Whistleblower Protection Blog
Posted at 7:38 AM on August 4, 2010 by Richard Renner
Study shows benefits of anti-retaliation policies
The Ethics Resource Center has just released a report from its 2009 National Business Ethics Survey. The report, called "Retaliation: The Cost to Your Company and Its Employees," documents how companies that tolerate retaliation suffer increased levels of employee misconduct. The report documents how the employees' mere perception of retaliation is sufficient to deter reporting of misconduct. It is also an indicator of the level of actual misconduct. The report finds that 15% of employees who report misconduct experience retaliation. The rate is higher for union members (21%) and those in firms of 100 to 500 employees (also 21%, an increase from 14% in 2007). If employees feel "extreme pressure" to compromise standards, then they report retaliation at a rate of 59%.
Of those reporting retaliation, most experienced exclusion from decisions and work activity (62%), a cold shoulder (60%), and verbal abuse by a supervisor or manager (55%). The survey reports that 48% say they almost lost their job, 43% say they lost promotions or raises, 18% were demoted, and 4% experienced physical harm to person or property. The survey included only respondents who are currently employed -- a methodology that might cause underreporting of discharges as a form of retaliation.
The ERC study associated retaliation with the ethical culture of the employer. Retaliation is much more common in organizations that have a weak ethical culture. If management tolerates retaliation, employee trust levels drop markedly. Employee engagement and commitment to the organization drops from 78% to 38% when employees experience retaliation for reporting misconduct. Among all employees who reported misconduct (including those who experienced retaliation and those who did not), engagement is 66%.
The ERC makes the following recommendations:
* Examine and, as needed, revise systems of procedural justice to make sure that reports are handled appropriately and that reporters feel heard, respected and protected.
* If your company has not done so already, develop a non-retaliation policy. Make sure that it is communicated broadly, included in your code and addressed in all-employee and management-level training and enforced when situations arise.
* Sanitize cases that have been reported and use them as case studies so reporters know that their decision to report made a difference.
* Be mindful of groups that are more likely to feel retaliated against. Take extra steps to make sure that these employees are safeguarded from punishment for reporting and, just as importantly, that they do not feel vulnerable to retaliation.
* Train everyone who is likely to receive reports—especially supervisors—to follow-up with reporters in an appropriate manner and to be mindful of how unrelated actions might be misinterpreted by an employee who is feeling uncertain and exposed after deciding to report.
* Encourage managers at all levels to communicate that retaliation is unacceptable and to back it up with action.
SAI Global sponsored the survey. Ann Wootton, President and General Manager of SAI Global Compliance Americas, told the Examiner, “This report demonstrates just how toxic the fear of retaliation can be in an organization.” She adds, “Companies that make zero tolerance their goal are doing their employees and themselves a big favor. Retaliation brings a lot of baggage with it that can truly damage an enterprise.”
Patricia J. Harned, president of the Ethics Resource Center. told the Examiner, “ERC’s research shows workplace retaliation for what it is – a destructive attitude-killer. The best antidote is a company-wide ethical culture where employees feel that reporting is not only tolerated but welcome. And surveys are the best way to assess what’s on employees’ minds.”
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.whistleblowersblog.org/admin/trackback/214903
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
National Whistleblower Legal Defense & Education Fund
3238 P Street, NW
| Washington, DC 20007 |
Phone:
202-342-1903
Friday, August 06, 2010
Florida Corruption Requires Strong Remedies and Strong Leaders Like Dave Aronberg
Florida is awash in corporate cash. Florida suffers from a culture of corruption, from the courthouse to the state capitol. Statistics in the New York Times, a retired judge friend (and FBI agents) suggest that Florida may be the most corrupt state in the Union. Louisiana may have colorful figures. Other states may have better reporters writing about it (Mike Royko's book, Boss, about the first Mayor Daley, is a classic.)
But Florida, with its many rotten government officials and lousy developers, takes the cake. Here in St. Johns County, our former Republican County Commission Chairman is currently residing in a federal prison, convicted of bribery. He's not the only St. Johns County official ever to take a bribe -- just the latest one to get caught and prosecuted (albeit in a questionable sting with questionable motives, stirred up by tacky Sheriff DAVID SHOAR and lawyer GEORGE McCLURE).
We need a state Attorney General who will fight corruption -- not one who defended it as a secretive white collar criminal defense lawyer for the state's largest law firm, AKERMAN SENTERFITT.
We need someone who will give no quarter to Sunshine and Open Records violations.
We need someone who will target Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP suits) and use the powers of government to fight them.
We need someone who can spell antitrust and will use the state's powers to protect consumers.
We need someone who is not tainted by associations with the 500-lawyer AKERMAN SENTERFITT law firm, which represents Big Oil, Big Sugar and Big Tobacco interests, developers, health care cartels, and other corporate criminals.
DAN GELBER is tainted by his association with the AKERMAN SENTERFITT firm. His income, friends and associations are on the side of corporate crime. He's a corporate criminal defense lawyer, and a darn good one -- he's taken his prosecution experience and used it to represent evildoers. In the words of William Wordsworth, "They have given their hearts away, a sordid boon. Getting and spending we lay waste our powers."
DAN GELBER was a fine legislator. He'd make a good U.S. Senator. But he'd make a lousy Attorney General -- it would be like putting Dracula in charge of the Blood Bank.
GELBER could have used his considerable courtroom skills to help consumers. He could have represented whistleblowers and other corporate crime victims. Instead, he represents the victimizers.
GELBER masks his deficiencies with hauteur, flippancy and ageism -- he thinks that anyone younger than him, with fewer jury trials, is unintelligent and unqualified.
He reminds me of some of the law review preppies I have known -- people who have contempt for anyone out of their "league," people who look down their distended nostrils at lesser mortals as if they were inferior. GELBER's affect gives it away, as a schemer (as recorded by one of my friends, who saw him here in St. Johns County last year). He's not for the people -- he's for the powerful special interests, the people who paid his paychecks as a shadowy "Policy" advocate and white collar criminal defense lawyer. DAN GELBER can't be trusted as Attorney General, because he's part of the culture of corruption that threatens to ruin Florida -- GELBER identifies with wrongdoers -- that's who he has represented for most of his legal career.
As Attorney General, Dave Aronberg will be a people's lawyer, in the spirit of Robert Kennedy --- someone we can count on to be a real Democrat.
DAN GELBER would lose if nominated for Attorney General by the Democrats. Republicans would beat DAN GELBER like a rented mule. If you think Dave Aronberg's ads are tough, wait till you see what the Republicans would do -- they would win.
In person and on the telephone, DAN GELBER comes off as a bully, one who was utterly insensitive to the fact that he went to work for a corporate law firm that represents oligopolists -- unseemly for a State Senator to have been part of the "Policy" (lobbying) practice of our State's largest law firm, and to have been a white collar criminal defense lawyer for the rich and powerful, while never taking any pro bono cases (when he called me July 2nd, his idea of pro bono was being a Big Brother. Oh bother!).
Dave Aronberg desires our support -- DAN GELBER was part of the sinkhole of corruption (AKERMAN SENTERFITT) that defended our Nation's Oldest City in its anti-environmental campaign, with AKERMAN SENTERFITT lawyers billing us more hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend the indefensible -- WILLIAM B. HARRISS' deposting 40,000 cubic yards of solid waste in our Old City Reservoir (in the African-American community of West Augustine). Our City wanted to bring the waste back the African-American community of Lincolnville, for a park, and the BIg Law firm of AKERMAN SENTERFITT argued this position (with straight faces).
Tell AKERMAN SENTERFITT (and DAN GELBER) we don't need their services, such as they are, and that AKERMAN SENTERFITT (and its feckless thug clients) have too much power and influence in the State of Florida already.
Vote against corruption.
Vote against BP's law firm.
Vote against polluters, price-fixers, union busters and other Philistines represented by AKERMAN SENTERFITT. As Robert Kennedy said, "if we do not, on a national scale, attack organized criminals with weapons and techniques as sophisticated as their own, they will destroy us."
Read Florida lawyer's Mike Papantonio's interview about BP's culture of corporate crime, below.
My recommendation: please vote for Dave Aronberg for Attorney General in the August 24, 2010 Democratic Primary. You'll be glad you did.
But Florida, with its many rotten government officials and lousy developers, takes the cake. Here in St. Johns County, our former Republican County Commission Chairman is currently residing in a federal prison, convicted of bribery. He's not the only St. Johns County official ever to take a bribe -- just the latest one to get caught and prosecuted (albeit in a questionable sting with questionable motives, stirred up by tacky Sheriff DAVID SHOAR and lawyer GEORGE McCLURE).
We need a state Attorney General who will fight corruption -- not one who defended it as a secretive white collar criminal defense lawyer for the state's largest law firm, AKERMAN SENTERFITT.
We need someone who will give no quarter to Sunshine and Open Records violations.
We need someone who will target Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP suits) and use the powers of government to fight them.
We need someone who can spell antitrust and will use the state's powers to protect consumers.
We need someone who is not tainted by associations with the 500-lawyer AKERMAN SENTERFITT law firm, which represents Big Oil, Big Sugar and Big Tobacco interests, developers, health care cartels, and other corporate criminals.
DAN GELBER is tainted by his association with the AKERMAN SENTERFITT firm. His income, friends and associations are on the side of corporate crime. He's a corporate criminal defense lawyer, and a darn good one -- he's taken his prosecution experience and used it to represent evildoers. In the words of William Wordsworth, "They have given their hearts away, a sordid boon. Getting and spending we lay waste our powers."
DAN GELBER was a fine legislator. He'd make a good U.S. Senator. But he'd make a lousy Attorney General -- it would be like putting Dracula in charge of the Blood Bank.
GELBER could have used his considerable courtroom skills to help consumers. He could have represented whistleblowers and other corporate crime victims. Instead, he represents the victimizers.
GELBER masks his deficiencies with hauteur, flippancy and ageism -- he thinks that anyone younger than him, with fewer jury trials, is unintelligent and unqualified.
He reminds me of some of the law review preppies I have known -- people who have contempt for anyone out of their "league," people who look down their distended nostrils at lesser mortals as if they were inferior. GELBER's affect gives it away, as a schemer (as recorded by one of my friends, who saw him here in St. Johns County last year). He's not for the people -- he's for the powerful special interests, the people who paid his paychecks as a shadowy "Policy" advocate and white collar criminal defense lawyer. DAN GELBER can't be trusted as Attorney General, because he's part of the culture of corruption that threatens to ruin Florida -- GELBER identifies with wrongdoers -- that's who he has represented for most of his legal career.
As Attorney General, Dave Aronberg will be a people's lawyer, in the spirit of Robert Kennedy --- someone we can count on to be a real Democrat.
DAN GELBER would lose if nominated for Attorney General by the Democrats. Republicans would beat DAN GELBER like a rented mule. If you think Dave Aronberg's ads are tough, wait till you see what the Republicans would do -- they would win.
In person and on the telephone, DAN GELBER comes off as a bully, one who was utterly insensitive to the fact that he went to work for a corporate law firm that represents oligopolists -- unseemly for a State Senator to have been part of the "Policy" (lobbying) practice of our State's largest law firm, and to have been a white collar criminal defense lawyer for the rich and powerful, while never taking any pro bono cases (when he called me July 2nd, his idea of pro bono was being a Big Brother. Oh bother!).
Dave Aronberg desires our support -- DAN GELBER was part of the sinkhole of corruption (AKERMAN SENTERFITT) that defended our Nation's Oldest City in its anti-environmental campaign, with AKERMAN SENTERFITT lawyers billing us more hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend the indefensible -- WILLIAM B. HARRISS' deposting 40,000 cubic yards of solid waste in our Old City Reservoir (in the African-American community of West Augustine). Our City wanted to bring the waste back the African-American community of Lincolnville, for a park, and the BIg Law firm of AKERMAN SENTERFITT argued this position (with straight faces).
Tell AKERMAN SENTERFITT (and DAN GELBER) we don't need their services, such as they are, and that AKERMAN SENTERFITT (and its feckless thug clients) have too much power and influence in the State of Florida already.
Vote against corruption.
Vote against BP's law firm.
Vote against polluters, price-fixers, union busters and other Philistines represented by AKERMAN SENTERFITT. As Robert Kennedy said, "if we do not, on a national scale, attack organized criminals with weapons and techniques as sophisticated as their own, they will destroy us."
Read Florida lawyer's Mike Papantonio's interview about BP's culture of corporate crime, below.
My recommendation: please vote for Dave Aronberg for Attorney General in the August 24, 2010 Democratic Primary. You'll be glad you did.
USDOJ Press Release: Former Wichita Municipal Court Worker Pleads Guilty to Falsifying Bail Bond Records
For Immediate Release
August 3, 2010 United States Attorney's Office
District of Kansas
Contact: (316) 269-6481
Former Wichita Municipal Court Worker Pleads Guilty to Falsifying Bail Bond Records
WICHITA, KS—A Wichita Municipal Court collections officer pleaded guilty today to changing computerized court records so that bondsmen wouldn’t have to pay bond forfeitures, U.S. Attorney Lanny Welch said Tuesday.
The collections officer, Kaylene J. “Katie” Pottorff, 54, had worked for municipal court since 1995. She was one of three persons indicted in April 2008 by a federal grand jury here for conspiracy, altering criminal justice records, and receiving bribes. The indictment alleged she was paid by bail bondsmen to change court records, which allowed them not only to avoid paying bond forfeitures, but aided in other fraudulent schemes.
Another defendant in the case, Alicia Bell, 37, Wichita, pleaded guilty on Feb. 25, 2010, to bribery. The third defendant, Jessie Garland, 43, formerly of Wichita who now lives in Arkansas, is scheduled for trial next Tuesday before U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Marten, who took Pottorff’s guilty plea Tuesday. Pottorff pleaded guilty to one count of impairing computerized administration of justice records, a federal felony carrying a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the government agrees to recommend that Pottorff be sentenced to 44 months in federal prison.
Judge Marten set Pottorff’s sentencing date for Oct. 20, 2010.
Both Bell and Garland were bonding agents and also were bond recovery agents, more commonly referred to as bounty hunters. By allegedly paying Pottorff to alter court records, they were able to avoid paying bond forfeitures for defendants who didn’t appear in court and also used altered lists to deceive bail bonding companies into paying fees to them for finding defendants who either were arrested by law enforcement officers or who remained at large.
Welch said the case was being investigated by the FBI and the Wichita Police Department and that the investigation is ongoing.
As in any criminal case, a person who has been indicted is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.
Press Releases | Kansas City Home
August 3, 2010 United States Attorney's Office
District of Kansas
Contact: (316) 269-6481
Former Wichita Municipal Court Worker Pleads Guilty to Falsifying Bail Bond Records
WICHITA, KS—A Wichita Municipal Court collections officer pleaded guilty today to changing computerized court records so that bondsmen wouldn’t have to pay bond forfeitures, U.S. Attorney Lanny Welch said Tuesday.
The collections officer, Kaylene J. “Katie” Pottorff, 54, had worked for municipal court since 1995. She was one of three persons indicted in April 2008 by a federal grand jury here for conspiracy, altering criminal justice records, and receiving bribes. The indictment alleged she was paid by bail bondsmen to change court records, which allowed them not only to avoid paying bond forfeitures, but aided in other fraudulent schemes.
Another defendant in the case, Alicia Bell, 37, Wichita, pleaded guilty on Feb. 25, 2010, to bribery. The third defendant, Jessie Garland, 43, formerly of Wichita who now lives in Arkansas, is scheduled for trial next Tuesday before U.S. District Judge J. Thomas Marten, who took Pottorff’s guilty plea Tuesday. Pottorff pleaded guilty to one count of impairing computerized administration of justice records, a federal felony carrying a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the government agrees to recommend that Pottorff be sentenced to 44 months in federal prison.
Judge Marten set Pottorff’s sentencing date for Oct. 20, 2010.
Both Bell and Garland were bonding agents and also were bond recovery agents, more commonly referred to as bounty hunters. By allegedly paying Pottorff to alter court records, they were able to avoid paying bond forfeitures for defendants who didn’t appear in court and also used altered lists to deceive bail bonding companies into paying fees to them for finding defendants who either were arrested by law enforcement officers or who remained at large.
Welch said the case was being investigated by the FBI and the Wichita Police Department and that the investigation is ongoing.
As in any criminal case, a person who has been indicted is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.
