PO Box 531  •  Durham,NC 27702  •  Telephone: (919) 419-8311  •  Fax: (919) 419-8315

Tuesday, January 31, 2006

The Alito effect

Didn't take them long, did it? According to Stateline.org:
With the Bush administration's reshaping of the U.S. Supreme Court, legislators in at least five states are proposing bold anti-abortion measures with a goal of challenging Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that ensured a woman’s right to an abortion.

Despite recent national polls indicating that a majority of Americans do not want abortion to be outlawed, lawmakers in at least five states -- Georgia, Indiana, Ohio, South Dakota and Tennessee -- have offered bills that seek to ban all abortions, except when the woman’s life is in danger.
The Plains states of North Dakota, Oklahoma and South Dakota seem to be the most anxious to nix Roe. Last year, the North Dakota legislature rushed to pass "a resolution urging Congress to pass an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would overturn Roe v. Wade and ban abortion throughout pregnancy."
posted by Chris Kromm at 11:24 AM | Email this post

Immigration in the South

The New York Times had an interesting article last week about a survey of 2660 day laborers at 264 hiring sites in 20 states across the country. Among the findings were that 75% of day workers are illegal immigrants, and that most are Hispanic. The survey also found that nearly half had been cheated out of wages, and many reported unsafe workplace conditions.

One of the researchers, Abel Valenzuela Jr. of UCLA, said "This is a labor market that thrives on cheap wages and the fact that most of these workers are undocumented. They're in a situation where they're extremely vulnerable, and employers know that and take advantage of them."

The Birmingham News has a special series of reports on immigration in the South that looks at some of the social and political issues, how immigration affects the community, and, through personal accounts of their experiences, how immigrants are adapting. I haven't read it all yet, but I found this interesting:

Read more after the jump...

About 35 percent to 40 percent of all Hispanic immigrants in Alabama are believed to be illegal - roughly 35,000 in 2004 out of an estimated 98,388. Most of them are Mexican, according to population experts Jeffrey Passel and Roberto Suro of the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group based in Washington.

Nolasco is part of a massive entry of Hispanic people into Alabama and five other Southeastern states since 1990, a migration that has increased the population of Hispanics in the area by 456 percent, or 1.3 million people, according to Pew reports released this summer.

Growth in construction, poultry processing, farming, service and hospitality industries is fueling the migration. The impact is being seen at churches, retail stores, hospitals, public schools, social service agencies and law enforcement throughout Alabama and the Southeast.

Illegal immigrants see mixed messages coming from the United States. It's illegal to cross the borders without documentation, but once they're here, business owners are eager to hire them; counterfeit Social Security cards are available for $50 to several hundred dollars; and a shortage of immigration enforcement officers makes policing and deportation unlikely.

"I came to get a better life, to help my dad pay for the farm and get whatever he needed," Nolasco said. "We are not coming to destroy America, we are coming to help America. And they (Americans) can help us, too."

Facing a wait of several years for a legal visa as an unskilled worker, Nolasco chose the way that was immediate - as an illegal immigrant. He packed his ID, school papers, family snapshots, a few clothes and cassette tapes from church, and walked six hours in the desert. He paid a human smuggler - known as a "coyote" - $100 to drive him in an RV to San Diego.

Relatives told him about jobs in Birmingham.

[..]

Within weeks of coming to Alabama, Nolasco was taking care of horses on a Birmingham-area farm. At a horse show, he was offered another job in Atlanta. Then he returned to Birmingham.

His story echoes the experiences of other Hispanic immigrants.

After a trip in 1999 to visit his family in Mexico, Nolasco had a tougher time coming back. Coyotes demanded $1,500 to help him cross the border. Walking through the desert to sneak back to the United States, Nolasco was attacked by other would-be migrants who wanted his jewelry.

"We were in the middle of nowhere and these people pulled out guns and took my clothes, my money, everything," Nolasco said. "I prayed real hard that if they kill me, my family find me - and if I get there, I will make sure I get my papers legal."

Nolasco called another coyote, who charged him $1,800 to bribe a border officer and drive him to the United States. He spent a night in the rain, crawled through tunnels near the border and took a pre-arranged taxi past the border officer into the United States the next day.

The case of illegal vs. legal immigrant isn't always a simple one. From time to time, the federal government has given temporary opportunities for illegal immigrants to become legal. It happened in 1986 and again in 2001.

Nolasco took advantage of the opportunity offered for a few months in 2001 to pay a fine, prove his new American roots and become a legal U.S. resident. Nolasco now manages a carpet warehouse in Trussville; he and his American wife, Danielle, own a house in Leeds.
What this story illustrates is how badly these people want to be here, and how they are willing to work and pay taxes and become productive citizens.

What some of the statistics show, however, is that our immigration policy isn't working to help people come here legally and become members of our society. Instead, it has created an underground social and economic environment in which government looks the other way while businesses exploit illegal immigrants, where everything is done off the books on a cash basis and no taxes are paid and no benefits are available, and where crime and corruption are standard business practices to get illegal workers here and keep them here.

Here in Tennessee the problems are exacerbated by our "driving certificate" program which allows anyone to obtain a state issued photo ID without proof of citizenship as long as they can show they are residents and pass the driving tests. There have been numerous arrests related to crime rings transporting illegal immigrants to the state to obtain the IDs. More recently, licensing examiners employed by the state were arrested for allegedly taking bribes to issue IDs without any documentation or testing at all.

While conservatives have no qualms about discussing immigration as a failure of policy that threatens our economy and social infrastructure, liberals and progressive types are afraid to touch it for fear of appearing racist or xenophobic. This is a shame, because we need a rational, progressive immigration policy that at minimum protects immigrants from abuse and exploitation while requiring employers to follow the law.

If progressive political leaders won't step up, we cede the problem to the right and the only policy forthcoming will be more "solutions" such as building walls and deploying "minutemen" vigilantes along our borders while denying illegal workers already here access to health care, education, and other social services that cater to basic human needs.

So, what does a "progressive" immigration policy look like? I don't know, but the first step towards defining it is admitting there's a problem.

OK, then.
posted by R. Neal at 7:27 AM | Email this post

FEMA response in perspective

Chris posted yesterday on the latest revelations that FEMA had ignored help that was available from other federal agencies, and notes that nobody seems to care and nobody is being held accountable.

Here is a little thought exercise.

Imagine that St. Louis or Phoenix or Cincinnati had been the target of a chemical weapons attack by terrorists. Or that terrorists had blown up the Tennessee River dam system, flooding the Tennessee Valley.

Now, imagine that while all this is going on, the President is on vacation, taking time out for a day trip to California for a photo-op to promote a war and stump his Social Security agenda. Imagine the director of FEMA e-mailing subordinates to complain about restaurants and ask about his wardrobe.

Imagine that later you learn they knew the disasters were imminent, and that they had resources available to help hundreds and thousands of people who were suffering and dying but didn't deploy them.

Now imagine how you would feel. Would you feel safe? Would you feel that your government was prepared and capable of responding to a large scale disaster resulting from a terrorist attack?

