Monday Reads by The Numbers
Posted: March 9, 2015 Filed under: morning reads | Tags: Bobby Jindal, Independent Book Stores, Iowa Caucuses, pay equity, Wage Gap, women on boards of directors in the US 15 Comments
Good Morning!
One of the hazards of my occupation is the use of statistics. Statistics can be very useful for spotting trends and outliers in all kinds of things. Many researchers and all politicians are selective about which statistics to share. They generally want the outcome that proves their hypothesis or case. I came across a variety of stories this weekend that caught my eye because descriptive statistics played a role. I thought I’d share a few with you.
We are less than a year from the Iowa caucuses. These odd little political happenings in an odd little state generally kick off the hopes and fears of presidential wannabes. I lived in Iowa as a kid and my father owned a business there for 30 years so I know a little about the state and its quirks. This essay in the Denver Post makes some very good points to argue that the “Iowa caucuses are a poor proxy for America”. Iowa manages to put forth some of the whackiest Republican candidates possible. They usually fail miserably when New Hampshire holds its primaries and fall out by the time the bigger states come into play. Why does the press spend so much time in Iowa then?
Considering they are the first in the nation for presidential delegate selection, the Iowa caucuses present quite the contrast to the United States as a whole. Iowa is not remotely demographically representative of our nation.
It is significantly more white, rural and Christian than the national average. Only 12.4 percent of Iowans are minorities, while nationally minorities comprise 28 percent of the population. Thirty-six percent of Iowans live in rural areas or small towns, whereas in the United States overall, 19.3 percent do. About 54 percent of Iowans identify as religious, whereas 49 percent of Americans identify as religious nationally.
While the disparity in the level of religious involvement is not shocking, the percentage of those religious people who are Christian stands out. Of the 54 percent of religious Iowans, only .5 percent identify as Muslim, Jewish, or of Eastern religion. This is markedly lower than the 4.7 percent of Americans nationally who identify themselves as religious but practice a religion other than Christianity.
On a racial basis, the Iowa caucuses skew significantly from the national average. The attendees are really white. Indeed, at the Republican caucuses of 2012, a full 99 percent of attendees were white, while nationally about 89 percent of the Republican Party is white. There was virtually zero representation at the Republican caucuses from the near 12 percent of Republicans who are from minorities.
The makeup of the Democratic caucuses is somewhat more representative of America, but not much. In 2008, the last time there were contested caucuses in Iowa, 93 percet of Democratic caucus-goers were white, with 4 percent of attendees reporting as African-American and 3 percent reporting as another race. Nationally, in 2008, the Democratic Party was 66 percent white, 16 percent African-American, and 12 percent Hispanic.
Perhaps the lack of participation among minority voters has something to do with the caucus process itself.
JJ did an excellent job covering some of the events of International Women’s Day yesterday. One of the issues that has always been near and dear to me–and Patricia Arquette it seems–is pay equity. Here’s some
depressing numbers on that. Basically, a report by the U.N. states that it will take 70 years for the gap to close at this rate. That’s completely disheartening.
Women will continue to be paid less than men for the next 70 years if the gender pay gap continues to reduce at the present rate, according to a report by a UN agency released ahead of International Women’s Day.
The document published by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) comes 20 years after 189 countries adopted a blueprint to achieve equality for women in 12 critical areas, including health, education, employment, political participation and human rights.
The historic agreement marked the first time that the UN recognised a woman’s right to control her own sexuality without coercion, and reaffirmed her right to decide whether and when to have children.
However, despite the agreement women still lack access to education, training, recruitment; have limited bargaining and decision-making power; and still shoulder responsibility for most unpaid care work.
And while women have slowly taken up more places in the global workplace since the 1995 Beijing Platform, the percentage that women earn in comparison to men has only crawled up by one point to 77 per cent.
The report also revealed that women across the world are also faced by a “motherhood pay gap”, over and above the gender pay gap, with women in developing countries suffering the most.
The country of Germany has taken one step to increase the number of women in corporate boardrooms. They’ve legislated quotas.
Germany on Friday became the latest and most significant country so far to commit to improving the representation of women on corporate boards, passing a law that requires some of Europe’s biggest companies to give 30 percent of supervisory seats to women beginning next year.
Fewer than 20 percent of the seats on corporate boards in Germany are held by women, while some of the biggest multinational companies in the world are based here, including Volkswagen, BMW and Daimler — the maker of Mercedes-Benz vehicles — as well as Siemens, Deutsche Bank, BASF, Bayer and Merck.