Press Releases | Kansas City Home
SNAKERMAN SENTERFITT SONG, dedicated to DAN GELBER
Rich SOBS with deadliest products
Bright preppy lawyers and deep corporate pockets
Brown paper packages tied up with strings
These are a few of my favorite things
Dead injured victims and crookedest conmen
Wiseguys, bad guys and schnitzels with poodles
Tortfeasors, fraudfeasors with G-5s for wings
These are a few of my favorite things
Polluters and price-fixers with limitless cashes
Robber barons who stink -- we’re taking their cashes
Silver white-haired lawyers, we know whom to call
These are a few of my favorite things
When the press bites
When the court stings
When I'm feeling sad
I simply remember my favorite things
And then I don't feel so bad
[Repeat all verses]
AlterNet: Attorney Mike Papantonio Says BP is a Criminal, Sociopathic and Predatory Corporation
Posted by Race-Talk at 6:59 am
August 5, 2010
comments1 COMMENT
Attorney Mike Papantonio Says BP is a Criminal, Sociopathic and Predatory Corporation
Posted by Race-Talk on @ 6:59 am
Article printed from speakeasy: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy
URL to article: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/08/05/attorney-mike-papantonio-says-bp-is-a-criminal-sociopathic-and-predatory-corporation/
By Kathleen Wells
Environmental lawyer, advocate for working Americans, and host of Ring of Fire, Mike Papantonio and his firm have handled thousands of cases throughout the nation, including asbestos, breast implants, pharmaceutical litigation, factory farming, securities fraud, the Florida tobacco litigation, etc., and has received numerous multi-million dollar verdicts.
Recently, he has been making frequent appearances on The Ed Show and Hardball to discuss the ramifications and implications of British Petroleum’s oil spill, in an effort to hold BP accountable for the damage that they have caused to the environment and persons, as well as to expose the lies that BP continues to feed the news media.
Kathleen Wells: You filed a class action lawsuit against BP. Talk to me about that suit, and differentiate it from the trust fund.
Mike Papantonio: I think the most important thing is: We filed a RICO case. The RICO case is much different from anything on the table. The RICO case says that the conduct of BP, Halliburton, and Transocean is really not just negligence, but it’s something that — it’s the same kind of suit you would use to go after the mob or a drug cartel or organized crime.
It’s a civil RICO case. It isn’t unique to Florida, but Florida has the most progressive – certainly the most far-reaching – civil RICO case in the country. That’s the case that I’m focusing on primarily.
Kathleen Wells: Now you are talking about the federal lawsuit that you filed recently in Pensacola. And you are alleging that the Bush administration relaxed federal regulatory oversight, etc.
Mike Papantonio: Yes. Because that’s far different than anything that the trust fund is going to be looking at. It’s not a typical OPA kind of case or typical class action. The other thing it does, because of the unique aspects of RICO, is that it allows you to ask for damages that are different from the typical kinds of damages.
For example, here, if you have a property owner in Florida and they own a home/a set of condos, there is nothing that allows, in the OPA claim, diminution of value. You can’t say these people have lost their value (It has been reduced 30 percent) because of this event.
Under this [RICO] statute, under the way that we brought the case, we then can ask for that. We can say that we have people in certain counties here that are heavily tourist areas. They are heavily reliant on the beach crowd, and because of that, the value of the property has gone down. The numbers are already fairly substantial.
That’s the damages that would flow from the RICO case. Now, any other damages as well can flow, but that’s the thing I’m focusing on.
Kathleen Wells: OK, so differentiate this from the trust fund. Why would a person come to you as opposed to filing a claim to recover via the trust fund?
Mike Papantonio: They wouldn’t. I really think most people, the typical person that has a claim – that charters a boat or a fishing business – it doesn’t make sense that they should first go out and hire an attorney if the damages are fairly easy to compute. If you’ve got somebody that’s been in the fishing business for ten years and they can say: “Well, here’s my history. I don’t have all the documents, but I can tell you, historically, I’ve been able to generate $250K in the eight or seven months, and now I can’t do that.” Why should you pay an attorney for that?
It’s different when you are talking about something as sophisticated as a taxing authority or a municipality or a hotel. You don’t just prance in and say: “Mr. Feinberg*, give me $8 million.” So those are the cases – the more complex cases – that I’m going to be handling.
If someone goes in and says, “I can’t quite articulate the amount of money that I’ve lost,” Feinberg isn’t saying you can’t have a lawyer; he is saying we are going to try and build it so that you don’t need one. It makes perfect sense.
Kathleen Wells: What is the likelihood of this $20-billion trust fund being sufficient to cover everyone’s damages?
Mike Papantanio: It’s not even close. Look, our experts tell us that the best analysis for BP — we are talking between $60-80 billion, which sounds like a lot of money, but in the big picture, this is a $115-billion company. They are way undervalued marketwise. They have staying power because they have assets that are the perennial kind of sources of money. They are always going to be there.
And so, even though that sounds like a big number, it really isn’t. And I don’t think anybody went into this with their eyes closed, thinking $20 billion was going to be enough – it’s not. Feinberg surely understood; he is very sophisticated. This is going to affect people in a diverse way, from a prioritize standpoint. You know they’ve lost their boat, they can’t make the payment on their boat, they are losing their home, they can’t feed their family – that’s what this $20-billion trust fund is for. And I think he [Feinberg] will prioritize it.
Kathleen Wells: And then there will be subsequent damages, because with the dispersants we are seeing personal injury damages — health concerns.
Mike Papantonio: Riki Ott has incredible history of data. I was with him yesterday. The stories he tells are just phenomenal. It’s serious. So, yeah, that’s a whole different claim.
Kathleen Wells: Are you in Louisiana right now?
Mike Papantonio: I’m in Pensacola right now, and it’s certainly not as affected as Louisiana, but from a tourist’s standpoint, this area is dead — the harm has already been done. We have tar balls already coming up on the beach. We have total slick that is three or four miles off shore. Everything is there [so] that a family in Topeka is not going to say: “Hey, kids, let’s load up the station wagon and go to Pensacola.”
Kathleen Wells: President Obama, in his speech, characterized BP’s conduct as reckless. Do you think that characterization is accurate?
Mike Papantonio: I think it was kind. It’s criminal! Listen, we are so upside down in the way we view this picture. This is a company that already has a history of being a felon – they killed 15 people over in Texas City; they pled the felonies. Shortly after that, they had to plead to a $350-million fine for price-fixing.
They are in business with a company that had to plead to a $500-million fine for bribery, a company that the GAO looked at, which is Halliburton, a company that the GAO determined overcharged taxpayers by $5 billion — a company, that allowed supervisory employees to rape and sodomize a 20-year-old employee and lock her up in a container for 24 hours so she couldn’t tell her story.
These are the people we are dealing with.
So, when I use the word criminal, a reporter that is not used to dealing with corporations like this, their first reaction is: That’s an odd characterization. But I deal with them all the time and I deal with corporations that aren’t criminal.
This is a criminal corporation. They are sociopaths in the way they view the world. They are predatory, and the President was very kind to them when he merely called them reckless. They are well beyond reckless.
Kathleen Wells: But will they face criminal responsibility/liability?
Mike Papantonio: If they don’t, it will be a travesty. We throw people in jail for carrying around five ounces of marijuana, and they can go to jail in excess of a year. And here, we’ve killed 11 people, and for the people responsible not to go to prison will be a travesty of justice.
Simply because they are dressed up in an Armani suit and expensive shoes and a silk tie doesn’t mean they are not criminals. It simply means we see them differently: They are not in an L.A. hood; they look different; they look like business people.
I’ve been in courtrooms with many corporations like this, and I’ve been in courtrooms with corporations that don’t function like this: They are not sociopaths; they are not predatory; they are simply negligent.
This is not simply a negligent corporation; this is a predatory, sociopathic, criminal, corporation.
Kathleen Wells: And so their conduct is intentional, you are saying? When you say it’s criminal, is it criminal negligence, you would say?
Mike Papantonio: Here’s the issue: Sometimes conduct is so reckless that we say we are going to treat them outside the analysis of negligence. A drunk driver has a blood alcohol level three times the legal limit. They drive through a school zone, and they kill a child. That is not intentional. They didn’t intend to kill the child. But their conduct is so wanton that they fall within the criminal realm.
At the very least, we have that. But the question is: Do we have something beyond that? Do we have an intentional design, where the design was: We are going to de-regulate, we are going to take control over the regulatory body that’s suppose to be the brakes, that’s suppose to stop us when we get out of hand? Do we have such control over that agency where it is a meaningless agency? And do we have a design to gain that control?
Kathleen Wells: When you characterize a company as reckless/criminal, who are the players that would be carted off to prison? Would it be the CEO?
Mike Papantonio: You would take them off to prison for reckless, wanton conduct that approaches manslaughter. In most countries you would do that. In the United States, we have been incapable of saying that. To give a parallel analysis, we know, for example, that Madoff stole billions of dollars. But we also know that there was conduct on Wall Street where we didn’t know Mr. Madoff. Madoff didn’t pull all the strings, but we know four or five people who did, and we treat them, not like criminals, but we treat them under the civil recovery – SEC civil. They should be prosecuted; they should be perp-walked.
That’s the same thing here. You see, negligence is forgivable. Somebody makes a bad mistake. OK, well, you know, people are human. We are not infallible.
But, when there is a design from day one. You see the design. You’ve taken the drink, you’ve jumped in the car, you’ve hit the gas pedal, and now you are driving 70 mph through a school zone. You know something is going to happen.
That’s what this company did.
Kathleen Wells: And who represents this company? Is it the CEO? Is it the COO? Who is going to go to prison?
Mike Papantonio: That’s the fallacy in the system, you see? This question is agonizing because you are sitting there saying: “There is no easy answer. We have built a Chinese wall around the CEO like Tony Hayward. Tony Hayward, we can’t go put in handcuffs and dress him up in one of those little orange suits and hall him away, because Tony is going to say: ‘Well, I didn’t really make the decision. This guy made the decision, collectively, with this team, collectively, with this company policy.”
And it’s a complete, utter sham.
To give you the best example I can, and this is one that is very easy to understand: Years ago, I handled the Factor VIII case. That’s where this particular company had manufactured a drug that would stop hemophiliacs from bleeding. They had created a drug from whole blood. They knew that the drug that they had created from whole blood was contaminated with the HIV virus.
After hundreds of people died — children primarily, because it’s a disease that is uniquely related to male children — after they contaminated hundreds, wiped out entire families — because that child would then spread the disease to the sister, and the sister would spread the disease to the other brother, father, and mother — after they were forced to take the product off of the market in the United States, they then took it and they shipped it to France, South America, and Asia and killed thousands of people.
In France, somebody went to prison. And that somebody paid the kind of price that we should be holding corporate types to: They went to prison.
In America, nobody was even arrested, much less sent to prison.
Kathleen Wells: Then, it becomes moot or irrelevant to paint/characterize a company as criminal, reckless, or sociopathic. It’s a moot point.
Mike Papantonio: I think you hit it on the head. It does, because even though the Supreme Court, six months ago in the United Citizens case, said that we have to treat a corporation like a person, we don’t treat them like a person.
And until somebody shows courage, and I don’t anticipate that that is going to be Holder. Holder comes from that silk stocking, corporate atmosphere. He was the guy that these corporations called on to defend them. Covington & Burling — that’s where he comes from.
Is that the guy that is going to pull the trigger on this? Probably not. But it’s going to take that kind of courage. It’s going to take an Attorney General saying: “Damnit, we just can’t allow this anymore. We have to set an example.”
Kathleen Wells: But he did announce that he is bringing a criminal investigation.
Mike Papantonio: So what! I’m pleased. I’m happy that he is. Hooray! Let’s see what it is. At the end of the day, let’s see what it really is.
How many indictments have you seen in the Goldman Sachs issue? How many indictments have you seen in AIG or any of these real, real, ugly cases that flowed from Wall Street?
Kathleen Wells: So you are basically saying this investigation has no teeth?
Mike Papantonio: It will have no teeth. It will look like it’s something, but when it is all over it’s not going to be anything. Nobody is going to go to jail.
Kathleen Wells: So corporations in this country are in a lofty position.
Mike Papantonio: They are above the law! There is no question. And until we start treating … If we are serious – if this dysfunctional, corporate-run Supreme Court that we have – if they are serious and they say we must treat a corporation like a person when it comes to giving campaign donations, they should have the right to do what a person does, well fine. It’s a two-way street: They also have the responsibility to be held accountable when they kill people, when they destroy an ecosystem, when they lie to us about their relationships with regulatory agencies, when they bribe regulators. We should be able to throw them in jail because they are a person.
Kathleen Wells: There has been no case law in United States where a CEO or an executive of a corporation has faced criminal penalties?
Mike Papantonio: That’s not accurate — there has been. But they are very few and far between. If you quantify it, what is the conduct en masse that we see in the United States? Can we go get somebody – yeah, we can. We saw it with Tyco. That was clear. We saw it with Enron, right? That was very clear: This person did this.
But most of the time they have so much insulation that we give them such a free pass that it is very, very difficult to do. It’s because we built it into the system to where the system perpetuates its willingness to protect a white-collar criminal and throw the blue-collar criminal in prison.
Kathleen Wells: And so you are saying it’s not likely that it’s going to happen with any of the executives with BP?
Mike Papantonio: No. Frankly, people with middle management should already be in prison. The people that were involved in the drug and sex orgy scandal that broke out right before this happened — they should already be in jail. What we are talking about is bribery – purely, simply bribery.
And so, when a corporation like Halliburton or BP then interacts with a regulatory agency and makes them do things that they know they are not supposed to do, and they give them something in exchange, that’s bribery.
Could we do something about it? Yes. Will we? No. Does this Attorney General have the courage to do it? No.
This is not unique to this situation. Who in the hell is Salazar? Where did he come from? The Republicans wanted Salazar. That was their guy. Where did Tim Geithner and Summers and Bill Rubin – where do these people come from?
They come from organizations that people like Eric Holder are beholden to. I mean, c’mon. I was very pleased that he was the first African-American Attorney General, but so what?
And for Eric Holder to grab himself and rise above what he has been beat into, which is the Covington & Burling culture, where he represents these people. These corporations are people they have represented all their lives.
Look, I hope he does. Nothing would please me more. But I’m not going to stand by and wait for it.
Kathleen Wells: You’re not going to hold your breath. I’m disappointed to hear this, because it speaks to the culture…
Mike Papantonio: Exactly. Most reporters don’t get that. They don’t understand that this is very complex. It’s a cultural policy issue. Let’s be honest with it – it’s a policy. We don’t throw our Harvard MBAs in prison.
Kathleen Wells: Recently, it was reported that the federal judge ruled to overturn the administration‘s six-month moratorium on drilling.
Mike Papantonio: Yeah, Feldman. Of course, how ridiculous! That’s a whole different story. That’s the story of the judiciary. Now, Feldman probably isn’t the best example of that. But while we have been paying attention to the shiny thing (the shiny thing is Congress and the Senate) — how many Senators are we going to have? How many Congressmen? Are we going to be able to get our 60 votes? Are we going to be able to overcome the filibuster?
While we have been paying attention to that, Karl Rove, people like Tom Delay, people like Newt Gingrich, people like Boehner and Eric Cantor – these people have been worried: can we pack the judiciary? How many federal judges can we put in there that come from the silk stocking background of Williams & Connolly or the Byrd Law Firm? How many people can we pack in there? And that’s what they have been doing ever since Karl Rove said: “That’s the way we are going to take back America. We are going to take it back through the judiciary, both at the trial level and the appellate level.”
And it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand what happened to us. Seventy percent of the judiciary now is Republican appointees, and when you break it down, it is even uglier than that. They are not simply Republican appointees, they are ideologues.
That didn’t just happen. It happened while I was doing radio shows with Bobby Kennedy on “Ring of Fire” on Air America, talking about how horrible it would be to lose a congressional race, and they were packing the courts in our backyard.
Kathleen Wells: And let’s take it on the legislative level. I just did an interview with Senator Bill Nelson of your state (Florida), and I was talking about the fact that Republicans, specifically Bill Frist, mentioned that they would work to defund any legislation subsequent to it’s being passed**.
Mike Papantonio: Of course. Listen to this – jump to your story. Do you really think that Joe Barton said, “I know what I’m going to do today. I’m going to apologize to Tony Hayward. I’m going to apologize to BP?”
Tom Price, who created the Republican talking points on this, he just didn’t create the talking points that we are going to apologize. You don’t have Newt Gingrich and Boehner out there apologizing overtly, but they are still apologizing.
The legislative process that you are going to see come at this is going to be driven by the same thing it’s always driven by, and that’s money. These are just the first few paper cuts. Barton’s statement was simply: “Let me see how the real crazy teabaggers are going to respond. Let’s talk to our base.” He is talking to his base.
Who is the base? The base are the teabaggers, the nutcases that live all up and down this coast. This is teabagger central, understand? So let me begin by talking to those people. Let me begin talking to those people, before we move to the legislative aspect of giving BP a free ride (which it will happen). Barton will be in charge of Energy, if the Republicans take the Congress back. He is the guy. So let’s start floating the ideas — that’s the first step.
