Unemployment high in March, Officials say

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

A day after President Barack Obama's budget was passed by a Congress boiling with partisanship, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released a report showing unemployment at its highest since 1983. There are now 13.2 million Americans out of work.

The pouring rain in Washington mirrored the sobered mood in the room, as the Joint Economic Committee heard the testimony of Keith Hall, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

March was one of the worst Months on record for unemployment, and when asked outright, Hall told the committee that there were no "bright spots" in the report.

National unemployment climbed to 8.5 percent in March, rising from the level of 8.1 percent in February and 7.6 percent in January.

Hall said that two-thirds of the job loss has happened in the past 5 months. Every state is in recession for the first time in 30 years, according to Carolyn Maloney (D-NY).

Official unemployment numbers do not encompass underemployed Americans or those who have officially left the workforce. It is reported that 16 percent of the country is out of work or underemployed. One in four of those unemployed have been out of work for more than six months, and of those, half have been looking for work for over a year, Hall said.

Maloney highlighted that last month, 8,000 jobs were lost in the news publishing industry. Those losses total 70,000 job cuts since Dec. 2007, Hall said, adding that most job losses have been see in the manufacturing, construction, and temporary services industries. The only area to see any growth in March was the Healthcare industry, Hall said.

Ranking Committee member Senator Sam Brownback (R-KA) noted that the impact of the ongoing recession was not severe for almost a year after it began in December 2007. Brownback attributed recent dramatic jumps in job losses over the past five months to the lockup in the credit markets and the government bailouts that followed.

The Federal Reserve believes that unemployment will peak at 8.8 percent this year, but Ranking House Committee Member Kevin Brady (R-TX) said that the unemployment rate is already higher than what the administration anticipated for 2009. Brady said that the Obama Administration's "optimistic assumptions" would not get the country out of its current mess.

President Obama’s Economic Stimulus package was passed by Congress earlier this year, and saw an unprecedented amount of money placed into public works meant to put people back to work. Obama has pledged the legislation will save or create three to four million jobs over the next two years.

Read the report here: Bureau of Labor Statistics Report

Lights out: America’s energy future

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

President Barack Obama’s massive energy overhaul may be cruising towards the edge of a cliff if the U.S. doesn’t start manufacturing more. Such was said today before Congress by Jeff Metts, President of Dowding Machining, a manufacturer of wind turbines.

Obama’s energy policy focuses on having 25 percent of the country’s electricity come from renewable sources of energy by 2025. The Senate has introduced a bill, S.661, which sets a slightly different standard: 20 percent by 2025. Mett doesn’t believe that the U.S. can manufacture enough wind turbines quickly enough to meet either of these goals at its current pace. He said that in 2008 the United States produced approximately 4,000 wind turbines, but that it would have to produce over 10,000 turbines each year until 2025 to meet the energy goal. There are several large logistical concerns to this process, including the cost of transporting these massive components and the time taken to manufacture each one. The transportation costs make it difficult for foreign production of the necessary parts.

Mett presented a solution to the manufacturing problem, which would cut the production time of certain components down to an eighth of what it would otherwise be. His company is seeking investors for new manufacturing plants in the United States to build these turbines quickly and efficiently. Mett said that the improvements manifest in his manufacturing process would be “game changers” in making clean energy, and that they will be the new standard around the world overnight. This would place the U.S. in a competitive advantage in the energy market. David Roders, representative from the Department of Energy, said that tight capital markets have made it difficult for industries to invest in energy efficiency. On that topic, Mett said that the problem with innovations like this is finding the first investor – he is asking the Federal government to be that ice breaker.

This manufacturing investment would be included in the comprehensive energy legislation the Senate is putting together. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) said that the Senate Bill will invest in America’s energy future. It will help industries be more productive while using less energy, create millions of new jobs, and keep America in its position as “a top innovator of clean energy technologies.” The intended byproduct of this would be lowered greenhouse gas emissions, which should slow climate change.

Iraq ambassador/nominee dodges fire on the hill

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

The U.S. may be one step closer to sending a new ambassador to Iraq. The Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee convened on Wedneday to vet Ambassador Designate Christopher Hill. Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) recognized the importance of getting a new ambassador to the region with expedience, but certain Senators have expressed concerns about Hill’s past.

Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), who should be noted is not on the Committee, several weeks ago promised a fight in the Senate confirmation process because of actions that transpired while Hill was heading the six-party talks concerning North Korean nuclear disarmament. Brownback felt that Hill had misled Congress on his intentions to confront the issues of Human Rights with North Korea during the negotiations, since those issues ended up not being addressed.

