alone, Gov. Martin O'Malley established a special commission to look into safety concerns surrounding fracking. The commission was tasked with reporting back to the General Assembly with a comprehensive set of studies. These studies would determine what "best practices" (if any) could prevent the fracking horrors experienced elsewhere.

The only problem is, the governor's fracking commission — of which I am a member — does not have dedicated resources to fund these studies. So last March, the House of Delegates voted overwhelmingly to attach a small fee to fracking leases in Maryland, just enough (about $2 million) to fund the necessary safety studies.

What happened next? The gas industry and its lobbyists, in a series of discreet phone calls and closed-door meetings, pressured key leaders in the Senate to keep the bill from ever coming up for a vote in committee.

So I say: Fine. If the gas industry doesn't want Maryland studying the safety risks associated with fracking, then there should be no fracking. Let's put an official, statutory moratorium in place and wait. Polling shows 71 percent of Marylanders agree that such studies are needed before drilling commences. And my legislation will be clear: Once these studies — as enumerated in the governor's June 2011 executive order on fracking — are finally funded, and they lay out the drilling methods and pollution measures needed to keep our people safe, then the General Assembly can decide to lift the moratorium and adopt these science-based standards.

Although a "de facto" moratorium on drilling has existed for the life of the proposed commission studies, as long as no statutory moratorium on drilling exists, the state remains unprotected from the influence of powerful drilling interests and potential lawsuits to force the state to issue drilling permits.

Is my proposal a radical step? Not at all. A state-level moratorium is a reasonable, methodical and thoughtful approach. What's radical is allowing a fossil fuel special interest to thrust upon us — without full democratic input — a drilling method that is associated with temblors and benzene-contaminated water in virtually every state where it's been tried.

Our state has a long history of using sound reasoning and the democratic process to make good choices. Let's continue that tradition as a new energy challenge knocks on our door.



Maryland Gov. O’Malley, the host of the DGA’s Spring Policy Conference, has attracted criticism from activists for his failure to use science to guide his decision on opening up the state to fracking.

Last April, the O’Malley-appointed Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission issued a draft report warning that fracking could have significant negative impacts in Maryland. Still,
O’Malley and other Maryland leaders are pushing forward with drilling as if it is inevitable.

Opponents of fracking believe that through O’Malley’s alliance with the Center for Sustainable Shale Development (CSSD), an industry group led by representatives from CONSOL Energy, Shell, Chevron, EQT Corporation and the Environmental Defense Fund, the governor is promoting the idea of industry-sponsored self-regulation. This week, Americans Against Fracking, Democracy for America and MoveOn.org will deliver to O’Malley more than 3,000 petitions urging him to ban fracking.


************************************************************

O'Malley placed himself at the head of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation just to get headlines as being environmental as he pushed to privatize the Port of Baltimore into a global shipping hub with ships tracking invasive species up the bay that will choke and kill the Chesapeake Bay.

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING AND ANYONE WHO LOVES THE BAY SHOULD BE OUTRAGED WITH THIS PORT OF BALTIMORE POLICY-----DO YOU HEAR MIZEUR'S OUTRAGE????
  NO, SHE SUPPORTS THE PRIVATIZATION OF THE PORT OF BALTIMORE FOR GOODNESS SAKE!


Environmentalists slam new bay pact CBF "shocked" draft agreement ignores toxic pollution, climate change


A person walks on the edge of the Chesapeake Bay. (Jen Rynda / Patuxent Publishing / January 28, 2012)

Tim Wheeler 11:21 a.m. EST, January 30, 2014  Baltimore Sun

Environmentalists are slamming a new draft Chesapeake Bay restoration agreement for failing to address toxic pollution or even mention climate change as a complicating factor in the three-decade effort to revive the ailing estuary.

********************************
This is the Maryland Public Service Commission, already heavily staffed with corporate appointments. 

DO YOU HEAR MIZEUR SHOUTING AGAINST THIS?


O'Malley names energy executive to PSC


By Michael Dresser, The Baltimore Sun 5:50 p.m. EDT, August 14, 2013


____________________________________________

Heather also strongly supported Maryland's offshore wind program.


The only way a utility will be green is if it is kept public.  As with all utilities in Maryland that are privatized as with this wind farm project, it immediately is handed to ever larger corporations and at this time most of Maryland's utilities are controlled by global corporations.  Even this wind farm was handed to a global corporation for operations.  Heather Mizeur supports all of these public private partnerships that make these operations not only about profit, but end up soaking the public for money through ever rising rates.  I told you of Commerce Energy seeking Maryland BGE consumers to sign the new green energy surcharge created from this wind project over to them.....they are a huge West Coast energy corporation having nothing to do with green.

So, as an environmentalist I was shout
ing to keep wind farms public------while Heather was pushing her private partnership with a global corporation.

HEATHER MIZEUR KNOWS THAT HANDING WIND FARMS OVER TO A GLOBAL CORPORATION AND ALLOWING A WEST COAST COMMERCE ENERGY TO COLLECT OUR MARYLAND BGE SURCHARGE IS NOT GREEN POLICY.....IT IS CORPORATE AND WEALTH POLICY.


Below you see a Texas corporation charged with the development and they contracted with a global corporation for operations.  Don't you just love when Texan energy corporations creating global warming are making money with the green energy movement! 

WOULD AN ENVIRONMENTALIST REALLY GO TO TEXAS TO CONTRACT THIS JOB????


Massive wind farm envisioned in Somerset


By BRUCE HOTCHKISS
Senior Editor

An estimated 7,000 to 8,000 acres, encompassing — or including fields in — 50 to 60 farms, are involved in an envisioned $150 million “wind farm” in Somerset County on Maryland’s Eastern Shore.
Adam Cohen, vice president of Pioneer Green Energy of Austin, Texas, who heads the company’s East Coast operations, said the company hopes to start construction in 2013.

It seems there are lots of global connections to the natural gas market setting up right here in Maryland even as Heather pretends there are studies being done!  Below you see one of the 'green' corporations BGE is handing the wind farm surcharge to!

FIGHTING FRACKING SAYS O'MALLEY AND MIZEUR-----REALLY??????


Commerce Energy -Commerce Energy Group, Inc., based in Costa Mesa, California, USA, was the parent company of a wholly owned independent electricity and natural gas marketing company ...
Commerce Energy


8600 La Salle Rd,

 Towson, MD 21286



Propane & Natural Gas, Gas Companies
___________________________________
__

The massive frauds of last decade moved more women and children into poverty than in any period in US history.  Maryland was ground zero for the subprime loan fraud----MERS operated in Mizeur's Washington suburbs.  Wall Street still owes Maryland hundreds of billions of dollars at least----and I do not hear a word from Heather....she doubles-down with Wall Street. A progressive would have created a state public bank and kicked these big banks out of Maryland.

SUSPENSION OF RULE OF LAW IS THE #1 ISSUE IMPOVERISHING WOMEN AND CHILDREN.  MARYLAND HAS DISMANTLED MOST OF PUBLIC JUSTICE.


Below you see propaganda at its finest.  The first thing the Maryland Assembly did after the economic collapse was to defund Medicare and Medicaid and social services to a great extent.  Remember, when a state defunds those programs the Federal cuts are super-sized.  In Baltimore, there is a policy of shutting down social service buildings making people go to phones for service and then making sure citizens cannot get through----this is a Texas policy to kill social services to women and children.  So, where does the money allotted to families unable to get Food Stamps?  HEAR THAT SUCKING MACHINE???


Maryland has one of the most underfunded social service agencies and it has the most fraud of what little money gets out.  Why would people care whether the poor are supported? 