The second step is — you have your Murkowski’s, you have the Palins, you have all of these shills, these hacks — with a straight face, they say: “Well, we have to legislate a way for BP to stay alive.” That’s what we will see if the Democrats lose next time.
Nothing is coincidental.
Kathleen Wells: So this is a strategy. Rand Paul characterized it as un-American to criticize BP. Michael Steele and also Michele Bachmann said that the trust fund was a slush fund and a redistribution of wealth.
Mike Papantonio: Here it is. Michele Bachmann — she wasn’t just talking to you and me. She was talking to the fringe edge. Where is the fringe edge? Where are they? They’re in Texas; they’re in Louisiana; they’re in Mississippi; they’re in Alabama; they’re in North Florida. That’s where the fringe edge lives.
That is the genesis, if you will, of the teabagger movement. So they aren’t just out there willy-nilly saying this stuff. This is the first step. And then, if the Democrats lose in the next election, then it’s going to be plausible — the issue will be a discussion issue. It will enter the mainstream discussion. We will feel comfortable talking about letting BP have a break. And then we will see legislation to change some of what we’ve been able to do to get BP to do what they are supposed to do.
Kathleen Wells: So it’s like gutting it – the legislation.
Mike Papantonio: Exactly. But this is just paper cuts right now. If the Democrats lose, you will have the Barton characters in control of changing the whole nature of the way we handle BP.
Kathleen Wells: I just don’t want to be partisan about it.
Mike Papantonio: I can’t help but be partisan about it. There is nothing redeeming I can tell you on the other side, so you would be talking to the wrong person for that.
Kathleen Wells: But what I’m saying is that with the health care bill we saw some of those Blue Dog Democrats not … so we have people in both parties, right? Maybe we are talking degrees.
Mike Papantonio: That’s exactly right – it is degrees. Of course, we have the Blanche Lincolns. You are always going to have that. You are always going to have those people out there. You are always going to have the Liebermans. But when you look at the total picture, which is all I can look at, I say: Where is the biggest threat? It’s this issue of the beginning paper cuts, the talking points, telling the teabaggers that it’s un-American, telling the teabaggers that it’s socialism. All that does is pander to their craziness to begin with, and then that becomes part of the broader public discussion. And then the legislature has an easier time to change the law.
Kathleen Wells: Also, Governor Haley Barbour and Governor Jindal said that a moratorium on drilling is bad for the region and bad for the country as a whole.
Mike Papantonio: It’s crazy talk. Here’s the tough thing that politicians can’t say. When the buffalo hunters killed all of the buffalo, then they were out of work, right? They killed them. There was nothing else they could do. We are at that crossroads right now, because what’s happening is we have an entire industry that we have to evaluate from the standpoint of the greater good. Like it or not, we have to do that.
And the greater good is this analysis: If we put 30,000 people out of work because of a moratorium or because we’ve changed the way that we are handling this industry here on the coast, then we’ve saved one million jobs that have been lost because of this oil spill. One million people have lost their jobs because of this oil spill.
So am I supposed to listen to Bobby Jindal or Haley Barbour and be moved by the fact that we have to?
Plants — car manufacturing plants, steel manufacturing plants, airplane manufacturing plants — close down all the time, and they put tens of thousands of people out of work all the time. It’s the reality. It’s where we are as a society. We are a dynamic, changing society. We are not static.
And it’s the same analysis of a buffalo hunter that says: “I’ve killed all the buffalo. Well, let me go kill something else now.”
*In August, the claims system will be taken over by Kenneth Feinberg, an independent administrator appointed by President Obama. BP will pay Feinberg’s salary, but he reports neither to BP nor to the government. Feinberg will have wide discretion in setting the rules to determine who is eligible for payments through the fund.
As of July 28, BP has yet to deposit any money in the oil spill compensation fund and Feinberg has stated that he could not begin making payments to businesses and individuals until BP makes a deposit.
** Recently, it was reported that Michele Bachmann has said in a speech that if the Republicans take back the House in November, they will spend their time issuing subpoenas and having one hearing after another and work to starve the beast, i.e., defund Obamacare and then unwind it, as well as other programs.
August 5, 2010
comments1 COMMENT
Attorney Mike Papantonio Says BP is a Criminal, Sociopathic and Predatory Corporation
Posted by Race-Talk on @ 6:59 am
Article printed from speakeasy: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy
URL to article: http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/08/05/attorney-mike-papantonio-says-bp-is-a-criminal-sociopathic-and-predatory-corporation/
By Kathleen Wells
Environmental lawyer, advocate for working Americans, and host of Ring of Fire, Mike Papantonio and his firm have handled thousands of cases throughout the nation, including asbestos, breast implants, pharmaceutical litigation, factory farming, securities fraud, the Florida tobacco litigation, etc., and has received numerous multi-million dollar verdicts.
Recently, he has been making frequent appearances on The Ed Show and Hardball to discuss the ramifications and implications of British Petroleum’s oil spill, in an effort to hold BP accountable for the damage that they have caused to the environment and persons, as well as to expose the lies that BP continues to feed the news media.
Kathleen Wells: You filed a class action lawsuit against BP. Talk to me about that suit, and differentiate it from the trust fund.
Mike Papantonio: I think the most important thing is: We filed a RICO case. The RICO case is much different from anything on the table. The RICO case says that the conduct of BP, Halliburton, and Transocean is really not just negligence, but it’s something that — it’s the same kind of suit you would use to go after the mob or a drug cartel or organized crime.
It’s a civil RICO case. It isn’t unique to Florida, but Florida has the most progressive – certainly the most far-reaching – civil RICO case in the country. That’s the case that I’m focusing on primarily.
Kathleen Wells: Now you are talking about the federal lawsuit that you filed recently in Pensacola. And you are alleging that the Bush administration relaxed federal regulatory oversight, etc.
Mike Papantonio: Yes. Because that’s far different than anything that the trust fund is going to be looking at. It’s not a typical OPA kind of case or typical class action. The other thing it does, because of the unique aspects of RICO, is that it allows you to ask for damages that are different from the typical kinds of damages.
For example, here, if you have a property owner in Florida and they own a home/a set of condos, there is nothing that allows, in the OPA claim, diminution of value. You can’t say these people have lost their value (It has been reduced 30 percent) because of this event.
Under this [RICO] statute, under the way that we brought the case, we then can ask for that. We can say that we have people in certain counties here that are heavily tourist areas. They are heavily reliant on the beach crowd, and because of that, the value of the property has gone down. The numbers are already fairly substantial.
That’s the damages that would flow from the RICO case. Now, any other damages as well can flow, but that’s the thing I’m focusing on.
Kathleen Wells: OK, so differentiate this from the trust fund. Why would a person come to you as opposed to filing a claim to recover via the trust fund?
Mike Papantonio: They wouldn’t. I really think most people, the typical person that has a claim – that charters a boat or a fishing business – it doesn’t make sense that they should first go out and hire an attorney if the damages are fairly easy to compute. If you’ve got somebody that’s been in the fishing business for ten years and they can say: “Well, here’s my history. I don’t have all the documents, but I can tell you, historically, I’ve been able to generate $250K in the eight or seven months, and now I can’t do that.” Why should you pay an attorney for that?
It’s different when you are talking about something as sophisticated as a taxing authority or a municipality or a hotel. You don’t just prance in and say: “Mr. Feinberg*, give me $8 million.” So those are the cases – the more complex cases – that I’m going to be handling.
If someone goes in and says, “I can’t quite articulate the amount of money that I’ve lost,” Feinberg isn’t saying you can’t have a lawyer; he is saying we are going to try and build it so that you don’t need one. It makes perfect sense.
Kathleen Wells: What is the likelihood of this $20-billion trust fund being sufficient to cover everyone’s damages?
Mike Papantanio: It’s not even close. Look, our experts tell us that the best analysis for BP — we are talking between $60-80 billion, which sounds like a lot of money, but in the big picture, this is a $115-billion company. They are way undervalued marketwise. They have staying power because they have assets that are the perennial kind of sources of money. They are always going to be there.
And so, even though that sounds like a big number, it really isn’t. And I don’t think anybody went into this with their eyes closed, thinking $20 billion was going to be enough – it’s not. Feinberg surely understood; he is very sophisticated. This is going to affect people in a diverse way, from a prioritize standpoint. You know they’ve lost their boat, they can’t make the payment on their boat, they are losing their home, they can’t feed their family – that’s what this $20-billion trust fund is for. And I think he [Feinberg] will prioritize it.
Kathleen Wells: And then there will be subsequent damages, because with the dispersants we are seeing personal injury damages — health concerns.
Mike Papantonio: Riki Ott has incredible history of data. I was with him yesterday. The stories he tells are just phenomenal. It’s serious. So, yeah, that’s a whole different claim.
Kathleen Wells: Are you in Louisiana right now?
Mike Papantonio: I’m in Pensacola right now, and it’s certainly not as affected as Louisiana, but from a tourist’s standpoint, this area is dead — the harm has already been done. We have tar balls already coming up on the beach. We have total slick that is three or four miles off shore. Everything is there [so] that a family in Topeka is not going to say: “Hey, kids, let’s load up the station wagon and go to Pensacola.”
Kathleen Wells: President Obama, in his speech, characterized BP’s conduct as reckless. Do you think that characterization is accurate?
Mike Papantonio: I think it was kind. It’s criminal! Listen, we are so upside down in the way we view this picture. This is a company that already has a history of being a felon – they killed 15 people over in Texas City; they pled the felonies. Shortly after that, they had to plead to a $350-million fine for price-fixing.
They are in business with a company that had to plead to a $500-million fine for bribery, a company that the GAO looked at, which is Halliburton, a company that the GAO determined overcharged taxpayers by $5 billion — a company, that allowed supervisory employees to rape and sodomize a 20-year-old employee and lock her up in a container for 24 hours so she couldn’t tell her story.
These are the people we are dealing with.
So, when I use the word criminal, a reporter that is not used to dealing with corporations like this, their first reaction is: That’s an odd characterization. But I deal with them all the time and I deal with corporations that aren’t criminal.
This is a criminal corporation. They are sociopaths in the way they view the world. They are predatory, and the President was very kind to them when he merely called them reckless. They are well beyond reckless.
Kathleen Wells: But will they face criminal responsibility/liability?
Mike Papantonio: If they don’t, it will be a travesty. We throw people in jail for carrying around five ounces of marijuana, and they can go to jail in excess of a year. And here, we’ve killed 11 people, and for the people responsible not to go to prison will be a travesty of justice.
Simply because they are dressed up in an Armani suit and expensive shoes and a silk tie doesn’t mean they are not criminals. It simply means we see them differently: They are not in an L.A. hood; they look different; they look like business people.
I’ve been in courtrooms with many corporations like this, and I’ve been in courtrooms with corporations that don’t function like this: They are not sociopaths; they are not predatory; they are simply negligent.
This is not simply a negligent corporation; this is a predatory, sociopathic, criminal, corporation.
Kathleen Wells: And so their conduct is intentional, you are saying? When you say it’s criminal, is it criminal negligence, you would say?
Mike Papantonio: Here’s the issue: Sometimes conduct is so reckless that we say we are going to treat them outside the analysis of negligence. A drunk driver has a blood alcohol level three times the legal limit. They drive through a school zone, and they kill a child. That is not intentional. They didn’t intend to kill the child. But their conduct is so wanton that they fall within the criminal realm.
At the very least, we have that. But the question is: Do we have something beyond that? Do we have an intentional design, where the design was: We are going to de-regulate, we are going to take control over the regulatory body that’s suppose to be the brakes, that’s suppose to stop us when we get out of hand? Do we have such control over that agency where it is a meaningless agency? And do we have a design to gain that control?
Kathleen Wells: When you characterize a company as reckless/criminal, who are the players that would be carted off to prison? Would it be the CEO?
Mike Papantonio: You would take them off to prison for reckless, wanton conduct that approaches manslaughter. In most countries you would do that. In the United States, we have been incapable of saying that. To give a parallel analysis, we know, for example, that Madoff stole billions of dollars. But we also know that there was conduct on Wall Street where we didn’t know Mr. Madoff. Madoff didn’t pull all the strings, but we know four or five people who did, and we treat them, not like criminals, but we treat them under the civil recovery – SEC civil. They should be prosecuted; they should be perp-walked.
That’s the same thing here. You see, negligence is forgivable. Somebody makes a bad mistake. OK, well, you know, people are human. We are not infallible.
But, when there is a design from day one. You see the design. You’ve taken the drink, you’ve jumped in the car, you’ve hit the gas pedal, and now you are driving 70 mph through a school zone. You know something is going to happen.
That’s what this company did.
Kathleen Wells: And who represents this company? Is it the CEO? Is it the COO? Who is going to go to prison?
Mike Papantonio: That’s the fallacy in the system, you see? This question is agonizing because you are sitting there saying: “There is no easy answer. We have built a Chinese wall around the CEO like Tony Hayward. Tony Hayward, we can’t go put in handcuffs and dress him up in one of those little orange suits and hall him away, because Tony is going to say: ‘Well, I didn’t really make the decision. This guy made the decision, collectively, with this team, collectively, with this company policy.”
And it’s a complete, utter sham.
To give you the best example I can, and this is one that is very easy to understand: Years ago, I handled the Factor VIII case. That’s where this particular company had manufactured a drug that would stop hemophiliacs from bleeding. They had created a drug from whole blood. They knew that the drug that they had created from whole blood was contaminated with the HIV virus.
After hundreds of people died — children primarily, because it’s a disease that is uniquely related to male children — after they contaminated hundreds, wiped out entire families — because that child would then spread the disease to the sister, and the sister would spread the disease to the other brother, father, and mother — after they were forced to take the product off of the market in the United States, they then took it and they shipped it to France, South America, and Asia and killed thousands of people.
In France, somebody went to prison. And that somebody paid the kind of price that we should be holding corporate types to: They went to prison.
In America, nobody was even arrested, much less sent to prison.
Kathleen Wells: Then, it becomes moot or irrelevant to paint/characterize a company as criminal, reckless, or sociopathic. It’s a moot point.
Mike Papantonio: I think you hit it on the head. It does, because even though the Supreme Court, six months ago in the United Citizens case, said that we have to treat a corporation like a person, we don’t treat them like a person.
And until somebody shows courage, and I don’t anticipate that that is going to be Holder. Holder comes from that silk stocking, corporate atmosphere. He was the guy that these corporations called on to defend them. Covington & Burling — that’s where he comes from.
Is that the guy that is going to pull the trigger on this? Probably not. But it’s going to take that kind of courage. It’s going to take an Attorney General saying: “Damnit, we just can’t allow this anymore. We have to set an example.”
Kathleen Wells: But he did announce that he is bringing a criminal investigation.
Mike Papantonio: So what! I’m pleased. I’m happy that he is. Hooray! Let’s see what it is. At the end of the day, let’s see what it really is.
How many indictments have you seen in the Goldman Sachs issue? How many indictments have you seen in AIG or any of these real, real, ugly cases that flowed from Wall Street?
Kathleen Wells: So you are basically saying this investigation has no teeth?
Mike Papantonio: It will have no teeth. It will look like it’s something, but when it is all over it’s not going to be anything. Nobody is going to go to jail.
Kathleen Wells: So corporations in this country are in a lofty position.
Mike Papantonio: They are above the law! There is no question. And until we start treating … If we are serious – if this dysfunctional, corporate-run Supreme Court that we have – if they are serious and they say we must treat a corporation like a person when it comes to giving campaign donations, they should have the right to do what a person does, well fine. It’s a two-way street: They also have the responsibility to be held accountable when they kill people, when they destroy an ecosystem, when they lie to us about their relationships with regulatory agencies, when they bribe regulators. We should be able to throw them in jail because they are a person.
Kathleen Wells: There has been no case law in United States where a CEO or an executive of a corporation has faced criminal penalties?
Mike Papantonio: That’s not accurate — there has been. But they are very few and far between. If you quantify it, what is the conduct en masse that we see in the United States? Can we go get somebody – yeah, we can. We saw it with Tyco. That was clear. We saw it with Enron, right? That was very clear: This person did this.
But most of the time they have so much insulation that we give them such a free pass that it is very, very difficult to do. It’s because we built it into the system to where the system perpetuates its willingness to protect a white-collar criminal and throw the blue-collar criminal in prison.
Kathleen Wells: And so you are saying it’s not likely that it’s going to happen with any of the executives with BP?
Mike Papantonio: No. Frankly, people with middle management should already be in prison. The people that were involved in the drug and sex orgy scandal that broke out right before this happened — they should already be in jail. What we are talking about is bribery – purely, simply bribery.
