viernes, marzo 28, 2008
Astillero
Un pajarito gastronómico plenamente identificado (por este tecleador, no por los comensales de los que enseguida se hablará) reporta que el pasado lunes cenaban en Au pied de cochon, el restaurante del hotel Intercontinental de la ciudad de México, Juan Camilo Mouriño Terrazo, todavía secretario de gobernación; Maximiliano Cortázar Lara, el baterista que funge como coordinador de comunicación social de Los Pinos, y dos mujeres, una que, según personal del lugar, sería María de los Ángeles Arronte Olguín, secretaria privada de Felipe Calderón, y otra de la que no se supo dar seña.
El corresponsal voluntario de esta columna así relató la parte interesante de lo que vio y escuchó: “Mouriño estaba atento a lo que decía Cortázar desenfadadamente, en el sentido de que ‘lo que hay que hacer en caliente es agarrarlos a patadas’ (térmica adaptación nacional de la doctrina Bours de patear a piedritas y piedrotas que se opongan a negocios familiares o grupales: nota del cálido columnista). Mouriño luego dijo que nada podría afectarlo en su posición, y que lo único que se habían ganado es que él y su familia ya no invertirían más en el país. Con actitud infantil y entre carcajadas denostaban a López Obrador y al Movimiento Nacional para la Defensa del Petróleo. Hubo vinos caros y selección de mariscos. Una treintena de elementos de seguridad vigilaban la velada”.
Mientras tanto, el embajador Jorge Zermeño Infante está de regreso en México, sin que se conozca una razón oficial para que haya viajado desde Madrid. Dado que la Secretaría de Gobernación está precariamente ocupada por Juan Camilo Mouriño, quien sólo pareciera estar en espera de que designen a su relevo, muchas especulaciones causó el extraño retorno del ex presidente de la mesa directiva de la Cámara de Diputados, quien se aplicó a darle carácter público a su viaje al ir de visita a San Lázaro para reunirse con legisladores de diferentes partidos y así subrayar su supuesta capacidad de interlocución plural.
En caso de que Los Pinos decidiera sustituir al abajofirmante (en contratos familiares) Mouriño por el improvisado embajador Zermeño (¿acaso el amigo Felipe estará pensando kafkianamente en proponer un enroque: el mexicanísimo Mouriño como embajador destinado a la tierra en que nació?), se estaría en presencia de una simulación evidente, pues el citado Zermeño es un subordinado político de Mouriño, tal como el 27 de junio del año pasado se escribió aquí: “Y, en otro lindo episodio de éxitos familiares, el vicepresidente de la Nueva España, Juan Camilo Mouriño, ha conseguido que México ponga en Madrid no a un embajador, sino a un encargado de negocios, pues Jorge Zermeño Infante llegará a aquel reino peninsular europeo a representar los intereses comerciales de la familia conquistadora. Zermeño fue representante de la firma Bardahl, de aceites y lubricantes, y en ese contexto conoció a otros negociantes del ramo en Campeche, la familia Mouriño, con tan buena suerte en esas relaciones que el propio Zermeño presentó a Juan Camilo con Felipe Calderón, quien había vivido durante años en aquella ciudad del sur como secretario y asistente de Carlos Castillo Peraza. ¡Ah, lo que las plumas literarias podrían contar de tantos gallos desplumados!”
Así es que, de ser ciertos los rumores, en Bucareli se pasaría del secretario Ivancar al secretario Bardahl (o al secretario Hola!, pues el todavía embajador hizo difundir su boda del año pasado en esa revista de “sociales”) y se mantendría el mismo conflicto de interés de Mouriño Company. Además, se fortalecería al bando coahuilense en el que participa el primer compadre del país, el senador Guillermo Anaya, que es secretario general del comité nacional panista. Ese grupo ha sido acusado de tener relaciones peligrosas que han estremecido La Laguna en una guerra por el control del narcotráfico que ha buscado transferir ganancias del capo tradicional, un viejo priísta, por jóvenes relevos relacionados con el panismo y el calderonismo (interesados en el tema, buscar al gobernador de Coahuila, Humberto Moreira).