Supporters said the measure has the potential to substantially alter the landscape of corporate governance here and to have repercussions far beyond Germany’s borders.
In passing the law, Germany joined a trend in Europe to accomplish what has not happened organically, or through general pressure: to legislate a much greater role for women in boardrooms.
The law was passed after an unusually passionate debate, and much talk of milestones, cracking glass ceilings and making history. Chancellor Angela Merkel, in her 10th year in power, was on hand as deputies in her governing grand coalition of center right and center left stood to register their votes in favor of the law, which passed by a simple clear majority. The small opposition of Greens and leftist deputies abstained, believing the measure did not go far enough.
“You have to be sparing with the word ‘historic,’ ” said Justice Minister Heiko Maas, who with a Social Democrat colleague, Family Minister Manuela Schwesig, spent months steering the law over legal and political hurdles. “But I think today we can apply it.” For Germans, he called the law “the greatest contribution to gender equality since women got the vote” in Germany in 1918.
With women still lagging globally in corporate offices, on governing boards and in pay, and many still struggling with family-work policies, pressure has been growing for legislative solutions.
Norway was the first in Europe to legislate boardroom quotas, joined by Spain, France and Iceland, which all set their minimums at 40 percent. Italy has a quota of one-third, Belgium of 30 percent and the Netherlands a 30 percent nonbinding target.
Britain has not legislated boardroom quotas, but a voluntary effort, known as the 30% Club, has helped to substantially increase women’s representation. The group, founded by Helena Morrissey, a money manager, has used persuasion to help double the percentage of women on the boards of major British companies since 2010, to 23 percent.
The United States has also seen women’s representation grow slightly, up to 17 percent of board seats, without legislative mandates, though its growth has been extremely slow.
There seems to be a definite movement by corporations and religious types to make sure that schools don’t teach any form of critical thinking. That and other trends make for an interesting question of the direction of culture in the US. Here’s a few numbers and question on that from The American Scholar and Scott Timberg.
Traditionally, bookstores were where aspiring writers earned a living, and where readers went for sustenance and community. Yet in the two decades since the mid-1990s, during which the U.S. population has grown by 60 million—we’ve lost half of our independent bookstores, and record shops have virtually disappeared. The causes are mostly technological and involve online outlets like Amazon. Meanwhile, in parts of Europe, especially the German-speaking world and France, independent culture merchants are at least surviving rough times, and some are thriving. Are Americans hopelessly mired in neoliberal economics, technology worship, and the logic of winner-take-all, or is there something we can do to save these places and the people who work in them?
If you really want a deranged use of statistics. Take a look at what USA just let my Governor pen for them. There is a total disconnect between what Jindal has written and what’s in the news about the Jindal “economy” on every newspaper in Louisiana. Why on earth would a newspaper publish such obvious bull shit and propaganda? Who owns that damned newspaper?
Seven years ago, I ran for governor promising to make the economy bigger and the government smaller. We have lived up to that, accomplishing in Louisiana what the federal government has failed to do. We have balanced budgets, drastically reduced the size of government and empowered growth in our private sector.
Our state budget is nearly $9 billion smaller, with over 30,000 fewer state workers, than when we took office in 2008. And guess what? After reining in the size of government and lowering taxes, Louisiana’s economy is stronger than ever.
Since 2008, Louisiana’s economy has grown nearly twice as fast as the national economy, and private-sector employment has grown at a rate of two-and-a-half times the U.S. rate, while our budgeting practices have earned our state eight credit rating upgrades. We now have more people working and living in Louisiana, with higher incomes, than ever before.
For next year’s budget, a dramatic drop in oil prices has meant less money for state government. That’s OK. It should come as no surprise to anyone that we plan to address this challenge by continuing to cut the size of government without raising taxes.
This is what was on USA Editorial page however. “Growth has been sluggish in Louisiana and Kansas, and the plunge in revenue has devastated their budgets.”
Here’s one worth steering away from: Governors in Louisiana and Kansas have been experimenting with big tax cuts that advocates claim will unleash explosive economic growth. The results have been dismal. Growth has been sluggish in both states, and the plunge in revenue has devastated both states’ budgets:
- In Louisiana, Gov. Bobby Jindal pushed a big tax cut through the legislature after he took office seven years ago. Since then, the state budget has gone from a nearly $1 billion budget surplus in 2007-08 to a projected $1.6 billion shortfall for the budget year that begins July 1. Jindal, who long ago took a pledge never to raise taxes, has cut higher education and resorted to unsustainable one-time remedies such as draining reserve funds and selling state assets.
