The Tak Team Blog

Hailing from Montreal, Quebec, 57-year-old economist and author, Marie Josee Kravis serves as the president of the Museum of Modern Art in New York. She is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, which is based in Washington and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. She is also part of the International Advisory Board of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. Furthermore, she has served on the boards of Ford Motor Co, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, Vivendi and IAC/Interactive Corp. Recently, Marie Josee Kravis became a member of the Board of the Qatar Museum Authority.

Aside from sitting on the board of Memorial Sloan-Kettering and the hedge fund-heavy Robin Hood Foundation, Marie Josee Kravis also donates substantially to several organizations around New York.

In 1994, she married billionaire financier Henry Kravis. Together with her husband, she has given more than $30 million to Mount Sinai and more than a million dollars to the Metropolitan Museum in recent years. Aside from several nonprofit organizations, she has also made substantial political donations. The conservative Marie Josee likewise supports a few right wing political causes. She has given contributions to the RNC as well as to the presidential campaigns of John McCain and George Bush.

We are all too aware of the anectode involving Isaac Newton and the falling apple, which it is said to have inspired the great scientist to later on devise and formulate his famous Law of Universal Gravitation, succintly stated in the principle that ‘everything that goes up must come down’. Certainly true, this principle, for most of the world we live in - including economics as it relates to OPEC, the oil cartel. To be sure OPEC in years past more often than not seemed to be working on a principle running exactly opposit Newton’s famous Law and which could be enunciated with the dictum: ‘everything that comes down must go up’. With respect to the price fluctuations at the pump we have all been subjected to for the most part of the year, I thought I’d take a brief trip into OPEC’s past fortunes and explore projections into the future. Readers are cautioned that due to the nature of the subject, any consideration must necessarily carry a political weight. As we live in times of democracy everyone is of course free to agree, agree to disagree, disagree to agree and disagree to disagree as the case may be.

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is comprised of eleven member nations, each with its own individual agenda: Algeria (1969), Indonesia (1962), the Islamic Republic of Iran (1960), Iraq (1960), Kuwait (1960), the Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (1962), Nigeria (1971), Qatar (1961), Saudi
Arabia (1960), United Arab Emirates (1967) and Venezuela (1960). These countries account for 78.3 percent of the world proven crude oil reserves by region. In the past, member states almost never showed identical or even similar interests and often found it difficult to reach consensus on strategy. Countries with relatively small oil reserves or others like Iran and Nigeria with large populations and few other resources often played the part of the “hawks” typically pushing for higher prices. Producers like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait with massive reserves and small populations feared instead that high prices would accelerate technological change and the development of new deposits, thus reducing the value of their oil in the ground. They played often times the part of the “doves” and, on a closer scrutiny, it would appear that the ‘doves’ are right since their fears are now in the process of being materialized.

OPEC, with headquarters in Vienna, Austria, says it has lost control of crude prices despite a pledge by its ministers to increase oil production to meet an ever increasing demand. The cartel adopted similar strategies before, notably during times of social unrest involving its own member states. This was the strategy adopted after the British blunder in Iran that led to the fall of Shah Reza Pahlavi in the mid ’60’s, when Saudi Arabia announced it would ‘cover’ Iran’s oil production by exceeding its own quota and then didn’t. Or during the First Gulf War, when again OPEC ‘guaranteed’ the West with increases in supply to balance off prices - and did so but only for a month, right to the end of the hostilities - which also lasted one month. Or, most recently, during America’s second armed intervention in Iraq.

This tendency of individual producers to cheat on the cartel agreement is a long-standing feature of OPEC behavior, so that official prices have been unstable - with a few exceptions - practically all the times. But now it seems that the cartel is facing a brand new problem never before anticipated: it is fast reaching maximum production. Put differently, OPEC is no longer able to quench the world’s thirst for oil, especially since this thirst is no longer the domain of the West. With its ever rapid modernization, China is poised to become a major consumer of crude - and its effects are beginning already to be felt the world over. And yet, despite the high cost of a barrel of crude, world demand shows no signs of slowing. Consumption is now believed by many analysts to be pressing up against the limits of what the world can produce.

Saudi Arabia is the only country believed to have any surplus production left, and even then the Saudis are pumping close to 90 percent of capacity, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. With worldwide demand this year rising by roughly 2 million barrels per day, whatever excess capacity is out there will be gone soon, with the end result that maybe not this year, but certainly in ‘06 there won’t be any excess capacity left.

That’s little solace to energy consumers, who have been watching rising crude oil prices push pump prices to record levels. And the U.S. economy is already beginning to show signs of slowing down and inflation is starting to creep up. It is out of the question that a continued rise in oil prices will eventually slow growth.

Inevitably Western societies and Japan have started already to explore alternatives. Just like two American Administrations have made perfectly clear that oil will not be used as a bargaining chip against the West, Western governments are already steadfastly at work to reduce their dependence on the very volatile Middle East. Initiatives are mushrooming to find new supplies of natural gas, to exctract fuel from plant material or building solar, wind or nuclear plants to make hydrogen for fuel-cell vehicles. But all this takes time to develop, and the general consensus among analysts is that things will become worse before they become better. And yet, OPEC seems to have begun to lose its grip as the single biggest source of energy - the Fall of the Gods.

OPEC maintains a rosy and somewhat philantropic website at http://www.opec.org that readers interested in this particular subject (and we all should be) are invited to view.

Luigi Frascati

Luigi Frascati is a Real Estate Agent based in Vancouver, British Columbia. He holds a Bachelor Degree in Economics and maintains a weblog entitled the Real Estate Chronicle at http://wwwrealestatechronicle.blogspot.com where you can find the full collection of his articles. Luigi is associated with the Sutton Group, the largest real estate organization in Canada, and is based with Sutton-Centre Realty in Burnaby, BC.

Luigi is very proud to be an EzineArticles Platinum Expert Author. Your rating at the footer of this Article is very much appreciated. Thank you.

Respected by some, feared by others, fascinating all, America today raises a lot of questions about his leadership around the world. Some facts seem to question his real capacity to play alone his recognized world leadership role. His quest in space through NASA is slowing down while his European counterpart has, again, registered a successful mission. 9/11 attacks revealed a Colosses aux pieds d’argile. However, the war in Iraq amidst diplomatic frustrations and international values relativisation, has confirmed America’s military capacity and supremacy in conducting a high Tech war.

On the other hand, Iraqi scenes of killings and insecurity show also that being able to conduct war does not necessary infer an ability to maintain peace. Now also, Katrina comes in to raise lots of questions acknowledged by the current President George W. Bush.

Accused of imperialism by some, seen by others as fighting the just war of Counter-Terrorism USA acknowledged role is still bringing a lot of controversies and discontentment around the world.