Astillas
Con la novedad de que el presidente del comité estatal del PRI en Sonora, Ernesto de Lucas, pagó la fianza necesaria para excarcelar contra su voluntad y romper la huelga de hambre de Adriana González Celaya, la activista detenida en días pasados por estar en contra del negocio Musas-Bours (Bursas) que pretende entregar terrenos públicos a empresarios encabezados por el hermano del gobernador del estado. González Celaya había rechazado acogerse al beneficio de la libertad caucional por considerar que no había cometido delito alguno. Ante ello, el tal De Lucas pagó por su cuenta la fianza y así el juzgado y la cárcel actuaron con desconocida celeridad para colocar a la opositora en la calle. La treta de mala factura es similar a la que en 2005 realizaron los diputados panistas Gabriela Cuevas y Jorge Lara (luego de consultarlo con Felipe Calderón, según dijeron) al pagar una fianza en el proceso abierto contra AMLO. El pateador de piedritas y piedrotas, Eduardo Bours, cree, equivocadamente, que así le quitará fuerza al movimiento cívico que defiende el Parque Villa de Seris… En cuanto llegó a la presidencia del IFE, Leonardo Valdés Zurita impulsó el acuerdo que dio carpetazo a las investigaciones que pretendían esclarecer y castigar el extraño caso de 281 mil espots transmitidos durante las campañas de 2006 que no fueron reportados oficialmente al Instituto del Fraude Electoral. Luego, los dueños de medios electrónicos se permitieron ni siquiera pelar al tal instituto en cuanto a transmitir cierto material. Pero ahora el valiente e implacable V. Zurita está dispuesto a ir a fondo y sancionar ejemplarmente el que en Televisión Azteca se hayan difundido anuncios invitando al acto del pasado martes en defensa del petróleo… Y, mientras Relaciones Exteriores y Los Pinos siguen demostrando su alineamiento vergonzoso con el gobierno de Colombia y la jefatura de Estados Unidos, negándose a actuar con decoro y sentido de justicia en el caso de los mexicanos asesinados en Ecuador, ¡feliz fin de semana!
Corrupción, ineficacia y encubrimiento
Según la Auditoría Superior de la Federación (ASF), en el arqueo de la Cuenta Pública 2006, el gobierno de Vicente Fox dispuso, a lo largo de su sexenio, de 719 mil millones de pesos de ingresos extraordinarios, además de 603 mil millones de pesos procedentes de la contratación de deuda, lo que, sumado, da más de un billón 300 mil pesos de recursos adicionales a los presupuestos que, año con año, le fueron autorizados por el Legislativo. El dato es escandaloso por dos razones: porque, a pesar de todo ese dinero, la economía nacional creció, durante todo el foxismo, a tasas anuales menos que mediocres, y hasta inexplicables, habida cuenta de los recursos adicionales, y porque buena parte de los centenares de miles de millones de pesos que recibió la administración pública no aparecen, ahora, por ninguna parte. En el mismo documento, la ASF reporta el hallazgo de inconsistencias por más de 33 mil millones de pesos sólo en el último año de la gestión presidencial pasada. Particularmente indignantes son los faltantes de comprobación, por más de 7 mil millones, en los pomposos programas educativos del foxismo, que a la postre se revelaron como verdaderas tomaduras de pelo, como la Enciclomedia y la biblioteca José Vasconcelos, o el inexplicable pozo sin fondo en que se convirtió la remodelación del aeropuerto capitalino, una obra que se presupuestó originalmente en 200 millones de pesos, que terminó costándole al erario más de 8 mil millones y que acabó siendo inaugurada antier, con 17 meses de retraso y sin estar plenamente terminada, por el sucesor de Fox en el cargo.
Es importante recalcar que las cifras señaladas deben tomarse únicamente como un indicativo de la ineficiencia, la turbiedad y el poco escrúpulo con que el gobierno pasado manejó el dinero público, y como la punta del iceberg de las irregularidades administrativas, toda vez que el trabajo realizado por la ASF dista mucho de cubrir la totalidad de los ejercicios presupuestales realizados por el Ejecutivo federal. En todo caso, las auditorías legislativas fortalecen, así sea en forma tangencial, las sospechas de corrupción que pesan sobre la Presidencia de Vicente Fox, las cuales el grupo en el poder no ha querido convertir en investigaciones formales.
