Bill Moyers is joined by the heads of two independent watchdog groups keeping an eye on government as well as on powerful interests seeking to influence it. Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics and OpenSecrets.org, and Danielle Brian, who runs the Project on Government Oversight, talk to Bill about the importance of transparency to our democracy, and their efforts to scrutinize who’s giving money, who’s receiving it, and most importantly, what’s expected in return.

Here's a snippet:

BILL MOYERS: The cliché is that you have to pay to play. What does that mean to the two of you?

SHEILA KRUMHOLZ: It means that organizations and mostly we’re talking about corporations, understand that Washington is often standing in the way of bigger profits for them. And so they see this as a perfectly legal, entirely common way for their companies to shape policy legislation, even regulation coming out of Washington that will ameliorate the damage and ultimately enhance their ability to turn a profit.

And so private interests if they are not successful in achieving their legislative agenda in Congress have other opportunities, many bites at the apple, to try to water down regulations that they see as onerous or to otherwise tweak laws as they are actually being implemented by the agencies.

Look at this headline: “After Aa Powerful Lobbyist Intervenes, EPA Reverses Stance on Polluting Texas County's Water.” That's a story from the news organizations ProPublica reporting that a big energy company wants permission from Environmental Protection Agency, the EPA, for a large-scale mining project in Texas that would pollute a pristine supply of drinking water.

So the EPA says no, can't have it. The big company hires Heather Podesta who's a big time lobbyist, a big time fundraiser for Democrats who was married at the time to another big Washington Democratic fixer named Tony Podesta, who used to be president of the liberal organization People for the American Way.

Through their connections these two have become the king and queen of influence peddling. Lo and behold, some months after the industry hires Heather Podesta, EPA reverses itself and the company gets an exemption and is allowed to pollute the aquifer. To hell with the public health. This is routine, isn't it?

A full transcript of the show follows below the fold...

Continue reading »

Narrated by Oscar winning actor Morgan Freeman, "Breaking the Taboo" is produced by Sam Branson's Sundog Pictures and Brazilian co-production partner Spray Films and was directed by Cosmo Feilding Mellen and Fernando Grostein Andrade. Featuring interviews with several current or former presidents from around the world, such as former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, the film follows The Global Commission on Drug Policy on a mission to break the political taboo over the United States led War on Drugs and expose what it calls the biggest failure of global policy in the last 40 years.

From the film's website:

"The War on Drugs has failed. After 50 years of prohibition, illicit drugs are now the third most valuable industry in the world after food and oil, all in the control of criminals. Drugs are cheaper and more available than ever before. Millions of people are in prison for drugs offences. Corruption and violence, especially in producer and transit countries, endangers democracy. Tens of thousands of people die each year in drug wars."

"Improving our drug policies is one of the key policy challenges of our time. The time for action is now."

There is also a petition on the film's website to the head of the United Nations and all heads of state calling for an end to the war on drugs.

By Kim Barker, ProPublica

In a confidential 2010 filing, Crossroads GPS — the dark money group that spent more than $70 million from anonymous donors on the 2012 election — told the Internal Revenue Service that its efforts would focus on public education, research and shaping legislation and policy.

The group's application for recognition as a social welfare nonprofit acknowledged that it would spend money to influence elections, but said "any such activity will be limited in amount, and will not constitute the organization's primary purpose."

Political insiders and campaign-finance watchdogs have long questioned how Crossroads, the brainchild of GOP strategist Karl Rove, had characterized its intentions to the IRS.

Now, for the first time, ProPublica has obtained the group's application for recognition of tax-exempt status, filed in September 2010. The IRS has not yet recognized Crossroads GPS as exempt, causing some tax experts to speculate that the agency is giving the application extra scrutiny. If Crossroads GPS is ultimately not recognized, it could be forced to reveal the identities of its donors.

The tax code allows groups like Crossroads to spend money on political campaigns — and to keep their donors private — as long as their primary purpose is enhancing social welfare.

Crossroads' breakdown of planned activities said it would focus half its efforts on "public education," 30 percent on "activity to influence legislation and policymaking" and 20 percent on "research," including sponsoring "in-depth policy research on significant issues."

This seems at odds with much of what the group has done since filing the application, experts said. Within two months of filing its application, Crossroads spent about $15.5 million on ads telling people to vote against Democrats or for Republicans in the 2010 midterm elections.

