pred_label
stringclasses 2
values | pred_label_prob
float64 0.5
1
| wiki_prob
float64 0.25
1
| text
stringlengths 23
1.02M
| source
stringlengths 37
43
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
__label__cc
| 0.581788
| 0.418212
|
Taylor Swift Helps Out Two Moms Behind on Rent With a $13,000 Donation to Each
Theo Wargo, Getty Images
It's the season for giving, and Taylor Swift is never one to back away from a charitable cause that truly helps others. On Tuesday (Dec. 8), the superstar singer gave $13,000 each to two mothers struggling to pay their rent after reading about their plights in a Washington Post article.
The amounts of the donations — the figures made personal by Swift, as 13 is her favorite number — were confirmed by Billboard after the entertainer made the offerings. On the women's GoFundMe pages, Swift included notes addressing their situations and letting them know how she learned about them.
To Nikki Cornwell of Nashville, the singer writes, "Nikki, I read about you in the Washington Post and thought it was really brave of you to share your story. I'm so sorry for everything you've had to go through this year and wanted to send you this gift, from one Nashville girl to another. Love, Taylor."
To Shelbie Selewski of Macomb County, Mich., Swift says, "Shelbie, I'm sending you this gift after reading about you in the Washington Post. No one should have to feel the kind of stress that's been put on you. I hope you and your beautiful family have a great holiday season. Love, Taylor."
As reported in the Washington Post piece that covered the two women, millions of Americans are now far behind on rent and utilities due to job loss as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.
Cornwell, a COVID-19 survivor, was $4,000 behind on rent and faced imminent eviction. This week, her water was shut off. She previously held a factory job before losing it in March, right as the coronavirus crisis first hit the United States. She's since pawned several items to help pay for food.
Selewski was $2,100 short on rent and utility bills after losing her job as a medical receptionist. By the time of the article, her landlord had served her three eviction notices. In September, her electricity got shut off before friends and relatives helped her get the lights back on.
Swift is known for helping others, especially around the holidays. In 2015, she visited a 13-year-old boy with cancer around Christmastime. She's also given millions to help the victims of natural disasters such as the 2016 Great Smoky Mountains wildfires and this year's tornados in Tennessee.
Those wishing to follow in Swift's footsteps can donate to Cornwell and Selewski via their respective crowdfunding campaigns, located here and here.
15 Country Stars Who Have Gone Above and Beyond for Charity:
Source: Taylor Swift Helps Out Two Moms Behind on Rent With a $13,000 Donation to Each
Filed Under: Coronavirus, Taylor Swift
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line832
|
__label__cc
| 0.694094
| 0.305906
|
Writing 201: Hero(ine)
Grab your verse by both ends (or hands; your call), like a hero with extra big hair. Week 2 here we go!
Welcome to Blogging U! This course isn't currently active, but you can learn more about what we offer and register for upcoming courses on the BU home page.
Your prompt: hero(ine)
Remember, comments are closed on Blogging U. assignments. If you have a question, or want to share or chat, head to The Commons.
Whether it’s a hero or a heroine, your poem today should focus on a person with an outsized personality — someone who makes a splash (or a mess) whenever he or she crosses others’ path. A parent, a teacher, a writer, Batman: we all know someone heroic, whether in real life or in fiction. Of course, if you’re feeling less laudatory today, feel free to turn things around by writing about an antihero or a villain.
Today’s form: ballad
Ballads at a glance:
Ballads are dramatic, emotionally-charged poems that tell a story, often about bigger-than-life characters and situations. They can be long, short, rhymed, or unrhymed — by now there are no strict rules — though it’s still common for ballads to have a refrain.
When you think of a ballad, what comes to your mind? Since the 80s happened to coincide with my formative years, I instinctively think of a big-hair (male or female) singer on a stage, shrouded in smoke, belting out a sappy tune about a sappy love story accompanied by just-as-sappy strings (yes, I know, too much alliteration). Or I just think about Meat Loaf.
Incredibly enough, the 80s were right: from the start, ballads were all about telling dramatic, big stories (though the smoke machine was, indeed, a later addition). Robin Hood started out as a ballad in the 15th century. The Rime of the Ancient Mariner? You guessed it — a ballad. Here’s a taste of Oscar Wilde:
And twice a day he smoked his pipe,
And drank his quart of beer:
His soul was resolute, and held
No hiding-place for fear;
He often said that he was glad
The hangman’s hands were near.
A ballad has something removed from daily life about it — though everyday topics can definitely be given the ballad treatment. The secret is to find the drama, the struggle, the heightened emotions of a given situation and use them to tell a story.
If you’d like a few more concrete ideas on how to go about ballad-writing, here’s a handy tutorial. As always, you can take or leave any and all pieces of advice when it comes to poetry.
While many traditional ballads (and lots of modern power ballads) are written in rhyme, you by no means have to write yours that way. And while many ballads are longer pieces of verse, taking their time to develop their narrative arcs and their moods, yours can be as long or short as you see fit — it’s about channeling a story and its emotional weight, not crossing off items from a checklist.
Today’s device: anaphora/epistrophe
We’ve tackled the repetition of sounds before, but not that of words. Today, let’s explore the potential of creative redundancy with two neighboring devices: anaphora (a-NAH-fra) and epistrophe (eh-PIS-tro-fee). You may have figured out by now that the fancier the Greek name, the simpler the device. And you’ll be right this time, too.
Anaphora simply means the repetition of the same word (or cluster of words) at the beginning of multiple lines of verse in the same poem. Epistrophe is its counterpart: the repeated words appear at the end of lines. Like most simple devices, though, the trick is in deploying them to their full effect. Repetition lends emphasis to words, adds weight, and leaves a deeper imprint in your readers’ memories. Think wisely about what it is you’re underlining.
There are so many great examples of both devices. From Martin Luther King, Jr.’s I have a dream speech to Nirvana’s All apologies (“what else should I…”), anaphora is everywhere. Can’t think of a famous epistrophe? I beg to differ:
Cause if you liked it then you should have put a ring on it
If you liked it then you should’ve put a ring on it
Don’t be mad once you see that he want it
If you’re feeling particularly adventurous, give symploce a try: it’s when successive lines of poetry contain both an anaphora and an epistrophe.
So: add some punch to your poem with verses that begin or end on a strong, emphatic note. Use the device sparingly, or throw it into each one of your lines. Let us know, by the time we’re done, why that word (or words) play such an important role in the poem.
Photo by Eneas de Troya (CC BY 2.0)
Blogging 101: Plug Into a Social Network
Writing 201: Fingers
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line834
|
__label__wiki
| 0.871406
| 0.871406
|
Home » Americas » Trump impeachment: Which US presidents have been impeached?
Trump impeachment: Which US presidents have been impeached?
WASHINGTON (NYTIMES) – In the first two centuries of the United States government, the House of Representatives conducted only two presidential impeachment proceedings.
By the time the sun set on Wednesday (Jan 13), it had conducted three in just 25 years – with two of them in the past year and a half, against the first president ever to be impeached twice. Welcome to history.
With a majority of the House voting on Wednesday afternoon to impeach President Donald Trump on a charge of inciting an insurrection, just 13 months after the chamber impeached him on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, here is an overview of what happened the previous times.
Donald Trump, 2019
In September 2019, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that the House would open an impeachment inquiry against Trump.
She took that step – one she had previously resisted – in response to a phone call in which Trump had pressured President Volodymyr Zelenskiy of Ukraine to investigate former vice-president Joe Biden, then a front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, and Biden’s son Hunter. The call came shortly after Trump had frozen nearly US$400 million (S$531 million) in aid to Ukraine.
The resulting charges stated that Trump had abused his power by using government aid as leverage to persuade Ukraine to help him electorally, and that he had obstructed Congress by refusing to provide documents and telling administration officials not to testify. The House impeached him on Dec 18, 2019, voting 230-197 to approve the abuse of power charge and 229-198 to approve the obstruction charge.
After weeks of hearings, lawmakers split almost entirely along party lines: No House Republican voted for impeachment on either charge, all but two Democrats voted for the abuse of power charge, and all but three Democrats voted for the obstruction charge.
On Feb 5, 2020, the Senate acquitted Trump on both charges: 52-48 on abuse of power and 53-47 on obstruction of Congress. Republican Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, joined Democrats in voting to remove him from office on the abuse of power charge, becoming the first senator ever to vote to convict a president of his own party.
Bill Clinton, 1998
PHOTO: BLOOMBERG
The impeachment process against President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, began in October 1998 in response to the revelation that he’d had a sexual relationship with a White House intern.
The charges pertained not directly to his misconduct with the intern, Monica Lewinsky – who was 22, nearly three decades younger than Clinton, when it began – but to the allegation that Clinton had lied about it under oath and encouraged others to do the same.
“I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” Clinton said in January 1998, before admitting months later that he had. “I never told anybody to lie, not a single time. Never.”
On Dec 19, 1998 – 21 years, almost to the day, before a Democratic-controlled House would vote to impeach Trump – the Republican-controlled House impeached Clinton on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. The votes were 228-206 on the perjury charge (with five Democrats voting for impeachment and five Republicans voting against it) and 221-212 on the obstruction charge (with five Democrats voting for and 12 Republicans voting against).
The House voted against impeachment on a second perjury charge and on an abuse of power charge.
On Feb 12, 1999, the Senate acquitted Clinton 55-45 on the perjury charge, with 10 Republicans joining all Democrats, and 50-50 on the obstruction charge, with five Republicans joining Democrats. A two-thirds majority would have been required to convict Clinton and remove him from office.
Richard Nixon, 1973
PHOTO: ST FILE
Congress never voted to impeach President Richard M. Nixon, a Republican, but only because he resigned before it could.
The impeachment proceedings stemmed broadly from the Watergate scandal, which started in 1972 when Nixon associates broke into the Democratic National Committee headquarters. That break-in was part of a huge, coordinated effort to influence the coming election, which Nixon ended up winning in one of the biggest landslides in American history.
The immediate catalyst for the House Judiciary Committee’s decision to begin the impeachment process, on Oct 30, 1973, was the so-called Saturday Night Massacre 10 days earlier. That was the night Nixon, enraged by the Watergate investigation, ordered the firing of the special prosecutor, Archibald Cox. Two officials whom he ordered to fire Cox refused to do so and resigned; the third, Solicitor General Robert Bork, obeyed.
The committee ultimately approved three articles of impeachment – obstruction of justice, abuse of power and contempt of Congress – and referred them to the House floor in July 1974. The articles were approved in three separate votes, with the abuse of power charge garnering the most support: 28-10, with seven Republicans on the committee joining all 21 Democrats.
But before the full House could complete its hearings and vote on impeachment, Nixon announced his resignation on Aug 8, 1974 – one day after Republican leaders in Congress told him that his support in his own party had crumbled, and that he would almost certainly be both impeached and convicted.
Andrew Johnson, 1868
More than any president impeached after him, Andrew Johnson was impeached not really for a specific violation of law, but because of a broad power struggle between the White House and Congress.
Johnson – a Democrat and white supremacist who was Abraham Lincoln’s vice-president and became President when Lincoln was assassinated – had spent much of his term clashing with the Republican-controlled Congress over Reconstruction. Among other things, he vetoed the Freedmen’s Bureau bill and the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which aimed to provide US citizenship to former slaves; Congress subsequently overrode his veto of the Civil Rights Act.
In March 1868, the House approved 11 articles of impeachment against Johnson. The main charge was that he had violated the Tenure of Office Act of 1867, which Congress had enacted in an explicit effort to prevent him from firing pro-Reconstruction officials whom Lincoln had appointed. The act stated that the President needed Senate approval to fire Senate-confirmed executive officials, and Johnson defied it by firing Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton.
In May 1868, Johnson came within a single vote of being removed from office. The Senate – then composed of 54 members, because there were only 27 states at the time – voted 35-19 in favour of conviction, but needed 36 votes for the required two-thirds majority.
He served out the remainder of his term, a little under a year.
Join ST’s Telegram channel here and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
« WHO convenes emergency committee early over coronavirus variants
COVID-19: Previous infection could give immunity for months – but reinfection is still possible »
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line836
|
__label__wiki
| 0.767439
| 0.767439
|
Balenciaga Rolls Out Stripped-Down E-commerce Site
The new balenciaga.com features a bare-bones menu inspired by an Excel sheet.
By Joelle Diderich on February 24, 2017
The new Balenciaga e-commerce layout for mobile.
BARE BONES: Not content with challenging the codes of luxury fashion, Demna Gvasalia is rethinking the rules of e-commerce.
While other brands add ever-more sophisticated content to their online shopping channels, Balenciaga is coming out with a stripped-down version of its site. Gvasalia is creative director of the Paris-based brand, in addition to his label Vetements.
The new balenciaga.com, which rolls out today on all devices, features a bare-bones menu inspired by an Excel sheet, designed for ease of use.
“Organized as a plain-view portal for ready-to-wear and accessories, it removes all the visual obstructions and useless distractions between the shopper and the purchase. Each click brings you closer to the product,” the brand said.
The e-commerce site, originally launched in September 2008, ships to 95 countries worldwide and will add five more in March: United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Balenciaga Vetements
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line839
|
__label__wiki
| 0.604979
| 0.604979
|
Oroville Dam:
Information contributed by Nick DeBar, Lisa Maddaus and Dave Stoughton from a report dated December 8, 1994
and from a report by Ben Au, Pauline Cheng, and Corrine Tan dated December 15, 1994.
Photograph(s)
Dam Design and Construction
Current Uses and Operations
Oroville Data Links
CDEC Station-Current Sensor Data
USGS Hydrologic Data Report
Return to top of Oroville Dam home page
Return to Dams first page
Oroville Dam and Lake during drought
Oroville Dam and Lake
Oroville Dam General Information
Dam Location/Directions
Ownership/Operators
Oroville Dam is located on the Feather River, nine miles east of Oroville, CA, located in the Sierra Nevada Foothills 75 miles north of Sacramento and 60 miles south of Redding. The coordinates of the dam are 38° 35.3' North Latitude and 122° 27.8' West Longitude.
From Sacramento, travel north on Interstate Five. In approximately three miles, turn off on Highway 99 north towards Yuba City. After 13 miles, take Highway 70 north towards Marysville. Oroville is 48 miles north on Highway 70. Take the second exit off the highway at Oroville Dam Boulevard (also Highway 162). Turn right on Oroville Dam Blvd. heading due east. Follow Oroville Dam Blvd. through town and in approximately nine miles the spillway and dam will be visible on the left hand side. Climb the hillside to the right of the dam, turn left at the stop sign and drive on top of the dam for spectacular views. One can also go straight through the stop sign and follow the green painted roadway stripe up to the Visitor's Center.
From Redding, travel south on Interstate Five. In Red Bluff, turn onto Highway 99 south towards Chico. Approximately eleven miles past Chico, take Highway 149 which joins with Highway 70 to Oroville. Take the Oroville Dam Blvd. exit. Turn left onto Oroville Dam Blvd., heading due east. Follow Oroville Dam Blvd. to the dam and use the directions above to get to specific dam facilities.
Oroville Dam is currently owned and operated by the State of California Department of Water Resources.
For a tour of the Edward Hyatt Powerplant and/or the Feather River Fish Hatchery facilities contact John Ford at (530)534-2306. Tours are scheduled on a first come-first serve basis, and generally given in groups. Tours are free of charge. Allow two hours for the tour of the dam facilities and one hour for the fish hatchery.
Oroville Dam Design and Construction:
zoned earthfill
Construction began in 1961 and was completed in 1968.
Crest elevation: 922 ft
Height above foundation: 770 ft
Crest Length 6920 ft
Operational Freeboard: 21 ft
Crest Width: 80 ft
Maximum Thickness: 3570 ft
Total volume of embankment: 80,000,000 cu. yd.
Type gated flood control outlet and an emergency weir
Discharge Capacity 250,000 cfs
maximum capacity 3,537,577 acre-feet
Power producing facilities at Oroville Dam include Hyatt Powerplant, Thermalito Powerplant, and Thermalito Diversion Dam. These facilities operate together to move water and to generate electricity.
The Hyatt Powerplant is the largest and has 6 turbine generators- 3 conventional and 3 reversible. The 6 generators are capable of producing 67,788 megawatts of electricity. Thermalito Powerplant has 4 generators- 1 conventional and 3 reversible. 119.6 megawatts can be produced at Thermalito. The Thermalito Diversion Dam can produce 3.4 megawatts of electricity (Ford, 1964)
The energy produced from these plants is partially used to offset the operating costs. Currently, Southern Cal Edison has contracted with DWR to purchase excess electricity.
Oroville Dam Current Uses and Operations:
Reservoir Background
Reservoir Storage/Flood Control
Water Deliveries
Fisheries Flows
Recent operating challenges
Concerns for future operations
In 1940, studies were done to determine where to construct a dam along the Feather River to act as a major water storage facility for the California State Water Project. In 1960, voters approved a bond issue to begin construction of Oroville Dam. The earthen dam was chosen for economic feasibility. The supply of tailings was hauled in by the railroad from impervious core material that could be found less than ten miles away. Workers then added 23 miles of railroad to move the existing railroad tracks out the the path of the reservoir. The relocation of the railroad required building three new bridges and five tunnels. Actual work on the dam began in 1961. The two diversion tunnels and initial dam were completed before the winter season of 1964-65. The embankment of the final dam was completed in 1967, and the spillway was finished in 1968. The power plant and cleanup of the site were finished within the next two years.
Two diversion tunnels were constructed for diverting water around the construction area. Diversion #2 is now used as an outlet for the water being utilized by the underground power plant. The 35 foot diameter size of the tunnels was chosen to withstand the flows of previously recorded floods on the Feather River. After final completion of the dam in 1967, Diversion Tunnels #1 and #2 were plugged. They excavated a system of tunnels for the powerhouse, some of which connected to Diversion Tunnel #2.
The Oroville-Thermalito Complex is a peak operating facility. There is coordination between releasing water and producing power, where releasing water takes precedence. During normal operation, a 24-hour supply of water is squeezed both plants during a peak 6-10 hour window of the day when power production is most needed. The water is then stored in Thermalito Afterbay, a holding reservoir located beneath the Thermalito facility.
A primary purpose of the Dam was to provide flood control. As the lake fills during heavy rains or large spring snow melts, water is carefully released to prevent flooding downstream, saving both lives and costly property damage (DWR, Oroville-Thermalito, 1991).
The dam mainly protects Butte County and area along the Feather River from large flooding. Floods occurred every few years, costing the residents of the area millions in damages. For example, in December of 1955, the largest flood to date caused damages along the Feather River in excess of $82 million (Report on Reservoir Regulation for Flood Control).
Oroville Dam is a major water storage facility for the State Water Project (SWP). The dam releases an average of 2.8 million acre feet (MAF) of its total capacity of 3.5 MAF. Water deliveries made to Butte and Plumas County in northern CA and to the lower San Joaquin Valley (Kern, San Bernadino, King and Riverside Counties) in southern CA are mainly to irrigate agricultural crops. Eighty-five percent of the water demand in the San Joaquin Region is for irrigation with twenty-nine percent of the water supply coming from imported State Water Project (SWP) deliveries from Lake Oroville. This imported water is crucial to prevent groundwater supplies from becoming severely depleted. Additional water supplied by Lake Oroville is delivered to counties to the South Coast Region.
Some of the water is used for environmental concerns. The water is used to maintain the Feather and Sacramento Rivers and the San Francisco-San Joaquin delta. The water for the Delta is used to increase the water quality by lowering the salinity levels. Additionally, the extra water helps restore the habitat for the Delta Smelt and Chinook Salmon (DWR, Bulletin 160, 1993).
The construction of the dam made the upper portion of the Feather River inaccessible to migrating salmon and steel head trout who used it for spawning grounds. To make up for the lost spawning area, the Feather River Hatchery was constructed.
Funded by DWR and the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), DWR maintains the facilities while DFG staffs and operates it (Ford, 1964). It can accommodate 9000 adult salmon and 2000 adult steel head. The incubator can hold 20 million eggs and 9.6 million fingerlings can be reared in the 8 concrete raceways (DWR, Bulletin 200, 1974).
Historically, the majority of the steel head and salmon spawn below the Oroville Dam. Currently, approximately 20% spawn in the hatchery and 80% spawn downstream (Ford, 1994). The hatchery has been very successful due to the carefully monitored flow of water.
To keep the recreation areas fully functional with the low water levels due to drought. Numerous faults were mapped in the foundations of the Oroville Dam and Hyatt Powerplant. However, none appeared to be significantly threatening since displacement along the faults would be minimal and unlikely to occur.
Landslides around the reservoir rim have occurred since Lake Oroville has been in operation. These landslide do not pose a threat to the freeboard of the dam or the safety of the public.
The Department of Water Resources signed contracts for the eventual delivery of 4.23 million acre-feet (MAF) from Lake Oroville. Currently, SWP facilities provide an average of 2.8 MAF with the potential of providing 3.4 MAF by 2010 with existing facilities (additional facilities could provide 4.2 MAF).
The main concern for the future operations of Oroville Dam lies in its ability to make efficient water releases to meet increasing water demands. Currently, San Jouquin Valley farmers are receiving 100% of their contract entitlement in non-drought years. However, the South Coast Region is only receiving 60% of its entitlement in wet years (DWR, Bulletin 160, 1993). Based on the 1990 census, the South Coast is projected to increase by 25 million people by 2020, thus increasing water demand by 1.5 MAF. A net water supply deficit of 3.3 MAF to 4.2 MAF is expected in year 2020 (DWR, Bulletin 160, 1993). To meet these shortages, it will require a more efficient operation of water storage facilities.
However, governmental regulations now require that more water supply is dedicated to environmental needs. Therefore, one the the future operating challenges for the Oroville Dam is to honor the signed contracts, while maintaining the needed water supply to meet environmental needs.
Dam References
Website designed by Nova Clemenza with additions from a website designed by Wilson Lew.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line842
|
__label__cc
| 0.731847
| 0.268153
|
Selling out: Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung and its Chinese propaganda ads
Can democratic societies get the upper hand against authoritarianism if their own institutions sell out to dictators? Since November 10, we have had to ask this question again—also and especially in Germany. It has become particularly pressing since Germany’s daily newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung, in its own words “Germany’s largest nationwide quality daily” notable for its “opinionated and independent journalism,” published a supplement from the state-run China Daily. Headlined “China Watch,” it promises to reveal “All you need to know.”
What’s in there is what you’d expect—16 pages of good news from the Middle Kingdom. The title article includes not one but two photos of Xi Jinping while the headline boasts that the country “is gaining new strength.” Naturally, they could not leave out the panda bears in the Berlin Zoo or German ex-pats celebrating Oktoberfest in China, their beer mugs in hand. And right in the middle you’ll find an enormous chart entitled “The Communist Party of China in Figures.” Pure propaganda from an authoritarian regime distributed in Western mass media. What is the difference, one feels compelled to ask, between Facebook and Twitter ads apparently paid for by Russia (and which exerted massive influence on the American presidential election) and the publication of a China Daily supplement in the Süddeutsche Zeitung?
The China Daily supplement, however, is not an isolated case. In July, the Süddeutsche Zeitung published a multi-page ad from the Chinese state agency Xinhua, just in time for the G20 Summit. The editorial board of the Süddeutsche Zeitung at least must have known who it was dealing with, either by reading its own paper or from – apparently cozy – meetings with representatives of the Chinese state media, for example, at the now expanded “Mediaforum China-Germany-USA” established by the Robert Bosch Foundation and which we’ve already written about (German language blog). Perhaps they laid the groundwork for further business at, for example, the fun-loving table top soccer game with the “enemies of press freedom”?
The Chinese state media are not such good sports when it comes to dissent and pluralism. For example, they actively took part in blackmailing human rights activists, bloggers, book dealers, and journalists into making “confessions” and publicly humiliating them. These methods, reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution, violate to an extreme degree the human rights, personal rights, and liberty of those they target. They intimidate dissenters and doubtlessly intensify the climate of repression under Xi Jinping. China Daily and Xinhua, state-run media, are an integral part of this repression.
The Süddeutsche Zeitung, if it really wishes to produce quality journalism and preserve its credibility as an independent paper, cannot publish the propaganda of authoritarian states guilty of egregious human rights violations. In this particular case, they also must disclose what the Chinese state media paid for advertising and supplements. The International Campaign for Tibet in Germany has urged the paper’s editorial board to rethink their policies accordingly.
In Germany, the door to authoritarian policies and ideas has been thrown wide open—ironically also by those who see themselves as the pillar of democratic societies and who should clearly be so: the media, universities, even NGOs. Will there be a change in thinking before it’s too late?
Kai Mueller, Executive Director, International Campaign for Tibet Germany, based on an original German language blog at http://savetibet.de/blog/ausverkauf-die-sueddeutsche-zeitung-und-ihre-chinesischen-propagandaanzeigen/
Previous postAnalyzing Chinese Official Zhang Yijiong’s Remarks on Dalai Lama and Tibet
Next postFollow-up: Süddeutsche Zeitung risks its credibility
Before joining the International Campaign for Tibet in 2005 as Executive Director in Germany, Kai Mueller served on the board of Amnesty International Germany and worked as research associate in the German parliament. He heads the Berlin office of ICT. Since 2015, he also coordinates ICT's United Nations initiatives.
Anthony McCay says:
Thanks for your article ?
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line845
|
__label__cc
| 0.732072
| 0.267928
|
The Makings of The Little Indigo House: 33 Lessons I've Learned as a Homeschooling Mama
Vendor: Kiara
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Default Title - $ 12.99
When making the decision to homeschool, parents may find themselves feeling overwhelmed and uneasy about where to begin. The Makings of The Little Indigo House is a guide to aid in the process of creating a purposeful homeschool vision. As an educator since 2005 and a homeschooler for close to a decade, author Kiara Diggs shares the 33 major lessons that she has learned along her family's journey. She offers personal stories, triumphs, and honest challenges to bring comfort to her readers; and to build an authentic connection with other homeschooling parents, parents who wish to homeschool, and parents who simply want to take charge of their children's education. The vision for the book is to inspire parents to reflect on who they are, who their children are, and to gradually build a homeschool that represents their own ideas, values, goals, interests, creativity, and purpose.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line846
|
__label__wiki
| 0.936661
| 0.936661
|
NEWS Transaero strikes financial rescue deal with Russian government
NewsBy admin4493 December 30, 2014 Leave a comment
Transaero Airlines, Russia’s second largest carrier, has expressed its “utmost gratitude” to financial authorities after receiving $170 million in debt guarantees from the government. In a statement the airline thanked the Russian ministry of finance, the transport ministry, the Federal Air Transport Agency, and the State Corporation Bank for Development for their financial support.
NEWS Delile to head up long-haul operations at Air France
Bruno Delile has been appointed to the role of executive vice president, long-haul operations with Air France. He will also sit on Air France’s Executive Committee. Delile, 53, holds an École Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées engineering diploma and is a graduate of ESSEC business school.
ALERT AirAsia says search and rescue operations still in progress; investigation of confirmed QZ8501 debris found off Indonesia's Belitung Island still underway – statement
Bruno Delile has been appointed to the role of executive vice president, long-haul operations with Air France. He will also sit on Air France’s Executive Committee. Delile, 53, holds an École Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées (ENSTA) engineering diploma and is a graduate of ESSEC business school.
NEWS Flight bookings move to mobile as passengers pick up phones
Brits are booking their travel on the go more than ever before as global travel search site Skyscanner reports a 152 per cent global increase in flight searches on handheld devices in the last year. One in five Brits have now booked flights on a mobile or tablet; the most common place to book flights…
NEWS Qatar Airways ramps up services to Salalah, Oman
The second largest Omani city Salalah will see Qatar Airways adding four new services by next February. From December the airline is offering three flights per week, and from February 3rd 2015, another additional flight per week will be added. A total of eight flights per week make it even easier and more convenient for…
ALERT Photo: Passengers deplane from AirAsia flight that overshot the runway in Kalibo, Philippines – @jetdsantos
ALERT AirAsia flight overshoots runway at Kalibo Airport in the Philippines – @jetdsantos
NEWS Ebola case confirmed on-board British Airways flight
A healthcare worker returning from west Africa has been diagnosed with the Ebola virus after arriving in the United Kingdom on a British Airways flight. The female patient arrived in Glasgow on BA 1478 on Sunday, following connections in London Heathrow and Casablanca in Morocco.
NEWS Virgin Atlantic flight makes ‘non-standard’ landing at Gatwick
A Virgin Atlantic flight with 447 passengers and 15 crew has landed safely at London Gatwick Airport after discovering a potential problem with its landing gear. Flight VS43 had departed for Las Vegas earlier when it was forced to return to London. After circling over the Bristol Channel for several hours to burn off fuel,…
ALERT American Airlines spokesman confirms Miami-bound flight which diverted to Jamaica landed safely without incident in Miami at 2:35am ET – @NBCNews
NEWS Bodies recovered in search for AirAsia Indonesia flight QZ8501
Indonesian officials have confirmed at least 40 bodies have been found in the ongoing search for missing AirAsia Indonesia flight QZ8501. Many have been recovered from the scene, with debris also sighted. The bodies were spotted in the Java Sea off the Indonesian part of Borneo.
23456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484485486487488489490491492493494495496497498499500501502503504505506507508509510511512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527528529530531532533534535536537538539540541542543544545546547548549550551552553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567568569570571572573574575576577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591592593594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617618619620621622623624625626627628629630631632633634635636637638639640641642643
649650651652653654655656657658659660661662663664665666667668669670671672673674675676677678679680681682683684685686687688689690691692693694695696697698699700701702703704705706707708709710711712713714715716717718719720721722723724725726727728729730731732733734735736737738739740741742743744745746747748749750751752753754755756757758759760761762763764765766767768769770771772773774775776777778779780781782783784785786787788789790791792793794795796797798799800801802803804805806807808809810811812813814815816817818819820821822823824825826827828829830831832833834835836837838839840841842843844845846847848849850
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line847
|
__label__wiki
| 0.984352
| 0.984352
|
Emirates to return to Istanbul with daily flights from 21 December
NewsBy AIRLIVE December 14, 2020
Emirates has announced it will resume daily flights to Istanbul from 21 December, bringing the total number of passenger destinations served by the airline to 99. In tandem with the gradual return of travel confidence and demand, Emirates continues to rebuild its network while offering customers a safe and enjoyable travel experience. Strict health and…
The first shipments of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine just arrived at Los Angeles LAX
As the first shipments of Pfizer’s authorized COVID-19 vaccine ship out from Michigan, about 83,000 doses are expected to arrive in Los Angeles County this week. A FedEx plane carrying the region’s first shipments landed at Los Angeles International Airport Sunday night, according to the airport. “The first batch of COVID-19 vaccine has arrived in…
Virgin Atlantic launched operations from Manchester and London to Islamabad
Virgin Atlantic is ramping up operations from Manchester Airport with a brand-new service between Manchester and Islamabad. With a significant proportion of Pakistani diaspora living in the region, the new services will provide vital connectivity for friends and relatives visiting family and loved ones, as well as serving growing demand for business and leisure travel.…
First aircraft with vaccine departed Grand Rapids airport for FedEx hub
A FedEx Express cargo plane left Gerald R. Ford International Airport in Grand Rapids, Michigan, at 11 a.m. Sunday on a regularly scheduled flight headed to Memphis with one of the first shipments of vaccine,. The Airbus A300 aircraft made the flight in 90 minutes. FedEx operates a facility at the Grand Rapids airport and…
Hong Kong bans British Airways after four passengers were found to be infected by COVID19
NewsBy Sharad Ranabhat December 13, 2020
Hong Kong’s Department of Health has banned British Airways until Christmas after four passengers were found to be infected with Covid-19 on arrival at Hong Kong airport while another person failed to comply with requirements The flight from London Heathrow had landed at Hong Kong Airport on 8th December. After finding the positive results, Hong…
FAA approves use of Pfizer COVID19 vaccine, but pilots have to wait 48 hrs before flying
FAA approves use of Pfizer COVID19 vaccine for pilots & air traffic controllers with appropriate precautions. Following the Emergency Use Authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for Pfizer, Inc.’s COVID-19 vaccine, the FAA has determined that pilots may receive the vaccine under the conditions of their FAA-issued airman medical certification. FAA Air Traffic…
You can offer your darling an Airbus A340-200 for Christmas!
The French Air and Space Force has listed two Airbus A340-200’s for sale. Both of these A340s are currently at Paris Roissy Airport. These two Airbus A340-200’s with registration F-RAJA and F-RAJB joined the French Air Force in 2006. Both aircraft were initially delivered to Australian Airlines back in February, 1995. These quad jets were…
In middle of the health crisis, a new low costs airline takeoffs
A new domestic South African airline launched on Wednesday, betting on low operating costs and oil prices to withstand an industry crisis that has left national flagship SAA struggling to survive and sunk other low-cost carriers. The new carrier, Lift, part-founded by former Uber Africa executive Jonathan Ayache and Gidon Novick, who ran low-cost flyer…
British Airways Boeing 747-400 BOAC livery performed its shortest ever flight and final landing
British Airways’ last Boeing 747 aircraft has operated its last flight earlier today. The aircraft completed a short, four-mile flight from Cardiff Airport to eCube Solutions in St Athan to be preserved. The aircraft painted in retro ‘Gold Speedbird’ livery took off from Cardiff at 13:37. British Airways’ Director of Flight Operations, Captain Al Bridger,…
China flight attendants advised to wear diapers for Covid protection
China’s aviation regulator is recommending cabin crew on charter flights to high-risk Covid-19 destinations. China’s aviation regulator is recommending cabin crew on charter flights to high-risk Covid-19 destinations wear disposable diapers and avoid using the bathroom to reduce the risk of infection. The advice comes in a 38-page list of guidelines for airlines to prevent…
Virgin Atlantic sells two Boeing 787-9 Dreamliners to raise up to $93 million
Virgin Atlantic has sold two of its 787-9 Dreamliners to Griffin Global Asset Management, which is backed by Bain Capital. Virgin Atlantic is expected to generate up to 70 million pounds ($92.8 million) in cash from the sale-and-leaseback of these two Boeing 787-9s. According to data from Planespotters.net, the following four Boeing 787s were owned…
One million people traveled through Heathrow airport in November
Terminal 4 to remain closed at Heathrow as passenger numbers collapse. Heathrow chief executive John Holland-Kaye says one million people traveled through the airport in November compared to seven million last year.
1112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479480481482483484485486487488489490491492493494495496497498499500501502503504505506507508509510511512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527528529530531532533534535536537538539540541542543544545546547548549550551552553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567568569570571572573574575576577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591592593594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617618619620621622623624625626627628629630631632633634635636637638639640641642643644645646647648649650651652653654655656657658659660661662663664665666667668669670671672673674675676677678679680681682683684685686687688689690691692693694695696697698699700701702703704705706707708709710711712713714715716717718719720721722723724725726727728729730731732733734735736737738739740741742743744745746747748749750751752753754755756757758759760761762763764765766767768769770771772773774775776777778779780781782783784785786787788789790791792793794795796797798799800801802803804805806807808809810811812813814815816817818819820821822823824825826827828829830831832833834835836837838839840841842843844845846847848849850
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line848
|
__label__cc
| 0.609757
| 0.390243
|
Issues That Obama and Romney Avoid: They Don’t Want to See Informed Citizens Making Rational Choices
Noam Chomsky on 2012-10-07
With the quadrennial presidential election extravaganza reaching its peak, it’s useful to ask how the political campaigns are dealing with the most crucial issues we face. The simple answer is: badly, or not at all. If so, some important questions arise: why, and what can we do about it?
There are two issues of overwhelming significance, because the fate of the species is at stake: environmental disaster, and nuclear war.
The former is regularly on the front pages. On Sept. 19, for example, Justin Gillis reported in The New York Times that the melting of Arctic sea ice had ended for the year, “but not before demolishing the previous record – and setting off new warnings about the rapid pace of change in the region.”
The melting is much faster than predicted by sophisticated computer models and the most recent U.N. report on global warming. New data indicate that summer ice might be gone by 2020, with severe consequences. Previous estimates had summer ice disappearing by 2050.
“But governments have not responded to the change with any greater urgency about limiting greenhouse emissions,” Gillis writes. “To the contrary, their main response has been to plan for exploitation of newly accessible minerals in the Arctic, including drilling for more oil” – that is, to accelerate the catastrophe.
This reaction demonstrates an extraordinary willingness to sacrifice the lives of our children and grandchildren for short-term gain. Or, perhaps, an equally remarkable willingness to shut our eyes so as not to see the impending peril.
That’s hardly all. A new study from the Climate Vulnerability Monitor has found that “climate change caused by global warming is slowing down world economic output by 1.6 percent a year and will lead to a doubling of costs in the next two decades.” The study was widely reported elsewhere but Americans have been spared the disturbing news.
The official Democratic and Republican platforms on climate matters are reviewed in Science magazine’s Sept. 14 issue. In a rare instance of bipartisanship, both parties demand that we make the problem worse.
In 2008, both party platforms had devoted some attention to how the government should address climate change. Today, the issue has almost disappeared from the Republican platform – which does, however, demand that Congress “take quick action” to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency, established by former Republican President Richard Nixon in saner days, from regulating greenhouse gases. And we must open Alaska’s Arctic refuge to drilling to take “advantage of all our American God-given resources.” We cannot disobey the Lord, after all.
The platform also states that “We must restore scientific integrity to our public research institutions and remove political incentives from publicly funded research” – code words for climate science.
The Republican candidate Mitt Romney, seeking to escape from the stigma of what he understood a few years ago about climate change, has declared that there is no scientific consensus, so we should support more debate and investigation – but not action, except to make the problems more serious.
The Democrats mention in their platform that there is a problem, and recommend that we should work “toward an agreement to set emissions limits in unison with other emerging powers.” But that’s about it.
President Barack Obama has emphasized that we must gain 100 years of energy independence by exploiting fracking and other new technologies – without asking what the world would look like after a century of such practices.
So there are differences between the parties: about how enthusiastically the lemmings should march toward the cliff.
The second major issue, nuclear war, is also on the front pages every day, but in a way that would astound a Martian observing the strange doings on Earth.
The current threat is again in the Middle East, specifically Iran – at least according to the West, that is. In the Middle East, the U.S. and Israel are considered much greater threats.
Unlike Iran, Israel refuses to allow inspections or to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It has hundreds of nuclear weapons and advanced delivery systems, and a long record of violence, aggression and lawlessness, thanks to unremitting American support. Whether Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons, U.S. intelligence doesn’t know.
In its latest report, the International Atomic Energy Agency says that it cannot demonstrate “the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities in Iran” – a roundabout way of condemning Iran, as the U.S. demands, while conceding that the agency can add nothing to the conclusions of U.S. intelligence.
Therefore Iran must be denied the right to enrich uranium that is guaranteed by the NPT and endorsed by most of the world, including the nonaligned countries that have just met in Tehran.
The possibility that Iran might develop nuclear weapons arises in the electoral campaign. (The fact that Israel already has them does not.) Two positions are counterposed: Should the U.S. declare that it will attack if Iran reaches the capability to develop nuclear weapons, which dozens of countries enjoy? Or should Washington keep the “red line” more indefinite?
The latter position is that of the White House; the former is demanded by Israeli hawks – and accepted by the U.S. Congress. The Senate just voted 90-1 to support the Israeli position.
Missing from the debate is the obvious way to mitigate or end whatever threat Iran might be believed to pose: Establish a nuclear weapons-free zone in the region. The opportunity is readily available: An international conference is to convene in a few months to pursue this objective, supported by almost the entire world, including a majority of Israelis.
The government of Israel, however, has announced that it will not participate until there is a general peace agreement in the region, which is unattainable as long as Israel persists in its illegal activities in the occupied Palestinian territories. Washington keeps to the same position, and insists that Israel must be excluded from any such regional agreement.
We could be moving toward a devastating war, possibly even nuclear. Straightforward ways exist to overcome this threat, but they will not be taken unless there is large-scale public activism demanding that the opportunity be pursued. This in turn is highly unlikely as long as these matters remain off the agenda, not just in the electoral circus, but in the media and larger national debate.
Elections are run by the public relations industry. Its primary task is commercial advertising, which is designed to undermine markets by creating uninformed consumers who will make irrational choices – the exact opposite of how markets are supposed to work, but certainly familiar to anyone who has watched television.
It’s only natural that when enlisted to run elections, the industry would adopt the same procedures in the interests of the paymasters, who certainly don’t want to see informed citizens making rational choices.
The victims, however, do not have to obey, in either case. Passivity may be the easy course, but it is hardly the honorable one.
Noam Chomsky is emeritus professor of linguistics and philosophy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass.
© 2012 Noam Chomsky
Previous article Western Propagandists Attempt to Trigger Catastrophic Turkish-Syrian War: Will Turkish PM Erdogan Become Another Saddam Hussein?
Next article “The War is Worth Waging”: Afghanistan’s Vast Reserves of Minerals and Natural Gas
Tags: Iran, Israel, Noam Chomsky, nuclear
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line851
|
__label__cc
| 0.604811
| 0.395189
|
Difference between revisions of "Value Sensitive Design"
Latour, B. (2004). Which politics for which artifacts? Domus, June 04.
*Mumford, L. (1964). Authoritarian and democratic technics. Technology and Culture, 5 (1), 1-8.
Mumford, L. (1964). Authoritarian and democratic technics. Technology and Culture, 5 (1), 1-8.
Sclove, R. (1995) Technology and democracy. New York: Guilford Press.
*Cowan, R. S. (1985). The Industrial Revolution in the Home. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman, (Eds.), The Social Shaping Of Technology: How The Refrigerator Got Its Hum (181-201). Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Cowan, R. S. (1985). The Industrial Revolution in the Home. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman, (Eds.), The Social Shaping Of Technology: How The Refrigerator Got Its Hum (181-201). Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Cowan, R. S. (1985). How the Refrigerator Got Its Hum. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman, (Eds.), The Social Shaping Of Technology: How The Refrigerator Got Its Hum (202-218). Philadelphia: Open University Press.
[[Category:Design]]
[[Category:P2P Hierarchy Theory]]
= Value Sensitive Design refers to an approach to the design of technology that accounts for human values in a principled and systematic manner throughout the design process.
It can be a strategy against hidden Protocollary Power, or as Social Architecture, a conscious way to influence online behaviour.
3.1 Design for Values as a method
3.2 Design for sustainability is inherently participatory
3.3 The importance of Meta-design as awareness of intentionality
3.4 The responsibility of the design team
4.1 Key Essay
"Value-Sensitive Design is primarily concerned with values that center on human well being, human dignity, justice, welfare, and human rights. Value-Sensitive Design connects the people who design systems and interfaces with the people who think about and understand the values of the stakeholders who are affected by the systems. Ultimately, Value-Sensitive Design requires that we broaden the goals and criteria for judging the quality of technological systems to include those that advance human flourishing." (http://projects.ischool.washington.edu/vsd/)
Desirable values:
- privacy ,
- ownership and property,
- freedom from bias,
- universal usability,
- autonomy,
- informed consent,
excerpted from this pdf : http://www.urbansim.org/papers/vsd-and-information-systems.pdf
Design for Values as a method
L. Jean Camp [1]:
"How is it that values such as privacy and autonomy become embedded in technical designs? How do cultural concepts of privacy, property, and propriety become assumptions about trust embedded in the coded infrastructure? Design for values theory, method, bibliography, and practitioners are described at http://www.designforvalues.org.
Design for values is a methodological approach based on a soft technological determinism, based on itterative evaluation of technology using the tools of the social science and detailed technical examination.
Above all design for values is design of technology in its social, economic, and political context. An understanding of design for values begins with the major strands of theoretical work and must include methodological approaches. on the interactions of technological development and social values.
First is technological determinism: what is technologically possible will inevitably be developed and the characteristics of the newly developed technologies will alter society as the technology is adopted. The second view is social constructed: technologies are constructed by the stakeholders, including inventors and governments, on the basis of social values. Some proponents of this view hold that users are the only critical stakeholders, that adoption is innovation and thus technology is defined by the users. The third view is that values emerge in a dynamic fashion -- while technologies have biases the way in which technologies are adopted alters the values in the technology, and thus the future design of the technology in a interactive, almost evolutionary, manner. All three theoretical frameworks support the argument that values can be embedded at any stage in the development process: invention, adoption, diffusion, and iterative improvement.
Thus design for values includes the evaluation of past designs with a critical eye on the initial design, improvement of specific designs, and the development of guidelines for designs. There is a specific design focus distinct from those methods that are focused on critique rather than design. As opposed to traditional technical approaches to socially responsible design, there is a focus on iteration and the use of legal and social scholarship to refine or correct designs that builds upon computer supported cooperative work.
Design for values is technological design with explicit recognition of the economic and political context. It is inherently interdisciplinary. " (http://www.ljean.com/design.html)
Design for sustainability is inherently participatory
Daniel Christian Wahl and Seaton Baxter:
"Sustainability is rapidly becoming an issue of critical importance for designers and society as a whole. A complexity of dynamically interrelated ecological, social, cultural economic and psychological (awareness) problems interact and converge in the current crisis of our unsustainable civilization. However, in a constantly changing environment, sustainability is not some ultimate endpoint but is better conceived as a continuous process of learning and adaptation. Designing for sustainability not only requires the re-design of our habits, lifestyles and practices, but also, the way we think about design. Sustainability is a process of co-evolution and co-design that involves diverse communities in making flexible and adaptable design decisions at local, regional and global scales. The transition towards sustainability is about co-creating a human civilization that flourishes within the ecological limits of the planetary life support system.
Design is fundamental to all human activity. At the nexus of values, attitudes, needs and actions, designers have the potential to act as a transdisciplinary integrators and facilitators. The map of value systems and perspectives described by Beck and Cowan as ‘Spiral Dynamics’, can serve as a tool in the facilitation of ‘transdisciplinary design dialogue’. Such dialogue will help to integrate the multiple perspectives and diverse knowledge base of different disciplines, value systems and stakeholders. Further expansion of the ‘integral vision’ by Wilber consolidates a framework for understanding, acknowledging and weaving together different perspectives and worldviews. Esbjörn-Hargens and Brown describe the application of this framework to solving complex problems of local and global relevance and to sustainable development. When applied to design this kind of framework can help us to conceptualise how different value systems and different onto-epistemological assumptions change our experience of reality and therefore intentionality behind design. This change in why we design things and processes, in turn, affects what and how we design.
Since sustainability requires widespread participation, communities everywhere need to begin to shape local, regional and global visions of sustainability and to offer strategies to engage humanity collectively in cooperative processes that will turn visions (designs) into reality. However, rather, than believing that we can design universally applicable blueprints to bring about sustainability by prediction and control-based top-down engineering, it may be more useful and appropriate to think of the outcome(s) as an emergent property of the complex dynamic system in which we all participate, co-create and adapt to interdependent bio-physical and psycho-social processes. Such a view has enormous consequences for the way we view design. As an integrative and transdisciplinary process, design thinking can inform more integral/holistic solutions that promote the emergence of systemic health and sustainability as properties of the complex dynamic system that contains culture and nature and of which we are integral participants."
Source: Designers as Transdisciplinary Integrators and Facilitators of Sustainable Solutions Daniel Christian Wahl and Seaton Baxter. Design Issues, 2008
The importance of Meta-design as awareness of intentionality
"Design can most broadly be defined as the expression of intentionality through interactions and relationships. At the downstream end of this process our cultural artefacts, institutions and patterns of production and consumption express intentionality materially. Upstream, in the immaterial dimension, the ‘metadesign’ of our conscious awareness, value systems, worldviews, and aspirations defines the intentionality behind materialized design. Here the term ‘metadesign’ refers to the concepts, and onto-epistemological assumptions we employ to define ourselves and to make sense of experiencing our participatory involvement in complex ecological, cultural, and social processes. The perspectives of different cultural worldviews and of different academic and professional disciplines are all shaped by the metadesign of the intentions, aspirations, and basic assumptions that inform them. Each of these different perspectives generates different specialized knowledge about certain aspects of perceived reality.
Appropriate decision-making, within complex eco-social dynamics, requires us to consider insights generated by a diverse range of perspectives and disciplines. Richard Buchanan writes: There is no area of contemporary life where design – the plan, project or working hypothesis which constitutes the ‘intention’ in intentional operations – is not a significant factor in shaping human experience. Design even extends into the core of traditional scientific activities, where it is employed to cultivate the subject matters that are the focus of scientific curiosity.
Materially, the intentionality behind design is expressed through the interactions and relationships formed by consumer products, transport systems, economies, systems of governance, settlement patterns, and resource and energy use, with the complexity of social and ecological processes. Immaterially, our organizing ideas, worldviews, and value systems express how we make sense of our experience of reality through metadesign. Transdisciplinary dialogue and collaboration can encourage researchers and practitioners to contextualise and situate their specialist knowledge within a larger holistic/integral metaperspective that acknowledges the validity and contributions of multiple points of view. Changes in the culturally dominant worldview, value system, and aspirations will lead to fundamental changes in intentionality and lifestyle. Such metadesign-induced changes will be catalytic in the transition towards a sustainable human civilization.
In general, sustainable decision-making and design processes must be open to contributions from diverse disciplines and perspectives and, at the same time, they must remain aware of the epistemological and ontological metadesign assumptions that define the perspective of each discipline. There is an important visionary element to design that affects how we experience and shape our environment. “Designers deal with possible worlds and with opinions about what the parts and the whole of the human environment should be.”
The transformation towards a more sustainable human civilization requires a process of inclusive and participatory dialogue that will ultimately turn visions of sustainability into reality. This will require the individual and collective participation of everybody. In the face of climate change, national and international inequity, social and ecological disintegration and rapid resource depletion, nothing less than a societal and civilizational change - without precedence in scale and profundity in the history of our species - is urgently required. It has to occur during the next few decades if humanity wants to avoid ecological and social meltdown.
David Orr argues:
“The very idea that we need to build a sustainable civilization needs to be invented or rediscovered, then widely disseminated, and put into practice quickly.” Design plays a central role in this, both in the material dimensions of product design, architecture, industrial design, and town and regional planning, as well as in the immaterial dimension of the metadesign of concepts and inclusive multi-perspectives from which a holistic/integral worldview can emerge.
The responsibility of the design team
Bokardo:
"The behavior you’re seeing is the behavior you’ve designed for.
It’s a simple statement, really. All it means is that what is happening on your web site or in your web application is a result of the current design you’ve created. If people are gaming the system, then your design allows for that. If people aren’t returning, then your design hasn’t given them reason to (or reminded them to). If people are signing up but aren’t getting started, then your design isn’t communicating the value of doing so or the way to do it.
The idea also subversively leads to a much closer monitoring of the behavior in question. If you start thinking in this way, you’ll find yourself asking “what, exactly, is the behavior we’re seeing?”. This alone is worth the price of admission…anything that gets designers more focused on the actual behaviors of their users is a good thing.
This idea can also change the mindset of design teams:
•It sharpens focus on the design of the product, not some other distracting thing
So many teams suffer from political infighting, unclear design goals, no vision for success, and many other things that simply stating that behavior is a result of current efforts really helps to bring focus to the situation. Instead of seeing design as something that certain people in the company do, we might recognize design as a response to the market and the behaviors that are happening there.
•It puts responsibility on the design team
This idea puts the responsibility of what happens on a site squarely on the shoulders of design teams. This produces changes in the design team: they start investigating behavior to make sure that things are going well. Unfortunately, many designers don’t do this yet, usually because they are judged not by what’s happening but by one of two other ways: by how beautiful their work is or by how much they get done. Neither of these criteria is good from an interaction-design standpoint. The only thing that matters is what’s happening on the web site!
•It elevates design in the discussion
Because this idea places responsibility square on the shoulders of the design team, it also elevates design in the discussion. All of a sudden we know where to go when the behavior isn’t what we want: the design team. Who do you call when things aren’t working right? The design team. Designers always seem to want a place at the table. By accepting that the behavior you’re seeing is the behavior you’ve designed for you might just get that seat…" (http://bokardo.com/archives/the-behavior-youve-designed-for/)
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/valuesindesign/
Michael Zimmer writes about Values in Design, at http://michaelzimmer.org/category/values-in-design/
Design for Cognitive Justice
Key Essay
Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. By BATYA FRIEDMAN, PETER H. KAHN, JR., AND ALAN BORNING. University of Washington
Forthcoming in P. Zhang & D. Galletta (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations. M.E. Sharpe, Inc: NY.
URL = http://www.urbansim.org/papers/vsd-and-information-systems.pdf
There is a longstanding interest in designing information and computational systems that support enduring human values. Researchers have focused, for example, on the value of privacy [Ackerman and Cranor 1999; Agre and Rotenberg 1998; Fuchs 1999; Jancke et al. 2001; Palen and Grudin 2003; Tang 1997], ownership and property [Lipinski and Britz 2000], physical welfare [Leveson 1991], freedom from bias [Friedman and Nissenbaum 1996], universal usability [Shneiderman 1999, 2000; Thomas 1997], autonomy [Suchman 1994; Winograd 1994], informed consent [Millett et al. 2001], and trust [Fogg and Tseng 1999; Palen and Grudin 2003; Riegelsberger and Sasse 2002; Rocco 1998; Zheng et al. 2001].
From http://epl.scu.edu/~stsvalues/readings.html:
Winner, L. (1986). Do artifacts have politics? In L. Winner, The whale and the reactor (pp. 19-39). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
Friedman, B. & Nissenbaum, H. (1996) Bias in Computer Systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14 (3), 330-347.
Pfaffenberger, B. (1992). Technological dramas. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 17 (3), 282-312.
Woolgar, S. & Pawluch, D. (1985) Ontological Gerrymandering: The Anatomy of Social Problems Explanations. Social Problems, 32(2), 214-227.
Joerges, B. (1999) Do Politics Have Artefacts? Social Studies of Science, 29 (3), 411-431.
Doorly, M. (1985) A Woman's Place: Dolores Haydenon the `Grand Domestic Revolution'. In D. MacKenzie & J. Wajcman, (Eds.), The Social Shaping Of Technology: How The Refrigerator Got Its Hum (219-222). Philadelphia: Open University Press.
The Internet Fridge. Caslon Analytics, version January 2005.
Bijker, W.E. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ch. 1: Introduction (1-19) and Ch 5: The Politics of Sociotechnical Change (269-290).
Wacjman, J. (2004). Technofeminism. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Ch. 2 Technosicence Reconfigured (32-55) and Ch. 5 Metaphor and Materiality (102-130).
MacKenzie, D. (1990). Inventing Accuracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ch. 1: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile Guidance (1-26) and Epilogue: Uninventing the Bomb (424-426).
Winner, L. (1993) Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and philosophy of technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 18(3), 362-378.
Bowker, G. & Star, S. L. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Ch.7: What a Difference a Name Makes – the Classification of Nursing Work (229-252) and Ch.10: Why Classifications Matter (319-326).
Suchman, L. (1997). Do categories have politics? The language/action perspective reconsidered. In B. Friedman, (Ed.), Human values and the design of computer technology (pp. 91-105). Oxford, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lansing, J.S. (1991). Priests and programmers: technologies of power in the engineered landscape of Bali. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Introduction: The Gods of the Countryside (3-17), Ch 2: The Powers of Water (37-49) and Ch. 3: The Waters of Power (50-73).
Friedman, B., Kahn, P. and Borning, A. Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. Forthcoming in P. Zhang & D. Galletta (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Flanagan, M., Howe, D. and Nissenbaum, H. (2005). Values in Design: Theory and Practice. (draft).
Vinck, D., (Ed.). (2003) Everyday Engineering: An Ethnography of Design and Innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Introduction (1-10), Ch.1: Socio-Technical Complexity: Redesigning a Shielding Wall (13-27) and Epilogue: Approaches to the Ethnography of Technologies (203-226).
Brand, S. (1994) How Buildings Learn: What happens after they’re built. New York: Viking. File 1: Ch.1: Flow (2-11), Ch. 2: Shearing Layers (12-24) File 2: Ch. 9: The Romance of Maintenance (110-131), Ch.12 Built for Change (190-209)
Weber, R. C. (1999). Manufacturing gender in military cockpit design. In D. MacKenzie and J. Wajeman, (Eds.), The social shaping of technology (2nd ed). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Pinch, T. and Bijker, W. (1992) The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other. In W. Bijker and J. Law (Eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992,
Norman, D. (1989) The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.
Cowan, R. S. (1983). More Work For Mother: The Ironies Of Household
Technology From The Open Hearth To The Microwave. New York: Basic Books.
Mitcham, C. (1995) Ethics Into Design. In R. Buchanan and V. Margolin (Eds.). Discovering Design: Explorations in Design Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mitcham, C. (2003) In Memoriam: Ivan Illich: Critic of Professionalized Design. Design Issues 19 (4), 26-30.
Diaz, A. (2005) Through the Google Goggles: Sociopolitical Bias in Search Engine Design. Thesis, Stanford University.
Introna. L. & Nissenbaum, H. (2000). Shaping the web: Why the politics of search engines matter. The Information Society, 16(3), 1-17.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/index.php?title=Value_Sensitive_Design&oldid=57025"
P2P Hierarchy Theory
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line852
|
__label__cc
| 0.620798
| 0.379202
|
ACP Facts
New Policy Supports Wearing of Masks to Reduce Transmission of COVID-19
Washington, DC (July 14, 2020) — The American College of Physicians (ACP) today released policy to support the wearing of surgical or cloth masks by the public in community settings where physical distancing is not possible, and said it may appropriately be required by public officials.
“As physicians, protecting the health of our patients, front line health care workers and physicians, and our communities is paramount. ACP supports wearing surgical or cloth masks in community settings when physical distancing is not possible, and believes that authorities may appropriately require it as part of a comprehensive public health strategy to reduce infections and deaths from COVID-19,” said Jacqueline W. Fincher, MD, MACP, president, ACP.
The policy recommends that a comprehensive public health strategy should also incorporate physical distancing, education about appropriate mask use (e.g., types of face coverings, application, safe use, and disposal), promotion of preventive hygiene protocols, and widespread diagnostic testing and contact tracing, and consider local demographics, epidemiologic data, and exposure context.
The policy can be found on ACP’s website: Wearing Masks in Community Settings.
About the American College of Physicians
The American College of Physicians is the largest medical specialty organization in the United States with members in more than 145 countries worldwide. ACP membership includes 163,000 internal medicine physicians (internists), related subspecialists, and medical students. Internal medicine physicians are specialists who apply scientific knowledge and clinical expertise to the diagnosis, treatment, and compassionate care of adults across the spectrum from health to complex illness. Follow ACP on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram.
Contact: Jacquelyn Blaser, (202) 261-4572, jblaser@acponline.org
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line854
|
__label__wiki
| 0.640377
| 0.640377
|
ACS > ACS Blogs > Expert Forum
Law and Policy Analysis
Congress’s Woman Problem
Martha F. Davis University Distinguished Professor, Northeastern University Law School of Law and Affiliated Scholar, Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Lund University, Sweden
Anyone who is paying attention knows that Congress has a woman problem—that is, in a nation where over half of the inhabitants are female, only 20% of Congress’s members are women.
There are subtle costs to the underrepresentation of women in government. For example, one recent study concluded that women in Congress are actually more productive legislators, introducing more bills spanning a wider range of issues than their male counterparts. Other studies have suggested that women legislators are more likely than men to prioritize issues such as health care, social services, reproductive rights, children’s rights, and the environment.
Day to day, it may be hard to notice that, with too few women in the room, many issues get short shrift. But then something dramatic happens, like the sexual assault charges levied against Brett Kavanaugh or the sexual harassment charges proffered against then-nominee Clarence Thomas. When that occurs, we notice all over again that in our current Congress, women’s issues are not part of the bread and butter of every legislators’ agenda. Instead, proposals identified with women’s interests too often serve as political footballs to be tossed around whenever members hope to distract feminist voters from the lack of women’s representation in Congress.
That was the situation this week with the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Though it has been languishing for months, with no Republican co-sponsors, there is no doubt that reauthorization of VAWA is critical to the nation’s efforts to combat violence against women. First enacted in 1994, the original VAWA was pending before Congress in 1991, during the Anita Hill hearings. It was finally passed three years later, when the tragic circumstances of Nicole Simpson’s murder forced national attention to the issue of violence against women. VAWA has since been reauthorized three times.
The 2018 reauthorization bill would, among other things, provide law enforcement with more tools to remove firearms from domestic abusers who are not legally allowed to own them and would increase funding for local rape prevention efforts. Kim Gandy, President of the National Network to End Domestic Violence, calls it a “modest” bill, drafted with the intention of garnering bi-partisan support just as prior VAWA bills have since 1994.
This is legislation that matters in every congressional district in the country and that should be a priority for every Senator and Representative.
Instead, it appears that Senator Chuck Grassley and other Republican members are prepared to cynically use VAWA reauthorization to show that they care about women, even as they seek every possible means to minimize the significance of sexual assault charges made against Judge Kavanaugh. At the time of this writing, Senate Republicans are continuing their efforts to rush the Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination through to a confirmation vote with little investigation of the attempted rape claims and without the benefit of expert testimony on the dynamics of sexual assault. Scheduling hearings on VAWA reauthorization will, they hope, help change the subject and show that Congress cares about women—at least when women aren’t making sexual assault accusations against powerful men in Washington.
Of course, VAWA should be passed whatever the reason, cynical or not, and Congress should take action before the September 30 deadline for reauthorization. But few women (or other voters) will be fooled into thinking that violence against women really matters to the congressional majority if they turn on their screens to see Anita Hill redux, as the Republican men of the Senate Judiciary Committee grill Dr. Christine Blasey Ford about her charges against Brett Kavanaugh. No, Congress can’t fix its woman problem just by reauthorizing the VAWA, though there’s nothing wrong with that. What we really need are more women in Congress, and more men in Congress to care about women even when it is not politically opportunistic.
Civil rights, Equality and Liberty, Women's rights
On MLK Day, Let Us Pledge to Courageously Meet the Problems of Today
Congress Legislated Under the Thirteenth Amendment Long Ago to Address Slavery’s Harms. It Should Do So Again.
Abortion Access for Low-Income People is at Stake in the Amy Coney Barrett Nomination
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line855
|
__label__wiki
| 0.524251
| 0.524251
|
Registration /
The Accreditation Council of Trinidad and Tobago Act, Chapter 39:06 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) requires all post-secondary and tertiary institutions operating in Trinidad and Tobago to be registered.
Institutions that meet the criteria for registration will be placed on a Register of Post-Secondary and Tertiary institutions as stated in Section 8 (3) of the Act. The criteria represent seven categories in which institutions are evaluated. Evidence must be provided that all criteria are met in order for an institution to be registered.
In order to determine if an institution meets these requirements, it is required to submit to an evaluation by ACTT to ensure compliance with the minimum quality requirements for post-secondary and tertiary education institutions in order to be registered.
An institution established after the proclamation of the Act on 9th July, 2004, must also secure ACTT’s approval to use the institutional title with which it wishes to be registered, for example, a new institution desirous of bearing one of the following titles: 'university', 'college', 'tertiary college', 'polytechnic', 'community college', 'technical institute' and 'technical university'. An institution that has met the registration criteria is then issued a Certificate of Registration and placed on the Register of Post-Secondary and Tertiary Institutions.
Registration shall be for a maximum period of three (3) years, after which the institution must re-apply to maintain its status. Registered institutions are required to submit an annual report on a prescribed form and pay an annual registration fee. Registered institutions are eligible to seek accreditation by ACTT.
Criterion 1.0: Legal, Policy and Regulatory Requirements
Criterion 2.0: Governance and Administration
Criterion 3.0: Quality Management System
Criterion 4.0: Resource Management
Criterion 5.0: Teaching-Learning Process
Criterion 6.0: Review
Criterion 7.0: Continuous Improvement
Criterion Statement: The institution’s activities comply with legal, policy and regulatory requirements.
Standard 1.1: The institution has been established as a legal entity.
Examples of evidence:
Certificate of incorporation or legislative decree bearing the name under which the institution wishes to operate or Cabinet minute or Act of Parliament showing the establishment of the institution.
Certificate of Conferment of Institutional Title bearing the name under which the institution wishes to operate, if it was established after July 9th, 2004.
Standard 1.2: The institution demonstrates the ownership of, and responsibility for, assuring access to the learning facilities that support and facilitate the learning expected of its students.
Master plan for buildings and facilities (for a minimum period of three years).
Provision for adequate ventilation and lighting to ensure occupant comfort, health and safety.
Adequate space allocation for learners, academic, administrative, support staff and other stakeholders to facilitate the fulfilment of institutional goals.
Plan for the acquisition of furnishings and equipment that are appropriate, functional and relevant to the needs of all constituents (students, lecturers etc).
Evacuation procedure and map.
Criterion Statement: The corporate governance body and management actively show their commitment to achieving the development and continual improvement of the Quality Management System.
Standard 2.1: Institution has a governance structure.
Policies and procedures of the governing body or board that are consistent with the institution’s mission.
Distribution of authority, responsibilities and relationships as defined in governance structures, processes and activities are understood by management, implemented through delegated authority, and periodically reviewed.
Standard 2.2: Institution has a documented Vision Statement.
Vision statement was formally adopted by the governing body.
Vision statement that is consistent with the philosophy of the institution.
The vision statement is published in official documentation of the institution or other information sources.
Standard 2.3 Institution has a documented Mission Statement.
Mission statement was formally adopted by the governing body.
Mission statement that is consistent with the purposes of the institution.
The mission statement is published in official documentation of the institution or other information sources.
The institution makes the mission available to the public, particularly toprospective and enrolled students.
The institutional goals are congruent with its mission.
Standard 2.4: Institution has an approved current Organisational Structure with supporting text that clearly identifies the role and responsibilities of all personnel.
The lines of reporting within the institution are clearly defined on the organisational chart.
The number of staff members in a particular job function is sufficient to support the needs of the institution.
Criterion Statement: The institution has a well-planned Quality Management System that is in keeping with its vision, mission, policies, processes, organisational structure, responsibilities and resources, in order to assure the quality of educational outcomes.
Standard 3.1: Institution has a documented Quality Policy.
Examples of evidence: Quality Policy
is appropriate to the mission of the institution.
includes a commitment to comply with government rules and regulations for the particular sector.
has measurable objectives.
indicates how the objectives in Policy will be achieved.
includes continual improvement, the result of which will increase the satisfaction of the institution’s stakeholders.
does not contradict other policies of the institution.
is efficiently communicated to stakeholders.
Standard 3.2: Appropriate personnel have been assigned the duty of establishing, implementing and maintaining the institution’s Quality Management System (QMS).
Examples of evidence: QMS representative’s job description contains the responsibility for
ensuring that processes needed for the QMS are established, implemented and maintained.
reporting to top management on the performance of the QMS and any need for improvement.
Standard 3.3 Institution has documented student policies to ensure that quality services are delivered to them.
Examples of evidence: Equal Opportunity Policy which ensures that the institution does not discriminate against applicants
on the grounds on which it refuses or fails to accept that person’s application for admission as a student; or
in the terms and conditions on which it admits him/her as a student.
Equal Opportunity Policy which ensures that the institution does not discriminate against students by
denying or limiting the student’s access to any benefits, facilities or services it provides
the grounds under which it expels students; or
subjecting the student to any other detriment.
Standard 4.6Management of the institution plans, makes available and controls the financial resources which are necessary for achieving the institution’s objectives.
Criterion Statement: The resources essential to the institution’s operational activities are identified and available.
Standard 4.1: Institution has established and documented policies and/or procedures relating to the management of its resources.
Health and Safety Policy and/or Procedures
Human Resources Policy and/or Plan
Physical Resources (Plant and equipment) Policy
Finance Policy and/or Procedures
Standard 4.2: Members of staff are competent on the basis of appropriate education, skills and work experience to perform their teaching functions as they relate to quality programme delivery in the institution.
Members of staff have appropriate qualifications and experience to match the level and area of instruction.
Job descriptions that clearly define requirements to perform the job and responsibilities
Standard 4.3 Institution has established and documented a procedure for maintaining its infrastructure.
Budgetary allocation
Standard 4.4 Institution offers reliable access to student and/or guidance counseling services, whenever needed.
Student support policy
Access to Student Counselor/Guidance Officer
Tutorials or other learning support
Access to Health Care Services
Standard 4.5 Physical resources are relevant and sufficient to meet the institution’s needs.
Examples of evidence: Adequate modern classroom, library, laboratory and workshop facilities, storage room(s) and resources that are easily accessible.
Approved budget which includes projections for both income and expenditure
Tuition and non-tuition fee structure
Criterion Statement: The institution has a plan for the various stages in its teaching-learning process.
Standard 5.1: Institution has established and documented an overall Quality Plan for its teaching-learning process.
Examples of evidence: Quality Plan includes or addresses
Documented Policies and Procedures for
Programme Monitoring
Programme Review
Standard 5.2: Curricula have been designed and developed to enable students to achieve the intended learning outcomes.
Approved Programme specifications
Programme Approval Committee that is independent of the academic department/unit that will be offering the programme. Evidence that the committee has access to any specialised advice which may be needed.
Standard 5.3 Institution has established and documented policies for the teaching-learning process.
Examples of evidence: Policies for
Tuition, Compulsory and Other Fees
Dropping/Adding courses
Leave of Absence or Withdrawal
Granting of Bursaries, Scholarships and Other Financial Aid
Award and Transfer of Credits
Award of Qualifications
Processing and Disbursing Transcripts
Criterion Statement: The institution’s management reviews the Quality Management System at planned intervals to ensure that it is suitable, adequate and effective. Records of the review are kept.
Standard 6.1: Institution’s management has established a process for collecting appropriate information.
Internal quality review procedure
Institutional research capability
Standard 6.2: Institution has reliable methods for monitoring and measuring stakeholder satisfaction.
Student feedback forms
Satisfaction surveys of other stakeholders, e.g. graduates, staff, parents, employers, etc
Standard 6.3 Institution has established and documented methods for monitoring student learning outcomes.
Plans for the identification, storage, protection, retrieval, retention time and disposition of records of assessment
Plans for the conduct of tracer studies
Criterion Statement: The institution continually reviews its Quality Management System.
Standard 7.1: Institution has documented a process to address all activities that do not comply with established criteria and standards for registration.
Procedure to address past problems to prevent their recurrence
Procedure to avoid potential problems
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line858
|
__label__wiki
| 0.866246
| 0.866246
|
ADFD Celebrates Emirati Women’s Day with Expert-led Seminar
Abu Dhabi,29 Aug 2017
Abu Dhabi Fund for Development (ADFD), the leading national entity for development aid, celebrated the third annual Emirati Women’s Day, themed ‘Women are Partners in Giving’, with an inspirational seminar, to coincide with the UAE’s ‘Year of Giving’ initiative.
The seminar featured two distinguished and influential Emirati women including Her Excellency Dr Mouza Obaid Ghanim Ghubash, Chairwoman of the Rewaq Ousha bint Hussein Cultural Centre and Dr Maryam Matar, founder and Chairperson of the UAE Genetic Diseases Association (UAEGDA).
The panellists shared their notable journeys and individual achievements in becoming successful local and international personalities in their own right. Thanking the UAE President His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan for his wise leadership, the women highlighted the country’s long history of driving and enabling equality in the workplace and society at large, a legacy of the founding father of the UAE, late Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan.
The seminar drew the participation of ADFD’s employees and invited guests, and offered the panellists a platform to discuss their key accomplishments. The session specifically focused on their roles as partners in influencing and contributing to the fields of science, technology, media, medicine, community development, engineering, social policy and services, genetic research and biotechnology, as well as in the humanitarian and political spheres.
Welcoming the panellists to ADFD’s headquarters, His Excellency Mohammed Saif Al Suwaidi, Director General of ADFD, said: “The Fund is proud to host Emirati women of your calibre. Your individual achievements have rivalled and often surpassed those of your male counterparts. Your combined efforts – in more way than one – have paved the way for young Emirati women to hope, reach, and achieve more. I encourage our audience today to learn from your insights that will help shape their own future goals and ultimately ensure a positive impact on the UAE’s development.”
