Lobbying // Current TV

Should DOW Chemical get a veto over government scientists?

A relatively obscure Congressional hearing on Tuesday became a flashpoint in a very important conflict: the attempt by the chemical industry — led by Dow Chemical – to gain a veto over the work of government scientists. This time, however, the scientists fought back, and they need our support.

The hearing was a joint project of the House Small Business Committee and House Science Committee. It focused on how a government report on cancer-causing chemicals is hurting “small business” in America. The Report on Carcinogens, which recently classified formaldehyde as a “known carcinogen” and styrene as a “reasonably anticipated” human carcinogen was under attack. It is a statutorily mandated report that is prepared by the highly respected National Toxicology Program (NTP).

The hearing is part of a disturbing pattern of political intimidation of government scientists for doing their jobs. Companies that make and use both chemicals launched an attack on the report even before it was published and its publication was delayed for years. It took political courage for Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to allow the report to be released, and I was told phones rang off the hook at the White House from chemical industry lobbyists complaining about the decision.

The Report itself does not restrict the chemicals it names. The findings can be used by regulatory agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency to decide if any changes are needed to environmental rules, but they mostly inform the public and the marketplace. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires that its safety data sheets be updated when the Report lists a chemical, a basic right-to-know measure for American workers.

So what was Dow complaining about at Tuesday’s hearing? Dow’s chief scientist Jim Bus effectively said that the NTP doesn’t do good science. Dow does good science. And the agency needs to give Dow and other companies a greater say in determinations like this for them to be credible with the public.

Never mind that the woman who runs the NTP and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences — Dr. Linda Birnbaum — is perhaps the most credentialed person on the planet on these matters. Never mind the exhaustive peer-review and outside consultation that already takes place. No, we need Dow more involved, because the public certainly thinks chemical makers are more credible judges of the products they make than public health scientists whose only mandate is to identify substances that may be harming public health.

The arrogance and self-serving nature of Dow’s position was breath-taking, but the upside of the hearing was that it was also obvious and fell flat. Representative Brad Miller (D-NC) deserves special credit for blowing the whistle on the hearing, by pointing out that the styrene industry took credit for the fact that the hearing was taking place. Miller and Representatives Richmond (D-LA) and Tonko (D-NY) pointed out that industry opponents who would exonerate styrene and formaldehyde were hardly more credible than the NTP. Overall, the show trial intended by the hearing backfired on the inquisitors, Subcommittee Chairs Broun (R-GA) and Ellmers (R-NC).

But the issue requires continued vigilance. Already, the United States has lost the leadership of the world on health and safety issues in favor of the European Union, and that has an impact on our ability to compete in a world market that increasingly demands safer products. The modest attempts by EPA Administrator Jackson to restore that leadership have not only been undermined by House Republicans but in some cases by industry allies in the White House who have blocked key reforms. The attempt to politically intimidate Dr. Birnbaum would bring this trend to a new low, however, because it would signal that companies like Dow can block even the most basic scientific work from seeing the light of day when it offends them.

So please ask your member of Congress to support the independence of government scientists like Dr. Birnbaum at the NTP, but please also take a moment to tell Dow to back off and let government scientists do their job.

by Andy Igrejas
Source: http://www.occupymonsanto360.org (http://s.tt/1aK8L)A relatively obscure Congressional hearing on Tuesday became a flashpoint in a very... more

