Saddam Hussein executed for war crimes

By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA, Associated Press Writers Dec 30
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Clutching a Quran and refusing a hood,
Saddam Hussein went to the gallows before sunrise Saturday, executed by vengeful countrymen after a quarter-century of remorseless brutality that killed countless thousands and led Iraq into disastrous wars against the United States and Iran.

In Baghdad's Shiite enclave of Sadr City, people danced in the streets while others fired guns in the air to celebrate the former dictator's death. The government did not impose a round-the-clock curfew as it did last month when Saddam was convicted to thwart any surge in retaliatory violence.

It was a grim end for the 69-year-old leader who had vexed three U.S. presidents. Despite his ouster, Washington, its allies and the new Iraqi leaders remain mired in a fight to quell a stubborn insurgency by Saddam loyalists and a vicious sectarian conflict.

The execution took place during the year's deadliest month for U.S. troops, with the toll reaching 108.

President Bush said that Saddam's execution marks the "end of a difficult year for the Iraqi people and for our troops" and cautioned that his death will not halt the violence in Iraq.

Yet, Bush said in a statement issued from his ranch in Texas, "it is an important milestone on Iraq's course to becoming a democracy that can govern, sustain and defend itself, and be an ally in the war on terror."

Ali Hamza, a 30-year-old university professor, said he went outside to shoot his gun into the air after he heard the news.

"Now all the victims' families will be happy because Saddam got his just sentence," said Hamza, who lives in Diwaniyah, a Shiite town 80 miles south of Baghdad.

"We are looking for a new page of history despite the tragedy of the past," said Saif Ibrahim, a 26-year-old Baghdad resident.

But people in the Sunni-dominated city of Tikrit, once a power base of Saddam, lamented his death.

"The president, the leader Saddam Hussein is a martyr and God will put him along with other martyrs. Do not be sad nor complain because he has died the death of a holy warrior," said Sheik Yahya al-Attawi, a cleric at the Saddam Big Mosque.

As a security precaution, police blocked the entrances to Tikrit and said nobody was allowed to leave or enter the city for four days.

State-run al-Iraqiya television initially reported that Saddam's half-brother Barzan Ibrahim and Awad Hamed al-Bandar, the former chief justice of the Revolutionary Court, also were hanged. However, three officials later said only Saddam was executed.

"We wanted him to be executed on a special day," National Security adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie told state-run Iraqiya.

Sami al-Askari, the political adviser of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, told The Associated Press that Saddam briefly struggled when he was taken from his cell in an American military prison but was composed in his last moments.

He said Saddam was clad completely in black, with a jacket, trousers, hat and shoes, rather than prison garb.

Shortly before the execution, Saddam's hat was removed and Saddam was asked if he wanted to say something, al-Askari said.

"No I don't want to," al-Askari, who was present at the execution, quoted Saddam as saying. Saddam repeated a prayer after a Sunni Muslim cleric who was present.

"Saddam later was taken to the gallows and refused to have his head covered with a hood," al-Askari said. "Before the rope was put around his neck, Saddam shouted: 'God is great. The nation will be victorious and Palestine is Arab.'"

Saddam was executed at a former military intelligence headquarters in Baghdad's Shiite neighborhood of Kazimiyah, al-Askari said. The neighborhood is home to the Iraqi capital's most important Shiite shine, the Imam Kazim shrine.

Al-Askari said the government had not decided what to do with Saddam's body. Issam Ghazzawi, a member of Saddam's defense team, said he was worried the body would be buried in an unmarked location.

Photographs and video footage were taken, al-Rubaie said.

"He did not ask for anything. He was carrying a Quran and said: 'I want this Quran to be given to this person,' a man he called Bander," he said. Al-Rubaie said he did not know who Bander was.

"Saddam was treated with respect when he was alive and after his death," al-Rubaie said. "Saddam's execution was 100 percent Iraqi and the American side did not interfere."

The station earlier was airing national songs after the first announcement and had a tag on the screen that read "Saddam's execution marks the end of a dark period of Iraq's history."

The execution came 56 days after a court convicted Saddam and sentenced him to death for his role in the killings of 148 Shiite Muslims from a town where assassins tried to kill the dictator in 1982. Iraq's highest court rejected Saddam's appeal Monday and ordered him executed within 30 days.

A U.S. judge on Friday refused to stop Saddam's execution, rejecting a last-minute court challenge.

Al-Maliki had rejected calls that Saddam be spared, telling families of people killed during the dictator's rule that would be an insult to the victims.

The prime minister's office released a statement that said Saddam's execution was a "strong lesson" to ruthless leaders who commit crimes against their own people.

"We strongly reject considering Saddam as a representative of any sect in Iraq because the tyrant only represented his evil soul," the statement said. "The door is still open for those whose hands are not tainted with the blood of innocent people to take part in the political process and work on rebuilding Iraq."

U.S. troops cheered as news of Saddam's execution appeared on television at the mess hall at Forward Operating Base Loyalty in eastern Baghdad. But some soldiers expressed doubt that Saddam's death would be a significant turning point for Iraq.

"First it was weapons of mass destruction. Then when there were none, it was that we had to find Saddam. We did that, but then it was that we had to put him on trial," said Spc. Thomas Sheck, 25, of Philadelphia, who is on his second tour in Iraq. "So now, what will be the next story they tell us to keep us over here?"

Sgt. Elston Miramonte, 25, of Monticello, N.Y., said Saddam got what he deserved.

"All the people that he killed, did they deserve to die? He had a fair trial, and it was time to execute him," he said.

The execution was carried out around the start of Eid al-Adha, the Islamic world's largest holiday, which marks the end of the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca, the hajj. Many Muslims celebrate by sacrificing domestic animals, usually sheep.

Sunnis and Shiites throughout the world began observing the four-day holiday at dawn Saturday, but Iraq's Shiite community — the country's majority — was due to start celebrating on Sunday.

Human Rights Watch criticized the execution, calling Saddam's trial "deeply flawed."

"Saddam Hussein was responsible for massive human rights violations, but that can't justify giving him the death penalty, which is a cruel and inhuman punishment," said Richard Dicker, director of Human Rights Watch's International Justice Program.

The hanging of Saddam, who was ruthless in ordering executions of his opponents, will keep other Iraqis from pursuing justice against the ousted leader.

At his death, he was in the midst of a second trial, charged with genocide and other crimes for a 1987-88 military crackdown that killed an estimated 180,000 Kurds in northern Iraq. Experts said the trial of his co-defendants was likely to continue despite his execution.

Many people in Iraq's Shiite majority were eager to see the execution of a man whose Sunni Arab-dominated regime oppressed them and Kurds.

Before the hanging, a mosque preacher in the Shiite holy city of Najaf on Friday called Saddam's execution "God's gift to Iraqis."

"Oh, God, you know what Saddam has done! He killed millions of Iraqis in prisons, in wars with neighboring countries and he is responsible for mass graves. Oh God, we ask you to take revenge on Saddam," said Sheik Sadralddin al-Qubanji, a member of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

On Thursday, two half brothers visited Saddam in his cell, a member of the former dictator's defense team, Badee Izzat Aref, told the AP by telephone from the United Arab Emirates. He said the former dictator handed them his personal belongings.

A senior official at the Iraqi defense ministry said Saddam gave his will to one of his half brothers. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media.

In a farewell message to Iraqis posted Wednesday on the Internet, Saddam said he was giving his life for his country as part of the struggle against the U.S. "Here, I offer my soul to God as a sacrifice, and if he wants, he will send it to heaven with the martyrs," he said.

One of Saddam's lawyers, Issam Ghazzawi, said the letter was written by Saddam on Nov. 5, the day he was convicted by an Iraqi tribunal in the Dujail killings.

The message called on Iraqis to put aside the sectarian hatred that has bloodied their nation for a year and voiced support for the Sunni Arab-dominated insurgency against U.S.-led forces, saying: "Long live jihad and the mujahedeen."

Saddam urged Iraqis to rely on God's help in fighting "against the unjust nations" that ousted his regime.

Najeeb al-Nauimi, a member of Saddam's legal team, said U.S. authorities maintained physical custody of Saddam until the execution to prevent him being humiliated publicly or his corpse being mutilated, as has happened to previous Iraqi leaders deposed by force. He said they didn't want anything to happen to further inflame Sunni Arabs.

"This is the end of an era in Iraq," al-Nauimi said from Doha, Qatar. "The Baath regime ruled for 35 years. Saddam was vice president or president of Iraq during those years. For Iraqis, he will be very well remembered. Like a martyr, he died for the sake of his country."

Iraq's death penalty was suspended by the U.S. military after it toppled Saddam in 2003, but the new Iraqi government reinstated it two years later, saying executions would deter criminals.

Saddam's own regime used executions and extrajudicial killings as a tool of political repression, both to eliminate real or suspected political opponents and to maintain a reign of terror.

In the months after he seized power on July 16, 1979, he had hundreds of members of his own party and army officers slain. In 1996, he ordered the slaying of two sons-in-law who had defected to Jordan but returned to Baghdad after receiving guarantees of safety.

Saddam built Iraq into a one of the Arab world's most modern societies, but then plunged the country into an eight-year war with neighboring Iran that killed hundreds of thousands of people on both sides and wrecked Iraq's economy.

During that war, as part of the wider campaign against Kurds, the Iraqi military used chemical weapons against the Kurdish town of Halabja in northern Iraq, killing an estimated 5,000 civilians.

The economic troubles from the Iran war led Saddam to invade Kuwait in the summer of 1990, seeking to grab its oil wealth, but a U.S.-led coalition inflicted a stinging defeat on the Iraq army and freed the Kuwaitis.

U.N. sanctions imposed over the Kuwait invasion remained in place when Saddam failed to cooperate fully in international efforts to ensure his programs for creating weapons of mass destruction had been dismantled. Iraqis, once among the region's most prosperous, were impoverished.

The final blow came when U.S.-led troops invaded in March 2003. Saddam's regime fell quickly, but political, sectarian and criminal violence have created chaos that has undermined efforts to rebuild Iraq's ruined economy.

While he wielded a heavy hand to maintain control, Saddam also sought to win public support with a personality cult that pervaded Iraqi society. Thousands of portraits, posters, statues and murals were erected in his honor all over Iraq. His face could be seen on the sides of office buildings, schools, airports and shops and on Iraq's currency.

___

Associated Press Writer Will Weissert contributed to this report.

-----------

This is why we do what we do. We have brought a tyrant to justice and have ensured that Iraq may move towards democracy and development. Hoorah -Xander

CrazyDoc--Nutritional Marxism, as semiserious concept

If you're like me, it annoys you that the same elite class of bureaucrats and CEOs with bulging pockets and empty souls persistently wind up in positions of power, directing the ship of state hither and yon according to their own self-interested whims. Fear not, fellow bloggers, Marie Antoinette had the solution . . .