“Her Highness Sheikha Fatima bint Mubarak, Chairwoman of the General Women's Union, Supreme Chairwoman of the Family Development Foundation, and President of the Supreme Council for Motherhood and Childhood, has proclaimed that this national occasion be celebrated every year on 28 August. Over the last three years, ADFD has celebrated Emirati women achievers on this occasion, and invited them to share their invaluable cross-industry experience and knowledge for the benefit of our nation’s young men and women.”
His Excellency Al Suwaidi added: “Under the wise leadership of the UAE President and the guidance of His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi and Deputy Supreme Commander of the UAE Armed Forces, our nation has notched up several milestones in promoting gender equality. Furthermore, with the strategic counsel of His Highness Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Presidential Affairs and Chairman of Abu Dhabi Fund for Development’s Board of Directors, the Fund proudly employs 37 women, 35 of whom are Emirati. Four of the 35 hold senior managerial positions and are board members of companies in which ADFD has an investment stake.”
Speaking about her academic and professional journey as an Emirati woman, Her Excellency Dr Mouza Obaid Ghanim Ghubash, said that today the Emirati woman faces no obstacles, but instead enjoys a well-educated and tolerating UAE society. Dr Ghubash noted that growing up, her generation had to pave the way for change and with the support from family members, she was amongst the first to complete her university studies abroad. Moreover, she lauded all the on-going efforts by the UAE government and institutions in educating the public on the importance of empowering women.
Reaffirming the significant contributions of Emirati women to society, science, and economy, Dr Maryam Matar, said that Emirati women are determined and resilient and have considerably helped shaped the UAE today. She highlighted the monumental role Emirati men played in empowering and supporting Emirati women. Furthermore, Dr Matar added that, over the years, her experiences and interactions shaped her professional career. Emphasizing that as a strongminded and educated Emirati woman, she was able to establish 28 successful social initiatives.
As well as being a world-renowned sociologist, Her Excellency Dr Mouza Obaid Ghanim Ghubash has accumulated decades of experience and holds various senior positions across the country. She is the Chairperson of the Standing Committee of Community Affairs Supreme Council for National Security. For a period of 13 years, Dr Ghubash was a Professor of Sociology, Faculty of Assistance Humanities and Social Sciences at the UAE University. Moreover, she is an author and the presenter of the weekly Emirates channel programme – Rewaq. Dr Ghubash is an expert in the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA) particularly in the field of social policy and development. She also holds the position of General Secretary of the Sheikha Shamsa Award for Creative Women.
In addition to establishing and managing UAEGDA, Dr Maryam Matar is a scientist, expert in genetics, influencer and leadership mentor. She was recognised as the most powerful scientist in the UAE and named among the top 20 Arab scientists to have made the biggest contributions to humanity by the British Scientific Community. She delivers keynote speeches on emerging technologies, biotechnology, epigenetics, impact of genetic screening and leadership in more than 20 international conferences and events every year. Dr Matar was the first Emirati woman to hold the position of Director General of the Community Development Authority.
Related:,,
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line860
|
__label__wiki
| 0.558101
| 0.558101
|
Talking Teaching: Race in Medical Education
By Bryce Peebles
Hello, I'm Bryce. I'm an Instructional Designer for Lt at ADInstruments. Every month our team of Instructional Designers meet up for “Talking Teaching” to share and discuss interesting articles, methods, and pedagogies. This month, we discussed two articles on how race is portrayed in medical education. Both of them have been published in Academic Medicine and are free to download.
The two articles we’d like to share with you this month:
Changing How Race is Portrayed in Medical Education was written by medical students who provide a brief history of how race has been inaccurately portrayed in medicine, provide examples of the current state of race in medical education, and then suggest actions to remove these biases.
Addressing Race, Culture, and Structural Inequality in Medical Education was published by a task force set up by Aquifer to find challenges affecting, and best practices for increasing, medical students’ understanding of culture and race. Six pitfalls were identified and a rubric was created to remove these pitfalls.
Before we begin – it’s important to note that racism does not always manifest as hatred or bigotry. Systemic problems occur independently of a person’s attitude toward others, especially when discriminatory biases are purposely introduced into a system. In medicine, these biases are still present and can lead to missed diagnoses and poor medical treatment for marginalized communities. Therefore it’s important to actively work against these biases and eliminate them where present.
So, let’s begin the discussion on how race is presented in medical education and what we can do to remove the discriminatory biases that are still present.
Photo by Piron Guillaume on Unsplash
Society needed to justify the subjugation of slaves, so “scientific” explanations were developed in the 18th century following centuries of religious justifications. These included:
Polygenesis, the incorrect view that human races have different origins.
The idea that different races are different species, as argued by Louis Aggasiz (a famed zoologist and ichthyologist; he’s the guy who named the Megalodon).
The publication of several texts including “Diseases and Physical Peculiarities of the Negro Race”, which detailed an ailment that “causes Negros to run away”.
These ideas formed part of the basis that led to the Jim Crow laws (the racial segregation laws in the US) and the many incorrect assumptions/philosophies that produced immoral experiments. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (which took place from 1932–1972) is an infamous example and was so horrific it led to the development of the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP). I point out these dates because although this example is in the history section, it was only a few decades ago that these attitudes were so explicit.
Doctor injects patient with placebo as part of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study.
The short of it is: the biases are less explicit, but still present. Pages 7–9 of Changing How Race is Portrayed in Medical Education provide several examples of current problems with how race is included in classrooms. It boils down to: race is still used as a proxy for diagnosis when it is a poor fit. For example, the calculation for glomerular filtration rate to assess kidney function includes race as a variable even though there is no physiological evidence that muscle mass varies by race. Genotype and ancestry are much more useful tools for diagnosis, but are not as widely used as they should be.
A variety of races and backgrounds have been included in clinical vignettes, but not in a constructive way. Native American people were generally only included in discussions on alcohol use disorder and hyptertension; Latinx individuals were often included for discussions on illegal immigration and race as a risk factor for diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus. Not only do these applications fail to support diversity, but students are rewarded for making assumptions and diagnosis solely based on race. The United States Medical Licensing Examination relies on assumptions to classify diagnoses by likeliness depending on the race presented in the vignette. Encouraging a “shortcut” to use race as a harbinger of disease could harm patients and ignores any socioeconomic factors affecting the patient.
This is where Addressing Race, Culture, and Structural Inequality in Medical Education comes in. The authors did an extensive literature review and assigned mistakes and biases to six major pitfalls:
Cases do not distinguish between race as a genetic risk factor and the social/structural causes of health disparities.
Any upstream or root causes of health disparities are not discussed, which encourages racial and cultural biases.
Patient descriptions frequently include reductionist and essentialist portrayals of non-Western cultures and people of color.
Social or structural causes of disease or illness are portrayed with a sense of futility.
Cases do not critically reflect on implicit biases or health disparities.
Minority identities are not consistently portrayed among patients, medical students, and physicians in cases.
These pitfalls and the ways to correct them were condensed into a rubric to be applied with the intent to eliminate these biases. Students gain a better understanding of how race and culture fit within the sphere of medicine and can do so without drastic changes to what is already a time-poor, intense curriculum. This also leads to better treatment for patients and a better educational environment.
Here is the action we are taking
As educators, we are committed to creating a high-quality learning environment. This includes: celebrating diversity and inclusion, not tolerating discrimination, and providing factual information backed up by empirical evidence. We understand that both vigilance and action are needed to remove biases that act against marginalized communities; simply supporting diversity isn’t enough, and hasn’t been enough for generations. So we’re acting. The next step we are taking to remove these biases from our lessons is to incorporate the full rubric created by the authors into our quality assurance checks.
We’ve found these resources to be incredibly useful and hope that you’ll join us in a discussion about how we as a community can continue to move forward. Have you come across any of the issues or biases raised in these articles? What have you done to remove them?
We'd like to invite you to join our online community to engage in discussions on important topics like this and many others related to life science teaching practices and pedagogy. The community connects and reflects a passionate group of life science educators from all over the world. Our hope is that the community is a way for educators to work together, get feedback from each other, and build stronger, more meaningful relationships in real-time - whether these are across campus, or across the globe.
It’s easy to join - if you are already an Lt user simply click here to get started. (And if you aren't, contact us and we'll be happy to help you get started.)
ADInstruments
Are you interested in using Lt to deliver your course? Try Lt now – for free!
Lt comes complete with over 500 ready-to-use lessons and labs for teaching physiology, anatomy, biology, nursing, and medicine. Our content is fully customizable, so you can easily add in your own text, videos, or images to shape the lessons to fit your specific teaching needs.
View all 10 content collections »
Try Lt Now
Education Lt
Receive blog email updates
Talking Teaching: Photosensitivity and Visually Accessible Course Design
Teaching through COVID19: Dos and Don’ts
Introducing the New Lt Analytics Dashboard!
Webinar: Educating the Practitioner of the Future - Lt for Nursing. Presented by Alison McLachlan.
How Lt's Nursing Collection aligns with the NMC Standards of Proficiency for Registered Nurses.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line861
|
__label__wiki
| 0.623075
| 0.623075
|
Drama Comedy Romance Crime
War Drama Melodrama Romantic Drama Crime Drama Political Drama Crime Thriller
Archie Mayo
Active - 1926 - 1996 | Born - Jan 1, 1891 | Died - Dec 4, 1968 | Genres - Drama, Comedy, Romance, Crime
Filmography ↓
Biography by Hal Erickson
In films as a utility player and comedy gag man from the mid-teens, Archie Mayo's first directing assignments consisted of slapstick 2-reelers. He began making features at Warner Bros. in 1926, just in time for that studio's switchover to sound. An efficient craftsman during his talkie years with Warners, Goldwyn and 20th Century-Fox, Mayo's great talent lay in not putting his personal stamp on his films; instead he allowed the personalities of his stars to dictate his films' style and substance. John Barrymore was the dominant force in the Mayo-directed Svengali (1931), just as James Cagney dominated The Mayor of Hell (1933) and George Raft and Bette Davis did the same in Bordertown (1935). Curiously, when Mayo became a free-lancer in the mid-1940s, he began asserting himself on the set in a most unattractive and obstreperous fashion. He fought constantly with Paul Muni during filming of Angel on My Shoulder (1946), while his tiltings with the Marx Brothers during Night in Casablanca (1946) moved Groucho Marx to dash off impassioned letters to his children, bemoaning the "fat slob" in the director's chair who was ruining the picture. After 12 years away from the business, Archie L. Mayo produced the obscure 1958 melodrama The Beast of Budapest.
Movie Highlights
See Full Filmography
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line865
|
__label__wiki
| 0.650171
| 0.650171
|
Tag Archives: King Calaway
“CMA Summer Stay-Cay” to Feature More Than 60 Stars, Including Luke Combs, Jason Aldean & Carly Peace
Nashville’s 2020 CMA Fest (June 4–7) may have been cancelled because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but the Country Music Association is planning to keep fans entertained this summer. Jimmie Allen and Lindsay Ell will host CMA Summer Stay-Cay on July 1 at 5 p.m. CT. The live-stream event will air via CMA’s YouTube and Facebook.…… MORE
Rascal Flatts Extends Farewell Tour With 11 New Dates
Goodbyes are hard. Country trio Rascal Flatts—comprised of Gary LeVox, Jay DeMarcus and Joe Don Rooney—revealed they are extending their Rascal Flatts Farewell: Life Is a Highway Tour with 11 new dates. After announcing an initial run of 25 dates, including stops in Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta and more, Rascal Flatts will make 11 additional stops…… MORE
Watch King Calaway’s Stirring Rendition of John Lennon’s “Happy Xmas (War Is Over)”
Country band King Calaway stopped by The Ty Bentli Show to spread some holiday cheer this week. The six-piece group—comprised of Chris Deaton, Simon Dumas, Chad Michael Jervis, Jordan Harvey, Austin Luther and Caleb Miller—crammed onto the set with their instruments and stirring vocals to perform “Happy Xmas (War Is Over),” which John Lennon and…… MORE
Mass Shooting at California Festival Results in Multiple Deaths & Injuries
A gunman opened fire at the Gilroy Garlic Festival in Gilroy, Calif., on July 28, killing three people, including a six-year-old boy, and injuring 15 people. Gilroy police engaged and killed the gunman, who was carrying an assault-style rifle, within minutes of the shooting. Authorities say a search is underway for a possible second suspect.…… MORE
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line866
|
__label__cc
| 0.608139
| 0.391861
|
Academies Journals Matrix Proceedings
Editorial Policy Guidelines & Resources Formatting Guidelines Submission Instructions
Academy Membership Bookstore Related Links
Academy of Strategic Management Journal (Print ISSN: 1544-1458; Online ISSN: 1939-6104)
Author Guidelines Formatting Guidelines Policies and Ethics
In Press Current Issue
Volume Selector
Research Article: 2020 Vol: 19 Issue: 1
Behavioural Intention of Service Providers: Analysis of Airbnb and Grabcar in Malaysia
Geetha Subramaniam, Universiti Teknologi MARA
Halimahton Binti Borhan, Universiti Teknologi MARA
Siti Aisyah Binti Jambak, Universiti Teknologi MARA
Balasundram Maniam, Sam Houston State University
Ellen Chung, Universiti Teknologi MARA
Sharing economy, a relatively new type of business has become very popular with the rise of technology and where businesses are willing to share their assets and services in the current travel and accommodation sphere. Using the Social Exchange Theory to understand the behavioural intention of service providers, this study tries to examine whether exchange factors such as economic benefits, moral motives, social-Hedonic motives, sustainability and sharing attitudes influence the service provider’s motives to participate in Airbnb, Uber and Grabcar services in Malaysia. Using a questionnaire, a survey was done among 100 service providers in Malaysia who provide Grabcar, Uber and Airbnb services. Bivariate analysis was used. Findings show that all the exchange factors have a positive correlation with the behavioural intention. Even though the sharing economy might pose a challenge to the regular taxi drivers and hotels, government regulation should look at a win-win situation that can benefit all stakeholders. As we move on to IR 4.0 and the digital economy, these businesses will be the call of the future.
Airbnb, Grabcar, Sharing Economy, Uber, Social Exchange Theory.
Using advanced information technologies, the sharing economy has become an emerging trend in the digital society and the business world today. Sharing economy is defined as “ICT-enabled platforms for exchanges of goods and services drawing on non-market logics such as sharing, lending, gifting and swapping as well as market logics such as renting and selling” (Laurell & Sandström, 2017). These sharing economy business models do not own any commodity but by using innovative platforms, they have developed a connection between providers and users of services.
Uber (which has since discontinued its services in Malaysia since April 2018) started operations in Malaysia in 2014, followed by Grabcar and Airbnb in 2016. While the success of sharing economic services is very challenging and depends a lot on the quality of the service platforms, the providers are well aware of the perceived risks and perceived benefits (Kim et al., 2015). Amidst claims that the sharing economy platforms seem to deliver a better economic deal compared to traditional services due to intermediation cost reduction, Airbnb and Grabcar providers are still facing challenges (Dillahunt et al., 2016). Hence it will be interesting to examine what motivates the service providers to continue to participate in such sharing services (Sutherland & Jarrahi, 2018).
Using the Social Exchange Theory, this study attempts to examine the factors which influence the service provider’s motives to participate in Airbnb, Uber and Grabcar services in Malaysia. This will provide some understanding on the behavioural intention of service providers in the transport and accommodation sector in Malaysia.
Social Exchange Theory
The social exchange theory is a social psychological and sociological perspective theory that explains the behaviour of an exchange of goods among the members that consist of four bodies of theory: behavioural psychology, economics, propositions about the dynamics of influence, and proposition about the structure of small group (Homans, 1958). Cropanzano & Mitchell (2005) state that the social exchange theory is one of the most famous conceptual paradigms in organizations and it involves in a series of interactions that create obligations where it can explain the motive of action of another person. The social exchange theory really plays an important role that influences the individual’s knowledge-sharing behavior. They suggested that the social interaction and trust from the social exchange theory moderated by information technology can be used to predict an individual’s knowledge-sharing behaviour.
Behavioural Intention and Variables.
Fang & Neufeld (2009), in the early stage of the participation, found that one cannot predict how long will an individual’s intention to participate in any activity be. The key intention to identify the behavioural intention is not by gaining access to someone’s possession but to help make human connection better. So, the intention of participants is the critical element to determine the sharing activity.
Binninger et al. (2015) found that the desire to response regarding the financial expectation is bigger than humanitarian value and ecological concerns on what is the service provider’s motivation on joining the sharing economy activities. In addition, monetary motivations can influence the sharing attitudes (Bucher et al., 2016).
Bucher et al. (2016), found that moral, social-hedonic and monetary motives can influence the sharing attitudes of the respondents. But Piscicelli et al. (2015) analyse individual values common among this sample of sharers and found that it may also contribute to the subjective importance of social or community as well as to moral or sustainability motives among sharers.
Basically, social-hedonic motive refers to the factors that influence an individual’s pleasure to decide on their action. Bucher et al. (2016) found that social-hedonic motives are shown to have the strongest effect on positive attitudes. However, Binninger et al. (2015), claim that the collaborative consumption is basically related to the desire to develop social interaction or social equality and not for ecological motive.
Sharing economy can give the benefits of ownership to the people which will reduce the cost, burden and lower the environmental impact. The sharing economy gives the benefits to the consumer where it enables them for example, for car sharing, to try different models of car where they can avoid the ownership process and have more freedom and flexible lifestyle (Binninger et al., 2015).
Hamari & Koivisto (2015) found that the “use rather than own” scheme depends on the attitudes and degree of awareness of the participants who are willing to join the scheme. Hence this study examines whether the constructs discussed above from social exchange theory impact the behavioural intention of sharing economy service providers’ motive to continue to participate in their business.
Based on the Social Exchange Theory (SET) by Homans (1958), five independent variables for this study were identified, namely economic benefits, moral motive, social-hedonic motive, sustainability and sharing attitudes. While the dependent variable or the variable to be tested was the behavioural intention. This explanatory study used a survey approach by using a questionnaire to examine the factors which influence the service provider’s motives to continue to participate in the sharing economy services in Malaysia.
First, a pre-test was done to check the questionnaire comprehension among Airbnb and Grabcar service providers and to correct any ambiguity. Target population of this study was any service provider who was providing any of the above mentioned three services. The three service providers were identified based on the popularity in late 2017, where majority were concentrated in Airbnb, Uber and Grabcar services. Using non-probability sampling method of purposive sampling, 100 questionnaires were distributed throughout Malaysia via social media and personally by hand. This was only possible by joining the Uber Malaysia, Grabcar Malaysia and Airbnb group in Facebook. However at the end of two months, only 67 usable questionnaires were received. The respondents were assured anonymity and confidentiality. A seven section questionnaire was prepared based on adaptation from (Hamari et al., 2015) and (Bucher et al., 2016).
The respondents who were providing Airbnb, Grabcar and Uber services were from throughout Malaysia. Majority (91%) of the respondents were Gen Y and young coming from the age group of 20 to 39 years old. Majority (65%) were males and 67 percent of the respondents were Malays. A major (61%) portion of them were doing the business part-time, who constituted employees (34%) who were working elsewhere, students (22%), freelance (15%).
The objective of this study is to examine the relationship between economic benefits, moral motives, social-hedonic motive, sustainability, sharing attitudes and behavioural intention to participate in sharing economy. Table 1 displays the bivariate correlation results between the variables.
Table 1 Bivariate Correlation of Behavioural Intention, Economic Benefits, Moral Motives, Social-Hedonic Motives, Sustainability and Sharing Attitudes
Construct Behavioural Intention Economic Benefits Moral Motives Social-Hedonic Motives Sustainability Sharing Attitudes
Behavioural Intention -
Economic Benefits 0.636*** (0.000) -
Moral Motives 0.391*** (0.000) 0.543*** (0.000) -
Social-Hedonic Motives 0.390*** (0.000) 0.477*** (0.000) 0.470*** (0.000) -
Sustainability 0.363*** (0.001) 0.459*** (0.000) 0.287*** (0.000) 0.311*** (0.010) -
Sharing Attitudes 0.697*** (0.001) 0.734*** (0.000) 0.551*** (0.000) 0.461*** (0.000) 0.555*** (0.000) -
As displayed in the Table 1, all the five independent variables, economic benefits, moral motives, Social-hedonic motives, sustainability and sharing attitudes have a significant effect on the behavioural intention of the service provides. Pearson correlation results between behavioural intention (M=4.20) and economic benefits (M=4.14), r (67) =0.636, p<0.01 indicates that there is a positive and strong relationship between the two variables. These results conforms to studies done by Bucher et al. (2016). Brekke et al. (2003) also found that the economic incentives have an effect on the morally ideal behaviour.
Secondly, Pearson correlation results between behavioural intention and moral motives (M=3.97), r (67) =0.391, p<0.01 indicates that there is a positive and medium relationship between these two variables. These results also conforms to studies done by Bucher et al. (2016).
Thirdly, Pearson correlation results between behavioural intention and social-hedonic motive (M=3.96), r (67) =0.390, p<0.01 indicates that there is a positive and medium relationship. These results conforms to studies done by Mannak et al., (2003). (Pebrianti, 2016) also found that the social-hedonic person is more oriented on online buying decision.
Fourthly, Pearson correlation results between behavioural intention and sustainability (M=4.11), r (67) = 0.363, p < 0.01 indicates that there is a positive and medium relationship and the results conforms with Binninger et al., (2015) Pomarici et al. (2015) state that economic benefits gives significant effect on sustainable practices.
Lastly, Pearson correlation between behavioural intention and sharing attitudes (M=4.26), r (67) =0.697, p<0.01 indicates that there is a positive and strong relationship which conforms to studies done by Hamari et al., (2015). Brekke et al. (2003) also found positive attitudes have a significant effect on the citizens’ behaviour to exchanging belongings.
The Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to test individual relationship among independent variables in this research. As a conclusion, it shows that there is a significant result between each of the variables between the dependent variable, behavioural intention and the independent variables, economic benefits, moral motive, social-hedonic, sustainability and sharing attitudes. There is also a significant result between each of the independent variables.
Conclusion and Policy Implications
Broadly speaking, this explanatory study shows that the Social Exchange Theory explains the behavioural intentions of service providers of sharing economy services in Malaysia.
Firstly, economic benefits and sharing attitudes have a strong relationship with the behavioural intention. The service providers felt that finding extra income really motivates the service providers to continue to participate in the sharing economy. Secondly, the service providers were very motivated and expressed positive sharing attitudes which are important characteristics for a sharing economy service provider. Finally, and very interestingly, in terms of social hedonic motive, the service providers found that their services allowed them to improve their network, meet new people and increase their confidence level in terms of communication and engagement with others.
From a theoretical perspective, firstly, this study extends the understanding of the literature on sharing economy. There are limited studies done on Grabcar and Airbnb in the Malaysian context. Secondly, this study enriches the literature on social exchange theory by exploring the behavioural intention of service providers of Grabcar and Airbnb despite the numerous challenges in a sharing economy. It has been found that sharing attitudes, economic benefits, moral motive, social-hedonic motive and sustainability have positive and significant correlations with Grabcar and Airbnb providers’ intention to provide these services. Sharing attitude and economic benefits outweighed all other factors.
Although this study has several notable contributions in explaining the behavioral intentions of sharing economy service providers, there are some limitations where several issues need to be investigated further. Firstly, the sample size could be increased. Secondly, as this study focused only on three main service providers, further studies could investigate more recent and new service providers in the food and retail sector. Thirdly, a comparative study can be carried out to cover the other countries in this region.
As the world moves towards IR 4.0 and the era of digitalization, sharing economy will be the way forward. However, there is a controversial issue in Malaysia surrounding Airbnb and Grabcar’s impact on existing businesses. The question which arises is: Is there a real threat of being substituted by the disruption that the sharing economy brings into our society or is it merely being overestimated? The government needs to conduct a win-win solution to all the participants in the sharing economy. The regulation needs to bring benefits not only to some services but to all sharing economy activities. While Airbnb can affect the hotel sector, and Grabcar can affect the conventional taxi drivers’ sustainability, policies which can earn revenue and regulate the sharing economy will be crucial to be implemented.
The authors would like to thank Universiti Teknologi MARA for the financial assistance in the research and publication of this article.
Binninger, A.S., Ourahmoune, N., & Robert, I. (2015). Collaborative Consumption And Sustainability: A Discursive Analysis Of Consumer Representations And Collaborative Website Narratives. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 31(3), 969-986.
Brekke, K.A., Kverndokk, S., & Nyborg, K. (2003). An economic model of moral motivation. Journal of Public Economics, 87(9-10), 1967-1983.
Bucher, E., Fieseler, C., & Lutz, C. (2016). What's mine is yours (for a nominal fee)-Exploring the spectrum of utilitarian to altruistic motives for Internet-mediated sharing. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 316-326.
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M.S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874-900.
Dillahunt, T., Lampinen, A., O'Neill, J., Terveen, L., & Kendrick, C. (2016). Does the sharing economy do any good?. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing companion (pp. 197-200). ACM.
Fang, Y., & Neufeld, D. (2009). Understanding sustained participation in open source software projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 25(4), 9-50.
Homans, G.C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology, 63(6), 597-606.
Kim, J., Yoon, Y., & Zo, H. (2015). Why people participate in the sharing economy: A social exchange perspective.
Laurell, C., & Sandström, C. (2017). The sharing economy in social media: Analyzing tensions between market and non-market logics. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 125, 58-65.
Pebrianti, W.E.N.N.Y. (2016). Web attractiveness, hedonic shopping value and online buying decision. Pertanika International Journal of Economic and Management (IJEM), 10, 123-134.
Piscicelli, L., Cooper, T., & Fisher, T. (2015). The role of values in collaborative consumption: insights from a product-service system for lending and borrowing in the UK. Journal of Cleaner Production, 97, 21-29.
Pomarici, E., Vecchio, R., & Mariani, A. (2015). Wineries’ perception of sustainability costs and benefits: An exploratory study in California. Sustainability, 7(12), 16164-16174.
Sutherland, W., & Jarrahi, M.H. (2018). The sharing economy and digital platforms: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Information Management, 43, 328-341.
Allied Business Academies publishing a total of 14 different journals in various fields of business. With an acceptance rate of 30%, each of the journals of our affiliates is double blind, peer reviewed and some of the journals are listed in SCOPUS, SCIMAGO, Google Scholar, ProQuest, Cengage Gale, LexisNexis and several other academic databases and search engines.
Journals Matrix Proceedings Guidelines About Us Member Services
Allied Business Academies
40 Bloomsbury Way Lower Ground Floor
(+ 44-2036082719)
© 2002-2021 Allied Business Academies. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line867
|
__label__cc
| 0.687223
| 0.312777
|
Virtual Classroom @ Your Library
Welcome to the Abilene Public Library’s Virtual Classroom. This space will offer a new place for youth, teens, and adults to learn more about a variety of topics, with new content added regularly.
For each class, we'll share background information, educational videos, lesson plans, resources available for continued learning and more. Plus, we’ll offer a link to a test we’d appreciate if you completed to show what you learned!
Euclid of Alexandria (lived c. 300 BCE)
Euclid of Alexandria lived circa 300 BCE. He systematized mathematics and geometry derived earlier from the Greeks and the Near East. He wrote the Elements which is a set of books on Mathematics. It is noted that he also wrote perhaps a dozen other titles, but most of those are lost to time.
Palmer, N. (2015, October 23). Euclid. Ancient History Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://www.ancient.eu/Euclid/
Euclid's Influence
For approximately 2000 years, Euclid's works entitled the Elements were considered a perfect example of correct reasoning. More than a thousand editions of his work have been published, making it the most popular book ever written outside of the Bible.
Euclid did not come up with all of the ideas in The Elements. Rather he gathered knowledge and wrote a textbook of known ideas of the time. It does not cover all known information, but focuses on definitions, postulates and axioms. He demonstrated that geometry was proven by logical steps from axioms and postulates. Euclid also included some of his original discoveries like infinitely prime numbers. His book is divided into sections of Chapters 1-6 featuring Plane Geometry. Chapters 7-10 describe Arithmetic and number theory. In chapters 11-13 he explores Solid Geometry. Four other books are still in existence. They are entitled Data, Division of Figures, Phenomena and Optics.
First English version of The Elements. To read a full text version of this ancient book visit this site and download the book. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/9719
Geometry on Khan Academy: We are surrounded by space. And that space contains lots of things. And these things have shapes. In geometry we are concerned with the nature of these shapes, how we define them, and what they teach us about the world at large--from math to architecture to biology to astronomy (and everything in between). Learning geometry is about more than just taking your medicine ("It's good for you!"), it's at the core of everything that exists--including you. Having said all that, some of the specific topics we'll cover include angles, intersecting lines, right triangles, perimeter, area, volume, circles, triangles, quadrilaterals, analytic geometry, and geometric constructions.
This lesson introduces the concept of Euclidean geometry and how it is used in the real world today. This lesson also traces the history of geometry.
Euclidean Geometry is the Geometry of flat space.It is based on the work of Euclid who was the father of Geometry. He proposed 5 postulates or axioms that are the foundation of this mathematical branch of Geometry. The 5 postulates are...
1. It is possible to draw a straight line from any point to any point.
2. If you have a straight line it is possible to extend in any direction to infinity.
3.It is possible to draw a circle given any center and a radius
4.All right angles are equal (congruent).
5.If you have two straight lines, and a third line crossing them, and the sum of the interior angle measure of the two lines is less than two 90 degrees, then if you extend the lines, they will eventually cross on that side.
Geometry lies at the root of all drawing, so it's good to know a little about it. This is the first video in a series which will explain the basics of Euclid's Elements of Geometry. Don't be scared - It's quite fun! The drawings and script are the basis of the book and ebook, Euclid, The Man Who Invented Geometry
Geometry Resources
Geometry Games for Kids https://www.kidsmathgamesonline.com/geometry.html
Wikipedia contributors. (2020, December 4). Geometry. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 18:55, December 7, 2020 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Geometry&oldid=992364396
Geometry Lesson for Kids: History & Facts https://study.com/academy/lesson/geometry-lesson-for-kids-history-facts.html (need and account)
Geometry with DK https://www.dkfindout.com/us/math/geometry/
Geometry - Definition with Examples https://www.splashlearn.com/math-vocabulary/geometry/geometry
High School Geometry https://kera.pbslearningmedia.org/subjects/mathematics/high-school-geometry/
Students discover relationships that exist between parallel and perpendicular lines; analyze the characteristics of distinct shapes such as circles, quadrilaterals, and triangles; and learn how geometric principles can solve real-world problems.
Perfect Math For Students Who Are Math Challenged. Lessons are presented in a format that everyone can understand. Each Lesson flows smoothly and logically to the next. Each lesson is short, concise, and to the point. Lots of examples with step-by -step solutions. Each lesson includes valuable Helpful Hints section. Review is built into each lesson. Students will retain what they have learned! Each lesson includes Problem Solving. This ensures that students will learn to apply their math skills to real-life situations. Includes free access to video tutorials. Just go to www.mathessentials.net and click on the Videos button. Passwords are in red print.
Provides an introduction to two-dimensional and three-dimensional shapes.
Reading Level: 4-7.
With scrumptious-looking photos, easy recipes, and a variety of pies to bake or just ogle, this book provides a fun and memorable approach to thinking and learning about circles, polygons, angles, parallel and perpendicular lines, tessellation, symmetry, area, volume, and more. This book will leave the reader with a taste for geometry!
Dr. Math presents more geometry : learning geometry is easy! just ask Dr. Math! Students just like you have been turning to Dr. Math for years asking questions about math problems, and the math doctors at The Math Forum have helped them find the answers with lots of clear explanations and helpful hints. Now, with Dr. Math Presents More Geometry, you'll learn just what it takes to succeed in this subject. You'll find the answers to dozens of real questions from students in a typical geometry class. You'll also find plenty of hints and shortcuts for using coordinate geometry, finding angle relationships, and working with circles. Pretty soon, everything from the Pythagorean theorem to logic and proofs will make more sense. Plus, you'll get plenty of tips for working with all kinds of real-life problems.
Euclid: the Father Of Geometry Grade 4
https://kera.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/wqzk3uaxahs/euclid-as-the-father-of-geometry-khan-wqzk3uaxahs/
It's important to have perspective about how some of our math concepts came about and how influential they have become.
Circumference and Area of Circles: Labeling Parts of a Circle Grade 5
https://kera.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/04n79titpea/parts-of-a-circle-khan-04n79titpea/
Radius, diameter, center, and circumference--all are parts of a circle. Let's go through each and make sure we understand how they are defined.
Concentric Circles Grades 9-12
https://kera.pbslearningmedia.org/resource/rr10.math.measure.cir.concirc/concentric-circles/
In this video you’ll discover how using concentric circles can help you determine how much paint is needed to cover the deck of a carousel. Regents Review materials are designed to help high school students prepare for New York State's Regents exams.
GEOMETRY LESSON PLANS & ACTIVITIES
https://sharemylesson.com/subject/geometry
Geometry Lesson Plans for all ages grades 1-6
https://www.education.com/lesson-plans/geometry/
Test Your Knowledge of Geometry
Mayflower, Passengers and Crew
Plimoth and the Wampanoag
202 Cedar St, Abilene TX 79601
South Branch Library
4310 Buffalo Gap Rd, Abilene, TX 79606
Mockingbird Branch Library
1326 N Mockingbird Ln, Abilene, TX 79603
Hours, Locations, Holiday Schedule
Make a Purchase Request
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line870
|
__label__cc
| 0.65342
| 0.34658
|
Diversity and equality Technology
Millennials and Gen Z less optimistic about future of traditional business, survey finds
By Sean McCabe May 20, 2019, 10:27 a.m. EDT 4 Min Read
Millennials and members of Generation Z have grown skeptical of traditional business models and are pessimistic about the economy and social progress, according to the 2019 Deloitte Millennial Survey, released on Monday.
The 2019 report polled a total of 16,425 young people — 13,416 millennials (born between January 1983 and December 1994) across 42 countries, and 3,009 Gen Z respondents (born between January 1995 and December 2002) across 10 countries.
Across both generations, traditional work-life goals have changed drastically. While more than half of respondents stated they would like to earn high salaries, traditional milestones such as starting a family was not cited as a top priority. For instance, 59 percent of respondents said they would rather travel and see the world versus buy a home (49 percent), as well as help their communities (46 percent) over have children (39 percent).
“From the economic recession a decade ago to the Fourth Industrial Revolution, millennials and Gen Zs have grown up in a unique moment in time impacting connectivity, trust, privacy, social mobility and work,” stated Michele Parmelee, Deloitte's global chief talent officer. “This uncertainty is reflected in their personal views on business, government, leadership and the need for positive societal change agents. As business leaders, we must continue to embrace the issues resonating most with these two generations, or risk losing out on talent in an increasingly competitive market.”
Respondents' trust in the global economy also fell to its lowest level in six years, with only 26 percent of respondents expecting economic conditions in their countries to improve over the next year (compared to 45 percent a year ago). Millennial opinion on businesses have also declined, as 55 percent of respondents see businesses having a positive impact on society, compared to 61 percent in 2018.
Income inequality and unemployment were also cited as top challenges facing the working world today. Approximately two-thirds of millennials believe that some people are not given a fair chance at achieving success in the world. Respondents also believe that the government is most responsible for improving social mobility, but don't believe it is one of government’s current priorities.
"We have less trust in employers because so many of our parents did lose their jobs, and they had been loyal to companies," said Laura Banks, an American millennial cited in the report. "We have less trust in the stock market because it crashed. And I think that a lot of us are worried that it is going to happen again. We are either putting off big life moments and keeping money in our savings [accounts], or we’re saying, ‘You know what? It could fall apart again tomorrow. Let’s travel the world.'"
Asked about technology in the workplace, 46 percent of respondents believe that the changing nature of work will make it tougher to find or change jobs, while another 70 percent believe they may not have all the skills required to thrive in the modern workplace. Millennials believe that businesses are most responsible for training them with new on-the-job skills, while Gen Z believes the responsibility lies with academia.
“Millennials and Gen Zs are conflicted about the role of technology, and they are looking to business to help them adjust to a new normal,” added Parmelee. “To attract and retain young employees, businesses should bolster their diversity and inclusion initiatives, find new ways to incorporate these generations into corporate societal impact programs and place a priority on reskilling and training to ensure talent is prepared for what’s ahead.”
Other notable findings from the report include:
Climate change was the top issue facing society, according to both millennials and Gen Z.
Seventy-three percent of respondents said political leaders are failing to have a positive impact on the world. Two-thirds say the same of religious leaders.
Forty-three percent of respondents said that traditional media is negatively impacting the world, with 27 percent citing no trust in the media as a reliable source of information.
Sixty-four percent of respondents believe they would be healthier if they reduced their social media consumption, with 41 percent wishing they could stop using social media entirely.
Seventy-eight percent of respondents are worried about how businesses share personal data with each other. Seventy-nine percent of respondents are worried that they will be victims of online fraud.
Forty-two percent of respondents have engaged more with businesses that they perceive are having a positive impact on society or the environment. Conversely, 38 percent have ended or disengaged their relationships with companies perceived to be having a negative impact on society.
In addition to releasing the Millennial Survey, Deloitte announced the launch of a new tool, the “MillZ Mood Monitor,” which will track respondents’ annual optimism on key political, personal, environmental and socio-economic topics. In the inaugural Mood Monitor, millennials posted a score of 39 (out of 100), while Gen Z scored 40.
For the full 2019 Millennial Survey, head to Deloitte's site here.
Sean McCabe
Senior editor, Accounting Today
Diversity and equality Technology Deloitte
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line871
|
__label__wiki
| 0.739466
| 0.739466
|
NFDA urges PM to allow automotive retailers to open
On 18 May, NFDA wrote to the Prime Minister to urge the Government to include automotive retailers in the first wave of non-essential retail reopening and allow the sector to safely restart.
Last week, the United Kingdom’s retail motor industry signalled its readiness to get back to work, with the publication of new sector-specific guidance by the National Franchised Dealers Association (NFDA) and Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) to help ensure all showrooms are safe spaces for employees and customers.
Automotive retail employs 590,000 people and there are over 4,500 franchise outlets in the UK. Turnover from sales of cars is £150 billion annually. Car sales in April fell by 96 per cent and we expect similar results in May.
NFDA urges the Government to include automotive retailers in the first wave of non-essential retail opening and ‘get the country moving again’.
Sue Robinson, NFDA Director, said, “The motor industry and retailers have been making enormous strides to creating a greener fleet of vehicles on the nation’s roads. The Government has set us a challenging target for a ban on petrol and diesel cars by 2035. The longer we remain unable to sell new cars, the harder it will be to hit this target.
“The Government has told people they should avoid public transport and return to work on foot, by bicycle or by car and the majority of the UK population will be relying heavily on cars to get to work, and on vans and trucks to move goods around the country.
“Franchised dealerships provide reliable motor vehicles – cars, vans and commercial vehicles – which are essential for many people to get to work and to undertake their work safely and efficiently. Automotive retailers need to be open to serve the workforce and get the country moving again”.
*Article Source https://www.rmif.co.uk/
New car market grows in December but declines in 2019
“The new car market saw a -2.4% decline in 2019 as a result of the continued, prolonged political uncertainty and a number of challenges affecting the automotive sector, namely supply constraints and confusion surrounding emissions”, said Sue Robinson, Director of the National Franchised Dealers Association (NFDA), which represents franchised car and commercial vehicle retailers in the UK commenting on the latest SMMT’s new passenger car registration figures.
Kia rated second in NFDA electric vehicle survey
In the second electric vehicle survey run by the NFDA (National Franchised Dealers Association) Kia Motors (UK) Limited has maintained its position near the top of the board. The survey was launched to understand dealers’ views on the electric vehicle sector covering manufacturers and the governments approach.
Motorpoint home delivery service proves huge hit with customers
The UK’s largest independent car retailer, which has a network of branches across England, Scotland and Wales, rolled out the complimentary service prior to the lockdown in late March in response to demand from customers.
Click and collect: Volvo Car UK delivers first online-bought car
Launched in April this year, Volvo’s online car purchase system is the most comprehensive currently offered by any manufacturer in the UK. It offers a smooth, convenient and secure end-to-end process, from car configuration to part-exchange and finance agreement approval, which can take as little as 20 minutes.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line874
|
__label__wiki
| 0.596617
| 0.596617
|
Child of the Dream: A Memoir of 1963
In January 1963, Sharon Robinson turns thirteen the night before George Wallace declares on national television "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" in his inauguration speech as governor of Alabama. It is the beginning of a year that will change the course of American history.
As the daughter of baseball legend Jackie Robinson, Sharon has opportunities that most people would never dream of experiencing. Her family hosts multiple fund-raisers at their home in Connecticut for the work that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is doing. Sharon sees her first concert after going backstage at the Apollo Theater. And her whole family attends the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.
But things don't always feel easy for Sharon. She is one of the only Black children in her wealthy Connecticut neighborhood. Her older brother, Jackie Robinson Jr., is having a hard time trying to live up to his father's famous name, causing some rifts in the family. And Sharon feels isolated, struggling to find her role in the civil rights movement that is taking place across the country. This incredible memoir is the story of how one girl finds her voice in the fight for justice and equality.
Little Rock Girl 1957: How a Photograph Changed the Fight for Integration
March Forward, Girl: From Young Warrior to Little Rock Nine
Brown v. Board of Education: A Fight for Simple Justice
This Promise of Change: One Girl's Story in the Fight for School Equality
"Observing her father’s commitment to furthering the cause of justice, watching the Children’s March in Birmingham, and hearing Martin Luther King Jr.’s 'I Have a Dream' speech inspire Robinson to embrace political activism and honor her family’s legacy. Robinson’s unique viewpoint, accompanied by illuminating photographs from this charged historical period, offers plenty to hold readers’ attention." — Publishers Weekly
Scholastic Press
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line876
|
__label__wiki
| 0.628162
| 0.628162
|
Reward Notice
Washington Field Division
Contact: Jan Kemp
www.atf.gov
ATF, Firearms Industry Offer Reward in Black Dog Sporting Goods Firearms Theft
BEDFORD COUNTY, Va. — The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms industry, have announced a reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for the burglary of Black Dog Sporting Goods, a federal firearms licensee (FFL), in Bedford County. ATF and the NSSF are each offering a reward of up to $2,500, for a total reward of $5,000 for information that leads to an arrest.
On Aug. 24, 2018 at 12:27a.m., the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office responded to Black Dog Sporting Goods, 1291 Burnbridge Road, Forest, Va., for a burglar alarm. Deputies arrived three minutes after being dispatched to the scene and found the front door to the business damaged and opened. Lynchburg Police also responded to assist Bedford County Sheriff’s Office in clearing the scene for suspects. None were located. Three firearms were reported missing by the business owner. Security footage revealed four male subjects wearing hooded sweatshirts, entering the building. ATF is working with the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office in this investigation.
Anyone with information about this crime should contact ATF at 1-800-ATF-GUNS (800-283-4867), email ATFTips@atf.gov or contact ATF through it’s website at www.atf.gov/contact/atf-tips. Tips may also be submitted to ATF by using the ReportIt app, or by visiting www.reportit.com. You may also provide information by contacting the Bedford County Sheriff’s Office at 540-586-7827 or Central Virginia Crime Stoppers at 1-888-798-5900 or go online to cvcrimestoppers.org. Enter your tip online at http://p3tips.com or use the P3TIPS app on your mobile device. Crime Stopper callers remain anonymous and could receive a cash reward up to $1,000. All calls and tips will be kept confidential.
ATF and its law enforcement partners are committed to ensuring that our communities are safe, and that those who commit violent crimes such as these will be held accountable. The reward is part of a larger national cooperative initiative between the NSSF and ATF, in which the NSSF matches ATF rewards in cases involving the theft of firearms from FFL retailers. ATF works closely with members of the firearms industry to curb the criminal acquisition and misuse of firearms.
For more information about ATF, go to www.atf.gov.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line881
|
__label__wiki
| 0.682769
| 0.682769
|
Tony Blackshield reviews 'Sir Ninian Stephen: A tribute' edited by Timothy L.K. McCormack and Cheryl Saunders
Tony Blackshield
The plans for this book were announced at the time of Ninian Stephen’s eightieth birthday, almost four years ago. Each of the ten contributors focuses on one of his public roles in the last thirty-five years – five of them in Australia, and five on the international stage. The last of the Australian positions, ambassador for the environment, is a bridge between the two. Kenneth Keith’s chapter finds another bridge: in Koowarta v Bjelke-Petersen (1982), on Stephen’s last day as a High Court judge, his judgment decisively transformed the issue of racial discrimination in Queensland by recognising its international potency.
Peter Rose reviews 'Two Lives: Gertrude and Alice' by Janet Malcolm
Peter Rose
The subtitle of Janet Malcolm’s new book (published in Australia by Melbourne University Press) is Gertrude and Alice. Few names of literary couples can be so confidently trimmed. Scott and Zelda, Ted and Sylvia, George and Martha … all those happy couples. Gertrude and Alice has been used before, as the main title of Diana Souyhami’s joint study (1991), and will doubtless be used again. Their fame is an achieved and bankable thing, notwithstanding the fact that Gertrude Stein (1874– 1946) – whose books included Three Lives (1909), The Making of Americans (1925) and the wonderfully titled A Long Gay Book (1932) – remains perhaps the least read of the modernists.
Noah Riseman reviews 'The Legacy of Douglas Grant' by John Ramsland
Noah Riseman
Soldier. Draftsman. Massacre survivor. Prisoner of war. Veteran. Son. Brother. Uncle. RSL Secretary. Indigenous Man. Activist. Black Scotsman. Celebrity. These are just some of the words used to describe Douglas Grant, an individual who embodied the contradictions of assimilation and the challenges facing Aboriginal people in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Famous during his lifetime, Grant’s reputation has faded since the 1950s but in recent years has attracted the attention of Indigenous Australians and historians of World War I.
Daniel Seaton reviews 'Archie Jackson: Cricket’s tragic genius' by David Frith
Daniel Seaton
David Frith’s slim biography of Archie Jackson reflects his subject’s tragically short life. When Jackson made his Test match début for Australia at Adelaide in the 1928–29 Ashes series, scoring an eye-catching 164, it was he, rather than the young Don Bradman, who instilled the most excitement in this country’s cricket-loving public. When Jackson was included in the 1930 tour of England, one ex-cricketer, Cecil Parkin, remarked that he was ‘a better bat than Bradman’, who had débuted in the same series as Jackson. This is but one example of the lavish praise that the gifted, though inconsistent, young cricketer received during his lifetime.
Tim Byrne reviews 'Boy on Fire: The young Nick Cave' by Mark Mordue
At one point in Boy on Fire, music critic Mark Mordue’s strange, hybrid biography and social history of the early years and musical development of singer–songwriter Nick Cave, Mordue describes his subject as ‘the nominal ship’s captain, a drug-spun Ahab running amok on stage and off’. It is a typically sharp image, but it may reveal more than was intended; for all that Cave is Mordue’s Ahab, he is far more like the white whale itself: a great and receding mythical creature that will swallow the world before giving up any of its secrets. For a long while, the reader is cajoled into thinking this work might be the first in an exhaustive series on the artist, but by the end the truth is revealed: the subject simply got the better of his biographer, who languishes still in the belly of the whale. After an unnaturally long gestation, it seems to have become a case of publish or go mad.
Michael Winkler reviews 'Lowitja: The authorised biography of Lowitja O’Donoghue' by Stuart Rintoul
In Recollections of a Bleeding Heart (2002), Don Watson wrote that Lowitja O’Donoghue ‘seemed then and has seemed ever since to be a person of such transcendent warmth, if Australians ever got to know her they would want her as their Queen’. Robert Manne, in the first-ever Quarterly Essay (2001), portrayed her as ‘a woman of scrupulous honesty and great beauty of soul’. These qualities gleam in Stuart Rintoul’s handsomely produced biography.
Alison Broinowski reviews 'The Genius of Donald Friend: Drawings from the diaries 1942–1989' by Lou Klepac
Alison Broinowski
Here we have the first intimations of the coming flowering of the Donald Friend diaries, which are to be published by the National Library with support from Morris West’s benefaction. Friendliness was not always the same as ugliness or cleanliness when he was alive. So, it is somehow comforting that two Australian artists, so different from each other in lifestyle, should after their deaths find common cause.
Ian Dickson reviews 'The Lives of Lucian Freud: Fame, 1968–2011' by William Feaver
Ian Dickson
To start with the broadest of generalisations, artists’ biographies can be divided into three types: those that concentrate on the work; those that take the life as their focus; and the ‘life and times’ volumes that attempt to place the artist in her social and political context.
Geordie Williamson reviews 'Tom Stoppard: A life' by Hermione Lee
Geordie Williamson
A tantalising ‘what if?’ emerges from the opening chapters of Hermione Lee’s immense, intricately researched life of Tom Stoppard. On the day in 1939 when the Germans invaded Czechoslovakia, the future playwright’s assimilated Jewish parents were obliged to flee the Moravian town where they lived. They made it to Singapore, only to endure Japanese invasion soon afterward. Stoppard’s mother, Martha, had to move again, and swiftly, with her two sons while her beloved husband, Eugen, a doctor, remained behind to aid with civilian defence. His evacuation ship was destroyed, and he was lost, presumably drowned, a little later. But when Stoppard’s mother boarded her own ship, earlier in 1941, she thought it was headed for Australia. Only later did she learn that India was their destination.
Gemma Betros reviews 'In Search of the Woman Who Sailed the World' by Danielle Clode
Gemma Betros
One of the frustrating things about being a historian is the number of times you are told by others that surely everything in your specialty must already have been ‘done’. After so many decades or centuries, what more could there possibly be to discover? One of the answers is that what interests scholars, and what topics are considered worthy of examination, changes over time. This explains how ‘new’ material – often sitting in the archives for centuries – comes to light. It also explains why women have not always made the cut, a problem compounded, as recent Twitter discussions have highlighted, by how often research about women by female scholars still goes unpublished.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line883
|
__label__wiki
| 0.798978
| 0.798978
|
Alliance Statement on the Retirement of Helicopter Association International President and CEO Matt Zuccaro
Washington, DC – This week, Matt Zuccaro, President and CEO of Helicopter Association International (HAI) announced he will retire effective June 30, 2020. Zuccaro has been in his current role at HAI since 2005, a board member of the Alliance for Aviation Across America since 2011, Vice President of the Alliance Board since 2018, and a tireless champion of the helicopter and general aviation industry for decades.
Zuccaro has had a distinguished 50-year career as an aviator, beginning as a helicopter pilot in Vietnam with the US Army. He went on to hold a variety of leadership positions at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the Eastern Regional Helicopter Association, and HAI.
He has earned many accolades over his career, including two Distinguished Flying Crosses, three Bronze Stars, and 19 Air Medals for his service in Vietnam, as well as the HAI Pilot Safety Award for 10,000 hours of accident- and violation-free flight hours and the NBAA Pilot Safety award.
Selena Shilad, Executive Director of the Alliance for Aviation Across America, said, “Matt Zuccaro has been a tireless leader and advocate on behalf of the helicopter industry and general aviation for decades. We have all been very fortunate to have a champion like Matt in our corner, and admire his thoughtful and deliberate leadership. We look forward to working with Matt and the HAI team over his next year, and wish him all the best in all of his future endeavors.”
Formed in 2007, the Alliance for Aviation Across America is a non-profit, non-partisan coalition of over 6,000 individuals representing businesses, agricultural groups, FBO’s, small airports, elected officials, charitable organizations, and leading business and aviation groups that support the interest of the general aviation community across various public policy issues.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line884
|
__label__wiki
| 0.854831
| 0.854831
|
Airbnb partnership is reminder of Puerto Rico's crisis
Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky and Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló (both far left). Photo: Airbnb
Airbnb announced a partnership with Puerto Rico Wednesday: The company will roll out its Experiences service there (through which hosts can arrange activities that guests can book), will donate its fees to a disaster relief organization, and help with tourism marketing.
Why it matters: The move provides a stark reminder of the territory's still precarious situation post-Hurricane Maria, which critics have blamed on an inadequate federal response to the disaster. Meanwhile, Airbnb hosts in Puerto Rico have earned $17 million since October, according to the company.
"We don’t have the right to vote or the right of representation,” Puerto Rico governor Ricardo Rosselló said about the territory's status during a press event at Airbnb's San Francisco headquarters. "We need to ask ourselves if it’s OK to have two tiers of citizenship, and my answer is no."
Last June, Puerto Ricans overwhelmingly voted in favor of becoming a U.S. state, but any move in that direction would require Congress to act first.
Be smart: While it's great PR for Airbnb, this partnership could also provide ammo for the "no bailouts, the private sector can handle things" crowd. But $17 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the billions of dollars Puerto Rico needs to straighten out its debt crisis, fix its power grid, and begin to grow again. Airbnb's donations of its fees will only last three months.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line887
|
__label__wiki
| 0.665277
| 0.665277
|
Osborn Maledon partner receives Community Impact Award
Osborn Maledon partner Tom Curzon honored by Boy Scouts
Tom Curzon, co-chair of Osborn Maledon, P.A.’s business practice, was honored by the Boy Scouts of America, Grand Canyon Council with its Community Impact Award at its On My Honor Breakfast on April 15.
In announcing the award, the Boy Scouts Council honored Curzon “for his unselfish devotion to serving Arizona’s citizens and leadership in the scouting community.”
Curzon is an Eagle Scout, Vigil Honor member of the Order of the Arrow and Silver Beaver Award recipient. One of the highlights of his youth was attending the 1969 National Scout Jamboree in Idaho, where he and 35,000 other Scouts watched astronaut Neil Armstrong walk on the moon via a giant outdoor, live screen projection, “an incredible experience,” he remembered.
As an adult, Curzon was previously engaged with Troop 644 in Scottsdale, serving as its Troop Committee Chairman for ten years, and was involved heavily in its leadership and camping programs. Recently, two Grand Canyon Council leaders, Andy Price, CEO, and Lisa Graham Keegan, president of the board, asked Curzon to become involved in the Council’s efforts to become more diverse, inclusive and welcoming.
“For me, and I suspect lots of others, Scouting gave me the first, and most significant, early leadership training I had,” Curzon said. “The training and the leadership opportunities became important foundations for the rest of my life-professionally and otherwise. Helping our boys and girls have these same opportunities to develop leadership skills early seems like an incredibly worthy endeavor, and I am delighted to help out.”
Curzon’s legal practice focuses primarily on serving as outside general counsel and trusted and strategic advisor to emerging, growth-oriented companies. He is an active leader in Arizona’s entrepreneurial ecosystem. He is a member of Greater Phoenix Leadership.
With more than 50 attorneys, Osborn Maledon is a leading Arizona law firm that provides litigation, business and general counsel solutions for its clients. More information is available at www.omlaw.com.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line889
|
__label__wiki
| 0.710823
| 0.710823
|
The Untitled Art Boutique
Home › Fahren Feingold & Indira Cesarine "We The People"
Untitled Space
Fahren Feingold & Indira Cesarine "We The People"
Regular price $12,500.00 Sale price $0.00 Unit price /per
Fahren Feingold & Indira Cesarine "We The People" 2020
Mixed Media Painting, Neon Glass Mounted to Watercolor on Paper on Wood Panel with an electrical transformer
Dimensions: 29.5 x 22.25 x 4in
Signed on Verso with Official Stamp, Includes Certificate of Authenticity
Watercolor artist Fahren Feingold imparts an ethereal quality to her unique works depicting the female form. Her watercolors featuring bold feminine figures reference imagery from early 20th century French photography, vintage American magazines from the 70s and 80s, and today’s Internet girls. In 2016, her dreamy watercolors caught the eye of the legendary Nick Knight, who commissioned her to illustrate Paris Fashion Week for SHOW Studio. Since then, her work has been featured in numerous international exhibitions, as well as solo shows and group shows presented by The Untitled Space. Celebrated as “a trailblazing artist on a meteoric rise” by Vogue, her watercolors have steadily gained recognition from collectors and critics alike for their sensitive, dreamlike colors, graceful brush stroke, and rendition of the female form. Through her creative depictions, Feingold gives new voices to women of the past and present while exploring larger notions of female constructs in contemporary society.
Indira Cesarine is a Mexican American multidisciplinary artist who works with photography, video, painting, printmaking, and sculpture. A graduate of Columbia University with a triple major in Art History, French and Women’s Studies, she additionally studied at Parson’s School of Design, International Center of Photography, School of Visual Arts, Art Students League, and the New York Academy of Art. Cesarine had her first solo show at the age of sixteen at Paul Mellon Arts Center. Her work as an artist has been featured internationally at many art galleries, museums, and art fairs, including The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Hudson Valley MOCA, The Watermill Center, Mattatuck Museum, Albany Institute of History and Art, CICA Museum, San Luis Obispo Museum of Art, French Embassy Cultural Center, Art Basel Miami, SCOPE Art Basel, SCOPE Miami, SPRING/BREAK Art Show, Getty Images Gallery, Cannes Film Festival, and the International Festival Photo Mode to name a few. In 2014, her public art sculpture, The Egg of Light was exhibited at Rockefeller Center as part of the Fabergé Big Egg Hunt. Her work has been auctioned at Sotheby’s New York for the annual Take Home A Nude art benefits in 2017 - 2019, at ARTWALK NY benefiting the Coalition for the Homeless in 2018 and 2019. Her artwork and exhibitions has been featured internationally in many publications including American Vogue, Vogue Italia, Forbes, Newsweek, W Magazine, Harper’s Bazaar, Dazed and Confused, New York Magazine, i-D Magazine, and The Huffington Post among many others. Cesarine currently lives and works in Tribeca, NY.
This artwork is currently featured in "Art4Equality x Life, Liberty & The Pursuit of Happiness" group exhibition at The Untitled Space.
Learn more about the artists on our website.
Shipping + Pick Up
The Untitled Space
45 Lispenard Street
Hours & Exhibit info:
untitled-space.com
Questions about artwork?
Contact us and we can arrange a phone call!
Sign up for the latest news on exhibitions, available artwork and offers!
HOLIDAY 2020 COLLECTION - 20% OFF + FREE SHIPPING
DISCOVER AND COLLECT ARTWORK THIS HOLIDAY SEASON The Untitled Space is offering a limited time special 2020 Holiday Promotion of 20% off select unique artworks and limited editions by...
Take 10% Off Your 1st Purchase with code: ILOVEUNTITLED
Visit the gallery's official website for more info on our exhibitions and artists:
Copyright © 2021, The Untitled Space. Powered by Shopify
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line891
|
__label__cc
| 0.557197
| 0.442803
|
Bill Perry August 31, 2017
US CHINA TRADE WAR–TRUMP SIMPLISTIC APPROACH TO TRADE INJURES US COMPANIES, US AGRICULTURE BADLY HURT, NAFTA NOT GOING WELL, SECTION 301 AND 232 CASES, TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE, SOLAR, FALSE CLAIMS ACT, MORE CASES
White House Washington DC
TRADE IS A TWO WAY STREET
US CHINA TRADE WAR AUGUST 30, 2017
As stated in many past blog posts, it is easy for Candidate Trump to talk protectionism, but President Trump is now learning it is much more complicated. Trump’s decision to push protectionism endangers his standing with a core constituency—farmers and rural America. As stated below, Trump’s decision to tear up the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) has already had a major negative impact on farmers.
Trump’s call for an economic war with China and other countries is already having a ramification. Trump’s threat to pull out of NAFTA is not helping the US position in the negotiations. Trump simply does not understand the ramifications of the trade deal when he terminated the TPP or when he threatens to tear up NAFTA.
The Trump trade policy is based on one arrogant presumption—the US market is the largest in the World and the rest of the World must kowtow, come on bended knee, to get into the US and that fact gives the US leverage. But that fact is no longer true. The 11 countries in the TPP have a larger market than the US. China has a larger market than the US so the Trump Administration has to be very careful when it plays this card.
In fact, Canada and Mexico already can fall back on trade agreements they have with other countries, such as Europe. The United States does not have that luxury. The US decision by both Trump and the Democrats to go protectionist is further isolating the US in the trade area and is and will have major negative economic ramifications on the US economy. The chickens will come home to roost.
Trump simply did not understand the dynamics of the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) and the ramifications of simply terminating it. During the campaign, Candidate Trump stated that the TPP was a bad deal and if only he led the negotiating the team, it would be a better deal. Thus, Trump argued that the TPP deal should be terminated and the US should then negotiate bilateral deals with the eleven countries in the TPP.
But two major problems with that strategy are becoming very clear. First the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) does not have the personnel to negotiate 11 separate trade deals with the individual countries. It took more than five years to negotiate the TPP. With Trump’s steep cuts to the Government bureaucracy, the government resources simply are not there.
Second, Trump did not understand the dynamics of the TPP deal. During those negotiations, countries could give the US concessions because they would get offsets from other countries and the importance of gaining access to the markets of 11 other countries was worth the concession to the US.
But with no other countries in bilateral deals, the other countries are less willing to make the concessions the US is demanding. In fact, as Robert Lighthizer, the USTR, has discovered, many of the countries in the TPP do not want to have a bilateral deal with the US. They fear and rightly so that the US will demand too much. Much easier to export and import from other countries.
The same problem is happening in the NAFTA negotiations. Trump is threatening to leave NAFTA when he simply does not understand the dynamics of the deal and the devastating impact that such a withdrawal would have on US farmers and also US manufacturing industries, such as the US auto industry. Trade is very complicated and running into the trade area like a bull in a China shop simply creates enormous damage. That damage will be borne by the US agricultural industry and US manufacturers and that means the loss of 1000s if not 100s of thousands of jobs.
Labor unions and working men like the sound of being politically tough on trade and the foreigners, but when jobs are lost, those same people may not like the actual reality of a very protectionist policy. Many American politicians, such as Donald Trump and Senators Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders, like to be tough on trade because foreigners do not vote. But if the economy is hurt by Trump’s trade actions, his base will be hurt and he will not be the next President. So there a lot riding on Trump’s trade policy and his Administration has run straight into the Wall of actual trade reality.
The only saving grace for Trump is that as evidenced by Senators Chuck Schumer and Bernie Sanders, the Democrats are even more protectionist than Trump. But neither the Democrats nor Trump understand the true ramifications of simply walking away from trade deals that open up foreign markets. The US agricultural industry is now learning those ramifications.
By kowtowing to the Steel industry with its 141,000 jobs, these trade actions could costs thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of jobs in downstream industries and other industries, such as Agriculture. It is time for the United States to wake up to the benefits of trade.
It is also time for the United States to find a way to make its companies more competitive in the US and international markets as they exist now rather than erect protectionist barriers to international competition. See the article on Trade Adjustment Assistance for Companies below and how companies, including steel companies, can be saved from import competition by making them competitive again.
USTR has also initiated a section 301 case against forced technology transfers in deals with China. But in an August 30, 2017 article by Dan Harris, my partner, entitled “China US Trade Wars and the IP Elephant in the Room”, Dan states that in over one hundred deals with Chinese companies, he has not seen US companies forced to give over their Intellectual Property (“IP”) by the Chinese government. Instead he has seen US companies make bad decisions leading them to give away their IP by their own volition. If US companies do not protect their IP rights, they will lose them. The US Government cannot protect against stupid mistakes.
Meanwhile, the Section 232 Steel and Aluminum cases remain on hold. The Section 201 case against imports of Solar Cells continues with the ITC hearing being 11 hours long. The United States has intervened in a False Claims Act case against Furniture. Commerce has also issued a circumvention determination in the Aluminum Extrusions case.
More Antidumping and Countervailing Duty and 337 cases have been filed against China and the trade beat goes on.
If anyone has any questions or wants additional information, please feel free to contact me at my e-mail address bill@harrisbricken.com.
THE WEAKNESS IN DONALD TRUMP’S ECONOMIC POLICY—TRADE
Donald Trump’s political strategy is fight the cultural war, but win the next election because of his economic policy. If jobs and wages are up, more companies move into the US, Trump’s firm belief is that he wins the next Presidential election. Even Michael Moore, the Democratic gadfly, believes that Trump will win reelection by carrying the states that he already won. See https://www.fastcompany.com/40459122/michael-moore-says-trump-is-on-track-to-win-again-in-2020.
There is only one fly in the ointment, flaw in this strategy—Trade. If the Trump trade policy hurts farmers, Trump could lose the rural states: Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, to name a few and that could lead to Trump’s loss in the next Presidential election.
The economic nationalist Steve Bannon, who is credited with helping get Donald Trump elected by in part pushing the American First Trump policy, was recently forced out of the White House. Before he left, however, Bannon made his trade position crystal clear. in an article entitled “Steve Bannon Unrepetent”, in the American Prospect” magazine on August 16, 2017, Bannon stated with regards to trade policy:
“We’re at economic war with China,” he added. “It’s in all their literature. They’re not shy about saying what they’re doing. One of us is going to be a hegemon in 25 or 30 years and it’s gonna be them if we go down this path. . .
Bannon went on to describe his battle inside the administration to take a harder line on China trade, and not to fall into a trap of wishful thinking in which complaints against China’s trade practices now had to take a backseat to the hope that China, as honest broker, would help restrain Kim.
“To me,” Bannon said, “the economic war with China is everything. And we have to be maniacally focused on that. If we continue to lose it, we’re five years away, I think, ten years at the most, of hitting an inflection point from which we’ll never be able to recover.”
Bannon’s plan of attack includes: a complaint under Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act against Chinese coercion of technology transfers from American corporations doing business there, and follow-up complaints against steel and aluminum dumping. “We’re going to run the tables on these guys. We’ve come to the conclusion that they’re in an economic war and they’re crushing us.”
From Bannon’s point of view, trade is economic war.
Although Bannon has since left the White House, President Trump and Commerce Secretary Ross apparently share Bannon’s thinking. On August 22nd, without understanding the ramifications on his voter base, President Trump announced that he might simply cancel NAFTA. Apparently, Trump believes that both Mexico and Canada are winning the economic war against the United States.
On August 28th, in an article entitled “Exclusive: Trump vents in Oval Office, “I want tariffs. Bring me some tariffs!”, Axios reported that in the first Oval Office meeting with Chief of Staff John Kelley and the last meeting with Steve Bannon, President Trump stated:
Trump, addressing Kelly, said, “John, you haven’t been in a trade discussion before, so I want to share with you my views. For the last six months, this same group of geniuses comes in here all the time and I tell them, ‘Tariffs. I want tariffs.’ And what do they do? They bring me IP. I can’t put a tariff on IP.” . . .
“China is laughing at us,” Trump added. “Laughing.”
Kelly responded: “Yes sir, I understand, you want tariffs.” . . . .
Staff secretary Rob Porter, who is a key mediator in such meetings, said to the president: “Sir, do you not want to sign this?” He was referring to Trump’s memo prodding Lighthizer to investigate China — which may lead to tariffs against Beijing.
Trump replied: “No, I’ll sign it, but it’s not what I’ve asked for the last six months.” He turned to Kelly: “So, John, I want you to know, this is my view. I want tariffs. And I want someone to bring me some tariffs.”
Kelly replied: “Yes sir, understood sir, I have it.” . . .
Trump made sure the meeting ended with no confusion as to what he wanted.
“John, let me tell you why they didn’t bring me any tariffs,” he said. “I know there are some people in the room right now that are upset. I know there are some globalists in the room right now. And they don’t want them, John, they don’t want the tariffs. But I’m telling you, I want tariffs.” . . . .
Emphasis in the original.
Trump’s statements in this article ring true because during the Presidential campaign, Donald Trump made it very clear that he likes tariffs.
On August 28th, however, George Will in an Op-ed article entitled “Trump, The Novice Protectionist” in Investors Business Daily responded to the Trump trade policy stating:
“Foreigners, however, have their uses. After the president trumpeted that the Dow surpassing the 22,000 mark was evidence of America’s resurgent greatness, The Wall Street Journal rather impertinently noted this: Boeing, whose shares have gained 50% this year and which accounted for 563 of the more than 2,000 points the Dow had gained this year en route to 22,000, makes about 60% of its sales overseas. Boeing has a backlog of orders for 5,705 planes, 75% going outside North America. For Apple, the second-biggest contributor (283 points) to this year’s Dow gain at that point, foreign sales are two-thirds of its total sales. Foreign sales are also two-thirds of the sales of McDonald’s, the third-biggest contributor (239 points).
Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute says that in the last 20 years the inflation-adjusted value of U.S. manufacturing output has increased 40% even though — actually, partly because — U.S. factory employment decreased 5.1 million jobs (29%). . . . Increased productivity is the reason there can be quadrupled output from the same number of workers. According to one study, 88% of manufacturing job losses are the result of improved productivity, not rapacious Chinese.
But those Democrats who think government should fine-tune everything are natural protectionists (Sen. Charles Schumer: “They’re rapacious, the Chinese”) and probably think Trump is too fainthearted because he is not protecting Americans from competition from Americans. . . .”
TRUMP TRADE WAR—THE SIMPLISTIC APPROACH TO TRADE COULD WELL DAMAGE THE US ECONOMY AND DOOM THE TRUMP ECONOMIC PLAN
In the above articles about Bannon’s and Trump’s approach to trade along with the below op-ed article in the Wall Street Journal by Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, the Trump trade team reveal the protectionist bent of the Trump Administration, which is based, in part, on blind arrogance and a simplistic approach to trade policy.
The Bannon and Trump approach reveal fatal misunderstandings: trade is a two-way street, and US exports are critical to the wellbeing of Donald Trump’s own constituents. In international trade, what goes around comes around. What the US does to other countries, they can do back to the US.
Moreover, Bannon, Ross and Trump are confusing economic warfare with economic competition. The United States has always strongly believed that economic competition is good for the economy, the country and the US consumer. The bedrock principle of the importance of economic competition to wellbeing of the US economy is the reason the US antitrust laws were enacted. As Deputy Assistant Attorney General Roger Alford of the US Justice Department’s Antitrust Division recently stated on August 30th at a Competition Policy Forum in Shanghai China:
Our continued engagement on this topic is significant for competition enforcement. We are the guardians of strong and vigorous competition for economic prosperity. Our lodestar is to promote competition, not to give preference to specific competitors, even when individual businesses jockey for advantage. . . .
Bill Gates believed that Microsoft had to go to war with its competition, but frankly that is why Microsoft produced such good software. CEOs of companies are driven by competition to produce better products at lower prices, which means stronger US companies and prosperity for the US economy and US consumers. Stronger US companies means more jobs at higher wages.
Protecting US companies from international competition does not strengthen the US companies. It weakens them and the poster child for such a point is the US Steel industry, which has had 40 years of protection from steel imports.
This is exactly why President Ronald Reagan was so opposed to protectionism. As President Reagan stated above in June 1986: “Protectionism is destructionism. It costs jobs.”
Moreover, Steve Bannon and Donald Trump have not figured out one important point: Not only do companies compete against each other and States compete against each other, but the United States and other countries compete against each other. The US decision to go the Protectionist route means it has given up competing, and, therefore, it will lose the economic war. Trump’s and Bannon’s combined with the Democrat’s protectionist policies mean the US will lose the economic war because of its decision to look inward and no longer compete in the international economic marketplace.
US companies do not get stronger by protecting them from international competition, which simply promotes the mentality of international trade victimhood. US companies get stronger by looking inward and working harder to become internationally competitive. See the article about Trade Adjustment Assistance for Companies below.
The arrogance of the Steve Bannon and the Trump trade policy is based on the principle that the United States is the largest market in the World, and this gives the US leverage and, therefore, countries must kowtow and bend their head to get into the US market. Although that principle may have been true twenty years ago, it is simply no longer true.
The Trans Pacific Partnership, for example, combines the markets of 12 countries, now 11 with the US exit, into one “huge” trading block. Since Mexico, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand are part of that block, the TPP market is a much larger market than the US alone. Mexico and Canada are also in a stronger trade position than the US because they already have free trade agreements with a number of other countries, including the EC, and that gives them a substantial competitive advantage getting into those markets. This fact gives Canada and Mexico leverage in the NAFTA negotiations even though Trump, Lighthizer and Ross simply do not understand the dynamics of the deal.
Maybe this is a major reason US companies move to Mexico and Canada to get better access to other foreign markets. The United States is competing with other countries too.