Louisiana’s jobless rate has gone from much better than the national rate in 2008 to much worse. Jindal claims his state’s economic growth has beaten the nation’s, but he cherry-picks the years and doesn’t mention that since 2010, the state has lagged behind the national recovery.
There’s like a total disconnect between what they’ve said on their editorial page and what they let Jindal blather on about. What a contrast in the Orwellian use of selected statistics by Jindal and the reality on the ground. Oh, if you want to see what exactly type of industry that Jindal’s bringing in check out this shady deal. This is a three part special from AJ called “China’s Louisiana Purchase: Who’s building a methanol plant on the bayou?” It’s by the numbers, textbook environmental racism.
ST. JAMES PARISH, La. — A prominent Chinese tycoon and politician — whose natural gas company’s environmental and labor rights record recently started coming under fire in the Chinese press — is parking assets in a multibillion dollar methanol plant in a Louisiana town. And he appears to be doing it with help from the administration of likely GOP 2016 presidential ticket contender Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.
Not many locals in a predominantly black neighborhood of St. James Parish — halfway between New Orleans and Baton Rouge — know that Wang Jinshu, the Communist Party Secretary for the northeastern Chinese village of Yuhuang and a delegate to the National People’s Congress, is the man at the helm of a $1.85 billion methanol plant to be built in their town over the next two years with a $9.5 million incentive package from the state. The details of the project are unclear, residents say, largely because they were not told about the project until local officials, amid discussions with state officials and Chinese diplomats, decided to move forward with the project in July 2014.
“We never had a town hall meeting pretending to get our opinion prior to them doing it,” said Lawrence “Palo” Ambrose, a 74-year-old black Vietnam War veteran who works at a nearby church. “They didn’t make us part of the discussion.”
The Chinese company has filed for expedited permits to construct and operate a plant on a sprawling 1,100 acres — situated between a high school, two churches and an assisted living facility for senior citizens — from the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, which is set to study the impact on the local environment and deliver its decision on March 6, 2015.
The plant is part of a recent push by New Orleans–area officials to reach out to Asia’s growing economic powerhouse to redevelop communities still devastated by the effects of natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina. Some of those projects, it appears, have since gone sour. In one instance, which Al Jazeera will explore in the third installment of this series, a company contracted by the city government stands accused of stealing millions of dollars from Chinese investors seeking U.S. citizenship in exchange for building businesses in an underserved neighborhood.
Local economic development authorities told Al Jazeera that St. James Parish is an ideal location for the methanol plant because of readily accessible deep water and cheap fuel from the shale oil boom that will help cut production costs. But it remains unclear what the impetus is behind a methanol plant that plans to send the lion’s share of its product back to China, which is struggling to find a market for the methanol already being produced.
What is clear is that there are links between Wang’s U.S. subsidiary — Houston-headquartered Yuhuang Chemical Inc. — and the Chinese government and the Jindal administration.
It seems China’s tired of being a polluted pissing pot so they’re joining with Jindal to stick it the poorest of the poor in Louisiana. This story series is a freaking eye-opener. Be sure to read all three parts.
Here’s a very sad story. I used to love to go pick out sheet music at the local music stores and in music stores in big cities when I was young. It seems the very last New York Classical Sheet music store has closed.
Even the home to Carnegie Hall and the New York Philharmonic isn’t immune to the realities of the digital age of music.
Frank Music Company, New York City’s last remaining store dedicated to selling classical sheet music, closed on Friday. Frank’s customers, a community of artists dedicated to playing music written with quills centuries ago, must now buy them online or download PDFs.
The store’s owner, Heidi Rogers, said dwindling sales killed the shop.
“Musicians are underpaid,” she said. “How can they buy music if they’re not getting paid enough?”
Here’s a number that’s a good one. Baby giant tortoises were born on one of the Galapagos Islands for the first time in more than a century!!
For the first time in more than one hundred years, researchers have found newborn baby tortoises on the tiny Galapagos island of Pinzón. It’s a major win for a population that has struggled after being nearly decimated by human impact.
“We found ten tiny, newly hatched saddleback tortoises on the island early last month,” wrote a trio of researchers in the January 15th issue of the journal Nature. “There could be many more, because their size and camouflage makes them hard to spot. Our discovery indicates that the giant tortoise is once again able to reproduce on its own in the wild.”
