Stocks to Watch Hot Stocks Penny stocks Stock Picks Stock Alerts Penny Stock Advice Penny Stocks The Bull Report

Remarks by the First Lady at a DNC Event — Los Angeles, CA

Posted on 01. Feb, 2012 by admin in News

1:18 P.M. PST

        MRS. OBAMA:  All right!  (Applause.)  All right, this is some good stuff.  This really is.  (Applause.)  Wow.  Thank you all so much.  Please, rest yourselves, because you obviously have been working hard already.  (Laughter.)

        Wow, the power of women — and a few brave men, too.  (Laughter.)  It's a good thing.  Thank you so much.  It is such a pleasure and an honor to be here with so many fabulous, fabulous women.  And you all brothers are okay, too — the men — men are good, men are good.  (Laughter.)

        I want to start by thanking Mattie for that very kind introduction.  But, more importantly, she and Michael have — they have been with us from the way beginning; the "Barack Obama Who?" beginning; the Barack — what?  You want me to write a check for that guy?  (Laughter.)  They were there from the very start, and they have not just been supporters but they have been friends, they have been our encouragers, they have been the handful of people who kind of keep us grounded in ways that I don't think they even really understand.  So I want to take this time to just give them a shoutout of love, because they are just amazing people.  Thank you.  Thank you, guys.  Thank you for opening up your home.  (Applause.) 

        I've been in L.A. for a couple of days, doing a few things, but today we had a wonderful event with your wonderful mayor, in Inglewood.  And it was a true privilege.  I mean, that's something that — I know we come here to raise money, but it is so important for us to get out in the neighborhoods and to focus on what's going on on the ground.  (Applause.)  Thank you, mayor.  Thank you for your leadership, thank you for your service, and thank you for taking time to be here with me today.  It means a lot.

        And of course, I want to recognize all the co-chairs and all the host committee people, and everyone here who worked so hard to make this event what is obviously a tremendous success.  Thank you all so much. 

        And finally, I want to thank everyone — everyone — for being here this afternoon.  Because the women in this room, the people in this room are busy folks.  And I know there's a reason why you are all here today.  And while you all may love me, it's not just because you like me — which I hope you do.  (Laughter and applause.)

        But you’re here because you also know that we stand at a fundamental crossroads for our country.  This is serious stuff.  You’re here because you know that in less than a year from today, we're going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come.

        And you’re here because you know that that choice won’t just affect all of us, but more importantly, it's going to affect our children and our grandchildren and the world we leave for them long after we're gone.  And that's why I'm here today.  That’s why I'm going to be out there, working hard.  That's — we have only just begun.

        You see, as First Lady, I have had the privilege — and this is a wonderful job — of traveling all across this country, something that we should all have the privilege and the honor to do.  Because when you do that, you get to meet folks — folks from all different kinds of backgrounds — and I get to hear what’s going on in their lives.

        Every day, I hear about how people are struggling to keep it together — the bills they're trying to pay, the business they're trying to keep afloat.  I hear about how folks are doing everything in their power to make it work, taking the extra shift, or working that extra job; how so many people are saving and sacrificing, not spending a dime on themselves because they desperately want something better for their kids.

        This is our America.  And make no mistake about it, these struggles are not new.  For decades now, middle-class folks have been squeezed from all sides.  While the cost of things like gas and groceries — tuition — have continued to rise, people’s paychecks just haven’t kept up.

        So when the economic crisis hit, for far too many families the bottom completely fell out.  Now, over the past three years, your President has worked very hard to dig us out of this mess.  And there has been a lot of progress made.  A lot of progress made.  (Applause.)  What I want you all to remember, if anybody asked:  We have had 22 straight months of private sector job growth.  (Applause.)  And the unemployment rate is now the lowest it’s been in nearly three years.  (Applause.)

        But we know that we still have a very long way to go.  Folks are still struggling.  And your President has been working hard to rebuild our economy based on a vision.  See, a President has to have a vision, and his is one that we all share — the belief, as my husband says, that hard work should pay off; that responsibility should be rewarded; and that everyone — everyone — in this country should get a fair shot, do their fair share, and play by the same rules.  (Applause.)  See, these are basic American values.  They're the values that so many of us were raised with, including myself.  We know these values.  We know who we are.

        My father was a blue-collar city worker; worked at water plant.  My family lived in a little-bitty apartment on the South Side of Chicago.  Neither — (applause) — yeah, South Side.  (Laughter and applause.)  Neither of my parents — I'm sure like many people in this room — they didn't attend college.  But what my parents did, like so many — they worked, and they saved, and they sacrificed everything for us.  My mother is still sacrificing her life to be a part of ours.  Because they want so much to have me and my brother to have more than they could ever imagine.

        See, and more than anything else, we have to remember that's what’s at stake — that fundamental promise that no matter who you are, or how you started out, if you work hard, you can build a decent life for yourself, and yes, an even better life for your kids.  That's what's at stake.

        And on just about every issue — from health care to education to the economy — that's the choice we face.

        For example, when we talk about tax cuts for middle-class families, when we talk about unemployment insurance for folks out of work, we're talking about whether people can heat their homes; put a hot meal on the table; put gas in their car so that they can even look for work.  We talk about these issues — this is about whether folks can afford to own a home, send their kids to college, retire with just a little dignity and security.  It’s about whether people will have more money in their pockets, which means more money in our economy, which in turn means more jobs.

        And that’s what’s at stake.  That is the choice we face.  That's why you're here.

        And if you think, for a minute, about what the Obama administration has done to stand up for the American consumer — see, I’m talking about families getting hit with those hidden credit card fees; I’m talking about students — our students, America's students — drowning in debt; our seniors losing their homes, losing their savings because they were tricked into loans they couldn’t afford, couldn't understand. 