Por si quedara alguna duda, antier Felipe Calderón inauguró, incompletas, las obras de remodelación del aeropuerto, omitió los fundados cuestionamientos realizados a “la inversión cuantiosa” y elogió “el esfuerzo de la administración del presidente Vicente Fox”, a pesar de que el costo del proyecto creció de manera inexplicable en cerca de 10 mil por ciento sin que nadie de la administración pasada se hubiese tomado la molestia de explicar los motivos por los cuales una obra de 200 millones absorbió 8 mil 395 millones adicionales.
Con esta actitud, y con su sistemática negativa a deslindarse del foxismo, el gobierno calderonista agrega a su propio déficit de legitimidad de origen la percepción ciudadana del encubrimiento de los desaseos del gobierno pasado, y envía a la sociedad un mensaje inequívoco: la continuidad de la vieja práctica priísta según la cual el sucesor cuidaba las espaldas del antecesor en el cargo y garantizaba una cadena de impunidad y encubrimiento que recorría –o que aún recorre, con todo y el cambio de siglas y de colores operado en Los Pinos hace ocho años– los sexenios.
CON INGRESO HISTÓRICO, FOX DEJÓ DEUDA RÉCORD
9 mil 53 millones de pesos por concepto de ingresos adicionales y el crecimiento promedio anual del país sólo alcanzó 3.2 por ciento
El endeudamiento llegó a 603 mil millones
Roberto Garduño y Víctor Ballinas
El gobierno de Vicente Fox Quesada dispuso entre 2000 y 2006 de 719 mil 53 millones de pesos de ingresos extraordinarios, y el crecimiento promedio anual del país sólo alcanzó 3.2 por ciento. El informe de resultados de la revisión de fiscalización superior de la cuenta pública 2006 también reveló que entre los años 2000 y 2006 la deuda pública contratada alcanzó la cifra récord de 603 mil millones de pesos.
Al presentarse en la Cámara de Diputados los 48 volúmenes que contienen las 754 auditorías aplicadas al gobierno federal, a los estatales y entes autónomos durante 2006, se reveló que la deuda del gobierno federal llegó a 2 billones 129 mil 91 millones de pesos, lo que representó un aumento de 13.8 por ciento en relación con el año 2005, “en razón de un endeudamiento neto de 224 mil 239 millones de pesos”.
Tan sólo el endeudamiento neto entre 2001 y 2006 sumó 603 mil 727 millones de pesos, “que si bien permitieron reducir el saldo de la deuda pública externa, fueron poco consistentes con los reducidos déficit presupuestarios observados en el periodo”.
Por el contrario, en el mismo periodo el sector público presupuestario tuvo a su disposición recursos provenientes de los recursos ordinarios adicionales, petroleros y no petroleros, por 719 mil 53 millones de pesos.
“Debe resaltarse que si dicha cifra se dividiera entre seis implicaría que, en promedio, se obtuvieron ingresos anuales excedentes por 119 mil 848 millones de pesos, monto prácticamente igual al que se esperaba con la iniciativa de la reforma fiscal propuesta en 2002 (120 mil millones) y que conforme al Programa Nacional de Financiamiento del Desarrollo 2002-2006, en su escenario de crecimiento económico con reforma fiscal, se hubiera propiciado un crecimiento promedio de 5.4 por ciento.
“La realidad mostró que pese a haberse obtenido esos ingresos, no se alcanzó el crecimiento de 3.4 por ciento proyectado en el escenario inercial, es decir, en ausencia de reformas.”
El informe revela también que en el último año del gobierno foxista se hallaron inconsistencias por un monto de 33 mil 187 millones de pesos. En la administración federal, las cifras más elevadas se dieron en el sector de educación pública, con 7 mil 596 millones; energía, 4 mil 123, y en el sector Hacienda y Crédito Público, con 2 mil 476 millones de pesos.
Un dato revelador se detecta en el terreno de los fideicomisos constituidos con recursos públicos. En el transcurso de 2006, las instituciones federales manejaron en esas figuras financieras 91 mil 213 millones de pesos, y aunado a ello “no existe un sistema donde se inscriban o registren la totalidad de los actos jurídicos que reciben recursos públicos federales, lo cual es contrario a los postulados de transparencia y rendición de cuentas que faciliten una adecuada fiscalización superior”.