So, that’s it for me today. Just thought I’d let you know that I’ve gone back to gigging to try to make ends meet. Yesterday, I played the most unique church service I’ve ever done. Well, the service wasn’t unique if you understood Norwegian. It was at the Norwegian Seaman’s church. It’s a Lutheran church funded by the Norwegian government for expats and visiting Norwegians. It was truly an experience! Oh, and Norwegian waffles are the best!!! So, that’s the first adventure. My second adventure will be on Bourbon Street where I will be playing three shows a night (4 times a week) as the straight woman and accompanist to Ms. Jessica Duplantier who is and up and comer and sure to head straight to RuPaul’s reality show Drag Race!!! So, how’s that for a stuffy old Finance professor? Yes, there will be pictures, I promise!
What’s on your reading and blogging list today? Any good news out there?
Friday Reads
Posted: March 6, 2015 Filed under: Keystone XL pipeline, morning reads 21 CommentsGood Morning!
I’m going to get a bit wonky today about issues surrounding the oil and gas industry. I’ve been concerned about several things and I thought I’d just wrap them all up into a nice little post for you this morning. First, another bomb train went off yesterday. It derailed then blew up near Galena, Illinois which is, thankfully, mostly farmland.
Earlier today, yet another massive train carrying crude oil derailed and caught on fire, this time in northern Illinois near the Mississippi River. One-hundred-and-three of the the train’s 105 cars were carrying crude oil—from where was not immediately clear—eight of which derailed. Two of the derailed cars have caught on fire, according to BNSF Railway which owns the train, sending plumes of smoke and fire into the sky above Galena, Illinois, a town of just over 3,300.
The image of smoldering oil train cars is now a familiar sight: Incidences of exploding oil trains have been rapidly rising in North America thanks to the fracking boom in North Dakota’s Bakken oil fields (Bakken oil is potentially more flammable than normal crude) and the slow transition away from old, unsafe rail cars. Oil-by-rail carloads are up 4000 percent from last year in the United States and this is the the third derailment in North America in the three weeks, including a massive explosion in West Virginia on February 16 that injured one person and spilled oil into the nearby Kanawha River. In fact, a Department of Transportation report predictedtrains carrying crude and ethanol would derail an average of 10 times per year in the next two decades. This is bad news for people who live near railways and the ecosystems in which they reside.
People living within a mile radius of today’s derailment have begun evacuating, and authorities are monitoring the Mississippi River for leakage.
This is getting to be a fairly common event. What doesn’t make sense is why oil production and shipping is going up with some of these other things going on. I was intrigued by an article in Forbes and have since done some poking around about it various markets related to the oil and gas business. It really doesn’t look good. Here’s the article I saw in Forbes that got me started down this path. We’re producing–and not using–so much oil that the U.S. is running out of places to store it all. Canada seems to be pumping it out at such levels that there’s really no way to deal with it all. Store baby Store?
Oil storage tanks are filling up. There’s a concern, highlighted by this AP story yesterday, that sometime in April U.S. storage could hit “tank tops.” With too much oil and not enough places to put it, the natural market response would be for the price of crude to plummet, maybe even down into the $20 range, deepening the nightmare for America’s frackers and possibly catalyzing a round of defaults and bankruptcies.
At first glance the reasons for the buildup in oil storage seems obvious. America’s oil companies are simply fracking out too much light, sweet crude, right? They are. But that’s not the cause of the glut at the storage hub in Cushing, Okla. A report out this week from the Energy Aspects consultancy explains that the issue is more complicated than that. Blame Canada.
Energy Aspects says that it’s not the American frackers at all. Rather the culprit is barrels of heavy Canadian crude backing up there on their way to Houston.
In November, pipeline company Enbridge started up its $3 billion Flanagan South pipeline. The line originates in Pontiac, Michigan and carries about 550,000 bpd of oil across Illinois, Missouri, Kansas and down to Cushing.
Flanagan South was a watershed project because it accomplishes what Keystone XL was supposed to — creates the first high-volume, direct connection between the heavy oil fields of western Canada and America’s refining megaplex on the Gulf Coast. The only material difference between the two: Keystone would go right over the U.S.-Canada border (and thus require State Dept. approvals), while Flanagan picks up oil that a separate pipeline brings in to Pontiac.
When this heavy oil gets to Cushing, customers paying to send their oil on the line (called “shippers”) have the option of storing it for a time at the hub, or sending it on down to the Gulf via the newly completed Seaway Twin pipeline, owned by Enbridge and Enterprise Products Partners.
If prices were higher for the heavy Canadian crude, those shippers might prefer to send it straight down Seaway. But because of the “contango” situation in the oil markets now — where the price of oil for delivery six months from now is higher than the current spot price — these shippers would rather store it and wait.
