You did not find this information in the Journal. It was in most responsible national papers on Friday and 60 Minutes on Sunday. The NYT broke the story and is running a series on how few taxes Big Corporate actually pay, but no series is in our Journal. The Journal does, however, try to keep us up on Charlie Sheen.
While huge corporations continue to scream about high U.S. Taxes, 60% of big U.S. corporations paid NO (none) taxes to the U.S. in 2005 (the last year we have this kind of data), and, according to 60 minutes and the network news, the number is growing rapidly.
I don't know about you, but this is a major untold story. My federal taxes are always in the 10%-20% range, and you can bet that local Albuquerque businesses are getting stuck for 20% to 35% while Big Corporate skates.
A fascinating NYT story is below:
General Electric, the nation’s largest corporation, had a very good year in 2010.
By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI Published: March 24, 2011
The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States.
Its American tax bill? None! (Same with Exxon) In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.
That may be hard to fathom for the millions of American business owners and households now preparing their own returns, but low taxes are nothing new for G.E. The company has been cutting the percentage of its American profits paid to the Internal Revenue Service for years, resulting in a far lower rate than at most multinational companies.
Its extraordinary success is based on an aggressive strategy that mixes fierce lobbying for tax breaks and innovative accounting that enables it to concentrate its profits offshore. G.E.’s giant tax department, led by a bow-tied former Treasury official named John Samuels, is often referred to as the world’s best tax law firm. Indeed, the company’s slogan “Imagination at Work” fits this department well. The team includes former officials not just from the Treasury, but also from the I.R.S. and virtually all the tax-writing committees in Congress.
While General Electric is one of the most skilled at reducing its tax burden, many other companies have become better at this as well. Although the top corporate tax rate in the United States is 35 percent, one of the highest in the world, companies have been increasingly using a maze of shelters, tax credits and subsidies to pay far less.
The rest of the story is here.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Who's Afraid of Reforming Wall Street? The Journal!
You will not find an article like this in the Albuquerque Journal. From this week's TIME:
By Joe Klein Thursday, Mar. 03, 2011
"Three years after a horrific financial crisis caused by massive fraud, not a single financial executive has gone to jail," said Charles Ferguson, accepting a well-deserved Oscar for Inside Job, his documentary about the great Wall Street heist. "And that's wrong." Of course it is — but that shouldn't be a surprise. To put bad guys in jail, you need police and prosecutors. The financial police we have, agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), have been laughably inept in the era of financial deregulation. The SEC wasn't even able to spot the broad-daylight highway robbery committed by Bernard Madoff. And so, in 2010, the Obama Administration nudged through Congress the Dodd-Frank financial-reform bill, which was designed to put real cops, with real regulatory heft, on the financial beat. And now, in 2011, the Republican House seems intent on quietly gutting the bill under the sordid camouflage of budget cutting. "They're defunding the police after we had the biggest bout of looting in history," an Administration official told me. "That's just crazy."
Let's review the outrage: the heart of the financial collapse was a fraudulent effort to sell home mortgages to people who couldn't afford them. Some of these mortgages were truly mind-boggling — no money down (but a hefty interest rate hidden in the thicket of contractual codicils), no documentation (like proof of job and salary). The mortgages were then thrown together into giant, opaque bond packages and sold again as solid investments. (The ratings agencies, Moody's and Standard & Poor's, were essentially unindicted co-conspirators in the scam.) And those packages were then sliced up, resold and transformed into exotic derivatives, which were bet on by bond traders and investors. (See "The Demise of Bernie Madoff.")
Confused? Well, that was the point. According to Michael Lewis, whose book The Big Short is a riveting encyclopedia of the disaster, even the SEC was confused by the actual contents of the most far-fetched packages, called collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). Wall Street spewed terms like collateralized debt obligation in order to mislead: a more accurate abbreviation might have been RCLs —repackaged crappy loans. When the crappy loans couldn't be repaid, the housing market, Wall Street and the American economy imploded. The Wall Street traders pocketed hundreds of millions in profits; the American taxpayer, and homeowner, picked up the losses.
Read more here.
Remember, the Albuquerque Journal enjoys a near monopoly in this state. It should be held to a high standard, so if you have your own Untold Stories, send them to me. If you think this type of e-mail is a good idea, forward it to others, so they can request to be added the Untold Stories list.
Yours in media education,
Bob McCannon
By Joe Klein Thursday, Mar. 03, 2011
"Three years after a horrific financial crisis caused by massive fraud, not a single financial executive has gone to jail," said Charles Ferguson, accepting a well-deserved Oscar for Inside Job, his documentary about the great Wall Street heist. "And that's wrong." Of course it is — but that shouldn't be a surprise. To put bad guys in jail, you need police and prosecutors. The financial police we have, agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), have been laughably inept in the era of financial deregulation. The SEC wasn't even able to spot the broad-daylight highway robbery committed by Bernard Madoff. And so, in 2010, the Obama Administration nudged through Congress the Dodd-Frank financial-reform bill, which was designed to put real cops, with real regulatory heft, on the financial beat. And now, in 2011, the Republican House seems intent on quietly gutting the bill under the sordid camouflage of budget cutting. "They're defunding the police after we had the biggest bout of looting in history," an Administration official told me. "That's just crazy."
Let's review the outrage: the heart of the financial collapse was a fraudulent effort to sell home mortgages to people who couldn't afford them. Some of these mortgages were truly mind-boggling — no money down (but a hefty interest rate hidden in the thicket of contractual codicils), no documentation (like proof of job and salary). The mortgages were then thrown together into giant, opaque bond packages and sold again as solid investments. (The ratings agencies, Moody's and Standard & Poor's, were essentially unindicted co-conspirators in the scam.) And those packages were then sliced up, resold and transformed into exotic derivatives, which were bet on by bond traders and investors. (See "The Demise of Bernie Madoff.")
Confused? Well, that was the point. According to Michael Lewis, whose book The Big Short is a riveting encyclopedia of the disaster, even the SEC was confused by the actual contents of the most far-fetched packages, called collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). Wall Street spewed terms like collateralized debt obligation in order to mislead: a more accurate abbreviation might have been RCLs —repackaged crappy loans. When the crappy loans couldn't be repaid, the housing market, Wall Street and the American economy imploded. The Wall Street traders pocketed hundreds of millions in profits; the American taxpayer, and homeowner, picked up the losses.
Read more here.
Remember, the Albuquerque Journal enjoys a near monopoly in this state. It should be held to a high standard, so if you have your own Untold Stories, send them to me. If you think this type of e-mail is a good idea, forward it to others, so they can request to be added the Untold Stories list.
Yours in media education,
Bob McCannon
Friday, March 4, 2011
Journal Ignores Petraeus' Apology for U.S. Atrocity
The story below was not on the Journal's front page–in fact not in the paper at all! Published by every major newspaper, most minor ones and national network news yesterday and the day before, it was not in the Albuquerque Journal, which did, however, publish stories about Charlie Sheen both days.
As a general rule the Journal ignores stories about our two wars that have destroyed countless lives and over four trillion dollars (source: Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz). (source: Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz).
Below are two stories about this event–one conservative, one liberal.
For a long list of such omissions, go to: http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=5652565662951898764
Coalition Apologizes for Deaths of Afghan Children (Wall Street Journal - March 3, 2011)
U.S. Gen. David Petraeus, the coalition's commander in Afghanistan, issued a rare apology Wednesday for a helicopter strike that killed nine children, hours after Afghan President Hamid Karzai condemned the allies for launching what he called a "ruthless attack."
[Rest of story here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704728004576176644160681276.html]
Nine Afghan Boys Collecting Firewood Killed by NATO Helicopters (New York Times - March 2, 2011)
The NATO statement, which included an unusual personal apology by the commander of the NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David H. Petraeus, said the boys had been misidentified as the attackers of a NATO base earlier in the day. News of the attack enraged Afghans and led to an anti-American demonstration on Wednesday in the village of Nanglam, where the boys were from. The only survivor, Hemad, 11, said his mother had told him to go out with other boys to collect firewood because “the weather is very cold now.”
[Rest of story here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/world/asia/03afghan.html]
As a general rule the Journal ignores stories about our two wars that have destroyed countless lives and over four trillion dollars (source: Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz). (source: Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz).
Below are two stories about this event–one conservative, one liberal.
For a long list of such omissions, go to: http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=5652565662951898764
Coalition Apologizes for Deaths of Afghan Children (Wall Street Journal - March 3, 2011)
U.S. Gen. David Petraeus, the coalition's commander in Afghanistan, issued a rare apology Wednesday for a helicopter strike that killed nine children, hours after Afghan President Hamid Karzai condemned the allies for launching what he called a "ruthless attack."
[Rest of story here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704728004576176644160681276.html]
Nine Afghan Boys Collecting Firewood Killed by NATO Helicopters (New York Times - March 2, 2011)
The NATO statement, which included an unusual personal apology by the commander of the NATO forces in Afghanistan, Gen. David H. Petraeus, said the boys had been misidentified as the attackers of a NATO base earlier in the day. News of the attack enraged Afghans and led to an anti-American demonstration on Wednesday in the village of Nanglam, where the boys were from. The only survivor, Hemad, 11, said his mother had told him to go out with other boys to collect firewood because “the weather is very cold now.”
[Rest of story here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/world/asia/03afghan.html]
Monday, February 28, 2011
Journal Ignores Afghanistan
The Albuquerque Journal continues to ignore the longest war in U.S. history with only a few small paragraphs last week. During this week, 100 Afghans and many of our young men/NATO soldiers were killed and wounded. We are spending $14 Million per hour in Afghanistan
As Congress argues about how to save $50-100 billion in the next year, we have spent trillions (no exaggeration) in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though most independent experts agree that the latter war is not winnable, and the former was a mistake.
The Journal has a responsibility to educate the public about the challenges, tenor and progress of this expensive conflict. This information is more important that a San Francisco snowstorm (Sunday's Journal) or Bristol Palin on Dancing with the Stars (a former front page lead story)? This interminable should be regular front page news.
Below you will find 12 articles from just the last few days. They are drawn from a variety of solid sources, including some reputable newspapers and the Associated Press (the Journal's main source).