Also in many ways, with 1.37 billion people China has a larger market than the US. In 2006, at a speech in Beijing, the US Commercial Attaché stated that 75% of all Chinese, including rural Chinese, have a color television set. Now that is close to 95% of 1.37 billion. That is a larger market than the US with its 323 million.
Also the upper class and upper middle class in China, which numbers between 250 to more than 300 million, have an income closer to the US and that segment of the China market is the same size, if not larger, than the US. That is why in the push for the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”), House Speaker Paul Ryan used to state that 75% of the World’s consumers are outside the United States.
But China is also not this overwhelming behemoth with an economic juggernaut that is going to crush the US. Yes, it may have a larger market, but on a per capita basis, it is much smaller. Thus, the US per capita income on average is $57,000 where the Chinese per capita income is $8,000. China has its own problems—keeping its people happy and fed.
Along with these problems, China has major weaknesses, which can be exploited by the US. China has a very high personal tax rate, which can be as high at 45%. This high tax rate is why many Chinese have emigrated to the US, looking for a lower tax rate and a better opportunity to keep the money they earn. If Trump can drive taxes lower, that may result in more entrepreneurs and businesses moving to the US, e.g. Foxconn.
Another problem is the Chinese government’s strict control of information flowing into China by its very strong control of the internet. Strict control of the internet stops knowledge flowing into China, which especially hurts the country’s high tech sector. When information and knowledge stop, economies do not do as well. The free flow of knowledge and ideas is critical for the most advanced economies and yet that is not true in China.
But arrogance is one of the great sins because it blinds you to all options. To make a better deal in trade negotiations, the Administration has to do its homework and first understand the actual American interest. If one is going to make America great again, one must first understand what is the nature of America’s interest in trade. This requires understanding the dynamics of the trade deal in question, which President Trump prides himself in doing. The Trump Administration must understand the actual trade deal closely, the US leverage points and the US weaknesses, what trade deals will help the US and the what trade deals will hurt the US interest. Donald Trump’s failure in trade negotiations is to understand the dynamics of the deal and the leverage that the US has in trade negotiations. In other words, with regards to trade, Trump simply does not understand “The Art of the Deal”.
In ripping up the TPP without even trying to renegotiate, Trump failed his own test because he did not understand the elements of the deal. Trump’s philosophy was to do away with multilateral deals because they fall to the lowest common denominator and do only bilateral deals because that gives the US more control over the deal and if the country does not live up to its side of the bargain cancel the deal.
The problem with that approach is first the US government does not have the personnel at USTR, which is very lean and mean, to negotiate 11 separate trade deals with all the countries in the TPP. It took more than 5 years to negotiate the TPP.
But secondly and more important, in recent bilateral negotiations, Canada, Mexico and Japan have all told the US do not assume that in bilateral deals or NAFTA, the United States will get the same deal it would have gotten in the TPP. In fact, as indicated below, many countries in the TPP simply do not want to do a bilateral deal with the US—too much work. Canada, Mexico and Japan were willing to give the US a better deal because they would gain access to a much greater market, the market of 11 additional countries. That gave countries the political ability to play one national interest against another national interest. Thus, Canada could give in to the US on dairy products because of the potential access to the much larger TPP market, including the Japanese and US markets. Thus, countries in the TPP could use tradeoffs with other countries to open their markets further to US exports. Those trades offs and the market access to the markets of 12 different countries does not exist with a bilateral deal with just the US.
On August 24, 2017, in an article entitled “Revived TPP may exclude trade concessions sought by US”, Nikkei, a Japanese newspaper, stated:
TOKYO — Japan is proposing suspending trade concessions made to the U.S. as part of the Trans-Pacific Partnership in order to resurrect the pact with the 11 remaining members.
Tokyo sounded out that proposal to other nations in the “TPP 11,” as those members became known after the U.S. withdrew from the deal. Senior negotiators will cite items they wish to see shelved during three days of talks starting Monday in Australia.
Washington had secured a number of major concessions from other nations in exchange for lower American tariffs on their exports. Though President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of the deal, those concessions remain on the TPP’s books — to the consternation of other members.
If all the 11 participants agree unanimously, any such concession would be put on hold, and national regulations governing that element of the pact would remain in place.
But the suspensions would be lifted if and when the U.S. decides to return to the partnership.
While the remaining members are leaning toward keeping the lower tariffs agreed on among the initial group, they are likely to revisit specific trade rules.
The U.S. sided with major domestic drug companies and settled on an effective eight-year window before competitors can have access to proprietary pharmaceutical data. That moratorium exceeds international standards, and other countries think it would impede development of cheap generics. All members of the TPP 11 are expected to agree on freezing that provision.
Other provisions that may be suspended involve copyright protection periods, fair-competition policies governing state-owned enterprises and the opening of government procurement to foreign capital.
American exports would face a competitive disadvantage if an 11-member TPP goes into force. Tokyo hopes that U.S. meat industry leaders will speak up in favor of rejoining the trade deal.
Trade is the one weak link in Trump’s economic plan. As indicated below, the decision to kill the TPP has already had a major negative impact on US agriculture and part of Trump’s base, the rural states, where agriculture is king.
SIMPLICITY IS OFTEN A GOOD TRADE POLICY BUT NOT WHEN THE POLICY IS SIMPLE MINDED AND NARROWLY FOCUSED
Trump has slowed down the Section 232 Steel and Aluminum Investigations because its “complicated”, but when Bannon and Trump take a very simplistic, black and white view of trade, it is extremely dangerous to the US economy and Donald Trump’s own constituents.
This is not a fight between Globalism and America First. The America First strategy requires the Administration to understand deeply the interest of the United States and the interest of all the significant US industries in trade negotiations, including agriculture, not just the narrow Steel and Aluminum Industries. The Trump and Bannon statements indicate a deep failure to analyze why Trump won the election and what the interest of the entire United States is in trade negotiations and also the interest of Donald Trump’s own constituents, the voters that elected Donald Trump President.
Bannon thinks that if we create a trade war with China and are tough on them we will win the economic trade war with China. But Bannon truly has forgotten why voters elected Donald Trump.
First, it was not just the US Steel and Aluminum industries that put Trump in the White House, it was the working man in many manufacturing plants throughout the United States. Because of their economic, black white view of the World, Trump and Bannon want to put up barriers to steel imports to protect the US Steel industry and its 141,000 jobs without realizing the damaging impact of such an action on the millions of jobs in the downstream steel consuming industries. Truthfully, if Donald Trump is going to be reelected, Trump himself, his trade team and Steve Bannon cannot be so simple minded.
More importantly Donald Trump also won because of farmers. Although Trump won the States in the Blue Wall, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, he was also able to win the Presidency because he won the US heartland, including the states of Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Arizona, Oklahoma, Utah and Florida. What do those states have in common and in common with Wisconsin—Agriculture. And the Trump trade policy is and has seriously hurt US farmers because US farmers are dependent on exports.
As the US Wheat Federation stated in the Section 232 Steel case, half of US wheat is exported. Putting up protectionist walls invites retaliation against US agricultural exports.
Finally, one other point in direct response to Steve Bannon’s and Trumps statement, substantial trade relations prevent real shooting wars. As indicated below in the Section 301 article, China is becoming more amenable on North Korea because of its enormous trade relationship with the United States. The total US China trade relationship is $578.6 billion with $115.8 billion in US exports and $462.8 billion in imports from China.
In direct contrast, the US trade relationship with Russia is much, much smaller. The total US Russia trade relationship is $38.1 billion with $11.2 in US exports and $27 billion in imports from Russia. Truly peanuts in the global trade market. It is better to compete with countries in the economic arena as compared to a real war, where millions die.
DEMOCRATS MORE PROTECTIONIST THAN DONALD TRUMP
The only saving grace for Donald Trump on trade is that the Democrats are even more protectionist. On August 13th, Senator Chuck Schumer, who heads the Democrats in the Senate, told John Catsimatidis on his New York AM 970 radio show “The Cats Roundtable” that he is closer now to President Donald Trump than he ever was with former President Barack Obama on trade. Senator Schumer stated:
“Trade is the thing [China cares] most about, and they’ve been treating us very badly on trade for a long time, frankly,. I was closer in trade views to Donald Trump than I was to either George Bush or Barack Obama, on China anyway. I think we were much too easy on them. But if we got tough on them now, maybe they would relent, but we have to be real tough. So far, the administration has not been as tough as they should be, as far as I’m concerned.”
The Trump Administration should be very tough with China on trade, but it should carefully analyze what its true interests are and the interests of US voters that elected Donald Trump. The US government should do everything in its power to drop barriers to US exports in China and other countries. But protectionism for protectionism’s sake will not cure the problems of US manufacturing and right the US China trade balance
TRUMP’S TRADE WAR HURTS US AGRICULTURE AND US FARMERS
As mentioned in prior newsletter, the ox that will be gored by Trump’s trade policy is agriculture and that is just what is happening. On August 7, 2017, in the attached extensive article entitled “Trump’s Trade Pullout Roils Rural America”, Trump’s Trade Pullout Roils Rural America – POLITICO Magazine, Politico did its homework and described in detail the deep negative impact of the Trump trade policy on US agriculture:
EAGLE GROVE, Iowa—On a cloud-swept landscape dotted with grain elevators, a meat producer called Prestage Farms is building a 700,000-square-foot processing plant. The gleaming new factory is both the great hope of Wright County, which voted by a 2-1 margin for Donald Trump, and the victim of one of Trump’s first policy moves, his decision to pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
For much of industrial America, the TPP was a suspect deal, the successor to the North American Free Trade Agreement, which some argue led to a massive offshoring of U.S. jobs to Mexico. But for the already struggling agricultural sector, the sprawling 12- nation TPP, covering 40 percent of the world’s economy, was a lifeline. It was a chance to erase punishing tariffs that restricted the United States—the onetime “breadbasket of the world”—from selling its meats, grains and dairy products to massive importers of foodstuffs such as Japan and Vietnam.
The decision to pull out of the trade deal has become a double hit on places like Eagle Grove. The promised bump of $10 billion in agricultural output over 15 years, based on estimates by the U.S. International Trade Commission, won’t materialize. But Trump’s decision to withdraw from the pact also cleared the way for rival exporters such as Australia, New Zealand and the European Union to negotiate even lower tariffs with importing nations, creating potentially greater competitive advantages over U.S. exports.
A POLITICO analysis found that the 11 other TPP countries are now involved in a whopping 27 separate trade negotiations with each other, other major trading powers in the region like China and massive blocs like the EU. Those efforts range from exploratory conversations to deals already signed and awaiting ratification. Seven of the most significant deals for U.S. farmers were either launched or concluded in the five months since the United States withdrew from the TPP.
“I’m scared to death,” said Ron Prestage, whose North Carolina-based family pork and poultry business made its huge investment in the plant near Eagle Grove in part to reap expected gains from the TPP. “I don’t guess I’ve gone beyond the point of no return on the new plant, but we did already start digging our wells and started moving dirt.”
He and other agricultural business people and workers have reason for concern.
On July 6, the EU, which already exports as much pork to Japan as the United States does, announced political agreement on a new deal that would give European pork farmers an advantage of up to $2 per pound over U.S. exporters under certain circumstances—a move which, if unchecked, is all but certain to create a widening gap between EU exports and those from the United States.
European wine producers, who sold more than $1 billion to Japan between 2014 and 2016, would also see a 15 percent tariff on exports to Japan disappear while U.S. exporters would continue to face that duty at the border. For other products, the deal essentially mirrors the rates negotiated under the TPP, which the United States has surrendered, giving the EU a clear advantage over U.S. farmers.
The EU’s deal is all the more noteworthy because American farmers were relying on the TPP—to which the EU was not a member—to give them an advantage over European competitors. But in a further rebuke to the United States, Tokyo decided within a matter of weeks to offer the European nations virtually the same agricultural access to its market that United States trade officials had spent two excruciating years extracting through near-monthly meetings with their Japanese counterparts on the sidelines of the broader TPP negotiations; the United States is now left out.
The EU, which also recently inked a deal with Vietnam, is now moving forward with talks with Malaysia and is in the process of modernizing a pre-existing trade deal with Mexico.
Meanwhile, a bloc of four Latin-American countries—Mexico, Peru, Chile and Colombia, known as the Pacific Alliance—is quickly becoming the leading force for free trade in the region, announcing near the end of June it would commence its own negotiations with New Zealand, Australia and Singapore, heedless of its neighbor to the north.
On its own, Australia, which in 2015 cut a deal to undersell the United States in beef exports to Japan, announced another round of scheduled tariff cuts with Japan. Without the TPP, Australian ranchers eventually will enjoy a 19 percent tariff advantage over U.S. competitors. Australia is also prioritizing the conclusion of trade talks with Indonesia, the largest nation in Southeast Asia by gross domestic product.
The remaining 11 TPP countries have already met two times, with a third meeting planned, to move ahead with the revival of the deal without the United States. The so- called TPP-11 would be in direct response to Trump’s trade policy. Economic forecasts already show projected gains for countries involved. Canada, according to one estimate, could permanently gain an annual market share of $412 million in beef and $111 million in pork sales to Japan by 2035, because lower tariffs would enable it to eclipse America’s position in the market.
As China, which was never a part of the TPP, senses blood in the water, it is moving quickly to assert itself, rather than the United States, as the region’s trade arbiter. China is aiming to close talks by the end of this year on its behemoth Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership—a trade agreement involving 15 other Asia-Pacific countries.
None of these deals are yet in effect. But already there are signs that competitors are gaining market share over U.S. producers in the post-TPP landscape, as Pacific nations take a closer look at alternatives to U.S. exporters.
Over the first five months of 2017, U.S. exports to Japan of chilled pork, which is preferable to frozen meat, are up 2 percent over the previous year. But exports of chilled pork from Canada, a prime competitor, are up 19 percent. Likewise, in frozen pork, U.S. exports are up 28 percent. But exports from the EU, the leading competitor, are up 44 percent.
Japan, which saw the TPP not only as a source of economic growth but a counterweight to China, is now taking the lead in salvaging the deal. Its goal is to have some sort of agreement between the 11 other countries in place for the annual summit of Asia-Pacific leaders in November. Trump is expected to attend, creating the awkward possibility that he will witness all the handshakes and back slaps as his fellow leaders congratulate themselves on a deal.
For his part, Trump once promised a slew of “beautiful” deals to replace the TPP, but his administration has yet to lay out a detailed strategy. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer told lawmakers that an analysis is underway to determine where it makes most sense to pursue negotiations.
In the meantime, Lighthizer, a trade attorney who pressured Japan to voluntarily restrain its steel exports when he was a trade official in the 1980s, said Tokyo should just go ahead and lower their tariffs without expecting anything in return.
“I think in the areas like beef and the others, they ought to be making some unilateral concessions, at least temporary concessions,” he told lawmakers in June. “And I don’t quite understand why that doesn’t happen.”
Lighthizer said the administration still hopes to strike bilateral trade deals—that is, separate agreements with individual countries—but he conceded that “some of the TPP countries don’t want to do bilaterals.” The value of the TPP for many countries was that they could justify giving up protective tariffs in exchange for their own access to the markets of a wide pool of countries; many are unwilling to make such concessions for the smaller gains of a bilateral deal.
Lighthizer acknowledged that even Japan, at least for the time being, may not be interested in one-on-one negotiations with the U.S. . . .
That leaves workers in 13,000-person Wright County, whose survival depends largely on agriculture, with relatively few signs of optimism. Trump’s decision to walk away from the TPP has stoked uncertainty about U.S. trade policy and, more notably, the president’s commitment to rural America.
“He fooled a lot of people,” said Sandy McGrath, mayor of Eagle Grove, who is not affiliated with any party and did not support Trump. . . .
But the plant’s success will depend largely on export opportunities. More than 26 percent of the pork produced in the U.S. in 2016 was exported to foreign markets. And more than $1.5 billion of the nearly $6 billion in U.S. pork exports in 2016 headed for Japan.
“At the time those investment decisions were made, the U.S. had never turned down a free trade opportunity,” said Dermot Hayes, an agricultural economist at Iowa State University, referring to the Prestage plant and other pork-industry investments.
Hayes said the livestock industry had in its sights a future of expansion amid soaring export growth. After Trump’s withdrawal from the TPP, “that has pretty much disappeared,” he said. . . .
In April, when Trump was on the verge of withdrawing from NAFTA, Maier said he watched corn prices plummet in anticipation of the president’s decision. Trump relented, at the request of Perdue, the agriculture secretary, who appealed to the president with colorful maps showing the president’s base was largely concentrated in states that heavily rely on agriculture.
Ultimately, Trump agreed to renegotiations with Canada and Mexico instead. But Maier remains wary that, despite pledges by the administration to “do no harm” for agriculture, the mere act of reopening the deal with Canada and Mexico, the two largest destinations for U.S. agricultural exporters, could mess up what has been a very good thing for American farmers in the Midwest.
“Farmers are willing to open up NAFTA, but if we open up NAFTA, there’s the risk of going backwards,” he said. . . .
The Obama administration, backed by a large cadre of free-trade Republicans, used that reality to grow support for the TPP among businesses and agricultural interests eager to grab a better foothold in a fast-growing area of the world where the U.S. has few formal trade deals.
But through the slow churn of negotiations, the dazzlingly complex deal among 12 countries soon fell victim to time and circumstance. After more than five years of talks, bleary-eyed trade negotiators were finally able to close the deal at an Atlanta hotel on October 5, 2015. But the agreement quickly became mired in election politics. Labor unions and blue-collar voters declared it to be a successor to NAFTA, which was blamed for the loss of factories. And while the U.S. trade commission predicted the deal would be broadly beneficial to the overall economy, some areas including food and agriculture were predicted to score more gains than others.
Even as supporters of the deal insisted it would put U.S. manufacturers on a stronger footing versus overseas competitors by enforcing higher labor and environmental standards, Trump and Bernie Sanders used anti-TPP fervor as a key plank of their campaign platforms, declaring that it would cost America jobs. Even Hillary Clinton, normally a supporter of freer trade, turned on the deal, saying she wanted to negotiate better terms.
Trump escalated his rhetoric on trade after the primaries and Congress, which has final say on trade deals, shied away from bringing TPP up for a vote. After Trump’s victory, the fate of the deal in the GOP-controlled Congress was all but sealed as Republican lawmakers put it aside to concentrate on tax reform and a bid to roll back Obamacare.
On his first full day in office, Trump signed an executive order withdrawing from the TPP, calling the action a “great thing for the American worker.”
“The Trans-Pacific Partnership is another disaster done and pushed by special interests who want to rape our country, just a continuing rape of our country,” Trump said during a campaign stop in Ohio. “That’s what it is, too. It’s a harsh word: It’s a rape of our country.” . . .
But even as Iowa was voting for Trump by 51 percent-42 percent, its farmers were looking to Asia as their savior. . . .
But despite Trump’s intense personal interest in trade, the White House has been slow to build the dream team of negotiators the president promised on the campaign trail. Lighthizer, who once served as a deputy U.S. trade representative under President Ronald Reagan, was confirmed on May 11. The people tapped to serve in the agency’s three deputy positions await confirmation, as does the administration’s pick for chief agriculture negotiator.
Iowa’s Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley says he thinks a trade deal with Japan would make up for much that was lost for agriculture by dropping TPP, but it will take “a lot more personnel, a lot more time to get it done, a lot more separate actions by Congress.”
As far as the administration’s strategy to get there, Grassley, who still owns his farm in Butler County, Iowa, said he hasn’t gotten much direction.
“I asked Lighthizer maybe a month ago in a meeting, and I didn’t get an answer,” Grassley said in a recent interview. “In a sense he answered, but not very definitively because their policy isn’t established.” . . .
Maybe the lesson of TPP demise for the protectionist firebreathers is be careful what you wish for. The negative ramifications of not doing the TPP appear to be infinitely higher than doing the trade deal.
NAFTA NEGOTIATIONS
On August 16th, United States, Canada and Mexico sat down together for the first round of talks to formally reopen NAFTA. On July 17th, the USTR released its attached “Summary of Objectives for the NAFTA Renegotiation”, USTR NAFTA RENGOTIATION OBJECTIVES.
But Trump keeps stirring the pot with his anti-NAFTA rhetoric. On August 22nd, during a speech in Phoenix President Trump announced that he might simply cancel NAFTA.
As Politico stated on August 23rd, “Trump’s threat of NAFTA withdrawal lose its edge”:
“Canada and Mexico appear to have reached a conclusion that when President Donald Trump threatens to withdraw from NAFTA, it is a negotiating ploy that is all bark and no bite. . . .
Instead, concerns were raised from within the United States government, where officials and lawmakers who support the deal see little value in the president repeatedly going to the well of harsh rhetoric in a way that makes the United States’ negotiating position more difficult.
“I don’t know a single person with a working brain cell that thinks that’s a good idea,” said one U.S. government source close to the talks, referring to renewing the threat of terminating the deal. “It’s a stupid message to send during the negotiations.”
Part of the reason Mexico and Canada might be less intimidated by Trump’s bluster is that they have plenty of other trading partners to fall back on if the relationship with the U.S. sours. Both countries have separate deals in place with the European Union — Mexico is currently ramping up talks to update theirs — and both are part of the effort to reboot the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which the remaining 11 members are pushing toward completion even without the U.S.
But after Trump cast aside the TPP almost immediately upon taking office, the U.S. has fewer such options to fall back on — so pro-NAFTA lawmakers and those from export- dependent states have repeatedly urged him to focus on modernizing and updating NAFTA, rather than terminating it.
House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady — whose home state of Texas counts Mexico as the No. 1 market for its exports, followed by Canada — cautioned Trump on Wednesday to be more aware of the effects his words have on the country’s trade relationships.
“The president’s rhetoric is red-hot, and it creates real impact,” Brady said during a town hall discussion at AT&T headquarters in Dallas. “I think the rhetoric, the words from the president matter, so I’d like to see that take a different approach in tone.”
Brady, whose powerful committee oversees trade on Capitol Hill, is one of a core group of Republicans whose support will be crucial if the administration succeeds in renegotiating a new deal with Canada and Mexico, since it will likely have to go through Congress for approval . . ..
The political question is whether Trump would discard NAFTA in the face of what certainly would be fierce resistance from Congress and industries like agriculture, which would take a significant hit in that event amid a sustained downturn in the farm economy.
Back in April, intense lobbying from the Hill and on the farm helped talk Trump down from inking a prepared executive order to withdraw from the deal. News of the planned order sparked such a public outcry and flurry of reaction in support of the deal that business and trade insiders sometimes refer to it as “Black Wednesday.” . . .”
Meanwhile, a chorus of industries are telling the Administration not to be so tough in the NAFTA negotiations because tweaks are fine, but the failure of the NAFTA deal would be disastrous to US industry and US agriculture. On August 10th Automobile and Auto Parts makers urged the Administration to cool down the rhetoric on rules of origin for automobiles and auto parts because major changes to automobile rules of origin through NAFTA modernization could have the unintended consequence of making North America’s auto industry less competitive. As Charles Uthus, vice president of international policy at the American Automotive Policy Council, the main lobbying arm of U.S. auto companies in Washington, stated:
“It’s the highest automotive rule of origin anywhere that you can find. It’s already extremely rigorous, very difficult to meet as it is. To actually strengthen it, there is a huge risk of unintended consequences.”
Ann Wilson, senior vice president of government affairs for MEMA, stated:
“Our members really struggle with finding a connection between changing the rules of origin and the reshoring of jobs. They do not see that connection.”
On August 17th Politico reported that Trump’s tough rhetoric has created intense hatred in Mexico, which will make it politically very difficult for Mexico to make concessions or agree to a deal that would clearly benefit the US. Thus, Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto is not afraid to walk away from the table if needed, potentially overturning the entire U.S.-Mexico bilateral trade relationship in the process.
Again, Trump does not understand the dynamics of the deal and the fact that since Mexico has more trade agreements than the US, it has leverage and is not afraid to walk away from the table.
Thus, both Mexico and Canada are resisting US pressure for a new “national content” provision in NAFTA’s auto trade rules to encourage more parts to be made in the United States. As Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo stated:
“It will not be best practice to introduce that kind of rigidities into the industrial process. It’s not good for American companies. It’s not good for Mexican companies.”
Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland also stated: “Canada is not in favor of specific national content in rules of origin”.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Dairy Producers stated that they will fight any U.S. effort to duplicate in NAFTA the dairy concessions secured through TPP negotiations. As Yves Leduc, director of policy and international trade for the Dairy Farmers of Canada, stated, “Not a possibility – as far as we are concerned, we would never agree to that.”
The small amount of dairy access that Canada granted the U.S. during the TPP talks – equal to 3.25 percent of Canada’s domestic milk production – was balanced out by concessions Canada secured in negotiations involving all of the 11 other countries. Those circumstances don’t apply to NAFTA, which involves only three countries. As Leduc stated, “To ask us to open up our market to allow more subsidized goods from the U.S. to enter the Canadian market, the answer is simple: It’s no.”
Meanwhile, US famers joined with Canadian and Mexican farmers to urge US negotiators to not let specific demands undermine the market access US farmers and ranchers enjoy under the existing agreement. Although all three groups want to lower trade barriers to exports and imports, it was their unified position to defend existing market access that was most notable, given the fear on the farm that Trump could use agriculture as a bargaining chip to satisfy his obsession with reducing America’s trade deficit in manufactured goods.
THE PHRASE “FREE BUT FAIR TRADE” IS A FRAUD BECAUSE COMMERCE HAS SO DEFINED DUMPING AS TO FIND ALMOST EVERY IMPORT DUMPED
In an article along the same lines as the Bannon article and the Trump quote, on August 1, 2017, Commerce Secretary Wibur Ross penned an article in the Wall Street Journal entitled, “Free Trade Is a Two Way Street”. In the article, Commerce Secretary Ross argued that many countries erect barriers to US exports, but then went on to state:
“Both China and Europe also bankroll their exports through grants, low-cost loans, energy subsidies, special value-added tax refunds, and below-market real-estate sales and leases, among other means. Comparable levels of government support do not exist in the U.S. If these countries really are free traders, why do they have such formidable tariff and nontariff barriers?
Until we make better deals with our trading partners, we will never know precisely how much of our deficit in goods is due to such trickery. But there can be no question that these barriers are responsible for a significant portion of our current trade imbalance.
China is not a market economy. The Chinese government creates national champions and takes other actions that significantly distort markets. Responding to such actions with trade remedies is not protectionist. In fact, the World Trade Organization specifically permits its members to take action when other countries are subsidizing, dumping and engaging in other unfair trade practices.
Consistent with WTO rules, the U.S. has since Jan. 20 brought 54 trade-remedy actions— antidumping and countervailing duty investigations—compared with 40 brought during the same period last year. The U.S. currently has 403 outstanding orders against 42 countries.
But unfortunately, in its annual reports, the WTO consistently casts the increase of trade enforcement cases as evidence of protectionism by the countries lodging the complaints. Apparently, the possibility never occurs to the WTO that there are more trade cases because there are more trade abuses.
The WTO should protect free and fair trade among nations, not attack those trade remedies necessary to ensure a level playing field. Defending U.S. workers and businesses against this onslaught should not be mislabeled as protectionism. Insisting on fair trade is the best way to ensure the long-term strength of the international trading system.
The Trump administration believes in free and fair trade and will use every available tool to counter the protectionism of those who pledge allegiance to free trade while violating its core principles. The U.S. is working to restore a level playing field, and under President Trump’s leadership, we will do so.
This is a true free-trade agenda.”
Let me begin by saying no one has a problem with US government actions challenging foreign, including Chinese, barriers to US exports. Every Administration be it Republican or Democrat has taken a tough stance to drop foreign barriers to US exports. In fact, many Senators and Congressmen are pressuring the Trump Administration for more free trade agreements because they remove barriers to US exports. The TPP, Trans Pacific Partnership, would have dropped tariffs down to 0 on more than 18,000 products exported by US companies, many agricultural products.
Although no one doubts that the Chinese market is significantly distorted, many foreign markets and in some cases US markets are significantly distorted. The US steel market with the many outstanding trade orders blocking steel imports is a good example of a significantly distorted market in which the US price for steel is much higher than the World market price.
Also no one doubts that many countries subsidize their exports or dump in the US market. For many years, the Commerce Department was able to find very high dumping rates on Japanese imports in antidumping cases by using price to price comparisons, which found that Japanese prices were significantly higher, sometimes four times higher, than US prices for the same Japanese product. That is classic dumping using higher prices in the home market to fuel lower prices to the United States.
The Japanese companies were able to use dumping because the Japanese Government erected non-tariff trade barriers to block imports from the US and other countries creating very high domestic Japanese prices. To protect its mikan /tangerine industry, for example, for many years Japan blocked all imports of citrus fruit. But it is also interesting to note that there are no outstanding countervailing duty/anti-subsidy orders against Japanese products.
The Chinese governments, especially the local governments, also subsidize their exports and provide low interest loans to their companies, but so does the US government, through its subsidies in the Agriculture area, and the State Governments, which will waive state income taxes or help with low interest loans, to encourage production of companies, such as Foxconn, to move to their states.
But the US Countervailing Duty law applies to China now and the Commerce Department has not been shy in finding Chinese imports into the United States to be subsidized. It should be noted, that the WTO has overturned 28 US Countervailing Duty cases against China, in part, because the WTO has ruled that Chinese state-owned companies are not necessarily the Chinese government itself, as the Commerce Department has ruled.
The US too has state-owned companies, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, which provides electricity to certain parts of the US. Should foreign governments assume that all electricity from the TVA is subsidized because it is owned by the US government?
The major problem, however, is the Commerce Department’s application of the antidumping law.
In the 1980s, James Bovard authored a book called the “Fair Trade Fraud”, which outlined many of these same problems in the US antidumping law. But nothing has changed. Instead Commerce has just developed new methodologies to increase antidumping rates even higher.
Moreover, the same economic warfare arguments were made about Japan in the 1980s. Although China does not have clean hands, that does not mean that every single import from China is unfairly traded. In fact, I would argue that a significant percentage, if not the majority, of imports from China are fairly traded. The Chinese government simply does not care about the Chinese Mushroom, Honey, Crawfish or Shrimp industries and does not set the prices for those products or any of the inputs. Does the Chinese government really care about the price of cow manure in China, a major input for mushrooms?
Remember Commerce over decades has so distorted the US antidumping law that it finds dumping in 100% of the cases from China because it refuses to look at actual prices and costs in China. If you have a hanging judge, does that mean every single import from China is dumped/unfairly traded?
Instead, Commerce should start easing the restrictions on the market economy status of China so as to determine which Chinese companies are truly dumping in the US market and nail them to the wall. Commerce should make its antidumping cases against China mirror actual reality in China, not for the Chinese companies, but for US importers and downstream customers.
Right now, because of its refusal to use actual prices and costs in China, neither Donald Trump, nor Wilbur Ross nor the Commerce Department know which Chinese companies are truly dumping and which Chinese companies are not. Until Commerce starts uses actual prices and costs in China, no one will know which Chinese company is truly dumping,
Finally, the Commerce Department decision to tilt the playing ground and find dumping in every antidumping and countervailing duty case against China and also against almost all every other foreign county has created a situation so that the public perception is that almost every import into the US is dumped. These hanging judge decisions fuel the protectionist/isolationist political rhetoric in the United States badly damaging US industry and agriculture. It has also led to a mentality by many US companies of international trade victimhood. We poor US companies simply cannot compete in the international or US market because all foreign exports and US imports are subsidized or dumped.
Instead, US companies want to rely on US government issued protectionist walls to protect themselves from competition rather than finding a way to make the US companies competitive again. See the article on Trade Adjustment Assistance for Companies below.
SECTION 232 STEEL AND ALUMINUM CASES STALLED
The Section 232 Steel and Aluminum cases continue to be stalled. On August 21ST, Politico reported:
“WHITHER THE NATIONAL SECURITY STEEL INVESTIGATION? White House chief strategist Steve Bannon’s departure from the White House . . tipped the balance of Trump’s economic advisers firmly toward the more centrist “globalist” wing – and that could mean that two reports examining whether to limit imports of steel and aluminum for national security reasons could be indefinitely delayed. The Commerce Department has prepared a report on its findings that is circulating among agencies, but the administration has decided to dial down the investigations as it turns its attention to tax reform . . . .
Part of the reason is the departure of Bannon, who had been a major proponent of the move. But the decision to put off the investigations was also made in part because of opposition from business groups and Republican lawmakers who were worried it would hurt steel users and the broader economy, the news report said. .
Although President Donald Trump and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross thought they had found a panacea, cure all, for US trade problems, using Section 232 National Security cases to put large tariffs and/or quotas on Steel, Aluminum and other raw material products, something happened on the way to the Trump trade heaven—reality. The major problem is that the steel industry has only 141,000 jobs at stake while downstream steel users have millions of jobs at stake.
As background, on April 20, 2017, President Trump and the Commerce Department in a press announcement and fact sheet along with a Federal Register notice, Presidential Memorandum Prioritizes Commerce Steel Investigation _ Department of Commerce Section 232 Investigation on the Effect of Imports of Steel on U.S COMMERCE FED REG SECTION 232 NOTICE, announced the self-initiation of a Section 232 National Security case against imports of steel from every country. See video of Trump signing the Executive Order with Secretary Ross and Steel Producers at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiVfNOl-_Ho.
Commerce held a hearing on May 24th in this case. The video of the hearing can be found at https://www.commerce.gov/file/public-hearing-section-232-investigation-steel-imports-national-security.
In the past Secretary Ross has stated that the Section 232 case is meant to fill the gaps created by the patchwork of antidumping and countervailing duties on foreign steel, which he said have provided only limited relief to the U.S. industry.
Under the terms of the executive order, an interagency group will present a report to the White House within 270 days that identifies goods that are essential for national security and analyzes the ability of the defense industrial base to produce those goods.
If the Secretary reports affirmatively, the President has 90 days to determine whether it concurs with the Secretary’s determination and “determine the nature and duration of the action that, in the judgment of the President, must be taken to adjust the imports of the article and its derivatives so that such imports will not threaten to impair the national security.”
Although Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross pledged to get the Section 232 Steel and Aluminum reports to President Trump’s desk by the end of June, that did not happen as the Administration began to realize the impact a broad tariff on steel or aluminum raw material inputs would have on downstream steel and aluminum users, which are dependent on high quality, competitively priced steel products to produce competitive downstream products made from steel and aluminum.
In response to the delay in the Section 232 Steel case, American steel industry executives appealed directly to President Donald Trump for immediate import restrictions because steel imports have surged back to 2015 levels. As the letter states:
“The need for action is urgent. Since the 232 investigation was announced in April, imports have continued to surge. Immediate action must meaningfully adjust imports to restore healthy levels of capacity utilization and profitability to the domestic industry over a sustained period.”
The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI), an industry trade group, reported on Wednesday that total steel imports through July this year were up 22 percent from the same period a year ago, with imports taking 28 percent of the U.S. market.
In the letter, Steel company executives from Nucor Corp., U.S. Steel, ArcelorMittal and Commercial Metals Co. said the sustained surge of steel imports into the United States had “hollowed out” much of the domestic steel industry and was threatening its ability to meet national security needs.
“Your leadership in finding a solution to the crisis facing the steel industry is badly needed now. Only you can authorize actions that can solve this crisis and we are asking for your immediate assistance.”
The collateral damage to the many US producers that produce downstream steel products created by any across the board tariffs on steel imports makes it very difficult for the Administration to use a broad brush to fix the steel problem. That is the problem with purely protectionist decisions. They distort the US market and simply transfer the problems of the steel industry to other downstream industries.
But does that mean the US government should simply let the US Steel industry and other manufacturing industries die? The election of Donald Trump indicates politically that simply is not a viable option.
Although Joseph Schumpeter in his book Capitalism, Socialism and Demcracy coined the term “creative destructionism”, which conservatives and libertarians love to quote, they do not acknowledge the real premise of Schumpeter’s book that capitalism by itself could not long survive. Schumpeter himself observed the collateral damage created by pure capitalism.
So what can be done for the steel and other manufacturing industries? Answer work with the companies on an individual basis to help them adjust to import competition and compete in the markets as they exist today. Moreover, there is already a government program, which can serve as a model to provide such a service—the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Companies Program.
What is the TAA for Companies secret sauce? Making US companies competitive again. Only by making US manufacturing companies competitive again will the trade problems really be solved. US industry needs to stop wallowing in international trade victimhood and cure its own ills first before always blaming the foreigners. That is exactly what TAA for Companies does—helps US companies cure their own ills first by making them competitive again.
TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FIRMS/COMPANIES – A BETTER ALTERNATIVE TRADE REMEDY WHICH ACTUALLY WORKS
As stated above, there is another more productive way to solve the Steel crisis and fix the trade problem and help US companies, including Steel and other companies, adjust to import competition. This program has a true track record of saving US companies injured by imports.
The Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms/Companies program does not put up barriers to imports. Instead the TAA for Companies program works with US companies injured by imports on an individual basis to make them more competitive. The objective of TAA for Companies is to save the company and by saving the company it saves the jobs that go with that company.
But as stated in the video below, for companies to succeed they must first give up the mentality of international trade victimhood.
In contrast to TAA for workers, TAAF or TAA for Companies is provided by the Economic Development Administration at the Commerce Department to help companies adjust to import competition before there is a massive lay-off or closure. Yet the program does not interfere in the market or restrict imports in any way.
Moreover, the Federal government saves money because if the company is saved, the jobs are saved and there are fewer workers to retrain and the saved company and workers end up paying taxes at all levels of government rather than being a drain on the Treasury. To retrain the worker for a new job, the average cost per job is $5,000. To save the company and the jobs that go with it in the TAA for Companies program, the average cost per job is $1,000.
Moreover, TAA for Firms/Companies works. In the Northwest, where I am located, the Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, http://www.nwtaac.org/, has been able to save 80% of the companies that entered the program since 1984. The Mid-Atlantic Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, http://www.mataac.org, uses a video, http://mataac.org/howitworks/, to show in detail how the program resulted in significant turnarounds for four companies. The reason the TAA for Firms/Companies is so successful—Its flexibility in working with companies on an individual basis to come up with a specific adjustment plan to make them competitive once again in the US market as it exists today. For a sample recovery plan, see http://mataac.org/documents/2014/06/sample-adjustment-plan.pdf, which has been developed specific to the strengths, weaknesses and threats each company faces.
But TAA for Companies has been cut to the bone. On August 22, 2017, in the attached press release, US Commerce Department Announces $13.3 Million to Boost Competitiveness of US Ma, the U.S. Commerce Department announced $13.3 Million to Boost Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturers. The press release specifically stated:
“WASHINGTON – U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross today announced $13.3 million in U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) grants to support 11 Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers (TAACs) in California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Washington that help manufacturers affected by imports adjust to increasing global competition and create jobs.
“The Trump administration is working every day to help America’s manufacturers, their workers, and their communities,” said Secretary Ross. “This funding is one element of a government-wide effort to restore American jobs and strengthen U.S. manufacturing.”
The 11 grants include:
$1.7 million to the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, for the Great Lakes Trade Adjustment Assistance Center
$1.2 million to the Mid-Atlantic Employers’ Association, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, for the Mid-Atlantic Trade Adjustment Assistance Center
$978,000 to the New England Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Inc., North Billerica, Massachusetts
$1.1 million to the Research Foundation, State University of New York Binghamton, for the New York, New Jersey and Puerto Rico Trade Adjustment Assistance Center
$1.2 million to the University of Colorado at Boulder for the Rocky Mountain Trade Adjustment Assistance Center . . .
$1 million to the University of Missouri–Columbia for the Mid-America Trade Adjustment Assistance Center …
$1.2 million to the Trade Task Group, Seattle, Washington, for the Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center…
EDA’s Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms program funds 11 Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers across the nation. The centers support a wide range of technical, planning, and business recovery projects that help companies and the communities that depend on them adapt to international competition and diversify their economies. . . .
The mission of the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) is to lead the federal economic development agenda by promoting competitiveness and preparing the nation’s regions for growth and success in the worldwide economy.” . . .
Are such paltry sums really going to help solve the manufacturing crisis in the Steel and other industries? Of course not!!
But when the program was originally set up, the budget was much larger at $50 to $100 million. If the program was funded to its full potential, yes steel companies and other companies could be saved.
To those libertarian conservatives that reject such a program as interference in the market, my response is that this program was personally approved by your icon, President Ronald Reagan. He understood that there was a price for free trade and avoiding protectionism and that is helping those companies injured by import competition. But teaching companies how to be competitive is a much bigger bang for the buck than simply retraining workers. And yes companies can learn and be competitive again in the US and other markets.
In the attached article entitled “Steel Competitiveness Seriously?”, Steel Competitiveness, William J. Bujalos, the head of the Mid-Atlantic Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, makes the proposal to expand the program to help large manufacturing companies, including steel producers. Mr. Bujalos states:
“Current reports suggest that the nation’s steel industry is experiencing a rebound – a rebound driven by a growing collective confidence about America’s economic future.
That’s all good but irrelevant because confidence is not a strategy for growing the nation’s global competitiveness. What is relevant is the extent to which our companies are able to grow other much more important things, like metrics critical to their competitive success. Do that and the power of any confidence index won’t matter.
Let me explain. Since 1998 I have been leading the nation’s Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms (TAAF) program in the Mid-Atlantic region. My business experience during the last 50 years has yielded insight into the kinds of things that have the highest probability for success at reversing an enterprise’s negative fortunes irrespective of the competitive battlespace that they’ve chosen to play in. Prior lives involved corporate management in both private and public sectors (large and small companies) in a wide variety of markets that included: management consulting, chemicals, plastics, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, automotive systems, battery tech and steel – and I’ve learned that there are some things that are universal …
For example, I’m a believer that, for businesses of all stripes, there is only one true asset to be quantified and listed on the Balance Sheet – knowledge. Nothing else really matters at the end of the day. And the overarching value of TAAF is that it is this nation’s singularly effective business model that injects it directly into a company’s bloodstream over an extended period of time, i.e. half a decade. That sort of holistic, long-term approach yields the biggest chance for success because it has a high probability of permanently upgrading a company’s core DNA.
In my view steel companies don’t operate in markets that are fundamentally any different from markets in general. No markets are forgiving. No customer base is loyal. Some players don’t play fair. No amount of investment is worth it if indigenous leadership is of poor quality. So as a direct consequence, all companies that are serious about permanently enhancing their global competitiveness must achieve mastery over stuff like: competitive intelligence, customer intelligence, market dynamics intelligence, costs/managerial finance, talent/leadership development, product development, planning effectiveness, etc., etc., etc.
In other words: it’s the knowledge stuff that’s critical and little else. And in my humble opinion, focusing the attributes that TAAF brings to the table on that industry on a larger scale would yield stunning results.
The TAAF business model places its nationwide network of Trade Adjustment Centers (i.e. TAACs) in the unique position of being the right catalyst at the right place at the right time. Does it always work? Certainly not. What does? But it works better than just about anything else in America’s tool kit. It is unique. And here’s the kicker, we don’t ask for equity. On behalf of the American taxpayer we simply insist on pure, unadulterated, robust, and relentless commitment from the Chief Executive Officer down to the shop floor. Absent that? Well, it’s unfortunate but some companies probably should fail.
This approach really works, without costing a great deal of money or causing economic disruption while at the same time providing our political establishment the cover it needs to smooth passage of critical treaties – and, because a company must match our injection dollar-for-dollar throughout the process, the American taxpayer is assured of management’s total and focused commitment for one simple reason … they share in the risk!
Bottom line? The long-term holistic approach is effective. The business model, stipulating unique strategies addressing each company’s unique circumstances, is effective. The program’s neutral economic impact is effective. It’s ability to support passage of trade agreements while not impeding the benefits of free trade is effective. It’s ability to lessen the costs associated with the engagement of outside expertise to reengineer critical business processes is effective.
And I firmly believe that it’s application is not limited to America’s smallest makers – only its funding is. For several decades that’s been little more than an afterthought.
Consider …
All manufacturing companies were at one time small ones.
All manufacturing companies are impacted by globalization.
Small ones need outside expertise to teach them basic stuff.
Larger ones need outside expertise to teach them sophisticated stuff.
Small makers, because they’re learning the basics and have little resources to tap, take a longer time to turn the corner.
Larger makers, because the basics are already inculcated and they have the requisite resources at hand, can turn the corner at much higher speed.
And if you were the Chief Executive of a tier-one domestic manufacturer, would you doubt for a minute –
That your supply chain probably has several thousand companies in it?
That extensive improvement in their performance would have a significantly positive impact on your performance?
Improvement in the performance of the small cohort will increase the probability that fewer will fail because a greater proportion will grow into larger ones – driving concomitant growth in good-paying manufacturing jobs and the creation of wealth. Go ahead. Beat that with a stick!”
For those who would simply dismiss the idea as impossible and too simplistic, watch the video. The program works. See http://mataac.org/howitworks/.
TRUMP AND CHINA
SECTION 301 CASE AGAINST CHINA ON FORCED TECHNOLOGY TRANSFERS MOVES FORWARD
In an attached August 18th Federal Register notice based on an August 14th Presidential Memorandum, 301 INITIATION NOTICE Presidential Memorandum for the United States Trade Representative whitehouseg, President Trump pulled the trigger on the Section 301 Intellection property case against China. The Section 301 investigation could take a year and probably will lead to negotiations with the Chinese government on technology transfer. If the negotiations fail, the US could take unilateral action, such as increasing tariffs, or pursue a case through the World Trade Organization. Unilateral actions under Section 301, however, also risk a WTO case against the United States in Geneva.
The notice states that the USTR will specifically investigate the following specific types of conduct:
“First, the Chinese government reportedly uses a variety of tools, including opaque and discretionary administrative approval processes, joint venture requirements, foreign equity limitations, procurements, and other mechanisms to regulate or intervene in U.S. companies’ operations in China, in order to require or pressure the transfer of technologies and intellectual property to Chinese companies. Moreover, many U.S. companies report facing vague and unwritten rules, as well as local rules that diverge from national ones, which are applied in a selective and non-transparent manner by Chinese government officials to pressure technology transfer.
Second, the Chinese government’s acts, policies and practices reportedly deprive U.S. companies of the ability to set market-based terms in licensing and other technology-related negotiations with Chinese companies and undermine U.S. companies’ control over their technology in China. For example, the Regulations on Technology Import and Export Administration mandate particular terms for indemnities and ownership of technology improvements for imported technology, and other measures also impose non-market terms in licensing and technology contracts.
Fourth, the investigation will consider whether the Chinese government is conducting or supporting unauthorized intrusions into U.S. commercial computer networks or cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, trade secrets, or confidential business information, and whether this conduct harms U.S. companies or provides competitive advantages to Chinese companies or commercial sectors.”
The United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) will hold a hearing on October 10th at the International Trade Commission and public comments are to be submitted by September 28th.
In an August 30, 2017 article by Dan Harris, who heads my law firm, on his China law blog at http://www.chinalawblog.com/2017/08/china-us-trade-wars-and-the-ip-elephant-in-the-room.html, entitled “China-US Trade Wars and the IP Elephant in the Room”, Dan states that in over one hundred negotiations with Chinese companies, he has not seem the Chinese government demand IP rights. What he has seen is bad negotiating:
“I have been called by reporters at least a half dozen times in the last couple of weeks regarding the Trump Administration’s planned investigation of China’s IP practices. But what I tell these reporters fits so badly with THE narrative that my name is not showing up in print. Sorry, but I can’t help it.
Here’s the situation. The Trump Administration is claiming that China’s government forces American companies to relinquish its IP to China and my problem is that despite my firm having worked on literally hundreds of China transactions that involve IP, I have very little proof of this. So no real story there.
Here though is the story as seen from my eyes and from the eyes of the China attorneys at my firm, readily conceding that we have not seen even close to everything.
We have never been involved in a China transaction where it has been clear to us that the Chinese government has forced our client to relinquish its IP to China. We have though been involved in a million transactions where the Chinese party on the other side — sometimes a State Owned Entity, but way more often not — has vigorously and aggressively sought to get our client to part with its IP for a very low price. Is the Chinese government behind this sort of pressure? Don’t know? Probably sometimes, but probably most of the time not. If the transaction involves rubber duckies, we can assume not. If it involves next generation computer chips, well that is probably a very different story.
Anyway, as we write on here so often, there are many terrible technology transfer and other sorts of IP deals to be had with Chinese companies and we have too often — even against our China attorneys’ clear counsel to our clients not to do it — seen our clients make bad deals that will involve them turning over their IP with little to no chance of receiving full value for it. But these companies have not been forced, not in the sense that any government was forcing them to do anything. These companies were simply willing to take huge risks either because they could not grasp the risks or because they felt they had no other choice for financial reasons.
In Three Myths of China Technology Transfers, we wrote about how our clients all too often forge ahead with bad deals and why, and we nowhere mention government compulsion:
A Chinese company that intends to violate a licensing agreement and run off with the foreign company’s IP will usually have a very clear plan. What the China lawyers in my office call the Standard Plan works as follows. First, the Chinese company will negotiate in a way that guarantees a weak license that cannot be enforced against them by the foreign party. The tricks used to do this are quite standardized. Second, the Chinese company will ensure that it does not make any (or else it makes very few) payments until after it has already received the technology. If the Chinese company makes any payment at all, it will make a minimal number of payments, usually late and in violation of the agreement and then once it has received enough of the technology it seeks, it will cease making any payments entirely.
When our China attorneys encounter a Chinese company clearly working on the Standard Plan, we warn our clients. However, it is also typical for our clients to nonetheless want to forge on ahead. The client will usually explain how their situation is unique and that means the Chinese could not possibly be planning to breach.
We discuss again in China Technology Transfers: The Relationship and Deal Structure Myths how it is that American companies lose their IP to Chinese companies and we again leave out government force:
Due to a partnership relationship, the foreign side often wrongly believes it is somehow better protected against IP theft. The foreign side then lets down its guard, only to learn that its China partner has appropriated its core technology. This sense of partnership is most common with SMEs and technology startups, especially those companies whose owner is directly involved in the relationship with the Chinese entity.
In China and The Internet of Things and How to Destroy Your Own Company I rant about technology companies that literally destroy themselves by failing to do enough to protect their IP from China:
Well for what it is worth, I will no longer describe technology companies as a whole as our dumbest clients when it comes to China. No, that honor now clearly belongs to a subset of technology companies: Internet of Things companies. And mind you, we love, love, love Internet of Things companies. For proof of this, just go to our recent post, China and the Internet of Things: A Love Story. Internet of Things (a/k/a IoT) companies are sprouting all over the place and they are booming. Most importantly for us, they need a ton of legal work because just about all IoT products are being made in China, more particularly, in Shenzhen. And just about all IoT products need a ton of complicated IP assistance.
So then why am I saying they are so dumb about China? Because they are relinquishing their intellectual property to Chinese companies more often, more wantonly, and more destructively than companies in any other industry I (or any of my firm’s other Chinese lawyers) have ever seen. Ever. And by a stunningly wide margin.
I then list out the following as “my prime example, taken from at least a half dozen real life examples in just the last few months”:
IoT Company: We just completed our Kickstarter (sometimes Indiegogo) campaign and we totally killed it and so now we are ready to get serious about protecting our IP in China.
One of our China Lawyers: Great. Where are you right now with China?
IoT Company: We have been working with a great company in Shenzhen. Together we are working on wrapping up the product and it should be ready in a few months.
China Lawyer: Okay. Do you have any sort of agreement with this Chinese company regarding your IP or production costs or anything else?
IoT Company: We have an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) that talks about how we will cooperate. They’ve really been great. They have told us that they would enter into a contract with us whenever we are ready.
China Lawyer: Can you please send us the MOU? Have you talked about what that contract will say?
IoT Company: Sure, we can send the MOU. It’s one page. No, we haven’t really talked much beyond just what we need to do to get the product completed.
China Lawyer: Okay, we will look at your MOU and then get back to you with our thoughts.
Then, a day or two later we a conversation like the following ensues:
China Lawyer: We looked at your “MOU” and we have bad news for you. We think there is a very good chance a Chinese court would view that MOU as a contract. (For why we say this, check out Beware Of Being Burned By The China MOU/LOI) And the Chinese language portion of the MOU — which is all that a Chinese court will be considering — is very different from the English language portion. The Chinese language portion says that any IP the two of you develop (the IoT company and the Chinese manufacturer) belongs to the Chinese company. So what we see is that as things now stand, there is a very good chance the Chinese company owns your IP. This being the case, there is no point in our writing a Product Development Agreement because your Chinese manufacturer is not going to sign that.
IoT Company: (And I swear we get this sort of response at least 90 percent of the time) I’m not worried. I think you have it wrong. I’m sure that they will sign such an agreement because we orally agreed on this before we even started the project.
China Lawyer: That’s fine, but I still think it makes sense for you to at least make sure that the Chinese company will sign a new contract making clear that the IP associated with your product belongs to you, because if they won’t sign something that says that, there is no point in our drafting such a contract and, most importantly, there is no point in your paying us to do so.
So far not a single such IoT company has been able to come back to us with an agreement from their Chinese manufacturer to sign.
Again, no government force, just an overzealous and insufficiently careful foreign company.
Now before anyone excoriates me for ignoring reality, let me say that I have read about instances where the Chinese government has “forced” foreign companies to turn over their IP to China; high speed rail is an often cited example of that. And I do not doubt that it happens in critical industries (nuclear power would be another example). And I am also not unaware of how China is increasingly forcing foreign companies to store their data in China, which absolutely puts technology at risk. But even in these instances the foreign company has some choice. Not good choices, I know. And arguably it is no choice at all when the decision is between doing business in China or not. The last thing I want to do is get all philosophical on anyone regarding what constitutes choice so I will leave it to our individual readers to determine for themselves where on the continuum of force and choice they want to put any and all of the above.
There is plenty to complain about how China protects IP and there is plenty to complain about how China protects foreign companies that do business in China or with China, but I am just not sure complaining about forced IP transfers goes at the top of that list for most American companies. When I talk with American and European and Australian companies about China their biggest legal complaint is invariably how expensive it is for them to comply with China laws and how they resent that their Chinese competitors generally are not held to the same legal standards.
A couple of years ago, I gave the following testimony before The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission of the United States Congress:
I was introduced as an expert, and I’d like to qualify that by saying do not think of myself as an expert. I am just a private practice lawyer who represents American and Australian companies and some European and Canadian companies as well in China.
I’m going to tell you a little bit about what we do so you can get a little bit better perspective of where I’m coming from on this. The bulk of my firms’ clients are small and medium-size businesses, mostly American businesses, but some European and Australian and Canadian businesses as well. Most of them have revenues between 100 million and a billion a year. Our clients are mostly tech companies, manufacturing companies and service businesses.
About 20 percent of our work is for companies in the movie and entertainment industry. We have some clients in highly-regulated industries, like health care, senior care, banking, insurance, finance, telecom and mining, but those companies make up less than ten percent of our client base.
Most of the China work we do for our clients is relatively routine. We help them register as companies in China. We register their trademarks and copyrights in China. We draft their contracts with Chinese companies. We help them with their employment, tax and customs matters. We oversee their litigation in China, and we represent them in arbitrations in China. We help them buy Chinese companies.
For our clients, the big anti-foreign issue is whether they will be allowed to conduct business at all in China as that is certainly not always a given. Certain industries in China are shut off or limited to foreign businesses acting alone. For our clients, publishing and movies are most prominent.
Essentially anything that might allow for nongovernmental communication to or between Chinese citizens is problematic, but it is not clear to me that these limitations are intended to be anti-foreign, as China does not really want any private entities, foreign or Chinese, engaging in these activities without strict governmental oversight.
So do these limits against foreign companies arise from anti-foreign bias or just the Chinese government’s belief that it can better control Chinese companies? To our clients, that distinction doesn’t matter.
On day-to-day legal matters, our clients are almost invariably treated pursuant to law, and so long as they abide by the law, they seldom have any problems. The problem for our clients isn’t so much how the Chinese government treats them; it’s how they are treated as compared to their Chinese competitors who are less likely to abide by the laws and more likely to get away with it.
I have no statistics on this. I doubt there are any statistics on this, but I see it and I hear it all the time.
I see it when one of our clients buys a Chinese business that has half of its employees off the grid and has facilities that are not even close to being in compliance with use laws, and I know foreign companies cannot get away with that.
And I hear it from Chinese employees of our clients who insist that there is no need for our clients to follow various laws. They insist there is no need to follow various laws and to do so is stupid. Is this disparity due to anti-foreign bias or is it due to corruption? Again, for our clients, the answer is irrelevant.
Is the Trump administration’s IP investigation a negotiating ploy done as much to get at disparate treatment as it is to get at forced technology transfers? I do not think it is, but some who know more about such things tell me it may be.
CNN was the only one of the media companies that both interviewed me on the above issues and ended up quoting me and I like how it handled the issue in its article, President Trump is set to crank up the pressure on China over trade:
Beijing has other ways of getting its hands on valuable commercial information. Officials often insist on taking a close look at technology that foreign companies want to sell in China.
“Chinese government authorities jeopardize the value of trade secrets by demanding unnecessary disclosure of confidential information for product approvals,” the American Chamber of Commerce in China said in a report published in April.
Some experts say that handing over technology has effectively become a cost of doing business in China — a market too big for most companies to ignore.
“Many Chinese companies go after technology hard and the tactics they use show up again and again, leading us to believe there is some force (the government?) teaching them how to do these things,” said Dan Harris, a Seattle-based attorney who advises international companies on doing business in China.
“The thing is that the foreign companies that give up their technology usually do so at least somewhat of their own volition,” he told CNNMoney. “Yes, maybe they need to do so to get into China, but they also have the choice not to go into China, right?”
Closing the stable door?
Other analysts say that the U.S. administration is coming to the problem too late.
“Intellectual property (IP) theft is yesterday’s issue,” wrote Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
“In part because of past technology transfer and in part because of heavy, sustained government investment in science and research, China has developed its own innovative capabilities,” he wrote.
“Creating new IP in the United States is more important than keeping IP from China.”
These are really complicated issues and I realize the above is more of a stream of consciousness “thoughts dump” than a coherent position paper. So more than ever, I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below.”
Dan’s point is that it is often bad negotiating tactics by the US side that leads to companies giving away their technology, not Chinese government pressure.
On August 15th, Investors Business Daily speculated that “Trump’s Trade War With China Is War On North Korea By Other Means” stating:
“But they [the Chinese government] may have underestimated Trump: He has the will, and likely the political support, for an even-more damaging war with China over trade. With the U.S. China’s largest market — in 2016, U.S. imports from China totaled nearly half a trillion dollars — a trade war is a serious threat to China, which is already showing signs of economic slowing.
That’s what’s behind Trump’s sudden decision to investigate China’s rampant theft of U.S. intellectual property. And on trade grounds only, Trump is right to investigate this, since it’s enshrined in both U.S. law and international trade treaties that egregious trade violations warrant retaliatory actions if the violations aren’t fixed.
The U.S. has been jawboning China on this for years, to no effect. China for years has seen the U.S. as a paper tiger, too feckless to act on its own behalf. Now, Trump is showing it otherwise. . .
Once again, Trump the savvy business negotiator seems to know his foe’s weak points.
Perhaps hoping to stall Trump’s trade action, China announced that it would cease North Korean imports of coal, iron and lead, and seafood, starting Sept. 5, in keeping with U.N. sanctions imposed on Kim Jong Un’s regime.
In a joint statement Monday, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and National Security Advisor Gen. James Mattis made explicit the link between China, trade and North Korea: “China is North Korea’s neighbor, sole treaty ally and main commercial partner,” they wrote. “Chinese entities are, in one way or another, involved with roughly 90% of North Korean trade. This affords China an unparalleled opportunity to assert its influence with the regime.”
The clear message: If you support North Korea’s regime economically, we’ll hurt you economically in return. It’s a Trumpian twist on Von Clausewitz’s famous dictum about war and politics: “(A trade) war is the continuation of politics by other means.”
As we’ve said before, we take a back seat to no one in advocating on behalf of free trade. But when one side routinely and systematically steals hundreds of billions of dollars worth of intellectual property, that’s no longer free trade. It’s piracy. . . .
North Korea’s nuclear blackmail, aided by China’s patronage, is not acceptable. If it takes trade sanctions to get China’s diplomatic attention, so be it. It’s time that China’s charade over its support of North Korea comes to an end.”
On August 8th, in an article entitled “Second Thoughts on Trade with China” William Galston for the Wall Street Journal stated:
“It is China’s techno-nationalism that poses the greatest threat to our future. In 2006 the Chinese government adopted a long-term plan to promote what it called “indigenous innovation.” As James McGregor, a leading expert on the Chinese economy, writes, China’s leading-edge firms were directed to obtain technology from their multinational partners through “co-innovation and re-innovation based on the assimilation of imported technologies.”
In practice, this meant giving American firms an offer Don Corleone would have recognized—either to “share their technologies with Chinese competitors—or refuse and miss out on the world’s fastest-growing market.” China’s ultimate goal is to use forced technology transfer to replace the U.S. as the world’s leading economy. . . .
Existing legal tools may not suffice to end these discriminatory practices. Although the WTO prohibits mandatory technology transfers, the Chinese government’s position is that trading technology for market access is purely a business decision. Protectionist government purchases are a key part of China’s strategy. . . .
If turning over our technological crown jewels to a foreign power is against the national interest, then our government should have the power to prevent it. But wielding this power without blowing up the international trade regime will not be easy.”
On August 21st, in an editorial entitled “Yes, China Steals U.S. Intellectual Property, But That Doesn’t Mean Trade With China Is A Bad Thing” Investors Business Daily tempered its initial response on the Section 301 case stating:
“Everyone is angry at China right now, and perhaps with good reason. China’s regime often bends trade rules to its own needs, and breaks them or ignores them when it’s convenient. . . .
The U.S. shouldn’t tolerate cheating on trade, by China or anyone else. It’s a matter of jobs and income for Americans and the companies that employ them.
Even so, that doesn’t mean everything China has done has been bad for the U.S. Far from it.
A new study, ” How Did China’s WTO Entry Benefit U.S. Consumers?” from the prestigious National Bureau of Economic Research, shows why. It notes that from the time China joined the World Trade Organization in 2000 to 2006, the U.S. inflation index for factory goods fell an estimated 7.6%.
This might not sound like a lot, but it is. “The resulting savings were large,” the study says. “U.S. manufacturing sector production was valued at $4.5 trillion in 2014, so if prices had been 7.6% higher, that production would have cost $340 billion more.”
That is, profits for U.S. firms were likely billions of dollars higher over that six-year period than otherwise. And prices to American consumers fell.
How did this happen? The simple answer is freer trade. China cut its average tariff on manufacturing inputs from 15% in 2000 to 9% in 2006, a 40% reduction. Meanwhile, China’s government lifted export limits on its domestic companies, got rid of capital requirements, eased restrictions on foreign investment, raised its limits on textile exports and lowered the number of goods that required import licenses.
The result: China’s factory exports to the U.S. surged 290% from 2000 to 2006.
According to the study, “69% of the growth was driven by new exporters offering a widening variety of products, while 16% was created by incumbent firms exporting new products.”
The lower tariffs and other reductions in trade restrictions led to a Chinese productivity boom, with an average 10% per year gain in productivity for Chinese companies that exported to the U.S. As for the price of U.S. manufactured goods, about two-thirds of the 7.6% reduction in factory prices here was due to China’s tariff cuts.
But didn’t the food of Chinese factory-made goods to the U.S. decimate American manufacturing during this period? That’s a myth. As the U.S. Federal Reserve’s monthly manufacturing index shows, from 2000 to 2006 American factory output rose a healthy 11.5%. It wasn’t decimated by the surge in Chinese exports to the U.S. It only crashed when the financial crisis hit.
For its part, China’s communist government in the early 2000s found that taking its hands off the economy’s windpipe and engaging with the rest of the world through trade was an effective strategy for making its economy grow. We also benefited from that.
Now the Trump administration is warning an increasingly hostile China that its recent trade violations aren’t acceptable. China, in response, has blasted the U.S. for its “protectionism.”
We hope a negotiated solution can be found. At the same time, we might want to think seriously about it before we back a giant U.S.-China trade war that could make all of us, Americans and Chinese, much worse off.”
In early 2000, China’s brilliant economic guru Premier Zhu Rongyi believed that China should join the WTO, not for the benefit of the United States or Europe, but for the benefit of China. Premier Zhu realized that China would benefit from free trade by breaking down its own protectionist walls, which isolated China from the rest of the World.
It is somewhat ironic that the United States is apparently moving in the opposite direction, building protectionist walls to protect its companies from foreign competition. Many US politicians have fallen into the trap of international trade victimhood because they simply do not understand the benefits of free trade to the United States.
SECTION 201 SOLAR CELLS CASE
On May 17, 2017, Suniva filed a Section 201 Escape Clause against all Solar Cell imports from all countries at the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”). On May 23, 2017, in the attached Federal Register notice, ITC iNITIATION NOTICE SOLAR CELLS, the ITC decided to go ahead and institute the case. If the ITC reaches an affirmative determination, within 60 days the President must decide whether or not to impose import relief, which can be in the form of increased tariffs, quotas or an orderly marketing agreements.
At the ITC, Section 201 cases are a two stage process. The ITC must first determine whether “crystalline silicon photovoltaic (“CSPV”) cells (whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products) are being imported into the United States in such increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported articles.” The ITC has determined that the investigation is “extraordinarily complicated” and will make its injury determination within 128 days after the petition was filed, or by September 22, 2017. The Commission will submit to the President the report required under section 202(f) of the Act (19 U.S.C. § 2252(f)(1)) within 180 days after the date on which the petition was filed, or by November 13, 2017.
Prehearing briefs and posthearing briefs have been filed at the ITC and the ITC hearing was held on August 15th and was reportedly 11 hours long.
If the ITC reaches an affirmative determination, it will go into a remedy phase and the hearing in that phase will be on October 3, 2017. Attached is the ITC public prehearing staff report, 2017.08.01 ITC Solar 201 Prehearing Report PUB.
The Staff Report shows that imports are up, value of imports are down, but US producers’ production and capacity have increased during the period of investigation 2012-2016. Moreover, US producers’ profits and sales have increased in the period. This is a very mixed staff report with no clear trends and could lead to a negative ITC injury determination on September 22nd.
Meanwhile, sixteen US senators have urged the ITC to consider how the increased tariffs on foreign solar cells could hurt the broader domestic solar industry. The letter specifically stated:
“We respectfully request that the commission carefully consider the potential negative impact that the high tariffs and minimum prices requested would have on the tens of thousands of solar workers in our states and on the hundreds of companies that employ them.”
The letter was signed by Senators: Heinrich (D-N.M.), Tillis (R-N.C.), Bennet (D- Colo.), Feinstein (D-Calif.), Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Perdue (R-Ga.), Gardner (R-Colo.), Heller (R-Nev.), Van Hollen (D-Md.), Moran (R- Kan.), Scott (R-S.C.), Cardin (D-Md.), King (I-Maine), Collins (R-Maine), Markey (D-Mass.) and Cortez Masto (D-Nev.).
ALUMINUM EXTRUSIONS CIRCUMVENTION
On July 26, 2017, in the attached memorandum, prc-aluminum-extrusions-ar-072617, the Commerce Department published in the Federal Register a notice of affirmative final determination of circumvention of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China. The Department determined that heat-treated extruded aluminum products that meet the chemical specifications for 5050 grade aluminum alloy, regardless of producer, exporter, or importer, constitute later-developed merchandise, are circumventing the orders.
As a result of the Department’s anti-circumvention determination, all heat-treated extruded aluminum products from the People’s Republic of China that meet the chemical specifications for 5050 grade aluminum alloy are considered to be in-scope merchandise and must be included in responses to the Department’s questionnaires.
FALSE CLAIMS ACT—FURNITURE
In a previous blog post, I mentioned that the real hammer against transshipment of products to evade trade orders is not recent legislation from Congress, but the False Claims Act. Under the False Claims Act, private parties can file suits in Federal District Court alleging fraud on the US government because of foreign exporters and US importers decision to use transshipment and other methods to evade US antidumping and countervailing duties. Under the FCA, the relator can look back at 10 years of past imports and the antidumping duties in question can be over 100, 200 or even 300%. Under the FCA the remedy is triple damages and when looking at imports over such a long period of time, the remedy can result in enormous payouts.
The private party files an FCA complaint as a relator on behalf of the US government. The US government then decides whether or not to intervene in the case. If the US government chooses to intervene, the relator is entitled to 15 to 25% of the recovery of the US government. In one small FCA case here in Washington regarding medical bills, a clerk at a hospital received a payout of $2 to 3 million so anyone can be a relator.
More on point, In an intervention complaint, US GOVT INTERVENTION BLUE FURNITURE CASE, the US government intervened in a False Claims Act filed against evasion of millions of dollars in antidumping duties on imports of wooden bedroom furniture from China.
The lawsuit brought by University Loft Co., an Indiana-based wooden bedroom furniture company, accuses Florida-based Blue Furniture Solutions LLC, founder and president and its chief financial officer of importing wooden bedroom furniture from China without paying the 216.01 percent anti-dumping rate by making false statements to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”).
In doing so, Blue Furniture escaped paying millions of dollars in duties and fees owed to the federal government from 2011 through 2015, the suit says.
The complaint states:
“To avoid the payment of anti-dumping duties and fees, defendants conspired with their Chinese manufacturers and exporters to fraudulently avoid customs duties and underpay fees owed to the United States by making false representations in entry documents about the nature and value of the imported merchandise.”
Specifically, the complaint states that Blue Furniture falsely identified its entries to Customs and Border Protection with codes and descriptions for merchandise that are not subject to antidumping duties. But the complaint states that many of the wooden chests, dressers, nightstands, wardrobes and many of the beds imported were subject to antidumping duties.
In addition, the FCA complaint accuses the Florida-based company of instructing its China-based manufacturers and exporters how to mislabel and misclassify the merchandise on documents to be shown to CBP.
NEW TRADE CASES
ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY CASES
STAINLESS STEEL FLANGES FROM CHINA
On August 16, 2017, the Coalition of American Flange Producers and its individual members, Core Pipe Products, Inc., and Maass Flange Corporation filed new antidumping and countervailing duty cases against imports of Stainless Steel Flanges from China and India.
FOREIGN ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY LAW AND CASES
UNIVERSAL TRADE WAR CONTINUES
CHINA AD/CVD NEWSLETTERS
Attached are newsletters from Chinese lawyer Roland Zhu and his trade group at the Allbright Law Office about Chinese trade law. Team’s newsletter-EN Vol.2017.30 Team’s newsletter-EN Vol.2017.32 Team’s newsletter-EN Vol.2017.33.
SECTION 337 AND IP CASES
NEW 337 CASES AGAINST CHINA
WI-FI ENABLED ELECTRONIC DEVICES
On August 29, 2017, Sharp Corporation and Sharp Electronics Corporation filed a section 337 case against imports of Wi-Fi Enabled Electronic Devices. The respondent companies named in the complaint are:
Hisense Co., Ltd., China; Hisense Electronic, Co., Ltd., China; Hisense International (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd., Hong Kong; Hisense USA Corporation, Suwanee, Georgia; Hisense Electronics Manufacturing Company of America Corporation, Suwanee, Georgia; Hisense USA Multimedia R&D Center, Inc., Suwanee, Georgia; and Hisense Inc., Huntington Beach, California.
If you have any questions about these cases or about Trump and Trade, including the impact on agriculture, the impact on downstream industries, the Section 232 and 301 cases, the 201 case against Solar Cells, US trade policy, the antidumping or countervailing duty law, trade adjustment assistance, customs, False Claims Act or 337 IP/patent law, please feel free to contact me.
Filed Under: 337, Agriculture, Aluminum antidumping, Aluminum Extrusions, Aluminum users, antidumping duty, antidumping review investigation, antitrust law, Auto Parts, Automobile industry, Bernie Sanders, CBP, Chinese steel overcapacity, countervailing duty, Crawfish, custom fraud, Customs, Customs Fraud, DOJ, Donald Trump, Downstream users, Evasion Antidumping Orders, Evasion Trade Laws, False Claims Act, False Claims Act/Customs Fraud, Fraud, Free Trade, Furniture Manufacturers Association, General, Honey, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means Committee, intellectual property/337, International Trade Commission, ITC, ITC TPP Report, Justice Department, Lighthizer, lobbying, Market Economy China, Mexico, missing antidumping duties, NAFTA, NAFTA RENEGOTIATION, NAFTA Termination, national security, NME, North Korea, Politics, President, Presidential Trade Politics, Protectionism, Reagan, retaliation, Ronald Reagan, Russia, Section 201, Section 201 Solar Cells, Section 232 Aluminum case, Section 301 China IP, Senate, Senate Finance Committee, Setion 232 Steel case, Solar Cells, Solar Products, Steel, Steel Cases, Steel users, Strong Free Trade Arguments, TAAC, TAAF, Tariffs, Taxes, Third Country Solar Cells, TPP, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center for Firms, trade law, Trade Legislation, Trade Policy, Trans Pacific Partnership, Transshipment, Trump Trade Agenda, Unions, United States Trade Representative, US China Trade War, US Commerce Department, US Motor & Equipment Manufacturers, US Pork Producers, ustr, Wilbur Ross, World Trade Organization, WTO Tagged With: 337, aluminum extrusions, antidumping, antitrust, auto parts, china, Commerce, Commerce Department, Congress, countervailing duty, customs fraud, DOJ, evasion, evasion trade laws, false claims act, fraud, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means, intellectual property, ITC, Justice Department, politics, Section 301, Section 301 China IP, solar cells, Solar Cells China, subsidy, trade law, trade war, us china trade war, ustr, wto
Bill Perry October 7, 2016
US CHINA TRADE WAR–UNIVERSAL TRADE WAR, TPP IN LAME DUCK, SPOTTING POTENTIAL AD CASES, CUSTOMS, FALSE CLAIMS ACT, VITAMIN C ANTITRUST, IP AND 337
US CHINA TRADE WAR OCTOBER 7, 2016
INTERVIEW ON WHAT US COMPANIES CAN DO IN THE PRESENT TRADE CRISIS
Just did an interview on what US companies can do to cope with the current trade crisis. Hope you will find it of interest. http://www.turbineagency.com/industry-insights/2016/10/25/accelerateb2b-how-do-global-trade-deals-really-impact-us-businesses
This blog post contains several new article and articles that have been posted on the Harris Moure blog, www.chinalawblog.com from the HM Trade Practice Group, including Adams Lee, Emily Lawson and myself. The new articles also reflect my discussions during my recent three-week trip to China meeting with various Chinese companies, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”), and Chinese trade lawyers.
The most important point is that the US China Trade War is expanding and has now become a universal trade war. Although the US continues to bring numerous antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) cases against China, the Chinese government is now bringing and will bring numerous AD and CVD cases against the US.
In the recent Chinese antidumping case against Distiller Grains from the US, the Chinese government has levied a 33% rate against $1.6 billion in US exports to China. There are rumors that the Chinese government may soon bring AD and CVD cases targeting $15 billion in US exports of soybeans to China.
Meanwhile numerous countries have adopted their own AD and CVD laws modeled on the US and EU and are bringing cases not only against China, but also against the US.
The only recent trade developments that would break the retaliation cycle are the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the TTIP deal with Europe and both trade agreements are in serious trouble.
In addition, set forth below are articles on how to spot an AD and CVD trade case coming and what do when your company is a target of a trade case, magnesium and steel cases, trade cases against Europe, and Trade Adjustment Assistance by David Holbert, who heads the Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center. In addition, there are a number of articles on Customs law, False Claims Act, including an FCA case against Furniture and Customs enforcement action against Honey. Finally, there is an article on recent Second Circuit Decision in the Vitamin C Antitrust Case and the antidumping back story, a Criminal Trade Secrets case, a new 337 case and the Section 337 article translated into Chinese.
If anyone has any questions or wants additional information, please feel free to contact me at my new e-mail address bill@harrismoure.com.
TRADE POLICY AND TPP
US CHINA ANTIDUMPING TRADE WAR IS NOW A UNIVERSAL ANTIDUMPING TRADE WAR
As Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton duel during the Presidential debate about who can be more protectionist, during my recent trip to China I learned that what was once a US China Trade War has now become a universal trade war. Country after country have adopted the US and EC Antidumping law and are filing case after case against other countries and the US.
Thus countries, such as EC, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, India, Turkey, Ukraine, Russia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Australia Thailand, South Africa, and Vietnam, all are filing antidumping and countervailing duty cases against each other and the United States. These countries have adopted the US law which finds dumping in 90% of the cases. The US and the EC have created a Frankenstein in the antidumping law and the whole World has adopted it.
Although Donald Trump, Hilary Clinton and many US politicians want to adopt a mercantilist trade policy which favors pushing exports and protecting US industries from imports, the US politicians simply do not understand retaliation. What the US can do to other countries, those countries can do back. President Reagan understood the retaliation danger of protectionism and a mercantilist trade policy, but many present day US politicians do not. So all of these countries are following the US lead and implementing a mercantilist trade policy.
Free trade agreements, such as the TPP and the TTIP, which would break this cycle are now all in deep trouble as each country wants to put its industries first and make their country and industries great again. The rise in nationalism results in trade wars in which country after country will fire trade guns against each other. As Jack Ma of Alibaba recently mentioned on CNN, real wars start when trade stops. See http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/02/technology/jack-ma-alibaba-g20/
During my recent trip to China, in the attached notice, ddgs-list-of-dumping-margin-of-each-company_en ddgs-preliminary-finding-summary-translation_en, on September 23, 2016, the Chinese government announced a 33% preliminary antidumping duty targeting $1.6 billion in imports from the United States of DDGS, Distiller’s Dried Grains with or without Solubles, which is used as an ingredient for animal feed.
During this trip, officials at the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”) told me that more trade cases will be coming next year against the US. In fact, there are rumors that the Chinese government will soon bring an AD and CVD case targeting $15 billion in US soybean exports to China. This is the number one US export to China. Now that China is bringing more trade cases against the US, these cases will hurt US companies and the jobs that go with them.
On the US side, the election of either Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton in November will mean more US trade cases next year against not only China, but many other countries as well.
On September 22, 2016, MOFCOM in China initiated an escape clause/safeguard action against Sugar from Brazil, Cuba, Guatemala, Australia, South Korea and Thailand alleging tariffs up to 155.90%.
On September 15, 2016, India brought its own antidumping case against Polybutadiene Rubber from South Korea, Russia, South Africa, Iran and Singapore.
Taiwan has brought a Steel antidumping case against China.
More and more cases will be filed in 2017 around the World and many will target the United States, China, and numerous other countries. Compromise is the best way to settle trade disputes, but it is very difficult, if not impossible, to settle US antidumping and other trade cases. What is “fair” trade for the United States is “fair” trade for every other country. Many countries want to make their industries Great again.
TPP IN THE LAME DUCK KEEPS ON TICKING
As mentioned in my last blog post, I believe that if Hilary Clinton is elected, President Obama will push for the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) to come up for a vote during the Lame Duck Session. Many Congressional leaders appeared to oppose tbringing up TPP in the Lame Duck. But with Hilary Clinton’s resurgence in the Polls after the first debate, there is more talk about the TPP coming up in the Lame Duck, the period after the Presidential election and before the end of the year, as President Obama pushes hard for passage of the legislation.
On September 16, 2016, Ohio Governor Republican John Kasich in an interview with CNN stated that he supports passage of the TPP and will support President Obama in this legislative push in the Lame Duck. See http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/15/politics/john-kasich-trans-pacific-partnership/index.html
Governor Kasich made clear that he feels “it’s his “responsibility and duty as a leader” — no matter the political cost — to help President Barack Obama push the Trans-Pacific Partnership through Congress.
Kasich stated that
“I have never been an ideological supporter of free trade. The ideologues used to come to me and be frustrated with me. But when you look at these agreements in a real sense – and this one is much different than even NAFTA.”
Kasich added that when Russian and Chinese leaders oppose the TPP, that is one reason to vote for the TPP, “We have to do this.”
Kasich further stated,
“This is the first time the candidates in both major political parties say they are opposed to free trade. It’s astounding to me. I welcome the fact that people will criticize me for putting my country ahead of my party.”
The interview came after Kasich met with President Obama in the Oval Office with former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, former George W. Bush administration Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and others for a meeting on the 12-nation Pacific Rim deal.
Kasich further stated:
“This is an opportunity for the Congress to carry out its responsibility. Frankly, if I have to come down here and spend some time lobbying my Republican colleagues, I’m more than glad to do that.
There’s definitely some people I can call and talk to. This is a big deal. I mean, if we were to just walk away with this — with both candidates saying they don’t want this — we turn our backs on Asia.
He also played down the political potency of Trump’s anti-trade position in manufacturing-heavy Ohio, saying it’s not why Trump might win the state.
On September 26, 2016, Robert Samuelson, a well-known economist, published an article entitled “Will TPP Rise from the Dead”, stating:
With Obama’s term ending and his already-modest influence eroding by the day, TPP seems dead. But it may still be in intensive care.
In a speech to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a Washington think tank, Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee whose jurisdiction includes trade agreements, said that the TPP could still be ratified in the lame-duck session after the election and before a new Congress takes office.
Samuelson went on to state that Brady gave two major reasons to approve the TPP.
First, geopolitical: The TPP would enhance US influence in the Pacific region and offset China’s growing economic and political power. TPP would give the United States a major role in regulating global commerce in the 21s century. The trade agreement codifies rules on “intellectual property” (patents, copyrights), data flows and state-owned firms
Ratification would be a strong signal to Asia that the United States intends to remain a Pacific power.
“The second reason is economic: Asia remains a fast-growing region. TPP would eliminate most tariffs among the 12 member countries, aiding American exporters in these markets. The advantage may be particularly important in services (tourism, consulting, finance and engineering), where U.S. firms are especially strong. In 2015, the United States had a $762 billion deficit in goods trade (machinery, steel, medical equipment) and a $262 billion surplus in services trade, leaving an overall deficit of $500 billion. According to the Peterson Institute, the 12 countries in the TPP accounted for about 36% of the world economy and 24% of global trade in 2014.”
Samuelson goes on to quote Brady on why he does not dismiss TPP’s prospects as bleak, “People change once they get into office.”
Samuelson then states:
Translation: The campaign’s anti-trade and anti-globalization rhetoric might recede before the realities of governing. Although Brady didn’t say so, one implication is that a victorious Hillary Clinton might put up only token opposition to TPP, both because the case for approval is strong and because she might feel obligated to Obama for his political support.
But Brady went on to state that getting a deal would be difficult. With many Democrats adamantly opposed to TPP, President Obama would need to rely on Republicans to approve the agreement. But if President Obama cannot round up enough Democratic votes to ensure victory, Republicans will not go out on a political limb and bring the agreement up during the Lame Duck.
“We are running out of time,” Brady told the Peterson audience. As Samuelson stated, “The TPP may yet wind up in the political morgue.”
CHINA IMPORTS: KNOW YOUR RISKS
By Adams Lee, Harris Moure International Trade Group
Every year U.S. producers file 10-15 petitions asking the U.S. government to investigate whether certain products imported into the US are sold at unfair prices (antidumping or AD) or are unfairly subsidized (countervailing duty or CVD). Many of the AD/CVD cases target products imported from China. Odds are good that at least two new AD/CVD petitions will be filed by Halloween and as many as five by year end.
Our clients often ask our international trade lawyers how they can determine the likelihood of a AD/CVD petition that could adversely affect their ability to compete in the US market. Each AD/CVD petition is unique to the product and industry it covers, but most AD/CVD investigations fall within a handful of categories. Understanding what has led to the filing of previous AD/CVD petitions can help you as a producer, exporter, or importer, recognize if and when to expect a new AD/CVD petition that could directly affect you. The following are some of the indicators you should be checking to determine whether your imported into the USA product will be next.
The Regulars. Certain domestic industries have been frequent filers of AD/CVD actions. Companies in these industries are veterans of AD/CVD actions; they don’t ask if a new petition will be filed, only when it will be filed.
Steel of all types (carbon steel, stainless steel, flat products, pipe, rebar, wire rod, wire, etc.) from all over the world. The latest wave of steel AD/CVD investigations are being completed with high AD/CVD margins in most cases.
Softwood Lumber from Canada. The latest round of the US-Canada Lumber wars is set to begin as new AD/CVD petitions are likely to be filed in October 2016. Filing a new AD/CVD petition may be necessary to push US-Canada negotiations to a meaningful level.
The Big Box Effect. When Walmart, Lowes, or Target switch their sourcing of a product from a domestic manufacturer to a foreign (read Chinese) one, it is quite common for the jilted domestic supplier to file an AD/CVD petition in an effort to save their business. Boltless steel shelving units, wood flooring, ironing tables, and candles are all examples of this, and all involving products from China.
US Products Squeezed by Imports. It is not uncommon for an AD/CVD petition to be filed by a US producer that makes a higher quality product but is starting to lose out to foreign producers with lower quality but cheaper products. Frozen shrimp from multiple countries, garlic from China, and wooden bedroom furniture from China are some examples of this.
Pressure from Downstream Customers. Many AD/CVD petitions involve products that are material inputs used to make a downstream finished product. Petitions can be triggered by larger downstream producers switching to, or just threatening to switch to imports to pressure smaller upstream suppliers to lower prices. Many chemical products from China, tire products from China and other countries, kitchen racks from China are examples of this.
AD/CVD Actions on Upstream Products. Sometimes AD/CVD actions filed by other domestic industries trickle down and harm downstream domestic industries. For example, US wire rod producers filed AD/CVD petitions that resulted in AD/CVD duties against imported wire rod. But these wire rod duties ended up hurting US wire producers, who in turn filed their own AD/CVD duties against imported wire.
Dying Dinosaurs/Last Survivors. Some AD/CVD petitions are filed by the remaining members of a nearly extinct domestic industry dealing with decreasing demand and increased import pressure. Sometimes the AD/CVD actions allow the surviving US producers to stay in the US market protected from import competition. Examples of this are wooden bedroom furniture, magnesium and innersprings from China.
Other Countries’ AD/CVD actions. The US is not the only country that acts to protect its domestic industries from unfair foreign trade. AD/CVD actions filed in Canada, India, the EU, Brazil, and even China are warning signs of industries facing tight competitive pressure. Imports blocked from one market are often diverted to other available markets. A prime example of this are products from China which first had AD/CVD filed in the EU before the US took action.
All of the above scenarios are good indicators of an imminent filing of a new United States’ AD/CVD petition, so if you are seeing these market conditions in your industry, an AD/CVD petition is probably in your near future.
WHAT SHOULD YOU DO WHEN THE CUSTOMS ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY BOGEYMAN IS COMING AFTER YOUR IMPORTED CHINA PRODUCTS
In China Imports Know Your Risks (above), I wrote about how companies can recognize impending antidumping (AD) or countervailing duty (CVD) petitions. In this post I address what you as an importer, exporter or foreign producer should do if you see an AD/CVD storm looming.
The first thing you should do is determine whether the AD/CVD petition will directly hit your primary operations. The second thing you should do is figure out how best to defend yourself interests if the AD/CVD petition is headed directly your way. The third thing you should do if you do get hit by AD/CVD duties is to figure out damage control going forward.
New AD/CVD Petition – Are my products affected? AD/CVD petitions include a proposed scope definition that identifies the products covered. AD/CVD scope definitions can be complicated and unclear. They may be broader or narrower than the Customs tariff classifications normally used to identify such imports. Even if you think your products are outside the scope of the petition, U.S. Customs may disagree. U.S. Customs commonly demands that you first pay an AD/CVD deposit, assuming that your products are within the scope of the AD/CVD petition, and then Customs will return your deposit only if you get a Department of Commerce (DOC) ruling that your products are actually outside the scope. For example, with aluminum extrusions from China, the DOC has received around a hundred scope ruling requests to clarify whether certain products are included or excluded from the scope of that order.
Once you know the scope definition, you can evaluate the degree to which the AD/CVD action could impact your business. Sometimes you and your customer can find alternatives to replace the subject AD/CVD products with either non-subject products or by your sourcing from non-subject countries. If you have options to switch away from the products covered by the AD/CVD action, it may not be necessary to participate in the AD/CVD investigation.
AD/CVD investigations – How to defend? If your product is squarely within the scope of the AD/CVD petition and the U.S. market is worth fighting for, you should determine the best way to prepare for the AD/CVD investigation. If you have enough time before a petition is filed, you theoretically can try to adjust your sales to remedy whatever is causing the dumped or subsidized sales, most commonly by raising your prices for certain products or customers or by modifying your production operations by lowering or reallocating costs. Unfortunately, most companies are not proactive about planning to avoid AD/CVD actions and instead react only after a petition is filed. We find this especially true of our clients that import from China, as opposed to Europe.
Once an AD/CVD investigation is initiated, foreign producers and exporters and US importers should try to defend their interests before the two agencies responsible for making AD/CVD determinations: The International Trade Commission (ITC) determines whether a domestic industry is injured or threatened with injury by reason of the subject imports and the Department of Commerce (DOC) determines how much the subject imports are dumped or subsidized.
In ITC investigations, the best defenses are presented when the foreign producers, US importers, and US purchasers can organize and explain why the subject imports should not be blamed for any decline in the domestic industry’s performance. Because the ITC examines a broad range of data regarding the US market for the subject product, a comprehensive explanation of relevant market conditions is necessary to a winning argument.
In DOC investigations, the foreign producer and exporters are the primary respondents to the DOC’s questionnaires. These companies must provide extensive corporate structure, sales and cost data, often through multiple rounds of questionnaires. The DOC uses the submitted data to calculate AD/CVD margins. Unaffiliated US importers usually do not need to submit data in DOC investigations and reviews, but they often will closely monitor the DOC’s proceedings because they will ultimately be responsible for paying the AD/CVD duties. See Sourcing Product From China: You Should Know About Importer of Record Liability.
The key to any AD/CVD defense is participating fully in both the DOC’s and the ITC’s investigations. If you don’t participate, you have no chance of winning. If a party does not respond on time or with complete responses, the DOC and the ITC can apply the adverse facts available that inevitably lead to higher AD/CVD margins. US importers should at least actively monitor DOC’s proceedings because their final AD/CVD liability often depends on how well the Chinese producers and exporters are able to respond to DOC’s questionnaires. It is not uncommon for the Chinese producer or exporter to mount a weak or no defense, leaving the U.S. importer essentially “holding the bag.” There are many things you can and should do to try to prevent this from happening to you.
How to Plan for Life with AD/CVD. The overwhelming majority of AD/CVD petitions lead to orders for imposing AD/CVD duties. But depending on the scope definition of the AD/CVD order, it may be possible for you to maintain your business operations by identifying alternative out-of-scope products or by switching your product sourcing to a non-subject country. But in switching sourcing, US importers should be careful to avoid actions that could be considered schemes designed primarily to evade AD/CVD duties, as the DOC can extend orders through circumvention investigations. Customs too can conduct its own investigation of duty evasion allegations.
Also, because the United States uses a retrospective AD/CVD system, foreign suppliers and US importers have the opportunity each year to try to lower their dumping margin. Since AD/CVD duties are “remedial”, foreign producers and U.S. importers have ample opportunity to adjust their production and sales operations so that they can sell “fairly” to the U.S. market, as defined by the U.S. trade laws and with proper planning and disciplined execution, companies can sometimes make even minor adjustments to reduce or eliminate their AD/CVD duty liability.
Bottom Line: You are not without defenses when the AD/CVD bogeyman appears to be heading for you. There are things you can do both to stop it from attacking your business and things you can do to restore your business once attacked.
Editor’s Note: This post focuses on products exported from China to the United States, but its advice applies with equal force to products exported from any other country to the United States and with nearly equal force to products exported from any other country to any other country that also has AD/CVD sanctions.
CAFC MAGNESIUM METAL DECISION
On October 6, 2016, in the attached decision, cafc-magnesium, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commerce Department’s decision that replacement of stainless steel retorts used to produce magnesium metal was an overhead expense and not a direct cost in the Magnesium Metal from China antidumping case.
STEEL TRADE CASES
CARBON AND ALLOY STEEL CUT-TO-LENGTH PLATE FROM CHINA AND KOREA
On September 7, 2016, in the attached fact sheet, clt-plate-cvd-prelim-fs-090716, Commerce issued an affirmative preliminary CVD determination in the initial investigation of certain carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from China and a negative preliminary determination in the CVD investigation of imports from Korea.
China CVD rate best on all facts available is 210.50% and Korea’s CVD rate is 0.
CARBON AND ALLOY STEEL CUT-TO-LENGTH PLATE FROM BRAZIL, SOUTH AFRICA AND TURKEY
On September 16, 2016, in the attached fact sheet, factsheet-multiple-ctl-plate-ad-prelim-091616, Commerce announced its affirmative preliminary determinations in the AD investigations of imports of certain carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate from Brazil, South Africa, and Turkey.
Brazil’s antidumping rate is 74.52%. South Africa’s antidumping rates range from 87.72% to 94.14%. Turkey’s antidumping rates range from 42.02% to 50%.
STAINLESS STEEL SHEET AND STRIP FROM CHINA
On September 12, 2016, in the attached fact sheet, factsheet-prc-stainless-steel-sheet-strip-ad-prelim-091216, Commerce announced its affirmative preliminary determination in the AD investigation of imports of stainless steel sheet and strip from China. The antidumping rates range from 63.86% to 76.64%.
TRADE CASES AGAINST EUROPE
EUROPEAN TARGETS IN ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY CASES AND WHAT CAN BE DONE TO GET BACK IN THE US MARKET AGAIN
Recently, there have been several articles about the sharp rise in AD and CVD/trade remedy cases in the last year. By the second half of 2016, the US Government has reported that twice as many AD and CVD cases have been initiated in 2015-2016 as in 2009.
China is not the only target. AD cases have been recently filed against a number of European countries, including Carbon and Alloy Steel Plate from Austria, Belgium, Germany, and Italy; Steel Flanges from Italy and Spain; and Rubber from Poland.
In addition, there are outstanding AD and CVD orders against Germany on brass sheet and strip, seamless pipe, sodium nitrite and non-oriented electrical steel. In addition to Germany, other EU Countries have been hit on various steel products, including a number of stainless steel products, from Spain, Belgium and Italy; brass sheet and strip from France and Italy, isocyanurates from Spain, pasta from Italy, paper from Portugal and Uranium from France. The oldest US AD order in place today is pressure sensitive plastic tape from Italy, which was issued in 1977.
Under US law Commerce determines whether dumping is taking place. Dumping is defined as selling imported goods at less than fair value or less than normal value, which in general terms means lower than prices in the home/foreign market or below the fully allocated cost of production. Antidumping duties are levied to remedy the unfair act by raising the US price so that the products are fairly traded.
Commerce also imposes Countervailing Duties to offset any foreign subsidies provided by foreign governments so as to raise the price of the subsidized imports.
AD and CVD duties can only be imposed if there is injury to the US industry, which is determined by the ITC. But in determining injury, the law directs the ITC to cumulate, that is add together all the imports of the same product from the various foreign countries.
The real question many companies may have is how can AD and CVD rates be reduced so that the European company can start exporting to the US again. US AD and CVD laws are considered remedial, not punitive statutes. Thus, every year in the month in which the AD or CVD order was issued, Commerce gives the parties, including the domestic producers, foreign producers and US importers, the right to request a review investigation based on sales of imports that entered the US in the preceding year.
Thus, the AD order on electrical steel from Germany was issued in December 2014. In December 2016, the German producer can request a review investigation of the electrical steel that entered, was actually imported into, the US during the period December 1, 2015 to November 31, 2016.
EU companies may ask that it is too difficult to export a 17 metric ton container of covered product to the US, requesting a nonaffiliated importer to put up an AD of 50 to over 100%, which can require a payment of $1 million USD or more. In contrast to European law, however, the US AD and CVD law is retrospective. Thus the importer posts a cash deposit when it imports products under an AD or CVD order, and the importer will get back the difference plus interest at the end of the review investigation.
More importantly, through a series of cases, Commerce has let foreign producers export smaller quantities of the product to use as a test sale in a review investigation if all other aspects of the sale are normal. Thus in a chemical case, we had the exporter put a metric ton of the chemical in question in a container with other products and that metric ton served as the test sale to establish the new AD rate.
EU Companies may also ask how we can make sure that we are not dumping. The answer is dump proofing and computer programs. In contrast to China, EU companies are considered market economy companies and, therefore, Commerce must use actual prices and costs in the European country to determine whether it is dumping or not. Computer programs can be used to reduce the dumping margin significantly by modeling US prices and EU home market prices to eliminate or significantly reduce antidumping rates.
How successful can companies be in reviews? In one EU Steel case, we dropped the dumping rate from over 17% in the initial investigation to 0% in the review investigation. In a chemical from China case, we dropped a dumping rate of over 200% to 0%, allowing the Chinese company to become the exclusive exporter of the product for decades per order of the US government.
Playing the AD and CVD game in review investigations can significantly reduce AD and CVD rates and get the EU company back in the US market again
TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE FOR FIRMS/COMPANIES
David Holbert, who heads the Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (“NWTAAC”), is writing a series of posts on the NWTAAC website on how Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms/Companies helps injured companies injured by imports. This is the first post.
Imports are Like a Thousand Flash Floods Injuring US Companies That Are Not Competitive
The issue of trade competition and lost jobs is well discussed in the media. I work with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) who are negatively affected by trade competition, what is often called “trade impact” in policy lingo. It’s a big issue. According to the U.S Trade Representative, the United States’ 30 million SMEs account for nearly two-thirds of net new private sector jobs in recent decades.
For large companies or from a macro-economic perspective, import competition may seem like a rising tide – one that can be anticipated, prepared for or proactively mitigated. For small and medium-sized businesses, not equipped with diverse product lines, resources or change acumen, import competition feels more like a flash flood.
What is it like for those companies? When trade impact hits, sales drop off, often suddenly.
Contract manufacturers build to specification for customers, often larger companies. For this group, trade impact could mean the loss of a major customer moving operations to a foreign country (and finding parts suppliers there), or simply an importer arriving on the scene with lower cost products.
For a consumer products company, trade impact will probably first arrive with falling sales to the big retail chains since they are the most sensitive to supplier prices.
For a commodity producer things are a little more predictable. There may be a change in currency valuation or the rise of a new industry in a foreign country. Regardless, these highly price sensitive markets will suddenly have a lower price option.
Commercial products producers will usually have more time. When imports arrive they will sell to generally more informed customers who usually value factors other than price. But the fall will come, just more slowly.
Sales could fall off for many reasons. How do you know its trade related? You ask or you ask around. It shouldn’t take long to find out.
Imports arrive product by product. Companies move offshore factory by factory. A domestic company makes that product, is part of the supply chain needed to make the product or is part of that commodity industry. When the imports arrive (or the factory moves), that one company or set of suppliers or community of producers is directly in the way. All of this happens in what can seem to be a relatively normal looking manufacturing neighborhood. Across the street there might be a company making another product that is experiencing no trade competition. Next door a third company might have gone through trade impact years ago and has adjusted. For small and medium sized companies, trade impact can be surprisingly direct and specific.
Here are some examples of what I’m talking about.
A commercial products company makes a specialized tool. A couple of other U.S. and European companies make similar products with some parity between price and features. One year they are at the big industry trade show and see a product, similar to theirs (and the others), but priced about 40% lower. Three months later sales started slipping.
A contract manufacturer that machines metal parts had gravitated away from stainless steel to titanium and built for several competitors in the same industry. Foreign producers had mastered stainless steel over the last decade. But as of a recent year, those producers finally mastered titanium as well. One by one, the manufacturer’s customers started buying imports. Once one did, it had a cost advantage, so the others had to go along also.
A nut grower was maintaining a slim profit. Then, a certain country decided to incentivize its nut growers to achieve more efficiency and export capability. It took a while, but when the imported nuts started arriving, they were at a price point below break-even for the domestic producer.
A safety products producer sold through a variety of retailers. One year, seemingly out of the blue, the big box stores stopped ordering. It didn’t take long to figure out why. A similar imported product was on the shelves at about half the price.
In future posts I’ll cover the steps to recovery. They are many effective tools in the economic recovery toolbox. In many cases, companies that employed these resources are now unrecognizable through increased scale and product changes. Interestingly, a surprising number become significant exporters.
My role at the Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center is to help small and medium-sized companies that are negatively impacted by trade competition through grants of up to $75,000. Our non-profit organization administers a federal program serving companies in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Alaska. You can learn more about us at NWTAAC.org.
CUSTOMS LAW
IMPORTING GOODS FROM CHINA: THE RISKS ARE RISING
Last month I wrote about how importers from China need to be on their guard since U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has implemented new regulations to investigate allegations of antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) evasion. See Importing From China: One More (New) Thing You Need To Know.
It didn’t take long, as U.S. Customs has already begun its first wave of investigations: Wheatland Tube, a US steel pipe producer, on September 14, 2016 announced it had filed with CBP an allegation of duty evasion on imports of Chinese circular welded steel pipe.
CBP has published a timeline for conducting its investigations and a process diagram (EAPA Investigation Timeline) and this newly filed allegation will be a test case to see how CBP will conduct its new duty evasion investigations. Hopefully, CBP will soon address many of the questions raised by the new regulations. How will parties be allowed to participate? What information from the investigation will be made public? How will CBP define “reasonable suspicion” of duty evasion?
This steel pipe investigation is likely to be the first of many CBP duty evasion investigations that are to come, many (probably most) of which will target Chinese products subject to AD/CVD duties. For how to figure out the risk quotient for the products you import from China, check out China Imports: Know Your Risks.
The new antidumping and countervailing duty regulations will unquestionably require an increased number of importers and foreign manufacturers to formally respond to CBP’s questions in response to allegations. Given the strong political pressure by domestic U.S. industries calling for tougher enforcement of US trade laws (not to mention the rising opposition to free trade among the American populace), Chinese producers and exporters and US importers should be prepared for increased CBP activity. CBP is likely looking to punish someone hard to set an example of their improved enforcement.
Getting Your China Products Through U.S. Customs: The 101
By Emily Lawson, Harris Moure International Trade Group
If you are importing products from China you need to do your homework to make sure your incoming shipments into the United States comply with U.S. Customs laws and regulations. Compliance with U.S. Customs laws and regulations is critical in avoiding your shipments being detained or seized, and/or penalties assessed. Common issues importers of products from China typically face include the following:
• Not determining proper classification and duty rate for products. If you plan to import and sell on a Delivered Duty Paid basis, you should consider customs duties in your costs and that means you should know all of your applicable duty rates before you import. Also certain products are subject to high antidumping or countervailing duties in addition to regular customs duties, which may be as high as 300%.
• Failing to mark the product with the country of origin of manufacture. Generally goods of foreign origin for import into the U.S. or immediate containers of the goods must be marked legibly and in a conspicuous location with the country of origin in English. Failure to do so accurately can result in civil and even possibly criminal penalties.
• Not properly marking wood packing material. All wood packing material for products imported into the U.S. must be properly treated and marked prior to shipping. Failure to meet the treatment and marking requirements may cause shipments to be delayed and penalties issued.
• Failing to provide complete commercial invoices. Customs regulations provide that specific data must be included on the commercial invoice for U.S. Customs purposes, including a detailed description of the merchandise, and correct value information. Omission of this information may result in improper declaration to U.S. Customs at the time of import and expose you to penalties.
• Failing to meet other U.S. Government agency requirements. Goods imported for sale in the U.S. must satisfy the same legal requirements as those goods manufactured in the United States. U.S. Customs enforces the laws of other agencies in the U.S., including, the Food and Drug Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), and the Environmental Protection Agency, in addition to others. Therefore, if toys, for example, are exported to the U.S., detailed CPSC requirements, including for testing, must be met prior to export.
• Distribution of many trademarked and copyrighted items. Items which are trademarked and copyrighted are restricted by contractual agreements that give exclusive rights to specific companies to distribute the product in the U.S. Imports of improperly trademarked or copyrighted items can be seized at the U.S. border and can subject you as the importer to penalties.
Taking the time to identify the required U.S. Customs laws and regulations for the products to be shipped to the U.S. from China will help you maintain seamless delivery of your merchandise to U.S. customers and avoid civil and criminal penalty exposure.
FALSE CLAIMS HAMMER GETS BIGGER — THIRD CIRCUIT HOLDS FCA’S APPLICATION TO FALSE STATEMENTS MADE TO US CUSTOMS
On October 5, 2916, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in the attached decision in United States ex rel Customs Fraud Investigations, LLC. v. Vitaulic Company, us-vs-vitaulic, reversed the Federal District Court and held that a failure to label imported goods with the proper country of origin is actionable under the False Claim Act (“FCA”). Vitaulic had imported millions of pounds of steel pipe with the wrong country of origin.
In holding that this is an actionable claim under the FCA, the Court stated:
These actions, according to CFI, give rise to the present qui tam action under the so-called “reverse false claims” provision in the False Claims Act (FCA). Typically, a claim under the FCA alleges that a person or company submitted a bill to the government for work that was not performed or was performed improperly, resulting in an undeserved payment flowing to that person or company. The FCA was enacted as a reaction to rampant fraud and price gouging by merchants supplying the Union army during the Civil War. In this case, by contrast, the allegation is not that Victaulic is obtaining monies from the government to which it is not entitled, but rather that it is retaining money it should have paid the government in the form of marking duties. Wrongful retention cases such as these are known as “reverse false claims” actions.
The Court went on to state:
Of particular importance here, the Senate Report discussed “customs duties for mismarking country of origin,” and how such duties would be covered by the amended reverse false claims Provision. . . .
The plain text of the FCA’s reverse claims provision is clear: any individual who “knowingly conceals or knowingly and improperly avoids or decreases an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government” may be subject to liability. As alleged by CFI in the amended complaint, Victaulic declined to notify the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection of its pipe fittings’ non-conforming status. This failure to notify resulted in the pipe fittings being released into the stream of commerce in the United States and, consequently, marking duties being owed and not paid.
From a policy perspective, the possibility of reverse false claims liability in such circumstances makes sense in the context of the larger import/export regulatory scheme created by Congress. Because of the government’s inability to inspect every shipment entering the United States, an importer may have an incentive to decline to mention that its goods are mismarked on the assumption that the mismarking will not be discovered. In doing so, an importer avoids its obligation under 19 U.S.C. § 1484 to provide the government with such information as is necessary to enable the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection to determine whether the merchandise may be released from government custody or whether it must be properly marked, re-exported or destroyed.
HONEY AND FURNITURE
On September 30, 2016, Ecologic Industries LLC and OMNI SCM LLC controlled by a Daniel Scott Goldman agreed to pay $1.525 million to settle a civil False Claims Act suit alleging it conspired to make false statements to avoid paying duties on wooden furniture imported from China to avoid the antidumping duties on Wooden Bedroom Furniture from China. The companies sell furniture for student housing.
The case was filed by a whistleblower Matthew Bissanti, who is the former president and director of OMNI. The Justice Department reported that Bissanti will receive $228,750 as his share of the settlement.
On Aug 12, 2016, in the attached notice, to-bee-or-not-to-bee_-cbp-and-partners-seized-132-drums-of-hone, Customs and Border Protection announced seizure of 42 tons of illegally imported Chinese honey. The honey was contained in 132 fifty-five gallon drums that were falsely declared as originating from Taiwan to evade antidumping duties applicable to Chinese honey. The evaded antidumping duties on this shipment of Chinese honey would be nearly $180,299.
VITAMIN C ANTITRUST CASE—THE REAL ANTIDUMPING BACK STORY
On September 20, 2016, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its attached decision in the Vitamin C Antitrust case against the Chinese companies, In Re: Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, vitamin-c-13-4791_opn-2d-cir-sept-20-2016. In its decision, the Court of Appeals reversed the Federal District Court’s decision that the Chinese Vitamin C companies had fixed prices in violation of the US antitrust because Chinese government action, in effect, insulated the Chinese companies from US antitrust liability.
The Court of Appeals made the correct decision because as indicated below, I have personal knowledge as to the reason the Chinese government set the Vitamin C export price scheme in place to raise Chinese export prices—to deter US and other Antidumping cases.
As the Court of Appeals stated in its opinion:
the Chinese Government filed a formal statement in the district court asserting that Chinese law required Defendants to set prices and reduce quantities of vitamin C sold abroad, and because Defendants could not simultaneously comply with Chinese law and U.S. antitrust law . . .
The Court of Appeals then reversed the District Court “on international comity grounds” and ordered the District Court to dismiss the complaint with prejudice.
In effect, the Second Circuit held that based on comity grounds, that is, respect for Chinese law as evidenced by a formal statement and submission of the Chinese government that the Chinese government lawfully set up a scheme to raise Vitamin C prices, the Federal District Court should have dismissed the case. The Court of Appeals held that the District Court should have deferred to the Chinese government and exempted the Chinese companies from the application of the US antitrust law based on the state action defense. It should be noted that the Federal Government and State Governments through state action can insulate US domestic companies from the application of the US antitrust law.
The Court of Appeals specifically determined in the decision that:
The official statements of the Ministry should be credited and accorded deference. . . .The 2002 Notice, inter alia, demonstrates that from 2002 to 2005, the relevant time period alleged in the complaint, Chinese law required Defendants to participate in the PVC regime in order to export vitamin C. This regulatory regime allowed vitamin C manufacturers the export only vitamin C subject to contracts that complied with the “industry‐wide negotiated” price.
Although the 2002 Notice does not specify how the “industry‐wide negotiated” price was set, we defer to the Ministry’s reasonable interpretation that the term means what it suggests—that members of the regulated industry were required to negotiate and agree upon a price. . . ..
In this context, we find it reasonable to view the entire PVC regime as a decentralized means by which the Ministry, through the Chamber, regulated the export of vitamin C by deferring to the manufacturers and adopting their agreed upon price as the minimum export price. In short, by directing vitamin C manufacturers to coordinate export prices and quantities and adopting those standards into the regulatory regime, the Chinese Government required Defendants to violate the Sherman Act. . . .
Because we hold that Defendants could not comply with both U.S. antitrust laws and Chinese law regulating the foreign export of vitamin C, a true conflict exists between the applicable laws of China and those of the United States.
The Court of Appeals went on to state:
Moreover, there is no evidence that Defendants acted with the express purpose or intent to affect U.S. commerce or harm U.S. businesses in particular. Rather, according to the Ministry, the regulations at issue governing Defendants’ conduct were intended to assist China in its transition from a state‐run command economy to a market‐driven economy, and the resulting price‐fixing was intended to ensure China remained a competitive participant in the global vitamin C market and to prevent harm to China’s trade relations. While it was reasonably foreseeable that China’s vitamin C policies would generally have a negative effect on Plaintiffs as participants in the international market for vitamin C, as noted above, there is no evidence that Defendants’ antitrust activities were specifically directed at Plaintiffs or other U.S. companies.
The purpose of the Chinese export scheme was not to damage US customers or businesses. In fact, just the opposite was true. The Chinese government wanted to keep exports flowing.
What was the concern of the Chinese government? US and other antidumping cases, which could wipe Chinese exports out of the US market for decades. This was the true number one anticompetitive threat that the Chinese government and companies were facing. Was this a realistic threat? Sure was.
The period that the export price scheme was set in place was 2002-2005. On July 11, 2002, after losing an antidumping case in the mid-90s against Saccharin from China despite very high antidumping rates because of a no injury determination by the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”), PMC, the sole US producer of saccharin, filed a second antidumping case against saccharin from China. The Chinese Chamber of Commerce in charge of the Saccharin case was the Chamber of Commerce for Medicines, the same Chamber in charge of the Vitamin C case.
On July 2, 2003, the Commerce Department issued an antidumping order against all imports of saccharin from China with rates ranging from an individual dumping rate of 249.39% to 329.29% for all other Chinese companies, effectively blocking all Chinese saccharin from China. The Antidumping Order was in effect for 10 years.
Although one company that I represented was after three and a half years able to reduce its dumping rate down to 0%, all other Chinese saccharin was blocked out of the US market for 10 years. Market prices for saccharin in the US soared from a low $1.50 per pound in the investigative period to a price well over $10 a pound.
And US plaintiff companies in the Vitamin C case were complaining about the price rise in Vitamin C exports to the US??!! I am sure the increase was not 10 times.
Since I represented the Chinese saccharin industry in the Saccharin antidumping case, the Chamber of Commerce for Medicine and I were very aware of the devastating effect a US or other antidumping case could have on Chinese companies and exports. After the antidumping order was issued, in the Summer of 2003 the Chamber called me to a meeting with the Chinese Vitamin C producers and the Chinese Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”} to discuss how to deter US and other antidumping cases. The Chamber and MOFCOM were very worried that intense Chinese price competition would lead to a wave of antidumping cases against the Vitamin C companies.
The Vitamin C companies, the Chamber and MOFCOM asked what can we do if there is a threat of an antidumping case. Since Commerce and all other countries treat China as a nonmarket economy country and refuse to use actual prices and costs in China to determine antidumping cases, the general practice of dump proofing where antidumping consultants use computer programs to eliminate the unfair act, dumping, is not an option for Chinese companies.
The only remedy I could think of was that the Chinese government impose an export price floor. That approach worked in the 90s with another Chamber of Commerce when there was a threat of a US antidumping case against Silicon Carbide from China. The US Silicon Carbide producer in the one company US industry never filed their threatened antidumping case against China because of the export price floor the Chamber with MOFCOM’s consent put in place.
After suggesting that the Chamber set up an export price floor with MOFCOM’s involvement, I went on to state that MOFCOM would have to issue a law, regulation or action to show that the Government mandated the establishment of the system to insulate the Chinese companies from attack under the US antitrust laws.
The Chamber did set up the export price system for Vitamin C exports to stop US and other antidumping cases from being filed against the Chinese companies. No Vitamin C antidumping cases were filed because the export price system was put in place.
As indicated by the Second Circuit, MOFOM did take government action to set up the export price scheme, which, in turn, insulated the Chinese companies from US antitrust liability.
The lesson of the story is that although the purpose of US antitrust law is to protect consumers and competition in the US market, the real threat to US consumers and market competition is the US antidumping law.
CRIMINAL IP/TRADE SECRET CASE
On October 5, 2016, the Justice Department in the attached notice, chinese-national-sentenced-to-prison-for-conspiracy-to-steal-tr, announced the sentencing of Mo Hailong, a/k/a Robert Mo, a Chinese national to three years in Federal prison for a conspiracy to steal trade secrets. Mr. Mo Hailong was the Director of International Business of the Beijing Dabeinong Technology Group Company, commonly referred to as DBN. DBN is a Chinese conglomerate with a corn seed subsidiary company, Kings Nower Seed.
According to the plea agreement, Mo Hailong admitted to participating in a long-term conspiracy to steal trade secrets from DuPont Pioneer and Monsanto. Mo Hailong participated in the theft of inbred corn seeds from fields in Iowa and elsewhere for the purpose of transporting the seeds to DBN in China. The stolen inbred, or parent, seeds were the valuable trade secrets of DuPont Pioneer and Monsanto.
U.S. Attorney Kevin E. VanderSchel stated:
“Mo Hailong stole valuable proprietary information in the form of seed corn from DuPont Pioneer and Monsanto in an effort to transport such trade secrets to China. Theft of trade secrets is a serious federal crime, as it harms victim companies that have invested millions of dollars and years of work toward the development of propriety technology. The theft of agricultural trade secrets, and other intellectual property, poses a grave threat to our national economic security. The Justice Department and federal law enforcement partners are committed to prosecuting those who in engage in conduct such as Mo Hailong.”
NEW 337 CASES
On October 6, 2016, Nite Ize, Inc. filed a major 337 case against Device Holders, many of which come from China. The relevant parts of the ITC notice along with the names of the Chinese respondent companies are below.
Commodity:
Device Holders
Filed by:
James B. Altman
Firm/Organization:
Foster, Murphy, Altman & Nickel, PC
Behalf of:
Nite Ize, Inc.
Letter to Lisa R. Barton, Secretary, USITC; requesting that the Commission conduct an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, regarding Certain Device Holders, and Components Thereof. The proposed respondents are Shenzhen Youtai Trade Company Limited, d/b/a NoChoice, China; REXS LLC, Lewes, DE; Spinido, Inc., Brighton, CO; Luo, Qiden, d/b/a Lita International Shop, China; Guangzhou Kuaguoyi E-commerece co., ltd., d/b/a Kagu Culture, China; Shenzhen New Dream Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a Newdreams, China; Shenzhen Gold South technology Co., Ltd. d/b/a Baidatong, China; Zhao Chunhui d/b/a Skyocean, China; Sunpauto Co., ltd., HK; Wang Zhi Gang d/b/a China; Dang Yuya d/b/a Sminiker, China; Shenzhen Topworld Technology Co., d/b/a IdeaPro, Hong Kong; Lin Zhen Mei d/b/a Anson, China; Wu Xuying d/b/a Novoland, China; Shenzhen New Dream Sailing Electronic Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a MegaDream, China; Zhongshan Feiyu Hardware technology Co., Ltd d/b/a YouFo, China; Ninghuazian Wangfulong Chaojishichang Youxian Gongsi, Ltd., d/b/a EasybuyUS, China; Chang Lee d/b/a Frentaly, Duluth, GA; Trendbox USA LLC d/b/a Trendbox, Scottsdale, AZ; Timespa d/b/a Jia Bai Nian (Shenzhen) Electronic Commerce Trade CO., LTD., China; Tontex d/b/a Shenzhen Hetongtai Electronics Co., Ltd., China; Scotabc d/b/a ShenChuang Opto-electronics Technology Co., Ltd., China; Tenswall d/b/a Shenzhen Tenswall International Trading Co., Ltd., La Puente, CA; Luo Jieqiong d/b/a Wekin, China; Pecham d/b/a Baichen Technology Ltd., Hong Kong; Cyrift d/b/a Guangzhou Sunway E-Commerce LLC., China; Rymemo d/b/a Global Box, LLC., Dunbar, PA; Wang Guoxiang d/b/a Minse, China; Yuan I d/b/a Bestrix, China; Zhiping Zhou d/b/a Runshion, China; Funlavie, Riverside, CA; Huijukon d/b/a Shenzhen Hui Ju Kang technology Co., Ltd., China; Zhang Haujun d/b/a CeeOne, China; Easy Acc d/b/a Searay LLC., Newark, DE; Barsone d/b/a Shenzhen Senweite Electronic Commerce Ltd., China; Oumeiou d/b/a Shenzhen Oumeiou Technology Co., Ltd., China; Grando d/b/a Shenzhen Dashentai Network Technology Co., Ltd., China; Shenzhen Yingxue Technology Co., Ltd., China; Shenzhen Longwang Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a LWANG, China; Hu Peng d/b/a AtomBud, China
CHINESE VERSION OF 337 ARTICLE
Set forth below is a Chinese version of the 337 English article published last month followed by the original English version.
“阻止来自中国的侵权产品：337条款调查案”
随着亚马逊和eBay加大力度引入中国卖家，以及越来越多的中国制造商另辟蹊径生产本身的产品，向我们在中国的律师咨询有关盗版产品和仿冒问题的公司数目也随之猛增。若该问题涉及到把侵权产品进口到美国，拥有美国知识产权的公司可以采取强大的补救措施进行反击。其中一个最强有力的补救措施就是337条款调查案，它可以用来阻止侵权产品进入美国，无论该产品生产自何处。
337条款调查案（该名称源自于19 U.S.C. 1337法令）可用来打击侵犯版权、商标、专利或商业秘密的进口品。但是由于注册商标和版权拥有人一般上可以采取其它的法律行动，337条款调查案对专利、未注册商标和商业秘密的拥有人尤其有效。虽然该调查案通常局限于知识产权，正在对钢铁产品进行的337调查案中，美国钢铁业试图将不公平行为的定义扩大以便将入侵计算机系统和违反反垄断行为包含在内。
首先，美国国际贸易委员会（“ITC”）会发起337条款的调查。如果ITC发现某进口货侵犯了特定的知识产权，可以发出排除令（exclusion order），美国海关就会扣留所有侵权的进口货。
大量种类各异的产品已经因337条款调查案而被禁止入口：从玩具（魔方拼图、椰菜娃娃）、鞋类（匡威运动鞋）、大型机器（造纸机）、消费类产品（首饰盒、汽车配件、电子香烟和烫发器）到高科技产品（电脑、手机和半导体芯片）等等。
337条款是知识产权和贸易的混合型法令，某个美国产业必须证明受到了伤害。伤害证明的要求很低，几乎所有的案例都符合此要求——只许一些销售损失就能证明伤害。对符合美国产业的要求可说是关键所在。美国产业通常是一家持有相关知识产权的公司。如果该知识产权是一项注册商标、版权或专利，美国产业的要求范围已扩大至凡在美国进行的工厂和设备、劳动力或资本的重大投资，以及专利权开发的实质性投资，包括工程、研发或授权许可，均可视为国内产业。然而，ITC最近提高了美国产业的要求，让专利“流氓”或非执业实体更难提出337调查案诉求。
337条款调查案由行政法官（ALJ）负责审理，诉讼过程迅速且激烈，一般上只需12至15个月来完成。ITC收到一份337调查的申请后，有30天的时间来决定是否立案。一旦确定立案，ITC会将诉状和调查通知答辩方。外国被诉方有30天的时间应诉，美国国内的被诉方则只有20天的时间应诉。如果进口商或外国被诉方没有做出回应，ITC会可认定公司放弃抗辩而发出排除令。
ITC在337调查案中所采取的是“对物”管辖权，也就是针对进口到美国的产品进行管辖。这很合理：ITC无权管制外国公司，但有权管制其进口产品。一般而言，337条款调查案和大多数的普通诉讼案不同，申诉方可以打赢一家1）不可能送达诉状、2）未能出庭聆讯，以及3）不可能被追讨款项的中国公司。
337条款调查案所采取的补救措施是颁布排除令，阻止答辩方的侵权产品进入美国。但是在某些特殊情况下，如果某个产品非常容易制造，ITC可以发布普遍排除令，不分来源地禁止所有同类侵权产品进入美国。以我处理过的魔方拼图案件为例，Ideal公司（申请人）把超过400家台湾公司列为侵犯其普通法商标的答辩人。ITC在1983年发布了普遍排除令（General Exclusion Order），阻止非Ideal公司制造的魔方产品进入美国市场，这一禁令沿用至今。除了排除令，ITC也可以发布制止令（cease and desist orders），禁止美国进口商继续售卖相关侵权产品。
337条款调查案的双方也可以选择庭外和解，但是和解协议必须经由ITC复审。我们经常协助客户尽早解决337条款调查案，以减少他们的诉讼费用。在20世纪90年代初期，RCA针对中国进口的电视提出了337条款调查。所有涉及的中国公司通过与RCA签署授权许可协议，迅速地解决了该调查案。
337条款调查案中的答辩人通常可以通过修改本身产品的设计来避开相关的侵权指责。约翰迪尔（John Deere）曾经指控把拖拉机漆成绿色和黄色的中国公司侵犯了约翰迪尔的商标，因而提出了一项著名的337条款调查案。大部分的中国答辩人与申诉人达成协议并改变拖拉机的颜色，例如蓝红色。
关键点：337条款调查案是由ITC发起的强有力诉讼案，美国公司应该把它视为阻止侵权产品进入美国市场的手段。另一方面，涉及这些调查案的美国进口商和外国答辩人应该认真地对待它们，并且迅速做出回应，因为排除令发出后可延续多年有效。
STOP IP INFRINGING PRODUCTS FROM CHINA AND OTHER COUNTRIES USING CUSTOMS AND SECTION 337 CASES
With Amazon and Ebay having increased their efforts at bringing in Chinese sellers and with more and more Chinese manufacturers branching out and making their own products, the number of companies contacting our China lawyers here at Harris Moure about problems with counterfeit products and knockoffs has soared. If the problem involves infringing products being imported into the United States, powerful remedies are available to companies with US IP rights if the infringing imports are products coming across the US border.
If the IP holder has a registered trademark or copyright, the individual or company holding the trademark or copyright can go directly to Customs and record the trademark under 19 CFR 133.1 or the copyright under 19 CFR 133.31. See https://iprr.cbp.gov/.
Many years ago a US floor tile company was having massive problems with imports infringing its copyrights on its tile designs. Initially, we looked at a Section 337 case as described below, but the more we dug down into the facts, we discovered that the company simply failed to register its copyrights with US Customs.
Once the trademarks and copyrights are registered, however, it is very important for the company to continually police the situation and educate the various Customs ports in the United States about the registered trademarks and copyrights and the infringing imports coming into the US. Such a campaign can help educate the Customs officers as to what they should be looking out for when it comes to identifying which imports infringe the trademarks and copyrights in question. The US recording industry many years ago had a very successful campaign at US Customs to stop infringing imports.
For those companies with problems from Chinese infringing imports, another alternative is to go to Chinese Customs to stop the export of infringing products from China. The owner of Beanie Babies did this very successfully having Chinese Customs stop the export of the infringing Beanie Babies out of China.
One of the most powerful remedies is a Section 337 case, which can block infringing products, regardless of their origin, from entering the U.S. A Section 337 action (the name comes from the implementing statute, 19 U.S.C. 1337) is available against imported goods that infringe a copyright, trademark, patent, or trade secret. But because other actions are usually readily available to owners of registered trademarks and copyrights, Section 337 actions are particularly effective for owners of patents, unregistered trademarks, and trade secrets. Although generally limited to IP rights, in the ongoing Section 337 steel case, US Steel has been attempting to expand the definition of unfair acts to include hacking into computer systems and antitrust violations.
The starting point is a section 337 investigation at the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”). If the ITC finds certain imports infringe a specific intellectual property right, it can issue an exclusion order and U.S. Customs will then keep out all the infringing imports at the border.
Section 337 cases have been brought and exclusion orders issued against a vast range of different products: from toys (Rubik’s Cube Puzzles, Cabbage Patch Dolls) to footwear (Converse sneakers) to large machinery (paper-making machines) to consumer products (caskets, auto parts, electronic cigarettes and hair irons) to high tech products (computers, cell phones, and semiconductor chips).
Section 337 is a hybrid IP and trade statute, which requires a showing of injury to a US industry. The injury requirement is very low and can nearly always be met–a few lost sales will suffice to show injury. The US industry requirement can be a sticking point. The US industry is usually the one company that holds the intellectual property right in question. If the IP right is a registered trademark, copyright or patent, the US industry requirement has been expanded to not only include significant US investment in plant and equipment, labor or capital to substantial investment in the exploitation of the IP right, including engineering, research and development or licensing. Recently, however, the ITC has raised the US industry requirement to make it harder for patent “trolls” or Non Practicing Entities to bring 337 cases.
Section 337 cases, however, are directed at truly unfair acts. Patents and Copyrights are protected by the US Constitution so in contrast to antidumping and countervailing duty cases, respondents in these cases get more due process protection. The Administrative Procedures Act is applied to Section 337 cases with a full trial before an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”), extended full discovery, a long trial type hearing, but on a very expedited time frame.
Section 337 actions, in fact, are the bullet train of IP litigation, fast, intense litigation in front of an ALJ. The typical section 337 case takes only 12-15 months. Once a 337 petition is filed, the ITC has 30 days to determine whether or not to institute the case. After institution, the ITC will serve the complaint and notice of investigation on the respondents. Foreign respondents have 30 days to respond to the complaint; US respondents have only 20 days. If the importers or foreign respondents do not respond to the complaint, the ITC can find the companies in default and issue an exclusion order.
The ITC’s jurisdiction in 337 cases is “in rem,” which means it is over the product being imported into the US. This makes sense: the ITC has no power over the foreign companies themselves, but it does have power over the imports. What this means in everyday terms is that unlike most regular litigation, a Section 337 case can be effectively won against a Chinese company that 1) is impossible to serve, 2) fails to show up at the hearing, and 3) is impossible to collect any money from.
The remedy in section 337 cases is an exclusion order excluding the respondent’s infringing products from entering the United States. In special situations, however, where it is very easy to manufacture a product, the ITC can issue a general exclusion order against the World. In the Rubik’s Cube puzzle case, which was my case at the ITC, Ideal (the claimant) named over 400 Taiwan companies as respondents infringing its common law trademark. The ITC issued a General Exclusion Order in 1983 and it is still in force today, blocking Rubik’s Cube not made by Ideal from entering the United States. In addition to exclusion orders, the ITC can issue cease and desist orders prohibiting US importers from selling products in inventory that infringe the IP rights in question
Section 337 cases can also be privately settled, but the settlement agreement is subject to ITC review. We frequently work with our respondent clients to settle 337 cases early to minimize their legal fees. In the early 1990s, RCA filed a section 337 case against TVs from China. The Chinese companies all quickly settled the case by signing a license agreement with RCA.
Respondents caught in section 337 cases often can modify their designs to avoid the IP right in question. John Deere brought a famous 337 case aimed at Chinese companies that painted their tractors green and yellow infringing John Deere’s trademark. Most of the Chinese respondents settled the case and painted their tractors different colors, such as blue and red.
Bottom Line: Section 337 cases are intense litigation before the ITC, and should be considered by U.S. companies as a tool for fighting against infringing products entering the United States. On the flip side, US importers and foreign respondents named in these cases should take them very seriously and respond quickly because exclusion orders can stay in place for years.
If you have any questions about these cases or about US trade policy, TPP, the antidumping or countervailing duty law, trade adjustment assistance, customs, False Claims Act or 337 IP/patent law in general, please feel free to contact me.
Filed Under: 337, Agriculture, Alibaba, Aluminum antidumping, Aluminum Extrusions, antidumping duty, antidumping review investigation, antitrust law, CAFC, Canada antidumping, cartel, CBP, China Trade Policy, China Trade Politics, Chinese Antidumping Case, Chinese antidumping law, CIT, Coalition, Commerce Department Rules, Congress, Copyright, countervailing duty, criminal, Criminal IP, custom fraud, Customs, Customs Fraud, Customs Regulations Trademark Copyright Infringement, DOJ, domestic industry, Donald Trump, environmental, Evasion Antidumping Orders, Evasion Trade Laws, False Claims Act, False Claims Act/Customs Fraud, FDA, Fraud, Free Trade, General, Hardwood Plywood, Hilary Clinton, Honey, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means Committee, importer of record, Infringement, intellectual property/337, International Trade Commission, ITC, Japan Trade Policy, Jurisdiction, Justice Department, Liability, licensing, MAGNESIUM, mandatory respondents, Market Economy China, missing antidumping duties, MOFCOM, national security, NME, Off the Road Tires China, Patent, Politics, President, President Obama, Presidential Primary, Presidential Trade Politics, price fixing, Protectionism, Reagan, remedial purpose of antidumping law, retaliation, retroactive liability, Ronald Reagan, Russia, Safeguards, Senate, Senate Finance Committee, Shellfish, Smuggling, Steel, Steel Cases, steel shelving, Steel Sinks, Strong Free Trade Arguments, TAAC, TAAF, Tariffs, TIANJIN MAGNESIUM, tires, TPP, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center for Firms, trade law, Trade Legislation, Trade Policy, Trade Secrets, Trans Pacific Partnership, Transshipment, TTIP, United States Trade Representative, US China Trade War, US Commerce Department, US Court of International Trade, ustr, Vitamin C, Vitamin C Antitrust, Welded Line Pipe, Wood Flooring Tagged With: 337, aluminum extrusions, antidumping, antitrust, china, CIT, Commerce, Commerce Department, Congress, countervailing duty, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, criminal, customs, customs fraud, DOJ, evasion, evasion trade laws, false claims act, fraud, furniture, honey, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means, importer of record, intellectual property, ITC, Justice Department, magnesium, patent, politics, retroactive liability, Solar Cells China, subsidy, trade, trade law, Trade Legislation, trade war, us china trade war, US Court of International Trade, ustr, Vitamin C, wto
Bill Perry September 8, 2016
US CHINA TRADE WAR–TPP POLITICS, TAAF THE ANSWER, $2 BILLION MISSING DUMPING DUTIES AS CASES RISE, CUSTOMS LAW CHANGES, SOLAR CELLS, 337 CUSTOMS STOP INFRINGING IMPORTS
FIRM UPDATE
In mid-August, Adams Lee, a well- known Trade and Customs lawyer from White & Case in Washington DC, has joined us here at Harris Moure in Seattle. Adams has handled well over 100 antidumping and countervailing duty cases. Attached is Adams’ bio, adams-lee-resume-aug-16, and his article is below on the new Customs Regulations against Evasion of US Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders.
Adams and I will both be in China from Sept 11th to October 1st in Beijing, Shanghai and Nanjing. If anyone would like to talk to us about these issues, please feel free to contact me at my e-mail, bill@harrismoure.com.
US CHINA TRADE WAR SEPTEMBER 8, 2016
Trade continues to be at the center of the Presidential primary with a possible passage of the Trans Pacific Partnership during the Lame Duck Session. This blog post contains the sixth, and maybe the most important, article on Trade Adjustment Assistance for Companies of a several part series on how weak free trade arguments have led to the sharp rise of protectionism of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders and the now possible demise of the Trans Pacific Partner (“TPP”).
The first article outlined the problem and why this is such a sharp attack on the TPP and some of the visceral arguments against free trade. The second article explored in depth the protectionist arguments and the reason for the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. The third article explored the weak and strong arguments against protectionism. The fourth article discussed one of the most important arguments for the TPP—National Security. The fifth article discussed why the Commerce Department’s and the US International Trade Commission’s (ITC) policy in antidumping (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) cases has led to a substantial increase in protectionism and national malaise of international trade victimhood.
The sixth article provides an answer with the only trade program that works and saves the companies and the jobs that go with them—The Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms/Companies program along with MEP, another US manufacturing program. The Article will describe the attempts by both Congress and the Obama Administration to kill the program, which may, in fact, have resulted in the sharp rise in protectionism in the US.
To pass the TPP, Congress must also provide assistance to make US companies competitive in the new free trade market created by the TPP. Congress must restore the trade safety net so that Congress can again vote for free trade agreements, and the United States can return to its leadership in the Free Trade area. The Congress has to fix the trade situation now before the US and the World return to the Smoot Hawley protectionism of the 1930s and the rise of nationalism, which can lead to military conflict.
In addition, set forth below are articles on a possible new antidumping case on Aluminum Foil from China and the rise of AD and CVD cases, the $2 billion in missing AD and CVD duties, the new Customs regulations to stop Transshipment in AD and CVD cases, the upcoming deadlines in the Solar Cells case in both English and Chinese, recent decisions in Steel cases, antidumping and countervailing duty reviews in September against Chinese companies, and finally an article about how to stop imports that infringe US intellectual property rights, either using US Customs law or Section 337 at the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”).
TRADE PROTECTIONISM IS STILL A VERY BIG TOPIC OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION; THE TPP PROBABLY IS NOT COMING UP IN THE LAME DUCK
As mentioned in my last newsletter, I believe that if Hilary Clinton is elected, President Obama will push for the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) to come up for a vote during the Lame Duck Session. The Congress, however, has other ideas.
In early August, U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan stated that he saw no reason to bring up the TPP in the Lame Duck because “we don’t have the votes.” Ryan went on to state:
“As long as we don’t have the votes, I see no point in bringing up an agreement only to defeat it. They have to fix this agreement and renegotiate some pieces of it if they have any hope or chance of passing it. I don’t see how they’ll ever get the votes for it.”
Democratic Senator Ron Wyden stated in late August that he will not take a position on the TPP until Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell brings the TPP up for a vote. But on August 26th, Mitch McConnell stated that passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership will be the next president’s problem, saying that the Senate will not vote on the treaty this year:
“The current agreement, the Trans-Pacific [Partnership], which has some serious flaws, will not be acted upon this year. It will still be around. It can be massaged, changed, worked on during the next administration.”
With this statement, McConnell appears to have killed passage during the Obama Administration.
But businesses continue to push for the TPP. On Sept 6th, the California Chamber of Commerce urged its Congressional delegation to pass the TPP. In the attached Sept 7th letter, 9-7finaltppletter, the Washington State Council on International Trade also urged its Congressional delegation to pass TPP, stating:
“with 40 percent of Washington jobs dependent upon trade, it is paramount that we prioritize policies and investments that increase our state’s international competitiveness. That is why it is so important that you join us in calling for an immediate vote on the TPP; according to a newly released Washington Council on International Trade-Association of Washington Business study, Washington could have already increased our exports by up to $8.7 billion and directly created 26,000 new jobs had the TPP been implemented in 2015.
While the U.S. has some of the lowest import duties in the world on most goods, our local Washington exporters are faced with thousands of tariffs that artificially inflate the cost of American-made goods. TPP will help eliminate these barriers . . ..
TPP aligns with Washington’s high standards, setting 21st century standards for digital trade, environmental protections, and labor rules . . . . If we want to increase our competitiveness and set American standards for global trade, we must act now with the TPP.
This election season’s rhetoric has been hostile toward trade, but the TPP’s benefits for our state are undeniable. It is imperative that our state steps up to advocate for the family wage jobs and economic opportunities created by trade, and the time to do so is now.”
Despite the Congressional opposition, ever the optimist, President Obama keeps pushing for passage during the Lame Duck. On August 30th, the White House Press Office stated:
“The president is going to make a strong case that we have made progress and there is a path for us to get this done before the president leaves office.”
On September 1, 2016, at a Press Conference in Hangzhou, China for the G20 meeting, President Obama said he is still optimistic about passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. Obama argued that the economic benefits of the pact would win out once the “noise” of the election season subsides.
The President said he plans to assure the leaders of the other countries that signed the TPP that the U.S. will eventually approve the deal despite the very vocal opposition from Democratic and Republican lawmakers and Presidential candidates.
President Obama went to state:
“And it’s my intention to get this one done, because, on the merits, it is smart for America to do it. And I have yet to hear a persuasive argument from the left or the right as to why we wouldn’t want to create a trade framework that raises labor standards, raising environmental standards, protects intellectual property, levels the playing field for U.S. businesses, brings down tariffs.”
Obama stated that although other countries, such as Japan, have troubles passing the TPP, the other countries:
“are ready to go. And what I’ll be telling them is that the United States has never had a smooth, uncontroversial path to ratifying trade deals, but they eventually get done”
“And so I intend to be making that argument. I will have to be less persuasive here because most people already understand that. Back home, we’ll have to cut through the noise once election season is over. It’s always a little noisy there.”
As mentioned in the last blog post, one of the strongest arguments for the TPP is National Security. Trade agreements help stop trade wars and military conflict. But despite that very strong point, the impact of free trade on the average manufacturing worker has not been beneficial.
In a recent e-mail blast, the Steel Workers make the point:
“Because of unfair trade, 1,500 of my colleagues at U.S. Steel Granite City Works in Granite City, Illinois are still laid-off. It’s been more than six months since our mill shut down.
Worker unemployment benefits are running out. Food banks are emptying out. People are losing their homes. City services might even shut down.
But there’s finally reason for hope. The Commerce Department recently took action to enforce our trade laws by placing duties on unfairly traded imports from countries like China. That will help ensure steel imports are priced fairly — and allow us to compete . . . .
All told, nearly 19,000 Americans have faced layoffs across the country because of the steel imports crisis.
China is making far more steel than it needs. China knows this is a problem, and repeatedly has pledged to cut down on steel production. But nothing has changed . . . .
China’s steel industry is heavily subsidized by its government, and it also doesn’t need to follow serious labor or environmental rules. But China has to do something with all that steel, so it dumps it into the United States far below market value.”
In a recent Business Week article, Four Myths about Trade, Robert Atkinson, the president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, made the same point stating:
The Washington trade establishment’s second core belief is that trade is an unalloyed good, even if other nations engage in mercantilism. . . . it doesn’t matter if other nations massively subsidize their exporters, require U.S. companies to hand over the keys to their technology in exchange for market access, or engage in other forms of mercantilist behavior. . . .
But China and others are proving that this is folly. In industry after industry, including the advanced innovation-based industries that are America’s future, they are gaming the rules of global trade to hold others back while they leap forward. . ..
It’s a reflection of having lost competitive advantage to other nations in many higher-value-added industries, in part because of foreign mercantilist policies and domestic economic-policy failures.
The Author then goes on to state the US must be tough in fighting mercantilism and “vigilantly enforce trade rules, such as by bringing many more trade-enforcement cases to the WTO, pressuring global aid organizations to cut funding to mercantilist nations, limiting the ability of companies in mercantilist nations to buy U.S. firms, and more.”
But this argument then runs into reality. As indicated below, Commerce finds dumping in about 95% of the cases. Thus, there are more than 130 AD and CVD orders against China blocking about $30 billion in imports. Presently more than 80 AD and CVD orders are against raw materials from China, chemicals, metals and various steel products, used in downstream US production. In the Steel area, there are AD and CVD orders against the following Chinese steel products:
carbon steel plate, hot rolled carbon steel flat products, circular welded and seamless carbon quality steel pipe, rectangular pipe and tube, circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe, steel threaded rod, oil country tubular goods, steel wire strand and wire, high pressure steel cylinders, non-oriented electrical steel, and carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod.
There are ongoing investigations against cold-rolled steel and corrosion resistant/galvanized steel so many Chinese steel products from China are already blocked by US AD and CVD orders with very high rates well over 100%.
AD and CVD orders stay in place for 5 to 30 years and yet the companies, such as the Steel Industry, still decline. After 40 years of protection from Steel imports by AD and CVD orders, where is Bethlehem Steel today? The Argument seems to be that if industries simply bring more cases, the Commerce Department is even tougher and the orders are enforced, all US companies will be saved, wages will go up and jobs will be everywhere.
The reality, however, is quite different. In fact, many of these orders have led to the destruction of US downstream industries so does hitting the Chinese with more trade cases really solve the trade problem?
More importantly, although Commerce does not use real numbers in antidumping cases against China, it does use actual prices and costs in antidumping steel cases against Korea, India, Taiwan, and many other countries. In a recent antidumping case against Off the Road Tires from India, where China faces dumping rates of between 11 and 105%, the only two Indian exporters, which were both mandatory respondents, received 0% dumping rates and the Commerce Department in a highly unusual preliminary determination reached a negative no dumping determination on the entire case.
Market economy countries, such as Korea and India, can run computer programs to make sure that they are not dumping. This is not gaming the system. This is doing exactly what the antidumping law is trying to remedy—elimination of the unfair act, dumping.
Antidumping and countervailing duty laws are not penal statutes, they are remedial statutes and that is why US importers, who pay the duties, and the foreign producers/exporters are not entitled to full due process rights in AD and CVD cases, including application of the Administrative Procedures Act, decision by a neutral Administrative Law Judge and a full trial type hearing before Commerce and the ITC, such as Section 337 Intellectual Property cases, described below.
In fact, when industries, such as the steel industry, companies and workers along with Government officials see dumping and subsidization in every import into the United States, this mindset creates a disease—Globalization/International Trade victimhood. We American workers and companies simply cannot compete because all imports are dumped and subsidized.
That simply is not true and to win the trade battles and war a change in mindset is required.
In his Article, Mr. Atkinson’s second argument may point to the real answer. The US government needs to make US manufacturing companies competitive again:
It must begin with reducing the effective tax rate on corporations. To believe that America can thrive in the global economy with the world’s highest statutory corporate-tax rates and among the highest effective corporate-tax rates, especially for manufacturers, is to ignore the intense global competitive realities of the 21st century. Tax reform then needs to be complemented with two other key items: a regulatory-reform strategy particularly aimed at reducing burdens on industries that compete globally, and increased funding for programs that help exporters, such as the Export-Import Bank, the new National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, and a robust apprenticeship program for manufacturing workers. . . .
if Congress and the next administration develop a credible new globalization doctrine for the 21st century — melding tough trade enforcement with a robust national competitiveness agenda — then necessary trade-opening steps like the Trans-Pacific Partnership will once again be on the table and the U.S. economy will begin to thrive once again.
When it comes to Trade Adjustment Assistance, however, as Congressman Jim McDermott recently stated in an article, workers do not want handouts and training. They want jobs. The only trade remedy that actually provides jobs is the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms/Companies program and MEP, another manufacturing program.
FREE TRADE REQUIRES COMPETITIVE US COMPANIES— TAA FOR FIRMS/COMPANIES AND THE MEP MANUFACTURING PROGRAM ARE THE ANSWER
On August 17th, in a letter to the Wall Street Journal, the author referred to “the longstanding Republican promotion of trade as an engine of growth.” The author then goes on to state:
But what Donald Trump sees and the Republican elites have long missed is that for trade to be a winner for Americans, our government must provide policies for our industries to be the most competitive in the world. Mr. Zoellick and others promoted trade without promoting American competitiveness. . . .
Mr. Zoellick should take a lesson from the American gymnasts in Rio and see how competitiveness leads to winning.
Although Donald Trump might agree with that point, there are Government programs already in effect that increase the competitiveness of US companies injured by imports, but they have been cut to the bone.
This is despite the fact that some of the highest paying American jobs have routinely been in the nation’s manufacturing sector. And some of the highest prices paid for the nation’s free trade deals have been paid by the folks who work in it. What’s shocking is the fact that that isn’t shocking anymore. And what’s really shocking is that we seem to have accepted it as the “new normal.” Now where did that ever come from?
How did we get here? How did we fall from the summit? Was it inexorable? Did we get soft? Did we get lazy? Did we stop caring? Well perhaps to some extent. But my sense of it is that too many of us have bought into the idea of globalization victimhood and a sort of paralysis has been allowed to set in.
Now in my opinion that’s simply not in America’s DNA. It’s about time that this nation decided not to participate in that mind set any longer. Economists and policy makers of all persuasions are now beginning to recognize the requirement for a robust response by this nation to foreign imports – irrespective of party affiliation or the particular free trade agreement under consideration at any given moment. Companies, workers and Government officials need to stop blaming the foreigner and figure out what they can do to compete with the foreign imports.
There is no doubt in my mind that open and free trade benefits the overall U.S. economy in the long run. However, companies and the families that depend on the employment therein, indeed whole communities, are adversely affected in the short run (some for extended periods) resulting in significant expenditures in public welfare and health programs, deteriorated communities and the overall lowering of America’s industrial output.
But here’s the kicker: programs that can respond effectively already exist. Three of them are domiciled in our Department of Commerce and one in our Department of Labor:
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms (Commerce)
The Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (Commerce)
Economic Adjustment for Communities (Commerce)
Trade Adjustment Assistance for Displaced Workers (Labor)
This Article, however, is focused on making US companies competitive again and the first two programs do just that, especially for smaller companies. Specific federal support for trade adjustment programs, however, has been legislatively restrictive, bureaucratically hampered, organizationally disjointed, and substantially under-funded.
The lessons of history are clear. In the 1990’s, after the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union, the federal government reduced defense industry procurements and closed military facilities. In response, a multi-agency, multi-year effort to assist adversely affected defense industries, their workers, and communities facing base closures were activated. Although successes usually required years of effort and follow on funding from agencies of proven approaches (for example the reinvention of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard into a center for innovation and vibrant commercial activities), there was a general sense that the federal government was actively responding to a felt need at the local level.
A similar multi-agency response has been developed in the event of natural disasters, i.e., floods, hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes. Dimensions of the problem are identified, an appropriate expenditure level for a fixed period of time is authorized and the funds are deployed as needed through FEMA, SBA and other relevant agencies such as EDA.
The analogy to trade policy is powerful. When the US Government enters into Trade Agreements, such as the TPP, Government action changes the market place. All of a sudden US companies can be faced, not with a Tidal Wave, but a series of flash floods of foreign competition and imports that can simply wipe out US companies.
A starting point for a trade adjustment strategy would be for a combined Commerce-Labor approach building upon existing authorities and proven programs, that can be upgraded and executed forthwith.
Commerce’s Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms (TAAF) has 11 regional (multi-state) TAAF Centers but the program has been cut to only $12.5 million annually. The amount of matching funds for US companies has not changed since the 1980s. The system has the band-width to increase to a run rate of $50 million. Projecting a four-year ramp up of $90 million (FY18-FY21), the TAA program could serve an additional 2,150 companies.
Foreign competitors may argue that TAA for Firms/Companies is a subsidy, but the money does not go directly to the companies themselves, but to consultants to work with the companies through a series of knowledge-based projects to make the companies competitive again. Moreover, the program does not affect the US market or block imports in any way.
Does the program work? In the Northwest, where I am located, the Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center has been able to save 80% of the companies that entered the program since 1984. The MidAtlantic Trade Adjustment Assistance Center in this video at http://mataac.org/howitworks/ describes in detail how the program works and why it is so successful—Its flexibility in working with companies on an individual basis to come up with specific adjustment plans for each company to make the companies competitive again in the US market as it exists today.
Increasing funding will allow the TAA for Firms/Companies program to expand its bandwidth and provide relief to larger US companies, including possibly even steel producers. If companies that use steel can be saved by the program, why can’t the steel producers themselves?
But it will take a tough love approach to trade problems. Working with the companies to forget about Globalization victimhood and start trying to actually solve the Company’s problems that hinder its competitiveness in the market as it exists today.
In addition to TAA for Firms/Companies, another important remedy needed to increase competitiveness is Commerce’s Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), which has a Center in each State and Puerto Rico. MEP provides high quality management and technical assistance to the country’s small manufacturers with an annual budget of $130 million. MEP, in fact, is one the remedies suggested by the TAA Centers along with other projects to make the companies competitive again.
As a consequence of a nation-wide re-invention of the system, MEP is positioned to serve even more companies. A commitment of $100 million over four years would serve an additional 8,400 firms. These funds could be targeted to the small manufacturing firms that are the base of our supply chain threatened by foreign imports.
Each of these programs requires significant non-federal match or cost share from the companies themselves, to assure that the local participants have significant skin in the game and to amplify taxpayer investment. A $250 million commitment from the U.S. government would be a tangible although modest first step in visibly addressing the local consequences of our trade policies. The Department of Commerce would operate these programs in a coordinated fashion, working in collaboration with the Department of Labor’s existing Trade Adjustment Assistance for Displaced Workers program.
TAA for Workers is funded at the $711 million level, but retraining workers should be the last remedy in the US government’s bag. If all else fails, retrain workers, but before that retrain the company so that the jobs and the companies are saved. That is what TAA for Firms/Companies and the MEP program do. Teach companies how to swim in the new market currents created by trade agreements and the US government
In short – this serious and multi-pronged approach will begin the process of stopping globalization victimhood in its tracks.
Attached is White Paper, taaf-2-0-white-paper, prepares to show to expand TAA for Firms/Companies and take it to the next level above $50 million, which can be used to help larger companies adjust to import competition. The White Paper also rebuts the common arguments against TAA for Firms/Companies.
ALUMINUM FOIL FROM CHINA, RISE IN ANTIDUMPING CASES PUSHED BY COMMERCE AND ITC
On August 22, 2016, the Wall Street Journal published an article on how the sharp rise of aluminum foil imports, mostly from China, has led to the shutdown of US U.S. aluminum foil producers. Articles, such as this one, often signal that an antidumping case is coming in the near future.
Recently, there have been several articles about the sharp rise in antidumping and countervailing duty/trade remedy cases in the last year. By the second half of 2016, the US Government has reported that twice as many antidumping (“AD”) and countervailing duty (“CVD”) case have been initiated in 2015-2016 as in 2009.
China is not the only target. AD cases have been recently filed against steel imports from Austria, Belgium, Brazil, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, South Africa, Taiwan, and Turkey; Steel Flanges from India, Italy and Spain; Chemicals from Korea and China, and Rubber from Brazil, Korea, Mexico and Poland.
The potential Aluminum Foil case may not be filed only against China. In addition to China, the case could also be filed against a number of foreign exporters of aluminum foil to the United States.
AD and CVD duties can only be imposed if there is injury to the US industry, which is determined by the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”). But in determining injury, the law directs the ITC to cumulate, that is add together all the imports of the same product from the various foreign exporters. Thus if a number of countries are exporting aluminum foil in addition to China, there is a real incentive for the US aluminum foil industry to file a case against all the other countries too.
There are several reasons for the sharp rise in AD and CVD cases. One is the state of the economy and the sharp rise in imports. In bad economic times, the two lawyers that do the best are bankruptcy and international trade lawyers. Chinese overcapacity can also result in numerous AD and CVD cases being filed not only in the United States but around the World.
Although the recent passage of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 has made it marginally better to bring an injury case at the ITC, a major reason for the continued rise in AD and CVD cases is the Commerce and ITC determinations in these cases. Bringing an AD case, especially against China, is like the old country saying, shooting fish in a barrel.
By its own regulation, Commerce finds dumping and subsidization in almost every case, and the ITC in Sunset Review Investigations leaves antidumping and countervailing duty orders in place for as long as 20 to 30 years, often to protect single company US industries, resulting in permanent barriers to imports and the creation of monopolies.
Many readers may ask why should people care if prices go up a few dollars at WalMart for US consumers? Jobs remain. Out of the 130 plus AD and CVD orders against China, more than 80 of the orders are against raw materials, chemicals, metals and steel, that go directly into downstream US production. AD orders have led to the closure of downstream US factories.
Commerce has defined dumping so that 95% of the products imported into the United States are dumped. Pursuant to the US Antidumping Law, Commerce chooses mandatory respondent companies to individually respond to the AD questionnaire. Commerce generally picks only two or three companies out of tens, if not hundreds, of respondent companies.
Only mandatory companies in an AD case have the right to get zero, no dumping margins. Only those mandatory respondent companies have the right to show that they are not dumping. If a company gets a 0 percent, no dumping determination, in the initial investigation, the antidumping order does not apply to that company.
Pursuant to the AD law, for the non-mandatory companies, the Commerce Department may use any other reasonable method to calculate antidumping rates, which means weight averaging the rates individually calculated for the mandatory respondents, not including 0 rates. If all mandatory companies receive a 0% rate, Commerce will use any other reasonable method to determine a positive AD rate, not including 0% rates.
So if there are more than two or three respondent companies in an AD case, which is the reality in most cases, by its own law and practice, Commerce will reach an affirmative dumping determination. All three mandatory companies may get 0% dumping rates, but all other companies get a positive dumping rate. Thus almost all imports are by the Commerce Department’s definition dumped.
Under the Commerce Department’s methodology all foreign companies are guilty of dumping and subsidization until they prove their innocence, and almost all foreign companies never have the chance to prove their innocence.
Commerce also has a number of other methodologies to increase antidumping rates. In AD cases against China, Commerce treats China as a nonmarket economy country and, therefore, refuses to use actual prices and costs in China to determine dumping, which makes it very easy for Commerce to find very high dumping rates.
In market economy cases, such as cases against EU and South American countries, Commerce has used zeroing or targeted dumping to create antidumping rates, even though the WTO has found such practices to be contrary to the AD Agreement.
The impact of the Commerce Department’s artificial methodology is further exaggerated by the ITC. Although in the initial investigation, the ITC will go negative, no injury, in 30 to 40% of the cases, once the antidumping order is in place it is almost impossible to persuade the ITC to lift the antidumping order in Sunset Review investigations.
So antidumping orders, such as Pressure Sensitive Tape from Italy (1977), Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand from Japan (1978), Potassium Permanganate from China (1984), Cholopicrin from China (1984), and Porcelain on Steel Cookware from China (1986), have been in place for more than 30 years. In 1987 when I was at the Commerce Department, an antidumping case was filed against Urea from the entire Soviet Union. Antidumping orders from that case against Russia and Ukraine are still in place today.
In addition, many of these antidumping orders, such as Potassium Permanganate, Magnesium, Porcelain on Steel Cookware, and Sulfanilic Acid, are in place to protect one company US industries, creating little monopolies in the United States.
Under the Sunset Review methodology, the ITC never sunsets AD and CVD orders unless the US industry no longer exists.
By defining dumping the way it does, both Commerce and the ITC perpetuate the myth of Globalization victimhood. We US companies and workers simply cannot compete against imports because all imports are dumped or subsidized. But is strangling downstream industries to protect one company US industries truly good trade policy? Does keeping AD orders in place for 20 to 30 years really save the US industry and make the US companies more competitive? The answer simply is no.
Protectionism does not work but it does destroy downstream industries and jobs. Protectionism is destructionism. It costs jobs.
US MISSING $2 BILLION IN ANTIDUMPING DUTIES, MANY ON CHINESE PRODUCTS
According to the attached recent report by the General Accounting Office, gao-report-ad-cvd-missing-duties, the US government is missing about $2.3 billion in unpaid anti-dumping and countervailing duties, two-thirds of which will probably never be paid.
The United States is the only country in the World that has retroactive liability for US importers. When rates go up, US importers are liable for the difference plus interest. But the actual determination of the amount owed by the US imports can take place many years after the import was actually made into the US.
The GAO found that billing errors and delays in final duty assessments were major factors in the unpaid bills, with many of the importers with the largest debts leaving the import business before they received their bill.
“U.S. Customs and Border Protection reported that it does not expect to collect most of that debt”. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) anticipates that about $1.6 billion of the total will never be paid.
As the GAO report states:
elements of the U.S. system for determining and collecting AD/CV duties create an inherent risk that some importers will not pay the full amount they owe in AD/CV duties. . . . three related factors create a heightened risk of AD/CV duty nonpayment: (1) The U.S. system for determining such duties involves the setting of an initial estimated duty rate upon the entry of goods, followed by the retrospective assessment of a final duty rate; (2) the amount of AD/CV duties for which an importer may be ultimately billed can significantly exceed what the importer pays when the goods enter the country; and (3) the assessment of final AD/CV duties can occur up to several years after an importer enters goods into the United States, during which time the importer may cease operations or become unable to pay additional duties.
The vast majority of the missing duties, 89%, were clustered around the following products from China: Fresh Garlic ($577 million), Wooden Bedroom Furniture ($505 million), Preserved Mushrooms ($459 million), crawfish tail meat ($210 million), Pure Magnesium ($170 million), and Honey ($158 million).
The GAO Report concludes at page 56-47:
We estimate the amount of uncollected duties on entries from fiscal year 2001 through 2014 to be $2.3 billion. While CBP collects on most AD/CV duty bills it issues, it only collects, on average, about 31 percent of the dollar amount owed. The large amount of uncollected duties is due in part to the long lag time between entry and billing in the U.S. retrospective AD/CV duty collection system, with an average of about 2-and-a-half years between the time goods enter the United States and the date a bill may be issued. Large differences between the initial estimated duty rate and the final duty rate assessed also contribute to unpaid bills, as importers receiving a large bill long after an entry is made may be unwilling or unable to pay. In 2015, CBP estimated that about $1.6 billion in duties owed was uncollectible. By not fully collecting unpaid AD/CV duty bills, the U.S. government loses a substantial amount of revenue and compromises its efforts to deter and remedy unfair and injurious trade practices.
But with all these missing duties, why doesn’t the US simply move to a prospective methodology, where the importer pays the dumping rate calculated by Commerce and the rate only goes up for future imports after the new rate is published.
Simple answer—the In Terrorem, trade chilling, effect of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders—the legal threat that the US importers will owe millions in the future, which could jeopardize the entire import company. As a result, over time imports from China and other countries covered by AD and CVD order often decline to 0 because established importers are simply too scared to take the risk of importing under an AD and CVD order.
CUTSOMS NEW LAW AGAINST TRANSSHIPMENT AROUND AD AND CVD ORDERS; ONE MORE LEGAL PROCEDURE FOR US IMPORTERS AND FOREIGN EXPORTERS TO BE WARY OF
By Adams Lee, Trade and Customs Partner, Harris Moure.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued new attached regulations, customs-regs-antidumping, that establish a new administrative procedure for CBP to investigate AD and CVD duty evasion. 81 FR 56477 (Aug. 22, 2016). Importers of any product that could remotely be considered merchandise subject to an AD/CVD order now face an increased likelihood of being investigated for AD/CVD duty evasion. The new CBP AD/CVD duty evasion investigations are the latest legal procedure, together with CBP Section 1592 penalty actions (19 USC 1592), CBP criminal prosecutions (18 USC 542, 545), and “qui tam” actions under the False Claims Act, aimed at ensnaring US importers and their foreign suppliers in burdensome and time-consuming proceedings that can result in significant financial expense or even criminal charges.
The following are key points from these new regulations:
CBP now has a new option to pursue and shut down AD/CVD duty evasion schemes.
CBP will have broad discretion to issue questions and conduct on-site verifications.
CBP investigations may result in interim measures that could significantly affect importers.
CBP’s interim measures may effectively establish a presumption of the importer’s guilt until proven innocent.
Other interested parties, including competing importers, can chime in to support CBP investigations against accused importers.
Both petitioners and respondents will have the opportunity to submit information and arguments.
Failure to cooperate and comply with CBP requests may result in CBP applying an adverse inference against the accused party.
Failing to respond adequately may result in CBP determining AD/CVD evasion has occurred.
The new CBP regulations (19 CFR Part 165) establish a formal process for how it will consider allegations of AD/CVD evasion. These new regulations are intended to address complaints from US manufacturers that CBP was not doing enough to address AD/CVD evasion schemes and that their investigations were neither transparent nor effective.
AD/CVD duty evasion schemes typically involve falsely declaring the country of origin or misclassifying the product (e.g., “widget from China” could be misreported as “widget from Malaysia” or “wadget from China”).
Petitions filed by domestic manufacturers trigger concurrent investigations by the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to determine whether AD/CVD orders should be issued to impose duties on covered imports. The DOC determines if imports have been dumped or subsidized and sets the initial AD/CVD rates. CBP then has the responsibility to collect AD/CVD duty deposits and to assess the final amount of AD/CVD duties owed at the rates determined by DOC.
US petitioners have decried U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as the weak link in enforcing US trade laws, not just because of it often being unable to collect the full amount of AD/CVD duties owed, but also because how CBP responds to allegations of AD/CVD evasion. Parties that provided CBP with information regarding evasion schemes were not allowed to participate in CBP’s investigations and were not notified of whether CBP had initiated an investigation or the results of any investigation.
CBP’s new regulations address many complaints regarding CBP’s lack of transparency in handling AD/CVD evasion allegations. The new regulations provide more details on how CBP procedures are to be conducted, the types of information that will be considered and made available to the public, and the specific timelines and deadlines in CBP investigations:
“Interested parties” for CBP investigations now includes not just the accused importers, but also competing importers that submit the allegations.
Interested parties now have access to public versions of information submitted in CBP’s investigation of AD/CVD evasion allegations.
After submission and receipt of a properly filed allegation, CBP has 15 business day to determine whether to initiate an investigation and 95 days to notify all interested parties of its decision. If CBP does not proceed with an investigation, CBP has five business days to notify the alleging party of that determination.
Within 90 days of initiating an investigation, CBP can impose interim measures if it has a “reasonable suspicion” that the importer used evasion to get products into the U.S.
Many questions remain as to how CBP will apply these regulations to actual investigations. How exactly will parties participate in CBP investigations and what kind of comments will be accepted? How much of the information in the investigations will be made public? How is “reasonable suspicion” defined and what kind of evidence will be considered? Is it really the case that accused Importers may be subject to interim measures (within 90 days of initiation) even before they receive notice of an investigation (within 95 days of initiation)?
These new AD/CVD duty evasion regulations further evidence the government’s plans to step up its efforts to enforce US trade laws more effectively and importers must – in turn – step up their vigilance to avoid being caught in one of these new traps.
UPCOMING DEADLINES IN SOLAR CELLS FROM CHINA ANTIDUMPING CASE—CHANCE TO GET BACK INTO THE US MARKET AGAIN
There are looming deadlines in the Solar Cells from China Antidumping (“AD”) and Countervailing Duty (“CVD”) case. In December 2016, US producers, Chinese companies and US importers can request a review investigation in the Solar Cells case of the sales and imports that entered the United States during the review period, December 1, 2015 to November 31, 2016.
December 2016 will be a very important month for US importers because administrative reviews determine how much US importers actually owe in AD and CVD cases. Generally, the US industry will request a review of all Chinese companies. If a Chinese company does not respond in the Commerce Department’s Administrative Review, its AD and CVD rate could well go to the highest level and for certain imports the US importer will be retroactively liable for the difference plus interest.
In my experience, many US importers do not realize the significance of the administrative review investigations. They think the AD and CVD case is over because the initial investigation is over. Many importers are blindsided because their Chinese supplier did not respond in the administrative review, and the US importers find themselves liable for millions of dollars in retroactive liability.
In February 2016, while in China I found many examples of Chinese solar companies or US importers, which did not file requests for a review investigation in December 2015. In one instance, although the Chinese company obtained a separate rate during the Solar Cells initial investigation, the Petitioner appealed to the Court. The Chinese company did not know the case was appealed, and the importer now owe millions in antidumping duties because they failed to file a review request in December 2015.
In another instance, in the Solar Products case, the Chinese company requested a review investigation in the CVD case but then did not respond to the Commerce quantity and value questionnaire. That could well result in a determination of All Facts Available giving the Chinese company the highest CVD China rate of more than 50%.
The worst catastrophe in CVD cases was Aluminum Extrusions from China where the failure of mandatory companies to respond led to a CVD rate of 374%. In the first review investigation, a Chinese company came to us because Customs had just ruled their auto part to be covered by the Aluminum Extrusions order. To make matters worse, an importer requested a CVD review of the Chinese company, but did not tell the company and they did not realize that a quantity and value questionnaire had been sent to them. We immediately filed a QV response just the day before Commerce’s preliminary determination.
Too late and Commerce gave the Chinese company an AFA rate of 121% by literally assigning the Chinese company every single subsidy in every single province and city in China, even though the Chinese company was located in Guangzhou. Through a Court appeal, we reduced the rate to 79%, but it was still a high rate, so it is very important for companies to keep close watch on review investigations.
The real question many Chinese solar companies may have is how can AD and CVD rates be reduced so that we can start exporting to the US again. In the Solar Cells case, the CVD China wide rate is only 15%. The real barrier to entry is the China wide AD rate of 249%
US AD and CVD laws, however, are considered remedial, not punitive statutes. Thus, every year in the month in which the AD or CVD order was issued, Commerce gives the parties, including the domestic producers, foreign producers and US importers, the right to request a review investigation based on sales of imports that entered the US in the preceding year.
Thus, the AD order on Solar Cells from China was issued in December 2012. In December 2016, a Chinese producer and/or US importer can request a review investigation of the Chinese solar cells that were entered, actually imported into, the US during the period December 1, 2015 to November 31, 2016.
Chinese companies may ask that it is too difficult and too expensive to export may solar cells to the US, requesting a nonaffiliated importer to put up an AD of 298%, which can require a payment of well over $1 million USD. The US AD and CVD law is retrospective. Thus the importer posts a cash deposit when it imports products under an AD or CVD order, and the importer will get back the difference plus interest at the end of the review investigation.
More importantly, through a series of cases, Commerce has let foreign producers export smaller quantities of the product to use as a test sale in a review investigation if all other aspects of the sale are normal. Thus in a Solar Cells review investigation, we had the exporter make a small sale of several panels along with other products and that small sale served as the test sale to establish the new AD rate.
How successful can companies be in reviews? In a recent Solar Cells review investigation, we dropped a dumping rate of 249% to 8.52%, allowing the Chinese Solar Cell companies to begin to export to the US again.
Playing the AD and CVD game in review investigations can significantly reduce AD and CVD rates and get the Chinese company back in the US market again
SOLAR CELLS FROM CHINA CHINESE VERSION OF THE ARTICLE
中国进口太阳能电池反倾销案即将到来的最后期限—重返美国市场的机会
针对原产自中国的太阳能电池反倾销（“AD”）和反补贴税（“CVD”）案的期限迫在眉睫。2016年12月，美国制造商、中国公司和美国进口商可以要求当局复审调查于2015年12月1日至2016年11月31日的审查期间进口并在美国销售的太阳能电池案例。
2016年12月将会是美国进口商的一个重要月份，因为行政复审将决定美国进口商在AD和CVD案中的实际欠款。一般上，美国业者会要求当局对所有中国公司进行复审。如果一家中国公司没有对商务部的行政复审做出回应，它很可能被征收最高的AD和CVD税率，美国进口商也将被追溯征收特定进口产品的差额及利息。
就我的经验而言，许多美国进口商并没有意识到行政复审调查的重要性。他们认为初步调查结束后，AD和CVD案也就此结束。许多进口商因为其中国供应商没有对行政复审做出回应，导致他们本身背负数百万美元的追溯性责任而因此措手不及。
2016年2月，我在中国期间发现很多中国太阳能公司或美国进口商没有在2015年12月提出复审调查请求。在其中一个例子中，某中国公司虽然在太阳能电池初步调查期间获得了单独税率，但是申请人向法庭提出了上诉。该中国公司并不知道有关的上诉案，结果进口商由于无法在2015年12月提出复审要求，现在欠下了数百万美元的反倾销税。
在另一个与太阳能产品有关的案例中，某中国公司针对CVD案提出了复审调查的要求，却没有对商务部的数量和价值问卷做出回应。这很可能导致当局根据“所有可得的事实”（All Facts Available）来向该中国公司征收超过50%的最高对华CVD税率。
在众多的CVD案例中，中国进口的铝合金型材所面对的局面最糟糕，受强制调查的公司若无法做出相关回应可被征收374%的CVD税率。一家中国公司在首个复审调查时联系上我们，因为海关刚裁定他们的汽车零部件属于铝合金型材生产项目。更糟的是，一家进口商在没有通知该中国公司的情况下，要求当局对其进行CVD审查，而他们也不晓得当局已经向他们发出一份数量和价值问卷。我们立即在初审的前一天提交了QV做出了回应。
可是这一切都已经太迟了，虽然该中国公司位于广州，商务部却逐一地根据中国的每一个省份和城市的补贴，向该中国公司征收了121%的AFA税率。我们通过向法庭提出上诉，将税率减少到了79%，可是这一税率还是很高，因此所有公司都有必要仔细地关注复审调查。
很多中国太阳能产品企业最想知道的，是如何降低AD和CVD税率，好让我们能再次将产品进口到美国。以太阳能电池的案例来看，当局向中国征收的统一性CVD税率仅为15%。当局向中国征收的统一性AD税率高达249%，这才是真正的入市门槛。
不过，美国的AD和CVD法律被认为是补救性而不是惩罚性法规，所以商务部每年在颁布AD或CVD令后，会在该月份允许包括美国国内生厂商、外国生厂商和美国进口商在内的各方，对上一年在美国销售的进口产品提出复审调查的要求。
因此，针对中国进口的太阳能电池的AD令是在2012年12月颁布的。一家中国生厂商和/或美国进口商可以在2016年12月，要求当局对从2015年12月1日至2016年11月31日期间进口到美国的中国太阳能电池进行复审调查。
中国公司或许会问，要求一家无关联的进口商承担298%的AD税，也就是支付超过1百万美元的费用，以便进口大批的太阳能电池到美国，是否太困难也太贵了。美国的AD和CVD法律是有追溯力的。因此，在AD或CVD令下，进口商在进口产品时会支付现款押金，并在复审调查结束后取回差额加上利息。
更重要的是，在一系列的案例中，商务部已经允许外国生厂商在其它销售方面都正常的情况下，出口少量产品作为试销用途。所以在一宗太阳能电池的复审调查案中，我们让出口商在销售其它产品的同时，出售少量的电池板作为试销用途以建立新的AD税率。
公司在复审案中的成功率有多大？在最近的一宗太阳能电池复审调查案中，我们将倾销率从249%下降到8.52%，协助中国太阳能电池公司重新进口产品到美国。
在复审调查期间了解如何应对并采取正确的策略，可以大幅度降低AD和CVD税率，并让中国公司重返美国市场。
HOT ROLLED STEEL FLAT PRODUCTS
On August 5, 2016, in the attached fact sheet, factsheet-multiple-hot-rolled-steel-flat-products-ad-cvd-final-080816, Commerce issued final dumping determinations in Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Australia, Brazil, Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Turkey, and the United Kingdom cases, and a final countervailing duty determination of Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, Korea, and Turkey.
Other than Brazil, Australia and the United Kingdom, most antidumping rates were in the single digits.
In the Countervailing duty case, most companies got rates in single digits, except for POSCO in Korea, which received a CVD rate of 57%.
SEPTEMBER ANTIDUMPING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
On September 8, 2016, Commerce published the attached Federal Register notice, pdf-published-fed-reg-notice-oppty, regarding antidumping and countervailing duty cases for which reviews can be requested in the month of September. The specific antidumping cases against China are: Crawfish Tailmeat, Foundry Coke, Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks, Lined Paper Products, Magnesia Carbon Bricks, Narrow Woven Ribbons, Off the Road Tires, Flexible Magnets, and Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars. The specific countervailing duty cases are: Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks, Narrow Woven Ribbons, Off the Road Tires, Flexible Magnets, and Magnesia Carbon Bricks.
For those US import companies that imported : Crawfish Tailmeat, Foundry Coke, Kitchen Appliance Shelving and Racks, Lined Paper Products, Magnesia Carbon Bricks, Narrow Woven Ribbons, Off the Road Tires, Flexible Magnets, and Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars during the antidumping period September 1, 2015-August 31, 2016 or the countervailing duty period of review, calendar year 2015, the end of this month is a very important deadline. Requests have to be filed at the Commerce Department by the Chinese suppliers, the US importers and US industry by the end of this month to participate in the administrative review.
This is a very important month for US importers because administrative reviews determine how much US importers actually owe in AD and CVD cases. Generally, the US industry will request a review of all Chinese companies. If a Chinese company does not respond in the Commerce Department’s Administrative Review, its antidumping and countervailing duty rate could well go to the highest level and for certain imports the US importer will be retroactively liable for the difference plus interest.
If you have any questions about these cases or about the antidumping or countervailing duty law, US trade policy, trade adjustment assistance, customs, or 337 IP/patent law in general, please feel free to contact me.
Filed Under: 337, 337 Steel Case, Accounting Firms, activated carbon, Adam Smith, Agriculture, Alibaba, Aluminum antidumping, aluminum billet, Aluminum Extrusions, Aluminum Foil, antidumping duty, antidumping review investigation, antitrust law, Antitrust Retaliation, Apple, Arbitration, Armed Forces Committee, Australia FTA China, Auto Parts, Bali, banking, Bernie Sanders, CAFC, Canada antidumping, cartel, CBP, CFIUS, Chicken, Chicken Feet, China Aluminum, China Cyber attacks, China Hacking, China Securities Regulatory Commission, China Stock Market Crash, China Trade Policy, China Trade Politics, Chinese aluminum Mexico, Chinese Antidumping Case, Chinese antidumping law, Chinese antitrust law, Chinese banks, Chinese steel overcapacity, CIETAC, CIT, class action, Clear Correct v. ITC, Coalition, Cold Rolled Steel, collections, Commerce Department Rules, Committee on Foreign Investment United States, Congress, Contamination, Copyright, corporate, Corrosion Resistant Steel, countervailing duty, Court of Appeals Federal Circuit, Crawfish, criminal, Criminal IP, Criminal Patent, currency manipulation, currency manipulation agreement, currency manipulation side deal, custom fraud, Customs, Customs bonds, Customs E-Allegation, Customs Fraud, Customs Regulations Trademark Copyright Infringement, cyber agrement, Cyber Attacks, CYBERSQUATTING, Dave Reichert, Delaware Law, Derek Kilmer, DOJ, domestic industry, Donald Trump, Drugs, Drywall Products Liability, EB5 Fraud cases, EC ANTIDUMPING LAW, EC SOLAR CELLS CASE, Endangered Species, Enforcing US Judgments China, environmental, Evasion Antidumping Orders, Evasion Trade Laws, Ex-Im Bank, Export Controls, False Claims Act, False Claims Act/Customs Fraud, Fast Track, Fast Track Trade Legislation, fcpa, FDA, fiduciary duty, foreign corrupt practices act, Fraud, Free Trade, GAO Report Missing Antidumping Duties, General, Glycine, GOES, Hacking, Haier, Hardwood Plywood, Harwdood Plywood, Hilary Clinton, Honey, Hong Kong Stock Market, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means Committee, Huawei, Hydrocarbon Blends, hydrofluorocarbon blends, IAA, IMF, importer of record, India, Infringement, intellectual property/337, International Trade Commission, Investment Opportunities, Iran Sanctions, Ironing Tables, ITC, ITC TPP Report, James R. Clapper, Japan Trade Policy, Jurisdiction, Justice Department, Lacey Act, LCDs, Liability, licensing, lobbying, Long Arm Jurisdiction, Lumber Liquidators, MAGNESIUM, mandatory respondents, Marco Rubio, Mario Rubio, Market Economy China, Melamine China, Microsoft, missing antidumping duties, MOFCOM, national security, New Dem Pac, NME, Non Practicing Entity, NPE, OCTG, OFAC, Off the Road Tires China, Office of Foreign Assets Control, Office Paper, Oil Country Tubular Goods, OKLAHOMA, optical fiber, Pangang Criminal IP Case, Patent, Patent Terms, Patent Trolls, PET Resin, Politics, polysilicon, President, President Obama, President Xi Jinping, Presidential Primary, Presidential Trade Politics, Presidential Veto 337, price fixing, PRISON LABOR, products liability, products liabilty law, Protectionism, Puda Coal, Pulp, Pump and Dump, Raw Aluminum, Reagan, remedial purpose of antidumping law, Residential Washers China, retaliation, retroactive liability, Reverse Merger, Rick Larsen, RICO, Roller Bearings China, Ron Kind, Ronald Reagan, Russia, Safeguards, sampling, SEC, Section 15 WTO China Agreement, Section 201, Section 421, Securities and Exchange Commission, Securities Law, SED, SED talks, Senate, Senate Finance Committee, SEPARATE RATES APPLICATIONS, service, Shanghai Stock Market, Shellfish, Shenzhen Stock Market, Silica Bricks, Silicon Steel, Smoot Hawley, Smuggling, Solar Cells, Solar Products, solyndra, solyndra antitrust, Sovereign Immunity, Steel, Steel Cases, STEEL RAIL TIE WIRE, steel shelving, Steel Sinks, Strong Free Trade Arguments, substantial transformation US antidumping law, Suprema v. ITC, Supreme Court, Suzan DelBene, TAAC, TAAF, Tariffs, Taxes, Third Country Solar Cells, TIANJIN MAGNESIUM, tires, TPP, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center for Firms, Trade Facilitation Agreement, trade law, Trade Legislation, Trade Policy, Trade Promotion Authority, Trade Secrets, Trans Pacific Partnership, Transshipment, TTIP, Ukraine, Ukraine Russia Arbitration, undervaluation Yuan, Unions, United States Trade Representative, US China Economic and Security Commission, US China Trade War, US Commerce Department, US Court of International Trade, US Hedge Funds, US Investment, US Judgments Chinese Companies, US Sanctions, US Sanctions Russia, USPTO, ustr, Violet Pigment, Vitamin C, Vitamin C Antitrust, Washington State, Wasjhington State, Welded Line Pipe, Wind Towers, Wine Antidumping, Wood Flooring, World Trade Organization, WTO, Xi Speech Tagged With: 337, aluminum extrusions, antidumping, china, Commerce, Commerce Department, Congress, countervailing duty, customs, customs fraud, Customs Regulations Copyrights Trademarks, evasion, evasion antidumping laws, evasion trade laws, false claims act, fraud, GAO Report, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means, importer of record, intellectual property, Intellectual Property Protection, IP protection Imports, ITC, MEP, missing antidumping duties, politics, retroactive liability, solar cells, Solar Cells China, subsidy, trade, trade adjustment assistance, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Trade Adjustment Assistance Firms, trade adjustment assistance for companies, trade adjustment assistance for workers, trade law, Trade Legislation, trade war, us china trade war
Bill Perry June 7, 2016
US China Trade War–Rise in Trump/Sanders Protectionism, Steel Cases, New AD and 337 Cases, False Claims Act
US CHINA TRADE WAR JUNE 7, 2016
This is the second article of a several part series on how weak free trade arguments have led to the sharp rise of protectionism of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders and the probable demise of the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”). The first article outlined the problem and why this is such a sharp attack on the TPP and some of the visceral arguments against free trade. The second article will explore in depth the protectionist arguments and the reason for the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.
Subsequent articles will describe the weak free trade arguments to counter the protectionism, the Probable Demise of the TPP, failure of Congressional Trade Policy and what can be done to provide the safety net that will allow Congress again to vote for free trade agreements so that the United States can return to its leadership in the Free Trade area. Congress has to fix the trade situation now before the US and the World return to the Smoot Hawley protectionism of the 1930s.
In addition, set forth are several developments involving steel trade litigation, antidumping and countervailing duty reviews against Chinese companies, new antidumping and countervailing duty cases, new 337 cases against Chinese companies and finally a new False Claims Act settlement against a US importer for evasion of US antidumping duties.
REASONS FOR THE RISE OF TRUMP SANDERS PROTECTIONISM IN THE UNITED STATES
As part two of my series of articles on how weak free trade arguments have created the rise in protectionism and the probably demise of the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”), in this segment I will describe some of the reasons for the rise of Trump and Sanders and the protectionism that goes with it.
The simple truth is that when weak academic, theoretical economic arguments for free trade meet the hard visceral arguments of bombed out US factories and the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs, the free trade arguments melt away. Weak theoretical free trade arguments will not be enough to stop the wave in protectionism sweeping the United States. More has to be done.
In a recent article in Time Magazine entitled “Welcome to the Election from Hell”, Frank Luntz, a well-known pollster for Fox and CBS, stated that because there is so much anger in the focus groups and the US electorate, he has lost control of the focus groups he uses to test ideas. One Trump supporter stated that he is not mad, he is angry and then stated:
“Because anger is way more than mad. Angry is what happens when you’ve been kicked around like a dog for too long, and you’re ready to fight back.”
This explains the rise of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders- anger in the electorate and also explains why recent polls have Donald Trump running neck in neck with Hilary Clinton. Both Trump and Sanders are political outsiders. Hilary is the symbol of the establishment and from what we are seeing from the electorate, this is definitely an outsider’s year.
But why has trade become a center of the Presidential campaign? What explains the sharp rise in protectionism?
LOSS OF JOBS EXPLAINS THE RISE IN PROTECTIONISM
Jim McDermott in a May 11th article in the New York Post entitled, “Trump, Sanders Voters Don’t Want Handouts — They Want Jobs” stated:
“A popular knock on voters who support Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders because they have been “left behind” by free trade, globalization and technological progress is that they want a handout from Uncle Sam.
But the truth is the opposite: These voters want to work. They want jobs. And that’s the key to understanding their support for Trump or Sanders. . . .
In this political season, I’ve been asking some of them and their friends, and their now-adult kids, which presidential candidates they find appealing. Only two find support: Sanders, the Vermont socialist, and Trump, the New York billionaire. Both candidates appeal to a working class that is frustrated, fed up and downright angry.
Neither can be bought.
To understand the simmering discontent of working-class folks who are attracted to one (or both) of these candidates, you need to imagine you’ve either lost a job or cannot break into the work force. Viewed from these perspectives, an academic debate about whether free trade results in net job losses or gains is mostly meaningless. These people want a good job, or at least a job no worse than the job they lost. Their economic futures seem to be on life support.
We can’t ignore the centrality of work in people’s lives. Most people want to work. Most people want to contribute to society and take care of their families. When the government adopts free-trade policies that pick winners (the better educated who gain new jobs) and losers (manufacturing workers), the government also needs to cushion the blow for the losers.
Since this hasn’t happened for the last couple of decades, anger has been building and is now finding a political outlet. Many Americans start to wonder: Our government helps rich Wall Street bankers but not Main Street homeowners? Supports elite universities but not vocational schools? Lowers taxes on the wealthiest Americans?
Our government has an obligation to help people adjust to seismic policy changes, like free trade. In the last couple of decades, trade agreements have resulted in, for example, the technology industry gaining ground, and the steel industry losing ground. Besides picking winners and losers, free-trade policies introduce major economic anxiety into many previously stable families. . . .
Sanders and Trump tap into this disillusionment. They’re paying attention to the working class. They appear to actually understand, on a visceral level, the challenges faced by these Americans — and at least they seem to understand these voters aren’t moochers. In different ways, they’re offering seething working-class Americans pathways to reclaiming what they’ve lost.
Until we admit that we have come precariously close to ending true social mobility in America, we’ll continue to see angry working-class voters approaching their boiling point. . . .”
The labor unions, such as the AFL-CIO, echo Mr. McDermott’s point. The Unions say they do not want Trade Adjustment Assistance (“TAA”) for workers. They want no more trade agreements. TAA for workers is not good enough. The Labor Unions want jobs for their workers.
As explained more below, it is the collateral destruction created by Trade Agreements, which puts the TPP directly at risk. It is also the failure of Congressional policy when it comes to Trade Adjustment Assistance, in part, that has created this problem. Congress gives $711 million in trade adjustment assistance to retrain workers for jobs, a very important program, but the jobs, in fact, may not exist.
But to save the companies and the jobs that go with them, Congress gives only $12.5 million total nationwide to help companies adjust to import competition and allow them to continue to exist and prosper along with jobs that go with them.
Trade Agreements, such as the TPP, do not create huge tidal waves of imports, but flash floods, which concentrate in one area and can wipe out US companies in an entire industry when they have no guidance on how to compete, survive and navigate through those flash floods.
But more on that below and in the next segment. In this segment we need to analyze the tidal wave of rising protectionism in the United States. If one combines the Trump and Sanders voters, that is a clear majority of the US voting electorate, and the one point that Trump and Sanders have in common is no more trade agreements and protecting the US workers from import competition. Too many jobs have been lost.
In an April 25, 2016 CNN article, entitled “Resetting Red and Blue in the Rust Belt,” Jeremy Moorhead describes interviews with voters in Buffalo New York, Erie, Pennsylvania and Youngstown Ohio. No Presidential candidate has ever been able to win an election without taking the state of Ohio, so it is critical to every Presidential candidate. Jeremy Moorhead states:
“The voters of the Rust Belt have shaken up the 2016 presidential campaign: Hoping to jolt a political system they see as ineffective and out of touch, they have repeatedly revolted by supporting unlikely, anti-establishment candidates.
In both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, these voters see a potential for change they haven’t felt in generations. They say they are willing to shed party allegiances and reimagine their priorities this year, even voting for a self-described democratic socialist, or for a flame-throwing real estate developer who has never served in government.
In doing so, they have become the engine of one of the most extraordinary elections in modern U.S. history.
Frustration with the economic and political system is especially strong in the Rust Belt, a section of the country in the Northeast and Midwest once at the heart of the United States’ manufacturing boom. Decades after the decline of heavy industries like steel production and coal mining, the region continues to struggle with decaying infrastructure, population decline and high unemployment.
Voters there are worried about economic stagnation and crime plaguing their communities. They are disappointed in Washington’s elected officials. They are calling out for swift, radical change. . . .
Buffalo demonstrates Trump’s remarkable appeal across the country to non-traditional Republican voters. Here, there are working- and middle-class voters, former supporters of President Barack Obama and individuals who have supported Democrats in the past now drawn to Trump’s promise of dramatic change.
In the First Ward of South Buffalo on the corner of Ohio and Michigan Avenues, there is a favorite spot among locals called the Swannie House. Wiles has owned the place for 33 years and sits on a stool in the corner of the bar every day, his feet elevated on the window sill because of a bad back. It’s “the perfect corner because you hear everything,” he says.
These days, it seems everyone wants to talk about one thing: Donald Trump.
“It doesn’t matter if you’re black, you’re green, you’re white, you’re a Martian with tentacles. It doesn’t matter,” Wiles, 60, says. “They’re all talking about Trump.” . . . .
YOUNGSTOWN OHIO
Downtown Youngstown looks like a booming college town. . . .
But away from the center of downtown, things get bleak — fast.
Along the former industrial corridor of Steel Valley, giant structures that used to be steel mills are now rusting and vacant. There are abandoned homes all across the city, a reminder of the thousands of residents who fled the area in the 1970s and ’80s when the mills shut down.
Although Ohio’s unemployment rate mirrors the national figure of 5%, it is much higher in Youngstown: 8.2%. . . .
ERIE PENNSYLVANIA
Spend a day talking to the residents of Erie — some 90 miles southwest of Buffalo — and you’re likely to learn two things. First, the General Electric plant in Lawrence Park is laying off 1,500 workers. Second, Presque Isle was recently voted in USA Today as the number one freshwater beach in the country.
Erie bled thousands of jobs over the years as manufacturing-based companies left the area, moving to the South or overseas in search of cheaper labor. . . . .”
On April 4, 2016, David Goldstein for the Portland Press Herald in an article entitled, “Blue Collar Voters: Trade is Killing Us,” stated:
“Establishment voices of economists, government and business officials argue that trade deals are critical in a global economy, and great for America. But critics such as organized labor call them “death warrants.”
And in blue collar communities in Wisconsin and across the industrial Midwest, that economic angst, coupled with some sense of betrayal, helps explain the roiling politics of 2016. . . . .
Wisconsin has lost more than 68,000 manufacturing jobs since the mid-1990s when the first of several controversial trade pacts with Mexico, China and others took hold. . …
That’s the case here in South Milwaukee, a community of more than 20,000 people whose economy is built around the sprawling Caterpillar plant, which builds huge steam shovels and other mining equipment. Its predecessor, Bucyrus International, built shovels that were used to dig the Panama Canal.
Now, Caterpillar has laid off about 600 of its 800-plus workers over the past two years because of a business slowdown.
“It’s had a pretty large impact,” said Brad Dorff, an assembler at Caterpillar and the local Steelworkers Union president. “Whether it’s small grocery stores, a hardware store down the street, local taverns; they used to get a lot of business from the people that live in this community who were making a good living, a good wage working here.”
Wisconsin’s heavy manufacturing sector, once one of the country’s strongest, has been taking a lot of punches in recent years. General Motors, General Electric, Chrysler, Joy Global Surface Mining and Manitowoc Cranes have all cut jobs or closed operations in recent years for a variety of reasons.
Hometown companies such as Kohler, the plumbing supply manufacturer; and Trek Bicycles have offshored jobs to India, China and Taiwan.
Meanwhile, Madison, the state capital, will lose 1,000 jobs over the next two years as the 100-year-old iconic Oscar Mayer meat processing plant shuts down. And just east on I-94 in Jefferson, Tyson Foods will cease operations at its pepperoni processing plant, cutting 400 jobs. . . .
The turmoil feeds into a debate over trade that’s playing out in the 2016 campaign. . . .
In Wisconsin, voters are about evenly split on whether free trade agreements have helped or hurt, according to a recent Marquette University Law School poll.
In Michigan and Ohio, a majority of primary voters in both parties believed trade kills jobs in the U.S. rather than creates them.
That’s the feeling inside union halls and communities that lie in the shadow of shuttered factories. Trade deals like NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership) spell only uncertainty and distress.
“We’ve watched a lot of our friends lose their jobs,” said Dorff, inside the local steelworkers union hall just blocks from the Caterpillar plant. “They have homes that now they can’t afford. They have families they have to support. They lost their insurance. Their kids have diabetes and they’re trying to get medication. It literally breaks your heart.”
The Business Roundtable, an association of corporate executives of major companies, say that international trade supports 1 in 5 Wisconsin jobs, and that cheaper manufacturing costs overseas lowers prices for consumers in this country.
“It is an economic fact of life that both businesses and their employees benefit when we sell more products overseas, and consumers enjoy a wider range of products at lower prices,” Jerry Jasinowski, former president of the National Association of Manufacturers, said in a recent statement.
But since NAFTA, which removed tariff barriers between the U.S. Canada and Mexico, went into effect in 1994, and Congress’ granting of permanent normal trade status to China in 2000, a key question has been how much have those decisions contributed to job losses at home.
Economists generally say that overall, trade creates more prosperity, and that displaced workers will find other work. But competition from China has meant the loss of 2.4 million jobs, according to a recent report by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a private nonprofit research group.
It pointed out that industries are often concentrated in certain parts of the country – the Midwest, for instance – and that local economies have not had the capacity to absorb those workers the Chinese competition has displaced.
Julie Granger, senior vice president of the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce, said that in a global economy, the notion that “free trade encourages the loss of local jobs … is not always the most responsible way to look at it. If we are not engaged in the global economy, we will lose more jobs.
There’s no going back. It’s the same story in Milwaukee as it in other cities: many of lowest skilled jobs simply were disappearing.”
So is organized labor, long the backbone of the working class, a force in Wisconsin politics and a persistent critic of the trade deals. From 2014-2015, union membership as a percentage of the Wisconsin workforce fell to 8.3 percent from nearly 12 percent, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
But organized labor has been under siege in Wisconsin for a while. Take the General Motors plant in Janesville, Wis. GM wrung significant concessions out of the United Autoworkers to help keep the plant open. But the automaker closed it eventually anyway in 2009, putting 850 people out of work.”
The article quotes Roger Hinkle, Wisconsin AFL-CIO employment training specialist:
“Free traders always point to free trade being good for everybody. There’s a mountain of victims who don’t have to look at some theoretical report to feel, Yes. I was directly affected by this.“
The ironic point in this article, however, is the closure of Caterpillar. Caterpillar is dependent on cheap steel as a raw material input, and they have been a major opponent of all the steel trade cases brought by the Union and US Steel because high prices for steel, their raw material input, makes them less competitive with companies, such as Komatsu, which have access to the lower cost steel.
As explained in more detail below, the recent decisions of the Commerce Department to impose large antidumping and countervailing duties on imports of steel from China and other countries has had an extremely negative impact on downstream US industries that use steel as a raw material input.
In fact, of the 130 outstanding antidumping and countervailing duty orders against China, over 80 of them are directed at raw material inputs—chemicals, metals and steel, which go directly into downstream US production and have a direct impact on their cost. Raw Material trade cases rob Peter to pay Paul.
Although Congressional representatives and Senators do not care if trade protectionism causes consumer products to go up by a few dollars at Wal Mart, what happens if these higher duties on imports means that companies in their Districts and States have to close and the jobs are lost because the companies cannot compete in the downstream markets.
COLD ROLLED STEEL
On May 17, 2016, in the attached fact sheet, cold rolled, Commerce made a final dumping and countervailing duty determinations in the Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products case from China and Japan cases. Because the Chinese companies refused to cooperate in the investigation, they received an antidumping rate of 265.79% and a countervailing duty rate of 256.44%. Japanese Steel was hit with an antidumping rate of 71.35 percent.
Commerce was able to hand down such high margins because the Chinese and Japanese respondents refused to cooperate with the Department allowing it to very high impose duties on the basis of adverse facts available on an expedited basis. Chinese companies refused to cooperate because since the Commerce Department considers China a nonmarket economy country and refuses to use actual prices and costs in China to determine dumping, it is impossible to win the case.
On May 20, 2016, the Wall Street Journal issued an editorial entitled, “Obama Front-Runs Trump on China” stating:
“The Obama Administration may not sound like Donald Trump when talking about trade with China, but it isn’t above using protectionism for political gain. On Tuesday the U.S. Commerce Department increased a tariff on “dumped” Chinese cold-rolled steel to 522%, a move that will hurt American manufacturers who need the steel to remain competitive.
The tariff may score some populist points with voters in an election year. It also may be a ploy to get lawmakers to ratify the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement before President Obama leaves office. But past experience suggests that such gambits inflame protectionist sentiment rather than tamp it down.
President George W. Bush imposed tariffs of up to 30% on a broad range of Chinese steel products in 2002. The Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition says the tariffs cost the US economy 200,000 jobs and $4 billion in lost wages. . . . .
[Low Chinese steel prices are] good news for the U.S. Since steel is an important raw material for many industries, China’s trade partners benefit from its wasteful policies. Lower prices make companies that use steel more competitive and bring down prices for consumers.
Daniel Pearson for the CATO Institute conservatively estimates that that American companies using steel produce $990 billion in value added, more than 16 times the output of the U.S. steel industry, and also employ 16 times more workers. If tariffs on Chinese imports raise the U.S. price of steel, these companies’ costs will be higher than foreign competitors,’ hurting their ability to grow and provide more jobs for Americans.
The article goes on to complain that US Steel companies do not make the same range of products as Chinese companies and that the Cold Rolled determination “is a warm up for the fight over granting China market economy status in December.”
The Editorial concludes:
“The larger question is whether the steel tariffs herald a new and more bitter era of trade retaliation. Previous skirmishes have been damaging but stopped short of full escalation. But Mr. Trump and Hilary Clinton have run for President as protectionists, and Mr. Obama’s surrender to steel interests is a bad omen.”
CORROSION RESISTANT STEEL
On May 25, 2016, in the attached factsheet, factsheet-multiple-corrosion-resistant-steel-products-ad-cvd-final-052516, Commerce announced its affirmative final determinations in the antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) investigations of imports of corrosion-resistant steel products (CORE) from China, India, Italy, Korea; its affirmative final determination in the AD investigation of imports of CORE from Taiwan; and its negative final determination in the CVD investigation of imports of CORE from Taiwan.
Again, since the Chinese companies refused to cooperate because of the nonmarket economy status of China, Chinese companies received an antidumping rate of 209.97% and a countervailing duty rate of 241.07%.
Antidumping and Countervailing duty rates for market economy countries, however, were much lower with India dumping rates between 3 to 4% and countervailing duty rates between 8 to 29%. Italy received rates of between 12 to 92%, Korea 8 to 47%, and Taiwan antidumping rate of 3.77% and 0% countervailing duty rate. As market economy companies, Commerce must use actual prices and costs in those countries to calculated antidumping rates and to value subsidies.
On June 1, 2016, the Wall Street Journal in an article entitled “Steel Tariffs Create a Double-Edged Sword” reported that there is already an impact on downstream US production:
New tariffs on imports are boosting steel prices in the U.S., offering a lifeline to beleaguered American steelmakers but raising costs for manufacturers of goods ranging from oil pipes to factory equipment to cars. . . .
The Article goes on to state that the U.S. benchmark for “hot rolled coil index has risen more than 60% per ton” and that:
is creating problems for some steel buyers . . .
Steelcase Inc. Chief Executive James Keane said a tariff on a special kind of Japanese steel could cost one of its subsidiaries [Polyvision] $4 to $5 million a year . . . where it employs 200 people. If nothing changes, we would have to close our Oklahoma plant.
The Article also reports that US “Car companies have been lobbying against steel tariffs.”
The problem with the Wall Street Journal Editorial and Article is that they assume President Obama has discretion not to impose the tariffs. These cases were not brought under Section 201, the Escape Clause, which provides for Presidential approval or disapproval of the duties, but under the US antidumping and countervailing law where there is no discretion. In contrast to most countries around the World, including Europe, Canada and yes China, the US antidumping and countervailing duty law do not have a public interest test. Since the Chinese and Japanese companies did not cooperate, pursuant to the US antidumping and countervailing duty law, the Administration had no choice but to impose very high antidumping and countervailing duties on those imports.
If the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”) goes affirmative in its injury determination and by statute it cannot give any weight to arguments by downstream producers, antidumping and countervailing duty orders will be issued and those orders can stay in place for 5 to 30 years.
STEEL 337 STEEL CASE
On May 26, 2016, the ITC instituted the section 337 case against Chinese steel import. In the attached notice, USITC Institutes 337 Steel Case, the ITC stated:
The investigation is based on a complaint filed by U.S. Steel Corporation of Pittsburgh, PA, on April 26, 2016. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation into the United States and sale of certain carbon and alloy steel products through one or more of the following unfair acts: (1) a conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export volumes, in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1; (2) the misappropriation and use of U.S. Steel’s trade secrets; and (3) the false designation of origin or manufacturer, in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). The complainants request that the USITC issue a general exclusion order, a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders.
The last two counts of the notice are traditional issues subject to section 337 cases. It is count 1 that raises the interesting issues.
The last time the ITC found a Section 337 violation based on an antitrust cause of action was in 1978 in Certain Welded Steel Pipe &Tube, No. 337-TA-29. Although the ITC found a violation, the President vetoed the determination, in part, because of pressure from the Justice Department, antitrust division.
The antitrust cause of action, however, has not been eliminated from section 337. Section 337 does not specifically define what is an antitrust violation, but presumably it should overlap the Sherman Act. The US Steel compliant specifically references the Sherman Act.
Recently former U.S. International Trade Commission Chairman Daniel Pearson stated that this is the widest 337 complaint he has ever seen, but went on to state that a sudden closure of the U.S. market to foreign steel would have dire consequences for the domestic economy. Pearson specifically stated:
“I don’t believe I’ve ever seen a 337 petition that is this broad. To me, it sounds a lot like overreach. There’s no way that I could see someone closing off all imports of steel into the U.S. and not have enormous effects on consumer welfare and other factors that are specified in the statute. I’m flummoxed by this.”
337 is broadly tailored to address “unfair methods of competition or unfair acts.” Still, Pearson speculated that the ITC may well reject the petition and informally advise U.S. Steel to more squarely focus its arguments on the trade secret prong.
The ITC, however, did not reject the petition and instituted the case.
Pearson’s concern about the case is the broad nature of the company’s desired remedy, the general exclusion order. He stated:
“U.S. Steel is not happy with imports, and they may have decided to just take this shot and see what happens. I have no idea whether or not they think they will be successful; I would rather guess not.”
But to date US Steel has been successful.
My fear, however, is that Chinese steel companies will think that this is like an antidumping and countervailing duty case and they can choose not to cooperate. Failure to cooperate in a 337 case could lead to a total exclusion order against every steel product produced by every single Chinese steel company that does not participate in the case and that exclusion order from the US market could be in place for up to 30 years.
The antitrust claim in the 337 case by its conspiracy claim has already expanded and brought every single Chinese steel company into the case and a refusal to cooperate in the investigation could well lead to their exclusion from the US market for years to come.
NEW ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY CASES AGAINST CHINA
On May 25, 2016, in the attached relevant pages of the attached petition, REVISED AMONIUM SULFATE PETITION, PCI Nitrogen, LLC filed an antidumping and countervailing duty case against ammonium sulfate from China.
JUNE ANTIDUMPING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
On June 2, 2016, Commerce published the attached Federal Register notice, JUNE REVIEW INVESTIGATIONS, regarding antidumping and countervailing duty cases for which reviews can be requested in the month of June. The specific antidumping cases against China are: Artist Canvas, Chlorinated Isocyanurates, Furfuryl Alcohol, High Pressure Steel Cylinders, Polyester Staple Fiber, Prestressed Concrete Steel Rail Tie Wire, Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand, Silicon Metal, and Tapered Roller Bearings.
The specific countervailing duty case is: High Pressure Steel Cylinders.
For those US import companies that imported : Artist Canvas, Chlorinated Isocyanurates, Furfuryl Alcohol, High Pressure Steel Cylinders, Polyester Staple Fiber, Prestressed Concrete Steel Rail Tie Wire, Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire Strand, Silicon Metal, or Tapered Roller Bearings during the antidumping period June 1, 2015-May 31, 2016 or the countervailing duty period of review, calendar year 2015, the end of this month is a very important deadline. Requests have to be filed at the Commerce Department by the Chinese suppliers, the US importers and US industry by the end of this month to participate in the administrative review.
This is a very important month for US importers because administrative reviews determine how much US importers actually owe in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty cases. Generally, the US industry will request a review of all Chinese companies. If a Chinese company does not respond in the Commerce Department’s Administrative Review, its antidumping and countervailing duty rate could well go to the highest level and for certain imports the US importer will be retroactively liable for the difference plus interest.
In my experience, many US importers do not realize the significance of the administrative review investigations. They think the antidumping and countervailing duty case is over because the initial investigation is over. Many importers are blindsided because their Chinese supplier did not respond in the administrative review, and the US importers find themselves liable for millions of dollars in retroactive liability.
While in China recently, I found so many examples of Chinese solar companies or US importers, which did not file requests for a review investigation. In one instance, although the Chinese companies obtained separate rates during the initial investigation, the Petitioner appealed to the Court and through a Court determination the Chinese companies lost their separate rates. Several Chinese companies and US importers did not know the case was appealed, and the importers now owe millions in antidumping duties because they failed to file a request for a review investigation in December.
On April 27, 2016, in the attached news release, california-based-z-gallerie-llc-, the Justice Department announced that Z Gallerie LLC agreed to pay $15 million to resolve allegations that the company engaged in a scheme to evade antidumping duties on imports of wooden bedroom furniture from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), in violation of the False Claims Act. The relator , the private company that reported the fraud, will obtain $2.4 million of the $15 million. As the Justice Department stated in its release:
“This settlement reflects the Department of Justice’s commitment to ensure that those who import and sell foreign-made goods in the United States comply with the law, including laws meant to protect domestic companies and American workers from unfair competition abroad,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department of Justice will zealously pursue those who seek an unfair advantage in U.S. markets by evading the duties owed on goods imported into this country.” . . .
The particular duties at issue in this case are antidumping duties, which protect domestic manufacturers against foreign companies “dumping” products on U.S. markets at prices below cost. Imports of wooden bedroom furniture manufactured in the PRC have been subject to antidumping duties since 2004.
The settlement announced today resolved allegations that Z Gallerie evaded antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture imported from the PRC from 2007 to 2014, by misclassifying, or conspiring with others to misclassify, the imported furniture as pieces intended for non-bedroom use on documents presented to CBP. For example, Z Gallerie allegedly sold certain Bassett Mirror Company products, including a six-drawer dresser and three-drawer chest, as part of a bedroom collection; however, these goods were misidentified on CBP documents, using descriptions such as “grand chests” and “hall chests,” in order to avoid paying antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture. . . .
“Under the new Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act, CBP will likely see an increase in these types of settlements as the streamlined processes take effect concerning allegations of duty evasion,” said CBP Commissioner R. Gil Kerlikowske. “The Act reinforces CBP’s existing authorities and tools to collect and investigate public allegations of duty evasion improving the overall effectiveness and enforcement of CBP law enforcement actions concerning illicit trade activity, specifically in the area of antidumping and countervailing duty evasion schemes.”
“Companies that intentionally mislabel shipments or misrepresent the value of goods being imported into the United States to avoid paying the appropriate duties do so in an attempt to create an unfair advantage over businesses that play by the rules,” said Special Agent in Charge Nick S. Annan of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations (ICE HSI) in Atlanta. “This type of activity hurts legitimate U.S. businesses and, by extension, our overall national economy. Uncovering these types of schemes will continue to be a major investigative priority for ICE HSI.”
The allegations resolved by the settlement were originally brought by whistleblower Kelly Wells, an e-commerce retailer of furniture, under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act. The act permits private parties to sue on behalf of the United States those who falsely claim federal funds or, as in this case, those who avoid paying funds owed to the government or cause or conspire in such conduct. The act also allows the whistleblower to receive a share of any funds recovered. Wells will receive $2.4 million as her share of the settlement.
IP/PATENT AND 337 CASES
NEW SECTION 337 CASES FILED AGAINST CHINA
On May 5, 2016, Aspen Aerogels Inc. filed a Section 337 case against Composite Aerogel Insulation Materials and Methods for Manufacturing from China. The proposed respondents are: Nano Tech Co., Ltd., China and Guangdong Alison Hi-Tech Co., Ltd., China.
On May 19, 2016, Intex Recreation Corp. and Intex Marketing Ltd. filed a new section 337 case against imports of Inflatable Products and Processes for Making the Same from China. The respondent companies in China and Hong Kong are Bestway (USA) Inc., Phoenix, Arizona; Bestway Global Holdings Inc., China; Bestway (Hong Kong) International Ltd., Hong Kong; Bestway Inflatables & Materials Corporation, China; and Bestway (Nantong) Recreation Corp., China.
Complaints are available upon request
If you have any questions about these cases or about the US trade policy, trade adjustment assistance, customs, 337, IP/patent, products liability, US/China antitrust or securities law in general, please feel free to contact me.
Filed Under: 337, antidumping duty, antidumping review investigation, antitrust law, Bernie Sanders, cartel, CBP, China Cyber attacks, China Hacking, China Trade Politics, Cold Rolled Steel, collections, Congress, Corrosion Resistant Steel, countervailing duty, custom fraud, Customs, Customs Fraud, Cyber Attacks, DOJ, Donald Trump, Evasion Antidumping Orders, Evasion Trade Laws, False Claims Act, False Claims Act/Customs Fraud, Fraud, Free Trade, General, Hacking, Hilary Clinton, Infringement, intellectual property/337, International Trade Commission, ITC, Justice Department, Market Economy China, missing antidumping duties, NME, Politics, President, President Obama, Presidential Primary, Presidential Trade Politics, Presidential Veto 337, price fixing, Protectionism, Reagan, retaliation, retroactive liability, Roller Bearings China, Safeguards, Section 201, Senate, Senate Finance Committee, Steel, Steel Cases, STEEL RAIL TIE WIRE, TAAC, TAAF, Tariffs, TPP, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center for Firms, trade law, Trade Legislation, Trade Policy, Trade Secrets, Trans Pacific Partnership, Transshipment, Unions, United States Trade Representative, US China Trade War, US Commerce Department, ustr, Welded Line Pipe Tagged With: 337, antidumping, antitrust, china, Commerce, Commerce Department, Congress, countervailing duty, customs fraud, DOJ, downstream production, evasion, evasion trade laws, false claims act, fraud, free trade, intellectual property, ITC, Justice Department, lost jobs, politics, protectionism, retroactive liability, subsidy, TAA for Workers, trade, trade law, Trade Legislation, trade war, us china trade war, US Court of International Trade, ustr
Bill Perry April 27, 2016
US CHINA TRADE WAR–Trump, Trade Policy, NME, TPP, Trade, Customs, False Claims, Products Liability, Antitrust and Securities
US CHINA TRADE WAR MARCH 11, 2016
MOVING TO NEW LAW FIRM, HARRIS MOURE
Have not been able to send out a new newsletter in April because we are in the process of moving to a new law firm. As of May 1, 2016, I will no longer be at the Dorsey law firm. Dorsey will continue to represent clients in international trade and customs matters but will no longer be handling antidumping, countervailing duty, section 201, escape clause and other similar trade regulation cases.
My new law firm is Harris Moure, here in Seattle and my new e-mail address is bill@harrismoure.com. The US China Trade War blog and newsletter will be coming with me, but coming from my new firm.
Although will miss my Dorsey friends, I am looking forward to Harris Moure, which can be found at http://www.harrismoure.com/. With a Beijing office and lawyers that can speak fluent Chinese, the Harris firm is well known for helping US and other foreign companies move to China to set up manufacturing operations. Dan Harris has a very famous blog, http://www.chinalawblog.com/, which is followed by many companies that are interested in doing business in and with China.
In addition, set forth are two major developments involving trade litigation against Chinese companies.
If anyone has any questions or wants additional information, please feel free to contact me at this Dorsey e-mail address until April 30th and then after that at bill@harrismoure.com.
TRADE UPDATES
NEW SECTION 337 UNFAIR TRADE CASE AGAINST ALL CHINESE CARBON ALLOY STEEL COMPANIES AND ALL STEEL PRODUCTS FROM CHINA
On April 26, 2016, US Steel Corp filed a major 337 unfair trade case against all the Chinese steel companies seeking an exclusion order to bar all imports of carbon and alloy steel from China. See the ITC notice below. U.S. Steel Corp. is accusing Chinese steel producers and their distributors of conspiring to fix prices, stealing trade secrets and false labeling to avoid trade duties. It is asking the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) to issue an exclusion order baring all the Chinese steel from the US market and also cease and desist orders prohibiting importers from selling any imported Chinese steel that has already been imported into the United States.
The petition alleges that the Chinese companies:
work together to injure U.S. competitors, including U.S. Steel. Through their cartel, the China Iron and Steel Association (“CISA”), Proposed Manufacturer Respondents conspire to control raw material input prices, share cost and capacity information, and regulate production and prices for steel products exported to the United States. Proposed Manufacturer Respondents also share production schedules and time the release of products across multiple companies. This enables them to coordinate exports of new products to flood the U.S. market and destroy competitors.
4. Some of the Proposed Manufacturer Respondents have used valuable trade secrets stolen from U.S. Steel to produce advanced high-strength steel that no Chinese manufacturer had been able to commercialize before the theft. In January 2011, the Chinese government hacked U.S. Steel’s research computers and equipment, stealing proprietary methods for manufacturing these products. Soon thereafter, the Baosteel Respondents began producing and exporting the very highest grades of advanced high-strength steel, even though they had previously been unable to do so. Chinese imports created with U.S. Steel’s stolen trade secrets compete against and undercut U.S. Steel’s own products.
5. Proposed Respondents create documentation showing false countries of origin and false manufacturers for Chinese steel products. They also transship them through third countries to disguise their country of origin, circumvent anti-dumping and countervailing duty orders, and deceive steel consumers about the origin of Chinese steel.
Having worked at the ITC on 337 cases and later in private practice, section 337 is generally aimed at imports that infringe intellectual property rights, such as patents, trademarks or copyrights. Moreover, one provision of section 337(b)(3) provides that when any aspect of a section 337 case relates to questions of dumping or subsidization, the Commission is to terminate the case immediately and refer the question to Commerce.
Also in the past when section 337 was used to bring antitrust cases, there was intense push back by the Justice Department. Customs and Border Protection also may not be happy with the use of section 337 to enforce US Custom law.
But section 337 cases are not antidumping and countervailing duty cases. There are no mandatory companies and lesser targets. All the Chinese steel companies are targets, and this will be intense litigation with very tight deadlines. If the individual Chinese steel companies do not respond to the complaint, their steel exports could be excluded in 70 days to six months. Section 337 cases are hard- nosed litigation on a very fast track.
If you are interested in a copy of the complaint, please feel free to contact me.
The ITC notice is as follows:
Commodity: Carbon and Alloy Steel Products
Pending Institution
Filed By: Paul F. Brinkman
Firm/Organization: Quinn Emanuel Urrquhart & Sullivan LLP
Behalf Of: United States Steel Corporation
Letter to Lisa R. Barton, Secretary, USITC; requesting that the Commission conduct an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, regarding Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products. The proposed respondents are: Hebei Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., China; Hebei Iron & Steel Group Hengshui Strip Rolling Co., Ltd., China; Hebei Iron & Steel (Hong Kong) International Trade Co., Ltd., China; Shanghai Baosteel Group Corporation,China; Baoshan Iron & Steel Co., Ltd., China; Baosteel America Inc., Montvale, New Jersey; Jiangsu Shagang Group, China; Jiangsu Shagang International Trade Co, Ltd., China; Anshan Iron and Steel Group, China; Angang Group International Trade Corporation, China; Angang Group Hong Kong Co., Ltd., China; Wuhan Iron and Steel Group Corp., China; Wuhan Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., China; WISCO America Co., Ltd., Newport Beach, California; Shougang Group, China; China Shougang International Trade & Engineering Corporation, China; Shandong Iron and Steel Group Co., Ltd, China; Shandong Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., China; Jigang Hong Kong Holdings Co., Ltd., China; Jinan Steel International Trade Co., Ltd., China; Magang Group Holding Co. Ltd, China; Maanshan Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., China; Bohai Iron and Steel Group, China; Tianjin Pipe (Group) Corporation, China; Tianjin Pipe International Economic & Trading Corporation, China; TPCO Enterprise Inc., Houston, Texas; TPCO America Corporation, Gregory, Texas; Benxi Steel (Group) Co., Ltd., China; Benxi Iron and Steel (Group) International Economic and Trading Co., Ltd., China; Hunan Valin Steel Co., Ltd., China; Hunan Valin Xiangtan Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., China; Tianjin Tiangang Guanye Co., Ltd., China; Wuxi Sunny Xin Rui Science and Technology Co., Ltd., China; Taian JNC Industrial Co., Ltd., China; EQ Metal (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., China; Kunshan Xinbei International Trade Co., Ltd, China; Tianjin Xinhai Trade Co., Ltd., China; Tianjin Xinlianxin Steel Pipe Co. Ltd, China; Tianjin Xinyue Industrial and Trade Co., Ltd., China; and Xian Linkun Materials (Steel Pipe Supplies) Co., Ltd., China.
UNION FILES SECTION 201 CASE ON ALUMINUM, BUT THEN WITHDRAWS IT
On April 18, 2016 the United Steelworkers Union filed a section 201 safeguard case against imports of aluminum from all countries at the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”). Although the target appeared to be China because its overcapacity has affected the World aluminum market, in fact, not so much. China has an export tax in place to prevent exports of primary aluminum. The real targets were Canada and Russia. Canada exports about $4 billion in aluminum to the US, and Russia exports about $1 billion.
But after intense pressure from the US Aluminum producers, on April 22th the Union withdrew the petition. Apparently, the US Aluminum producers have production facilities in Canada and also part of the Union was in Canada and not happy with the case.
Moreover, at the request of Congress, the ITC is conducting a fact-finding investigation on the US aluminum industry. The report is due out June 24, 2017. The Union may have decided to wait until the ITC issues the fact-finding report in June and then it will refile the 201 case.
But there are reports that as a result of the case the Canadian and US governments are discussing the aluminum trade problem, which may result in a settlement down the road.
On March 21, 2016 and March 17, 2016, after this post was sent out, I was interviewed on Donald Trump and the US China Trade War by the World Finance, a bi-monthly print and web outlet on the financial industry.
To see the video on the impact of Donald Trump on International Trade policy, please see Could Trump Take the US Back to the Great Depression, http://www.worldfinance.com/inward-investment/asia-and-australasia/could-trump-take-the-us-back-to-the-great-depression
To see the video on the US China Trade War, click on the following link
http://www.worldfinance.com/inward-investment/asia-and-australasia/the-us-china-trade-war-explained
For more information on the specific points made in the two videos on the US China Trade War and Donald Trump, please see the lead article below on the Trump Impact on International Trade policy.
March 11 Blog Post
After returning from a two week trip to China to work on the Solar Cells case, this March blog post will cover trade policy, including Trump’s impact on Trade Policy, trade, Customs, False Claims Act, the recent ZTE Export Control debacle, 337, patents/IP, criminal IP cases, products liability, antitrust and securities. There are significant developments in the US antitrust area.
If anyone has any questions or wants additional information, please feel free to contact me.
THE TRUMP IMPACT ON US TRADE POLICY
As stated in numerous past blog posts, one of the major reasons the Trans Pacific Partnership is running into problems in Congress along with a number of other trade issues, such as market economy for China, is the impact of the Presidential elections, especially the rise of Donald Trump. After Super Tuesday on March 1, 2016 and the Trump victories in seven different states many Republican pundits believe the game is over and Trump has won the Republican primary and will be the party’s nominee.
Thus Ed Rollins, who worked in the Reagan Administration and is a highly respected expert on the Republican party, published an article on March 2, 2016 on the Fox News website stating, “Trump is now unstoppable. It’s game over for Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson.” Rollins goes on to state:
Game over! This was a rout, America. Winning seven states and the vast majority of delegates is a landslide. Donald Trump and the millions of his supporters have changed American politics and the Republican Party for the foreseeable future. . . .
Trump, who is an unconventional candidate, to say the least, has tapped into the anger and frustration across America and has mobilized voters to turn out in record numbers.
Love him or hate him, be inspired by him or be appalled by him, Trump has totally dominated a political cycle like no other politician I’ve seen in decades.
I admit I was a total skeptic, like many others. At first, I didn’t think he would run. Then I thought there was no way he could beat the all-star cast of elected officials running against him.
Then I underestimated his lack of substance and trite answers in the debates. Then I underestimated his lack of a real campaign.
Then I was convinced the political establishment was going to spend millions and take him out. And like the Energizer bunny he just keeps going and winning!
Trump is getting stronger by the day and his supporters are locked in and not going away. And no one has mastered the media like this since Teddy Roosevelt and his rough riders.
What’s ahead is a Republican Party that either becomes part of his movement or splinters into many pieces. No matter what Trump does or says, the nomination is his for the taking.
For the full article, see http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/03/02/trump-is-now-unstoppable-its-game-over-for-cruz-rubio-kasich-and-carson.html?intcmp=hpbt2#
At most, there is only a 30% chance that some other Republican candidate can beat Trump, but with a 70% chance that Trump will be the Republican nominee, the question is can Trump beat Hilary Clinton? Many facts indicate that Trump could win and become the next President.
On February 29, 2016, the Boston Herald reported that my childhood state, Massachusetts, which is very liberal and very Democratic, is seeing a surge in Democratic voters switching parties to vote Republican for Trump. As the Boston Herald reported on February 29, 2016, “Amid Trump surge, nearly 20,000 Mass. voters quit Democratic party”. The Article goes on to state:
The primary reason? [Secretary of State Galvin said his “guess” is simple: “The Trump phenomenon” . . . . Galvin said the state could see as many as 700,000 voting in tomorrow’s Republican primary, a significant number given just 468,000 people are actually registered Republicans. In Massachusetts. unenrolled — otherwise known as independent — voters can cast a ballot in the primary of any party.
For full article see http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2016/02/amid_tru… 3/1/2016
On February 29, 2016, Buck Fox in Investors Business Daily, one of the more well- known financial newspapers in the US, predicted that Trump would win the Presidency:
Let’s take a rare journalistic moment to answer definitively: Will Donald Trump win the presidency? Yes.
Good. Got that out of the way. No dialing a focus group. Tell it straight. … Answers. Trump rattles them off fearlessly. He doesn’t consult pollsters. He goes with his gut.
Which is one reason he’s wildly popular — dominating the Drudge debate poll with 57% — and on the way to delivering the inaugural address on Jan. 20, 2017, as the 45th president.
As Ann Coulter says, President Trump will be halfway through that speech as the Republican Party keeps debating his viability.
Don’t limit that hedge to GOP bureaucrats. Throw in 99% of TV pundits: Karl Rove, Brit Hume, George Will, Bill Kristol, Rich Lowry, Steve Hayes, Charles Krauthammer, S.E. Cupp, Mike Smerconish, Ben Ferguson, Jeff Toobin.
They share a maddening trait — smug, glib and handsomely paid while belittling Trump’s odds of winning. Even though that’s all he’s done while building a titanic real estate empire. . . .
The smart ones see a runaway Trump Train, with Los Angeles radio host Doug McIntyre —hardly a Don fan — conceding after Nevada’s rout, “Donald Trump will win the Republican nomination.”
No “maybe.” No “very well could.” Trump will claim the GOP trophy in July in Cleveland. And win it all in November. Why?
Issues. Trump owns immigration, trade, Muslim terror, self-funding his campaign to ignore special interests. . . . .
For full article, see http://www.investors.com/politics/capital-hill/trump-towers-over-the-presidential-field/[2/29/2016 12:29:13 PM]
On March 1, 2016, Politico published an article “The media’s Trump reckoning: ‘Everyone was wrong’ From the New Yorker to FiveThirtyEight, outlets across the spectrum failed to grasp the Trump phenomenon.”
In a March 3, 2016 article, John Brinkley of Forbes asks “Why Is Trade Such A Big Deal In The Election Campaign?”, stating in part:
Did you ever think you’d see a day when international trade was a central issue in a U.S. presidential election?
That’s where we are in 2016. For one reason or another, all the presidential candidates have felt the need to stake out positions on trade.
Let’s look at the last half-century. Issues that animated presidential campaigns were the Cold War, civil rights, the Vietnam War, Watergate, nuclear weapons, inflation, budget deficits, health care costs, terrorism, national security, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a financial crisis, illegal immigration. But never trade.
Well, almost never. While running for president in 1992, Ross Perot warned that NAFTA would cause “a giant sucking sound” from Mexico, but he wasn’t able to elevate NAFTA to a prominent position in that year’s election debates.
This year the Republican front-runner Donald Trump, who says he knows a lot about trade, but has proven that he doesn’t, says he’ll repeal NAFTA and the Trans-Pacific Partnership if it takes effect before he becomes president.
He also says he wants to slap a 45 percent tariff on Chinese imports. It’s been pointed out that this would get us into a trade war. The Trump camp’s fatuous response is that we’re already in a trade war with China. That’s like saying your house is in fire, so let’s spray gasoline on it.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, who had a realistic shot at the Democratic nomination until Super Tuesday, has ranted and raved about free trade agreements throughout his campaign. He says they have cost millions of Americans their jobs, although there is no empirical evidence of that.
In her inimical please-all-the-people-all-the-time style, Democratic frontrunner Hilary Clinton says she doesn’t like the Trans-Pacific Partnership in its present form, but might change her mind if certain changes are made. She obviously thinks trade is important enough as a political issue that she has to bob and weave rather than take an unambiguous yes-or-no position. . . .
Why is trade such a volatile issue this year?
An obvious reason is that the Obama administration has negotiated and signed the most mammoth trade agreement in the history of the universe.
The TPP encompasses 12 countries and 40 percent of the world’s economy. . . .
And a third we can call The Trump Factor: the other GOP candidates are so scared of Trump that they feel they have to respond to everything he says, just to show that they’re not like him (which hardly seems necessary). . . .
Keeler said the prominence of trade in the 2016 presidential campaign “is surprising in the same way that everything about Donald Trump is surprising.”
For the full article, see
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbrinkley/2016/03/03/why-is-trade-such-a-big-deal-in-the-election-campaign/print/.
Why is trade policy so important in this election? It is not because Trump says it is so. Instead, it is the reason Trump is doing so well in the Republican primary—his appeal to a large constituency that is being hammered by illegal immigration, hurt by trade and afraid of losing their jobs. Several pundits have tried to explain what this election is really about and the reason for Trump’s rise:
Hundreds of workers in Indiana, who just saw their jobs heading to Mexico;
Disney employees being fired and forced to retrain foreign replacements;
and finally the systematic invasion of the country by illegal immigrants, who take American jobs away.
Middle class and lower middle class people are afraid of losing their jobs and their livelihood and are flocking to Trump.
In two word, this is economic nationalism.
One central core of Donald Trump’s strategy is the argument that the United States has been soft on trade and “does not win any more.” Trump specifically points to China as one of the biggest winners saying that China, Mexico and Japan all beat the US in trade.
Moreover, the Core Constituency of Trump, his followers, are blue collar workers, many without a college education, so-called Reagan Democrats, that work in companies, factories, service industries and often are in labor unions. These workers are in regular 9 to 5 jobs on a set salary, in the lower middle and middle class, who are not privileged and not protected, feel their livelihoods threatened by illegal immigration and trade deals that give other countries access to US markets. These blue collar workers are white, black, and Hispanic, such as in the Nevada primary where many Hispanics voted for Trump. These workers would normally vote Democratic, but they firmly believe that no party be it Democratic or Republican truly represents their interests and are willing to protect their jobs and way of life. Along comes Donald Trump stating that he will stop illegal immigrants at the border, do away with trade agreements and stop imports from China saving their jobs. He will make America great again. For many, many workers this argument makes them solid Trump supporters.
In a March 2 article entitled Eight Reasons we need to start preparing for President Trump, Geoff Earle writing for the NY Post states
Reason 5:
Trump’s main demographic strength — working-class men and white voters — matches up well against one of Hillary Clinton’s chief weaknesses. He could go after Clinton in must-win Ohio, where “Trump’s rhetoric appeals to those blue-collar Democrats,” said GOP strategist Brian Walsh.
For full article, see http://nypost.com/2016/03/02/8-reasons-we-need-to-start-preparing-for-president-trump.
In listening to Donald Trump’s victory speech on Super Tuesday, he stated that he wants to be a unifier and that he will reduce corporate taxes and make it easier for US companies to repatriate profits and set up manufacturing in the US. No one has problems with Trump’s idea of using carrots to bring back US manufacturing. The problem is with Trump’s idea of using trade sticks to force manufacturing back to the US by setting up high protectionist walls.
On February 29, 2016, The Wall Street Journal in an editorial entitled, “Making Depressions Great Again — The U.S. may renounce its trade leadership at a dangerous economic moment,” expressed its real concern that by using the Trade/Tariff sticks Trump could take the United States back to the 1930s and the Smoot Hawley Tariff that created the Great Depression:
Reviving trade is crucial to driving faster growth, yet the paradox of trade politics is that it is least popular when economic anxiety is high and thus trade is most crucial.
And so it is now: Four of the remaining U.S. candidates claim to oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and Congress now lacks the votes to pass it.
The loudest voice of America’s new antitrade populism is Mr. Trump, who has endorsed 45% tariffs on Chinese and Japanese imports and promises to punish U.S. companies that make cookies and cars in Mexico. When Mr. Trump visited the Journal in November, he couldn’t name a single trade deal he supported, including the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta).
He says he’s a free trader but that recent Administrations have been staffed by pathetic losers, so as President he would make deals more favorable to the U.S., and foreigners would bow before his threats. “I don’t mind trade wars,” he said at Thursday’s debate.
He should be careful what he wishes. Trade brinksmanship is always hazardous, especially when the world economy is so weak. A trade crash could trigger a new recession that would take years to repair, and these conflicts are unpredictable and can escalate into far greater damage.
The tragic historic precedent is the Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1930, signed reluctantly by Herbert Hoover. In that era the GOP was the party of tariffs, which economist Joseph Schumpeter called the Republican “household remedy.” Smoot-Hawley was intended to protect U.S. jobs and farmers from foreign competition, but it enraged U.S. trading partners like Canada, Britain and France.
As economic historian Charles Kindleberger shows in his classic, “The World in Depression, 1929-1939,” the U.S. tariff cascaded into a global war of beggar-thy-neighbor tariff reprisals and currency devaluation to gain a trading advantage. Each country’s search for a protectionist advantage became a disaster for all as trade volumes shrank and deepened the Great Depression.
Kindleberger blames the Depression in large part on a failure of leadership, especially by a U.S. that was unwilling to defend open markets in a period of distress. “For the world economy to be stabilized, there has to be a stabilizer—one stabilizer,” he wrote. Britain had played that role for two centuries but was then too weak. The U.S. failed to pick up the mantle. . . .
Once the President recovered his trade bearings, Mitt Romney promised in 2012 to sanction China for currency manipulation and even ran TV ads claiming that “for the first time, China is beating us.”
Mr. Trump is now escalating this line into the centerpiece of his economic agenda—protectionism you can believe in. And what markets and the public should understand is that as President he would have enormous unilateral power to follow through. Congress has handed the President more power over the years to impose punitive tariffs, in large part so Members can blame someone else when antitrade populism runs hot. . . .
In an exchange with Bill O’Reilly on Feb. 10, Mr. Trump said that’s exactly what he plans to do. The Fox News host suggested a trade war is “going to be bloody.” Mr. Trump replied that Americans needn’t worry because the Chinese “will crash their economy,” adding that “they will have a depression, the likes of which you have never seen” in a trade war. He might be right about China, but the U.S. wouldn’t be spared.
The Trump candidacy thus introduces a new and dangerous element of economic risk to a world still struggling to emerge from the 2008 panic and the failed progressive policy response. A trade war would compound the potential to make depressions great again.
For the full editorial see http://www.wsj.com/articles/making-depressions-great-again-1456790200 3/1/2016.
President Ronald Reagan, who lived through the Great Depression and knew about the impact of the Smoot Hawley tariff on his generation, was a solid free trader stating on June 28, 1986 in the attached speech on international trade, BETTER COPY REAGAN IT SPEECH:
But cliches and demagoguery aside, the truth is these trade restrictions badly hurt economic growth. You see, trade barriers and protectionism only put off the inevitable.
Sooner or later, economic reality intrudes, and industries protected by the Government face a new and unexpected form of competition. It may be a better product, a more efficient manufacturing technique, or a new foreign or domestic competitor.
By this time, of course, the protected industry is so listless and its competitive instincts so atrophied that it can’t stand up to the competition. And that, my friends, is when the factories shut down and the unemployment lines start. We had an excellent example of this in our own history during the Great Depression. Most of you are too young to remember this, but not long after the stock market crash of 1929, the Congress passed something called the Smoot-Hawley tariff.
Many economists believe it was one of the worst blows ever to our economy. By crippling free and fair trade with other nations, it internationalized the Depression. It also helped shut off America’s export market, eliminating many jobs here at home and driving the Depression even deeper.
Ronald Reagan was a true free trader; Donald Trump is not.
But Trump’s rhetoric along with the strong positions of Bernie Sanders, have already had an impact on US trade policy.
Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”)
On February 22, 2016, despite strong opposition from Republican lawmakers and many Democratic Senators and Congressmen, in a speech before the National Governors Association, President Obama stated that he was cautiously optimistic that Congress would pass the TPP before he leaves office. President Obama specifically stated:
“I am cautiously optimistic that we can still get it done. Leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan both have been supportive of this trade deal. We’re going to … enter this agreement, present it formally with some sort of implementation documents to Congress at some point this year and my hope is that we can get votes.”
But President Obama admitted that selling the TPP is not easy with the opposition of four of the top five candidates for the presidency — Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton and Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Ted Cruz, R-Texas. He further stated:
“The presidential campaigns have created some noise within and roiled things a little bit within the Republican Party, as well as the Democratic Party around this issue. I think we should just have a good, solid, healthy debate about it. What all of you can do to help is to talk to your Congressional delegations and let them know this is really important. All of you, though, can really lift up the benefits for your states, and talk to your congressional delegations directly.”
Obama can only submit legislation to implement the TPP to Congress after the U.S. International Trade Commission releases an extensive report on the agreement’s economic impact in mid-May.
As reported in my last newsletter, on February 5, 2016, in the Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton stated that she could support the TPP if the deal is changed, but also stated afterwards that she opposes the deal as currently written. Meanwhile there is intense pressure on Clinton to stay opposed to the TPP as the labor unions have increased pressure on those Democratic Congressmen and Senators that voted in favor of the Trade Promotion Authority and were put on labor’s hit list. On February 29, 2016, it was reported that labor unions were now targeting 28 moderate Democrats who supported “fast-track” trade promotion legislation.
California Rep. Scott Peters estimates his reelection campaign is likely to see a $200,000 to $300,000 drop in labor donations — about a seventh of his total contributions so far — and fewer ground volunteers knocking on doors unless he changes his trade stance. The two-term lawmaker, who won reelection by 3 percent of the vote, is likely to face ad buys, call-in campaigns and protests outside his office. As Peters further stated:
“We’ve lost some pretty important labor support as a result on the vote on TPA, and that’s painful … There’s no doubt there has been a political price.”
Labor’s attacks on the free traders could also be decisive in the reelection bids of California Rep. Ami Bera and New York Rep. Kathleen Rice. The White House has sought to counter the labor attacks by early endorsements, raised campaign funds and deployed Cabinet officials to praise members in their districts.
This makes passage of the TPP very doubtful in Congress. As Texas Rep Eddie Bernice Johnson said of the loss of the AFL-CIO backing:
“It gets your attention,” adding that trade is an “economic engine” for her Dallas district. “But I cannot neglect the stance and conditions of my district that I pledged heartily to represent.”
There’s a chance a TPP vote could get delayed until the Lame Duck session or the next administration and the next Congress, but AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka has stated:
“So they want to put it after the election because they think we’ll forget. Well, we’re not going to forget, and we’re not going to let the American worker forget, and we think they’ll have a tough time explaining their vote to workers who have lost jobs”
During a meeting with labor and trade protectionists, Oregon Congressman Earl Blumenauer reportedly slammed a notepad down on a table at the height of the debate, telling the group he was frustrated with the constant calls and picketing outside his home and district office. Blumenauer went on to state:
“I have a community that is very trade-dependent, but we also have people who are trade skeptics. So I’m just going to let the chips fall where they may.”
On March 7, 2016, former Congressman Don Bonker wrote the following article for the Seattle Times about the developments in the Trade area:
Trump’s trade rhetoric threatens U.S. economy, global standing, Trump’s fear tactics combined with viral protectionism spreading across the country is a monkey wrench for passage of Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Donald Trump’s political rhetoric, however absurd, is boastfully driving the debate among Republicans on issues such as immigration, but it’s his relentless jabs at U.S. trade policy that is more alarming.
Threatening to slap a 35 percent tariff on all imports from China definitely resonates with his support base, but it could undermine America’s leadership globally and also prove harmful in the Puget Sound area, given that such arbitrary tariffs are imposed on American importers, not Chinese suppliers, then passed on to distributors and ultimately result in higher consumer prices.
Trump, ever boastful of his business savvy, should also expect the Chinese to retaliate, as they predictably will, to restrict U.S. exports from Washington state and beyond.
Not surprisingly, Trump wants it both ways, asserting that free trade is terrible because we have “stupid” officials doing the negotiating, yet it could be wonderful if he calls the shots and has the final word (someone should inform him about the Constitution, which clearly states that “Congress shall regulate interstate and foreign commerce.”)
This may be how he cuts backroom business deals, but Trump’s approach would be unacceptable as leader of the world’s No. 1 economy.
Such fear tactics combined with viral protectionism spreading across the country, tapped into by Bernie Sanders and now Hillary Clinton switching her position on Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), is alarming to other nations who depend on America leadership in today’s global economy.
Using Trump’s words, “to make America great again,” our president must be a strong leader in today’s global economy, which Barack Obama has attempted to do with initiatives such as TPP. The partnership would give the U.S. a stronger presence in the Pacific Rim and provide a protective shield for Asian countries threatened by China’s enormous growth and influence in the region.
The TPP is destined for burial thanks to Trump’ rhetoric and growing protectionism among Democrats in Congress. It will be to China’s advantage given their own trade negotiations with the same countries.
If Trump is elected, will it put us in a trade war with China? In the 1928 presidential election, Herbert Hoover was less pompous than Trump but nonetheless called for higher tariffs that set the stage for a Republican Congress poised to run amok on limiting imports.
Shortly after the elections, hundreds of trade associations were formed that triggered an unbridled frenzy of logrolling, jockeying for maximum protection for commodity and industry producers leading to enactment of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act that hiked import fees up to 100 percent on over 20,000 imported products.
On the Senate side, another 1,200 amendments were added that proved so egregious, prompting Democrat Senator Thaedeus H. Caraway of Arkansas to declare that, “I might suggest that we have taxed everything in this bill except gall,” to which Senator Carter Glass of Virginia responded, “Yes, and a tax on that would bring considerable revenue.”
What Congress sent to the president proved so alarming it prompted 1,000 of nation’s leading economists to sign a petition urging President Hoover to veto the Smoot-Hawley Act, while The New York Times printed an ad that listed 46 states and 179 universities warning that signing the bill may prompt a fierce reaction.
Indeed within a few months, America’s leading trade partners — Canada, France, Mexico, Italy, 26 countries in all — retaliated, causing the world trade to plummet by more than half of the pre-1929 totals, one of several factors that precipitated the Great Depression.
Based on his campaign rhetoric, a Trump presidency would have plenty of gall, to be sure but it is certainly not what is needed to make America great again.
On March 9, I attended a reception here in Seattle with Congressman Dave Reichert, Chairman Subcommittee on Trade, House Ways and Means. Congressman Reichert stated that he is the first Washington State Congressman to become Chairman of the Trade Subcommittee. He also stated that he is dedicated and personally committed to passing the TPP through Congress no matter how long it takes because of its importance for the economies of Washington State and the entire United States.
On March 10, 2016, however, the Wall Street Journal had a front page headline entitled, “Free Trade Loses Political Favor, Republican backing fades as voters voice surprising skepticism; Pacific pact seen at risk”. The Article states in part:
After decades in which successive Republican and Democratic presidents have pushed to open U.S. and global markets, resentment toward free trade now appears to have the upper hand in both parties, making passage this year of a sweeping Pacific trade deal far less likely and clouding the longer-term outlook for international economic exchange.
Many Democrats have long blamed free-trade deals for big job losses and depressed wages, especially in the industrialized Midwest, which has been battered over the years by competition from lower-cost manufacturing centers in countries like Japan, Mexico and China. . . .
But one big surprise Tuesday was how loudly trade fears reverberated among Republican voters in the primary contests in Michigan and Mississippi—evidence, many observers say, of a widening undercurrent of skepticism on the right about who reaps the benefits from loosened trade restrictions.
Despite arguments by the Federalist Society in the attached article, Everything Trump Says About Trade With China Is Wrong, that Donald Trump’s arguments against China are simply wrong, Trump’s strong position and Hilary Clinton’s desire to keep Union support has forced her to take a much tougher stand on trade with China and the TPP. On February 23rd, 2016 in the attached commentary to the Maine Press Herald, CLINTON ARTICLE CHINA, entitled “If elected president, I’ll level the playing field on global trade,” Hilary Clinton stated:
At the same time, China and other countries are using underhanded and unfair trade practices to tilt the playing field against American workers and businesses.
When they dump cheap products in our markets, subsidize state-owned enterprises, manipulate currencies and discriminate against American companies, our middle class pays the price. That has to stop.
Ninety-five percent of America’s potential customers live overseas, so closing ourselves off to trade is not a solution. . . .
As President, my goal will be to win the global competition for the good-paying manufacturing jobs of the future.
First, we have to strongly enforce trade rules to ensure American workers aren’t being cheated. Too often, the federal government has put the burden of initiating trade cases on workers and unions, and failed to take action until after the damage is done and workers have been laid off.
That’s backward: The government should be enforcing the law from the beginning, and workers should be able to focus on doing their jobs. To make sure it gets done, we should establish and empower a new chief trade prosecutor reporting directly to the president, triple the number of trade enforcement officers and build new early-warning systems so we can intervene before trade violations cost American jobs.
We should also hold other countries accountable for meeting internationally sanctioned labor standards – fighting against child and slave labor and for the basic rights of workers to organize around the world.
Second, we have to stand up to Chinese abuses. Right now, Washington is considering Beijing’s request for “market economy” status. That sounds pretty obscure. But here’s the rub – if they get market economy status, it would defang our anti-dumping laws and let cheap products flood into our markets. So we should reply with only one word: No.;
With thousands of state-owned enterprises; massive subsidies for domestic industry; systematic, state-sponsored efforts to steal business secrets; and blatant refusal to play by the rules, China is far from a market economy. If China wants to be treated like a market economy, it needs to act like one.
Third, we need to crack down on currency manipulation – which can be destructive for American workers. China, Japan and other Asian economies kept their goods artificially cheap for years by holding down the value of their currencies.;
I’ve fought against these unfair practices before, and I will do it again. Tough new surveillance, transparency and monitoring regimes are part of the answer – but only part. We need to expand our toolbox to include effective new remedies, such as duties or tariffs and other measures.
Fourth, we need to stop rewarding U.S. companies for shipping jobs overseas by closing loopholes and ending tax write-offs – and encouraging “in-sourcing” here in America instead. Two HVAC plants in Indiana recently decided to move abroad, costing 2,100 jobs – and likely pocketing a tax deduction.
They’re not just turning their back on the workers and community that supported them for years, they’re turning their back on America. As President, I’ll also end so-called “inversions” that allow multinational businesses to avoid paying U.S. taxes by moving overseas in name only.
Fifth, we have to set a high bar for any new trade agreements, and only support them if they will create good jobs, raise wages and advance our national security. I opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership when it failed to meet those tests, and would oppose future agreements if they failed to meet that bar.;
America spent generations working with partners to develop strong and fair rules of the road for the global economy – but those rules only work if we enforce them. Tough enforcement and other smart policies to support a manufacturing renaissance are the only way we can ensure that trade helps American workers. If I’m elected President, that’s what I’ll do.
THE REASON TRADE IS AT THE CENTER OF THE DEBATE AND THE REAL TRADE ANSWER—TAA FOR COMPANIES
What is the reason that trade is the center of the Presidential debate? I believe at its core there are two fundamental reasons—failure to educate the general populace on the benefits of trade so that they understand how manufacturing in the US is connected in global supply chain with raw material inputs from abroad.
The second reason is the toxic domestic raw material heavy industry/Labor Union attack based on false arguments that all trade competition is caused by unfair trade and that companies can be saved by bringing trade remedy cases. This rhetoric has generated a Globalization victimhood way of thinking that all imports are unfairly traded, especially from China. This is despite the fact that 80 of the outstanding 120 antidumping orders against China are directed at raw materials, chemicals, metal and steel, which goes directly into downstream US production. Restrictions on raw material inputs hurts downstream US industries, which have no standing under US antidumping and countervailing duty laws to argue against the restrictions and have their arguments have any weight in the determination.
Years ago a United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) in the W Bush Administration spoke in Seattle and said that in the Trade area the major failure has been to educate the American public on the benefits of trade. Washington State, which is dependent on imports and exports, certainly knows the benefits of trade. The Ports in Washington State are incredibly important for the economic health of the State. Our largest trading partner is China to which Washington exports $20 billion every year. Thus the Washington Council for International Trade is pushing hard for the Trans Pacific Partnership. See http://wcit.freeenterpriseaction.com/v9xpssZ
But that is not true in many other states, especially in the Midwest and on the East Coast, which have adopted the trade victimization ideology. In addition, the Steel Industry and Labor Unions make three attacks against China—currency manipulation, cyber hacking and antidumping. When one looks deeper at these arguments, however, they fall apart.
CURRENCY MANIPULATION
Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton have been screaming about currency manipulation. But on May 22, 2015, on the Senate floor during the debate on Trade Promotion Authority (“TPA”) Senator Hatch made a very strong argument against the Stabenow and Portman Currency Amendment, which would have included tough provisions and sanctions, against currency manipulation. Senator Hatch clearly stated that the reason he opposed the Amendment was because President Obama under pressure from Treasury Secretary Lew stated that if the currency amendment was included, he would veto the TPA bill.
Why were President Obama and Treasury Secretary Lew opposed to tough sanctions against currency manipulation? Because those sanctions could be used against the United States. See Testimony of Senators Wyden and Hatch at http://www.c-span.org/video/?326202-1/us-senate-debate-trade-promotion-authority&live. As Senator Hatch stated:
I think I can boil this very complicated issue down to a single point: The Portman-Stabenow Amendment will kill TPA.
I’m not just saying that, Mr. President. It is, at this point, a verifiable fact.
Yesterday, I received a letter from Treasury Secretary Lew outlining the Obama Administration’s opposition to this amendment. . . . most importantly, at the end of the letter, Secretary Lew stated very plainly that he would recommend that the President veto a TPA bill that included this amendment.
That’s pretty clear, Mr. President. It doesn’t leave much room for interpretation or speculation. No TPA bill that contains the language of the Portman-Stabenow Amendment stands a chance of becoming law. . . .
We know this is the case, Mr. President. Virtually all of our major negotiating partners, most notably Japan, have already made clear that they will not agree to an enforceable provisions like the one required by the Portman-Stabenow Amendment. No country that I am aware of, including the United States, has ever shown the willingness to have their monetary policies subject to potential trade sanctions. . . .
Second, the Portman-Stabenow Amendment would put at risk the Federal Reserve’s independence in its ability to formulate and execute monetary policies designed to protect and stabilize the U.S. economy. While some in this chamber have made decrees that our domestic monetary policies do not constitute currency manipulation, we know that not all of our trading partners see it that way. . . .
If the Portman-Stabenow language is adopted into TPA and these rules become part of our trade agreements, how long do you think it will take for our trading partners to enter disputes and seek remedies against Federal Reserve quantitative easing policies? Not long, I’d imagine.
If the Portman-Stabenow objective becomes part of our trade agreements, we will undoubtedly see formal actions to impose sanctions on U.S. trade, under the guise that the Federal Reserve has manipulated our currency for trade advantage. We’ll also be hearing from other countries that Fed policy is causing instability in their financial markets and economies and, unless the Fed takes a different path, those countries could argue for relief or justify their own exchange-rate policies to gain some trade advantage for themselves.
CYBER HACKING
The trade critics also attack China for Cyber Hacking, but on September 29, 2015, in response to specific questions from Senator Manchin in the Senate Armed Services Committee, James R. Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, testified that China cyber- attacks to obtain information on weapon systems are not cyber- crime. It is cyber espionage, which the United States itself engages in. As Dr. Clapper stated, both countries, including the United States, engage in cyber espionage and “we are pretty good at it.” Dr. Clapper went on to state that “people in glass houses” shouldn’t throw stones. See http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/15-09-29-united-states-cybersecurity-policy-and-threats at 1hour 8 minutes to 10 minutes.
In response to a specific question from Senator Ayotte, Director Clapper also specifically admitted that the attack on OPM and theft of US government employee data is state espionage and not commercial activity, which the US also engages in. See above hearing at 1 hour 18 and 19 minutes.
Thus, the United States itself does not want to clearly define Cyber Hacking as unacceptable because it is state espionage and we the United States do it too and are pretty good at it.
As indicated in numerous past blog posts, more dumping and countervailing duty cases, some against China based on faked numbers, does not solve the trade problem. For over 40 years the Commerce Department has refused to use actual prices and costs in China to determine dumping resulting in antidumping and countervailing duty orders blocking about $30 billion in Chinese imports. In doing so, however, China is treated worse the Iran, Russia, Syria and many other countries under the US antidumping law.
As indicated below, that issue comes to a boil on December 11, 2016 when pursuant to the China WTO Agreement, China is supposed to be treated as a market economy country. But Hilary Clinton states that if market economy treatment were given to China so they could be treated like Iran, we would “defang our antidumping laws.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Having worked at the Commerce Department, I am convinced that if China were to become a market economy, Commerce would still find very large dumping rates against China.
More importantly, the antidumping, countervailing duty and other trade laws do not work. They do not save US companies and industries. We have a poster child to prove this point—The US Steel Industry. After forty years of trade cases and protection from steel imports, where is the US steel industry today?
Many of the major steel companies, such as Bethlehem Steel, Lone Star Steel and Jones & Laughlin, have become green fields. The total employment of the US Steel industry now is less than one high tech company. A failure caused not because of the lack of antidumping and countervailing duty protection covering billions of dollars in imports, but because as President Reagan stated back in 1986, protectionism does not work. It does not save the companies, because these cases do not get at the root causes of the company’s and industry’s decline.
Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton have pointed to the closure of manufacturing plants in the US and their move to Mexico. But why did the factories close?
On March 4, 2016, the Wall Street Journal in an editorial entitled “Trump on Ford and Nabisco The real reasons the companies left the U.S. for Mexico” clearly set out the reasons some of these companies left the United State to move to Mexico—Wages demands as high as $60 an hour from the Labor Unions coupled with sky high taxes to support public workers in Illinois. As the Journal stated:
“Last summer, Deerfield, Illinois-based Mondelez, which owns Nabisco, announced that it would close nine production lines at its plant in Chicago—the largest bakery in the world—while investing in new technology at a facility in Salinas, Mexico. Mondelez made the decision after asking its unions for $46 million in concessions to match the annual savings it would achieve from shifting production to Mexico. . . .
Operating in Chicago is particularly expensive since Illinois has among the nation’s highest corporate and property taxes—which are soaring to pay for city employee pensions—and workers’ compensation premiums. Last year Illinois lost 56 manufacturing jobs per work day while employment increased in most other Midwest states including Wisconsin (18 a day), Indiana (20), Ohio (58) and Michigan (74).
As for Ford, Mr. Trump flogged the auto maker’s $2.5 billion investment in two new engine and transmission plants in Mexico. . . . One impetus behind Detroit’s Mexico expansion is the United Auto Workers new collective-bargaining agreement, which raises hourly labor and benefit costs to $60 in 2019—about $10 more than foreign auto makers with plants in the U.S.—from the current $57 for Ford and $55 for GM. The increasing wages make it less economical to produce low-margin cars.
Foreign car manufacturers including BMW, Honda, Volkswagen, Kia, Nissan and Mazda have also recently announced new investments in Mexico. Besides lower labor costs, one reason they give is Mexico’s free-trade agreements, which allow access to 60% of world markets. Mexico has 10 free-trade agreements with 45 countries including Japan and the European Union whereas the U.S. has only 14 deals with 20 countries.”
Companies have to be competitive with foreign competition, and labor unions must work with management to stay competitive with the rest of the World. The “More” statement of the famous US labor leader John L. Lewis no longer works if the labor union’s more leads to the closure of the US manufacturing company, which employs the workers in question.
Not only must US Companies be competitive, but countries, including the United States, must also be competitive and be willing to meet the competition from other countries. A major reason for the rise of Donald Trump is the failure of the US Congress to formulate a trade policy that works and promote the only US trade program that truly saves import injured manufacturing companies by helping them adjust to import competition—the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for Firms/Companies program. As stated in prior blog posts, because of ideological purity among many Republican conservatives in Congress and the Senate, the TAA for Companies program has been cut to the bone to $12.5 million nationwide. This cut is despite the fact that since 1984 here in the Northwest, the Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (“NWTAAC”) has been able to save 80% of the companies that entered the program.
To understand the transformative power of TAA for Companies, see the TAA video from Mid-Atlantic TAAC at http://mataac.org/howitworks/ , which describes in detail how four import injured companies used the program to change and turn their company around and make it profitable. One of the companies was using steel as an input, and was getting smashed by Chinese imports. After getting into the program, not only did the company become prosperous and profitable, it is now exporting products to China.
This cut back to $12. 5 million nationwide from $50 million makes it impossible for the TAA for Companies program to work with medium or larger US companies, which have been injured by imports. TAA for Companies is hamstrung by neglect with a maximum technical assistance per firm level that has not changed in at least 30 years.
In case you don’t know about TAAF, this is a program that offers a one-time, highly targeted benefit to domestic companies hurt by trade. The benefit is not paid to the companies, but to consultants, who help the company adjust to import competition. To put that in context, the very much larger TAA for Worker Program’s appropriation for FY 2015 was $711 million to retrain workers for jobs that may not exist after the company has closed.
Congress needs to find a cure to the trade problem, and it is not more trade cases, which do not save US companies and the jobs that go with them. TAA for Companies works, but because of politics, ideology and the resulting Congressional cuts, TAA has been so reduced it is now marginalized and cannot do the job it was set up to do.
Both Republicans and Democrats have failed to formulate a trade policy that will help US companies injured by imports truly adjust to import competition and become competitive in the World again. This failure has created Donald Trump and possibly a new dangerous protectionist era in US politics, which could have a disastrous impact on the US economy.
TPP TEXT AND TRADE ADVISORY REPORTS
On November 5, 2015, the United States Trade Representative Office (“USTR”) released the text of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (“TPP”). This is an enormous trade agreement covering 12 countries, including the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, and covers 40% of the World’s economy. To read more about the TPP and the political negotiations behind the Agreement see past newsletters and my blog, www.uschinatradewar.com.
The attached text of the Agreement is over 6,000 pages.Chapters 3 – 30 – Bates 4116 – 5135 Chapters 1 – 2 – Bates 1 – 4115 Annex 1 – 4 – Bates A-1-1074
On November 5th, the Treasury Department released the text of the Currency Manipulation side deal, Press Release – 12 Nation Statement on Joint Declaration Press Release – Joint Declaration Fact Sheet TPP_Currency_November 2015.
On December 2nd and 3rd, 2015 various trade advisory groups operating under the umbrella of the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) Group issued reports on the impact of the TPP on various industries and legal areas. All the reports can be found at https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/advisory-group-reports-TPP and attached are many of the reports, ITAC-2-Automobile-Equipment-and-Capital-Goods, ITAC-12-Steel ITAC-11-Small-and-Minority-Business, ITAC-9-Building-Materials-Construction-and-Non-Ferrous-Metals ITAC-10-Services-and-Finance-Industries ITAC-6-Energy-and-Energy-Services ITAC-2-Automobile-Equipment-and-Capital-Goods ITAC-3-Chemicals-Pharmaceuticals-Health-Science-Products-and-Services ITAC-5-Distribution-Services ITAC-8-Information-and-Communication-Technologies-Services-and-Electronic-Commerce. Almost all of the reports are favorable, except for the Steel Report, which takes no position, and the Labor Advisory Report, which is opposed because it is the position of the Unions.
NEW TRADE AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT BILL
President Obama signed the bipartisan Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (TFTE) on February 24. A copy of the bill, the conference report and summary of the bill are attached, JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE CONFERENCE REPORT TRADE FACILITATION AND TRADE ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 20152 Summary of TRADE FACILITATION AND TRADE ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2015 Trade-and-Environment-Policy-Advisory-Committee.pdf.
The bill makes many changes to the Customs and Trade laws with a specific focus on enforcement, particularly of the Trade laws. One of the provisions focuses on concerns surrounding non-resident, small “fly-by-night” importers of record. The TFTE authorizes the Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to set up an importer-of-record program. Through the program, CBP must establish criteria that importers must meet to obtain an importer-of-record number.
In addition, CBP is to establish an importer risk assessment program to review the risk associated with certain importers, particularly new importers and nonresident importers, to determine whether to adjust an importer’s bond or increase screening for an importer’s entries. Specifically, Section 115(a) of the law provides:
Not later than the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner shall establish a program that directs U.S. Customs and Border Protection to adjust bond amounts for importers, including new importers and nonresident importers, based on risk assessments of such importers conducted by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, in order to protect the revenue of the Federal Government.
Title IV of the Act, Prevention of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, sets up a new remedy for companies that believe that antidumping and countervailing duty orders are being evaded by shipping through a third country or misclassification or some other means. The Act creates the Trade Remedy Enforcement Division within Department of Homeland Security, which is charged with developing and administering policies to prevent evasion of US antidumping and countervailing duty orders. The Secretary of Treasury is also authorized to enter into agreements with foreign nations to enforce the trade remedy laws.
On Aug. 23, 2016, CBP must begin investigating allegations of trade remedy evasion according to established procedures. Those procedures include that CBP must initiate an investigation within 15 business days of receiving an allegation from an interested party and then has 300 days to determine whether the merchandise was entered through evasion. If CBP finds that there is a reasonable suspicion that merchandise entered the U.S. through evasion, CBP is directed to suspend the liquidation of each unliquidated entry of such covered merchandise.
Any CBP evasion decision is subject to judicial review by the Court of International Trade. The act also provides an expanded range of penalties where evasion is found to have occurred, including the imposition of additional duties and referrals to other agencies for other civil or criminal investigations.
Section 433 of the Act also eliminates the ability of an importer of a new shipper’s merchandise to post a bond or security instead of a cash deposit. This provision will prevent a company from importing substantial quantities of merchandise covered by an antidumping and/or countervailing duty order and then fail to pay the appropriate duty.
Finally, section 701 of the act, Enhancement of Engagement on Currency Exchange Rate and Economic Policies with Certain Major Trading Partners of the United States, establishes a procedure for identifying trade partners that are suspected of currency manipulation and conducting a macroeconomic analysis of those partners. The key finding is under section 701(2)(B), where the Treasury Secretary is to publicly describe the factors used to assess under paragraph (2)(A)(ii) whether a country has a significant bilateral trade surplus with the United States, has a material current account surplus, and has engaged in persistent one-sided intervention in the foreign exchange market.
If the Treasury Secretary is unable to address currency manipulation issues with a trading partner, the act authorizes the President to take additional steps to prevent and remedy further manipulation. For instance, the president may prohibit the approval of new financing products, which can be waived only upon a finding of adverse impact on the U.S. economy or serious harm to national security.
ZTE EXPORT LAW VIOLATIONS—MORE FUEL ON THE FIRE OF THE US CHINA TRADE WAR
On March 8, 2015, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) published the attached Federal Register notice, ZTE FED REG NOTICE, announcing that China based mega corporation ZTE and three of its affiliated companies have been added to the Entity List, which requires an export license before US made products can be exported to those companies. As China’s second largest telecommunications company, ZTE is also the world’s seventh largest producer of smartphones and has operations in the US and more than 160 other countries.
The Federal Register notice states:
The End-User Review Committee (“ERC”) composed of representatives of the Departments of Commerce (Chair), State, Defense, Energy, and, where appropriate, the Treasury has determined:
to add four entities—three in China and one in Iran—to the Entity List under the authority of § 744.11 (License requirements that apply to entities acting contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States) of the EAR. . . .
The ERC reviewed § 744.11(b) (Criteria for revising the Entity List) in making the determination to list these four entities. Under that paragraph, entities and other persons for which there is reasonable cause to believe, based on specific and articulable facts, have been involved, are involved, or pose a significant risk of being or becoming involved in, activities that are contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States . . . .
Pursuant to § 744.11 of the EAR, the ERC determined that Zhongxing Telecommunications Equipment Corporation (‘‘ZTE Corporation’’) . . . be added to the Entity List under the destination of China for actions contrary to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States. Specifically, the ZTE Corporation document ‘‘Report Regarding Comprehensive Reorganization and Standardization of the Company Export Control Related Matters’’ (available at http://www.bis.doc.gov) indicates that ZTE Corporation has reexported controlled items to sanctioned countries contrary to United States law. The ZTE Corporation document ‘‘Proposal for Import and Export Control Risk Avoidance’’ (available at http://www.bis.doc.gov) describes how ZTE Corporation also planned and organized a scheme to establish, control, and use a series of ‘‘detached’’ (i.e., shell) companies to illicitly re-export controlled items to Iran in violation of U.S. export control laws.
Having looked at the internal confidential ZTE report, which Commerce in a very unusual situation has published as a public document on its website, ZTE truly has been caught red handed. The ZTE Report lays out a detailed scheme to evade US Export Control laws. No country, including the United States or China, would tolerate such a scheme to systematically evade a country’s laws.
For more on the ZTE Action along with a link to the confidential ZTE document now posted on the Commerce Department website, see http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2016/03/08/2155724/has-the-cold-us-sino-trade-war-just-got-piping-hot/.
From the Chinese point of view, however, the Commerce Department has no credibility because its antidumping laws presently block about $30 billion in imports based on fake numbers. Because the US Government’s Import and Export Control Administration are both located in the Commerce Department, the Chinese government looks at all the Department’s decisions as US based protectionism.
The problem is that through its nonmarket economy methodology, which does not use actual costs and prices to determine dumping, Commerce has created a game, and the Chinese will play it. Sometimes Chinese companies talk to me about using the “houmen” back door and shipping products through different countries to evade US antidumping laws. I always tell the Chinese companies that this is Customs fraud and they risk civil and criminal prosecution under US Customs and trade laws.
In fact, in the past Chinese honey suppliers that used transshipment to get around the US antidumping law were caught in the United States and hauled in front of Federal Court on criminal charges for evasion of US antidumping laws. I have heard of one Chinese company seafood executive arrested in Belgium and sent to Belgian jail on an extradition warrant for evasion of US antidumping laws.
With the enactment of the New Trade and Customs Enforcement Act, described above, the US government now has more ways of catching Chinese companies and US importers that try to evade US trade laws. As one Chinese friend told me, such actions are “too damned dangerous”.
Although US judgments are not enforceable in China, Chinese companies have to also realize, that like ZTE, they have grown up and have subsidiaries all around the World. US judgments may not be enforceable in China, but they are enforceable in Hong Kong and other countries, and every Chinese company I have ever dealt with has a Hong Kong bank account. Through its scheme to evade US export control laws, ZTE now has major problems and those problems may now multiply worldwide.
CHINA’S NME STATUS—ANOTHER HOT TOPIC FOR 2016
As stated in prior newsletters, interest groups on both sides of the issue have increased their political attacks in the debate over China’s market economy status. On February 23, 2016, under intense pressure from the labor unions, Hilary Clinton stated that to give market economy status to China:
“would defang our anti-dumping laws and let cheap products flood into our markets. So we should reply with only one word: No.”
To summarize the issue, on December 11, 2016, pursuant to the WTO Agreement, the 15 year provision, expires. More specifically, the United States faces a looming deadline under the WTO Agreement with regard to the application of this nonmarket economy methodology to China.
Under Nonmarket economy methodology, Commerce does not use actual prices and costs in China to determine dumping, but constructs a cost from consumption factors in China multiplied by surrogate values from import statistics in 5 to 10 different countries and those values can change from preliminary to final determination and review to review. Because of this methodology no Chinese company and certainly no US importer that is liable for the duties, knows whether the Chinese company is truly dumping. Fake numbers lead to fake results.
Section 15 of the China WTO Accession Agreement, which originated from the US China WTO Accession Agreement, provides:
Price Comparability in Determining Subsidies and Dumping . . .
(a) In determining price comparability under Article VI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement, the importing WTO Member shall use either Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation or a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China based on the following rules: . . .
(ii) The importing WTO Member may use a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China if the producers under investigation cannot clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the industry producing the like product with regard to manufacture, production and sale of that product. . . .
(d) Once China has established, under the national law of the importing WTO Member, that it is a market economy, the provisions of subparagraph (a) shall be terminated provided that the importing Member’s national law contains market economy criteria as of the date of accession. In any event, the provisions of subparagraph (a)(ii) shall expire 15 years after the date of accession. In addition, should China establish, pursuant to the national law of the importing WTO Member, that market economy conditions prevail in a particular industry or sector, the non-market economy provisions of subparagraph (a) shall no longer apply to that industry or sector.
In other words, pursuant to the China WTO Accession Agreement, Commerce’s right to use a nonmarket economy methodology “shall expire 15 years after the date of accession”. China acceded to the WTO on December 11, 2001 so Section 15(d) should kick in on December 11, 2016.
That provision specifies that an importing WTO member may use a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices and costs in China to determine normal value in an AD case, if producers of a given product under investigation cannot clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in their industry.
The question that is now being debated is whether Section 15(d) automatically ends the possibility of using a non-market economy methodology to China or if it can still be applied if petitioners can show that market conditions do not prevail for producers of the product under investigation.
As stated above, Hilary Clinton is under enormous pressure to be tough on China. On February 12th,The American Iron and Steel Industry made it clear that it wants China’s non-market economy status in antidumping cases to be at the forefront of the public debate. Thus Thomas Gibson, AISI president and CEO, stated:
“We want to keep the issue in front of decision makers and in the public debate because there will be a new government a year from now. “
He further stated that the Obama administration has not shown any sign that it is considering treating China as a market economy in AD cases as a result of an expiring provision in the country’s accession protocol to the World Trade Organization. As Gibson further stated:
“We have not heard anyone in the administration say that they agree with China’s assertion that it is to be given market economy status automatically at the end of the year. I think the administration has heard our concerns.”
Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Michael Punke also reportedly stated in early February in Geneva that there was little administration interest in treating China as a market economy:
“The issue of China’s status is not automatic. The mere change of date at the end of the year does not automatically result in a change of status for China.”
Other US government officials have informally conceded that the administration has arrived at the conclusion that no automatic change of U.S. AD methodology is needed, a position clearly articulated by the Commerce Department.
In the attached February 24, 2016 statement to the US China Economic and Security Review Commission, HUFBAUER STATE, however, Gary Clyde Hufbauer, a well-known international trade expert at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, made the opposite argument noting first that the following countries have granted China market economy status in antidumping cases: New Zealand, Singapore, Malaysia and Australia. Hufbauer went on to state:
Some lawyers read the text differently. While they agree that Article 15(a)(ii) effectively disappears on December 11, 2016, they do not agree that the Protocol confines WTO members to a binary choice between MES (strict comparison of export prices with Chinese prices or costs) and NME (comparison with surrogate prices or costs). They point to the opening language in Article 15(a), which states:
…the importing WTO member shall use either Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation or a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China….
To be sure, under Article 15(d), the whole of Article 15(a) disappears:
Once China has established, under the national law of the importing WTO Member, that it is a market economy, the provisions of subparagraph (a) shall be terminated….
The United States might well argue, come December 11, 2016, that China has not established that it has become, in all important respects, a market economy. The Commerce Department could modify its current surrogate practices and instead use a “mix-and-match” approach—claiming on a case-by-case basis that some Chinese prices or costs reflect market conditions and others do not. For the prices or costs that do not reflect market conditions, the Commerce Department could use surrogate prices or costs. This seems most likely in industries, such as steel, dominated by state-owned enterprises, with large losses financed by state-controlled banks.
Whether the United States takes a “mix-and-match” approach, rather than granting China blanket market economy status, will turn primarily on policy considerations, not legal parsing. The policy decision may reflect the general atmosphere of commercial relations with China late in 2016, including the evolution of the renminbi exchange rate (manipulated devaluation would inspire a harder line) and the outcome of US-China bilateral investment treaty (BIT) negotiations (success would have the opposite effect).
Assuming the United States adopts a “mix-and-match” approach, the stage will be set for China to initiate WTO litigation. In this scenario, the year 2018 seems the earliest date for a final decision by the WTO Appellate Body. My guess is that the Appellate Body would rule against the “mix-and-match” approach. Even so, China would not receive retroactive refunds for antidumping duties collected prior to the ruling.
Moreover, within China, the US denial of full-fledged MES would resonate strongly, in a negative way. Antagonism would be particularly strong if, as I expect, the European Union and other major countries accord MES in December 2016. Consequently, China would likely retaliate in opaque ways against US exporters and investors.
On balance, the United States would lose more than it gains from withholding full-fledged MES. A very large irritant would be thrown into US-China commercial relations, with a modest benefit to US industries that initiate AD proceedings. Even without the use of surrogate costs and prices, AD margins are typically high. Adding an extra 20 percent penalty, through the use of surrogate cost and price methodologies, will not do a great deal more to restrain injurious imports.
On February 25, 2016, Cecilia Malmström, the EU Commissioner for Trade, stated at a China Association Event in London that China is:
a major investment partner too. The EU has stocks of 117 billion pound sterling in the Chinese economy. And China is a growing source of foreign investment for the EU. Chinese investment in EU in 2014 is four times what it was in 2008.
And, if we just look at our exports alone, over 3 million jobs here in Europe depend on our sales in China. . . .
The second issue I want to raise is the question of changing the methodology in anti-dumping investigations concerning Chinese products, the so-called market economy status.
This is a sensitive issue. And it’s become even more so with the steel situation. That’s why the EU is conducting a thorough impact assessment and public consultation before we make up our minds on where to go.
But what is clear is that certain provisions of China’s protocol of accession to the WTO related to this issue will expire in December.
We need to be very careful how we approach this and we need to work cooperatively. We will need the constructive engagement of all Member States, including the UK.
On March 3, 2016, the executive council of the AFL-CIO labor union called on the US government to end the trade agreement TTIP negotiations if the EU makes China a market economy country.
RAW ALUMINUM PROBLEMS
In light of the impact of the aluminum extrusions case on the US market, the import problem has now moved upstream. The next round of antidumping and countervailing duty cases against China looks like it will be on raw aluminum products.
On February 24, 2016, in a letter to the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”), WAYS MEANS LETTER ALUMINUM, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Kevin Brady requested that the Commission conduct a section 332 fact finding investigation of the US aluminum industry. The letter specifically states:
The Committee on Ways and Means is interested in obtaining current information on relevant factors affecting the global competitiveness of the U.S. aluminum industry. The U.S. aluminum industry remains a globally successful producer of aluminum products. A healthy and growing aluminum industry is not only important to our economy, but is also vital for our national defense. ·
In order to better assess the current market conditions confronting the U.S. industry, we request that the U.S. International Trade Commission conduct an investigation under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 ( 19 U.S.C. !332(g)), and provide a report setting forth the results of the investigation. The investigation should cover unwrought (e.g., primary and secondary) and wrought (e.g., semi-finished) aluminum products
To the extent that information is available, the report should contain:
an overview of the aluminum industry in the United States and other major global producing and exporting countries, including production, production capacity, capacity utilization, employment, wages, inventories, supply chains, domestic demand, and exports;
information on recent trade trends and developments in the global market for aluminum, including U.S. and other major foreign producer imports and exports, and trade flows through third countries for further processing and subsequent exports;
a comparison of the competitive strengths and weaknesses of aluminum production and exports in the United States and other major producing and exporting countries, including such factors as producer revenue and production costs, industry structure, input prices and availability, energy costs and sources, production technology, product in novation, exchange rates, and pricing, as well as government policies and programs that directly or indirectly affect aluminum production and exporting in these countries;
in countries where unwrought aluminum capacity has significantly increased, identify factors driving those capacity and related production changes; and
a qualitative and, to the extent possible, quantitative assessment of the impact of government policies and programs in major foreign aluminum producing and exporting countries on their aluminum production, exports, consumption, and domestic prices, as well as on the U.S. aluminum industry and on aluminum markets worldwide.
The report should focus primarily on the 2011-2015 time period, but examine longer term trends since 2011. To develop detailed information on the domestic aluminum market and industry, it is anticipated that the Commission will need to collect primary data from market participants through questionnaires. The Committee requests that the Commission transmit its report to Congress no later than 16 months following the receipt of this request. . . .
One major purpose of the investigation is to assess how China policies have affected the US aluminum industry.
President Heidi Brock of the US Aluminum Association, which represents the US aluminum industry, applauded the Ways and Means request for an ITC investigation:
“An investigation by the [ITC] will help us address ongoing issues in the global aluminum industry that are hurting the domestic market and leading to curtailments, closures and job losses. I am pleased that the Congress recognizes the continued economic importance of this vital industry and I applaud Chairman Brady’s leadership to move this issue forward.”
Recently, the U.S. industry has curtailed or closed 65 percent of U.S. aluminum capacity with many job losses for U.S. workers
The information collected by the ITC could be used as the basis for trade cases against China and other countries.
THE ONGOING STEEL CASES
Many companies have been asking me about the ongoing Steel antidumping and countervailing duty cases so this section will address the Steel cases in more detail.
As happened in the OCTG cases, where Chinese OCTG was simply replaced by imports from Korea, India, Taiwan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, Thailand and Turkey, the same scenario is happening in other steel cases, such as the recent cold-rolled and corrosion-resistant/galvanized steel cases.
Based on the nonmarket economy antidumping methodology, which does not use actual prices and costs in China, in the recent cases Chinese steel companies were smashed with high antidumping rates of 200 to 300 percent. In the Cold Rolled Steel countervailing duty case, the Chinese companies and Chinese government simply gave up and received a rate over 200% and now under the Antidumping Law rates of over 200%.
COLD ROLLED STEEL FROM CHINA, BRAZIL, KOREA, INDIA AND RUSSIA—PRELIMINARY COUNTERVAILING DUTY AND ANTIDUMPING DETERMINATIONS
On December 16, 2015, Commerce issued its attached preliminary countervailing duty determination, factsheet-multiple-cold-rolled-steel-flat-products-cvd-prelim-121615, in Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, China, India, and Russia and No Countervailable Subsidization of Imports of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Korea. The effect of the case is to wipe all Chinese cold rolled steel out of the United States with a countervailing duty (CVD) rate of 227.29%.
As also predicted, the countervailing duty rates for all the other countries were very low, if not nonexistent: Brazil 7.42% for all companies, India 4.45% for all companies, Korea 0 for all companies and Russia 0 to 6.33% for all companies.
The 227.29% CVD rate for all the Chinese companies was based on all facts available as the Chinese government and the Chinese steel companies simply refused to cooperate realizing that it was a futile exercise to fight the case at Commerce because of the surrogate value methodology and refusal to use actual prices and costs in China.
On March 1, 2016 Commerce issued its attached preliminary antidumping determination mirroring the rates in the preliminary CVD determination. Specifically, in a factsheet, factsheet-multiple-cold-rolled-steel-flat-products-ad-prelim-030116, Commerce announced its affirmative preliminary determinations in the antidumping duty investigations of imports of certain cold rolled steel flat products from Brazil, China, India, Japan, Korea, Russia, and the United Kingdom.
As predicted, China’s antidumping rate was 265.79% as the Chinese companies simply gave up and did not participate because they believed that it would be impossible to get a good antidumping rate using nonmarket economy methodology.
For the other market economy countries, the results were mixed. Brazil received antidumping rates of 38.93% and Japan was 71.35%.
But India’s rate was only 6.78% and Korea had rates ranging from 2.17 to 6.85%. For Russia, the rates ranged from 12.62 to 16.89% and the United Kingdom rates were between 5.79 to 31.39%.
What does this mean? China is wiped out along with Japan and probably Brazil, but Korea, India, Russia and UK will continue to export steel to the US and simply take the Chinese market share.
Antidumping and countervailing duty cases do not save US industries.
CUSTOMS NEW “LIVE ENTRY” PROCEDURES FOR STEEL IMPORTS
On March 3, 2016, Customs announced a new effort to enforce trade rules against steel shipments at risk for evasion of antidumping and countervailing duty orders. It requires importers of record to provide the paperwork and pay the necessary duties before a given shipment is released into the U.S. market.
This live-entry requirement is already being applied to cut-to-length steel plate from China. Customs is considering requiring live-entry procedures for other high-risk steel imports subject to the 100 plus AD/CVD cases, but sidestepped a question on whether these procedures would apply to products other than steel.
This new live entry requirement slows up imports from entering the US commerce to that Customs can make sure everything in the shipment is correct before releasing it into the Commerce of the United States.
SOLAR CELLS REVIEW DETERMINATION
On December 18, 2015, in an attached decision, SOLAR CELLS AD PRELIM, the Commerce Department issued its preliminary determination in the 2013-2014 Solar Cells antidumping review investigation. The antidumping rates range from 4.53% for Trina to 11.47% for Yingli. The average dumping rate for the Chinese separate rate companies is 7.27%.
On December 31, 2015, Commerce issued its attached preliminary determination in the 2013 Countervailing duty case, DOC SOLAR CVD 2013, and the rates went up to 19.62% for three Chinese companies–JA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd., Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Ltd.
Meanwhile, requests for antidumping and countervailing duty review investigations in the Solar Cells case were due in December 2015 and in February 2016 for the Solar Products. While in China in February, I ran into many Chinese solar companies that were in serious trouble because they failed to request a review investigation.
MARCH ANTIDUMPING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
On March 1, 2015, Commerce published the attached Federal Register notice, MARCH REVIEWS, regarding antidumping and countervailing duty cases for which reviews can be requested in the month of March. The specific antidumping cases against China are: Chloropicrin, Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure Pipe, Glycine, Sodium Hexametaphosphate, and Tissue Paper Products.
The specific countervailing duty case is: Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure Pipe
For those US import companies that imported : Chloropicrin, Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure Pipe, Glycine, Sodium Hexametaphosphate, or Tissue Paper Products during the antidumping period March 1, 2015-February28, 2016 or the countervailing duty period of review, calendar year 2015, the end of this month is a very important deadline. Requests have to be filed at the Commerce Department by the Chinese suppliers, the US importers and US industry by the end of this month to participate in the administrative review.
While in China in February, I found so many examples of Chinese solar companies or US importers, which did not file requests for a review investigation. In one instance, although the Chinese companies obtained separate rates during the initial investigation, the Petitioner appealed to the Court. Several Chinese companies and US importers did not know the case was appealed, and the importers now owe millions in antidumping duties because they failed to file a request for a review investigation in December.
RICO ACTION AGAINST CHINESE GARLIC EXPORTERS
In the attached complaint, GARLIC COMPLAINT, on January 28, 2016, Chinese garlic exporter Zhengzhou Harmoni Spice Co. Ltd. and its parent company sued a group of Chinese competitors in California federal court accusing them of deliberately defrauding the U.S. government in order to acquire preferential duty rates.
Zhengzhou Harmoni claimed the exporters, which the company says are affiliated to Chinese businessman Wenxuan Bai, are defrauding the system by lying and submitting falsified documents to Customs and Commerce in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The company said their competitors’ allegedly unlawful conduct is unfairly eroding Harmoni’s market share because Harmoni rightly earned favorable rates from the federal government through the antidumping review process,
Zhengzhou Harmoni told the court that its parent company and exclusive importer enjoys a similar advantage in the U.S. marketplace, but accused the Bai-affiliated garlic exporters of unlawfully forming new corporate entities and revitalizing old ones in order to obtain coveted “new shipper” designations to garner preferential treatment.
Meanwhile, in a decision, CIT PREMIER GARLIC, in late January Premier Trading, Inc. v. United States, Premier, a U.S. garlic importer of garlic from Qingdao Tiantaixing Foods Co. Ltd., one of the companies named in Harmoni’s RICO suit, sued Customs and Commerce in the U.S. Court of International Trade (“CIT”). Premier Trading Inc. alleged CBP’s enhanced bond requirements for shipments from QTF are resulting in delays and leaving fresh garlic to spoil.
On February 11, 2016, Judge Gordon of the CIT denied Premier’s motion for a preliminary injunction, stating at the outset that there was no likelihood of success on the merits:
It is apparent that QTF may potentially be subject to the higher PRC-wide rate as a consequence of Commerce’s preliminary determination in the 20th administrative review. Furthermore, there has been a long and documented pattern of non-payment and underpayment of antidumping duties subject to the Garlic Order (amounting to several hundred million dollars). . . . Customs, here, has also provided confidential documents regarding Plaintiff’s connection to other importers that mirror a pattern of non-payment and underpayment, which suggests, as Customs claims, that Plaintiff poses a similar risk to the revenue. . . . In light of these facts, it is hard to see merit in Plaintiff’s claim that Customs failed to provide an adequate explanation for the enhanced bonding requirement for Plaintiff’s entries. Accordingly, Customs’ imposition of a heightened bonding requirement on imports from QTF does not appear arbitrary or capricious. . . . Plaintiff has therefore failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits.
Judge Gordon then found that there was no irreparable injury and that the balance of equities favored the Government. Judge Gordon then stated that Public Interest lies in favor of the Government:
Here, the public has an interest in protecting the revenue of the United States and in assuring compliance with the trade laws. See 19 U.S.C. § 1623. Enhanced bonding pending litigation serves both these interests. Additional security covers potential liabilities and protects against default, ensuring the correct antidumping duty is paid.
CUSTOMS PROTEST RULE APPEALED TO SUPREME COURT
Meanwhile, International Custom Products Inc. has filed an attached writ of certiorari on January 19, SUPREME COURT CERT PROTEST ISSUE, and asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of a Customs rule requiring the full payment of duties by an importer before a court case can proceed, challenging the Federal Circuit’s conclusion that the policy meets due process requirements. The importer argues that the CPB rule requiring importers to fully pay imposed duties before bringing a court case is unconstitutional because it deprives the company of due process. The company has been disputing $28 million in tariffs it claims have been erroneously applied to its imports of white sauce due to the agency’s reclassification of the product.
On February 22, 2016 in a settlement agreement, SETTLEMENT FCA GRAPHITE, Ameri-Source International Inc., a graphite electrodes company, paid $3 million to settle a false claims act case that it schemed to avoid antidumping duties on imports of graphite electrodes from China in violation of the False Claims Act. The complaint alleges that the importer misclassified the merchandise and lied about the country of origin to avoid paying anti-dumping duties on shipments of small-diameter graphite electrodes use for manufacturing.
Ameri-Source reportedly established a shell company in India to accept the imports of graphite rods from China for “jobwork,” and to re-export the materials to the U.S. to circumvent stateside customs regulations. The settlement resolves claims that Ameri-Source evaded anti-dumping duties on 15 shipments.
On January 21, 2016, Edgewell Personal Care Brands, LLC and International Refills Company Ltd. filed a new 337 patent case on Certain Diaper Disposal Systems and Components Thereof, Including Diaper Refill Cassettes against Munchkin, Inc., Van Nuys, CA; Munchkin Baby Canada Ltd., Canada; and Lianyungang Brilliant Daily Products Co. Ltd., in China.
On February 5, 2016, Simple Wishes, LLC filed a new section 337 on Pumping Bras against Tanzky, China; Baby Preg, China; Deal Perfect, China; and Buywish, China.
CRIMINAL PATENT CASES
On January 26, 2016, the US Justice Department announced that Chinese National Mo Hailong, Robert Mo, pled guilty to conspiring to steal trade secrets from Dupont, Pioneer and Monsanto. In a notice, Chinese National Pleads Guilty to Conspiring to Steal Trade Secrets _ OPA _, the Justice Department stated:
Specifically, Hailong admitted to participating in the theft of inbred – or parent – corn seeds from fields in the Southern District of Iowa for the purpose of transporting those seeds to China. The stolen inbred seeds constitute the valuable intellectual property of DuPont Pioneer and Monsanto.
During the conspiracy, Hailong was employed as director of international business of the Beijing Dabeinong Technology Group Company, a Chinese conglomerate with a corn seed subsidiary company, Kings Nower Seed. Hailong is a Chinese national who became a lawful permanent resident of the United States pursuant to an H-1B visa.
Hailong is scheduled to be sentenced at a date to be determined later in Des Moines, Iowa. Conspiracy to steal trade secrets is a felony that carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000. As part of Hailong’s plea agreement, the government has agreed not to seek a prison sentence exceeding five years.
NEW PATENT AND TRADEMARK COMPLAINTS AGAINST CHINESE, HONG KONG AND TAIWAN COMPANIES
On January 13, 2016, in the attached complaint, SHENZHEN PATENT CASE, PS Products Inc and Bill Pennington filed a patent case against Global Sources, Ltd. and affiliated parties, and Jiangsu Rayi Security Products, Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Rose Industrial Co., Ltd.
On January 21, 2016, in the attached complaint, STAHLS PATENT CASEStahls’ Inc. filed a patent case against Vevor Corp., Shanghai Sishun Machinery Equipment Co., Ltd. and Saven Corp.
On January 25, 2016, in the attached complaint, UNICOLORS COPYRIGHT, Unicolors, Inc. filed a copyright infringement case against Jiangsu Global Development, Inc., T. Milano Ross Stores Inc., DD’s Discounts, Phool Fashion Ltd., the Vermont Country Store, Inc. and Trends Inc.
On January 26, 2016, in the attached complaint, BLUE RHINO PATENT CASE, Blue Rhino Global Sourcing filed a patent case against Guangdong Chant Group Co., Ltd.
On February 1, 2016, in the attached complaint, ZHEJIANG PATENT CASE, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. filed a patent case against Stason Industrial Corp., Stason Pharmaceuticals Inc., Zhejiang Jinhua Conba Bio-Pharm Co., Ltd., Tai Heng Industry Co., Ltd, and Breckenridge Pharmaceutical Inc.
On February 5, 2016, in the attached complaint, VACCUUM TRADE SECRET CASE, IMIG, Inc., Nationwide Sales and Services Inc, Gumwand Inc. and Perfect Products Services and Supply Inc. filed a trade secrets and unfair competition case against Omi Electric Appliance Company Co., Ltd., Beijing China Base Startrade Co., Ltd. and Xi Shihui, a Chinese citizen.
On February 10, 2016, in the attached complaint, HUAWEI PATENT CASE, Blue Spike LLC filed a patent case against Huawei Technologies.
PRODUCTS LIABILITY CASES AND LACY ACT VIOLATIONS
THE RISE OF CHINESE PRODUCTS LIABILITY INSURANCE
While in China last month working on various cases, I learned that the People’s Insurance Company (“PICC”) is offering Chinese companies products liability insurance. Every US importer should demand that his Chinese supplier obtain product’s liability insurance. Otherwise when something goes wrong, the US importer is on the hook for damages, not the Chinese company that created the problem.
PRODUCT LIABILITY COMPLAINTS
On January 26, 2016, in the attached complaint, CHINA FIREWORKS CASE, the Reynolds Family filed a products liability/wrongful death case on behalf of Russell Reynolds, who was killed when Chinese fireworks went off by mistake. The respondent companies are Pyro Shows of Texas, Inc., Pyro Shows, Inc., Czech International Trading, Jiangxi Lidu Fireworks Group Co., Ltd., Jiangxi Province Lidu Fireworks Corp., Ltd., Fireworks Corp., Ltd., Icon Pyrotechnic International Co., Ltd., Oriental Fireworks Co., Ltd. and Glorious Company.
On January 26, 2016, in the attached complaint, CHINA REFRIGERATOR, Allstate Insurance Company on behalf of Miguel Bejarno filed a products liability case against Electrolux Home Products Inc., Midea Group Co., Ltd. and Guangzhou Refrigeration Co., Ltd. because a Chinese produced refrigerator blew up and burned down a house causing extensive damage.
LARGEST LACEY ACT FINE IN HISTORY AGAINST LUMBER LIQUIDATORS FOR CHINESE HARDWOOD IMPORTS
On February 1, 2016, the Justice Department in the attached statement, Lumber Liquidators Inc. Sentenced for Illegal Importation of Hardwood and Re, announced that Lumber Liquidators Inc. was sentenced for illegal Importation of hardwood from China and related environmental crimes and agreed to pay 13 million, one of the largest penalties ever issued under the Lacey Act. The announcement states:
Virginia-based hardwood flooring retailer Lumber Liquidators Inc. was sentenced today in federal court in Norfolk, Virginia, and will pay more than $13 million in criminal fines, community service and forfeited assets related to its illegal importation of hardwood flooring, much of which was manufactured in China from timber that had been illegally logged in far eastern Russia, in the habitat of the last remaining Siberian tigers and Amur leopards in the world . . . .
In total, the company will pay $13.15 million, including $7.8 million in criminal fines, $969,175 in criminal forfeiture and more than $1.23 million in community service payments. Lumber Liquidators has also agreed to a five-year term of organizational probation and mandatory implementation of a government-approved environmental compliance plan and independent audits. In addition, the company will pay more than $3.15 million in cash through a related civil forfeiture. The more than $13.15 million dollar penalty is the largest financial penalty for timber trafficking under the Lacey Act and one of the largest Lacey Act penalties ever.
Lumber Liquidators pleaded guilty and was charged in October 2015 in the Eastern District of Virginia with one felony count of importing goods through false statements and four misdemeanor violations of the Lacey Act, which makes it a crime to import timber that was taken in violation of the laws of a foreign country and to transport falsely-labeled timber across international borders into the United States. . . . This is the first felony conviction related to the import or use of illegal timber and the largest criminal fine ever under the Lacey Act.
“The case against Lumber Liquidators shows the true cost of turning a blind eye to the environmental laws that protect endangered wildlife,” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden for the Department of Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “This company left a trail of corrupt transactions and habitat destruction. Now they will pay a price for this callous and careless pursuit of profit.” . . .
“By knowingly and illegally sourcing timber from vulnerable forests in Asia and other parts of the world, Lumber Liquidators made American consumers unwittingly complicit in the ongoing destruction of some of the world’s last remaining intact forests,” said Director Dan Ashe of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Along with hastening the extinction of the highly endangered Siberian tiger and many other native species, illegal logging driven by the company’s greed threatens the many people who depend on sustainable use of these forests for food, clean water, shelter and legitimate jobs. These unprecedented sanctions show how seriously we take illegal trade, and I am grateful to the Service special agents and wildlife inspectors, Homeland Security agents, and Justice Department attorneys who halted Lumber Liquidators’ criminal acts and held the company accountable under the law.”
According to a joint statement of facts filed with the court, from 2010 to 2013, Lumber Liquidators repeatedly failed to follow its own internal procedures and failed to take action on self-identified “red flags.” Those red flags included imports from high risk countries, imports of high risk species, imports from suppliers who were unable to provide documentation of legal harvest and imports from suppliers who provided false information about their products. Despite internal warnings of risk and noncompliance, very little changed at Lumber Liquidators.
There have been developments in the antitrust area.
CHINESE BAUXITE EXPORTERS WIN ANTITRUST CASE
On January 25, 2016, in the attached opinion in Resco Products, Inc. v. Bosai Minerals Group Co., Ltd. and CMP Tianjin Co., Ltd., BAUXITE OPINION, Chief District Judge Conti in the Western District of Pennsylvania granted summary judgment for the Chinese companies and dismissed the antitrust case. Resco brought the claim individually and as a class representative, against Bosai and CMP alleging a conspiracy in China to fix the price and limit the supply of refractory grade bauxite in violation of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1.
The Court concluded that any price floor or quota was set by the Chinese government’s Ministry of Commerce, not by the individual Chinese Bauxite companies. In its discussion of the facts, the Court stated:
In his declaration for the China Chamber of Commerce for Metals and Chemicals (“CCCMC”), Liu Jian (“Jian”), a CCCMC employee since 1995 and deputy director of the Bidding Office since 2006, . . . explained that “[a]t Bauxite Branch meetings, Bidding Office staff asked the Bauxite Branch members for their opinions about specific proposed quota amounts, quota bidding minimum prices, and other matters relating to quota bidding.” . . . but the authority and power to adopt quotas, and to establish the quota amount, minimum bidding price, and other terms, was always with MOFCOM, not the members or the CCCMC. MOFCOM could, and often did, set the quotas and minimum bidding prices at levels different than those favored by members. . . .
The Judge went on to state:
Here, plaintiff’s § 1 claim is based on its assertion that “[d]efendants and their co-conspirators colluded to fix export prices and quotas for bauxite from 2003 to 2009. . . .
In a per se case, “‘the plaintiff need only prove that the defendants conspired among each other and that this conspiracy was the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.’” . . .
In a vacuum, proposals to set bauxite quotas at specified levels being voted on at Bauxite Branch meetings appear to indicate explicit member participation in a conspiracy to limit output. However, the Bauxite Branch’s demonstrated lack of authority with respect to quotas invalidates such a finding. Since at least 2001, MOFCOM has been “responsible for deciding and announcing the types and the total quota quantity of commodities subject to bidding,” not the CCCMC or its Branches. . . . The quota announced by the Bidding Committee during each of the years of the alleged conspiracy never corresponded to a resolution of the Bauxite Branch. At its 2004 through 2006 meetings, the Bauxite Branch failed to pass any resolution related to quota amount, yet the Bidding Committee, an instrumentality of MOFCOM, still announced quotas in each of those years. . . . Any conspiracy to establish a limit equal to or higher than that imposed by the government could have no effect.
Consistent with the undisputed Declaration of the CCCMC, Bauxite Branch member votes for proposals concerning the yearly bauxite quota amount can only be construed as opinions offered to MOFCOM. . . . These opinions were not that limits should be placed on bauxite output. The implementation of quotas was mandated by the Chinese government, not agreed to by private entities. . . .
Bauxite Branch members were asked for their opinions pertaining to the bauxite quota during meetings, “but the authority and power to adopt quotas, and to establish the quota amount, minimum bidding price, and other terms, was always with MOFCOM.” . . .
As discussed previously, the evidence adduced with respect to the quotas cannot support a § 1 claim, because the Chinese government – and not defendants – set the quotas.
Resco has appealed the District’s Court’s determination to the Court of Appeals.
CHINESE COMPANIES SETTLE SOLYNDRA SOLAR CASE
On February 26, 2016, in the attached settlement agreement, SOLYNDRA SETTLEMENT, Yingli Green Energy Holding Company Ltd. agreed to settle for $7.5 million a US antitrust case alleging that Chinese companies conspired to set prices with the objective of destroying Solyndra.
Solyndra previously settled the litigation against two other Chinese companies, Trina Solar Ltd. and Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd, for a total of $51 million, with Trina Solar paying $45 million and Suntech paying $6 million.
CHINA ANTI-MONOPOLY CASES
On February 3, 2016, T&D sent us their attached January report on Chinese competition law, T&D Monthly Antitrust Report of January 2016. The main contents of the January report are:
(1) NDRC: Guideline on Leniency Policies in Horizontal Monopoly Agreement Cases has Begun to Seek for Opinions; (2) SAIC Held a Forum to Seek for Opinions and Comments on the Guideline on Prohibiting the Behavior of Abusing Intellectual Property Rights to Restrict or Eliminate Competition (the Sixth Draft); (3) MOFCOM Year-End Review: Positively Promoting Anti-monopoly Enforcement and Protecting Fair Competition of the Market; (4) SAIC: Anti-monopoly Law Enforcement Treats All Market Players the Same, etc. . . .
On February 5, 2016, T&D sent us the latest attached draft of Guideline on Undertakings’ Commitments in Anti-Monopoly Cases on February 3rd, 2015, Guideline on Undertakings’ Commitments in Anti-Monopoly Cases-EN-T&D.
US LISTED CHINESE COMPANIES MOVING BACK TO CHINA TO RAISE MONEY
On February 29, 2016, it was reported that many U.S.-listed Chinese companies are leaving the United States and moving back to China as the easing of Chinese securities regulations has renewed the possibility of finding stronger valuations domestically.
Although there has been market volatility in China, US too has had volatility. Apparently, there is a perception that a stronger valuation can be found in Chinese domestic stock markets, where investors have a stronger understanding of the companies and the role they play. In November, the China Securities Regulatory Commission began greenlighting IPO-bound companies and promised to take measures to help reform the country’s system for initial public offerings.
In February Dorsey& Whitney LLP issued its January February 2016 Anti-Corruption Digest, TIANJIN INVESTMENT COMPANY. The Digest states with regards to China:
Wang Qishan, the Secretary of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection has given assurances that China’s anti-corruption efforts will continue in 2016. In a recent speech, Mr. Wang stressed that, “the strength of our anti-corruption efforts will not be lessened”.
This sentiment was echoed by the recent sentencing of two former officials:
According to state media, Li Dongsheng, China’s former deputy national police chief, has been sentenced to 15 years in prison for corruption. Reports state that Mr. Li stood accused of taking bribes totally ¥22 million ($3.3 million/£2.3 million) and abusing his power. It is said that Mr. Li will not appeal the verdict.
A former top official in the city of Guangzhou has reportedly admitted to taking ¥111 million ($17 million/£11.5 million) in bribes between 2000 and 2014. Wan Qingliang’s alleged corruption is said to have included taking bribes of more than ¥50 million ($7.6 million/£5.2 million) from a company that he had helped to win a government development project.
In a written statement the Nanning Intermediate People’s Court said that Mr. Wan raised no objection to the charge of corruption and that he showed remorse during the trial. It is said that Mr. Wan told the court that, “I have hurt the Party, the people and my family and I hope that the court can give me another chance.”
Recently, Dorsey& Whitney LLP issued its attached February 2016 Anti-Corruption Digest, Anti_Corruption_Digest_Feb2016. The Digest states with regards to China:
China’s army has not been immune from President Xi Jinping’s anti-corruption drive and has seen a number of its officers investigated, including two former vice chairmen of the Central Military Commission.
To continue this drive, it has been reported that the military’s anti-corruption discipline inspection committee has established a hotline as a means for reports to be made regarding allegations of corruption in the People’s Liberation Army. It is said that the hotline will “fully utilize supervision by the masses” and complaints will be addressed in a “timely and earnest” fashion.
SECURITIES COMPLAINTS.
On March 8, 2016 Jacob Sheiner filed the attached class action securities complaint, TIANJIN INVESTMENT COMPANY, against a number of individuals and also Tianjin Tianhai Investment Co., Ltd. as well as GCL Acquisition, Inc.
Filed Under: 337, Aluminum antidumping, aluminum billet, Aluminum Extrusions, antidumping duty, antidumping review investigation, antitrust law, Bernie Sanders, cartel, CBP, China Aluminum, China Cyber attacks, China Hacking, China Securities Regulatory Commission, China Trade Politics, Chinese antitrust law, CIT, class action, Coalition, Cold Rolled Steel, collections, Commerce Department Rules, Congress, Copyright, countervailing duty, criminal, Criminal IP, Criminal Patent, currency manipulation, currency manipulation agreement, custom fraud, Customs, Customs bonds, Customs E-Allegation, Customs Fraud, cyber agrement, Cyber Attacks, Dave Reichert, DOJ, Donald Trump, Enforcing US Judgments China, Evasion Antidumping Orders, Evasion Trade Laws, Export Controls, False Claims Act, False Claims Act/Customs Fraud, Fast Track, Fast Track Trade Legislation, fcpa, foreign corrupt practices act, Fraud, Free Trade, General, Hacking, Hilary Clinton, Honey, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means Committee, Huawei, India, Infringement, intellectual property/337, International Trade Commission, ITC, James R. Clapper, Justice Department, Lacey Act, Liability, Lumber Liquidators, mandatory respondents, Market Economy China, missing antidumping duties, MOFCOM, NME, OCTG, Off the Road Tires China, Oil Country Tubular Goods, Patent, Politics, President, President Obama, Presidential Primary, Presidential Trade Politics, price fixing, products liability, products liabilty law, Protectionism, Raw Aluminum, Reagan, remedial purpose of antidumping law, retaliation, retroactive liability, RICO, Ronald Reagan, SEC, Section 15 WTO China Agreement, Section 201, Securities and Exchange Commission, Securities Law, Senate, Senate Finance Committee, Smoot Hawley, Smuggling, Solar Cells, Solar Products, solyndra, solyndra antitrust, Steel, Steel Cases, Supreme Court, TAAC, TAAF, Tariffs, tires, TPP, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center for Firms, trade law, Trade Legislation, Trade Policy, Trade Promotion Authority, Trade Secrets, Trans Pacific Partnership, Transshipment, TTIP, undervaluation Yuan, Unions, United States Trade Representative, US China Economic and Security Commission, US China Trade War, US Commerce Department, US Court of International Trade, US Judgments Chinese Companies, ustr, Washington State, World Trade Organization, WTO Tagged With: 337, aluminum, aluminum extrusions, antidumping, antitrust, Bernie Sanders, china, CIT, class action, Commerce, Commerce Department, Congress, countervailing duty, criminal, customs, customs fraud, DOJ, Donald Trump, escape clause, evasion, evasion trade laws, false claims act, fraud, Hilary Clinton, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means, importer of record, intellectual property, ITC, Justice Department, patent, politics, Presidential Primary, Presidential Primary Presidential Trade Politics, primary aluminum, products liability, protectionism, retroactive liability, safeguard, SEC, Section 201, securities, Securities and Exchange Commssion, Smoot Hawley, solar cells, Solar Cells China, Steel, subsidy, trade, trade law, trade war, us china trade war, US Court of International Trade, ustr, wto
Bill Perry January 13, 2016
US CHINA TRADE WAR–DEVELOPMENTS IN TRADE POLICY, TRADE, PRODUCTS LIABILITY, 337/IP ANTITRUST AND SECURITIES
US CHINA TRADE WAR NEWSLETTER JANUARY 13, 2016
This January newsletter will cover trade policy, trade, general litigation, 337/patents, antitrust and securities .
TPP RUNS INTO HEADWINDS
As predicted in past blog posts, on December 28, 2015, the Wall Street Journal reported that the US Election Debate was complicating the passage of the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) in Congress. The Wall Street Journal specifically stated:
The trade agreement is expected to lead to some job losses and boost competition for some companies—including labor-intensive manufacturers and Detroit auto makers.
Still, many economists say it would generate overall gains to U.S. gross domestic product and increase incomes for many Americans in ways that improve the overall economy.
The TPP’s potential to create vocal middle-class losers makes the agreement harder to pass in an election year, since the winners, even if more numerous, are likely to be less motivated.
GOP lawmakers and officials, backed by big businesses, have more reliably supported trade agreements than Democrats, who tend to be closer to the labor movement. Among the broad electorate, blue-collar workers of both parties are skeptical of freer trade.
Recently Republican voters have emerged as bigger opponents, a shift not lost on the tea-party movement and Mr. Trump. In a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, 56% of Democrats said free trade is good for America, compared with 48% of Republicans.
Trade experts say Mr. Trump’s policies would make him, if elected, the biggest fan of tariffs since the late 19th century presidency of William McKinley. . . .
For Mr. Cruz or another GOP president, White House policy on trade would likely depend on whether the party is controlled by the pro-business wing that has dominated the party since World War II or shifts toward protectionist ideas espoused by Mr. Trump.
Meanwhile on December 10, 2015, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced that there would be no vote on the TPP until after the election. McConnell indicated that he was undecided on the vote, but he was sure that the TPP would be defeated if it were sent to Capitol Hill next spring or summer. McConnell further stated:
“It certainly shouldn’t come before the election. I don’t think so, and I have some serious problems with what I think it is. But I think the President would be making a big mistake to try to have that voted on during the election. There’s significant pushback all over the place.
Yeah, I think it would be a big mistake to send it up before the election.
The next president, whoever that is, will have the authority to either revisit this one, if it doesn’t pass, or finish the European deal or other deals, and give Congress a chance to weigh in on it,”
McConnell who opposes the tobacco provisions in the TPP, has joined with Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), the Senate Finance Committee chairman, who was also a key supporter of the fast-track legislation, but has raised particular concerns about provisions related to pharmaceutical companies. Utah has a growing pharmaceutical industry.
McConnell’s and Hatch’s concerns have reduced the enthusiasm among the Republicans as the debate over trade policies on the 2016 campaign trail has become entangled in Presidential politics. Several top contenders for the GOP presidential nomination, including Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.), have denounced the pact, and all of the Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton and Bernie Saunders, oppose it.
On January 7, 2016, however, the White House pushed for a TPP vote sooner rather than later, arguing for a quick vote warning that a delay of the vote to the lame-duck session of Congress or into the next administration would be a significant lost opportunity. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said in a press briefing that Congress should act quickly to ratify the plan amid recent turbulence in the China stock market, which some media reports have said is in its worst shape since the global financial crisis. He further stated that the best way for the U.S. economy to weather volatility in international markets is through the TPP:
“I’m not suggesting that Congress should fast-forward through that process and vote today. But I am suggesting that we should move expeditiously through this process and that Congress should not wait until the end of the year or even next year to approve the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement.”
One point in favor of TPP is that on January 4, 2016 the National Association of Manufacturers announced that they were in support of the TPP. NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons stated:
“After careful analysis, the NAM will support the TPP as it will open markets and put manufacturers in a much stronger position to compete in an important and growing region of the world.
We recognize this agreement is not perfect, and there are some principled objections to the TPP, so the NAM will continue to work closely with its members to address remaining barriers.
Importantly, we encourage the administration to work closely with the industry, Congressional leaders and the other TPP governments to address these key issues.”
Subsequently, a coalition of top U.S. CEOs from the Business Roundtable gave the TPP a firm endorsement, but urged the Obama administration to quickly alter portions of the deal that are not up to par. As the Business Round Table International Engagement Committee stated:
“We want Congress to approve the TPP this year. To that end, we are urging the administration to quickly address the remaining issues that impact certain business sectors in order to ensure the broadest possible benefits to all sectors of U.S. business, which will enable the broadest support possible for the TPP.”
But in addition to tobacco and pharmaceutical problems in the TPP, another issue is banking and data flows. On January 12, 2016, in a letter to three Cabinet Secretaries, a bipartisan group of 63 Congressional representatives urged the Obama administration officials to correct the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s exclusion of financial services from the agreement’s e-commerce chapter, warning that the current text of the deal leaves banks exposed to risky data storage rules. The letter stated:
“Omission of these disciplines in the TPP is a missed opportunity to ensure that all U.S. companies benefit from strong rules prohibiting localization requirements. We note that such disciplines can be included in trade agreements while maintaining the ability of U.S. regulators to protect consumers through prudential regulation.”
The TPP’s e-commerce chapter contains a general ban on the localization of data through the establishment of expensive in-country servers. But the lawmakers argued that the banking, insurance and securities industries are not different from other sectors that depend on the unimpeded flow of data to keep their businesses running in the World marketplace. The letter further states:
“These types of requirements not only impair the competitiveness of U.S. companies but also reduce overall data security and create inefficiencies. We request that your agencies use all available measures to address the existing gaps in the TPP. In addition, going forward, we request that there be a single approach that prohibits localization requirements in future trade and investment agreements.”
Recently, John Brinkley writing for Forbes rebutted many of the Arguments against the TPP. See http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbrinkley/2016/01/13/for-trans-pacific-partnership-opponents-noting-short-of-perfect-will-suffice/#29e99cb6563d433c578b563d
On November 5, 2015, the United States Trade Representative Office (“USTR”) released the text of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (“TPP”). This is an enormous trade agreement covering 12 countries, including the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, and covers 40% of the World’s economy. To read more about the TPP and the political negotiations behind the Agreement see past blog posts.
The attached text of the Agreement is over 6,000 pages, Chapters 3 – 30 – Bates 4116 – 5135 Chapters 1 – 2 – Bates 1 – 4115 Annex 1 – 4 – Bates A-1-1074.
On November 5th, the Treasury Department released the attached text of the Currency Manipulation side deal, Press Release – 12 Nation Statement on Joint Declaration Press Release – Joint Declaration Fact Sheet TPP_Currency_November 2015,
On December 2nd and 3rd, 2015 various trade advisory groups operating under the umbrella of the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) Group issued reports on the impact of the TPP on various industries and legal areas. All the reports can be found at https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacific-partnership/advisory-group-reports-TPP and many of the reports are attached here, ITAC-16-Standards-and-Technical-Barriers-to-Trade Labor-Advisory-Committee-for-Trade-Negotiations-and-Trade-Policy ITAC-15-Intellectual-Property ITAC-9-Building-Materials-Construction-and-Non-Ferrous-Metals ITAC-10-Services-and-Finance-Industries ITAC-12-Steel ITAC-11-Small-and-Minority-Business ITAC-14-Customs-Matters-and-Trade-Facilitation ITAC-8-Information-and-Communication-Technologies-Services-and-Electronic-Commerce ITAC-6-Energy-and-Energy-Services ITAC-2-Automobile-Equipment-and-Capital-Goods ITAC-3-Chemicals-Pharmaceuticals-Health-Science-Products-and-Services ITAC-5-Distribution-Services Intergovernmental-Policy-Advisory-Committee-on-Trade ATAC-Sweeteners-and-Sweetener-Products ATAC-Grains-Feed-Oilseed-and-Planting-Seeds ATAC-Processed-Foods ATAC-Fruits-and-Vegetables ATAC-Animals-and-Animal-Products Agricultural-Policy-Advisory-Committee. Almost all of the reports are favorable, except for the Steel Report, which takes no position, and the Labor Advisory Report, which is opposed because it is the position of the Unions.
On December 9, 2015, in the attached announcement, Trade-and-Environment-Policy-Advisory-Committee.pdf, Senate Finance Chairman Orrin Hatch, House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member, Ron Wyden, announced a final agreement on the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015.
A copy of the bill, the conference report and summary of the bill are attached, Summary of TRADE FACILITATION AND TRADE ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2015 CONFERENCE REPORT TRADE FACILITATION AND TRADE ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 20152 JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF CONFERENCE. The bill has not yet passed the Senate.
Interest groups on both sides of the issue have increased their political attacks in the debate over China’s market economy status. On December 11, 2016, pursuant to the WTO Agreement, the 15 year provision, expires.
More specifically, the United States faces a looming deadline under the WTO Agreement with regard to the application of this nonmarket economy methodology to China. Section 15 of the China WTO Accession Agreement, which originated from the US China WTO Accession Agreement, provides:
In other words, pursuant to the China WTO Accession Agreement, Commerce’s right to us a nonmarket economy methodology “shall expire 15 years after the date of accession”. China acceded to the WTO on December 11, 2001 so Section 15(d) should kick in on December 11, 2016.
In November 2015 European Union Industry Commissioner Elzbieta Bienkowska told the European Parliament that geopolitical considerations must be weighed against the industrial interests of the EU in the evaluation of extending market economy status (NME) to China.
On October 30, 2015, it was reported that during a visit to China, German Chancellor Angela Merkel backs more ‘market economy status’ for China – with certain conditions. More specifically, German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated:
“Germany supports, in general, China’s claim to get the market economy status. At the same time China has to do some homework, for example in the area of public procurement. But we want to advance the process – as we want to do that with the EU-China investment agreement.”
Under the NME methodology, administering authorities in countries administering antidumping laws, such as the US Commerce Department, do not use actual costs and prices in China to determine antidumping rates. Instead the administering authorities use values in various surrogate countries, which in the Commerce Department’s case, can change between preliminary and final determinations and various review investigations to determine the foreign value. As a result, neither the Commerce Department nor other foreign countries can know whether China is truly dumping.
The European Union Industry commission is seen as strongly favoring a change to market economy status for China, but the European parliament has not taken such a strong stand.
In the U.S., the Commerce Department has taken the position that it will not automatically bestow market economy status on China, but will consider if it meets the statutory criteria for doing so in the context of a specific case if it receives a properly filed petition.
Other countries that are not likely to bestow automatic market economy status to China at the end of 2016 are Japan, Canada, Brazil and India.
On Dec. 30, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lu Kang made clear that China is pushing for the granting of market economy status, stating:
“We hope that the EU can set a good example in obeying the WTO rules and take substantive actions to meet its obligations under Article 15 of the Protocol, which will also facilitate the development of China-EU economic and trade ties.”
Steel industries and unions in both the US and EU are fighting hard against giving China market economy status. As indicated below, steel experts have been pointing to the large overcapacity of the Chinese steel industry. But with almost all Chinese steel blocked from entry into the US by large antidumping and countervailing duties, it is questionable how much weight such arguments will be given.
The only two major Chinese steel products still coming into the US are galvanized and cold-rolled steel, and based on surrogate values, Commerce just issued very high antidumping and countervailing duty rates against both products, wiping them out of the US market. Currently, if not all, almost all, steel products from China are covered by an AD order and often also a CVD order, including carbon steel plate, hot rolled carbon steel flat products, circular welded carbon quality steel pipe, light walled rectangular pipe and tube, circular welded carbon quality steel line pipe, circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe, steel threaded rod, oil country tubular goods, prestressed concrete steel wire strand, seamless carbon and alloy steel standard line and pressure pipe, high pressure steel cylinders, prestreessed concrete steel rail tire wire, non-oriented electrical steel, and carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod.
On Dec. 22, the United Steelworkers (“USW”) union, according to a USW press release, held a private meeting in Minnesota with White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, as well as Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Al Franken (D-MN), at which they discussed the “urgency of federal, state and local government authorities to provide more immediate relief against the global onslaught of steel imports that have shut down half of the region’s steel sector mining jobs,” Emil Ramirez, director for USW District 11 — which covers Midwestern states including Minnesota, Missouri and Montana — said at the meeting that the union is “at war with China’s illegal steel imports flooding into our market.” He added that China had in some months in 2015 dumped more than 100,000 tons of cold-rolled steel into the U.S. market, contributing to mining job losses in Northern Minnesota’s so-called “Iron Range” A day later, the union welcomed what it called a “whopping” 255.8% preliminary AD rate on Chinese corrosion-resistant steel based on surrogate values, despite the fact that all the other antidumping rates against other countries based on actual prices and costs were in the single digits or 0s.
On October 26, 2015, Leo Gerard, who heads the Steel Union, sent the following attached letter,USW CHINA NME , to USTR Michael Froman about steel imports and China’s market economy status:
Dear Ambassador Froman:
I am writing to you regarding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the potential for U.S manufacturing interests to be adversely affected by how the European Union (EU) may change its current treatment of the People’s Republic of China (China) as a non-market economy.
As you well know, under the terms of China’s Protocol of Access to the World Trade Organization, other WTO members had the right to treat the PRC as a non-market economy (NME) for purposes of antidumping and countervailing duty laws. One clause regarding the treatment of China expires on December 11, 2016, but the remaining language continues to operate. This has led to an active effort by China to end its treatment as a non-market economy by those countries which continue to treat it as such so as to gain preferential treatment. The media has suggested that while the EU has not decided how it will proceed, an internal EU memo argues for granting market economy treatment. This memo is not yet public. How China is treated under U.S. and EU antidumping laws is critical to workers and companies in both countries. With massive distortions in most aspects of the Chinese economy, changing China’s status before their economy in fact operates on market principles on a sustained and verifiable basis will have far reaching consequences for workers, companies and communities across the U.S. and the EU. If the EU makes a change in treatment of China under its antidumping law when China has not in fact truly engaged in comprehensive reform of its economy, there will be broad repercussions for how fair market conditions will be assessed in Europe and, in terms of U.S. exports to the EU, could result in dramatically lower opportunities for the export of America’s manufactured products.
As noted, press reports indicate that the EU is considering granting China market economy status in the near future, despite overwhelming evidence of the continued state-led direction, intervention, subsidization and control of that country’s economy and its firms. If the EU chooses to grant China this preferential status, either for the country as a whole or for individual sectors or firms, it will subject U.S. products to a potential risk of having to compete against unfairly traded products in the EU and, potentially, as components in products shipped to the U.S. or to third country markets. Thus, the EU’s decisions in this area must be addressed as part of the ongoing TTIP negotiations and that any alterations in their treatment of China as a NME be subject to dispute resolution and potential compensation for any adverse effects it may have on the U.S., producers and workers
The TPP negotiations have overshadowed the TTIP negotiations and, as a result, many important issues are receiving limited attention. The EU’s potential actions in this area must not be viewed simply as a matter for the EU Commission to consider but, rather, must be addressed in terms of their potential impact on the U.S. manufacturing sector and its employees.
I look forward to working with you on this important matter.
Leo W. Gerard
International President
CHINA CURRENCY APPROVED BY THE INTERENATIONAL MONETARY FUND AS A MAIN WORLD CURRENCY
In the past, one of the arguments that Commerce has used to deny China market economy status is that the Chinese yuan/RMB is not convertible. On November 30, 2015, however, in the attached announcement, IMF PRESS RELEASE, the International Monetary Fund (“IMF”) announced that the Chinese renminbi will become the fifth currency to be included in the organization’s international reserve asset that supplements member countries’ official reserves.
As the IMF stated the renminbi, or RMB, will join the U.S. dollar, the euro, the Japanese yen and the British pound on Oct. 1, 2016, in a basket of currencies known as the Special Drawing Right, which plays a critical role in providing liquidity to the global economic system, especially during financial crises, the IMF said.
IMF managing director Christine Lagarde stated that the executive board’s decision is “an important milestone” recognizing China’s integration in the international financial system:
“It is also a recognition of the progress that the Chinese authorities have made in the past years in reforming China’s monetary and financial systems. The continuation and deepening of these efforts will bring about a more robust international monetary and financial system, which in turn will support the growth and stability of China and the global economy.”
Lagarde’s decision was based on a paper prepared by IMF staff, which determined that the RMB is a “freely usable” currency.
The IMF. designation, an accounting unit known as the special drawing rights, bestows global importance. Many central banks follow this benchmark in building their reserves, which countries hold to help protect their economies in times of trouble. By adding the renminbi to this group, the IMF effectively considers a currency to be safe and reliable.
EXIM BANK RISES FROM THE DEAD BUT THEN RUNS INTO A NEW ROADBLOCK
Congress let the Export-Import (“EXIM”) Bank’s lending authority expire after June 30, but a number of Republicans in the House of Representatives, including Congressman Dave Reichert, currently Chairman Subcommittee on Trade, House Ways and Means, joined Democrats to force a vote in October to resurrect the Bank. The House attached Ex-Im to a highway funding bill and stopped ten amendments that would have limited the bank’s scope. This highway/Ex-Im bill passed the House 363 to 64. In December negotiators from both chambers of Congress reached an agreement that revived the bank’s lending authority through Sept. 30, 2019.
On December 3, 2015, the Senate passed the Transportation Bill with the Reauthorization of the EX-IM Bank, and on December 4, 2015, President Obama signed the bill into law.
The arguments for the EX-IM Bank are many, as Steve Myrow, who used to work at the EXIM Bank, stated in an Article in The Hill on July 9, 2014:
The debate over reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank has become the latest proxy battle between the conservative and establishment wings of the Republican Party. However, this issue should not be used as an ideological litmus test. Instead, it should evoke a practical and constructive dialogue about how best to level the playing field for American businesses overseas while protecting taxpayers here at home.
Founded in 1934, the Export-Import Bank’s mission has not changed throughout its 80-year history. Its raison d’être has always been to create jobs at home by financing the sale of American goods and services abroad. Ex-Im Bank does not compete with private-sector lenders, but rather seeks to match the foreign government support that U.S. firms’ foreign competitors enjoy.
When I served in the bank’s leadership in President George W. Bush’s administration, our overarching goal was to steer the bank between two beacons — one focused on creating jobs and the other on protecting the taxpayers.
We believed, as did members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, that an ideal way to navigate these two beacons was to convert the bank into one of the only truly self-sustaining government agencies.
By making the bank stand on its own two feet and rely solely on its revenue stream to fund its operations, we not only made it possible for companies to grow high-quality domestic jobs, but we earned a profit for the taxpayers.
Few government agencies can claim to have reduced the deficit, a fact that should be especially welcome during the current era of austerity.
Nevertheless, some of the bank’s Congressional detractors argue that it distorts the market by providing a subsidy. It’s true that in a perfect market, subsidies should not exist. But unfortunately, the real world is not a perfect market. Most countries that meaningfully benefit from international trade provide varying degrees of export subsidies.
Some identify specific firms as their national champions and others, like China, even provide financing on terms more akin to development assistance.
To put it another way, should the U.S. unilaterally disarm just because atomic weapons are undesirable? Of course not. We need a nuclear arsenal because other countries have them. The same is true for maintaining an export credit agency. Ex-Im Bank’s role is to ensure that U.S. exporters get a fair chance to compete based on quality, price and service, rather than on the basis of financing assistance.
For the full article, see http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/international/211664-congress-should-bank-on-success
But despite the many arguments in favor of the EXIM bank and the passage of the reauthorization, EXIM is not out of the woods yet. Senator Shelby, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, has held up nominations for the EXIM bank Board of Directors. Because there is no quorum, the failure to appoint a new director means that no large projects, such as the sale of Boeing airplanes or sales of GE products, can be approved.
EXIM’s board of directors has only two of the five members it is supposed to have, including Chairman Fred Hochberg. That means it cannot approve loans above $10 million, which make up about a third, value-wise, of EXIM’s transactions.
More specifically, Democrats have sought consent for the nomination of Patricia Loui-Schmicker to the EXIM Bank board of directors, despite the fact that the White House sought a second term for her in March 2015. Loui-Schmicker is needed to give the Ex-Im bank five-member board a quorum. The panel reviews Ex-Im Bank loans above $10 million.
On January 11th, President Obama withdrew the nomination of Democrat Loui-Schmicker and nominated John Mark Mcwatters, a former staffer to House Financial Services Chairman Jeb Hensarling, to fill one of the vacant Republican seats on the Export-Import Bank’s board of directors. McWatters’ former boss, Hensarling, chairman of the House’s Financial Services Committee, has led efforts to shut down the Export-Import Bank.
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Richard Shelby, who opposed Ex-Im’s reauthorization last year, however, has expressed little interest in acting on any nominees to fill its board openings. On January 11, 2016, Senator Shelby indicated that clearing the panel’s backlog of nominees might not see much progress before his March 1 primary in Alabama, stating, “I’m in the primary now. That’s what’s going to eat a lot of my time up – always does.”
When asked about the McWatters nomination, to fill one of the vacant Republican seats on the Export-Import Bank’s board of directors, Shelby stated, “I’m in a primary right now. We’re in no hurry to hold hearings.”
As Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown stated, “The Ex-Im Bank can’t operate because the Senate Banking Committee won’t do its job.”
No wonder Boeing is going to manufacture airplanes in China.
ALUMINUM EXTRUSIONS FINAL 2013-2014 REVIEW INVESTIGATION
On November 20, 2015, the Commerce Department issued the attached final determination in the 2013-2014 antidumping review investigation of aluminum extrusions from China, ALUMINUM EXTRUSIONS FINAL. Based on surrogate values, Commerce issued antidumping rates of 86.01%, but for companies that did not cooperate, Commerce issued antidumping rates of only 33.28%.
In addition, in the attached Countervailing Final Determination for 2013, CVD Aluminum Extrusions 2013 Final Review Notice.3424528-01 CVD Aluminum Extrusions 2013 Decision Memo.3424530-01, Commerce issued a countervailing duty rate ranging from 3.59% to 222.82% with most companies receiving a rate of 61.36% rate.
MEXICO ALUMINUM EXTRUSIONS PROBLEM
Meanwhile, US producers are growing concerned over a large stockpile of aluminum extrusions at a casting facility in Mexico. Aluminicaste Fundición de México S. de RL de CV, a producer of secondary billet, slab and forging billet, is storing around 850,000 tonnes of aluminum extrusions at its San José Iturbide, Mexico, facility.
It was reported that the extrusions had been shipped directly from extrusion plants in China and were being remelted into billet at the Mexico facility. The source told the American Metals Market:
“Yes, it’s about 850,000 (tonnes) on the ground. The quality of the metal is very good. It’s coming from billets that are extruded in China, shipped to Mexico, and made back into billet. They are currently casting at full capacity, which is about 100,000 (tonnes) per year.”
“It’s a lot of metal. Even me, I have not seen that much metal before. It was 300,000 (tonnes) about a year ago and quickly grew to 850,000 (tonnes).”
The practice of importing extrusions from China and remelting them into billet is not illegal or known to violate any law.
NEW TRADE CASES COMING—RAW ALUMINUM
As indicated in the attached letter, NEW ALUMINUM CASES COMING, on November 24, 2015, the US Aluminum Association and the Canadian Aluminum Producers complained about Chinese aluminum production and the subsidies they receive:
Dear Secretary Kerry and Minister McKenna,
We write to you representing aluminum producers in the United States and Canada. We are concerned about China’s state-planned and carbon intensive aluminum industry which has amassed considerable overproduction. This not only leads to a distortion of international trade impacting our entire value chain, but also undermines global efforts to decarbonize the economy. . . .
Only ten years ago China supplied 24% of the world’s primary aluminum. Today, spurred by energy subsidies, Chinese manufacturers have more than doubled their output and supply 52% of all primary aluminum produced globally. At the same time, this massive increase in production entails a significant environmental consequence.
Aluminum production in China is the most carbon intensive in the world, with its coal-based smelters emitting significantly more greenhouse gases per ton of aluminum than its North American counterparts. In fact, a ton of aluminum produced in China is at least twice as carbon-intensive as that same metal produced in North America. Given the rapid expansion of high-carbon aluminum production in China, many of the efficiency and emission reduction gains made by the global aluminum industry over the last several decades are being offset. . . .
The U.S. and Canadian aluminum industry is concerned that overproduction in China will continue unabated and is insufficiently regulated. These commitments represent a critical opportunity for China to advance energy efficiency and emissions reductions targets in support of global commitments to address climate change.
We appreciate your support to help us to reestablish fair trade conditions and to make a significant contribution to advancing a low-carbon global economy. . . .
Letters, like this, are usually a sign that an antidumping/countervailing duty case is coming. In addition, US aluminum producers have launched a new China Trade Task Force with their target being “illegal” Chinese government subsidies. In a letter to USTR Michael Froman, the US producers asked USTR to intervene on behalf of an industry that supports thousands of jobs:
“Illegal Chinese subsidies — such as direct grants, interest free loans, transfers of low cost state owned land, and preferential regulatory treatment — have collapsed the global price of aluminum.
This price drop has forced aluminum smelters across the United States to close while Chinese government continues to prop-up its producers through these unfair and illegal subsidies.”
Based on the nonmarket economy antidumping methodology, which does not use actual prices and costs in China, in the two recent cases Chinese steel companies were smashed with high antidumping rates of 200 to 300 percent. In the Cold Rolled Steel countervailing duty case, the Chinese companies and Chinese government simply gave up and received a rate over 200%.
But all the other countries, including Russia, which has market economy status, received antidumping rates in the single digits or 0s for no dumping. Steel will continue to flow into the United States in large amounts because such small antidumping and countervailing duty rates simply will have no effect.
The decisions also indicate why the Unions and the Steel industry will fight very hard in Congress and before the Administration to push the Commerce Department to continue using the nonmarket economy methodology against China. It easy for Commerce to find dumping when it uses fake numbers/surrogate values from third countries, which have no relationship to actual prices and costs in China.
COLD ROLLED STEEL FROM CHINA, BRAZIL, KOREA, INDIA AND RUSSIA
CORROSION RESISTANT STEEEL PRODUCTS—GALVANIZED STEEL PRODUCTS FROM CHINA, INDIA, ITALY, KOREA AND TAIWAN
On December 22, 2015, in the attached factsheet, factsheet-multiple-corrosion-resistant-steel-products-122215, Commerce announced its affirmative preliminary determinations in the antidumping duty (AD) investigations of imports of corrosion-resistant steel products from China, India, Italy, and Korea, and its negative preliminary determination in the AD investigation of imports of corrosion-resistant steel products from Taiwan.
China received antidumping rates of 255.8%, but antidumping rates from the other countries were very low.
India received rates ranging from 6.64 to 6.92%. Italy received rates from 0 to 3.11%. Korea received rates from 2.99 to 3.51%. Taiwan’s antidumping rates were all 0s.
Although the US industry was pleased with the rate against China, AK Steel Corp. stated, “we are disappointed that the preliminary dumping margins for India, Italy, South Korea and Taiwan were not higher as they do not appear to adequately address the dumping that we believe is occurring in the U.S. market.”
Because Commerce uses market economy methodology in antidumping cases against these countries, companies in those countries can use computer programs to eliminate or reduce significantly their antidumping rates. Foreign steel companies know they will be targeted by US antidumping and countervailing duty cases, and, therefore, prepare for such suits by eliminating the unfair acts.
The fact that the antidumping and countervailing duty rates in these cases are so low strongly indicate that the US Steel Industry’s problem is not steel imports. The problem is the US steel industry’s failure to modernize their facilities and remain competitive with the rest of the world.
In the parallel countervailing duty investigation, certain Chinese companies earned margins exceeding 235 percent while Taiwanese producers were given no CVD rates at all.
HOW NME METHODOLOGY IN ANTIDUMPING CASES LEADS TO OVER CAPACITY IN CHINESE STEEL AND ALUMINUM INDUSTRIES
Meanwhile, US experts complain about Chinese overcapacity in the Steel and Aluminum industries. In a December 1, 2015 article, one expert, Terence P. Stewart, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, which represents the Unions and various steel companies in US antidumping and countervailing cases against China, including the recent Off the Road Tires case against China, complained about Chinese overcapacity in the Steel and Aluminum industries and their distortive impact on the World steel and aluminum markets stating:
In the United States, the domestic steel industry is in the midst of a major crisis as they try to deal with waves of imports that seem to flow directly (i.e., imports from China) and indirectly (i.e., from other countries facing import challenges from China in their home markets and hence expanding their exports) from massive excess capacity in China and in other countries. . . .
The story is being repeated in the aluminum sector as well with many unwrought aluminum facilities being closed in the US and other western countries in recent years and some trade cases being filed. Indeed, Alcoa recently announced the idling of three facilities in the U.S. (New York and Washington) with a capacity of more than a half million tons —a significant portion of the remaining capacity in the United States. The problem again flows from massive excess capacity in China.
In both sectors, the underlying facts are similar. In the late 1990s, Chinese capacity amounted to 10-15 percent of global capacity. With massive government incentives, state ownership and support, by 2014 each industry had ballooned to have more than half of global capacity having accounted for nearly 80 percent of global capacity expansions. . . .
Without concerted efforts by China itself and its trading partners, the balance will be achieved only at the expense of countries that had nothing to do with the creation of the problem — a grossly inequitable and economically and politically unacceptable outcome. . . .
The Article goes on to complain that China should do this and do that, such as establishing “voluntary export restraints on all product sectors where it has serious excess capacity to reduce the problems it has created for its trading partners” and “China could implement the many remaining reforms needed to have its economy actually operate on market forces.” It should be noted that voluntary export restraints and prices floors are export restraints, which are specifically prohibited in the China-WTO Agreement. In fact, when in the past the Chinese government tried to set price floors to deter dumping, the US government took the Chinese government to the WTO and US antitrust cases were filed against the Chinese companies.
The Article goes on to state:
All of China’s major trading partners need to encourage China to solve its internal problem quickly. Trading partners need to be prepared to act quickly to apply such pressure as will enable China to overcome any internal reluctance to face the significant challenges. This means using the tools that currently exist, including WTO disputes, to make clear the enormous damage being done to others by China’s subsidy practices. . . .
Finally, the U.S., EU and other trading partners with trade remedy laws that have found China to be a nonmarket economy, should ensure that their industries and workers can obtain the full measure of trade remedy relief existing laws, regulations and practices provide until such time as China has in fact achieved the serious reforms still needed for its economy to work on market principles.
Unfortunately, US industries and domestic experts never ask the real question. Why should the Chinese government and Chinese companies listen to these complaints when the US government and governments in other countries continue to attack China using antidumping and countervailing duty cases based on fake numbers?
As indicated above, US antidumping and countervailing duty orders and ongoing cases have the effect of blocking almost 100% of Chinese steel from the US market. Since the US steel industry, the Unions and their representatives have declared a trade war with China, why should the Chinese government and companies listen to the United States?
In talking with Chinese Government officials in the past, they told me that US antidumping cases could be ok because they could be used to regulate Chinese production. Some Chinese companies undoubtedly are truly dumping. If Chinese companies get hit with real very high antidumping rates based on actual prices and costs in China, that could cause the company to shut down.
But when antidumping cases are based on phony numbers/surrogate values, which have no relationship to the actual situation in China, the US government creates a game and the Chinese government and the Chinese companies will simply play or not play the game. But they will not listen to sanctimonious arguments from US experts, who do not want the Chinese to compete on a level playing field with the US and other countries, such as Russia and Iran, and instead want to continue a trade war with China based on fake numbers.
On December 18, 2015, in the attached decision, the Commerce Department issued its preliminary determination in the 2013-2014 Solar Cells antidumping review investigation, SOLAR CELLS AD PRELIM. The antidumping rates range from 4.53% for Trina to 11.47% for Yingli. The average dumping rate for the Chinese separate rate companies is 7.27%.
DRAWN STAINLESS STEEL SINKS FINAL
In the attached decision, on November 10, 2015, Commerce issued its final determination in the first 2012-2014 review in the Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks case with antidumping rates ranging from 2.82 to 9.83%, AD STEEL SINKS 2012-2014FED REG., AD DECISION MEMO 2012-2014
In addition, the countervailing duty rate for one company, Guangdong Dongyuan Kitchenware Industrial Co., Ltd. is 9.83%. SeeCVD SINKS 2012-2013FEDREG
CIT REMANDS GLYCINE CASE BACK TO COMMERCE BECAUSE OF ITS PUNITIVE 453% ANTIDUMPING RATE.
On November 3, 2015, in Baoding Mantong Fine Chemistry Co., Ltd. v. United States, the Court of International Trade in the attached decision, BAODING VS US PUNITIVE CALCULATION, reversed the Commerce Department’ s determination in Glycine from China, holding that Commerce had issued a 453% punitive tariff against Baoding in violation of the remedial purpose of the statute. As the CIT stated:
“The court rules that Commerce failed to fulfill its obligation to determine the most accurate margin possible when it assigned Baoding a weighted average dumping margin of 453.79%, which on the record of this case was not realistic in any commercial or economic sense and punitive in its effect. The court directs Commerce to determine a new margin for Baoding that is the most accurate margin possible, that is grounded in the commercial and economic reality surrounding the production and sale of Baoding’s subject merchandise, and that is fair, equitable, and not so large as to be punitive.”
As Judge Stanceu further stated:
“In assigning Baoding such a huge margin, Commerce has lost sight of the purpose of the antidumping duty statute, which is remedial, not punitive. The 453.79 percent margin is undeniably punitive in effect, regardless of the department’s intent, and it violates the department’s obligation to treat every party before it fairly and equitably as well as the obligation to arrive at the most accurate margin possible.”
Judge Stanceu said the agency was misstating the law, and that the facts demonstrate that the margin assigned is “commercially impossible.”
ROLLR BEARINGS PRODUCED IN THAILAND FROM CHINA SUBPARTS CANNOT BE COVERED BY BEARINGS ORDER AGAINST CHINA
On December 22, 2015 in the attached decision, Peer Bearing Company-Changshan v. United States,PEER BEARING CASE, the Court of International Trade held that roller bearings made in Thailand from Chinese parts were not subject to an anti-dumping duty order against Chinese bearings because the production process in Thailand had the effect of substantially transforming the roller bearings into a product of Thailand, not China.
MELAMINE FROM CHINA ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY ORDERS
On December 1, 2015, Commerce issued the attached antidumping and countervailing duty orders against Melamine from China, MELAMINE AD ORDERS. The Antidumping rate for China is 363.31% and the Countervailing Duties range from 154 to 156.9%.
LARGE RESIDENTIAL WASHERS FROM CHINA
On December 16, 2015, Whirlpool filed a major antidumping and countervailing duty case against Large Residential Washers from China. According to the Petition, the real target companies are the Korean companies, Samsung and LG, and their production facilities in China.
The specific products covered by the petition are:
the term “large residential washers” denotes all automatic clothes washing machines, regardless of the orientation of the rotational axis, with a cabinet width (measured from its widest point) of at least 24.5 inches (62.23 em) and no more than 32.0 inches (81.28 em), except as noted below.
Also covered are certain parts used in large residential washers, namely: (1) all cabinets, or portions thereof, designed for use in large residential washers; (2) all assembled tubs designed for use in large residential washers which incorporate, at a minimum: (a) a tub; and (b) a seal; (3) all assembled baskets 11 designed for use in large residential washers which incorporate, at a minimum: (a) a side wrapper; 12 (b) a base; and (c) a drive hub; 13 and (4) any combination of the foregoing parts or subassemblies.
Excluded from the scope are stacked washer-dryers and commercial washers. The term “stacked washer-dryers” denotes distinct washing and drying machines that are built on a unitary frame and share a common console that controls both the washer and the dryer. The term “commercial washer” denotes an automatic clothes washing machine designed for the “pay per use” segment . . .
The relevant pages of the petition, including the full scope, the list of Chinese exporters and US importers, are attached, Whirlpool Petition Scope Exporters Importers 121615.
NEW OFF THE REOAD TIRES CASE
On January 8, 2016, Titan Tire Corporation (Titan) and the United Steel, Paper, and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, ALF-CIO (USW) filed a new antidumping and countervailing duty case against Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India, China and Sri Lanka. The relevant parts of the petition, including the scope and the list of Chinese exporters and US importers, are attached, US Importers Pneumatic Tires Petition Volume I General Issues Injury Cover Scope 1-8-16 Chinese Exporters Pneumatic Tires .
The specific products covered by this antidumping and countervailing duty case are:
New pneumatic tires designed for off-the-road (OTR) and off-highway use, subject to exceptions identified below. Certain OTR tires are generally designed, manufactured and offered for sale for use on off-road or off-highway surfaces, including but not limited to, agricultural fields, forests, construction sites, factory and warehouse interiors, airport tarmacs, ports and harbors, mines, quarries, gravel yards, and steel mills. . . . .
While the physical characteristics of certain OTR tires will vary depending on·the specific applications and conditions for which the tires are designed (e.g., tread pattern and depth), all of the tires within the scope have in common that they are designed for off-road and off-highway use.
Except as discussed below, OTR tires included in the scope of the proceeding range in size (rim diameter) generally but not exclusively from 8 inches to 54 inches. The tires may be either tube-type40 or tubeless, radial or non-radial, and intended for sale either to original equipment manufacturers or the replacement market.
Certain OTR tires, whether or not attached to wheels or rims, are included in the scope. However, if a subject tire is imported attached to a wheel or rim, only the tire is covered by the scope. Subject merchandise includes certain OTR tires produced in the subject countries whether attached to wheels or rims in a subject country or in a third country. . . .
This is the second antidumping and countervailing duty case the USW has filed against off-the-road tires from China. The USW stated that un-mounted off-the-road tires from China are already covered by antidumping and countervailing duty orders, but that mounted tires from China are not subject to those duties. Thus, this second case has been brought to close the loophole.
Some of the Chinese companies named in the complaint are: BDP Intl Ltd (China), Betel Holding Group, Lizhong Group, Qingdao Huifuxin Tyre, Qingdao J & G International Trading Co., Qingdao Keter Tyre, Qingdao Milestone Tyres Co., Ltd., Qingdao Rhino International Co., Ltd., Qingdao STW Tire Co., Ltd., Qingdao Tide Tire, Shandong Hawk International Rubber Industry Co., Ltd., Shandong Taishan Tyre Co., Ltd. Shandong Zhaoyuan Shengrun Wheel Assembly Co., Ltd. Shandong guanxian Cartwheel Co., Ltd., Shenzhen CJG Model Products, THI Group Ltd., Trans Knight Inc., relleborg China/Trelleborg Wheel Systems (Xingtai) Ltd. , Weifang Jintongda Tyre Co., Ltd., Weifang Lutong Rubber Co., Ltd., Weihai Zhongwei Rubber Co., Ltd., Wendeng Sanfeng Tyre Co., Ltd., Wenling Yaoding Machinery Co., Ltd., Wuxi Kinetic Machinery Co., Ltd., Wuxi Superior Wheel Company LLC, Xingyuan Tire Group, Yantai Wonray Rubber Tire Co. Ltd.
JANUARY ANTIDUMPING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
On January 4, 2015, Commerce published the attached Federal Register notice, DOC JAN 2016 REVOEW INVESTIGATIONS AD AND CVD OPPTY, regarding antidumping and countervailing duty cases for which reviews can be requested in the month of January . The specific antidumping cases against China are: Calcium Hypochlorite, Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod, Crepe Paper Products, Ferrovanadium, Folding Gift Boxes, Potassium Permanganate, and Wooden Bedroom Furniture.
The specific countervailing duty cases are: Calcium Hypochlorite, Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod, Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods, Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe.
For those US import companies that imported Calcium Hypochlorite, Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod, Crepe Paper Products, Ferrovanadium, Folding Gift Boxes, Potassium Permanganate, and Wooden Bedroom Furniture from China during the antidumping period January 1, 2015-December 31, 2015 or if this is the First Review Investigation, for imports imported after the Commerce Department preliminary determinations in the initial investigation, the end of this month is a very important deadline. Requests have to be filed at the Commerce Department by the Chinese suppliers, the US importers and US industry by the end of this month to participate in the administrative review.
In my experience, many US importers do not realize the significance of the administrative review investigations. They think the antidumping and countervailing duty case is over because the initial investigation is over. Many importers are blindsided because their Chinese supplier did not respond in the administrative review, and the US importers find themselves liable for millions of dollars in retroactive liability. In the recent Solar Cells 2012-2013 final review determination, for example, the following Chinese companies were determined to no longer be eligible for a separate antidumping rate and to have the PRC antidumping rate of 298:
(1) Shanghai Suntech; (2) Wuxi Sunshine; (3) Changzhou NESL Solartech Co., Ltd.; (4) CSG PVTech Co., Ltd.; (5) Era Solar Co., Ltd.; (6) Innovosolar; (7) Jiangsu Sunlink PV Technology Co., Ltd.; (8) Jiawei Solarchina Co., Ltd.; (9) Jinko Solar Co., Ltd.; (10) LDK Solar Hi-tech (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.; (11) Leye Photovoltaic Science Tech.; (12) Magi Solar Technology; (13) Ningbo ETDZ Holdings, Ltd.; (14) ReneSola; (15) Shanghai Machinery Complete Equipment (Group) Corp., Ltd.; (16) Shenglong PV-Tech; (17) Solarbest Energy-Tech (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.; (18) Suzhou Shenglong PV–TECH Co., Ltd.; (19) Zhejiang Shuqimeng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd.; (20) Zhejiang Xinshun Guangfu Science and Technology Co., Ltd.; (21) Zhejiang ZG-Cells Co., Ltd.; (22) Zhiheng Solar Inc.; and (23) LDK Hi-Tech Nanchang Co., Ltd.
GENERAL LITIGATION AND ARIBITRATION
DORSEY VICTORY IN SUPREME COURT HELPS FOREIGN COMPANIES
On December 1, 2015 the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that Dorsey’s client, OBB Personenverkehr AG (“OBB”), the national railway of the Republic of Austria, is entitled to foreign sovereign immunity in a lawsuit filed against it in federal court by a United States resident who was injured while boarding OBB’s train in Innsbruck, Austria.
The decision, authored by Chief Justice Roberts, has broad application and is significant in confirming that there are limits to the reach of American courts. It establishes that, in the commercial context, in order for a United States court to exercise jurisdiction over a foreign state, or an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state, the claims must be “based upon” commercial activity that occurred within the territorial limits of the United States. In reversing the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court rejected the notion that a foreign state-owned railway could be sued in the United States, simply based upon the purchase of a Eurail pass on the Internet from a United State travel agency, curtailing the impact of the Internet on the jurisdictional reach of United States courts. Instead, the Supreme Court held that courts must focus on what is “the ‘particular conduct’ that constitutes the ‘gravamen’ of the suit,” or its “essentials,” which here, was the accident that took place in Austria. In this case, the injured passenger could have sued in Austria instead, which forum afforded adequate legal remedies.
Dorsey lawyer Juan Basombrio, who argued the case before the Supreme Court on behalf of OBB, notes that the decision is significant from an international business and legal perspective: “Whereas the Ninth Circuit’s decision would have dragged foreign states and their agencies into United States court, the Supreme Court’s decision recognizes the importance of international comity; that is, the respect that nations afford to the courts of other nations with respect to matters that occur within their territory.”
Juan further notes that, “In a world that has become increasingly connected by international commercial transactions, and where there is also increasing friction in the relations between the United States and other nations, this is a seminal and important decision that will foster harmony between the United States and other nations at least in the commercial context.” Juan explains that, “From the perspective of American business, this decision also will incentivize other nations to adopt similar rulings, which will protect American businesses from being dragged into court overseas.”
Finally, “The unanimous decision of the Supreme Court,” according to Juan, “also underscores that the Supreme Court is not a fractured Court, as it has been recently criticized, but instead can and has spoken with one voice in this important area of the law, which involves the foreign relations of the United States.”
Dorsey represented OBB at all stages of the litigation. Juan was lead counsel on the case from the trial court through the Supreme Court argument.
UKRAINE ATTACKS RUSSIA USING ARBITRATION
Ukrainian companies have initiated five arbitration proceedings against Russia that range from approximately $20 million to $1 billion. The cases have been brought by a number of Ukrainian businesses including Ukraine’s largest bank, a real estate investment company, several petrol stations and a private airport.
The claims have been brought under a 1998 bilateral investment treaty meant to encourage economic cooperation and expansion between Ukraine and Russia and are to recover for alleged losses incurred after Russian troops invaded Crimea in 2014 and shut down or nationalized Ukrainian businesses without paying for them.
The claims were lodged at various times in the first half of 2015 in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, an intergovernmental organization with approximately 115 member states. The parties that launched the claims include PrivatBank & Finance Co. Finilon LLC, or PrivatBank; and PJSC Ukrnafta, which is both publicly and privately owned and is one of Ukraine’s largest oil and gas companies.
The lawyer representing the Ukrainian companies stated:
Apparently, the bilateral investment treaty permits the investors of one country whose property has been appropriated by the other country to launch private arbitration proceedings either under the rules governing the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce or the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.
On November 10, 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) in the attached Clear Correct v. ITC, CLEAR CORRECT V ITC, held that the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) does not have the authority to expand the scope of Section 337 Intellectual property (“IP”) investigations to cover electronic transmissions of digital data imported into the United States. In a 2-1 decision, the Court determined that such an expansion would:
run counter to the “unambiguously expressed intent of Congress.” . . . . Here, it is clear that “articles” means “material things,” whether when looking to the literal text or when read in context “with a view to [the term’s] place in the overall statutory scheme.” . . . . We recognize, of course, that electronic transmissions have some physical properties—for example an electron’s invariant mass is a known quantity—but common sense dictates that there is a fundamental difference between electronic transmissions and “material things.” . . .
On November 5, 2015, Hydor USA, Inc. filed a section 337 case against imports for certain aquarium fittings and parts thereof from a Chinese company, Jebao Co., Ltd in Zhongshan City, Guangdong province, China.
On November 12, 2015, Belkin International, Inc. filed a section 337 case against imports of Computer Cables, Chargers, Adapters, Peripheral Devices and Packaging from China. The proposed respondents are: Dongguan Pinte Electronic Co., Ltd., China; and Dongguan Shijie Fresh Electronic Products Factory, China.
On November 17, 2015, FeraDyne Outdoors, LLC and Out RAGE, LLC filed a section 337 case against Arrowheads With Deploying Blades against the following Chinese respondents: Linyi Junxing Sports Equipment Co., Ltd., China; Ningbo Faith Sports Co., Ltd., China; Ningbo Forever Best Import & Export Co. Ltd., China; Ningbo Linkboy Outdoor Sports Co, Ltd., China; Shenzhen Zowaysoon Trading Company Ltd., China; Xiamen Xinhongyou Industrial Trade Co., Ltd., China; Xiamen Zhongxinyuan Industry & Trade Ltd., China; Zhengzhou IRQ Trading Limited Company, China; and Zhenghou Paiao Trade Co., Ltd., China.
On January 8, 2016, Covidien LP filed a section 337 case against imports of Surgical Stapler Devices from Chongqing QMI Surgical Co., Ltd., China.
On January 5th, in U.S. v. Pangang Group Co. Ltd., the US government brought the attached criminal indictment, CHINA INDICTMENT, against Pangang Group Co. Ltd., a state-owned Chinese steel company, alleging that Pangang engaged in economic spying and stole manufacturing trade secrets from DuPont Co. through a California businessman and a former DuPont engineer, who have been sent to prison for their crimes.
Prosecutors claim Pangang stole trade secrets held by DuPont covering its proprietary method of manufacturing titanium dioxide, which is used to make cars, paper and other items appear whiter.
On November 4, 2015, SATA GmbH & Co. KG, a German corporation, filed a counterfeit trademark case against Zhejiang Refine Wufu Airt Tools Co., Ltd. and Prona Tools Inc. COUNTERFEIT SPRAY PAINT GUNS
On November 23, 2015, Penn Engineering & Manufacturing Corp. filed, a patent, trademark infringement and counterfeit case against Pemco Hardware, Inc., Dongguan Fenggang Pemco Hardware Factory, and Shenzhen Pemco Fastening Systems :Co., Ltd. PENN DONGGUAN
On December 3, 2015, Fellowship Filtering Technologies filed a patent case against Alibaba and Taobao Holding Ltd. and other Alibaba and Taobao companies. ALIBABA PATENT CASE
PRODUCTS LIABILITY CASES
On November 9, 2015, Neoteric Solution Inc. d/b/a Wowparts filed a products liability case against batteries supplied by Dongguan Hosowell Technology Co., Ltd, and Hosowell (HK) Technology Co., Ltd.DONGGUAN HOUSEWELL
On November 12, 2015, Momo Ren and Miao Xin Hu filed a class action products liability case for misbranding egg roll packages against Domega NY International Ltd., Dongguan City Tongxin Food Co., Ltd. and Net A Generation Food Stuffs Co., Ltd. EGG ROLL CASE
On November 23, 2015, Stephen and Diane Brooke filed a class action products liability case in the drywall area against The State-Owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission of the State Council; Taishan Gypsum Co., Ltd. f/k/a Shandong Taihe Dongxin Co., Ltd.; Tai’an Taishan Plasterboard Co., Ltd.; Beijing New Building Materials Public Limited Co.; China National Building Material Co., Ltd.; Beijing New Building Materials (Group) Co., Ltd.; and China National Building Materials Group Corporation. BROOKE TAISHAN SAC
T&D NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER REPORT
In December and January T&D sent us their attached November and December reports on Chinese competition law. T&D Monthly Antitrust Report of November 2015 T&D Monthly Antitrust Report of December 2015
In early January 2016, T&D also sent us the latest attached draft translated into English of IPR Anti-monopoly Guideline from the National Development and Reform Commission of China (NDRC) released on the last day of 2015, i.e. December 31, 2015. IPR Guideline (draft) 20151231-EN
Recently, Dorsey& Whitney LLP issued its attached December 2015 Anti-Corruption Digest,AntiCorruptionDigestDec2015. The Digest states with regards to China:
China: Setback in the Anti-Corruption Campaign
It has been reported that President Xi Jinping’s ongoing anti-corruption campaign has suffered a setback after a prominent official of the inspection team in charge of the government’s anti-corruption efforts, Liu Xiangdong, was removed from his post after allegedly being in possession of more than $31 million (£20 million) in cash.
Mr. Liu was accused of “violating inspection rules and leaking related secrets” and accepting large bribes. He was also stripped of his Communist Party membership and removed from his position, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, the party’s top anti- corruption committee, said in a statement on its website.
China: Corruption in the Education Sector
China’s anti-corruption campaign has already touched many of the country’s sectors and has now extended to the education sector with a number of officials at the Communication University of China being targeted.
The president of the university, Su Wuzhi, was reportedly removed from his post for having an office that was “severely beyond the official standards, using university funds to hold banquets in public venues and putting gifts sent to the university on display in his own office without registering them.”
Lv Zhisheng, the vice president of the university, was also removed from office for allegedly failing to enforce frugality rules, leading to “chaos in financial management” of the institution, such as expenditures in “fancy cars” which exceeded budgets.
An official announcement from the Education Ministry is said to have called for increased monitoring of the education sector to ensure that “the high aims” of the party were upheld.
SECURITIES COMPLAINTS
On November 24, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed an insider trading case against two Chinese individuals, Yue Han and Wei Han, who presently reside in China. SEC VERSUS HAN
On November 24, 2015, Amy Liu and a number of individuals filed a class action securities case for fraud against China North East Petroleum Holdings Ltd. (“CNEP”). Defendant CNEP is a Nevada corporation with its sole asset being ownership of Song Yrun North East Petroleum Technical Services Co., Ltd, a subsidiary operating in China. On September 5, 2013 CNEP transferred all CNEP assets and all CNEP liabilities to Ju Guizhi, a CNEP director and mother of CNEP CEO Wang Hongiun, for the purpose of effecting a merger into CLP Huaxing Equity Changchun City Investment Limited (“CLP”), a limited liability chinese corporation majority owned and controlled by Ju Guizhi and Wang Hongiun, NEVEDA SHAREHOLDERS SUIT.
On December 10, 2015, Shouming Zhang, a Chinese individual, filed the attached fraud case against several US companies and a Chinese individual alleging three Los Angeles-area companies and an attorney of swindling her into investing in an $8 million business deal with promises that she would obtain an EB-5 visa, CHINA NATIONAL COMPLAINT EB5.
Shoumin Zhang — whose visa application was denied — accuses Arcadia, California-based Americana One LLC of committing fraud and breach of contract by luring her into paying $500,000 for the supposed renovation of a commercial building. Zhang says that after she discovered the $8 million investment was a fraud, she visited the U.S. to personally ask AFRC and Americana One to seek a refund of her money.
Through the Immigrant Investor Pilot Program, the U.S. government offers EB-5 visas to foreigners who make certain business investments in the country. A website for AFRC offers consultations for the program, which allegedly requires only $500,000 of investment in exchange for permanent resident status in the U.S.
On December 14, 2015 Sally Mogle filed a class action securities case against Mattson Technology, Inc., Beijing E-Town Dragon Semiconductor Industry Investment Center and Dragon Acquisition Sub, Inc. and a number of individuals. BLOCK SEMICONDUCTOR ACQUISITION
On December 22, 2015, Philip Durgin filed a class action securities case against Mattson Technology, Inc., Beijing E-Town Dragon Semiconductor Industry Investment Center and Dragon Acquisition Sub, Inc. and a number of individuals. BEIJING DRAGON
If you have any questions about these cases or about the US trade policy, trade adjustment assistance, customs, 337, patent, US/China antitrust or securities law in general, please feel free to contact me.
Filed Under: 337, Agriculture, Alibaba, Aluminum antidumping, aluminum billet, Aluminum Extrusions, antidumping duty, antidumping review investigation, antitrust law, Arbitration, banking, Bernie Sanders, CAFC, CBP, China Aluminum, China Trade Politics, Chinese aluminum Mexico, Chinese antitrust law, Chinese steel overcapacity, CIT, class action, Clear Correct v. ITC, Coalition, Cold Rolled Steel, Commerce Department Rules, Congress, Contamination, Corrosion Resistant Steel, countervailing duty, Court of Appeals Federal Circuit, criminal, Criminal IP, Criminal Patent, currency manipulation, currency manipulation agreement, currency manipulation side deal, Customs, Dave Reichert, DOJ, Donald Trump, Drywall Products Liability, EB5 Fraud cases, EC ANTIDUMPING LAW, Evasion Antidumping Orders, Evasion Trade Laws, Ex-Im Bank, Fast Track, Fast Track Trade Legislation, fcpa, fiduciary duty, Fraud, Free Trade, General, Glycine, Haier, Hilary Clinton, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means Committee, IAA, IMF, India, Infringement, intellectual property/337, International Trade Commission, ITC, Jurisdiction, Justice Department, Liability, lobbying, Long Arm Jurisdiction, mandatory respondents, Market Economy China, Melamine China, missing antidumping duties, MOFCOM, NME, OCTG, Off the Road Tires China, Oil Country Tubular Goods, Pangang Criminal IP Case, Patent, Patent Terms, Politics, President, President Obama, President Xi Jinping, Presidential Primary, Presidential Trade Politics, products liability, products liabilty law, Protectionism, Raw Aluminum, Reagan, remedial purpose of antidumping law, Residential Washers China, retroactive liability, Roller Bearings China, Ronald Reagan, Russia, SEC, Section 15 WTO China Agreement, Securities and Exchange Commission, Securities Law, Senate, Senate Finance Committee, SEPARATE RATES APPLICATIONS, Smoot Hawley, Solar Cells, Solar Products, Sovereign Immunity, Steel, Steel Cases, Steel Sinks, substantial transformation US antidumping law, Supreme Court, Tariffs, tires, TPP, trade law, Trade Legislation, Trade Policy, Trade Promotion Authority, Trans Pacific Partnership, TTIP, Ukraine, Ukraine Russia Arbitration, undervaluation Yuan, Unions, United States Trade Representative, US China Trade War, US Commerce Department, US Court of International Trade, ustr, Welded Line Pipe, World Trade Organization, WTO Tagged With: 337, Aluminum antidumping, aluminum extrusions, antidumping, antitrust, china, China antitrust, CIT, class action, Clear Correct v. ITC, Cold Rolled Steel, Commerce, Commerce Department, Congress, Corrosion Resistant Steel, countervailing duty, criminal, Criminal Patent, customs fraud, digital 337, DOJ, drywall, Drywall case, EB5, evasion, evasion trade laws, fcpa, fraud, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means, importer of record, intellectual property, ITC, Justice Department, Melamine China, Off the Road Tires, Pangang, patent, politics, products liability, raw aluminum antidumping, Residential Washers, retroactive liability, Roller Bearings, SEC, securities, Securities and Exchange Commssion, solar cells, Solar Cells China, Sovereign Immunity, steel sinks antidumping, subsidy, trade, Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, trade law, Trade Legislation, trade war, Ukraine Russia Arbitration, us china trade war, US Court of International Trade, ustr, wto
Bill Perry November 6, 2015
US China Trade War — TPP, Three False Trade Arguments, China President Trip, Trade, Customs, IP/Patent Securities
US CHINA TRADE WAR NEWSLETTER OCTOBER 23, 2015
IMPORT ALLIANCE MEETINGS NOVEMBER 17th and 18th WASHINGTON DC
As indicated in more detail below, the Import Alliance will have meetings on November 17th and 18th in Washington DC. On the afternoon of November 17th, we will meet in our Washington DC office and then on November 18th meet with a Congressmen and Congressional Trade Staff to discuss the issues of retroactive liability of US importers in US antidumping and countervailing duty cases and market economy for China in December 2016 as provided in the US China WTO Agreement and the China WTO Agreement.
We welcome participation from US importers and US downstream customers. Please feel free to contact me or the Import Alliance directly. See the attached pamphlet for more information. FINAL IAFA_November2015_Flyer
US CHINA TRADE WAR NEWSLETTER UPDATE NOVEMBER 6, 2015
The USTR released the test of the Trans Pacific Agreement (“TPP”) yesterday. This has provoked another fire storm in Washington DC and we will be sending out another blog post detailing the reaction.
But now the clock starts ticking and the release of the text means that President Obama can sign the TPP on January 4th, 60 days after releasing the text of the Agreement. The Congress could theoretically pass the TPP on February 3, 2015, 30 days after President Obama signs it.
But in talking with a Congressional trade staffer on Capitol Hill yesterday, it does not appear to be moving that quickly, but on the other hand I suspect that Congress will not wait until the Lame Duck session either after the November Presidential election.
2016 will certainly be an interesting time in the Trade area.
TPP TEXT RELEASED TODAY
Yesterday, November 5, 2015, the United States Trade Representative Office (“USTR”) released the text of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement. This is an enormous trade agreement covering 12 countries, including the United States, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam, and covers 40% of the World’s economy. To read more about the TPP and the political negotiations behind the Agreement see blog post below and past blog posts on this site.
The text of the Agreement is well over 800 pages. We have downloaded the text of the various Chapters, which are listed below.
We have broken the Agreement down into three parts and have added consecutive page numbers to the Agreement in the right hand lower corner to make the Agreement easier to navigate.
For specific tariff changes on specific products, look at attached Chapter 2 National Treatment and Market Access for Goods, Chapters 1 – 2 – Bates 1 – 4115. This is the largest document because it includes all imported items by tariff number. But this is the section that will impact most companies.
The other parts of the text covering Chapters 3 to 30 is attached, Chapters 3 – 30 – Bates 4116 – 5135, along with the Appendices, Annex 1 – 4 – Bates A-1-1074.
We will also be preparing an analysis of each Chapter, which will release in a the near future through a blog post.
