The spill, triggered by an April 20 explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, which Transocean Ltd. leased to London-based BP. Halliburton provided cementing services on the well BP was drilling. Halliburton Chief Executive Officer David Lesar said in May that the company is fully indemnified from costs related to the spill.

derived of about 13 percent of its North American revenue from the Gulf of Mexico in the first quarter. Last month, Halliburton said it planned to relocate workers and equipment to other markets as appropriate.

Halliburton ended last week at $27.51 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading, leaving the shares 17 percent lower than before the rig blast.

According to excerpts on his speech released by the U.K. government Wednesday morning, Mr. Brown will urge Congress to “seize the moment” to meet the challenges of the steep economic downturn together.

“If these times have shown us anything it is that the major challenges we all face are global,” Mr. Brown will say.

The Prime Minister will address Congress at 11 a.m. EST Wednesday.

At a time when in some elements of the Democratically controlled Congress there are distinctly protectionist noises being made, Mr. Brown will send a clear signal that the rest of the world relies on the U.S. to help lift it out economic crisis.

“For a century you have carried upon your shoulders the greatest of responsibilities: to work with and for the rest of the world,” Mr. Brown will say. “And let me tell you that now more than ever the rest of the world wants to work with you.”

“I’m here to appeal to you, to your sense of fairness, your sense of responsibility, and to the truth,” Blagojevich said in a closing address that lasted less than an hour.

It was the first time he had appeared at the impeachment trial, which began Monday.

“I’m asking you to acquit me and give me a chance to show my innocence,” he said. “And if you’re not comfortable with an acquittal, then extend this process, and get more evidence, if you can get it, to show that I did something wrong or give me a chance to bring my evidence in.”

Blagojevich, a two-term Democratic governor, was arrested on federal corruption charges in December.

Federal authorities allege he was trying to sell or trade the Senate seat that became vacant after Barack Obama was elected president. After the governor’s arrest, the state House voted overwhelmingly to impeach him.

The governor firmly denied wrongdoing Thursday, as he has all week on television talk shows.

“If I felt I did something wrong, I would have resigned in December,” he said. “If I felt I violated a law, I would meet my responsibility, I would have resigned in December.

“I wouldn’t put my family through this, I wouldn’t put you through this, and most importantly, I wouldn’t put the people of Illinois through this.

“But I didn’t resign then, and I’m not resigning now, because I have done nothing wrong.” Video Watch Blagojevich make his case »

The governor, who did not use notes during his remarks, said the allegations against him were unproved.

“There hasn’t been a single piece of information that proves any wrongdoing,” he said. “You haven’t proved a crime and you can’t, because it hasn’t happened.

The final vote was 244 to 188. No Republicans voted for the bill, while just 12 Democrats voted against it.

The Senate is likely to take up the bill next week.

“I hope that we can continue to strengthen this plan before it gets to my desk,” Obama said in a statement after the vote. “We must move swiftly and boldly to put Americans back to work, and that is exactly what this plan begins to do.”

In floor debate earlier, House Democrats offered near-unanimous support for the bill, touting the package’s ability to quickly create jobs and jumpstart economic growth.

“One week and one day ago, our new President delivered a great inaugural address … which I believe is a great blueprint for the future,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “With swift and bold action today, we are doing just that — with this vote today, we are taking America in a new direction.”

But Republicans, who are outnumbered in the House, have pushed back, expressing concern about the large amount of spending in the bill, and have criticized the tax cut provisions for not going far enough.

“The underlying bill, while it has some good provisions, has a lot of wasteful provisions and slow-moving spending in it,” said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. “We have to act — we have to heal the ailing economy. The question is how to do it best; we think that fast-acting tax relief is the way to get it done.”

The House voted down a Republican amendment, which would have cut a significant portion of the bill’s spending and greatly expanded the amount of tax cuts in the bill.

Obama spent much of his first week as president rallying support for the bill. After meeting with congressional leadership of both parties on Friday, he met with Republican congressional leaders on Tuesday and a dozen CEOs on Wednesday.

Obama and House Democrats etched out plans for a stimulus package in the weeks leading up to the president’s inauguration. Two House committees amended and added some provisions, resulting in $607 billion in direct pending and appropriations and $212 billion in tax cuts.

Next week, the full Senate will vote on its version. The House and Senate bills will be different and need to be reconciled. Then, both chambers would have to vote on the final version in the coming weeks.

Congress has put the legislation on a fast track, as many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle agree that fast action is needed to help pull the economy out of a deep recession. Both Democratic and Republican leaders have said they aim to get the bill to Obama’s desk for him to sign before lawmakers’ Presidents’ Day recess in mid-February.

Foreclosures rose 81% in 2008, ensnaring 2.3 million U.S. households during the year, according to RealtyTrac Inc. data released today.
Advertisement

The Irvine, Calif.-based foreclosure Web site said December filings rose 17% from November and by 41% from December 2007 levels.

Michigan ranked sixth nationwide with 145,365 filings on 106,058 properties, up 21.6% from 2007 and up 107.9% from 2006, RealtyTrac said.

And Wayne County fell to 10th place from first place for 2007 with 38,106 foreclosure filings, down 7.7% from 2007. The rest of metro Detroit, including Oakland, Macomb, St. Clair, Lapeer and Livingston counties, ranked in 25th place with 30,817 filings, up 42.6% from 2007.

The big jump in December foreclosure activity was somewhat surprising given the moratorium enacted by both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and lender programs meant to delay foreclosure actions against distressed homeowners, said James J. Saccacio, chief executive of RealtyTrac.

Nevada, Florida and Arizona had the highest foreclosure rates in 2008, while California had the highest number of properties with a foreclosure filing at 523,624.

While Michigan has had flat foreclosure activity for a few months, it is too early to say whether the state has hit bottom, said RealtyTrac spokesman Daren Blomquist. “The one thing that makes me hesitant to say it will continue on that trend is we are seeing the higher unemployment rate and that could spark some more foreclosures,” he said.