        And that’s why my husband created a new consumer watchdog with just one simple mission, and that is to protect folks from exactly these kind of abuses.  Because when you’ve worked, and you’ve saved, and you've followed the rules, you shouldn’t lose it all to someone looking to make an easy buck.  That is not fair.  That is not right.  And your President is working to do something about that.  That's what's at stake.  (Applause.)

        And what about what we've all done together for our small businesses?  I mean, these are the companies that create two-thirds of all new jobs each year in this country — two-thirds.  We're talking about the mom who opens up a drycleaners in her neighborhood to help provide for her kids — that's who we're talking about.  We're talking about the family that's been running that neighborhood diner for generations, or the veteran who launches a startup and pursues that American Dream that he fought so hard for.

        See, it's these folks who work themselves to the bone during the day, and then they head home, pore over the books late into the night, determined to make those numbers add up.  See, for these folks, the small business tax cuts that this administration has passed, that means the difference from these folks hiring new employees or handing out pink slips; it's the difference between them closing their doors for good, or having a place open forever.

        That is the choice we face.

        And how about the very first bill my husband signed into law — the very first thing he did as President of the United States:  the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, to help women get equal pay for equal work.  (Applause.)

        And he did this because he knows what it means when women aren’t treated fairly in the workplace.  See, he watched his own grandmother, woman with a high school education, who worked her way up to become the vice president at a little community bank.  And he saw how hard she worked.  He saw how good she was at her job.  Yet, like so many women, she hit that glass ceiling and watched men no more qualified than she was — men she had actually trained — climb that corporate ladder ahead of her.

        So, believe me, Barack, for him, this issue is not abstract.  This is not hypothetical for your President.  He signed this bill because he knows that closing that pay gap can mean the difference between women losing , 0, 0 from each check, or having that money to buy gas and groceries, to put school clothes on the backs of their children.

        He did it because when nearly two-thirds of women are breadwinners or co-breadwinners, he knows that women’s success in this economy is the key to families’ success in this economy.  (Applause.)  And he did it because, as he put it, we believe that here in America, there are no second-class citizens in our workplace. 

        That is what’s at stake in this election.

        And let’s talk just a minute about health care.  Just a little second about health care.  (Applause.)  Because last year, we made history together by finally passing health reform.  We did that together.  But now, there are folks actually talking about repealing this reform.  So today, we have to ask ourselves, are we going to stand by and let that happen?  Or are we going to stand up to those insurance companies?  Are we going to let them refuse to cover things like cancer screenings, prenatal care; things that save money, but more importantly, save lives?  Or are we going to stand up for our lives, and the lives of the people we love?  What are we going to do?  (Applause.) 

        Are we going to go back to the days when insurance companies could deny our children coverage because they have a pre-existing condition like cancer, diabetes, even asthma?  Or will we stand up and say that in this country, no one should ever have to choose between going bankrupt or watching their child suffer because they can’t afford a doctor?

        And when our kids get older and they graduate from school, we all know how hard it is for them to find jobs, let alone jobs with insurance.  And that’s why, as part of health reform, kids can now stay on their parents’ insurance until they’re 26 years old.  (Applause.)  And today, that is how 2.5 million of our young people are getting their coverage.

        So will we take that insurance away from our kids?  Or will we say that we don't want our sons and our daughters going without health care when they’re just starting out, trying to build families and careers of their own?  But that is the choice we face.

        And think, for a minute, about what's been done on education.  Think about all the investments your President has made to raise standards and reform our public schools.  I mean, this is about — (applause) — yes, it's about improving the circumstances for millions of children in this country.  I mean, these are all our kids we know are sitting in crumbling classrooms; our kids, with so much promise, kids who could be anything they wanted if we just gave them a chance.

        And think about how we've tripled investments for job training at community colleges.  I mean, this is about hundreds of thousands of hard-working folks who are determined to get the skills they need to better their job and better their wages.  I mean, these are the folks who are doing it all.  They’re working full-time, raising kids, but they still make it to class every evening, study late into the night because they desperately want something better for their families.

        And make no mistake about it, this kind of investment in our students and our workers will determine nothing less than the future of this economy.  It will determine whether we’re prepared to make the discoveries and to build the industries that will let us compete with any country, anywhere in the world.  That’s what’s at stake.

        And let us not forget what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court Justices — (applause) — and for the first time in history, our daughters and our sons watched three women take their seat on our nation’s highest court.  (Applause.)  And let's not forget the impact their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come — on our privacy and our security; on whether we can speak freely, worship openly and, yes, love whomever we choose.  That’s what’s at stake here.  (Applause.)  That’s the choice we're facing in this election.  That's why you're here.  (Applause.)

        And finally, let’s not forget about all this administration has done to keep our country safe and restore our standing in the world.  (Applause.)  And thanks to our brave men and women in uniform, we finally brought to justice the man behind the 9/11 attacks and so many other horrific acts of terror.  (Applause.)

        My husband ended the war in Iraq, brought our troops home for the holidays.  (Applause.)  And, yes, we are working, now that these wars are coming to a close, to make sure that our veterans and their families get the education, the employment, the benefits that they have earned.  (Applause.)  

        And because my husband ended "don’t ask, don’t tell," never again will our troops have to lie about who they are to serve the country they love.  (Applause.)  Believe me, that is what’s at stake.  That's the choice.  That's what's going on this year.  (Applause.)