(Multiple readers are scratching their heads right now, saying, "Huh?"). "Let them eat cake," I say. Yes, I propose that if we tax unhealthy food exorbitantly, the poor would lack the resources to eat it, and unhealthy eating would become a status symbol that was available only to the rich.The poor would thereby incur much less in health care expenses, and the rich (who can actually afford it) would spend more. Hospitals rarely recover the expenses incurred by the poor, but the wealthy are a good source of income for them, so the healthcare system would smile broadly as the Donald Trumps and T. Boone Pickens of the world gourmandize their way to coronary hell. Meanwhile, the population that provides us with most of our military and manual labor force would be much healthier, and would lose less time from work.

Finally, as the weathier class dies off from diabetes, heart disease, and general gluttony, a new class can replace them on the political throne. Goodbye Kennedy and Bush families! Hello to the upwardly mobile!

And with that semiserious thought, I leave you to fill yourselves with turkey, ham, and multiple desserts. Happy Holidays!!

Time

Have a nice, relaxing, fun, Christmas weekend.

If you do surf the blogs, stop by, I will be posting. Nothing heavy. Lots of pictures. Maybe a Christmas story, if I get to it. I'm off to a Christmas party, bye.

Fitz--A Letter to Humanity from the Dark One Himself! (re-post)

Satan Speaks

Thank you Fitz, for allowing me to make an entry as I have some important things to say.

First off, let me just mention that Al Pacino’s portrayal of me in The Devil’s Advocate, while not entirely accurate, is nonetheless, close. Some of the things he said (pretending to be me) are, of course, true.

I would like to thank humanity for making it so easy to fist-fuck God’s ex-planet. Indeed, the 20th century was indeed, entirely mine. War, famine, disease, poverty, fascism, racism and genocide—my minions were busy, busy, busy. I would like to make special mention of the German people for being so pliant in carrying out my goals.

Now as my work continues into the 21st century, I have found a new people who find my whisperings to compelling to ignore. Additionally, the 21st century, represents a triumph equaled only by the Spanish Inquisition, Catholicism before the Reformation and counter-Reformation, and the Crusades—a complete perversion and corruption of the Christian belief system.

Nothing brings me greater delight than to watch human beings believing they are doing God’s work, filled with self-righteousness and holy glee, not realizing that they are in fact doing my work. They make it so easy to bring about humanity’s final doom and my ultimate triumph. Yes, I know, considering the source I don’t have much of a chance—but then again humanity might give me the victory I wave waited millennia to achieve.

The greatest perversion is when I can convince human beings that they are following God’s path, but still perpetuate the most basic of human sins. When they promote violence, ignorance, and intolerance in His name, that is my greatest triumph. When they preach and quote God’s work, but do not follow Christ’s teachings themselves, this assures my ultimate victory.

Thanks to the events of September 11th a result of the perversion of the Islamic belief system, has allowed me to really penetrate and corrupt the majority of Christians living in the United States of America. How easy was it to make these people forget and ignore Christ’s basic teachings in order to perpetrate the most basic sin of Wrath and vengeance?

“Love thy Neighbor as you love yourself”
“Love thy Enemy as you love yourself”
“Turn the other cheek”
“Man does not sit in judgment of other men, for that is God’s domain”
“He who is without sin may cast the first stone”

These, the most basic of God’s word, ignored, corrupted. Many don’t even read God’s work themselves, they have it spoon fed to them by others with others interpretations of its teachings. They are too lazy to learn anything for themselves, this works to my advantage.

Most Christians do not live correctly according to God’s most basic teachings and instead use these teachings to justify preconceived prejudices, pronounce judgments upon others, and commit more sins. Most of the time, they are not even aware of what they are doing, they are so convinced that they are “in the know” and “saved.” In their self-righteousness they don’t even realize what they are doing. They are unaware of these inconsistencies.

Like my characterization in the Devil’s Advocate, vanity (Pride) is my favorite sin. Human beings so easily convince themselves about how special they are. That God looks out especially for you and not for humanity as a whole.

Therefore it is easy for many Americans to perpetuate war as “God’s work.” As if Christ promoted the use of violence and war against others—classic! It is easy for many to continue to hold prejudices and perpetuate them—they are “saved.” It is easy to remain intolerant of others, forgetting that Christ actually promoted toleration and love of others—but please—preach away and remain ignorant of your own doom! Put down other people and make judgments about how others practice their faith—blame the practices themselves for evil instead of human nature where it truly belongs, even in you.

I would really like to thank Apocalyptic Christians; they are the most judgmental of them all. They will make the final war easy. A self-fulfilling prophecy, I won’t even have to do any work at all to bring about the end of the world, they will do it for me. I can’t wait to see their faces when the Rapture comes and they are left behind, not knowing they have been doing my work all along. That gives me chuckles all over!

The American people, like the Germans in the 20th century, are now my most pliant minions. My plans have almost achieved fruition. My corruption has spread so much; there is almost no hope of humankind’s redemption. As each generation of humankind continues to perpetuate the sins of its fathers and mothers, ignoring the lessons of the past, remaining ignorant and uneducated about the larger world around them—my victory is almost assured.

Yours Truly with Love and Understanding of All Humankinds Faults,

Satan

Marijuana Called Top U.S. Cash Crop

By NITYA VENKATARAMAN

Dec. 18, 2006 — Weeding through the value of the nation's cash crops, a study released today states that marijuana is the U.S.'s most valuable crop and promotes the drug's legalization and taxation.

Drug enforcement officials say the equation is not that simple.

The report, "Marijuana Production in the United States," by marijuana policy researcher Jon Gettman, concludes that despite massive eradication efforts at the hands of the federal government, "marijuana has become a pervasive and ineradicable part of the national economy."

In the report, Gettman, a marijuana-reform activist and leader of the Coalition for Rescheduling Cannabis, champions a system of legal regulation.

Contrasting government figures for traditional crops — like corn and wheat — against the study projections for marijuana production, the report cites marijuana as the top cash crop in 12 states and among the top three cash crops in 30.

The study estimates that marijuana production, at a value of $35.8 billion, exceeds the combined value of corn ($23.3 billion) and wheat ($7.5 billion).

Pot Tax?

To activists for marijuana legalization, the study confirms a position they've held for years, and uses government stats to support their claim.

"The fact that marijuana is America's No. 1 cash crop after more than three decades of governmental eradication efforts is the clearest illustration that our present marijuana laws are a complete failure," says Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project in
Washington D.C., a group that focuses on removing criminal penalties for marijuana use.

Kampia, whose comments were included in the study press release, adds, "Our nation's laws guarantee that 100 percent of the proceeds from marijuana sales go to unregulated criminals rather than to legitimate businesses that pay taxes to support schools, police and roads."

A 2005 analysis by Harvard visiting professor Jeffrey Miron estimates that if the United States legalized marijuana, the country would save $7.7 billion in law enforcement costs and could generated as much as $6.2 billion annually if marijuana were taxed like alcohol or tobacco.

Miron's report on the costs of marijuana prohibition was signed by more than 500 leading economists, most notably the late Nobel laureate Milton Friedman, who served as an economist in both the Nixon and Reagan administrations.

The Dangers of Legalization

Aside from the health debate over legalizing marijuana, Garrison Courtney, spokesman for the Drug Enforcement Agency, says groups that advocate its taxation sometimes paint too rosy a picture.

"It's still a drug," Courtney says. "Just because it's a good cash crop doesn't mean you should legalize and tax it."

"It's not these cute mom-and-pop bong shops anymore," Courtney continued. "It's violent drug-trafficking groups that are doing all these grows."

Local marijuana growers, he says, are the tentacles of international drug-trafficking organizations that bring weapons, violence and a slew of other drugs into the market.

"You can't tax a Mexican drug trafficking group," Courtney explains. "That's the side a lot of people don't focus on."


TIME:

If it was legal, wouldn't that eliminate the criminal, violent drug traffickers? Wasn't that the lesson from prohibition? It would also take the strain off our prison system. What the politicians will do with the money - well you can't change everything.

The report comes from a biased source, but the undisputed numbers are impressive. The facts do point to a failure on the war on drugs. The government concedes and approves the medical use of this drug. In fact; if prescribed, you can only get it from the government.

This debate has been going on for decades. I agree this drug should be legal, but controlled as liquor is. In case you are wondering; I don't drink or use drugs of any kind, and I advise others to stay away from booze, drugs, and tobacco.

Japan rolls back pacifist pillars

TOKYO, Japan (AP) -- Japan's conservative government chipped away at two pillars of the country's postwar pacifism, requiring schools to teach patriotism and upgrading the Defense Agency to a full ministry for the first time since World War II.

The measures, enacted Friday in a vote by Parliament's upper house, form key elements of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's push to bolster Japan's international military role, build up national pride and distance the country from its post-1945 war guilt.

The votes were important victories for Abe's government, which has suffered sharp drops in popularity polls since taking office in September over the perception that he has not paid enough attention to domestic issues.

The education reform bill triggered controversy, both because of its sensitive content and because of disclosures this week that the government had planted officials posing as ordinary citizens at "town meetings" discussing the measure.

The scandal and other issues inspired a spate of no-confidence motions against Abe and some members of his Cabinet, but they were crushed in Parliament, which is dominated by the ruling party coalition.

The upgrading of the Defense Agency under the Cabinet Office to a full ministry passed Parliament without significant opposition, propelled by deep concern in Japan over North Korean missile and nuclear weapons development.

The upgrade, to be effected early next year, gives Japan's generals greater budgetary powers and prestige -- a reversal for a military establishment that has kept a low profile since being discredited by Japan's disastrous wartime defeat.

The education measure, the first change to Japan's main education law since 1947, calls on schools to "to cultivate an attitude that respects tradition and culture, that loves the nation and home country."

The reform reflected concerns voiced by Abe and strident Education Minister Bunmei Ibuki that Japan's long stretch of economic prosperity has eroded the morals and cooperative spirit of prewar Japanese.

"The new education law will allow children to acquire a good understanding of their heritage and become intelligent and dignified Japanese," ruling party lawmaker Hiroo Nakashima said during the upper house debate.

Critics, however, attacked the move as harkening back to Japan's war-era education system, in which children were instructed to support the country's imperialist military and sacrifice themselves for the emperor and nation.

Opponents on Friday voiced fears that the changes could lead to schools grading students on their patriotic fervor -- possibly as a prelude to making Japan an aggressive nation once again.

"The government is putting the future of Japanese children at risk and turning Japan into a country that wages war abroad," said Yuko Ishii, a Communist Party lawmaker.

The call for more patriotism in the schools coincides with a push by some local governments to crack down on teachers and students who refuse to stand for the national flag or sing an anthem to the emperor at school ceremonies.

Postwar Japan has been solidly pacifist under the 1947 U.S.-drafted Constitution, which forswears Japan from using force to settle international disputes, and Tokyo maintains fighting forces only for self-defense. The U.S. bases some 50,000 troops in Japan under a security alliance.

TIME:

Two weeks ago Japan announced that it had the capability to produce nuclear weapons, but had no plan to do so.

After 62 years, Japan is now rearming itself. I find it interesting that a country that was once a brutal waring society, destroyed by the only ever use of nuclear weapons, then a pacifist society, is now rebuilding its military.

After their defeat in WW II, Japan eliminated a military force from their society. Although, title #9 of their new constitution did allow for Japan to have a military force to protect itself, and that title did NOT exclude nuclear weapons.