La Auditoría Superior de la Federación (ASF) determinó que Luz y Fuerza del Centro, Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social e Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales de los Trabajadores del Estado, así como las universidades públicas, no son financieramente sostenibles y requerirán recursos extra para el pago de sus pensiones.
En la revisión de Aeropuertos y Servicios Auxiliares, la ASF realizó ocho auditorías y tan sólo en 2006 determinó que en la construcción de la Terminal 2 no se determina el destino de 775 millones de pesos por falta de recuperación de anticipos, pagos improcedentes y en exceso, pagos de recargos, intereses y comisiones con incumplimiento de obligaciones, y falta de documentación comprobatoria de erogaciones efectuadas.
En el sector de educación pública, la evaluación del programa Enciclomedia arrojó que el gobierno de Vicente Fox no comprobó el destino de 4 mil 857 millones de pesos y es que, al fracasar la cobertura que pretendía abarcar todos los grados de educación primaria y secundaria, se encontró la siguiente:
Con el análisis de los resultados de la prueba Enlace 2006, se observó que los alumnos de quinto grado de primaria atendidos con Enciclomedia obtuvieron en promedio 496 puntos, 24 menos respecto de los escolares que no contaron con el programa, quienes sumaron 520 puntos en promedio. Los estudiantes de sexto grado que recibieron clase con dicha herramienta alcanzaron 494 puntos en promedio, mientras que los que no tuvieron acceso a Enciclomedia tuvieron 24 puntos más, es decir, 518.
En ambos grados, los puntajes obtenidos por los estudiantes atendidos con el programa se ubicaron por debajo del estándar, con 500 puntos, establecidos por la Secretaría de Educación Pública como rango a alcanzar por alumno con conocimientos suficientes.
Otro tema concerniente al área de educación se refiere a la evaluación del fideicomiso para el programa especial de financiamiento a la vivienda para el magisterio: “El fideicomiso no cumplió con su meta global de otorgar 80 mil créditos para sufragar los gastos de enganche y escrituración para la compra de vivienda nueva o usada. En 12 años de operación (1994-2006) sólo se habían otorgado 43 mil 233 créditos, lo que representa 50 por ciento de la meta señalada. El fideicomiso que controla Elba Esther Gordillo recibió al cierre de 2006, 151 millones 569 mil pesos.
Y esta chachalaca ladrona asistió junto con el otro sátrapa de Castañeda a un encuentro de "intelectuales de derecha" en Argentina con Mario Vargas Llosa, a quien el ahora su invitado lo hizo colombiano y ganador del premio Nobel, será por eso que lo invitó. Estos "intelectuales de derecha" ¿piensan? Sí, piensan cómo chingarse a los más pobres. Parece que se están reuniendo para ver cómo le hacen para derrocar gobiernos democráticos de Sudamérica, por supuesto Hugo Chávez es uno de los que tienen en la mira, como ya lo expresó la chachalaca ladrona alguna vez.
Total que allá les salieron manifestantes a protestarles por su corto entendimiento. La noticia salió en Telesur ayer.
Nosotros, los idiotas
Debe haber algo muy grave que los escépticos no alcanzamos a ver, comprender. Supongo que en verdad la patria debe estar en riesgo como para dinamitar así el proceso legislativo, democrático.
El humor político de Quino
No sé a ustedes, compañer@s de lucha... pero a mí el humor político de Quino siempre me hace pensar que... la única opresión realmente invencible es la que nos viene de dentro, la que es auto-opresión decidida... Si vencemos esa, las demás opresiones, las externas, las ajenas, terminarán desmoronándose, y, mientras eso sucede, por lo pronto, no harán el daño irreparable que podrían estar haciendo...
Álvaro, de la vieja humanidad trágicamente divertido...
Álvaro, de la Nueva Humanidad enamorado...
Si te interesan artículos como este, visita http:conamoryconhumor.blogspot
Encuentro Nacional de Estudiantes en Defensa del Petróleo
| |
| |
Sendero del Peje
La cita es el próximo mártes 1 de abril a las 11:00 am
Lugar: La Covadonga (Salón Chamelo)
Puebla 121 Col. Roma
entre Córdova y Orizaba
Los esperamos.