        So make no mistake about it, whether it’s health care, whether it's the economy, education, foreign policy, you name it — I could go on, but we don't have all day.  (Laughter.)  The choice we make will determine nothing less than who we are as a country, but more importantly, who do we want to be.  Who are we?

        Will we be a country where opportunity is limited to a few at the top?  Is that who we are? 

        AUDIENCE:  No!

        MRS. OBAMA:  Or will we be a place where if you work hard, you can get ahead no matter who you are or how you started?  Who are we?  That's what we have to ask ourselves.  (Applause.)  Will we tell folks who’ve done everything right, but are struggling just a little bit — are we going to tell those folks, tough luck, you’re on your own?  I mean, who are we?

        Or will we honor that fundamental American belief that this country is strongest when we’re all better off?  Who do we want to be?  Will we continue all the change we’ve begun, all the progress that we’ve made, or will we allow everything to just slip away?  What are we going to do?  But that is the choice we face.  See, those are the stakes.

        And, believe me, your President, my husband, he knows this far too well.  He understands these issues, because he’s lived them.  He was raised by a single mother he watched struggle to put herself through school, pay the bills.  And when she needed help, who stepped in?  His grandmother, waking up every morning before dawn to take that bus to the job at a bank.  And even though she was passed over — clearly faced disappointment — she didn’t complain.  How many people do we know like that in our lives?  She didn't complain.  She just kept showing up, just kept doing her best.  (Applause.)

        So, believe me, Barack knows what it means when a family struggles.  This isn't a joke to him.  He knows what it means when someone doesn’t have a chance to fulfill their potential, what that does to the spirit.  Those are the experiences that have made him the man, and yes, the President he is today.  And we are blessed to have him.  (Applause.) 

        And I share this with everyone:  It is that — is what I hear in his voice when he returns home from a long day traveling around the country, and he tells me about the people he’s met.  See, that's what I see in those quiet moments late at night, after the girls have gone to bed, and he is up poring over those letters — the thousands of letters people send him.  The letter from the woman dying of cancer whose insurance company won’t cover her care; the letter from the father still struggling to pay his family’s bills; the letter from too many young people with so much promise, and so few opportunities.

        And I hear the passion and the determination in his voice.  He says, "You won’t believe what folks are going through."  He says, "Michelle, this is not right.  We have to fix this.  We have so much more to do."

        See, when it comes to the people Barack meets, he has a memory like a steel trap.  (Laughter.)  He might not remember your name, but if he's had a few minutes and a decent conversation, he will never forget your story.  It becomes imprinted on his heart.  And that's what he carries with him every single day — it is our collections of struggles and hopes and our dreams.

        And that is where he gets his passion.  That is where he gets his toughness and his fight.  And that’s why, when he faces those hard moments, when it seems like all is lost and we're all sweating it, wringing our hands and sweating him — "Oh, lord, Barack" — (laughter) — "What you going to do now?"  "Oh, no!" — because I've done it, too.  (Laughter.)  Barack Obama never loses sight of the end goal.  He sees it.  (Applause.)  He never lets himself get distracted by all that chatter and noise.  He just keeps moving forward.  (Applause.)

        Because, as I said earlier, he has a vision for this country.  And it is a vision that we all share.  But I have said this before and I will say it again and again — he cannot do this alone.  He cannot do this alone.  That was never the promise — never the promise.  I know I didn’t make that promise.  (Laughter.)

        He needs your help.  He needed it then, he needs you now.  He needs you to be fired up.  He needs you to understand like nothing else what is at stake.  So you make those calls.  Look what you've done just in this room.  This has to be multiplied 100-fold.  We need you to register those voters.  He needs you to take your “I’m In” cards, sign them up.  Sign up your friends, your neighbors, and your colleagues.  Do not underestimate the power of that one-on-one connection.  People have to know what this President has done, what's at stake, and what more we have to let — have left to do.  You have to convince them to join in giving just a little part of their lives each week to this campaign.

        Because we all know that this is not just about one extraordinary man.  Although, I think my husband is very cute, very wonderful.  (Laughter and applause.)  And as it turns out, he can sing.  (Laughter and applause.)  But it was never about Barack Obama.  This election, this presidency was not about Barack Obama.  It's always been — it always has been about us.  All of us.  All of us coming together for the values we believe in, and the country that we want to be.

        And I’m not going to kid you, this journey is going to be long.  It already has been.  (Laughter.)  There are going to be many twists and turns along the way.  See, but the truth is that’s how change always happens in this country — always.  The reality is — and we have to own this — real change is slow.  Real change does take time.  Real change never happens all at once.  But if we keep showing up, if we keep fighting the good fight, then eventually we will get there.  Because we always do.  We have never moved backwards — never.  There has never been a point in time when we moved backwards.  Maybe it won't happen in our lifetimes, but maybe it will happen in our children’s lifetime, maybe it will happen in our grandchildren’s lifetimes.

        Because in the end, that’s what this is about.  In the end, we are not fighting these battles for ourselves.  It's not about us.  We are fighting them for our sons and our daughters.  We're fighting them for our grandsons and our granddaughters.  (Applause.)  We’re fighting for the world we want to leave for them.  This is about them, it's not about us.  (Applause.)

        And I am in this not just as a mother who wants to leave a legacy for my girls.  I’m in this as a citizen who knows what we can do together to change this country for the better.  Because the truth is that no matter what happens, my girls will be fine.  See, they're blessed.  My girls will have plenty of advantages and opportunities in their lives, and that's probably true for so many of your kids as well.

        But I think the last few years have shown us the truth of what Barack has always said:  that if any child in this country is left behind, then that matters to all of us, even if she is not our daughter, even if he is not our son.  (Applause.)  If any family in this country struggles, then we cannot be fully content with our own family’s good fortune, because that is not who we are.  (Applause.)