Our effort today is to look at the questions Katrina raises about America and par ricochet about every and each country’s capacity to read, plan and manage natural disasters. This quest, for sure, will not be apologetic but does not aim to be doleful. It aims at raising some issues and preparing us to find sustainable solutions to prevent natural disasters and also to manage man-made ones.

VERBA VERSUS RES

A lot have been said already. But what are the main revelations brought by Katrina? Someone had the audacity to compare the New Orleans anarchy to Darfur! We felt uncomfortable with this comparison. We had the feeling that Darfur cannot be compared to Katrina. At least, an African failure could not be compared to American mess! But it depends on from where we stand to look at this disaster. The fundamental difference is that one is man-made or started by human beings who are expected to be reasonable, the other is natural disaster or caused by nature, our mother nature. My concern here is HOW DO WE READ, PLAN AND RESPOND TO A DISASTER WHENEVER IT IS MAN-MADE OR NATURAL? How are we preventing a disaster caused by men (which we expect to be reasonable as stated by Aristotle) or by our mother nature (who is blind)? Can someone look at the New Orleans situation and compare it to Darfur in terms of politic empathy, mismanagement and lack of ethical commitment? Can we compare the despair, anarchy and state insensitiveness of these two parts of region?

A lot have been said about the disaster in New Orleans whose 67 % population is black and whose budget was cut by 44 millions to profit to FEMA despite its dangerous location below the sea level. Let me put it differently. Mutatis muntandis. What if this disaster was in Wisconsin? Could we expect the same level of mismanagement? What if this disaster happened in Detroit? Would it have been mismanaged like in New Orleans?
My deep feeling is human life should be respected and protected. And that is the role of our modern States to foster this fundamental right and to make it real. Why is it that this Credo was not respected? Where did we go wrong and what should we fix so that it does not happen again?
New Orleans is another illustration of America’s paradox:

“South Louisiana is the anchor of America’s Energy Coast, securing more than three-quarters of U.S. offshore oil and gas production — a greater share of our nation’s energy supply than even the kingdom of Saudi Arabia accounts for. The ports of south Louisiana, including New Orleans, are America’s gateway to the world, handling more than 20 percent of U.S. imports and exports each day, including more than 70 percent of all grains as they move from farms across the nation to markets overseas. And 40 percent of the seafood consumed by Americans each year comes through coastal Louisiana1″

SUSTAINABLE POLICY

If Tsunami took us by surprise, Katrina was predicted and was preceded a year before by the Hurricane Ivan. Ivan confirmed that New Orleans should be re-built and protected at a cost of 14 billions dollars. This proposal was not approved by the Government who found it too expensive and maybe not worthy. Today, analysis says that we will need 200 billions to rebuild New Orleans whose water has become very toxic and contaminated. The question may be “Should New Orleans be rebuilt at the same location or be relocated?

The rich and prosperous Campanian town of Pompeii was buried by the volcano Vesuve in 98 AD. Today, Katrina has shown us that we have to be prudent and read signs she sends to us.

Seniors citizens were abandoned in their bedrooms, sick people were left in their rooms of hospital rooms by usually dedicated personnel. Policemen did not have any choice rather than protecting and saving their own life and their families. Katrina has revealed that when one’s life is in danger there is hardly place for heroism. Emmanuel Kant’s ethics of duty has been defeated because there was no policy to sustain act of heroism or ethics of duty.

LEVELS OF COORDINATION FEDERAL, PROVINCIAL AND MUNICIPAL

Created by President Carter, FEMA’s motto is “Helping people before,during and after disasters”2. The Federal Emergency Management Agency is tasked with responding to , planning for, recovering from and mitigating against disasters. So do we read on the mission statement of the agency that became part of the Bush created Department of Homeland Security since March 2003.

9/11 was a man-made disaster. It was an attack which revealed a breach in the Homeland security system of America. A homeland security problem should be tackled at the security, intelligence level. Preventive actions can be taken, strong intelligence system should be put in place. Strong collaboration and flow of information should be passed among key levels of national organizations and institutions. But FEMA cannot be blamed alone. It is true that the legal fact of putting the city under siege alerts immediately the federal institution to step in and to come to the rescue of the local institution. We did not see it on time and as expected! Katrina reveals systemic dysfonctionment between federal, provincial and local structures or institutions in America and may be in our democratic nations.

It is the City’s responsibility to plan for evacuations in time such as Katrina. Also the city had records of people who are really needy in time of disasters. The City knew full well that it had a large population needing shelter that could not evacuate (otherwise, Mayor Nagin wouldn’t have ordered people into the Superdome). But the City failed to have the needed water, food, and other supplies stocked and on hand to take care of those people. This is shelter set-up 101, and is something that could and should have been included in the shelter plan. We saw the photos of the buses which could have been used to evacuate people sitting idle. What did the Mayor do? How did the municipal government collapse so strongly? And when the city was under siege, why did the federal responses ot come on time!
Weber has convinced us that bureaucracy is the key for efficiency. That’s why our system has become very bureaucratic. But do we still have the spirit behind Max Weber’s sociology of bureaucracy?

RACIAL POLICY

When African leaders behave badly towards their own citizens and are sponsored and supported by western countries, champions of democracy and good governance, one can be astonished that good example are not duplicated and imposed upon pairs by droit d’ingérence. On the contrary, it looks like bad leaders from developing countries have strong supports from their western pairs in the name of non interference. Eyadema was a patent example. So was Mobutu. So is Kagame whose government has committed crimes against humanity, crimes of war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
The same attitude has been revealed in America, through the Katrina hurricane. Black communities are hit, no one cares. No one cares to assist them immediately when they are deprived and impoverished by nature. No one cares! No one cares when it is time to care.
Since no one cares, we understand the state of anarchy into which the area sank: crimes, homicide, rapes,looting, despair, and acts of barbarism.

Media has been a clear demonstration of the ambient racism in the world despite the last World summit against racism which took place in Cape town, Africa3. Media have been reporting only comments on black people. After almost a week of starvation, those who went to take food from stores were differently portrayed. Blacks were looting,Whites were taking bread! Same fact, two interpretations revealing the state of racism in our world. When Kanye West says it loudly, we hypocritically say he is being extremist. But who is the hypocrite? Kanye West who truly says the message sent and is well perceived or the one who sends the message and who does not want others to talk about it.

We like their blues and jazz and hip pop but we don’t like them! We have seen images of very disturbing emotions. We have seen Devonta, a six year old kid, saving five other children younger than him who he did not know. On the other hand, the government who has means, resources and power did not send relief when expected, did not plan when alerted. National mourning day and prayers were decreed. Prayers which talk but which don’t walk are not Christian. The country was already under national mourning when Dr. Condolezza Rice was shopping ostensibly in Manhattan while her community was deprived of simple water! Private gesture, social interpretation! It reminds one of the Mississipi flood of 19274.