Remember, the Albuquerque Journal enjoys a near monopoly in this state. It should be held to a high standard, so if you have your own Untold Stories, please e-mail them to me. If you think this e-mail is a good idea, forward it to others, so they can request to be added the Untold Stories list.
Yours in media education,
Bob McCannon
More US-led troops killed in Afghan war
An 8-year war built on lies: But when did the lying begin?
Afghanistan civilian casualties spike; officials say 200 killed in 2-week period
Bomb kills nine civilians in Afghanistan
Bomber kills at least 4 in northwest Afghanistan
Taliban Scrambles to Stem Bad Publicity After Civilian 'Massacres'
Three rockets fired into heart of Kabul
Low pay, big risks for fuel haulers in Afghan war
Canadian mentors walk a delicate path in training Afghan soldiers
Gates: Warning Against Wars Like Iraq and Afghanistan
US Reduces Troops in Afghan Valley
Afghanistan says 50 civilians killed in Western battle with insurgents
Bob McCannon
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant,
President: The Action Coalition for Media Education
American Academy of Pediatrics' Media Educator of the Year
Author, college and secondary texts
As Congress argues about how to save $50-100 billion in the next year, we have spent trillions (no exaggeration) in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though most independent experts agree that the latter war is not winnable, and the former was a mistake.
The Journal has a responsibility to educate the public about the challenges, tenor and progress of this expensive conflict. This information is more important that a San Francisco snowstorm (Sunday's Journal) or Bristol Palin on Dancing with the Stars (a former front page lead story)? This interminable should be regular front page news.
Below you will find 12 articles from just the last few days. They are drawn from a variety of solid sources, including some reputable newspapers and the Associated Press (the Journal's main source).
Remember, the Albuquerque Journal enjoys a near monopoly in this state. It should be held to a high standard, so if you have your own Untold Stories, please e-mail them to me. If you think this e-mail is a good idea, forward it to others, so they can request to be added the Untold Stories list.
Yours in media education,
Bob McCannon
More US-led troops killed in Afghan war
An 8-year war built on lies: But when did the lying begin?
Afghanistan civilian casualties spike; officials say 200 killed in 2-week period
Bomb kills nine civilians in Afghanistan
Bomber kills at least 4 in northwest Afghanistan
Taliban Scrambles to Stem Bad Publicity After Civilian 'Massacres'
Three rockets fired into heart of Kabul
Low pay, big risks for fuel haulers in Afghan war
Canadian mentors walk a delicate path in training Afghan soldiers
Gates: Warning Against Wars Like Iraq and Afghanistan
US Reduces Troops in Afghan Valley
Afghanistan says 50 civilians killed in Western battle with insurgents
Bob McCannon
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant,
President: The Action Coalition for Media Education
American Academy of Pediatrics' Media Educator of the Year
Author, college and secondary texts
Monday, March 23, 2009
SunCal TIDDs Bill Fails
After passing the Senate, the SunCal TIDDs bill stalled in the House 33-33, save the taxpayers 408 million dollars. Here is a great comment from this blog:
Anonymous said...
Corporate Welfare,
shame on Linda Lopez and Sen. Bernadette sanchez for proposing this during these difficult finacial times. 4000 acre development. this works out to over $100,000 per acre. ARE YOU KIDDING. GIVE THIS MONEY TO THE PEOPLE. What happened to the ethics reform bill, oops , they must have been too busy working on how to sneak this by us common folks!
March 22, 2009 12:00 AM
Anonymous said...
Corporate Welfare,
shame on Linda Lopez and Sen. Bernadette sanchez for proposing this during these difficult finacial times. 4000 acre development. this works out to over $100,000 per acre. ARE YOU KIDDING. GIVE THIS MONEY TO THE PEOPLE. What happened to the ethics reform bill, oops , they must have been too busy working on how to sneak this by us common folks!
March 22, 2009 12:00 AM
More TIDDs Info You Won't Find in the J
Another Response to my TIDDs story with comments(**) from a TIDDs expert:
SunCal will get the TIDD money whether they provide a single job or
not. There is nothing in the state law which requires that they
actually come through on their promises.
**The bonds can't be sold until there is sufficient GRT and property tax revenues generated within the TIDD to back the bonds ........ so SunCal doesn't have to create new jobs, but if they don't bring in jobs there will be no GRT......and no bonds.
That makes the TIDDs a pure giveaway - money for nothing. It ought
to be illegal. If they were contracts, they would have people going to
jail, even in New Mexico.
**I don't agree with this statement, but I understand what motivates the sentiment.
Once the Bonding is approved, it cannot be disapproved in the
future. Once and over - it's a done deal.
**I'm researching this point ..... everyone I have spoken with concurs with this statement. It concerns me very much.
TIDDs are funding for infrastructure - roads, sidewalks, parks,
flood control, stuff like that. Nothing to do with jobs - nothing.
But the money is a direct subsidy to the developer - it significantly
cuts his cost of doing business, so his profits go up by that amount.
Wonder why SunCal is will ing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars
to get the TIDD passed? They will make hundreds of millions in pure
profit when the funds roll in.
**TIDDs are pure profit for SunCal .... I agree. Normally, the developer is required to construct the roads, sewer, and water, etc. with his own $$. In the case of TIDDs, he still must use his own $$ upfront, but then he is repaid in the future when the TIDD bonds are issued. So it cushions his bottom line --- his profit. It also shifts the risk from the private sector to the public sector.
They say they don't get paid until they do what they promise. In
real life, that means they promise to build a road and some flood
control, and they get paid for it. Bringing jobs is NOT in that
equation. It's all about infrastructure.
**This is true to a point. If there are no jobs ....there is no GRT. If there is no GRT (and property tax), there will be no bonds. So he must generate jobs. The real issue ... will he simply entice existing jobs away from another part of the city or state to his development. I think the cannibalization issue a serious one.
If TIDDs bring jobs from outside the state, why did the State
provide incentives of $132M to Schott Solar and $47M to Fidelity to
move into Mesa del Sol? MdS has huge TIDDs - no pun intended - why
didn't their magic suffice to bring in those outfits? In fact, what
effect did their TIDDs have, at all, in bringing these companies to
town?
Giving up the taxes doesn't matter? The development will be built
out in a few years, but for at least 30 years, the City and/or County
must provide ALL of the services, operations, maintenance, and anything
else that a big development like that would require. But they have to
do it with only their remaining part of the Tax revenue - 25% to 50%.
They can't do it. Somehow current planning seems to ignore this point,
but it's very real - there is going to be a real awakening when things
start to get built.
Or, if it turns out that this portion of the tax revenues is enough
- then taxes should be cut big time! You just can't win.
SunCal will get the TIDD money whether they provide a single job or
not. There is nothing in the state law which requires that they
actually come through on their promises.
**The bonds can't be sold until there is sufficient GRT and property tax revenues generated within the TIDD to back the bonds ........ so SunCal doesn't have to create new jobs, but if they don't bring in jobs there will be no GRT......and no bonds.
That makes the TIDDs a pure giveaway - money for nothing. It ought
to be illegal. If they were contracts, they would have people going to
jail, even in New Mexico.
**I don't agree with this statement, but I understand what motivates the sentiment.
Once the Bonding is approved, it cannot be disapproved in the
future. Once and over - it's a done deal.
**I'm researching this point ..... everyone I have spoken with concurs with this statement. It concerns me very much.
TIDDs are funding for infrastructure - roads, sidewalks, parks,
flood control, stuff like that. Nothing to do with jobs - nothing.
But the money is a direct subsidy to the developer - it significantly
cuts his cost of doing business, so his profits go up by that amount.
Wonder why SunCal is will ing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars
to get the TIDD passed? They will make hundreds of millions in pure
profit when the funds roll in.
**TIDDs are pure profit for SunCal .... I agree. Normally, the developer is required to construct the roads, sewer, and water, etc. with his own $$. In the case of TIDDs, he still must use his own $$ upfront, but then he is repaid in the future when the TIDD bonds are issued. So it cushions his bottom line --- his profit. It also shifts the risk from the private sector to the public sector.
They say they don't get paid until they do what they promise. In
real life, that means they promise to build a road and some flood
control, and they get paid for it. Bringing jobs is NOT in that
equation. It's all about infrastructure.
**This is true to a point. If there are no jobs ....there is no GRT. If there is no GRT (and property tax), there will be no bonds. So he must generate jobs. The real issue ... will he simply entice existing jobs away from another part of the city or state to his development. I think the cannibalization issue a serious one.
If TIDDs bring jobs from outside the state, why did the State
provide incentives of $132M to Schott Solar and $47M to Fidelity to
move into Mesa del Sol? MdS has huge TIDDs - no pun intended - why
didn't their magic suffice to bring in those outfits? In fact, what
effect did their TIDDs have, at all, in bringing these companies to
town?
Giving up the taxes doesn't matter? The development will be built
out in a few years, but for at least 30 years, the City and/or County
must provide ALL of the services, operations, maintenance, and anything
else that a big development like that would require. But they have to
do it with only their remaining part of the Tax revenue - 25% to 50%.
They can't do it. Somehow current planning seems to ignore this point,
but it's very real - there is going to be a real awakening when things
start to get built.
Or, if it turns out that this portion of the tax revenues is enough
- then taxes should be cut big time! You just can't win.
Journal Misses TIDDs Import
The good news is that the TIDDS bill has been temporarily pulled from the house due to rising public outcry. Of course, the Journal softpedaled this story. The bad news is that TIDDs will be back! It's a complex issue, so I have assembled more information.
Now is the time to email your legislators to prevent 400 million of your tax dollars being given to a CA company that already has many documented bankrupt developments. Here are some talking points (from a legislator) and a list of House email addresses.
Our local guy is Moe Maestas who is pro TIDDS (and, according to today's paper, sponsoring a bill to wipe away criminals' past crimes, making more business for criminal attorneys. Guess what he does for a living?)
From a legislator:
• TIDDs are a giveaway to the Developers. They fund roads and sidewalks, and only increase the developer's profits. They have nothing whatever to do with bringing jobs into the state.
• TIDDs take away the tax base the Cities and Counties need to provide services to the new developments, and take State funds needed for Capital Outlay, Education, and Aid to Children.
• TIDDs take tax revenues to benefit large developers at the expense of the whole state.