And so, when a corporation like Halliburton or BP then interacts with a regulatory agency and makes them do things that they know they are not supposed to do, and they give them something in exchange, that’s bribery.
Could we do something about it? Yes. Will we? No. Does this Attorney General have the courage to do it? No.
This is not unique to this situation. Who in the hell is Salazar? Where did he come from? The Republicans wanted Salazar. That was their guy. Where did Tim Geithner and Summers and Bill Rubin – where do these people come from?
They come from organizations that people like Eric Holder are beholden to. I mean, c’mon. I was very pleased that he was the first African-American Attorney General, but so what?
And for Eric Holder to grab himself and rise above what he has been beat into, which is the Covington & Burling culture, where he represents these people. These corporations are people they have represented all their lives.
Look, I hope he does. Nothing would please me more. But I’m not going to stand by and wait for it.
Kathleen Wells: You’re not going to hold your breath. I’m disappointed to hear this, because it speaks to the culture…
Mike Papantonio: Exactly. Most reporters don’t get that. They don’t understand that this is very complex. It’s a cultural policy issue. Let’s be honest with it – it’s a policy. We don’t throw our Harvard MBAs in prison.
Kathleen Wells: Recently, it was reported that the federal judge ruled to overturn the administration‘s six-month moratorium on drilling.
Mike Papantonio: Yeah, Feldman. Of course, how ridiculous! That’s a whole different story. That’s the story of the judiciary. Now, Feldman probably isn’t the best example of that. But while we have been paying attention to the shiny thing (the shiny thing is Congress and the Senate) — how many Senators are we going to have? How many Congressmen? Are we going to be able to get our 60 votes? Are we going to be able to overcome the filibuster?
While we have been paying attention to that, Karl Rove, people like Tom Delay, people like Newt Gingrich, people like Boehner and Eric Cantor – these people have been worried: can we pack the judiciary? How many federal judges can we put in there that come from the silk stocking background of Williams & Connolly or the Byrd Law Firm? How many people can we pack in there? And that’s what they have been doing ever since Karl Rove said: “That’s the way we are going to take back America. We are going to take it back through the judiciary, both at the trial level and the appellate level.”
And it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand what happened to us. Seventy percent of the judiciary now is Republican appointees, and when you break it down, it is even uglier than that. They are not simply Republican appointees, they are ideologues.
That didn’t just happen. It happened while I was doing radio shows with Bobby Kennedy on “Ring of Fire” on Air America, talking about how horrible it would be to lose a congressional race, and they were packing the courts in our backyard.
Kathleen Wells: And let’s take it on the legislative level. I just did an interview with Senator Bill Nelson of your state (Florida), and I was talking about the fact that Republicans, specifically Bill Frist, mentioned that they would work to defund any legislation subsequent to it’s being passed**.
Mike Papantonio: Of course. Listen to this – jump to your story. Do you really think that Joe Barton said, “I know what I’m going to do today. I’m going to apologize to Tony Hayward. I’m going to apologize to BP?”
Tom Price, who created the Republican talking points on this, he just didn’t create the talking points that we are going to apologize. You don’t have Newt Gingrich and Boehner out there apologizing overtly, but they are still apologizing.
The legislative process that you are going to see come at this is going to be driven by the same thing it’s always driven by, and that’s money. These are just the first few paper cuts. Barton’s statement was simply: “Let me see how the real crazy teabaggers are going to respond. Let’s talk to our base.” He is talking to his base.
Who is the base? The base are the teabaggers, the nutcases that live all up and down this coast. This is teabagger central, understand? So let me begin by talking to those people. Let me begin talking to those people, before we move to the legislative aspect of giving BP a free ride (which it will happen). Barton will be in charge of Energy, if the Republicans take the Congress back. He is the guy. So let’s start floating the ideas — that’s the first step.
The second step is — you have your Murkowski’s, you have the Palins, you have all of these shills, these hacks — with a straight face, they say: “Well, we have to legislate a way for BP to stay alive.” That’s what we will see if the Democrats lose next time.
Nothing is coincidental.
Kathleen Wells: So this is a strategy. Rand Paul characterized it as un-American to criticize BP. Michael Steele and also Michele Bachmann said that the trust fund was a slush fund and a redistribution of wealth.
Mike Papantonio: Here it is. Michele Bachmann — she wasn’t just talking to you and me. She was talking to the fringe edge. Where is the fringe edge? Where are they? They’re in Texas; they’re in Louisiana; they’re in Mississippi; they’re in Alabama; they’re in North Florida. That’s where the fringe edge lives.
That is the genesis, if you will, of the teabagger movement. So they aren’t just out there willy-nilly saying this stuff. This is the first step. And then, if the Democrats lose in the next election, then it’s going to be plausible — the issue will be a discussion issue. It will enter the mainstream discussion. We will feel comfortable talking about letting BP have a break. And then we will see legislation to change some of what we’ve been able to do to get BP to do what they are supposed to do.
Kathleen Wells: So it’s like gutting it – the legislation.
Mike Papantonio: Exactly. But this is just paper cuts right now. If the Democrats lose, you will have the Barton characters in control of changing the whole nature of the way we handle BP.
Kathleen Wells: I just don’t want to be partisan about it.
Mike Papantonio: I can’t help but be partisan about it. There is nothing redeeming I can tell you on the other side, so you would be talking to the wrong person for that.
Kathleen Wells: But what I’m saying is that with the health care bill we saw some of those Blue Dog Democrats not … so we have people in both parties, right? Maybe we are talking degrees.
Mike Papantonio: That’s exactly right – it is degrees. Of course, we have the Blanche Lincolns. You are always going to have that. You are always going to have those people out there. You are always going to have the Liebermans. But when you look at the total picture, which is all I can look at, I say: Where is the biggest threat? It’s this issue of the beginning paper cuts, the talking points, telling the teabaggers that it’s un-American, telling the teabaggers that it’s socialism. All that does is pander to their craziness to begin with, and then that becomes part of the broader public discussion. And then the legislature has an easier time to change the law.
Kathleen Wells: Also, Governor Haley Barbour and Governor Jindal said that a moratorium on drilling is bad for the region and bad for the country as a whole.
Mike Papantonio: It’s crazy talk. Here’s the tough thing that politicians can’t say. When the buffalo hunters killed all of the buffalo, then they were out of work, right? They killed them. There was nothing else they could do. We are at that crossroads right now, because what’s happening is we have an entire industry that we have to evaluate from the standpoint of the greater good. Like it or not, we have to do that.
And the greater good is this analysis: If we put 30,000 people out of work because of a moratorium or because we’ve changed the way that we are handling this industry here on the coast, then we’ve saved one million jobs that have been lost because of this oil spill. One million people have lost their jobs because of this oil spill.
So am I supposed to listen to Bobby Jindal or Haley Barbour and be moved by the fact that we have to?
Plants — car manufacturing plants, steel manufacturing plants, airplane manufacturing plants — close down all the time, and they put tens of thousands of people out of work all the time. It’s the reality. It’s where we are as a society. We are a dynamic, changing society. We are not static.
And it’s the same analysis of a buffalo hunter that says: “I’ve killed all the buffalo. Well, let me go kill something else now.”
*In August, the claims system will be taken over by Kenneth Feinberg, an independent administrator appointed by President Obama. BP will pay Feinberg’s salary, but he reports neither to BP nor to the government. Feinberg will have wide discretion in setting the rules to determine who is eligible for payments through the fund.
As of July 28, BP has yet to deposit any money in the oil spill compensation fund and Feinberg has stated that he could not begin making payments to businesses and individuals until BP makes a deposit.
** Recently, it was reported that Michele Bachmann has said in a speech that if the Republicans take back the House in November, they will spend their time issuing subpoenas and having one hearing after another and work to starve the beast, i.e., defund Obamacare and then unwind it, as well as other programs.
Orlando Sentinel: Heather Beaven hopes oil sticks to John Mica
2010 election, John Mica — posted by Mark Schlueb on August, 6 2010 3:19 PM
Heather Beaven has an uphill battle against an entrenched incumbent in Florida’s 7th Congressional District, where Republican John Mica has never had much trouble winning re-election.
But the Democrat keeps picking away at Mica’s friendly relationship with the oil industry. Today, she sent out an “oil spill” map that literally draws those ties (campaign contributions, family jobs), with a nefarious spin.
You can see the piece [above]. And it’s a safe bet you’ll see it handed out by Beaven’s people at campaign events as we get closer to the general election.
EPA Press Release: EPA Develops Innovative Software to Secure Nation’s Water Supply
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 5, 2010
EPA Develops Innovative Software to Secure Nation’s Water Supply
Canary software enhances detection of hazardous contaminants in drinking water systems
WASHINGTON - Scientists from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) have collaborated in developing innovative water quality software that enhances a water system’s ability to detect when there has been intentional or unintentional contamination. The Canary software can help detect a wide variety of chemical and biological contaminants, including pesticides, metals, and pathogens. Once contamination is detected quickly, a water utility can issue a “Do Not Drink” order to prevent customers from ingesting the water.
"This cutting-edge technology helps to protect all Americans and secure our nation's water supply from threats," said Paul Anastas, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Research and Development. "The new software also improves our drinking water systems and allows water utilities to quickly advise customers when their water is not safe to drink."
Drinking water utilities use the software in conjunction with a network of water quality sensors to rapidly detect contamination and to more accurately assess when and how they need to respond. The software helps to distinguish between natural variation in water quality measurements and hazardous contamination, and sends an alarm to indicate when water utilities should take steps to investigate and respond to potential contamination. In addition to achieving homeland security goals, Canary can be used to enhance day-to-day water quality management, and ensure the safety and security of water for all consumers.
The Greater Cincinnati Water Works is the first utility to pilot the software and has been using Canary to assist in detecting and managing contamination incidents since 2007. The software is currently being evaluated in four other U.S. cities -- New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and San Francisco -- and in Singapore.
EPA and DOE received a 2010 “R&D 100 Award” from R&D Magazine for developing Canary. The R&D 100 awards recognize the top high-technology products of the year.
August 5, 2010
EPA Develops Innovative Software to Secure Nation’s Water Supply
Canary software enhances detection of hazardous contaminants in drinking water systems
WASHINGTON - Scientists from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) have collaborated in developing innovative water quality software that enhances a water system’s ability to detect when there has been intentional or unintentional contamination. The Canary software can help detect a wide variety of chemical and biological contaminants, including pesticides, metals, and pathogens. Once contamination is detected quickly, a water utility can issue a “Do Not Drink” order to prevent customers from ingesting the water.
"This cutting-edge technology helps to protect all Americans and secure our nation's water supply from threats," said Paul Anastas, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Research and Development. "The new software also improves our drinking water systems and allows water utilities to quickly advise customers when their water is not safe to drink."
Drinking water utilities use the software in conjunction with a network of water quality sensors to rapidly detect contamination and to more accurately assess when and how they need to respond. The software helps to distinguish between natural variation in water quality measurements and hazardous contamination, and sends an alarm to indicate when water utilities should take steps to investigate and respond to potential contamination. In addition to achieving homeland security goals, Canary can be used to enhance day-to-day water quality management, and ensure the safety and security of water for all consumers.
The Greater Cincinnati Water Works is the first utility to pilot the software and has been using Canary to assist in detecting and managing contamination incidents since 2007. The software is currently being evaluated in four other U.S. cities -- New York, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and San Francisco -- and in Singapore.
EPA and DOE received a 2010 “R&D 100 Award” from R&D Magazine for developing Canary. The R&D 100 awards recognize the top high-technology products of the year.
McClatchy Newspapers: Could better corporate ethics have prevented BP oil spill?
McClatchy Washington Bureau
Print This Article Print This Article
Posted on Mon, Aug. 02, 2010
Could better corporate ethics have prevented BP oil spill?
Andrew Seidman | McClatchy Newspapers
last updated: August 02, 2010 03:23:00 PM
WASHINGTON — Religious leaders and scholars are clamoring for more corporate accountability in the wake of what they call the destruction of God's creation in the Gulf of Mexico, and they may have found a partner in their battle cry: the American business school.
"Look at the Gulf disaster — no one has questioned the core value system that BP used to cut corners with that rig out in the Gulf; namely, the race to maximize profits at all costs," said Mark Wallace, a professor of religious studies at Swarthmore College. "That's the religion of our time . . . the fundamental worldview that animates our common life together."
Eco-religious scholars such as Wallace aren't calling for the erosion of capitalism. Rather, they envision a nuanced form in which businesses also consider the well-being of communities and the environment in computing the bottom line. It's a system known as triple bottom line economics.
Business educators say they see no conflict in the approach — and expect the BP spill will soon be part of their curriculums as well.
"Without a doubt, it's feasible for companies to incorporate those values. Anyone who looks at this particular situation in hindsight is going to recognize that prudence is the best option," said Bruce Bullock, the director of the Maguire Energy Institute at Southern Methodist University's Cox School of Business. "Good business and good environmental sense need not conflict."
David Garvin, professor of business administration at Harvard Business School, said that research indicates the triple bottom line approach typically doesn't hurt a business's financial results. For that reason, more and more businesses are willing to use it.
"It is indeed a growing phenomenon, largely because society is holding business leaders accountable in multiple arenas, far more so today than they did in past," Garvin said.
The Deepwater Horizon oil spill has offered a moment for reflection for leaders in the religious community about their most basic beliefs.
"It's an opportunity to raise these larger questions as a society: What constitutes the good life?" said Walt Grazer, a former director of the Environmental Justice Program for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
That question has spurred deeper thinking about the economy by religious scholars, who've turned to the Bible for answers.
"A general theme from the Hebrew Scriptures that may be relevant to Deepwater is one that runs through the Prophets: When the people have become arrogant and obsessed with wealth, the poor suffer and the land suffers," said Willis Jenkins, professor of social ethics at Yale Divinity School. "Says the prophet Hosea: 'Even the birds of the air and fish of the sea are perishing.'"
The imagery of the trees, water and land that pervades the Psalms suggests that "the song of Creation is meant to be respected and revered," noted Mary Evelyn Tucker, coordinator of the Forum on Religion and Ecology at Yale.
Instead, Tucker lamented, disasters like the spill in the Gulf illustrate the "endless appetite of the octopus of market capitalism."
For business instructors such as Garvin, the BP spill has brought home the idea that future corporate leaders must develop personal standards for making decisions that go beyond just a financial calculation.
He predicts that a BP case study where students act out the same choices BP officials faced will soon enter the curriculum.
One priority for business schools and corporations as a result of the spill will be "getting students and executives to understand the power of situational pressures," Garvin said.
Many of the factors thought to have led to the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig were the result of bad decisions in which a less expensive option — whether to run a test or use a particular kind casing pipe, for example — was consistently chosen over one that would have cost more money.
The task for business instructors, Garvin added, will be to teach students how to remove themselves from those pressures and also build in mechanisms for dissent that were absent at BP.
As with business leaders, religious scholars place the onus for change on the individual.
"What happened in the Gulf — that's me," Wallace said. "It's not about BP or the Bush or the Obama administration — it's about every day people in the West who insist on cheap coal, cheap oil and cheap gas to power their lifestyles."
McClatchy Newspapers 2010
Print This Article Print This Article
Posted on Mon, Aug. 02, 2010
Could better corporate ethics have prevented BP oil spill?
Andrew Seidman | McClatchy Newspapers
last updated: August 02, 2010 03:23:00 PM
WASHINGTON — Religious leaders and scholars are clamoring for more corporate accountability in the wake of what they call the destruction of God's creation in the Gulf of Mexico, and they may have found a partner in their battle cry: the American business school.
"Look at the Gulf disaster — no one has questioned the core value system that BP used to cut corners with that rig out in the Gulf; namely, the race to maximize profits at all costs," said Mark Wallace, a professor of religious studies at Swarthmore College. "That's the religion of our time . . . the fundamental worldview that animates our common life together."
Eco-religious scholars such as Wallace aren't calling for the erosion of capitalism. Rather, they envision a nuanced form in which businesses also consider the well-being of communities and the environment in computing the bottom line. It's a system known as triple bottom line economics.
Business educators say they see no conflict in the approach — and expect the BP spill will soon be part of their curriculums as well.
"Without a doubt, it's feasible for companies to incorporate those values. Anyone who looks at this particular situation in hindsight is going to recognize that prudence is the best option," said Bruce Bullock, the director of the Maguire Energy Institute at Southern Methodist University's Cox School of Business. "Good business and good environmental sense need not conflict."
David Garvin, professor of business administration at Harvard Business School, said that research indicates the triple bottom line approach typically doesn't hurt a business's financial results. For that reason, more and more businesses are willing to use it.
"It is indeed a growing phenomenon, largely because society is holding business leaders accountable in multiple arenas, far more so today than they did in past," Garvin said.