POLITICS AGAINST EFFICIENCY.

America has the most political patronage in the world. Mike Brown before his appointment as head of FEMA was, until last year, the head of a horse breeding association. He did not have any qualification nor competence to take this position. But, since this job is a politically patroned position, he got it. Since 2000, FEMA had its budget cut, and senior officials have been forced to retire or went to other agencies. This has undermined FEMA’s capacity to respond effectively. Political patronage facilitates corruption in the American system because most of the people are appointed in public services without respecting the UN Convention Against Corruption which requires a public service being selected upon “merit, equity and aptitude”5.

Public servants should be well trained, educated and having the Wilsonian mission of improving human condition. This vision for humanity should be proportionately compensated so that public servants are appreciated and envied both for their positions and their jobs and outcomes, and for what they stand for in the society.

JUST SOCIETY AND MOVEMENT FOR GOOD GOVERNANCE

What is a just society? A just society is the one whose priority is welfare rather than warfare. A just society or welfare society does not privilege bureaucracy bungle over humanity and fairness. A just society or welfare society looks for a democratic government whose democracy goes beyond electoral exercise and stiff principles. New Orleans was abandoned a long time before the Hurricane. So are American places like Detroit in Michigan! And since, le malheur ne vient jamais seul, Katrina hits to tell us more about. America’s society, a society which does not care about the poor, the orphans and those wretched of earth who happen to be mainly blacks! Is it by accident?

“I know that our planet is fragile, and that natural disasters like the one that recently assailed our American neighbors are a brutal reminder of that fragility. And we have seen so many lose their possessions(…) And as is universally the case in such circumstances, we have seen emerge entire segments of a population among the most destitute, men and women who had nowhere to go. Dispossessed, with no points of reference, facing sheer devastation, even utter dismay. Such images we have seen before from Darfur, from Haiti, from Niger. And this time they came from New Orleans, from the margins of an affluent society6.”

America’s sense of patriotism should really go beyond liberals and republican etiquette. America is most respected for his sense of patriotism beyond colors, states, municipalities, positions, genders… Patriotism calls upon citizens to serve, politically and professionally, the country at a moment of need by good civil service that is equally as compelling for the nation as is the Katrina disaster for New Orleans. Nationwide progressive movement for good governance can really save and bolder American patriotism which will continue to be seen as a model for modern democracies.

This can be possible only if our Institutions are more relevant in our world, i-e helping us to go from state of nature to state of right7.

SCIENTIFIC SOLUTIONS TO HALT HURRICANES

Hurricanes in the Atlantic, Typhoons in the west Pacific, Cyclones in the West Indian Ocean these huge rotating storms will continue to haunt our days and tranquility. Since we know it, we have to find a scientific way to resolve them or to slow their speed. This can be done only if we get a deep and measurable, then predictable understanding of these storms which are causing tragedy among us. We must control them, instead of leaving them destroying us. We have succeeded to make rain fall when scarcely needed, why not to slow hurricanes velocity ? We have succeeded to send spacecraft in remote areas of the galaxy. We should succeed to halt the hurricanes. We have a challenge over our heads, over our economies, over our lives, over our cultural understanding of natural disasters, over the traditional power of our intelligence. It belongs to us to show,as DR Martin Luther King Jr. was saying that “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in times of comfort and convenience, but where he stands in times of challenge and controversy”.

Europe has come out with a global policy including structural measures such as dams, river chanalisation and diversions, protection dykes, artificial flooding areas, plant and habitat engineering, and also non structural measures such as precautionary building, flood plain zoning, regulation and insurance, forecasting and early warning systems. Katrina calls for solidarity, mutual understanding, humanity and unity to make lives better on our planet.Let us find how!

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ross Hoffman, Controlling Hurricanes in Scientific American, September 2005 www.sciam.com

Mark Fischetti, Drowning New Orleans in Scientific American, October 2001 www.sciam.com

Max Weber, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, part III, chap. 6, pp. 650-78.
Immauel Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals.Pleaide (2000)
European Environment Agency, Report 21 in http://reports.eea.eu.int/Environmental_Issues_No_21/en/tab_content_RLR

John McPhee, The Control of Nature, Strauss & Giroux (2003)

John M. Barry, Rising Tide. The Great Missisipi Flood of 1927 and How It Changed America. Simon & Schuter (1998).

Jean-Pierre is an educator and has extensively worked in the field of equity and conflict prevention. He lives in Toronto.

B. The Press As Watchdog

Many constitutional scholars consider the point of carving out constitutional protection for press freedom to be to guarantee that the press is able to effectively question and challenge government policies and actions. The proper role of the press in relation to government, according to this view, is as watchdog: journalists serve an important function in maintaining both the honesty and effectiveness of government. Roy S. Gutterman, Note, Chilled Bananas: Why Newsgathering Demands More First Amendment Protection, 50 Syracuse L. Rev. 197 (2000). If government is left to its own devices, it will naturally tend toward secrecy and closed decision-making. Under this model of interaction, only a vigilant press can ferret out corruption and hold the feet of the government to the fire.

The classic expression of support for this role for the press in the national security context occurred in New York Times v. United States, a case involving the power of the government to prevent the publication of a classified study about the decision-making process that led the United States to enter the Vietnam War. New York Times Co. v. U.S., 403 U.S. 713, 717 (1971) (Black, J., concurring). Justice Black, in a concurring opinion supported by Justice Douglas, was highly critical of the restraints the U.S. government sought on publication in that case. He wrote that “the Founding Fathers gave the free press the protection it must have to fulfill its essential role in our democracy. The press was to serve the governed, not the governors. The Government’s power to censor the press was abolished so that the press would remain forever free to censure the Government. The press was protected so that it could bare the secrets of government and inform the people. Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell. In my view, far from deserving condemnation for their courageous reporting, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other newspapers should be commended for serving the purpose that the Founding Fathers saw so clearly.” Id.

This theory of the role of the press in a democratic society requires protection via the First Amendment as a prerequisite. The government must be unable to restrict or otherwise interfere with the ability of the press to select and publish its stories. While it might be possible to square government restrictions with this view in some situations, it is plain that proponents of the watchdog model are highly suspicious of any government interference whatsoever. Justice Douglas’ view of the First Amendment is in accord with this need for an unrestricted press: he interpreted “no law” to mean absolutely no interference with press freedoms by the government. Nichelle Frelix, Note, Turner Broadcast v. FCC: Modern Communications Development and the Evolving First Amendment, 16 WHITTIER L. REV. 685, 710 (1995). Were the government able to broadly (or even narrowly, according to some advocates) regulate the press, it would be able to largely choke off its ability to function as a check against government corruption.

While proponents view the press as an able watchdog capable of preventing significant abuses of authority, there have been a number of criticisms leveled against this model. First, critics have charged that a watchdog press often sacrifices accuracy in its quest for the story. Thus, advocacy often conflicts with the goal of accuracy because “[w]hen the public is bombarded with false assertions and inaccurate facts from a press that operates largely unchecked, the results directly contradict one of the historical purposes underlying the First Amendment: to foster an informed electorate.” Philip L. Judy, Comment, The First Amendment Watchdog Has a Flea Problem, 26 CAP. U.L. REV. 541, 541 (1997). According to this criticism, members of the press, encouraged to one-up each other by identifying government corruption, end up sacrificing truthfulness to advance their careers. Recent scandals at prominent press entities only seem to confirm this fear. See Timothy W. Maier, The Crumbling of The Fourth Estate, INSIGHT ON THE NEWS, May 24, 2004, at 30 (describing recent scandals at USAToday involving fabrications by prominent journalist Jack Kelley); Charles Lane, Charmed, I’m Sure: Why Newsrooms So Often Fail to Detect the Deceivers in Their Midst, WASHINGTON POST, May 2, 2004, at B03 (discussing a variety of recent scandals in press accuracy at both the New York Times and USAToday). However, a lack of truthfulness by some members of the media does not necessarily spell the end of the watchdog model. As Justice Brennan has pointed out, while “the press has, on occasion, grossly abused the freedom it is given by the Constitution … from the earliest days of our history, this free society, dependent as it is for its survival upon a vigorous free press, has tolerated some abuse.” Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc., 403 U.S. 29, 51 (1971). While some journalists who stray from strictly factual reporting will inevitably twist or distort some facts, the necessity of having someone to play the role of watcher to the government’s role as watchman justifies the model in his view despite occasional abuses. Second, some critics of the press as watchdog model have alleged that shifting power relationships have rendered it an outdated model. Because the power of corporations and other non-governmental entities has grown to challenge or exceed that of governments, the press should shift its focus from a watchdog against government to a watchdog against these new entities. See William E. Berry et al., Last Rights: Revisiting Four Theories of the Press 159-60 (John C. Nerone ed., 1995). This criticism is at best, however, an addition to the watchdog model and not a repudiation of it (at least in the case of embedded journalism). The need for the press to hold corporations accountable does not end the need for criticism and commentary about actions of the government. See Karen M. Marken, An “Unholy Alliance”: The Law of Media Ride-Alongs, 12 COMMLAW CONSPECTUS 33, 35 (2004) (analyzing this objection in the context of press “ride-alongs” with police officers). Additionally, this objection seems too narrow in light of the potential for corporate and government power to intermingle. Lobbying and other devices can be used by corporations to influence the government, and even if corporations are important actors, they can only impose speech restrictions indirectly through the government. At any rate, the United States government still appears to have sufficient powers that it should not be ignored by the press in its role as watchdog.

Teve Torbes is a prolific author about such subjects as fleas along with his favorite thing which is an air bed. He has also created a valuable air purifiers site.

Upon Naveen Jain’s exit from InfoSpace in December 2002, the next logical thing for him to do was to found a new company. True enough, Intelius, Inc. began its operations just a month after. Using a vast database of public records in the state and outside, Intellius offers over a hundred intelligence services, mostly pertaining to personal information. Intelius compiles information on a certain person from publicly available documents such as court papers, county papers, address registries, property records, business records, and more. It goes without saying that information like this is vital to everyday business and personal dealings. Such data help businesses make informed decisions in, for instance, hiring employees. For ordinary consumers, it could mean greater security, in that they could use this information to weed out inauspicious contacts in their community, from the neighborhood nanny to the house contractor. Intelius also has a ready capacity for people-searching, especially in Washington. In addition, the company offers a WSA Industry Achievement Award-winning identify theft prevention product, aptly called IDWatch. According to comScore, a massive number of potential clients go to Intelius.com for the company’s pay-per-use services, which include neighborhood reviews and reverse phone lookups. So far the company has catered to over seven million customers. Based in Bellevue, Washington, Intellius is one of the state’s most expansive Internet entities. The Puget Sound Business Journal acknowledged it was one of 2008’s “Fastest Growing Private Companies” and worthy of the distinction of being one of the “Best Places to Work.” Washington CEO Magazine agrees on the latter, naming Intelius one of its finalists for the state’s “Best Companies to Work For.” Among 50 companies in Washington, Intelius ranks 8th on Deloitte and Touche’s list of the fastest-growing technology companies. Above all, Intelius is the recipient of the 2006 American Business Award for Best New Company, which, according to the New York Post, is the equivalent of an Oscar.

After the dance the piper must be paid. To help us calculate the cost of paying the piper we will borrow from the math of physics. In the laws of physics there resides an immutable principle whose exact formulations I do not know, but even a novice like me can know how it works. If you throw logs on a flame (cause), a roaring fire is what you get. (Effect) I know it probably seems too dumb, bothering to explain something so simple. But I for one believe it is the ability to see this that most people have as an ordinary function of the brain that liberals may have been born without. To most of us it is what we call common sense. It is what teenagers seem to lose for a while and what liberals seem to have lost forever, if they ever had it.

The things mentioned in the following list may not be occurring as a direct result of some liberal bill passed in the legislature. But in every case it is a concomitant to some liberal bill, attitude, concession or notion. Let’s do some cause and effect viewing.

Cause: Roe V. Wade the landmark ruling that brought in the abortion practices that exist today.

Effect: The slaughter of upwards of 450 million babies. Notice I didn’t use the word “fetus.” I won’t dignify abortions by hiding them behind a scientific word that is supposed to make it less than murder. My brother asked me a few years ago what I thought the most dangerous place in this country would be. I pondered his question for a while. I thought of cities like Detroit or New Orleans where the murder rate is high. I cannot remember exactly what answer I finally gave him, but I will never forget the answer he finally gave me. He said…the most dangerous place to be in this country right now is a mother’s womb.

Cause: Removal of prayers in the public school system.

Effect: It is now easier for a child to get guns, knives and drugs into a school; than a prayer. The metal detectors, police, sniffing dogs, arrests, expulsions and stiffer punishments may be suppressing this malady to some degree but the real question is, why for the first time in history do children want to bring these things to school. Let’s not let them look to a higher power on the school grounds but watch as they suffer the consequences of being left to lower powers and compunctions. Maybe we should send school kids to give testimony before congress to explain their feelings about these things. The 9/11 commission would not have any more to say about terror than any of our school children who after events like the Columbine Massacre could write the definition for terror. They undoubtedly would start their address to congress with a familiar expression of youth, heard everywhere in our country today. Although I have several degrees from institutions of higher learning I don’t think I could find a more eloquent expression than the one our kids would use…Duh!

Cause: The preoccupation with and the exploitation of sex in Hollywood, TV and the media in general.

Effect: A rise in sexually transmitted diseases now down to the primary school level.
Millions of un-planned pregnancies resulting in abortion or life shattering consequences that children should never have to face, are prevalent countrywide. The hypocrisy of the stars and celebrities is a mockery that no one ever seems to call them out for. Celebrities regularly spew out the language and behavior of free and open sex in movies, sitcoms, and magazines, then appear as great benefactors of youth or those diseased with STDs. They host specials, provide free concerts and write big checks to hospitals and research organizations for the treatment of such diseases. They give new definition to the term …double standard.

Cause: The liberalizing of the media under the guise of the first amendment.

Effect: This is only an article…it would take a book to speak of the effects this farcical notion has produced. In the past few weeks alone, announcements were made about a new channel already up and running in the cable TV industry that is completely devoted to the Gay or Lesbian lifestyle. A new program now in its first run produced by Showtime is called, “Weeds.” It depicts a mother played by actress Mary-Louise Parker, who recently is widowed and sells pot (marijuana, not stove utensils) to supplement her income. In one of the first offerings, Mom not only sells pot to a city councilman but also to a fifteen year old child. She is not arrested or called out by anyone for this, and the show goes on. Americans can now sit with a remote control and wade through from seventy five to two hundred choices provided by satellite or broadband cable companies. I have combed through these channels myself often enough to know that what isn’t geared to the mind of an eight year is pretty much headed toward the toilette. Is this the result of first amendment freedoms? If you really believe that then let me make you the offer I heard in an old country song. Come on out to see the fine ocean front property I’ve got for sale in Arizona.

Cause: A grieving mom who has decided that the sacrifice of her son in Iraq is greater than any other mom’s loss.

Effect: Now a new Jane Fonda type movement is rearing its head complete with seven mouths all speaking, slander, discontent, cowardice, and other morale busting sentiments. I thank God my mother knew when to take her hands off my life enough to let me make my own decisions, and to face the consequences of the same. Haven’t these mistaken moms and their sympathizers been informed that our servicemen are all volunteers? That means no one made them sign up and no one could keep them from doing so…not even mom!

Cause: The ordination of gays in one major protestant denomination, and the call for it in other churches.

Effect: The effect has been no less than devastating. Thousands of Christians are now roaming around to various churches looking for a new spiritual home. With broken hearts for the betrayal in some cases of a lifetime of loyalty, these believers are proof of the ability of liberal policy to touch virtually everyone regardless of race, color or creed. I can remember asking a few gays if they wanted to open their hearts to Christ, repent of their sins and receive him as their savior. But not once did I insist they make me a leader of one of their organizations, groups or clubs. How I wish they might extend the same courtesy to my fellow Christians in any denomination. I promise I would not even think about charging them with discrimination.

The mark for civil discourse, child safety, moral resolve and common decency has been lowered to the point that we may have to come in under the floor to make it through. Extreme, I think not and most Americans don’t either. Yet, whether we like it or not we are all paying the price for this new lower standard, a price like gasoline which is rising faster than we can afford.

Rev Bresciani has written many articles over the past thirty years in such periodicals as Guideposts and Catholic Digest. He is the author of two books available on Amazon.com, Alibris, Barnes and Noble and many other places. Rev Bresciani wrote “Hook Line and Sinker or what has Your Church Been Teaching You,” publisher, PublishAmerica of Baltimore MD. He also wrote a book published by Xulon Press entitled “An American Prophet and His Message, Questions and Answers on the Second Coming of Christ.” His book is now being heralded as the clearest book on the subject of the second coming of Christ since Hal Lindsey’s “Late Great Planet Earth” Rev Bresciani’s website is,

http://americanprophet.org

Many non-profit groups are feeling upset that they are allowed to do car wash fundraisers in some California Cities. It is not that the government officials are against your groups raising money, it is that they worry where are the soapy dirty water is going. It is a problem and it might be good for you to understand some of the history behind the rules rather than get upset over it.

HISTORY

Well it all started many years ago when Congress passed the Federal Clean Water Act in 1972 during the Nixon Administration. This was in response to major pollution issues involving polluting the nation’s waterways from factories, strip mining and sewage treatment plants or lack thereof. It was actually quite a problem. It was an ecosystem disaster causing disease and death to wildlife and some people. When it was discovered just how bad the problem really was, the federal government empowered the states to take care of the issues within their state. The states enacted state laws to help fix the problem. Meanwhile, the federal government tightened standards forcing states to tighten their standards or be in violation. With the threat of withholding federal monies to the states, the states continued to make more and more laws. Industry obviously wasn’t happy and even government agencies were unable to comply with the laws they made. So, target dates were enacted to give time for everyone to comply. Overnight environmental consulting firms sprung up along with a whole new industry of environmental equipment and product manufactures, many of whom weren’t even in compliance themselves. Of course, all good things take time and cleaning up our water is obviously a good thing.

The State of California divided the state into nine different regions realizing that each region had different pollution problems based on industry types, demography and population in the areas. These regions were called ‘Regional Water Quality Control Districts’ (RWQCD). These were all controlled by the State Board that was defined by the Federal Clean Water Act as the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Once the problem was broken down into smaller pieces things started to change for the better.

The SWRCB was formed in California and is commonly called ‘The State Board’. The State Board regulates Water Quality Control, which is any activity or factor that might affect the quality of waters of the state and includes the prevention and correction of water pollution and nuisance. This sounds very encompassing and the State Board has a lot of power. Luckily, with the combined efforts of industry, government and the people, they now understand the issues enough to make intelligent decisions and they fully understand that your organization needs to earn money. Thus, rather than prevent and outlaw activities, everyone is working on solutions and procedures to allow responsible discharges creating a win-win situation for everyone.

Recently, the State Water Quality Control Boards asked the counties to submit for approval and receive permits to discharge the same waters they’ve been discharging for years. These permits were called NPDES permits. This stands for National Pollution Discharge Elimination System. Most counties assigned an existing department to work on this permit. More likely than not, it is the county’s Flood Control Department. Unfortunately, this part of the county deals with permits for land development, bridges, infrastructures, etc. Until now, they knew very little about pollution. Some counties turned this responsibility over to the Environmental Health Services Department who in turn worked with the Flood Control Department which controls storm drains. The NPDES permits are approved by the state for local county urban runoff discharges. Each city in each county through municipal codes is supposed to pass ordinances and come up with a plan for controlling their local runoff/pollution. The county remains responsible to the state and the states to the Federal Government. The NPDES requirements are an offspring of the EPA, Environmental Protection Agency even though they are enforced, permitted and regulated locally by cities, counties and states.

The actual law that is used to enforce these statutes can be found in 13.260 - 13.265 of the California Water Code. At one point it actually reads:

“No person, or persons may discharge water to any waterways without permission or a permit from a state regional water quality control board.”

This sounds pretty absolute doesn’t it. It is against the law for you to take a glass of water from your sink, walk over to a storm drain and pour the water in the drain. This in itself would obviously not hurt the environment, but by granting absolute power the Regional Water Quality Control Boards can look at everything on a case-by-case basis. So do be serious about your water after you wash those cars.

STORM WATER DISCHARGE

City, county and state governments know that car washing has always been a favorite fundraiser for sports teams, scout troops, schools and other non-profit groups. Due to the low capital investment costs, car wash fundraisers can generate significant amounts of profit. For the last ten years government agencies especially in California have been working with industry to come up with solutions to clean up our water. Today the waterways of America are significantly cleaner than they were in the past even though many regions are more heavily populated. It’s been working great. Now we are going one step further. No pollution from any source, even mobile dog groomers. Only in the last few years have government agencies decided that the adverse environmental impact is too great to allow car wash fundraisers. Along with strong lobbying from fixed site car wash owners, some cities and counties have actually outlawed these fundraisers unless certain procedures are followed to insure that no waste wash water enters storm drains, ditches or waterways.

Their reasoning is this: Dirty water containing soaps and detergents, residues from exhaust fumes, gasoline and motor oils is washed off of the cars and flows into nearby storm drains. Unlike the water we use in our homes and businesses that goes down the drain and is treated at sewer treatment plants, water that goes into storm drains flows directly into rivers, bays, oceans and lakes without any kind of treatment. Obviously one car wash fundraiser by itself will create little if any adverse environmental impact. But government agencies know that collectively car wash fundraisers contribute significant pollution.

They also realize that biodegradable soaps do not lessen the impact. This is because biodegradable only means that the soap will degrade over time. So does plutonium, it just takes longer. Soaps and car wash products are still toxic to aquatic life even if they are biodegradable. Think on this a bit. If you really want to have the city allow you to do a car wash fundraiser you are going to have to figure out how to keep the dirty soapy water out of the storm drain.

“Lance Winslow” - Online Think Tank forum board. If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs/

Introduction:

Although politicians and so-called “Intelligence Experts” are the ones appearing on TV, discussing and relaying the news on the War or Terror, they are far from the ones who actually have anything to do with the war on terror. As in the past so it is today, the real planning in the war on terror goes on in covert ops-rooms by the real “Spooks” from the three letter agencies: CIA, MIA, ISI, MI-5, MI-6, GRU and the FSB, just to name a few of the major players.

The sad truth is that these spook agencies are in the large, responsible for the effectiveness’ of the major Islamic terrorist groups. The tactical planning, the CQB skills and the weapon and explosive knowledge of these Islamic terrorists, are largely courtesy of the spook agencies.

I am not arguing that the spook agencies are directly responsible for the terrorist acts, carried out by these Islamic terror groups. But that with a bit of common sense and forward planning, they should have realized the future evils they where helping to create. Old wisdom say it all, “When you lie with dogs, you get fleas” translated into modern languages that even a mission-oriented spook should be able to understand, the old wisdom says “When you train terrorists, innocent civilians get killed”

Afghanistan:
Prior to and during the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, the US spook agencies saw in their infinite wisdom the Mujahadeen, as a means to an end. The support of the Mujahadeen forces were initiated by the Carter administration, prior to the Soviet invasion and was increased by the Reagan administration. During both administrations, intelligence agents from the CIA and MIA went to Afghanistan by way of the Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, to make secret contributions in forms of funds, weapons and training to the Afghani resistance fighters.

The strategic plan was to stir up a rebellion against the Afghan government, which would result in the influx of Soviet troops. After the “Soviet Invasion” the purpose was to help the Afghani resistance fighting the Soviet forces. The objective of the plan was to ensure that the occupation would be very costly, for the Soviet army in funds and life’s. This wisdom of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” was arguably not a new idea as it has been an ideology of warfare, from the dawn of time. Training and supporting your enemies enemy, was the big thing during the cold war, from Asia to Africa, from the Middle East to South America, is was the tactic favoured by the Super Powers, their allies and their foes.

However, the Intelligence agents were soon to discover that, the Afghanis where in general a untrustworthy ally, who would only follow a set plan as long as they did not have other plans on the sideline. Unfortunately, they always had plans on the side which had a tendency to become the most important plan, plans that at least most of the time came ahead of fighting the Russians. Inter-Tribal feuds where constantly flaring, this in turn led to an unstable situation where military and political alliances changed faster than a “prostitute” did sheets.

This is where the “spooks” came up with a solution which still haunts us today, they decided to direct the Pakistani ISI, to focus most of their training and supplies on the Arab Mujahadeen or jihadist’s, who had more zeal for the fight against the Russians.

The Afghan warlords continued to receive the majority of the cash flowing from the spook agencies, but it was the radical Islamic Arabs that got the real training and in return they delivered. The mighty Red Army was forced to retreat in shame and defeat. Russia had met its Afghanistan, as Napoleon had met his Waterloo and the US had met its Vietnam; the spooks of the west had won the decade.

The Spooks success caused a stir in the Soviet “Empire of Evil”, within a few years the Soviet Empire where defeated by stratagem and replaced by a “democratic” Russia. So one might say we owe the spooks congratulations on such a worthy contribution to human history. Had it not been for the minor fact, that the CIA/ISI trained Mujahadeen turned into the infamous terror groups, associated with Osama Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda Group.

The Al Qaeda group has in its relatively short terrorist lifespan, turned into the “Olympic Champion” of terror. The Al Qaeda group has staged very few attacks compared to other known terrorist groups, however Al Qaeda has blown the scale when it comes to fatalities and injures caused by terrorist attacks. From January 1998 to December 2003, Al Qaeda only caused a measly 0,1% of all terrorist incidents, grotesquely though the 0,1% of attacks caused 29% of the fatalities and 22% of the injuries inflicted by all terrorist acts in the same time span!

Chechnya:
One would think that Russia’s experience in the Soviet-Afghan war, would have taught it that radical Islamic fighters are neither just the enemy of your enemy, but also your enemy. However the GRU (Russia’s military intelligence unit) fell prey to the same short sightedness as the CIA did, in 1994 they trained and funded mercenaries to fight in Abkhazia, among them where a number of militant Islamic Chechens. The purpose of the clandestine operation were to destabilize the Abkhazian region, in order to weaken the Government of Georgia who sought total separation from Russia. Among those militants were Shamil Basayev, a name the Russians will never again forget although they are more than willing to forget that they trained him.