"That statement of proposed activities does not seem to align with what they actually did, which was to raise and spend hundreds of millions to influence candidate elections," said Paul S. Ryan, senior counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, who reviewed the group's application at ProPublica's request.

Officials with Crossroads GPS would not answer specific questions about the material in the application or whether the IRS had sent a response to it.

"As far as we know, the Crossroads application is still pending, in which case it seems that either you obtained whatever document you have illegally, or that it has been approved," Jonathan Collegio, the group's spokesman, said in an email.

The IRS sent Crossroads' application to ProPublica in response to a public-records request. The document sent to ProPublica didn't include an official IRS recognition letter, which is typically attached to applications of nonprofits that have been recognized. The IRS is only required to give out applications of groups recognized as tax-exempt.

In an email Thursday, an IRS spokeswoman said the agency had no record of an approved application for Crossroads GPS, meaning that the group's application was still in limbo.

"It has come to our attention that you are in receipt of application materials of organizations that have not been recognized by the IRS as tax-exempt," wrote the spokeswoman, Michelle Eldridge. She cited a law saying that publishing unauthorized returns or return information was a felony punishable by a fine of up to $5,000 and imprisonment of up to five years, or both. The IRS would not comment further on the Crossroads application.

"ProPublica believes that the information we are publishing is not barred by the statute cited by the IRS, and it is clear to us that there is a strong First Amendment interest in its publication," said Richard Tofel, ProPublica's general manager.

ProPublica has redacted parts of the application to omit Crossroads' financial information.

With its sister group, the super PAC American Crossroads, Crossroads GPS has helped remake how modern political campaigns are financed.

American Crossroads, which does identify its donors, spent almost $105 million on election ads in the 2012 cycle. For its part, Crossroads GPS poured more than $70 million into ads and phone calls urging voters to pick Republicans — outlays that were reported to the Federal Election Commission. It also announced spending an additional $50 million on ads critical of President Barack Obama that ran outside the FEC's reporting window.

Based on the extent of Crossroads GPS' campaign activities, Obama's re-election campaign asked the FEC in June to force it to register as a political action committee and disclose its donors. The FEC has yet to rule on the request.

Politically active social welfare nonprofits like Crossroads have proliferated since the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision in January 2010 opened the door to unlimited political spending by corporations and unions.

Earlier this year, a ProPublica report showed that many of these groups exploit gaps in regulation between the IRS and the FEC, using their social welfare status as a way to shield donors' identities while spending millions on political campaigns. The IRS' definition of political activity is broader than the FEC's, yet our investigation showed many social welfare groups underreported political spending on their tax returns.

It's impossible to know precisely how Crossroads has directed its efforts, but the breakdown of expenses on its tax returns from June 2010 to December 2011 gives some indications.

During those 19 months, Crossroads spent a total of $64.7 million, of which $1.4 million — or just 2 percent — was identified as being spent on research. That compares with the 20 percent of effort Crossroads said it would devote to research in its application.

A tax return covering this year isn't due until November 2013.

The IRS rarely pursues criminal charges against nonprofits based on statements in their applications. It's more common for the agency to deny recognition or revoke a group's tax-exempt status.

In a letter to Congress in September, the IRS said it was engaged in "more than 70 ongoing examinations" of social welfare nonprofits. Earlier, in its work plan for the 2012 fiscal year, the agency said it was taking a hard look at social welfare nonprofits with "serious allegations of impermissible political intervention."

Campaign finance watchdog Fred Wertheimer, who runs Democracy 21 and has filed several complaints to the IRS about Crossroads, said the group's application for recognition showed why more aggressive enforcement is needed.

"When you read what they say on their application, there are a lot of words there. But I find them to be disingenuous and to have little to do with why Karl Rove founded this organization," Wertheimer said. "If you believe this is a social welfare organization, I have a rocket that can get you to the moon very quickly and at very little cost."

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg told a reporter on Monday that forcing the NYPD to submit to oversight from an inspector general would destroy the city of New York:

Appointing an inspector general to oversee the NYPD is a recipe for disaster, Mayor Bloomberg warned yesterday.

“I think if you want to bring crime back, let’s go politicize control of the Police Department,” the mayor said, responding to a reporter’s question about a new City Council bill requiring an IG for cops getting a hearing tomorrow.

“The last thing we need is some politician or judge getting involved with setting policy, because you won’t be safe anymore. But today, you are. Think about that when you write your story,” Bloomberg added.

