Allison Hanes: Disgrace is the deterrent for Applebaum – Montreal Gazette

Michael Applebaum in 2016: It's hard to justify filling up overcrowded jails with white-collar criminals like the former mayor, Allison Hanes says, but corruption is not a victimless crime. Dave Sidaway / Montreal Gazette

The whiff of corruption in Quebec has claimed political careers and unseated administrations. It spawned a public inquiry and fuelled scandals. It has sparked legislative changes, led to the creation of watchdog bodies and generated investigative exposs.

But at the end of the day, when someone is charged, tried and convicted of breaching public confidence, the penalty meted out might seem underwhelming compared to all the outrage, debate and hand-wringing over the extent of the rot.

Michael Applebaum is in many ways a case in point. The former mayor of Montreal and long-time borough mayor of Notre-Dame-de-GrceCte-des-Neiges spent just two months behind bars after being convicted on eight fraud charges for demanding a $55,000 kickback connected to a construction project.

By all accounts, he was a model prisoner, participating in animal therapy sessions and going to Alcoholics Anonymous meetings even though he didnt have a drinking problem. And, perhaps most notably, he has now owned up to his crimes and the harm they inflicted after fighting the charges tooth and nail in court. So the Quebec parole board released him, after he served one-sixth of his 12-month jail term. He is still on probation and has to do community service, but he is out from behind bars and back at home.

These decisions are par for the course in the normal administration of justice, however they tend to be met with incomprehension, and sometimes fury, by society at large.

The court system, thankfully, isnt moved by the barometer of public opinion in such matters.But it is still valid to ask in such cases whether the punishment fits the crime and whether the justice system is accomplishing the goals it has set for itself.

Judges must weigh several principles in meting out sentences. Besides the circumstances of the case, the particular aggravating or mitigating factors can include denunciation, deterrence, rehabilitation and separation from society (a.k.a. protecting the public).

When it comes to corruption, I would argue deterrence is the most important of these considerations.

Specific deterrence is the message the censure sends to the offender, the consequences that are supposed to persuade them to not repeat their mistakes. In Applebaums case, its hard to see how he got off lightly.

He has lost his influence, power and profile. He is up to his eyeballs in debt to his lawyer. He torpedoed his career, both at city hall and in real estate. He has squandered all the respect, dignity and pride he garnered from his public service. He may have compromised his mental and physical health, too. And he has probably wounded his family by putting them through this ordeal.

This is a mess entirely of his own making, so you can hold the sympathy.He did this, he now admits, not to line his own pockets, but to feed the insatiable goat of campaign financing.

For a public officeholder like Applebaum, who staked his success on the approbation and approval of others, disgrace is the ultimate comeuppance.

But what message does the two months he actually served send to other officials who might be tempted to bend the rules, abuse their authority or otherwise breach the public trust out of personal or political greed? This is the real question.

General deterrence is another part of the puzzle judges must contemplate. Its the cautionary tale, the attempt to dissuade others from going down a similar path. Will two months discourage other risk-takers driven by hubris from cheating the public purse?

White-collar crime is not typically dealt with very harshly by the justice system.

Lets face it, its likely the only reason Applebaum got jail time in the first place was that he denied the fraud until the end, contesting the charges at trial, when his co-accused, councillor Saulie Zajdel and borough inspections director Yves Bisson, pleaded guilty. That was his right, but its also a risk. The court offers leniency in exchange for acknowledging wrongdoing.

Pragmatically speaking, its hard to justify filling up overcrowded jails with white-collar criminals who arent an imminent threat to security when there are many violent offenders who should be taken off the streets. But corruption is not a victimless crime.

Taxpayers and citizens suffer from being constantly forced to pay the inflated price of contracts won through deceptive means. Companies and contractors who play by the rules are hurt where there is a lack of fair competition for public work. And confidence in our very democracy is undermined when those who exploit their influence to cling to power.

This is no longer about Applebaum, who has done his time and will live with the consequences for the rest of his life (or as long as the collective memory endures). This is about uprooting the system his crimes served, the one Justice France Charbonneau (but not her co-commissioner Renaud Lachance) uncovered, and warned us is very deeply entrenched.

ahanes@postmedia.com

Read the original here:

Allison Hanes: Disgrace is the deterrent for Applebaum - Montreal Gazette

Best and Worst Political Cameos in Movies and TV – LifeZette

Some say politics is just Hollywood for ugly people but today the lines are more blurred than ever. Beloved Hollywood figures run for political office as easily as politicians jump in front of the cameras these days.

Sometimes its all a little cringe-inducing, and sometimes its rather amusing. Heres a look at some of the worst and some of the best political cameos ever in television and film.

Ron Paul, Atlas Shrugged III: Who Is John Galt? (2013).Former Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has arguably been the biggest influencer on modern libertarianism next to novelist Ayn Rand, whose 1,000-plus-page 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged is reportedly the second highest-selling book after the Bible.

So when producers John Aglialoro and Harmon Kaslow adapted Rand's novel into three films, it was only natural they'd reach out to Paul to do a cameo as himself. Fox News host Sean Hannity also appeared in a collection of segments showing real-life political figures reacting to a fictional speech made by John Galt, the man working to "stop the motor of the world."

It was a fitting moment for Paul, as he's often said the book was a major influence on him. "Shrugged" follows a world in which the concept of the individual is quickly eroding and the public and government are more violent and angry toward entrepreneurs and creators than ever. When various business leaders and artists begin disappearing, business leaders and free market believers Dagny Taggart and Hank Rearden begin down a road that leads them to the mysterious John Galt and the ideal world he's working to build away from government.

Read more here:

Best and Worst Political Cameos in Movies and TV - LifeZette

Liberal Democrats rule out coalition with Labour as former leader Nick Clegg loses seat – Telegraph.co.uk

He had previously ruled out a coalition deal with other parties after warning their positions on Brexit could not be reconciled.

Speaking about the loss Mr Clegg said the next parliament will preside over a deeply, deeply divided and polarised nation.

We saw that in the Brexit referendum last year and we see it again tonight, he said, adding that the most grave gulf of all in society is between the young and the old. Accepting his defeat, he said that in politics You live by the sword and you die by the sword.

It came after the former leader warned he had seen an "uptick" in support for Jeremy Corbyn's party in his seat, which has a high student population.

The former Lib Dem leader ruled out a coalition between his former party and Labour or the Conservatives, addingthere is no "meeting point" between them because of their views on Brexit.

Speaking to ITV MrCleggsaid: "It's clearly a complete boomerang election for the Conservatives who when they started out in this election campaign were treating it as something of a coronation and clearly it's going to be a much tighter fought contest."

Asked about the possibly of a coalition with either Labour or the Tories he added:"There's no meeting point between the Conservatives and the Labour parties and the Lib Dems."

Read the original:

Liberal Democrats rule out coalition with Labour as former leader Nick Clegg loses seat - Telegraph.co.uk

‘A Proud Liberal’ Engages ‘a Proud Deplorable’ – New York Times

'A Proud Liberal' Engages 'a Proud Deplorable'
New York Times
Dear Friend: I write as a proud liberal with an open mind. Though there is much we disagree about, there is one thing you and I agree on: We live in a dangerous world. One of the greatest risks we face is our belief that those who disagree with us have ...

View post:

'A Proud Liberal' Engages 'a Proud Deplorable' - New York Times

Liberal group MoveOn calls for Trump to be impeached – The Hill (blog)

Liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org called for President Trumps impeachmentThursday after the release of former FBI Director James Comeys opening testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

In the United States, no one is above the law. The testimony that former FBI Director James Comey is expected to deliver today makes clear that Congress must begin impeachment proceedings immediately, the statement reads.

Todays testimony puts us in fundamentally new territory. This is no longer about our opposition to Trumps policies and rhetoric.

ADVERTISEMENT

MoveOns call for Trumps impeachment is not the only one. Democratic Reps. Al GreenAl GreenRyan denies GOP would try to impeach Dem accused of same actions as Trump Liberal group MoveOn calls for Trump to be impeached Second Dem joins effort to impeach Trump MORE (Texas) and Brad Sherman (Calif.) have also called for the presidents impeachment.

Sherman said he was drafting a single article of impeachment due to Trumps firing of Comey. This would be the first step in any congressional bid to oust the president.

However, House Democratic leaders have pushed back on calls for impeachment,saying the efforts could undermine the congressional and federal investigations into alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russian election meddling.