Hill responded to Brownback’s concerns during the hearing today, and said that although he had agreed before Congress to address human rights, the process was stalled before the issue could be discussed. Human rights would have been on the table during the restoration of diplomatic ties with North Korea, Hill said, but that phase would have come only after the verification of North Korea's nuclear assets, and that verification never took place. Hill had planned on supporting initiatives from then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to put together a human rights program to tie progress in human rights reform to better diplomatic ties. Hill said today that America’s relationship with North Korea would not be normalized until North Korea completely did away with its nuclear stockpiles, and Hill could not fulfill his promise to Congress until the stockpiles had been eliminated.

It’s uncertain when the Senate confirmation vote will take place. There has been talk concerning delaying the vote until after the upcoming Congressional recess.

Dog the blue dog

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

Grassroots advocacy groups are launching an offensive against conservative Democrats in Congress who are opposing President Obama’s legislation. Campaign for America’s Future has launched a program called “Dog the Blue Dogs”, which is aimed at persuading members of the Blue Dog Coalition into voting for President Obama’s legislation. The Blue Dog Coalition is a group of moderate and conservative Democrats in the House of Representatives.

Bob Borosage, President of Campaign for America’s Future, said that several Blue Dog Democrats are conspiring with the Republicans to be obstructionists of the president’s agenda, and are partnering with the likes of talk show host Rush Limbaugh to try to make Obama fail all together. The response from Borosage and groups like USAction is going to be a ground offensive against these Democratic members of Congress. The plan is to run ads in each member’s home district, informing the constituents of how their congressional representatives voted against the President. Borosage said that the campaign is about educating the public, not partisanship.

Senator Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) has been painted with a target for his position on the president’s budget. William McNary, President of USAction and part of Unity 09, said that his organization was going to be mobilizing grassroots efforts in Bayh’s home state of Indiana during the upcoming congressional recess, but could not elaborate on what specific strategies would be used. McNary said that if Senator Bayh wants some specific changes made to the Obama budget, he should express that in a clear and articulate manner, instead of simply voting against the bill.

McNary said that the public should not let members of Congress get “cold feet” about change. Borosage believes this reluctance by some members is because of the power of entrenched interests, rather than individual political stances. He continued that these legislators must “be heard by their constituents, not just their contributors”.

Borosage denied planning this with any of the Congressional Leadership, and said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel was also not involved.

Enron Executive to Supreme Court: I’m being unjustly prosecuted

By Michael Ruhl, University of New Mexico – Talk Radio News Service

Today one of Enron’s former executives found himself back in the lime light as the Supreme Court heard his case of being unjustly prosecuted. F. Scott Yeager, an executive at Enron Broadband Services, was caught up in the hunt for white-collar wrongdoing after the Enron scandal. He was charged with wire fraud, securities fraud, insider trading, money laundering, and conspiracy to engage in securities fraud and wire fraud. The original trial saw Yeager acquitted of three of the charges, but the jury couldn’t agree on the charges of insider trading and money laundering.

The United States government then tried to re-try the insider trading and money laundering charges, since the jury was undecided on the matter, something that Yeager says violates his rights against being prosecuted twice for the same matter. Yeager moved to have the case thrown out. He argued that he is protected by collateral estoppel, which prohibits the same issue from being tried twice, and is similar to double jeopardy. Yeager’s legal team relied on a good-faith defense in his initial trial, saying he was not guilty because he had a reasonable belief in his company’s financial stability. The argument for collateral estoppel was that since he was acquitted based on the good-faith defense, it would not be possible to prosecute him on insider trading, since the jury established he could not have illegality at the heart of his actions.

Both the District and Circuit Courts denied Yeager’s motion to have the case thrown out. Yeager then took the matter before the Supreme Court, in Yeager v. United States.

The Justices were undecided in the courtroom about whether or not the acquittal on the similar charges was enough to remove Yeager from any shadow of wrongdoing. Justices Samuel Alito and David Souter felt that he might have been acquitted for other reasons than simply the good-faith defense, although it was self evident that they could not know with certainty why the jury did what it did. The counsel for the United States said that the jury should have said Yeager was not guilty on the two undecided charges if they really meant it. Chief Justice John Roberts showed concern at the effect this decision could have on the Seventh Amendment in the Constitution, which protects the right to jury trials. Roberts questioned whether or not retrial of the undecided charges would undermine the jury’s decisions in the acquitted charges. Although Justice Stephen Breyer did not display a firm position on the case at large, he did say that he can’t think of why this wouldn’t be a second trial, and why collateral estoppel should not apply.

The Court is expected to return a decision on this case in May or June of this year.