Obama's GM Plan Looks Like a Raw Deal...by Ralph Nader

Congress, not a secret task force, should decide the company's fate.

By RALPH NADER and ROBERT WEISSMAN

What public purposes animate the government's planned rescue of General Motors Corp?

Millions of people in communities across the country depend on the government getting the GM rescue right. That's why it is startling -- and mistaken -- for the future of GM to rest with a small, largely unaccountable, ad hoc task force made up of a handful of Wall Street expats.

A congressional abdication of authority of historic proportions has left the executive branch with nearly complete discretion over how to handle GM and Chrysler's restructuring. President Barack Obama has further delegated authority, giving effective control to this task force, which operates under the titular authority of a top-level interagency group headed by National Economic Council Director Larry Summers and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.

In the days before an avoidable June 1 bankruptcy filing, it is imperative that Congress honor its constitutional duties and demand that the GM restructuring deal be sent to it for deliberative review -- before any irreversible measures, such as a voluntary bankruptcy declaration, are taken. This means delaying any precipitous decisions until after Congress returns from its Memorial Day recess.

The case for congressional involvement would be solid enough on constitutional and procedural grounds alone. But the secretive task force's plan raises red flags and requires Congressional examination in open hearings. With the government set to take a 70% ownership stake in GM, there are too many unanswered, troubling questions to proceed with a risky bankruptcy declaration. Here are 10 pressing issues among many:

1) Has the task force conducted any kind of formal or informal cost-benefit analysis on the costs of a GM bankruptcy and excessive closures? These may include the social effects of lost jobs (including more than 100,000 dealership jobs alone), more housing foreclosures, the government expense of providing unemployment and social relief, lost tax revenues, supplier companies that will be forced to close, damaged consumer confidence in the GM brand, and impacts on GM's industrial creditors.

2) Do GM and Chrysler really need to close as many dealerships -- which do not cost manufacturers -- as have been announced? Is the logic of closing dealerships to enable the remaining dealers to charge higher prices? If so, why is the government facilitating such a move?

3) Is the task force asking for too many plants to close and the elimination of too many brands?

4) Why is the task force permitting GM to increase manufacturing overseas for export back into the U.S.? Under the GM reorganization plan, the company will rely increasingly on overseas plants to make cars for sale in the U.S., with cars made in low-wage countries like Mexico rising from 15% to 23% of GM sales here. For the first time, GM plans to export cars from China to the U.S. in what is a harbinger of the company's future business model. What is the conceivable rationale for permitting GM to increase manufacturing overseas -- especially in dictatorships, for export back into the U.S. -- when preserving jobs and industry is the avowed goal of this immense taxpayer bailout?

5) Why is the task force supporting GM's efforts to devise a two-tier wage structure, whereby new auto jobs no longer provide a ticket to the middle class?

6) How will bankruptcy affect GM's overseas operations, with special reference to China and GM's corporate entanglements with Chinese partners? Are they and their large profits being exempted from the conditions imposed on domestic operations? Are GM's China-based assets and profits inside or outside of the bankruptcy process?

7) Would a corporate and government-driven bankruptcy process comport with any rights of owner-shareholders to decide whether they want their company to be dissolved?

8) How will bankruptcy affect GM's obligations to parties engaged in pending or future litigation in the courts with GM regarding serious injuries suffered because of design or product defects in vehicles sold prior to the bankruptcy? Or parties engaged in "lemon" litigation?

9) What guarantees are the task force, supposedly representing the taxpayers' investment, obtaining to ensure that the GM of the future invests in safer and more fuel-efficient vehicles?

10) Why is the Obama administration signaling that, after reorganization, when the government owns 70% of GM, it will not exercise the control that attaches to ownership?

Many in Congress have been eager to disassociate themselves from the perceived mess of the GM reorganization, believing it too complicated. This is a stark contrast to 1979, when Congress held extensive hearings and passed enacting legislation on the Chrysler bailout and later with the complex Conrail restructuring.

If not motivated by their constitutional duty, members of Congress might perhaps listen to political arguments to assert their rightful authority. If GM and the task force take the company into bankruptcy, more than displaced workers will be demanding that Congress answer: "Why are we bailing out the auto companies and then facilitating their moving production overseas? Why aren't we leveraging the public investment to protect jobs and manufacturing capacity, as well as facilitate investments in environmentally appropriate technologies?"

It need not be so. The congressional leadership still has a few days to stop the reckless rush to bankruptcy court and to assert its responsibilities.

Mr. Nader is a consumer advocate. Mr. Weissman is editor of Multinational Monitor magazine.

GM prepares for bankruptcy protection announcement

An AP story

By KIMBERLY S. JOHNSON and TOM KRISHER, AP Auto Writers Kimberly S. Johnson And Tom Krisher, Ap Auto Writers

DETROIT – General Motors Corp. was making final preparations Sunday for its bankruptcy protection announcement after bondholders accepted a sweetened deal, smoothing the way for the company's reorganization.

A statement Sunday from a group of large, institutional bondholders said 54 percent of GM bondholders agreed to exchange their unsecured bonds for a 10 percent stake in a newly restructured company, plus warrants to purchase a greater share later. Their acceptance is seen as critical in moving the company through bankruptcy quickly.

GM and the Treasury Department, which has been guiding the Detroit automaker toward a rescue plan that will give taxpayers more than a 70 percent stake in the company, were quiet on the bondholders' decision.

Although GM has not confirmed it will seek bankruptcy protection, Chief Executive Officer Fritz Henderson has scheduled a news conference Monday morning in New York. President Barack Obama is also expected to give a speech addressing the Detroit automaker's fate.

The Treasury Department must find that there is sufficient acceptance for the deal to move forward. In a previous bond exchange offer, the Treasury demanded participation of 90 percent of bondholders, representing a debt exchange of $24 billion.

In Germany, the government agreed Sunday to loan GM's Opel unit $2.1 billion, a move necessary for Magna International Inc. to acquire the company.

The Canadian auto parts supplier Magna will take a 20 percent stake in Opel and Russian-owned Sberbank will take 35 percent, giving the two businesses a majority. GM retains 35 percent of Opel, with the remaining 10 percent going to employees.

The German funds are available to Opel immediately, as it attempts to shield itself from cuts if GM files for bankruptcy protection. Opel employs 25,000 people in Germany, nearly half of GM Europe's work force. Under the deal, four factories in Germany would stay open, though Magna previously has said it would need to shed some 2,600 jobs.

GM is racing to meet the government's Monday deadline to qualify for more aid. It already has received about $20 billion in government loans and could get $30 billion more to make it through what is expected to be a 60- to 90-day reorganization in bankruptcy court.

Beyond the bankruptcy announcement Monday, GM is expected to reveal 14 plants it intends to close and name the buyer of its Hummer division.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who was traveling to China, followed developments closely Sunday taking a military aircraft with the latest in communications equipment that allowed him frequent contact with Steven Rattner, head of the administration's auto task force, and Obama economic aide Lawrence Summers.

The Treasury on Thursday offered bondholders 10 percent of a newly formed GM's stock, plus warrants to buy 15 percent more to erase the debt. Last week, GM withdrew an offer of 10 percent equity after only 15 percent of the thousands of bondholders signed up.

The current 54 percent acceptance represents only $14.6 billion, but by lining up support in advance of a bankruptcy protection filing, GM is likely to find it easier to persuade a judge to apply terms of the sweetened offer to the rest of its unsecured debt.

It could also help the automaker get through the court process more quickly, said Robert Gordon, head of the corporate restructuring and bankruptcy group at Clark Hill PLC in Detroit.

"The more consensus you have, the more likely it is you'll be able to move through the bankruptcy process in an expeditious fashion with less resistance," Gordon said.

The company made a huge stride toward restructuring Friday when the United Auto Workers union agreed to a cost-cutting deal.

GM's fate and the federal government's intervention was the topic on several Sunday morning talk shows.

"I think the government auto bailout was a big mistake," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on CNN's "State of the Union" program.

He said the companies could have been allowed to go into the bankruptcy process much earlier, without providing additional government money, "and ended up in the same place."

In a typical Chapter 11 bankruptcy case, the company files a plan of reorganization that must be voted on by creditors. In each class of creditors, the plan would have to be approved by holders of two-thirds of the claims and a majority of the number of individual creditors who vote.

But the GM case is anything but ordinary, and it appears the company will sell some or all of its assets to a new entity that would become the new GM, rather than submit a plan to reorganize the old company.

Under a so-called Section 363 sale, the prospective buyer and seller present a fully negotiated asset purchase agreement for approval by the court.