This is a unique situation and debate about military power. Japan is capable of becoming a top military power, if they want to.

Stuart-- Bulgaria and Title Insurance: a Capital Idea?

The American title insurance system is largely unique in the world, with only a few other nation-states adopting similar systems. (The only other states that employ a title insurance system are Canada, England and Mexico. Hugh Brodkey “Land Title Issues For Countries in Transition: The American Experience” 1996 29 J. Marshall L. Rev. 799, 799). Most other nation-states employ government registration of real estate where the registrar issues a title that is sanctioned by the state and is supposed to represent the true title to the land. However some of the same problems exist under the government registration system and in Bulgaria, these problems can lead to extended periods of litigation and expense.

The paramount real estate transaction is sales. Purchasers need to be assured that the seller can convey the property free of any other interests or encumbrances, especially competing claims to ownership. Under a recording system the lender must search the recorded titles in order to determine the nature of the property. There exists the possibility that an error, oversight or imprecise title search could lead to a conflict of title. (See Charles Szypszak “Public Registries and Private Solutions: An Evolving American Real Estate Conveyance Regime” 2003. 24 Whittier L. Rev. 663, 668).

American familiarity with and dependence on the title insurance system has created Americans that are much more risk adverse in regards to foreign investment compared to those investors accustomed to government registration systems. (Brodkey at 799). Brodkey states that “[t]he legacy of the Nazi and Communist regimes in Central and Eastern Europe… have all raised serious questions for outside investors. Not unexpectedly, U.S. investors wonder whether title insurance companies can issue title insurance in each of these foreign countries.” (Id. at 800).

If Bulgaria wishes to attract more US foreign investment then it needs to institute a title insurance system that would protect foreign investment in the event of challenges of title for acquired real estate. Moreover, a title insurance system may be good for Bulgarian investment overall and reduce the amount of time that title disputes slow down the process and occupy court time. To determine how and why Bulgaria should adopt a title insurance system, an analysis of the system in the US is required.

Title insurance, which is a way of protecting against the risks inherent in real estate transactions, is different than most other forms of insurance in that it insures the purchaser against losses resulting from events that have taken place in the past. Owners’ policies are used to insure the purchaser against defects or unmarketable title. (Szypszak at 684). Title insurance is a relatively small portion of the price involved in a real estate transaction, typically about 0.5%-1% of the total cost of the real estate itself. (See http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/11/real_estate/title_insurance_exposed/ Also see Szypszak at 684). The fee attached to the title insurance pays for a title search, examination and the issuance of the policy itself. (Szypszak at 684). According to Szypszak “[t]he standard ‘national rate’ is three dollars and fifty cents per one thousand dollars of coverage for a property owner.” (Id.)

Once insurance is issued, the policy protects against adverse claims of title, defects in title, liens, lack of access and non-marketability of title. (Id. at 685). Because of the comprehensive coverage the title company conducts its own search of title and if problems are found prior to purchase the insurance will not cover known defects. (Id. at 686). Title insurance will typically not cover “[r]estrictions imposed by public land use regulations; government takings; defects that the insured agreed to assume… and, rights under bankruptcy or creditors’ laws.” (Id.). Therefore, title insurance companies are liable only for they do not find in regards to the title. The title companies identify problems prior to a transaction closing, enabling the purchaser to terminate the purchase contract, and if the title company fails to adequately satisfy its obligations, the purchaser is reimbursed. (Id. at 687).
The chief advantage to the title insurance system is that it places the burden of title searches on a private entity that has expertise regarding the title search methodologies and who’s profitability is dependant on accurate searches. The second main advantage, and why it is so successful in the American system, is the speed at which the title insurance system allows property transactions to take place. The policy advantage of title insurance is that it is focused on risk prevention rather than risk assumption. (Szypszak at 688). The fourth advantage of the title insurance system is that it is ideal for markets that have a substantial amount of imperfect title histories and where conflicts over title claims are likely to be commonplace and would place a heavy burden on the judiciary to resolve the disputes.

Title insurance companies, in an effort to gain competitive edge and to minimize policy payouts, have developed procedures that are efficient beyond what is permitted by the public registries. (Id. at 689). Many companies maintain their own database of public records with varieties of search mechanisms that make title checks easier and faster. (Id.). These privately held records, driven by the desire to be faster and more reliable than competitors, move title security beyond what any state registration system could provide.

Most state title insurance laws require a title search before any policy can be issued and there must be recorded proof as to an examination of title. (Id.). Other laws prohibit the issuing of insurance if the title is unmarketable. (Id.). The combined effects of these laws is to make the role of title insurance risk avoidance and all but prohibit high risk transactions when title confidence is low. Fewer disputes facilitate faster business transactions and fewer wasted resources, which can be better used to fund more real estate transactions.

The potential for confusion arising out of imperfect records is what led to the adoption of the title insurance system within the United States. Prior to the insurance system forgery, error and other hidden risks would create situations in which there was confusion over which part was responsible and how damages could be recovered. (Brodkey at 806). Moreover, it placed the burden of title recordation and searches on lawyers and registrar’s who could ill-afford to assume the financial burden if mistakes were made. Brodkey has found that “[t[he U.S. system of document recording and title insurance has proven itself to be effective for a country with its history and its tradition of land development. Indeed, with few exceptions, American experiments with "Torrens"-style title registration systems have been discarded.” (Id. at 807).

The American states have experimented with Torrens’ government title registration system with some mixed results. In order to comply with the US Constitution, the Australian “Torrens” system was necessarily modified to allow courts to decide conflict over registered titles; to do otherwise would grant the registrar’s office a judicial role regarding claims. (Szypszak at 675). This primary change, combined with other changes, produced a registration system that was much slower that the title insurance system and one that was still not void of imperfections. Titles were still not completely indefeasible in the event of unregistered easements, liens, survey errors and problems stemming from fraud. (Id. at 676). The Torrren style systems establish state funds that are used to indemnify purchasers’ real estate transactions when the purchasers have exercised the proper duty of care and yet suffer a loss due to error by the state registrar’s office. (Id. at 678). However, Indemnifications often do not cover all expenses and losses and there are sometimes statutory provisions that disallow any indemnification at all. (Id. at 679).

The primary drawback of the title insurance system is that title companies only pay out approximately 4% of premiums collected and therefore one could argue that with such a low occurrence of title confusion that the insurance system isn’t required at all. (http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/11/real_estate/title_insurance_exposed/ ) This low rate of premium payout however could be more reflective of the risk avoidance aspect of title insurance and the fact that the majority of the premium goes towards establishing an efficient, searchable database of public records and towards training agents to be experts in the methodology of title searches.

The Bulgarian real estate market suffers from many of the ailments that the title insurance system has been effective at remedying in the United States. Title .confusion in Bulgaria is relatively more likely because of past Communist and Nazi land seizures as well as inadequately maintained records. Depending on the level of connectivity of the purchaser, a real estate transaction can take anywhere from two days to several months. If a dispute over title arises there is no indemnification and the parties must seek judicial remedies. The Bulgarian judicial system can be incredibly slow, taking up to several years, at remedying title disputes and is difficult for foreign investors to navigate.

Although there has traditionally been a tendency towards Bulgarian reliance on government regulation and management of all property transactions in the past, the speed at which Bulgaria has been moving towards privatization of services is encouraging for a move towards the adoption of a title insurance system. The Bulgarian land registrars inherited a rather incomplete database of records and although they are becoming more infrequent, the number of restoration claims and title disputes has been enough to create a roadblock to foreign investment. The introduction of private title insurance firms that will focus on risk avoidance and the creation of more complete public record databases is exactly what the Bulgarian land registration system needs and is exactly what is needed to encourage foreign, especially US, investment.

Stuart -- Come One, Come All: Foreign Investment in Bulgarian Property

Recent to the last few years, land investment in Bulgaria has become extremely desirable for foreign investors due to Bulgarian policy reform that is likely to continue, and to high capital returns. High returns combined with some improved security that is afforded by new Bulgarian laws have become the engines fueling the investment boom. However, there remain some inhibitors that may prevent future foreign investment when returns are not so lucrative. The primary roadblock for foreign investors is the constitutional ban on non-Bulgarian ownership of real estate property. This impediment has been largely overcome through a legal mechanism that allows foreign investors to set up a Bulgarian company for the purpose of purchasing land. The Bulgarian process for property registration has created some additional complexities that raise special concerns for foreign investors when comparing the Bulgarian property market with other potential investment locations. Alternative procedures exist in foreign systems that might highlight the complexities that are restricting property investment.

The number of procedures and the cost associated with company registration in Bulgaria are unnecessarily high. At the extreme, New Zealand accomplishes the same process with only two procedures and none of the cost. The EU recommends that no more than four procedures be involved. Moreover, the number of procedures necessitates the added cost of legal counsel to ensure that the process proceeds in a timely manner.

Although speedy, the process for registering property in Bulgaria is also encumbered with a large number of procedures and involves a serious number of state agencies. Alternative processes can provide just as secure title assessment, as well as the added security of title insurance. The use of private title assessment combined with the elimination of the linkage between taxes and property transfer, would do much to make the process less cumbersome and more in line with the processes used in the more efficient systems.

It must also be stressed how important legal representation is to an efficient registration in Bulgaria. The system is quite streamlined when efficient representation is utilized but quite cumbersome otherwise. This creates a built in limitation of investment since companies will need competent legal representation from the start, but may not have the knowledge or resources to obtain such. Also, this requirement understates the true total capital investment involved in registering land, as the legal fees need to be considered. Bulgaria has undergone substantial privatization and has instituted many new laws that ensure the investment of both Bulgarian and foreign investors.

There are some non-procedural limitations that are well known to affect foreign investment:

* Infrastructure

Since 2000, there has been substantial privatization in the energy, telecommunications, water, and banking sectors. Although there have been developments in privatization, the degree of development of Bulgaria's necessary domestic infrastructure stands at 68% of that of the E15 countries, and lower than that of Romania, Estonia and Lithuania and has continued to limit foreign investment in Bulgarian land.

* Restitution

Another non-procedural barrier to foreign investment that is more unique arises out of the Bulgarian system of land restitution. Bulgarian restitution law stipulates that both Bulgarian and non-Bulgarian citizens, people that have moved away and have lost citizenship, or those whom are the beneficiaries of a Bulgarian citizen, are eligible to receive property confiscated during the communist period. In the event of a successful restitution claim by a non-Bulgarian, the ownership of the land must be transferred to a Bulgarian citizen or business within 2 years. The possibility of a restitution claim makes title confidence that much more important and becomes a concern for any investor that has purchased land that may be lost or tied up in court.

* Foreign Ownership

Finally, foreign individuals cannot own land in Bulgaria, and despite expected EU membership in 2007, they will not be able to do so until 2014. This limitation does not prevent non-Bulgarian investment in real estate however, due to a loophole that allows foreign citizens to set up a Bulgarian business that can purchase property. This loophole has become the course of business in Bulgaria and dictates the manner through which all foreign investment in Bulgarian land must occur. Although the limitation is not prohibitive, it does create additional procedural steps and added costs.

