Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2014

Kristy Kreme knows One Direction: ducks out on legislative committee for boy band concert at N.O. Smoothie King Arena

Posted in Contract, Contracts, DOA, Governor's Office, Health Care, Legislature, Legislators, OGB, Office of Group Benefits, Privatization, Teague on October 6, 2014| 25 Comments »

You have to hand it to Commissioner of Administration Kristy Kreme Nichols. When she has something to do, she is completely One Direction-al about it.

As the minutes ticked by during the House Appropriations Committee’s seven-hour hearing on the Office of Group Benefits on Sept. 25, and as Division of Administration (DOA) Executive Counsel Liz Murrill and the rest of the DOA pack occupied themselves by texting during heart-wrenching testimony from those who will be adversely affected by rising deductibles and co-pays, Kristy fidgeted.

She continued to fidget and to be as evasive as possible with her answers to questions from legislators until she suddenly “got an important phone call” and left the committee room. She did not return before the meeting finally adjourned.

In fact, it was not a telephone call that pulled her from the meeting at all.

One Direction, the latest boy band to make little girls squeal, was playing in the Smoothie King Arena in New Orleans and Kristy and her daughter (and possibly some of her daughter’s friends) watched the concert from the special Arena luxury suite assigned to Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-Iowa, R-New Hampshire, R-Anywhere but Louisiana).

Kristy Kreme at the Smoothie King. Has a certain ring to it, doesn’t it?

Kristy Kreme could have told the audience the truth. Certainly OGB members, mostly retirees, who had traveled from all over the state to testify and to get answers would have understood that a teeny bopper band was more important to Kristy Kreme than the medical coverage of 230,000 state employees, retirees and dependents.

But you see, telling the truth simply is not her style.

Witness her repeated claims that the OGB $500 million reserve fund was reduced to only about half that amount because of Obama Care and rising health care costs. She made that claim repeatedly, blaming those two factors and those alone for the drawdown of the reserve fund when everyone on the committee and those in the audience knew better.

Everyone in attendance knew that three consecutive years of premium reductions in the face of rising costs was the reason the fund has been all but depleted. She would never admit that even though everyone knew that Jindal lowered the rates so that the state’s 75 percent contribution to member premiums would be reduced also, thus leaving money that would have gone to premium payments for Jindal to use to plug gaping holes in his budget.

Remember when Kristy Kreme’s predecessor, former Commissioner of Administration Paul Rainwater wrote that comforting letter to OGB members in April of 2011 in an effort to debunk all those rumors about increased costs and raids on the reserve fund? No? Well, we have it right here: https://www.groupbenefits.org/portal/pls/portal30/ogbweb.get_latest_news_file?p_doc_name=4F444D324D5441344C6C4245526A51344E7A413D

In that letter, Rainwater said members would continue to receive quality service and coverage, benefits would NOT change, and OGB’s administrative oversight would continue, “securing the continued success of all the plans.”

“As for the allegation that OGB’s surplus will somehow be ‘stolen,’” Rainwater continued, “let me be absolutely clear: this claim is categorically untrue.”

But that was yesterday, as Chad and Jeremy sang back in the 60s, and yesterday’s gone. Let us return to the AWOL Kristy Kreme.

Even as she was invoking her super powers to convince legislators and audience members that she had only the best interest of OGB members at heart and that the depletion of the reserve fund was beyond the control of the administration, the report of Buck Consultants, hired by Kristy Kreme said on page iii of its summary: IMG_9230

  • It is our understanding that the Plan premium rates, used both to determine contributions from the various employer agencies, and to set contributions required from the retirees, were set artificially low to draw down the OGB’s reserve fund, and it is our further understanding that this is a temporary deviation from the Plan’s substantive plan, which continues to provide for the legislated 75-25 cost-sharing under a “full subsidy” from the State. Our valuation anticipates that the 21 percent premium deficiency will be gradually eliminated on a uniform basis over five years from fiscal year 2015 through fiscal year 2019 through increases in retiree premium rates in excess of the underlying assumed health trend. The actuary notes that in the prior valuation at July 1, 2012, the plan incurred a loss of $388 million associated with premium rates lower than anticipated.

For the entire Buck Consultants report, click here. http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/osrap/library/afr%20packetts/2014OGB_OPEBValuationReport.pdf

State Rep. John Bel Edwards (D-Amite) said he had received a copy of the Buck report earlier. “Nothing in this supports Kristy Nichols,” he said.

Edwards has been a vocal critic of the proposed OGB changes, claiming that the increased co-pays and deductibles will create unnecessary hardships on retirees, some of whom are facing co-payments and deductibles higher than their monthly income.

The entire OGB affair has become so confusing that many OGB members were turned away from the first meeting held in Baton Rouge on Monday to explain the changes. Jindal fired about two dozen OGB workers in the last round of firings and Kristy Kreme immediately found it necessary to contract with Ansafone of San Diego, California, and Ocala, Florida which has been trying to hire 100 people in each state to man telephone banks to answer questions about Louisiana’s plan.

Kristy Kreme has already found it necessary to dispatch one OGB employee to San Diego to train Ansafone employees and now $107,000-a-year OGB Chief Operating Officer Bill Guerra is in San Diego conducting training sessions on how to answer questions from OGB members.

DOA, by the way, is supposed to be strapped for cash and there is a statewide freeze on out of state travel but apparently found it necessary to send Guerra to California for a month.

So, let’s recap:

  • Jindal fires most of the OGB employees, including director Tommy Teague, and turns over a perfectly smooth-running agency to Blue Cross/Blue Shield (BCBS) with promises of no changes in benefits or premiums.
  • Less than two years after BCBS takes over, the OGB reserve fund is depleted by one half.
  • The administration fires two dozen more employees because of a lack of work and then enters into a $1.3 million contract with a California company to respond to questions from Louisiana residents.
  • Kristy has to hire two executives from BCBS to help OGB CEO Susan West who apparently is not up to the task. One of those, who ostensibly serves under West, is paid a higher salary than West.
  • Kristy Kreme Nichols attempts to mislead legislators and OGB members by repeatedly saying Obamacare is responsible for rising health costs and the depletion of the OGB reserve fund. No one buys her story.
  • Kristy tells State Rep. John Bel Edwards that the OGB actuary, Buck Consultants, recommended a decrease in premiums but a single paragraph from the Buck Consultants report summary contradicts that claim.
  • Two OGB executives have been sent to California to attempt to teach Ansafone employees how to respond to questions from Louisiana residents.
  • Kristy Kreme ducks out on legislators near the end of the Sept. 25 hearing by the House Appropriations Committee to take her daughter to a One Direction concert in New Orleans where she and her daughter occupy Jindal’s suite at the Smoothie King Arena.
  • A survey of employee job satisfaction conducted in 21 agencies in the Division of Administration reveals widespread dissatisfaction and distrust of the administration. Understandably, the survey has never been released and its contents were not divulged until LouisianaVoice recently obtained a copy.