JanforGore
added this
25 days ago
|
7 comments

UN-covering the other ALECS

Taxpayer-subsidized stealth lobbyists: Lobbyists who circumvent normal lobbying regulations and procedures to advance the corporate agenda in statehouses nationwide on the taxpayer dime.
IF WASHINGTON, D.C. is the new Versailles, run by corporate overlords and their lobbyist-hired guns, then the 50 statehouses are its paternal twins. That is, while they look different in form, they share the same genetic function as avenues for the fulfillment of the corporate agenda.
The Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) has made this abundantly clear through its ongoing ALEC Exposed project, bringing sunshine to the tax-deductible, statehouse-level influence-peddling efforts made by corporations through the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ALEC has been described by CMD as a "corporate bill mill." (Full disclosure: Steve Horn is a former reporter and researcher at CMD. He was on the team that broke ALEC Exposed in the summer of 2011.)
ALEC, though, is not the only "corporate bill mill" playing this game.
"Taxpayer-subsidized stealth lobbyists" have upped the ante and skillfully advanced their agendas through bipartisan "trade associations" for state government officials--in particular, the Council of State Governments (CSG) whose multimillion-dollar budget is mostly funded by taxpayers. Through CSG and friends, lobbyists exploit a well-tethered network of nonprofits representing state-level officials to advance the agenda of their corporate clientele.
"In a climate of stalled federal initiatives, and what I think is really unprecedented partisan battling and bickering, these state legislatures are really shaping the national policy environment," explained one such stealth lobbyist, Michael Behm, in an interview. "I really think they [states] are the real engines of government. And that's why the private sector is interested, quite frankly."
This, then, is part one of a four-party story about how the "real engines of government" work. First stop on the voyage: the CSG.
"That other bill mill": Council of State Governments (CSG)
ALEC IS far and away the most well known of the consortium of 501(c)(3) organizations that allow corporate influence to seep into every facet of state-level government affairs. CSG, on the other hand, is not so well known.
Upon being sworn into office, all state-level legislators (there are about 7,500 of them total), as well as their respective legislative staffs, automatically become CSG members. The organization's membership also includes representatives from the executive and judicial branches of state governments.
Between 2009 and 2011, CSG's Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 990 forms indicate revenue between $29 and $34 million annually. While most of its sizable budget is covered by taxpayers, some 43 percent--or roughly between $12.5 and 14.6 million, according to its website; another 29 percent--or almost $8.4 to $9.9 million of these funds--come from what it describes as "entrepreneurial efforts" which can be loosely interpreted to mean anything from publication sales to a sizable chunk from corporate patronage.
Some perspective is warranted: 990s filed by ALEC in 2010 placed its entire budget at just under $6 million.
"CSG has long believed private sector involvement in the American governance system is critical in formulating sound solutions to public policy challenges," reads the web page for the organization's private enterprise Associates Program. The page also explains a range of benefits special interest groups will receive for annual dues of $6,000.
Many corporations spend additional money sponsoring leadership trainings and conferences.
The CSG "dating service"
ALEC HAS recently taken the hot seat for many of its model bills and for its lobbyist-politician "dating service" process. Yet the idea behind the ALEC model legislation process was, to be clear, originally conceived by CSG, which was founded in 1933. ALEC was born 40 years later, in 1973.
To date, CSG is responsible for publishing between 30-40 model bills annually, in a process called Suggested State Legislation (SSL). These bills are distributed to the states as templates of bipartisan "best practices" often promoting the agendas of multinational corporations.
Behm, the lobbyist, wrote the following about the SSL process:

Few other state officials meetings or forums capture the attention--and stimulate the heart rates--of government affairs professionals [lobbyists] as does the Council of State Governments' Committee on Suggested State Legislation. We pour through the Committee Dockets the minute they are released searching for those bills, or that one law, that caused us so much heartburn earlier in the session season and hoping that it didn't find its way onto the "Committee List." A flurry of e-mails begins, conference calls are scheduled and a full-court press of lobbying is launched on the Committee members.

One only has to look briefly at the most recent SSL dockets to see that the private sector is often successful in its lobbying endeavors.
Most recently, the 2013 SSL docket includes legislation written by and for the shale gas industry on hydraulic fracturing (fracking), as well as a corporate-backed, union-busting collective bargaining "reform" bill. Both of these policies have been, to date, associated exclusively with ALEC by critical observers.Taxpayer-subsidized stealth lobbyists: Lobbyists who circumvent normal lobbying... more

figgdimension
added this
7 days ago
|
6 comments

The Lobbyist in the Gray Flannel Suit

Just when you thought things were crazy enough, here comes a British firm buying up... more

lazloman
added this
13 days ago
|
0 comments

Accretive Health Debt Collector Defends Embedding Employees Inside Hospitals

Accretive Health, a debt-collection company under fire from Minnesota and federal... more

Imzadi
added this
18 days ago
|
19 comments

$Energy expert Daniel Fine, MIT. discusses North Carolina's Shale gas and hydraulic fracturing - video$

Energy expert Daniel Fine, MIT. discusses North Carolina's Shale gas and hydraulic fracturing

Dr. Daniel Fine of the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy discusses North... more

manomet67
added this
3 months ago
|
0 comments

For It Before They Were Against It: Google Spent $400K On SOPA Lobbying

According to filings with the Federal Election Commission, Google spent approximately... more

maasanova
added this
4 months ago
|
2 comments

Republican Jewish Congress Bans Ron Paul From Presidential Debate

Ron Paul opposes killing Muslims on behalf of Israel so only Zionists who support the... more

maasanova
added this
6 months ago
|
56 comments

General Electric's (G.E.) 57,000 Page Tax Return

The 57,000 Page Tax Return
by Alex Tabarrok

The NYTimes reported earlier this year that through an extraordinary use of tax breaks and clever accounting:

[General Electric] 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. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.