For a non-Bulgarian to purchase property in Bulgaria there exist two separate sets of procedures. The first set of procedures stems from the set-up of a Bulgarian business. The second set of procedures stems from the registration of the property itself. A comparison with the US, which ranks high in terms of efficiency in both categories, is needed to show where the Bulgarian procedures are efficient and where they are cumbersome.

The two most popular legal forms for carrying out business in Bulgaria are the joint-stock company and the limited liability company. The joint-stock alternative provides an option for investors to make indirect investment through the purchase of shares and facilitates large-scale investments. This option carries some restrictions that make it purely a large-scale investment alternative.

The set-up of a special investment purpose joint-stock company (SIPJSC) requires capitalization of at least 500,000 Leva (approx. 270,000 Euro) and also contains some regulatory requirements, such as the requirement that the company cannot maintain investment property itself, but must instead outsource the maintenance to Bulgarian firms with experience in such matters. SIPJSCs are exempt from corporate taxation, which avoids the double taxation of the company and the profit of the shareholders. These companies are also obligated to distribute at least 90% of profit to the shareholders. The rules that govern the SIPJSCs ensure high confidence in operation through the capitalization and regulation of business practices, and they also provide for high yields for shareholders in terms of dividends that are exempt from double taxation.

The set-up of a direct investment company is much less costly in terms of capital requirements, a minimum capital requirement of approximately 5,000 Leva (approx. 2,700 Euro) and nominal fees totaling approximately 410 Leva (approx. 220 Euro), but still requires approximately nine procedures that can take up to 32 days without the assistance of counsel. Still, a company registration can be completed within 7 to 10 business days including all the applicable post-court registrations if executed properly. It can be noted that the capital requirement for establishing the business may be refunded following registration, but is always required for the registration process.

The Bulgarian process requires that the party registering the company must (1) obtain pre-approval of the company name, (2) deposit capital in a bank, (3) pay the court fee at the treasury, (4) register at the District Court (the companies’ registrations shall be effected with the Registration Agency with the Minister of Justice as from 1st of October 2006), (5) publish in the State Gazette (the promulgation will no longer be required as from 1st of October 2006), (6) make a seal, (7) register for taxes, with BULSTAT (for statistical purposes) and with the National Income Agency, (8) register with the Regional Social Security Institute,

Under varying types of business formation, not applicable to the two most popular options, there would also be a requirement that the statutes must be notified. It should also be noted that due to some of the more informal components of the Bulgarian system, well-connected counsel might be able to reduce the time required substantially, so much so in fact that the entire process can take as little as one day. This underscores the fact that legal representation is crucial to the process.

Although not required for foreign investment in property, starting a business in the United States requires five procedures that on average take 5 days, and a nominal amount of fees. The majority of the US process involves the registration for a tax ID, the registration for a sales tax and the insurance for the benefit of employees.

In many countries, including the US, business registration only involves the entering of information into a statistical database, but in Bulgaria, regulations call for the involvement of several agencies and registration with the court system. These procedures could be abandoned in favor of licenses and permits. Also, the relatively high initial capital requirement of 5,000 Leva (approx. 2,700 Euro) discourages formal participation in the registration system and encourages informal business ventures. The comparatively high number of procedures is even more cumbersome when one considers that the most efficient systems require no more than two procedures, and the EU recommends no more than four. Although Bulgaria requires a series of registrations and a formal court check, international convention has demonstrated all that is absolutely necessary is the registration of the business into a database and the application for a tax ID.

It should be considered that the primary purpose behind several of the registration processes for a business in Bulgaria is the prevention of "paper companies" for fraudulent purposes. The prevention of fraudulent businesses before they are formed reduces the likelihood of a later dispute in the courts. While paper companies are a danger in every country, Bulgarian law regards them as especially dangerous.

Once the set-up of the business is achieved, foreign investors may purchase property through the same domestic processes that Bulgarian citizens operate through. The property registration process offers a second layer of nine procedures that require the involvement of the municipality, the tax authority, the real estate register, the court, the insurance institute and the notary.[i] Registration in Bulgaria can take up to 19 days, a relatively short amount of time. Again, well-connected legal counsel might be able to complete the process in as little as a day. Moreover, the taxation related to the transfer/registration of property in Bulgaria amounts to 2.1% of the total value of the property and there is also a notary fee of up to 3,000 Leva (approx. 1,600 Euro).

In contrast, the registration of property in the US employs four procedures that may take up to 12 days and involves 0.5% of the total value of the property for taxes and fees. The process involves: (1) obtaining a title from a private title company, (2) an environmental review of the property, (3) completion of forms for the transfer of title, and (4) recording the transfer with the county clerk. Of the steps, only 1, 3, and 4 are essential. The lack of state agency involvement in the transfer reduces the opportunities for failure in the transfer and often alleviates the need for legal counsel.

The Bulgarian system for preparing and registering property is cumbersome in comparison because of the heavy involvement of state agencies and the linkage of tax obligations to the purely market transaction of purchasing property. Although Bulgaria has a history of state involvement in the transfer of property, these procedures must be careful as to not involve too many bureaucracies to the point of being dysfunctional. The number and nature of procedures necessitates experience in the process and can require the involvement of legal counsel for even simple registrations. The chief advantage to the US model is the use of private title firms that complete professional and insured title determination for the purchaser.

The Bulgarian concern over title purity could be well served through the use of private title companies that compete for business and are insured. Although there would be initial resistance to the idea of insured title assessments due to high risk in the form of restitution claims, the likelihood of claims would diminish significantly as private firms build expertise and as the passage of time makes such claims unlikely.

It should be noted that the high risk of title confusion exists in the US as well, which is the primary reason for the success of the title companies and the insured title claims they provide. Although several of the states have attempted different approaches to resolve title confusion, the risk for title confusion remains high. However, because of the amount of property investment it inspires, the success of the title insurance system also remains high. The lack of professional private title companies that are insured creates the potential for an entirely new enterprise in Bulgaria's near future. This would lead to a substantial reduction of risk for foreign investors and would remove many of the procedures that complicate the Bulgarian land registration system.

Making property registration simple, fast and cheap allows investors to focus on the other aspects of investment. If the registration process becomes too cumbersome, property transfer will occur through informal channels and the change will scare off foreign investors.

Beyond the business and property registration procedures, there are some additional concerns that affect foreign investment. As discussed supra, title companies that insure the title assessment relieve many of the impediments that would dissuade a foreign investor.

Another concern that a buyer might have is the degree to which the Bulgarian court system enforces contracts and the speed in which those disputes are resolved. Trust in Bulgarian courts' willingness to enforce contracts is low among Bulgarian businesses, and average time to resolution of a dispute in the country is 440 days. In comparison, the average time the US is 250 days. Part of the problem stems from the absence of specialized commercial courts and the heavy reliance on written over oral procedures combined with the overall complexity of the property registration process. The added length of time in addition to the complexity, results in a system where contract disputes in Bulgaria are almost twice as expensive to remedy in comparison to similar disputes in the US.

It should be reiterated that foreign investment in Bulgaria remains high despite many of the concerns for foreign investors. This is in large part due to the very high returns that investment in Bulgaria has yielded and continues to yield. As the Bulgarian property investment market matures, and returns diminish proportionately, the importance of streamlining the Bulgarian property registration system will become very important if foreign investment is to continue. Bulgaria is currently undertaking some reforms, reducing the number of procedures for the registration of a business and reforming those procedures already in place. Efficient changes will ensure that foreign investment levels remain high and that Bulgaria can benefit the most from its property system.

I prepared this summary of Bulgarian real estate investment procedures while employed at a law firm in Sofia this summer. Much of the information for this piece came from personal interviews and I am indebted to those that helped me. If you want more information regarding Bulgarian investment feel free to contact me. I believe that investment in the former "Eastern European" bloc is currently a bold and high-return decision.

Fitz--On War

“The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic.”
--Joseph Stalin

War: the greatest mobilization of human and material resources.

The tragedy: that it is used for such destructive ends.

Let’s take a look at the Iraq War. The war in 2005 cost nearly 9 billion a month according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Numerous websites keep records of the human cost which so far: 2937 for soldiers killed and 21,000 wounded. The toll on the Iraqi people so far is something like 50,000. The Lancet report puts the toll on the Iraqi people as well over 100,000 deaths since 2003.

This is pretty tame when compared to previous conflicts that the United States has been involved in.

Thinking about World War II alone, the destructiveness was so much higher, the impact on civilian populations in Europe and Asia was catastrophic. World War II was the largest most widespread and destructive conflict in human history. It took the coordinated effort of many nations to bring down the Nazi and Japanese juggernauts.

This is always amazing to me and I will admit, awe-inspiring. The planning, training, coordination, materials, boats, and men needed for Operation Overlord alone is a source of awe.

But it always leads me to ask: what could human kind accomplish if it put forth its collective energies and resources towards constructive ends? If human beings put forth as much effort into humanitarian efforts, into global welfare, peace, exploration of space, combating disease, or poverty, what could we accomplish?

Nine billion a month to wage war in Iraq. It cost approximately 25 billion to put a man on the moon. Think about what an awe-inspiring event that was. It no doubt inspired a generation of young children with the dream of growing up to be astronauts or cosmonauts (including myself, even though I was born sometime afterwards).

I am aware that the motivation for the space race was due mostly to Cold War competition between the United States and the Soviet Union, but it also exemplifies our intrepid spirit, a desire to explore the unknown, and the quest to do great things.

We also have an innate desire to help other human beings. The proliferation of NGOs dedicated to an assortment of humanitarian tasks to fight disease or poverty across the globe shows that many have an altruistic spirit and a desire to uplift those that are less fortunate.

Do we have an innate war-making spirit? Often times, war is shown as an honorable endeavor. War is often seen as exemplifying virtues of courage and self-sacrifice for one’s country. We often think of soldiers as heroes.

But we can think the same way about an astronaut, the intrepid explorer risking danger to explore new frontiers. Or a fire-fighter individual who risks his own life to save others. We can think the same way about those who give selflessly to a cause such as fighting cancer or poverty. These are also examples of heroes and self-sacrifice.

There is one important difference however. While the former has a moral ambiguous quality, the latter does not.

It is always interesting to me how the moral imperative against killing another human being is much stronger on an individual level versus killing on an aggregate level. It makes me wonder if we focused on the death of every individual in combat versus keeping a running aggregate total, whether we would find war more abhorrent.

War means that human beings set out to kill or maim other human beings. We have laws that prohibit the slaughter of another human being. Nearly every religion on the planet has some sort of prohibition regarding the taking of human life. The question is: why do we take great measures to try and prevent the killing of human beings on an individual level, but will go to great lengths to justify the slaughter of human beings on an aggregate level?

It is time we start to engage the better parts of our nature. It is time for society to change its priorities. That we don’t have the resources to build a better world for all does not hold up. The time, money, manpower, and resources we waste in the prosecution of war demonstrates just what human beings can mobilize. It is time to start and think how many of the global problems we face might move towards resolution if we devoted the same effort into them or what other dreams humanity might be able to accomplish.