THIS IS WHAT MAKES BALTIMORE THIRD WORLD IN CRIME AND VIOLENCE---NO SOCIAL SUPPORT SERVICES. 


Do we really want to see teenagers angry at being left with no future assaulting and stealing from the middle-class in order to survive? 


HOW THIRD WORLD IS THAT...JUST SO THE RICH CAN GET RICHER.

So, when Mizeur outlines the funding and support she sends to the underserved, women, and children....she never speaks of the dismantling of public justice and massive fraud and corruption taking all this funding.

When she is not shouting that Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP) will allow all labor and justice laws to be ignored-----all these labor policies will be mute as Heather works to build the TPP structures here in Maryland.

Read Heather’s plan to expand access to and increase benefits of child care subsidies.


Ensure Equal Pay for Equal Work



Provide Paid Family and Medical Leave


__________________________________________

Mizeur supporting Medicare for All while the State of Maryland seeks wavers from Medicare for years just to end it as a Federal program?  REALLY?????

THIS IS PROGRESSIVE POSING AT ITS FINEST----TRYING TO USURP THE UNIVERSAL CARE ISSUE WHILE PUSHING THE MOST PRIVATE OF STATE HEALTH SYSTEMS WITH POLICY WRITTEN BY THE MOST PROFIT-DRIVEN NEO-CONSERVATIVE ORGANIZATION IN THE NATION----JOHNS HOPKINS.


All the issues around roll-out of the state health structures meant to send all public sector health plans, all Medicare and Medicaid when these programs are ended are just a screen to hide the fact that Maryland will be ground zero for the worst of denial of access to health care for 80% of Maryland citizens.  This will lower life expectancy for those 80% in one generation and if you are middle-class now and affording a Silver tiered plan----you may well not be in a decade if these Affordable Care Act policies are kept.

The Affordable Care Act is a republican policy to end Federal public health and acting to consolidate/deregulate the health industry as Clinton did with the financial industry making global health corporations looking and acting like Wall Street.
  This time rather than impoverishing people with constant predation and fraud-----people will die from lack of ordinary care just so the rich can get richer.

THAT'S A NEO-LIBERAL FOR YOU-----WORKING FOR WEALTH AND PROFIT ON THE BACKS OF LABOR AND JUSTICE!



SAYS HEATHER MIZEUR:

Guiding Principles for Fixing Maryland's Affordable Care Act Implementation


'Politics and pride have gotten in the way of protecting families in desperate need for health coverage. It’s time for the General Assembly to step in and make it right. Emergency legislation is necessary to assure there are no gaps in coverage and that families are held harmless from out of pocket costs incurred in the wake of cancelled plans and inability to enroll in new coverage'



We know that Obama has spent his entire time in office working to finalize Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP) and that includes working with Bill and Hillary Clinton and Bill Gates in demanding that public health around the world and public subsidy to health care be ended.  That is what TPP does.  So, we know there was never any intent to protect public health by Obama and neo-liberals.  We know all of the appointments to Federal health programs and to Senate Committees by Harry Reid were all pols ready to privatize and defund public health.

This is what Heather Mizeur works towards as well.  All these pols and pundits shouting out for Affordable Care Act knew its goal was ending Medicare and Medicaid and public health.


Wake-up Call Resist the Corporate State


Root of Our Health Care Problems: Privatization

Patients gather outside the Virginia-Kentucky Fairgrounds for their turn to enter the Remote Area Medical (RAM) Health Expedition in Wise, Va., July 24, 2009. Photo by Paul Morse for AARP Bulletin Today

“The root of the problem is the privatization of the funding and organization of medical care.”

Consequences of the Privatized Funding of Medical Care and the Privatized Electoral Process

By Vicente Navarro, M.D.
American Journal of Public Health, Jan. 14, 2010



The current state of health care reform in the United States reveals the enormous limitations of democracy in this country, unparalleled in the western world. Why is there such a large gap between what people want from their representatives in Congress – including universal access to health care as a matter of right – and what they get?

To answer this question, we first need to look at what is happening in the U.S. medical care sector. I think it’s fair to say that what we see there is also unparalleled in the western world. Forty-seven million people are without any form of health insurance coverage (and a million more are added each year) and 102 million have insufficient coverage (and many aren’t aware of how limited their coverage is until they find out that an illness or needed test is not covered).
The clearest indicator of the inhumane system of funding and organizing medical care in the United States is that 40 percent of people in the terminal stages of illness say they are worrying about how to pay their medical bills. No other major country comes even close to this level of inhumanity.


The root of the problem is the privatization of the funding and organization of medical care. Most of the funds are collected and services administered by private insurance companies. This system is rooted in the Taft-Hartley Act (the same act that forbade the working class to act as a class, by forbidding sympathy strikes that would allow workers from different employment sectors to strike to defend their class interests). Taft-Hartley shifted the responsibility for working people’s health benefits coverage to highly decentralized collective bargaining agreements, which explains the great variability in coverage. One consequence is that when American workers lose their jobs, they lose not just income but health benefits for themselves and their families. It is not surprising that the United States has the fewest working days lost to strikes. Workers are afraid to make trouble in the workplace, because getting fired could mean losing medical care for
their families.

It has been a traditional demand of the labor movement to get rid of the consequences of the Taft-Hartley Act.
The demand for universality of health care, with every American having the right to access care, has been a constant in the labor and progressive movements. The majority of Americans agree with this demand, but they are unlikely to get it.

The reason for this gap between what people want and what people get is, again, privatization – a privatized electoral process, in which most campaign funding of candidates for political office comes from private sources. That private money does not mainly come (as myth would have it) from multitudes of average Americans sending in $50. The great majority comes from huge economic interests (components of the “Corporate Class”), including the insurance, pharmaceutical, and medical equipment companies; the professional associations; and other components of the medical-industrial complex.
The six key members of the Senate Finance Committee, chaired by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), have received support from these interests. They received a million dollars each.

To further compound the problem created by a privatized electoral process, U.S. democracy is a nonproportional type of democracy— that is, the population is not represented in Congress in proportion to the size of the electorate. Each state is represented by two senators, regardless of its size, which gives enormous power (as the country’s founders intended) to rural, conservative states. The six key senators on the Finance Committee represent rural states that, in sum, include only about 3 percent of the U.S. population, and these senators have the future of health care reform in their hands.

Democracy in the United States is indeed extremely limited. The opening of the nation’s founding document, the U.S. Constitution, suggests that it is “We the People . . .” who make decisions, but it should include a footnote saying “or Corporate America.” Furthermore, those who do decide are not fully representative of the population. Still, the United States is not a dictatorship, but a democracy so tilted in favor of corporate and conservative interests that an enormous effort is required to create change. The election of President Obama seemed to be such a change and a sign of hope, because this was the trademark of his campaign. But since coming into office, he seems to have been poorly advised on his strategy for implementing the promised change. He has made several big mistakes.

OBAMA’S MISTAKES


1. An emphasis on the issue of economic viability of the system, stressing that medical expenditures (private and public) are increasing too rapidly and enlarging the federal deficit. This message has been repeated in many different ways, emphasizing that a primary goal of health care reform is to reduce the federal deficit. Most of the reforms the administration is calling for (which will, undoubtedly, cost money) will be funded by increasing the efficiency of the current public and private programs. People’s well-founded skepticism about Congress explains why so many (including Medicare beneficiaries)
have expressed their concern about the meaning of “increasing the efficiency,” which they interpret to mean reducing their benefits. It is not surprising that the major opposition to the Obama reform proposal comes from the beneficiaries of these public programs, especially Medicare.