• If you approve these big TIDDs, you guarantee the developers hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidy, but the state law requires absolutely nothing in return from the developers. They plan jobs, they promise jobs, but if they don't produce any, there is NO PENALTY. You should not DARE to vote yes for these giveaways.
• TIDD funding encourages new, sprawling developments. These developments will cannibalize jobs and business from other places in the area and the region. This means TIDD subsidies are helping create rich new areas at the expense of existing areas. The state should not, ever, subsidize this activity.
• If TIDDs have power to bring new jobs to NM, why did the State have to put in $130M to bring Schott Solar and $47M to bring Fidelity Investments to Mesa del Sol, which already has a huge TIDD? Wasn't the "Job Magic" of their TIDD enough to bring in these companies? Just what DID their TIDD contribute to bringing these businesses here?
Now is the time to email your legislators to prevent 400 million of your tax dollars being given to a CA company that already has many documented bankrupt developments. Here are some talking points (from a legislator) and a list of House email addresses.
Our local guy is Moe Maestas who is pro TIDDS (and, according to today's paper, sponsoring a bill to wipe away criminals' past crimes, making more business for criminal attorneys. Guess what he does for a living?)
From a legislator:
• TIDDs are a giveaway to the Developers. They fund roads and sidewalks, and only increase the developer's profits. They have nothing whatever to do with bringing jobs into the state.
• TIDDs take away the tax base the Cities and Counties need to provide services to the new developments, and take State funds needed for Capital Outlay, Education, and Aid to Children.
• TIDDs take tax revenues to benefit large developers at the expense of the whole state.
• If you approve these big TIDDs, you guarantee the developers hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidy, but the state law requires absolutely nothing in return from the developers. They plan jobs, they promise jobs, but if they don't produce any, there is NO PENALTY. You should not DARE to vote yes for these giveaways.
• TIDD funding encourages new, sprawling developments. These developments will cannibalize jobs and business from other places in the area and the region. This means TIDD subsidies are helping create rich new areas at the expense of existing areas. The state should not, ever, subsidize this activity.
• If TIDDs have power to bring new jobs to NM, why did the State have to put in $130M to bring Schott Solar and $47M to bring Fidelity Investments to Mesa del Sol, which already has a huge TIDD? Wasn't the "Job Magic" of their TIDD enough to bring in these companies? Just what DID their TIDD contribute to bringing these businesses here?
Friday, March 13, 2009
Journal Fails to cover Ethics Commission
New Mexico needs legislative ethics reform, but especially an Ethics Commission. Such a bill is proposed, but Senators like Bernadette Sanchez oppose it.
Below you will find a great oped from the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and Common Cause, published yesterday in the Albuquerque Journal, WHICH SHOULD BE RUNNING STORIES LIKE THIS ON ITS FRONT PAGE.
Ever wonder why we have an unending series of public officials stealing our money? Can you say Manny Aragon? Forty other states have independent ethics commissions which investigate and deter corruption and crime.
Little known fact: New Mexico has just such a commission that investigates, disciplines and, even, fires judges. The Judicial Standards Commission operates independently, competently, professionally and without bias, taking down judges that are drunks, drug abusers, corrupt and/or perverts -- all recent cases.
Ask yourself, why don't legislators want an independent group looking for corruption??
So, you might want to phone your legislator about establishing an Ethics commission and the other reforms listed in the following oped from the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and Common Cause, published yesterday in the Albuquerque Journal, which should be running articles like this on the front page.
Ethics Reform Bogs Down
By Don Chalmers And Jack Taylor
Ethics Reform Advocates
New Mexicans are asking the Legislature for meaningful ethics reform this year, and we couldn't agree more. Apparently, a number of lawmakers are also in agreement, given that they have introduced more than 45 bills related to campaign contribution limits, establishment of an ethics commission, limitations on state contractors' contributions to public officials, fiscal penalties for public officials who have committed crimes related to their office and imposition of state conduct legislation on local governments.
However, we are running out of time to get this done. The Senate Rules Committee, which is the first committee of several in the Senate to which the ethics bills go, has spent the last three weeks reviewing the various ethics bills sponsored by senators in an effort to allow each legislator the opportunity to have a hearing on his or her bill.
To date, several bills have passed out of this committee, one of which has made it out of the Senate and over to the House. That bill would allow the imposition of financial penalties on those public officials who commit a felony related to their office.
The House has also been working on some ethics reform bills. It sent a whistle blower bill, an open conference committee bill and a bill to allow the Attorney General to prosecute statewide elected officials over to the Senate. It also has a bill to establish an ethics commission in its third committee.
Yet, we still don't have a single piece of major ethics reform legislation moving through the process fast enough to be considered by both chambers and be sent up to the governor.
As in years past, the major bills are stalled in committee. We know that legislators have a great deal on their plate, but many of these bills were introduced early in the session. They should be heard in committee and moved forward now; otherwise, we will, once again, fail to enact major, meaningful ethics reform.
Perhaps it would help if all of us, legislators included, remember that:
n New Mexico is one of five states in the country with no campaign contribution limits.
n We're one of 10 states with no independent ethics commission to investigate allegations of misconduct by public officials.
n We're one of just a handful of states in which the public is not allowed to observe legislative conference committees, the powerful committees that reconcile differences between bills that pass both chambers.
n New Mexico is one of just six states that until recently didn't broadcast any of its legislative proceedings. (That's changed a bit this session, largely due to a bit of high-profile civil disobedience by Republican representative Janice Arnold-Jones.)
n In reports published by the UCLA School of Law and the California Voter Foundation that analyzed states' campaign finance disclosure systems, New Mexico has received two consecutive “F” grades.
We don't want to remain at the bottom of another list—if our state is ever to move up the economic and social ladder, the first step needs to be cleaning up the rules of the game in our state government.
Legislators need to do the right thing and take action quickly on ethics reform. This is what their constituents want. This is what the New Mexico business community wants. This is what government reform advocates want. We believe this is probably what most legislators themselves want.
Don Chalmers is board chairman of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce. Jack Taylor is chairman of Common Cause of New Mexico.
Below you will find a great oped from the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and Common Cause, published yesterday in the Albuquerque Journal, WHICH SHOULD BE RUNNING STORIES LIKE THIS ON ITS FRONT PAGE.
Ever wonder why we have an unending series of public officials stealing our money? Can you say Manny Aragon? Forty other states have independent ethics commissions which investigate and deter corruption and crime.
Little known fact: New Mexico has just such a commission that investigates, disciplines and, even, fires judges. The Judicial Standards Commission operates independently, competently, professionally and without bias, taking down judges that are drunks, drug abusers, corrupt and/or perverts -- all recent cases.
Ask yourself, why don't legislators want an independent group looking for corruption??
So, you might want to phone your legislator about establishing an Ethics commission and the other reforms listed in the following oped from the Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and Common Cause, published yesterday in the Albuquerque Journal, which should be running articles like this on the front page.
Ethics Reform Bogs Down
By Don Chalmers And Jack Taylor
Ethics Reform Advocates
New Mexicans are asking the Legislature for meaningful ethics reform this year, and we couldn't agree more. Apparently, a number of lawmakers are also in agreement, given that they have introduced more than 45 bills related to campaign contribution limits, establishment of an ethics commission, limitations on state contractors' contributions to public officials, fiscal penalties for public officials who have committed crimes related to their office and imposition of state conduct legislation on local governments.
However, we are running out of time to get this done. The Senate Rules Committee, which is the first committee of several in the Senate to which the ethics bills go, has spent the last three weeks reviewing the various ethics bills sponsored by senators in an effort to allow each legislator the opportunity to have a hearing on his or her bill.
To date, several bills have passed out of this committee, one of which has made it out of the Senate and over to the House. That bill would allow the imposition of financial penalties on those public officials who commit a felony related to their office.
The House has also been working on some ethics reform bills. It sent a whistle blower bill, an open conference committee bill and a bill to allow the Attorney General to prosecute statewide elected officials over to the Senate. It also has a bill to establish an ethics commission in its third committee.
Yet, we still don't have a single piece of major ethics reform legislation moving through the process fast enough to be considered by both chambers and be sent up to the governor.
As in years past, the major bills are stalled in committee. We know that legislators have a great deal on their plate, but many of these bills were introduced early in the session. They should be heard in committee and moved forward now; otherwise, we will, once again, fail to enact major, meaningful ethics reform.
Perhaps it would help if all of us, legislators included, remember that:
n New Mexico is one of five states in the country with no campaign contribution limits.
n We're one of 10 states with no independent ethics commission to investigate allegations of misconduct by public officials.
n We're one of just a handful of states in which the public is not allowed to observe legislative conference committees, the powerful committees that reconcile differences between bills that pass both chambers.
n New Mexico is one of just six states that until recently didn't broadcast any of its legislative proceedings. (That's changed a bit this session, largely due to a bit of high-profile civil disobedience by Republican representative Janice Arnold-Jones.)
n In reports published by the UCLA School of Law and the California Voter Foundation that analyzed states' campaign finance disclosure systems, New Mexico has received two consecutive “F” grades.
We don't want to remain at the bottom of another list—if our state is ever to move up the economic and social ladder, the first step needs to be cleaning up the rules of the game in our state government.
Legislators need to do the right thing and take action quickly on ethics reform. This is what their constituents want. This is what the New Mexico business community wants. This is what government reform advocates want. We believe this is probably what most legislators themselves want.
Don Chalmers is board chairman of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce. Jack Taylor is chairman of Common Cause of New Mexico.
Journal Covers TIDDs (sort of)
Tax Increment Development Districts are becoming ever more common in the U.S. and New Mexico despite being a disaster in cities like St. Louis and Chicago.
During the last week, after several years of supporting TIDDs, the Albuquerque Journal has at last devoted more coverage to both sides of this issue with two front page articles.
If Bernadette Sanchez, Linda Lopez, Moe Maestas and other legislators have their way, over the next few decades, hundreds of millions of NM tax dollars are going to go to a corporation (SunCal) whose main claim to fame is dozens of bankrupt developments in CA.
SunCal says it is going to bring jobs to Albuquerque. There is absolutely no proof of this, but they keep saying it, even though the record shows that SunCal's TIDDs will probably just cause jobs to move to their area from other areas of the city, which is a double tax loss for taxpayers.
There is, however, proof of one thing, a massive spending campaign with unprecedented amounts of money going to legislators and lobbyists.