Now imagine that the President is a Democrat, and his FEMA director is an incompetent, unqualified patronage appointee. Let's go so far as to imagine that the president is Bill Clinton.

Now, what do you suppose a Republican controlled Congress would be doing about it? And what do you think the right-wing pundits and bloviators would be saying right about now?
posted by R. Neal at 7:15 AM | Email this post

Ms. Coretta Scott King, Part II

Pam Spaulding has an excellent post up reminding people that Coretta Scott King wasn't just "the wife of Martin," although she worked tirelessly to ensure his legacy was remembered -- including battling the unconstructed Southerners like Trent Lott who opposed the King holiday.

She was an activist in her own right -- and she didn't shy away from the "wedge" issues that the right tries to divide people over. As Pam points out, she took pains to argue that the struggle for gay and lesbian equality was a natural extension of the civil rights struggle. Here's King speaking to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in 2000:
[W]e have a lot more work to do in our common struggle against bigotry and discrimination. I say "common struggle" because I believe very strongly that all forms of bigotry and discrimination are equally wrong and should be opposed by right-thinking Americans everywhere. Freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation is surely a fundamental human right in any great democracy, as much as freedom from racial, religious, gender, or ethnic discrimination.

My husband, Martin Luther King Jr., once said, "We are all tied together in a single garment of destiny…an inescapable network of mutuality. [...] I can never be what I ought to be until you are allowed to be what you ought to be." Therefore, I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people.
King also became an eloquent and unimpeachable opponent of the death penalty. Every group opposing the death penalty has this quote by Ms. King on their site:
Justice is never advanced in the taking of human life, morality is never upheld by legalized murder.
She knew this better than any get-tough-and-fry-'em type ever could.
posted by Chris Kromm at 6:29 AM | Email this post

Coretta Scott King

ATLANTA - "Coretta Scott King, who turned a life shattered by her husband's assassination into one devoted to enshrining his legacy of human rights and equality, has died. She was 78."
posted by R. Neal at 6:10 AM | Email this post

Monday, January 30, 2006

FEMA ignored help from federal agencies

Today's revelations about the grotesque failures of FEMA's response to Katrina weren't necessarily shocking for the information that was brought to light -- but by the fact that nobody seems to care, and no one is being held accountable.

The report by Joby Warrick in today's Washington Post presents a damning indictment of FEMA, this time for being offered vast resources by other federal agencies -- and then utterly failing to follow up:
Acting in the "immediate aftermath" of the hurricane, [Department of] Interior officials provided FEMA with a comprehensive list of assets that were "immediately available for humanitarian and emergency assistance," according to the memo, dated Nov. 7, 2005. Those assets included more than 300 boats, 11 aircraft, 119 pieces of heavy equipment, 300 dump trucks and other vehicles for clearing debris, as well as Interior-owned campgrounds and other land that could be used as staging areas or emergency shelters.

Also offered were rescue crews from the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, teams specially trained for urban search-and-rescue missions using flat-bottom boats.
When it became clear that FEMA was completely useless, workers in these agencies took matters into their own hands:
Ultimately, many Fish and Wildlife teams did travel to the Gulf and assisted in the rescues of more than 4,500 people -- but they were "never formally tasked" for that assignment by FEMA, the document states.
These stories raise an interesting point, which I haven't heard anyone mention: despite all the dreadful stories you hear about lazy and coddled government workers, it seems many sprung into action to help in the face of tragedy, in spite of the colossal incompetence of their superiors.
posted by Chris Kromm at 4:36 PM | Email this post

How much did Ken Lay help Bush?

It's no mystery that Ken Lay and Enron were big benefactors of George W. Bush -- the biggest in Bush Jr.'s political career, by far. The question is, how much?

Campaign finance groups like OpenSecrets.org offer a snapshot of the direct contributions from Lay and Enron that propelled Bush's career. All told, they add up to some $736,800 -- a staggering sum by any standard.

But that figure just scratches the surface of the many financial tentacles holding Lay and Bush together. Kevin Philips, author of the excellent book American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, makes a stab at capturing the decisive role Lay/Enron played in Bush's fortunes:
The most interesting Bush family involvement is with Enron. Over the twentieth-century emergence of modern government ethics, no presidential family has had a parallel relationship. [...]However, the only way a chronicler can seriously weigh the Enron-Bush tie is by a yardstick the American press has never really employed: the unseemliness of a sixteen- or seventeen-year interaction by the members of an American political dynasty in promoting and being rewarded by a single U.S. corporation based in its home state. [...]

Most of the Washington press corps has been content to leave alone the much larger story—the apparent seventeen-year connection between the Bush dynasty and Enron. Even without such information, it seems clear, counting campaign contributions, consultancies, joint investments, deals, presidential library and inaugural contributions, speech fees and the like, that the Bush family and entourage collected some $8 million to $10 million from Enron over the years, which is more than changed hands in Harding's Teapot Dome scandal. Depending on some still-unclear relationships, it could be as high as $25 million.
Would Bush even be in the White House if it weren't for Lay and Enron? It's a valid question.
posted by Chris Kromm at 11:19 AM | Email this post

The economy: is it good for you?

The rich man is dancing:
DALLAS - Exxon Mobil Corp. posted record profits for any U.S. company on Monday — $10.71 billion for the fourth quarter and $36.13 billion for the year — as the world's biggest publicly traded oil company benefited from high oil and gas prices and demand for refined products. The results exceeded Wall Street expectations and Exxon shares rose nearly 3 percent in morning trading. (AP, 1/30/06)

DALLAS - Halliburton Co. said Friday it plans to sell a minority stake in its engineering and construction unit KBR, which has generated enormous controversy over how it has become the largest U.S. contractor in Iraq. Halliburton shares rose nearly 5 percent ... The KBR unit posted $3 billion in overall revenue in the fourth quarter. (AP, 1/27/06)
While the poor folks pay the band:
NEW YORK - By a 59 percent to 37 percent margin, Americans disapprove of the way Bush is handling the economy, according to a Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll this week [...] By 47 percent to 22 percent, the public says the country is worse off economically since Bush became president. [...] The failure of incomes to keep pace with the economy, as well as high energy prices -- especially for gasoline -- also are undermining consumer optimism, said Roger Altman, who was deputy Treasury secretary under Democratic President Bill Clinton. (Bloomberg, 1/27)

WASHINGTON - The economy grew at only a 1.1 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter of last year, the slowest pace in three years, amid belt-tightening by consumers facing spiraling energy costs. [...] The White House acknowledged the economy's fourth-quarter slowdown was bigger than expected. (CBS/AP, 1/27)

WASHINGTON - A US government audit has found that US-led occupation authorities squandered tens of millions of dollars earmarked for rebuilding Iraq through undocumented spending and outright fraud. Auditors recommend criminal charges in some cases and in others ask the US ambassador to recoup the money. (The Herald, 1/30)

NEW YORK - Because of unforeseen security costs, haphazard planning and shifting priorities, the U.S.-financed reconstruction program in Iraq will not complete scores of projects that were promised to help rebuild the country, according to a U.S. oversight agency. Only 49 of the 136 projects that were originally pledged to improve Iraqi water and sanitation will be finished, along with about 300 of an initial 425 projects to provide electricity, according to the report released Thursday. (New York Times, 1/27)
posted by Chris Kromm at 10:07 AM | Email this post

Enron Nation: Does a trial miss the real issue?