MoveOns statement comes hours before the former FBI chief will testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee. The former FBI head put out his opening own opening statement on Wednesday, in which he says the president said he expected Comeys loyalty and that Trump wanted him to lift the cloud surrounding the Russia investigation.

Visit link:

Liberal group MoveOn calls for Trump to be impeached - The Hill (blog)

Liberal, NDP MLAs take part in swearing-in ceremony – CBC.ca

Christy Clark reiterated that she doesn't expect to be B.C. premier much longer, while addressing media at today's Liberal MLA swearing-in ceremony.

"There is a very strong likelihood that the government will be defeated on a confidence motion, and I think that's a fair assumption to make," she said.

"We are in an unusual place in the province," she said. "It's an unusual situation when the party that gets the most seats does not govern."

The NDP and Greens won a combined 44 seats in last month's election and have agreed to work together to unseat the Liberals and form a minority government. The Liberals won 43 seats.

With the legislature set to berecalled June 22, there is growing intrigue over who will be elected Speakerand whether or not it will throw the legislature into gridlock.

Normally, the Speaker comes from the party forming government, which would have the effect of reducing the combined NDP-Green seat total to 43, tied with the Liberals.

Parliamentary convention has it that in the event of a tievote, the Speaker would continue debate and maintain the status quo. However, in the matter of a confidence vote, the speaker could cast the tie-breaking vote.

LiberalGovernment House Leader Mike deJongcautioned it would be dangerous to go against custom and politicizethe Speaker's position.

NDP leader John Horgan is introduced to his caucus in advance of the NDP swearing-in ceremony. (Mike McArthur/CBC)

"Whoever that person ends up being, there are parliamentary conventions in place for the approach the Speaker takes when called upon to cast a deciding vote," he said.

"To begin to amend the rules simply to buttress or make life easier in a precarious minoritysituation isfraught with problems."

The 41-member NDP caucus was sworn in this afternoon, one day after thethree elected members from theB.C. Green Party.

Clark said her party would be willing to support the NDP-Greens on issues they agree on, but that major decisions on Liberal-backed Kinder Morgan and Site C need to be pushed forward.

Clark and NDP Leader John Horganhave been waging a public letter-writing battle over the massive Site C hydroelectric dam, sparked by Horganadvising BC Hydro to not sign any new contracts related to the $8.8 billion project.

And the NDP-Green alliance has said it will attempt to stop the twinning of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline, which has federal approval and is slated to begin work in September.

Excerpt from:

Liberal, NDP MLAs take part in swearing-in ceremony - CBC.ca

James O’Keefe’s undercover video stings damaged liberal icons … – Washington Post

Project Veritas, the conservative activist group famous for damaging undercover videosthat recently forced two Democratic operatives out of their jobs, has been hit with a potentially expensive problem a $1 million conspiracy lawsuit.

The allegations: Project Veritas infiltrated a Democratic consulting firm under false pretenses, secretly recorded private conversations and published deceptively edited footage all to mislead the public and hurt former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's chances of winning the White House.In doing so, Project Veritas violatedfederal and Washington wiretapping laws, among other things, said attorney Joseph Sandler, a former Democratic National Committee general counsel who represents the plaintiff, Democracy Partners, a consulting group working with the Clinton campaign.

Project Veritas's founder, James O'Keefe, hasdenounced the lawsuit as an intimidation tacticto impedeProject Veritas's army of guerrilla journalists and their pursuit of the truth.

The lawsuit, which comes at a time of strong political divisiveness,will not be without significant challenges, legal experts say.

For one, pretending to be someone else to expose something that might be of public interest is hardly new. And courts in the pasthave protected constitutional rights to gather and publish news, whether by the institutional press or the average citizen, said David Heller, deputy director of the Media Law Resource Center.

[Two Democratic operatives lose jobs after James OKeefe sting]

Secondly, although wiretapping laws make it illegal to secretly tape conversations, they also say that it's okay to do so as long as one party knows about the recording and had consented to it. The exception, known as the one-party consent, is the reason why, for example, President Trump wouldn'thave broken any laws if he did tape conversations with former FBI director James B. Comey.

A judge or a jury will have to answer these questions: Do Project Veritas's undercover investigations serve the public interest? Or are they a smear campaign disguising asjournalism?

In the current environment of 'fake news' and hyper partisanship, it won't be surprising if judges struggle over what is or isn't for the good of the public, Heller told The Washington Post.

It all started in June 2016, when a man named Daniel Sandini introduced himself to Democracy Partners's founder, Robert Creamer. Using a false name, Sandini connected Creamer tohis niece who he claimed was interested in advocacy and political work, according to the complaint, which was filed last week. That niece, Allison Maas, used a false name and a fabricated resume to secure an internship at Democracy Partners.

Both Sandini and Maas are Project Veritas operatives, the lawsuit states.

During the course of her internship, which started in September, Maas wore a hidden camera and audio recording devices. Sherecorded conversations made with clients in person or via conference calls, the lawsuit states. Shehad access to confidential emails and documents and was present at confidential meetings.

Creamer had told her not to share information with anyone, the lawsuit states, although Maas never signed a nondisclosure agreement with Democracy Partners. Sandler said that even without a nondisclosure agreement, Maas owed it to Democracy Partners to not steal information.

[James OKeefe says CNN is the target of his next sting]

You essentially sign up for an internship and become part of an organization, Sandler said. You owe a basic duty of loyalty to that organization that you are not going to that you haven't deceived them, defrauded them. That's what she breached here.

Mason Kortz, an instructional fellow at Harvard University's Cyberlaw Clinic, said what will likely be a hurdle for Democracy Partners is the manner in which the conversations were recorded. Was Maasa bystander recording other people's conversations? Or was she a part of the conversations? If it's the latter, federal andWashington wiretapping laws' one-party consent couldgive Maas some reprieve, Kortz said.

But the laws also provide another exception that could help Democracy Partners, Kortz said.Secret recordings are illegal in Washington if they were done to purposely damagea person or an organization.

They would have to provide proof of what(Maas's) purpose was, her state of mind, Kortz said.

According to O'Keefe, his organization's purpose is investigative journalism that exposes malfeasance and corruption of certain organizations. Sandler calls it political espionage.

In the weeks leading up to the presidential election, Project Veritas released videos, some of which were from footage taken by Maas. The series, called Rigging the Election, purport to prove that Democracy Partners, including Creamer and a Democratic activist from Madison, Wis., had committed voter fraud and conspired to disrupt campaign ralliesof Trump, who was then a Republican presidential candidate.

Creamer announced that he was stepping back from his work for the Clinton campaign shortly after the videos were published. Scott Foval, the activist who contracted with Democracy Partners, was laid off. Democracy Partners and a consulting firm owned by Creamer also lost clients and contracts.

The lawsuit alleged that the videos, some of which Trump mentioned at presidential debates and which have been viewed millions of times on YouTube, were selectively and heavily edited and contained false commentary by O'Keefe.

[James OKeefes CNN Leaks are totally overrated]

Yael Bromberg, a supervising attorney for the Institute for Public Representation at Georgetown Law, said the videos gained widespread criticism across the political spectrum.

We're in an era of unprecedented hyper partisanship and fake news, and the integrity of the public domain is critical to the practice of democracy, said Bromberg, who's also representing Democracy Partners and Creamer. What's more is they degrade public discourse during a time of heightened importance, which is when the public is most in tuned into politics just before the election.

In an earlier statement, Democracy Partners denounced both Project Veritas and the statements caught on camera.

Our firm has recently been the victim of a well-funded, systematic spy operation that is the modern-day equivalent of the Watergate burglars, the firm said. The plot involved the use of trained operatives using false identifications, disguises and elaborate false covers to infiltrate our firm and others, to steal campaign plans and goad unsuspecting individuals into making careless statements on hidden cameras. One of those individuals was a temporary regional subcontractor who was goaded into statements that do not reflect our values.

O'Keefe saidthat he and his group are on the right side of the law.

This lawsuit further justifies the need to drain the swamp. We will not be intimidated. We will not be silenced. We will find out who is funding this lawsuit. We will never stop exposing the truth. We will not back down,said O'Keefe, whose organization received $10,000 from the Trump Foundation in 2015 before heannounced his candidacy.

O'Keefe first gained notoriety in 2009,when Project Veritas's undercover sting led to the destruction ofthe Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. Another sting in 2011 led to two resignations at NPR, although subsequent investigations found discrepancies between what NPR executives actually saidin taped conversations and what was shown in the sting video.