Prices are coming down incredibly and that has a lot of ramifications. However, production is not going down at all in response. That almost appears to violate the Law of Supply. What’s going on?
Drillers have been shutting down rigs at a record pace. But oil production isn’t slowing yet. In fact, the U.S. is pumping more crude now than at any time in 40 years. Why? We explore the conundrum in our animated explainer: Why Cheap Oil Doesn’t Stop the Drilling.
The primary reason is that the new rigs that use fracking are more efficient and are not the rigs being taken off line. Also, shale production is cheaper than traditional rigs so they’re still producing profitably at the current prices. However, there are beginning to be some spill over problems and it’s showing up in financial markets. States like Louisiana that are dependent on oil jobs and revenues are beginning to feel the pinch. Investors and banks that have been investing in boom towns that have gone hand-in-hand with the shale oil business are now looking quite risky. The commercial mortgage business and those pesky mortgage backed bond markets are once again looking very shaky. Will Shale town property loans be the next thing to crash the real estate market?
While loans in small, energy-dependent cities make up a fraction of the roughly $600 billion commercial-mortgage bond market, some CMBS deals issued in the past five years have a relatively high exposure to such debt, the Nomura analysts said.
The boom in oil production coincided with the resurgence of the commercial-mortgage backed securities market, where property owners can finance just about any building that produces rental income. Bond sales linked to everything from skyscrapers to strip malls are surging amid a recovery in real estate values after issuance froze for more than a year in the wake of the financial crisis.
Concern among investors is mounting that lenders are lowering their standards amid the rush to sell new bonds, making it easier for borrowers to fund potentially unstable projects. Looser underwriting standards in the CMBS market are enabling landlords with subpar properties to pile on large amounts of debt, Moody’s Investors Service said in a January report.
Moody’s already flagged some of the holdings almost a year ago.
Moody’s flagged the potential dangers of inflated apartment rents in North Dakota to commercial-mortgage bond buyers in a March 2014 report.
“Valuations could implicitly assume that rents are sustainable or neglect to address the high level of volatility associated with rapid growth in small towns,” Moody’s analysts led by Tad Philipp wrote in the report.
Even in big cities with diverse economies, the 45 percent drop in oil prices during the past eight months is sapping demand for real estate. In Houston, Shorenstein Properties took a 28-story office tower off the market in December after receiving bids.
The pullback may signal a shift in fortunes for U.S. oil and gas centers such as Houston and Austin, Texas. As recently as October they were named the most attractive markets for buying and developing real estate in 2015 in a survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Urban Land Institute.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why we keep getting on this merry go round. There are so many external costs dumped to taxpayers by this industry that it would behoove us to completely downsize it out of existence.
The average cost of a gallon of gasoline in the U.S. right now is $2.47. If that cost took into account the environmental and human health costs of burning the gasoline, however, it would more than double, according to a new study.
The study, published this week in the journal Climatic Change, created models for the “social cost of atmospheric release,” a method of determining the costs of emissions beyond their market value. According to the study, accounting for the social costs of burning gasoline would add an average of $3.80 per gallon to the pump price, raising the price to $6.27. Diesel has an even higher social cost of $4.80 per gallon.
The study also measured the social costs of other fossil fuels not used at the pump. Coal, for example, would jump from 10 cents per kilowatt hour to 42 cents per kilowatt hour, the study found. And natural gas, which has emerged in recent years as a cheap source of fuel, would see its price rise from 7 cents per kWh to 17 cents per kWh.
In all, according to the study, the environmental costs of producing electricity in the U.S. total $330-970 billion every year.
Right now, the Environmental Protection Agency and other government agencies use theSocial Cost of Carbon to measure the monetary impact of carbon emissions on human health and the environment. But there is no similar measure for fossil fuels in general.
Drew Shindell, professor of climate sciences at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment and author of the study, told ThinkProgress that he was interested in putting a price on the health and environmental impacts of pollutants other than carbon because he wasn’t satisfied with the current methods available for comparing sources of energy. People would discuss whether natural gas was more environmentally-friendly than coal, and come to a conclusion using metrics that only took into account the energy source’s global warming potential. But that ignored the fact that burning coal produces copious amounts of other air pollutants besides CO2, including sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulates, and that natural gas produces air pollutants too, though to a lesser extent.
So Shindell worked to develop a way that would take both climate considerations and health and environmental considerations into account when looking at different forms of energy.
“I wanted to do something that would treat both air quality and climate consistently,” he said. “It’s easy to get misleading answers on what’s better for society when you’re only looking at a portion of puzzle.”
Multiple studies have confirmed air pollution’s toll on human health. A study last monthfound that air pollution in India is cutting three years off the lives of some of the country’s residents, and a more wide-reaching report from the World Health Organization last year found that air pollution is responsible for seven million deaths around the world every year. Shindell said he knew about air pollution’s effect on health, but he was still surprised at just how high the social cost of burning fossil fuels was, according to the study.
So, in all of the midst of all of this is a very interesting financial move made by ExxonMobil. They’re floating tons of bonds at these currently low interest rates with these dropping oil prices. What are they going to
do with the proceeds?
Exxon Mobil Corp. is making a splash with its move to sell $8 billion of debt in a bond offering, the most sizable deal in the energy industry since oil prices began their staggering nosedive.
Bloomberg reports that ExxonMobil held a seven-part sale of both fixed- and floating-rate notes. “Exxon holds top triple-A credit ratings from Moody’s Investors Service and Standard & Poor’s, making it one of only three U.S. corporations — Johnson & Johnson and Microsoft Corp. are the others — that stand on nearly equal footing with governments in debt markets,” the article notes. Because of this status, ExxonMobil had no lack of buyers. A top corporate name combined with higher yields than bonds from sovereign debt make Exxon’s securities a hot commodity.
The sale of securities, the largest portion of which were 10-year, 2.709 percent notes that sold for $1.75 billion, was likely a move to improve Exxon’s financial security. With oil prices still crippled, the move could help the company maintain a war chest for future acquisitions.
Rumors have arisen that the Texas-based company is using the bond sale to prepare for the purchase of BP PLC, the London-based oil giant which some have speculated is susceptible to a takeover.
According to the Dallas Business Journal, Exxon officials have noted in recent months that they remain alert to the values of acquisition possibilities. Given BP’s weakened status in the aftermath of the Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2010, it could be a viable target for other major oil companies.
Can you say Global Monopoly?
None of this should make any of us comfortable. It’s time for us to move beyond energies and machinery that require this deadly, dirty, and toxic resource. It’s ruining our health and environment. It’s caused many a modern war. There have been oil and gas industry booms, busts, and disasters for as long as I can remember during my lifetime. I just can’t figure out why we aren’t working harder to get rid of it all.
What’s on your reading and blogging list today? This is an open thread. I’ve just gotten carried away speculating how long the oil and gas company are going to have a hold on us all.
Thursday Reads: Media Clutches Pearls, Takes to Fainting Couch, and Calls for Smelling Salts
Posted: March 5, 2015 Filed under: Foreign Affairs, Hillary Clinton, Media, morning reads, Republican politics, Surreality, The Media SUCKS, U.S. Politics | Tags: Benghazi, Fox News, House Oversight Committee, Jason Chaffetz, New York Times, State Department emails, Washington Post 44 Comments
Good Morning!!
I can’t figure out if the corporate media wants to stop Hillary Clinton from running for president or if they desperately want her to run so they can figuratively flog her with a cat-o-nine-tails and then put her in stocks in front of the Capital building.
The story about Hillary using a private email domain when she was Secretary of State has reached the point of ridiculousness, but the media can’t help themselves–they are and yet the coverage continues to get more heated by the hour. The Hillary haters in the media see blood in the water and they’re circling in hopes of getting their teeth into her.
Sorry for the tortured metaphors, but seriously, what does the media want from this woman?
Check out this story from The Hill reporting on remarks by House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz of Utah. (Chaffetz and former Chairman Darrell Issa have been the leaders of the “investigations” of the Bengazi, IRS, and Fast and Furious non-scandals.)
Asked on “Fox and Friends” whether Clinton’s exclusive use of a personal email address during her time as secretary of State raised national security concerns, Chaffetz said, “It does beg the question: Were there any sort of classified pieces of information that were flowing through her personal email account?”
“Which is something you can’t do and something yesterday Gen. Petraeus had to plead guilty to, or was going out in a deal, dealing with his personal email and interaction with somebody who didn’t have a classification,” Chaffetz added….
Petraeus reached a plea deal, the Justice Department announced Tuesday, over charges he failed to turn over for archiving small record books kept while commanding U.S. forces in Afghanistan, instead providing them and their classified information to his mistress, Paula Broadwell, who wrote a biography of the Army general.
Seriously?
State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said Tuesday, “we have no indication that Secretary Clinton used her personal email account for anything but unclassified purposes,” adding that Clinton used secure phone calls, aides or took other steps to send sensitive messages and has turned over some emails for archiving.