Lorena Martínez
nextel 36 17 26 01
El Turbión de Colombia
Número 192 - marzo 27 de 2008 |
| Editorial |
|
| Opinión |
|
| Crónica y reportaje |
|
| Economía |
|
| Regiones |
____________________________ Pereira se moviliza contra el olvido y la barbarie
|
| Movimientos sociales |
|
|
|
| El Turbión es un proyecto de comunicación del |
¡Vámonos de pinta!
Elizabeth Alcalá Esqueda
Sólo le pido a mi conciencia que la pobreza no me sea indiferente...
http://mx.youtube.com/watch?v=bavhpRfYubM
When 27-year-old Ben Allbright returned from Iraq, he was treated like a hero. But he is haunted by the "harsh interrogations" he oversaw.
The prisons in Iraq stink. Ask any guard or interrogator and they'll tell you it's a smell they'll never forget: sweat, fear and rot. On the base where Ben Allbright served from May to September 2003, a small outfit named Tiger in western Iraq, water was especially scarce; Ben would rig a hose to a water bottle in a feeble attempt to shower. He and the other Army reservists tried mopping the floors, but the cheap solvents only added a chemical note to the stench. During the day, when the temperature was in the triple digits, the smell fermented.It got even hotter in the Conex container, the kind you see on top of 18-wheelers, where Ben kept his prisoners. Not uncommonly the thermometer inside read 135, even 145 degrees. The Conex box was the first stop for all prisoners brought to the base, most of them Iraqis swept up during mass raids. Ben kept them blindfolded, their hands bound behind their backs with plastic zip ties, without food or sleep, for up to 48 hours at a time. He made them stand in awkward positions, so that they could not rest their heads against the wall. Sometimes he blared loud music, such as Ozzy or AC/DC, blew air horns, banged on the container, or shouted. "Whatever it took to make sure they'd stay awake," he explains.
Ben was not a "bad apple," and he didn't make up these treatments. He was following standard operating procedure as ordered by military intelligence officers. The MI guys didn't make up the techniques either; they have a long international history as effective torture methods. Though generally referred to by circumlocutions such as "harsh techniques," "softening up," and "enhanced interrogation," they have been medically shown to have the same effects as other forms of torture. Forced standing, for example, causes ankles to swell to twice their size within 24 hours, making walking excruciating and potentially causing kidney failure.
Ben says he never saw anything like that. The detainees didn't faint or go insane, as people have been known to do under similar conditions, but they also "weren't exactly lucid." And, he notes, "I was hardly getting any sleep myself."
When I first set off to interview the rank-and-file guards and interrogators tasked with implementing the administration's torture guidelines, I thought they'd never talk openly. They would be embarrassed, wracked by guilt, living in silent shame in communities that would ostracize them if they knew of their histories. What I found instead were young men hiding their regrets from neighbors who wanted to celebrate them as war heroes. They seemed relieved to talk with me about things no one else wanted to hear -- not just about the acts themselves, but also about the guilt, pain and anger they felt along with pride and righteousness about their service. They struggled with these things, wanted to make sense of them -- even as the nation seemed determined to dismiss the whole matter and move on.
This, perhaps, is the real scandal of Abu Ghraib: In survey after survey, as many as two-thirds of Americans say torture is justified when it's used to get information from terrorists. In an ABC/Washington Post poll in the wake of the 2004 scandal, 60 percent of respondents classified what happened at Abu Ghraib as mere abuse, not torture. And as recently as last year, 68 percent of Americans told Pew Research pollsters that they consider torture an acceptable option when dealing with terrorists.
Critics of the administration's interrogation policies warn that the ramifications will be felt across the globe, including by Americans unlucky enough to be imprisoned abroad. Foreign policy scholars fear the fallout from Abu Ghraib has already weakened the U.S. military's anti-terrorism capabilities. Lawyers warn about war crime tribunals. But hardly anyone is discussing the repercussions already being felt here at home. It's the soldiers tying the sandbags around Iraqis' necks and blaring the foghorns through the night who are experiencing the effects most acutely. And the communities they're returning to are reeling as a result.