Shamil Basayev started his guerrilla/terrorist campaign in 1991, when he masterminded the hijacking of a passenger plane from the town of Mineralnye Vody, the plane was flown to Turkey where the hostages where freed. An agreement ensured the Chechens free passage back to Chechnya. Bolstered by his hijacking success Basayev started his guerrilla campaign, gaining combat experience by fighting in the regions many conflicts with the Azerbaijanis in Nagorno-Karabakh, against the Georgians in Abkhazia and against the Russians in Chechnya. In between the fighting,Basayev received training in terrorist camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

However, Basayevs real terror campaign began with the 1995, attack at the Budennovsk militia headquarters which evolved into the hospital siege. Shamil Basayev appears to be the mastermind behind all of the major Chechen terrorist attacks, carried out since 1995. His network of guerrilla/terrorist groups has several names, the Abkhaz battalion, Sword of Islam, Movsar Barayev Gang and Riyadh-as-Saliheen, the latter being the most notorious group. Since 1995, the network has carried out at least 13 successful terrorist attacks which has caused ca. 949 fatalities and injured a minimum of 1147. This is an enormously high fatality and injury rate for a single terrorist network.

The Shamil Basayev terrorist network has proven itself far more efficient and deadly, than other well-known terrorist groups, such as FARC, HAMAS and ETA. Although the Shamil Basayev network has not yet reached the horrific scale of the Al Qaeda attacks, the future may prove to be different.

Osama Bin Laden and Shamil Basayev are both Islamic militants, who not only fight with a religious zeal but also with sound tactics, learned through training provided by the CIA and GRU. These tactics combined with actual combat experience, has made a mock of the best of both US and Russia’s elite forces. It is a tragic irony that these two most infamous terrorists where in part created by the superpowers, who now find them as their fiercest enemies. Mockingly, both carry out their operations dressed in US military uniforms and using Russian assault rifles as their primary weapons.

Guantanamo:
Lately, the US has been releasing several enemy combatants from the Guantanamo prisoner camp, this has been done due to mounting international pressure, to either convict or release the prisoners, of the original 680 enemy combatants who were brought to Guantanamo, only 4 have been charged so far. However, the choice of which prisoners to release clearly remains with the CIA and MIA, who are in charge of the investigations and interrogations. As in the past so in the present, the three-letter agencies seems incapable of understanding the absolute commitment to jihad, by the Islamic militants.

Slimane Hadj Abderrahmane, a half Danish, half-Algerian enemy combatant who was caught on the Afghan Pakistani border, was recently released from the Guantanamo camp. He had no sooner arrived in Denmark before he publicly stated that the Danish government where a legitimate target of Islamic terrorism, due to the Danish involvement in the war in Iraq. Subsequently, he publicly stated that the US “can use [my promise not to engage in warfare] as toilet paper.” He next stated that he intends to continue Jihad by joining the Chechen militants in their fight against the Russian military.

Abdullah Mahsud, a Pakistani enemy combatant caught in Afghanistan, were also recently released from the Guantanamo camp. As soon as he arrived in the Waziristan region in Pakistan, he immediately reconfirmed his commitment to Jihad and met with his former Taliban allies, he planned and carried out a kidnapping of two Chinese engineers. The subsequent attempt by the Pakistani Special Forces to free the hostages, resulted in the death of one of the hostages and five of the kidnappers. Abdullah Mahsud, however managed to escape and is wanted by the Pakistani forces, obviously for more than just neglecting to keep his promise,to the US of not “to engage in warfare”, hopefully a promise to not engage in terrorism was also included in his release conditions.

Conclusions:
The real problem with making agreements with Islamic militants is that they are devout Muslims, who have dedicated their life to Jihad which brings us to a problem, that the Israelis knows only to well. A Muslim does not have to honour his word, or even his signature as Muslims are permitted to lie to non-Muslims and break agreements with them, under the Koranic law of Hudaibiya.

The four examples of Osama Bin Laden, Shamil Basayev, Slimane Hadj Abderrahmane and Abdullah Mahsud should prove beyond doubt that, the consequences of dealing and negotiating with Islamic militants committed to Jihad, is not only foolish but also outright disastrous. For decades the Official stance by western Governments regarding terrorism, has been a firm strategy of “No negotiations with terrorists”, a controversial strategy but clearly it is about time that someone explained to the Spook Agencies, that no negotiations also means no funds, weapons and training. They should also be reminded that the end does not justify the means.

When it comes to dealing with Islamic guerrillas and terrorists, the so-called counter intelligence operations undertaken during the last three decades, by the three-letter intelligence agencies have proven to be anything but intelligent, with hindsight these operations have proved to be absolutely “Counter Intelligent”.

Dan Sommer is the author of the SD Agent, a Surveillance Detection Manual, he has been part of the process of designing, implementing and training a SD team for a European Embassy. His 17 years security career started in 1986 and he has active experience from military, security, close protection, counter assault team and surveillance detection operations. Since 1994 the author has been writing training material’s for security companies and police departments. He has been instructing courses world-wide for security officers, bodyguards, police officers, counter assault teams and surveillance detection units. Dan currently acts as the International Director of the World Federation of Bodyguards and has a private business as a Security & Protection Consultant. His work can be viewed at his website http://www.DanSommer.Biz

The new law “Special Protective, Antidumping and Import Compensatory Measures” differs from the old one by the fact that it fully complies with the WTO (World Trade Organization) standards. It is for the first time in the Russian practice that a law describes in detail what is necessary to do in order to protect the Russian market and how to do it. As its authors promised, the Law has turned out to be extremely concrete: it is conceived so that the officials as well as the participants of trade agreements will be able to find straight answers to their questions, and they should not search for any special “explanations” and “commentaries”.

The law provides a listing of basic concepts. Not everyone in Russia, even among lawyers, will be able to tell straight off what “dumping leverage” is, and what “dumping import” is. For the majority of people it becomes a revelation, that “dumping” is not the sale of foreign goods in Russia at lower prices than similar local products cost (that’s what for some reason most people think) but the sale of a product cheaper, than local production costs. A number of base concepts comprise such, as “the material loss of an industry” (what to understand in general under the term “damage”) and “serious damage ” (how to calculate it), and in general a lot of other things, which are clear “in general”, but very artful when officials start to build a state policy, based on the intuitive understanding of such terms.

For example, the Law provides the description of the investigation concept, which should precede the introduction of all protective measures against “bad” foreign goods.

The Law states, that the body responsible for investigation, is appointed by the decision of the Government of the Russian Federation, and defines concrete timeframe, both for the investigation, and for implementation of its results (the measures, taken according to investigation results should be approved by the Government not later than 14 days after they are exposed). In case of a highly critical situation such measures need to be introduced extremely rapidly, as the Government can practically instantly introduce a special tax (protective import tax) on the goods that cause damage to the economy. Should it be found out later, that this tax is excessively heavy; the foreign trade participants will have the right to be reimbursed for the actual incurred losses. Such import tax cannot be effective for more than 200 days.

The Law describes in detail how to establish the degree of damage to the Russian economy from “bad” import. Special protective measures have to be implemented in order to protect the economy, the Law clearly defines, what those are and in what case they should be used, for how long and what is the order of their review. The main idea behind this is that such protective measures should be lifted, as soon as they fulfill their purpose. It is important not to go too far with those measures, otherwise the market protection may cause more harm than good, creating with the domestic manufacturer a sensation of absence of competition, that the buyers will be the first ones to feel.

A separate chapter of the Law is dedicated to antidumping measures. Discovering the fact of goods dumping in Russia, calculating the damage and introducing protective measures - each step is exposed in every detail, because this is a new practice for this country. Here, as well as in the case of application of special protective measures may be, the lawgiver requires that the facts should be carefully investigated, as it is possible that blind measures can do more harm than good. If dumping influence does not exceed a certain allowable threshold, strict measures should not be used. Moreover, if the supplier of the goods states in writing that he followed a dishonest price policy, and signs an obligation to stop it, the investigation is then suspended, should the “inspectors” make the decision, that the supplier can be trusted. However, tight control is carried out to verify how he complies with the promise.

The Law introduces the concept of “compensatory measure” which is necessary in case when the goods, produced with the subsidies of the foreign governments are imported into Russia. In the reality however, as it has been already noticed by the experts, it is firstly the foodstuffs: the crisis of overproduction of agrarian and industrial complex, the aspiration to support quiet lifestyle of local farmers cause the foreign governments to buy from manufacturers of agrarian and industrial complex the goods at unfairly high prices, and then resell them for export at lower prices, compensating the difference from the budget. The demands of domestic manufacturers of agrarian and industrial complex “to forbid” such imports was faced with fears, that the sharp interdiction of imports will not cause the growth of own production and will result only in shortages and price increases. The Law has defined the “golden balance”: the investigation concerning the subsidized import is conducted extremely objectively, abstracting from lobbyism of domestic manufacturers.

The document is extremely transparent, as it could not be any different. The attempts to declare a “trade war” to Russia when its goods are exported to some countries, on one hand, as well as obvious practice of “bad import” to our country from which we were not protected, on another hand, have forced Russia to use protective measures (on import of fowl, beef, pork) before the adoption of this law. It caused an ambiguous and sometimes extremely strong reaction in the outside world. The reaction of Russia’s supporters during the WTO negotiations was especially painful. There was not a single country at this stage of joining the WTO who dared strengthening its protective measures. Russia has invested a great deal of efforts to prove, that it had the right to protect the market, and has spent a lot of time to explain to foreign experts, how its market was going to be protected.

Copyright 2005 OpenRussia.ru
Russian business directory

The predominant discussion in the Indianapolis media over the proposed $500 million Colts stadium is how to fund it, not over the wisdom and propriety of taxpayers going into debt to build it.

Apparently the leaders of both major political parties in Indiana have signed off on the concept, including a poor building design, and are content to confine their discussion to who’s picking up the tab.

Come hell or high water on White River, Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson has vowed not to lose the Colts during his administration. His plan in part is to raise $13 million annually through higher car rental, innkeeper and admissions taxes in Marion County, as well as with annual gambling profits of $46 million from 2,500 pull-tab gambling machines in downtown Indianapolis.

Regional Republicans have their own plans to fund a new stadium. Rep. Luke Messer of Shelbyville proposes giving Indianapolis $30 million in annual revenue from 2,500 slot machines at the Hoosier Park and Indiana Downs horse tracks. Marion County GOP chairman and state Rep. Michael Murphy has a similar plan that would divide the slot machine profits differently, giving Indianapolis $48 million annually.

Here are three problems with these major party proposals, besides any issues that readers might have over funding the stadium with gambling profits.

First, they do not address the issue of stadium obsolescence. Taxpayers cannot afford to again let government build a stadium that the NFL outgrows, especially one that is three-times the real cost of the first one. Proponents should guarantee that the stadium will be valuable for 50 years, or promise to indenture the lives of their children and grandchildren at double the rate of our servitude.

Second, their proposals treat businesses unequally. They subsidize rich millionaires at the expense of smaller or more deserving businesses. Likewise, they treat businesses such as the Indianapolis Motor Speedway unfairly by taxing them to underwrite their sports competitor. It’s a slap in the face to the Speedway, which funds itself.

And why should we indenture each Indianapolis citizens with more than $1,000 in debt for eight regular-season football games each year? If gambling revenue projections are not met, are residents of Indianapolis willing to be on the hook for the balance? I’m certainly not.

But here’s the real crux. The RCA Dome is perfectly good as it is, except for one basic flaw. No, the flaw is NOT the size of the Dome. Although it is the smallest in the league at 57,900 seats, the Colts barely sell the Dome out even with ticket prices just below the league’s average of $54.75.

The problem with the RCA Dome stems from how NFL teams share revenue. Owners keep their revenues from private luxury suites. At the Dome, Colts owner Jim Irsay has 104 suites. The league’s most profitable franchise, the Washington Redskins, has 280.

Irsay seeks a stadium with enough suites to give him a shot at a medium profit relative to the rest of the league. He would have already moved his franchise to Los Angeles had that city promised him a stadium with enough suites, which it could not afford to do.

So he and his franchise are leveraging Indianapolis and our state government into building him a stadium by 2008 that merely gives him more profit potential. Ironically, Irsay’s best selling point is that he will not also hold the city hostage by making it guarantee that the suites it builds him will be sold. Huh? Until then, the city expects to pay him at least $36 million to keep the Colts in town.

Compare this to the real costs of a new stadium. Its $500 million price tag can triple by the time its bond is paid. For the 400 permanent jobs that the stadium creates and the hundred or so new suites that are created, that amounts to a public investment of over $1 million per job and $3 million per luxury suite. Plus, we will build a stadium with no more capacity than the original Hoosier Dome and, from the looks of the design, one with lousy viewing for NCAA basketball.

That’s maddening. Our elected officials are about to build another obsolete stadium with limited capacity, a poor configuration and an exorbitant price tag. They will again saddle us with public debt that is tall on political horseplay and short on horse sense.

©2005 Libertarian Writers Bureau

Attorney, screen writer and former chair of the Libertarian Party of Marion County.