In 2013, O'Keefe agreed to pay $100,000 to a former ACORN employee who said he was illegally recorded.

David Weigel contributed to this report.

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly characterized Shane Bauer's reporting when he worked as a prison guard for a Mother Jones expose. The article has been updated.

READ MORE:

James OKeefe finally realized that people will develop conspiracy theories all on their own

The left jousts with James OKeefe

New James OKeefe video: Clinton campaign allowed a foreigner to acquire official swag

Read more:

James O'Keefe's undercover video stings damaged liberal icons ... - Washington Post

Why I’m voting Liberal Democrat for the first time today – Spectator.co.uk (blog)

From a very early age Ive been put off by sanctimoniousness; its why, I think, Ive never been attracted to the political Left, which when I was growing up was heavy on the finger-wagging, and why I find a certain style of newspaper column irritating. They remind me of the sour-faced old guys we used to see at church all in competition to see who could look the most serious and disapproving. This whole idea that if you dont support Labour and the Left youre not just wrong or misguided but a bad person is what puts me off; this Daily Mash article is depressingly close to reality in my experience.

Yet this election has made me feel the same, for the first time; my area is flooded with Labour posters outside front doors and when I look at them I find myself shaking my head.

The extent to which Labour have done better than expected in polling is disappointing; they will certainly lose, but I hoped and expected that they would haemorrhage support from the start as people were put off by Jeremy Corbyn. Some seem to see him as a sort of Obi Wan Kanobi character saving the NHS; I look at him and see a man who has previously spoken of his admiration for the Venezuela regime which has brought such an economic miracle to that country; then theres a shadow chancellor who appears alongside Soviet flags at a rally, and a director of strategy who quite openly laments that the Berlin Wall came down. Even if supporters of the three parties have disagreements, we tend to think of each other as being wrong within normal parameters, as P.J. ORourke said of Hilary Clinton but these views seem so far beyond the bounds of normality I assumed most would be repulsed.

Instead huge numbers not just support him, but see Corbyn as a deeply moral man in a crusade; most troubling is the level of popularity among the young, estimated to be over 60 and maybe 70 per cent.

Sorry if I sound sanctimonious, but the Soviet Union was evil and if you stand beside its flag theres something wrong with you as a human being; yet over two-thirds of the next generation want Britain to be Venezuela with Jihadis. Where has the education system gone wrong?

Thats why Im voting Liberal Democrat for the first time today. The main practical reason is that I live in a two-horse constituency; I am also totally underwhelmed by the Tory party and, ideology aside, Im not sure they are competent enough to do the job. But I also believe the Lib Dems have been unfairly maligned, and the lack of support for them is not just surprising, but also unjust. Im not a natural liberal but they have been unfairly blamed for a coalition they had almost no choice to enter and in which they achieved much, as this Economist assessment points out.

The coalition has cut the deficit more pragmatically than it admits and more progressively than its critics allow. When the economy weakened, the Tories eased the pace (although not by as much as this newspaper would have liked). Though the poorest Britons have been hit hard by spending cuts, the richest 10% have borne the greatest burden of extra taxes.

Its not a perfect record, by any means, but in real life there are only imperfect governments, and terrible governments. (John Rentoul also wrote a good defence of the Lib Dems in government here.)

The Liberals didnt do enough to get their message across while in government, especially on the subject of cuts; a narrative seemed to emerge which went unchallenged, although I think thats probably a perennial problem with those in the political centre. (Likewise Ive come to appreciate the Blair government did lots of pretty good things but almost no one in the Labour party seems to defend them anymore.)

I thought that with Corbyn in charge the Liberal Democrats would become the natural home of Britains moderates, but it doesnt seem to have worked that way; liberals dont seem to support them, so I think its only sporting I should.

See the original post:

Why I'm voting Liberal Democrat for the first time today - Spectator.co.uk (blog)

Liberal faces five-year suspension for criticising MP Felicity Wilson – The Sydney Morning Herald

A member of the NSW Liberals is facing up to five years' suspension for publicly criticising an MP who was caught falsely swearing to have lived in her electorate for a decade.

Liberal headquarters is moving to suspend barrister Juris Laucis for up to five years for criticising Felicity Wilson, the party's candidate for North Shore.

During a close preselection battle, Ms Wilson was revealed to have falsely sworn to have lived in the electorate for a decade.

On the eve of the April byelection, Ms Wilson said she should have been more careful with her wordsamid a burgeoning media scandal about inconsistencies in her claimed connection to the electorate.

Writing for The Spectator, Mr Laucis described the affair as a "running sore" for the party.

"The honourable thing to do, even at the 11th hour, would have been for the Liberal Party to withdraw from the race, and thereby demonstrate that it is a Party that commands the moral high ground," he wrote.

"The election of Felicity Wilson is a running sore that will plague the Berejiklian government all the way to the next election."

Liberal party state director Chris Stone commenced suspension proceedings against Mr Laucis for those comments this week.

"Mr Laucis did not obtain authority from the State Director prior to publishing the article and has therefore breached [regulations]," a motion from the Department of Party Affairs and passed by the Liberals' ruling state executive read.

But Mr Laucis was unrepentant.

"They're trying to set up a Stalinist regime," he told Fairfax Media. "The reason I speak out is the only way that culture is going to change is if it comes out in the public domain.

"Within the Liberal Party there's no mechanism we can [use to] stop whatever the executive is doing."

Mr Laucis' fate will be determined by a meeting of the party's all-powerful state executive on July 28.

In her first tilt at Parliament, Ms Wilson retained the seat of North Shore for the Liberals, notwithstanding a swing of more than 15 per cent.

Last week she was revealed to have presented her third different account of her ties to the electorate in a speech to party members that significantly watered down her initial apology.

A spokesman for the NSW Liberal party declined to comment.

The Liberal Party maintains famously strict rules that prohibit members from discussing "internal party matters" in the media.

Ex-federal MP Ross Cameron recently fell foul of the rule and was recently suspended for four-and-a-half years for critical comments he made about now-Premier Gladys Berejiklian.

Mr Laucis was also previously suspended last year, along with former MP Charlie Lynn and Mr Cameron, for a period of six months, for comments critical of party preselection processes made to the ABC's 7.30 program.

Read more:

Liberal faces five-year suspension for criticising MP Felicity Wilson - The Sydney Morning Herald

View From the Pier: Just how free are we in Wisconsin? – hngnews.com

I was Googling The Free State of Jones, a 2016 movie about an interesting episode of Civil War history, when I stumbled across a couple of interesting studies on freedom in the 50 states.

Both studies were produced by conservative think tanks. The first came in 2015 from the John Locke Foundation of North Carolina.

(Locke, by the way, was a 17th century British doctor and philosopher often called the father of classic liberalism, and an early advocate of the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that appear in the U.S. Declaration of Independence.)

According to the Locke Foundations First in Freedom Index, The freest state is Florida, followed byArizona, Indiana, South Dakota and Georgia.

The least free state is New York, followed by New Jersey, California, West Virginia and Kentucky.

Wisconsin ranked 34th for fiscal policy, 11th for educational freedom, seventh for regulatory freedom and 11th for health care freedom.

Why is freedom important? Because in general, freedom correlates with a more robust and resilient economy.

The foundation noted: Overall, there have been 37 studies of economic freedom and state economic growth published in scholarly journals since 1990 of which 29 found a positive, statistically significant relationship and eight found no link.

Not a single study found that ranking high in economic freedom was associated with lower economic performance.

A far more comprehensive study on freedom in the states was conducted in 2015-16 by the Mercatus Institute at George Mason University. (You can find the whole thing at freedominthe50states.org.)

We score all 50 states on over 200 policies encompassing fiscal policy, regulatory policy and personal freedom. We weight public policies according to the estimated costs that government restrictions on freedom impose on their victims, the authors wrote.

The Mercatus study identified the most free states as New Hampshire, Colorado, South Dakota, Idaho and Texas. (Only South Dakota also made the Locke list.)

The least free were New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, California and Maryland. (New York, New Jersey and California made both lists.)

The Mercatus study put Wisconsin squarely in the middle of the pack at 27th.

For all the talk about Scott Walkers radical reforms, the authors wrote, we find that economic freedom has been more or less constant since 2011 whereas personal freedom has grown substantially.

The Badger State has relatively high taxes, which have fallen only marginally since 2012. State taxes are projected to be 5.8 percent of personal income in 2015, while local taxes have risen since 2000 and now stand at 4.4 percent of income, above the national average

State and local debt has fallen somewhat since 2007, and government employment and subsidies are below average. Overall, Wisconsin has seen definite improvement on fiscal policy since 2010, but it hasnt yet reached the national average.