But the Committee will investigate anyway, and yesterday, according to the WaPo, the “Select Committee on Benghazi”
subpoenaed all communications of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton related to Libya and to the State Department for other individuals who have information pertinent to the investigation,” according to a statement by committee spokesman Jamal Ware. “The Committee also has issued preservation letters to internet firms informing them of their legal obligation to protect all relevant documents.”
Back to The Hill article (emphasis added):
Earlier this week, Chaffetz said his committee would join the House Select Committee on Benghazi to further explore Clinton’s use of personal emails. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), the chairman of that committee, said Clinton might have to testify several times before the panel, even into 2016.
Chaffetz himself lists a personal gmail address on his “official House card,” according to ABC News, but Chaffetz says that’s different. According to the Hill, when he was asked about the comparison between his use of email and Clinton’s, Chaffetz said, “Well that’s like comparing apples to a boat.”
Read more about the House efforts to bring Hillary down at Bloomberg Politics: House Oversight Committee to ‘Explore’ Clinton’s E-Mail Use, Chairman Says.
At New York Magazine, Frank Rich is deeply concerned.
Do the Democrats Need a Backup Plan for 2016?
Are Clinton’s email shenanigans a federal offense? Probably not. But we still don’t know the whole story, and it seems to be thickening by the minute — notably with a new report from the AP that she was protecting her email by cycling it through her own private email server out of Chappaqua. But the more important question is why the Clintons, who more than anyone in American politics understand the high risks of perceived improprieties, have left Hillary’s campaign so vulnerable even before it is officially out of the gate.
Why in God’s name did they change the name of the Clinton Foundation to the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation? That gives Hillary full ownership of a stream of potential conflict-of-interest revelations that have been emerging ever since, notably in the Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, and Politico: that the foundation solicited funds from at least 60 corporations that were lobbying the State Department during her tenure as Secretary of State; that the foundation quietly resumed soliciting donations from foreign governments once she left the State Department; that an Obama Administration ethics framework established to monitor potential conflicts of interest between Bill Clinton’s lucrative foreign speech engagements and State on Hillary’s watch was less-than-exacting.
And one imagines this is only the beginning. At the Post, a lead reporter on the Clinton story is Rosalind S. Helderman, whom some may recall was the dogged investigative journalist whose forensic journalism helped expose the pay-for-play scandal that brought down Bob McDonnell, the former Virginia Governor, and his wife Maureen.
You can check out Rich’s links for more background. Both the Post and the NYT are really pushing this story, but the Post seems even more worked up than the Times. Rich points out that Democrats really don’t have any legitimate alternatives to Clinton. Who are they going to run instead? Martin O’Malley? Jim Webb? Give me a break. And sorry, Emo-Progs,, Elizabeth Warren is not running.
At least one Joe Biden backer sees this new “scandal” as a golden opportunity, according to the Washington Post.
Top Biden backer: Hillary Clinton will ‘die by 1,000 cuts’ on e-mail story.
Dick Harpootlian, a former Democratic Party chairman in South Carolina, home to an early and important presidential primary, said recent reports about Clinton’s use of private e-mail to conduct government business and her family’s charitable foundation accepting donations from foreign governments while she was secretary of state could be damaging to her likely 2016 presidential campaign.
“There’s always another shoe to drop with Hillary,” Harpootlian said in an interview Wednesday. “Do we nominate her not knowing what’s in those e-mails?… If the e-mails were just her and her family and friends canoodling about fashion and what they’re going to do next week, that’s one thing. But the fact that she’s already turned e-mails to the Benghazi committee because she was doing official business on it means she’s going to die by 1,000 cuts on this one.”
He wishes.
Harpootlian — who has been an active and outspoken booster of a Biden 2016 candidacy — said the foundation donations and e-mail stories have sparked chatter among South Carolina politicos about drafting other candidates into the Democratic primary. Referencing Biden specifically, he said, “I’ll tell you this: He ain’t got no e-mail problems. He ain’t got no foundation problems. What you see with Joe is what you get. There’s nothing hidden there.”
Harpootlian added, “The chatter down here is, ‘Is this the best we can do?’ Certainly everyone wants to give a woman a chance to lead this country, but is [Clinton] the woman? There are plenty of other women who would be competitive, whether it’s Elizabeth Warren or Amy Klobuchar or Kirsten Gillibrand.”
Sorry, Dick, those women aren’t running and they wouldn’t be any more competitive than your pal Joe Biden–who has his own past scandals to worry about.