And now, Jindal is offering foreign policy advice to President Obama with the release of a “policy paper” that calls for more defense spending. http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/10/bobby_jindal_takes_on_obama_fo.html

Read Full Post »

Edmonson Amendment notwithstanding, big dollar pay raises, aka pension spiking, could hook state for millions

Posted in Civil Service, Ethics, Governor's Office, Retirement on October 6, 2014| 5 Comments »

The Jindal administration may have been thwarted in sneaking through an amendment giving State Police Superintendent Mike Edmonson an extra $55,000 per year in retirement income but pay raises for at least 29 mostly unclassified employees could mean additional liabilities of $25 million to $42 million over 20-30 years for the Louisiana State Employee Retirement System (LASERS), LouisianaVoice has learned.

Even as merit pay increases for rank and file civil service employees has been frozen for the last five years, top tier employees, mostly unclassified supervisors and agency heads, have realized pay raises ranging from a one-year increases of 12.5 percent for the governor’s director of communications and 118.7 percent for the CEO of the Office of Group Benefits (OGB) to nearly 127 percent for the press secretary for the Department of Health and Hospitals.

No fewer than 10 of the pay bumps not surprisingly benefitted gubernatorial appointees and employees in the office of Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-Iowa, R-New Hampshire, R-Anywhere but Louisiana), who has devoted much of his time while in the state to firing state employees, slashing medical benefits and trying to destroy the state retirement system.

Retirement for state employees is computed by multiplying the average salary for the top three earning years times the number of years employed times 2.5 percent.

Thus, in the case of Susan West, who was promoted from State Risk Administrator at a salary of $83,200 in 2013 to the $170,000-a-year position as CEO of Group Benefits, her retirement, should she remain at OGB for three years, would be based on the higher amount, a difference of $86,800.

Thus, if she retires after 20 years at her present salary, she will receive 50 percent of $170,000, or $85,000 per year as opposed to $41,600—an additional $38,600 per year—had she remained at the $83,200 pay level. That would mean an additional $1.158 million in retirement income over 30 years.

In her case and in the cases of a few others, the salary increases were the result of major promotions but in others, pay increases went with lateral moves or new assignments and some of the other promotions would appear to be just for the purpose of implementing pay raises for favored employees.

In the case of 20 employees, the pay increases were $1,000 or more bi-weekly, or at least $26,000 a year while 10 others’ pay increases ranged from $500 to $999 bi-weekly, according to records obtained from the Office of Civil Service.

And it’s all legal—as opposed to the backdoor attempt the Edmonson to revoke his decision to enter the state’s Deferred Retirement Option Plan (DROP), which locked in his retirement at his captain’s rank level when he entered DROP.

In that case, Jindal, his executive counsel Thomas Enright, State Sen. Neil Riser, Edmonson and his chief of staff, Charles Dupuy all appear to have conspired to sneak an amendment, aka the Edmonson Amendment, onto a law officer disciplinary bill on the final, hectic day of the legislature. The amendment sailed through both the Senate and House and Jindal promptly signed it into law only to have a state district judge rule the procedure unconstitutional.

By granting generous pay raises, a procedure known as pension spiking, retirement benefits are automatically ratcheted upward, even if the employees does not stay a full three years at the higher level.

If, for instance, an employee who made $75,000 two years in a row gets a $25,000 raise to $100,000 and stays for only an additional year, his retirement still goes up. Say the employee retires after 40 years. He automatically retires at 100 percent of his salary. Not the $100,000 level, but not the $75,000 level, either. Two years at $75,000 is $150,000. Add the one year at $100,000 and you get $250,000. Divide that by three years and his retirement is $83,000. So, by jacking his salary up by $25,000 for one year, he gets an additional $8,333 per year for the rest of his life.

In California, pension spiking could increase public pension costs as much as $796 million over the next 20 years the state controller said recently.

Besides West, here is pay raise information for a few other Louisiana employees since 2010:

  • Kathy Klebert, Assistant Secretary, Department of Health and Hospitals from July 1, 2010, to Jan. 21, 2011 at salary of $140,000; promoted to Deputy Secretary on Jan. 22, 2011 at salary of $145,000; named DHH Secretary on April 1, 2013, at salary of $236,000 upon resignation of Bruce Greenstein. Overall increase of 68.6 percent since 2010.
  • Ruth Johnson, former head of the Department of Children and Family Services—retired at salary of $130,000 per year on June 21, 2012, re-hired on May 27, 2013 as Director of Accountability and Research in the Division of Administration at $150,000; promoted to Assistant Commissioner on Sept. 30, 2013, at $170,000; promoted to Director’s title in the governor’s office on Feb. 24, 2014, at $180,000. Overall increase of $50,000 (38.5 percent) since June 21, 2010.
  • William Guerra, hired as State Budget Management Analyst 3 on May 3, 2010 at $48,500, promoted to Chief Operating Officer for the Office of Group Benefits on Feb. 20, 2014, at $107,000 per year, a four-year increase of $58,500, (120.6 percent).
  • Courtney Phillips, hired on Oct. 1, 2010, as a Program Manager 2 at a salary of $93,000, was named DHH Deputy Secretary at $145,000 per year on May 10, 2013, a three-year increase of $52,000 (55.8 percent).
  • William Jeffrey Reynolds, named DHH Medicaid Deputy Director on May 31, 2011, at a salary of $113,700, promoted to DHH Undersecretary on March 10, 2014 at $145,000, a three-year raise of $31,300 (27.5 percent).
  • Calder Lynch, hired on Oct. 25, 2010 as DHH Press Secretary at $52,000, on Aug. 26, 2013, was named Kleibert’s Chief of Staff at a salary of $118,000, a raise of $66,000 (126.9 percent).
  • Thomas Enright started on Mar. 8, 2010, as Executive Counsel for the Department of Veterans Affairs at $104,000 and on Feb. 4, 2013 was hired as Jindal’s Executive Counsel at $165,000, a $61,000 increase in only three years (58.7 percent).
  • Jane Patterson was an IT Telecommunications Technical Services Administrator on Nov. 18, 2012, at a salary of $126,000 and an IT Telecommunications Administrator on Oct. 1, 2013, at a salary of $131,500, a raise in less than a year of $4,900 (3.9 percent).
  • Christopher Guilbeaux was an $85,200-a-year Section Chief for the Governor’s Office of Home Security and Emergency Preparedness (GOHSEP) on June 29, 2011. Two years later, on Oct. 1, 2013, he was a $130,000-a-year Deputy Director, a raise of $44,800 (52.6 percent).
  • Stephen Chustz was appointed as Section Head at the Department of Natural Resources on Aug. 9, 2012 at $129,200, up $25,600 (24.7 percent) from his $103,600-a-year salary as Deputy Assistant Secretary on Sept. 30, 2011.
  • Jerome Zeringue has gone from Deputy Director of the Governor’s Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority at $126,250 in July of 2011 to advisor to the governor at since last Feb. 28 at $160,000, a $33,750 (26.7 percent).
  • Thomas Barfield came on board as Jindal’s Executive Counsel in July of 2009 at $167,000 per year but by July of 2013, he was the $250,000 per year Secretary of the Department of Revenue (DOR), a three-year increase of $83,000 (49.7 percent).
  • What’s the difference between an Assistant Secretary and a Deputy Secretary? Apparently, about $19,100 a year. Jarrod Coniglio went from Assistant Secretary of DOR on Oct. 15, 2010 at $107,800 to Deputy Secretary on July 1, 2013, at $127,000 (a 17.7 increase).
  • In just over a year, Andrew Perilloux went from Assistant DOR (May 27, 2013) at $90,000 to Under Secretary on Aug. 18, 2014 at $107,800, an increase of $17,800 (19.8 percent).
  • Joseph Vaughn, Jr. was making of $69,000 on Jan. 29, 2012, as an Assistant Director of DOR and was named Assistant Secretary on Jan. 30, 2012 at a salary of $107,800, a raise of $38,800 (56.2 percent).
  • Noble Ellington (you remember him, the legislator who retired and went to work as Deputy Commissioner of Insurance) is making $162,100 in that position, up $6,200 (up 4 percent) from Oct. 1, 2012.
  • Kyle Plotkin, the New Jersey import started out in the governor’s office on Nov. 19, 2008 as Press Secretary and on July 26, 2011, was named Special Assistant to the governor at $85,000. Less than three years later, on Mar. 4, 2014, he was named Chief of Staff at $165,800, a three-year increase of $80,800 (95 percent).
  • Michael Reed of Boston began as an $80,000-a-year Deputy Director of Communications on Feb. 4, 2013 and a year later was Director of Communications at $90,000 (12.5 percent).
  • The difference between Administrative Assistant and Executive Assistant apparently is $24,000. Elizabeth “Lizzy” Rayford Bossier was making $30,000 on Sept. 10, 2012, as an Administrative Assistant in the governor’s office. By July 22, 2013, she was making $54,000 as an Executive Assistant, an increase of $24,000 (80 percent).
  • Melissa Mann has gone from Executive Assistant in the governor’s office in February of 2010, at $54,000 to Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs on March 3, 2014, at $95,000, a $41,000 (75.9 percent) increase.
  • Elizabeth Murrill went from being the governor’s Executive Counsel on Nov. 5, 2010, at $110,000 to Executive Counsel and Chief Texter for the Division of Administration on Oct. 16, 2012, at $165,000, an increase of $55,000 (50 percent).
  • Ileana Ledet was making $63,300 a Public Information Director 2 for the Department of Insurance (DOI) on Feb. 7, 2011, and on Oct. 1, 2013, whe was earning $127,400, an increase of $64,100 (101.3 percent).
  • Keith Lovell was making $83,300 as a Coastal Resources Scientist Manager for the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in May of 2010, and by April 1, 2013, he was making $109,200 as Assistant Secretary of DNR, an increase of $25,900 (31 percent).
  • Barry Landry was making $70,000 a year as a Public Information Director 1 for the Department of Education (DOE) on Jan 27, 2014 and less than five months later, on June 2, was making $85,000 as Press Secretary, a $15,000 (21.4 percent) increase.
  • Marian Lee Schutte was making $60,000 as a Coordinator for DOE on Dec. 2, 2011, and on July 22, 2013, she was a director earing $75,000, an increase of $15,000 (25 percent).
  • Robert Keogh has been a Procurement Director for DOE’s Recovery School District (RSD) since June of 2012 but his salary has also jumped $15,000 (25 percent) in two years, from $60,000 to $75,000 on May 12, 2014.

Read Full Post »

Reporter Pete Schroeder of ‘The Hill’ likes Gov. Jindal’s presidential chances; we’d like what he’s been smoking

Posted in Economy, Education, Elections, Ethics, Governor's Office, Higher Education, Media, Politicians, Taxes, Transparency on October 5, 2014| 15 Comments »

Peter Schroeder, a writer for The Hill, has drunk the Kool-Aid.

The Hill is a subsidiary of News Communications, Inc. that covers the U.S. Congress with an emphasis on business, lobbying and political campaigns and is one of the first web pages accessed each day by those wishing to stay abreast of events in the nation’s capital.

But Sunday’s story by Schroeder has to leave readers in Louisiana scratching their heads and wondering about his credentials or his sanity—or both.

His story, The New and Improved Jindal, touts the prospects of Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-Iowa, R-New Hampshire, R-Anywhere but Louisiana) as a legitimate challenger for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/219759-the-new-and-improved-bobby-jindal

Perhaps unwittingly, however, the headline to his story may have provided an insight to what’s in store for the Boy Blunder.

By invoking the term “new and improved,” we immediately are left with the idea that he is being packaged and sold like so much washing powder or toothpaste—or perhaps more appropriately, toilet paper.

To bolster his evaluation of Jindal as a real comer, Schroeder relied on people like Tony Perkins, founder of the Louisiana Family Forum, former legislator, failed U.S. Senate candidate and president of the Family Research Council and Jindal’s former chief of staff, current political adviser Timmy Teepell and Baton Rouge political pollster Bernie Pinsonat.

The fact that Jindal and Perkins are in lock step on family values issues does not exactly make Perkins an impartial observer and Teepell certainly has much to gain if he and his consulting company, OnMessage, can ride Jindal’s coattails into the White House (or as Sarah Palin would say, 1400 Pennsylvania Avenue).

Schroeder also hangs his analysis on a single speech by Jindal last week when he cracked a couple of jokes that actually got chuckles from his conservative audience at the Values Voters Summit in Washington. “Jindal showed a dynamic style as he paced across the state,” he wrote.

What!!? Really? You’re staking your writing career on that thin bit of evidence?

Well, not exactly. There is this from Teepell:

“Most people’s impression of his speaking skills go back to his State of the Union response (of 2009), which was just a terrible speech.

“You’re having to do it (speaking) all the time, and on a number of different issues every single day, and so he just gets better and better.”

So, there you have it. By Teepell’s own admission, Jindal is making these speeches “every single day,” which leaves damned little time for him to devote his attention to the mundane duties of governor—a job to which he was re-elected by 67 percent of 20 percent of the state’s voters, a veritable mandate.

If he’s such a rising star, perhaps Schroeder can explain to us how Jindal managed to finish behind “nobody” in a recent straw poll. Maybe he can tell us why he remains a bottom feeder in the polls, along with Palin who can’t seem to get the address of the White House right.

Jindal’s supporters argue that his low numbers can be attributed to the fact that voters in the heartland don’t know him, not because they don’t like him.

News flash: we know him in Louisiana and his numbers have never been lower here and it’s precisely because we do know him.

Louisiana pollster Bernie Pinsonat said Jindal simply needs an issue that will give him national exposure.

