Republican Justice: blindness to conflicts of interest

The United States Supreme Court was barely able to hold that it's wrong to spend $3,000,000 electing a judge and than be able to have your newly purchased judge decide a big case in your favor. Decided June 8, 2009, Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Company Inc. was a 5-4 decision, with dissents by John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito. The defendant in the West Virginia case was a coal company that had been accused of fraud, and the jury had awarded $50 M in damages against defendant. It was A.T. Massey's Chairman and Chief Officer Don Blankenship who stepped in to buy the judgship for Brent Benjamin for $3 M after the verdict, knowing that this case would be considered by the West Virginia Supreme Court. Chief Justice John Roberts frets that he can't criticize this obviously wrong case of a $3,000,000 judge because there are less obvious cases that would be more difficult to decide. Think about it: Roberts is urging that the Court can't decide the easy cases because there are also some other cases that aren't so easy. Why not just hang up your robes and give it up? Tell me a situation where that isn't true. Roberts goes even further, suggesting that hammering the $3,000,000 judge will undermine our fair, independent, and impartial judiciary. Good grief. Scalia had previously shown that he is completely obtuse to the idea of a conflict of interest when he decided a case favoring his duck-hunting buddy, Dick Cheney.

Continue ReadingRepublican Justice: blindness to conflicts of interest

Two ways to get into public college

At the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, there are two ways to get admitted. You can be a qualified student or, if you have the right connections, you can get in even though you are not well qualified. The linked article raises a good point. Private colleges can admit or deny admission to anyone, subject to civil rights laws. But what is a public university doing with a shadow admission list? And in how many other public colleges is this sort of thing going on?

Continue ReadingTwo ways to get into public college

How to really reform the SEC

Dan Smolin asks a good question: Why should we assume that the SEC's Mary Schapiro will make a U-turn in 2009, given that Schapiro has spent her entire career inviting brokerages to "self-regulate" and doing everything in her power to keep consumers at bay when they are ripped off and kept in the dark by brokerages? The easy answer is that we shouldn't assume that Schapiro will all of a sudden go to bat for the consumers. After all, Schapiro "has been at the very center of a failed regulatory process for the past two decades." We know where her loyalties lie, just like we know that Tim Geithner will never turn hard against Wall Street to clean up the corruption (see here for more details on Geithner--and here). Truly, years of actions speak much more loudly than months of words for both Schapiro and Geithner. I am convinced that Obama doesn't have the horses he needs to clean up Wall Street corruption. It's a typical modern conundrum where you need a highly motivated powerful outsider to get the job down, but there simply aren't enough highly motivated powerful outsiders. If Mary Schapiro had even an iota of interest in protecting consumers, Smolin wouldn't be needing to advocate for the following changes he is now pushing--they would have been a reality years ago:

1. Abolish the mandatory arbitration system and give investors back their constitutional rights;

2. Abolish "self regulation" by FINRA, which is a sham. The brokerage industry should be regulated by a governmental authority with the power to do so effectively. The SEC would be the likely agency to do so, with the right leadership;

3. Require brokerage statements to:

(a) Disclose the risk of every portfolio, as measured by standard deviation; (b) Compare the returns of every portfolio to a portfolio indexed to benchmarks of comparable risk; and (c) Disclose the "cost equity" of the portfolio, which is the amount the investor must make to break even, after payment of commissions, fees and margin interest. Common sense, right? Why aren't these reforms a reality? Good question. And why is a terribly motivated person like Mary Schapiro still sitting there pretending to be a reformer?

Continue ReadingHow to really reform the SEC

McClatchy calls out Cheney on his lies

Good for McClatchy, publishing an article detailing Dick Cheney's recent lies regarding torture conducted by the United States.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney's defense Thursday of the Bush administration's policies for interrogating suspected terrorists contained omissions, exaggerations and misstatements.

If Cheney really wants to claim that the U.S. mistreatment of prisoners produced information that "prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people." OK, Cheney. If that really were true (it isn't) tell us what information was obtained and how it saved thousands of people. Just give us one example of how that information saved any lives at all. It's hard to believe that this clown was theVP of the United States. He could never gotten his way invading Iraq in the first place if all the media had been as diligent as McClatchy has been over the years. Note that the article doesn't limit itself to Cheney's speech, but reviews many of the lies and distortions of the Bush Administration.

Continue ReadingMcClatchy calls out Cheney on his lies

Who’s watching the Federal Reserve? Not the Inspector General of the Federal Reserve.

Who's watching the Federal Reserve? Not the Inspector General of the Federal Reserve. This video shows a May 5, 2009 hearing where Rep. Alan Grayson asks Elizabeth Coleman, the Federal Reserve Inspector General, about the trillions of dollars lent or spent by the Federal Reserve and where it went, and the trillions of off balance sheet obligations. As you can see, she is clueless and/or full of bullshit. So much for public accountability. It's time for a real investigation of the Federal Reserve.

Continue ReadingWho’s watching the Federal Reserve? Not the Inspector General of the Federal Reserve.