Creditors still can lodge objections, but GM could avoid the drawn-out fights between competing creditors, such as bondholders and workers, that often occur.

Chrysler LLC, which filed for bankruptcy protection April 30, chose a similar path. A judge heard three days of testimony and arguments last week over the sale of most of Chrysler's assets to Italian carmaker Fiat Group SpA.

U.S. Judge Arthur Gonzalez is expected to approve the sale Monday, pushing Chrysler closer to its goal of a speedy exit from bankruptcy protection. But an appeal is likely from three Indiana state pension and construction funds, which invested in Chrysler debt and say the deal isn't fair. That may force Chrysler to further postpone the deal's closing.

GM's stock tumbled to the lowest price in the company's 100-year history on Friday, closing at just 75 cents after trading as low as 74 cents. In a Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization, the shares would become virtually worthless.

___

AP Business Writer Harry R. Weber in Atlanta and Associated Press Writer Ken Thomas in Washington contributed to this report.

Health Care Reform: “Urgency and Determination”

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning, everybody. This is a gorgeous day and an encouraging day, because we just wrapped up, as the Speaker said, a extremely productive meeting with the chairmen of the relevant committees, as well as the Majority Leader and Vice President Biden, to discuss one of the key pillars of a new foundation for our economy, and that is affordable, accessible, high-quality health care for all Americans.

I want to take a moment before I start talking about health care just to congratulate Chairman Waxman and the Energy and Commerce Committee Democrats, who've made such extraordinary progress in reaching a deal on comprehensive energy reform and climate legislation. This is a major step forward in building the kind of clean-energy economy that will reduce America's dependence on foreign oil. And I once again call on Congress to send me legislation that places a market-based cap on carbon pollution, which will then drive incent for the kind of innovation and dynamic, new clean-energy economy that can create jobs and new businesses all across America.

So this is an example of the extraordinary productivity that we're seeing over in the House right now. On health care, as Speaker Pelosi just mentioned, the House is working to pass a comprehensive health care reform bill by July 31st, before they head out for the August recess. And that's the kind of urgency and determination that we need to achieve what I believe will be historic legislation.

As I've said before, and as all Americans know, our health care system is broken. It's unsustainable for families, for businesses. It is unsustainable for the federal government and state governments.

We've had a lot of discussions in this town about deficits and people across the political spectrum like to throw barbs back and forth about debt and deficits. (photo right by Pete Souza) The fact of the matter is the most significant driver by far of our long-term debt and our long-term deficits is ever-escalating health care costs. And if we don't reform how health care is delivered in this country, then we are not going to be able to get a handle on that.

Now, in addition to the implications for the federal budget, obviously we're also thinking about the millions of American families out there who are struggling to pay premiums that have doubled over the last decade -- rising four times the rate of their wages -- and 46 million Americans who don't have any health insurance at all.

Businesses are using money to pay their rising health care costs that could be going to innovation and growth and new hiring. Far too many small businesses are dropping health care altogether. In fact, you've got small business owners who can't afford health care for themselves, much less for their employees. And as we learned yesterday, pressures on Medicare are growing, which only underscores the need for reform.

That's why we've got to get this done. We've got to get it done this year. We've got to get it done this year -- both in the House and in the Senate. And we don't have any excuses; the stars are aligned.

Now, the problems in our health care system didn't emerge overnight. We've debated about what to do about them for decades, but too often efforts at comprehensive reform have fallen apart due to special-interest lobbying and petty politics and the failure of all sides to come together. What's been so encouraging this week is you're starting to see a shift in these patterns.

On Monday I met with representatives of the insurance and the drug companies, doctors and hospitals, and labor unions, groups that included some of the strongest critics of past comprehensive reform proposals. We discussed how they're pledging to do their part to reduce our nation's health care spending by 1.5 percent per year. Coupled with comprehensive reform, this could result in our nation saving over $2 trillion over the next 10 years, and that could save families $2,500 in the coming years -- $2,500 per family.

Yesterday I met with CEOs (above photo by Pete Souza) from some of America's leading corporations who are finding innovative ways to cut their own health care costs by improving the health of their workers through prevention and wellness programs.

In the coming weeks and months, I believe that the House and Senate will be engaged in a difficult issue, and I'm committed to building a transparent process to get this moving. But whatever plans emerge, both from the House and the Senate, I do believe that they've got to uphold three basic principles: first, that the rising cost of health care has to be brought down; second, that Americans have to be able to choose their own doctor and their own plan; and third, all Americans have to have quality, affordable health care.

These are the principles to which I'm committed. These are the principles to which the chairmen and the Speaker and the Majority Leader, my Vice President are committed. We're seeing now that traditional opponents of health care reform are embracing these ideas. They recognize that the time is now.

And so I am just deeply encouraged. And I want the message to go out all across America, we are not going to rest until we've delivered the kind of health care reform that's going to bring down cost for families, and improve quality, affordability, accessibility for all Americans.

So, thank you very much, and enjoy this wonderful weather.

Securing Our Digital Future

Friday, May 29th, 2009 at 10:00 am

Melissa Hathaway, Cybersecurity Chief at the National Security Council, discusses securing our nation's digital future:

The globally-interconnected digital information and communications infrastructure known as cyberspace underpins almost every facet of modern society and provides critical support for the U.S. economy, civil infrastructure, public safety and national security. The United States is one of the global leaders on embedding technology into our daily lives and this technology adoption has transformed the global economy and connected people in ways never imagined. My boys are 8 and 9 and use the Internet daily to do homework, blog with their friends and teacher, and email their mom; it is second nature to them. My mom and dad can read the newspapers about their daughter on-line and can reach me anywhere in the world from their cell phone to mine. And people all over the world can post and watch videos and read our blogs within minutes of completion. I can’t imagine my world without this connectivity and I would bet that you cannot either. Now consider that the same networks that provide this connectively also increasingly help control our critical infrastructure. These networks deliver power and water to our households and businesses, they enable us to access our bank accounts from almost any city in the world, and they are transforming the way our doctors provide healthcare. For all of these reasons, we need a safe Internet with a strong network infrastructure and we as a nation need to take prompt action to protect cyberspace for what we use it for today and will need in the future.

Protecting cyberspace requires strong vision and leadership and will require changes(http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Cyberspace_Policy_Review_final.pdf) summarizes our conclusions and outlines the beginning of a way forward in building a reliable, resilient, trustworthy digital infrastructure for the future. There are opportunities for everyone—individuals, academia, industry, and governments—to contribute toward this vision. During the review we engaged in more than 40 meetings and received and read more than 100 papers (http://www.whitehouse.gov/cyberreview/documents/)that informed our recommendations. As you will see in our review there is a lot of work for us to do together and an ambitious action plan to accomplish our goals. It must begin with a national dialogue on cybersecurity and we should start with our family, friends, and colleagues.

We are late in addressing this critical national need and our response must be focused, aggressive, and well-resourced. We have garnered great momentum in the last few months, and the vision developed in our review is based on the important input we received from industry, academia, the civil liberties and privacy communities, others in the Executive Branch, State governments, Congress, and our international partners. We now have a strong and common view of what is needed to achieve change. Ensuring that cyberspace is sufficiently resilient and trustworthy to support U.S. goals of economic growth, civil liberties and privacy protections, national security, and the continued advancement of democratic institutions requires making cybersecurity a national priority.

President Barack Obama Weekly Address: May 30, 2009

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Washington D.C.


This week, I nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the U.S. Court of Appeals to replace Justice David Souter, who is retiring after nearly two decades on the Supreme Court. After reviewing many terrific candidates, I am certain that she is the right choice. In fact, there has not been a nominee in several generations who has brought the depth of judicial experience to this job that she offers.

Judge Sotomayor’s career began when she served as an Assistant District Attorney in New York, prosecuting violent crimes in America’s largest city. After leaving the DA’s office, she became a litigator, representing clients in complex international legal disputes. She was appointed to the U.S. District Court, serving six years as a trial judge where she presided over hundreds of cases. And most recently, she has spent eleven years on the U.S. Court of Appeals, our nation’s second highest court, grappling with some of the most difficult constitutional and legal issues we face as a nation. She has more experience on the federal bench than any incoming Supreme Court Justice in the past 100 years. Quite simply, Judge Sotomayor has a deep familiarity with our judicial system from almost every angle.