The Times highlighted the skill of GE’s dream team:

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.

More recently from The Weekly Standard we find what kind of effort it takes to pay no taxes on $14 billion in profits:

General Electric, one of the largest corporations in America, filed a whopping 57,000-page federal tax return earlier this year but didn’t pay taxes on $14 billion in profits. The return, which was filed electronically, would have been 19 feet high if printed out and stacked.

(FYI, the length of GE’s tax return has doubled since 2006 when it (first?) filed electronically at an equivalent of 24,000 pages.)

GE’s tax bill illustrates both why our corporate tax rate is too high and too low. The nominal rate is too high which encourages a real rate which is too low.

Consider the resources that GE spends to lowers its tax bill, not just the many millions spent on clever accounting and accountants and the many millions spent on lobbying but also the many inefficient ways that GE structures its businesses just to avoid paying taxes and the many millions it invests in socially wasteful projects just in order to produce privately valuable tax credits. Now add to that the allocational inefficiencies of taxing some firms at different rates than others and you have a corporate tax system which wastes a lot of resources and raises relatively little revenue. Indeed, a corporate tax system with a tax rate of zero could well be preferable as it would waste fewer resources and raise not much less revenue.

Hat tip: TaxProf blog.The 57,000 Page Tax Return by Alex Tabarrok The NYTimes reported earlier this... more

dryeraser
added this
6 months ago
|
0 comments

Stop the undemocratic Super Committee!

The super-rich 1% have plunged us into a debt crisis by refusing to pay their fair share of taxes even as they strain the budget with wars, corporate welfare and bailouts. Now, the crisis they created is their excuse to force us to accept austerity measures.
Led by the Koch brothers and using the Tea Party as a front group, they succeeded in passing a bill that set up a Super Committee charged with drafting legislation by November 23 to slash $1.5 trillion from the federal budget.

If the Super Committee fails to produce a budget reduction plan or if the plan does not become law, spending will be lowered by $1.2 trillion, with $109.3 billion in cuts per year, half of which, $54.7 billion, comes from military spending and the other half from the rest of the budget. These cuts affect both mandatory and discretionary spending with proportionate cuts to both, but Social Security and Medicaid are protected while Medicare providers would see, at most, a two percent reduction in payments.

Why the Supercommittee Should Disband

Defense Contractors Pay Little To No Corporate Income Tax While Earning Billions
Fraudulent defense contractors paid $1 trillion

The dozen Super Committee members are the targets of countless corporate lobbyists and campaign donors working to protect defense contracts and industry subsidies while encouraging spending cuts and privatization for Food Stamps/SNAP, School Meals, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

In the last three months, the Farm Bureau and Biotech have spent $700,000 to influence the Super Committee and stave off cuts to direct payments for commodity producers (most are huge corporations growing Monsanto's genetically engineered crops) by gutting nutrition programs for hungry people.

If Congress had to put each of these deficit reduction measures to a vote, they would lose. Maintaining corporate welfare and tax breaks for the richest 1% by looting programs that serve the working poor and unemployed in a time of economic crisis isn't a good reelection strategy.

The Senate recently voted 84-15 to cut farm subsidies to anyone with an average income over $1 million. They voted 58 to 41 to defeat cuts to Food Stamps/SNAP.

The Super Committee process is designed to avoid votes like that. Congress will have to vote up or down on the debt reduction package without amendments or filibuster.

The Super Committee shuts down democracy. We need to shut down the Super Committee!