Michigan’s unemployment rate was 9.6% in November.

Bank repossessions rose 19.3% to 55,801 in Michigan last year compared with 46,780 in 2007, Blomquist said. “People had fewer options to refinance. The credit crunch combined with lowering home values really gave people fewer options to avoid foreclosure,” he said.

Blomquist said that bank repossessions in November declined by 8% nationwide and by 2% in Michigan, showing the possible impact of the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae moratorium for the holidays.

But when that artificial cap is lifted Jan. 31, many expect a flood of bank repossessions as distressed homeowners are unable to pay their mortgages.

“Once the 31st comes, I have heard that we will get triple the number of foreclosures,” said Joe Dakroub, owner and broker of Dearborn-based ERA Dynasty.

There are some good signs for the start of a turnaround in 2009, said Alexis McGee, president of Foreclosures.com, a Sacramento, Calif.-based Web site.

Housing affordability is better than it’s been in years, mortgage rates are low, minimal new housing construction and a growing U.S. population will inch up demand and unemployment is still below the highs of the early 1980s.

McGee said that Michigan bank repossessions have leveled off at roughly 5,000 per month in recent months.

“What I’m looking at right now is a stabilizing of the Michigan area based on foreclosure filings today,” McGee said. “But if we have big unemployment in Michigan, that will change.”

The White House upped its commitment to bail out the American auto industry, moving late on Monday to send General Motors Corp. and its financing arm another $6 billion in federal money.

The new money brings the total of taxpayer-backed support to the carmakers to $23.4 billion.

The latest move comes after the Bush administration supported a $17.4 billion loan package less than two weeks ago to prop up GM and Chrysler LLC through March 2009 as part of an effort to encourage the industry to restructure. The administration acted after a bill supported by the White House and congressional Democrats was blocked by Senate Republicans wary of sending billions in taxpayer dollars to a struggling industry.

GM and Chrysler had both warned of their dire financial situations, with GM cautioning that it could not survive December without financial help. Ford Motor Corp., in the strongest financial situation of the Big Three automakers, will not receive federal money.

The Treasury Department will purchase a $5 billion equity stake in GMAC, the financing arm of GM, to spur lending to help consumers purchase cars. The money will come from the $700 billion financial rescue package that was intended originally for financial institutions. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson had at first strongly opposed using the money for the auto industry.

An additional $1 billion will go to GM that will in turn use the money to buy stock in GMAC.

GMAC was approved for bank holding status last week, meaning it will be regulated by the Federal Reserve Bank. The move gives it a stronger claim to access for funds under the financial rescue package, the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

Paulson had intended to leave the last $350 billion of TARP funds to President-elect Obama’s administration, but the new $6 billion commitment raises questions about whether the administration will seek access to the money before Obama takes office. The administration must seek congressional approval for access to the rest of the money, but lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have heaped criticism on Paulson’s handling of the program, particularly as he shifted from the original intention of purchasing troubled assets to later using the money chiefly to buy equity stakes in banks.

Congress could choose to add new restrictions on how the rest of the TARP funds are spent.

Democratic lawmakers have discussed efforts requiring the Treasury Department to use some of the money to reduce foreclosures and support a program to modify existing mortgages.
The first $350 billion has been committed already to a range of banks, financial institutions and the automakers, but not all of the money has actually been spent. The money for GM and GMAC will come from this allocated yet unspent pool of money.

To state the obvious, no one is eager to use hard-earned taxpayer dollars to bail out the bozos of Detroit. Yes, I know that American cars are better than they used to be, and yes, I know that the much-heralded Chevy Volt is on the way. But our domestic auto industry has been thoroughly outthought and outhustled by the foreign competition, and no infusion of public funds is likely to change this established pattern.

It may be that General Motors, Chrysler and Ford are lumbering, Jurassic beasts that deserve their looming extinction. But only a free-market fundamentalist, a lunatic or a Senate Republican — perhaps I’m being redundant — would conclude that now is the moment to hasten Detroit’s demise.

To recap: We’re in the midst of a global financial crisis. The housing bubble has burst and prices have collapsed. The economy has been in recession for a year. Unemployment has risen to 6.7 percent, and if “marginally attached” workers are included — those who have given up even looking for a job — along with those who want to work full time but are forced to accept fewer hours, the rate is 12.5 percent.

Even if the Big Three deserve to die, they shouldn’t die now. Economic theory notwithstanding, it would be insanity to throw hundreds of thousands of auto company employees, and maybe a few million others in the supply and sales chains, out of work — leaving them and their families at the mercy of an economy that has no replacement jobs for them. Public funds would end up supporting these people anyway, except that we would have lost our domestic auto industry — which, despite its many failings, is the only domestic auto industry we’ve got.

What the auto companies need is something on the order of $14 billion, which will allow them to survive until the Obama administration takes office and is able to address the crisis in a more systematic way. That sounds like a lot of money, but it’s a rounding error in the context of the ongoing financial meltdown. We’ve already agreed to spend $700 billion to bail out Wall Street.

The thing to do is give the automakers the money to buy some time. This is obvious to the current administration, the incoming administration, a majority in the House of Representatives and the Democrats in the Senate — but not to the Senate Republicans. They killed the bailout measure by demanding that the United Auto Workers agree to sharp, almost immediate cuts in wages and benefits.

Funny, I don’t recall a cry from Senate Republicans for salary caps on the stockbrokers whose jobs were saved in the Wall Street bailout — nor, to my knowledge, have they demanded that white-collar workers in the auto companies take pay cuts. I do recall lectures from some Republicans in the Senate about how inadvisable it is for government to meddle in the workings of the free market. In my book, renegotiating labor contracts qualifies as meddling.

Some of the most vocal critics of a Detroit bailout — Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., and Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., for example — happen to have foreign-owned auto plants in their home states. This has led to accusations that they are deliberately trying to sabotage the Big Three to help foreign automakers, but I think it’s more likely that they’re just being doctrinaire and ultimately self-defeating.