Following is the article from today's Albuquerque Journal:
To unsubscribe or subscribe, email me,
Bob McCannon (mccannon@flash.net )
Co-President
The Action Coalition for Media Education,
www.acmecoalition.org
2808 El Tesoro Escondido, Albuquerque NM 87120
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant
mccannon@flash.net (505) 839-9702
www.bobmccannon.org
Author, "Media Literacy/Media Education:
Definitions and Literature Review" in Children Adolescents and Media, 2nd edition - college text, 2008
Winner: The Holroyd-Sherry Award for Excellence
in Media Education by the American Academy
of Pediatrics, Boston, October, 2008
Executive Director, 1993 -2005
The New Mexico Media Literacy Project (founded 1993)
Thursday, March 12, 2009
TIDD Analysis Leaves Out Concerns
By Jeff Jones
Journal Staff Writer
Critics of a plan to give $408 million in future tax money to a California-based developer are questioning why a state analysis provided to lawmakers omitted major concerns about the deal that were described in a similar document last year.
A 2008 legislative analysis of a so-called TIDD deal for SunCal Cos. said the firm's planned development on Albuquerque's West Side might not generate nearly as much tax revenue as SunCal claimed.
Last year's analysis also said that according to one of SunCal's own studies, most of the demand for industrial space in the giant new development would come from firms already doing business in the Albuquerque area rather than new, out-of-state firms — a top concern of critics who warn the tax break amounts to "cannibalism."
The issue could have a "potentially huge impact for the state," the 2008 analysis said.
Neither of those criticisms was detailed in this year's Legislative Finance Committee analysis given to lawmakers considering the controversial deal, which was approved by the Senate in late February and is pending in the House.
"I absolutely think it (this year's analysis) does not tell the whole story," said Sen. Eric Griego, D-Albuquerque, a TIDD critic who questioned whether the LFC was pressured on the new analysis.
LFC director David Abbey told the Journal on Tuesday that he was indeed pressured on the TIDD issue.
He declined to say who applied pressure and insisted it had no impact.
"We absolutely didn't bow to pressure," Abbey said. "We prize our objectivity."
While he defended the objectivity of both the 2008 and 2009 analyses, he said this year's report should have detailed the cannibalism concern. And the LFC analysis was amended for lawmakers Wednesday morning after the Journal's inquiry.
Since a SunCal TIDD bill died in the Roundhouse last year, the developer has embarked on a major push to get a similar measure through this year's Legislature.
SunCal has spent a chunk of cash — it refuses to say how much — on pro-TIDD billboards, advertising and mailers. It also has a team of 11 top lobbyists and has spread more than $50,000 in campaign cash among dozens of Democratic and Republican lawmakers and the state Democratic Party.
TIDDs, shorthand for tax increment development districts, involve the formation of special tax districts in which portions of the gross receipts and property taxes are set aside to pay the developer for infrastructure such as roads and water and sewer systems. The TIDDs issue bonds secured by the tax money.
Backers of TIDDs say developers get none of the future tax money until they build their projects and say they benefit the state because they bring new jobs and tax revenue.
Opponents equate them to a tax giveaway. And some maintain that much of the business locating in the SunCal TIDD would be existing Albuquerque-area companies enticed to relocate or expand there by lower rent or construction costs made possible by the TIDD tax subsidy.
Cannibalism concerns stem from the possibility of existing companies moving to a TIDD-subsidized development, shifting some of the existing tax revenue from local government to the TIDD.
The LFC's 2008 analysis, prepared by agency chief economist Norton Francis, said a study done for SunCal assumed most of the industrial growth would be from "intramarket" demand.
"This is activity that would have generated revenue for the state that is moving to an area where half of the revenue is redistributed to the development, a potentially huge impact for the state," Francis wrote.
The analysis added that according to a separate state study, the amount of permanent gross receipts tax revenue generated in several of the areas in the TIDD "will be less than 20 percent of the amount calculated by the (SunCal) study."
The shorter, 2009 analysis that did not detail the concerns was done by another LFC staffer.
SunCal chief spokesman David Soyka in written responses to Journal questions said the study done for his firm was" clearly based only upon historical averages" concerning typical Albuquerque growth and does not address SunCal's emphasis on recruiting firms from other states and countries.
"TIDDs will allow us to attract large out-of-state companies to New Mexico by providing infrastructure and shovel-ready industrial land," Soyka wrote. "We have met with more than 30 international companies in our recruitment efforts to date."
During the last week, after several years of supporting TIDDs, the Albuquerque Journal has at last devoted more coverage to both sides of this issue with two front page articles.
If Bernadette Sanchez, Linda Lopez, Moe Maestas and other legislators have their way, over the next few decades, hundreds of millions of NM tax dollars are going to go to a corporation (SunCal) whose main claim to fame is dozens of bankrupt developments in CA.
SunCal says it is going to bring jobs to Albuquerque. There is absolutely no proof of this, but they keep saying it, even though the record shows that SunCal's TIDDs will probably just cause jobs to move to their area from other areas of the city, which is a double tax loss for taxpayers.
There is, however, proof of one thing, a massive spending campaign with unprecedented amounts of money going to legislators and lobbyists.
Following is the article from today's Albuquerque Journal:
To unsubscribe or subscribe, email me,
Bob McCannon (mccannon@flash.net )
Co-President
The Action Coalition for Media Education,
www.acmecoalition.org
2808 El Tesoro Escondido, Albuquerque NM 87120
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant
mccannon@flash.net (505) 839-9702
www.bobmccannon.org
Author, "Media Literacy/Media Education:
Definitions and Literature Review" in Children Adolescents and Media, 2nd edition - college text, 2008
Winner: The Holroyd-Sherry Award for Excellence
in Media Education by the American Academy
of Pediatrics, Boston, October, 2008
Executive Director, 1993 -2005
The New Mexico Media Literacy Project (founded 1993)
Thursday, March 12, 2009
TIDD Analysis Leaves Out Concerns
By Jeff Jones
Journal Staff Writer
Critics of a plan to give $408 million in future tax money to a California-based developer are questioning why a state analysis provided to lawmakers omitted major concerns about the deal that were described in a similar document last year.
A 2008 legislative analysis of a so-called TIDD deal for SunCal Cos. said the firm's planned development on Albuquerque's West Side might not generate nearly as much tax revenue as SunCal claimed.
Last year's analysis also said that according to one of SunCal's own studies, most of the demand for industrial space in the giant new development would come from firms already doing business in the Albuquerque area rather than new, out-of-state firms — a top concern of critics who warn the tax break amounts to "cannibalism."
The issue could have a "potentially huge impact for the state," the 2008 analysis said.
Neither of those criticisms was detailed in this year's Legislative Finance Committee analysis given to lawmakers considering the controversial deal, which was approved by the Senate in late February and is pending in the House.
"I absolutely think it (this year's analysis) does not tell the whole story," said Sen. Eric Griego, D-Albuquerque, a TIDD critic who questioned whether the LFC was pressured on the new analysis.
LFC director David Abbey told the Journal on Tuesday that he was indeed pressured on the TIDD issue.
He declined to say who applied pressure and insisted it had no impact.
"We absolutely didn't bow to pressure," Abbey said. "We prize our objectivity."
While he defended the objectivity of both the 2008 and 2009 analyses, he said this year's report should have detailed the cannibalism concern. And the LFC analysis was amended for lawmakers Wednesday morning after the Journal's inquiry.
Since a SunCal TIDD bill died in the Roundhouse last year, the developer has embarked on a major push to get a similar measure through this year's Legislature.
SunCal has spent a chunk of cash — it refuses to say how much — on pro-TIDD billboards, advertising and mailers. It also has a team of 11 top lobbyists and has spread more than $50,000 in campaign cash among dozens of Democratic and Republican lawmakers and the state Democratic Party.
TIDDs, shorthand for tax increment development districts, involve the formation of special tax districts in which portions of the gross receipts and property taxes are set aside to pay the developer for infrastructure such as roads and water and sewer systems. The TIDDs issue bonds secured by the tax money.
Backers of TIDDs say developers get none of the future tax money until they build their projects and say they benefit the state because they bring new jobs and tax revenue.
Opponents equate them to a tax giveaway. And some maintain that much of the business locating in the SunCal TIDD would be existing Albuquerque-area companies enticed to relocate or expand there by lower rent or construction costs made possible by the TIDD tax subsidy.
Cannibalism concerns stem from the possibility of existing companies moving to a TIDD-subsidized development, shifting some of the existing tax revenue from local government to the TIDD.
The LFC's 2008 analysis, prepared by agency chief economist Norton Francis, said a study done for SunCal assumed most of the industrial growth would be from "intramarket" demand.
"This is activity that would have generated revenue for the state that is moving to an area where half of the revenue is redistributed to the development, a potentially huge impact for the state," Francis wrote.
The analysis added that according to a separate state study, the amount of permanent gross receipts tax revenue generated in several of the areas in the TIDD "will be less than 20 percent of the amount calculated by the (SunCal) study."
The shorter, 2009 analysis that did not detail the concerns was done by another LFC staffer.
SunCal chief spokesman David Soyka in written responses to Journal questions said the study done for his firm was" clearly based only upon historical averages" concerning typical Albuquerque growth and does not address SunCal's emphasis on recruiting firms from other states and countries.
"TIDDs will allow us to attract large out-of-state companies to New Mexico by providing infrastructure and shovel-ready industrial land," Soyka wrote. "We have met with more than 30 international companies in our recruitment efforts to date."
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Where is Ted Stevens?
Today, my paper, the Albuquerque Journal, put the conviction of corrupt Republican Senator Ted Stevens on the last page of the front section. Where did your paper put the story? Last night CBS and NBC featured the story.
This is important. This kind of corruption is not only history making, but our media need to feature public governmental corruption in order to keep public informed and the system honest.
For only the fifth time in history a sitting Senator of the United States became a convicted felon. In fact, Republican Senator Ted Stevens was convicted of seven felonies. He was the senior U.S. Senator, the longest serving senator, the ranking member and former chairperson of the most important Senate committee, the appropriations committee.
It is the committee that controls all spending bills and all earmarks. Earmarks are those spending appropriations which are never debated by the legislature. This Senator had more to say about money matters than any other Republican. People owed him! He had incredible power.