2. The concern about costs and the need to improve efficiency expressed together with an emphasis on covering the uncovered as a moral problem that needs to be resolved. This is indeed a moral issue. But, when Obama adds that he plans to pay for this expansion of coverage by increasing the efficiency of current programs, he is calling on people’s compassion, with the possibility of most people (who do have coverage) seeing their benefits reduced to take care of the uncovered. We have plenty of experience (with antipoverty and other means-tested programs) to show that compassion is not a good motivator. Solidarity (I take care of you on the condition that you take care of me) is a much better motivator.

What Obama should have done is expand and improve the Medicare Program to all Americans. This would resolve the problems of the uncovered and of everyone else. The call for a universalism mandated by government (not a mandate that individuals must buy their own health insurance, just as they have to buy car insurance) is far more ambitious (and more realistic) than a gradual path to universalism, which is likely to fail.


3. Antagonizing the left. Achieving a universal right to health care requires a huge mobilization, comparable to that which got Obama elected. For this the president needs the left. Obama could not win only by mobilizing the left, but he could not win without it. He has antagonized the left by excluding single-payer health care from the negotiating table. I can understand why he changed his mind and decided not to support the single-payer option, but I cannot understand (because it was a tactical error) why, after saying that all options would be included, he excluded the single-payer option – the alternative preferred by the trade unions, the major social movements (such as the civil rights, feminist, and green movements), and others who were the core of his support and are the grassroots of the Democratic Party. To make things worse, he is ready to eliminate even the public option, which is seen as a way of introducing the single-payer option through
the backdoor. So, it is not surprising that the left is feeling frustrated, angry, and demoralized (and did not show up at the town hall meetings).

All of this reminds me of what I saw during and after my time on the Clinton White House health care reform task force (as the “token single-payer expert”). Clinton had won the election of 1992 with a commitment to provide universal coverage. But once in office, he gave priority to reducing the federal deficit (not even in his campaign program), under pressure from Wall Street through Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, and to approving the North American Free Trade Agreement, which was opposed by the trade unions and the majority of the Democratic Party. This antagonized the left of the party, and large numbers of Democratic voters stayed home in the 1994 congressional elections. The “Gingrich Revolution” was a consequence of this abstention of the Democratic grassroots. The Republicans received about the same number of votes in 1994 as in 1990 (the preceding nonpresidential election year). There was no increase in the Republican vote, but rather a decline in the Democratic vote. I am afraid that the same could happen in 2010.




________________________________________

WE CAN REVERSE THIS BUT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE MUST WAKE UP AND BECOME ACTIVE CITIZENS----IF YOU DO NOT, YOU WILL BECOME THIRD WORLD.



What any democratic politician today would be shouting is the threat of global corporations and totalitarianism.  We know Maryland is ground zero for the spying apparatus.....NSA and all that comes with the surveillance system tied with Wall Street.  So, where are the warnings from Heather Mizeur------

THIS IS WHAT ANY AMERICAN POLITICIAN WOULD BE SHOUTING-----IF NOT, THEY ARE WORKING FOR GLOBAL CORPORATIONS AND CORPORATE RULE.

All of Maryland pols are working with Wall Street to expand the hold on Maryland and its citizens.  We can reverse this by running and voting for labor and justice candidates----

REAL PEOPLE WORKING TO BRING BACK RULE OF LAW AND EQUAL PROTECTION.  STOP ALLOWING A NEO-LIBERAL DNC TO  CHOOSE YOUR CANDIDATES----THIS IS WHY CINDY WALSH FOR GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND IS BLOCKED FROM ELECTION COVERAGE!


I read a Clinton website that had Chelsea Clinton's child birth deemed a royal birth----these people are moving in that direction!


  Corporate Control of American Democracy

" Corporations have taken over the government and turned it against its own people." Ralph Nader

Corporate watch
Corporate Welfare Transnational Corporations & the Third World


" I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country. "

Thomas Jefferson, 3rd US president 1801-1809




  "I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country...corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war." President Abraham Lincoln



***** "The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist. McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas." Thomas Friedman, New York Times columnist



0 Comments

April 19th, 2014

4/19/2014

0 Comments

 
ALL CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR ARE GLOBAL CORPORATE POLITICIANS.....ESPECIALLY GANLER, BROWN, AND MIZEUR.  I'M GOING TO PICK ON MIZEUR BECAUSE GLOBAL CORPORATIONS CHOSE HER TO BE THE 'PROGRESSIVE' NEO-LIBERAL.

STOP VOTING FOR NEO-LIBERALS WHO WILL CONTINUE TO HAND ALL THAT IS PUBLIC TO GLOBAL CORPORATIONS.


I am going to use this weekend to talk about my fellow democratic candidates for governor.  Why they are running as democrats I'll never know!!



Heather Mizeur plans to continue O’Malley’s relentless privatization of all that is public with public private partnerships with global corporations taking over all our public sector. Killing the people’s ability to control public policy, union busting public sector unions, driving wages to the lowest point. What is progressive about all of this? Between these goals of public private partnership and Wall Street leveraging Heather Mizeur plans to super-size global corporate rule in Maryland.

MARYLAND IS DOING JUST WHAT THIS ARTICLE SHOWS HAPPENING IN VIRGINIA----BECAUSE WE HAVE NEO-LIBERALS AND NOT DEMOCRATS.

A bad track record for privatizing infrastructure

By Cate Long
April 4, 2013 REUTERS


public private partnerships

The poster boy for privatizing U.S. public infrastructure has been Virginia’s governor Bob McDonnell. I wrote last June about McDonnell:

Governor Bob McDonnell might as well have put a for-sale sign on Virginia’s front lawn when he announced that the state’s Office of Transportation Public-Private Partnerships (OTP3) has a ‘pipeline’ of potential privatization projects. The governor and Sean Connaughton, the head of the Department of Transportation, appear to be racing to move as many of Virginia’s public assets into private hands as possible.

How was McDonnell doing this? The Bond Buyer had the story:

In a move that is likely to make Virginia the leading state for public-private partnerships, Gov. Robert McDonnell has announced 22 transportation and infrastructure projects that may be developed as P3s.

The governor is asking for public input on the projects, which include highway, seaport and spaceport projects that are either under active consideration or flagged as possible candidates for P3s.

‘It’s a fairly major step forward for P3s in Virginia,’ said Secretary of Transportation Sean Connaughton.

Virginia’s 1995 legislation enabling P3s allows private companies to submit unsolicited proposals that meet certain guidelines, and that is how most of the commonwealth’s P3 projects have emerged, Connaughton said.

In April, APM Terminals Inc. submitted such a proposal to operate the Port of Virginia as a P3. That project is among those announced by McDonnell. Virginia is now making an effort to harness more interest from the private sector, said Connaughton.

McDonnell basically put the public assets of Virginia up for sale. One of the governor’s biggest disappointments was the privatization of the Ports of Virginia, which was being operated by the non-profit Virginia International Terminals Inc. The board of the Virginia Port Authority rejected bids from private operators to take control of the ports. The Virginian-Pilot said in an Op-Ed:

In 2011, McDonnell fired 10 of 11 members of the port authority’s board of commissioners. And by year’s end, he and Transportation Secretary Sean Connaughton had offered, on the state’s behalf, to purchase APM’s Portsmouth terminal outright. APM declined the offer, but in April 2012, countered with its own bid to resume operations at its terminal and replace VIT at the state-owned terminals in Norfolk, Newport News and Portsmouth. The proposal was valued at up to $3.9 billion over a 48-year term.

That offer seemed to dazzle Connaughton and other state officials, who set an absurdly short period – less than 60 days – for others to present competing proposals under the state’s Public-Private Transportation Act. Public outcry ensued. Legislators criticized the use of the PPTA to bypass the General Assembly and conclude the transaction before they could return to Richmond and interfere during the legislative session.

The political process was a disaster. More from the The Virginian-Pilot:

Those actions were a clear message that it would take a substantially better, and better-vetted, offer before Virginia’s leaders even considered selling a state asset as critical as the port, which supports some 340,000 jobs and has an estimated annual economic impact of $41 billion.

The episode also stands as a caution to state officials about cherry-picking numbers to make a point. Despite its repetition in the cause of forcing a deal, reports of VIT’s financial difficulties were found to be unsubstantiated and overstated. Criticism of the port’s performance under VIT ignored the variables affecting global maritime commerce, much less the role of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

Fitch Ratings commented on how the failed Virginia deal will weaken interest in other big infrastructure privatization deals:

Virginia Port Authority’s decision to discontinue negotiations with two potential lessors of its ocean terminals may create negative momentum for other large port privatization projects because of the length of the negotiation, the strong brand names of the bidders, and the meaningful pricing that was considered. It would have been the first privatization of a major U.S. port facility. In our view, the privatization of smaller, individual terminals is less likely to be affected.

I never saw the cost benefit analysis of the Virginia port deal, but my rough math shows that it short-changed the state. Those in authority seem to have determined the same thing.

The momentum is shifting away from privatization deals for infrastructure. The new Tappan Zee bridge in New York that spans the Hudson River was instead contracted as a design-build project. In this arrangement a joint venture called the Tappan Zee Constructors, consisting of Fluor Enterprises, Inc., American Bridge Company, Granite Construction Northeast, Inc., and Traylor Bros., Inc., was chosen to design and build the bridge under contract to the state. From The Journal News:

‘(This) action is also amplified by the fact that, under design-build, the selected bridge plan came in $1 billion under the expected price, maximizing the impact of this major financial support,’ he said.

Proponents of privatization cite the financial advantages of private investors taking control of public assets. But when you look at the financial performance of many of these projects, the initial projections are not realized. In January I summarized the failure of seven U.S. infrastructure privatization projects, many of which relied on wildly optimistic financial projections, and many of which defaulted on their bonds.

There are plenty of promises from investors, but very little real analysis of privatization deals. I hope this paradigm of infrastructure will fade away and be buried with the other overblown and underperforming financial schemes.





________________________________________



Heather Mizeur for Governor of Maryland is running as a 'progressive democrat' and yet she is joining Obama in pushing a myRA privatization platform on a state level. WOW----privatization of both Social Security and Medicare? SEE HOW NEO-LIBERALS RUNNING AS PROGRESSIVES ARE TAKING OVER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY?




The Truth About Social Security and Privatization
Our Social Security System vs. "Privatization"
Social Security is a successful intergenerational program that has served this country well. Yet some groups want to "privatize" Social Security by taking payroll tax money that now goes into the Social Security trust funds and investing it instead in private investment accounts.


Under Social Security, people earn the right to participate by working and contributing. The program was never intended to be an investment program. With broader policy goals than private retirement plans, its intent is to provide guaranteed income to seniors, disabled citizens, survivors, and their families. Privatization would severely undermine this system.


The arguments for privatization can seem persuasive at first, but they are all hollow and easily disproved. Following are five simple rebuttals to many common and misleading claims being spread by the privatization movement. When you hear any of the pro-privatization claims, refer to the facts provided here.


When They Say , "Privatization Will Fix Social Security for Future Generations," The TRUTH is...


Privatization is not a plan to save Social Security; it is a plan to dismantle Social Security. Privatization means increased retirement risks, severe cuts in Social Security benefits, and a multi-trillion dollar increase in the federal debt.


Privatization diverts money out of Social Security into individual accounts leaving an even larger solvency problem. Privatizers fill this funding gap by dramatically cutting Social Security benefits. They cover the rest by borrowing money, thereby increasing the debt burden on all taxpayers by trillions of dollars over the next half century. With market-based accounts, the risk of an adequate retirement is placed entirely on the individual.


When They Say, "Social Security will soon go bankrupt," The TRUTH is...


If Congress does nothing - makes no changes or "reforms" - Social Security is projected to deliver full guaranteed benefits until at least 2037. Even after 2037, again without any changes, the trust funds will continue to pay 76 percent of benefits for years after that.

It's true, the aging baby boom generation will strain Social Security in the future. However, if Congress enacts modest changes, Social Security should be able to meet 100% of its benefit obligations for many decades to come.


When They Say, "Workers could get a better return by investing in the Stock Market," The TRUTH is...


Right now, Social Security provides a guaranteed income, paying benefits every month for life, with increases for inflation. After adjusting for risk, Social Security has a rate of return equal to that of any mix of financial assets in private accounts.


And risk must be taken into account, because stock market returns are never guaranteed! As we've seen in recent years, returns can fluctuate wildly. One need only be reminded that between 2001 and 2003, the NASDAQ lost 75% of its value. And the market took a major downturn again in 2008. Nest eggs can disappear in an instant - and take months, if not years, to rebuild.


With privatization, some might do well, many might lose - but our society would lose the benefit of the sound, basic income security provided by Social Security retirement, disability and survivor benefits.


When They Say, "Social Security is unfair because tomorrow's workers will have to support the Baby Boomers' retirement," The TRUTH is...


In fact, the Boomers have helped pre-fund part of their benefits by building a huge surplus that should keep Social Security alive and well for many years. With privatization, however, workers would end up in a double bind - paying taxes to support the Boomers' retirement plus investing money in their own individual accounts, in hopes of building retirement funds for themselves.


To make matters even worse, today's workers would have to bear the transition costs of switching to privatization, estimated at nearly $5 trillion over just the first twenty years- a cost that would fall on today's young people.


When They Say, "Privatization gets rid of the inefficiency of big government," The TRUTH is...


Administrative costs for Social Security are very low - less than 1% of the program's budget. Diverting money to the stock market would incur the very high costs of brokers' commissions, mutual fund management fees, and other expenses inherent in buying and selling stocks and bonds.


Small investment accounts are very expensive to administer. Commissions and fees could easily burn up as much as 15 cents out of every dollar of a worker's annual investment as they do in some countries with privatized systems.


Wall Street brokers and fund managers would stand to make billions of dollars a year thanks to privatization, so it's no surprise that they strongly support the privatization movement!


Conclusion: Privatization is NOT the Answer!


Unfortunately, exaggerated media coverage regarding Social Security's finances has contributed to the illusion that Social Security is in immediate trouble. And the pro-privatization movement has spent millions of dollars promoting that illusion.


That's why the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare is spreading the truth, through education material like the booklet you're reading right now. And that's why NCPSSM remains committed to blocking any effort to privatize Social Security.


By using these facts, you can help the truth - and Social Security - win! Thank you for supporting Social Security for the benefit of every generation of Americans!



_____________________________________________

Heather Mizeur is gung-ho on all that is Wall Street financial leverage and state partnerships with Wall Street! She is silent on the fact that Wall Street is systemically criminal and still owes the American people trillions of dollars and the State of Maryland tens of billions of dollars from the last frauds. Neo-liberals in Maryland are deliberately soaking the state with debt knowing we are heading for an economic collapse that will have all levels of government defaulting on these deals-----handing all these public projects----especially our schools----to private investors. That is exactly what neo-liberals want after all----they intend to end public education!

HEATHER SUGGESTED THAT UNIONS GIVE UP PART OF THEIR PENSIONS TO PAY FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION AND SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE STATE BEING RANKED AT THE BOTTOM FOR FRAUD AND CORRUPTION LOSING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO CORPORATE FRAUD.




Next `Big Crisis' Is Unfolding in Muni-Bond Market: Joe Mysak By Joe Mysak Apr 8, 2010 9:01 PM ET


Look to municipal bonds for the next big disaster.

That’s the advice of Richard Bookstaber, a senior policy adviser at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Writing on his blog this past week, Bookstaber said the next big crisis looked a lot like the last big crisis, in housing and credit.

Conditions in the municipal-bond market match almost exactly the conditions that existed for the blowup that sparked the worst recession since the Great Depression, he said.

I would agree with him up to this point. What he then predicts seems rather unlikely to happen.

The muni market is leveraged and opaque, in terms of pension obligations. It is a big market, and problems can “go systemic,” he writes. Much of the tax base, things like toll revenue, is already mortgaged. Once a few municipalities default on their debt, “there is a risk of a widespread cascade because the opprobrium will be lessened.”

Finally, those investors who seek salvation in geographic diversification may be disappointed, just as those in the housing market were. That’s “because similar methods of leveraging were being employed throughout the country.”

Bookstaber is a serious, smart fellow, a hedge-fund and Wall Street securities firm veteran. What he says can’t be dismissed as the usual headline-grabbing bloggery hysteria.

Los Angeles, Detroit

Bookstaber also works for the SEC. So he may have some special insights (he noted that his blog post is his personal opinion and not the views of the SEC or its staff).

As if to punctuate the man’s arguments, the city controller of Los Angeles this week said it might go broke in a month; the mayor called for nonessential services to be shut down for two days a week. The Citizens Research Council of Michigan, an independent research organization, released a report on Detroit, and said it might be helpful if the city reorganized under bankruptcy protection.

There’s a lot of bad stuff going on in Muniland right now. Because tax revenue tends to lag behind economic recovery, there’s more gloom on the horizon. The question for bond buyers is whether “things can go systemic,” as Bookstaber puts it.

I don’t think so.

Nor do I think that bond investors are well-served by ignoring the imminent perils their market has to navigate. Perhaps I have received one too many e-mails from readers complaining that I somehow do a disservice to the municipal market by publishing facts about unfunded pension liabilities, rising default rates, and public officials who are looking into the possibility of Chapter 9 bankruptcy.

Default Record

Still, systemic? Really? What would that mean? The $2.8 trillion municipal market is enormous. First there’s the number of governmental units, including things such as school districts and authorities: 89,526 at last count, which was in 2007. There are probably more today.

So how would you quantify “systemic” default? If we say only half of the governments sold bonds, that’s about 45,000. The figure is probably higher, though, because so many small issuers sell bonds once every few years.

Is systemic, then, 10,000 defaults? Maybe it’s 20,000? The record year in recent history for defaults was 1991, when 259 bond issues either failed to make debt-service payments or violated covenants, according to the Distressed Debt Securities newsletter of Miami Lakes, Florida.

During the Great Depression, from 1930 to 1939, 4,770 municipal-bond issues defaulted, according to George H. Hempel’s book “The Postwar Quality of State and Local Debt” (1971). More than 60 percent occurred in the South or the Midwest.

Inconsistent Condition

I don’t buy the idea of a mass meltdown. The municipal market is too specific and too particular. It resists categorization and generalization.

Not all states and localities are alike, when it comes to their budgets or pension liabilities. Some are on the brink, others are courting disaster, and still others are managing. Tax revenue and investment returns are already coming back.

What will we see instead? It will be bad enough. There will be more defaults, yes, and possibly a few high-profile bankruptcies that will shock the system. The really bad news will probably be concentrated in a number of states, the same way most of the housing collapse was.

The best thing about these “crisis” calls is that they focus states’ and municipalities’ attention on their pension shortfalls and their intractable public labor unions.

The backlash against ever more lavish public pensions has begun, and it won’t be pretty.



______________________________________________


Heather Mizeur is running for Governor of Maryland as a 'progressive democratic candidate' supporting labor issues like sick days.

Did you know Maryland ranks at the top for wage theft and workplace abuse because there is no oversight protecting these workers. Did you know that Maryland leads in illegal designation of workers as independent contractors? Did you know that if Trans Pacific Trade Pact is passed all these labor laws will be ignored? ALL MARYLAND CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR ARE NEO-LIBERALS READY TO PUSH FOR TPP.
Why do you think Heather does not mention all the abuses and lack of public justice but pretends to support labor protections? That is what neo-liberals do-----they throw progressive bones they don’t intend to support.

IF YOU ARE GOING TO PROPOSE MORE LABOR LAW PROTECTIONS TRY ENFORCING THE ONES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. IF A POL IS NOT SHOUTING ABOUT THE SUSPENSION OF RULE OF LAW IN MARYLAND THEY ARE NOT PROTECTING LABOR!


Fri Aug 03, 2012 at 12:32 PM PDT
Wage theft: abusive employers fuel nationwide epidemic

by Paddy Ryan Daily KOS

Wage theft - the non-payment or the under-payment of an agreed upon wage - has been a growing problem across the country, seen in every industry from retail and service to manufacturing and construction. Wage theft primarily affects low-wage unskilled workers, forcing most families who rely on minimum wage below the federal poverty line. Unfortunately the issue has been widely under-publicized and, therefore, vastly unknown to a majority of the American public.

But many recent studies have been conducted over the past few years that are now shining a beacon of light on how bad the growing epidemic of wage theft has become. Universities, labor organizations, community groups, non-profits, and others have been collecting data on the subject for long enough now that a lot of valuable new information has been discovered.

The most common forms of wage theft: the refusal to pay proper overtime, the refusal to honor the minimum wage, and illegal paycheck deductions like transportation costs. Illegal transportation deductions are most frequently seen in the temporary employment industry, where low-wage 'temp agency' workers are driven to and from the job site.

"Although this practice is of dubious legality, many agency workers have little practical alternative but to accept these [transportation] charges if they hope to have a job."

Studies have been conducted across the United States regarding the wage theft epidemic. An especially disheartening independent study from 2009 - Broken Laws, Unprotected Workers - found that a whopping 76 percent of workers claimed they had been underpaid or not paid at all by their employer. The study – conducted by the National Employment Law Project – surveyed over 4,000 low-wage workers throughout the cities of New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

In 2010, the Seton Hall Law School Center for Social Justice released a report entitled All Work and No Pay, which documented rampant wage theft throughout the low-wage community in New Jersey. According to their survey results, "54% of the workers statewide were paid less money than they were promised by at least one employer."

One of the most recent independent studies was conducted by New Labor - a community outreach & labor organization - along with Jason Rowe of Harvard University. The study surveyed 291 workers in the New Jersey logistics industry and found that over one-third (36.1%) of those surveyed were not paid in full for the wages that they had been promised. That's almost 4 out of 10 low-wage workers that have been underpaid, or even unpaid, by their employer!

Wage theft doesn't only affect low-wage workers either; it affects everyones paycheck by driving down salaries across the economic spectrum.

"There is a cost to our local economies, with fewer dollars circulating to local businesses, stunting economic recovery. And there is a cost to growth and opportunity as generations of workers are trapped in sub-minimum wage jobs."

Fighting Back

In 2011, the National Employment Law Project released a guide to combating wage theft entitled Winning Wage Justice, An Advocate's Guide to State and City Policies to Fight Wage Theft.

NELP's guide contains seven basic principles to help stop wage theft:

1. Raise the Cost to Employers for Violating the Law.
2. Make Government Agencies Effective Enforcers of the Law.
3. Better Protect Workers From Retaliation.
4. End the Exclusions in Minimum Wage and Overtime Standards.
5. Stop Independent Contractor Misclassification and Hold Subcontractors Accountable.
6. Ensure Workers Are Paid for All Hours Worked.
7. Guarantee that Workers Can Collect from Their Employers.

NELP was able to publish its suggestions with the help of new information, released by organizations like New Labor and Seton Hall, who have provided a better understanding of the problem, and how to successfully combat it.

However, only a limited number of states are actually listening to these suggestions and trying to do something about the problem.

In both New York and California, Wage Theft Prevention Acts were passed in 2011. The New York Wage Theft Prevention Act, expands the civil and criminal remedies that are available when employers fail to comply with the provisions. The California Wage Theft Prevention Act of 2011 differs significantly from the New York law because it requires that notices be given only to non-exempt (hourly) employees. Massachusetts also has wage theft legislation in place, along with Connecticut, Illinois, and (surprisingly) North Carolina.

But all of these state laws need to be strengthened.

According to a new study from the Progressive States Network,

As it turns out, one of the most important findings of this report is that state wage theft laws, in general, are almost universally inadequate. In our scoring system, the two highest-rating states, New York (with an overall grade of C+) and Massachusetts (with a grade of C), only receive 77% and 74% of the total possible points respectively, and it is a steep fall from there: Connecticut, Illinois, North Carolina, and California follow with grades of D, and the other 44 states and Washington, DC receive F’s. Further underscoring the deep drop-off, the tenth-ranked state receives only 52% of the total points, and the bottom eleven states all receive 25% or less. Two states — Alabama and Mississippi — scored zero points.

However, there is some good news. The legislation passed in 2011 has let workers reclaim millions of dollars in stolen wages throughout New York and California.

The National Employment Law Project reports that, "In the past year alone, workers recovered tens of millions of dollars in unpaid wages from their employers in a range of industries. For example, ... New York car wash workers received $3.5 million in unpaid overtime."

Unfortunately, only six states currently have laws dealing with wage theft, and all of those laws need to be strengthened. The fight against wage theft is just beginning and there is much more to be done. Most workers are not as lucky as those workers who were able to recover millions of dollars in lost wages. Many will continue to suffer from the abuses of wage theft, and still desperately need help. It will take a team effort by the liberal media, an informed and concerned citizenry, community organizations, advocacy groups, Democratic politicians, organized labor and the like, to put an end to wage theft for good.





______________________________________________


Heather Mizeur, running for Governor of Maryland as a 'progressive democrat'.....while being a neo-liberal.......is pushing this tired excuse of a corporate tax law that we all know offers no value as this article shows. Why are global corporate pols like Mizeur pretending to be holding corporations accountable with this bogus policy? THEY ARE PROMOTING A cut in CORPORATE TAX RATE with it for goodness sake!



Combine reporting of corporate income taxes isn't a panacea for Maryland

May 31, 2013  Baltimore Sun

Regarding your recent editorial on combined reporting for corporate income tax in Maryland, you argue that a switch to combined reporting in favor of a 0.65 percent decrease in the corporate rate would represent only a temporary "inconvenience" (How to make Md.'s taxes more competitive," May 9).

The Council On State Taxation, a trade association representing almost 600 corporations engaged in interstate commerce, including significant operations in Maryland, has found that combined reporting neither provides the panacea for perceived "hiding" of profits nor provides the "permanent" revenue benefit asserted in the editorial.

The editorial notes that combined reporting is "a decades-old idea that is the law in a majority of states." While it is true that combined reporting has spread from its mainly western confines to some eastern states, with the exception of West Virginia and Washington, D.C., the mid-Atlantic and South are otherwise devoid of this mandatory filing method.

Had the editorial page ever canvassed corporate tax departments, it would have found that combined reporting is not a short-term inconvenience. The definition of a "unitary business," which determines the entities that are part of the combined report, is notoriously imprecise and subject to controversy, resulting in the under-inclusion of entities; prolonged administrative and court disputes; and arbitrariness by the revenue department in seeking to include profitable entities but excluding loss entities.

The editorial cites the current anti-abuse provisions in the Maryland corporate tax law as an example of complexity. Rather, these provisions underscore that every reporting regime will be subject to scrutiny as to whether it creates opportunities for abuse; it is hardly an argument for why including every related entity under the uncertain unitary business standard, and determining taxable income for the "multi-state conglomerate," to use the words of the editorial, is no more difficult than determining the income of a single entity doing business in Maryland.

One need only look to California and Illinois to see prime examples of states with hopelessly complex combined reporting regimes that are constantly seeking revisions in response to other perceived "loopholes" in the law.

The editorial also asserts that combined reporting "seeks to more accurately calculate a corporation's economic activity in a state." This statement may well reflect the intent, but not the reality.

In practice, combined reporting may actually reduce the link between income tax liabilities and where income is earned. Combined reporting regimes vary across the states; it is fair to say that each state's system is unique. Combined reporting variables include what entities are included or excluded from the combined report; how inter-company transactions are handled; treatment of net operating losses and credits among group members; treatment of foreign income and expenses; and many more complex and arcane tax rules.

Perhaps the greatest variable is apportionment. This imprecise gauge of income attributable to the taxing state becomes even more inaccurate in combined reporting states, as states and taxpayers struggle with the proper inclusion of factors of numerous corporate and pass-through entities. Add on the tendency of taxpayers to exclude profitable entities and revenue departments to exclude loss entities and you get a pretty clear picture of how combined reporting works in the real world.

This leads to the main point of the editorial: revenue. The editorial makes the simplistic "trade-off" argument for a modestly lower corporate rate, saying that there would be some immediate and permanent revenue benefit from a combined reporting move.

In bad times, the Maryland Business Tax Reform Commission found, combined reporting would be a revenue loser. As profits continue to grow (hopefully), the Department of Legislative Services projects revenue gains. Ignore the uncertainties mentioned above that make this revenue spike anything but a certainty, especially in the early years after adoption, when compliance and enforcement will be in their fledgling stages.

Do Marylanders really think a demonstrably fluctuating revenue source will fund long-term tax relief for business? Or, more likely, would Maryland be saddled with a complex, anti-competitive, under-performing corporate tax regime the next time trouble approaches and the state looks to raise revenue?

Independent studies have shown that combined reporting at best is an uncertain proposition for raising revenue – it could just as well be a revenue loser (see, for example, the recent University of Tennessee study on the topic, cited in our opposition testimony to SB 469).

Further, the editorialists should remember that any tax increases will ultimately be borne by labor in the state, through fewer jobs (or lower wages over time), or by in-state consumers (through higher prices for goods and services).

The editorial also seems to embrace the idea that Maryland shouldn't try to compete for investment by larger businesses, instead looking to "start-up" companies for its future. Don't throw in the towel, Maryland! Go for both. Improve your business climate, including your tax regime. Demand performance for business tax breaks by all means. But don't embrace combined reporting as the panacea it isn't.

Douglas L. Lindholm, Washington, D.C.

The writer is president and executive director of the Council on State Taxation.



________________________________________________
Heather Mizeur is ready to spend that GREEN money for the 'environment' ----do you hear her shout the the entire system is filled with fraud??????


Did you know that ½ of the money designated to GREEN projects is fraud and that many of the corporations designating themselves as b-corporations…….the social good tax write-off are fraud? The entire GREEN system of funding has no oversight and accountability and is full of fraud. Businesses wanting to do the right thing are being forced to join in the fraud-for-all just to stay in business.
Did you know that the wind farm off of Maryland’s coast was handed to a Texas corporation for development and a global corporation to operate and that a California Energy Conglomerate is trying to sign people up for this corporation to receive BGE Green surcharge from this windmill deal? EVEN THE SURCHARGE MARYLAND RATE-PAYERS WILL PAY FOR THIS ‘GREEN PROJECT’ IS ALREADY BEING TAKEN OUT OF THE STATE. Will a global corporation really hire Somerset County workers to build these turbines?????
Below you see an article by businesses trying to do the right thing. They are outing the LEEDS program that is supposed to certify construction as GREEN and getting tax credits and development breaks.
THERE IS TONS OF DOCUMENTATION SHOWING THAT THE ENTIRE PROCESS IS SYSTEMICALLY FRAUDULENT AND MARYLAND IS GROUND ZERO FOR THE FRAUD. Is it really GREEN to allow ½ of GREEN spending to be stolen????




Is the LEED program a fraud?

  March 13th, 2009 in Blogs   Kevin Ireton, editor-at-large
Share This The LEED rating system is “a tragedy,” according to Henry Gifford, resulting in buildings that use more energy, not less, and “a fraud perpetrated on U.S. consumers trying their best to achieve true environmental friendliness.” Henry is a mechanical systems specialist in New York City and, apparently, a vocal critic of the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design program. I heard him make these claims on Tuesday night as he sat next to Brendan Owens, USGBC’s vice president of technical development. The two were part of a public debate that took place in Boston at Building Energy 09, the annual conference of the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association.

The source of the debate is a study released a year ago that compared the energy performance of LEED-certified buildings with that of existing, noncertified buildings. The USGBC claims that the study shows LEED buildings to be 25% to 30% more efficient, but Henry says their methodology is flawed. According to him, the LEED buildings actually use 29% more energy than other buildings. Henry also thinks that “green” buildings ought to be certified based on their performance after a year or two of service and that the energy use for buildings ought to be available to the public on utility Web sites. You can read more about Henry’s views on his Web site and in the latest issue of Northeast Sun. Iconoclastic building scientist Joe Lstiburek has weighed in on this debate (pretty much agreeing with Henry), as has Nadav Malin of Building Green.

I should make it clear at this point that the study and the controversy surrounding LEED deal only with commercial buildings, not houses. The USGBC launched the LEED program for commercial buildings more than 10 years ago, while LEED for Homes is brand new. I hesitate to offer an opinion on all of this because I haven't read the study and don't understand the rating system like these other guys do. But I will venture to say that launching LEED and then waiting 10 years before studying the actual performance of certified buildings hardly qualifies as “leadership.” And I certainly hope that the LEED for Homes program learns from this embarrassment.


_________________________________________


OH, LOOK......India is doing exactly what Heather Mizeur and Congressional neo-liberals are doing right now in the US. It looks like both nations have pols working for global corporate tribunals writing these deregulatory laws with TPP!!!!!




Those cumbersome regulations regarding procurement and bidding contracts getting in the way of handing all public operations to corporations. Silly things like low bidder and minority/women contractors or environmental requirements just get in the way of business. So, neo-liberals are pushing all across America a further dismantling of corporate regulation just as has happened at the Federal level with Bush and now Obama. So, you see why Maryland’s Attorney General Gansler served 8 years ‘seeing no fraud and corruption’……..these neo-liberals consider Trans Pacific Trade Pact (TPP) is already in place. Just what we need when US corporations are systemically fraudulent and government is systemically corrupt------REMOVE ALL REMAINING REGULATIONS TO MAKE NAKED CAPITALISM COMPLETE.

What you are seeing is your Congressional and now state-level neo-liberals creating the laws that Trans Pacific Trade Pact require! WHAT????? THESE POLS DON’T KNOW WHAT IS IN THE TPP!!!!!

OH, REALLY???? THEY ARE PASSING ALL THE LAWS THAT MAKE THE US WITHOUT ANY REGULATION OR OVERSIGHT WHICH IS WHAT TPP DOES FOR GOODNESS SAKE!


BUSINESS REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
April 8, 2014

The key objective of streamlining of business activities through regulatory framework should be
  1. Low compliance cost for doing business in India
  2. Simple regulatory environment saving time and energy for doing business and
  3. Ensuring fair competition.
Key challenges faced by the regulatory framework today are
  1. Weak institutional architecture for business regulation in the country.
  2. Ambiguous nature and vast scope of business regulations.
  3. Absence of single repository for business regulations.
  4. Lack of coherence in business regulatory governance across country.
  5. Lack of defined mechanism for consultation between government and industry.
  6. Inherent limitations of regulatory system in the country.
  7. Regulatory reforms have not been implemented yet due to absence of any one dedicated agency accountable for reforms
Strategy and Key Recommendations:
  1. Establishing enabling institutional architecture
    1. Formulating a national policy on business development and regulation
    2. Drafting and enacting ‘National Business Development Regulation’ Bill.
    3. Building institutional architecture for looking after the business regulatory reforms.
    4. Enabling institutional architecture for ensuring competitiveness in manufacturing.
  2. Systemization of Business Regulation Governance.
    1. Mapping and classification of all existing business regulations and procedures and providing one online shop – ‘National Business Facilitation Grid” for all information related to business regulations and procedures.
    2. A system of mandatory reviews of existing regulations at periodic intervals should be established and operationalised.
    3. A decentralized single window system should be established with appropriate geographical spread.
  3. E-Biz Mission Mode Project
The e-Biz Mission Mode Project under the National e-Governance Plan aims to create a business and investor friendly ecosystem in India by making all business and investment related regulations across Central, State and local governments available on a single portal. It is envisaged that the services offered on e-Biz will eventually cover the entire life cycle of a business – right from its establishment, through its ongoing operations, to even its possible closure. Once operational, this project will also create a platform for multiple government agencies to cross validate information.

  1. Adopting a Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA).
  2. Making business more responsible towards society.
  3. Developing an ongoing process of stakeholder consultations.
  4. Capacity building for carrying out regulatory reforms.
__________________________

WILL A POLITICIAN SO CONNECTED WITH CORPORATE POLICY REALLY WORK FOR STRONG PUBLIC SCHOOLS? HEATHER MIZEUR WORKS EVERY WAY FOR WALL STREET----WHY NOT SCHOOLS?

If you listened to Heather Mizeur and her debate forum with the Baltimore Education Coalition you would have not known she was addressing the core of education privatization in Maryland. The BEC is a Michelle Rhee K-12 privatization group that has Baltimore well on its way to a privatized K-12 with charter schools, school choice, Teach for America, and school funding by private corporations that has erased equal opportunity and access education. Schools in Baltimore are businesses and are being tied with businesses in a vocational K-career college tracking. This privatized platform will be expanded all across Maryland if allowed to continue and not once did Heather say anything to counter any of this. That is because she intends to continue these policies regardless of those ‘progressive’ policies on testing and public funding of schools with Thornton. A new Thornton? With Mike Miller calling to end state funding of public schools and state and localities ending most corporate and wealth property taxes----the main source of public school funding……and Heather’s commitment to Wall Street financial instruments….I WOULD GIVE THIS A ‘P’ FOR PHOOEY.
Testing and data gathering is central to Bill Gates and privatizers and a neo-liberal will not stop this process.
I would also like to point to Heather’s embracement of private non-profits used in partnership with schools and most people are seeing how these private non-profits are taking control of schools with parents and students having little voice.

0 Comments
<<Previous

    Author

    Cindy Walsh is a lifelong political activist and academic living in Baltimore, Maryland.

    Archives

    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012

    Categories

    All
    2014 Economic Crash
    21st Century Economy
    Affordable Care Act
    Affordable Care Act
    Alec
    Americorp/VISTA
    Anthony Brown
    Anthony Brown
    Anti Incumbant
    Anti-incumbant
    Anti Incumbent
    Anti Incumbent
    Attacking The Post Office Union
    Baltimore And Cronyism
    Baltimore Board Of Estimates
    Baltimore Board Of Estimates
    Baltimore Development Corp
    Baltimore Development Corp
    Baltimore Recall/Retroactive Term Limits
    Bank Fraud
    Bank Fraud
    Bank Of America
    Bank Settlement
    Bank-settlement
    B Corporations
    Bgeexelon Mergerf59060c411
    Brookings Institution
    Business Tax Credits
    California Charter Expansion
    Cardin
    Career Colleges
    Career Colleges Replacing Union Apprenticeships
    Charters
    Charter School
    Collection Agencies
    Common Core
    Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
    Consumer-financial-protection-bureau
    Corporate Media
    Corporate-media
    Corporate Oversight
    Corporate-oversight
    Corporate Politicians
    Corporate-politicians
    Corporate Rule
    Corporate-rule
    Corporate Taxes
    Corporate-taxes
    Corporate Tax Reform
    Corporatizing Us Universities
    Cost-benefit-analysis
    Credit Crisis
    Credit-crisis
    Cummings
    Department Of Education
    Department Of Justice
    Department-of-justice
    Derivatives Reform
    Development
    Dismantling Public Justice
    Dodd Frank
    Doddfrankbba4ff090a
    Doug Gansler
    Doug-gansler
    Ebdi
    Education Funding
    Education Reform
    Edwards
    Election Reform
    Election-reform
    Elections
    Emigration
    Energy-sector-consolidation-in-maryland
    Enterprise Zones
    Equal Access
    Estate Taxes
    European Crisis
    Expanded And Improved Medicare For All
    Expanded-and-improved-medicare-for-all
    Failure To Prosecute
    Failure-to-prosecute
    Fair
    Fair And Balanced Elections
    Fair-and-balanced-elections
    Farm Bill
    Federal Election Commissionelection Violationsmaryland
    Federal Election Commissionelection Violationsmarylandd20a348918
    Federal-emergency-management-agency-fema
    Federal Reserve
    Financial Reform Bill
    Food Safety Not In Tpp
    For Profit Education
    Forprofit-education
    Fracking
    Fraud
    Freedom Of Press And Speech
    Frosh
    Gambling In Marylandbaltimore8dbce1f7d2
    Granting Agencies
    Greening Fraud
    Gun Control Policy
    Healthcare For All
    Healthcare-for-all
    Health Enterprise Zones
    High Speed Rail
    Hoyer
    Imf
    Immigration
    Incarceration Bubble
    Incumbent
    Incumbents
    Innovation Centers
    Insurance Industry Leverage And Fraud
    International Criminal Court
    International Trade Deals
    International-trade-deals
    Jack Young
    Jack-young
    Johns Hopkins
    Johns-hopkins
    Johns Hopkins Medical Systems
    Johns-hopkins-medical-systems
    Kaliope Parthemos
    Labor And Justice Law Under Attack
    Labor And Wages
    Lehmann Brothers
    Living Wageunionspolitical Action0e39f5c885
    Maggie McIntosh
    Maggie-mcintosh
    Martin O'Malley
    Martin O'Malley
    Martin-omalley
    Martin-omalley8ecd6b6eb0
    Maryland Health Co Ops
    Maryland-health-co-ops
    Maryland-health-co-ops1f77692967
    Maryland Health Coopsccd73554da
    Maryland Judiciary
    Marylandnonprofits
    Maryland Non Profits
    Maryland Nonprofits2509c2ca2c
    Maryland Public Service Commission
    Maryland State Bar Association
    Md Credit Bondleverage Debt441d7f3605
    Media
    Media Bias
    Media-bias
    Medicaremedicaid
    Medicaremedicaid8416fd8754
    Mental Health Issues
    Mental-health-issues
    Mers Fraud
    Mikulski
    Military Privatization
    Minority Unemploymentunion And Labor Wagebaltimore Board Of Estimates4acb15e7fa
    Municipal Debt Fraud
    Ndaa-indefinite-detention
    Ndaaindefinite Detentiond65cc4283d
    Net Neutrality
    New Economy
    New-economy
    Ngo
    Non Profit To Profit
    Nonprofit To Profitb2d6cb4b41
    Nsa
    O'Malley
    Odette Ramos
    Omalley
    O'Malley
    Open Meetings
    Osha
    Patronage
    Pension-benefit-guaranty-corp
    Pension Funds
    Pension-funds
    Police Abuse
    Private-and-public-pension-fraud
    Private Health Systemsentitlementsprofits Over People
    Private Health Systemsentitlementsprofits Over People6541f468ae
    Private Non Profits
    Private-non-profits
    Private Nonprofits50b33fd8c2
    Privatizing Education
    Privatizing Government Assets
    Privatizing-the-veterans-admin-va
    Privitizing Public Education
    Progressive Policy
    Progressive Taxes Replace Regressive Policy
    Protections Of The People
    Protections-of-the-people
    Public Education
    Public Funding Of Private Universities
    Public Housing Privatization
    Public-libraries-privatized-or-closed
    Public Private Partnerships
    Public-private-partnerships
    Public Transportation Privatization
    Public Utilities
    Rapid Bus Network
    Rawlings Blake
    Rawlings-blake
    Rawlingsblake1640055471
    Real Progressives
    Reit-real-estate-investment-trusts
    Reitreal Estate Investment Trustsa1a18ad402
    Repatriation Taxes
    Rule Of Law
    Rule-of-law
    Ruppersberger
    SAIC AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY
    Sarbanes
    S Corp Taxes
    Selling Public Datapersonal Privacy
    Smart Meters
    Snowden
    Social Security
    Sovereign Debt Fraudsubprime Mortgage Fraudmortgage Fraud Settlement
    Sovereign Debt Fraudsubprime Mortgage Fraudmortgage Fraud Settlement0d62c56e69
    Statistics As Spin
    Statistics-as-spin
    Student-corps
    Subprime Mortgage Fraud
    Subprime-mortgage-fraud
    Surveillance And Security
    Sustainability
    Teachers
    Teachers Unions2bc448afc8
    Teach For America
    Teach For America
    Technology Parks
    Third Way Democrats/new Economy/public Union Employees/public Private Patnerships/government Fraud And Corruption
    Third Way Democratsnew Economypublic Union Employeespublic Private Patnershipsgovernment Fraud And Corruption
    Third-way-democratsnew-economypublic-union-employeespublic-private-patnershipsgovernment-fraud-and-corruptionc10a007aee
    Third Way/neo Liberals
    Third-wayneo-liberals
    Third-wayneo-liberals5e1e6d4716
    Third Wayneoliberals7286dda6aa
    Tifcorporate Tax Breaks2d87bba974
    Tpp
    Transportation Inequity In Maryland
    Union Busting
    Unionbusting0858fddb8b
    Unions
    Unionsthird Waypost Officealec3c887e7815
    Universities
    Unreliable Polling
    Unreliable-polling
    Van Hollen
    Van-hollen
    VEOLA Environment -privatization Of Public Water
    Veterans
    War Against Women And Children
    War-against-women-and-children
    Youth Works

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.