Debtors’ Prisons are Making a Comeback in America

December 26, 2013


Apparently having 5% of the world’s population, but 25% of its prisoners simply isn’t good enough for neo-feudal America. No, we need to find more creative and archaic ways to wastefully, immorally and unconstitutionally incarcerate poor people. Welcome to the latest trend in the penal colony formerly known as America. Debtors’ prisons. A practice I thought had long since been deemed outdated (indeed it has been largely eradicated in the Western world with the exception of about 1/3 of U.S. states as well as Greece).

From Fox News:

As if out of a Charles Dickens novel, people struggling to pay overdue fines and fees associated with court costs for even the simplest traffic infractions are being thrown in jail across the United States.

Critics are calling the practice the new “debtors’ prison” — referring to the jails that flourished in the U.S. and Western Europe over 150 years ago. Before the time of bankruptcy laws and social safety nets, poor folks and ruined business owners were locked up until their debts were paid off.

Reforms eventually outlawed the practice. But groups like the Brennan Center for Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union say it’s been reborn in local courts which may not be aware it’s against the law to send indigent people to jail over unpaid fines and fees — or they just haven’t been called on it until now.

The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law released a “Tool Kit for Action” in 2012 that broke down the cost to municipalities to jail debtors in comparison with the amount of old debt it was collecting. It doesn’t look like a bargain. For example, according to the report, Mecklenburg County, N.C., collected $33,476 in debts in 2009, but spent $40,000 jailing 246 debtors — a loss of $6,524.
Don’t worry, I’m sure private prisons for debtors will soon spring up to make this practice a pillar of GDP growth.

Many jurisdictions have taken to hiring private collection/probation companies to go after debtors, giving them the authority to revoke probation and incarcerate if they can’t pay. Research into the practice has found that private companies impose their own additional surcharges. Some 15 private companies have emerged to run these services in the South, including the popular Judicial Correction Services (JCS).

In 2012, Circuit Judge Hub Harrington at Harpersville Municipal Court in Alabama shut down what he called the “debtors’ prison” process there, echoing complaints that private companies are only in it for the money. He cited JCS in part for sending indigent people to jail. Calling it a “judicially sanctioned extortion racket,” Harrington said many defendants were locked up on bogus failure-to-appear warrants, and slapped with more fines and fees as a result.

Repeated calls to JCS in Alabama and Georgia were not returned.

The ACLU found that seven out of 11 counties they studied were operating de facto debtors’ prisons, despite clear “constitutional and legislative prohibitions.” Some were worse than others. In the second half of 2012 in Huron County, 20 percent of arrests were for failure to pay fines. The Sandusky Municipal Court in Erie County jailed 75 people in a little more than a month during the summer of 2012. The ACLU says it costs upwards of $400 in Ohio to execute a warrant and $65 a night to jail people.

Mark Silverstein, a staff attorney at the Colorado ACLU, claimed judges in these courts never assess the defendants’ ability to pay before sentencing them to jail, which would be unconstitutional.

Full article here.

On a related note, I strong suggest everyone read the following article from The Atlantic called: I Got Myself Arrested So I Could Look Inside the Justice System.

You’ll never see the “justice” system in the same light again.

Debtors Prisons Are Punishing the Poor Across America

A 19th century tool for instilling fear in the public to pay off debt
May 1, 2013 | AlterNet/By Bill Berkowitz

"In the 1990s, Jack [Dawley's] drug and alcohol addictions led to convictions for domestic violence and driving under the influence, resulting in nearly $1,500 in fines and costs in the Norwalk Municipal Court. Jack was also behind on his child support, which led to an out-of-state jail sentence." After serving three and a half years in Wisconsin, Dawley, now sober for 14 years, is still trying to catch up with the fines he owes, and it has "continue[d] to wreak havoc on his life."

Tricia Metcalf is a mother with sole custody of two teenagers. In 2006, Metcalf "was convicted of passing multiple bad checks. The fines mounted into the thousands. Unable to pay the total amount owed, Tricia entered into a payment plan of $50 per month." Although she's worked temporary jobs, a long-term job has been hard to find. "Whenever Tricia missed a payment, a warrant was issued and she was taken to jail."

The stories of Jack Dawley and Tricia Metcalf are only two of several compelling accounts in the ACLU's new report, The Outskirts of Hope: How Ohio's Debtors' Prisons Are Ruining Lives and Costing Communities .

The jailing of people unable to pay fines and court costs is no longer a relic of the 19th century American judicial system. Debtors' prisons are alive and well in one-third of the states in this country.

In 2011, Think Progress' Marie Diamond wrote: "Federal imprisonment for unpaid debt has been illegal in the U.S. since 1833. It's a practice people associate more with the age of Dickens than modern-day America. But as more Americans struggle to pay their bills in the wake of the recession, collection agencies are using harsher methods to get their money, ushering in the return of debtor's prisons."