The Wall Street Journal says “some Democrats” are “troubled” about the new Hillary “scandals.” Yes, I’m sure they are. Sometimes I think there are more Clinton-haters among Democrats than Republicans. WSJ reports:
Some Democrats are uneasy about the reports involving Hillary Clinton ’s use of a private email account during her time as secretary of state and her foundation’s fundraising practices, calling on her to break her silence and personally address the two controversies.
Some party figures say the recent disclosures show a need for Democratic rivals to step forward and challenge Mrs. Clinton for a nomination that has long seemed to be hers for the asking.
At least one of these “uneasy” Democrats was willing to use his name.
Don Paulson, chairman of the Muscatine County Democrats in Iowa, said he was disturbed by the Clinton Foundation’s practice of accepting donations from foreign governments at a time when Mrs. Clinton was preparing a campaign for the White House. He saw that as one reason why the party should vet her and other candidates in a competitive primary, rather than allow her to coast to the nomination without a real fight. “It’s a healthier thing all around if there’s competition,” he said.
I’m sure Muscatine County Chairman is a Very Important Job, so we’d better being paying close attention to Mr. Paulson. Or not.
The WSJ admits that “Mrs. Clinton’s email arrangement…was legal while she served as the nation’s top diplomat,” but never mind that. It’s still so “troubling” and it makes people so “uneasy.” They do include the names of two more disapproving Democrats:
Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist who has worked on six presidential campaigns, said of the email account: “She needs to explain why she did what she did. I do think it’s a real issue, and I think it’s an issue that has to get dealt with on a serious level.”
“I don’t think it’s something a junior staffer can put out a statement and expect the thing to go away,” he said.
Kim Weaver, chairman of the O’Brien County Democrats in Iowa, which holds the nation’s first presidential contest, said: “The questions need to be answered.” She added she would like to hear whether the personal email system Mrs. Clinton used carried adequate security protections. “If it’s no big deal, why not just come out and say what it is.”
It seems that Iowa Democrats are particularly upset.
But will any of this matter to voters in November of 2016? Brendan Nyhan of the NYT blog The Upshot doesn’t think so. He notes that most Americans aren’t thinking about the 2016 presidential campaign yet, and when they do, attitudes toward toward the “email furor” will likely break down along partisan lines.
Of course that won’t stop his newspaper from running story after story about it on their front page while they ignore the potential loss of health insurance for 8,000,000 Americans along with other important world events.
One more from Business Insider:
Former State Department officials explain why the Clinton email ‘scandal’ is ridiculous.
According to the State Department, Hillary Clinton’s use of a personalized email address during her time as secretary of state was no secret.
“The State Department has long had access to a wide array of Secretary Clinton’s records — including emails between her and Department officials with state.gov accounts,” State Department Deputy Spokesperon Marie Harf said in an email to Business Insider….
Business Insider reached out to Clinton’s representatives. They put us in touch with two former State Department officials who argued that Clinton was careful to use the address in a manner that went above and beyond regulatory requirements and ensured her communications were preserved.
The former officials, who requested anonymity to freely discuss Clinton’s emails and State Department policy, echoed the notion the former secretary’s personalized email address was not kept secret. They said she used it to communicate with over 100 department staffers, other officials, and lawmakers on Capitol Hill….
Clinton’s spokesman Nick Merrill issued a statement in response to the article wherein he argued Clinton corresponded with people on their government account whenever she conducted official business….”Like Secretaries of State before her, she used her own email account when engaging with any Department officials. For government business, she emailed them on their Department accounts, with every expectation they would be retained,” Merrill said.
Guess what? John Kerry is the first Secretary of State to use a government email account! Colin Power also used a private account during the Bush Administration.
The two former officials said efficiency was one reason Clinton set up her own address. At the time, State Department policy would not have allowed her to have multiple email addresses on her Blackberry. Because of this, the officials said, she opted to have one address for both personal and governmental communications. They echoed Merrill’s statement and said Clinton took care to correspond with other State officials exclusively on their governmental addresses. The officials said this meant all of her emails and those sent to her were immediately preserved on government servers.
According to the two officials, regulations discouraged the use of personal email but did not prohibit it. Merrill also argued that Clinton’s use of private email was not against the rules.
“Both the letter and spirit of the rules permitted State Department officials to use non-government email, as long as appropriate records were preserved,” he said.
So far, Hillary herself has only responded on Twitter:
So . . . . there are lots of important stories out there today. Which ones are you following?























Recent Comments