We have several such issues:

  • He was for Common Core before he decided it would be politically expedient to oppose it.
  • He regularly hopped all over north Louisiana handing out stimulus money at Protestant churches and “awarding” military veterans’ pins during his first term but has not visited a single church of any stripe nor has he delivered any military pins since his re-election where only 20 percent of registered voters even bothered to vote.
  • He has bankrupted the state with tax giveaways to corporations while attempting to rip state employees’ pensions from them with a patently unconstitutional legislative bill.
  • He is now attempting to do the same thing with state worker health benefits while at the same time depleting the fund balance of the Office of Group Benefits.
  • He has handed out hundreds of millions of dollars in questionable state contracts to consultants and favored firms.
  • His hand-picked Secretary of Health and Hospitals has been indicted on nine counts of perjury in connection with one of those contracts.
  • He has given away the state hospital system to private entities though the move has yet to be approved by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).
  • He has repeatedly cut the budgets of higher education in Louisiana.
  • He has consistently promoted school vouchers and charter schools at the expense of low-income students who are left in the underfunded public schools.
  • He attempted to give the State Police Superintendent a $55,000 a year retirement raise while ignoring rank and file state police and state employees.
  • He has broken his promise not to use one-time money for recurring expenses—not once, but six times.
  • He has enveloped the governor’s office in secrecy.
  • He has cloaked himself in a mantle of self-righteousness that is betrayed by his callous lack of concern for the people of Louisiana.

“People are going to have plenty of time to get a better impression of Gov. Jindal,” Teepell said. “That (2009) speech won’t be the only thing they remember about him.”

The business of remaking or re-packaging of the new and improved Jindal reminds of the wisdom of Mark Twain who said, “If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything.”

As far as we’re concerned, Jindal is going to have plenty to try to remember in his quest for the brass ring that is the GOP nomination.

Or, as we prefer to think, if you’re genuine—if you’re the real deal—there’s really no need for a makeover.

And if ever a person needed a makeover, it’s Jindal.

Read Full Post »

MedImpact problems abound for OGB members; Gingrich, Tauzin linked to company through separate organizations

Posted in DHH, DOA, Health Care, House, Legislature, Office of Group Benefits, OGB, Office of Group Benefits on October 4, 2014| 12 Comments »

You wouldn’t ordinarily expect to see the names of two prominent former congressmen bob to the surface when discussing a health care benefit program for state workers in Louisiana.

But when Office of Group Benefits (OGB) switched to MedImpact, a San Diego company, to provide its prescription drug benefit management services on Jan. 1, the state awarded an 18-month, $350 million contract to a company tied to the 2007 Republican presidential nomination quest of former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich. http://hl-isy.com/Products-and-Services/Pharmacy-Benefit-Evaluator/PBE-Abstracts/2012/MedImpact

And those who listened to testimony last week before the Louisiana House Appropriations Committee learned that the company has proved to be less than satisfactory in handling claims for pharmaceutical benefits.

Gingrich launched the Center for Health Transformation as part of an ambitious consulting and communications conglomerate to let consumers, not health maintenance organizations (HMOs), choose their doctors, medical treatments and hospitals.

While the concept might be a good one on the surface, Gingrich failed to reveal that his idea would greatly benefit drug manufacturers, health insurers and other health care professionals who paid up to $200,000 annually to participate in the center’s operations.

MedImpact was one of those companies who ponied up the big bucks for that privilege.

Sid Wolfe, director of health research for the watchdog group Public Citizen, called Gingrich’s taking money from organizations like MedImpact and then using the weight of his name to advance the interests of those organizations “a massive financial conflict of interest.”

And when Gingrich again flirted with seeking the GOP presidential nomination in 2012, one of the men he chose to co-chair his Florida chairman was Alan Levine, former Secretary of Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals under Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-Iowa, R-New Hampshire, R-Anywhere but Louisiana) and former Secretary of Health Care Administration for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

Even former Congressman Billy Tauzin of Louisiana has entered the picture as co-chair of Medicine Access and Compliance Coalition (MACC), an assortment of health care providers who advocate lower drug prices through the federal 340B Program. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/billy-tauzin-drugs_n_3719468.html

Section 340B of the Public Health Service Act requires pharmaceutical manufacturers participating in the Medicaid drug rebate program to provide outpatient drugs at discounted prices to taxpayer-supported health care facilities that provide care for uninsured and low-income people. http://www.aha.org/content/13/fs-340b.pdf

The program allows eligible hospitals and community health centers to reduce pharmaceutical costs to patients.

That would seem to be a radical departure from Tauzin’s previous position as head of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).

You may remember how in one of his last official acts as Congressman from Louisiana’s 3rd District Tauzin of Chackbay in Lafourche Parish, pushed through that 2003 bill that prohibited the federal government from negotiating pharmaceutical costs for Medicare patients. http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/ex_rep_billy_tauzin_smack_in_t.html

Right after that legislative coup, the Democrat-turned-Republican went to work for PhRMA, eventually earning an eye-popping $11.6 million per year. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-29/tauzin-s-11-6-million-made-him-highest-paid-health-law-lobbyist.html

No sooner had MedImpact came forward with its presentation on ways in which hospitals may be missing out on opportunities to profit from 340B. In that presentation, MedImpact promised hospitals that it could work “with any wholesaler, pharmacy or claims processing service,” providing hospitals “with the lowest prices, maximum flexibility and revenue.”

Then, last December, OGB sent a letter to its members informing them that MedImpact would begin providing pharmacy benefit management (PBM) on Jan. 1. CCF10032014_0001

Medicare-eligible retirees and their Medicare-eligible dependents would be covered by MedGenerations, a subsidiary of MedImpact, supposedly under that same $350 million contract given that there was no separate contract listed for MedGenerations.

Horror stories about MedImpact and MedGenerations began emerging almost immediately.

A Nightmare called Bobbycare: prelude to healthcare ruin (alternate headline: the time has come to privatize Jindal)

Henry Reed, a retired State Fire Marshal’s office employee, testified before the House Appropriations Committee on Sept. 25 that he fought FEMA for hurricane recovery money on behalf of the state but has experienced nothing but frustration with the state’s pharmaceutical management service. A victim of both epilepsy and narcolepsy, Reed said he has to take one medication that costs $2,000 per one-month supply.

His doctor prescribed two pills per day of that medication but “Medimpact informed me they would pay for only one pill per day. Apparently someone sitting at a desk in California knows more about my condition than my doctor.

“I thought I had a good health plan,” Reed said. “I called OGB and they referred me to Medimpact.”

The company simply refused to even approve prescription medications for the son of OGB member Dayne Sherman until he was forced to jump through all types of bureaucratic hoops to get the prescription approved.

So, what is the motivation for Medimpact to arbitrarily cut medications in half or to refuse them outright? Does it get to keep that part of the $350 million that isn’t spent on medications? Does it receive some other incentive to deny or reduce claims? Has it taken lessons from the McKinsey Group, which taught Allstate and State Farm how to delay, deny and defend claims stemming from Hurricane Katrina?

And for that matter, what do MedImpact’s employees think of their employer?