Who the hell is safe in NYC? It sure wasn't this teenager who was forced to submit to the NYPD's version of 'Stop and Frisk':

Continue reading »

The devastating heatwave that's overtaken the United States is destroying a great part of American agriculture. Forty-five percent of the corn crop has been destroyed, 35 percent of the soya bean crop, pushing the price of commodities to record highs. Overall, the global food prices have risen by 6 percent in July alone.

And what is the reaction of one of the biggest commodity traders in the world? Well, here's what the head of food department for Glencore had to say about all this. Chris Mahoney, who's the traders' director of agricultural products, said on a conference call, quote, "In terms of the outlook for the balance of the year, the environment is a good one." I have to add, a good one for Glencore. "High prices, lots of volatility, a lot of dislocation, tightness, a lot of arbitrage opportunities"—and that's "the purchase and sale of an asset in order to profit from price differences in different markets." Glencore, it should be added, reported pretax profits last year of $2.2 billion.

Sophia Murphy works as a consultant and senior adviser on agricultural, trade, and governance issues with the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. She's co-author of a new research report, Cereal secrets: The world's largest grain traders and global agriculture, joins Paul Jay, Senior Editor, TRNN to discuss.

Full transcript available here.

Via Lee Camp: The man who is the progenitor of the Euro has said it was designed to take fiscal policy out of the hands of the people. So whose hands is it in? This is your Moment of Clarity #158.

Your open thread begins below...

"ALEC Rock" turns Schoolhouse Rock on its head in this instructional film illustrating how Washington really works. In the hands of the ALEC Exposed Project, "I'm just a bill on Capitol Hill" becomes "a bunch of corporations bribe politicians and together they secretly dictate policy."

Produced by Mark Fiore.

Bill opens this week’s show by explaining how last week’s Supreme Court decision not to reconsider Citizens United exposes the hoax that Citizens United was ever about “free” speech. In reality, Bill says, it’s about carpet bombing elections “with all the tonnage your rich paymasters want to buy.”

Full transcript after the jump...

Continue reading »

Shorter version? Nothing new here, the actual report hasn't been released to the public, and the recommendations for the Oakland Police Department might get done someday, if they get the money, and if they get the time. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's code for maybe the next administration will get around to it.

Via:

Oakland police received some harsh criticism for the way they handled the Occupy demonstrations last fall, but Oakland's police chief is not taking offense.

Details of the 121-page report were made available to city leaders more than six weeks ago, but they held on to it. They released it to the media less than five minutes before they held a carefully worded and brief press conference.
...

The report was not kind. Among the criticisms, it calls the Oakland Police Department's response to protesters last year, "flawed by inadequate staffing, insufficient planning and lack of understanding of crowd management techniques." The report even called many of their policing methods "outdated".
...

The report recommends that OPD institute a mutual aid policy to include OPD and responding agencies abilities -- a move Jordan says, will require time and additional resources.

"These are things that we can't do overnight, these are long range changes that I intend to implement. It's just not something we're going to do right away," said Jordan.

Possibly the worst part of this "report" is the fact that city officials claim to have paid $100,000 for it. There's your tax dollars at work, Oakland, a report that restates the obvious and doesn't place any blame on any of the city's officials.

The glowing praise of the racist "Stop and Frisk" policy by the NYPD and city officials and the fuzzy math statistics that claim vastly reduced crime weren't enough to stop a federal judge today from granting class-action status in a lawsuit against the NYPD that claims the practice violates the constitutional rights of blacks and Hispanics.

Maybe it was the Jateik Reed video or the facts that revealed, among other things, that more young black men were stopped and frisked by police last year than actually live in the city, according to an analysis by the New York Civil Liberties Union.

The New York Times obtained Judge Shira Scheindlin's opinion, which stated that the evidence presented showed that the central tenets that make up the NYPD's stop-and-frisk policy led to many illegal stops. Judge Scheindlin writes:

It is rather audacious of the NYPD to argue that if it were possible to protect "the right of people to be secure in their persons" from unlawful searches and seizures by the NYPD, then the legislature would already have done so and judicial intervention would therefore be futile. Indeed, it is precisely when the political branches violate the individual rights of minorities that "more searching judicial enquiry" is appropriate.

(Emphasis is Judge Scheindlin's.) The NYPD is on track to break last year's record of 601,055 stops (that's 1,900 a day) in 2012.