President Bush must view it as an unhappy coincidence that, just a day before he tries to restore public confidence in Tuesday's State of the Union Address, lawyers in Houston begin jury selection in the trials against Enron executives Ken Lay and Peter Skilling.

Since Enron collapsed in 2001 — dragging hundreds of thousands of workers, investors and retirees down with them — the entire saga has been treated mostly as a legal issue, and the current trials will reinforce that perception.

But the most important thing about Enron was the mutually corrupting relationship they held with political leaders, especially George W. Bush. As the excellent Texans for Public Justice noted:
The chief mourners of Enron’s demise — apart from the investors and workers that it deceived — are the legions of lobbyists and politicians whom Enron fed. Enron spent $10.2 million in the last two election cycles (1997 through 2000) influencing Washington politicians. During this period, Enron moved $1,003,273 to Texas PACs and state candidates, as well as spending up to $4.8 million on 89 Texas lobby contracts.

Last year the Center for Public Integrity identified Enron as the single largest patron of George W. Bush’s political career. A frequent flier on Enron corporate jets, Bush received $774,100 from Enron’s PAC and executives — including $312,500 for his two gubernatorial campaigns.3

Bush’s greatest gubernatorial gifts to Enron were:

  • Deregulating state electric markets in 1999;
  • Indulging “grandfathered air polluters;” and
  • Laws protecting businesses from lawsuits.
It's no exaggeration to say that Enron may be one of the biggest reasons W is in the White House today — and he rewarded them handsomely for the patronage, in ways that were disasterous to the public interest. That's the real Enron scandal.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Lay and the Enron gang deserve all the legal charges brought against them, and more. The Texas Republican political machine hoped this trial would never happen.

In November 2001, when the scandal was unfolding before the national media, the first response of then-Texas Attorney General John Cornyn — now a U.S. Senator, and a recipient of over $100,000 in Enron money at the time — was to say his office was "studying what response — if any — it will have" to Enron’s massive fraud.

That was in stark contrast to Attorney General Bill Lockyer of blackout-bitten California, who said, “I would love to personally escort Lay to an 8 x 10 cell that he could share with a tattooed dude who says, ‘Hi, my name is Spike, honey.’”
posted by Chris Kromm at 7:15 AM | Email this post

Friday, January 27, 2006

The right-wing fraud about race and Katrina

Earlier this month, right-wing pundit John Leo -- columnist for U.S News and World Report, syndicated to newspapers nation-wide -- wrote a piece that would be forgettable if it didn't echo a growing sentiment on the right about Hurricane Katrina and issues of race in America.

In short, the new conservative line is this: all the talk about how Hurricane Katrina hurt African-Americans is wrong, and is just another example of black folks and progressives playing "the race card."

Leo's editorial is a perfect case study of the right's new approach, showing at once how dangerous and utterly flawed it is.

In his January 9 Op Ed, Leo blames the mainstream media for "strumming the racial theme ... relentlessly in the absence of actual information," with statements such as Wolf Blitzer's claim that the Hurricane's victims were "so poor, so black."

Leo also goes after "Racial agitators and entertainers," such as activist and author Randall Robinson's apparently outrageous claim that Katrina constituted a "defining watershed moment in America's racial history" (gasp!).

All of these statements, Leo claims, are wrong. Why? Because, according to a December 18 news story in the Los Angeles Times he cites, "The bodies of New Orleans residents killed by Hurricane Katrina were almost as likely to be recovered from middle-class neighborhoods as from the city’s poorer districts."

Using that evidence -- and that alone -- Leo dismisses any claim that the impact of Katrina was in any way related to race. Dozens of newspapers took the bait and printed his editorial, to the delight of the right-wing blogosphere.

Let's break down just how ridiculous this is.

First: does a person have to be dead to be a victim? Only 2 of the 11 "agitators" Leo quotes say anything about African-Americans being killed, and none are quoted as believing they were killed disproportionately.

Second, did you notice that Leo's quote from the LA Times never mentions race? Read the story's lead again:
The bodies of New Orleans residents killed by Hurricane Katrina were almost as likely to be recovered from middle-class neighborhoods as from the city's poorer districts, such as the Lower 9th Ward, according to a Times analysis of data released by the state of Louisiana.
In other words, the story is mostly about the income levels -- not the racial makeup-- of the neighborhoods inhabited by the deceased (and not necessarily the economic status of the dead themselves).

In fact, Leo goes to great lengths to ignore the one paragraph that does talk about race, the only one which would be relevant to his Op Ed. After noting that only 380 bodies could be identified by race, the Times noted:
Of those 380, the New Orleans Times-Picayune reports, "33% of the identified victims in the city are white and 67% black."
Doesn't sound like black folks got off too easy to me.

So there you have it -- an entire right-wing narrative about race and Katrina, publicized in media outlets around the country, that is based on 1) a false interpretation of 2) an old and 3) small study that 4) never mentions race, except 5) one paragraph which proves Leo wrong, and 6) only focuses on deaths, not people impacted in other ways.

Pretty astounding, even by right-wing attack media standards.

Fortunately, there was an excellent, updated, and in-depth report that came out this week that sets the story straight:
Study: Katrina hit black areas hardest
Friday, January 27, 2006

By KAREN BROOKS / The Dallas Morning News

The areas of New Orleans that suffered the worst of Hurricane Katrina were home to 80 percent of its black population, university researchers said Thursday – underscoring the difficulties in the city's struggle to rebuild while preserving its cultural and racial heritage. [...]

The study, one of the most concrete profiles of Katrina victims to come out since the storm, cross-referenced the damaged areas with census tracts and found that the damaged areas had higher concentrations of residents who were black, poor, or renting their homes than did the undamaged areas. The results closely match a similar study done recently by the New Orleans Times-Picayune newspaper.
Will this story spread, too?
posted by Chris Kromm at 2:25 PM | Email this post

How insurance companies view health problems

In what passes for "the health care debate" in this country -- the only wealthy nation that doesn't attempt some form of universal care -- many states are forming commissions and holding hearings into how to face the two key issues of health policy: rising costs and declining coverage.

This week, a committee in North Carolina grappling with these issues heard testimony from various experts, which revealed a lot about how insurance companies view health coverage. Chris Fitzsimon of NC Policy Watch reports:
The outrage of the week comes from a presentation from an executive with Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina to a legislative committee studying the cost of health insurance. BCBSNC Vice President John Friesen told the committee that lifestyle is the biggest driver of rising health care costs.

Friesen listed obesity, tobacco use and depression as the major cost items in the lifestyle category and said that 7 of the top ten prescription drugs that Blue Cross pays for are related to lifestyle.

Apparently, Blue Cross believes that mental illness is a lifestyle choice. People can choose to exercise and they can choose not to be mentally ill. That may come as surprising news to individuals and families devastated by mental illness, including depression. Folks should just choose to feel better, just like they should choose not to be poor.
This reminds me of Abbie Hoffman's classic zinger when asked to comment on then-first lady Nancy Reagan's infamous anti-drug campaign of the 1980s. Her "Just Say No" initiative, he said, is like "telling manic depressives to 'just cheer up.'" Maybe Blue Cross Blue Shield doesn't know that Abbie was joking.
posted by Chris Kromm at 11:37 AM | Email this post

Friday Bird Blogging



No, not a repeat, but probably the same little fellow as last week. He likes to perch outside my window, and I like to watch him and take his photo. So here he is again.
posted by R. Neal at 11:26 AM | Email this post

Poll Watch: South not so sweet on Bush

Survey USA has released its latest state-by-state poll of our President's net job approval ratings. The not-so-surprising finding is that Bush's approval percentage continues to languish in the low 40s.

It may be more surprising to realize that most of Bush's support isn't in the South, but in the Plains and the West. Only three Southern states -- Texas, Alabama and Mississippi -- are in the top 10 Bush-liking states, and those are the only Southern states where his "approves" outnumber his "disapproves." Here's Survey USA's graph, ranked by "net approval rating" (approves minus disapproves):

posted by Chris Kromm at 10:02 AM | Email this post

Show some love for Facing South

Since we launched our humble Facing South blog in February 2005 -- warning, one-year anniversary post coming soon! -- we haven't done much in the way of self-promotion (aside from fundraising season, of course!). I also must confess that I don't follow the blog awards scene as closely as I should, except to cheer on our good friends to victory.

But several of you have written to point out that Facing South has been nominated as a blog "Most Deserving of Wider Recognition" for the 2005 Koufax Awards, a great institution run by Wampum for recognizing the work of progressive bloggers. (He could use some donations to keep the awards going.) We're also up for "Best State and Local Blog."

We'd love your support for either honor. (How could we turn down a claim that we deserve wider recognition?!) Feel free to visit Wampum and show Facing South some love.

I think Facing South is something unique on the blog scene, being a mix of first-hand investigative reporting, personal commentary, news clips, and other under-reported information and provocative ideas.

The blog has become a central part of our progressive media arsenal here at the Institute for Southern Studies, which also includes Southern Exposure magazine, and our e-newsletter, also called Facing South. Facing South also spawned our special post-Katrina investigative project, Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch.

Working together, we hope these different media offer a thoughtful, progressive take on this region we call home, so that we can change it for the better. Thanks for reading!
posted by Chris Kromm at 8:30 AM | Email this post

Thursday, January 26, 2006

Katrina forces look at flood insurance program

Posted by R. Neal

The debate raises several difficult questions:
WASHINGTON - Property owners would face higher flood insurance premiums and more of them would have to have the coverage under proposals a congressional committee discussed Wednesday to reform the bankrupt National Flood Insurance Program.

The chairman of the Senate banking committee also said the debt - more than $23 billion - the flood insurance program is expected to rack up because of Hurricane Katrina may never be paid back to the U.S. Treasury, making it a taxpayer bailout.

[..]

The debate is likely to involve arguments over whether higher insurance premiums would sting wealthy owners of beach homes who have not been paying their fair share for flood coverage, and whether higher premiums would be a further burden on working families who live full time in flood-prone areas and can't afford to pay more.

"Should we as public policymakers look at the people who are least likely and able to buy something because of their economic situation, as opposed to some of the very wealthy that have second or third homes and they're getting a ride, so to speak?" Shelby said. "A lot of people are probably getting a free ride.

"Should we continue to subsidize building in hurricane-, flood-prone areas? Should the taxpayers pay for that? That's one of the policy questions we'll have to answer here."

[..]

Historically, the flood insurance program has paid back its loans with interest. Since Katrina, however, Congress has increased its borrowing authority to $18.5 billion and a top Federal Emergency Management Agency official said he expects that money to run out by Feb. 10.
The article looks at other issues regarding flood insurance, and some of the proposals for reform. This is a good example of yet another policy that Katrina has forced government to evaluate.
posted by R. Neal at 12:42 PM | Email this post

ChoicePoint in the news again

Posted by R. Neal

ChoicePoint is nearing a settlement with the FTC regarding a security breach that led to hundreds of cases of identity theft:
ATLANTA - Data warehouser ChoicePoint Inc. said Thursday it is close to a settlement of a Federal Trade Commission investigation of a major data breach at the company that will include a civil penalty, as it reported a more than 29 percent drop in fourth-quarter profit.

[..]

The Alpharetta, Ga.-based company, which had revealed last year that its massive database of consumer information was accessed by thieves, also said the settlement will include establishment of a fund to be administered by the FTC for consumer redress initiatives and completion of certain customer credentialing activities.

The company, which also is the subject of a pending Securities and Exchange Commission probe, said it does not admit to any wrongdoing in the FTC probe. It did not specify the amount of the penalty, but an FTC announcement could come later Thursday.

[..]

Stock trades by Curling and Derek Smith, ChoicePoint's chief executive officer, are being investigated by the SEC. Curling and Smith made a combined $16.6 million in profit in the months after the company learned of the data breach and before the breach was made public.

[..]

The data breach involved thieves posing as small business customers who gained access to ChoicePoint's database, possibly compromising the personal information of 145,000 Americans. The company discovered the breach more than four months before disclosing it to the public. ChoicePoint has said authorities asked it to keep the information secret initially.

Authorities say at least 750 people were defrauded in the scam that has fueled consumer advocates' calls for federal oversight of the loosely regulated data-brokering business. The company also is a defendant in several lawsuits and complaints arising from the breach, and several government agencies are investigating.

[..]

ChoicePoint collects data on individuals, including Social Security numbers, real estate holdings and current and former addresses. It has about 19 billion records, and its customers include insurance companies, financial institutions and federal, state and local agencies.
This stuff needs to be highly regulated, if not outlawed. You might also recall that ChoicePoint is the same company that Florida Governor Jeb Bush and Secretary of State Katherine Harris hired to "scrub" the Florida voter registration database in 2000 to remove convicted felons. The trouble is, they also removed some 8,000 legitimate voters, some of whom were subsequently denied their right to vote in the 2000 presidential election (which you may also recall George Bush won by 537 votes in Florida and 5 to 4 in the U.S. Supreme Court.)
posted by R. Neal at 8:16 AM | Email this post

Old times there are not forgotten

Posted by R. Neal

The Alabama State Legislature is debating (!), again (!), whether they should have a referendum to remove segregationist provisions from the State Constitution:
In 2004, the last go-round at deleting the racist provisions from the Constitution went by the extremely pedestrian name of Amendment 2. After it lost by 1,846 votes, a better handle would have been The Tennessee-Florida-Georgia-Mississippi Tourism Improvement Act.

Perhaps whether a national organization books a convention in Alabama does not hinge on the state’s inability to remove the hate speech from its Constitution, but it most certainly cannot help.

Yet, what we’re hearing from Montgomery is the same tired arguments that confused the debate last time. Removing a 1956 amendment, opponents say, would allow a judge to unilaterally raise taxes to better fund Alabama schools.

Do we really want to go here again?

The 1956 amendment, records and media accounts from the time show, was written as a reaction to the 1954 Supreme Court order to integrate public schools. Alabamians riled by the Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education decision approved an amendment telling any public school that the Legislature reserved the right to pull government funding if it got the notion to obey the high court’s order.

[..]

It’s way past time for the state to remove this foul-smelling dead letter from its governing document. Both the Democrats who don’t want to talk about it this session and the Republicans who want to only partially edit racist language owe Alabamians an explanation. Either put forth the amendment as offered in 2004 or explain why you won’t.
It's amazing how something so obvious and so simple can get so convoluted when there are politicians involved.
posted by R. Neal at 7:44 AM | Email this post

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Contracting scandals, from one Gulf to another

Katrina contracting scandals find their match in the latest audit from the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, as reported today in the NY Times:
A new audit of American financial practices in Iraq has uncovered irregularities including millions of reconstruction dollars stuffed casually into footlockers and filing cabinets, an American soldier in the Philippines who gambled away cash belonging to Iraq, and three Iraqis who plunged to their deaths in a rebuilt hospital elevator that had been improperly certified as safe.

The audit, released yesterday by the office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, expands on its previous findings of fraud, incompetence and confusion as the American occupation poured money into training and rebuilding programs in 2003 and 2004. [...]

Agents from the inspector general's office found that the living and working quarters of American occupation officials were awash in shrink-wrapped stacks of $100 bills, colloquially known as bricks.

One official kept $2 million in a bathroom safe, another more than half a million dollars in an unlocked footlocker. One contractor received more than $100,000 to completely refurbish an Olympic pool but only polished the pumps; even so, local American officials certified the work as completed. More than 2,000 contracts ranging in value from a few thousand dollars to more than half a million, some $88 million in all, were examined by agents from the inspector general's office.
posted by Chris Kromm at 1:51 PM | Email this post

NC: Money for roads, not people

Scandals in Washington often overshadow the dozens of smaller scandals that unfold at the state level each year. In North Carolina, Democratic House Speaker Jim Black has been a magnet for dubious dealings, the most recently of which is described here by NC Policy Watch:
Revelations this week that House Speaker Jim Black slipped a provision into the state budget last session to pay for a road project in Mecklenburg County are troubling, but not surprising.

The provision called for $6 million to widen a road to encourage development of a controversial shopping center. The road was not requested by local officials and did not come out of any transportation planning process. No legislative committee debated the proposal. It was simply inserted into the 300-page budget bill at the last minute.

Black admits that he put the road project in the budget after discussions with the developer of the shopping center and a lawyer for Belk, the large retain chain based in Charlotte that will have a store at the new complex.
This is the same Democratic-controlled legislature that has relentlessly slashed money for AIDS patients, child abuse prevention, mental health programs ... on and on. But when the rubber hits the road -- or the money hits the politician -- the purse strings loosen up, and millions in taxpayer money fly out the window.
posted by Chris Kromm at 12:50 PM | Email this post

Bush refuses to cooperate with Katrina investigation

As more scandals emerge about the federal response to Katrina, the Bush administration is battening down the hatches.

This week's big announcement: the White House has announced it will deny access to further information and undermine what little oversight power Congress had planned to exercise, reports the NY Times:
The Bush administration, citing the confidentiality of executive branch communications, said Tuesday that it did not plan to turn over certain documents about Hurricane Katrina or make senior White House officials available for sworn testimony before two Congressional committees investigating the storm response. [...]

In response to questions later from a reporter, the deputy White House spokesman, Trent Duffy, said the administration had declined requests to provide testimony by Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff; Mr. Card's deputy, Joe Hagin; Frances Fragos Townsend, the domestic security adviser; and her deputy, Ken Rapuano.

Mr. Duffy said the administration had also declined to provide storm-related e-mail correspondence and other communications involving White House staff members. [...]

[E]ven Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, objected when administration officials who were not part of the president's staff said they could not testify about communications with the White House.

"I completely disagree with that practice," Ms. Collins, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said in an interview Tuesday.
In the same story: the administration won't "support ... legislation creating a federally financed reconstruction program for the state that would bail out homeowners and mortgage lenders."

So much for Bush's September 15 pledge in New Orleans to "do what it takes" and "stay as long as it takes" to rebuild the Gulf.
posted by Chris Kromm at 11:00 AM | Email this post

More details revealed in Katrina bus evacuation scandal

Investigative reporter Tim Shorrock has an update at Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch on the unfolding scandal about why evacuation buses didn't show up until a week after Hurricane Katrina.

Let's remember how important this story is to the Katrina saga. The botched evacuation of hurricane survivors is one of Katrina's biggest tragedies, perhaps the ultimate symbol of the incompetence and neglect of the relief effort.

Following the storm, the nation looked on in horror as thousands of survivors at the New Orleans Convention Center and other central locations waited in vain for the buses to arrive. If the buses had arrived like they were supposed to, there wouldn't have been the tales of horror from the Convention Center, about survivors giving up on FEMA and walking miles with children through toxic water, and other stories we now associate with the Katrina tragedy.

The details of the failed evacuation are still emerging, but this much is clear: all roads lead back to Washington. As Tim Shorrock revealed in his Watch investigation last Friday, it was the federal FAA that contracted with Landstar Express America -- a Florida company with ties to Gov. Jeb Bush -- to deliver buses for evacuations.

But as Shorrock reports, FEMA didn't even know FAA had contracted with them, and neither agency provided oversight to "verify that the services had been performed."

Adding insult to injury, bus companies that DID try to provide vehicles to rescue storm survivors were either turned away, or haven't been compensated for their work -- while Landstar was given $32 million in overpayments.

So while many of the Katrina response failures are in dispute, the bus evacuation tragedy has a clear source: the federal agencies who failed to coordinate with each other and police the corporations given hundreds of millions of dollars worth of government contracts.

The Department of Transportation's first audit of the contract, released this week, reveals the $32 million overcharge but ignores the larger questions of the evacuation operation:
The DOT audit, conducted in October and November, sought to determine if the FAA's controls over the evacuation contract ensured "fair and reasonable prices" and that the government received the goods and services it paid for. But it "did not assess the policies, procedures, or systems used by the contractor," the DOT said.

By sidestepping those assessments, the DOT avoided making any conclusions about FEMA's botched evacuation of New Orleans. That evacuation was delayed for nearly a week by bureaucratic confusion and Landstar's inexplicable failure to ask subcontractors about the availability of evacuation buses until Aug. 30, 2005, 18 hours after the storm hit and a full two days after New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin ordered the evacuation of the city, as previously reported by Reconstruction Watch.
Responsibility for the failed Katrina evacuation -- the source of much of the storm's suffering -- goes all the way to the top. And if the DOT audit is any sign, the federal agencies appear unwilling to ask themselves the tough questions.

Only a full, independent federal inquiry can deliver the answers the public deserves -- and hold the appropriate people accountable -- for this most devastating federal failure.
posted by Chris Kromm at 7:40 AM | Email this post

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

New Orleans is a medical emergency

Posted by R. Neal

Housing isn't the only crisis in New Orleans. Health care is turning into a medical emergency:
The slow repopulation of the city picked up speed after the holidays as more schools reopened and, in the words of one emergency room doctor, the sicker people began to return. But only seven of what had been 15 adult acute-care facilities in the city and three surrounding parishes are open, and only one-third of the acute-care beds.

Hundreds or perhaps thousands of doctors and nurses never returned to New Orleans after the flood; long-term and psychiatric hospitals, not to mention hospices and rehabilitation centers, are now almost nonexistent in and around the city.

As a result, the returning residents have filled the functioning hospitals in and immediately around the city to capacity and beyond. Waiting times in emergency rooms have extended to as much as six hours, medical personnel at three hospitals reported.

Early one recent morning, doctors and nurses at East Jefferson General Hospital in Metairie, just outside of New Orleans, were already caring for five seriously ill or injured patients in the emergency room - because the hospital had no more beds to admit them to - while still managing a full load of incoming emergency patients near the entrance. Then two trauma victims from a car accident were brought in, followed by someone showing signs of appendicitis.
The article says that doctors and hospitals are worried about the onset of flu season and the upcoming Mardi Gras celebrations because they aren't prepared and don't have the resources to handle the expected medical needs of the community.

Officials also say that if projections for July 1 population levels are accurate, they will need to triple the number of hospital beds and hire "2,500 new medical staff members in six months" which will involve "extraordinary expense" for housing and incentives. Further, rebuilding hospitals and community clinics is expected to take a year or more in some cases.

This is just one of many disasters after the disaster facing New Orleans.
posted by R. Neal at 7:28 AM | Email this post

New Orleans housing: the next crisis

Posted by R. Neal

Our pal Toby Applegate is pursuing his PhD in Geography at Rutgers and wrote this research paper on New Orleans housing in the wake of Katrina. [Ed. note: the paper was an assignment for a seminar on Natural Hazards and not intended for publication.] It's an interesting paper about the historical and cultural aspects of New Orleans architecture in relation to the social and political interactions influencing the reconstruction. The entire paper is worth a read, but here's an excerpt that gets to the heart of the matter:
Housing has been an issue throughout New Orleans in the aftermath of the hurricane and its subsequent flooding. The sorts of housing that one finds in New Orleans run the breadth of American urban housing spectrum in terms of wealth from antebellum mansions to middle-class bungalows, from public housing to shotgun houses, from modern high rises to the oldest of Creole townhouses. The very fact that these houses exist is a testament that memory and cultural traditions are important to New Orleans residents, but also as a testament that poverty shapes a cultural landscape as readily as wealth. Therefore the sort of housing that the poor or those who remember poverty occupy might only be the sorriest of public housing projects, or, in the case of New Orleans, important vernacular [ed. note: "folk architecture"] houses that provide shelter and act as markers of identity on that cultural landscape.

Under the pall of a disaster, these houses do not serve to insulate their residents from the dissonance and disorder that follows. These houses ability to beam their cultural significance out to the world fails as quickly as their forms that do not protect them from flooding fail. The everyday quality of their existence is not enough to insulate them from their vulnerability. What is readily known about them becomes ambiguous. They become ‘death traps’ not shelters. They become ‘rooftops’ not ‘double galleries.’ They become ‘shells’ not structures. When their everyday, practical reality becomes ambiguous and (dis)order becomes the reality of a flooded neighborhood, how that (dis)order and its attendant reordering of the landscape plays out might be the subject of reinterpreting and recasting what that everyday life was like.

When the geography of a place is known so well, it is easily assumed that order can return in a fairly well understood and normal way. The people who remain or return would easily recognize the everyday aspects of the place they call home, but the wholly ambiguous nature of a disaster combined with the subjectivity of its victims can render this view of a place not so much impossible, but so utterly changed that what is similar to what existed before might not be so easily seen. The point here is that no place where people live goes unchanged by a disaster. The everyday cannot return to way it was ever. But, in the case of New Orleans, everyday life can be recapture to re-empower people who have been rendered subject to the haze of the disaster.
And here's an interesting take on a feminist approach to reconstruction dialogue:
Recent scholarship directly calls for the wealth of materialist feminist knowledge to start speaking directly to women in everyday situations using language that facilitates and eases the communication between subjects (Pratt 2004). This is not expressly a talking down to people who are not trained feminist scholars, but a talking across to people who share uncertainties about the world and are ill served by power/knowledge relationships guided by masculinist agendas.

If a subversion of how reconstruction occurs in New Orleans using an optic guided by feminist approaches to knowledge then a clearer portrait of what is at stake for the very landscape itself. If only the measured and presumed rational voices that make plans and govern accordingly are only heard then the reality for the vernacular landscape is this: a reordering where those whose identities are bound up in that vernacular landscape by virtue of the houses through which they speak will cleave to those whose intent is to speak not of cultural process but of cultural desire. The African-American landscape of New Orleans will disappear into the well-appointed pied-a-terres of well heeled interlopers. The ground gained and so tentatively held in these neighborhoods and the markers of that territory will be lost to a reterritorialization by those who don’t desire their culture, but desire their beauty. Possibly this optic of everyday life guided by feminist voices could offer a way to keep some measure of the past in the hands of those
who wrought it.
In view of some of the proposals being put forth in New Orleans and in Washington, this paper serves as a warning that social and political forces are aligned for a "land grab." Toby also cites this Economist article about the controversial decisions facing New Orleans:
A mass migration to higher ground would appear to make sense—and not just because nobody wants a repeat of last summer's disaster. For the foreseeable future, New Orleans will be a smaller city. The city's population, which rose above 600,000 in the mid-1960s, had declined to about 462,000 before Katrina emptied the town. The mayor's commission puts the current figure at 144,000, but expects the population to be only 247,000 by 2008.

Even before the hurricane, city agencies struggled to fight crime, mow grass and keep streets and waterpipes in working order. After losing much of its tax base, New Orleans may be too broke to provide services over the same geographical area. The cost of subsidising services for a few foolhardy souls could be better spent in potentially viable neighbourhoods. Most urban planners insist that the city must write off some areas for the rest to survive.

Here, however, logic runs into principle and racial politics. Many politicians feel queasy about violating the property rights of individual householders, some of whom are determined to return to their homes come what may. There are also accusations of racism. Most of the city's highest neighbourhoods are also its oldest, wealthiest and whitest. There are some exceptions—Lakeview, a rich white area, and Eastover, a rich black one, were both hit hard—but, in general, plans to shrink the city's size could mean the end of a lot of poor black neighbourhoods.
And on the same subject, here is an interesting NOLA Times Picayune series on how other cities have rebuilt following disasters and the lessons learned. It is, however, difficult to recall an event in modern American history that encompasses such a complex set of practical, social, political, racial, and class issues, or to comprehend the work that will be needed to recover from a natural and social disaster of this magnitude.

OK, then.
posted by R. Neal at 6:56 AM | Email this post

Monday, January 23, 2006

How are those levees coming along?

Not so well, says the New York Times:
At the halfway mark between the onslaught of Hurricane Katrina last year and the beginning of the 2006 hurricane season on June 1, the Army Corps of Engineers has completed only 16 percent of its planned repairs to New Orleans's battered flood protection system, according to corps representatives.
The goes on to describe the competing proposals for securing the city -- all of which are running up against the inevitable constraints of money, bureaucracy and time. This puts the reluctance of many NOLA natives to return in context.
posted by Chris Kromm at 1:57 PM | Email this post

Watch investigative reporter to discuss Katrina bus scandal

Tim Shorrock, reporter for the Institute's Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch project, will be on Houston's Pacifica station 90.1 FM at 5:30 pm today. They're doing a news piece on Tim's explosive investigation into why the fleet of private buses FEMA supposedly had at its disposal didn't get to New Orleans until a week after Hurricane Katrina hit, stranding thousands at the city Convention Center and elsewhere.

You can listen live here -- we'll put up a link after the newscast.
posted by Chris Kromm at 11:34 AM | Email this post

Rummy's snooping operation

Fresh off the NSA eavesdropping scandal, Newsweek reveals that the Pentagon has its own domestic snooping operation. It's called Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), and writer Michael Isikoff offers a glimpse of who they're keeping tabs on:
The demonstration seemed harmless enough. Late on a June afternoon in 2004, a motley group of about 10 peace activists showed up outside the Houston headquarters of Halliburton, the giant military contractor once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. They were there to protest the corporation's supposed "war profiteering." The demonstrators wore papier-mache masks and handed out free peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches to Halliburton employees as they left work. [...]

But that's not how the Pentagon saw it. To U.S. Army analysts at the top-secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), the peanut-butter protest was regarded as a potential threat to national security. Created three years ago by the Defense Department, CIFA's role is "force protection"- tracking threats and terrorist plots against military installations and personnel inside the United States. In May 2003, Paul Wolfowitz, then deputy Defense secretary, authorized a fact-gathering
operation code-named TALON - short for Threat and Local Observation Notice - that would collect "raw information" about "suspicious incidents." [...]

A Defense document shows that Army analysts wrote a report on the
Halliburton protest and stored it in CIFA's database. It's not clear why
the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention [...]

[T]here are now questions about whether CIFA exceeded its authority and conducted unauthorized spying on innocent people and organizations. A Pentagon memo obtained by NEWSWEEK shows that the deputy Defense secretary now acknowledges that some TALON reports may have contained information on U.S. citizens and groups that never should have been retained. The number of reports with names of U.S. persons could be in the thousands, says a senior Pentagon official who asked not be named because of the sensitivity of the subject.
Osama bin Laden is still on the loose, and Rummy is going after peaceniks in Houston handing out peanut butter sandwiches?

(Hat tip to reader RM)
posted by Chris Kromm at 7:40 AM | Email this post

Sunday, January 22, 2006

Congress discovers problems in Gulf Coast

The Associated Press had a story yesterday about how many Congress-folk had actually been to the Gulf Coast to witness the wreckage and progress of rebuilding. Warning: for anyone who cares about what's happening down there, it will bring your blood to slow boil:
With Congress in recess, a steady procession of federal lawmakers has toured the Gulf Coast over the last two weeks.

But the recent rash of visits isn't good enough for members of the Mississippi and Louisiana delegations, who say their colleagues can't fathom the scope of the devastation unless they see it for themselves.

Thirty senators have visited New Orleans since the storm, according to a spokesman for U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La. A tally this week by The Times-Picayune of New Orleans found that 44 of 435 House members had been to the city.

That's a far cry from the number that visited New York after the Sept. 11 attacks, said U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon, D-La.

"When 9/11 happened, you had to beat members of Congress off with a stick from going to New York City," Melancon said. "What's the difference (with New Orleans? It's a major city we need to save."
Pardon my Cajun French, but maybe if a few more of our esteemed leaders had gotten off their asses to see the devastation -- and pitiful pace of recovery -- for themselves, they wouldn't have screwed around until late December -- three and a half months -- before passing a relief package.

And when they finally got around to coughing up some money, maybe it wouldn't have been one in which over half of the money was just re-shuffled appropriations, of which $2 billion will go towards rebuilding Naval ships instead of helping survivors.

Just a theory.
posted by Chris Kromm at 5:40 AM | Email this post

Friday, January 20, 2006

NEW INVESTIGATION: Why didn't the buses come?

One of the biggest mysteries of the botched response to Hurricane Katrina is this: why did it take nearly a week for FEMA to mobilize buses to evacuate thousands of city residents?

In a special investigation for Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch, our special project covering the post-Katrina South, reporter Tim Shorrock follows the money and finds a little-noticed audit that raises explosive questions about the contracting-out of relief.

You can read the full report here or read it in the extended text below.

DOT Audit Probes Katrina Evacuation Fiasco

By TIM SHORROCK
Reconstruction Watch
January 20, 2006

MEMPHIS -- The U.S. Department of Transportation may hold the key to one of the biggest unanswered questions from Hurricane Katrina:

Why did it take nearly a week for the Federal Emergency Management Agency to mobilize private buses to evacuate thousands of city residents desperately seeking rescue from the horrific conditions in the Superdome, the Convention Center and the open tarmac of Interstate 10?

Clues to that mystery will come in the form of an audit into a FEMA contract for hurricane evacuation services awarded in 2002 to the Federal Aviation Administration. An initial report on the audit, which was quietly opened last October by the DOT's Office of Inspector General, is nearing completion and will be released to the public soon, a DOT official told Reconstruction Watch.

So far, the IG's office suspects that that the FAA "did not verify that the services were performed," said David Barnes, a public affairs officer in the Office of Inspector General. As a result, the IG "has raised questions about the FAA's internal controls."

The audit is also focused on Landstar Express America Inc. A trucking and logistics company based in Jacksonville, Fla., Landstar is a politically well-connected corporation that's risen to the top of the U.S. transportation industry without actually owning any trucks. Chairman Jeffrey Crowe served until recently as head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and last April Florida Gov. Jeb Bush appointed him to his Advisory Council on Base Realignment and Closure.

Landstar managed the evacuation contract for the FAA under a $100 million subcontract signed in October 2002. The audit "is an ongoing thing," said Barnes. IG inspectors are still not sure how the contract ended up at FAA, which manages the nation's air traffic control system, he added.

The FAA would not comment, and FEMA press officials did not return telephone calls. A Landstar vice president did not respond to a request for comment, either.

Landstar, however, has not been reticent to talk about its profits from the contract. Last October, the company disclosed that $129.8 million of the $676 million it earned in revenue during the third quarter of 2005 was directly attributable to its "disaster relief" contract with "the United States Department of Transportation/Federal Aviation Administration."

By all accounts, the FAA and Landstar failed miserably to help the citizens of New Orleans escape from their drowned city. And when the crisis hit, FEMA, whose bungling during Katrina has become legendary, was unaware that it had even contracted the operation to FAA, or that FAA had subcontracted the work to Landstar,

"It's classic government," said Peter Pantuso, president of the American Busing Association, which represents many of the companies involved in the evacuation. "There were too many people in the chain of command."

Adding insult to injury, many of the companies that scrambled buses and drivers to assist FEMA haven't been paid by the government for their services, Pantuso told Reconstruction Watch.

"When the government needed these guys, they were there within 48 hours," he said. "In some cases, they cancelled other trips so they could step in and help out in what was obviously a national emergency. I think it's unconscionable that the government can't pay them within 90 days."

According to Pantuso's group, the first buses commandeered to move New Orleans' beleaguered residents to safety didn't arrive until the Thursday after the hurricane hit -- nearly a week after Mayor Ray Nagin ordered a mandatory evacuation.

Worse, neither FEMA or the FAA appear to have made any calls to the interstate bus industry in the days prior to the storm despite widespread warnings from weather officials that Katrina was becoming a monster hurricane that had the potential to demolish New Orleans and the Gulf Coast.

FEMA's initial contacts with the private busing industry, Pantuso recalled, came one day into the storm, when small bus lines in the Mid-South and East Coast began getting frantic requests for vehicles from two limousine companies in New York and Chicago that had been sub-contracted by Landstar to manage the evacuation. These bus lines then called the bus association to find out if the companies were genuine FEMA subcontractors.

But when Pantuso called FEMA seeking this information, he was stunned to learn that FEMA itself didn't know this important task had been contracted out. "FEMA couldn't answer us for days," he said. (Strangely, on the day of the storm, former FEMA Director Michael Brown informed Louisiana Governor Blanco that "FEMA has 500 buses on standby, ready to be deployed," according to internal e-mails released by the governor's office in December.)

Pantuso's account is consistent with a startling report that appeared in the Chicago Tribune on Sept. 23. Landstar, which held the evacuation contract, didn't ask its subcontractors about the availability of evacuation buses until Aug. 30, 18 hours after the storm hit and a full two days after Nagin ordered the evacuation, the Tribune reported.

The failure by Landstar, FEMA and the FAA to respond quickly to the hurricane, the newspaper noted, "underscores a critical failure in the disaster plan: the inability of government to provide even the most rudimentary transportation to take people out of harm's way."

In the end, the bus companies did their best without FEMA's help. In the days that followed the hurricane and the disastrous flooding of New Orleans, said Pantuso, the bus association and its members quickly put together spreadsheets of companies with available buses and dispatched them to the storm zone as quickly as they could.

Even then, FEMA's response was slow and confusing, according to accounts of the evacuation reported in a special edition of Destinations Magazine, the in-house publication of the American Bus Association.

One company, Toby Travel and Tours Inc., of Louisville, Ky., sent two motor coaches and four drivers to New Orleans. Once there, "drivers had to wait, bus by bus, for clearance to unload their passengers while ground crews completed necessary paperwork for each passenger," Destinations reported. "Some buses that arrived in the same convoy on Saturday night had to keep their passengers on board until Monday morning."

Another company, Spirit Tours in Glen Allen, Va., called federal authorities after learning that New Orleans needed buses to help evacuate people stranded by the hurricane but "heard nothing for several days." Then, after getting an "urgent plea for help," Spirit sent two buses and three drivers to New Orleans, "where they sat and waited with many other eager drivers and empty motor coaches."

Finally, the Spirit buses moved 110 people to Dallas, where they were told by authorities to continue to San Antonio, 300 miles away, because the city's shelters were full. "During the nine days Spirit participated in the effort, its two buses carried passengers on only one 550-mile run, but the buses, as per the authority's ever-changing instructions, traveled 3,700 miles," Destinations reported.

None of these accounts mentioned a word about Landstar. In an interview, Pantuso could not recall Landstar playing any role in his discussions with FEMA or its subcontractors.

Yet according to Landstar's October earning statement, the Florida company "was not only able to source the necessary capacity required for the disaster relief efforts but was also able to source sufficient capacity to support a 9.5 percent increase in revenue." Landstar President and CEO Henry Gerkens was "very pleased" with that increase, which he called "the highest quarterly revenue in Landstar history."

FEMA's record during Katrina contrasts sharply with how Texas handled Hurricane Rita, which hit the Gulf region shortly after Katrina.

About a day before Rita's landfall, Pantuso said, he received a call from the Texas Office of Procurement asking how they could direct buses during and after the storm. The bus association, using the spreadsheets it put together during Katrina, did a "blast e-mail" to companies in about 14 states and "within an hour and a half had heard from 30 to 40 companies." As a result, that evacuation went smoothly.

According to Barnes, the IG press officer, the government audit is focusing less on the turmoil and lack of organization of the evacuation of New Orleans and more on Landstar's billing practices and the FAA's auditing record. The IG's upcoming report will make recommendations to the FAA so "before next hurricane season the agency can find a baseline for these services," he said.

FEMA's contracting-out of the management of its emergency services apparently started after 9/11, when the agency was folded into the Department of Homeland Security, Barnes said.

The IG's office explained its audit in a "Management Advisory" issued Oct. 12. Specifically, it said the IG was auditing the ordering and payment system of the FAA's Southern Region near Atlanta, which holds the FEMA hurricane evacuation contract. DOT inspectors, it said, had discovered major discrepancies -- with estimates ranging from $60 million to over $200 million -- between the FAA's recorded "obligations" to Landstar and the "taskings" received from FEMA and issued to Landstar for providing logistics services during Katrina and other recent hurricanes.

Tim Shorrock is an investigative reporter based in Memphis, Tenn., and can be reached at timshorrock@gmail.com.
posted by Chris Kromm at 2:40 PM | Email this post

FDIC to Wal-Mart: Not so fast with the bank

A major announcement came out today from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC), who are slowing down Wal-Mart's lastest plan for economic domination, establishing its own bank:
U.S. regulators will likely hold a public hearing on Wal-Mart's controversial application to open a bank before a final decision is made, the supervisory agency told lawmakers in a letter this week.
Wal-Mart says the bank would merely process checks and credit cards for its retail stores, but the story notes that "some in Congress are concerned that the company might use it as a base to offer a much wider array of services."

Also towards the end of the story, we learn why the FDIC putting the brakes on Wal-Mart's bank application:
The application drew more than 1,500 comments from the public and more than 90 requests for hearings, Gruenberg said in the letter.

The heightened interest in Wal-Mart's bank application should come as no surprise given the opposition the retail giant has attracted in recent years, some Washington lobbyists and congressional sources say.

The company faces increasing opposition from labor groups, environmentalists and others who accuse it of paying poor wages and benefits, gobbling up green space and pressuring suppliers to lower prices.
It's been a rough year for Wal-Mart so far -- Maryland's Fair Share Health Care bill passing, the Department of Labor ending its sweetheart deal giving the company 15 days notice about when it's coming to investigate workplace violations, and now this. Maybe the tide is turning.
posted by Chris Kromm at 1:01 PM | Email this post

Fri