When I went to visit Ben in Little Rock, Ark., I wanted to know why this charming, intelligent, and overly polite 27-year-old had done what he'd done. For 10 days we rode around in his beat-up maroon 1970s Mercedes -- running errands, picking up job applications, meeting his girlfriend for lunch. Ben wore pink shirts, hipster blazers and color-coordinated Campers; he used hair products, which to his friends meant being a metrosexual; he listened to indie rock, watched "The Daily Show" and wrote attitude-filled blogs on veterans' rights, which meant being a liberal. He refereed football games, worshipped novelist Dave Eggers and placed special orders at McDonald's so his meals would be fresh.
He was unemployed, fired from his latest job as a bank teller the day before I arrived. Ben had worked there for four months -- the longest he'd held down a full-time job since coming home from Iraq. He'd tried tutoring high schoolers, bagging groceries and doing IT support for Best Buy. Part of the problem, he said, was the lack of good jobs in the area, part of it his own "flailing and procrastinating." He had toyed with the idea of law school and scored a near-perfect 178 on the LSAT entrance test, but then turned down offers from schools such as NYU. While I was in town he picked up an application for a job at his corner liquor store. In high school he was one of two students voted most likely to become famous. "The other kid became a doctor," Ben confessed, "and I, well, yeah …"
To read more...


Famed NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen tells the depressing story of government censorship of years of impeccable research.
Just over a year ago, Dr. Hansen went public with a charge that made headlines around the world, that the Bush administration had been trying to silence his warnings about the urgent need to address climate change.
AMY GOODMAN: You may have heard Dr. James Hansen mentioned before on Democracy Now! His name has been cited by many guests on the show.
JOHN PASSACANTANDO: This government, at the behest of its oil company contributors, has been told not to put out information about global warming, not to allow the scientists to talk about their expertise with the press, about the connection between global warming and hurricanes. That happened at NOAA. There's been pressure on Dr. James Hansen at NASA.
PAUL EHRLICH: I think it's true that attitudes have changed slightly in the White House, because they now see a political issue, but they have worked very, very hard to suppress the science on global warming. For instance, they sent some junior jerk to try and keep Jim Hansen, who's one of our very top climate scientists, from saying what he thought.
CHRIS MOONEY: Apparently, a NASA aide was instructed to interfere with Hansen's ability to do press interviews. Actually, this completely backfired, because Hansen is not someone to be told to be quiet. And so, he just went to the media anyway, and it ended up exploding.
TIM FLANNERY: Can you imagine what it would be like for one of the world's leading scientists, who is revered by everyone, to have this pipsqueak who lied about his credentials controlling what he tells the public? Just appalling. And, you know, the countries around the world would -- I don't know what they'd pay to have the advice of a Jim Hansen. It's the sort of stuff we all desperately need. And here, in a country that actually pays him a salary and allows him to do his work, he is silenced. I mean, I honestly cannot see the sense of that. I can't see who benefits.
AMY GOODMAN: That last speaker was acclaimed Australian scientist and writer Tim Flannery. Well, today, Dr. James Hansen himself joins us in our firehouse studio. His story of how the Bush administration tried to silence his warnings on climate change is detailed in a new book. It's called Censoring Science: Inside the Political Attack on Dr. James Hansen and the Truth of Global Warming. It's written by author Mark Bowen. He joins us from a studio in Watertown, Massachusetts.
We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Dr. Hansen, 1988, talk about the significance of that time.
DR. JAMES HANSEN: Well, I think it had become clear that the climate was changing and that human-made greenhouse gases were a reason for the long-term trend in the climate. And I just wanted to draw that to the attention of the public, because we really need to do something before the climate change becomes large, just because of the inertia of the system. If we wait until the climate change is large, then it's too late to stop it from happening.
AMY GOODMAN: So, what did you do twenty years ago?
DR. JAMES HANSEN: Well, I just reported that the world at that time was getting warmer, and I expected 1988 to be the warmest year in the period of instrumental record, which it did turn out to be, and that humans were primarily the reason for this long-term warming trend.
JUAN GONZALEZ: And, of course, that was twenty years ago, and while the Bush administration has gotten a lot of attention for its failure to heed any kinds of warnings, there was another administration before that, the Clinton administration, as well. And I think Bowen talks in the book about some problems that you had with Al Gore and -- could you talk about how the Clinton administration reacted to some of the warnings you raised?
DR. JAMES HANSEN: Well, my concern is general with both Republican and Democratic administrations. They both feel that they can control what scientists say to the public. So their offices of public affairs in the science agencies are headed, in general, by political appointees, and they review the press releases before they go out. So, it doesn't really make sense in a democracy. The public should be honestly informed. And then, of course, the publications are allowed to make the decisions, and they don't have to follow exactly what the science says. There are other considerations that they have. But they shouldn't influence what is presented, the scientific evidence. And I object to that, regardless of which administration is in power.
AMY GOODMAN: So, before we go on to the Bush administration, where you did have the most trouble, can you talk about what happened during the Clinton years and how you were able to express or not your research?
The financial services industry has shown again and again that it cannot self-regulate. It's time for the government to step in.
The nation's escalating economic troubles -- triggered by the growing wave of home foreclosures, declining housing prices,and bank failures -- was entirely preventable. It will take years and trillions of dollars to dig ourselves out of this hole, as the ripple effects of the mortgage meltdown reverberate throughout the economy: millions of families losing their homes, a housing industry in disarray, skyrocketing consumer debt, tight credit, massive lay-offs, neighborhoods in decline, and serious fiscal woes for states and cities.
The issue should be at the forefront of this presidential campaign. John McCain is conspicuously silent, even as George Bush proposes to bail-out Wall Street, which played a major role in getting us into the mess. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have offered reasonable ideas for coping with the symptoms (especially homeowners facing foreclosure), but neither has proposed the sweeping reforms needed to address the root causes -- five pillars of which are outlined below.
The problem began in the 1980s, when -- under political pressure from the banking industry -- the Reagan administration and Congress stopped regulating the nation's financial institutions. Commercial banks and savings-and-loans used their political clout -- especially campaign contributions -- to get Congress to loosen restrictions on the kinds of loans they could make.
One of government's important roles is to establish ground-rules, and to regulate companies and industries, to save them from their own short-sighted greed. Government is necessary to make business act responsibly. Without it, capitalism becomes anarchy.
Washington now needs to put a short-term tourniquet on the banking industry to stem the damage, and to get back into the business of protecting consumers, employees, and investors from corporate greed. But in its last year in office, the Bush administration is repeating the same mistakes. It is about to invest huge sums of taxpayer dollars to bail out Wall Street -- including the investment bank Bear Stearns -- without insisting on any quid-pro-quo. And if there's anyone who should be screaming "stop!" before the Bushies gift-wrap the bail-out package, it should be John McCain, a politician who claimed that he'd learned his lesson after getting caught being a sock puppet for a sleazy banker. But so far his silence is deafening.
We're in the current mess because the financial industry has too much influence in Washington. This culture of corruption was epitomized by the Keating Five scandal. Five Senators -- including John McCain and four Democrats (none of them still in Congress) -- tried to intimidate federal bank regulators on behalf of Charles Keating, an Arizona real estate developer and owner of Lincoln Savings who had raised $1.3 million for the politicians. McCain, who received $112,000 from Keating and flew to the banker's home in the Bahamas on company planes, attended several meetings in 1987 with federal bank regulators who were investigating Keating for swindling investors.
McCain says he learned a valuable lesson from that experience about conflicts-of-interest, even though he later repeated the behavior in other instances, including intervening with the Federal Communications Commission on behalf of Paxson Communications, which was seeking to buy a television station license in Pennsylvania and which had donated more than $20,000 to McCain and lent him the company's jet for campaign travel.
But if McCain were alone in participating in this culture of corruption, we wouldn't be in the economic mess we're now in. Unfortunately, McCain's behavior was typical. Congress let the financial industry get away with giant rip-offs. While federal regulators looked the other way, banks engaged in an orgy of risky loans and speculative investments. Every aspect of the financial industry was so short-sighted and greedy that they didn't see the train wreck coming around the corner.