A sampling of postings on a web page that lets employees rate their employers anonymously is not kind to the company:

  • “They can pay you well and give good benefits in exchange for your soul.”
  • “No one is encouraged to think about what they are doing and try to make it better. The leadership team is completely disconnected.”
  • “Great people to work with; lousy leadership.”
  • “Strange, secretive leadership. A lack of clarity, vision and generally poor downward communication.”
  • “Lack direction, unorganized and management sucks.”
  • “Upper management tends to chase bright shiny objects. Burnout is high.”

You can read more here: http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/MedImpact-Reviews-E40035.htm

Read Full Post »

PAC money outstrips individual contributions by 2.5 to 1 for Congressman Cedric Richmond, fed. campaign records show

Posted in ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, Campaign Contributions, Congress, Elections, House, Senate, PACs, Politicians on October 3, 2014| 6 Comments »

Between U.S. Mary Landrieu and U.S. Rep. Bill Cassidy, the man who wants to replace her, incumbents in five of the state’s six November congressional races have received more than $21.5 million in campaign contributions, of which more than $6.5 million has come from political action committees, or PACs, according to figures provided by the Federal Elections Commission.

The number of corporate dollars that have flowed into the races is somewhat deceptive, however, because money given by corporate officers and board members are listed as individual contributions and is not counted with the PAC money.

LouisianaVoice has always maintained that political clout no longer belongs to the citizenry, but to special interest groups like corporations and corporate officers who pour money into political campaigns, in the process drowning out the voice of individual voters.

In two of the congressional races, PAC contributions to incumbents actually outpace those of individuals—Reps. Charles Boustany of the 3rd District ($984,000 to $769,000) and Cedric Richmond of the 2nd District ($723,000 to $278,000).

Even more alarming, each candidate we’ve reported on thus far has accepted money from PACs connected to corporations that have serious legal and ethical issues. Those issues include, among others, insider trading, influence peddling, environmental pollution, and fraud.

It might be of no real consequence if these were isolated occurrences, but they’re not. The same companies keep turning up in report after report is what has become a dangerous trend of corporate control of the entire Congress as the welfare of the American people has been all but crowded out of the picture and excluded from the national dialog.

Following is a partial list of some of Richmond’s PAC contributions:

ALTRIA GROUP PAC: $1,500

  • Altria Group, Inc. (previously named Philip Morris Companies Inc.) The name change alternative offers the possibility of masking the negatives associated with the tobacco business,” thus enabling the company to improve its image and raise its profile without sacrificing tobacco profits,
  • According to the Center for Public Integrity, Altria spent around $101 million on lobbying the U.S. government between 1998 and 2004, making it the second most active organization in the nation.
  • Altria also funded The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition which lobbied against the scientific consensus on climate change.
  • Daniel Smith, representing Altria, sits on the Private Enterprise Board of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND CO.: $1,000

  • On December 20, 2013 the SEC announced that it had charged ADM for failing to prevent illicit payments (bribes) made by its foreign subsidiaries to Ukrainian government officials in violation of federal statutes. ADM agreed to pay more than $36 million to settle the SEC’s charges.
  • In 1993, the company was the subject of a lysine price-fixing investigation. Senior ADM executives were indicted on criminal charges. Three of ADM’s top officials, including vice chairman Michael Andreas were eventually sentenced to federal prison in 1999. Moreover, in 1997, the company was fined $100 million, the largest antitrust fine in U.S. history at the time.
  • One hundred percent or more of overcharges resulting from price fixing are passed through to consumers.
  • The company has been the subject of several major federal lawsuits related to air pollution. In 2001, it agreed to pay a $1.46 million fine for violating federal and Illinois clean-air regulations at its Decatur feed plant and to spend $1.6 million to reduce air pollution there.
  • The company paid $4.5 million in penalties and more than $6 million to support environmental projects. In addition, ADM agreed to eliminate more than 60,000 tons of emissions of carbon monoxide, particulate matter, organic volatile chemicals and other pollutants from 42 plants in 17 states at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars.

AT&T PAC: $6,000

  • AT&T is the second-largest donor to United States political campaigns, and the top American corporate donor, having contributed more than US$47.7 million since 1990, 56% and 44% of which went to Republican and Democratic recipients, respectively. Also, during the period of 1998 to 2010, the company expended US$130 million on lobbying in the United States. A key political issue for AT&T has been the question of which businesses win the right to profit by providing broadband internet access in the United States.
  • Bobby Jindal rejected an $80 million federal grant for the expansion of broadband internet service in rural Louisiana even as AT&T was contributing $250,000 to the Foundation run by Jindal’s wife Supriya after Gov. Jindal signed SB- 807 into law (Act 433) in 2008 over the objections of the Louisiana Municipal and the State Police Jury associations. The bill, the Consumer Choice for Television Act removed from local and parish governments their authority and responsibility to negotiate cable franchise agreements with companies that relied largely on locally-owned public infrastructure such as utility poles. The bill also allows AT&T to sell cable television service without the necessity of obtaining local franchises.
  • Bill Leahy, representing AT&T, sits on the Private Enterprise Board of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORP. PAC: $2,000

  • Former Chief Executive Aubrey McClendon borrowed $1.1 billion against his stake in thousands of company wells. The loans, undisclosed to shareholders, were used to fund McClendon’s operating costs for the Founders Well Participation Program, which offered him a chance to invest in a 2.5 percent interest in every well the company drills. McClendon in turn used the 2.5 percent stakes as collateral on those same loans. Analysts, academics and attorneys who reviewed the loan documents said the structure raised the potential for conflicts of interest and raised questions on the corporate governance and business ethics of Chesapeake Energy’s senior management. The company disagreed that this is a conflict of interest or a violation of business ethics.
  • Current CEO Doug Lawler was responsible for laying off over 800 employees—roughly 16 percent of the workforce—within a few months of taking the position. Lawler released waves of employees over the course of a few months. All of the layoffs culminated in October of 2013 when Lawler released a staggering 800 employees nationwide, 640 of whom were from the corporate office in Oklahoma City.
  • In June of 2014, the state of Michigan filed felony fraud and racketeering charges against Chesapeake Energy, alleging that the company canceled hundreds of land leases on false pretenses after it sought to obtain oil and gas rights. Chesapeake Energy disputed all charges.