On regulatory policy, we see little change in recent years, although our index does not yet take account of the 2015 right-to-work law. Land-use freedom is a bit better than average; local zoning has not gotten out of hand, though it has grown some...

Occupational licensing increased dramatically between 2000 and 2006; still, the state is about average overall on extent of licensure

The state has a price-gouging law, as well as controversial, strictly enforced minimum-markup laws for gasoline and general retailers. The civil liability system is above average and improved significantly since 2010, due to a punitive damages cap.

Wisconsin is below average on criminal justice policies, but it has improved substantially since 2010 because of local policing strategies. The incarceration rate has fallen, as have nondrug victimless crime arrest rates. The states asset forfeiture law is one of the stricter ones in the country

Tobacco freedom is extremely low, due to airtight smoking bans and high taxes.

Educational freedom grew significantly in 201314 with the expansion of vouchers. However, private schools are relatively tightly regulated.

Here is something I dont understand: There is almost no legal gambling, even for social purposes. Has Mercatus never heard of Indian casinos? The state lottery?

The authors go on to state: Cannabis law is unreformed. Wisconsin is the best state for alcohol freedom, with no state role in distribution, no keg registration, low taxes (especially on beer imagine that), no blue laws, legal happy hours, legal direct wine shipment, and both wine and spirits in grocery stores.

The state is now about average on gun rights after the Legislature passed a shall-issue concealed-carry license, one of the last states in the country to legalize concealed carry

The Institutes policy recommendations for Wisconsin: Reduce the income tax burden while continuing to cut spending on employee retirement and government employment. Abolish price controls. Eliminate teacher licensing and mandatory state approval for private schools.

Hmm

Speaking of freedom, I am now free of the need for wearing glasses or contacts for the first time in almost 60 years.

Cataract surgery is a miracle, at least for me -- although, every single morning when I wake up and look out the window, I think, Oh darn! I forgot to take my contacts out last night. Im just not used to being able to see.

I would have preferred to be unconscious during the procedures (theres nothing like people using a pen to draw on your eyeball to make you wonder how much worse water-boarding could possibly be) but the doctors explained that I needed to be conscious to cooperate with them: OK, look to your left No, your other left.

But the discomfort was fleeting and the result is miraculous.

Got something Sunny Schubert should know? Call her at 222-1604 or email sunschu16@gmail.com.

See the article here:

View From the Pier: Just how free are we in Wisconsin? - hngnews.com

After 35 Years in Prison, Puerto Rican Activist Oscar Lpez Rivera on Freedom & Decolonization – Democracy Now!

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

JUAN GONZLEZ: Today we spend the hour with longtime Puerto Rican independence activist Oscar Lpez Rivera, who was in prison for more than 35 years, much of the time in solitary confinement, before President Obama commuted his sentence in January. On May 17th, 2017, less than a month ago, Lpez Rivera was released. Today he joins us in our New York studio.

Oscar Lpez Rivera was born in San Sebastin, Puerto Rico, and moved with his family to Chicago when he was a boy. He was drafted into the Army at age 18 and served in Vietnam, for which he was awarded the Bronze Star. Upon his return in 1967, he became a community organizer who fought for bilingual education, jobs and better housing.

During the 1970s and 1980s, he was a leader of the pro-independence group FALN, the armed liberationthe Forces of Armed National Liberation. Its members set more than a hundred bombs, including one attack on Fraunces Tavern in New York City that killed four people. He was never charged, however, with setting those bombs. Instead, in 1981, Lpez Rivera was convicted on federal charges that included seditious conspiracyconspiring to oppose U.S. authority over Puerto Rico by force. In fact, seditious conspiracy is the same charge Nelson Mandela faced. Lpez Rivera described his charges in a rare prison interview in 2006.

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: I think that the fact that I was charged with seditious conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States speaks for itself. But the charge in reference to Puerto Ricans has always been used for political purposes. It goes back to 1936. The first time that a group of Puerto Ricans was put in prison was by using the seditious conspiracy charge. And this ishas always been a strictly political charge used against Puerto Ricans.

JUAN GONZLEZ: In 1999, President Bill Clinton commuted the sentences of 16 members of the FALN, but Lpez Rivera refused at that time to accept the deal because it did not include two fellow activists, who have since been released.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Oscar Lpez Riveras first visit to New York City since his release last month, and it coincides with New Yorks long-standing Puerto Rican Day Parade, which always takes place on the second Sunday of June. This years organizers chose to honor Lpez Rivera as the parades first "National Freedom Hero." This prompted the citys police chief and a number of corporate sponsors to boycott the event, including Goya Foods, Coca-Cola, Univision and Telemundo. As Juan reported in his column for the New York Daily News, a boycott campaign to condemn Lpez Rivera as a terrorist "was quietly organized by a right-wing conservative group in Washington, D.C., the Media Research Center, that receives major funding from donors close to both President Trump and to Breitbart News," unquote. Well, Oscar Lpez Rivera says he will still march, but not as an official honoree, simply as a humble Puerto Rican and grandfather.

Over the years, one of Oscar Lpez Riveras strongest supporters has been Archbishop Desmond Tutu. On Wednesday, Tutu issued a statement in support of his participation in the parade, noting, quote, "Had South Africans and people of the African diaspora allowed others to determine who we would embrace, Mandela would still be in prison and have been stripped of the stature we gave him and that he deserved," unquote.

All of this comes as Puerto Rico is in the midst of a bankruptcy process and is preparing to hold a referendum on its political future on Sundaythe same day as the parade.

For more, were joined in studio by Oscar Lpez Rivera. While in prison, he wrote two books, Between Torture and Resistance and Letters to Karina. Were also joined by Juan Cartagena, president and general counsel of LatinoJustice.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Oscar Lpez Rivera, how does it feel to be free?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: It feels wonderful. It feels completely, completely different than being in prison. For the first time, I can hear the roosters sing early in the morning. I can seeI can see my family. I can see my friends. I can see my granddaughter. I recently went to California just to spend a few days with her. I can move around Puerto Rico. So it feels wonderful. It feels a world completely, completely different than the world of prisons.

JUAN GONZLEZ: And all of these years that you were not only in prison, but in solitary for a good portion of that time, Im wondering: Did you have an expectation that you would eventually be freed? And was it a surprise when, in earlyearly this year, you finally got the word that President Obama had commuted your sentence?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: Well, one of the things that I never allowed myself to do was to fall into what I call illusory optimism. You know, so I tried my best to keep my hope that I will come out of prison, but at the same time prepare for the worst. So, on Mayon January 17th, when President Obama commuted my sentence and I was told that my sentence had been commuted, my reaction was not one that was expected, because I was prepared for the worst. And it took me about four days to really, really realize that I was on my way out of prison. But it was not a very, very exciting moment when I was told that President Obama had commuted my sentence.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, this wasnt the first commutation. I mean, Bill Clinton also did this, along with a number of your compatriotsright?16 Puerto Rican independence activists. But you chose not to leave at that time. You could have left more than a decade ago, two decades ago.

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: Well, I believe in principles, and I have never left anyone behind, whether it was in Vietnam, whether it was in the city of Chicago, whether it was in Puerto Rico. And for me, it was important to stay in prison while two of my co-defendants were in prison. Both of them came out by 2010. Both of them were out of prison. And finally, on May 17th, I was finally, finally out of prison. The sentence was commuted the 17th of January, but I had to be under home confinement until May 17th. So, it was May 17th when I started to walk on the streets of Puerto Rico and to enjoy Puerto Rico.

JUAN GONZLEZ: Juan Cartagena, I wanted to ask you about the campaign to free Oscar Lpez Rivera, because it really included thea cross-section of all political persuasions, religious groups in Puerto Rico, and it lasted for a long time. I remember when we were covering the Democratic convention in Philadelphia, there was a very strong contingent from Chicago and other cities that had come to demonstrate at the Democratic convention about the issue of finally freeing him. Your sense of the importance of that campaign?

JUAN CARTAGENA: Oh, critically important. Many of us thought that one last hope would have been the Obama administration. Like we were hoping for a long time that the president, Obama, would actually commute his sentence. We wereI was following how President Obama was eulogizing Nelson Mandela when he went to the wake in South Africa, talking about how, by freeing Mandela, the system also freed itself. And in many ways, we keptI kept using that, and others kept using that kind of quote.