        In the end, we cannot separate our individual story from the broader American story.  That is not who we are.  Because we know that in this country, we rise and we fall together.  And we know that if we make the right choices, if we have the right priorities, we can ensure that everyone gets a fair shake, that everyone has a chance to get ahead.  That is what's at stake.

        So it's time for us to get moving.  It is time for us to get to work.  We don't have time to be tired, or disappointed, or complacent.  We don't have time.  So I have one last question:  Are you in?

        AUDIENCE:  Yes!  (Applause.)

        MRS. OBAMA:  No, no, are you in?

        AUDIENCE:  Yes!  (Applause.) 

        MRS. OBAMA:  Are you ready for this?  Because I am in, and I am so fired up.  (Applause.)  I hope you all are ready to go.  We've got work to do.  We've got a vision to create.  We've got more people who need help.  We've got more kids who need work done.  And I am looking forward to getting out there, and I need every single one of you just as passionate today as you will be in 10 months.

        You all — thank you all so much.  Thank you for having our backs.  God bless you all.  (Applause.)
 
END 1:45 P.M. PST

White House.gov Press Office Feed

Florida Prisons Bill Would Expand Private Management, Netting A Big Win For Political Contributors

Posted on 01. Feb, 2012 by admin in News

Florida this week faces a choice that is increasingly confronting much of the nation — whether to hand over a major slice of its prison system to private, for-profit businesses that answer to Wall Street.

Florida lawmakers are taking a final vote on legislation that would result in the single largest expansion of for-profit prisons in the country, resulting in the privatizing of every state prison south of Orlando. This would amount to just under 30 facilities representing 20 percent of the state’s sprawling correctional system. The state Senate is expected to vote on the issue this afternoon. The House would still have to approve a companion bill for the measure to become law.

Proponents have advanced the move as a cost-saving measure, a business-minded response to the state’s budget shortfall. But a series of studies and the experiences of several other states that have experimented with privatizing prison systems raise significant doubts about the cost savings that are supposed to accrue: Private prisons have tended to take control of the lowest-cost inmates, those lacking health problems and posing less risk of violence, while leaving states to contend with the harder cases.

The action by Florida’s legislature comes after years of sustained lobbying by corporations that operate private prisons, an industry that has been expanding aggressively by offering itself as a solution to state budget shortages. The industry has contributed more than .4 million to Florida’s Republican Party in recent years and has spent millions lobbying key lawmakers in that state.

The stakes are high: Florida has the third-largest prison system in the nation. Opponents decry the move as a perversion of the legislative process, one that would determine the shape of the corrections system not based on concerns over public safety, but as a means of distributing spoils to a well-financed special interest group.

“This is a major policy change,” said state Sen. Mike Fasano, a Republican who opposes prison privatization despite his party’s strong support, speaking during a recent hearing on the plan. “Do we privatize public safety now? Is that what we’re doing — just so some private companies — some multi-million dollar companies — can make a profit?”

The moves in Florida highlight a contentious debate, ongoing for the past two decades, about U.S. criminal justice and incarceration policies. As prison populations have surged nationwide since the 1980s, private corporations have positioned themselves to secure a growing share of the money expended on incarceration, courting influence in Washington and in state capitols across the country in a strategic bid to secure contracts.

Among proponents’ primary talking points is the contention that they will save the taxpayer money — an argument that experts say is difficult to prove.

“There is no real empirical data to say with any certainty that private prisons cost less or that they’re more effective than public prisons,” said John Hall, a public policy consultant in Florida who studied private prisons in recent years as the executive director of the Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy.

But even as the Florida Senate considers final drafts of legislation on prison privatization, lawmakers have commissioned no outside studies to analyze the projected costs or benefits of the plan, which would more than double the number of private prisons and inmates under private supervision in the state.

Over the last two decades, Florida increasingly has come to rely on the private prison industry in such a fashion that experts say the history justifies taking a pause before approving the expansion plan. A 2005 report by a state inspector general’s office found that the commission overseeing Florida private prisons had been unable to calculate the cost savings required by the state, while allowing contract modifications that benefited private prison operators — changes that resulted in the state’s being overbilled by millions of dollars.

While reports from the state’s legislative research office show that Florida’s six existing private prisons cost less than public facilities — a benefit cited repeatedly over the past week by supporters of the bill — the same reports point out that “the cost savings estimates are subject to caveats and should be evaluated cautiously.”

Cutting costs is a key issue in Florida, which faces a more than billion budget deficit. But critics in the Senate have questioned why the bill has moved so fast even though the annual cost savings estimated by supporters come to no more than million. The state’s Department of Corrections budget exceeds billion.

“Privatization is good for certain functions, but it’s not good in my mind for public safety,” said Paula Dockery, another Republican state senator who disapproves of the privatization plan. “They have not done any true fiscal analysis on it, and I think it’s really an embarrassment.”

BIG SPENDING IN THE SUNSHINE STATE

One company that is especially well positioned to take advantage of new legislation in the Sunshine State is the GEO Group, a Florida business that is the nation’s second-largest for-profit prison corporation. Based in Boca Raton, at the northern end of the Miami metropolitan area, GEO owns or manages more than 100 correctional facilities in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and South Africa.

The GEO Group already has contracts in Florida and aims for more. The Corrections Corp. of America, the country’s largest operator of private prisons, also operates prisons in Florida.

Information about its potential Florida expansion is featured prominently on the GEO Group’s home page, and executives have headlined quarterly earnings calls over the past year with discussion of the legislature’s proposal.