CHEVRON EMPLOYEES PAC: $4,500

  • In 2003 a class action lawsuit against Chevron was sued in Ecuadorian court for $28 billion for making residents ill and damaging forests and rivers by discharging 18 billion US gallons of formation water into the Amazon. Chevron claimed that agreements with the Ecuadorian Government exempted the company from any liabilities.
  • In 2011, Ecuadorian residents were awarded $8.6 billion, based on claims of loss of crops and farm animals as well as increased local cancer rates. The award was later revised to $19 billion on appeals, which was then appealed to the Ecuadorean National Court of Justice. Chevron described the lawsuit as an “extortion scheme” and refused to pay the fine.
  • Chevron’s activities at its century-old Richmond refinery have been the subject of ongoing controversy. The project generated over 11 million pounds of toxic materials and caused more than 304 accidents. The Richmond refinery paid $540,000 in 1998 for illegally bypassing waste water treatments and failing to notify the public about toxic releases. Overall, Chevron is listed as potentially liable for 95 Superfund sites, with funds set aside by the EPA for clean-up.
  • Chevron’s operations in Africa have also been criticized as environmentally unsound. In 2002, Angola became the first country in Africa to levy a fine on a major multinational corporation operating within its borders when it demanded $2 million in compensation for oil spills allegedly caused by Chevron.
  • On October 16, 2003, Chevron U.S.A. settled a charge under the Clean Air Act, which reduced harmful air emissions by about 10,000 tons a year. In San Francisco, Chevron was ordered to spend almost $275 million to install and utilize innovative technology to reduce nitrogen and sulfur dioxide emissions at its refineries. In 2000, after violating the Clean Air Act at an offline loading terminal in El Segundo, California, Chevron paid a $6 million penalty as well as $1 million for environmental improvement projects.

CH2M HILL COMPANIES: $1,000

  • CH2M HILL used nearly $10 million in stimulus funding to design the elaborate Solyndra solar panel facility in Fremont, California. While CH2M HILL is in no danger of suffering the same bankruptcy plight, they also languish in a pool of mismanaged taxpayer funds. The firm has a history of fraud, kickbacks, violations, and cover-ups, not to mention one particular parallel with the Solyndra scandal—layoffs. This, despite receiving almost $2 billion in stimulus funding.
  • CH2M Hill has agreed to pay a total of $18.5 million in 2013 after admitting to defrauding the public by engaging in years of widespread time card fraud in its contract with the Department of Energy.

COMCAST: $5,000

  • Comcast’s customer satisfaction often ranks among the lowest in the cable industry.
  • With $18.8 million spent in 2013, Comcast has the seventh largest lobbying budget of any individual company or organization in the United States. Comcast employs multiple former U.S. congressmen as lobbyists.
  • Comcast also supports lobbying and PACs on a regional level, backing organizations such as the Tennessee Cable Telecommunications Association and the Broadband Communications Association of Washington PAC. Comcast and other cable companies have lobbied state governments to pass legislation restricting or banning individual cities from offering public broadband service. Municipal broadband restrictions of varying scope have been passed in a total of 20 US States, including Louisiana.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE PAC: $5,000

  • Deloitte has delayed payments to hundreds of thousands of unemployed in the State of California.
  • The firm has been working on a statewide case management system for California courts which originally had a budget of around $260 million. Almost $500 million has already been spent and costs are expected to run as high as $2 billion. No single court is yet fully operational. California’s Judicial Council terminated the project in 2012 citing actual deployment costs associated with the project and California’s budget concerns

DUKE ENERGY: $5,000

  • In 1999 the EPA initiated an enforcement action against Duke Energy for making modifications to old and deteriorating coal-burning power plants without getting permits under the Clean Air Act.
  • In 2002, researchers identified Duke Energy as the 46th-largest corporate producer of air pollution in the United States, with roughly 36 million pounds of toxic chemicals released into the air annually. Major pollutants included sulfuric and hydrochloric acid, chromium compounds, and hydrogen fluoride. The Political Economy Research Institute ranks Duke Energy 13th among corporations emitting airborne pollutants in the United States.

EMPLOYEES OF NORTHROP GRUMMAN PAC: $5,000

  • From 1990-2002, Northrop Grumman contributed $8.5 million to federal campaigns. The company gave more than $1 million to federal candidates in 2005-2006 election cycle, compared to $10.6 million given by all defense contractors in the same cycle. This was behind only General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin in the defense industry. Former Northrop Grumman Electronics Systems chief James Roche served as Secretary of the Air Force for two years under George W. Bush. Roche was eventually nominated to head the Army, but was forced to withdraw his nomination among accusations of mismanaging a contract with Boeing and of failing to properly handle the Air Force sexual assault scandals of 2003. At least seven former officials, consultants, or shareholders of Northrop Grumman held posts in the Bush administration.
  • Northrop Grumman has dealt with multiple scandals during its history. In 1995, Robert Ferro, an employee for TRW, a company acquired by Northrop Grumman, discovered that satellite components manufactured for the U.S. Air Force were faulty and likely to fail in operation. TRW allegedly suppressed Ferro’s report and hid the information from the Air Force, even after a satellite in space equipped with the faulty components experienced serious anomalies. Ferro later sued Northrop Grumman in federal court under the federal whistle-blower law. In April 2009 Northrop Grumman agreed to pay $325 million to settle the suit. Ferro was awarded $48.8 million of the settlement.
  • The company was sued in 1999 for allegedly knowingly giving the Navy defective aircraft. This suit sought $210 million in damages. Then in 2003, the company was sued for allegedly overcharging the U.S. government for space projects in the 1990s. Northrop Grumman paid $111.2 million to settle out of court.
  • In 2010, Virginia’s computer operations experienced a week-long computer outage. Northrop Grumman operated these systems under a $2.4 billion contract. As a result, as many as 45,000 citizens could not renew their driver’s licenses prior to their expiration. Computer systems for 26 of the state’s 89 agencies were affected and some data may have been permanently lost.

EXXON MOBIL CORP. PAC: $2,500

  • ExxonMobil has drawn criticism from scientists, science organizations and the environmental lobby for funding organizations critical of the Kyoto Protocol and seeking to undermine public opinion about the scientific conclusion that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Mother Jones Magazine said the company channeled more than $8 million to 40 different organizations that have employed disinformation campaigns including “skeptical propaganda masquerading as journalism” to influence opinion of the public and of political leaders about global warming and that the company was a member of one of the first such groups, the Global Climate Coalition, founded in 1989. ExxonMobil’s support for these organizations has drawn criticism from the Royal Society, the academy of sciences of the United Kingdom. The Union of Concerned Scientists released a report in 2007 accusing ExxonMobil of spending $16 million, between 1998 and 2005, towards 43 advocacy organizations which dispute the impact of global warming. The report argued that ExxonMobil used disinformation tactics similar to those used by the tobacco industry in its denials of the link between lung cancer and smoking, saying that the company used “many of the same organizations and personnel to cloud the scientific understanding of climate change and delay action on the issue.” These charges are consistent with a purported 1998 internal ExxonMobil strategy memo, posted by the environmental group Environmental Defense, which said:

“Victory will be achieved when

  • Average citizens [and the media] ‘understand’ (recognize) uncertainties in climate science; recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the conventional wisdom;
  • Industry senior leadership understands uncertainties in climate science, making them stronger ambassadors to those who shape climate policy;
  • Those promoting the Kyoto treaty on the basis of extant science appear out of touch with reality.”