The Deepwater Horizon oil spill has offered a moment for reflection for leaders in the religious community about their most basic beliefs.
"It's an opportunity to raise these larger questions as a society: What constitutes the good life?" said Walt Grazer, a former director of the Environmental Justice Program for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
That question has spurred deeper thinking about the economy by religious scholars, who've turned to the Bible for answers.
"A general theme from the Hebrew Scriptures that may be relevant to Deepwater is one that runs through the Prophets: When the people have become arrogant and obsessed with wealth, the poor suffer and the land suffers," said Willis Jenkins, professor of social ethics at Yale Divinity School. "Says the prophet Hosea: 'Even the birds of the air and fish of the sea are perishing.'"
The imagery of the trees, water and land that pervades the Psalms suggests that "the song of Creation is meant to be respected and revered," noted Mary Evelyn Tucker, coordinator of the Forum on Religion and Ecology at Yale.
Instead, Tucker lamented, disasters like the spill in the Gulf illustrate the "endless appetite of the octopus of market capitalism."
For business instructors such as Garvin, the BP spill has brought home the idea that future corporate leaders must develop personal standards for making decisions that go beyond just a financial calculation.
He predicts that a BP case study where students act out the same choices BP officials faced will soon enter the curriculum.
One priority for business schools and corporations as a result of the spill will be "getting students and executives to understand the power of situational pressures," Garvin said.
Many of the factors thought to have led to the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon offshore drilling rig were the result of bad decisions in which a less expensive option — whether to run a test or use a particular kind casing pipe, for example — was consistently chosen over one that would have cost more money.
The task for business instructors, Garvin added, will be to teach students how to remove themselves from those pressures and also build in mechanisms for dissent that were absent at BP.
As with business leaders, religious scholars place the onus for change on the individual.
"What happened in the Gulf — that's me," Wallace said. "It's not about BP or the Bush or the Obama administration — it's about every day people in the West who insist on cheap coal, cheap oil and cheap gas to power their lifestyles."
McClatchy Newspapers 2010
Thursday, August 05, 2010
McClatchey Newspapers: BP's oil spill caused by fed's 'dangerous culture of permissiveness'
By Erika Bolstad | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration focused from its earliest days on ramping up domestic oil and gas production, charged House Democrats, but at the same time allowed the industry a "dangerous culture of permissiveness" that culminated in the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico.
The House panel interrogated former Interior Department secretaries who implemented the 2001 recommendations of former Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force, which in turn resulted in an executive order requiring federal agencies to expedite offshore drilling and other domestic energy production.
Dirk Kempthorne, his predecessor Gale Norton, as well as the current Interior Secretary in the Obama administration, Ken Salazar, were all called before the House Energy and Commerce committee Tuesday about their oversight of the regulatory agency that oversaw offshore drilling, the Minerals Management Service.
The committee, which has been investigating the cause of the explosion, also is examining potential regulatory lapses that could have increased the likelihood of the massive blowout that killed 11 people, and that until this week, was pumping an estimated 60,000 barrels of oil a day into the Gulf of Mexico.
"There has been a pervasive failure by the regulators to take the actions necessary to protect safety and the environment," said Rep Bart Stupak, D-Mich., the chairman of the committee's oversight and investigative subcommittee. "These failures to regulate happened at the same time as federal officials offered oil and gas companies new incentives to drill in deeper and riskier waters in the Gulf of Mexico."
Norton, he said, gave in to the oil and gas industry when it objected to proposals to strengthen government regulations. Reports prepared for MMS in 2001, 2002 and 2003 recommended two blind-shear rams on blowout preventers and questioned the reliability of their backup systems, Stupak said. But the regulations finalized in 2003, during her tenure, didn't require a second blind-shear ram backup system on blowout preventers or even testing of backup systems.
As recently as three months ago, the regulatory and response structure of government was based on decades of success in the Gulf of Mexico, Norton said. Plans under both Republican and Democratic administrations were adopted against that backdrop of safety, she said.
But the decisions the Interior Department made when she was in charge sent a clear message to the industry, said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif, the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee: "The priority was more drilling first, and safety second."
Democrats noted that Norton left to work as general counsel for Shell Oil amid the scandals in the Interior Department over the influence of lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Last year, the Justice Department began investigating her role in a Shell lease; on Tuesday she referred questions about the status of the investigation to her lawyer.
But while Democrats focused on the Bush administration failures, they also were critical of the current administration's approach to energy and offshore drilling — as were Republicans.
The top Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, said the Obama administration was just as complicit as the previous administration.
Salazar had overseen some reforms, Waxman said. But he had done little to change drill permit procedures at the Minerals Management Service, the agency that's recently been restructured and renamed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement.
"There is little evidence that these reforms change the laissez-faire approach (at) MMS in regulating the BP well," Waxman said. The blowout, he said, "was a wake-up call for this administration and for Congress."
Barton urged his colleagues to focus on the decisions made under the current Interior secretary, not the two past ones testifying Tuesday morning. Although the Interior Department sold BP the lease during the Bush administration, the Obama administration signed off on the company's drilling plan, including the environmental impacts.
"We want to understand why the department allowed BP to do what it did," Barton said. "Americans want to understand what the Obama administration's response to the oil spill was and is."
He and other Republicans also used the hearing to continue to call for the White House to end the deepwater drilling moratorium that many — on both sides of the aisle — fear will be devastating to the Gulf Coast's economy.
Salazar said that he believes it's "imprudent and irresponsible" to lift the moratorium until they are assured of the safety of deepwater drilling practices, the ability of companies to contain oil in the event of a blowout, and the adequacy of their oil spill response plans.
"We are not out of the woods, even though this well has been temporarily shut in, because until we get to the ultimate kill of the well, the situation is still a very dangerous one," Salazar said.
Kempthorne, Interior secretary from 2006 through January 2009, said that no one conceived of an oil spill of the magnitude of the one in the Gulf during his tenure.
It wasn't raised at his confirmation hearing or when the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act was considered in 2006, Kempthorne said. Instead, when gas prices were hovering around $4 a barrel, he said he was asked pointedly why his agency wasn't "doing more to expand offshore energy development, not less."
Both Norton and Kempthorne said they were reluctant to criticize their successor, but acknowledged they didn't agree with the moratorium.
"A moratorium will compound the devastation by the economic devastation that will continue by the loss of jobs," Kempthorne said. "And the Gulf Coast region needs an opportunity to recover, and not have further devastation."
Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/07/20/97851/bps-oil-spill-caused-by-feds-dangerous.html#ixzz0vrB2JxBv
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration focused from its earliest days on ramping up domestic oil and gas production, charged House Democrats, but at the same time allowed the industry a "dangerous culture of permissiveness" that culminated in the April 20 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico.
The House panel interrogated former Interior Department secretaries who implemented the 2001 recommendations of former Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force, which in turn resulted in an executive order requiring federal agencies to expedite offshore drilling and other domestic energy production.
Dirk Kempthorne, his predecessor Gale Norton, as well as the current Interior Secretary in the Obama administration, Ken Salazar, were all called before the House Energy and Commerce committee Tuesday about their oversight of the regulatory agency that oversaw offshore drilling, the Minerals Management Service.
The committee, which has been investigating the cause of the explosion, also is examining potential regulatory lapses that could have increased the likelihood of the massive blowout that killed 11 people, and that until this week, was pumping an estimated 60,000 barrels of oil a day into the Gulf of Mexico.
"There has been a pervasive failure by the regulators to take the actions necessary to protect safety and the environment," said Rep Bart Stupak, D-Mich., the chairman of the committee's oversight and investigative subcommittee. "These failures to regulate happened at the same time as federal officials offered oil and gas companies new incentives to drill in deeper and riskier waters in the Gulf of Mexico."
Norton, he said, gave in to the oil and gas industry when it objected to proposals to strengthen government regulations. Reports prepared for MMS in 2001, 2002 and 2003 recommended two blind-shear rams on blowout preventers and questioned the reliability of their backup systems, Stupak said. But the regulations finalized in 2003, during her tenure, didn't require a second blind-shear ram backup system on blowout preventers or even testing of backup systems.
As recently as three months ago, the regulatory and response structure of government was based on decades of success in the Gulf of Mexico, Norton said. Plans under both Republican and Democratic administrations were adopted against that backdrop of safety, she said.
But the decisions the Interior Department made when she was in charge sent a clear message to the industry, said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif, the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee: "The priority was more drilling first, and safety second."
Democrats noted that Norton left to work as general counsel for Shell Oil amid the scandals in the Interior Department over the influence of lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Last year, the Justice Department began investigating her role in a Shell lease; on Tuesday she referred questions about the status of the investigation to her lawyer.
But while Democrats focused on the Bush administration failures, they also were critical of the current administration's approach to energy and offshore drilling — as were Republicans.
The top Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, said the Obama administration was just as complicit as the previous administration.
Salazar had overseen some reforms, Waxman said. But he had done little to change drill permit procedures at the Minerals Management Service, the agency that's recently been restructured and renamed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement.
"There is little evidence that these reforms change the laissez-faire approach (at) MMS in regulating the BP well," Waxman said. The blowout, he said, "was a wake-up call for this administration and for Congress."
Barton urged his colleagues to focus on the decisions made under the current Interior secretary, not the two past ones testifying Tuesday morning. Although the Interior Department sold BP the lease during the Bush administration, the Obama administration signed off on the company's drilling plan, including the environmental impacts.
"We want to understand why the department allowed BP to do what it did," Barton said. "Americans want to understand what the Obama administration's response to the oil spill was and is."
He and other Republicans also used the hearing to continue to call for the White House to end the deepwater drilling moratorium that many — on both sides of the aisle — fear will be devastating to the Gulf Coast's economy.
Salazar said that he believes it's "imprudent and irresponsible" to lift the moratorium until they are assured of the safety of deepwater drilling practices, the ability of companies to contain oil in the event of a blowout, and the adequacy of their oil spill response plans.
"We are not out of the woods, even though this well has been temporarily shut in, because until we get to the ultimate kill of the well, the situation is still a very dangerous one," Salazar said.
Kempthorne, Interior secretary from 2006 through January 2009, said that no one conceived of an oil spill of the magnitude of the one in the Gulf during his tenure.
It wasn't raised at his confirmation hearing or when the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act was considered in 2006, Kempthorne said. Instead, when gas prices were hovering around $4 a barrel, he said he was asked pointedly why his agency wasn't "doing more to expand offshore energy development, not less."
Both Norton and Kempthorne said they were reluctant to criticize their successor, but acknowledged they didn't agree with the moratorium.
"A moratorium will compound the devastation by the economic devastation that will continue by the loss of jobs," Kempthorne said. "And the Gulf Coast region needs an opportunity to recover, and not have further devastation."
Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/07/20/97851/bps-oil-spill-caused-by-feds-dangerous.html#ixzz0vrB2JxBv
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
SNAKERMAN SENTERFITT SONG, dedicated to DAN GELBER
Rich SOBS with deadliest products
Bright preppy lawyers and deep corporate pockets
Brown paper packages tied up with strings
These are a few of my favorite things
Dead injured victims and crookedest conmen
Wiseguys, bad guys and schnitzels with poodles
Tortfeasors, fraudfeasors with G-5s for wings
These are a few of my favorite things
Polluters and price-fixers with limitless cashes
Robber barons who stink -- we’re taking their cashes
Silver white-haired lawyers, we know whom to call
These are a few of my favorite things
When the press bites
When the court stings
When I'm feeling sad
I simply remember my favorite things
And then I don't feel so bad
[Repeat all verses]
AP: Giuliani daughter arrested at NYC cosmetics store
By COLLEEN LONG
The Associated Press
Posted: 5:12 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 4, 2010
Rudy Giuliani's daughter was arrested Wednesday on a misdemeanor shoplifting charge at a beauty supplies store after she was seen on security video pocketing makeup, police said.
Caroline Giuliani, a 20-year-old Harvard University student, was seen taking five items worth more than $100 at a Sephora store in Manhattan, New York Police Department spokesman Paul Browne said.
Store managers, after calling police, said they didn't want to press charges against her, Browne said. But police arrested her on a petty larceny charge, he said.
Giuliani, wearing black pants and a red sweater and with her arms folded, exited a police precinct Wednesday evening and quickly got into an SUV with her mother. She did not respond to reporters' questions.
Her father, through a spokeswoman, said the case was a personal matter and asked the media to respect her privacy.
The Manhattan district attorney's office had not decided whether to file formal charges against her, office spokeswoman Erin Duggan said. She's due in court on Aug. 31.
Caroline Giuliani is the younger of the former New York mayor's two children with ex-wife Donna Hanover, a television reporter and actress. She is believed to be estranged from her prosecutor-turned-politican father.
In 2007, when Rudy Giuliani was seeking the Republican nomination for president, Caroline Giuliani listed herself as a member of Barack Obama's Facebook group supporting his candidacy. But she left the group after an online magazine sent her an inquiry about it, and she didn't comment on the presidential race.
Rudy Giuliani lost to U.S. Sen. John McCain, who lost to Obama.
He has asked for privacy to deal with strained relationships in his family. His son, Andrew Giuliani, 23, has said their relationship became distant after his father's messy divorce from his mother and marriage to another woman.
The arrest Wednesday was first reported by the New York Post.
___
Associated Press writers Tom Hays and Marc Beja contributed to this report.
___
August 05, 2010 02:28 AM EDT
Copyright 2010, The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
The Associated Press
Posted: 5:12 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 4, 2010
Rudy Giuliani's daughter was arrested Wednesday on a misdemeanor shoplifting charge at a beauty supplies store after she was seen on security video pocketing makeup, police said.
Caroline Giuliani, a 20-year-old Harvard University student, was seen taking five items worth more than $100 at a Sephora store in Manhattan, New York Police Department spokesman Paul Browne said.
Store managers, after calling police, said they didn't want to press charges against her, Browne said. But police arrested her on a petty larceny charge, he said.
Giuliani, wearing black pants and a red sweater and with her arms folded, exited a police precinct Wednesday evening and quickly got into an SUV with her mother. She did not respond to reporters' questions.
Her father, through a spokeswoman, said the case was a personal matter and asked the media to respect her privacy.
The Manhattan district attorney's office had not decided whether to file formal charges against her, office spokeswoman Erin Duggan said. She's due in court on Aug. 31.
Caroline Giuliani is the younger of the former New York mayor's two children with ex-wife Donna Hanover, a television reporter and actress. She is believed to be estranged from her prosecutor-turned-politican father.
In 2007, when Rudy Giuliani was seeking the Republican nomination for president, Caroline Giuliani listed herself as a member of Barack Obama's Facebook group supporting his candidacy. But she left the group after an online magazine sent her an inquiry about it, and she didn't comment on the presidential race.
Rudy Giuliani lost to U.S. Sen. John McCain, who lost to Obama.
He has asked for privacy to deal with strained relationships in his family. His son, Andrew Giuliani, 23, has said their relationship became distant after his father's messy divorce from his mother and marriage to another woman.
The arrest Wednesday was first reported by the New York Post.
___
Associated Press writers Tom Hays and Marc Beja contributed to this report.
___
August 05, 2010 02:28 AM EDT
Copyright 2010, The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
IN HAEC VERBA: Endorsements of Dave Aronberg for Attorney General of Florida
Aronberg is "likely the strongest consumer advocate in the legislature."
-- South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Recent Endorsements Of Dave Aronberg
"You won't find my name on a lot of campaigns. But every once in a while, it is important to step out and step up for someone. Dave Aronberg is that someone. He has earned my support and my endorsement. He has the experience and the proven track record and I know he will make a great Attorney General."
Putnam County Sheriff Jeff Hardy
"Dave Aronberg has a strong record of working with law enforcement to protect public safety in cities and in rural communities like mine. He is the best prepared AG candidate and I proudly endorse him."
DeSoto County Sheriff William (Will) P. Wise
"He is one of the strongest consumer advocates in Florida government, and after eight years in the hands of Republicans, it's time we had a strong Democrat in the Office of Attorney General who will stand up for of all Floridians."
Congressman Ted Deutch
"The Florida Police Benevolent Association proudly endorses Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave has spent his entire professional career fighting for stronger enforcement of our laws while also passionately advocating for the professional men and women of law enforcement and corrections. We ask each of you to please support Dave Aronberg."
Police Benevolent Association
"Dave Aronberg has my support and my endorsement. His experience and understanding of our court system and how to keep it running smoothly makes him perfectly qualified to be our state's next Attorney General."
Madison County Clerk of Court Tim Sanders
"It is with great pleasure that I endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave's experience and his longstanding commitment to helping keep our courts running smoothly will serve the citizens of our state very well."