That he was beyond his time and out of touch was never in doubt. He most famously referred to the internet as a group of “tubes” in last year’s famous debate over net neutrality, coming down on the side of the big telecoms.
As chairman, he refused to allow Big Oil’s CEOs to be sworn in at a hearing (a singularly unique breach of custom). One now has to wonder why he would do such a favor for them. Did he get something in return?
He was one of the most arrogant of the famous club of one hundred millionaires.
More importantly, this man typified what is most wrong with our system of government. People fight, dig and scratch to become politicians, get elected, and, then, get rich. Common people like you and I sigh and scratch our heads, but the fact remains.
Whether mayors, county commissioners, city councilors, state or national legislators, these people almost always wind up living way beyond their meager salaries. With the Ted Stevens case, one source of their largesse is clearly revealed. Private corporations and/or business do them “favors.”
In this case $250,000 worth of improvements were done to Stevens’ home. He somehow was unaware that they had come for free.
Ladies and gentlemen, we need more investigation and reporting like this. Why? Simply put, to help keep our legislators honest.
If you think a friend might be interested in reading about the media's untold and underreported stories, forward this newsletter to them. I'll put them on my list.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, simply email mccannon@flash.net.
Have a great October 28th,
Bob
Winner: The Holroyd-Sherry Award for Excellence
in Media Education by the American Academy
of Pediatrics, Boston, October, 2008
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant
www.bobmccannon.org
Co-President, Co-Founder
The Action Coalition for Media Education,
www.acmecoalition.org
2808 El Tesoro Escondido, Albuquerque NM 87120
mccannon@flash.net (505) 839-9702
Author, "Media Literacy/Media Education
Literature Review" in Children Adolescents
and Media, 2nd edition - college text, July, 2008
Executive Director, 1993 -2005
The New Mexico Media Literacy Project (founded 1993)
This is important. This kind of corruption is not only history making, but our media need to feature public governmental corruption in order to keep public informed and the system honest.
For only the fifth time in history a sitting Senator of the United States became a convicted felon. In fact, Republican Senator Ted Stevens was convicted of seven felonies. He was the senior U.S. Senator, the longest serving senator, the ranking member and former chairperson of the most important Senate committee, the appropriations committee.
It is the committee that controls all spending bills and all earmarks. Earmarks are those spending appropriations which are never debated by the legislature. This Senator had more to say about money matters than any other Republican. People owed him! He had incredible power.
That he was beyond his time and out of touch was never in doubt. He most famously referred to the internet as a group of “tubes” in last year’s famous debate over net neutrality, coming down on the side of the big telecoms.
As chairman, he refused to allow Big Oil’s CEOs to be sworn in at a hearing (a singularly unique breach of custom). One now has to wonder why he would do such a favor for them. Did he get something in return?
He was one of the most arrogant of the famous club of one hundred millionaires.
More importantly, this man typified what is most wrong with our system of government. People fight, dig and scratch to become politicians, get elected, and, then, get rich. Common people like you and I sigh and scratch our heads, but the fact remains.
Whether mayors, county commissioners, city councilors, state or national legislators, these people almost always wind up living way beyond their meager salaries. With the Ted Stevens case, one source of their largesse is clearly revealed. Private corporations and/or business do them “favors.”
In this case $250,000 worth of improvements were done to Stevens’ home. He somehow was unaware that they had come for free.
Ladies and gentlemen, we need more investigation and reporting like this. Why? Simply put, to help keep our legislators honest.
If you think a friend might be interested in reading about the media's untold and underreported stories, forward this newsletter to them. I'll put them on my list.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, simply email mccannon@flash.net.
Have a great October 28th,
Bob
Winner: The Holroyd-Sherry Award for Excellence
in Media Education by the American Academy
of Pediatrics, Boston, October, 2008
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant
www.bobmccannon.org
Co-President, Co-Founder
The Action Coalition for Media Education,
www.acmecoalition.org
2808 El Tesoro Escondido, Albuquerque NM 87120
mccannon@flash.net (505) 839-9702
Author, "Media Literacy/Media Education
Literature Review" in Children Adolescents
and Media, 2nd edition - college text, July, 2008
Executive Director, 1993 -2005
The New Mexico Media Literacy Project (founded 1993)
Friday, October 24, 2008
Financial Crisis Review = Inadequate
The Sunday Journal, Money Section (on how we got into this financial mess) did NOT include most of the following information. I think readers deserve better.
In April I warned about the economic danger of hedge funds and associated financial instruments, most importantly called derivatives and credit-default swaps(CDS). Sadly, the warning was prophetic, and our economy is falling apart, and not because of problem mortgages. Bad mortgages we could have handled; hedge funds we are struggling with.
Interestingly enough, in our current financial catastrophe the mainstream news (MSN) still refuses to discuss the role of hedge funds, derivatives and CDS. More importantly, the Presidential candidates are not talking about them either.
There seems to be an unspoken agreement to blame mortgages and generalized "greed on Wall Street" as the cause of the current crisis which has caused the FED to throw almost two TRILLION dollars at the problem (and the end is not in sight).
The lack of information is ominous, closely resembling censorship. It is more than an untold story; it verges on information control. I follow the mainstream news, and I have only seen Obama mention hedge funds once and McCain not at all.
CBS nightly news has talked about hedge funds three times and NBC twice. Two weeks ago there was a Sixty Minutes story that was very detailed and informative about derivatives and CDS. That is not much news for a crisis that has run over a month. We should all be hearing repeatedly about hedge funds, derivatives and CDS.
Don't get me wrong. I am not absolving don't Fannie, Freddie and the other causes of our crisis, but I am saying that more important topics are not being discussed in the MSN.
Leverage should be a major topic around the proverbial water cooler. We should all be talking about mortgage instruments that were leveraged twenty to three hundred times in various kinds of derivatives and, then, INSURED by CDS. After all, leverage did cause the Great Depression.
I have been waiting for Sixty Minutes' information to be verified by a responsible MSN source, and yesterday none other than Alan Greenspan did so, and he pointed out how wrong he was to leave these investment banks unregulated.
What's the total exposure? Believe it or not; we are talking about 50-60 TRILLION DOLLARS worth of highly leveraged, possibly worthless paper. That is the reason the markets are in the crapper, and that is the reason banks are failing left and right. Hundreds of people sold these schemes, made fortunes and should be on their way to jail, but where is the news?
Again, it bears repeating that leveraging assets at the margin was the cause of the Great Depression and the reason for the creation of the SEC, the FDIC and the FED. This is worse that the savings and loan scandal of the 80's that saw over 747 banks close due to the same kind of greed.
In April I quoted the SEC chairman, William Donaldson, who was fired by George Bush for trying to regulate hedge funds and CDS. As he said, "They are totally unregulated." That is why, for example, CDS are called swaps. If they were called insurance, they'd be regulated. As I noted in April Warren Buffet, John Bogle and Robert Kutner all agree about hedge fund dangers.
Now, here is the 64 zillion dollar question: why are the politicians and their media lapdogs avoiding the hedge fund issue?
I really don't know. I can only speculate that the pigs do not want this trough regulated.
I might further speculate that they want our tax dollars to stabilize their feed lots, so they can continue to take huge leveraged risks (now with our money) and possibly make zillions more in the future (instead of going to jail). If you have a better idea, please email me.
Remember, according to the Wall Street Journal, last year the 30 top hedge fund CEOs made an AVERAGE of one BILLION dollars in just that one year.
This needs to be talked about. Congress is holding hearings on regulating hedge funds. Last night, again, neither CBS nor NBC went into significant detail about these complex financial instruments. Write/call your Congressperson.
In April I warned about the economic danger of hedge funds and associated financial instruments, most importantly called derivatives and credit-default swaps(CDS). Sadly, the warning was prophetic, and our economy is falling apart, and not because of problem mortgages. Bad mortgages we could have handled; hedge funds we are struggling with.
Interestingly enough, in our current financial catastrophe the mainstream news (MSN) still refuses to discuss the role of hedge funds, derivatives and CDS. More importantly, the Presidential candidates are not talking about them either.
There seems to be an unspoken agreement to blame mortgages and generalized "greed on Wall Street" as the cause of the current crisis which has caused the FED to throw almost two TRILLION dollars at the problem (and the end is not in sight).
The lack of information is ominous, closely resembling censorship. It is more than an untold story; it verges on information control. I follow the mainstream news, and I have only seen Obama mention hedge funds once and McCain not at all.
CBS nightly news has talked about hedge funds three times and NBC twice. Two weeks ago there was a Sixty Minutes story that was very detailed and informative about derivatives and CDS. That is not much news for a crisis that has run over a month. We should all be hearing repeatedly about hedge funds, derivatives and CDS.
Don't get me wrong. I am not absolving don't Fannie, Freddie and the other causes of our crisis, but I am saying that more important topics are not being discussed in the MSN.
Leverage should be a major topic around the proverbial water cooler. We should all be talking about mortgage instruments that were leveraged twenty to three hundred times in various kinds of derivatives and, then, INSURED by CDS. After all, leverage did cause the Great Depression.
I have been waiting for Sixty Minutes' information to be verified by a responsible MSN source, and yesterday none other than Alan Greenspan did so, and he pointed out how wrong he was to leave these investment banks unregulated.
What's the total exposure? Believe it or not; we are talking about 50-60 TRILLION DOLLARS worth of highly leveraged, possibly worthless paper. That is the reason the markets are in the crapper, and that is the reason banks are failing left and right. Hundreds of people sold these schemes, made fortunes and should be on their way to jail, but where is the news?
Again, it bears repeating that leveraging assets at the margin was the cause of the Great Depression and the reason for the creation of the SEC, the FDIC and the FED. This is worse that the savings and loan scandal of the 80's that saw over 747 banks close due to the same kind of greed.
In April I quoted the SEC chairman, William Donaldson, who was fired by George Bush for trying to regulate hedge funds and CDS. As he said, "They are totally unregulated." That is why, for example, CDS are called swaps. If they were called insurance, they'd be regulated. As I noted in April Warren Buffet, John Bogle and Robert Kutner all agree about hedge fund dangers.
Now, here is the 64 zillion dollar question: why are the politicians and their media lapdogs avoiding the hedge fund issue?
I really don't know. I can only speculate that the pigs do not want this trough regulated.