 

  • In 2003, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York announced that J. Bryan Williams, a former senior executive of Mobil Oil Corp., had been sentenced to three years and ten months in prison on charges of evading income taxes on more than $7 million in unreported income, including a $2 million kickback he received in connection with Mobil’s oil business in Kazakhstan. Documents filed with the court said Williams’ unreported income included millions of dollars in kickbacks from governments, persons, and other entities with whom Williams conducted business while employed by Mobil. In addition to his sentence, Williams must pay a fine of $25,000 and more than $3.5 million in restitution to the IRS, in addition to penalties and interest.

GLAXOSMITHKLINE PAC:  $1,000

  • In July 2012 GSK pleaded guilty to criminal charges and agreed to a pay $3 billion to settle the criminal charges as well as civil lawsuits in the largest settlement paid by a drug company at the time. The criminal charges were for promoting Paxil and Wellbutrin and for unapproved uses and failing to report safety data about Avandia:; GSK paid $1 billion to settle the criminal charges. The remaining $2 billion were part of the civil settlement over unapproved promotion and paying kickbacks, making false statements concerning the safety of Avandia; and reporting false prices to Medicaid. GSK also signed an agreement which obligated it to make major changes to the way it did business.

HONEYWELL PAC: $5,000

  • The EPA says that no corporation has been linked to a greater number of Superfund toxic waste sites than has Honeywell. Honeywell ranks 44th among U.S. corporations causing air pollution. The firm released more than 9.4 million pounds of toxins per year into the air. In 2001, Honeywell agreed to pay $150,000 in civil penalties and to perform $772,000 worth of reparations for environmental violations.
  • In 2003, a federal judge in New Jersey ordered the company to perform an estimated $400 million environmental remediation of chromium waste, citing “a substantial risk of imminent damage to public health and safety and imminent and severe damage to the environment.” In the same year, Honeywell paid $3.6 million to avoid a federal trial regarding its responsibility for trichloroethylene contamination in Illinois. In 2004, the State of New York announced that it would require Honeywell to complete an estimated $448 million cleanup of more than 165,000 pounds of mercury and other toxic waste dumped into Onondaga Lake in Syracuse, N.Y.

LOCKHEED MARTIN EMPLOYEES’ PAC: $5,000

  • Lockheed Martin received $36 billion in government contracts in 2008, more than any company in history. It does work for more than two dozen government agencies from the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy to the Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency. It’s involved in surveillance and information processing for the CIA, the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the National Security Agency (NSA), The Pentagon, the Census Bureau and the Postal Service.
  • Lockheed is listed as the largest U.S. government contractor and ranks third for number of incidents, and 21st for size of settlements. Since 1995 the company has agreed to pay $606 million to settle 59 instances of misconduct.
  • Through its political action committee (PAC), the company provides low levels of financial support to candidates who advocate national defense and relevant business issues. It was the top contributor to House Armed Services Committee chairman Howard P. “Buck” McKeon (R-California), giving more than $50,000 in the most recent election cycle. It also topped the list of donors to Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee before his death in 2012.
  • Lockheed Martin Employees Political Action Committee is one of the 50 largest in the country. With contributions from 3,000 employees, it donates $500,000 a year to about 260 House and Senate candidates.
  • In March 2013, Maryland State Senate Majority Leader Rob Garagiola, while he was said to be dating a Lockheed Martin lobbyist, cosponsored a resolution which would give Lockheed Martin tax rebate worth millions of dollars related to hotel taxes paid at its CLE facility in Bethesda, MD. This was after Montgomery County Council refused to pass a similar resolution.

MARATHON OIL EMPLOYEES PAC: $10,000

  • Marathon gave $250,000 to the Supriya Jindal Foundation and Gov. Bobby Jindal’s administration promptly awarded Marathon subsidiaries $5.2 million in state funds.

MICROSOFT CORP. PAC: $4,500

  • One of Microsoft’s business tactics, described by an executive as “embrace, extend and extinguish,” initially embraces a competing standard or product, then extends it to produce their own version which is then incompatible with the standard, which in time extinguishes competition that does not or cannot use Microsoft’s new version. Various companies and governments have sued Microsoft over this set of tactics, resulting in billions of dollars in rulings against the company.
  • Microsoft has been criticized for its involvement in censorship in the People’s Republic of China. Microsoft has also come under criticism for outsourcing jobs to China and India. There were reports of poor working conditions at a factory in southern China that makes some of Microsoft’s products.
  • To avoid providing stock options and medical and retirement benefits to employees, Microsoft hires thousands of temporary workers (temps) for the designing, editing and testing of its software. When a federal judge (upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court) outlawed the hiring of temps for longer than six months, Microsoft got around the ruling by laying off its temps for 100 days and then rehiring them.

MONSANTO CO.: $4,000

 

  • In 2003, Monsanto reached a $300 million settlement for manufacturing and dumping of the toxic chemical polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in Alabama.
  • In 2004, Monsanto, along with Dow and other chemical companies, were sued by a group of Vietnamese for the effects of its Agent Orange defoliant, used by the U.S. military in the Vietnam War. The case was dismissed.
  • In 2005, the US DOJ filed a Deferred Prosecution Agreement in which Monsanto admitted to violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and making false entries into its books and records. Monsanto also agreed to pay a $1.5 million fine. The case involved bribes paid to an Indonesian official.
  • The Monsanto Company Citizenship Fund has donated more than $10 million to various candidates since 2003. In 2011, Monsanto spent about $6.3 million lobbying Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture about regulations that would affect the production and distribution of genetically engineered produce.
  • US diplomats in Europe have worked directly for Monsanto.
  • Monsanto gave $186,250 to federal candidates in the 2008 election.
  • Monsanto spent $8.1 million opposing the passage of Proposition 37 in California, making it the largest donor against the initiative. Proposition 37, which was rejected in November 2012, would have mandated the disclosure of genetically modified crops used in the production of California food products.
  • More recently, as of October 2013, Monsanto and DuPont Co. are backing an anti- labeling campaign with roughly $18 million so far dedicated to the campaign.

 

PFIZER, INC. PAC: $2,500

 

  • In September 2009, Pfizer pleaded guilty to the illegal marketing of the arthritis drug Bextra for uses unapproved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and agreed to a $2.3 billion settlement, the largest health care fraud settlement at that time. Pfizer also paid the U.S. government $1.3 billion in criminal fines related to the “off-label” marketing of Bextra, the largest monetary penalty ever rendered for any crime. Called a repeat offender by prosecutors, this was Pfizer’s fourth such settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in the previous ten years.