Polk County Clerk of Court Richard Weiss
"I am supporting Dave Aronberg because of his experience and because he knows what it takes to keep the wheels of justice turning. Dave has been an outstanding Senator and I know he will be an equally outstanding Attorney General."
Wakulla County Clerk of Court Brent Thurmond
"I'm with Dave because he has shown, time and time again, a commitment to public safety and a desire to make a difference for Florida's consumers. As the Clerk of Court in Alachua County, I am proud to endorse Dave Aronberg."
Alachua County Clerk of Court Buddy Irby
"I certainly and strongly endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave has the experience we need and the values we seek in our state's chief legal officer. As a clerk of the courts, that means a great deal to me."
Washington County Clerk of Court Linda Cook
"It is with great pleasure that I endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave's experience and his longstanding commitment to helping keep our courts running smoothly will serve the citizens of our state very well."
Hardee County Clerk of Court B. Hugh Bradley
"As County Clerk, my job is to ensure smooth and efficient operation of our courts. I can think of no better partner than Attorney General candidate Dave Aronberg. As an experienced lawyer and Senator, Dave will be an outstanding guardian for the rights of Florida's citizens."
St. Lucie County Clerk of Court Joseph Smith
"I am proud to publicly endorse Dave Aronberg because he has the experience and the track record we need. Our Constitution calls the Attorney General the state's 'chief legal officer.' As Clerk, I am charged with making sure our courts run smoothly, and with Dave at the helm, I know he will remain firmly committed to seeing our courts open and accessible to all Floridians."
Jackson County Clerk of Court Dale Guthrie
"I want my chief legal officer to exhibit the highest level of integrity, have the courage to take tough stands and be an advocate for the people. That is why I'm supporting and voting for Senator Dave Aronberg for Attorney General."
Leon County Clerk of Court Bob Inzer
"As a Senator, Dave Aronberg did not forget the needs of Florida's small counties like mine. He is a tireless champion for Florida's consumers and I know he will be a great 'chief legal officer' of our state...I proudly endorse Dave Aronberg."
Union County Clerk of the Court Regina Parrish
"I endorse Dave Aronberg because of his track record. He will be a very effective Attorney General because he is not afraid to stand up for average Floridians. Dave has a true and honest commitment to the people of Florida and I am proud to be a part of his team."
Taylor County Clerk of the Court Annie Mae Murphy
"I proudly endorse Dave Aronberg because he knows how important a smooth-running court system is to our democracy and he has always worked to ensure that the judicial system serves the people of Florida."
Gilchrist County Clerk of the Court Joseph Gilliam
"Dave Aronberg has the right experience and credentials to be an excellent Attorney General, which is why I proudly endorse him."
Columbia County Clerk of the Court P. Dewitt Cason
"The good people of the state of Florida deserve an Attorney General with a proven track record of standing up for the citizens of our state. I am proud to endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General because he has that experience."
Putnam County Clerk of the Court, Tim Smith
"Dave Aronberg has the experience and the track record of standing up for Florida's consumers, victims of crime, and for those of us who fight crime every day of our lives. Dave, you have always had our back, and I am happy to publicly support you."
Franklin County Sheriff Lloyd A. "Skip" Shiver
"Dave's legislative record embodies the commitment to public safety and consumer advocacy that we must demand of Florida's next attorney general. That's why today I proudly endorse Dave Aronberg."
U.S. Representative Ron Klein
"I am actively working to elect Dave Aronberg because he has proven leadership in protecting public safety and standing up for civil rights. We need an Attorney General who will do both, which is why I proudly endorse him."
Gadsden County Sheriff Morris Young
"Experience, commitment to public safety and an honest desire to put public policy over politics: Dave has all that and more."
Calhoun County Sheriff David L. Tatum
"Dave Aronberg has always listened to the views of the law enforcement community. I am proud to join all the other Sheriffs who have publicly endorsed him."
Jackson County Sheriff Lou Roberts
"Dave Aronberg's legacy as a State Senator and Assistant Attorney General...make him perfectly suited to be our next Attorney General."
Citrus County Sheriff Jeffrey J. Dawsy
"Dave Aronberg has been fighting for public safety and consumer protection...which is why so many of my Sheriff colleagues have endorsed him."
Hamilton County Sheriff J. Harrell Reid
"I enthusiastically endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General."
Wakulla County Sheriff David Harvey
"Dave is a powerful advocate for women, for seniors, and for the safety of all Florida citizens...Dave Aronberg is the #1 candidate for public safety."
Alachua County Sheriff Sadie Darnell
"Dave fits the mold of an ideal Attorney General....previous experience...as assistant AG...no one else can offer Floridians that kind of background and dedication to the job."
Glades County Sheriff Stuart Whiddon
"Dave Aronberg and I share the same commitment...zero tolerance for anyone who preys on any Floridian. We need someone...to protect the public from serious crimes including consumer fraud."
St. Lucie County Sheriff Ken Mascara
"He is custom made for this job."
Hendry County Sheriff Steve Whidden
"His experience serving as an assistant attorney general, and his legislative record...make him the top pick to be Florida's next Attorney General"
Baker County Sheriff Joey Dobson
"This State will be well served by an individual who serves all the people of Florida - in cities and in rural counties like mine."
Bradford County Sheriff Gordon Smith
"One thing about Senator Aronberg, he's a voice you can always count on ... He's always been there when I needed him and I know he's gonna be there when you need him."
Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw
“Dave has shown an interest in running for AG for several years now, and I've always told him I'd support him”
Rep. Scott Randolph
"No one is more passionate about the Attorney General's Office than Dave Aronberg”
Pat Frank, Clerk of Court
“We are confident in the leadership that Dave Aronberg will bring to the office of Attorney General."
Fraternal Order Of Police
-- South Florida Sun-Sentinel
Recent Endorsements Of Dave Aronberg
"You won't find my name on a lot of campaigns. But every once in a while, it is important to step out and step up for someone. Dave Aronberg is that someone. He has earned my support and my endorsement. He has the experience and the proven track record and I know he will make a great Attorney General."
Putnam County Sheriff Jeff Hardy
"Dave Aronberg has a strong record of working with law enforcement to protect public safety in cities and in rural communities like mine. He is the best prepared AG candidate and I proudly endorse him."
DeSoto County Sheriff William (Will) P. Wise
"He is one of the strongest consumer advocates in Florida government, and after eight years in the hands of Republicans, it's time we had a strong Democrat in the Office of Attorney General who will stand up for of all Floridians."
Congressman Ted Deutch
"The Florida Police Benevolent Association proudly endorses Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave has spent his entire professional career fighting for stronger enforcement of our laws while also passionately advocating for the professional men and women of law enforcement and corrections. We ask each of you to please support Dave Aronberg."
Police Benevolent Association
"Dave Aronberg has my support and my endorsement. His experience and understanding of our court system and how to keep it running smoothly makes him perfectly qualified to be our state's next Attorney General."
Madison County Clerk of Court Tim Sanders
"It is with great pleasure that I endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave's experience and his longstanding commitment to helping keep our courts running smoothly will serve the citizens of our state very well."
Polk County Clerk of Court Richard Weiss
"I am supporting Dave Aronberg because of his experience and because he knows what it takes to keep the wheels of justice turning. Dave has been an outstanding Senator and I know he will be an equally outstanding Attorney General."
Wakulla County Clerk of Court Brent Thurmond
"I'm with Dave because he has shown, time and time again, a commitment to public safety and a desire to make a difference for Florida's consumers. As the Clerk of Court in Alachua County, I am proud to endorse Dave Aronberg."
Alachua County Clerk of Court Buddy Irby
"I certainly and strongly endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave has the experience we need and the values we seek in our state's chief legal officer. As a clerk of the courts, that means a great deal to me."
Washington County Clerk of Court Linda Cook
"It is with great pleasure that I endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General. Dave's experience and his longstanding commitment to helping keep our courts running smoothly will serve the citizens of our state very well."
Hardee County Clerk of Court B. Hugh Bradley
"As County Clerk, my job is to ensure smooth and efficient operation of our courts. I can think of no better partner than Attorney General candidate Dave Aronberg. As an experienced lawyer and Senator, Dave will be an outstanding guardian for the rights of Florida's citizens."
St. Lucie County Clerk of Court Joseph Smith
"I am proud to publicly endorse Dave Aronberg because he has the experience and the track record we need. Our Constitution calls the Attorney General the state's 'chief legal officer.' As Clerk, I am charged with making sure our courts run smoothly, and with Dave at the helm, I know he will remain firmly committed to seeing our courts open and accessible to all Floridians."
Jackson County Clerk of Court Dale Guthrie
"I want my chief legal officer to exhibit the highest level of integrity, have the courage to take tough stands and be an advocate for the people. That is why I'm supporting and voting for Senator Dave Aronberg for Attorney General."
Leon County Clerk of Court Bob Inzer
"As a Senator, Dave Aronberg did not forget the needs of Florida's small counties like mine. He is a tireless champion for Florida's consumers and I know he will be a great 'chief legal officer' of our state...I proudly endorse Dave Aronberg."
Union County Clerk of the Court Regina Parrish
"I endorse Dave Aronberg because of his track record. He will be a very effective Attorney General because he is not afraid to stand up for average Floridians. Dave has a true and honest commitment to the people of Florida and I am proud to be a part of his team."
Taylor County Clerk of the Court Annie Mae Murphy
"I proudly endorse Dave Aronberg because he knows how important a smooth-running court system is to our democracy and he has always worked to ensure that the judicial system serves the people of Florida."
Gilchrist County Clerk of the Court Joseph Gilliam
"Dave Aronberg has the right experience and credentials to be an excellent Attorney General, which is why I proudly endorse him."
Columbia County Clerk of the Court P. Dewitt Cason
"The good people of the state of Florida deserve an Attorney General with a proven track record of standing up for the citizens of our state. I am proud to endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General because he has that experience."
Putnam County Clerk of the Court, Tim Smith
"Dave Aronberg has the experience and the track record of standing up for Florida's consumers, victims of crime, and for those of us who fight crime every day of our lives. Dave, you have always had our back, and I am happy to publicly support you."
Franklin County Sheriff Lloyd A. "Skip" Shiver
"Dave's legislative record embodies the commitment to public safety and consumer advocacy that we must demand of Florida's next attorney general. That's why today I proudly endorse Dave Aronberg."
U.S. Representative Ron Klein
"I am actively working to elect Dave Aronberg because he has proven leadership in protecting public safety and standing up for civil rights. We need an Attorney General who will do both, which is why I proudly endorse him."
Gadsden County Sheriff Morris Young
"Experience, commitment to public safety and an honest desire to put public policy over politics: Dave has all that and more."
Calhoun County Sheriff David L. Tatum
"Dave Aronberg has always listened to the views of the law enforcement community. I am proud to join all the other Sheriffs who have publicly endorsed him."
Jackson County Sheriff Lou Roberts
"Dave Aronberg's legacy as a State Senator and Assistant Attorney General...make him perfectly suited to be our next Attorney General."
Citrus County Sheriff Jeffrey J. Dawsy
"Dave Aronberg has been fighting for public safety and consumer protection...which is why so many of my Sheriff colleagues have endorsed him."
Hamilton County Sheriff J. Harrell Reid
"I enthusiastically endorse Dave Aronberg for Attorney General."
Wakulla County Sheriff David Harvey
"Dave is a powerful advocate for women, for seniors, and for the safety of all Florida citizens...Dave Aronberg is the #1 candidate for public safety."
Alachua County Sheriff Sadie Darnell
"Dave fits the mold of an ideal Attorney General....previous experience...as assistant AG...no one else can offer Floridians that kind of background and dedication to the job."
Glades County Sheriff Stuart Whiddon
"Dave Aronberg and I share the same commitment...zero tolerance for anyone who preys on any Floridian. We need someone...to protect the public from serious crimes including consumer fraud."
St. Lucie County Sheriff Ken Mascara
"He is custom made for this job."
Hendry County Sheriff Steve Whidden
"His experience serving as an assistant attorney general, and his legislative record...make him the top pick to be Florida's next Attorney General"
Baker County Sheriff Joey Dobson
"This State will be well served by an individual who serves all the people of Florida - in cities and in rural counties like mine."
Bradford County Sheriff Gordon Smith
"One thing about Senator Aronberg, he's a voice you can always count on ... He's always been there when I needed him and I know he's gonna be there when you need him."
Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw
“Dave has shown an interest in running for AG for several years now, and I've always told him I'd support him”
Rep. Scott Randolph
"No one is more passionate about the Attorney General's Office than Dave Aronberg”
Pat Frank, Clerk of Court
“We are confident in the leadership that Dave Aronberg will bring to the office of Attorney General."
Fraternal Order Of Police
USDOJ Press Release: Minneapolis Police Officer Charged with Civil Rights Violation
Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Minneapolis Police Officer Charged with Civil Rights Violation
WASHINGTON – A federal grand jury in St. Paul, Minn., returned an indictment today charging Minneapolis Police Officer Jason Andersen, 33, with a felony civil rights crime for assaulting a juvenile during an arrest , the Justice Department announced.
Andersen was charged with one count of willfully depriving a juvenile arrestee of his constitutional right to be free from the unreasonable use of force by a police officer . If convicted, Andersen faces a maximum punishment of 10 years in prison for this charge.
According to the indictment, Andersen kicked the juvenile during his arrest, which resulted in bodily injury to the victim. The charge set forth in the indictment is merely an accusation and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
This case was investigated by the FBI. The case is being prosecuted by Special Litigation Counsel Gerard Hogan and Trial Attorney Nicole Lee Ndumele from the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.
10-892
Civil Rights Division
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Minneapolis Police Officer Charged with Civil Rights Violation
WASHINGTON – A federal grand jury in St. Paul, Minn., returned an indictment today charging Minneapolis Police Officer Jason Andersen, 33, with a felony civil rights crime for assaulting a juvenile during an arrest , the Justice Department announced.
Andersen was charged with one count of willfully depriving a juvenile arrestee of his constitutional right to be free from the unreasonable use of force by a police officer . If convicted, Andersen faces a maximum punishment of 10 years in prison for this charge.
According to the indictment, Andersen kicked the juvenile during his arrest, which resulted in bodily injury to the victim. The charge set forth in the indictment is merely an accusation and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
This case was investigated by the FBI. The case is being prosecuted by Special Litigation Counsel Gerard Hogan and Trial Attorney Nicole Lee Ndumele from the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.
10-892
Civil Rights Division
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
St. Augustine Record: Letter: Keep Stern, Bryant, Adams off commission
Posted: August 2, 2010 - 12:08am
By RICH DE ANGELIS
Editor: The St. Augustine Record, Tuesday, June 29, story, "Spending paved way to crisis," claims the agenda of Karen Stern, Jim Bryant and Ben Adams may force a tax hike.
We, the taxpayers, have been paying for their tax, spend and growth for a long time. Our property taxes are going higher while our property values are sinking.
I can picture Cyndi Stevenson licking her chops in anticipation of these three returning to the County Commission with their development associates lined up behind, their bulldozers poised at our county once again. The county is having a rough time balancing the budget because of over-growth and bad decisions by the County Commission before 2007.
County Administrator Michael Wanchick states in The Record on Sunday, June 6, that revenues are down and as expenses go up this will put more burden on the property owners resulting in higher taxes and probably a hike in sales tax. Our representatives believe if you are buying or own a home, it is a bottomless pit for revenue. I know I have learned a great amount of knowledge from the past. Some are rewarding and others not so good.
Having Stern, Bryant and Adams return to the County Commission would be a disaster. I, as a registered Republican, will not vote for any one of the above candidates because of the legacy and decisions they have made in the past that we, the taxpayers, are going to be paying and taxed for a long time.
Let's stop these three so their past agenda will not cripple our county again. Please vote for those running against these candidates. Our future depends on your vote.
By RICH DE ANGELIS
Editor: The St. Augustine Record, Tuesday, June 29, story, "Spending paved way to crisis," claims the agenda of Karen Stern, Jim Bryant and Ben Adams may force a tax hike.
We, the taxpayers, have been paying for their tax, spend and growth for a long time. Our property taxes are going higher while our property values are sinking.
I can picture Cyndi Stevenson licking her chops in anticipation of these three returning to the County Commission with their development associates lined up behind, their bulldozers poised at our county once again. The county is having a rough time balancing the budget because of over-growth and bad decisions by the County Commission before 2007.
County Administrator Michael Wanchick states in The Record on Sunday, June 6, that revenues are down and as expenses go up this will put more burden on the property owners resulting in higher taxes and probably a hike in sales tax. Our representatives believe if you are buying or own a home, it is a bottomless pit for revenue. I know I have learned a great amount of knowledge from the past. Some are rewarding and others not so good.