There was a time, not too long ago, when Washington did regulate banks. The Depression triggered the creation of government bank regulations and agencies, such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Federal Home Loan Bank System, Home Owners Loan Corporation (HOLC), Fannie Mae, and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), to protect consumers and expand homeownership. After World War II, until the late 1970s, the system worked. The savings-and-loan industry was highly regulated by the federal government, with a mission to take people's deposits and then provide loans for the sole purpose of helping people buy homes to live in. Washington insured those loans through the FDIC, provided mortgage discounts through FHA and the Veterans Administration, created a secondary mortgage market to guarantee a steady flow of capital, and required S&Ls to make predictable 30-year fixed loans. The result was a steady increase in homeownership and few foreclosures.
In order to read the complete article HERE.
Rather than taking this opportunity to tighten the screws, many progressives are actually cheering on plans to bail out the ridiculously rich.
Progressives usually fight for the interests of those at the middle and bottom at the expense of those on top. However, during this period of unprecedented financial crisis, when the Wall Street rich are begging for the helping hand of the government, most progressives appear to be on the sidelines. Rather than taking advantage of this extraordinary opportunity to reduce inequality and educate the public about how the economy really works, progressive voices have been unusually quiet.
While the basic story on the economic crisis should be well known, it is nonetheless worth repeating. The Federal Reserve Board allowed the growth of an $8 trillion housing bubble ($110,000 of housing bubble wealth for every homeowner) in the years from 1996 to 2006. While this bubble was easily recognizable to competent economists, the entire political and financial establishments managed to ignore the housing bubble until it began to burst last year.
The collapse of the bubble is now pushing the economy into a recession. This is the result of both the direct effect of the collapse on the housing market and, more importantly, because of the indirect effect the loss of trillions of dollars of housing wealth has on consumption. Homeowners are rapidly scaling back their consumption after losing much of their life's savings in the last year.
The collapse of the housing bubble has inflicted enormous pain on tens of millions of people, but it is also inflicting pain on Wall Street and the financial sector. The honchos in this sector include many of the richest people in the country. With the collapse of the housing bubble, we are finding out they were far less financially sophisticated than any of us could have imagined. Many banks, brokerage houses and investment funds took highly leveraged bets that assumed the housing bubble would not burst. Now that it has burst, some of the richest people in the country face the risk of a middle-class lifestyle - unless the government comes to the rescue.
This is where things really get painful. Rather than taking this opportunity to tighten the screws, many progressives are standing by the sidelines or actually cheering on plans to bail out the ridiculously rich. The same people - who, on other days, are fighting to raise the income tax rate on the rich or for preserving the estate tax - are just watching as the Fed hands taxpayer dollars to Wall Street, and hoping Congress will come up with tens of billions for buying the bankers' bad mortgage debt.
There is, of course, a cover story - there always is. We have to let the Fed bail out the banks or the financial system would collapse. This would hurt everyone, especially ordinary workers. And the mortgage bailout is supposed to help low- and moderate-income homeowners.
But the cover stories don't hold water. We can keep the banks running without bailing out the incredibly rich people who drove them to ruin. England showed us the way earlier this year with its takeover of Northern Rock, a major bank that got itself in trouble with bad mortgage debt.
We can also help homeowners without bailing out the banks. The rescue proposals currently on the table would have the government buy or guarantee mortgages on homes that are still hugely overpriced. These proposals could give hundreds of billions of dollars to the banks, while providing little help to homeowners. Most would still be paying far more on their mortgage, property taxes and insurance than they would to rent a comparable home. Furthermore, the bailout conditions virtually guarantee they will never have a dime in equity.
As an alternative to bailing out the banks, we can temporarily change the rules on foreclosure to give homeowners the right to rent at the fair market rate. This would provide them with security in their home. More importantly, it would likely create a situation where most homeowners stay in their house as owners, since banks would rather renegotiate mortgage terms than end up as landlords.
The Wall Street boys got themselves in a huge mess through their own greed and stupidity. Now is the time to make sure they enjoy the fruits of their labor.
These are the same people who don't think they should have to pay higher taxes so kids can get health care and childcare. There is no reason the rest of us should pay higher taxes so they can keep their mansions in the Hamptons, their private jets and retinue of personal services. Let's leave this one to the market.