“This is the largest single contract procurement in the history of our industry, and we’ve taken what we believe are important steps to put our company in a competitive position to pursue this unprecedented opportunity,” GEO Group’s chief executive, George Zoley, said in an August call with investors.

Corrections Corp.’s chief executive, Damon Hininger, was similarly eager in a conference call last year, saying the company was “aggressively pursuing this opportunity.”

Both companies have been active contributors to the state’s elected officials and have hired top-tier lobbyists in Tallahassee to influence legislators and officials in the governor’s administration in recent years.

A spokesman for the GEO Group did not respond to requests for comment. Mike Machak, a spokesman for Corrections Corp. of America, wrote in an email that the company had a “longstanding and productive partnership with Florida.”

“We would certainly be interested in expanding our presence as both a partner and corporate citizen in Florida,” Machak wrote.

A Huffington Post analysis of campaign contributions over the last three election cycles finds that political action committees, executives and spouses at for-profit prison companies have donated nearly .8 million to Florida candidates and committees.

The Florida Republican Party over the last decade has been the single largest recipient of campaign money nationwide from both the GEO Group and Corrections Corp. of America. Prominent Florida lawmakers in federal and state offices are among the top recipients of campaign donations from the GEO Group.

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) received ,000 from the GEO Group during his 2010 campaign, and GEO was listed as contributing the maximum of ,000 last year to the inaugural party for Florida’s Republican Gov. Rick Scott.

State Senate President Mike Haridopolos, a major supporter of the prison privatization plan, also received more than ,000 from the GEO Group last year when he decided to seek the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate race to challenge the Democratic incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson. Haridopolos decided to drop out of the race last summer.

An analysis by the National Institute on Money in State Politics found that during the 2010 election cycle, private prison interests gave 8,000 to Florida state lawmakers. By comparison, the Florida Police Benevolent Association, which until recently represented the state’s correctional officers, donated about million. The Police Benevolent Association also serves as a union for local police officers and many other law enforcement agents in the state.

HARD PUSH FOR PRIVATIZATION

This month’s move to privatize South Florida’s prisons is the second time in less than a year that the legislature has taken up the measure. Last spring, legislators included the prison privatization plan in a massive budget bill, rather than introducing separate legislation on the issue.

Using the budget approach, lawmakers avoided a direct up-or-down vote on the prison changes. The Florida Police Benevolent Association sued the state in July to halt the plan, arguing that the legislature had overstepped its authority by slipping language into a budget bill.

A state judge in Tallahassee ruled last fall that the approach was unconstitutional and that lawmakers could not use the “hidden recesses” of the budget process to enact such a sweeping change in state policy.

After the court ruling was announced in September, the GEO Group’s stock fell by nearly 5 percent in one day.

Lawmakers started anew on the privatization effort earlier this month, swiftly moving the bills through committees. The head of the committee that sponsored the legislation in the state Senate, John Thrasher, was the former chairman of the Florida Republican Party, which has received more than .4 million in donations from political action committees and executives of for-profit prison corporations over the last three election cycles.

In recent debate in the Senate, Thrasher has argued that the goal of the legislation is about cutting state costs.

“I’ve got taxpayers in my district who are concerned about the [shortfall] we have in the state of Florida, and they’ve asked us to look at ways that we can make government more efficient,” Thrasher said in a committee meeting last week. “It’s not a new concept. The evidence is that we’re going to save money.”

Supporters have argued that the state requires outsourced government services to be provided at a 7 percent discount and say the state would have the power to keep companies accountable for achieving the savings.

But evidence from numerous national studies has shown that the benefits of handing prisons off to private corporations can be illusory at best.

In Arizona, a 2010 report from the state’s auditor general showed that it actually cost the state more to house prisoners in private facilities than public prisons, for both minimum- and medium-security prisons. After adjusting for the types of medical care provided in state prisons, the report found that the state spent more per inmate in private prisons than it did in its own public facilities.

Other outside research has found little in the way of convincing evidence that privatization significantly reduces prison costs. An analysis from the University of Utah that compiled a bevy of previous research on prison costs found that “neither cost savings nor improvements in quality of confinement are guaranteed through privatization.”

Reports from Florida’s own legislative research arm, the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, noted that the cost savings were more of a cost shift. Recent reports showed that the biggest savings in Florida’s private prisons mostly resulted from lower retirement benefits for private guards; but higher administrative costs turned up for state, which is still charged with overseeing the entire corrections system.

Dockery, the Republican state senator who disapproves of the privatization plan, questioned why budget decisions should be made by effectively firing state workers who have the option of getting rehired by a private company with fewer benefits.

“You’re not even really balancing the budget. You’re giving this for-profit company all of the employees’ benefits as their profits,” she said. “If you had employees who were not doing a good job, then laying them off for reason is one thing. But you’re really making all these cuts off the backs of 3,800 employees.”

The Florida Senate could vote as early as today on a final version of the bill. The House would still have to approve a companion bill. Once enacted, the legislation would give companies 30 days to draw up proposals to operate the 27 facilities in South Florida.

Business on HuffingtonPost.com

Amazon Shares Plunge After Results Disappoint Wall Street

Posted on 01. Feb, 2012 by admin in News

Online e-commerce giant Amazon continues to grow rapidly, but the company’s increasing expenses are taking a bite out of its profit. On Tuesday, the company reported fourth-quarter earnings results that missed Wall Street expectations and said it could lose money in the current quarter, sending the company’s shares down nearly 10% in after-hours trading. The [...]
Business

Is Google In Danger of Being Shut Out of the Changing Internet?

Posted on 01. Feb, 2012 by admin in News

The upcoming IPO of Facebook, the flak surrounding Twitter’s decision to censor some tweets, and Google’s weaker-than-expected 4th-quarter earnings all point to one of the big events of our times: The crazy, chaotic, idealistic days of the Internet are ending. Once, the Prairies were open and shared by everyone. Then the farmers arrived and fenced them in. [...]
Business

Sanford D. Horwitt: Alinsky, Foreclosures and Holding Banks Accountable

Posted on 01. Feb, 2012 by admin in News

Memo to the Obama Administration: if you want to see the makings of a national model to hold big banks accountable for fixing foreclosure-devastated neighborhoods, go to Milwaukee and talk to citizen leaders of a community organization who are practicing what Saul Alinsky preached.

“You broke it, you fix it,” demonstrators chanted outside Wells Fargo’s downtown Milwaukee headquarters on a cold January day two years ago. The scores of angry citizens were members of a broad-based community organization, Common Ground, that is comprised of some 40 interfaith religious congregations and other organizations. Ultimately, they targeted not only Wells Fargo but also four other large banks — Deutsche Bank, U.S. Bank, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase — that either owned, were trustees or servicers of foreclosed houses.

Forty years after his death, Alinsky’s influence is alive and well not only through his still widely read book, Rules for Radicals, but also through the work of his Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF) that he started more than 70 years ago with a grant from Marshall Field III, scion of the Chicago department store family.

Today’s IAF has created more than 60 community organizations in the U.S. and abroad, but one of the newest, Common Ground, that spans Milwaukee and three adjacent Wisconsin counties, is doing what even the federal government has found to be so elusive: holding big banks accountable for the subprime foreclosure fallout that has left many cities much poorer and pockmarked with foreclosed and abandoned houses. By successfully pressuring five big banks into an unprecedented multimillion dollar commitment to help rehabilitate Milwaukee neighborhoods and winning local government support, the IAF’s grassroots Milwaukee organization has forged what observers say should be replicated nationwide.

Before they took to the streets, some 250 Common Ground volunteers devoted nearly a year and hundreds of hours researching the banks’ financial statements and foreclosure filings, and going door-to-door documenting the condition of poorly maintained, abandoned houses that degraded neighborhoods. The grim statistics: more than 20,000 foreclosure actions since 2007, a staggering billion in lost property values and, in the case of just one bank, Deutsche Bank, an astonishing 17,041 housing code violations.

Consulting with city officials, Common Ground developed a set of demands, which included a bank-financed fund for the rehabilitation of abandoned houses. At first, the banks refused to meet, but Common Ground members, with terrier-like tenacity, weren’t going to be stonewalled like the city government had been when the banks ignored the upkeep of their foreclosed houses.

Using media coverage to good advantage, Common Ground leaders hosted a high-profile public hearing where housing and financial experts explained the link between the blighted neighborhoods and the banks’ investment in the subprime mortgage market.

In May of 2010, Common Ground sent two of its members some 4,000 miles to confront Deutsche Bank’s CEO, Josef Ackermann, at the bank’s annual shareholders meeting in Frankfurt, Germany. German media gave Common Ground’s story about Deutsche Bank extensive coverage, including its slogan: “German immigrants built Milwaukee; now a German bank is destroying Milwaukee.” After a Common Ground member addressed the shareholders in fluent German, Ackermann announced that he was sending a high-level delegation to Milwaukee to meet with Common Ground and city officials.

But the negotiations with Deutsche Bank and the other four banks dragged on for a year, and it took another trip to Germany, plus a Common Ground appearance at Wells Fargo’s 2011 shareholders meeting in San Francisco before a deal started to take shape.

Wells Fargo was the first to step forward with a financial commitment and by the end of the summer the other four banks did, too. The total: .8 million in cash and mortgage commitments for priorities that the city and Common Ground identified: the rehabilitation of 100 foreclosed houses in one pilot neighborhood, Sherman Park; mortgage commitments so the rehabbed houses in Sherman Park and other neighborhoods can be sold; hiring more nonprofit housing counselors and supporting a new nonprofit organization that will employ and train low-income men and woman to monitor foreclosed houses and keep them safe and secure.

Here’s the larger, national significance of the Milwaukee story.

First, to repair foreclosure-damaged neighborhoods in American cities, grassroots groups with the pluck and persistence of Common Ground must organize to pressure banks to do the right thing when other institutions, including government, are not up to the task. These groups also have the indispensable role, which banks and governments cannot perform, of strengthening the social fabric in fragile, recovering neighborhoods by inspiring local residents to become engaged citizens and shape their own destiny.

Second, the Milwaukee story shows how a savvy community organization and city officials working together can leverage limited public money. Like other hard-hit cities, Milwaukee received federal Neighborhood Stabilization Program funds. When Common Ground brought the banks to the negotiating table, city officials agreed to target million of its NSP money to revitalize the Sherman Park neighborhood. With that million, Common Ground leveraged a total of .8 million from the five banks, a ratio of almost 17 to 1. Multiply the woefully inadequate billion in NSP funds appropriated nationwide to fix devastated neighborhoods by 17 and you get a much more realistic 9 billion. That should be the big banks’ share, at a minimum. Call it the banks’ down payment on repairing the subprime damage.

The precedent that has been established with the banks in Milwaukee has national implications, according to Alexander von Hoffman, senior fellow at the Joint Center of Housing Studies of Harvard University, who calls the multi-bank financial commitment “unique and significant.” And as Alderman Michael Murphy, the respected, veteran chairman of Milwaukee’s Common Council Finance and Personnel Committee says about the Milwaukee model: “I would hope that other cities would look at this as a blueprint of how to try to address the foreclosure crisis.” Indeed, it is a blueprint and a success story that deserves to be repeated — and, one would hope, promoted by the Obama Administraton.

Sanford D. Horwitt is the author of Let Them Call Me Rebel: The Life and Legacy of Saul Alinsky.

Business on HuffingtonPost.com

Consumers Mostly Complain About Credit Cards To New Agency

Posted on 31. Jan, 2012 by admin in News

The new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has received about 12,000 complaints over the past six months from consumers who had problems with their credit cards and mortgages, according to the CFPB’s semi-annual report to Congress.

In the half year ending Dec. 31, 2011, the agency received 9,307 credit card complaints and 2,326 mortgage complaints through its website, by phone, and through referrals from other federal regulators, according to the report released Tuesday.

What are people upset about?

There is no clear winning category among credit card complaints. “Billing disputes” edged out “Identity theft/fraud/embezzlement,” but collectively accounted for about a quarter of all complaints.

More than half of all consumers who contacted the CFPB with a complaint about mortgages reported issues over making payments, or problems they experienced when they were unable to pay, such as related to loan modification or foreclosure.

Established under the Dodd-Frank financial regulation law and launched last July, the CFPB has sought input from consumers on how it should carry out its mission, soliciting specific complaints regarding credit cards and mortgages. The number of complaints received so far should help the agency better understand consumer beefs. But, it represents just a small fraction of the universe of possible complaints the bureau could potentially receive, given the current foreclosure crisis and the more than 500 million outstanding credit card bills, according to the report.

“The consumer response system is still in its early stages,” said Jennifer Howard, a CFPB spokeswoman. “We are using our website and public events to publicize the system and coordinating with other agencies to ensure consumers know CFPB is here to help. We expect that volume will pick up as more consumers learn about it.”

The CFPB passed along about 75 percent of all the complaints it received to the company involved in the dispute. Slightly more than half — 55 percent — of those complaints were reported as “closed with relief,” meaning the company resolved whatever issue it was that led to the complaint. About 30 percent were closed without relief — were not resolved — and the rest are pending, according to the bureau.

The bureau also provided some information in the report about how consumers felt about those actions. About 40 percent of consumers “did not dispute” the action the company took in response, while 13 percent of consumers did dispute the responses. Nearly half of all customers have not yet replied to the CFPB to tell the agency what they think about the response.

What is missing from the report is any indication that the agency was anything but a conduit for these complaints, though the agency previously said in a press release about credit card complaints that they “provide potential insights into issues within the credit card marketplace that may inform the CFPB across its full range of activities: supervision, enforcement, rulemaking, research, and consumer education.”

It is also quite likely that a bank or a credit card company would take a complaint forwarded along by its regulator more seriously than one that came through directly from a consumer.

The agency’s most significant public outreach thus far has been a year-long request for feedback on efforts to both make mortgage documents more transparent and also to make it easier for the housing industry to comply with various federal laws. Over seven rounds of testing, the CFPB received about 27,000 individual comments on its website providing feedback on the prototype mortgage forms. Roughly half of these comments were provided by consumers and half by industry representatives, the bureau said.

Also on Tuesday, a planned Republican boycott of new director Richard Cordray’s appearance at a Senate hearing to discuss the report fizzled, as only half the GOP members skipped out in protest of his recess appointment by President Barack Obama.

Business on HuffingtonPost.com

Disgraced Bank’s Ex-CEO Stripped Of Knighthood

Posted on 31. Jan, 2012 by admin in News

LONDON, Jan 31 (Reuters) – Britain took the rare step of stripping former Royal Bank of Scotland chief Fred Goodwin of his knighthood, following intense criticism of his role in RBS’ near-collapse during the 2008 credit crisis, and public anger towards wealthy bankers.

“The failure of RBS played an important role in the financial crisis of 2008-9 which, together with other macroeconomic factors, triggered the worst recession in the UK since the Second World War and imposed significant direct costs on British taxpayers and businesses,” the government said in a statement.

“Fred Goodwin was the dominant decision maker at RBS at the time,” it added, explaining a decision taken by a committee of civil servants.

Goodwin had been awarded the knighthood in 2004 for services to banking, but has since come under heavy criticism from the public after taxpayer funds were used to bail out the stricken bank.

The government said it would soon be announced that Goodwin’s knighthood had been “cancelled and annulled”.

The Scottish banker spearheaded RBS’ disastrous acquisition of Dutch bank ABN AMRO, which nearly caused the collapse of RBS during the 2008 crisis.

RBS ended up having to be propped up with 45 billion pounds ( billion) of taxpayers’ money, with the government finishing up with an 83 percent stake in the bank.

It is very rare for Britain to remove people of their knighthoods, and Goodwin joins the ranks of figures such as former Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu who forfeited an honorary knighthood.

The woes of RBS have come to symbolise for many in Britain more serious problems with the country’s banking industry.

Many are still angry at the fact that bankers are continuing to get paid millions while elsewhere thousands lose their jobs as the economy weakens.

On Sunday, the current chief executive of RBS – Stephen Hester – was forced to decline a million pound share bonus after the award had been attacked by all major British political parties.

Business on HuffingtonPost.com

Statement by the Press Secretary

Posted on 31. Jan, 2012 by admin in News

In the State of the Union Address, the President laid out a blueprint for an economy built to last, where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules – especially those who have been sent here to serve the American people.

Last week, the President called on Congress to pass a bill that makes clear that Members of Congress may not engage in insider trading.  No one should be able to trade stocks based on nonpublic information gleaned on Capitol Hill. So we are pleased the Senate is one step closer to passing the STOCK Act. While there’s more work to be done to eliminate the corrosive influence of money in politics, this is an important step to repair the deficit of trust between Washington and the American people. We urge Congress to pass this bill, and the President will sign it right away.