Having Stern, Bryant and Adams return to the County Commission would be a disaster. I, as a registered Republican, will not vote for any one of the above candidates because of the legacy and decisions they have made in the past that we, the taxpayers, are going to be paying and taxed for a long time.
Let's stop these three so their past agenda will not cripple our county again. Please vote for those running against these candidates. Our future depends on your vote.
Associated Press: Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Calls it Quits
DEP chief resigns
By Jeanette Bradley
Created 2010-08-03 06:21
TALLAHASSEE (AP) — Mike Sole announced Monday that he will resign as secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection on Sept. 10 after leading the state's response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Gov. Charlie Crist appointed Mimi Drew, the agency's deputy secretary of regulatory programs, as an interim replacement.
Sole's letter of resignation to Crist says he plans to pursue other opportunities, but he didn't specify what they will be. Agency spokeswoman Amy Graham said he has not yet announced his plans and was unavailable for interviews.
Sole offered his resignation to Crist less than a week after announcing the state was "rightsizing" its response to the oil spill because a temporary cap put in place by BP has been holding back the oil, and permanent fixes are being readied.
"Now that the Deepwater Horizon well has been capped, and Florida is on the road to recovery, it is necessary for me to announce my departure date," Sole wrote.
Sole spent nearly 20 years at the agency. He was deputy secretary for regulatory programs and energy before Crist appointed him to head the department in 2007 with approval from the three-member state Cabinet.
"During his time at the helm of the Department of Environmental Protection, he has championed Florida's Everglades restoration, including expanding our efforts to the northernmost parts of an ecosystem that is essential to the water quality of millions of Floridians," Crist said in a statement.
Crist also praised Sole for leading efforts to address climate change through energy efficiency and alternative fuels.
The Republican-controlled Florida Legislature, though, has balked at proposals for greenhouse gas limits for electric utilities and new vehicles championed by Sole and Crist, who has left the GOP to run for the U.S. Senate as an independent.
Environmentalists had praised Sole's appointment but some later criticized his agency as failing to protect the state's waters from polluters.
Sole earlier this year questioned some aspects of federal regulations proposed for Florida waters in response to a lawsuit by environmentalists, but he denied that he was siding with agriculture and business interests that oppose those rules.
The agency's website credits Sole with making customer service a top priority and launching several new initiatives including an online tool called the Contamination Locator Map with information on pollution sites and clean up projects. He also has set up websites for state lands, permitting and compliance and enforcement.
A former Marine captain, Sole is a veteran of Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
By Jeanette Bradley
Created 2010-08-03 06:21
TALLAHASSEE (AP) — Mike Sole announced Monday that he will resign as secretary of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection on Sept. 10 after leading the state's response to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
Gov. Charlie Crist appointed Mimi Drew, the agency's deputy secretary of regulatory programs, as an interim replacement.
Sole's letter of resignation to Crist says he plans to pursue other opportunities, but he didn't specify what they will be. Agency spokeswoman Amy Graham said he has not yet announced his plans and was unavailable for interviews.
Sole offered his resignation to Crist less than a week after announcing the state was "rightsizing" its response to the oil spill because a temporary cap put in place by BP has been holding back the oil, and permanent fixes are being readied.
"Now that the Deepwater Horizon well has been capped, and Florida is on the road to recovery, it is necessary for me to announce my departure date," Sole wrote.
Sole spent nearly 20 years at the agency. He was deputy secretary for regulatory programs and energy before Crist appointed him to head the department in 2007 with approval from the three-member state Cabinet.
"During his time at the helm of the Department of Environmental Protection, he has championed Florida's Everglades restoration, including expanding our efforts to the northernmost parts of an ecosystem that is essential to the water quality of millions of Floridians," Crist said in a statement.
Crist also praised Sole for leading efforts to address climate change through energy efficiency and alternative fuels.
The Republican-controlled Florida Legislature, though, has balked at proposals for greenhouse gas limits for electric utilities and new vehicles championed by Sole and Crist, who has left the GOP to run for the U.S. Senate as an independent.
Environmentalists had praised Sole's appointment but some later criticized his agency as failing to protect the state's waters from polluters.
Sole earlier this year questioned some aspects of federal regulations proposed for Florida waters in response to a lawsuit by environmentalists, but he denied that he was siding with agriculture and business interests that oppose those rules.
The agency's website credits Sole with making customer service a top priority and launching several new initiatives including an online tool called the Contamination Locator Map with information on pollution sites and clean up projects. He also has set up websites for state lands, permitting and compliance and enforcement.
A former Marine captain, Sole is a veteran of Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm.
TIME FOR A NO-BRIBERY POLICY HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY
Former Republican County Commission Chairman JAMES BRYANT is exposed in the Ponte Vedra Recorder last week (see "The House that Jim Built", below). Former Republican Former St. Johns County Commission Chair THOMAS G. MANUEL is now federal prisoner number #32566-018, incarcerated at the federal prison in Butner, North Carolina.
MANUEL was not the first public official in St. Johns County to take a bribe.
We need an anti-bribery campaign in St. Johns County and St. Augustine and the other government agencies here. A St. Augustine Record editorial didn't quite call for that, as I have for months. Instead, it acts like bribery was a one-time event instead of commonplace.
How revealing -- the Record ignores the evidence of its own senses, refuses to print the news and praises GEORGE McCLURE (of all people), a seedy lobbyist for environmental devastators, who gets off on his representing speculators like ROBERT MICHAEL GRAUBARD.
Of course, people who are offered bribes should turn in the bribepayer.
Of course, people who are asked to give bribes should turn in the public official.
A culture of corruption can be changed one day at a time, just as courageous citizens have done in Sicily.
Stand up to bribepayers and bribetakers, who destroy our democracy.
Interesting that there's still never been one editorial in local newspapers against bribery and calling for an anti-bribery campaign, even though our former Republican County Commission Chair THOMAS MANUEL is pleading guilty tomorrow, after ndictment for bribery,for accepting $60,000.
In fact, when MANUEL pled guilty, the WRecKord omitted the fact that MANUEL was a REPUBLICAN.
One-party rule wasn't even relevant to the two reporters who covered the MANUEL plea. (A chronology did say "GOP", but neither article said "REPUBLICAN.")
In fact, when former NYC Police Commissioner (and George W. Bush Homeland Security nominee) BERNARD KERIK was sentenced to four years in prison, the WrecKord omitted that fact too.
Oleaginous St. Augustine corporate lawyer GEORGE McCLURE, longtime developer lawyer who shows his open contempt for public particpation in government, was scheduled to be a witness against MANUEL. Did McCLURE get a deal from federal prosecutors? If not, why would be McCLURE testifying? Is this a sudden pang of conscience after inflicting so many ugly, tree-killing, wetland-destroying projects on our community?
What do you reckon?
Will St. Johns County and St. Augustine return to business as usual?
What's next?
Ponte Vedra Recorder: The House That Jim Built
Sara Kaufman | July 30, 2010 | 22 Comments
In March 2005 Cynthia Beckwith purchased two plots of land in Vilano Beach for a total of $215,000 at a time when similar lots were being sold for more than $250,000 apiece.
The same day she signed the deed on the properties, she sold one of them to another buyer for $215,000 — essentially getting her a lot at no cost.
Five months later she married then County Commissioner Jim Bryant, who is now campaigning to return to the commission as the District 4 representative.
Bryant, who served as a commissioner from 1996 until 2008, lives with his wife in a house built on the lot she essentially got for free.
The Property
In November 2002, an application for zoning change for the land located at 166 Oak Avenue in Vilano Beach was filed with St. Johns County. The project name was North River Island and the applicant, Mark Ambach of Ponte Vedra, requested the zoning classification be changed from commercial highway and tourist to residential single family. According to the application for rezoning, the present use of the property was listed as "vacant, unfinished marina" and an attachment to the application for rezoning states, "the site was designated and approved for a marina but the marina project failed. The use proposed is compatible with the residential characteristics of the surrounding neighborhoods and is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation of Residential - Density C."
The firm of Pappas, Metcalf, Jenks and Miller P.A. was listed as the contact for the rezoning application.
The Developer
Mark Ambach, John Kenny and John Deneen formed North River Island LLC, which they filed as a LLC in the state of Florida on Feb. 27, 2003.
On March 4, 2003 Pappas, Metcalf, Jenks and Miller P.A. on behalf of the Barco Family Trust, then owners of the land in question, presented an application for rezoning to the commission.
As chairman of the commission, Bryant signed Ordinance 2003-15, designating the property residential single family — the rezoning became effective March 10, 2003.
The Woman
Bryant said his marriage to Lisa Lee Bryant went south long before the official January 2005 dissolution date. He said Cynthia Beckwith was an old friend from pharmacy school who he reconnected with in 2003 at a conference.
Bryant and Beckwith began planning for a life together, which they hoped to begin once Bryant got divorced. At the time, theirs was a long distance relationship. Bryant remained in St. Augustine and Beckwith lived in De Leon Springs.
According to Bryant, Beckwith wanted to relocate to St. Johns County and was looking to purchase property where they could eventually build a home together. He told The Recorder he was helping Beckwith shop for property at the time.
The Deal Opens
Beckwith signed a contract to purchase two plots of land (labeled lots 4 and 6) from Mark Ambach for $215,000. The contract was dated June 16, 2003.
According to Bryant, he was approached by Ambach regarding property Ambach had recently acquired and was looking to sell.
Listed in the contract Beckwith signed with Ambach were two conditions — the first was that the sale would not close until after July 1, 2004. The second condition was that it was understood that the buildable area in lot 6 was very limited and might not accommodate a house.
Bryant said a survey map provided by Ambach prior to placing the lots under contract
showed the buildable area on lot six was compromised by wetlands. He said he was under the impression that they would not be able to build on the lot.
He also said he and Beckwith continued to look at other property even though she had contracted to buy the two lots from Ambach.
The Final Plat
In July 2003, weeks after the Ambach contracted to sell the lots to Beckwith, North River Island LLC purchased portions of the rezoned land for $4.7 million from the Barco Family Trust.
Bryant and Beckwith were married in August 2005.
The final plat for North River Island was not approved until August 26, 2003 with the adoption of Resolution 2003-159. At the time of the vote to approve the plat, Bryant was chairman of the commission.
The Donation
On November 3, 2004 the commission, with Bryant representing District 5, adopted Resolution 2004-328, accepting the donation of park and conservation land from North River Island LLC. Included in this dedication were lots directly behind and adjacent to the lots Beckwith had under contract.
The Deal Closes
On Jan. 7, 2005, John Kenny Construction Company (Kenny is one of the partners in North River Island LLC) sold "Lot 2, Block CC, Unit "A" Surfside" to Jim and Nancy McFauls for $250,000.
On March 7, 2005, Beckwith’s purchase of lots 4 and 6, the contracted land from North River Island LLC, closed for $215,000.
On the same day, Beckwith sold one of the lots (lot 6) to J-Mac Construction for the same price she’d just paid for both lots — $215,000 — which meant she’d essentially paid nothing for lot 4.
McFaul, who had two months before purchased lot 2, owns J-Mac Construction.
The Missed Connections
Bryant said he was not aware of the connection between Ambach and North River Island LLC at the time Beckwith purchased of the land.
"I would say that there was no shady part on our actions," he said. "It wasn’t orchestrated on my part."
Bryant said he was surprised when The Recorder showed him the connections between Ambach, North River Island LLC, Kenny, J-Mac Construction and the McFauls. He said he had no idea how the deal to sell lot 6 to J-Mac was arranged.
"It happened so fast. I assumed it was on the up and up," he said.
The Law
Florida statutes governing standards of conduct for public officials say public officials should exercise care anytime they accept something of value.
Should Bryant have known that Mark Ambach and John Kenney were affiliated with North River Island LLC and that the deal that resulted in Beckwith getting lot 4 for free involved another company that had done business with the developers?
A 1980 advisory opinion from the Florida Commission on Ethics indicates the law places the burden on public officials "to exercise reasonable care in determining whether a particular payment or thing of value has been given with the internet to influence his official action."
It further states that "assuming the donor is in a position to be benefited by the officer’s or employee’s action, the officer should weigh the value of the thing received against the ostensible purposed for its being given. The larger its value, the more difficult it should be to justify its being given for any reason except to influence."
St. Johns County spokeswoman Karen Pan said County Attorney Patrick McCormack hosts a training session for commissioners that is designed to help them better understand the state’s ethics laws, among other things. In addition, Pan said, commissioners can go through in-depth training through the Florida Association of Counties at their discretion.
Former state attorney John Tanner, when told the facts contained in this story but not the names of the parties involved, said, "There are questionable circumstances that could have been avoided with perhaps a more diligent inquiry into the parties."
Tanner added that whether the commissioner knew or not may be moot. He said that under current laws he wasn’t sure he could be "tagged" with another person’s actions — not his spouse at the time — even though later he benefited from it.
If Beckwith had stopped seeing Bryant after she purchase the lots and sold one of them to J-Mac, but before she and Bryant were married, Bryant might not have received any benefit from the land deal.
But as things turned out, Beckwith, who is now Cynthia Bryant, has spent the past several years living with Bryant in a 2,955 square foot house they built on lot 4. The house is currently for sale, listed at $999,000, according to an MLS listing on Yahoo Real Estate.
Bryant is also renting a home in Ponte Vedra Beach to qualify as a resident of District 4, and plans to relocate here if he wins the primary election Aug.24.
sarakaufman@pontevedrarecorder.com
(904)285-8831 ext. 16
Reporter Shane Griffis contributed to this report.
In March 2005 Cynthia Beckwith purchased two plots of land in Vilano Beach for a total of $215,000 at a time when similar lots were being sold for more than $250,000 apiece.
The same day she signed the deed on the properties, she sold one of them to another buyer for $215,000 — essentially getting her a lot at no cost.
Five months later she married then County Commissioner Jim Bryant, who is now campaigning to return to the commission as the District 4 representative.
Bryant, who served as a commissioner from 1996 until 2008, lives with his wife in a house built on the lot she essentially got for free.
The Property
In November 2002, an application for zoning change for the land located at 166 Oak Avenue in Vilano Beach was filed with St. Johns County. The project name was North River Island and the applicant, Mark Ambach of Ponte Vedra, requested the zoning classification be changed from commercial highway and tourist to residential single family. According to the application for rezoning, the present use of the property was listed as "vacant, unfinished marina" and an attachment to the application for rezoning states, "the site was designated and approved for a marina but the marina project failed. The use proposed is compatible with the residential characteristics of the surrounding neighborhoods and is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation of Residential - Density C."
The firm of Pappas, Metcalf, Jenks and Miller P.A. was listed as the contact for the rezoning application.
The Developer
Mark Ambach, John Kenny and John Deneen formed North River Island LLC, which they filed as a LLC in the state of Florida on Feb. 27, 2003.
On March 4, 2003 Pappas, Metcalf, Jenks and Miller P.A. on behalf of the Barco Family Trust, then owners of the land in question, presented an application for rezoning to the commission.
As chairman of the commission, Bryant signed Ordinance 2003-15, designating the property residential single family — the rezoning became effective March 10, 2003.
The Woman
Bryant said his marriage to Lisa Lee Bryant went south long before the official January 2005 dissolution date. He said Cynthia Beckwith was an old friend from pharmacy school who he reconnected with in 2003 at a conference.
Bryant and Beckwith began planning for a life together, which they hoped to begin once Bryant got divorced. At the time, theirs was a long distance relationship. Bryant remained in St. Augustine and Beckwith lived in De Leon Springs.
According to Bryant, Beckwith wanted to relocate to St. Johns County and was looking to purchase property where they could eventually build a home together. He told The Recorder he was helping Beckwith shop for property at the time.
The Deal Opens
Beckwith signed a contract to purchase two plots of land (labeled lots 4 and 6) from Mark Ambach for $215,000. The contract was dated June 16, 2003.
According to Bryant, he was approached by Ambach regarding property Ambach had recently acquired and was looking to sell.
Listed in the contract Beckwith signed with Ambach were two conditions — the first was that the sale would not close until after July 1, 2004. The second condition was that it was understood that the buildable area in lot 6 was very limited and might not accommodate a house.
Bryant said a survey map provided by Ambach prior to placing the lots under contract
showed the buildable area on lot six was compromised by wetlands. He said he was under the impression that they would not be able to build on the lot.
He also said he and Beckwith continued to look at other property even though she had contracted to buy the two lots from Ambach.
The Final Plat
In July 2003, weeks after the Ambach contracted to sell the lots to Beckwith, North River Island LLC purchased portions of the rezoned land for $4.7 million from the Barco Family Trust.
Bryant and Beckwith were married in August 2005.
The final plat for North River Island was not approved until August 26, 2003 with the adoption of Resolution 2003-159. At the time of the vote to approve the plat, Bryant was chairman of the commission.