 

RAYTHEON CO. PAC: $7,500

  • In March 1990, Raytheon pleaded guilty to one felony count of illegally obtaining classified Air Force budget and planning documents. U.S. District Judge Albert V. Bryan, Jr. imposed a $10,000 criminal fine for one felony count of “conveyance without authority” and $900,000 in civil penalties and damages. The documents allegedly gave Raytheon an unfair advantage against its competitors in bidding for weapons contracts. Although the plea only involved 1983 Air Force documents, U.S. Attorney Henry Hudson said Raytheon also illegally obtained a wide range of secret Pentagon documents.
  • In October 1994, Raytheon paid $4 million to settle a U.S. government claim that it inflated a defense contract for antimissile radar. The PAVE PAWS (Precision Acquisition Vehicle Entry Phased Array Warning System) system was designed to detect incoming submarine-launched ballistic missiles. The government claimed in a federal lawsuit that Raytheon inflated a contract to upgrade two of four PAVE PAWS sites by proposing to hire higher-skilled employees than were necessary for the job.
  • Just one year earlier, on October 14, 1993, Raytheon paid $3.7 million to settle allegations that it misled the U.S. Department of Defense by overstating the labor costs involved in manufacturing Patriot missiles. “The recovery of this money is yet another warning to contractors that the Truth in Negotiations Act’s information disclosure requirements will be strictly and sternly enforced,” Assistant Attorney General Frank Hunger said.
  • The Patriot missile system was not the spectacular success in the Persian Gulf War that the American public was led to believe. There is little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scud missiles launched by Iraq during the Gulf War, and there are some doubts about even these engagements. The public and the U.S. Congress were misled by definitive statements of success issued by administration and Raytheon representatives during and after the war.

BOEING CO. PAC.: $2,000

  • In 2003, Lockheed Martin sued Boeing for industrial espionage to win the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) competition. Lockheed Martin claimed that the former employee Kenneth Branch, who went to work for McDonnell Douglas and Boeing, passed nearly 30,000 pages of proprietary documents to his new employers. Lockheed Martin argued that these documents allowed Boeing to win 19 of the 28 tendered military satellite launches.
  • In July 2003, Boeing was penalized, with the Pentagon stripping seven launches away from the company and awarding them to Lockheed Martin. Furthermore, the company was forbidden to bid for rocket contracts for a twenty-month period, which expired in March 2005. Boeing settled with the U.S. Department of Justice for $615 million.
  • On September 15, 2010, the World Trade Organization ruled that Boeing had received billions of dollars in illegal government subsidies.

DOW CHEMICAL EMPLOYEES PAC: $10,000

  • Dow was one of several manufacturers who began producing the napalm B compound under government contract from 1965. After experiencing protests and negative publicity, the other suppliers discontinued manufacturing the product, leaving Dow as the sole provider. The company said that it carefully considered its position, and decided, as a matter of principle, “its first obligation was to the government.” Despite a boycott of its products by anti-war groups and harassment of recruiters on some college campuses, Dow continued to manufacture napalm B until 1969. The USA continued to drop napalm bombs on North Vietnam until 1973.
  • Until the late 1970s, Dow produced DBCP (1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane), a soil fumigant, and nematicide, sold under the names the Nemagon and Fumazone. Workers at Dow’s DBCP production plants were made sterile by exposure to the compound. These effects were consistent with animal experiments showing that DBCP sterilized rabbits. The workers successfully sued the company, and most domestic uses of DBCP were banned in 1977.
  • Areas along Michigan’s Tittabawassee River, which runs within yards of Dow’s main plant in Midland, were found to contain elevated levels of the cancer-causing chemical dioxin in November 2006. In July 2007, Dow reached an agreement with the EPA to remove 50,000 cubic yards of sediment from three areas of the riverbed and levees of the river that had been found to be contaminated. In November 2008, Dow Chemical along with the EPA and Michigan Department of Environmental Quality agreed to establish a Superfund to address dioxin cleanup of the Tittabawassee River, Saginaw River and Saginaw Bay.[48]
  • According to the EPA, Dow has some responsibility for 96 of the United States’ Superfund toxic waste sites, placing it in 10th place by number of sites.

GOLDMAN SACHS PAC: $5,000

  • A federal appeals court upheld the conviction of former Goldman Sachs Group Inc director Rajat Gupta, one of the biggest successes in federal prosecutors’ long-running probe to stop insider trading on Wall Street.
  • Federal prosecutors and Securities and Exchange Commission officials also investigated whether a senior Goldman investment banker, Matthew Korenberg, fed inside information to a Galleon Group portfolio manager named Paul Yook, according to separate reports in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.

 

HOME DEPOT PAC: $2,500

  • In July 2005, former employee Michael Davis filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the Home Depot, alleging that his discharge was in retaliation for refusing to make unwarranted backcharges against vendors. Davis alleges that the Home Depot forced its employees to meet a set quota of backcharges to cover damaged or defective merchandise, forcing employees to make chargebacks to vendors for merchandise that was undamaged and not defective.
  • In the settlement of the litigation, Home Depot changed some of its corporate governance provisions. Home Depot also agreed to pay the plaintiff’s counsel $6 million in cash and $8.5 million in common stock.

WALMART STORES PAC: $6,000

  • Wal-Mart is the beneficiary of $96.5 million in economic development subsidies in Louisiana and $1.2 billion in tax breaks nationwide. Yet, in 2011, Walmart, four of whose owners are among the 11 richest Americans, decided to roll back health care coverage and to increase premiums for its employees. Wal-Mart still boasted that 90 percent of its employees had health coverage, neglecting to mention that more than half of those got their coverage through their spouses’ group coverage. The company provides no health coverage at all for new part time employees despite the company’s 24.7 percent gross profit martin that same year.
  • An April 2012 New York Times investigative report revealed that a former Walmart executive alleged that, in September 2005, Walmart de Mexico paid bribes throughout Mexico in order to obtain construction permits, information, and other favors. Concerns were raised that Walmart executives in the United States concealed the allegations. Reportedly, bribes were given to speed up construction permits, which gave Walmart a substantial advantage over its business competitors. A follow-up investigation by The New York Times published December 17, 2012, revealed evidence that regulatory permission for siting, construction, and operation of 19 stores were obtained through bribery.
  • A paper published in Farm Foundation in 1997 found that some small towns can lose almost half of their retail trade within ten years of a Walmart store opening.
  • A 2004 paper by two professors at Penn State University found that counties with Walmart stores suffered increased poverty compared with counties without Walmarts due to displacement of workers from higher-paid jobs in retail stores which customers no longer choose to patronize. A study in Nebraska looked at two different Walmarts, the first of which had just arrived and was in the process of driving everyone else out of business by cutting their prices to the bone. In the other Walmart, “they had successfully destroyed the local economy, there was a sort of economic crater with Wal-Mart in the middle; and, in that community, the prices were 17 percent higher.”
  • The Economic Policy Institute estimates that between 2001 and 2006, Walmart’s trade deficit with China alone eliminated nearly 200,000 U.S. jobs. Another study found that a new store increases net retail employment in the county by 100 jobs in the short term, half of which disappear over five years as other retail establishments close.
  • Walmart has been criticized by labor unions, community groups, grassroots organizations, religious organizations, environmental groups, and even Walmart’s own customers and employees. They have protested against the company’s policies and business practices, including charges of racial and gender discrimination. Other areas of criticism include the corporation’s foreign product sourcing, treatment of product suppliers, employee compensation and working conditions, environmental practices, the use of public subsidies, the company’s security policies and slavery. Wal-Mart denies doing anything wrong and maintains that low prices are the result of efficiency.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »