Redwing Blackbird

The Times-Picayune summarizes the New Orleans public housing debate:

Seven months after Hurricane Katrina, federal housing officials say they still haven't decided what to do with thousands of government-subsidized apartments in New Orleans that have remained shuttered since the storm, leaving former residents in a quandary about whether to return.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, which oversees the more than 7,000 public apartments in New Orleans, said it is holding off on decisions until its gets plans from Mayor Ray Nagin and Gov. Kathleen Blanco -- both of whom say they are looking to HUD for some signal.

This raises, again, the question of "who's in charge?" There appears to be a leadership vacuum as residents wait for answers. There are other problems, as the article notes:

The lack of answers has stoked frustration among former residents, who want to come back and rebuild their lives but are unable to afford what has suddenly become a high-rent market in the New Orleans area.

There are also concerns that proposed solutions such as HOPE IV mixed-use/mixed-income development to replace public housing are "a way to tear down public housing and displace low-income residents." Others are concerned about "re-creating pockets of poverty."

Then there are practical issues:

HUD spokesman Jereon Brown said the six closed complexes are rife with mold and the agency is working on abatement. Brown said the apartments are uninhabitable although housing advocates said that some of the units, which sustained limited damage, could be reopened in fairly short order.

"There is no doubt that many of the units could be habitable in a short amount of time with a little work," said Doug Rice of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which works at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate-income families and individuals.

But Cabrera, the HUD assistant secretary, said rehabilitating the apartments is a 12- to 18-month undertaking. Besides, he said, fixing them up isn't the only issue. He said that until there is an adequate community infrastructure -- such as hospitals, schools and dependable utilities -- they won't be reopened.

And of course, political issues:

Neither Nagin nor Blanco are as adamant as [Rep. William Jefferson, D-New Orleans, who is urging HUD to step up their efforts] about reopening public housing. The future of public housing has become a loaded political issue: What some say is an opportunity to tear down the complexes that nobody liked, others interpret as an attempt to keep low-income residents out of the city.

In such an atmosphere, most politicians are treading lightly, especially with the New Orleans mayoral election a month away.

Economists are concerned about the housing shortage, and say that solving it is a key to recovery:

Yet another report released Monday identified additional housing as the key to the region's economic revitalization.

James Richardson, an economist at Louisiana State University, unveiled the report, saying that even with modest economic growth, the New Orleans area will have a housing shortage of more than 100,000 houses and apartments by 2008.

"The employment structure is up and running if the people have a place to live," Richardson said. "If you get the housing, schools will come back. If you get the housing, the health care sector will come back."

It would be hard for anyone to argue with that. Except the HUD official who said that some units won't reopen until there is infrastructure such as schools and hospitals in place. There appears to be a serious breakdown in communication and no clear strategy. Someone is going to have to step up to the plate and take charge before any of this gets solved. The question of the day is, who?

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Institute for Legal Reform has a new report out this week that ranks states according to their "legal climate," which is code for how business friendly their courts are (rankings are based on corporate lawyer's views of the "litigation climate" in each state).

From the bottom up, West Virginia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama rank the "worst", presumably meaning people are still able to get justice in the courts there.

Mississippi has moved up from dead last to 48th place, an "improvement" that the U.S. Chamber attributes to "reforms" enacted in the state:

Mississippi's legal climate has shown significant progress, moving up two spots in the 2006 Harris State Liability Systems Ranking Study, according to the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform.

"The comprehensive legal reforms enacted in 2004 truly have made Mississippi open for business," said Tom Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

[..]

"There have been some great improvements under Gov. Barbour's leadership and we are trying to help spread the word that Mississippi is now a good place in which to do business," said Donohue.

Not so fast, says this Clarion-Ledger editorial:

Despite adopting sweeping tort reform measures, Mississippi still lags near bottom in its legal climate affecting business, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, prompting the question: Does this ranking really mean anything?

In its latest ranking, the chamber put Mississippi 48th among the 50 states, rising only two places, ahead of Louisiana and West Virginia, from previous years.

Of course, this is a big improvement from 2002, when business groups listed Mississippi as a "judicial hellhole."

But it falls far short of assurances by Gov. Haley Barbour that Mississippi should now be considered a leader.

Barbour was so praised for reforms to limit jury awards and stop frivolous lawsuits under his watch that he was tapped last year to help the National Association of Manufacturers launch a national reform campaign.
[..]

Mississippi should be among the top. But, what's this? It only rose two places? It's considered not last, but nearly last?

The chamber rating is incredible.

So it would seem that the calls for tort "reform" are not having the desired effects, other than limiting the average guy's ability to get justice.

The U.S. Chamber had similar praise for Florida's "progress" in passing bans on "frivolous" asbestos and silica claims. They want the state to further limit who can be sued, though, because an "unfair legal system sucks the life out of a state's economy."

The article also says:

To highlight the results of the study and the need for comprehensive legal reform, ILR is launching a national advertising campaign. In Tallahassee, ILR will run print and billboard ads featuring the message "Please Don't Feed the Trial Lawyers."

There is some good news, though. Intense lobbying by the medical/health care industry in Tennessee was unsuccessful in ramming through legislation to limit "pain and suffering" damages to $250,000. A House judicial subcommittee voted against the measure yesterday:

Yesterday afternoon the Civil Practice Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee voted 3-2 to reject a bill offered by Rep. Doug Overbey that would have capped pain and suffering awards to medical malpractice victims and placed other limitations on recoveries.

[..]

The health care industry reportedly spent $500,000+ on this effort and one of their representatives has told me that they will be back next year. They want caps on damages and will accept nothing less.

The people should accept nothing less than justice for all. Judging by the poor marks given by corporate lawyers, it appears that may still be possible in at least a few Southern states.

Sorry about the light (no) blogging yesterday in Chris's absence. We got wound up in a huge local story that, while it doesn't have a wide ranging affect around the South, is interesting nonetheless.

It seems that twelve years after voters enacted term limits in the state's second and third largest municipalities (Memphis/Shelby Co. and Knoxville/Knox Co.), the Tennessee Supreme Court finally got around to upholding them yesterday. This has a huge impact on local government and upcoming elections in in Knox Co. because two-thirds of the county commission were just made ineligible to hold office or seek reelection, and their names are being removed from the ballot that was just approved for a primary in which early voting starts in about two weeks.

For those who are interested, there's more on the story as it unfolded yesterday afternoon here, commentary here, and this morning's media roundup here.

The Nature Conservancy and the Conservation Group have purchased more than 200,000 acres of forest land from International Paper for $300 million. The properties are all located in the South.

International Paper is thinking about selling off all of its more than six million acres of forest land, igniting concerns that a land grab by developers would lead to more destruction of forests and wildlife habitat. 200,000 acres is a tiny fraction of the land that could be up for grabs, but it's a good start.

As I mentioned here before, I believe the U.S. needs a rational immigration policy but I'm not sure what one looks like. I'm surprised that Congress has decided to take it on in a hotly contested election year, but I guess I shouldn't be because there could be lots of votes to be gained with the right posturing and rhetoric.

Maybe they will figure out what a rational immigration policy looks like, but I fear there will be too much politics and not enough thought or even much common sense. There are too many competing interests, as this Washington Post analysis points out:

As the Senate begins debate on revamping the nation's immigration laws, the issue poses multiple challenges for both political parties, while offering no clearly expedient solution. Two huge electoral prizes, the Southwest and Florida, are potentially up for grabs, as are millions of Hispanic votes elsewhere. But also in play are the votes of angry residents in border states and beyond who feel overwhelmed by the rising tide of illegal immigration.

That seems to sum up the situation, but they sort of lost me here:

Views on immigration break into two camps. At one end are law-and-order types, mostly conservative Republicans, who want to tighten border security and step up enforcement against illegal workers. The business community, the Roman Catholic Church, many Republicans and most Democrats occupy the other camp -- joined, notably, by President Bush. Although they generally support tougher enforcement, they also want to change federal law to allow illegal workers to gain legal status so they can continue to fill many low-skill jobs that they believe would otherwise go vacant. Moreover, they say, welcoming outsiders is a core American ideal.

Maybe it's just me, but a) I don't think it breaks down to just two camps, because b) I don't think "most Democrats" side with the business community or President Bush on creating a permanent, legally recognized sub-class of workers to be exploited.

And, sorry, but I'm not convinced that all these "low-skill jobs" would "otherwise go vacant" if employers had to pay a fair wage and provide the same benefits and employment/workplace protections that "legal" American workers enjoy.

At any rate, the debate should be interesting. If nothing else, we will get to see just how far politicians on both sides are willing to go to pander to their perceived base. And with the right-wing agenda on the ropes and Democrats struggling to get traction on something or anything, it will also be interesting to see just who each side perceives is their "base" these days.

Tennessee-North Carolina Scheduled For 7 P.M. Tip-off On ESPN

(Not trying to start anything or anything, but... GO LADY VOLS!)

Our local newspaper here in Knoxville (home of TVA) ran a lengthy article yesterday defending TVA which I posted about at my blog. Here's an excerpt:

Along with the usual puffery about what TVA is doing to fix the problem, Baxter goes on the offensive, saying that NC should clean up their own act. And, you won't hear us say this very often, but he's right. Duke Power and CPL are just as bad or worse than TVA.

But the problem is that TVA is the Goliath among utilities, and it's operated by the Federal Government. And while the Federal Government may not have enough sense to know better, you would think they have enough money to do better.

According to an analysis by KnoxViews of 30 utilities around the South, TVA generates 20% of the coal-fired electricity and 23% of the nitrous oxide (NOX) emissions, as compared to Duke which generates 9.3% of the power and 7.9% of the NOX pollution and CPL which generates 3.5% of the power and 6.3% of the NOX pollution.

There's more...

Chris wanted me to let everyone know that he is taking the week off for some well deserved R&R. Blogging will be lighter than usual, although he may pop up from time to time. I'm sure there will be plenty to talk about in his absence, so keep checking back.

Ben Domenech, the "Red State" blogger, is out at the Washington Post. Not because he falsely labeled Coretta Scott King a "communist," which we wrote about at length earlier today, but because of a plagiarism problem (the guy was a veritable kleptomaniac for words).

The issues raised by Domenech's commie hysteria -- maybe the blog should have been called "Red Scare"? -- still hold.

From backwards-looking cultural mores to McCarthy apologetics, the 50s revival is in full swing (it was even the theme of this week's American Idol, a sure sign of the zeitgeist). Domenech was just a particularly visible and pathetic specimen.

The Washington Post's new blogger Ben Domenech, a staunch conservative brought on to "balance" the paper's "liberal" image, is being hammered on many fronts, including plagiarism. But the only charge he's addressed -- and apologized for -- is his bizarre claim ("joke") that the recently deceased Coretta Scott King was a "communist." Here's Domenech's equivocating apology today:

"Some people have taken issue with an old two-line comment of mine on RedState.com where I referred to Coretta Scott King as a Communist on the day after her funeral. Coretta Scott King was many things, and her most significant contribution was the unflagging support of her husband in his own noble work to bring equality to all Americans.

"She was also a liberal activist on a number of issues, including same-sex marriage and abortion. The thread where my comment appeared discussed President Bush's attendance at Mrs. King's funeral, which was criticized by some for its political nature. My comment questioned the president's decision to attend the funeral after he had phoned in a message to the March for Life, the largest pro-life rally and a significant annual event. Mrs. King participated in many different political causes, some of which involved associations with questionable people, but referring to her as a Communist was a mistake, hyperbole in the context of a larger debate about President Bush's political priorities. Mea Culpa."

No, it doesn't make any sense to me either why being upset that Bush isn't sufficiently "pro-life" is any reason to have a Joe McCarthy moment.

But there's a history here, one which the WaPo and both sides of the bloggerati are missing. Communist hysteria like Domenech's outburst was one of the critical tools -- some historians say the most important -- that the Southern power structure and their national allies used to discredit the civil rights struggle and maintain white supremacy.

Days after Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his stirring "I Have a Dream" speech at the August 1963 March on Washington, J. Edgar Hoover's FBI went into overdrive to find a way to discredit King, who he saw as a "demagogic."

Realizing that King and the movement were gaining the moral high ground, the FBI desperately turned to two lines of attack to bring King down: exposing him as a philanderer and, most importantly, a communist. After learning that "200 communists" attended the 1963 march -- out of 250,000 total -- the FBI singled out King in this dispatch:

He stands head and shoulders over all other Negro leaders put together when it comes to influencing great masses of Negroes. We must mark him now . . . as the most dangerous Negro of the future in this Nation from the standpoint of Communism the Negro and national security.

It was then that Hoover approved his infamous COMINFIL-COINTELPRO program, which called for intensifying efforts to uncover "Communist influence on the Negro," which included wiretapping and harassment of King and others active in the movement.

The "red menace" and Cold War politics were used at all levels to discredit every measure of racial progress in the South. It was the pretext for Kentucky authorities to charge Carl Braden and recently-deceased Anne Braden with sedition in 1954 for merely selling their house to an African-American couple in segregated Louisville.

The idea that King and the movement had Moscow on speed-dial is, of course, total bunk and laughable to any informed observer (I don't include Domenech in this category). There were surely members of the left, including communists, who were deeply involved in civil rights, including King's close friend Stanley Levinson.

But most weren't communists intent on helping the Soviets: for example, the Highlander Folk School in Tennessee that trained Rosa Parks and other civil rights figures -- and which the right wing still uses as "proof" of King's nefarious red ties -- was led by home-grown Christian socialists and pacifists. The Kings themselves were never members of any group.

That leads to another key part of this story that most bloggers are missing. If Martin and Coretta King "associated" with communists, it was for the simple reason that leftists were often the first and most dedicated defenders of civil rights. For example, the communist International Defense League was the first group to step forward to defend the "Scottsboro Boys," the nine black teens sentenced to death in trumped-up charges of raping a white woman (even the NAACP wouldn't take the case).

African Americans in the South did occasionally turn to white socialists and communists for support because liberal and "tolerant" whites often flaked out (read King's "Letter from a Birmingham Jail," directed at the white liberal clergy). Those further to the left were much more reliable and hard-working allies.

On the other side, civil rights leaders also saw that those who red-baited and whipped up communist hysteria were also those who most bitterly defended white racist rule. When the Red Scare right-wingers forced people to take sides, which do you think was more appealing to African-Americans in the South?

So let's be clear: Domenech's comment is more than unhinged howling (although it is that). It's part of the right's larger preoccupation with reliving the Cold War, and a larger agenda to resuscitate McCarthyism and validate the Red Scare.

There are two goals at work here. One is to justify today's crack-down on dissent, from illegal wire-tapping and surveillance of peace groups, to the harassment of "tenured radicals" the right fears are out to brainwash our impressionable youth.

But just as dangerously, it's also an attempt to re-write our entire history -- to cast as vicitims those who stood for racism, white rule and persecution (McCarthy suffered from a "witch-hunt," says Ann Coulter), and to portray those who stood most nobly for justice and freedom as irrelevant or diabolically un-American.

In other words, to change the very definition of progress in our country.

We need more than a good movie by George Clooney to win this battle.

The Arkansas Times breaks an important story this week in the national war against science and reason, this time in the state's public schools:

Teachers at [a geology teacher's] facility are forbidden to use the "e-word" (evolution) with the kids. They are permitted to use the word "adaptation" but only to refer to a current characteristic of an organism, not as a product of evolutionary change via natural selection. They cannot even use the term "natural selection."

"I am instructed NOT to use hard numbers when telling kids how old rocks are. I am supposed to say that these rocks are VERY VERY OLD ... but I am NOT to say that these rocks are thought to be about 300 million years old.”

Arkansas kids will be dumb as rocks if the state keeps this up. As my friend Tony says, "it's like the Enlightenment never happened."

You may recall that former Atlanta Mayor and civil rights activist Andrew Young's company recently signed on with Wal*Mart to help rehabilitate their image. Yesterday Young made a personal appearance at a Wal*Mart grand opening in Atlanta:

At the grand opening of a Wal-Mart in a black suburb of Atlanta, civil rights leader Andrew Young danced with store clerks, bouncing to the song "We Are Family."

He also posed with a $1 million check from the company — a donation for a memorial to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. to be built on the National Mall in Washington.

Young took part in the pep rally in his new position as a paid corporate cheerleader for Wal-Mart — a role that has perplexed some of his longtime civil rights colleagues, who have all but accused him of going over to the enemy.

Read the article for reaction from other civil rights leaders. So is he for sale to the highest bidder, or is he working from the inside to effect change? At any rate, Wal*Mart is pressing a massive PR blitz with the simple message they they aren't all that bad and they create lots of jobs. Whatever.

Florida lawmakers say that 30,000 students attending private schools on taxpayer funded vouchers should not be held to the same FCAT (Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test) testing requirements as students attending public schools:

The Republican-controlled Florida House rejected a Democratic proposal Tuesday that would have required voucher students who attend private schools at taxpayer expense to take the same standardized test as children in public schools.

It was offered as an amendment to a bill (HB 7041) that would let most students in an unconstitutional voucher program switch to another one that has not yet been challenged in court.

The amendment would have required that voucher students, except those who are disabled, take the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, or FCAT, which the state uses to grade public schools. It failed on a voice vote.

The House is expected to take a final vote Thursday on the bill. It would require voucher students to take other standardized tests chosen by their private schools or voluntarily take the FCAT, said the sponsor, Rep. Joe Pickens, R-Palatka.

"If it's good for public schools, why aren't we painting everybody the same way?" asked Rep. Ron Greenstein, D-Coconut Creek. "If the FCAT is the whole and mighty grail in student promotion and student graduation, why shouldn't it go … to these other schools, too?"

The article also notes that the Florida Supreme Court recently overturned another voucher program because it violated the state's constitution requirement for uniform public education. It will be interesting to see if this FCAT legislation, if it passes, also makes it to the Florida Supreme Court.

There has been a pattern in Florida of penalizing public education while propping up private schools and vouchers in an apparent effort to make a test case proving that public education is failing and that vouchers are the solution. Just last year, the Florida Senate rejected Gov. Bush's proposal to eliminate class size limits imposed by a 2002 constitutional amendment approved by Florida's voters.

And speaking of FCAT, there's this from another report on the debate of Gov. Jeb Bush's "A-Plus-Plus" program (no, we're not making this up, it's double-plus good!):

Rep. Rafael Arza, R-Hialeah, introduced the bill with the air of a man who knows the outcome is preordained. He didn't really need to answer questions of the other side, but he indulged them a little.

Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach, wanted to know why Florida's high school graduation rate had fallen to 50th in the nation, two years in a row, since A-Plus came in.

Arza didn't know. His own talking points showed that the state was graduating more high school kids than ever. He said he'd look into it. Said it with a smile that said, "Why are you wasting everyone's time?"

Maybe that's why they don't want private school voucher students to take the test?

The rest of the report on the debate is somewhat humorous but also sad in a way. It's snapshot of how the GOP operates when they have absolute power. Another amusing excerpt:

Rep. Eleanor Sobel, D-Hollywood, wanted to include health and physical education in the target curriculum to help students fight obesity.

At the voice vote, I heard a wan chorus of "aye."

Then a resounding "NAY!"

This was a switch. Girly-man Democrats voting for P.E. and macho Republicans shouting them down.

As they say, read the whole thing.

OK, then.

The front page of today's Raleigh News & Observer features an eye-opening story about the 20,000+ private contractors operating in Iraq. Drawing on the reports submitted by the contractors themselves, it becomes clear these rent-an-army operations are accountable to no one:

About 6,000 non-Iraqi security contractors are operating in Iraq. During nine months in 2004-05, contractors reported firing into 61 civilian vehicles; no one was ever prosecuted. Security analysts say it is likely that such incidents are vastly underreported. [...]

In the documents, which cover nine months of the three-year-old war, contractors reported shooting into 61 vehicles they believed were threatening them. In just seven cases were Iraqis clearly attacking -- showing guns, shooting at contractors or detonating explosives.

There was no way to tell how many civilians were hurt, or how many were innocent: In most cases, the contractors drove away. No contractors have been prosecuted for a mistaken shooting in Iraq.

"What you've done is privatize the fog of war," said Peter W. Singer, an expert on military contracting with the Brookings Institution in Washington.

The most infamous is North Carolina-based Blackwater International, known for their rampages in Fallujah which led to four Blackwater men being killed (and controversy when DKos famously said "I feel nothing over the death of merceneries." [sorry, can't find the link].

The fact that contractors have self-reported this many incidents with such candor signals that this is likely just the tip of the iceberg:

Because the reports are voluntary, experts say they probably represent only a fraction of such incidents, and cases in which contractors broke laws or rules are unlikely to be reported.

"If you've got 60 cases where contractors shot into cars, there are probably 600," said James Yeager, a Camden, Tenn., arms trainer whose team shot at cars half a dozen times during his 11 months as a security contractor.

Even the man representing the contractor trade association, the International Peace Operations Association (their conferences must be fun) acknowledges the attacks under-reported by at least 50%.

It's not just Halliburton that's raking in big contracts these days. The Washington Post has a revealing story today about far-right, religious organizations that are landing mega-deals under the Bush administration, like Heritage Community Services in Charleston, South Carolina:

A decade ago, Heritage was a tiny organization with deeply conservative social philosophy but not much muscle to promote it. An offshoot of an antiabortion pregnancy crisis center, Heritage promoted abstinence education at the county fair, local schools and the local Navy base. The budget was $51,288.

By 2004, Heritage Community Services had become a major player in the booming business of abstinence education. Its budget passed $3 million -- much of it in federal grants distributed by Bush's Department of Health and Human Services -- supporting programs for students in middle school and high school in South Carolina, Georgia and Kentucky.

There are parallels between Halliburton and the fundamentalists feeding at the public trough.

There's the familiar circumventing of the bidding process: Heritage Community Services got its first big grant when Republican Gov. David Beaseley gave the state's entire $1.3 million allotment for sex ed. in a no-bid contract to Heritage, which doesn't believe in sex ed.

There's also political cronyism: President Bush found out about Heritage and its director, Ann Badgley, while on the campaign trail in South Carolina in 1999:

A politically connected GOP activist, Badgley organized a meeting for Bush with local conservative leaders and put her Roladex at his disposal. "I could see he was very sincere, and I worked hard to get him elected," she recalls.

Her efforts on behalf of the Bush team -- which at the time was smearing opponent Sen. John McCain with the rumor that he had an illegitimate black child -- seem to have paid off handsomely.

The Devil went down to Georgia, and so did former Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed. State Republicans aren't happy about what his candidacy for Lt. Governor are doing to their political prospects, reports Political Wire:

In Georgia, GOP lieutenant governor candidate Ralph Reed (R) "represents an 8-point drag" on a ticket with Gov. Sonny Perdue (R), the Atlanta Journal Constitution reports. Reed had close business ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Pollster Matt Towery says Reed's weakness "is that he frightens the independents who are essential to the creation of winning majorities in Georgia."

The headline alone should strike fear and loathing in the heart of any right thinking American. At any rate, I have slogged through a massive, steaming pile of Chertoff B.S. such as "this is therefore a good opportunity for me to talk about three areas which I think will be the critical points of triangulation in terms of our next year of opportunity and challenge at the Department of Homeland Security" to bring you this summary:

The Katrina disaster was the fault of state and local government. There's nothing in the Constitution that requires the federal government to get involved. It's a state and local problem, and that's just "common sense."

The Katrina disaster was the fault of individual Americans who didn't take responsibility for their own preparations. People must "discharge their civil responsibility" to have plenty of food, water, medicine, radios, and internet access on hand in case of an emergency.

The Katrina disaster was a one-off, an anomaly, you know, out of the ordinary. Nothing learned from Katrina is applicable to "ordinary disasters."

FEMA was prepared, but will be even more prepared for the upcoming hurricane season, but no one can predict whether it will be better or worse than last year. (Oh, and the first hurricane won't necessarily strike on June 1st. That's just the start of hurricane season. The first hurricane could strike after June 1st. There could be lots of them. Apparently hurricanes do not operate on a rigid schedule, thus making them more difficult to anticipate and respond to.)

FEMA is going to contract UPS to track water and supplies with barcodes and stuff, similar to how they track tennis shoes. Or something like that.

FEMA will get some of these newfangled computers (by way of "effort contracts that give us a surge capability") to track victims and their claims.

FEMA will outsource taking out the trash to local firms, unless the Corps of Engineers is needed.

DHS is going to upgrade and improve communications capabilities for first responders. (Didn't Bush say back on 9/12/2001 that he would do that? What's taking so long?)

There's more stuff about immigration and port security, but this was about all I could take. You're on your own, but be forewarned that your blood will be boiling as a result of either a) the tone of his remarks, b) the substance of his remarks, or c) the rich, complex layers of Byzantine bureaucrat-speak, or d) all of the above.

OK, then.

P.S. The number one improvement the Bush administration could make at DHS and FEMA would be to accept Chertoff's resignation forthwith.

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin unveiled the latest plan for rebuilding New Orleans. It appears he is backing off previous controversial Bring New Orleans Back Commission proposals to withhold building permits and the idea of bulldozing poor neighborhoods and replacing them with parks, saying now that residents in places like the Lower 9th Ward can rebuild but only at their own risk:

Mayor Ray Nagin presented his plan for resuscitating this hurricane-battered city, saying residents should be allowed to rebuild anywhere — as long as they do so at their own risk.

Nagin said the city will continue issuing building permits to all comers, but warned that low-lying neighborhoods like New Orleans East and the Lower Ninth Ward could flood again if another hurricane hits.

"I don't recommend you going in areas I'm not comfortable with," the mayor said Monday. "I'm confident that the citizens can decide intelligently for themselves."
The report also recommended a host of other ideas, from revamping schools to consolidating some city offices. The wish-list of projects included new light-rail systems, more farmers' markets, new riverfront development, job-training sites and better flood protection.

The announcement was met with some skepticism and even open hostility:

Residents lined up to speak against the latest proposal during a public-comment period. One of them, an activist named Chui Clark, called the commission "a rotten, racist committee," echoing criticism by many black residents who say they are being discouraged from returning.

[..]

Groups including the NAACP, the Advancement Project and the New Orleans-based People's Hurricane Relief Fund complained that the state plan gives short shrift to poor and low-income victims by focusing too much on bailing out homeowners and encouraging high-end development at the expense of low-income renters.

In a letter to Gov. Kathleen Blanco's administration, the groups cited government estimates showing that about 126,570 rental units without insurance were flooded last year. By contrast, they said, only about 25,180 uninsured homes were damaged, which is about 20 percent of all the ruined homes.

"This is really like the opening salvo, if you will, of attempts to get a fair share of that money for low- and moderate-income people," said Bill Quigley, a lawyer and civil rights activist.

And here's another report on the mood at the press conference.

Another puzzling thing about all this is, who's in charge? The city's Bring New Orleans Back Commission does not have the force of law. The state's Louisiana Recover Authority and the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development are all involved. As with all things Katrina related, there appears to be a problem with clear leadership.

But for a bit of good news, Gov. Blanco has proposed carving out $2.5 billion of federal relief funds to rebuild Charity Hospital.

A South Carolina "payday" lender is running into obstacles in Arkansas:

A South Carolina company that had been making so-called "payday loans" from 30 branches in Arkansas says it will stop making bank-financed loans in the state.

[..]

Advance America had been using a federally regulated bank, First Fidelity Bank of Burke, S.D., to make loans in Arkansas. The bank was told last month by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. that it could no long provide funds to payday lenders, because the loans were too risky.

Apparently they are having difficulties in other states, too:

Advance America said earlier this month it would stop making similar loans in Pennsylvania. The company also suspended operations in North Carolina in December after that state's banking commissioner determined the company's high rates were illegal. Advance America has appealed.

It's good to see regulators taking a closer look at these operations.

Here in Tennessee there is legislation that would limit interest on payday and title loans to 36% APR in total instead of the current 24% and up to 20% of the principal in fees. Similar legislation in the last session would have limited the interest to 12% and 10% of the principle in fees, but it went nowhere.

There is also proposed legislation to require more extensive financial disclosures for payday and title loans to U.S. military and their families, and limit interest to 36%. Soldiers are frequent targets of predatory lenders.

36% sounds like a lot, but apparently it’s the best state lawmakers around the South think they can get away with v. the powerful payday lending special interests. And these are frequently risky loans. But still. The usury limit in Tennessee is, I believe, 24% or four points above prime, whichever is less, and credit cards are limited at 21% interest.

For more information, the Institute for Southern Studies and Facing South have extensive investigative coverage of predatory lending practices in the archives.

So says Dr. Iyad Allawi, the man the U.S. installed to lead Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam. Patrick Cockburn, reporter for The Independent (London), from Iraq (via CounterPunch)

Irbil, Iraq -- Iraq is a country convulsed by fear. It is at its worst in Baghdad. Sectarian killings are commonplace. In the three days after the bombing of the Shia shrine in Samarra on February 22 , some 1,300 people, mostly Sunni, were picked up on the street or dragged from their cars and murdered. The dead bodies of four suspected suicide bombers were left dangling from a pylon in the Sadr City slum.

The scale of the violence is such that most of it is unreported. Iyad Allawi, the former prime minister, said yesterday that scores were dying every day. "It is unfortunate that we are in civil war. We are losing each day, as an average, 50 to 60 people throughout the country, if not more," he said. "If this is not civil war, then God knows what civil war is."

Halliburton, the company which has become synonymous with "profiteering and fraud," is having its annual shareholders meeting May 17. But instead of toasting the millions in profits they've raked in from disasters from Iraq to the Southern Gulf from their usual perch in Houston, this year they'll be meeting in Duncan, Oklahoma. And it has nothing to do with the fact that their Texas meetings in recent years have been overrun with demonstrators:

Halliburton Co., the U.S. company that has been the target of bitter protests for its work in Iraq, has moved its shareholders meeting from its Houston headquarters to the Oklahoma town where it was founded.

The annual meeting usually draws hundreds of protesters and are often marred by violent clashes with police around the Houston hotel where Halliburton management meets with investors. [...]

But the oil services company, which was formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney and maintains close Bush administration ties, denied the protests were behind its decision to move the May 17 meeting to Duncan, a city best known as a stop on the Chisholm Trail, a cattle artery of the Old West.

"Absolutely not. We are holding our meeting in Duncan because we are a company that values our tradition and spirit of innovation."

Which is why they haven't had a meeting there since 1972. The distant location will likely cut down on protests, but not everybody will be deterred:

"I would doubt the number (of protesters) would be equivalent to what it has been in Houston, but I can’t speak for the folks who might want to form a posse and chase them down on the Chisolm Trail," said Charlie Cray, the co-editor of HalliburtonWatch.org, a Web site devoted to tracking the company’s controversies.

The finalists for the 2006 National Magazine Awards have been announced, and the big surprise publication (at least to those who don't read it) is the Virginia Quarterly Review, which has received an impressive six nominations. Kudos to the Review, which has done an amazing job under young editor Ted Genoways (read more about the Review's rise here.)

Some other publications I'm glad to see honored this year:

REPORTING
Rolling Stone: Jann S. Wenner, editor and publisher; Will Dana, managing editor, for The Man Who Sold the War, by James Bamford, December 1.

PUBLIC INTEREST
Mother Jones: Russ Rymer, editor-in-chief, for Climate of Denial, a special report on global warming, big money and junk science, May/June.

The New Yorker: David Remnick, editor, for The Climate of Man, a three-part series by Elizabeth Kolbert, Part I, April 25; Part II, May 2; Part III, May 9.

Texas Monthly: Evan Smith, editor, for Hurt? Injured? Need a Lawyer? Too Bad!, by Mimi Swartz, November.

ESSAYS
Harper’s Magazine: Lewis H. Lapham, editor, for The Christian Paradox, by Bill McKibben, August.

SINGLE-TOPIC ISSUE
The Oxford American: Marc Smirnoff, editor & publisher, for its Southern Music Issue, Summer.

(Someone asked: did we nominate any stories for Southern Exposure? Not this year. We missed in 2004 for "Banking on Misery," although that did win the George Polk Award for Magazine Reporting. Our last NMA awards were winning in the 1990 Public Interest category for our investigation into the poultry industry; a 1994 expose of predatory lenders was a finalist)

Rob Christensen, political reporter for the Raleigh News & Observer, had an interesting column yesterday on how North Carolina has largely spurned religious-right politics that have overtaken other states:

[S]o far the contentious social issues have largely remained off North Carolina's legislative agenda. That might seem surprising in a state that fostered the career of former U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms, one of the heroes of the religious right. Sen. Elizabeth Dole has described North Carolina as "the buckle on the Bible Belt."

Part of the explanation is in which party controls Raleigh. The agenda of the religious right has been pushed largely by Republicans. But North Carolina is one of the few Southern states where Democrats have controlled both the state legislature and the governor's mansion throughout this decade.

Most North Carolinians go to church and believe in the Bible, polls show. But North Carolina has always been a more nuanced state on social issues than many imagine. Take abortion.

In 1968, North Carolina became the second state to legalize abortions. Until the mid-'90s, North Carolina was the only state in the South -- and one of just 13 in the country -- to fund abortions for poor women.

Even Helms has acknowledged that his strong anti-abortion stance was the position that he had the most difficulty explaining to his constituents.

This is an interesting update on V.O Key's thesis about North Carolina in his legendary 1949 book "Southern Politics," where he argued the state was a "progressive plutocracy" -- tolerant on social issues like race relations, and conservative and subservient to business interests when it came to economics.

"Small turnout." "Anti-war protesters lament apathy." The media theme for the peace marches that sprang up across the world this weekend -- the 3rd anniversary of the Iraq war -- wasn't hard to figure out. Short version: there is little public outcry against the administration's war agenda. Resistance is useless.

These are exactly the kind of headlines Karl Rove like to read, and most media accounts were way too dismissive. Although the numbers were nothing like the millions that marched world-wide in early 2003 -- when many thought there was still a chance to stop the war -- it's impressive anytime 1,000-2,000 people come out to demonstrate in a military town like Fayetteville, North Carolina. Many of the vets who would have been in Fayetteville were marching from Mobile, Alabama to New Orleans to draw connections between Iraq and the neglect of the Gulf Coast.

But let's face it, there's also a real kernel of truth to the reports. Despite polls showing that up to 60% of Americans think the Iraq war isn't worth the cost, the marches this past weekend were small -- and most importantly, have been getting smaller each year. Today's peace movement is headed on the opposite trajectory of the 1960s movement against Vietnam.

While today's movement appears to be growing more demoralized with time, the anti-Vietnam struggle grew rapidly as the war dragged on: a March on Washington in 1967 drew 250,000 people; by 1969, 500,000 came to the nation's capitol. And it's not just about the marches -- they were a barometer of a larger movement, where campuses and communities were ablaze with teach-ins, organizing drives, and massive political pressure to Stop The War.

In 1970, when news came out about the Mai Lai Massacre that killed over 500 civilians in Vietnam, hundreds of campuses were shut down in a storm of protest, including the deadly shooting at Kent State. Long-time Iraq reporter Andrew Cockburn recently put the number of killed Iraq civilians anywhere from 183,000 - 511,000. Estamm at DKos says that we may already have our Mai Lai in Iraq, as Knight Ridder reports:

Iraqi police have accused U.S. troops of executing 11 people, including a 75-year-old woman and a 6-month-old infant, in the aftermath of a raid Wednesday on a house about 60 miles north of Baghdad. The villagers were killed after U.S. troops herded them into a single room of the house, according to a police document obtained by Knight Ridder Newspapers. The soldiers also burned three vehicles, killed the villagers' animals and blew up the house, the document said.

So what's going on? Why is today's anti-war movement so weak, given these atrocities and especially given the public's clear -- if silent -- support for the peace movement's core positions?

One theory is that much of the public is intimidated from speaking out thanks to our chilly post-9/11 political climate, where to publicly disagree with the "war on terror" is considered tantamount to treason. This is no doubt true -- and stories of the FBI snapping pictures of peace vigils in Pittsburgh doesn't help.

But overall, I think the space for disagreement has loosened up since the Dixie Chicks got roasted in 2003 for the mere mention that they didn't like President Bush. And the climate for dissent is certainly more open than it was in the 60s, when professors were routinely fired for publicly opposing Vietnam. In 1966, the state of Georgia wouldn't even allow state representative Julian Bond (a founder of the Institute for Southern Studies) to be seated in the legislature because of his anti-war views.

So what else can explain it? Another argument, which I find more persuasive, is that part of what's stopping a broader anti-war movement from taking shape is partisan politics.

Much progressive energy over the last 3-4 years has been channelled exclusively into defeating Bush or the campaign of this or that Democratic hopeful. Whatever one thinks about this approach, the dilemma it has created is clear: what happens when those who are inclined to speak out about peace have hitched their entire fortunes to Democratic Party politics -- and the Democratic Party has no clear position on Iraq?

I remember seeing this dynamic at work in 2003, when idealistic young activists who had thrown their lives into the Howard Dean campaign would privately tell me how frustrated they were about Dean's bizarre vascillations on Iraq, condemning the war one moment and then calling for more troops a few weeks later. Many of the grassroots and the "netroots" of the Democratic Party have been screaming about the Iraq war from day one. But you wouldn't know it in Washington, where -- aside from a couple public apologies and the quickly-shunned Rep. John Murtha -- the Democratic position is as confused and ineffectual as ever.

Or, as "Army wife" Jennifer Battaglia is quoted as saying about the Democrats during the Fayetteville peace march, "they have no plan." She has a point.

In the late 1960s, muckraking journalist I.F. Stone (the real kind, who broke stories before Google) wrote that with Vietnam, the issue wasn't Democrats vs. Republicans, "it's about the Pentagon Party vs. the People's Party," each with a shifting cast of characters of all political stripes.

The Iraq war demonstrates what will be one of the greatest challenges of the progressive movement in the coming years: to figure out when electoral politics serves its interests, and when it does not.

Yesterday, by a vote of 348-71, the House approved a measure to provide $19.1 billion for cleanup and rebuilding of the Gulf Coast in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. H.R. 4939, “The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Hurricane Recovery,” passed six and a half months after Katrina hit the Gulf Coast despite the efforts of key Republicans to remove Katrina funding from the bill entirely.

The House bill includes welcome, if belated, funding for housing, debris removal, and other critical needs. But the package falls woefully short in providing the resources needed to address critical barriers to Gulf rebuilding, and comes way too late to help most survivors. What’s more, the House Republicans voted along party lines to kill key amendments that would have boosted money for stronger levees and rebuilding homes.

NO MONEY TO MAKE LEVEES SAFE: With the 2006 hurricane season just 76 days away, House Republicans killed an amendment to the bill that would have provided $430 million to fortify levees in New Orleans to withstand a hurricane as strong as Katrina (Category 3). The Army Corps of Engineers is now only authorized to rebuild the city’s levees to Category 2 – even though some experts predict the chance of a “major” (Category 3 or higher) hurricane hitting in 2006 has increased by 18% over last year. [SOURCES: Baton Rouge Advocate, 3/17/06; St.
Petersburg Times, 3/16/06]

WAY TOO LATE: The House bill, passed over half a year after the hurricanes, comes too late to help many Gulf survivors. For example, the measure includes $4.2 billion in Community Development Block Grants to address housing needs, including $1 billion for rebuilding affordable rental housing – important because renters make up the bulk of storm survivors. But New Orleans tenants have been facing evictions since October 2005, and the House rejected an amendment that would have barred FEMA from evicting residents from temporary housing until suitable alternatives are available. What’s more, the Senate isn’t planning a vote on its version of the package until May – 9 months after Katrina hit. [SOURCES: Thomas, 3/17/06; NY Times, 3/17/06; Times-Picayune, 3/17/06]

PITS STATES AGAINST EACH OTHER: The White House had targeted all of the $4.2 billion in housing assistance for Louisiana, which bore the brunt of the 2005 storms. Yet Republican leaders insisted the money be split with Mississippi and Texas. Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-LA) amendment to add $2 billion to meet Texas housing needs without short-changing Louisiana almost passed, until Republican lawmakers twisted arms to defeat it. “This has put us in a competition for the pittance, the few dollars,” said Rep. Charlie Melancon. (D-LA). [SOURCES: NY Times, 3/17/06; Times-Picayune, 3/17/06]

IGNORES KEY BARRIERS TO GULF REBUILDING: The measure does nothing to address many of the most urgent problems that have stalled rebuilding in New Orleans and the Gulf. For example, Congress has yet to allocate money for reviving the Gulf’s devastated health care system. Out of 22 hospitals in New Orleans pre-Katrina, only 7 are open now. There are no plans to re-open Charity Hospital, the only facility aimed at serving poor residents and where 2/3 of uninsured New Orleans patients received their health care. The bill also includes little or no money for re-opening schools, cleaning up soil and water toxins, and stimulating job creation – obstacles that all need to be tackled if New Orleans and the Gulf are to come back. [SOURCE: Institute for Southern Studies, 2/28/06]

FAILS TO PROTECT VOTING RIGHTS: The House also voted down an amendment to provide $50 million to help New Orleans and other Gulf Coast communities organize elections. New Orleans will be holding elections April 22, yet only 45% of residents have been able to return thanks to lack of housing and jobs. 75% of the displaced are African-American. Today, the U.S. Department of Justice approved the April elections, despite a call from civil rights groups urging the state to provide satellite voting centers and other measures to reach displaced voters. [SOURCES: Times-Picayune, 3/17/06; Greater New Orleans Community Data Center, Feb. 2006; Washington Post, 3/17/06]


Gulf Coast officials were clearly dismayed by this latest example of Washington’s response to the 2005 storms, which they have viewed as slow and inadequate. Rep. Melancon (D-LA) expressed his frustration about his colleagues this way: "They're hoping we disappear off the radar screen. People who wear Christ on their sleeves and vote against helping people are the biggest hypocrites."

As we document in our report, "The Mardi Gras Index" (pdf), one of the key barriers to rebuilding in New Orleans is the decimation of the city's health care system. Here are some of the facts:

1) There were 22 hospitals in Orleans Parish before the 2005 hurricanes; only seven remain.

2) The crisis is only going to grow: the city estimates they will need 770 staffed hospital beds by July 1, 2006, to meet the needs of the returning population. As of December, there were only 260.

3) Those affected most are children, the elderly, and low-income residents, who won't be able to return to the city unless the public health system is restored. Two-thirds of the city's uninsured population went to Charity Hospital in New Orleans, the only medical facility with a mandate to serve the poor.

Immediately after the storm, Charity was fixed up to accomodate contractors and relief workers -- but after they left, the city condemned the building and announced Charity would be closed.

In the midst of this crisis, we received the following dispatch -- from a group with the clever name "Doctors Without Hospitals" (a riff on the popular aid group Doctors Without Borders) -- about efforts to keep Charity open:

Save Charity Hospital! Healthcare for all!

Rally Outside of Charity Hospital
Saturday, March 25th 2 PM

On March 25, 2006, at 2 p.m. several hundred doctors, residents, medical students, nurses, hospital employees, patients, community members, and political activists will be rally together outside Charity Hospital in New Orleans, Louisiana to protest the closure of this esteemed public hospital. Considered the oldest continuously running public hospital in the country, Charity has cared for hundreds of thousands of members of the New Orleans community for two centuries.

These New Orleans residents are now largely without access to healthcare and forced to rely entirely on understaffed emergency rooms for basic health needs, such as monthly prescriptions and routine medical complaints. This shift has caused a healthcare catastrophe in the New Orleans metropolitan area and will be the focus of this rally, along with a discussion of the future of Charity Hospital and the fate of this city's uninsured.

Speakers include Charity doctors and patients. Healthcare workers are encouraged to wear their scrubs.

Sponsored by Doctors Without Hospitals,
Contact: mglass@tulane.edu
And the People's Hurricane Relief Coalition Healthcare Committee,
Contact: phrf.healthcare@gmail.com

These people need NATIONAL support. Not one dime of federal money has been allocated to rebuild health care facilities decimated by Katrina -- jeapordizing the health of thousands of residents, and preventing many from being able to return.

Contact them and find out how you can help, and contact your elected officials to say it's disgraceful that Congress hasn't helped Gulf communities rebuild health care facilities for their people.

Downy Woodpecker?

Despite repeated warnings by employees, it appears Halliburton subsidiary KBR exposed U.S. troops to untreated, contaminated water that could have caused "mass sickness and death":

Halliburton Co. failed to protect the water supply it is paid to purify for U.S. soldiers throughout Iraq, in one instance missing contamination that could have caused "mass sickness or death," an internal company report concluded.

The report, obtained by The Associated Press, said the company failed to assemble and use its own water purification equipment, allowing contaminated water directly from the Euphrates River to be used for washing and laundry at Camp Ar Ramadi in Ramadi, Iraq.

The problems discovered last year at that site -- poor training, miscommunication and lax record keeping -- occurred at Halliburton's other operations throughout Iraq, the report said.

"Countrywide, all camps suffer to some extent from all or some of the deficiencies noted," Wil Granger, Theatre Water Quality Manager in the war zone for Halliburton's KBR subsidiary, wrote in his May 2005 report.

AP reported earlier this year allegations from whistleblowers about the Camp Ar Ramadi incident, but Halliburton never made public Granger's internal report alleging wider problems.

According to the article, another employee who first discovered the problems and tried to alert management resigned after he was told to keep quiet:

The contaminated, non-chlorinated water at Ar Ramadi was discovered in March 2005 in a commode by Ben Carter, a KBR water expert at the base. In an interview, Carter said he resigned after KBR barred him from notifying the military and senior company officials about the untreated water.

A supervisor at Ar Ramadi "told me to stop e-mailing" company officials outside the base and warned that informing the military "was none of my concern," Carter said. He said he threatened to sue if company officials didn't let him be examined to determine whether he suffered medical problems from exposure to the contaminated water.

The problem was also the subject of a Senate Democratic Policy Committee oversight hearing in January. A transcript of that hearing is here, and internal KBR e-mails submitted into evidence are here. As the e-mails reveal, of course the first priority in any Halliburton crisis situation is PR and damage control:

From: Jennifer Dellinger
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 4:15 PM
To: Katja Wimmer; Anthony Reed
Cc: Stephanie Price; Melissa Norcross
Subject: FW: possible water contamination

Kat and Anthony:

Please see the below email from Faith Sproul regarding possible contaminated non-potable (non-drinking) water at B4 in Ar Ramadi. I have spoken with Faith and she does not have much more information at this time. However, she does believe that initial tests showed some contamination to be present. According to Faith, these three former employees (who claim they quit due to the contaminated water) have refused to go to the doctor to be tested. But in order to make a claim for disability, you actually have to have proof of injury.

It’s possible we could receive some queries on this if these former employees decide to go to the press. Therefore, can you please run some traps on this and see what you can find out? I don’t want to turn it into a big issue right now, but if we end up getting some media calls I want to make sure we have all the facts so we are ready to respond.

Thanks in advance for your help,
Jennifer
Jennifer W. Dellinger
Halliburton Public Relations

Perhaps the greatest irony of all, though, is this quote that appears in Wil Granger's e-mail signature:

"Compliance with the law and honesty and integrity in our dealings with others are not to be sacrificed in the name of profits. Management does not and will not condone any such action. Our success will be attained through compliance with the law, dealings evidencing fairness and integrity and a commitment to quality. We expect your wholehearted support of these Company values and principles." - Dave Lesar

Dave Lesar, is, of course, Chairman of the Board, President & Chief Executive Officer of Halliburton.

OK, then.

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a former tobacco lobbyist, vetoed a bill passed by the state legislature that would raise the tax on a pack of cigarettes to $1 and reduce the sales tax on groceries by half from its current rate of 7%. The change would have been phased in over a period of two years. He also vetoed a previous version of the bill that would have raised the cigarette tax by $1 and eliminated the sales tax on groceries altogether by 2014.

A similar bill was introduced in the Tennessee General Assembly that would raise the cigarette tax to 35 cents per pack and cut the state sales tax on groceries from 6% to 3%. It would also increase the cigarette tax each year through 2016 to offset any decrease in sales tax revenues from groceries. The bill appears to have wide bi-partisan support. Tennessee's current tax on cigarettes is 20 cents per pack, one of the lowest in the nation. (Mississippi's is even lower at 18 cents per pack.)

Tennessee's Gov. Phil Bredesen and his Finance Commissioner say they are opposed to the change because of uncertain revenues from the tax and declining sales of cigarettes. Gov. Bredesen vetoed a bill last year that would have raised the cigarette tax to 50 cents per pack, but only on selected smaller brands. The tax revenues, estimated at $12 million, would have been earmarked to help Tennessee's troubled TennCare program.

Tobacco special interest groups and lobbyists are of course watching closely. They spent more than $23 million in federal elections alone over the past five years. The top three highest paid lobbyists in Mississippi all list tobacco companies among their biggest clients.