We also recognized that thisthis incredible unity that happened in Puerto Rico is hardly ever seen that many times, right? In my own lifetime, Ive seen it around Vieques. But rarely have we seen so many political parties, so many faith, union members and activists of all persuasions, of all types, really line up to make sure that Oscar Lpez Rivera was freed, and, you know, have the happiness, the joy and the pride that we have that we finally we were able to achieve that, because, as he said, hes a man of principle, and to work on behalf of a man of principle has always been an honor.

AMY GOODMAN: Were going to break and then come back to our discussion with Juan Cartagena, whos president and general counsel of LatinoJustice, and with Oscar Lpez Rivera, Puerto Rican independence activist, freed last month after serving 35 years in prison. This is Democracy Now! Well be back in a minute.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: "From a Bird the Two Wings" by Pablo Milans, here on Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. Im Amy Goodman, with Juan Gonzlez. Our guest is Oscar Lpez Rivera, Puerto Rican independence activist, freed last month after serving 35 years in prison. Were also joined by Juan Cartagena, president and general counsel of LatinoJustice. This is the time here in New York City that the Puerto Rican Day Parade is taking place on Sunday. It is also the day, Sunday, that the Puerto Rican referendum will take place in Puerto Rico. Juan?

JUAN GONZLEZ: Well, Oscar, Id like to ask you about how you see Puerto Rico now, having come out of prison. The last time you were there was over 35 years ago, and now youre seeing a situation with total economic collapse and bankruptcy, an imposed control board by Congress. What do you see as the situation on the island right now and how it could possibly get out of its enormous crisis?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: Puerto Rico is suffering an enormous crisis. Puerto Rico, as I see it, has been set up in a way that there is no way for Puerto Rico to lift itself up economically. First of all, the junta de fiscal control, fiscal control board, has already spent a lot of money without offering Puerto Rico anyany remedy to resolve its economic problem. What it has done thus far is extract money from programs such as the University of Puerto Rico, such as the public education system and otherpensions from workers, that will definitely, definitely make Puerto Ricos economy worse, much worse than it was last year or the year before. And Puerto Rico cannotcannot pay that debt. Its impossible for Puerto Rico to pay a debt, except if every dollar, every last dollar, that the Puerto Rican worker has in his pocket is taken out of his pocket. That is the reality from the economic point of view.

Besides that, we have a government in Puerto Rico, a colonial government in Puerto Rico, that has no wayoffer any incentives to the Puerto Rican people. On the contrary, it offers incentives to foreigners to invest in Puerto Rico. Whoeverwhoever invests in Puerto Rico is not a Puerto Rican. What happens is that the money that is made in Puerto Rico is taken out of Puerto Rico. That money does not stay in Puerto Rico. It does not help the economy of Puerto Rico. So, my way of looking at it is, Puerto Rico is in trouble economically, and the junta de control fiscal, the control board, that is imposed or has been imposed on Puerto Rico, is really a detrimentalI will dare say, a criminalact on the Puerto Rican people.

Now, there other things in Puerto Rico that I see being positive. For example, I see the students at the university struggling. I see the universitythe students at the university trying to do something to preserve or at least protect the university. That is positive. The youth, the Puerto Rican youth, represent the future of Puerto Rico. And as long as they are struggling and doing something for the economy, doing something for themselves, doing something for Puerto Rico, there is hope.

There is also oneanother element that I see. Puerto Rico, as has been mentioned, is going into or is celebrating a plebiscite, anotheranother colonial act. And to justify what? Puerto Rico is not going to become a state, definitely not. And only one political party in Puerto Rico is going on this plebiscite, is participating in this plebiscite. The rest of Puerto Rico is boycotting the plebiscite. That money, $10 million that will be spent on the plebiscite, could go into at least the education system. We could preserve some of those schools that are being closed. A hundred and sixty-nine public schools are going to be closed. Why not use that money to help those schools? That will be one of the questions that I will ask the governor of Puerto Rico right now. He has been asked. He has no answers.

AMY GOODMAN: I was wondering if we can go back in time to your history, what politicized you, where you were born, how you came to head up the FALN, and then your 35 years in prison, how you survived there?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: Well, I was born in a very small farm in Puerto Rico. At age 14, I was sent to Chicago to live with my sister. I entered high school. Im going to make a little story here, so you will probably see my politics.

When I was in high school in Chicago, the teacher asked the students to define a hero and why that person was a hero. So, I had beenwhen I entered elementary school in Puerto Rico at age 5, every day we would sing a song that would say George Washington was to be celebrated because he never, never said a lie. OK, so on that particular day, I said that George Washington was my hero, because he had never, never said a lie. And the students started laughing. I thought it was because of my English accent. When I steppedwhen the class was over, a fellow student pulled me to the side, and he said, "Dont you know that George Washington was a liar? You shouldnt have said that." So, indoctrination was taking place in Puerto Rico in a very sophisticated, subtle way. I was deeply and profoundly, profoundly indoctrinated into believing that Puerto Rico could never be an independent country, that Puerto Rico could not be self-sufficient, that we will starve to death if the United States will walk out of Puerto Rico. Thats how I was influenced for the first 14 years in my life.

Then, in Chicago, I found myself facing things that I had never thought I would facefor example, discrimination for the first time, finding racism for the first time, a real, real blatant racism, and discrimination when I was trying to find a job. In the military, I also found the same, same practice. Yeah, there was racism. There was discrimination. So, when I came back home from Vietnamand for some reason, Vietnam changed my way of life, my way of thinking. I came back from Vietnam, and I found myself obligated to find out what was the reason for being for the war in Vietnam. I found myself more sympathetic with the Vietnamese people than I thought that I would ever be. And little by little, I was starting to discover what Vietnam had done. For example, I discovered Dien Bien Phu, how the Vietnamese fought against the French, how they decolonized themselves. I came back to Chicago, and I found a community of Puerto

AMY GOODMAN: You got a Bronze Star when you were there.

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: I got a Bronze Star for that.

AMY GOODMAN: What was your brother doing during this time?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: Who?

AMY GOODMAN: Your brother.

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: My brother? My brother was studying. But when I came back from Vietnam, I found a community, a Puerto Rican community, that was beginning to wake up, to demand to be seen, to be heard, to transcend its marginalization. And I started organizing in the community. At that time, the Young Lords were coming up out of Chicago. It was a street gang that became political. A lot of things were happening in 1967. For example, it was 1967 when Dr. Martin Luther King pronounced himself against the war in Vietnam and called it a criminal war. 1967 was when Muhammad Ali refused to be drafted. And he paid a big price.

And 1967 was the first time that I was invited by a nationalist, a Puerto Rican nationalist, to go to his house and listen to some tapes of the nationalists. And one of the tapesone of the tapes was Lolita Lebrn, who had gone to Washington the 1st of March, 1954. And she said in that interview that she came to Washington not to kill anyone, but to give her life for Puerto Rico. And when I heard that woman say that, I was amazed. I was amazed. And from that moment on, we started working on the campaign to free the five. There were five Puerto Rican political prisoners. And from 1967 on, in Chicago, we started to organize a campaign for their release. By that time, Lolita Lebrn, Irvin Flores, Andres Figueroa Cordero, Rafael Cancel Miranda had been in prison for 13 years, and and Oscar Collazo Lpez had been in prison for 17 years. And we believed that we should do something to win their release. And finally, in 1979, they were released from prison.

JUAN GONZLEZ: I wanted to ask you, when you were in Chicago, you helped to start a school, didnt you, in Chicago, that diddo I have it right? Luis Gutirrez was a student at that school?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: No, Luis Gutirrez was a tutor at the school.

JUAN GONZLEZ: Oh, tutor.

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: Yeah.

AMY GOODMAN: The now congressman.

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: Yes, yes. In 1972, we started an alternative high school for high school dropouts. I have been involved in the issue of education since 1967. We fought to get schools built in the community. We fought to bring bilingual education into the schools. We fought to open up the doors at the universities, especially University of Illinois Chicago Circle and Northeastern, universities where programs were implemented to allow Latino students, because it was not only Puerto Ricans, we were also involved in helping the Latino population in general. So, those programs still exist, the programs at University of Illinois, the program at Northeastern University and our high school. Our high school is a really, really, really interesting project. It was based on Paulo Freires Pedagogy of the Oppressed. And we were hoping that we would get dropouts, put them through a very rigorous educational system, and do it without any funds. What we did, we asked college professors to give us three hours for a class. And wethe students that were at the university, that we had helped to get into the university, we asked them to be tutors. And thats how Congressman Gutirrez got to be a tutor at the high school.

AMY GOODMAN: So talk about going to prison and what it meant for you in prison. You were in solitary confinement for over 12 years?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: I was in solitary confinement for 12 years, four months. And first, from 1986, June 1986, in Marion, USP Marion in Illinois, up til 1994, and then, from 1994 to November 1996 in ADX. In ADX, for the first 58 days, I was awakened every half-hour, 58 days straight. So that will give you an idea what it is to be in prison, to be under those conditions.

JUAN GONZLEZ: Well, I wanted to ask you, in terms of the reasons for your being in prison, I mean, clearly, the big narrative that youre seeing in the commercial media is this was a terrorist, this is a person whos unrepentant, this is a person who never should be allowed to be out free again, is certainly not celebrated as a hero. The issue of the FALNs campaign of bombings that occurred in that period of of time, your retrospectively looking back at that, how you view that campaign and how you feel about it now, and also the criticisms that some people have that youthat the organization participated in the killing of many innocent people?

OSCAR LPEZ RIVERA: First of all, yeah, I want to make this point clear. I have neverfor me, human life is precious. I was in Vietnam. I hope and I pray that I neverI never killed anyone. Now, we know. We know. But if youre a soldier, you know when you have shot somebody, because there is a field of range that youre covering. And on my path, I never saw anyone being wounded or killed. So, I can say that I came home from Vietnam without blood on my hands. I hope so. For me, the issue of human life, human life is precious. Now, Ive been asked over and over about the bombings. Ive been asked over and over what took place. I can guarantee one thing: that I have never participated in an act where a human lifewhere we knew that a human life was going to be put in jeopardy. OK?

Now, one thing that I want to make a very, very clear: Puerto RicoPuerto Rico, as a colony, has every rightevery rightto its independence. To its independence, it has every right. And by international law, Puerto RicoPuerto Rico can usePuerto Ricans who want to decolonize Puerto Rico can use all the means at their disposal, including the use of force. Im not advocating for that. Lets make that clear. By 1992, by 1992, all of us who were in prison had taken a position that we will notwe will not promote violence, that we will notwe were not going to be active in violence. In 1999, mostly all my co-defendants were released. Up to this time, up to this time, almost 20 years later, there has not been a minute, not a single act, a criminal or any kind of violation committed by my co-defendants. That really should be the measuring point for anything. That should be the way that we should be seen. We left prison. We committed ourselves not to act violently. And thus far, no one can accuse us of doing so.

Now, had there been any evidence against any of usany of usI guarantee you that I wouldnt be here today, because the federal judge, the federal judge we faced, he told us that if the law would allow it, he would sentence all of us to death, if the law would allow it. And that sometimesthat narrative is never talked about. But theres a narrative. Theres a narrative. Colonialism is a crime against humanity. We have to be clear on that. And Puerto RicansPuerto Ricans, to tolerate colonialism, we are tolerating a crime. So, I think that its important to understand that we love Puerto Rico. I love my homeland. Thats my homeland. Thats my promised land. And the way I see it is that we have to decolonize Puerto Rico. Now, the issue of violence is no longer one that we will ever entertain or that well ever promote. And lets be clear on that, because I think that its important for people to know who we are, who we are as people, as human beings, because we lovewe love our homeland. We alsowe also love justice and freedom for the whole world.

Continued here:

After 35 Years in Prison, Puerto Rican Activist Oscar Lpez Rivera on Freedom & Decolonization - Democracy Now!

Auditor Independence Definition from Financial Times Lexicon

Auditor independence can be defined as a reference to the independence of internal or external auditors from parties that might have a financial interest in the business being audited.

Independence requires:

- Independence of mind: The state of mind that permits the provision of an opinion without being affected by influences that compromise professional judgment, allowing an individual to act with integrity, and exercise objectivity and professional scepticism.

- Independence in appearance: The avoidance of facts and circumstances that are so significant that a reasonable and informed third party, having knowledge of all relevant information, including safeguards applied, would reasonably conclude a firms, or a member of the assurance teams, integrity, objectivity or professional scepticism had been compromised.

The use of the word independence on its own may create misunderstandings. Standing alone, the word may lead observers to suppose that a person exercising professional judgment ought to be free from all economic, financial and other relationships. This is impossible, as every member of society has relationships with others. Therefore, the significance of economic, financial and other relationships should also be evaluated in the light of what a reasonable and informed third party having knowledge of all relevant information would reasonably conclude to be unacceptable.

Example

AU section 220 of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) states that for auditor independence the auditor "must be without bias with respect to the client since otherwise he [or she] would lack that impartiality necessary for the dependability of his [or her] findings, however excellent his [or her] technical proficiency may be."

The International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) provides a framework of principles that members of assurance teams, firms and network firms should use to identify threats to independence, evaluate the significance of those threats, and, if the threats are other than clearly insignificant, identify and apply safeguards to eliminate the threats or reduce them to an acceptable level, such that independence of mind and independence in appearance are not compromised.

In situations when no safeguards are available to reduce the threat to an acceptable level, the only possible actions are to eliminate the activities or interest creating the threat, or to refuse to accept or continue the assurance engagement.

In the US context independency is governed by the SEC, PCAOB and AICPA.

In the case of Enron collapse in 2001, auditors independence was violatedand Arthur and Andersonfell alongwith its client, leaving us with only big four audit firms,'the big four',rather thanfive, as previously. [1]

Originally posted here:

Auditor Independence Definition from Financial Times Lexicon

House Republicans Vote to Strip Away Post-Financial Crisis Safeguards – Roll Call

House Republicans voted 233-186 Thursday to repeal large parts of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial overhaul, just one month short of the seventh anniversary of the landmark laws enactment.

The measure would unwind much of the financial structure put in place in the wake of the financial crisis. One of the biggest pieces of legislation enacted during the two terms of President Barack Obama, Dodd-Frank was designed to prevent the type of practices that led to the 2008 financial crisis and the recession it caused. Republicans have long complained that the law stifled the economy because it put too large a regulatory burden on business.

All of the promises of Dodd-Frank were broken, said Rep. Jeb Hensarling, the Texan who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and who authored the bill. It promised us it would lift the economy, but we are stymied in the weakest and slowest recovery in the post-war era.

The vote to repeal was more partisan than the House vote on the law in 2010. Walter B. Jones of North Carolina was the only Republican to vote against the bill Thursday and no Democrats voted for it. Three House Republicans voted for Dodd-Frank in 2010 and 19 Democrats voted against it.

Dodd-Frank provisions reached deep into U.S. business and financial life, setting up a new agency to monitor financial products, a multi-agency supervisory body to identify risks to the financial system, and tougher disclosure and other regulatory standards for financial institutions.

Republicans forget that Dodd-Frank was passed in response to a crisis that pushed the unemployment rate to 10 percent, spurred 11 million home foreclosures and caused the evaporation of $13 trillion in private wealth, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said Thursday.

Today House Republicans are pushing a dangerous Wall Street first bill that will drag us straight back into the days of the Great Recession, the California Democrat said, calling the measure dastardly and malicious.

Republicans say Dodd-Frank provisions made it harder for banks to provide loans to business. They complain that small bankers in particular have been handicapped by the cost of complying with the many regulations that emerged from Dodd-Frank.

The House bill is rife with provisions that drew veto threats last year from Obama, including a repeal of the Labor Departments so-called fiduciary rule and an overhaul of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an agency established by Dodd-Frank..

Democrats say it would end protections put in place after the 2008-9 financial crisis, intimidate regulators by removing their financial independence, and effectively kill a dozen bipartisan provisions by putting them in a bill that Senate Democrats are expected to block because of its objectionable provisions.

I believe it will lead to the next financial crisis, said Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, D-Mass., a member of the Financial Services Committee. This is an awful bill. This is a real stinker.

The bill would repeal many key parts of Dodd-Frank:

The bill would also make changes to the financial regulatory structure that pre-dated Dodd-Frank. It would put the Federal Reserves bank supervisory function and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation into the appropriations process. And it would require an annual audit of the Fed.

The Congressional Budget Office said last month that Hensarlings bill would deliver more than $24 billion in deficit reduction over 10 years, including $14.5 billion from the elimination of the Orderly Liquidation Authority. Most of the rest of the savings would come from cuts to the CFPBs budget.

The House bill isnt expected to be taken up in the Senate.

Sen. Michael D. Crapo, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, held a hearing Thursday on the importance of smaller, local banks. These community banks have been the targets of bipartisan, regulatory relief bills in recent years, such as a provision to lengthen the time between bank examinations by regulators.

The Idaho Republican promised more hearings in the coming months on regulatory reforms that would spur the economy with the goal of ultimately passing a meaningful and bipartisan reform package.

Among the specific changes he mentioned were measures to lessen paperwork and lift certain mortgage restrictions for community banks.

The House bill would likely have its greatest impact on the big banks. Dodd-Frank required banks with $50 billion or more in assets to adopt so-called living wills describing how they would be unwound if they failed, and subjecting them to enhanced, prudential regulation.

Smaller banks were exempted from Dodd-Franks main features, but stricter mortgage rules, compliance with the Volcker Rule, and what critics call a Dodd-Frank trickle-down effect are seen by Republicans and some Democrats as overly, and unnecessarily, burdensome on community banks.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, R-Wisc., told House members that our community banks are in trouble. They are being crushed by the costly rules imposed on them by the Dodd-Frank Act.

Smaller, local banks historically have lent heavily to small, local businesses. But rules requiring a more statistical approach to lending, as opposed to community banks strength of often actually knowing their borrowers, are blamed for community banks losing much of the small business lending market.

Republicans see economic harm because small businesses have created fewer jobs than in past recoveries.

But Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wisc., said the Republican talk about the bill helping community banks is not fooling anyone.

This legislation unleashes every bloodthirsty, greedy Wall Street super-predator back to the American people to feast on our misery like they did pre-Dodd-Frank, she said.

Get breaking news alerts and more from Roll Call on your iPhone or your Android.

Original post:

House Republicans Vote to Strip Away Post-Financial Crisis Safeguards - Roll Call

How Are Analysts Interpreting Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR)’s Relative Strength? – Nelson Research

Relative strength is a momentum-investing technique that compares the performance of a stock to that of the overall market. Traders and investors can target the strongest performers as compared to the market overall, creating investment recommendations by using specific calculations. Relative strength assumes a stock whose price has been moving upward will continue to rise. Traders and investors who use relative strength have specific entry and exit strategies. Traders and investors using this technique buy securities that show signs of strength and then sell them as when they begin to appear weak. Relative strength is also applied to more complex strategies. Investors use relative strength in order to single out top performers within a group of potential investments, comparing the performance of each commodity to other securities or to a specific benchmark index. There are multiple ways to calculate relative. Relative strength doesnt take into account the risk assessment with a particular investment. Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR)s Nine-Day Relative Strength is51.99% and its Fourteen-Day Relative Strength is 51.96%. Looking back further, Twenty-Day Relative Strength is51.90% and its Fifty-Day Relative Strength is51.90%. Finally, its One-Hundred-Day Relative Strength is 48.87%.

The Open is the start of trading on a securities exchange. The open indicates the start of an official business day for an exchange, meaning that transactions may begin for the day. The different exchanges have different opening times. Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) opened at $0.5. Its high for the day was $0.5, its low was $0.5 and last trade price was $0.5. Standard Deviation is a measure of the current average variability of return. A move of (plus or minus) 1 std deviation means a 33% odds for a major price move, whereas a move of (plus or minus) 3 std deviations means a 1% odds for a major price move. Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR)s Standard Deviation is +0.89.

Weighted Alpha is a measure of how much a stock has risen or fallen over a one-year period with a higher weighting for recent price activity. Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR)s Weighted Alpha is -49.26. Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR)s TrendSpotter Opinion, the signal from Trendspotter, a Barchart trend analysis system that uses wave theory, market momentum & volatility in an attempt to find a general trend, is Buy.

Barchart Opinions show investors what a variety of popular trading systems are suggesting. These Opinions take up to 2 years worth of historical data and runs the prices through thirteen technical indicators. After each calculation, a buy, sell or hold value for each study is assigned, depending on where the price is in reference to the interpretation of the study. Todays opinion, the overall signal based on where the price lies in reference to the common interpretation of all 13 studies, for Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR) is 72% Buy. Relative Strength is part of technical analysis. Technical analysis is a trading tool used to judge securities as well as attempt to forecast their future moves by analyzing trading activity statistics like volume and price fluctuations. Where fundamental analysts attempt to evaluate the intrinsic value of a security, technical analytics observe charts of price movements and forecast future price movements through various analytical tools to evaluate a securitys strength or weakness.

Technical analysts believe in the idea that price changes of a security and past trading activity are better indicators of that given securitys future price movements than simply the intrinsic value of said security. Technical analysis was created out of simple concepts learned from Dow Theory, the theory of trading market movements that originated from the early writings of Charles Dow. The two basic assumptions of Dow Theory say analysis are: 1.) market price discounts all the factors that could influence a securitys price and: 2.) market price movements are not simply random but move in an identifiable pattern and that repeat over time. The first assumption, that price discounts everything, means the market price of a commodity at any given point in time perfectly reflects all available information, and re represents the securitys true fair value. It is based on the idea the market price always reflects the sum total knowledge of the market.

The second basic assumption, the notion that price changes are not just random, leads to the belief that both short term and long term market trends can be identified, allowing traders to profit from investing when following the existing trend. Technical analysis is used in order to forecast the price movement of all tradable instruments that are subject to the forces of supply and demand, including currency pairs, bonds, stocks, and futures. Technical analysis can be viewed simply as the study of supply and demand as reflected in market price movements of securities. It is usually applied to price changes, though analysts may also track numbers other than price, such as open interest figures or trading volume.

Many technical indicators have been developed by analysts over the years in an attempt to forecast future price movements accurately. Some indicators are focused on determining the how strong a trend is and also the possibility of its continuation while other indicators focus on identifying current market trends, including resistance areas and support. Commonly used technical indicators include moving averages, trendlines, and momentum indicators like the moving average convergence divergence (MACD) indicator. Technical analysts apply these indicators to charts of differing timeframes. Short-term traders may use charts covering one-minute timeframes to hourly or even four-hour timeframes, and traders analyzing more long-term price movements look over daily, weekly or monthly charts.

Disclaimer: The advice provided on this website is general advice only. It has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. Before acting on this advice you should consider the appropriateness of the advice, having regard to your own objectives, financial situation and needs. Where quoted, past performance is not indicative of future performance.

View post:

How Are Analysts Interpreting Sealand Natural Resources Inc (SLNR)'s Relative Strength? - Nelson Research

NEXUS pipeline revved and waiting – News – Times Reporter – New … – New Philadelphia Times Reporter

Project could still hit year-end service target if FERC gives approval soon.

NORTH CANTON The stalled NEXUS Gas Transmission project still could be completed before year's end, but federal regulators would have to approve the pipeline soon to meet that target.

"We've got that race car sitting there revved and all ready to go, we just need that go ahead," NEXUS President James Grech said Wednesday during theUtica Capital Midstream Seminar at Walsh University.

NEXUS was one of several pipeline projects discussed at the conference hosted by the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce and ShaleDirectories.com.

NEXUS is a proposed 36-inch-diameter interstate natural gas pipeline. The $2.1 billion project would cross eastern and northern Stark County and the city of Green in Summit County and carry natural gas from the Utica and Marcellus shales to users in Ohio, Michigan, Canada and other Midwestern markets.

Detroit-based DTE Energy and Spectra Energy, which merged this year with Calgary-based Enbridge, are partners in the project.

NEXUS had expected the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to approve the project earlier this year and to have the pipeline in service during the fourth quarter.

That didn't happen before one of FERC's three commissioners resigned in February, leaving the commission without a quorum and stalling the project. The term of another commissioner ends June 30.

"We were waiting until the last minute to see if we got our certificate, and obviously we didn't get it, but we feel pretty good about our prospects once FERC has its quorum back in getting approved," Grech said.

FERC nominees

That quorum could arrive soon.

On Tuesday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committeesent President Donald J. Trump's two FERC nominees Robert Powelson and Neil Chatterjee to the full Senate for a vote.

Powelson is a member of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. Chatterjee is a senior energy adviser to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky.

Federal bureaucracy isn't the only obstacle for NEXUS, however.

The Coalition to Reroute NEXUS (CORN) landowner group, with support from the city of Green, took FERC and NEXUS to court in May, asking a federal judge to bar FERC from approving the project.

CORN alleged that FERC's review of the project was arbitrary and failed to account for safety issues. The case is pending.

NEXUS also would need to find workers to build the pipeline at a time when other projects, such as Energy Transfer's Rover Pipeline are under construction.

Grech said contractors have assured NEXUS they will have the needed workers to build the pipeline.

Project spokesman Adam Parker said NEXUS would follow all safety and environmental guidelines in trying to meet the year-end target.

"We pride ourselves on that and feel it sets us apart from others," Parker said.

Utopia underway

Conference attendees also heard an update on Kinder Morgan's Utopia Pipeline.

Utopia is a 12-inch-diameter pipeline designed to carry natural gas liquids, such as ethane or an ethane-propane mix, roughly 215 miles from Harrison County to Fulton County for shipment to Canada.

The $540 million pipeline is under construction and should be in service in January, said Allen Fore, Kinder Morgan's vice president of public affairs.

Utopia's route crosses southwestern Stark County and parts of Tuscarawas and Carroll counties.

Reach Shane at 330-580-8338 or shane.hoover@cantonrep.com

On Twitter:@shooverREP

Read the rest here:

NEXUS pipeline revved and waiting - News - Times Reporter - New ... - New Philadelphia Times Reporter

Oceania Healthcare Limited (NZSE:OCA) Company Valuation & Investor Review – JCTY News

Oceania Healthcare Limited (NZSE:OCA) has a Q.i. Value of 53.00000. The purpose of the Q.i. Value is to help identify companies that are the most undervalued. Typically, the lower the value, the more undervalued the company tends to be. The Q.i. Value ranks companies using four ratios. These ratios consist of EBITDA Yield, FCF Yield, Liquidity, and Earnings Yield.

Checking in on some valuation rankings, Oceania Healthcare Limited (NZSE:OCA) has a Value Composite score of 70. Developed by James OShaughnessy, the VC score uses five valuation ratios. These ratios are price to earnings, price to cash flow, EBITDA to EV, price to book value, and price to sales.

The VC is displayed as a number between 1 and 100. In general, a company with a score closer to 0 would be seen as undervalued, and a score closer to 100 would indicate an overvalued company. Adding a sixth ratio, shareholder yield, we can view the Value Composite 2 score which is currently sitting at 65.

Oceania Healthcare Limited (NZSE:OCA) has a current ERP5 Rank of 12232. The ERP5 Rank may assist investors with spotting companies that are undervalued. This ranking uses four ratios. These ratios are Earnings Yield, ROIC, Price to Book, and 5 year average ROIC. When looking at the ERP5 ranking, it is generally considered the lower the value, the better.

Looking at some alternate time periods, the 12 month price index is 1.05063, the 24 month is 1.05063, and the 36 month is 1.05063. Narrowing in a bit closer, the 5 month price index is 1.05063, the 3 month is 1.05063, and the 1 month is currently 1.05063.

Watching some historical volatility numbers on shares of Oceania Healthcare Limited (NZSE:OCA), we can see that the 12 month volatility is presently 0.000000. The 6 month volatility is 0.000000, and the 3 month is spotted at 0.000000.

Following volatility data can help measure how much the stock price has fluctuated over the specified time period. Although past volatility action may help project future stock volatility, it may also be vastly different when taking into account other factors that may be driving price action during the measured time period.

We can now take a quick look at some historical stock price index data. Oceania Healthcare Limited (NZSE:OCA) presently has a 10 month price index of 1.05063. The price index is calculated by dividing the current share price by the share price ten months ago. A ratio over one indicates an increase in share price over the period. A ratio lower than one shows that the price has decreased over that time period.

Go here to read the rest:

Oceania Healthcare Limited (NZSE:OCA) Company Valuation & Investor Review - JCTY News

Proposed Trump budget cuts could pose security danger for Caribbean, United States – Miami Herald


Miami Herald
Proposed Trump budget cuts could pose security danger for Caribbean, United States
Miami Herald
Caribbean leaders say proposed cuts to the U.S. State Department's foreign aid budget could have serious implications for the region and the United States at a time when there is increasing concern about terrorism. Hosted by Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-New ...

The rest is here:

Proposed Trump budget cuts could pose security danger for Caribbean, United States - Miami Herald

Barbados Wins Top Culinary Honors At 2017 Taste Of The Caribbean; BVI Takes Chef Of The Year – VI Consortium (press release)

MIAMI, FL Barbados is the Caribbean National Culinary Team of the Year, according to a release issued by the Caribbean Hotel and Tourism Association (CHTA).

The Bajan team won the top honors in the finale of the 2017 Taste of the Caribbean culinary competition at the Hyatt Regency in Miami Wednesday evening, after also bagging individual honors for Ryan Adamson, Caribbean Bartender of the Year, and Damian Leach for Seafood.

Kenneth Molyneaux from the British Virgin Islands was crowned Caribbean Chef of the Year and also took home the top prize in the Beef Competition. The Cayman Islands Melissa Logan was Caribbean Pastry Chef of the Year, while Kenria Taylor from The Bahamas was Caribbean Junior Chef of the Year. The Chocolate winner was Bonaires Sherundly Bernabela.

We really applaud all these Taste of the Caribbean participants, their national hotel and tourism associations, team managers and sponsors for developing 14 astounding Caribbean national teams to compete at this event, said Frank Comito, Director General and CEO of CHTA. The teams commitment to the region showed in the heart and soul that each of the participants invested in their presentations, he added.

Presented by CHTA, Taste of the Caribbean hosted cooking and bartending competitions between teams from The Bahamas, Barbados, Bonaire, the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Curaao, Jamaica, Puerto Rico, St. Lucia, St. Maarten, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

This years event was held June 2-6 at the Hyatt Regency Miami.

Excerpt from:

Barbados Wins Top Culinary Honors At 2017 Taste Of The Caribbean; BVI Takes Chef Of The Year - VI Consortium (press release)

The irony of Trump and his National Caribbean American Heritage Month proclamation – Amsterdam News

Not to be outdone by his predecessors, Barack Obama and George W. Bush, who signed the bill declaring National Caribbean-American Heritage Month, June 6, 2006, Donald Trump Wednesday, May 31, issued his first CAHM proclamation.

The Trump proclamation honored the 11th anniversary of the month, which pays tribute to Caribbean immigrants and their contribution since slavery to these United States.

The irony of the Trump proclamation was hardly lost on this writer, especially because it comes at a time of great unease for the Caribbean and immigrant community across the country.

It comes at a time when the U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency has boasted of increased deportation rates, stating in a report recently that its deported some 41,000 immigrants in 100 days back to their countries of birth, especially to Latin America and the Caribbean.

While ICE continues following the Trump executive orders of January, rounding up and deporting not just criminal immigrants but immigrants whose only crime has been to live in the U.S. without legal working papers, and his Department of Homeland Security threatens to repatriate 58,000 Haitians back to Haiti next January, Trumps National Caribbean-American Heritage Month proclamation pays tribute to Americas greatest undocumented immigrant Caribbean nativeAlexander Hamilton.

Throughout our history, Caribbean Americans have helped create and maintain the strength and independence of our Nation, the proclamation reads. Alexander Hamilton, who came from poverty in Nevis, was a key contributor to our Constitution and the first Secretary of the Treasury, helping to establish our modern financial system and to create the United States Coast Guard.

The irony, however, lost on the man who tweeted a word that does not exist, covfefe, is that Hamilton was undeniably an undocumented immigrant.

The Nevis-born Hamilton, who went on to become an American statesman and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, simply arrived from St. Croix, Virgin Islands in 1772. He did not have a visa or a work permit or a green card, but history tells us he merely entered the country and began studying here.

And like many immigrants, Hamilton struggled, and then strived and excelled, much like millions of undocumented immigrants today are doing and seeking a chance to legally keep on doing.

In identifying and paying tribute to this Caribbean son, Trump has ignorantly or hypocritically chosen to ignore the fact that Hamilton was also an undocumented immigrant.

And although Trump has chosen to encourage all Americans to join in celebrating the history, culture and achievements of Caribbean Americans with appropriate ceremonies and activities, tens of thousands of Caribbean immigrants are living in fear of being arrested and deported back to countries they barely know.

For the anti-immigrant bigot in the White House to pay tribute to the culture Caribbean Americans have shared with our nation and the many contributions they have made to our society is not only ironic, it is downright nauseating, and even Hamiltons bones must be turning over from this despicable display of hypocrisy.

The writer is CMO at Hard Beat Communications, Inc. which owns the brands NewsAmericasNow, CaribPRWire and InvestCaribbeanNow.

View post:

The irony of Trump and his National Caribbean American Heritage Month proclamation - Amsterdam News