War does not hold up morally and the moral needs to be that the destruction of human life is always a wrong, no matter what the context. The ideals of those that sought a resolution and outlawing of war following the two destructive conflicts of the previous century cannot be forgotten or abandoned. We need to change for a better world, a world that builds, not a destructive world.

Fitz--On Death (re-post)

Here is my little thought experiment. For fun, I read a lot of philosophy (weird "fun" hobby to have). I also read up on the latest scientific theories regarding human origins and the origins of the universe. I used to be an avid reader of Carl Sagan, unfortunately, he has shuffled off his mortal coil.

So I wanted to write some thoughts I have had about death. Of course, if you are of any religious persuasion, the answer to that question is really simple: live a good life--go to heavan, achieve nirvana, reincarnate as something better than a roach, etc.. Live a bad life and you are damned to hell, burn in eternal flames, are cut off from the maker, reincarnate as something worse than a roach--some sort of parasite maybe?

But what if it isn't that simple? Faith based religions and death are accepted on just that--faith. The are often inherently illogical and contradictory to what science tells us about the universe. Can one logically concieve of life after death without reliance on a faith-based system? I wanted to try, just for fun.

These thoughts I have had are not new, I have had them for a long time. I once shared them with a good buddy of mine while playing pool at the dive of all dives here in Tucson--the Bayhorse Lounge after many beers.

I also had a theory developed in college based on Stephen Hawking's expanding and contracting universe model--Nic Scott was the one I shared that theory with.

So here goes:

In my readings of the origin of the universe and general observations about how the universe works (I am by no means an expert in such subjects and I am more concerned with their philosophical implications), one thing seems almost certain.

The universe wastes nothing.

When our bodies die, the decompose. Our bodies are consumed or converted into usuable materials by insects and the soil we are often incased in. Therefore our bodies are not wasted an infact the enrich the soild thus giving birth to the possible of new life--i.e. plants, flowers, grass etc...

Reuse of material does not just happen here on Earth, but also at a cosmic level. Space is filled with lots of materials. Stars and gaseous nebulae being an interesting component. Star formation illustrates my point. Second generation stars are formed out of nebulu's that are hit by "shockwaves" sent out from supernovas. When a star goes nova, it spues out tons of gas and sents out a resounding shockwave. When this shockwave of energy and materials hits other gaseous materials--in a nebulae, it causes massive changes in the gravitational make up. The gases start to collapse, thus giving birth to new stars. Thus the death of a star ensues that its materials are recycled and contribute to the formation of new stars.

It seems to me that physics, astronomy, and philosophy are becoming more and more interrelated. Quantum mechanics is finding more and more that matter, energy, and their observer are interrelated. Some physicists are starting to theorize that space, time, matter, energy, and even thought are somehow intertwined together. More and more there is the idea that there is no such thing as nothingness. Particles infinately regress to smaller and smaller particles without an end point. Even supposedly empty space is filled with matter.

Other new theories suggest that like multiple galaxies, there are multiple universes along some sort of "tree" with universes sprouting to life like pearls on a string. Again the idea that the "death" of one universe--gives rise to new universes--all with different physical laws. They argue that there really is not "beginning," that there has just been existence--which some of them argue means that there is no need for a god (I will touch on this in another post) to create existence--it has simply always been there--no such thing as nothingness.

So in a universe that recycles everything, is it also possible that I will be recycled? Recycled in more than a physical way...if indeed thought is now entering into an intregal part of our theorizing about the nature of the universe, then it seems possible that the accumulation of memories, personality, and thoughts that make up an individual will survive. This is not an argument of reincarnation, I cannot argue that when my physical form is recycled, it resembles anything of what it was before. But it is possible that such a collection of thoughts continue on in some other form.

So there is my brief attempt (thought experiment) to justify an after-life that is somehow related to science rather than a faith-based system.

Dems plan to cut rates on college loans

From the AP, Tue Dec 12, 9:27 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Democrats say they are putting education reform at the top of their to-do list as they prepare to take control of Congress.

However, they have not spelled out what the math will look like.

Democrats say they will use their new authority in the House and Senate to slash interest rates on need-based college loans in half — from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent.

"That will be done almost immediately, certainly within the first couple of weeks of the new session," California Democratic Rep. George Miller (news, bio, voting record), the incoming chairman of the House education committee, said in an interview.

At a news conference Tuesday, Miller said anew that making it easier for low-income and middle-class families to pay for college will be a priority. He declined, however, to say how lawmakers would pay for their initiatives, which may run head-on into another pledge: to require any new spending to be offset with cuts elsewhere or new taxes to avoid increasing the deficit.

Miller said Democrats would stick with announced plans to boost Pell grants, which do not have to be paid back and go to low-income students. Party leaders have said they want to raise the maximum Pell award from $4,050 to $5,100. That would cost roughly $4 billion a year, prompting some to press for a go-slow approach.

"I think it's clearly going to have to be over a period of a couple of years," Miller said.

Miller and Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record), the new chairman of the Senate education committee, say the government can save money by steering college students toward getting direct loans from the government instead of borrowing from banks that in turn get federal subsidies. They point to government studies showing direct lending to be cheaper for the government.

"We'll raise the Pell grant and lower loan payments by ending corporate welfare for big lenders of college loans," Kennedy said in a statement.

That idea will likely face resistance from Republicans who say it's important to keep the banks in the subsidized college loan business.

"I'll be as blunt as possible: You will never convince me — never — that the federal bureaucracy can do a better job than the private sector in managing the student loan program," Republican Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, the outgoing chairman of the House education committee, said in a recent speech to bankers.

Money also is a sticking point in the debate over the No Child Left Behind law, passed in 2001 and now up for renewal.

Democrats have promised hearings, and Miller said Tuesday that renewing the law was a high priority.

The law requires schools that get federal poverty aid and fall short of annual progress goals to take steps to boost student achievement. Schools in need of improvement must provide tutoring, offer public school choice to students or initiate other reforms such as overhauling their staffs.

President Bush to push for the law's passage, and they still support it. However, they say Republicans haven't spent the money needed. They say the administration has provided about $50 billion less than Congress called for.

Miller said there were several aspects of the law he wanted to revisit but added, "Of course, the granddaddy of them all is funding."

Republicans say it's common for legislation to be funded at less than the full level Congress authorizes.

Michigan Democratic Rep. Dale Kildee (news, bio, voting record), who is likely to lead the subcommittee that oversees the No Child Left Behind law, said the federal government has an obligation to boost funding.

"We have mandated to these local districts to achieve or face restructuring," Kildee said. "The schools that have the greatest problems have the fewest resources."

Margaret Spellings, who recently discussed the law with Miller and Kennedy, said she was optimistic leaders in both parties will ensure the law is renewed for another five years.

Besides money, a point of contention between some of the law's critics and its supporters is an unprecedented requirement that all students be proficient in reading and math by 2013-14, a goal critics say is unrealistic. Spellings says the date should not be moved.

"Politically it's very difficult," said Michael Rebell, an expert in the law at Columbia University's Teachers College. "Nobody wants to be the one to say that I'm going to leave any children behind."

On the Net:

House Committee on Education and the Workforce:

http://edworkforce.house.gov/

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions:

http://help.senate.gov/

Stuart: I often wondered why they thought it was best to reduce the rates on loans (which are still owed) than to directly give more money to the schools in exchange for an agreement that they will cap tuition. I would personally rather have fewer loans at a higher rate, then more loans at a lower rate. Moreover, this would ensure more funding for the Universities and put a good use to the money. So here's hoping that grants increase, and by a lot more than the proposed amounts. And although it is great they are reducing interest rates, it isn't enough, there needs to be debt forgiveness for those with law/medical/business degrees that go into public service. The amount of debt incurred all but forbids public sector employment which does not offer competitive salary.

The Rise of China and Its Position in the International Community

The International Herald Tribune has an interesting article on China and its rise to international power. It discusses, among other things, China's role in international law and relations. This includes its position on the UN Security Council and the fact that the first Chinese person was recently elected head of the World Health Organization.

The article also points out that China is preparing to wield power militarily if diplomacy fails. The CIA believes the Chinese military receives two to third times more funding then reported. China is second only to the US in military spending.

Meanwhile, China has shown its willingness to protect human rights abusers in exchange for the raw materials needed to drive its burgeoning economy. One expert has stated China is second only to the US militarily, economically, and politically and that "China's fast growth in political and economic power will dramatically narrow its power gap with the United States.

"It appears there is no slowing China's accession into a major global power, and I can only hope that there is not another Cold War type show down between the US and China in the future.


Link the headline for the complete story from the Herald Tribune

From the International Law Blog:
www.internationallawblog.blogspot.com

Nobel Acceptance Caps NASA's Big Week

Sunday, December 10, 2006

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. - How could NASA improve on a week that saw a successful space shuttle launch against bad-weather odds, the unveiling of an exciting new mission to the moon and a tantalizing discovery on Mars?

With a Nobel Prize, of course. NASA scientist John C. Mather picked up the prize for physics on Sunday - a bit of added glory for an agency that hasn't always seen such happy days.

NASA has had "a great, great, great run," said W. Henry Lambright, professor of public administration at the Maxwell School at Syracuse University. "It's a terrific week for NASA. I think the only reason it isn't better recognized is that everything in public policy is overshadowed by Iraq."

Asked if the space agency has had any week like the one that just ended, David Mould, a public affairs official, replied: "July 1969 comes to mind." That's when NASA landed the first man on the moon.

Still, top NASA's boss wasn't taking bows.

"I would never want to convey the impression that what we do at NASA is easy because it is not," NASA Administrator Michael Griffin said in a Saturday night press conference when asked about the great week. "Sometimes we stumble."

Lambright noted that with some earlier space shuttle and Mars missions, the agency failed grandly, but learned important lessons in engineering and management that led to this week's successes.

NASA had good news nearly every day.

On Sunday, Nobel laureate Mather, of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland, was honored in Stockholm along with George Smoot of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, for uncovering evidence that helped seal the big-bang theory of the universe. Their findings were based on data from a NASA satellite.

On Saturday night, mission managers successfully launched the space shuttle Discovery, despite entering the afternoon two hours behind schedule on fueling the spacecraft and facing a forecast that offered just a 30 percent chance for good launch weather. Amazingly, the weather cleared by liftoff.

On Thursday, the White House announced it was giving the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian award, to microbiologist Joshua Lederberg, a longtime NASA adviser in the search for life on other planets.

On Wednesday, NASA scientists announced they'd found compelling evidence that running water may have flowed recently on Mars. Some of the last pictures taken by the agency's Mars Global Surveyor showed changes in craters that provide the strongest evidence yet that water coursed through them recently and is perhaps doing so even now.

On Monday, officials unveiled their grand plan for an outpost on the moon, which unlike Apollo, would involve a permanent human presence there.

NASA has come a long way in the past several years. In 2003, there was the wrenching loss of the shuttle Columbia and its seven astronauts, then the grounding of the shuttle fleet and a long investigation in the cause of the accident.

And from 1999 to 2004, NASA lost three robotic spacecraft due to small but embarrassing engineering mistakes, including the loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter because of a mix-up between English and metric units.

TIME: As a follow up to my last post, I wondered if you saw this press release. NASA will be busy for the next few years, many shuttles will have to be launched until the space station is complete.

Xander-- Short Proposition

Banning that which has no worth. Recently Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have advocating that America leave the “n-word” behind. I personally could not agree more, as I find that term along with other symbols of hatred, absolutely reprehensible. However, it is interesting that the liberal party, the champions of free speech are now advocating widespread censorship. (see http://newsbusters.org/node/9251) However, that point aside, I want to advance the idea there is a myriad of symbols and terms that have no worth and in fact only contribute negativity to society. Moreover, I think we need a few new unifying images, symbols and terms that can help bring a common, proud society together and erase the internal divisions that we have. If we are going to be the society that brings order to those that have none, we need to strengthen and reaffirm our own unity.

Bill Megatron—The War on Terror

The great Bill Megatron has been absent, but for no longer. I am here to help my lonely and beleaguered brother Xander counter the liberal slant of this blog. The libs here seem to be flexing their intellectual muscles lately to demonstrate the benefits of multilateralism and reliance on global institutions. It is time they got a lesson in the real use of international power, power in the hands of a responsible and visionary leader.

Realism and the New Unilateralism

The Iraq Study Group headed by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton have just released a report that claim that President’s plans have failed and a major course correction is needed.

I say if President Bush follows any kind of course correction that will be the real failure. It’s time for people to put this war in perspective and look at the big picture.

For one, I refuse to call it the “Iraq War.” It’s the War on Terror, of which Iraq is but one component of a much larger national security strategy.

But first things first, let’s look where we are at. The United States of America currently stands as the foremost military, economic, technological, and cultural power in the world. Our power is unrivaled and unchecked. We face no major great power contender and no alliance has been formed to check our power.

Despite this, threats to our global dominance still remain. That threat comes from terrorists and rogue states. To quote the great Charles Krauthammer:

“The central truth of the coming era is that…relatively small, peripheral and backward states will be able to emerge rapidly as threats not only to regional, but to world, security.” The Unipolar Moment

Nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons give rogue states great capacity to cause mass deaths. Rogue states allow for the danger that such weapons will fall into terrorist’s hands. Rogue states open their borders to terrorist and give them sanctuary and support. The threats posed by terrorists are undeterrable and virtually undetectable.

How should we deal with such threats to global security? Should we follow this idea of Liberal Internationalism? Liberal Internationalism envisions a world order, like domestic society, is governed by laws. However, this is hopelessly utopian. Make all the treaties you want, but in the end, they are worthless pieces of parchment.

A realist knows that the only determinant of security, stability, and peace--is power. The United States has this power and should not handicap its ability to reshape the global order through multilateralism. Of course France and Germany want us to behave according to the precepts of the United Nations. They are weak and want to curb or control US power.

Why should the United States convey any sort of moral authority to the United States? The UN was created to institutionalize realpolitik for the winners of World War II. The Security Council ensures that the 5 victors are able to exercise their self-interest. Why should we seek a nod of approval from the dictator in China for our actions or the approval of Russia, or France which would have zero influence in the world if it wasn’t for the UN?

Furthermore, Is the US some sort of evil empire whose power must be controlled? No, we are a benign hegemon. We do not define our interests according to narrow self-interest alone, but we also look towards global ends.

These ends are not only in the interest of global welfare but also in the interests of the United States. As outlined in the National Security Document of the United States 2002 we have several goals to pursue:

1. The promotion of democracy.
2. Maintaining regional balances and security.
3. Acting unilaterally, which does not mean we go it alone, but simply means we are not hostage to the interests of others.

The United States will seek to maintain its dominance in the coming decades, while promoting democracy and commercial enterprise. This is not only to our benefit, but will have the benefit of increased global welfare. You only have to look at the writings of Thomas Freidman’s Jihad vs. McWorld to know that commercial enterprise and free trade between states will pacify them. It will also benefit the United States given us access to markets and resources that we need to fuel our economy which in turn fuels global enterprise. And cry all you want about “Blood for Oil,” but we need it to fuel our economy and its in our strategic interest to have secure and stable access to it.

The spread of democracy and freedom will also have a pacifying effect and increase world stability. The more democracies in the world, the better. Spreading the ideals of democratic rule is a global good and will give large dividends towards global peace and security.

And this is exactly what we are trying to accomplish in Afghanistan and Iraq. By building these nations into democratic commercial republics, we ensure not only their security and freedom, but also our own. As we democratize the Middle Eastern region, the breeding ground for Islamic fundamentalism, we eliminate that threat. Once we offer those people a better vision than the one they have, a prosperous and free future, then they will stop listening to the fanatical clerics who take advantage of their impoverished state with promises of paradise upon death for the holy cause.

Democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan will have a ripple effect in the region and will strengthen the desire for democracy in their neighbors. Nation-building has worked in the past; we only have to look at our efforts in Europe and Japan following World War II. We recognized then, as your leaders do now, that the only way to ensure a peaceful Europe was to rebuild it, to only way to guarantee that Germany and Japan would not have imperial ambitions again, was to ensure the creation of prosperous democratic states. South Korea is a prosperous democratic state thanks to the long-time efforts and protection of the United States. Same goes for Taiwan.

It’s a long hard road to be sure, but it is in the long-run interest of the United States and the world to continue the War on Terror and the pursuit of our national security goals. A policy of unilateralism and pre-emption ensures America’s freedom of action to deal with threats brought about by rogue states and terrorism. A comprehensive long-term strategy is in place to deal with the dangers of terrorism and rogue states that might support them. It is essential we do not lose our resolve.

Withdrawal would be an unmitigated disaster sending a clear message that we do not have the will and resolve to fight terrorism and support our ideals and values. It is important for the America people, our allies, and detractors to look at the big picture and think in the long-term. Our interests also serve global ends.

I’m Bill Megatron and I support a stronger, victorious America.

CRAZYDOC-- Dishonorable Doctorates: A Long Overdue Idea

Donald Rumsfeld

As a Princeton University graduate who takes the school's motto "In the nation's service" somewhat seriously, I would like to suggest Mr. Donald Rumsfeld (Class of 1955) as our first recipient of a dishonorable doctorate.

This is our way of saying to America, "We're sorry we woke him up after all those concussions at wrestling practice. We should have let him sleep off his bellicosity." Alas, Rummy realized the error of his ways two days prior to his forced resignation, but that is tantamount to someone climbing Everest only to remember 17,000 feet up "Oops, I forgot my jacket".

We would like to encourage our compadres at Yale to hand out a doctorate of dishonor to President George "Shrubby" Bush, who singlehandedly has made people the world over scratch their heads and say, "How did you elect THAT GUY?" . The educational Hall of Shame is an idea whose time has come! Let America's fine colleges and universities take responsibilities for the errors, just as they are so proud to claim their successes. Let the holiday bells ring with the sounds of dishonor!!

Black hole gulps remote star

POSTED: 12:14 p.m. EST, December 6, 2006

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A giant black hole displaying horrifying table manners has been caught in the act of guzzling a star in a galaxy 4 billion light-years away, scientists using an orbiting NASA telescope said on Tuesday.

For the past two years, scientists have monitored the dramatic events as the star, residing in a galaxy in the Bootes constellation, was ripped apart by the black hole.

Scientists used NASA's Galaxy Evolution Explorer, an orbiting telescope sensitive to two bands of ultraviolet wave lengths, to detect an ultraviolet flare coming from the center of a remote elliptical galaxy.

"This ultraviolet flare was from a star literally being ripped apart and swallowed by the black hole," Suvi Gezari of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena and lead author of the paper describing the findings in Astrophysical Journal Letters, said in an interview.

"This is the first time that we've actually been able to monitor the flare of radiation from such an event in detail. Only once every 10,000 years will a star pass close enough to a (galaxy's) central black hole to be ripped apart and swallowed in this manner," Gezari said.

The scientists hope the findings will give them a better understanding of black holes, objects whose gravity is so powerful even light cannot escape.

It is believed that super-massive black holes are located at the core of every galaxy. For example, Gezari said, the Milky Way galaxy in which our solar system resides has a dormant super-massive black hole at its center.

Scientists said in this case the unfortunate star strayed a bit too close to the black hole deep inside the galaxy, and was mutilated by the force of its gravity. They believe that parts of the star swirled around and then plunged into the black hole, which sent out the bright ultraviolet flare that the satellite detected.

Scientists continue to use the telescope to observe the ultraviolet light as it fades while the black hole snacks on the final table scraps from the devoured star.

"We looked at the galaxy in 2003 and there was no ultraviolet light coming from the galaxy at all," Gezari said. "And then in 2004, we suddenly saw this very bright source."

"The only way to explain such a luminous ultraviolet flare is if the black hole swallowed a star," Gezari said.

Caltech leads the Galaxy Evolution Explorer mission and is responsible for science operations and data analysis, while NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory manages the mission and built the instrument.

The scientists also used data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory, the Canada France Hawaii Telescope in Hawaii and the Keck Telescope in Hawaii.

TIME: The space shuttle is scheduled to lift off at 9:35 p.m. Eastern time (first night launch in over 4 years) Thursday December 7th. A night launch is really something to see, BUT bad weather might pospone the launch untill as late as next Tuesday Dec. 12th.

Fitz—Sustainable Development and Human Security

Often times when looking at the global economy, the market apologists, tend to look at the world according to the precepts of efficiency, cost, and production values. Market liberalization worldwide has some notable successes around the globe. One has only to look at the Newly Industrialized Countries of East Asia, the “Celtic Tiger” of Ireland to see that some countries are doing very well.

However, it is important to keep in mind that not there are also some notable failures. I mentioned the Great Divide in my comment to Stuart’s post. The benefits of globalization are not equally distributed among states. The poorest countries, those classified as “low income,” are the least well positioned to benefit from market liberalization. Some 60 countries with an average per capita income of $875 and representing nearly 3.5 billion of the world’s 6.5 billion people (World Bank, World Development Report 2006). These countries are predominately African countries along with some of the most populous countries in South Asia and Asia.

As discussed on other posts, the standard economic model for development includes a number of policies to liberalize domestic markets and to open international trade, including lowering tariffs, privatizing state-owned enterprises, reducing government interference in the economy, and cutting back government subsidies to capital and labor. This standard set of policies is referred as the “Washington Consensus” (Stiglitz, 2002).

The term “Washington Consensus” is meant to have a negative connotation as the neoliberal market policies advanced by the developed world often had disastrous affects on many of the developing and underdeveloped countries. The rigid viewpoint, that if you follow these economic reforms and prosperity will be achieved, failed to pan out for many nations. The 1980s demonstrated declining GDP growth rates for many developing countries and by the end of the 1990s, more than eighty countries had lower per capita incomes compared to 10 years earlier (Nye and Donahue, 2000).

Today, nearly 3 billion of the world’s population lives on less than a dollar a day (based on Purchasing Power Parity--World Bank, World Development Report 2006). It has become clear that the solution of introducing the “correct policies” is not the best or most balanced means for development and has often been criticized for being too rigid.

A number of solutions have been advanced to arrest this perpetual problem of global poverty and poverty is not the only problem. We face a myriad of global problems such as poverty, hunger, environmental and ecological degradation, disease, and violence in many forms. Finally, many cultures and societies have felt threatened by the globalization process and by the “Washington consensus,” which is often seen as Westernization and a replay of imperialism or colonialism.

Stuart discusses international organizations and concludes that “we must form a new architecture that promotes responsible use of resources, endogenize costs, and that allows culture specific approaches to problems.”

There are two concepts that have developed extensive literature in academic circles and have been discussed by world leaders going back two decades. The first I would like to introduce is the idea of Sustainable Development. This idea was first introduced at the Brundtland Commission of the United Nations in 1987.

Sustainable Development means simply that the development process should “meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/

A rather simple statement, but a wide range of strategies have been developed around it and the definition has expanded over the years. What it represents is a holistic and integrated approach to development that is strongly contrasted to the rigid neoliberal economic model as proposed by the “Washington Consensus.”

Sustainable development proposes to deal with global problems at the community and local level—“thinking globally and acting locally.” This means that the needs of individual communities are addressed worldwide in order to combat poverty, combat hunger, improve education, improve people’s technical skills, improve health, etc…

It also means a more environmentally aware approach that balances the resource needs of the current generation without harming or depleting the supply for future generations nor causing unnecessary harm to the local environment that sacrifices the health or livelihood of future generations.

Each community within a myriad of societies and cultures will have different needs, problems, and imperatives for development. Sustainable development means that development is tailored and balanced for those communities. It entails a deliberative decision-making process between global or regional globalizations with the needs of localities. This is contrasted with the broad macro-economic reforms that the “Washington Consensus” proposed through conditional IMF loans which failed to take into account some of the specific needs of the states and the communities within them.

Another related concept is the idea of Human Security. Traditionally, the idea of security in international relations relates to the protection of national security or the security of territory. Once again some scholars and world leaders have sought to redefine what this means.
This is related to the idea of sustainable development in that it takes a more holistic view of how to achieve security. Rather than threats to security being defined as military threats or threats of violence, it broadens the definition to include the threat of hunger, disease, and repression. It advocates the same process of sustainable development, that one recognizes the complex web of social, economic, environmental, and other factors that threaten the lives and livelihood of human beings on a daily basis.

Fundamentally, this also includes the idea of human rights and the protection on freedom. As discussed in the Copenhagen Declaration on Social Development, World Social Summit, 1995:

“We share the conviction that social development and social justice are indispensable for the achievement and maintenance of peace and security within and among nations. In turn, social development and social justice cannot be attained in the absence of peace and security or in the absence of respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

Often we focus on the symptoms of a problem rather than the root causes. We also often focus on one solution or a highly technical cure-all fix. Many of the global problems we face require social change, not fixes. This requires that policy-makers treat issues and problems within the context in which they occur and not focus on individual symptoms. Fundamental to solving the many challenges we face on the global level requires global and regional organizations and national governments that compliment one another to improve international cooperation and strengthen civil society in order to create a better future for the whole of humanity.

Stuart's Manic Monday Motivator

This week isn’t a motivator so much as it is a focal point for your thoughts. I have to channel Happy Gilmore’s Chubbs Peterson for this… Find your happy place. So where is your happy place? As I embark on my next-to-last semester of law finals, I have to think, somewhere on this God’s green earth there has to be something resembling a peaceful environment that would un-knot my back and allow me to relax. I have to think where that place is for me, but where is it for you all?

Stuart-- Solutions Regarding Globalization?

The Potential Global Solution

The problems associated with globalization transcend borders and cannot be regulated or “solved” by any traditional institutional structure; therefore there exists a need for the creation of new institutional structures that are equipped to address the unique nature of each problem area. Unsurprisingly the global system has witnessed the creation of international organizations throughout the last century attempting to regulate in part, some of the potential problems with globalization. As the rate of globalization has increased, so too has the rate of international organization formation, both in the form of intergovernmental organizations and in non-governmental organizations (Between 1975 and 1989 there was a 24% increase in the number of IGOs in the international system followed by an 11% decrease following the fall of the Cold War system. See Volgy, Fausett, Grant and Rodgers. “What is an Intergovernmental Organization.” Journal of Political Science Research, Forthcoming). Despite the rapid increase in IGO and NGO creation that has occurred, the increase has been reactionary and usually half-hearted, so it is also unsurprising that these organizations have met with little success in solving global problems. What is needed, is a new wave of IGO creation where the problems associated with globalization are the immediate mandate for these organizations and the central focus of their operation.

What are Intergovernmental Organizations?

Broadly, IGOs are entities created to provide formal, ongoing, multilateral processes of decision making between states, and provide some capacity to execute the collective will of its members. (Id.). Three dimensions comprise IGOs: autonomy, bureaucratic organization, and collective decision-making by states. Although IGOs vary as to what degree they fall upon the three dimensions, they all share these basic behavior-inducing mechanisms or they are not truly IGOs. These institutions affect the way states behave in the international system through the implementation of positive incentives and negative punishments.

Botcheva and Martin argue that there is an institutional effect on state behavior that can cause policy convergence among member-states. They suggest that states recognize substantial externalities from behavior, either in the form of punishment for violation or in reward for compliance, when institutions have appropriate apparatus for monitoring and enforcing agreements. (Botcheva and Martin. 2001. “Institutional Effects on State Behavior: Convergence and Divergence.” International Studies Quaterly 45:1-26). Positive externalities will be recognized by the member-states for compliance if those policies prescribed by the institution generate surplus in trade, technology exchange and security (By creating reward systems, such as reduced tariff fees, reduced contribution fees, increased quotas, any activity can be made “pro-trade” in regards to encouraging a specific market behavior. The encouraged behavior does not have to be specifically “free trade” for these incentives to work). Negative externalities will be incurred by the states if they repeatedly violate the agreement because of the potential for isolation in the international system. (Pevehouse, Jon. 2002. “Democracy from the Outside-In? International Organizations and Democratization.” International Organization 46:515-549). The result is a change in the set of desirable policy options available to member-states. Examination of IGO treaties reveals that historically IGOs have attempted to converge the policies of their member-states around certain key principles of free trade (According to Rodgers, these key principles are market openness, harmonization of interests, transparency, political and economic stability, and the use of third-party dispute settlement mechanisms. See Rodgers, Stuart. “RTAs: Incentives and Constraints.” Presented at 2003 International Studies Association Conference: Montreal). The traditional role of IGOs in the international system and the role with which they must play in the coming era share some key principles but also have some important deviations if IGOs are going to provide a corrective force instead of a destructive one.

IGOs in the International System

The type of IGOs in the international system can be divided into four categories, each with their own unique nature to address different problems. There are global intergovernmental organizations (GIGOs), inter-regional governmental organizations (IRGOs), regional governmental organizations (RGOs), and sub-regional governmental organizations (SRGOs). Although all of these organizations share common characteristics and are comprised of the same three dimensions, the issue mandates determine the member-state composition.

GIGOs, such as the UN, are best built around issues that are global in nature/ GIGOs have historically attempted to solve global problems such as over-population (Population has been a central issue for the UN and several resolutions have been adopted by the General Assembly deciding that the number and spacing of children is a basic right and should not be denied to anyone. This obviously has important connotations for population control. However, in 1988 the World Bank announced the opinion that population control was absolutely necessary for raising quality of life and that a two-child limit should be a desirable and realistic goal world wide. . See Bennett and Oliver, International Organizations (7th Ed.), New Jersey: Pearson Education Press, 2002, at 339-340), environment (The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) is concerned with air pollution and climate changes; the World Health Organization (WHO) attempts to solve many environmental issues such as desertification and water depletion; the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) deals with pesticide accumulation and misuse of the environment; etc. See Bennett and Oliver at 342-345), energy consumption (Two examples are the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). OPEC serves more as an economic organization to ensure maximum profit and returns for member-states while the IAEA monitors and reports on compliance with the Treaty on Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons and with safe usage of nuclear power. Id at 341), and food issues. The primary road-blocks that GIGOs have come up against is that issue areas require global cooperation but often states world wide put these issues secondary to political rivalries (During the Cold War this was often an East-West distinction, but since 1989 it has turned more into a North-South or former colonial power-former colony division. The group-of-88 (southern nations) wish to pursue very different remedies than those advocated by the northern states) and also because global issues are collective-action problems that create the incentive for nations to “free ride” (Free riding occurs when a common good, which is desired by all, cannot be privatized and therefore states have an incentive to not contribute to the provision of the good as long as other states are willing to foot the bill. The outcome is that the provision of the good will be only to the degree that the contributors can afford/desire and that they whole community will get less of the good than it would if all states had contributed).

IRGOs are organizations that span across at least two regions but are centered on issues that do not require global cooperation. IRGOs are frequently built around cultural bonds (e.g., Latin organizations, Francophone organizations, Arabic organizations, etc) and these organizations tend to foster approaches to problems that are different from those that originate in GIGOs. One of the central concerns of the Francophone organizations is to preserve the French language, to ensure the continued production of media in French and to create a common Francophone identity. There are economic oriented IRGOs as well, but again, they tend to be different from the GIGOs in that they center on the development goals of the specific members and may not be totally in line with the global free-market agenda. For example, there exist several development funds that contribute to the development of nations in the Caribbean, Latin America, Africa, and Asia that transcend borders but offer low interest loans without some of the reforms mandated by larger development banks headed and funded by western nations. (For an exhaustive list of all IGOs, including specific IGOs, See Volgy et. Al). These IRGOs are concerned about development through independent channels without the need for affiliation that would shift priorities to the western goals for Third World development.

RGOs are the most dominant form of IGOs in the international system and are built around geographic regions (Although there is an enormous amount of controversy as to how to identify regions in international relations, Volgy et. Al have created a generic classification scheme based on geography and broad political affiliation that satisfies most of the concerns. See Volgy, Fausett, Grant and Rodgers, Ergo Figo: Identifying Formal Intergovernmental Organizations, Working Papers Series in International Relations, 2006 at 19). The success of RGOs arises in part out of the similarity of resources, geo-political influence and economic goals of states that are geographically close. Because of geographic proximity and similarity of economic agendas, RGOs tend to focus more on political and economic stability of member states; pooling economic and political power to renegotiate better terms of trade and structured economic development through more efficient resource management and hybrid economic policies. (See Generally Mansfield and Pevehouse. 2000. “Trade Blocs, Trade Flows and International Conflict.” International Organization 54: 775-808).

The last category is SRGOs which are restrictive organizations that confine membership so a small geographic area or to a culture that is a subset of a region. For example, SRGOs are frequently based on shared access to a specific resource such as a lake or river, and the organization centers on the management of that shared resource for the good of the small group. SRGOs are much more efficient at protecting shared resources because they are often comprised of a very small number of states and therefore the ability to “free ride” is greatly reduced. (For a very complete discussion of why small groups are able to manage common goods more effectively see Olson, Mancur. The Logic of Collective Action. Mass: Harvard University Press. 1965).

Unsurprisingly member-state composition affects the manner in which problems are addressed by IGOs and also the effectiveness to which they can solve them. GIGOs, due to global membership, often take on global issues of concern but are hampered by diverging philosophies between the developed and developing states and between varying ideologies. IRGOs and RGOs are often more attuned to the cultural goals and the alternative approaches of member-states, but lack the participation of many of the system’s largest and most powerful states. Moreover, most all of the IGOs in the international system revolve around an IGO architecture erected by the Post-World War powers and must necessarily subordinate problem solving to perpetuation of the success of the system architects. For IGOs to effectively manage the problems associated with globalization, a remodeled global architecture is required, and it must be centered on a plan for the development of the entire global system. Although it is important to note that the plan need not be the same for all regions, cultures or regime types.

Global Institutional Reform and the Solution to the Problems of Globalization

In this paper I argue the need for a new global architecture. Global architecture changes normally occur in response to massive shocks to the system and are designed by the newly emerging power. The end of the Cold War brought no such shock to the system and therefore the architecture constructed by the Great Powers at the end of the Second World War has remained more or less intact. This unique event in political history provides a new opportunity for forward thinking redesign of architecture, which can center on the cooperation between states that wish to survive globalcide, and not merely by a newly successful conquering Hegemon. Although I don’t pretend to be able to foretell whether states would be able to design such a new architecture and implement it from the top down, or if it would have to aggregate at the regional level and force a change in system-wide institutions. However it must come into being, it is clear that there is a need for an efficient and effective system of organizations to create, monitor, and enforce collective strategies for planetary survival.

New Role and Form for GIGOs

The mandate for many of the GIGOs erected after WWII was free trade and interdependence, based on the theory that the more interdependent nations are the less likely they are to engage in conflict. (See Generally Mitchell, Sara McLaughlin. 2002. “A Kantian System? Democracy and Third-Party Conflict Resolution.” American Journal of Political Science 46: 749-759). This mandate was reinforced by the divisions between the East and West and it became crucial for the US and Western Allies to encourage free market behavior in much of the developing world out of fear of Soviet domination of resources. Because of the impetus for the promotion of free trade, many of the organizational structures lacked apparatus to adequately deal with the side-affects of global free trade and organs were added ad-hoc at later points. Ad-hoc problem solving could not remedy that the organizations were designed, and funded, to play a minimalist role in influencing state behavior outside of free-trade promotion, and were therefore ill-equipped and ill-funded to solve any problem other than free-trade promotion.

The global community, having recognized the important role that trade plays in international relations, must also elevate to equal importance the goal of solving the economic, social, environmental and technological problems associated with globalization. To better meet these problems head on, a centralized organization would need to be formed that would assess and collect proportional fees from all states within the system. The organization would have no other purpose other than to collect, and then distribute appropriate IGOs funding; this IGO would not have any policy-making abilities or powers. Fees would have to be substantially higher than they any organization currently has in effect and would have to be assessed independently of any individual national input. Enforcement would have to be swift and total in the event of non-payment by delinquent nations.

Secondary to the primary funding organization, there would have to be organizations to monitor environmental damage, social unrest and social preservation, population issues, technological advances, etc. (Similar to many of the functions of the UN today). The primary functions of the GIGOs would be to collect and disperse capital, collect information and to report status, not to implement global policy because of the problems of inefficiency and cultural differences.

There would have to be one two large exceptions to the GIGO no-policy rule and they would be a GIGO that would determine and strictly implement “basic human rights” and a GIGO to decide and ban “inappropriate technological development.” In these areas there could be no variation, no individual approach to solving the problems since the first is unacceptable in a cooperative world where oppression by one state gives it a market advantage over others and the second because the rapid spread of technology is too pervasive to be efficiently dealt with at local levels.

Inter-regional Social Development

The domain of the IRGOs would fall along social lines and their purpose would be to encourage continued social development within like cultures. Funding would be dispersed by the centralized GIGO to the IRGOs and would be substantially more than any of the IRGOs might be able to collect from member-states alone. IRGOs would be efficient in continuing their role in promoting scientific discourse, health and disease related research, publication of culture-specific media, etc. This would be especially true for ensuring that educational materials and religious materials are produced within the appropriate cultural sphere and it could minimize the corporate whitewashing of cultures. The IRGOs would set the rules for import and export of culturally related materials. Moreover, the IRGOs would be held accountable to the GIGOs for allocation of funds and efficient use of resources, but would be able to implement policy according to their own ideologies as determined by member-states. Funding would not, and could not, be dependent on global approval of the given cultural approach.

Regional Development Through Regional Power

RGOs would subsume many of the activities currently occupied by economic GIGOs. Instead of a global free trade system, there would be a global system comprised of economic regions where it would be impermissible for states to engage in direct, bilateral trade across regions without the given approval of the respective RGOs. This would force states, no matter how disproportionate in power, to deal with an entire economic region and would ensure more fair terms of trade. Entire economic regions would determine the amount of foreign corporate penetration it wished to allow, making the chances of corporate bribes and corruption much lower since decisions would be made by a collective group of states and not by single regimes.

Sub-Regions Solving Collective Action Problems Through Global Allocation

SRGOs are comprised by few states and therefore are most equipped to deal with collective action problems, specifically resource management. There would have to be a GIGO to collect information on, and distribute credits for the use of resources contained within a region to ensure global accountability. The credits would represent the allowable amount of extraction/consumption of resources by all regions within the global community and the SRGOs would decide how resources would be conserved/extracted in cooperation with the economic plans implemented by the RGOs. The reason the SRGO is the appropriate body is because member-states share the specific resources and have the most to gain/lose by their extraction and sale. Because the states decide how to use them as a cartel, the incentive for immediate extraction is lessened; if the group decides to lower production all states with the SRGO must lower production.

SRGO management of resources brings with it the advantage of the federal system, in that it allows for many different experiments to manage resources to occur within any given region and the solutions developed are fit to the specific area for which they are applied. This design allows for local solutions for the management of local resources, but in conformity with regional development plans and with global requirements of accountability for resources and environmental standards. A violation of the international credit system would have to pass through the SRGO, the RGO and the GIGO, that all monitor and enforce the global standards. If a SRGO were to be found in violation, that sub-region could lose its right to engage in trade with the rest of its region or with the entire world.

Conclusions

The current global system, a system without any clear mandate, provides a unique opportunity for states within the system to fashion a new global architecture that would arise out of cooperation and not domination. The institutional architecture that has existed since the Second World War has allowed states to interact within institutional frameworks and within given sets of rules, but the architecture is incomplete in that it was not designed to remedy the problems associated with free trade. A global free market has brought rapid change, and also a great amount of information about what we as a species are doing to the planet and to each other. If we are to prevent the next great shock to the system, originating not out of war but out of prosperity, then we must form a new architecture that promotes responsible use of resources, endogenize costs, and that allows culture specific approaches to problems.

Fortunately, we don’t have to start from scratch, and no prosperity must be sacrificed; we simply have to change the manner in which we continue to progress and change the rules of the system to encourage longer-term planning. The redesigned architecture I briefly sketch out is a jumping off point for such a discussion and I think we can, through interactive questions, take this idea further.

Beware the falling dollar

Sure, it's good for Detroit, U.S. exporters and the tourism biz. But it could boost oil prices - hello, $3-a-gallon gas again - and tie the Fed's hands, leading to recession or even stagflation.

By Jon Birger, Fortune senior writer
December 1, 2006: 3:03 PM EST

(Fortune) -- Given the sorry state of U.S. manufacturing and the widening trade gap between U.S. and the rest of the world, it's understandable why there's been little hand-wringing over the falling value of the U.S. dollar. Since October, the dollar has fallen 4% against both the euro and the Japanese yen. And this week, the dollar hit the lowest it's been against the euro since March 2005.

If you're an auto executive at GM (Charts) or Ford (Charts), a steelworker in Pennsylvania or a hotel manager in Florida, the falling dollar is an early Christmas present. Our products are now cheaper versus those produced abroad, aiding exports and sales at home too. Our tourist destinations are also attractive to travel-happy foreigners deciding between Florida and some other warm-weather locale.

And for the rest of us? Let's just say we've yet to see any breathless local TV news reports with mall-goers complaining how the dollar's slide is threatening to ruin Christmas - i.e. the kind bellyaching we've heard about gas prices off and on for the past two years.

The dollar's slide: How far, how hard?

Well, a little more anxiety may be in order. Fact is, a falling dollar is a stealthy drain on an economy already at risk of a slowdown. Take oil for instance. The stock market's autumn rally was directly related to the decline in energy prices and the confidence that inspired in investors. Oil fell from $77 a barrel to $56, providing relief not only to consumers but to energy-intensive industries like trucking, airlines, chemicals and manufacturing. While oil prices are less front and center in the public consciousness today than they were a few months ago, the fact is that prices are back on the rise. They're now at around $63, which represents a 7% increase in just two weeks.

Part of the explanation is seasonal - oil usually eases in the fall, after the summer driving season and before the winter-heating season. But the weaker dollar has played a role in oil's climb too.

How so? Like many globally traded commodities, oil is priced in dollars. Thus any weakening of the dollar versus other major currencies almost always inflates the cost of energy here at home. Consumers in London, Tokyo and Vancouver don't feel it because of their more favorable exchange rates.

Tie Bernanke's hands?

Another concern is how the dollar's slide could tie the hands of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke next year. There are many signs that that the bust in the housing market will lead to a slowdown in the U.S. economy next year, if not an outright recession. U.S. Gross Domestic Product growth is already decelerating, down to 2.2% in the third quarter from 2.6% in the second. And the latest numbers from the Chicago PMI - a closely-watched survey of purchasing-manager activity - came in well below consensus estimates. The Chicago PMI fell to 49.9 from 53.5 in October; readings below 50 means the firms surveyed are contracting.

If the economy does take a tumble, the Fed's normal course of action would be to lower interest rates to stimulate borrowing and spending. Problem is, a falling dollar is inflationary almost by definition, and the Fed's primary responsibility is keeping prices stable and inflation in check. Were Bernanke to lower interest rates, money would exit U.S. bonds in favor of, say, euro-dominated ones with higher yields. That would push the dollar even lower, perhaps leading to late-'70s style stagflation.

Asia's assist

The good news is the dollar's slide is likely almost over. There's a limit to how much the dollar can fall, argues Lord Abbett market strategist Milton Ezrati, given that the central banks of China, and, less formally, India, South Korea and Taiwan all peg their currencies to the dollar. (They do so to support domestic industries, for whom the U.S. is their biggest export market.)

These pegs support the dollar not only in Asia but against non-Asian currencies as well. "As the euro or sterling rises, for instance, Europe and British producers lose their pricing advantage not just against their American competition but also against competitors throughout this entire huge dollar area," Ezrati wrote in a recent report.

"Faced with such disadvantages, they naturally will pressure their respective governments and central banks to take steps to relieve the currency strain. In the extreme, such pressure could bring recession to an already weak European economy," he wrote. "Either way, the downward pressure on the dollar would relax."

Construction spending hit by housing slump

Manufacturing shrinks for 1st time in 3 years

TIME : Written today ( Friday 12/1/06) this is the most up to date information I could find on the dollar, construction, and manufacturing numbers; and their effects on our international trade. I should note that the stock market was down today, experts say, because of the Construction and Manufacturing numbers reported (2 last links in this story) today.