In 2010, the ACLU did a study titled In for a Penny: The Rise of America's New Debtors' Prisons, which revealed the use of debtors prison practices in five states, Louisiana, Michigan, Ohio, Georgia and Washington.

In his 1964 State of the Union address, President Lyndon B. Johnson said:

"Unfortunately, many Americans live on the outskirts of hope - some because of their poverty, and some because of their color, and all too many because of both. Our task is to help replace their despair with opportunity."

Nearly 50 years after Johnson's address, which launched the "War on Poverty," "poverty in America has not dissipated," the ACLU's report states that "the number of people living in poverty in Ohio grew by 57.7% from 1999 to 2011, with the largest increase coming from suburban counties."

This year's ACLU report - which takes its name from a phrase in Johnson's speech - points out that many poor "Ohioans ... convicted of a criminal or traffic offense and sentenced to pay a fine an affluent defendant may simply pay ... and go on with his or her life [find the fine] unaffordable [launching] the beginning of a protracted process that may involve contempt charges, mounting fees, arrest warrants, and even jail time. The stark reality is that, in 2013, Ohioans are being repeatedly jailed simply for being too poor to pay fines."

According to the report, Ohio courts in Huron, Cuyahoga, and Erie counties "are among the worst offenders. In the second half of 2012, over 20% of all bookings in the Huron County Jail were related to failure to pay fines. In Cuyahoga County, the Parma Municipal Court jailed at least 45 people for failure to pay fines and costs between July 15 and August 31, 2012. During the same period in Erie County, the Sandusky Municipal Court jailed at least 75 people for similar charges."

Debtors' prisons are unconstitutional

If you are thinking that debtors' prisons must be unconstitutional, you are right. The ACLU report points out that the U.S. Constitution, the Ohio Constitution, and Ohio Revised Code "all prohibit debtors' prisons."

"The law requires that, before jailing anyone for unpaid fines, courts must determine whether an individual is too poor to pay. Jailing a person who is unable to pay violates the law, and yet municipal courts and mayors' courts across the state continue this draconian practice."

The phenomenon of jailing people because they are unable to pay their fines and/or court costs isn't limited to Ohio. CBS Money Watch's Alain Sherter recently reported that "Roughly a third of U.S. states today jail people for not paying off their debts, from court-related fines and fees to credit card and car loans, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. Such practices contravene a 1983 United States Supreme Court ruling that they violate the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause."
Wreaking havoc on ordinary peoples' lives

Jack Dawley: "You'd go do your ten days, and they'd set you up a court date and give you another 90 days to pay or go back to jail... It was hard for me to obtain work, so I fell back into the cycle of going to jail every three months."

"I tried to pay my fines several times in multiple ways," Tricia Metcalf said. "I had even gone to churches and asked if there was any way they could help. There was nothing I could do. I asked the judge about community service." She even sold personal possessions, including her only mode of transportation to keep up with paying the fines. "Since 2006, Tricia has been incarcerated five times for failure to pay fines," causing major disruptions for her family.

There are several other compelling personal stories in the report.

Perhaps the most irrational aspect of the growing use of debtors' prisons during tough economic times when counties are stretched beyond their financial capabilities, is that they "actually waste taxpayer dollars by arresting and incarcerating people who will simply never be able to pay their fines, which are in any event usually smaller than the amount it costs to arrest and jail them."

The ACLU is calling on the Ohio Supreme Court "to institute administrative rules to ensure that all courts properly determine whether a person can afford to pay her criminal fines, in order to ensure that those who are unable to pay are not incarcerated for these debts."

"....Until the state Supreme Court takes action, thousands of Ohioans will continue to be relegated to the outskirts of hope, where the crime of poverty sentences them to a vicious cycle of incarceration, burdensome fees, and diminishing optimism for a better life. Our constitution - and our conscience - demand that Ohio courts do better."

Big Banks and Drug Money

Apologize Then Call it a Day
by HELEN REDMOND

The illicit drug trade relies heavily on money laundering because it is almost exclusively a cash business. Drug interdiction, while an essential component of attacking the illicit drug trade cannot, standing alone, reverse the tide of illicit drugs. Combating money laundering, combined with strong interdiction efforts, offers a more effective law enforcement response.
- Money Laundering in Florida: Report of the Legislative Task Force, 1999

Stuart Gulliver, the Chief Executive of the London-based international banking giant HSBC said: “We accept responsibility for our past mistakes. We have said we are profoundly sorry for them and we do so again… What happened in Mexico and the US is shameful, it’s embarrassing, it’s very painful for all of us in the firm…The HSBC of today is a fundamentally different organization from the one that made those mistakes.”

What was Mr. Gulliver apologizing for and was he sincere? His bank got caught laundering tons of cash for drug cartels and alleged terrorists. That is a crime.

Lanny Breuer, the Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice (DOJ) explained at a press conference, “HSBC is being held accountable for stunning failures of oversight – and worse – that led the bank to permit narcotics traffickers and others to launder hundreds of millions of dollars through HSBC subsidiaries… The record of dysfunction that prevailed at HSBC for many years was astonishing.”

U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch added, “HSBC’s blatant failure to implement proper anti-money laundering controls facilitated the laundering of at least $881 million in drug proceeds through the U.S. financial system…”

As punishment, HSBC was assessed a fine of 1.9 billion — about four weeks’ worth of its pre-tax profits. No bank officials who were caught red-handed will be prosecuted or imprisoned.

Take responsibility, apologize, pay a fine for your drug crimes and then call it a day. Go home to family who will forgive you for doing business with so-called “narco-terrorists.” Prison time? Felony record? Asset forfeiture? No. Not for drug trafficking executives of laundromat/banks that are “too big to fail” or jail.

It is not so for those individuals and organizations that provide other, equally vital services to the $400 billion illicit drug trade. From the heads of Afghan drug cartels, to drug couriers like the Panamanian woman who had cocaine implanted in her breasts, to injection drug users in America’s needle parks, they will be demonized as purveyors of poison and death then punished severely. They won’t go home for a very long time, if ever.

The U.S. justice system will mete out life sentences without the possibility of parole or mandatory minimum sentences of decades to drug kingpins, mules and the drug addicted. Drug law offender’s lives behind bars will become a dystopia that the profits of the privatized correctional industries depend on.

The convicted will be disappeared in to twenty-first century concentration camps in remote, rural towns. Some prisoners will end up in solitary confinement and be driven mad. Their children will be orphaned and their families destroyed by shame, lack of visitation and communication.

Everything will be legally stolen from drug law violators. Cars, jewelry, family heirlooms, clothes, cash, homes and property will be seized and put up for sale to benefit various branches of law enforcement.

Check out the Asset Forfeiture Program at the DOJ website. You can bid on Rita A. Crundwell’s farmland in Dixon, Illinois. If you prefer a warmer climate, there is beachfront property for sale in the Dominican Republic.

Admitting guilt, apologizing, promising “fundamental” change and paying a financial penalty will not suffice for the poor, low hanging fruit convicted of drug crimes. They have to be taught a “tough love” lesson in zero tolerance, and this: “You do the crime, you do the time.”

This stripping the person of everything that connects them to society and to other human beings and locking them up in spaces smaller than a bathroom has to happen because as the Mission Statement of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) asserts, those involved in the drug trade are criminals who “…perpetrate violence in our communities and terrorize citizens through fear and intimidation.” The DEA and the DOJ’s unapologetic modus operandi in the forty-year long War on Drugs is, Lock ‘em up and throw away the key!

Except when the criminals are rich, well-connected bankers who wash drug trafficker’s dirty Benjamin Franklin’s clean. Tough on crime and the rule of law doesn’t apply to them.

DOJ attorneys argued that aggressively prosecuting HSBC could destabilize the entire international banking system. Breuer said in an interview with the Washington Post, “If you prosecute one of the largest banks in the world, do you risk that people will lose jobs, other financial institutions and other parties will leave the bank, and there will be some kind of event in the world economy?” In other words, banks that break the law by laundering money for drug cartels and rogue states are immune from criminal prosecution because a global financial meltdown could be triggered.

But that didn’t happen twenty-five years ago when the Bank of Credit and Commerce International Bank (BCCI) was prosecuted for laundering drug profits. Like HSBC, BCCI did business with an international cast of unsavory drug dealers and dictators. BCCI helped former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega and the Columbian Medellin cocaine cartel convert millions of dollars into pesos. An aggressive investigation led by Senator John Kerry and New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau concluded that BCCI was “one of the biggest criminal enterprises in world history.”

BCCI was indicted for money laundering, grand larceny and bribery. Bank branches were shut down in seven countries and restricted in dozens more. The criminals at BCCI were punished and effectively put out of business. They got drug war tough love and the world banking system didn’t crash.

The convictions almost didn’t happen. The Bush Administration only wanted a slap on the wrist for BCCI, but Kerry was apoplectic. He went on national television slamming the hypocrisy: “We send drug people to jail for the rest of their life, and these guys who are bankers in the corporate world seem to just walk away, and it’s business as usual…When banks engage knowingly in the laundering of money, they should be shut down. It’s that simple, it really is.”

That was in 1999. Where is Senator Kerry and the rest of Congress’s outrage for the career drug criminals at HSBC that facilitated the illegal deposit of millions of dollars packed into specially designed boxes that would fit through the bank’s teller windows in Mexico?

Why isn’t the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations that accused HSBC of exposing the United States “financial system to money laundering and terrorist financing risks” and for violating the Trading With the Enemy Act screaming hysterically that those who fund “narco-terrorism” must be punished to keep America safe?

The most Congress could muster was a letter written by Rep. Barney Frank to Attorney General Eric Holder asking him to reconsider the agreement with HSBC. A letter. Wow! That’s tough on crime?

How come the nation’s top drug warrior Michelle Leonhart, Administrator of the DEA, isn’t demanding that HSBC officials pay for their crimes? According to an investigation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), from 2006 to 2010 the bank laundered millions in profits for the Sinaloa drug cartel in Mexico and the Norte Del Valle cartel in Columbia through the Black Market Peso Exchange (BMPE.)

And why isn’t Leonhart extraditing Gulliver and other senior bank executives to the United States to face drug trafficking and narco-terrorism charges?

The DEA and the DOJ gloat in their ability to extradite or simply seize alleged drug kingpins from all over the world and bring them to the United States to stand trial – especially suspects from Afghanistan and Latin America. They’re not concerned about the impact that these extraditions will have on the international drug trade. The consequence is often an uptick in violence and murder as internecine fighting erupts to reconfigure drug markets.

The case of Haji Bagcho, a 70-year-old Afghan man convicted of drug trafficking and narco-terrorism reveals the double standard of the DEA and the DOJ when it comes to who they chose to criminally prosecute for drug crimes. Afghan drug traffickers are shown no leniency, are never offered sweetheart deals and are prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Both Breuer and Leonhart expressed outrage and contempt for Bagcho’s alleged crimes. Breuer said, “Haji Bagcho led a massive drug production and trafficking operation that supplied heroin in more than 20 countries, including the United States. In 2006 alone, he conducted heroin transactions worth more than $250 million. Today’s life sentence is an appropriate punishment for one of the most notorious heroin traffickers in the world.”

Leonhart added with her usual bravado, “This is DEA at its finest, working in close collaboration with our Afghan partners to end the long reign of this Afghan drug lord whose drug proceeds financed terror. One of the world’s most prolific drug traffickers who helped fund the Taliban will spend his remaining days behind bars in a U.S. prison…”

Now imagine those words being hurled at Mr. Gulliver and his “massive” operation (HSBC has branches in 85 countries) “whose drug proceeds financed terror.” Imagine “notorious,” high-level HSBC officials spending their “remaining days behind bars in a U.S. prison.” Hard to imagine isn’t it?

But not for Afghans like Haji Bagcho or Haji Bashar who was also given a life sentence even though he cooperated with the DEA and the DOJ. And there’s Haji Juma Khan. He’s been held in solitary confinement awaiting trial since he was extradited to the United States in 2008. Incarcerating Bagcho, Bashar and Khan hasn’t weakened the Taliban or made a dent in the Afghan drug trade. Afghanistan retains its premier position as the number one grower of poppy and exporter of heroin to Central Asia and Europe. Moreover, Afghans are involved in the illicit drug trade out of economic necessity as are Mexicans, because the legal economies in both countries are in shambles. British bankers have no such reason – their motive is pure greed.

It is a mathematical certainty that as long as drugs are illegal, banks will continue to launder drug trafficker’s money. Superprofits are guaranteed and the financial penalties aren’t a deterrent.

The HSBC scandal shows how the illicit drug trade is completely integrated into the world financial system. I In the face of the enormous economic power of the global banking industry to circumvent anti-laundering regulations, winning the war on drugs is utterly futile.

The only solution is to legalize and regulate the sale of all drugs. It is an inescapable reality that heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana are global commodities that cross all borders. Millions of people buy drugs and making them illegal has never stopped the use or abuse of them.

Ending the war on drugs would not only save human lives and billions of dollars, it would free up law enforcement agencies to investigate and prosecute banks whose real crimes are far worse than laundering drug money.

Courts Should Stop Jailing People for Being Poor

By Carl Takei, ACLU National Prison Project 

Across the country, cash-strapped cities and counties are throwing poor defendants in jail for failing to pay legal debts that they can never hope to manage. On Monday, the New York Times told the story of Gina Ray, whose $179 speeding ticket mushroomed into $3,170 in fines and fees and 40 days in jail when she couldn’t afford to pay it. Gina is one of many swept up in America’s new debtors’ prisons, a growing problem nationwide.

Also this week, the ABA Journal  told the story of the Philadelphia courts’ aggressive efforts to collect unpaid fines and fees, many of which are decades old. Ameen Muqtadir was billed nearly $41,000 for two failures to appear in court dating back to 1991 and 1997—even though he’d been incarcerated at the time of each hearing. Meanwhile, Hakim Waliyyudin spent 12 days in jail while he raised the money to post a $1,000 bond with the court; after the criminal charges against him were dismissed, the court clerk told him that he owed another $9,000 plus $1,500 in collection fees because of a missed court date.   Although a free attorney from Community Legal Services ultimately convinced the court to waive the judgment and collection charges against Hakim, many other indigent defendants around the country face further jail time when they cannot pay court-ordered fines and fees.

As the ACLU emphasized in its October 2010 report, In for a Penny: The Rise of America’s New Debtors’ Prisons, jailing people for unpaid court debts imposes devastating human costs on men and women whose only remaining crime is that they are poor. Upon release, they face the daunting prospect of having to rebuild their lives yet again, while their substantial legal debts pose a significant, and at times insurmountable, barrier as they attempt to re-enter society.

They see their incomes fall, their credit ratings worsen, their prospects for housing and employment dim, and their chances of ending up back in jail or prison increase. Many must make hard choices each month as they attempt to balance their needs and those of their families with their legal financial obligations. They also remain tethered to the criminal justice system—sometimes decades after they complete their sentences—and live under constant threat of being sent back to jail or prison, solely because they cannot pay what has become an unmanageable legal debt.

Aggressive collection of legal financial obligations creates a two-tiered system of justice in which the poorest defendants are punished more harshly than those with means. Although courts attempt to collect legal financial obligations from indigent and affluent defendants alike, those who can afford to pay their legal debts avoid jail, complete their sentences, and move on with their lives. Those unable to pay end up incarcerated or under continued court supervision.
Perversely, they also often end up paying much more in fines and fees than defendants who can pay their legal financial obligations. Additionally, the imposition of legal financial obligations disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minorities, who are disproportionately represented among the prisoner population

Courts have found that incarcerating people for debts they couldn’t afford to pay violates the 14^th Amendment. Further, it creates hardships for men and women who already struggle with re-entering society after being released from prison or jail, and wastes resources in an often fruitless effort to extract payments. In an age when more Americans are deprived of their liberty than ever before, unnecessarily and unfairly, we should be shutting down debtors’ prisons, not creating more of them.

Token Fine for GlaxoSmithKline Won't Stop BigPharma's Bad Behavior: Watchdog

Tuesday, July 3, 2012 by Common Dreams

Pharmaceutical mammoth GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) has been ordered to pay $3 billion fine in what is described as the largest case of healthcare fraud in U.S. history. But critics say it is just as a slap on the wrist as the amount "pales in comparison" to the profits pharmaceutical companies earn and does nothing to preclude such further behavior from big pharma.

GSK, which had $44 billion in sales and a net profit of nearly $9 billion in 2011, faces the fine for marketing its antidepressants Paxil and Wellbutrin for non-FDA-approved purposes, including marketing them to children, and for withholding from the FDA safety information for its diabetes drug Avandia.

Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole said, "At every level, we are determined to stop practices that jeopardize patients' health; harm taxpayers; and violate the public trust — and this historic action is a clear warning to any company that chooses to break the law," he said.

But Dr. Sidney Wolfe, Director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, states that this is in no way a "clear warning."

"The fines imposed on pharmaceutical companies for dangerous and illegal conduct pale in comparison to the profits generated from such activity. The industry is therefore tacitly encouraged to continue its illegal activity," Wolfe said in a statement.

"Until more meaningful penalties and the prospect of jail time for company heads who are responsible for such activity become commonplace, companies will continue defrauding the government and putting patients’ lives in danger," added Wolfe.

Economist Dean Baker notes that GSK's lying about its drugs' safety and uses was incentivized by the monopolies drug companies are allowed to have. "This is the incentive that we give to drug companies when the government grants patent monopolies that allow them to sell drugs for hundreds or even thousands of times the cost of production."

SCOTUS Rules on Mandatory Minimum Sentencing for Crack and Nudity & Profanity Fines Meted by FCC

Older convictions subject to new crack sentencing guidelines
By Stephen C. Webster - RAW Story
Thursday, June 21, 2012

In a 5-4 decision (PDF) on Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that reduced sentences for crack cocaine, approved by Congress in 2010, must be applied to individuals with pending legal cases at the time of its passage if they had not yet been sentenced.

The nation’s top judges took up the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA) after two Chicago men were given mandatory minimum sentences as required by Congress in the 1980s, when a crack “epidemic” was sweeping the nation. Then, Congress set the sentence for simple possession of a single gram of crack to a minimum of five years, whereas someone found with less than 100 grams of powder cocaine wouldn’t face nearly the same sentence.

Due to the popularity of crack in low-income, urban communities, the harsh sentencing laws saw a wildly inordinate number of African-Americans jailed for much longer than white offenders caught with the more expensive powder cocaine. Crack and cocaine are the same drug in different forms, but crack is thought to be more addictive because it is commonly smoked, rather than snorted, producing a stronger and faster high.

Congress finally recognized this disparity and passed the FSA with bipartisan support in August 2010. The new law adjusted the sentencing rules to bring crack and cocaine penalties in line with each other, setting a mandatory minimum sentence of five years at 28 grams of crack, instead of one.

Just one month after that measure was signed into law, the two Chicago men — Corey Hill and Edward Dorsey — were both given mandatory minimum sentences in line with the Reagan-era penalties. Judges on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with those sentences, too, noting that the men had both committed their crimes before the FSA was signed by President Barack Obama, and because it was not clear whether the FSA should be applied to cases pending at that time.

The Supreme Court reversed that decision on Thursday, however, after Justice Anthony Kennedy sided with Sotomayor, Kagan, Breyer and Ginsburg to overcome the conservative justices in a split decision.

++++

Supreme Court overrules FCC on TV swearing ban 
By Arturo Garcia - RAW Story
Thursday, June 21, 2012

So it turns out you can curse on television – sort of.

According to MSNBC, a ruling by the Supreme Court Thursday waived fines and sanctions against ABC and Fox, saying the Federal Communications Commission did not give them fair notice before punishing them over brief instances of curse words and nudity.

The ruling (PDF), which does not affect the FCC’s overall policy toward profanity, centered on outbursts by Cher and Nicole Richie on live awards shows on FOX and a brief instance of partial nudity shown on ABC’s NYPD Blue.

“Because the Commission failed to give Fox or ABC fair notice prior to the broadcasts in question that fleeting expletives and momentary nudity could be found actionably indecent, the Commission’s standards as applied to these broadcasts were vague,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the unanimous decision, adding that the FCC was free to revise its current policy “in light of its determination of the public interest and applicable legal requirements.”

The Door is About to Shut for Americans

(Not saying I buy into this philosophy wholeheartedly, but it does make some decent points.--jef)

Tim Hawkins - Thursday, May 26, 2011

Anyone aware of the US Government's real financial situation knows that time is running out. The Government has $15.5 trillion in admitted debts but those debts, when calculated under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), or 'honest accounting', is over $70 trillion. $70 trillion divided by 300 million+ Americans works out to $233,000 per person in US Federal Government debt and obligations. Or nearly $1 million per family of four.

That does not included personal debt, state debt or municipal debt.

This debt plus an economy that has been completely hollowed out by the Federal Reserve system ensures that there is no way the US Government can ever pay off this debt. And, everyone knows it.

The indications that the US Government is moving very quickly to enact any legal measure or fine against Americans and to make it nearly impossible for any American to escape payment to pay for their sins are everywhere.

Well, the problem is, the US Government is moving very quickly to make it so almost everyone is seen as a criminal in the eyes of the US legal system.

Now We Are All Criminals

It is already said that there are so many laws, rules and regulations in the US that each person in the US breaks at least one law per day, if not much more - without even knowing it. But the US Government is becoming more obvious in how it will go about making everyone a criminal and fining them ridiculous amounts of money in doing so.

This week, an American family who said they were just trying to teach their son about responsibility and entrepreneurship was fined $90,000 by the USDA because the teenager sold $4,600 worth of bunnies in one calendar year without a license. Not only were they demanded to pay $90,000, but if they did not pay within a short period of time the fine could increase to as high as $4 million.

This one case only goes to show how easy it is, within the system, to take any small transgression and to blackmail someone for, for all intents and purposes, every penny they have - or more.

Students to be Forced into the Military to Repay Debts

We also recently commented on how the US college system draws people into large debts (Debtucation) and how student debt is now larger than credit card debt in the US. It is the US Government itself that has made college education so expensive by offering student loans to anyone who can fog a mirror but again they have shown their intentions by making student loan debt the only debt which can not be forgiven. A 2005 decree from the Bush Administration stated that student loan debt could not be dissolved through bankruptcy proceedings. The only other scenario where this “no-escape” clause exists is debt from criminal acts and debt from fraud. In other words, student loan debt is seen, by the US Government, as being similar to proceeds from crime.

What will this mean with more young Americans in student loan debt than any other time? It's anyones guess but it would not be out of the realm of possibility to force students who can not pay off their debt into the military to repay their debt.

And with the US military with 800 military bases worldwide with US military personnel in 156 countries and US Military bases in 63 countries and currently occupying or attacking Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and with other drone operations in places like Yemen and Pakistan, the US is all but ensuring that it is screwing around in enough places to eventually draw in one of the big boys. Russia, China or Iran.

And, hey, we Gotta Support the Troops, right?

US Government Eyeing Pensions and Retirement Funds

On the other end of the spectrum, seniors and those in retirement, the US Government recently made it very obvious that funds held in retirement accounts are going to be the first to be taken when times get tough.

In the recent scuffle over raising the debt ceiling, the US Government was short of some funds after reaching the United States' $14.3 trillion debt ceiling last Monday. Where was the very first place the US Government went to find new sources of funds? Last week they dipped into state pension funds in order to make payments.

It is no great leap to think that as things worsen in the US Government's financial situation, which is all but guaranteed, that the first thing that will be nationalized will be all tax sheltered retirement accounts. After all, we all have to do our part to pay for the debts of the Government, right?

Anyone living off of US pensions should be very worried. And anyone with significant funds in retirement accounts should be running, not walking, to get any funds they can outside of the direct control of the US Government. We recommend looking at "Unleash Your IRA", a great program for diversifying your IRA internationally.

Get a 2nd Passport

There are two ways to look at the upcoming battle between the US Government and US citizens. You can stay and fight or you can run and hide.

If you plan to stay and fight we wish you good luck and will try to support your efforts in any way we can.

If you would rather run and hide then one of the first things you should be looking to do at this time is to at least get a second passport. This is still legal for Americans and there are many options.

As well, if you have the financial capability, we highly recommend buying some foreign real estate - preferably somewhere you like to live.

2011 Last Year to Get Out

Most things are still legal in the US. It is still legal to have foreign bank accounts - although you are required by law to report them to the Government. It is still legal to get a second passport. It is still legal to move assets in your IRA outside of the country. It is still legal to move money outside of the country and buy foreign real estate.

The window of opportunity is closing. If you live in the US and still have all your assets inside of the US, you likely have months, not years, to internationally diversify your assets and to get your affairs in order. Anything much after 2011 is taking a big risk of losing it all.

The Government Can

After all, we, as individuals have to live within our means and it is considered a crime if we forcibly take money from others to pay for our debts. The Government, on the other hand? The Government can take whatever they want.

High-tech carts will tell on Cleveland residents who don't recycle ... and they face $100 fine

Mark Gillispie, The Plain Dealer, Friday, August 20, 2010 
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- It would be a stretch to say that Big Brother will hang out in Clevelanders' trash cans, but the city plans to sort through curbside trash to make sure residents are recycling -- and fine them $100 if they don't. 

The move is part of a high-tech collection system the city will roll out next year with new trash and recycling carts embedded with radio frequency identification chips and bar codes.

The chips will allow city workers to monitor how often residents roll carts to the curb for collection. If a chip show a recyclable cart hasn't been brought to the curb in weeks, a trash supervisor will sort through the trash for recyclables.

Trash carts containing more than 10 percent recyclable material could lead to a $100 fine, according to Waste Collection Commissioner Ronnie Owens. Recyclables include glass, metal cans, plastic bottles, paper and cardboard.

City Council on Wednesday approved spending $2.5 million on high-tech carts for 25,000 households across the city, expanding a pilot program that began in 2007 with 15,000 households.

The expansion will continue at 25,000 households a year until nearly all of the city's 150,000 residences are included. Existing carts might be retrofitted with the microchips.

"We're trying to automate our system to be a more efficient operation," Owens said. "This chip will assist us in doing our job better."

The chip-embedded carts are just starting to catch on elsewhere. The Washington, D.C. suburb of Alexandria, Va., earlier this year announced it would issue carts to check whether people are recycling.

Some cities in England have used the high-tech trash carts for several years to weigh how much garbage people throw out. People are charged extra for exceeding allotted limits.

Cleveland officials want to automate nearly all residential waste collection under a program being financed in part by a new fee that went into effect earlier this year.

The automated trucks allow drivers to remain in the cab and empty carts using a remote-control arm. Cleveland owns three of these trucks and plans to buy nine more.

Recycling is good for the environment and the city's bottom line, officials said. Cleveland pays $30 a ton to dump garbage in landfills, but earns $26 a ton for recyclables.

The city last year sent 220,000 tons of garbage to landfills and collected 5,800 tons of recyclables.

City Council approved updated trash collection ordinances last month to include a section on automated waste collection and curbside recycling. The new law changes infractions of the law from a minor misdemeanor to a civil penalty. The recycling law only applies to residents who have been issued the carts.

The new law also prohibits people from setting out excessive amounts of trash on tree lawns, which officials say has been an ongoing problem. Fines for excessive trash will range from $250 to $500 depending on the amount.

In either case, the property owner receives the citation. Landlords are responsible for making sure their tenants follow the law.

Owens said Cleveland will conduct a public-service campaign to educate residents about the new collection system and recycling program.

The city stepped up enforcement of ordinances governing trash collection last year by issuing 2,900 tickets, nearly five times more tickets than in 2008. Those infractions include citations for people who put out their trash too early or fail to bring in their garbage cans from the curb in a timely manner.

The Division of Waste Collection is on track to meet its goal of issuing 4,000 citations this year, Owens said.

"We're trying to make sure Cleveland stays clean and residents are properly informed on how these things should be set out," he said. "By issuing these tickets, it's helping us change the attitude or perception on how things should be set out."

Councilman Martin Keane, who represents the West Park neighborhood, said he would prefer that the Division of Waste Collection use more discretion when deciding whether to issue a ticket. A warning in many instances would suffice, he said.

"Everybody knows the ones who blatantly disregards the law," Keane said. "Those are the people we should hit with a $100 ticket."

Safety Violations and Fines Did Not Deter BP and Massey Disasters

Wednesday 02 June 2010
by: Joshua Frank, t r u t h o u t | Report

When natural resource industry giants get hit with worker safety and environmental violations, they open their checkbook, pay a fine and go on operating as per usual.

At least that's the lesson learned from the recent Massey Energy deadly mine explosion and British Petroleum's (BP) massive oil spill. Both companies have paid millions in fines in recent years, yet, have gone on with their business as usual.

"Violations are, you know, unfortunately, a normal part of the mining process. You know, you have inspections every day," said Massey CEO Don Blankenship on MetroNews Radio shortly after the disaster. "And it's hard to differentiate sometimes between, you know, head count or number counts on violations and, you know, the seriousness or type of it."

According to Blankenship, these violations are simply something we should all accept. In all, Massey was levied over 1,300 safety violations at its Upper Branch Mine where 29 miners died horrific and arguably preventable, deaths in April. It appears these fines are just a part of doing business instead of an effective method of enforcing the law.

Data from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) shows that Upper Big Branch Mine had six violations related to ventilation since January of this year and four since mid-March.

Last year, the mine had 50 "unwarrantable failure citations," which are the most serious acts of negligence a mine inspector can ticket a mining company. In 2009, MSHA had also proposed 458 total safety violations, which racked up $900,000 in fines.

But if you thought Massey's rap sheet was long, take a peak at BP's list of documented mishaps.

Transocean, which oversees 141 oil rigs around the globe, manages BP's Deepwater Horizon rig that claimed the lives of 11 workers and continues to leak thousands of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico daily. The company operates 15 other oil rigs in the Gulf, yet, avoids paying a single royalty to US taxpayers.

BP also owes US citizens for its law breaking ways. Since 2005, the oil company has been paid the US government $485 million in fines and settlements for "willful neglect of worker safety rules and penalties for manipulating energy markets." BP is the most heavily fined energy company in the United States.

"We need to consider whether or not [BP's] Corporate Charter in the United States needs to be revoked," Tyson Slocum, the director of energy for Public Citizen, a Washington, DC, based citizen advocacy group, said on Free Speech radio. "We need to consider whether or not its rights to win leases on public lands should be revoked."

In 2009, the British-based company paid $87.43 million for a single Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) violation for willful negligence that led to the deaths of 15 works in a 2005 explosion at a Texas refinery. BP handed over $50 million to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for the same crime.

In 2006, an oil leak at a BP pipeline in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, resulted in a $20 million settlement for alleged Clean Water Act violations.

"The Texas and Alaska cases illustrate the twin pillars of environmental enforcement: first, protecting human life and health and, second, protecting our natural resources," said Acting Assistant Attorney General Ronald J. Tenpas of the DOJ's Environment and Natural Resources Division. "BP cut corners with disastrous consequences for both and is being held to account."

Despite the DOJ's claim that BP is "being held to account," just last month, the company paid another $3 million fine for42 worker safety violations at a company refinery in Ohio. In fact, if BP were an actual person it would have spent time in prison, as the company has been levied two separate felony charge for violating the Clean Air and Water Acts.

"We need to get tough on corporations that fail to comply with US laws and regulations," said Slocum of Public Citizen.

Federal fines have not put an end to BP's egregious environmental and worker safety violations. But consumer advocate Ralph Nader takes it a bit further, claiming that manslaughter charges ought to be considered for Massey Energy.

"In the last month, MSHA has filed a dozen citations specifically alleging the mines failure to properly ventilate the lethal, highly volatile methane gas," Nader recently wrote in response to Massey's Upper Branch Mine explosion. "That is why affected people are wondering whether any district attorneys will have the will and an adequate budget to charge Massey officials with 'involuntary manslaughter,' should the findings of the completed investigation meet the statutory definition."