The Donation
On November 3, 2004 the commission, with Bryant representing District 5, adopted Resolution 2004-328, accepting the donation of park and conservation land from North River Island LLC. Included in this dedication were lots directly behind and adjacent to the lots Beckwith had under contract.
The Deal Closes
On Jan. 7, 2005, John Kenny Construction Company (Kenny is one of the partners in North River Island LLC) sold "Lot 2, Block CC, Unit "A" Surfside" to Jim and Nancy McFauls for $250,000.
On March 7, 2005, Beckwith’s purchase of lots 4 and 6, the contracted land from North River Island LLC, closed for $215,000.
On the same day, Beckwith sold one of the lots (lot 6) to J-Mac Construction for the same price she’d just paid for both lots — $215,000 — which meant she’d essentially paid nothing for lot 4.
McFaul, who had two months before purchased lot 2, owns J-Mac Construction.
The Missed Connections
Bryant said he was not aware of the connection between Ambach and North River Island LLC at the time Beckwith purchased of the land.
"I would say that there was no shady part on our actions," he said. "It wasn’t orchestrated on my part."
Bryant said he was surprised when The Recorder showed him the connections between Ambach, North River Island LLC, Kenny, J-Mac Construction and the McFauls. He said he had no idea how the deal to sell lot 6 to J-Mac was arranged.
"It happened so fast. I assumed it was on the up and up," he said.
The Law
Florida statutes governing standards of conduct for public officials say public officials should exercise care anytime they accept something of value.
Should Bryant have known that Mark Ambach and John Kenney were affiliated with North River Island LLC and that the deal that resulted in Beckwith getting lot 4 for free involved another company that had done business with the developers?
A 1980 advisory opinion from the Florida Commission on Ethics indicates the law places the burden on public officials "to exercise reasonable care in determining whether a particular payment or thing of value has been given with the internet to influence his official action."
It further states that "assuming the donor is in a position to be benefited by the officer’s or employee’s action, the officer should weigh the value of the thing received against the ostensible purposed for its being given. The larger its value, the more difficult it should be to justify its being given for any reason except to influence."
St. Johns County spokeswoman Karen Pan said County Attorney Patrick McCormack hosts a training session for commissioners that is designed to help them better understand the state’s ethics laws, among other things. In addition, Pan said, commissioners can go through in-depth training through the Florida Association of Counties at their discretion.
Former state attorney John Tanner, when told the facts contained in this story but not the names of the parties involved, said, "There are questionable circumstances that could have been avoided with perhaps a more diligent inquiry into the parties."
Tanner added that whether the commissioner knew or not may be moot. He said that under current laws he wasn’t sure he could be "tagged" with another person’s actions — not his spouse at the time — even though later he benefited from it.
If Beckwith had stopped seeing Bryant after she purchase the lots and sold one of them to J-Mac, but before she and Bryant were married, Bryant might not have received any benefit from the land deal.
But as things turned out, Beckwith, who is now Cynthia Bryant, has spent the past several years living with Bryant in a 2,955 square foot house they built on lot 4. The house is currently for sale, listed at $999,000, according to an MLS listing on Yahoo Real Estate.
Bryant is also renting a home in Ponte Vedra Beach to qualify as a resident of District 4, and plans to relocate here if he wins the primary election Aug.24.
sarakaufman@pontevedrarecorder.com
(904)285-8831 ext. 16
Reporter Shane Griffis contributed to this report.
Monday, August 02, 2010
WIMPETTE WATCH -- On Media and Politics: How Some Chain Gang Journalists Have “Delusions of Adequacy” in Covering the Florida Attorney General’s Race
A very serious looking Aronberg on the left side.
FEARLESS FOSDICK
"You cannot hope
to bribe or twist,
thank God! The
British journalist.
But, seeing what
the man will do
unbribed, there's
no occasion to.
--Humbert Wolfe
Readers of several Florida newspapers have complained bitterly about the lack of coverage of GELBER’s working for our State’s largest corporate law firm as a white collar criminal defense lawyer, while refusing to disclose any of his clients. What chutzpa!
We have all been learning since June all about one DANIEL SAUL GELBER and his former law firm, AKERMAN SENTERFITT and its representation of the likes of the CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE and its racist former City Manager, WILLIAM B. HARRISS in resisting environmental law enforcement. AKERMAN SENTERFITT employed Gelber, who may have even rendered criminal law advice after EPA and DEP investigators with guns and badges came to the Old City Reservoir on
Some once-great newspapers in Florida are demure and dainty, refusing to touch it. That’s sad.
Our Founding Fathers had great wisdom and showed how important freedom of the press was when they protected newspapers with the First Amendment -- our Founding Fathers expected newspapers would be zealous advocates to protect people from oppression.
Newspapers helped expose corruption from the earliest days of our Republic.
Newspapers brought down Boss Tweed, exposed Teapot Dome and Watergate and helped bring down Richard Nixon.
What have they done lately to earn their keep?
Not much, I reckon.
Now, too many newspapers have died.
Too many newspapers are dying.
Too many newspapers – like our local daily -- have become like what Lincoln said in the Lincoln-Douglas debates about Stephen Douglas’ arguments, "as thin as the homeopathic soup that was made by boiling the shadow of a pigeon that had starved to death.”
The most important race in the State of Florida right now is barely being covered by most Florida newspapers. This is a country where 2/3 of Americans can’t name a single Supreme Court Justice (and only 1% can name all of them).
This most important race is barely being covered by the dumbed-down birdcage liners we used to call newspapers.
This most important race is the race for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General, who is a Constitutional officer charged with protecting the people of Florida. Florida’s AG took on Big Tobacco and won a huge settlement, halting marketing to kids and recovering billions of dollars spent on indigent cancer care. Florida’s Constitution states that the Attorney General is a member of the Cabinet, with full voting power and “shall be the chief state legal officer. There is created in the office of the attorney general the position of statewide prosecutor. The statewide prosecutor shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the state attorneys to prosecute violations of criminal laws occurring or having occurred, in two or more judicial circuits as part of a related transaction, or when any such offense is affecting or has affected two or more judicial circuits as provided by general law. The statewide prosecutor shall be appointed by the attorney general from not less than three persons nominated by the judicial nominating commission for the supreme court, or as otherwise provided by general law.”
Why would you want a Big Law Firm lawyer with an undisclosed client list in that job? Why would you want a Big Firm lawyer who does not do pro bono work in a job that is supposed to protect the people of Florida from consumer fraud and monopolistic practices?
That would be like putting Dracula in charge of the Blood Bank.
Some uninformed editorial writers elsewhere in Florida have taken GELBER’s ”spin” as if it were holy writ, issuing brazen ukases. Their wrong-headed editorials claimed Dave Aronberg was wrong to raise the issue of GELBER’s being a partner in BP’s law firm. Dave Aronberg was courageous enough to stand up to Florida’s largest law firm and British Petroleum. Newspapers that took GELBER’s side without investigation exemplify shoddy journalism – they attacked Aronberg for criticizing Gelber and raising ethics issues, as if their misreading of a State Bar rule should be binding on every voter.
How foolish.
How inane.
How elitist.
Each voter gets to make the decision, not uninformed “journalists” without credentials or credibility.
These are not just technical ethics issues – they are issues involving the appearance of impropriety. They are issues that every voter must consider in making what is essentially a hiring decision – do we hire Aronberg or Gelber to be our Democratic nominee for AG?
They sound like ninnies and boobies to me – why do so many Florida newspapers take the side of the rich and powerful, against those who do most of the living and dying and productive economic activity in our State? .
Rather than assign investigative reporters, these feckless thugs assigned only shallow political reporters (whose motto is “let ‘em eat handouts”) opted for their usual shallowness (“who’s up, who’s down”) rather than learning the facts.
The Chain Gang Journalist’s Politifact column’s thin gruel pigeon soup didn’t learn as much as this blog did. It didn’t take too long for me to read 500 web pages on the AKERMAN SENTERFITT website and share the list of clients with our readers.
Shame on you, Miami Herald, Palm Beach Post, Orlando Sentinel and other tepid, timid Chain Gang Journalism papers.
Your inept editors and reporters are under-funded and uninspired. Your reporting is lackluster. You have delusions of adequacy.
Without thought, without investigation or research, they errantly presume GELBER was telling the truth, without asking questions, without demanding documents, and without so much as examining GELBER’s AKERMAN SENTERFITT Martindale-Hubbell, Linked-in, and state legislature listings, all of which showed him as a shareholder (partner).
Some uninformed editorial writers don’t know peaturkey about a durn thing and show it every day.
Frankly, the Miami Herald, Palm Beach Post and Orlando Sentinel are shadows of their former selves, leaving their news writers and editorialists to produce a thin gruel instead of meaty substance.
Of course, as JFK said, 90% of all newspaper publishers are Republicans. So why would Democrats, voting in a Democratic primary, take the word of Republican Chain Gang “Journalists” from large organizations like COX NEWSPAPERS and the CHICAGO TRIBUNE COMPANY?
Republicans would (naturally) like Democrats to nominate the weakest possible candidate for AG, so they can beat him. Nominating GELBER for AG would be the functional equivalent of a boxer leading with his chin. Republicans would have a field day talking about GELBER’s secrecy in refusing to disclose any of his clients. They would beat GELBER like a rented mule.
On the other hand, Dave Aronberg is the strongest candidate, a real Democrat, and he would win.
Dave Aronberg, a real Democrat, reminds me of Robert Kennedy, committed to justice and speaking truth to power. Like Robert Kennedy in 1968, Dave Aronberg reaches out to both Democrats and Republicans, as shown by his election and re-election from a conservative district that spans from East to West in several counties.
GELBER has sent trashy mailings saying Dave Aronberg is a “typical politician.” That’s chutzpa. As the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in Motorola Corp. v. Uzan, 561 F.3d 123 (2nd Cir. 2009) regarding “chutzpa”:
“Chutzpah” as a legal term of art is analytically similar to “unclean hands,” though not necessarily coterminous with that concept as understood in the law of chancery. The 'classic definition' of chutzpah has been described as 'that quality enshrined in a man who, having killed his mother and father, throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.' Leo Rosten, The Joys of Yiddish 92 (1968); see also Thaler v. Second New Haven Bank, Civ. No. B-713, slip op. at 1 (D. Conn. Apr. 10, 1974) (“When the apocryphal child murdered his parents and then sought mercy as an orphan, he set a standard for courtroom chutzpah that has not been rivaled until the filing of this lawsuit”); Scher v. Nat’l Assoc. of Sec. Dealers, 386 F. Supp. 2d 402, 404 (S.D.N.Y. 2005) (quoting the unpublished opinion by then-District Judge Newman and explaining the extraordinary circumstances of the civil suit brought by Seymour Thaler, a convicted felon and former New York state senator). Cf. Yates v. City of New York, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54199, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 4, 2006) (using this “vastly overused” but nonetheless “most appropriate” term to describe “an individual, [who] after being mauled by the 450-pound Siberian tiger he had been raising inside his fifth-floor apartment along with an alligator, sue[d] the city and the police who entered the apartment in an effort to rescue the animals for do
GELBER is like “the apocryphal child [who] murdered his parents and then sought mercy as an orphan.”
GELBER is not a likable guy. That makes him a bad candidate for the Democrats if he were nominated to run for AG.
GELBER is more like a “typical [Republican] politician” – they cower to power, kiss up and kick down. They appeal to the lowest common denominator instead of what Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature.” GELBER reminds me of every slick tv and movie corporate lawyer, a John Crisham caricature, a honky-tonk medley of villainy, like Snidely Whiplash without the moustache or panache.
The fact of the matter is that GELBER won’t identify his AKERMAN SENTERFITT clients, plays fast and loose with the truth and thinks that pro bono legal work is being a “big brother!” Oh, bother!
I recently told this last datum (GELBER thinks it’s pro bono legal work to be a “big brother”) to one of my retired judge friends living in Florida – he laughed.
GELBER’s false advertising doesn’t pass the laugh test.
GELBER doesn’t know why he’s running for Attorney General.
GELBER’s naked ambition made him drop his dream of running for United States Senator, a job for which he would be supremely qualified, having been chief counsel to one of Congress’ best subcommittees – the United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (which was then chaired by the homophobic Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia, for whom GELBER worked for four years; Nunn is a retired senior partner with the law firm of King & Spalding).
Increasingly, GELBER, erstwhile AKERMAN SENTERFITT shareholder/partner/of counsel, seems angry at and out-of-touch with real people. GELBER issues lying campaign ads claiming Dave Aronberg has only two years of legal experience, or when he makes an issue of Dave Aronberg being too young and never trying a jury case.
What a red herring.
GELBER’s first attacklette is about age – Aronberg is younger (40) than GELBER (50). How trite. How revealing.
GELBER’s age attack on the younger, more qualified candidate reminds me of the scene in the tv series “The West Wing” where President Jed Bartlet (played by Martin Sheen) is interviewing a pompous jerk who is being considered for a Supreme Court nomination. Said pompous jerk condescends to a younger lawyer (Sam Seaborn (Rob Lowe) who is helping President Josiah Edward “Jed” Barlett question him – the pompous jerk doesn’t like being questioned and ends up by saying, “this sideshow is over. With all due respect, Mr. President, I find this kind of questioning very rude,” saying “you have me taken to school by some kid.”
Jed Barlett responds, “That Sam is young, drives me nuts too, but he took you off for a ride, sir, because that’s what I told him to do.”
We need an Attorney General who is young enough to care and does what the people of Florida told him to do – represent them and not the special interests. That Attorney General is Dave Aronberg, who passionately cares about helping people. Dave Aronberg is still young enough to be passionate, unjaded, and unfazed by power lawyers and the trash they emit.
GELBER’s second attacklette is about jury trials. Yes, GELBER has jury trial experience – but not one representing an individual against a large organization. GELBER prosecuted cases for the federal government. He now descends the rich and powerful, with secretive investigations under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the clients for which he refused to disclose.
Jury trials are an endangered species, thanks to the likes of AKERMAN SENTERFITT. Jury trials are an endangered species because of the immense expense that defense law firms have invested in cheating people out of their sacred rights to jury trial. Many lawyers work their entire careers without trying a jury trial. Legislators and judges have betrayed their oaths by taking away our Seventh Amendment right to jury trial – which the late U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist said was a “bulwark against oppression” – with summary judgment and cramdown mediation and arbitration.
Oligopolists don’t trust juries – that’s why they’ve funded the “Alternative Dispute Resolution” movement for years, as Judge James L. Guill and I documented in a 1989 Judges’ Journal article, “A Rush to Unfairness – the Downside to Alternative Dispute Resolution.”
Thus, for the oligopolists’ candidate (GELBER) to brag on his jury trial experience in running for a Constitutional officer’s job proves once again that “Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue.” (Francois de La Rochefoucauld).
Florida’s Attorney General is a Constitutional officer. He does not try jury cases. He sets the tone for 500 lawyers – he leads our state in consumer protection cases, including winning cases against Big Tobacco (which AKERMAN SENTERFITT brags of defending in more than 40 jury trials).
In the past, some candidates for State Attorney General have played “bait and switch” with the voters – acting as if the job of State AG were primarily criminal, rather than civil. Then, when they’re elected, and you call their staffs (e.g., about Sunshine and Open Records violations) they say, oh, that’s the job of your local State’s Attorney and your FDLE (both of whom too often turn a blind eye to organized crime and white collar crime by local governments).
GELBER is in that mold – reading his propaganda, you’d think he was running for Miami State’s Attorney (for which he’s supremely qualified), rather than for Florida’s State AG.
It is up to us.
Do we nominate a wolf in sheep’s clothing (GELBER)?
Or do we nominate a committed consumer protection advocate, a mensch, a real man with real convictions (not a compromised corporate lawyer) who can win and make a difference in peoples’ lives?
Lazy newspapers aren’t helping us make this decision.
Let GELBER run for the U.S. Senate (as he had originally announced) the next time there’s a vacancy (which could be as eariy as 2012 of Senator Bill Nelson retires).
GELBER reminds me of Dick Tracy’s “Fearless Fosdick” – a stiff, stilted, self-caricature, a man who brags that everyone in his family is either a teacher or a prosecutor.
GELBER is singularly thin-skinned, as lugubrious a goober as ever made a chair squeak, someone who thinks that it’s all about him.
It’s not – it’s about who is fit to lead the State of Florida in the biggest civil litigation we’ve ever seen in history – the case of the State of Florida v. British Petroleum, Halliburton, et al.
We deserve a lawyer who is not a former hired gun with BP’s new law firm.
We deserve a lawyer who won’t have conflicts of interest.
Dave Aronberg deserves our support for Florida’s Attorney General.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)