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) has introduced legislation to do just that (H.R.3201). Here's her argument:

More at the linkThe super-rich 1% have plunged us into a debt crisis by refusing to pay their fair... more

JanforGore
added this
7 months ago
|
25 comments

The Brothers Koch: 'Educating' Our Elected Leaders (VIDEO)

Obviously, this new “academy” values the welfare of the corporate interest... more

StewSteve
added this
8 months ago
|
0 comments

The tax break that didn’t create jobs, and now corporations want another one

Imagine corporations telling you they want to create American jobs in exchange for a... more

hoosierdaddy
added this
9 months ago
|
0 comments

Kochs & Extreme Right vs. Your Environment !

Thank Sandy Berman for directing us to this link at The Nation, pointing out how the... more

COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
added this
11 months ago
|
0 comments

Is the Kazakhstan government secretly funding members of Congress?

It has all the twists of a Hollywood blockbuster: shadowy international figures, a... more

cosmicsmudge
added this
12 months ago
|
0 comments

That Didn’t Take Long - NYTimes.com

Editorial That Didn’t Take Long Published: May 12, 2011 Meredith Attwell... more

figgdimension
added this
1 year ago
|
1 comment

AIPAC 101- What Every American Should Know

The American Israel Public Affairs Committe is coming to Washington, May 22nd to May... more

maasanova
added this
1 year ago
|
2 comments

Hobbs conference focuses on nuclear energy issues: ABQ Journal

N.M. Tech News Service
HOBBS – Nuclear energy, small-scale reactors and safety in the industry will take center stage next month at the 2011 national energy conference in Hobbs.
The Uranium Fuel Cycle Conference on Wednesday and Thursday, April 27 and 28, will focus on potential developments and implementation of small-scale reactors.
The conference features top leaders in nuclear technology, including Babcock & Wilcox, New Mexico Tech, URENCO USA, Washington TRU Solutions, Uranium Resources Inc., Energy Solutions and the U.S. Department of Energy.
The "uranium fuel cycle" begins with mining, continues with enrichment, followed by use in a reactor, and ends with processing and storage. Hobbs is in the center of the developing Eastern New Mexico Energy Corridor, which is involved in all aspects of the nuclear energy fuel cycle.
"Almost the entire cycle is contained in New Mexico, from mining to waste storage. This conference is an important step in bringing together key players in the area and continuing a dialogue about energy and our national policies," said Van Romero, Ph.D. and vice president of research at New Mexico Tech.
A new enrichment facility is now operational near Eunice, N.M. A deconversion plant is in the licensing stage in Lea County. Also located in the region are Waste Control Specialist LLC and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, near Carlsbad, which is a long-term storage facility funded by the Department of Energy. While not currently being mined, vast deposits of raw uranium ore exist in west-central New Mexico.
What's missing? The small-scale nuclear power plants.
"Communities in southeast New Mexico have expressed an interest in nuclear power," Romero said.
One area the conference will focus on is the commercial deployment of small nuclear reactors in eastern New Mexico. Representatives of Babcock & Wilcox will present their strategy to how to deploy a light-water reactor system to provide energy to communities in New Mexico.
Babcock & Wilcox is the leading international company in development and deployment of small-scale nuclear reactors. The company unveiled the B&W mPower reactor in 2009. The mPower reactor, with its scalable, modular design, has the capacity to provide 125 megawatts to 750 megawatts of electricity for a five-year operating cycle without refueling. The reactor is designed to produce clean, near-zero emission operations, according to the company website.
Following the Babcock & Wilcox presentation, Romero will lead a discussion on "Small Reactor Research and Readiness." Then, a representative from the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy will talk on the status and outlook for nuclear energy development.
The two-day conference is hosted by the New Mexico Center for Energy Policy, a division of New Mexico Tech, the Economic Development Corp. of Lea County and New Mexico Junior College.
Online registration is under way at http://nmcep.nmt.edu/ or by calling 575-397-2039.

Read more: ABQJOURNAL BIZ: Hobbs conference focuses on nuclear energy issues http://www.abqjournal.com/biz/212143529029biz03-21-11.htm#ixzz1JmpeVufd
Subscribe Now Albuquerque JournalN.M. Tech News Service HOBBS – Nuclear energy, small-scale reactors... more

bluehelen [removed]
added this
1 year ago
|
0 comments

Google dropped $5.16 million dollars on lobbyists in 2010

The Google dropped $5.16 million dollars on lobbyists in 2010, according to the... more

Wade_Dokken
added this
1 year ago
|
0 comments

Canadian Embassy emails reveal Canadian, US lobbying on tar sands-derived oil

Recently published emails written by Canadian Embassy and government employees show... more

angliss
added this
1 year ago
|
0 comments

Corporates running India? « Ramanan50's Blog

Truly corporate clique is ruling India as it does in the US.

ramanan50
added this
1 year ago
|
0 comments

For Democracy to Work...

For democracy to work, complete transparency must be obtained. There must be no hiding behind patriotism, national security, and fear. These catch phrases are a vault for the secrets a government does not want the public to know of. Also due to these phrases, Americans society, while often preaching freedom of speech, in reality practices resentment, hatred, and peer pressure against those who step outside the norm (of what is politically correct). I would thus say no government needs to prohibit the freedom of speech, but only let the people prohibit (more so regulate) speech for them. It has happened so many times in our country’s past, we cannot afford to let this keep happening.

For democracy to work, diplomacy must be the first and preferably the only course of action in settling disputes. Democracy cannot be offensive in nature—only defensive. Due to reasons prior, freedoms and liberties (primarily those stemming from privacy) cannot waver in the shadow of fear, and thus democracy is at a severe disadvantage when it comes to warfare—either democracy (liberty) fails, or military security fails. Just as the integrity of a family is tested through hardships, the integrity of our government is tested through decisions made during or related to warfare and economic downtimes. A democratic government thus cannot suddenly revoke civil liberties or rights in lieu of the often vague, "Clear and Present Danger."

And thus, for democracy to work, preemptive strikes cannot occur. A democratic society must lead by example, not retaliation, revenge, or fear.

For democracy to work, the freedom of the press must be entirely free of regulation and censorship. The live footage of firefights during the Vietnam War had an immense impact on the outlook of war for those on the home front. The press is vastly more censored (both from corporate, and government), today. We cannot afford to have a censored press, as it holds all the power in shifting the majority of Americans’ view of any issue or event. People (straw man, I know) are gullible, and do not realize the power that manipulation has on their decisions and views.

For democracy to work, capitalism must maintain complete separation and segregation from the democratic system. As soon as private funding enters the picture, our potential candidates are primarily only determined by officials promising the majority (the currently diminishing middle class) of Americans false promises, while truly only representing those providing the most money (synonymous with votes) to their campaign. Votes don't get politicians elected, advertising & funding does. So who will get prioritized?

For democracy to work, lobbying must be made illegal, or vastly more restricted and regulated.

For democracy to work, a form of free election must be in order. An equal amount of taxpayer money must be distributed to the two presidential candidates. Since funding is the primary means of obtaining a position, we limit ourselves on the selection of candidates. Money cannot be a prerequisite in order to obtain or maintain a political position--yet it is. Set up two temporary television channels and websites for these candidates. Debates should be daily, and written correspondence between the two candidates should be a must—the topic voted upon by the public. I say written responses because some people are better at composing their thoughts on paper rather than in speech with millions watching, that is more or less just a game of who is quicker on their feet, not who is more reasonable or knowledgeable. Nominees for the general elections should only obtain their money through local donation from the citizens of their future jurisdiction, or by some other means which would allow absolutely ANY American citizen to run and potentially win—not based on their funding and advertising flash, but by their intelligence, charisma, knowledge, ethos, and promises. In sociology, "random" is defined as everyone having an equal chance and possibility to participate (in an experiment); not every American citizen has an equal chance of running for office. I don't have a perfect answer, but it's apparent something needs changed.

For democracy to work, bliss cannot be derived from ignorance. The importance of pursuing the truth and finding information for ones’ self must be emphasized. Everyone is entitled to vote, but not everyone understands for whom their vote entitles.

For democracy to work, accountability must be exacted out. False campaign promises are a form of false advertisement. Politicians must be held to the same justice system as we, the people, are.

Anything else to add?

(News seemed to be the only appropriate place to put this; my apologies if not).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Bald_eagle_landing.jpgFor democracy to work, complete transparency must be obtained. There must be no hiding... more

Jake_Leonard
added this
1 year ago
|
86 comments

select your country

Community Spotlight

TAGS

tagged w/ Lobbying

top videos

find current on tv

find current online

recent comments

© 2012 Current TV, LLC All Rights Reserved

the basics

follow us online

tools

stay in touch

© 2012 Current TV, LLC
All Rights Reserved