And her achievements are all the more impressive when you consider what she had to overcome in order to achieve them. Judge Sotomayor grew up in a housing project in the South Bronx; her parents came to New York from Puerto Rico during the Second World War. Her father was a factory worker with a third grade education; when she was just nine years old, he passed away. Her mother worked six days a week as a nurse to provide for her and her brother, buying the only set of encyclopedias in the neighborhood and sending her children to Catholic school. That’s what made it possible for Judge Sotomayor to attend two of America’s leading universities, graduating at the top of her class at Princeton University, and studying at Yale Law School where she won a prestigious post as an editor of the school’s Law Journal.

These many years later, it was hard not to be moved by Judge Sotomayor’s mother, sitting in the front row at the White House, her eyes welling with tears, as her daughter – who had come so far, for whom she sacrificed so much – was nominated to the highest court in the land.

And this is what makes Judge Sotomayor so extraordinary. Even as she has reached the heights of her profession, she has never forgotten where she began. She has faced down barriers, overcome difficult odds, and lived the American dream. As a Justice of the Supreme Court, she will bring not only the experience acquired over the course of a brilliant legal career, but the wisdom accumulated over the course of an extraordinary journey – a journey defined by hard work, fierce intelligence, and the enduring faith that, in America, all things are possible.

It is her experience in life and her achievements in the legal profession that have earned Judge Sotomayor respect across party lines and ideological divides. She was originally named to the U.S. District Court by the first President Bush, a Republican. She was appointed to the federal Court of Appeals by President Clinton, a Democrat. She twice has been overwhelmingly confirmed by the U.S. Senate. And I am gratified by the support for this nomination voiced by members of the legal community who represent views from across the political spectrum.

There are, of course, some in Washington who are attempting to draw old battle lines and playing the usual political games, pulling a few comments out of context to paint a distorted picture of Judge Sotomayor’s record. But I am confident that these efforts will fail; because Judge Sotomayor’s seventeen-year record on the bench – hundreds of judicial decisions that every American can read for him or herself – speak far louder than any attack; her record makes clear that she is fair, unbiased, and dedicated to the rule of law. As a fellow judge on her court, appointed by Ronald Reagan, said recently, "I don’t think I’d go as far as to classify her in one camp or another. I think she just deserves the classification of outstanding judge."

Congress returns this week and I hope the confirmation process will begin without delay. No nominee should be seated without rigorous evaluation and hearing; I expect nothing less. But what I hope is that we can avoid the political posturing and ideological brinksmanship that has bogged down this process, and Congress, in the past. Judge Sotomayor ought to be on the bench when the Supreme Court decides what cases to hear this year and I’m calling on Democrats and Republicans to be thorough, and timely in dealing with this nomination.

As President, there are few responsibilities more serious or consequential than the naming of a Supreme Court Justice. The members of our highest court are granted life tenure. They are charged with applying principles put to paper more than two centuries ago to some of the most difficult questions of our time. And the impact of their decisions extends beyond an administration, but for generations to come.

This is a decision that I have not taken lightly and it is one that I am proud to have made. I know that Justice Sotomayor will serve this nation with distinction. And when she ascends those marble steps to assume her seat on the Supreme Court, bringing a lifetime of experience on and off the bench, America will have taken another important step toward realizing the ideal that is chiseled above its entrance: Equal justice under the law.

Thanks.

Illinois Senator Roland Burris in the Hot seat...again

by David Mercer, Associated Press


DECATUR, Ill. (AP) — Sen. Roland Burris said Wednesday he did not tell an Illinois House impeachment committee that he promised to help then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich's campaign while also pushing for a Senate appointment because, like any good lawyer, he did not want to volunteer information he was not asked about.

Burris, 71, told The Associated Press on Wednesday it never occurred to him he should have told lawmakers in January about his conversation with the former governor's brother, Robert Blagojevich, about both the empty seat and raising money for the governor.

"You're being asked questions, and one thing you don't do is to try to volunteer information that wasn't asked," Burris said at a union hall in Decatur. "There was no obligation there."

Burris said he did not consider informing members of the committee afterward. "Why would I in hindsight turn around and say, 'I shoulda, shoulda, shoulda?'"

On newly released wiretaps, Burris tells Robert Blagojevich that he would like the appointment to the Senate seat vacated by President Barack Obama. But he says it would look bad for him to raise money directly, so he promises to personally write a check and take other actions to help the campaign.

President Obama’s Supreme Choice

by Raynard Jackson

President Obama’s pick of judge Sonia Sotomayor was a supreme choice. I say this not for all the conventional reasons one would expect.

Before I explain my position, let me establish a few facts that will give you the context for my position.

First, a president is entitled to have his nominees confirmed, unless a disqualifying issue is discovered. Disagreeing with a person on abortion, gay rights, or affirmative action are not disqualifying issues. Non payment of taxes, lying under oath, or not renewing one’s law license, etc., are disqualifying acts.

But, as usual, expect Republicans to overreach on trying to block Obama’s pick. They will further alienate independent voters who want solutions to problems and not continued partisan bickering. You can disagree with judge Sotomayor on a range of issues, as I do, but you can’t make the argument that she is not qualified.

I hope and pray that Republicans won’t revert back to their natural inclination of injecting race into this battle. They know they don’t have the votes to block her confirmation, so they are going throw mud at her and hope that something sticks. Rush Limbaugh has already called Sotomayor a “racist.” Not one Republican leader voiced any objection to Rush’s race baiting.

Republicans continue to underestimate Obama’s political skills. You do not come from total obscurity to being president of the United States in four years without being a shrewd and skilled political tactician. His nomination of Sotomayor was one of the most amazing political moves I have seen in all my years of being a political operative.

In Obama’s calculation, he is at his most popular (his number will only go down and then stabilize), Democrats control the senate, and he expects another pick to the court during his term. He also knows that the Republicans are in an extremely weakened position politically. They are worse than impotent right now. Therefore, now is the time to nominate his most controversial pick (on a relative scale). Even Republicans concede that Sotomayor will be confirmed.

But, Obama’s pick has less to do with the court and more to do with the Hispanic community. Obama has been under intense pressure from the Hispanic community because he has few Hispanics in his administration in any significant position. So, the president met with a group of Hispanics and promised them a town hall meeting about giving amnesty to all the illegals in the country. But, the meeting never happened and the group began to voice their frustration to the media.

After the White House’s internal polling data came back and they had conversations with members of congress, the president realized that there was no appetite to deal with amnesty this year. Word was sent to the Hispanic community to back off. So, their consolation prize was a Hispanic on the U.S. Supreme Court.

So, basically the White House’s position with the Hispanic community is now, “shut up!” Obama has issues like a bad economy to deal with, two wars, North Korea, and health care, to name a few. Picking Sotomayor basically buys off the Hispanic community and will prevent them from bugging the administration about illegal immigration.

This move by the president was a stroke of genius. Regardless of your politics, you have to tip your hat to the president’s move. The president knows that there is absolutely nothing the Republicans can do to counter his move. Republicans don’t have anything to offer the Hispanic community.

Effectively, this is Obama’s opening salvo for his reelection campaign in 2012. He has basically taken the Hispanic vote off the table. Don’t be surprised if his next pick were not a Black person. If there is a third pick (which there is a real possibility), it will be a white male.

So, how do Republicans win a national election if they have written off the Black and Hispanic votes from day one? There are not enough white Republican/conservative voters to win a national election without a broader base of support.

Politically, Republicans are in bad shape and there is no light at the end of the tunnel in the near term. If the economy recovers, it’s difficult to imagine a scenario for a Republican victory in 2012. Based on current political demographics, Republicans will probably lose seats in both houses of congress during next years congressional elections.

Obama is playing chess while the Republicans are playing checkers. That is why his picking of Sonia Sotomayor was such a supreme stroke of genius.

Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a D.C.-based political consulting/government affairs firm.

The Presidents' thoughts on Supreme Court nomination - Video link (click this title)

Kirk --

I am proud to announce my nominee for the next Justice of the United States Supreme Court: Judge Sonia Sotomayor.

This decision affects us all -- and so it must involve us all. I've recorded a special message to personally introduce Judge Sotomayor and explain why I'm so confident she will make an excellent Justice.

Please watch the video, and then pass this note on to friends and family to include them in this historic moment.

Judge Sotomayor has lived the America Dream. Born and raised in a South Bronx housing project, she distinguished herself in academia and then as a hard-charging New York District Attorney.

Judge Sotomayor has gone on to earn bipartisan acclaim as one of America's finest legal minds. As a Supreme Court Justice, she would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any Justice in 100 years. Judge Sotomayor would show fidelity to our Constitution and draw on a common-sense understanding of how the law affects our day-to-day lives.

A nomination for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land is one of the most important decisions a President can make. And the discussions that follow will be among the most important we have as a nation. You can begin the conversation today by watching this special message and then passing it on:

http://my.barackobama.com/SupremeCourt

Thank you,

President Barack Obama

President Obama nominates Federal Appeals Judge Sonia Sotomayor to vacant Supreme Court post

from MSNBC

PPM REALITY

"I haven't worn a beeper in years, and nothing I've got goes with it," Tom Joyner joked after his show was dropped by WVAZ-FM in Chicago. "PPM has systematically rated urban stations much lower than they have been in the past. The diary method that Arbitron used to use was more favorable."

The Federal Communications Commission last week announced an inquiry to determine if the new methodology undercounts audience for radio stations targeting minorities. Arbitron responded by saying it welcomed the opportunity to explain the advantages of PPMs.

I spent a day at Arbitron headquarters in Columbia, Maryland studying the PPM ratings system. Unfortunately I cannot tell you what was discussed, due to my employer sending me to this "very informative" all-day session for the good of our success. What I can say is that the answer was very clear, as to what steps are needed to be taken for your radio station to prosper in the PPM radio ratings system.

Based on the multitude of factual information that the Arbitron Executives revealed at the all-day meeting, executing for the diary ratings environment is totally different than the methods necessary to succeed in the PPM ratings environment. Many that were there at the PPM seminar are doing what was learned at the seminar. However some are not adapting to the necessary changes needed to succeed in the new PPM frontier. Then there are those that learned from the meeting with every intention to make the drastic changes, but their managers are slow to change. Then there are those that were just overwhelmed with the all the statistical information and frankly need another session.

The results are in the ratings at the markets now participating in the PPM. I can tell which operations quickly implemented the changes and those -- for what ever reasons -- are not. For those operations that are not, they will only sink lower each week in the PPM world. Not attacking the PPM with research methods, based on facts given by Arbitron at that all-day session, you are sure to fail. The Research and Operation Methods for the PPM, are totally different than the Diary world. If you are implementing the same DIARY methods in a totally different PPM measurement, you are sure to fail. Or you may be one of those operations that is O.K. with mediocracy, comfortable to be below the jsut-passing level that you previous had.

There is a Murphy in the PPM that throws even a highly educated PPM Programmer methods out the window. A former Chicago radio personality named Eddie Volkman put it best. Volkman said that if a teenager is riding to and from school with his father, whatever radio station that the father is listening to are credited to both PPM meters. The teenager probably is listening to the IPOD, while his father (or mother) is listening to a more adult programmed station. The results so far are closer to proving Volkman's point. Daddy's News format and Mom's AC station are the most successful formats in PPM cities.

Will the top fifty market radio stations' owners in the PPM-rated system move towards the successful trend in News and AC formats, away from the teenager/young adult format during drivetime? What will happen to Urban or Modern Rock formats?

Drive-time cume is important to a radio station. Without a highly rated drive time show (so far the younger demo formats ratings are moving southward), that radio station loses advertising revenue. That radio station losing revenue will have to make tough decisions. The tough decision could be lay-offs, or hire someone that understands methods to succeed in the new PPM world.

These are real facts, from a "yet-to-be-accreditted" PPM rating system.

Singer Natalie Cole kidney transplant successful! On the same day, Coles' oldest sister Carol dies

by Richard Johnson - New York Post

NATALIE Cole has just had the most heart-wrenching week of her life.

As Nat King Cole's Grammy Award-winning daughter, who's suffering from kidney disease, sat comforting her dying sister, Carol "Cookie" Cole, she got a frantic call from doctors saying that a kidney from a 22-year-old patient had become available and that she could receive a life-saving transplant immediately.

As Cole -- who was battling hepatitis C from a past drug addiction and needed kidney dialysis three times a week -- was undergoing transplant surgery a few hours later, her older sister passed away last Monday.

"This is all so surreal, and it is devastating," Natalie's younger sister, Timolin Cole, told the New York Post.

"Our sister Cookie hadn't been to a doctor in 30 years, and last week she went in and they found a cancerous spot on her lung. They had wanted to start chemo right away, but Cookie said no."

Natalie quickly rushed to Cookie's side, expecting to comfort her to the end.

"Natalie was there with her at her bedside at 4 in the morning on Monday (May 18th), and she got a phone call from her doctors that a kidney was ready for her," Timolin related.

"She said, 'What do you mean? I can't deal with that right now! I'm here with my dying sister!' And they said to her, 'No, ma'am. We've got to do it now. You've got to be at Cedars-Sinai in two hours.'

"I told her, 'Natalie, this is God's gift, and you've got to go now. Cookie would want this for you.' "

Cole relented and rushed to Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles. The transplant was, mercifully, a success, and she's expected to go home over the weekend.

"She's doing well, and she's going to party like a rock star in no time," Timolin said.

Natalie's rep called the family's life-and-death drama "a tragic coincidence."

Cookie's Credits from washingtonpost.com: The eldest of Nat King Cole's children, Carole Cole began her acting career in 1965 and signed to Columbia Pictures with her fellow actor, Harrison Ford. Her acting credits include the films The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3 (1974), The Mad Room (1969) and The Silencers (1967). She appeared on television in "Positively Black" (1975) and was a series costar on the NBC sitcom "Grady" (1975-6). On stage Cole appeared in Gore Vidal's Weekend (1968), the Lincoln Center/Public Theater production of Pericles (1974 New York Shakespeare Festival) and What If It Had Turned Up Heads (1972). As a writer, Cole's credits include features in On Stage, On Location Magazine and Christmas For Kids (CD).

Cole (Carol standing in picture with father, Richard Edwards - host of 'This is Your Life' TV show, and Natalie Cole) was CEO of King Cole Partners and King Cole Productions and sat on the Board of Directors with sisters Natalie Cole, Timolin Cole-Augustus and Casey Cole-Ray.

President Barack Obama weekly address 5-23-2009

Prepared Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address -- Saturday, May 23, 2009


This Memorial Day weekend, Americans will gather on lawns and porches, fire up the grill, and enjoy the company of family, friends, and neighbors. But this is not only a time for celebration, it is also a time to reflect on what this holiday is all about; to pay tribute to our fallen heroes; and to remember the servicemen and women who cannot be with us this year because they are standing post far from home – in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around the world.

On Friday, I traveled to Annapolis, where I spoke at the Commencement of the United States Naval Academy. It was an honor to address some of America’s newest sailors and Marines as their Commander-in-Chief. Looking out at all of those young men and women, I was reminded of the extraordinary service that they are rendering to our country. And I was reminded, too, of all of the sacrifices that their parents, siblings, and loved ones make each day on their behalf and on our behalf.

Our fighting men and women – and the military families who love them – embody what is best in America. And we have a responsibility to serve all of them as well as they serve all of us.

And yet, all too often in recent years and decades, we, as a nation, have failed to live up to that responsibility. We have failed to give them the support they need or pay them the respect they deserve. That is a betrayal of the sacred trust that America has with all who wear – and all who have worn – the proud uniform of our country.

And that is a sacred trust I am committed to keeping as President of the United States. That is why I will send our servicemen and women into harm’s way only when it is necessary, and ensure that they have the training and equipment they need when they enter the theater of war.

That is why we are building a 21st century Department of Veterans Affairs with the largest single-year funding increase in three decades. It’s a commitment that will help us provide our veterans with the support and benefits they have earned, and expand quality health care to a half million more veterans.

That is why, this week, I signed a bill that will eliminate some of the waste and inefficiency in our defense projects – reform that will better protect our nation, better protect our troops, and save taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.

And that is why we are laying a new foundation for our economy so that when our troops return home and take off the uniform, they can find a good job, provide for their families, and earn a college degree on a Post-9/11 GI Bill that will offer them the same opportunity to live out their dreams that was afforded our greatest generation.

These are some of the ways we can, must, and will honor the service of our troops and the sacrifice of their families. But we must also do our part, not only as a nation, but as individuals for those Americans who are bearing the burden of wars being fought on our behalf. That can mean sending a letter or a care package to our troops overseas. It can mean volunteering at a clinic where a wounded warrior is being treated or bringing supplies to a homeless veterans center. Or it can mean something as simple as saying "thank you" to a veteran you pass on the street.

That is what Memorial Day is all about. It is about doing all we can to repay the debt we owe to those men and women who have answered our nation’s call by fighting under its flag. It is about recognizing that we, as a people, did not get here by accident or good fortune alone. It’s about remembering the hard winter of 1776, when our fragile American experiment seemed doomed to fail; and the early battles of 1861 when a union victory was anything but certain; and the summer of 1944, when the fate of a world rested on a perilous landing unlike any ever attempted.

It’s about remembering each and every one of those moments when our survival as a nation came down not simply to the wisdom of our leaders or the resilience of our people, but to the courage and valor of our fighting men and women. For it is only by remembering these moments that we can truly appreciate a simple lesson of American life – that what makes all we are and all we aspire to be possible are the sacrifices of an unbroken line of Americans that stretches back to our nation’s founding.

That is the meaning of this holiday. That is a truth at the heart of our history. And that is a lesson I hope all Americans will carry with them this Memorial Day weekend and beyond.

Thank you.

President Obama explains, then signs your Credit Card Reform Bill

The Republican Party and the Auto Industry—Planned Obsolescence

by Raynard Jackson

There is a strange irony between the Republican Party and the auto industry. Both are bankrupt through terrible leadership who made bad decisions. Now, those decisions that were made years ago are coming back to bite both groups.

The Republican’s adoption of the “Southern Strategy,” which basically ceded the Black vote in order to get the white vote, is the starting point for the party’s demise. In the short term, the strategy was a great success (it gave Republicans 4 presidents—Nixon, Reagan, Bush, and Bush). But, the long term effects of this strategy is proving to be devastating to the Republican Party. It’s like someone who was a heavy drug user throughout their 20’s. Then they cleaned up their lives in their 30’s, but in their 40’s they began to have all kinds of medical issues. The doctor tells them that the medical conditions are a result of the decisions that were made in their 20’s (the “Southern Strategy’).

Don’t believe me? Look at what former Nixon aide Kevin Phillips said in a 1970 New York Times interview. According to Phillips, “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that…but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”

Still don’t believe me? Look at what former head of the Republican Party, Lee Atwater had to say when interviewed in 1981 by New York Times columnist Bob Herbert. According to Atwater , “You start out in 1954 by saying, Nigger, nigger, nigger. By 1968 you can’t say nigger—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced bussing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now that you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is that blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying we want to cut this is much more abstract than even the busing thing and a hell of a lot more abstract than Nigger, nigger.”

Still not quite convinced? Remember how Republicans did one of their own after the 2004 elections? This person basically went to the party and said you need help with this addiction (the Southern Strategy). The party activists went apoplectic. This person was Bush’s campaign manager and former Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Ken Mehlman. Here’s what he said in 2005 about the Southern Strategy when addressing a Black group, “Republican candidates often have prospered by ignoring black voters and even by exploiting racial tensions and by the ‘70s and into the ‘80s and ‘90s, the Democratic Party solidified its gains in the African-American community, and we Republicans did not effectively reach out. Some Republicans gave up on winning the Africa-American vote, looking the other way or trying to benefit politically from racial polarization. I am here today as the Republican chairman to tell you we were wrong.” People like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity castigated Mehlman for his remarks.

What the Southern Strategy didn’t prepare the Republican Party for is the tectonic shifts in the political landscape. The environment that allowed the Southern Strategy to flourish is no longer around. These Republican strategists that devised and continued this perverted strategy have now been marginalized by the shifting demographics of our changing society.

You have about a third of the Republican base controlling an entire party. They have a very narrow view of the shifting demographics of this country and are not capable of appealing to anyone who disagrees with them. Their view is very similar to the auto industry of the ‘80s and ‘90s. Their attitude was, “we will build the cars we think people want and then spend billions trying to convince them to buy something they don’t want.”

Then came the Japanese auto makers. Their approach was, “tell us what you want and we will build it.” Thus, American auto makers are in financial ruins not because of the economy, but because they made bad decisions in the ‘80s that are now coming back to haunt them today.

Rightly or wrongly, Americans don’t trust Republicans and they blame them for the financial collapse we are going through. People have tuned the Republicans out. They can set up a million new groups with all kinds of fancy names, but you can’t continue to trot out the same, tired people who put the party in this situation and expect people to respond. Like an addict in denial, Republicans don’t see a problem with their message. They think they have a communication problem. The American people have told the Republican Party in no uncertain terms that they do not like to message coming from them. But, just like an addict tunes out his doctor because he is in denial, Republicans continue to think the problem is communication, not message.

So, it goes with the auto industry. Because of the decisions they made in the ‘80s, they nor their industry will never be what it once was. The Republican Party would do well to heed the lesson.



Raynard Jackson is president & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a D.C.-based political consulting/government affairs firm.

The President shoots hoops with the undefeated U-Conn Women's Championship Basketballl Team at the White House

The President shoots baskets with UConn's womens' basketball team.


Undefeated NCAA Champion UConn women's basketball team visit White House

Government financing for Black-Owned Radio operations

The below article by the Hill magazine/website, should not be confused with the HR 848 bill, that is vehemently opposed by Radio One's Cathy Hughes, Tom Joyner, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Michael Baisden, and a growing amount of Congressional legislatures. It is somewhat ironic that this article about a very different bill below, which requests financing for Minority-owned radio stations, would happen to come out at this time when Black-Radio could be taxed out of business by a different bill that Rep. John Conyers (HR 848 bill) sponsored that is on the House floor now. Just a preface to your reading the article about this new, yet different bill, as to how tricky Congress can be. Opening up credit for minority broadcast operations is relavent enough to print, but more important to understand what is being released by the magazine championed by Congress. Congress members that read my blog, don't get the bills twisted and further please understand trickery and well-timed releases. KT

Democrats seek financial rescue of minority-owned broadcasters

By Silla Brush of The Hill

High-ranking House Democrats are urging the Treasury Department to prop up minority-owned broadcasters suffering from a lack of capital and lost advertising revenue amid the economic slump.

House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) is leading an effort to convince Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to take “decisive action” by extending credit to this sector of the broadcasting industry.

Clyburn and other senior members, including House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), argue that minority-owned broadcasters are sound businesses, but that the recession could undermine the government’s efforts to diversify the airwaves.

A number of members from the Congressional Black Caucus signed the letter, too.

“While many jobs are at stake, a more important principle — the government’s fundamental interest in promoting a diversity of voices, including service to underserved communities — is severely threatened,” the members write in a draft of a letter that was scheduled to be sent Tuesday.

The letter comes as some of the biggest recipients of government bailout money, including JPMorgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, jockey to repay government bailout money. As banks seek a way out from the government’s restrictions, other industries struggle and seek government support. Some firms seeking to repay the government argue that the government’s restrictions have burdened their businesses.

The congressmen suggest the Treasury Department could provide access to capital to minority-owned broadcasters, which they say represent less than 7 percent of full-power radio stations and a “negligible” ownership of television stations.

“They are looking for continued access to capital to continue their otherwise fundamentally sound operations,” the members write.

The letter suggests Treasury could set up a credit facility specific to the industry, similar to the government’s efforts to support auto suppliers, or possibly set up a program for bridge financing and government-backed loans until the economy improves.

“In addition to the credit crisis, also weighing heavily on minority broadcasters is a significant decline in advertising revenues, particularly the loss of automobile advertising,” the congressmen write.

The members are asking for a meeting with the Treasury Department and minority-owned broadcast entities and representatives from the National Association of Black Owned Broadcasters.

Other members signing the letter are Democratic Reps. Bobby Rush (Ill.), Edolphus Towns (N.Y.), Maurice Hinchey (N.Y.), Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.), Maxine Waters (Calif.), Gregory Meeks (N.Y.), G.K. Butterfield (N.C.), Barbara Lee (Calif.), Lynn Woolsey (Calif.) and Bennie Thompson (Miss.)

Little Rock Nine - 3 years after Brown versus Board of Education

On September 24, 1957, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed Executive Order 10730. The order federalized the Arkansas National Guard and ordered the Secretary of Defense to employ the Arkansas soldiers. President Eisenhower sent the 101st Airbourne Division to uphold the Supreme Court Decision of 1954 'Brown versus the Board of Education'and made sure that Ernest Green -- featured in video above -- part of the Little Rock Nine, made it to school Safely.


Minnie Jean Brown, one of the original Little Rock Nine who was subjected to the racism of the first integrated school, returns to Central High and can barely speak about the hatred she faced while attempting to simply go to school.


A day in the life of the Little Rock Nine.

Pittsburg Steeler James Harrison refuses White House invite

When the Pittsburgh Steelers visit the White House as Super Bowl champions on Thursday, they’ll be without their reigning defensive player of the year.

Linebacker James Harrison has said the trip is no “big deal” and he’ll skip it again after not making the trip following the Steelers’ title in 2006.

Highlights of the best moments from James Harrison in 2008.

“If you want to see the Pittsburgh Steelers, invite us when we don’t win the Super Bowl,” he told Pittsburgh’s WTAE-TV. “So as far as I’m concerned he would have invited Arizona if they had won.”

FCC Formally Launches PPM Inquiry

PPM Probe Begins
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-09-43A1.doc

The FCC has a format Notice Of Inquiry into ARBITRON's PPM. "In his Notice of Inquiry (NOI), we seek comment on issues relating to the commercial use of a radio audience measurement device, developed by ARBITRON, INC. known as the portable people meter, or PPM. Broadcasters, media organizations, and others have raised concerns about the use of the PPM and its potential impact on audience ratings of stations that air programming targeted to minority audiences, and consequently, on the financial viability of those stations.

"They claim that the current PPM methodology undercounts and misrepresents the number and loyalty of minority radio listeners.

"They assert that, because audience ratings affect advertising revenues, undercounting minority audiences could negatively affect the ability of these stations to compete for advertising revenues and to continue to offer local service to minority audiences.

"They express concern that such undercounting could particularly affect the ratings of local, urban-formatted radio stations that broadcast programming of interest to African-American and Hispanic audiences.

"This NOI investigates the impact of PPM methodology on the broadcast industry as well as whether the audience ratings data is sufficiently accurate and reliable to merit the Commission's own reliance on it in its rules, policies and procedures.

"Close the Gap in Education" rally moves on to other cities

The "Close the Gap in Education" movement, led by Rev. Al Sharpton, is on and poppin' in a big way. The meeting with the President (pictured left) was very successful. Successful in the sense that it is mutually agreed that the Public Education system does not provide a quality education in all American communities, and something must be done to improve performance. The Syndication One News-Talk Network radio broadcast, and C-Span's television broadcast was successful. Due to these successful meetings with the President and the public, future "Close the Gap in Education" Rallies will be even greater, but more specific in dealing with the hosting citys' drop-out rates.

The speakers at the Washington DC May 16th "Close the Gap in Education" rally included the Secretary of Education, New York's Education Chancellor, former Speaker of the House, President of the United Negro College fund, Elementary and High School student leaders, concerned Parents, a member of the Little Rock Nine, Church leaders, Mayor of Washington DC, NAACP DC chairman, Teacher of the Year, and the Council of School Supervisors and Adminstrators.. The coalition at the Washington DC rally along with the successful coverage will grow as the Education movement expands.

Education and the Educational environment, which includes greater participation by parents, is probably the most important vehicle to turning the current wave of ignorance around. Ignorance here defined by the high drop-out rates: 70 percent in Detroit, 50 percent drop-out rates in other cities, and States like North Carolina and Georgia having state-wide dropout rate of 25 percent or more --- State Wide!

We need the communities to support education and clean up the street violence, so kids can walk freely down the street. Without a safe environment, there is no focus by students in clase. If the kids and their parents have to worry about going through a war-zone to get to school, and a war-zone in their communities, then how will a child be able to focus under these stressful conditions.

There are more relative issues for sure, and more people will come on board. However, considering that our first "Close the Gap in Education" Rally in Washington DC has the interest of the President of the United States and the nation's Secretary of Education, I consider this a great start.

Now the "Close the Gap in Education" movement goes on to other cities. We are probably going to rally in cities that are underperforming the most. I thank you for your interest, and encourage you to come on board.

Close the Gap in Education Rally in Washington DC -- May 16, 2009

Live Education Equality Day coverage from Close the Gap Rally

Tom Vander
Huffingtonpost.com

After a few drops of rain, inspiring student choirs and drum lines, Chancellor Joel Klein, NYC Public School & Education Equality Project Co-Founder kicked off a rally commemorating the 55th anniversary of Brown v Board. Like DC Mayor Fenty that followed him, Klein called for parent support for new and better schools.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan called education the new currency. Like Fenty and Klein, he called for parents to demand quality education.

Symbolizing the odd-bed fellows behind educational equality, Newt Gingrich, Former House Speaker and Rev. Al Sharpton announced a five city tour. On stage, Gingrich said, "We can't wait for incremental improvement, we need radical change."

Roy Romer, Former Governor of Colorado, and LA Board Member Marlene Cantor, called for a good teacher in every classroom. Romer echoed the President's call for performance pay and training or removing ineffective teachers.

Kevin Chavous, Former DC City Councilman (EEP and DFER board), led a chant, "Put children First." He gave a shout out to a large group of DC Scholarship supporters. Chavous railed against work rules that allow bad teachers to stay on the payroll and concluded with an impassioned plea to ensure that "Every child has access to a quality education by any means necessary."

With "No justice, no peace!" Rev. Al Sharpton lit up the crowd. He encouraged everyone to"Put your agenda aside and work together to put children first. Step outside of the box. Hold everybody accountable--teachers, parents, administrations, community members--because we're failing our children. " He continued, "55 years (after Brown v Board) education is still separate and unequal. We need to come together to deal with the problem. " Sharpton echoed the President's call for personal responsibility and high expectations for all young people. He concluded with a crowd rousing chant, "Close the gap."

President Barack Obama weekly address May 16th., 2009

WEEKLY ADDRESS: President Obama Says Progress on Clean Energy and Healthcare Reform Will Lay New Foundation

WASHINGTON – This week, President Barack Obama praised individuals representing different perspectives for coming together to address the challenges of building a clean energy economy, reforming the healthcare system and laying a new foundation for the long-term strength of our economy. Utility companies and corporate leaders are working with environmental advocates and labor leaders to find a way to reduce dependence on foreign oil, to fight climate change, and to create millions of new jobs in America. Recently, past critics and advocates of healthcare reform sat down with the President to work on reducing the healthcare costs by $2 trillion in the next decade and saving families $2,500 in the coming years.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
Saturday, May 16, 2009

Good morning. Over the past few months, as we have put in place a plan to speed our economic recovery, I have spoken repeatedly of the need to lay a new foundation for lasting prosperity; a foundation that will support good jobs and rising incomes; a foundation for economic growth where we no longer rely on excessive debt and reckless risk – but instead on skilled workers and sound investments to lead the world in the industries of the 21st century.

Two pillars of this new foundation are clean energy and health care. And while there remains a great deal of difficult work ahead, I am heartened by what we have seen these past few days: a willingness of those with different points of view and disparate interests to come together around common goals – to embrace a shared sense of responsibility and make historic progress.

Chairman Henry Waxman and members of the Energy and Commerce Committee brought together stakeholders from all corners of the country – and every sector of our economy – to reach an historic agreement on comprehensive energy legislation. It’s another promising sign of progress, as longtime opponents are sitting together, at the same table, to help solve one of America’s most serious challenges.

For the first time, utility companies and corporate leaders are joining, not opposing, environmental advocates and labor leaders to create a new system of clean energy initiatives that will help unleash a new era of growth and prosperity.

It’s a plan that will finally reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil and cap the carbon pollution that threatens our health and our climate. Most important, it’s a plan that will trigger the creation of millions of new jobs for Americans, who will produce the wind turbines and solar panels and develop the alternative fuels to power the future. Because this we know: the nation that leads in 21st century clean energy is the nation that will lead the 21st century global economy. America can and must be that nation – and this agreement is a major step toward this goal.

But we know that our families, our economy, and our nation itself will not succeed in the 21st century if we continue to be held down by the weight of rapidly rising health care costs and a broken health care system. That’s why I met with representatives of insurance and drug companies, doctors and hospitals, and labor unions who are pledging to do their part to reduce health care costs. These are some of the groups who have been among the fiercest critics of past comprehensive health care reform plans. But today they too are recognizing that we must act. Our businesses will not be able to compete; our families will not be able to save or spend; our budgets will remain unsustainable unless we get health care costs under control.

These groups have pledged to do their part to reduce the annual health care spending growth rate by 1.5 percentage points. Coupled with comprehensive reform, their efforts could help to save our nation more than $2 trillion in the next ten years – and save hardworking families $2,500 each in the coming years.

This week, I also invited Speaker of House Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, and other congressional leaders to the White House to discuss comprehensive health reform legislation. The House is working to pass a bill by the end of July – before they head out for their August recess. That’s the kind of urgency and determination we need to achieve comprehensive reform by the end of this year. And the reductions in spending the health care community has pledged will help make this reform possible.

I have always believed that it is better to talk than not to talk; that it is far more productive to reach over a divide than to shake your fist across it. This has been an alien notion in Washington for far too long, but we are seeing that the ways of Washington are beginning to change. For the calling of this moment is too loud and too urgent to ignore. Our success as a nation – the future of our children and grandchildren – depends upon our willingness to cast aside old arguments, overcome stubborn divisions, and march forward as one people and one nation.