They have managed to position their party as against unions, against America’s domestic industrial patrimony, against the blue-collar working class — and also, incredibly, against the Rust Belt states, such as Michigan and Ohio, that are home to UAW-represented auto plants and that also regularly tip the balance of presidential elections.

And for what? The Republican senators who voted to kill the bailout knew full well that the White House was determined to find some way to tide the automakers over. It was as if they couldn’t help themselves. Even lemmings must be shaking their heads in dismay.

WASHINGTON (UPI) — New rules for U.S. credit card companies to be released soon are a step forward for consumers, who have lobbied hard for oversight, industry analysts say.

The U.S. Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision and the National Credit Union Administration was to announce new guidelines Thursday, The Washington Post reported.

Proposals released in May, included prohibiting banks from raising interest rates until late payments were at least 30 days overdue and barring banks from slapping on late fees too quickly. Proposals also included applying payments to balances with higher rates of interest before others, the Post said.

“When companies sharply increase interest rates, that could have a devastating effect on the financial stability of credit card holders,” Travis Plunkett of the Consumer Federation of America told the Post.

The strategy has changed from educating consumers to dictating rules for the industry.

“Eighteen months ago the Fed was focused on disclosure and transparency, and now they’re coming out with a prescriptive, rules-based guidance. It’s a whole different world,” said Brian Gardner at investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods.

————————————————–

INDIANAPOLIS (UPI) — U.S. ethanol producers in the Midwest are struggling financially amid falling prices and tightening credit markets, analysts say.

The Indianapolis Star reported Sunday that many ethanol producers have experienced dwindling profits, and some have been forced into bankruptcy.

Most recently, Aventine Renewable Energy Holdings said last week it would slow construction of a plant in Mount Vernon, Ind., and delay the opening for about nine months.

The plant, designed to produce 220 million gallons of ethanol a year, had been scheduled to open early next year. The newspaper also reported the company plans to suspend construction at a plant in Aurora, Neb.

“The margins in the ethanol business today are not very good. They are near break-even,” said company spokesman Les Nelson. “We need to make sure we have liquidity in our business.”

Some observers say the ethanol industry is suffering from overbuilding and a sudden downturn in the markets and a souring economy.

“I think there certainly was excessive optimism,” said Chris Hurt, an agricultural economist at Purdue University. “There was a lot of talk and a lot of interest. But the vast majority of those projects did not go ahead.”

Barack Obama has noted, carefully and correctly, that we have only one president at a time. Yet on at least one issue he has taken the lead and nudged the man who will soon be his predecessor in a direction that he might not have taken without prompting.

It is an issue, moreover, that points up the tension between Obama’s appeal to young voters and his calls for creating a new America on the one hand and, on the other, policies that he backs which seem designed to freeze in place the America we have.

The issue is whether the federal government should bail out, with a capital injection the size of what would have been unthinkable four months ago, General Motors and perhaps the other two U.S.-based auto manufacturers, Ford and Chrysler.

As one born and raised in Detroit and its suburbs, who once lived next door to Big Three factory workers and later went to school with the children of Big Three executives, I have mixed feelings about this proposal. My native Michigan is ailing, with the highest unemployment in the nation, plummeting housing values and cascading foreclosures. Its economy, despite the efforts of two previous governors — Democrat Jim Blanchard and Republican John Engler — is dangerously dependent on what used to be called the Big Three and are now called the Detroit Three.

The bankruptcy of one or more of them would deeply impact the personal lives and dash the seemingly reasonable expectations of those who, directly or indirectly, have depended on them. I can’t help but think of these people when the issue is raised.

And yet the implications of a bailout are frightening. The Detroit Three were unprofitable well before the current financial crisis hit, and GM is reportedly hemorrhaging $1 billion a month. The huge cost of lavish employee and retiree health care benefits, negotiated with the United Auto Workers (UAW), makes it impossible for the companies to sell for a profit anything but the big cars and SUVs that, after gas prices hit $4 a gallon last spring, almost no one wants to buy.

No one in the private sector is willing to pony up a dime for this business plan. GM stock is below its 1946 price, and one investment house has priced it at zero.

The Detroit Three are taking advantage of the passage of the $700 billion financial bailout to argue that they, too, need government money to go on. But as Megan McArdle of The Atlantic argues, the finance firms are different. If credit coagulates, everyone suffers, while if the Detroit Three go bankrupt, their shareholders lose their stake, employee and retiree pay and benefits are cut, and real estate values go down in areas where the companies and their suppliers operate — but life for most of us goes on.

McArdle, native of a similarly bedraggled industrial area (Upstate New York) and an Obama supporter, further argues that the capital invested in keeping the hulk of the Detroit Three operating pretty much as they are, unprofitably, will not be available to those whose startups could morph into the Microsofts and FedExes of the future. We don’t know who today’s Bill Gateses and Fred Smiths are, but markets sure have a better chance of finding them than the federal government.

Obama’s presidential campaign was an entrepreneurial enterprise whose success owed much to harnessing individual initiative through an innovative management structure and creatively using emerging technology. The campaign, as well as the candidate, helped inspire under-30 voters, who preferred Obama by an unprecedented 66 percent to 32 percent margin — as opposed to his 50 percent to 49 percent margin in those 30 and over.

But keeping the Detroit Three in their present form, with their extravagant health care benefits and the union’s 5,000 pages of work rules, is an exercise in preserving in amber the America of the past.

And of course the Detroit Three will not be the last flagging enterprises to line up for government subsidy. Michigan is not the only state that has a talented congressional delegation capable of enlisting allies on relevant committees and from states with economic stakes in failing companies. Other unions, noting the UAW’s success in maintaining benefits, will be standing in line.

George W. Bush may well acquiesce in a Detroit Three bailout. GM could run out of cash over Christmastime (Big Three plants don’t operate between Christmas and New Year’s), well before Jan. 20. If so, I will feel happy for the respite provided my friends and relatives in Michigan. But I will wonder if in preserving the past we are giving up the chance to get to a better future.

“I think it was very gracious of President Bush to invite him so early — usually it happens a little later in the process,” Valerie Jarrett, one of the transition team’s co-chairs, told reporters.

“I think because of the daunting challenges that are facing our country, President Bush thought it was important to move forward quickly.”

A prominent Democratic source close to Obama said Jarrett is also Obama’s choice to be named to take over his seat in the Senate, though Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich would have the final say over a replacement.

And John Podesta, the other co-chair, said the talks are likely to cover “a broad range of issues” — but the slumping U.S. economy is expected to dominate the discussion.

Podesta told CNN’s “Late Edition” that Obama will push Congress to enact “at least part” of an economic package before he takes office in January, but said the problems Americans face need short-term and long-term approaches.

“It’s clear that we need to stabilize the economy, to deal with the financial meltdown that’s now spreading across the rest of the economy. The auto industry is really, really back on its heels,” Podesta said.

And Obama’s designated White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said the government needs to consider “fast-forwarding” $25 billion in low-interest loans already approved by Congress to help the Big Three U.S. automakers retool for more efficient vehicles. iReport.com: Who should be in Obama’s cabinet?
“They are an essential part of our economy and our industrial base,” Emanuel told CBS’ “Face the Nation.” He added: “There are existing authorities within the government today that the administration should tap to help the auto industry.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, both Democrats, urged Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson over the weekend to extend the $700 billion bailout of the financial industry to shore up the ailing Ford, Chrysler and General Motors, which have been battered by the credit crisis and poor sales of gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles. But Treasury spokesperson Brookly McLaughlin said Sunday that the department remains focused on the financial sector and restarting stalled lending.

Podesta said Congress could extend unemployment benefits for laid-off workers and provide assistance to states grappling with increased Medicaid costs quickly. But he said efforts to improve schools, expand health-care coverage and wean the nation’s energy industry away from imported fuels “need to be tackled together.”

And he told “Fox News Sunday” that the incoming administration is conducting an extensive review of Bush’s executive orders, looking for quick changes that Obama can make from his first day in office. Video Watch more on the team’s working weekend »

“As a candidate, Senator Obama said that he wanted all the Bush executive orders reviewed and decide which ones should be kept and which ones should be repealed and which ones should be amended, and that process is going on. It’s been undertaken,” Podesta said.

Podesta said Obama’s team will be “looking at — again, in virtually every agency — to see where we can move forward, whether that’s on energy transformation, on improving health care, on stem cell research.”

Podesta said there is a lot the president can do without waiting for Congress, and voters can expect to see Obama do so to try to restore “a sense that the country is working on behalf of the common good.”

Bush and Obama are set to meet Monday afternoon at the White House’s Oval Office. Video Watch report from CNN’s Kathleen Koch on meeting Monday »

“I’m sure they’ll be open and frank, as I’m sure they’ve always been able to talk to one another,” Jarrett said. “So I think it’s a good sign for this country that they’re having this meeting when they’re having it, and we look forward to the days and weeks ahead.”
advertisement

At the same time, first lady Laura Bush will take Obama’s wife, Michelle, on a tour of the executive mansion.

Podesta said cooperation with Bush administration officials has been “excellent” since Tuesday’s election.

There are online or offline program to help with getting the job you want. You will find schools all around the United States with all the information you need to make an intelligent decisions about your future. We all have to start thinking out side the box and make sure that what we have today isn’t lost in the future.

By taking the time to learn something new we will have given ourselves the advantage of opening up doors that were before locked. Target what people now need and what they are willing to spend their money on, and then take a course in learning just that. For instance, people will always eat, so culinary school might be an option. Massage therapy is going to be needed due to the much added stress in our lives. Stand strong and brave the new world.

xray technician

To make the math simple, let ‘s assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.

Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up…  So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.

My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a We Deserve It Dividend.

Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let ‘s assume a tax rate of 30%.

Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.

But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket .  A husband and wife have $595,000.00.

What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?

Pay off your mortgage – housing crisis solved.

Repay college loans – what a great boost to new grads.

Put away money for college – it’ll be there.

Save in a bank – create money to loan to entrepreneurs.

Buy a new car – create jobs.

Invest in the market – capital drives growth.

Pay for your parent’s medical insurance – health care improves.

Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean – or else.

Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.

If we’re going to re-distribute wealth let ‘s really do it…instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ( “vote buy” ) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President.

If we’re going to do an $85 billion bailout, l et ‘s bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!

As for AIG – liquidate it . Sell off its parts.  Let American General go back to being American General.  Sell off the real estate.  Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.

Here’s my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn’t.

Sure it’s a crazy idea that can “never work.”

But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!

How do you spell Economic Boom?

I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 billion We Deserve It Dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC .

And remember, their plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.

There problems solved.   Now onto the debate on Friday!

Mary Milz/Eyewitness News

Indianapolis – It could soon cost more to take the bus. IndyGo, which presented its 2009 budget to a City County Council committee Monday night, proposes raising its one-way fares from $1.50 to $1.75 to keep itself out of the red.

“That’s pretty consistent with what’s going on across the country. What we’re not doing is cutting services,” said interim CEO Mike Terry.

Terry said while ridership is up 16 percent this year over last, the cost of the running the bus company is also up. He said like everyone else, IndyGo is paying more at the pump and more for things like health insurance. At the same time, the city has fewer property tax dollars to dole out.

“2009 is pretty scary,” Terry said. “There are a lot of ‘ifs’ in terms of revenue and expenses.”

While no one wants to pay more, even a quarter per trip, several riders said they were okay with the fare hike.

Iva Dean Vance, who takes the bus regularly, said, “I’ve been expecting it and I have to have a ride, there is no choice.”

Helen Rush said she had “no problem” paying more as “it’s easier to catch the bus and the service is good so I’m satisfied.”

Esteban Sanchez, who wears a cast after breaking his arm, said, “I need (the bus) now more than ever. We all need to get around. You try to do what you can.”

Besides raising fares, IndyGo wants to freeze wages and charge employees a $500 deductible for health insurance.  Right now it’s zero.

Mike Hale, the financial secretary/treasurer for Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1070 said, “We’re not happy with it at all, at all.”

He and union president Joyce Ledell said with the deductible they’re actually looking at a pay cut.

“So, yes, it will put a hardship on some of us,” Ledell said.

Terry said IndyGo also wants to outsource all of its para-transit service. That’s the curb-to-curb service it provides for people with disabilities. While para-transit drivers can either switch to fixed routes at a higher pay rate or work for MV Transportation, the company already providing some of the service, Ledell said many drivers want to keep things as they are.

She said they don’t want to lose their seniority or days off and “they really like their jobs.”

Hale said he worried the service would suffer because “the people who work for IndyGo represent the city and the contract people work for that company.”

Bonnie Fazio, who just signed up for para-transit service, said she’s okay with the switch and even a fare hike.

“I can escape the isolation I endure in bad weather and it makes me more mobile and independent,” she said.

Terry said IndyGo hasn’t decided the new fares for para-transit or the express buses to Carmel, Fishers and the airport, but they too will likely increase.

Any changes need the full council’s approval.  A vote is set for Sept. 22.  If approved the new fares would take effect January 1, 2009.

IndyGo

Slap Down ‘Free Market’ Pirates

Joe Conason

For many years, Robert Morgenthau has warned America that the nexus of capitalism and criminality poses a serious threat to our prosperity, security and growth. Now in the wake of the collapse of Bear Stearns, which pushed global markets further closer to the brink, perhaps the nation will listen to the Manhattan district attorney, whose scrutinizing gaze is fixed on targets well beyond New York.

As a legendary prosecutor of international financial crime, Morgenthau has long kept a watchful eye on the buccaneering crew at Bear, the firm that now symbolizes the worst in amoral capital. Its executives were notorious for testing the limits of the law by sheltering shady stock promoters and bucket-shop brokerages, and by swelling the assets of its hedge funds with dubious mortgage-backed assets.

When a pair of Bear hedge funds based in the Cayman Islands fell last summer, after their subprime mortgage investments went sour, Morgenthau sounded an early alarm. He urged the federal government to remember the fall of Long-Term Capital Management, the huge Cayman-based hedge fund whose implosion 10 years ago came close to sinking several major U.S. banks. The inevitable multibillion-dollar federal bailout prevented or postponed financial disaster — but we were not ready then to absorb the real meaning of that costly experience. That lesson, as Morgenthau explains, was simple: “Markets, like the hedge fund market, that are unsupervised and conduct business in secret, in tax havens, will eventually cause serious problems.” He has always possessed a talent for understatement.

Ironically, Bear Stearns executives shunned any participation in the rescue of Long-Term Capital in 1998 — and indeed mocked the government intervention that they now covet. Like so many corporate leaders who proclaim strict adherence to free market principles and standards, the Bear gang doesn’t stand up too well under close examination. When those Cayman-based funds — wonderfully named the “High Grade Structured Credit Strategies Fund” and the “High Grade Structured Master Credit Strategies Enhanced Leverage Fund” — nose-dived last year, Bear’s clients lost billions.

Of course Bear’s poor performance didn’t dissuade James Cayne, its recently departed boss, from the gross display of buying himself a $28 million home weeks before his corrupted firm finally tanked. There he sits in diminished splendor, while lawyers and economists bargain with the Treasury Department over the price of his company’s distressed shares.

If we must preserve Bear and its profligate executives to protect ourselves, we should make comparable efforts to save the homeowners, cities and states that stand to lose so much in this deluge of stinking paper. There is no moral excuse to subsidize the losses of the super-rich, while leaving everyone else to the mercies of the market. What’s good for the country club Republicans is good for the working family Democrats, too.

But as Morgenthau insists, we cannot sustain an economy of universal bailouts. A son of FDR’s treasury secretary, he understands how the New Deal saved democratic capitalism from mindless greed 75 years ago, and he knows that the undoing of those reforms during the past 25 years has led to our present troubles. More and more of our capital (including public pension funds) has moved into offshore havens, where banking and corporate secrecy laws allow hedge fund operators to avoid regulation and taxes. This escape from transparency will continue as long as it is permitted by law and rewarded by the tax code.

All that will soon have to end, or we will find ourselves again at the edge of disaster.

Obviously, we should hope that the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve find a way through this crisis without severe damage to the U.S. and world economy. The question is whether we will make the necessary changes to our political economy — including a renewed regulatory regime and a new New Deal for the American people — without suffering hard times such as we have not seen for decades.

As we mark the end of a long era of conservative excess, we could do much worse than heed Morgenthau’s advice. In the name of free markets, we made ourselves and our economy vulnerable to the worst impulses of a greedy, remorseless few. He saw that on the horizon and tried to tell us. Now, perhaps we will listen.

By Arianna Huffington, Tribune Media Services

It’s hard out there for a surrogate. Especially for a Clinton surrogate being asked why Hillary Clinton has not released the last eight years of her tax returns. As congresswoman and Clinton surrogate Nita Lowey made clear on “Meet The Press” last weekend, the reason it’s so hard to give a good answer to “Why hasn’t Clinton released her returns?” is because there is no good answer.

Lowey gave it a shot, but it wasn’t pretty — or particularly intelligible. When Tim Russert asked about the returns, she opened with the main talking point the Clinton campaign has been using for weeks: “It’s my understanding that there are 20 years of tax returns in the public view from both Bill and Hillary Clinton.”

And she’s exactly right. There are 20 years worth of returns that have been released. What’s missing are the last eight years — years in which Bill Clinton has been making money hand over fist, and involving himself in all kinds of interesting financial deals (see Ron Burkle, Yucaipa, and the ruler of Dubai).

Lowey then quickly pivoted away from tax returns (clearly the 20-year line, as lame as it is, was the only arrow in her quiver) to make points about earmarks and the terrific work Bill Clinton’s foundation has done on HIV/AIDS in Africa — neither of which Russert had asked her about or have anything to do with tax returns.

Now, Nita Lowey is no slouch. She’s smart and accomplished. But when you are sent into battle armed with little more than nonsensical blather, you are not going to end up looking very good. And Lowey didn’t. And she seemed to know it — her eyes belied a classic case of surrogatancholy.

Hillary Clinton has repeatedly paired herself with John McCain as of late, making the case that they are candidates with a “lifetime of experience,” so it seems appropriate that her refusal to release her tax returns is another thing they have in common.

While Clinton has been tossing verbal bouquets to McCain and attacking Obama for not being “vetted,” Obama has been living up to his promises about making government more transparent. Not only did he release his latest tax returns in April 2007 , he also just made public his list of earmarks, and sat down at the end of last week with the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times to answer all their questions about Tony Rezko. The conclusion of the Tribune?

“When we endorsed Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination Jan. 27 , we said we had formed our opinions of him during 12 years of scrutiny. We concluded that the professional judgment and personal decency with which he has managed himself and his ambition distinguish him. Nothing Obama said in our editorial board room Friday diminishes that verdict. . . . Barack Obama now has spoken about his ties to Tony Rezko in uncommon detail. That’s a standard for candor by which other presidential candidates facing serious inquiries now can be judged.”

It’s a standard not being met by either McCain or Clinton.

As Sheila Krumholz of the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics said of Clinton’s not releasing her tax returns: “What is the holdup? She hasn’t exactly made it clear as to what process is making it so cumbersome to just release them.”

Or as John Aravosis summed it up: “People with nothing to hide don’t usually hide.”

The main excuse we’ve gotten so far is that Hillary Clinton just has too much on her plate. “I’m a little busy right now,” she said during the Ohio debate. “I hardly have time to sleep. But I will certainly work toward releasing, and we will get that done and in the public domain.”

That was three weeks ago. Two weeks ago, Howard Wolfson promised that the returns would be released “on or around April 15 .” But weren’t the returns completed and filed a long time ago? Doesn’t Clinton’s accountant have time to print them out and make some copies. (Note to Clinton’s accountant: Many Kinko’s are open 24 hours.)

As Andrew Sullivan notes, “Did they file an extension for the past few years? If they didn’t, the forms are available now.”

And it’s not as if the Clintons have attempted to make a reasoned argument as to why the returns shouldn’t be released — something about there being too much scrutiny of public officials. Instead, they’ve gone with Classic Clintonism: Envelope themselves in lofty, good-guy rhetoric while utterly failing to follow through. And then smearing their opponents, such as their absurd attack on Obama’s campaign for “imitating Ken Starr.”

The Clintons have obviously done very well during the Bush years — well enough that she was able to loan her campaign $5 million at a critical moment. Is it really Ken Starr-like to want to know where that money came from? Or to ask for a list of the donors who have contributed $500 million to her husband’s library? Or to ask what her policy as president would be regarding the transparency of huge donations from foreign interests to her husband’s charitable fund? (See the $31.3 million donation and additional $100 million pledge to Bill Clinton’s foundation after he helped a Canadian mining mogul secure a massive uranium deal with Kazakhstan.)

As a New York Times editorial put it: “As a former president, Bill Clinton has been making millions annually giving speeches and traveling the globe. What is publicly known about his business dealings is sketchy, and clearer disclosure of them is required to reassure voters that Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy is unencumbered by hidden entanglements.”

In short, it’s well past time for Hillary Clinton to be as “vetted” as she claims to already be — and to have this vetting done now by Democratic voters rather than later by GOP hit squads. She needs to live up to the standard she laid out for Rick Lazio, the opponent in her 2000 Senate race. At that time, she said it was “frankly disturbing” that Lazio was holding back on releasing his tax returns.

What a difference eight years — and tens of millions of dollars (some of them from questionable deals) — can make.

Following is the full length text of presidential hopeful Ron Paul’s comprehensive reform package which he believes will revive the US economy: Introduction:America became the greatest, most prosperous nation in human history through low taxes, constitutionally limited government, personal freedom and a belief in sound money. We need to return to these principles so our economy can thrive again. When enacted, my plan will provide both short-term stimulus and lay the groundwork for long-term prosperity.

Other candidates talk a lot about stimulus packages, but my record stands alone. I have fought for these measures for years as a member of Congress and will make them a top priority as president.

Ron Paul, a 10-term Republican Congressman from Texas’s 14th District, is currently the ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee’s Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology. He has been named “Taxpayers’ Best Friend” for 10 consecutive years by the National Taxpayers’ Union. Ron Paul is also the author of several books on monetary policy and economics.

The Four-Point Plan

1. Tax Reform: Reduce the tax burden and eliminate taxes that punish investment and savings, including job-killing corporate taxes.

2. Spending Reform: Eliminate wasteful spending. Reduce overseas commitments. Freeze all non-defense, non-entitlement spending at current levels.

3. Monetary Policy Reform: Expand openness at the Federal Reserve and require the Fed to televise its meetings. Return value to our money.

4. Regulatory Reform: Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley regulations that push companies to seek capital outside of US markets. Stop restricting community banks from fostering local economic growth.

1. Tax Reform

- Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. The basis of capitalism is savings, and Americans who do so should be rewarded.

Pass HJ Res. 23 to encourage savings over consumption.

- Repeal the Death Tax. Attacking small businesses and breaking up family farms smothers growth and kills jobs.

Pass H.R. 2734 to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

- Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. Grandmothers and grandfathers working to make ends meet should keep all the fruits of their labor.

Pass H.R. 191 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the inclusion in gross income of Social Security benefits.

- Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. That money belongs to seniors, not the government. They paid into the system for a lifetime, and they should be free to spend every penny as they see fit.

Pass H.R. 192 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1993 increase in taxes on Social Security benefits.

- Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. We need to help companies grow and create jobs.

Pass H.R. 4995 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce corporate marginal income tax rates.

- Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. Investment should be embraced and rewarded.