I might further speculate that they want our tax dollars to stabilize their feed lots, so they can continue to take huge leveraged risks (now with our money) and possibly make zillions more in the future (instead of going to jail). If you have a better idea, please email me.
Remember, according to the Wall Street Journal, last year the 30 top hedge fund CEOs made an AVERAGE of one BILLION dollars in just that one year.
This needs to be talked about. Congress is holding hearings on regulating hedge funds. Last night, again, neither CBS nor NBC went into significant detail about these complex financial instruments. Write/call your Congressperson.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Journal Ignores Merrill Lynch
The financial crisis in this country is getting serious. My local paper, the Albuquerque Journal devoted half of its front page today to a 14 year-old who got in a fight (the lead story) and an epileptic baby--sad enough, but we had TWO MORE MAJOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FAIL over the weekend! The failure of Merrill Lynch is not worth the Journal's front page.
The Feds are still pouring many billions of $$ into saving Bear Stearns, Fannie May, Freddie Mac, and several other failed institutions while the FDIC has said it expects over a hundred more banks to fail. A hundred more! (And all so sleazy bankers could make big bonuses giving out millions of sleazy loans!)
The Federal deficit is now over a half TRILLION dollars/year, yet both Presidential candidates say they want to cut taxes AND reduce Federal spending. Hello?? Anyone who has taken Econ 101 would ask "how?" We have a ton of debt and two expensive wars, and Afghanistan is fixing to get a whole lot more expensive.
The only way would be to borrow more from our enemies or print more money, which, BTW, the FED is doing. They call it "expanding the money supply."
Inflation just hit the highest level in decades--over 12% annually adjusted for a few months. At 12% you have to make 12% on your investments to break even.
Now, I actually taught Econ 101, and I agree with what the Journal said in its Sept. 14th article about inflation. Inflation is "too much money chasing too few goods."
However, the Journal did not say, and no commercial media is telling you the key fact. "Inflation is a TAX." The government spends money it does not have--inflating the money supply (yes, running the printing presses) to pay its obligations (wars, programs or payments on its debt), and, presto, your money will not by as much. You have been taxed! Politicians love inflation; it allows them to promise more stuff to the voters without "raising taxes."
This is not a partisan statement. It is an economic axiom. As Colbert would say. It is "truthiness."
Whether you are a Republican or Democrat, ask your candidates about the economic facts of life. Here are two articles that should have been on today's Journal front page.
After Frantic Day, Wall Street Banks Falter
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/business/15lehman.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Andrew Ross Sorkin, The New York Times: "In one of the most dramatic days in Wall Street’s history, Merrill Lynch agreed to sell itself on Sunday to Bank of America for roughly $50 billion to avert a deepening financial crisis, while another prominent securities firm, Lehman Brothers, said it would seek bankruptcy protection and hurtled toward liquidation after it failed to find a buyer. The humbling moves, which reshape the landscape of American finance, mark the latest chapter in a tumultuous year in which once-proud financial institutions have been brought to their knees as a result of hundreds of billions of dollars in losses because of bad mortgage finance and real estate investments."
Greenspan: Can't Afford McCain Tax Cuts
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26689925/
The Associated Press: "Alan Greenspan says the country can't afford tax cuts of the magnitude proposed by Republican presidential contender John McCain - at least not without a corresponding reduction in government spending. 'Unless we cut spending, no,' the former Federal Reserve chairman said Friday when asked about McCain's proposed tax cuts, pegged in some estimates at $3.3 trillion. 'I'm not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money,' Greenspan said during an interview with Bloomberg Television. 'I always have tied tax cuts to spending.'"
If you think a friend might be interested in reading the media's untold or underreported stories, forward this newsletter to them.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, simply email mccannon@flash.net.
Have a great day,
Bob
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant
www.bobmccannon.org
Co-President, Co-Founder
The Action Coalition for Media Education,
www.acmecoalition.org
2808 El Tesoro Escondido, Albuquerque NM 87120
mccannon@flash.net (505) 839-9702
Author, "Media Literacy/Media Education
Literature Review" in Children Adolescents
and Media, 2nd edition - college text, July, 2008
Executive Director, 1993 -2005
The New Mexico Media Literacy Project (founded 1993)
The Feds are still pouring many billions of $$ into saving Bear Stearns, Fannie May, Freddie Mac, and several other failed institutions while the FDIC has said it expects over a hundred more banks to fail. A hundred more! (And all so sleazy bankers could make big bonuses giving out millions of sleazy loans!)
The Federal deficit is now over a half TRILLION dollars/year, yet both Presidential candidates say they want to cut taxes AND reduce Federal spending. Hello?? Anyone who has taken Econ 101 would ask "how?" We have a ton of debt and two expensive wars, and Afghanistan is fixing to get a whole lot more expensive.
The only way would be to borrow more from our enemies or print more money, which, BTW, the FED is doing. They call it "expanding the money supply."
Inflation just hit the highest level in decades--over 12% annually adjusted for a few months. At 12% you have to make 12% on your investments to break even.
Now, I actually taught Econ 101, and I agree with what the Journal said in its Sept. 14th article about inflation. Inflation is "too much money chasing too few goods."
However, the Journal did not say, and no commercial media is telling you the key fact. "Inflation is a TAX." The government spends money it does not have--inflating the money supply (yes, running the printing presses) to pay its obligations (wars, programs or payments on its debt), and, presto, your money will not by as much. You have been taxed! Politicians love inflation; it allows them to promise more stuff to the voters without "raising taxes."
This is not a partisan statement. It is an economic axiom. As Colbert would say. It is "truthiness."
Whether you are a Republican or Democrat, ask your candidates about the economic facts of life. Here are two articles that should have been on today's Journal front page.
After Frantic Day, Wall Street Banks Falter
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/business/15lehman.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Andrew Ross Sorkin, The New York Times: "In one of the most dramatic days in Wall Street’s history, Merrill Lynch agreed to sell itself on Sunday to Bank of America for roughly $50 billion to avert a deepening financial crisis, while another prominent securities firm, Lehman Brothers, said it would seek bankruptcy protection and hurtled toward liquidation after it failed to find a buyer. The humbling moves, which reshape the landscape of American finance, mark the latest chapter in a tumultuous year in which once-proud financial institutions have been brought to their knees as a result of hundreds of billions of dollars in losses because of bad mortgage finance and real estate investments."
Greenspan: Can't Afford McCain Tax Cuts
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26689925/
The Associated Press: "Alan Greenspan says the country can't afford tax cuts of the magnitude proposed by Republican presidential contender John McCain - at least not without a corresponding reduction in government spending. 'Unless we cut spending, no,' the former Federal Reserve chairman said Friday when asked about McCain's proposed tax cuts, pegged in some estimates at $3.3 trillion. 'I'm not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money,' Greenspan said during an interview with Bloomberg Television. 'I always have tied tax cuts to spending.'"
If you think a friend might be interested in reading the media's untold or underreported stories, forward this newsletter to them.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, simply email mccannon@flash.net.
Have a great day,
Bob
Presenter, Media Educator, Consultant
www.bobmccannon.org
Co-President, Co-Founder
The Action Coalition for Media Education,
www.acmecoalition.org
2808 El Tesoro Escondido, Albuquerque NM 87120
mccannon@flash.net (505) 839-9702
Author, "Media Literacy/Media Education
Literature Review" in Children Adolescents
and Media, 2nd edition - college text, July, 2008
Executive Director, 1993 -2005
The New Mexico Media Literacy Project (founded 1993)
Thursday, September 11, 2008
What Happened to 9-11?
How did your local paper treat today's anniversary of possibly the greatest catastrophe in U.S. history?
If you were living here in Albuquerque, depending on the Albuquerque Journal, you probably would not even know it was a special day.
Now, I must confess that I was jolted into action by an email from a friend who just wrote me and said, "I loved the Albuquerque Journal front page. 9/11 was not worthy of ANY mention on the front page??? But, luckily, we got to read about campaign signs and mountain lions. The Journal is so ****ed up." (I am sure she meant "messed" up.)
What does it say when the LEAD story in today's Journal was about some boys being sexually humiliated WEEKS ago? Yes, it was a sick tragedy, but, really, it was the Journal's third story about these poor kids, i.e., very old news. This sort of editing reminds one of the National Enquirer.
The Journal devoted almost a whole PAGE to Sarah Palin, but only a TINY mention on page seven about the anniversary of the date that has cost our country literally TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS, THOUSANDS OF DEAD, a DEVASTATED ECONOMY and much more!
9/11 affects our lives in so many ways. Our bridges are ancient, falling down, and we don't have the money to fix them. Our electric transmission system is prehistoric; our schools are ineffective; we are sending $700 Billion to our enemies every year for oil. The list goes on. Economists call this opportunity cost--the cost of what we are giving up because of what we are spending on the war on terror.
If you were living here in Albuquerque, depending on the Albuquerque Journal, you probably would not even know it was a special day.
Now, I must confess that I was jolted into action by an email from a friend who just wrote me and said, "I loved the Albuquerque Journal front page. 9/11 was not worthy of ANY mention on the front page??? But, luckily, we got to read about campaign signs and mountain lions. The Journal is so ****ed up." (I am sure she meant "messed" up.)
What does it say when the LEAD story in today's Journal was about some boys being sexually humiliated WEEKS ago? Yes, it was a sick tragedy, but, really, it was the Journal's third story about these poor kids, i.e., very old news. This sort of editing reminds one of the National Enquirer.
The Journal devoted almost a whole PAGE to Sarah Palin, but only a TINY mention on page seven about the anniversary of the date that has cost our country literally TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS, THOUSANDS OF DEAD, a DEVASTATED ECONOMY and much more!
9/11 affects our lives in so many ways. Our bridges are ancient, falling down, and we don't have the money to fix them. Our electric transmission system is prehistoric; our schools are ineffective; we are sending $700 Billion to our enemies every year for oil. The list goes on. Economists call this opportunity cost--the cost of what we are giving up because of what we are spending on the war on terror.
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Journal Promotes Gambling
Gambling . . . Excuse me, I should use today's politically correct term, promoted by industry executives, lobbyists and legislators. "GAMING" is one of the largest industries in the U.S. It accounts for over $50 million in contributions politicians.