White House.gov Press Office Feed

Occupy Oakland Protest Rekindles Debate About Flag-Burning

Posted on 31. Jan, 2012 by admin in News

By TERRY COLLINS and BETH DUFF-BROWN, The Associated Press

OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — Many in the crowd outside Oakland City Hall shouted “Burn it! Burn it!” as masked protesters readied to set fire to an American flag. That’s when a woman emerged from the scrum, screaming for them to stop, that it would hurt the cause.

Moments later, the flames began, and suddenly a movement that seemingly vanished weeks ago was back in the spotlight, this time for an act of protest that has long divided the nation and now the movement itself.

(CLICK HERE OR SCROLL DOWN FOR LATEST UPDATES)

The images of the flag-burning went viral in the hours after Saturday’s demonstrations on Oakland’s streets, with Occupy supporters denouncing the act as unpatriotic and a black mark on the movement. Others called it justified.

The flag-burning, however, raised questions about whether the act will tarnish a movement of largely peaceful protests and alienate people who agree with its message against corporate excess and economic inequality.

“I’m quite confident that the general view is that violence of this sort – whether it’s symbolic or otherwise – is contrary to the spirit of the movement and should be renounced,” Columbia University sociologist Todd Gitlin said.

Gitlin, who is writing a book about the movement, noted that flags have had a prominent place at the Occupy Wall Street encampments that sprang up last fall. They are typically pinned to tents or waving from wooden flagpoles.

“I was thinking how they have come to embrace the American flag as a hallmark of this movement; it’s very common to see American flags honored and elevated at these encampments,” he said.

Flag-burning has been a powerful symbol since the days of the anti-Vietnam War movement. Congress at the time passed a law to protect the flag in 1968, and most states followed suit.

In 1989, the U.S. Supreme Court decided such laws were unconstitutional restrictions on free speech. The court’s decision set off a move in Congress to pass a constitutional amendment to prohibit desecration of the flag. An attempt in 2006 failed by only one vote in the Senate.

In Oakland, social activism and civic unrest have long marked the rough-edged city across the bay from San Francisco. Beset by poverty, crime and a decades-long tense relationship between the police and residents, its streets have seen many clashes, including anti-draft protests in the 1960s that spilled into town from neighboring Berkeley.

At Occupy Oakland, flag-burning is nothing new. A well-known Bay Area activist burned three during protests that temporarily shut down the Port of Oakland in November.

Troy Johnson, an Occupy Oakland member, said he arrived just in time Saturday to watch his friend, whom he would not name in order to protect his identity, emerge from City Hall with an American flag in tow.

“He asked the crowd, `What do you want us to do with the flag?’” Johnson recalled. “They said, `Burn it! Burn it! Burn it!’”

As many egged on the bandanna-masked men, lighters were passed around. A photographer on assignment for The Associated Press said a woman rose from among the crowd to urge against the flag-burning. She then threw the flag to the ground and tried to put out the fire, shouting at them that it would only hurt their cause.

The fire-starter is not an anarchist, but a typical member of Occupy Oakland who feels the system has failed them, said Johnson, who pulled out his cellphone to show his recording of the flag-burning.

“I would describe him as someone who loves his country, but also disappointed in the system that’s running this country,” said Johnson, who goes by the nickname “Uncle Boom” and was a sergeant in the U.S. Army.

Johnson said he wouldn’t stop the flag-burning because the country is based on freedom of speech and expression.

“To the veterans who fought for this country, I wholeheartedly apologize,” he said. “Because when they took the oath to join the military, they fought for the flag. But they also fought for the right to express ourselves.”

Another Occupy member, Sean Palmer, who served in the Marines, said he opposed flag-burning. “I think they should’ve hung it upside down, because that’s the international call for distress and that’s what we are, in distress,” Palmer said.

Saturday’s protest culminated in rock- and bottle-throwing and volleys of tear gas from the police, as well as the City Hall break-in that left glass cases smashed, graffiti spray-painted on the walls and, finally, the flag-burning.

Police said more than 400 people were arrested; at least three officers and one protester were injured.

Police said Monday that they were still trying to determine how many of those arrested were from Oakland. In the past, the majority of those arrested in Occupy sweeps were not Oakland residents and this has rankled city officials. Mayor Jean Quan has called on the loosely organized movement to “stop using Oakland as its playground.”

Officials said vandalism and activities related to Occupy Oakland have cost the financially strapped city million since October.

Oakland Councilwoman Libby Schaaf said she was disgusted not to see the American and California flags atop the grand staircase inside City Hall on Monday. The destruction to her workplace couldn’t have come at a worse time as the city is grappling with closing a million budget deficit.

“To do this to us in a week were we have to lay off so many city workers is so unconscionable,” Schaaf said.

Protester Julion Lewis-Tatman said he led the crowd in the plaza outside City Hall, but did not take part in the flag-burning.

“I love this country to death, but burning the flag means nothing to me,” he said. “We’re burning down the old system and we’re starting a new country.”

___

Beth Duff-Brown reported from San Francisco. Deepti Hajela contributed to this story from New York.

___

Online:

Business on HuffingtonPost.com

Starbucks to Open 1st India Store with Tata Group

Posted on 30. Jan, 2012 by admin in News

(MUMBAI, India) — Starbucks will open its first outlet in India by September through a 50-50 joint venture with Tata Global Beverages, the companies said Monday. “We’re going to move as fast as possible in opening as many stores as we can so long as we are successful and so long as we are embraced [...]
Business