Pass H.J. Res 23 (The “Liberty Amendment”), proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to abolishing personal income, estate, and gift taxes and prohibiting the United States Government from engaging in business in competition with its citizens.

- Eliminate Taxes on Tips. The single parents and working students who earn their income chiefly through tips deserve to keep all of their money. This tax on “estimated income” is unfair and should be ended.

Pass H.R. 3664 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that tips shall not be subject to income or employment taxes.

- Support the Mortgage Cancellation Relief Act. Working families who lost their homes should not be punished a second time with a big IRS bill.

Pass H.R. 1876 to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from the gross income of individual taxpayers discharges of indebtedness attributable to certain forgiven residential mortgage obligations.

2. Spending Reform

- Reduce Overseas Military Commitments. Our bases and troops should be on our soil. It’s time to stop subsidizing our trading partners in Europe, Japan and South Korea.

- Freeze Non-Defense, Non-Entitlement Spending at Current Levels. I vote against all bloated, pork laden spending bills and will veto them as president.

3. Monetary Policy Reform

- Televise Federal Open Market Committee Meetings. An institution as powerful as the Federal Reserve deserves full public scrutiny.

- Expand Transparency and Accountability at the Federal Reserve.

Pass H.R. 2754 to require the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to continue to make available to the public on a weekly basis information on the measure of the M3 monetary aggregate and its components.

- Return Value to Our Money. Legalize gold and silver as a competing currency.

Level the long-term boom and bust business cycle by passing H.R. 4683, which would repeal provisions of the federal criminal code relating to issuing coins of gold, silver, or other metal for use as current money and making or possessing likenesses of such coins.

4. Regulatory Reform

- Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. It has seriously wounded our capital markets and helped make the UK a financial center at our expense. Ending these misguided regulations would bring jobs flooding back to the United States.

Pass H.R. 1049 to reform Sarbanes-Oxley and reduce the burden it places on small businesses.

- Repeal or Remove Costly and Unnecessary Federal Regulations. Neighbors know best how to help their neighbors. We need to make it easier for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions to better serve their communities and to help people in these communities get access to credit and capital.

Pass H.R. 1869 to enhance the ability of community banks to foster economic growth and serve their communities, boost small businesses, increase individual savings, and for other purposes.

MD/AA

Too radical? You tell me. ]]> http://manfredeye.com/ron-pauls-tax-reform-proposal/feed/ 2 http://manfredeye.com/merry-christmas-dude/ http://manfredeye.com/merry-christmas-dude/#comments Tue, 25 Dec 2007 11:22:16 +0000 Manfred http://manfredeye.com/?p=335

THE NORTH AMERICAN UNION

While US citizens remain hypnotized by events in the Middle East, and by Islamic terror in general, the creeping terror is already upon us. Nothing less than the eradication of the United States as we have known it for the past 231 years.

Global economists would have us believe that due to the dollar’s recent slide, and possible collapse, a drastic solution is needed; the incorporation of Mexico and Canada, along with the US into a single soveriegn state. Canadian and US dollars, along with the peso would be abolished and replaced with something called the ‘Amero.’

Borders would become irrelevant, and internal immigration between the three countries commonplace. This, they argue, would stabilize and augment the economies of all three previously independent nations.

It would also effectively replace current US laws, override Congressional oversight and remove the Supreme Court as the ultimate authority. In effect, this is an executive decision to dismantle the United States in order to allow multinational conglomorates free reign to squeeze as much profit as possible from their goods and services.

But it screws the common people. US workers would literally be forced to compete with third-world immigrants (who would be free to vie for jobs under this plan). Wages would drop dramatically.

This is not a joke, nor is it some pipe-dream of world business; it has already been set in motion.

Unfortunately, nearly every major presidential hopeful in the upcoming election supports this change in our government. Why shouldn’t they, it gives nearly dictatorial powers to the president, and renders the other branches irrelevant.

My recommendation is to vote Democratic because of their opposition to the Iraq war. The Republican plan for continuation of that war only helps drive us deeper into debt and closer to the NAU.

You may want to contact your congressperson, too. It’s their job that is in danger of being outsourced to Mexico.

Chesney indicated that there were questions of the legality of the Bush administration’s plan, as well as whether or not it could be easily determined that those who failed to match their social security numbers were truly illegal immigrants.

The Bush plan has been put forth as a means of toughening a 1986 law that subjects employers to criminal or civil prosecution for knowingly hiring illegals.

Unfortunately, this plan does nothing to enforce that law. Instead, it allows non-complying employers to get off scot-free simply by discharging the workers. The undocumented employee bears the entire onus of the new rule. There is nothing about deportation of violaters, only a law that says they have no right to work in this country. Does the government think that they will voluntarily migrate back to their homelands?

Of course not. They will stay here and swell the ranks of American criminal society. Then, when they are caught, they will be deported, since they are illegals. After that, they will return across our porous border.

And what happens to the employers? Nothing but a slap on the wrist. These are the people that we should be cracking down on. The workers come to the US looking for employment. So long as it remains open to them–even under the table–they will continue to come in droves.

In a 2005 article in the Chicago Tribune, reporters Stephen Franklin and Barbara Rose introduce us to Muyiwa Jaiyeola. Jaiyeola, who is 33 years old, works a 40-hour week as a salesman at a Sears store, then works another 20 hours in the stockroom of a Gap store in downtown Chicago. When Jaiyeola pulled two all-night shifts at his stockroom job in late August, he was able to sleep only two hours in the afternoon, then two more in the morning before going back to his sales job.

This is life in America for over a quarter of the work force today.

Cons argue that we have to choose between having high wages and having low prices. They are wrong.

Take the case of Wal-Mart. According to the United Food and Commercial Workers union (UFCW), Wal-Mart could pay each employee a dollar more per hour if the company increased its prices by a half penny per dollar. For example, a $2 pair of socks would then cost $2.01. This minimal increase would add up to $1,800 annually for each employee.

But it doesn’t happen because Wal-Mart wants to squeeze every possible bit of profit out at the expense of their workers. The economy remains strong at the expense of American labor, but they are not rewarded for their hard work.

Instead, this short-sighted strategy will eventually suck the life out of America. While most of us carry on blissfully unaware of what is happening, or assuming that the ship will somehow right itself, other economic powerhouses, such as China, are already arising to take our place.

Vote for change, not complacency. We must change course soon.

Even if the crime is a petty one, or you’re a helpless addict, or you’re a single woman with children to feed, or a juvenile. Even if you are mentally disturbed or deficient. None of these things matter when stacked up against the ability to profit on the misery or misfortune of others.

Profit. Return on investment.

Profiteer. One who profits through a state of emergency.

Rodney Hulin, 16 years old, Texas. Sentenced to 8 years in an adult facility for setting fire to a dumpster. Repeatedly raped and infected with HIV. Hanged himself in his cell.

Billy Ochoa, California. Sentenced to 326 years for welfare fraud in a super maximum security prison. Locked up 23 hours per day in his cell.

Why do these things happen? Why does the United States have the 2nd highest incarceration rate in the world?

Profit.

For-profit prison executives contribute to politicians who back tough-on-crime legislation, even to the point of writing such legislation themselves. And it’s not such a tough sell. No politician wants to appear “soft” on crime.

With sensationalistic headlines blaring out the “big crimes,” such as murder, rape, and kidnapping, smaller criminals are caught up in the dragnet and incarcerated alongside of them. By the time they are released, however–if ever, they are also hardened criminals. By attempting to sweep our streets clean of any and all crime–a fairytale philosophy at best, we are instead building a self-perpetuating system that can only get worse.

How long can it be before the reestablishment of debtors prisons? Talk about an explosion of inmates! Are you in debt? Have you ever been? How about political detention centers? There goes the blogosphere! And when do we take the homeless off the streets? Must they not be guilty of something if they can’t get a job?

You see? Self-perpetuating. For profit.

If you say you don’t wish to associate with “criminals” because you’ve never in your life comitted an illegal act, you’re a Goddamn liar.

All it takes is one hit off of a joint, too many beers at a bar, or even jaywalking on a street, and you’ve comitted an illegal act.

In 2006, financial and credit card companies gave $7 million in presidential campaign contributions, and banks $25 million. The biggest recipient of this largess was Hillary Clinton, with $378,000.

In no way, however, does Clinton deserve any more blame for America’s growing credit problem than any other candidate. The new bankruptcy law that requires filers to pay off much of their credit card debt–effectively making them debtors to the credit institutions for years, if not the rest of their lives–was initially supported by Joe Biden and John Edwards as well, and recieved the support of 36 Senate Democrats. President Bush also pushed hard for it’s passage.

In 2005, when the bill came up again, Barack Obama, Dennis Kucinich and Chris Dodd voted against it, although Obama voted against an amendment that would cap interest rates at 30%. Clinton did not vote.

At this point, 40% of American housholds spend more than they make per year, the average houshold credit card debt is $10,000, and total US consumer credit card debt is $880 billion. That figure has increased 100% in the last 40 years.

The credit card industry is virtually unregulated, nationally. Companies can charge and change interest rates at will. Incomprehensible disclaimers insure that consumers cannot understand terms. And over 4 billion new offers are sent out in the mail every year. While states can regulate the industry, two, South Dakota and Delaware do not, and almost every credit card company is based in one of these two states.

Alone among all current presidential candidates, only John Edwards has pledged to do something about predatory loan practices, despite his yes vote in 2001.

Most politicians are too reliant upon contributions from these companies to even concieve of doing anything to anger them. It is another case of selling out the American people in favor of corporate special interests. Our jobs, our liberties, our very way of life is being slowly eaten away in favor of the freedom of big business to turn a profit.

Those whom we depend upon most to keep us secure have perverted the very meaning of security and turned it into a euphanism for world conquest, both militarily and economically. The American citizen has become a pawn in the game of wealth and power, an old shoe on the board of World Monopoly.

Nevertheless, they will be victims of the tax hike just as their home owning brothers and sisters are, and maybe even more so, because the taxes they pay will be used to improve areas owned by their landlords, who will remain long after the paying lessees have moved on.

Estimates are that the rental increase will be the largest in five years. While there is not yet enough data to accurately predict the average bump in rent, there are early indications as to what might occur.

Alex Jackiw, president of Monon Place’s owner, Buckingham Management estimates that there will be a $100 per month increase if the full amount is passed on to renters.

Taxes on Riverchase Apartments in Wayne Township has already risen 20% from last year.

Does all of this mean that landlords stand to make the biggest profit on this disaster? Not necessarily. Many tenants will consider moving to a more tax-friendly county to avoid the excessive increases, and this is an area that already has 10% vacancy.

Definitely, nobody wins in this situation; owners, renters, business, nobody. We will all be sucked dry to pay for our “booming economy.”

Although some apartment owners will actually see a decrease in property taxes, the one thing lodgers can count on is a rental increase. No owner has ever said, “Let’s give the tenants a break.” The more likely scenario is “Let’s let them think we got stiffed too, and make a profit on their backs.”

House Democratic leaders have said that their priorities “do not include the renewal of fast-track authority.”

Instead, their legislations on this issue will lean more toward extending relief and increasing the benefits of globalization to Americans who have been victimized by free-trade agreements. They also plan to tighten up on existing deals such as NAFTA, and to crack down on countries with a history of abusing such agreements, such as China.

Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice recommended yesterday that Congress renew Bush’s authority, claiming that it is “an important diplomatic tool that has proven essential to bringing foreign leaders to the negotiating table and advancing our nation’s broader foreign policy interests.”

Of course Rice meant that this authority is the carrot to the military stick in the game of political brinksmanship that the administration insists on playing with the rest of the world. It really is not a good enough excuse for allowing powerful US multinationals to fast-track jobs abroad for profit.

Administration policy is killing the middle-class even as the US GDP continues to rise. If America is so much better off under these policies, where is the money going? Certainly not into the pockets of the average US citizen.