In fact, gambling is bigger than theme parks, the movie industry and outdoor sports. Actually, it is bigger than all of these COMBINED. It is so big and has such a huge media presence that we do not even question it any more--on the national or local scene.
Today's front page Albuquerque Journal story, "3 Groups Vying for State's Last Racetrack Liscense" filled a full page and a half of section A.
The writer, Charles Blount, touted the the economic BENEFITS of the proposed "racinos" again and again. Each "racino" would have 600 "state of the art" slot machines.
Unfortunately, Blount made NO attempt to point out the negative impact of injecting gambling into a small town NM community. He promoted the increase in jobs and the "annual economic impact" of the racinos ad nauseum, but REFUSED TO INFORM HIS READERS OF THE BALANCING NEGATIVE IMPACT OF GAMBLING.
Blount could have sought out some experts on gambling and included them in his story which painted such a positive face on gambling. I am not an expert, but the following have all been mentioned as negative and expensive impacts of introducing gambling to a community:
1) Less disposable income for community members who lose at the racino. The huge amounts generated by casinos has to come from individuals.
Most individuals in small town NM have precious little money they can afford to lose. For example, most New Mexicans cannot pay for their retirement.
2) Lost jobs at other businesses when community members have less disposable income to spend upon things like restaurants, home repair, health care, education, retirement, etc.
3) Increased crime and drug addiction associated with problem gamblers.
4) Increased tax burden upon community institutions that have to pick up the slack for the above (police, hospitals, agencies, etc.).
The Journal routinely neglects to honor the basic ethics of professional journalism, but this is a particularly egregious example of omission.
Sigh.
In fact, gambling is bigger than theme parks, the movie industry and outdoor sports. Actually, it is bigger than all of these COMBINED. It is so big and has such a huge media presence that we do not even question it any more--on the national or local scene.
Today's front page Albuquerque Journal story, "3 Groups Vying for State's Last Racetrack Liscense" filled a full page and a half of section A.
The writer, Charles Blount, touted the the economic BENEFITS of the proposed "racinos" again and again. Each "racino" would have 600 "state of the art" slot machines.
Unfortunately, Blount made NO attempt to point out the negative impact of injecting gambling into a small town NM community. He promoted the increase in jobs and the "annual economic impact" of the racinos ad nauseum, but REFUSED TO INFORM HIS READERS OF THE BALANCING NEGATIVE IMPACT OF GAMBLING.
Blount could have sought out some experts on gambling and included them in his story which painted such a positive face on gambling. I am not an expert, but the following have all been mentioned as negative and expensive impacts of introducing gambling to a community:
1) Less disposable income for community members who lose at the racino. The huge amounts generated by casinos has to come from individuals.
Most individuals in small town NM have precious little money they can afford to lose. For example, most New Mexicans cannot pay for their retirement.
2) Lost jobs at other businesses when community members have less disposable income to spend upon things like restaurants, home repair, health care, education, retirement, etc.
3) Increased crime and drug addiction associated with problem gamblers.
4) Increased tax burden upon community institutions that have to pick up the slack for the above (police, hospitals, agencies, etc.).
The Journal routinely neglects to honor the basic ethics of professional journalism, but this is a particularly egregious example of omission.
Sigh.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
The Missing Energy Solutions
For a week, I have been monitoring CBS and NBC's national news' coverage of the energy crisis. Each night they give us a "new record" in gas and oil prices, and "discuss" the controversy. Their debate is almost always framed as a choice between "drilling" and "conservation."
The networks go into "depth" (as much depth as sixty second TV news stories can) about the candidates positions on whether or not to drill in ANWR or offshore, or conserve. often mentioned is more "clean" coal (if such a thing exists) or more nuclear plants.
Shale oil, hydrogen cars, reporting on hybrid sales, and environmental stories are also covered along with the rare story on corn ethanol driving up the price of food. Along the way, we are subjected to interminable statements by industry "experts" who are usually lobbyists.
Now and then, one hears the words, "alternative energy sources," but they are seldom explored with any serious or persuasive intent, and of course, this whole charade is surrounded by oil company advertisements which tell us how Big Oil loves us and is looking out for our interests.
My local paper, the Albuquerque Journal, is no better. It ran a lead story on "NM's Energy Gurus (6-15-08)" and in a full page and a half of questioning our two Senators, who chair the Senate Energy Committee, the word "SOLAR" is only mentioned once (tangentially) and "WIND" not at all!
When the Senate refused to renew tax credits for solar and wind energy companies, the Journal put the story in Section C (6-18-08). Imagine that, with $4 gasoline the Senate will not renew solar and wind energy credits, and it is not a front page story!
Two week later (6-2-08) the Journal's front page story was "Public Says Drill." It highlighted only two solutions for our energy crisis, more drilling or conservation with nuclear and alternative energy mentioned only in passing. It mentioned drilling in ANWR three times.
Today's Journal article, "Time for Energy Debate?" gives readers the same old choices--drill more or conserve--not a word about renewable sources of energy.
What do you think?
Why do we see so little about alternative energy in our news?
Some say that if we had spent the $150 Billion economic "stimulus" package (that we borrowed) on wind and solar, instead of giving most of us a $600 check, we would be on our way to energy independence, building whole new industries with good jobs and employing legions of Americans for decades and lowering the price of oil.
Many scientists say there is enough solar power in NM to free the whole country from mideast oil. They say the same thing about wind in North Dakota.
Could Big Oil and Big Coal be tilting our news, both national and local? Are they afraid of energy sources that they cannot control?
Something to think about.
Have a great Fourth of July weekend.
The networks go into "depth" (as much depth as sixty second TV news stories can) about the candidates positions on whether or not to drill in ANWR or offshore, or conserve. often mentioned is more "clean" coal (if such a thing exists) or more nuclear plants.
Shale oil, hydrogen cars, reporting on hybrid sales, and environmental stories are also covered along with the rare story on corn ethanol driving up the price of food. Along the way, we are subjected to interminable statements by industry "experts" who are usually lobbyists.
Now and then, one hears the words, "alternative energy sources," but they are seldom explored with any serious or persuasive intent, and of course, this whole charade is surrounded by oil company advertisements which tell us how Big Oil loves us and is looking out for our interests.
My local paper, the Albuquerque Journal, is no better. It ran a lead story on "NM's Energy Gurus (6-15-08)" and in a full page and a half of questioning our two Senators, who chair the Senate Energy Committee, the word "SOLAR" is only mentioned once (tangentially) and "WIND" not at all!
When the Senate refused to renew tax credits for solar and wind energy companies, the Journal put the story in Section C (6-18-08). Imagine that, with $4 gasoline the Senate will not renew solar and wind energy credits, and it is not a front page story!
Two week later (6-2-08) the Journal's front page story was "Public Says Drill." It highlighted only two solutions for our energy crisis, more drilling or conservation with nuclear and alternative energy mentioned only in passing. It mentioned drilling in ANWR three times.
Today's Journal article, "Time for Energy Debate?" gives readers the same old choices--drill more or conserve--not a word about renewable sources of energy.
What do you think?
Why do we see so little about alternative energy in our news?
Some say that if we had spent the $150 Billion economic "stimulus" package (that we borrowed) on wind and solar, instead of giving most of us a $600 check, we would be on our way to energy independence, building whole new industries with good jobs and employing legions of Americans for decades and lowering the price of oil.
Many scientists say there is enough solar power in NM to free the whole country from mideast oil. They say the same thing about wind in North Dakota.
Could Big Oil and Big Coal be tilting our news, both national and local? Are they afraid of energy sources that they cannot control?
Something to think about.
Have a great Fourth of July weekend.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Journal needs to Take Econ 101
I teach history, economics and the media. Our media leave many issues "untold," so I have started this e-list, going to 500+ leaders, citizens and media. It is devoted to "untold stories"--information and viewpoints which are important, but covered inconsequentially in our media.
This week's example: For a year I asked the Albuquerque Journal to explore hedge funds. Friday, it finally gave front page attention to this topic with a woefully inadequate article.
Hedge funds are new and huge, probably the most powerful force on Wall Street, bigger than most global banks. Some days they comprise half of NYSE shares traded. They own about 40% of U.S. business.
They are profitable! The average salary of the top 25 hedge fund managers last year was $900 million; that's right -- almost a billion dollars for one year's work.
Warren Buffet, arguably the world's greatest investor, complains that most of these men are taxed at a lower rate than their secretaries.
Due to a legal loophole, hedge funds are completely unregulated (no hyperbole--completely!). According to George W. Bush's former SEC chairman, William Donaldson, this is a dangerous situation. Bush fired Donaldson for insisting that hedge funds, like banks, be regulated by the SEC.
Hedge funds take huge risks, sometimes with disastrous results. Much of our cascading subprime mortgage crisis involves hedge funds and speculators like Bear Stearns and the Carlysle group. It would be wise to remember the prime lesson of the Great Depression--unregulated speculation almost destroyed our economy.
How does this hurt you? Experts hired by CBS News have estimated that one third of today's oil price is the result of speculation, not supply and demand, causing inflation and higher prices for food, clothes and many other products.
Do you think gas will go to $5/gallon? If hedge fund managers and speculators can make money pushing the price that far, they will.
How could hedge funds hurt New Mexico? Corporations increasingly demand taxpayer subsidies as the price of doing business (Verde, Forest Covington, SunCal -- even local shopping center developers). The potential of a hedge fund takeover of these corporations could be a threat to New Mexico communities who give them tax money and bond guarantees.
To avoid responsibility, hedge funds often employ armies of lawyers to hide their ownership in interminable "layers" of fiscal instruments. Bill Moyers reported that hundreds of Florida nursing homes were taken over by hedge funds who reduced services to jack up profits, hurting many residents, killing some. The occupants' lawyers oftentimes cannot even find out who owns the nursing homes!
Note: none of the aforementioned information was in the Journal article!
Hedge funds are just one of many issues that the corporate media refuse to cover in any depth. The Journal did a series of detailed front page articles on beautifying the Big I interchange. Why not a series on TIDDS and SunCal? Why indeed?
One reason is that big corporations buy advertising and politicians. Ads pay the salaries of newspeople. Legislators' campaigns are financed by corporations. Politicians influence the content of the news.
This is nothing new. American history is replete with examples of business and politics buying media coverage.
Nonetheless, citizens need depth, context, and non-corporatized points of view, and now we have this new electronic tool that can provide such.
This week's example: For a year I asked the Albuquerque Journal to explore hedge funds. Friday, it finally gave front page attention to this topic with a woefully inadequate article.
Hedge funds are new and huge, probably the most powerful force on Wall Street, bigger than most global banks. Some days they comprise half of NYSE shares traded. They own about 40% of U.S. business.
They are profitable! The average salary of the top 25 hedge fund managers last year was $900 million; that's right -- almost a billion dollars for one year's work.
Warren Buffet, arguably the world's greatest investor, complains that most of these men are taxed at a lower rate than their secretaries.
Due to a legal loophole, hedge funds are completely unregulated (no hyperbole--completely!). According to George W. Bush's former SEC chairman, William Donaldson, this is a dangerous situation. Bush fired Donaldson for insisting that hedge funds, like banks, be regulated by the SEC.
Hedge funds take huge risks, sometimes with disastrous results. Much of our cascading subprime mortgage crisis involves hedge funds and speculators like Bear Stearns and the Carlysle group. It would be wise to remember the prime lesson of the Great Depression--unregulated speculation almost destroyed our economy.
How does this hurt you? Experts hired by CBS News have estimated that one third of today's oil price is the result of speculation, not supply and demand, causing inflation and higher prices for food, clothes and many other products.
Do you think gas will go to $5/gallon? If hedge fund managers and speculators can make money pushing the price that far, they will.
How could hedge funds hurt New Mexico? Corporations increasingly demand taxpayer subsidies as the price of doing business (Verde, Forest Covington, SunCal -- even local shopping center developers). The potential of a hedge fund takeover of these corporations could be a threat to New Mexico communities who give them tax money and bond guarantees.
To avoid responsibility, hedge funds often employ armies of lawyers to hide their ownership in interminable "layers" of fiscal instruments. Bill Moyers reported that hundreds of Florida nursing homes were taken over by hedge funds who reduced services to jack up profits, hurting many residents, killing some. The occupants' lawyers oftentimes cannot even find out who owns the nursing homes!
Note: none of the aforementioned information was in the Journal article!
Hedge funds are just one of many issues that the corporate media refuse to cover in any depth. The Journal did a series of detailed front page articles on beautifying the Big I interchange. Why not a series on TIDDS and SunCal? Why indeed?
One reason is that big corporations buy advertising and politicians. Ads pay the salaries of newspeople. Legislators' campaigns are financed by corporations. Politicians influence the content of the news.
This is nothing new. American history is replete with examples of business and politics buying media coverage.
Nonetheless, citizens need depth, context, and non-corporatized points of view, and now we have this new electronic tool that can provide such.
More Tabloidism Re: Richardson
Today the front page has an article about Tuesday's CNN appearance of Governor Richardson and political personality, James Carville.
This story uses terms tabloid terms like "duke it out," "face off," "showdown," and "political boxing match." The front page part of this article, continued on page 5, listed only negatives about Richardson. Oh well, so much for a Pulitzer.
But wait, it gets worse. In the "Metro and NM" section. The Journal place a current story (real news) about Richardson's upcoming trip to Venezuela to try and free 3 U.S. hostages from Columbian guerrillas. IS THIS A METRO STORY?
Which story should have been on the front page? A U.S. State Department coordinated humanitarian mission by an experienced diplomat who happens to be our governor or biased, gossip from a talk show?
This story uses terms tabloid terms like "duke it out," "face off," "showdown," and "political boxing match." The front page part of this article, continued on page 5, listed only negatives about Richardson. Oh well, so much for a Pulitzer.
But wait, it gets worse. In the "Metro and NM" section. The Journal place a current story (real news) about Richardson's upcoming trip to Venezuela to try and free 3 U.S. hostages from Columbian guerrillas. IS THIS A METRO STORY?
Which story should have been on the front page? A U.S. State Department coordinated humanitarian mission by an experienced diplomat who happens to be our governor or biased, gossip from a talk show?
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Shock Jocks Spotlight Journal SlimeFest
The J showed less integrity than a Hollywood tabloid and less honor than when it used maniacal shock jock Don Imus to criticize Bill Richardson (really, former lead story, front page).
Dragging out its designated slanderer, Leslie Linthicum (infamous for her unflattering two-part “biography” of the Governor), the rag’s front page bashed Bill Richardson for the THIRD day in ONE week—not with fact, not with real news--but with innuendo from another shock jock--that paragon of hysterical hyperbole, James Carville.
Surely, the front page could be used for something more newsworthy than the ravings of a man whose only job seems to be bald faced (or “headed” in his case) ad hominem in pursuit of ever more lucrative TV “commentary” jobs.
It might be lost on an unknowing reader that Carville has less credibility than Imus.
It might be lost on the uncritical J regular, that Bill Richardson is not only a good guy, but a good governor.
Dragging out its designated slanderer, Leslie Linthicum (infamous for her unflattering two-part “biography” of the Governor), the rag’s front page bashed Bill Richardson for the THIRD day in ONE week—not with fact, not with real news--but with innuendo from another shock jock--that paragon of hysterical hyperbole, James Carville.
Surely, the front page could be used for something more newsworthy than the ravings of a man whose only job seems to be bald faced (or “headed” in his case) ad hominem in pursuit of ever more lucrative TV “commentary” jobs.
It might be lost on an unknowing reader that Carville has less credibility than Imus.
It might be lost on the uncritical J regular, that Bill Richardson is not only a good guy, but a good governor.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Disrespecting our fallen soldiers
The front page lead stories for yesterday’s Journal (J):
-- the lead - UNM “close” to extending basketball coach’s contract (that should win a Pulitzer.)
-- two mayhem stories about murderers
-- yet another Richardson bashing – this one featuring “Judas” comments about his lack of loyalty for backing Obama and more crap from the Mayor
ON PAGE A-6 (no kidding), was the story commemorating the 4,000th death in Iraq. Heaven forbid that the J might have run a SERIES about the incredible cost in MEN (including 30,000 seriously wounded and unknown hundreds of thousands of Iraqis), not to mention TREASURE ($3 Trillion and counting – bankrupting this country)
On Monday, the J ran a small front page story about the 4,000th death, but larger and higher were stories about:
-- no increase in tuition at CNM (really - no increase is a front page story)
-- more bashing Bill Richardson - quoting the Mayor, etc., and the
-- LEAD STORY on Monday was (ready for this?) DNA testing your DOG - to find out his breeding makeup (I AM NOT KIDDING! - the lead story)
SOOO, that's how the J recognized the milestone of 4,000 brave men who have died in an absolutely useless war.
Whatta tabloid!
Now, compare that to the PBS Frontline commemoration of this momentous event.
This Frontline may have been the most impressive documentary I have ever seen. The number of sources and the careful construction of this four hour epic is incredible.
Even more amazing is the conclusion left with the viewer that basically three people conspired to create the rationale and atmosphere that led us to war and, then, the same triad completely screwed up the occupation.
History will hammer Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld who lied, circumvented the normal chains of command and, of course, manipulated poor, sad, ill-equipped George W.
What was amazing to me is the number of people in the administration and military willing to go on camera about this disaster.
I talked a normal "regular guy" type of neighbor into watching it -- his first Frontline -- he just sent me this reaction:
"If there were any justice in this World, they would try Cheney,
Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz as war criminals. If I had a son or daughter
that got killed or injured in that %$#@ *&%$, I am not so sure that I could keep myself from hunting down one of those &%$#@."
If you did not see it, you might owe it to yourself as a citizen/media educator to find it and watch.
-- the lead - UNM “close” to extending basketball coach’s contract (that should win a Pulitzer.)
-- two mayhem stories about murderers
-- yet another Richardson bashing – this one featuring “Judas” comments about his lack of loyalty for backing Obama and more crap from the Mayor
ON PAGE A-6 (no kidding), was the story commemorating the 4,000th death in Iraq. Heaven forbid that the J might have run a SERIES about the incredible cost in MEN (including 30,000 seriously wounded and unknown hundreds of thousands of Iraqis), not to mention TREASURE ($3 Trillion and counting – bankrupting this country)
On Monday, the J ran a small front page story about the 4,000th death, but larger and higher were stories about:
-- no increase in tuition at CNM (really - no increase is a front page story)
-- more bashing Bill Richardson - quoting the Mayor, etc., and the
-- LEAD STORY on Monday was (ready for this?) DNA testing your DOG - to find out his breeding makeup (I AM NOT KIDDING! - the lead story)
SOOO, that's how the J recognized the milestone of 4,000 brave men who have died in an absolutely useless war.
Whatta tabloid!
Now, compare that to the PBS Frontline commemoration of this momentous event.
This Frontline may have been the most impressive documentary I have ever seen. The number of sources and the careful construction of this four hour epic is incredible.
Even more amazing is the conclusion left with the viewer that basically three people conspired to create the rationale and atmosphere that led us to war and, then, the same triad completely screwed up the occupation.
History will hammer Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld who lied, circumvented the normal chains of command and, of course, manipulated poor, sad, ill-equipped George W.
What was amazing to me is the number of people in the administration and military willing to go on camera about this disaster.
I talked a normal "regular guy" type of neighbor into watching it -- his first Frontline -- he just sent me this reaction:
"If there were any justice in this World, they would try Cheney,
Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz as war criminals. If I had a son or daughter
that got killed or injured in that %$#@ *&%$, I am not so sure that I could keep myself from hunting down one of those &%$#@."
If you did not see it, you might owe it to yourself as a citizen/media educator to find it and watch.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Journal gives porn, not news
"That is why our press was protected by the First Ammendment, the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution, not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and the sentimental, NOT TO SIMPLY GIVE THE PUBLIC WHAT IT WANTS, but to INFORM, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold, educate and sometimes even anger public opinion."
John F. Kennedy
The page one lead story on today's Journal is about a professor who sent porn to another, beneath the screaming headline, "NMSU Porn Investigation." The second lead is a fluff story about a 95 year-old basketball coach.
I am sure Kennedy is sighing, as are we.
John F. Kennedy
The page one lead story on today's Journal is about a professor who sent porn to another, beneath the screaming headline, "NMSU Porn Investigation." The second lead is a fluff story about a 95 year-old basketball coach.
I am sure Kennedy is sighing, as are we.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)