This is how progress has always been made. This is how a new foundation will be built. We cannot assume that interests will always align, or that fragile partnerships will not fray. There will be setbacks. There will be difficult days. But we are off to a good start. And I am confident that we will – in the weeks, months, and years ahead – build on what we have already achieved and lay this foundation which will not only bring about prosperity for this generation, but for generations to come.

Thanks so much.

Letter from Ms. H regarding: H.R. 848

Owner and Chairwoman of Radio One Cathy Hughes' open letter.

TO MY RADIO ONE FAMILY:

The Honorable John Conyers, our 80 year old African-American Congressman is the sponsor of a new bill that could put many black owned radio stations out of business. And force others to abandon their commitment to provide free music, entertainment, news, information, and money losing formats like gospel and black talk. This is Cathy Hughes, founder and chairperson of Radio One with an urgent call to our Radio Family.

The John Conyers Performance Tax Bill is the brain child of the foreign owned record industry who would receive at least 50% of the revenue that would be charged to radio stations in order for them to play music. The music that you now receive free from us - we would have to pay millions of dollars for. And in the midst of this economic depression, black radio stations simply do not have that financial ability.

There has been only one hearing on the bill and that hearing did not have any black ownership representation. Black radio owners and community leaders including Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, Dick Gregory, Tom Joyner, and myself have all begged Conyers to at least allow us the opportunity for a hearing. He has flatly refused. We now ask you, our radio family, to assist us in saving the future of black radio. Please call or email or visit the offices of John Conyers today.

His phone numbers are 202-225-5126 and 313-961-5670 and his email address is john.conyers@mail.house.gov

TELL HIM that you oppose this bill that would murder Black owned radio and the free music that you now hear on all free radio stations. In the midst of an American economic recession, it is not the right time to send millions of dollars to foreign owned record companies that don’t even pay taxes like you and me in this country. This bill is not in the interest of Black people! Please help us save Black radio!

Radio Stations Are Singing the Blues

Conyers’ Bill Would Make Stations Play and Pay

By Kate Ackley
Roll Call Staff

May 13, 2009, 12 a.m.

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.) is a stalwart of the civil rights agenda. But on an issue that would appear to be colorblind, he has raised the ire of many of his longtime supporters who insist he’s on the wrong side.

Conyers’ committee is scheduled this morning to mark up a bill that would compel broadcasters to pay performance royalties to artists and record labels when radio stations play their music. The bill has sparked a star-studded lobbying campaign with the likes of Sheryl Crow and Tony Bennett urging Congress to pass the bill, known as the Performance Rights Act.

But on the other side, broadcasters, especially minority-owned radio stations, have turned to the civil rights community — including Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton — to put the pressure on Conyers and other lawmakers to stop the bill.

David Honig, a civil rights lawyer who serves as executive director of the Minority Media and Telecommunications Council, says the stakes couldn’t be higher. And, in a twist, his side is drawing on the Conyers’ playbook of perseverance to block the legislation, he said.


“I’ve known him for almost 40 years,” Honig said of Conyers. “I love him like a brother, and I’m baffled. This is the only time in all the years I’ve known him that he’s just wrong. If you’re going to be wrong, be wrong on something little, not something this big.”

Honig said that minority-owned ra-

dio stations will be particularly hurt if the bill passes because they are starting from a disadvantage and can’t afford to add a new expense.

“It’ll give all radio stations a headache and put minority stations in intensive care,” Honig said.

Some minority stations are integral to get-out-the-vote efforts, particularly among African- Americans and Hispanics, he added.

But a broad coalition of artists and recording industry groups argues that it’s simply a matter of fairness to artists, many of whom are minorities. Already, satellite radio and Internet radio companies pay performance royalties to artists and labels.

“It’s clear that everybody from the big names to working musicians is behind this, and we think it’s time for the loophole to be closed,” said Daryl Friedman, top lobbyist for the Recording Academy and a member of the musicFIRST Coalition. “Certainly Mr. Conyers is going to be someone who is going to have a great concern about these issues and won’t do anything to harm minority-owned stations. We’re confident Mr. Conyers will come up with a solution that will be fair to all sides.”

Indeed, Conyers is expected to introduce a manager’s amendment today that would allow any radio station that makes less than $100,000 a year to pay a flat fee of $500 for unlimited use of music.

And two Democratic minority Members, Reps. Hank Johnson (Ga.) and Linda Sánchez (Calif.), wrote in a “Dear Colleague” letter: “We have an obligation to protect both the ability of minority broadcasters to conduct their business and to compensate the minority artists whose work they use at the same time.”

On Tuesday, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights came out in support of Conyers’ chairman’s mark, which includes the amendment. The group noted that while it is committed to “media diversity, we also believe that artists must be fairly compensated for their work.”

But such comity has not resonated among broadcasters.

Radio One founder and Chairwoman Cathy Hughes, an African-American, on Tuesday issued a call to action. “The John Conyers Performance Tax Bill is the brain child of the foreign-owned record industry who would receive at least 50% of the revenue that would be charged to radio stations in order for them to play music,” she said, according to a statement released by the National Association of Broadcasters. “The music that you now receive free from us —we would have to pay millions of dollars for.”

Marty Machowsky, a spokesman for the musicFIRST Coalition, said the gloomy rhetoric coming from all broadcasters, including the NAB and minority stations, is over the edge. “We’ve extended our hand time and again, and Members have asked radio representatives time and again to sit down,” he said.

But the broadcasters have not been willing to negotiate, he added.

The head of NAB, David Rehr, last week resigned his post, in part, sources said, because his side was not scoring victories on this and other important issues to the broadcasting associations.

The NAB’s spokesman, Dennis Wharton, called musicFIRST simply a front group for the big multinational record labels and said NAB is lining up supporters of its own, thanks in part to the help of the civil rights activists.

“It’s pretty shameless for the record labels who have historically abused artists — and artists have sued them for cheating them out of royalties — to now profess to be so concerned about fairness to artists,” Wharton said.

While most industry sources on both sides of the issue said they expect the bill to pass Conyers’ committee today, the fight will not end there.

Machowsky said artists and musicians will flock to the Capitol “in greater numbers” to make the case that radio companies, many of them billion-dollar enterprises, should compensate artists and musicians for the use of their work.

Honig’s side won’t back down, either.

“We’ll fight it on the [House] floor,” he said. “If we lose it in the House, we’ll fight it in the Senate. If we lose in the Senate, we’ll fight it at the White House. This is a survival issue.

“It’s something I learned from Conyers when we were working on the King holiday,” Honig said, referring to the multiyear fight to create a federal holiday recognizing civil rights icon Martin Luther King Jr. Conyers introduced the first bill to start the MLK holiday and continued pushing the legislation until it passed some 15 years later.

If the radio bill passes, Honig added, “What we will have done is lost about a generation of work in meticulously building up minorities in radio ownership.”

The House Judiciary Committee today passes HR 848

Radio-fees bill passes committee as stations stage protest

Deb Price / The Detroit News

Washington -- As a 200-person "Save Black Radio" rally was held in Detroit, the House Judiciary Committee today passed a controversial bill to impose a performer's fee on over-the-air radio stations.

The Performance Rights Act would change law so that AM and FM radio stations would pay performers to play their songs, as is true of satellite, cable and Internet music services. All four music platforms pay songwriters for use of their work.
The final vote was 21 to 9. The bill moves to the House floor for a full vote. The Senate has a companion bill pending action.

The committee approved by voice vote a "manager's amendment" by Chairman John Conyers, D-Detroit, to try to address critics -- including Radio One Detroit -- who contend the bill threatens the survival of minority and women-owned stations during rocky economic times.

"This is not a revolutionary concept," Conyers said of the proposed performer's fee for AM and FM stations. "Everybody gets paid for their creativity and their work."
About 200 marchers joined local radio hosts Mildred Gaddis and Reggie Reg outside of Conyer's office in Detroit, chanting, "No to the bill on the hill," and, "Save black radio," as supporters honked as they passed. Branding the new fee a "tax," many critics argued it could destroy small broadcasters, including minority and women-owned stations that provide valuable diversity on the airwaves.

"This is crucial; this is critical," Gaddis, host at WCHB-AM (1200), said. "(Conyers) is generally 95 percent of the time on the right side. He's on the wrong side on this one."

Conyers and other committee members said their offices had been flooded by critics of the bill.

Conyers said he shares the concern about the potential impact of new fees on small broadcasters.

As a result, he proposed changes that were agreed to that create a sliding fee scale for small broadcasters and delays the start date of payments:
• Stations with annual gross revenues of less than $100,000 would pay $500 each year. Those with gross revenues between $100,000 and $500,000 would pay $2,500. Those between $500,000 and $1.25 million would pay a royalty fee of $5,000 per year.
In the original bill, stations with gross revenues of less than $1.25 million would pay a flat fee of $5,000.

Conyers said the change to a sliding fee would affect 90 percent of all minority-owned radio stations, and 77 percent of all radio stations.

• The fees wouldn't start for three years if a station's revenues are less than $5 million annually, and for 1 year for others.
Talk radio stations playing only snippets of songs are exempt, as are broadcasts of religious services. Non-commercial stations, such as college stations, would pay $1,000.

Larger stations would work with performers to negotiate fees, which would then be approved by Copyright Royalty Board. A copyright arm of the Library of Congress, the royalty board would set rates when agreements can't be reached.
Conyers also asked for a Government Accountability Office study of the bill's potential impact on radio broadcasters, as well as performing artists and copyright holders.

But Conyers' changes weren't enough to quiet concerns of some committee members.
The ranking Republican on the committee, Lamar Smith of Texas, urged delay until members could read the GAO report.

Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., offered an amendment to delay the vote on the bill for six months until the GAO report is available. His amendment was defeated, 20 to 10.
"Spike" of "Mojo in the Morning on WKOI-FM (95.5) also joined protestors in Detroit, saying that the bill would affect all radio stations, big and small. His station is owned by Clear Channel.

"We've already had a 50 percent decline in revenues in two years," he said. "It's just going to change free radio as we know it."
The Detroit City Council also weighed in, discussing a resolution Tuesday that supports the arguments made by black radio stations. The resolution, introduced by Kwame Kenyatta and JoAnn Watson, failed and was referred to an entertainment committee.

"Many of our artists haven't gotten their due, but it should be the record companies, not the stations, who should pay," said Watson, who has hosted the "Hello Detroit" radio show for more than 20 years. "(Small) black-owned stations will go out of business. They will close the stations down, I'm telling you."
But Councilwoman Martha Reeves said she wants to be fairly compensated. Reeves, of Motown fame, said she's a part of a group of about 300 artists who helped initiate Conyers' bill. She added during Tuesday's session that stations in other countries such as England pay the artists, and it should be the same in the United States.
"The artists whose records that are being played, they should be paid," Reeves said. "I'm representing my career and legacy. We've had music played for 40 years, and we're not being paid for it. America should step up to the plate and be responsible. We deserve this money."

Critics argue that it's unfair to charge them a royalty fee when they can't charge performers a fee for the advertising they grant them that then turn into sales of CDs and concert tickets.

"Broadcasters bring value to the recording artist by airing their songs," said Karole White, president and CEO of the Michigan Association of Broadcasters.

"Many of our members have awards given to them by artists, by recording companies thanking them for making them the stars they are today. We are prohibited from charging anyone for the music that we play," she added.
dprice@detnews.com (202) 662-8736 Detroit News Staff Writers Susan Whitall, Catherine Jun and Darren

Cathy Hughes says Black Radio will END with Rep. John Conyers' H.R. 848 Congressional Bill

Chairwoman of Radio One -- America's Largest Black-Owned Radio operation in Radio One == Ms. Cathy Hughes says that Black Radio will END with the passage of Michigan's Congressional Representative John Conyers-sponsored bill H.R. 848. H.R. 848 will be voted on today by the Judicial Committee that is chaired by 80-year old John Conyers. H.R. 848 will then be taken to the House and Senate for passage. Ms. Hughes urges every reader to call their U.S. Senator, U.S. Representatives, and the Detroit and Washington DC office of Congressman John Conyers, to demand a "No" vote on H.R. 848.

Rep. John Conyers contact information:
1. Detroit office: 313.961.5670
2. Washington DC office: 202.225.5126
3. Fax: 202.225.5126
4. Email: john.conyers@mail.house.gov

Black Radio registered millions of voters to elect our first African-American President Barack Obama, the Congressional Black Caucus, promising White Presidents and members of Congress, Mayors, and City Councilmen. Black radio mobilized thousands for Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the Civil rights movement, and for minority education benefactors from the landmark case Brown versus the Board of Education. Black Radio has promoted the sale of billions of CDs'/Records/MP3's for Black artists and their respective Record Companies & Distributors. Black Radio has been the communicating guiding force for passing policies that eliminated "legal" Racism in Government, Corporate, and Scholastic institutions. Black Radio has hundreds of thousand of African-Americans people in the field of Broadcasting. Black Radio has appointed Board members, CEO'ss, CFO's, VP's, Managers, and Directors, whom consistently cracked their heads on thick glass ceiling at White-Owned broadcast operations.

In the below link (or lick the title above), Ms. H. explains how H.R. 848 will end Black radio's powerful voice in an interview with Syndication One News-Talk Network's talk show host Al Sharpton.

http://www.newmusicinsite.com/audio/sharptonhughes.mp3

President Barack Obama Weekly Address May 9, 2009

WEEKLY ADDRESS: President Obama Calls on Congress to Pass Credit Card Reform Bill


WASHINGTON – In his weekly address, President Barack Obama called on Congress to pass a credit card reform bill, so that he can sign it into law by Memorial Day. The American people know that they must act responsibly and fairly, and credit institutions must do the same. Sudden rate hikes, unfair penalties, and hidden fees are too common and are hurting too many people. The set of principles the President has advocated will bring strong and reliable protections to consumers and strengthen monitoring, enforcement, and penalties for credit card companies that attempt to take advantage of ordinary Americans.

The full audio of the address is HERE. The video can be viewed online at www.whitehouse.gov.


Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
Washington, D.C.


Good morning. I want to briefly share some news about our economy, and talk about the work that we’re doing both to protect American consumers, and to put our economy back on a path to growth and prosperity.

This week, we saw some signs that the gears of America’s economic engine are slowly beginning to turn. Consumer spending and home sales are stabilizing. Unemployment claims are dropping and job losses are beginning to slow. But these trends are far from satisfactory. The unemployment rate is at its highest point in twenty-five years. We are still in the midst of a deep recession that was years in the making, and it will take time to fully turn this economy around.

We cannot rest until our work is done. Not when Americans continue to lose their jobs and struggle to pay their bills. Not when we are wrestling with record deficits and an over-burdened middle class. That is why every action that my Administration is taking is focused on clearing away the wreckage of this recession, and building a new foundation for job-creation and long-term growth.

This past week, we acted on several fronts. To restart the flow of credit that businesses and individuals depend upon, we completed an unprecedented review of the condition of our nation’s largest banks to determine what additional steps are necessary to get our economy moving. To restore fiscal discipline, we identified 121 programs to eliminate from our budget. And to restore a sense of fairness to our tax code and common sense to our economy, I have asked Congress to work with me in closing the loopholes that let companies ship jobs and stash profits overseas – reforms will help save $210 billion over the next ten years.

These important steps are just one part of a broad effort to get government, businesses and banks to act more responsibly, so that we are creating good jobs and making sound investments instead of spending recklessly and padding false profits. Because American institutions must act with the same sense of responsibility and fairness that the American people aspire to in their own lives.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in our credit card industry. Americans know that they have a responsibility to live within their means and pay what they owe. But they also have a right to not get ripped off by the sudden rate hikes, unfair penalties, and hidden fees that have become all-too common in our credit card industry. You shouldn’t have to fear that any new credit card is going to come with strings attached, nor should you need a magnifying glass and a reference book to read a credit card application. And the abuses in our credit card industry have only multiplied in the midst of this recession, when Americans can least afford to bear an extra burden.

It is past time for rules that are fair and transparent. That is why I have called for a set of new principles to reform our credit card industry. Instead of an "anything goes" approach, we need strong and reliable protections for consumers. Instead of fine print that hides the truth, we need credit card forms and statements that have plain language in plain sight, and we need to give people the tools they need to find a credit card that meets their needs. And instead of abuse that goes unpunished, we need to strengthen monitoring, enforcement, and penalties for credit card companies that take advantage of ordinary Americans.

The House has taken important steps toward putting these principles into law, and the Senate is poised to do the same next week. Now, I’m calling on Congress to take final action to pass a credit card reform bill that protects American consumers so that I can sign it into law by Memorial Day. There is no time for delay. We need a durable and successful flow of credit in our economy, but we can’t tolerate profits that depend upon misleading working families. Those days are over.

This economic crisis has reminded us that we are all in this together. We can’t prosper by putting off hard choices, or by protecting the profits of the few at the expense of the middle class. We are making steady progress toward recovery, but we must ensure that the legacy of this recession is an American economy that rewards work and innovation; that is guided by fairness and responsibility; and that grows steadily into the future.

Thanks.