USTR LIST OF CHAPTERS AND OTHER PARTS OF TPP AGREEMENT
Initial Provisions and General definitions (Chapter Summary)
National Treatment and Market Access (Chapter Summary)
Annex 2-D: Tariff Commitments
Australia General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Australia Tariff Elimination Schedule
Brunei General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Brunei Tariff Elimination Schedule
Canada General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Canada Tariff Elimination Schedule
Canada Appendix A Tariff Rate Quotas
Canada Appendix B Japan Canada Motor Vehicle NTM
Chile General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Chile Tariff Elimination Schedule
Japan General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Japan Tariff Elimination Schedule
Japan Appendix A Tariff Rate Quotas
Japan Appendix B 1 Agricultural Safeguard Measures
Japan Appendix B 2 Forest Good Safeguard Measure
Japan Appendix C Tariff-Differentials
Japan Appendix D Appendix between Japan and the United States on Motor Vehicle Trade
Japan Appendix E Appendix between Japan and Canada on Motor Vehicle Trade
Malaysia General Notes to Tariff-Schedule
Malaysia Tariff Elimination-Schedule
Malaysia Appendix A Tariff Rate Quotas
Mexico General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Mexico Appendix A, B and C Tariff Rate Quotas and Tariff Differentials
Mexico Tariff Elimination Schedule
New Zealand General Notes to Tariff Schedule
New Zealand Tariff Elimination Schedule
Peru General Notes to Tariff-Schedule
Peru Tariff Elimination Schedule
Singapore General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Singapore Tariff Elimination Schedule
US General Notes to Tariff Schedule
US Tariff Elimination-Schedule
US Appendix A Tariff Rate Quotas
US Appendix B Agricultural Safeguard Measures
US Appendix C Tariff Differentials
US Appendix D Motor Vehicle Trade
US Appendix E Earned Import Allowance Program
Viet-Nam General Notes to Tariff Schedule
Viet-Nam Tariff Elimination Schedule
Viet-Nam Appendix A Tariff Rate Quotas
Rules of Origin and Origin Procedures (Chapter Summary)
Annex 3-D: Product Specific Rules
Annex 3-D: Appendix 1—Automotive
Textiles and Apparel (Chapter Summary)
Annex 4-A: Textiles Product Specific Rule
Annex 4-A Appendix: Short Supply List
Customs Administration and Trade Facilitation (Chapter Summary)
Trade Remedies (Chapter Summary)
Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures (Chapter Summary)
Technical Barriers to Trade (Chapter Summary)
Investment (Chapter Summary)
Cross Border Trade in Services (Chapter Summary)
Financial Services (Chapter Summary)
Temporary Entry for Business Persons (Chapter Summary)
Annex 12-A: Temporary Entry for Business Persons
Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Viet Nam
Telecommunications (Chapter Summary)
Electronic Commerce (Chapter Summary)
Government Procurement (Chapter Summary)
Annex 15-A: Government Procurement
Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, Viet Nam
Competition (Chapter Summary)
State-Owned Enterprises (Chapter Summary)
Intellectual Property (Chapter Summary)
Labour (Chapter Summary)
US-BN Labor Consistency Plan
US- MY Labor Consistency Plan
US-VN Plan for Enhancement of Trade and Labor Relations
Environment (Chapter Summary)
Cooperation and Capacity Building (Chapter Summary)
Competitiveness and Business Facilitation (Chapter Summary)
Development (Chapter Summary)
Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (Chapter Summary)
Regulatory Coherence (Chapter Summary)
Transparency and Anti-corruption (Chapter Summary)
Administration and Institutional Provisions (Chapter Summary)
Dispute Settlement (Chapter Summary)
Exceptions (Chapter Summary)
Final Provisions (Chapter Summary)
Annex I: Non-Conforming Measures
Consolidated Formatting Note
Annex II: Non-Conforming Measures Consolidated Formatting Note
Annex III: Financial Services Consolidated Formatting Note
Annex IV: State-Owned Enterprise
Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, United States, Viet Nam
Market Access Related
US- AU Letter Exchange re Recognition of FTA TRQs in TPP
US-AU Letter Exchange on Sugar Review
US-CA Letter Exchange on Milk Equivalence
US-CA Letter Exchange on Agricultural Transparency
US-CL Letter Exchange on Distinctive Products
US-CL Letter Exchange regarding Recognition of FTA TRQs in TPP
JP Exchange of Letters on Distinctive Products
JP to US Letter on Safety Regulations for Motor Vehicles
US-JP Letter Exchange on Operation of SBS Mechanism
US-JP Letter Exchange on Operation of Whey Protein Concentrate Safeguard
US-JP Letter Exchange regarding Standards of Fill
US-JP Letters related to the PHP
US-MY Letter Exchange on Auto Imports
US-MY Letter Exchange on Distinctive Products
US-NZ Letter Exchange on Distinctive Products
US-PE Letter Exchange on Distinctive Products
US-PE Letter Exchange on TRQs and Safeguards
US-VN Letter Exchange on Catfish
US-VN Letter Exchange on Distinctive Products of US
US-VN Letter Exchange on Distinctive Products of VN
US-VN Letter Exchange on Offals
Textiles and Apparel Related
US-BN Letter Exchange on Textiles and Apparel
US-MY Letter Exchange on Registered Textile and Apparel Enterprises
US-SG Exchange on Letters on Textiles and US-SG FTA
US-VN Letter Exchange on Registered Textile and Apparel Enterprises
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Related
US-CL SPS Letter Exchange regarding Salmonid Eggs
Intellectual Property Related
US-AU Letter Exchange on Selected IP Provisions
US-AU Letter Exchange on Article 17.9.7(b) of AUSFTA
US-CA Letter Exchange on IP Border Enforcement
US-CL Letter Exchange re Geographical Indications
US-CL Letter Exchange re Article 17.10.2 of US Chile FTA
US-JP Letter Exchange re Copyright Term
US-MY Letter Exchange re Articles 18.41 .50 and .52
US-MY Letter Exchange re Geographical Indications
US-MX Letter Exchange re Geographical Indications
US-MX Letter Exchange re Tequila and Mezcal
US-PE Letter Exchange re Article 16.14.3 of US-Peru TPA
US-VN Letter Exchange on Biologics
US-VN Letter Exchange re Geographical Indications
Services/Financial Services/E-Commerce
US-CL Letter Exchange regarding Express Delivery Services
US-VN Letter Exchange on Pharmaceutical Distribution
US-VN Letter Exchange regarding Electronic Payment Services
US-AU Letter Exchange on Privacy
Temporary Entry
US-JP Letter Exchange re Temporary Entry
US-AU Letter Exchange on AUSFTA GP Thresholds
US-CA Letter Exchange re GP Thresholds
Letter Exchange US-CA-MX re GP Procedures
SOEs
US-SG Letter Exchange on SOE Transparency
US-CL Understanding regarding Fisheries Subsidies and Natural Disasters
US-MY Exchange of Letters on Committee to Coordinate Implementation of Environment Chapters
US-PE Understanding regarding Biodiversity and Traditional Knowledge
US-PE Understanding regarding Conservation and Trade
Annex on Transparency and Procedural Fairness for Pharmaceutical Products and Medical Devices
US-AU Letter Exchange on Transparency and Procedural Fairness for Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices
US-JP Transparency and Procedural Fairness for Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices
US-PE Understanding re Transparency and Procedural Fairness for Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices
US-Japan Bilateral Outcomes
US-Japan Motor Vehicle Trade Non-Tariff Measures
US-JP Letter Exchange on Certain Auto NTMs
JP to US Letter on Motor Vehicle Distribution Survey
Japan Parallel Negotiations on Non-Tariff Measures
US-JP Letter Exchange on Non-Tariff Measures
Joint Declaration of the Macroeconomic Policy Authorities of
CURRENCY MANIPULATION TEXT
On November 5, 2015, the Treasury Department released the attached text of the Currency Manipulation side deal, Press Release – 12 Nation Statement on Joint Declaration Press Release – Joint Declaration Fact Sheet TPP_Currency_November 2015, stating:
Trans-Pacific Partnership Countries
For the first time in the context of a free trade agreement, countries have adopted a Declaration that addresses unfair currency practices by promoting transparency and accountability.
All TPP countries commit to avoid unfair currency practices and refrain from competitive devaluation.
TPP countries will publicly report their foreign-exchange intervention and foreign reserves data, some for the first time.
Officials from all TPP countries will consult regularly to address macroeconomic issues, including to engage on efforts to avoid unfair currency practices.
This October post will comment on the TPP Agreement in more detail as well as President Xi Jinping’s recent trip to the US and my impressions from Beijing, China during that period, discuss the three flawed trade arguments against China, and also discuss Trade Policy, Trade, Steel and the OCTG case, IP/patent, China antitrust and securities.
As stated below, on October 5th in Atlanta, Trade ministers from the U.S. and 11 other nations, including Japan, Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam and Malaysia, reached an agreement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (“TPP”), which will link up 40 percent of the world’s economy. President Obama cannot sign the Agreement for a minimum of 60 days after releasing the Agreement to the public. Congress cannot consider and pass the Agreement for a minimum of 30 days after that.
The real question, however, is whether the TPP can pass Congress. Although January was a possible period for Congressional consideration, some Congressional staffers are saying that it will not come until April or possibly in the lame duck session after the Presidential/Congressional election. That would be right in the middle of the Presidential election and all bets are off.
From much of the US Press point of view, President Xi’s recent trip to the US was based on deception with the Chinese government having no real interest in coming to agreement on the US China trade problems on environment, cybersecurity, bilateral investment treaty and other hot button issues. In Beijing, China, however, Chinese television was truly involved in a love fest with the United States.
In the United States, we see cynicism. In China, I saw real friendship for the United States, and a determination to work with the United States in partnership based on a win-win principle that both sides must benefit from the relationship. This is the problem of the US China relationship in a nutshell. Never give any credit to China where credit is due and where they are making efforts to solve the bilateral problems.
Fortunately for the United States, China understands the importance of the US China relationship better than many US politicians and the US press. To be specific, there is more than $500 billion in trade between the United States and China annually with US exports, including services, coming close to $200 billion. As stated above, trade is a two way street, and very few US politicians acknowledge the huge US exports to China, which create US jobs.
The Chinese government has agreed to do one very important thing with regards to the problems with the US government—talk about it. For the last several years, twice a year China and the US have conducted negotiations in the SED and JCCT talks. Now as a result, China will have periodic negotiations on cyber-attacks. In great contrast to Russia, China believes firmly in negotiations with the United States to iron out differences and that is very important for the future of US China relationship.
Also this newsletter discusses the three flawed arguments against China: Cyber Attacks, Currency Manipulation and Dumping and the problem that they foster/create a feeling of international trade victim, which leads to protectionism and a loss of jobs.
The real victims of the trade wars are upstream and downstream producers, such as US based, REC Silicon, a US exporter and major manufacturer of polysilicon and victim of the US China Solar Trade War, as it announces that it may close its US plant in Moses Lake, Washington because it is shut out of China.
TPP SHOULD PASS CONGRESS BUT 2016 IS AN ELECTION YEAR AND ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN
As stated above, on October 5th, in Atlanta Trade ministers from the U.S. and 11 other nations, including Japan, Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam and Malaysia, reached an agreement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (“TPP”), which will link up 40 percent of the world’s economy. Some of the key issues in the TPP are:
Cut Tariffs on 18,000 products
New special 2 year safeguard for Certain domestic industries that face a surge in imports
State-owned companies with TPP Countries must conduct commercial activities in accordance with market- based considerations
Vietnam must allow formation of independent labor unions
Malaysia will face trade retaliation if it does not improve its forced labor and human trafficking record
Bar countries from requiring the localized storage of data or surrender valuable source codes as condition of market entry
Require parties to commit to sustainable forest management and conserve at risk plants and animals.
A quick look at the latest statements from USTR, the White House and the Department of Agriculture indicate that two areas will see major benefits – Agriculture and Services, including banking and legal services. Also a number of manufacturing and high tech products will see substantial benefits.
The TPP would phase out thousands of import tariffs as well as other barriers to international trade, such as Japanese regulations, that keep out some American-made autos and trucks. It also would establish uniform rules on corporations’ intellectual property and open the Internet even in Vietnam.
USTR has stated the TPP would end more than 18,000 tariffs that the TPP countries have placed on US exports, including autos, machinery, information technology and consumer goods, chemicals and agricultural products, such as avocados in California and wheat, pork and beef from the Plains states.
Right after the Atlanta agreement, USTR Michael Froman stated in an interview:
In sector after sector, our workers are the most productive in the world. Our farmers and ranchers are globally competitive. Our manufacturing plants are globally competitive. If there’s a level playing field, we can compete, and we believe we can win.
Froman further stated that the US, which has an average tariff of approximately 1.4 percent, faces tariffs twice as high when US companies export to other countries. Froman also stated that Iowa would benefit from decreases in tariffs on pork, currently as high as 388 percent, and beef, which are as high as 50 percent:
“We already know there’s great demand for American beef in Japan,” where the beef tariff would ultimately drop to 9 percent from 38.5 percent currently.”
Tariffs on beer, some as high as 47 percent in certain TPP countries, will be “eliminated”
Froman further stated,
We’re working with the other countries to finalize details of the text and put it through a legal scrub.” In the meantime, “we’re having ongoing conversations with congressional leadership and our congressional partners about the process going forward”
On October 16th, however, during a Council on Foreign Relations conference call, USTR Froman also stated that the TPP could not be renegotiated and expressed confidence that Congress would eventually pass the TPP Agreement, stating:
“This is a different kind of agreement than other [free trade agreements] we’ve negotiated; other negotiations have tended to be between the U.S. and one other trading partner. It’s infinitely more complex when you’ve got 11 other trading partners at the table. This isn’t one of those agreements where [you can] reopen an issue or renegotiate a provision.”
Froman conceded that some TPP countries will need “capacity building to technical assistance” when it comes to implementation and enforcement in areas such as patent systems and promoting independent unions, but noted that U.S. officials are working to address concerns voiced by skeptics in government and industry:
“We’re working with Congress, we’re working with the other agencies to develop a full plan for the monitoring and enforcement of TPP. And we’re working with the U.S. Department of Labor on the enforcement of labor provisions, working with our embassies, people on the ground who can help monitor the implementation and cite enforcement issues as they arise.”
Froman further stated:
“TPP presents a choice between two futures, one in which the U.S. is helping to lead on trade and starting a race to the top in terms of global standards, and the other where we take a backseat or sit on the sidelines and allow a race to the bottom that would undermine U.S. influence around the world and result in a lower standard, less open global trading system.”
According to Paulson Institute, in addition to agriculture and manufacturing, the TPP will cause substantial growth in the service industries, including the legal and banking industries. The elimination of services barrier in the TPP countries could lead U.S. services exports to jump by $300 billion. The Paulson Institute further stated a major reason:
“high barriers to service imports and investment that now prevail in TPP countries will be lowered. The barriers include outright bans, quotas, restrictive licenses, buy-national procurement rules, and discriminatory access to distribution networks.”
Meanwhile five former Democratic National Committee chairmen urged party members and Congress to support the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership, arguing that the pact will ultimately benefit American workers and businesses by expanding labor rights around the world.
Automobile tires made in Ohio that face tariffs or foreign taxes as high as 40 percent would be eliminated. According to Josh Earnest, White House press secretary:
“The TPP actually goes one step further by making sure that manufacturers aren’t at a disadvantage when they sell their tires abroad to any of our 11 TPP countries. So Ohio is a good example.”
According to Earnest, leather boots that are shipped from Texas to TPP countries face foreign taxes as high as 30 percent, which would be eliminated, along with tariff elimination or reduction on exports of US-made bourbon whisky, Port wine, Michigan cars and Missouri barbecue sauce.
The agreement will immediately cut in half and eventually eliminate Japan’s 8.5 percent tariff on imports of fresh cherries. On October 6, 2015, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack stated:
“The TPP is a high-value, high-standards agreement that will allow the U.S. and other nations to counter Chinese influence in the region. History will tell us that agriculture is a winner every time in trade deals, and TPP is going to be no exception to that history.”
Vilsack stated that some of the agricultural products that will see lower tariffs are U.S. beef, pork, produce, nuts and wine. TPP will reduce Japanese tariffs on beef imports from 38.5 percent to 9 percent, and Japan also will eliminate 80 percent of its pork tariffs in 11 years.
Highly protected dairy industries in Canada and Japan also will be opened to limited import access. Japan has a 40 percent tariff on cheese, which will be eliminated under the TPP, and the country established a low-tariff quota for milk powder and butter equivalent to 70,000 tons of raw milk. Canada granted duty-free access to 3.25 percent of its dairy sector.
Vilsack said historic reductions in tariffs on U.S. exports should indicate that the TPP is a “net winner” and that failing to grasp the opportunity to sell more U.S. products to a rapidly expanding middle class in the Asia Pacific would be a mistake.
With regards to dairy products, Vilsack stated:
“When it came to Canada and Japan, we pushed for as strong access as possible and focused on the most lucrative products for the U.S. At the same time, we were somewhat sensitive to New Zealand expanding access in the U.S.”
The U.S. dairy industry in 2014 said it was prepared to eliminate all tariffs affecting trade with Canada and Japan if they did the same. In the end, the U.S. had to pull back when it became apparent the two countries weren’t ready to go from “zero to 100.” Japan, which counts dairy among its five sensitive agricultural commodities protected by a politically influential union of farmer cooperatives and tariffs and quotas, committed to phasing out tariffs on cheese over 16 years and created low-tariff quotas for milk powder and butter.
Those offers meant the U.S. had to balance New Zealand’s requests for a completely liberalized international dairy market resembling its own, where there are no tariffs. Dairy also is New Zealand’s No. 1 export and can move into new markets quickly. The U.S. agreed in 20 to 30 years to eliminate tariffs on less sensitive products like milk powder and non-fat dry milk from Australia, Canada and New Zealand, and allow additional butter and cheese imports through tariff-rate quotas. All tariffs on dairy products from Japan, Malaysia and Vietnam would be gone within 20 years. The U.S. also will have safeguard measures for milk powders and some cheese to combat potential import surges.
Jim Mulhern, president and chief executive officer of the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), stated:
“Based on information available to date, it appears that our industry has successfully avoided the type of disproportionate one-way street that we were deeply concerned could have resulted under this agreement. New Zealand did not get the unfettered access to the U.S. market that it long sought; but Japan and Canada did not open their markets to the degree we sought.”
The entire U.S. horticulture sector is the hidden winner in the TPP agricultural deal. All tariffs would go to zero if TPP were implemented in countries like Japan, Vietnam and Malaysia that currently have high taxes on imports. Japan imposes an 8.5 percent tariff on frozen French fries, which would be eliminated in four years, and a 20 percent tariff on dehydrated potatoes that would be phased out over six years. Once the TPP is implemented, more than 50 percent of U.S. farm goods will get immediate duty-free treatment in Japan, most of which are horticultural products, such as grapes, strawberries, walnuts, almonds, raisins and certain fruit juices. Vietnam has tariffs up to 40 percent on vegetable imports that would end within 11 years, while Malaysia would immediately eliminate tariffs as high as 90 percent.
To see a White House video on how the TPP works and benefits exports of Washington State Cherries, see https://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/economy/trade#cherry.
The real question, however, is whether the TPP can pass Congress. Although January was a possible period for Congressional consideration, some Congressional staffers stated that it would not come until April. Recently, statements have been made that there will be no vote on TPP until the lame duck session in Congress after the Presidential/Congressional elections in November 2016. Recently, however, the White House indicated that it wants a Congressional vote on the TPP before the Lame Duck session.
The first question, however, is when will the actual text of the TPP be released to the Public and that apparently will not happen until late November, which means President Obama cannot sign the Agreement until 60 days later and the Congress cannot pass it until 30 days after that.
But this time deadline seems to be moving away as there are further negotiations to clean up the legal terms in the Agreement, especially on currency manipulation. This will mean that the TPP will be a major issue in the Presidential primary and election, which makes it more difficult.
On October 5th, Senator Sessions, a well-known Republican Senator, who opposes TPP, told Breitbart news that it is possible to kill the TPP bill, but then following the law he stated that the Bill does not require 60 votes to pass filibuster in the Senate or 67 votes because it is a treaty:
“I think it’s possible. When they passed fast track, they got 60 votes… The treaty itself now is no longer subject to supermajority or filibuster. It will pass with a simple majority. It cannot be amended: it’ll be brought up one day and voted on the next day with no amendments– up or down. And in the past, they’ve always passed. And I think that will be what experts will tell you today, but I think the American people are getting more and more uneasy about the effect of trade and the promises that our trading partners are going to comply with their part of the bargain and that we’re all going to benefit have not been real . . . .”
But since the TPP only requires a simple majority to pass the Senate, not the 60 votes to pass Trade Promotion Authority (“TPA”), it should pass but now the ball is truly in the Court of Senators Orrin Hatch, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Ron Wyden, Ranking Democratic Member of the Senate Finance Committee, and Representative Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. All three members are in the Center of their respective parties. No matter what the Press states, Senator Hatch is not on the extreme right wing of the Republican party and neither is Paul Ryan. If they approve the TPP, a majority of Republican members should stay with them.
The heaviest lift, however, will be on the Democratic side by Senator Ron Wyden because the majority of the Democratic Party is against the Free Trade Agreement because of the power of the Unions. The only reason the TPA bill passed in late July is that the Republicans won the mid-term elections in 2014. If the Democrats has won, Senator Harry Reid had already stated that the TPA bill would not have come to the floor. But to pass the TPA bill through the Senate, the Republicans still needed Democratic votes because of the 60 vote filibuster rule. The TPA bill received 62 votes, but just 62 and no more with a number of Democratic votes, including Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell from Washington State, to replace the Republican Senators, such Senator Sessions and Senator Rand Paul, who voted against the Agreement.
But these three members, Hatch, Wyden and Ryan are critical to the passage of the TPP. One problem is that October 5th, the day of the announcement, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch stated that although the details of the TPP “are still emerging, unfortunately I am afraid this deal appears to fall woefully short.” Also listen to his October 8th phone call on CSPAN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2T6xA7XMuY when he explains his concerns in more detail.
Another problem is the turmoil in the House of Representatives over the next speaker. Paul Ryan’s name has been mentioned, but some conservative members are against Ryan because of his stand on the TPP. As the Wall Street Journal stated on October 21, 2015 in its editorial entitled, The Ryan Stakes:
“He has impeccable conservative credentials. . . . Yet in the last week some on the right have come out against Mr. Ryan because he supposedly is not conservative enough – in particular because he favors free trade . . . .”
The Administration will have some heavy lifting to persuade Senators Hatch, Wyden and Representative Ryan that the TPP does meet the high standards set by the Congress in the TPA legislation in July. But if these three lawmakers approve, a majority of the members in the Senate and House should pass the TPP.
Other lawmakers that will be critical in this upcoming battle are in the Senate, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell and Democratic Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell from Washington State and in the House, Republican representatives Pat Tiberi and Dave Reichert on the Subcommittee on Trade, House Ways and Means. Also important in the House, will be the 50 member New Dem Coalition, which is pro international trade and pro economic growth, such as Representatives Ron Kind, Rick Larson, Derek Kilmer and Suzan DelBene. See the Politico article, which describes the New Democrat Coalition in detail at http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/new-dems-plan-assertive-new-presence-in-house-121208.html. See also http://www.newdempac.com.
But Democrats have felt significant pressure from environmental groups and labor unions, who are fiercely opposed to the accord. Meanwhile, Republicans have struggled to strike a balance between support for free trade in general and the deep mistrust of giving Obama more power among GOP voters.
But as stated above, 2016 is an election year, and in contrast to several Republican candidates, such as Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and John Kasich, which are inclined to support the Agreement, but want to read it first, Donald Trump on the Republican side and Bernie Sanders on the Democratic side are both fighting hard against the TPP. It is interesting to note that the extreme Right of the Republican party, Donald Trump, and the extreme Left of the Democratic party, Bernie Sanders, both have a common goal to stop the Trade Agreement and send the United States back to protectionism. They are both populists and they know that being protectionist stirs up the bases.
Keep in mind that the Unions are solidly behind Sanders and recently the Teamsters told the Clinton campaign that they would not endorse her because they wanted to talk to Trump first. They like Trump’s stand on the trade agreements, including TPP.
Trump has taken the strongest position against TPP or Obamatrade as he calls it — making opposition to global trade policies and trade agreements one of the key issues of his campaign. In a quote to Breitbart News, even though he has not read the Agreement, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump hammered President Barack Obama for failing the American worker with the TPP stating:
“The incompetence and dishonesty of the President, his administration and—perhaps most disturbing—the Congress of the United States are about to place American jobs and the very livelihoods of Americans at risk . . . . The only entities to benefit from this trade deal will be other countries, particularly China and Japan, and big corporations in America. . . .”
Trump indicated that if crony capitalism were not bad enough, then sticking it to unions, small businesses and everyday Americans seems to be the new blood sport inside the Washington DC Beltway.
“If this was such a good deal, why was there not more transparency? Why are we striking trade agreements with countries we already have agreements with? Why is there no effort to make sure we have fair trade instead of ‘free’ trade that isn’t free to Americans? Why do we not have accompanying legislation that will punish countries that manipulate their currencies to seek unfair advantage in trade arrangements? Why has the Congress not addressed prohibitive corporate tax rates and trade agreements that continue to drain dollars and jobs from America’s shores?”
Trump finally stated:
“It’s time for leadership in Washington It’s time to elect a President who will represent the only special interest not getting any attention—The American People. It’s time to send a real businessman to the White House. It’s time to Make America Great Again.”
For full article see http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/10/05/exclusive-donald-trump-declares-war-on-obamatrade-time-to-send-a-real-businessman-to-white-house-to-end-this/.
By the way, if you want to see one video circulating China now, it is Trump blaming China 234 times for all the US economic problems. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-says-china_55e06f30e4b0aec9f352e904
In regards to the TPP, Trump’s major argument is that we have lousy negotiators in Washington DC and he will appoint better negotiators if he becomes President. The TPP, however, has been negotiated by the United States Trade Representative’s office (“USTR”) for more than five years. USTR’s officials are considered the top trade officials/negotiators in the US Government, and Ambassador Froman, who heads up USTR, is a trade pro, liked by both Democrats and Republicans in Congress.
Bottom line is the TPP deal is probably the best deal the US could get under the circumstances. Just having a tough negotiator, does not mean that there would be a better deal. All of international trade law is based on reciprocity and what the US can do to other countries, those countries can do back.
In contrast to Trump, the Washington Post likes the deal. On October 5th, it issued an editorial stating:
“The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a trade deal worth celebrating
The United States and 11 other nations concluded the long-awaited Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, or TPP, on Monday -demonstrating that it is still possible for this country to exercise world leadership, and to do big things in its own national interest, given consistent White House leadership and sufficient bipartisan support in Congress.
As President Obama sees it, the TPP would achieve both economic and strategic goals. By slashing tariffs and harmonizing regulatory regimes covering 40 percent of the global economy, the deal would spur growth in the United States and abroad. By knitting the U.S. and Japanese economies together in their first free-trade deal-and binding both of them closer to rising Asian nations-the TPP would create a counterweight to China in East Asia. Not incidentally, the deal would also help Japan’s prime minister, Shinzo Abe, overcome domestic interest-group resistance to reforming his nation’s sclerotic economy.
Those arguments persuaded bipartisan majorities of the Republican-controlled Congress to empower Mr. Obama’s negotiating team with so-called “fast-track” authority this year, and, as predicted, that vote helped win substantial new access to the Japanese and other markets for U.S. producers, as well as provisions on the environment and labor rights -including Vietnam’s first acceptance of possible independent trade unions.
In granting the administration fast-track authority, Congress rejected claims from a legion of critics to the effect that the TPP would sell out U.S. workers, the environment or even public health. In fact, the tentative deal would ensure that a controversial dispute arbitration system is more transparent and cannot be used by tobacco makers to escape member nations’ tough regulations. The U.S. team also struck a compromise designed to protect the legitimate intellectual property interests of American drugmakers without depriving poor nations of access to life-saving medicine.
It’s good that the critics lost the fast-track debate in Congress; but it’s not bad we had that debate, because it helped U.S. negotiators identify areas of legitimate concern and, accordingly, areas where the deal could incorporate those concerns. What’s emerged from the talks suggests that the TPP will indeed live up to Mr. Obama’s promise of a “21St-century” agreement: one that anchors the United States in a key region for decades to come, while increasing the scope of trade policy beyond just tariffs.
Difficult as it has been to reach this point, the last leg-final passage for the TPP in both houses of Congress during an election year could prove even more difficult. Republican Donald Trump and Independent-running-as Democrat Bernie Sanders have been whipping up protectionist sentiment against the TPP even before they knew what would be in it. Over the course of the next few months, the public and Congress will have an opportunity to pore over the pact. If its details prove to be as advertised, people are likely to conclude that the benefits of the deal outweigh its risks. For now, though, it’s enough to note the fact that Washington can still get something done, and to celebrate that.”
On October 7th, Hilary Clinton, however, announced her opposition to the TPP in an interview with Judy Woodruff for PBS’s “News Hour” program. She stated:
“What I know about it, as of today, I am not in favor of what I have learned about it. I don’t believe it’s going to meet the high bar I have set.”
She cited weakness on currency manipulation and failures with the FTA with Korea. While Secretary of State, Clinton had predicted TPP would be the “gold standard” of free trade agreements and firmly supported it numerous times, but the pressure of the primary, in particular, attacks by Bernie Sanders have pushed her more to the left of the Party and to oppose the Agreement. Labor unions, whose endorsements she is seeking, are united against it, as are the vast majority of Congressional Democrats. Only 28 House Democrats, and 13 in the Senate, voted for the fast-track bill.
On October 7th, in response to Hilary Clinton’ s statement on TPP, Paul Ryan, Chairman of House Ways and Means, stated on MSNBC:
“I wrote TPA so that Congress would have the tools and the public would have the ability to see what’s in this agreement. I am for free trade agreements, but I’m for very good free trade agreements. I have yet to decide… if this is a very good free trade agreement because I haven’t read it yet, so I just do not know the answer to your question, Chuck. But I’m holding judgment; I’m hopeful, but there are some concerns I have with some of the provisions in here, and quite frankly, we want to see what it is on net,…but it’s going to take some time to scrub through this agreement, to render final judgment.”
“I find it interesting that a person who is seeking to run for the Presidency of the United States, who was in favor of it before, say Hillary Clinton, that she hasn’t even read yet. It’s an enormous agreement and I think we need to be cautious about it. I think we need to do our jobs and read what’s in here.”
For Ryan’s full statement, see http://www.msnbc.com/mtp-daily/watch/ryan-backs-mccarthy-despite-benghazi-slip-540513347596.
On October 8, 2015, the Washington Post in an editorial stated that Hilary Clinton’s stance on the TPP was “disappointing”:
“Bowing to pressure from the Democratic Party’s ascendant protectionist wing, would-be presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has come out against President Obama’s freshly negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement. The most hopeful thing to be said about this deeply disappointing abandonment of the president she served, and the internationalist tendency in Democratic ideology she once embodied, is that it is so transparently political. There is no way that Ms. Clinton can oppose the 12-nation deal on its merits.
In part, that’s because she doesn’t know all the details, as she acknowledged. More to the point, the reasons she offered for her view could not have been convincing, even to her. There was nothing in the deal about alleged currency manipulation by U.S. trading partners, she complained. Yet the biggest manipulator, China, isn’t a party to the pact. As the Obama administration argued, trade pacts by definition deal with tariffs and the like, not monetary policy; currency rules might have been construed to limit the Federal Reserve’s options unduly. . . .
And of course, Ms. Clinton’s opposition to the TPP flies in the face of her repeated statements to the opposite effect when she was Mr. Obama’s secretary of state — and after. . . .Ms. Clinton understood then, the TPP was not only about economics but also about geopolitics.
It’s particularly crucial to Mr. Obama’s essential effort to strengthen U.S. ties to Japan and other East Asian nations, thus counterbalancing China, a “rebalance” for which Ms. Clinton once proudly claimed some authorship.
To be sure, Ms. Clinton salted her anti-TPP statement with qualifiers . . .
And so on. In other words, there is still a chance that later on, if or when she’s president, and it is to her advantage, she may discover some decisive good point in the TPP that would let her take a different position without, technically, contradicting herself. Cynical? Perhaps, but as we said, that’s the hope.”
For full editorial, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ms-clinton-avoids-the-hard-choice-on-the-trans-pacific-partnership/2015/10/08/a795a0cc-6df6-11e5-9bfe-e59f5e244f92_story.html
On October 9th, John Brinkley at Forbes in article entitled Hillary Clinton’s Flip-Flop On TPP Comes Amid Shift In Washington On Free Trade, stated:
“To borrow a phrase from Alice in Wonderland, the politics of trade are getting curiouser and curiouser.
Shortly after the 12 governments that are parties to the Trans-Pacific Partnership announced they had arrived at a deal, Hillary Clinton announced that she opposed it. The timing suggests that she came out against it not because she thought it was, on balance, a bad deal for Americans, but because she determined that supporting it would cost her more votes than opposing it would.
Now, all three major Democratic presidential candidates – Clinton, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley – are against the TPP, which is one of President Obama’s signature foreign policy goals. Sanders and O’Malley have always opposed free trade. Clinton had always supported it – until she became a presidential candidate.
Earlier, two Republican senators who historically have voted in favor of free trade agreements said they weren’t so sure about this one. . . .
These position changes don’t represent a sea-change in the way politicians view free trade. Hatch and McConnell objection to sections of that offend the corporate CEOs and country club Republicans they so nobly represent.
But it does seem that the spectrum of American support for free trade is getting narrower. It used to be that almost all congressional Republicans and most moderate Democrats were reliable yes votes for free trade agreements. Not anymore.
Tea Party Republicans oppose the TPP and free trade in general. But now, their animus seems to be seeping into the mainstream of the Republican Party. Pro-labor Democrats have opposed free trade all the way back to NAFTA. But now, some of the more moderate members of the Democratic Party are starting to look askance at the TPP.
The first sign of this appeared in June, when the House passed a Trade Promotion Authority bill last June by only eight votes.
Optimists hope the 219-211 vote by which the House voted to approve TPA will hold up for the TPP vote. Maybe it will, but the TPP vote will take place in an election year and the TPA vote didn’t. . . .
A long-term reason is that the anti-free trade forces are better at selling their case to the American public than the pro-free trade camp is. The former appeals to their emotions, the latter to their intellects. . . .
So, you can see why pro-trade Democrats who voted for TPA might be reluctant to support the TPP. And, they have an easy way out: their access to the TPP text was restricted during the negotiations. When the final text is posted publicly, they can read it and say, “OMG, I didn’t know THAT was in there!”
“Those of us who think this (agreement) is good were late the party,” Rosenberg said. Not only were they late, they didn’t bring anything good to eat or drink.
“The chances of our losing this have to be a clear and present danger for all of us,” he said.”
For the full article, see http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbrinkley/2015/10/09/politics-of-trade-arent-what-they-used-to-be/print/.
During the Democratic debate on October 13, 2015, Hilary Clinton stated that she had read the TPP, which created a lot head scratching at the White House because the final TPP Agreement has not been released to the public and some aspects, such as currency manipulation, are still being negotiated.
President Obama has been clear on his support for the Agreement:
“When more than 95 percent of our potential customers live outside our borders, we can’t let countries like China write the rules of the global economy. We should write those rules, opening new markets to American products while setting high standards for protecting workers and preserving our environment.”
One surprise came on October 5, 2015 when the Treasury announced that, in addition to lowering trade barriers, the 12 Trans-Pacific Partnership member nations would “strengthen macroeconomic cooperation, including on exchange rate issues, in appropriate fora.” The 12 countries are discussing a possible arrangement for senior finance ministry and central bank officials to meet periodically. As indicated in more detail below, Congress put considerable pressure on the Obama administration last spring to insist on an enforceable currency provision in the trade pact. But the administration and the Federal Reserve fought back, saying that it might someday be used against American policy makers to limit their flexibility to set short-term interest rates and adopt other monetary measures.
At the same time, US trade officials have suggested that the TPP could be a model for an eventual deal with China. China has emerged as the largest foreign investor in many Asian countries as well as the biggest exporter to them, and that has given China a stake in greater openness and an interest in TPP. See Article below from Chinese Trade lawyer about TPP.
On October 6, 2015, The Wall Street Journal in an editorial entitled The Pacific Trade Stakes stated:
“it would be an historic loss if the pact failed because U.S. negotiators bowed too far to protectionist forces, as some early signals suggest TPP will eliminate or reduce about 18,000 tariffs, taxes and non-tariff barriers like quotas, and there’s no denying the pro-growth gains, especially for U.S. goods and services. America already has low tariffs on most products, so this will do more to open up the foreign markets to which 44% of U.S. goods exports now flow.
The U.S. enjoys big comparative advantages in agriculture (soybeans, fruit, corn) and high-value manufacturing like aerospace, computer equipment, auto parts, organic chemicals and more recently oil and gas. Other domestic winners include software, insurance and finance.
Planks that deal with non-discriminatory market access for investment and cross-border services are also useful, as is a provision to protect the free movement of data and information as digital markets mature. TPP includes innovative mechanisms to promote the development of production and supply chains, such as requiring some yarns and fabrics for apparel to be sourced from a TPP member. . . .
No labor or environmental safeguards can win over the Bernie Sanders left, while the Donald Trump right doesn’t care about specifics like IP. Their opposition is implacable and will be amplified by the presidential campaign.
To ratify the pact, President Obama really needs the support of free traders like Orrin Hatch, who said TPP “appears to fall woefully short.” We hope he’s wrong and that the Administration negotiated enough liberalization to deserve his support. Yet the Utah Senator and the three other bipartisan chairmen and ranking members of the Senate Finance and Ways and Means committees joined on a letter last week importuning negotiators “to take the time necessary to get the best deal possible for the United States.” .
If the Administration prioritized speed over substance to get TPP done on Mr. Obama’s watch and capitulated too soon on biotech and elsewhere, the danger is that free traders will defect—and there is little margin for error. The fast-track trade promotion bill passed the House 218-206 and the Senate 60-38.
TPP probably won’t come to a vote until after the 2016 election. Congress should use the time to carefully vet the chapters and ensure that the pact complies with the 150 or so congressionally mandated “negotiating objectives” built into fast track. Mr. Obama will also need to start persuading the Congress with more than his usual Mr. Congeniality routine.
Nine and a half of every 10 of the world’s consumers resides somewhere other than America, so arrangements like the TPP that break down obstacles to trade and investment are crucial to prosperity at home. The question is whether this TPP is the best the U.S. can do.”
INDIA MOANS THAT IT IS OUT AND CHINA WANTS IN
Meanwhile India moans that it is out, but China wants in. On October, 6, 2015, the Wall Street Journal also reported in an article about India lagging other nations in lowering trade barriers and the impact of the TPP on India:
“As more of its biggest trading partners stitch together their economies into low-tariff blocs, India risks getting edged out of key markets at a time when Prime Minister Narendra Modi is trying to rev up economic growth and further integrate his country into global supply chains.
A senior official in India’s Commerce Ministry said Tuesday that New Delhi didn’t want to join the new partnership and is worried the deal could slow WTO trade negotiations.
“WTO will lose much of its steam because the U.S. won’t have the appetite for it anymore” as it focuses on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the official said. “Nothing of the development agenda in the current round of talks [in the WTO] will be taken seriously.” . . . .
The Trans-Pacific Partnership, if approved by member governments, could make India less competitive in some of the world’s largest markets. A study last year by the Indian Institute of Foreign Trade found that the pact would harm India’s exports, particularly in textiles, clothing and leather products, as countries such as Vietnam and Malaysia get cheaper access to the U.S. and other markets covered by the deal. But the negative fallout would be limited, the researchers said, because India already has tariff agreements with several partnership nations, including Japan and Malaysia. . . .”
The Wall Street Journal also reported on October 5th that the TPP was a setback for China:
“China had been invited to join the trade group, but Beijing has been reluctant to comply with many of the required rules, such as opening up the financial sector. By not being a founding member, experts say, China misses the opportunity to help shape an important pillar of the global trading system—a priority for President Xi Jinping.
“The key is whether China’s domestic reforms will be enough or sufficient. If they are not, it will have to follow the U.S. and lose its chance with the TPP to help make the rules,” said Shi Yinhong, director of the Center on American Studies at Renmin University.
The trade deal is expected to help blunt Beijing’s efforts to chart its own course for the region. . . .
The world’s second-largest economy also misses out on a grouping that includes many technologically advanced countries at a time when it is working hard to introduce high tech innovation, analysts said. And its economy needs the pressure of foreign competition to give its stalled domestic reform agenda a push, as with the productivity burst China enjoyed after joining the World Trade Organization in 2001, they added.
Two years ago, Mr. Xi announced a broad overhaul to give markets greater sway in an effort to ward off a slowdown and shift the economy to services and consumption and away from industry. Restructuring, however, has been spotty, delayed by opposition from state companies, by the sharpness of the deceleration, corporate and local government debt and excess capacity in housing and industry. . . .
Beijing could face significant internal and external hurdles if it eventually moves to join the trade bloc, said University of Chicago professor Dali Yang, especially given concern among some that it hasn’t always followed the rules since joining the WTO. Even inside China, there is growing recognition that China’s somewhat capricious system—where regulations can be applied arbitrarily and state-owned companies still dominate large swaths of the economy—makes membership unlikely soon, he added.
“The Chinese economy needs a jolt. It really needs reform,” Mr. Yang said. “Many feel the TPP was borne out of a frustration after the WTO, that China went back on its word in telecommunication, for instance, by not letting foreigners have a major stake.”
On October 8th Commerce Minister Gao Hucheng of MOFCOM, China’s Ministry of Commerce, stated that China will evaluate the impact of the TPP based on the official text of the treaty and hopes it will complement other agreements, stating:
“China hopes the TPP pact and other free trade arrangements in the region can boost each other and contribute to the Asia-Pacific’s trade, investment and economic growth.
Chinese officials have stated that they would need to see the agreement enter into force and be in effect for several years before deciding whether it would be worthwhile for China to make all the legal and policy changes necessary to meet the commitments in the agreement and attempt to accede to the TPP.”
On October 6, 2015, in the attached article entitled Trans-Pacific Partnership and China’s Trade Strategy,Trans-Pacific Partnership and China’s Trade Strategy _ Zhaokang JIANG _ Link , Zhaokang Jiang, a well-known Chinese trade lawyer, states:
“As the result of a high-standard, ambitious, comprehensive agreement promoting economic growth; enhancing innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raising living standards; reducing poverty in our countries; and promoting transparency, good governance, and enhancing labor and environmental protections, the TPP will be an important step toward the ultimate goal of open trade and regional integration across the region and setting the example rules for the global commerce. . . .
The current TPP members cover 40% of the global trade, and 36% of the world GDP. Once the pact is ratified and signed into laws by the members for implementation, more regional economies such as Korea, Philippines, Thailand, and Taiwan will have a chance to join. The TPP will also serve as a good example for additional trade negotiations, such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (“TTIP”), and even the WTO further negotiations. Since international trade is intertwined, the long term significance of the TPP shall not be downplayed, even for the non-member economies and other regions.
Since 1980’s, China has been the beneficiary and contributing party of trade globalization, liberalization and regional economic boom, and shall continue to welcome opportunities and accept the challenges in positive and active thinking, decision-making and behavior. In addition to the bilateral trade pacts, we believe China should seize this chance and embrace the TTP to more deeply participate in the regional trade arrangement, play more significant roles and enjoy more benefits. China should review and study the pact diligently and carefully and prepare to negotiate and join the regional trade deal for a beneficial trade growth.
At the same time, China can use this to adopt best practices for domestic reforms as they did in 2000 when it negotiated the WTO entry deal.
While details of the TPP are emerging in the near future, in additional to the general principles of rule of law, transparency, nondiscrimination, national treatment, the most-favored nation treatment, “minimum standard of treatment”, “negative list”, and due process, the Chinese side at least needs to focus the following key areas, for which the Chinese rules may have significant gaps . . . .
China, as the second largest economy of the world, is left out of the landmark trade deal, but the door is still open, and the future is in the hands of the Chinese leadership.
We hope China will take this rare opportunity in decades to review and accept the internationally recognized values, rules, and procedures for free and fair trade, enhance the trade, economic and legal reforms in China, collaborate with the trade partners, overcome the difficulties of economic and social changes, and finally reach the goal of being a nation of sustainable development, modernization, rule of law and democracy for the better-off of the people.”
TRANS PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP FINALIZED IN ATLANTA ROUND
On October 5, 2015, in Atlanta, Georgia, Trade ministers from the U.S. and 11 other nations, including Japan, Canada, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam and Malaysia, announced the agreement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which will link up 40 percent of the world’s economy, following an exhausting round of last-minute negotiations that stretched over the weekend.
The scheduled two day session was extended by three days to deal with a number of contentious issues, including commercial exclusivity for biologic pharmaceuticals, automotive issues and market access for dairy products.
President Obama cannot sign the Agreement for a minimum of 60 days after the Agreement is published publicly. Congress cannot consider and pass the Agreement for a minimum of 30 days, after the 60 days, which places Congressional passage possibly in January. The process formally begins when President Barack Obama notifies Congress that he intends to sign the agreement and publishes it. From there, the administration will continue working to brief lawmakers on the contents of the agreement.
In response to the Agreement, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch stated:
“A robust and balanced Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement holds the potential to enhance our economy by unlocking foreign markets for American exports and producing higher-paying jobs here at home. But a poor deal risks losing a historic opportunity to break down trade barriers for American made products with a trade block representing 40 percent of the global economy. Closing a deal is an achievement for our nation only if it works for the American people and can pass Congress by meeting the high-standard objectives laid out in bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority. While the details are still emerging, unfortunately I am afraid this deal appears to fall woefully short. Over the next several days and months, I will carefully examine the agreement to determine whether our trade negotiators have diligently followed the law so that this trade agreement meets Congress’s criteria and increases opportunity for American businesses and workers. The Trans-Pacific Partnership is a once in a lifetime opportunity and the United States should not settle for a mediocre deal that fails to set high-standard trade rules in the Asia-Pacific region for years to come.”
Predictably, as soon as the deal was announced, Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders, who is running for President and bound at the hip with the labor unions, stated that the new trade deal was “disastrous,” and that he would work to defeat it. As Sanders further stated:
Wall Street and other big corporations have won again. It is time for the rest of us to stop letting multinational corporations rig the system to pad their profits at our expense. In the Senate, I will do all that I can to defeat this agreement. We need trade policies that benefit American workers and consumers, not just the CEOs of large multinational corporations.
On October 5th, Chairman Paul Ryan of the House Ways and Means Committee issued a press release, stating:
“A successful Trans-Pacific Partnership would mean greater American influence in the world and more good jobs at home. But only a good agreement—and one that meets congressional guidelines in the newly enacted Trade Promotion Authority—will be able to pass the House. I am reserving judgment until I am able to review the final text and consult with my colleagues and my constituents. In particular, I want to explore concerns surrounding the most recent aspects of the agreement. I’m pleased that the American people will be able to read it as well because TPA requires, for the first time ever, the administration to make the text public for at least 60 days before sending it to Congress for consideration. The administration must clearly explain the benefits of this agreement and what it will mean for American families. I hope that Amb. Froman and the White House have produced an agreement that the House can support.”
On October 4th and 5th, the United States Trade Representative issued the attached summary of the Trans Pacific Partnership. Summary of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement _ United States Trade Rep Some of the salient parts of the Summary are as follows:
Summary of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement
On October 4, 2015, Ministers of the 12 Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) countries – Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam – announced conclusion of their negotiations. The result is a high-standard, ambitious, comprehensive, and balanced agreement that will promote economic growth; support the creation and retention of jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and promote transparency, good governance, and enhanced labor and environmental protections. We envision conclusion of this agreement, with its new and high standards for trade and investment in the Asia Pacific, as an important step toward our ultimate goal of open trade and regional integration across the region.
Five defining features make the Trans-Pacific Partnership a landmark 21st-century agreement, setting a new standard for global trade while taking up next-generation issues. These features include:
Comprehensive market access. The TPP eliminates or reduces tariff and non-tariff barriers across substantially all trade in goods and services and covers the full spectrum of trade, including goods and services trade and investment, so as to create new opportunities and benefits for our businesses, workers, and consumers.
Regional approach to commitments. The TPP facilitates the development of production and supply chains, and seamless trade, enhancing efficiency and supporting our goal of creating and supporting jobs, raising living standards, enhancing conservation efforts, and facilitating cross-border integration, as well as opening domestic markets.
Addressing new trade challenges. The TPP promotes innovation, productivity, and competitiveness by addressing new issues, including the development of the digital economy, and the role of state owned enterprises in the global economy.
Inclusive trade. The TPP includes new elements that seek to ensure that economies at all levels of development and businesses of all sizes can benefit from trade. It includes commitments to help small- and medium-sized businesses understand the Agreement, take advantage of its opportunities, and bring their unique challenges to the attention of the TPP governments. It also includes specific commitments on development and trade capacity building, to ensure that all Parties are able to meet the commitments in the Agreement and take full advantage of its benefits.
Platform for regional integration. The TPP is intended as a platform for regional economic integration and designed to include additional economies across the Asia-Pacific region.
The TPP includes 30 chapters covering trade and trade-related issues, beginning with trade in goods and continuing through customs and trade facilitation; sanitary and phytosanitary measures; technical barriers to trade; trade remedies; investment; services; electronic commerce; government procurement; intellectual property; labour; environment; ‘horizontal’ chapters meant to ensure that TPP fulfils its potential for development, competitiveness, and inclusiveness; dispute settlement, exceptions, and institutional provisions.
In addition to updating traditional approaches to issues covered by previous free trade agreements (FTAs), the TPP incorporates new and emerging trade issues and cross-cutting issues. These include issues related to the Internet and the digital economy, the participation of state-owned enterprises in international trade and investment, the ability of small businesses to take advantage of trade agreements, and other topics.
TPP unites a diverse group of countries – diverse by geography, language and history, size, and levels of development. All TPP countries recognize that diversity is a unique asset, but also one which requires close cooperation, capacity-building for the lesser-developed TPP countries, and in some cases special transitional periods and mechanisms which offer some TPP partners additional time, where warranted, to develop capacity to implement new obligations.
SETTING REGIONAL TRADE RULES
Below is a summary of the TPP’s 30 chapters. Schedules and annexes are attached to the chapters of the Agreement related to goods and services trade, investment, government procurement, and temporary entry of business persons. In addition, the State-Owned Enterprises chapter includes country-specific exceptions in annexes.
Initial Provisions and General Definitions
Many TPP Parties have existing agreements with one another. The Initial Provisions and General Definitions Chapter recognizes that the TPP can coexist with other international trade agreements between the Parties, including the WTO Agreement, bilateral, and regional agreements. It also provides definitions of terms used in more than one chapter of the Agreement.
Trade in Goods
TPP Parties agree to eliminate and reduce tariffs and non-tariff barriers on industrial goods, and to eliminate or reduce tariffs and other restrictive policies on agricultural goods. The preferential access provided through the TPP will increase trade between the TPP countries in this market of 800 million people and will support high-quality jobs in all 12 Parties. Most tariff elimination in industrial goods will be implemented immediately, although tariffs on some products will be eliminated over longer timeframes as agreed by the TPP Parties. The specific tariff cuts agreed by the TPP Parties are included in schedules covering all goods. The TPP Parties will publish all tariffs and other information related to goods trade to ensure that small- and medium-sized businesses as well as large companies can take advantage of the TPP. They also agree not to use performance requirements, which are conditions such as local production requirements that some countries impose on companies in order for them to obtain tariff benefits. In addition, they agree not to impose WTO-inconsistent import and export restrictions and duties, including on remanufactured goods – which will promote recycling of parts into new products. If TPP Parties maintain import or export license requirements, they will notify each other about the procedures so as to increase transparency and facilitate trade flows.
On agricultural products, the Parties will eliminate or reduce tariffs and other restrictive policies, which will increase agricultural trade in the region, and enhance food security. In addition to eliminating or reducing tariffs, TPP Parties agree to promote policy reforms, including by eliminating agricultural export subsidies, working together in the WTO to develop disciplines on export state trading enterprises, export credits, and limiting the timeframes allowed for restrictions on food exports so as to provide greater food security in the region. The TPP Parties have also agreed to increased transparency and cooperation on certain activities related to agricultural biotechnology.
Textiles and Apparel
The TPP Parties agree to eliminate tariffs on textiles and apparel, industries which are important contributors to economic growth in several TPP Parties’ markets. Most tariffs will be eliminated immediately, although tariffs on some sensitive products will be eliminated over longer timeframes as agreed by the TPP Parties. The chapter also includes specific rules of origin that require use of yarns and fabrics from the TPP region, which will promote regional supply chains and investment in this sector, with a “short supply list” mechanism that allows use of certain yarns and fabrics not widely available in the region. In addition, the chapter includes commitments on customs cooperation and enforcement to prevent duty evasion, smuggling and fraud, as well as a textile-specific special safeguard to respond to serious damage or the threat of serious damage to domestic industry in the event of a sudden surge in imports.
To provide simple rules of origin, promote regional supply chains, and help ensure the TPP countries rather than non-participants are the primary beneficiaries of the Agreement, the 12 Parties have agreed on a single set of rules of origin that define whether a particular good is “originating” and therefore eligible to receive TPP preferential tariff benefits. The product-specific rules of origin are attached to the text of the Agreement. The TPP provides for “accumulation,” so that in general, inputs from one TPP Party are treated the same as materials from any other TPP Party, if used to produce a product in any TPP Party. The TPP Parties also have set rules that ensure businesses can easily operate across the TPP region, by creating a common TPP-wide system of showing and verifying that goods made in the TPP meet the rules of origin. Importers will be able to claim preferential tariff treatment as long as they have the documentation to support their claim. In addition, the chapter provides the competent authorities with the procedures to verify claims appropriately.
Customs Administration and Trade Facilitation . . . .
To help counter smuggling and duty evasion, the TPP Parties agree to provide information, when requested, to help each other enforce their respective customs laws.
Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures
In developing SPS rules, the TPP Parties have advanced their shared interest in ensuring transparent, non-discriminatory rules based on science, and reaffirmed their right to protect human, animal or plant life or health in their countries. The TPP builds on WTO SPS rules for identifying and managing risks in a manner that is no more trade restrictive than necessary. . . .
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)
In developing TBT rules, the TPP Parties have agreed on transparent, non-discriminatory rules for developing technical regulations, standards and conformity assessment procedures, while preserving TPP Parties’ ability to fulfill legitimate objectives. They agree to cooperate to ensure that technical regulations and standards do not create unnecessary barriers to trade. . . .
Trade Remedies
The Trade Remedies chapter promotes transparency and due process in trade remedy proceedings through recognition of best practices, but does not affect the TPP Parties’ rights and obligations under the WTO. The chapter provides for a transitional safeguard mechanism, which allows a Party to apply a transitional safeguard measure during a certain period of time if import increases as a result of the tariff cuts implemented under the TPP cause serious injury to a domestic industry. These measures may be maintained for up to two years, with a one-year extension, but must be progressively liberalized if they last longer than a year. . . .
In establishing investment rules, the TPP Parties set out rules requiring non-discriminatory investment policies and protections that assure basic rule of law protections, while protecting the ability of Parties’ governments to achieve legitimate public policy objectives. . . .
TPP Parties adopt a “negative-list” basis, meaning that their markets are fully open to foreign investors, except where they have taken an exception (non-conforming measure) in one of two country specific annexes: (1) current measures on which a Party accepts an obligation not to make its measures more restrictive in the future and to bind any future liberalization, and (2) measures and policies on which a Party retains full discretion in the future. . . .
Cross-Border Trade in Services
Given the growing importance of services trade to TPP Parties, the 12 countries share an interest in liberalized trade in this area. TPP includes core obligations found in the WTO and other trade agreements . . . .
The TPP Financial Services chapter will provide important cross-border and investment market access opportunities, while ensuring that Parties will retain the ability to regulate financial markets and institutions and to take emergency measures in the event of crisis. The chapter includes core obligations found in other trade agreements . . . . In addition, the TPP includes specific commitments on portfolio management, electronic payment card services, and transfer of information for data processing.
The Financial Services chapter provides for the resolution of disputes relating to certain provisions through neutral and transparent investment arbitration. It includes specific provisions on investment disputes related to the minimum standard of treatment, as well as provisions requiring arbitrators to have financial services expertise, and a special State-to-State mechanism to facilitate the application of the prudential exception and other exceptions in the chapter in the context of investment disputes. . . .
Temporary Entry for Business Persons
The Temporary Entry for Business Persons chapter encourages authorities of TPP Parties to provide information on applications for temporary entry, to ensure that application fees are reasonable, and to make decisions on applications and inform applicants of decisions as quickly as possible. TPP Parties agree to ensure that information on requirements for temporary entry are readily available to the public, including by publishing information promptly and online if possible, and providing explanatory materials. The Parties agree to ongoing cooperation on temporary entry issues such as visa processing. Almost all TPP Parties have made commitments on access for each other’s business persons, which are in country-specific annexes.
TPP Parties share an interest in ensuring efficient and reliable telecommunications networks in their countries. . . .
In the Electronic Commerce chapter, TPP Parties commit to ensuring free flow of the global information and data that drive the Internet and the digital economy, subject to legitimate public policy objectives such as personal information protection. The 12 Parties also agree not to require that TPP companies build data centers to store data as a condition for operating in a TPP market, and, in addition, that source code of software is not required to be transferred or accessed. The chapter prohibits the imposition of customs duties on electronic transmissions, and prevents TPP Parties from favoring national producers or suppliers of such products through discriminatory measures or outright blocking. . . .
TPP Parties share an interest in accessing each other’s large government procurement markets through transparent, predictable, and non-discriminatory rules. In the Government Procurement chapter, TPP Parties commit to core disciplines of national treatment and non-discrimination. They also agree to publish relevant information in a timely manner, to allow sufficient time for suppliers to obtain the tender documentation and submit a bid, to treat tenders fairly and impartially, and to maintain confidentiality of tenders. . . ..
TPP Parties share an interest in ensuring a framework of fair competition in the region through rules that require TPP Parties to maintain legal regimes that prohibit anticompetitive business conduct, as well as fraudulent and deceptive commercial activities that harm consumers. . . . TPP Parties agree to adopt or maintain national competition laws that proscribe anticompetitive business conduct and work to apply these laws to all commercial activities in their territories. . . .
The chapter is not subject to the dispute settlement provisions of the TPP, but TPP Parties may consult on concerns related to the chapter.
State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and Designated Monopolies
All TPP Parties have SOEs, which often play a role in providing public services and other activities, but TPP Parties recognize the benefit of agreeing on a framework of rules on SOEs. The SOE chapter covers large SOEs that are principally engaged in commercial activities. Parties agree to ensure that their SOEs make commercial purchases and sales on the basis of commercial considerations, except when doing so would be inconsistent with any mandate under which an SOE is operating that would require it to provide public services. They also agree to ensure that their SOEs or designated monopolies do not discriminate against the enterprises, goods, and services of other Parties. Parties agree to provide their courts with jurisdiction over commercial activities of foreign SOEs in their territory, and to ensure that administrative bodies regulating both SOEs and private companies do so in an impartial manner. TPP Parties agree to not cause adverse effects to the interests of other TPP Parties in providing non-commercial assistance to SOEs, or injury to another Party’s domestic industry by providing non-commercial assistance to an SOE that produces and sells goods in that other Party’s territory. TPP Parties agree to share a list of their SOEs with the other TPP Parties and to provide, upon request, additional information about the extent of government ownership or control and the non-commercial assistance they provide to SOEs. There are some exceptions from the obligations in the chapter, for example, where there is a national or global economy emergency, as well as country-specific exceptions that are set out in annexes.
TPP’s Intellectual Property (IP) chapter covers patents, trademarks, copyrights, industrial designs, geographical indications, trade secrets, other forms of intellectual property, and enforcement of intellectual property rights, as well as areas in which Parties agree to cooperate. The IP chapter will make it easier for businesses to search, register, and protect IP rights in new markets, which is particularly important for small businesses.
The chapter establishes standards for patents, based on the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement and international best practices. On trademarks, it provides protections of brand names and other signs that businesses and individuals use to distinguish their products in the marketplace. The chapter also requires certain transparency and due process safeguards with respect to the protection of new geographical indications, including for geographical indications recognized or protected through international agreements. These include confirmation of understandings on the relationship between trademarks and geographical indications, as well as safeguards regarding the use of commonly used terms. . . .
In addition, the chapter contains pharmaceutical-related provisions that facilitate both the development of innovative, life-saving medicines and the availability of generic medicines, taking into account the time that various Parties may need to meet these standards. . . .
Finally, TPP Parties agree to provide strong enforcement systems, including, for example, civil procedures, provisional measures, border measures, and criminal procedures and penalties for commercial-scale trademark counterfeiting and copyright or related rights piracy. In particular, TPP Parties will provide the legal means to prevent the misappropriation of trade secrets, and establish criminal procedures and penalties for trade secret theft, including by means of cyber-theft, and for cam-cording.
All TPP Parties are International Labour Organization (ILO) members and recognize the importance of promoting internationally recognized labour rights. TPP Parties agree to adopt and maintain in their laws and practices the fundamental labour rights as recognized in the ILO 1998 Declaration, namely freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining; elimination of forced labour; abolition of child labour and a prohibition on the worst forms of child labour; and elimination of discrimination in employment. They also agree to have laws governing minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health. These commitments also apply to export processing zones. The 12 Parties agree not to waive or derogate from laws implementing fundamental labour rights in order to attract trade or investment, and not to fail to effectively enforce their labour laws in a sustained or recurring pattern that would affect trade or investment between the TPP Parties. In addition to commitments by Parties to eliminate forced labour in their own countries, the Labour chapter includes commitments to discourage importation of goods that are produced by forced labour or child labour, or that contain inputs produced by forced labour, regardless of whether the source country is a TPP Party.
Each of the 12 TPP Parties commits to ensure access to fair, equitable and transparent administrative and judicial proceedings and to provide effective remedies for violations of its labour laws. They also agree to public participation in implementation of the Labour chapter, including establishing mechanisms to obtain public input.
The commitments in the chapter are subject to the dispute settlement procedures laid out in the Dispute Settlement chapter. To promote the rapid resolution of labour issues between TPP Parties, the Labour chapter also establishes a labour dialogue that Parties may choose to use to try to resolve any labour issue between them that arises under the chapter. This dialogue allows for expeditious consideration of matters and for Parties to mutually agree to a course of action to address issues. The Labour chapter establishes a mechanism for cooperation on labour issues, including opportunities for stakeholder input in identifying areas of cooperation and participation, as appropriate and jointly agreed, in cooperative activities.
As home to a significant portion of the world’s people, wildlife, plants and marine species, TPP Parties share a strong commitment to protecting and conserving the environment, including by working together to address environmental challenges, such as pollution, illegal wildlife trafficking, illegal logging, illegal fishing, and protection of the marine environment. The 12 Parties agree to effectively enforce their environmental laws; and not to weaken environmental laws in order to encourage trade or investment. . . .
The chapter is subject to the dispute settlement procedure laid out in the Dispute Settlement chapter. . . .
Cooperation and Capacity Building . . ..
Competitiveness and Business Facilitation
The Competitiveness and Business Facilitation chapter aims to help the TPP reach its potential to improve the competitiveness of the participating countries, and the Asia-Pacific region as a whole. . . .
The TPP Parties seek to ensure that the TPP will be a high-standard model for trade and economic integration, and in particular to ensure that all TPP Parties can obtain the complete benefits of the TPP, are fully able to implement their commitments, and emerge as more prosperous societies with strong markets. . . .
TPP Parties have a shared interest in promoting the participation of small- and medium-sized enterprises in trade and to ensure that small- and medium-sized enterprises share in the benefits of the TPP. . . .
Regulatory Coherence
TPP’s Regulatory Coherence chapter will help ensure an open, fair, and predictable regulatory environment for businesses operating in the TPP markets by encouraging transparency, impartiality, and coordination across each government to achieve a coherent regulatory approach. . . .
Transparency and Anti-Corruption
The TPP’s Transparency and Anti-Corruption chapter aims to promote the goal, shared by all TPP Parties, of strengthening good governance and addressing the corrosive effects bribery and corruption can have on their economies. . . .
Administrative and Institutional Provisions
The Administrative and Institutional Provisions Chapter sets out the institutional framework by which the Parties will assess and guide implementation or operation of the TPP, in particular by establishing the Trans-Pacific Partnership Commission, composed of Ministers or senior level officials, to oversee the implementation or operation of the Agreement and guide its future evolution. This Commission will review the economic relationship and partnership among the Parties on a periodic basis to ensure that the Agreement remains relevant to the trade and investment challenges confronting the Parties.. . .
The Dispute Settlement chapter is intended to allow Parties to expeditiously address disputes between them over implementation of the TPP. TPP Parties will make every attempt to resolve disputes through cooperation and consultation and encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms when appropriate. When this is not possible, TPP Parties aim to have these disputes resolved through impartial, unbiased panels. The dispute settlement mechanism created in this chapter applies across the TPP, with few specific exceptions. . . .
Should consultations fail to resolve an issue, Parties may request establishment of a panel, which would be established within 60 days after the date of receipt of a request for consultations or 30 days after the date of receipt of a request related to perishable goods. Panels will be composed of three international trade and subject matter experts independent of the disputing Parties, with procedures available to ensure that a panel can be composed even if a Party fails to appoint a panelist within a set period of time. These panelists will be subject to a code of conduct to ensure the integrity of the dispute settlement mechanism. . . .
To maximize compliance, the Dispute Settlement chapter allows for the use of trade retaliation (e.g., suspension of benefits), if a Party found not to have complied with its obligations fails to bring itself into compliance with its obligations. Before use of trade retaliation, a Party found in violation can negotiate or arbitrate a reasonable period of time in which to remedy the breach.
The Exceptions Chapter ensures that flexibilities are available to all TPP Parties that guarantee full rights to regulate in the public interest, including for a Party’s essential security interest and other public welfare reasons. This chapter incorporates the general exceptions provided for in Article XX of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 to the goods trade-related provisions, specifying that nothing in the TPP shall be construed to prevent the adoption or enforcement by a Party of measures necessary to, among other things, protect public morals, protect human, animal or plant life or health, protect intellectual property, enforce measures relating to products of prison labour, and measures relating to conservation of exhaustible natural resources. . . .
In addition, it specifies that no Party is obligated to furnish information under the TPP if it would be contrary to its law or public interest, or would prejudice the legitimate commercial interests of particular enterprises. A Party may elect to deny the benefits of Investor-State dispute settlement with respect to a claim challenging a tobacco control measure of the Party.
Final Provisions
The Final Provisions chapter defines the way the TPP will enter into force, the way in which it can be amended, the rules that establish the process for other States or separate customs territories to join the TPP in the future, the means by which Parties can withdraw, and the authentic languages of the TPP. It also designates a Depositary for the Agreement responsible for receiving and disseminating documents. . . .
THREE CHINA CANARDS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE VICTIMHOOD
In light of President Xi’s recent trip to the United States and the many arguments thrown at China by the Press and US Politicians, it is time to look at the three major trade/economic attacks against China in detail: cyber- attacks, currency manipulation and dumping. When one digs down, one finds that the arguments are based on misunderstandings and misperceptions and often are not based on complete or actual facts. There are a lot of holes in the US arguments.
In fact, often these arguments are the pot, the United States, calling the kettle, China, black or in Chinese, the crow calling the pig black. What the US accuses the Chinese government of doing, the US government itself is doing against China and other countries.
In truth, the Chinese government can take actions, which are totally unfair, but US government officials should get their facts right and make sure that the attacks on China are based on actual economic reality and the US Government’s actual position.
More importantly, the problem with these attacks is that they lead to a US mindset among companies and unions of globalization/international trade victimhood. The whole world and especially China is out to get the US and we US companies and US workers cannot compete with imports into the US because all are unfairly traded so let’s put up protectionist walls.
This mindset, however, leads to corrosion of a company’s competitive instincts and makes them less able to compete in the modern world and US market. Protectionism leads to the decline of the US industry and the loss of jobs. As President Reagan so eloquently put it the attached June 28, 1968 speech on international trade, BETTER COPY REAGAN IT SPEECH:
international trade is one of those issues that politicians find an unending source of temptation. Like a 5-cent cigar or a chicken in every pot, demanding high tariffs or import restrictions is a familiar bit of flimflmmaery in American politics. But cliches and demagoguery aside, the truth is these trade restrictions badly hurt economic growth. You see, trade barriers and protectionism only put off the inevitable.
By this time, of course, the protected industry is so listless and its competitive instincts so atrophied that it can’t stand up to the competition. And that, my friends, is when the factories shut down and the unemployment lines start. . . .
As indicated below, this last paragraph would appear to fit exactly the Steel Industry.
The inconvenient truth for a Donald Trump and the Republican protectionists is that President Ronald Reagan, who Republicans hold up as their icon, was a true free trader and not a false prophet. So let’s look at these three arguments in detail.
CYBER-ATTACKS
As stated more below, although the US Press, including Forbes, Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times along with a number of US politicians, including Senators McCain and Ayotte, vehemently attack China for its cyber- attacks, when one digs down it turns out that part of the problem is the United States.
As indicated below, on September 29, 2015, in response to specific questions from Senator Manchin in the Senate Armed Services Committee, James R. Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, testified that China cyber- attacks to obtain information on weapon systems are not cyber- crime. It is cyber espionage, which the United States itself engages in. As Dr. Clapper stated both countries, including the United States, engage in cyber espionage and “we are pretty good at it.” Dr. Clapper went on to state that “people in glass houses” shouldn’t throw stones. See http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/15-09-29-united-states-cybersecurity-policy-and-threats at 1hour 8 minutes to 10 minutes.
During the same hearing, Administration officials acknowledged that the recent Cyber Agreement with China is a good first step.
What does this mean? It means that the US government never asked China for a comprehensive agreement to stop cyber hacking, because the US government is engaged in cyber espionage too and “we are pretty good at it. . . . People in glass houses…”. This illustrates the hypocrisy of much of the political attacks on China regarding cyber-attacks on US security interests and OPM, which are based on incorrect definitions as set down by the US government itself.
What the US Government did demand on the threat of economic sanctions was for the Chinese government to stop cyber-attacks on commercial interests, including the theft of intellectual property. The Chinese government agreed, not only because of the threats of economic sanctions, but also because they realize how important the US China economic/trade relationship is for China, the Chinese people and the entire World.
Although the Press reports that the cyber- attacks still continue, as President Xi specifically mentioned, the Chinese government cannot unilaterally stop all private cyberattacks that come from China, just as the US government cannot unilaterally stop all private cyber- attacks from the US. These are criminal acts.
At the Armed Services hearing, Senator McCain stated that he was astonished at the statement by Director Clapper. What is astonishing is that high level Senators, who launched cynical attack after attack on the Chinese government, do not know the position of their own government and the distinction between state espionage and commercial cyber- attacks. The Senators do not realize or do not want to acknowledge that the pot (the US) is calling the kettle (China) black.
Recently, in an October 6, 2015 article on Energy Wire, entitled “DOE cold case shows limits of U.S.-China cyber cooperation” at http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060025891[10/6/2015 10:41:38 AM] about the Justice Department accusing Chinese officials in the People’s Liberation Army of hacking, Robert Cattanach, co-chairman of the cybersecurity practice group at Dorsey, stated with regards to the provisions in the China Cyber Agreement:
“to end “cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information, with the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or commercial sectors” . . . the framework’s omissions are telling. “The U.S. clearly signaled that it was still fine for China to do whatever it wished in the area of national security cyberespionage – and the subtext there is, because we’re doing it, too. Problems come up right away, however, due to the fact that “it’s not at all clear where the dividing line is between ‘acceptable’ cyber hacking and ‘unacceptable’ cyber hacking,”
The same problem exists with currency manipulation. First, the general definition of currency manipulation is that a country artificially lowers the value of its currency, to undervalue the currency, so as to have a competitive advantage and encourage exports.
But the problem with this issue is that like cyber-attacks there is no internationally approved definition of currency manipulation, and both the Obama Administration, including President Obama and Secretary of Treasury Lew, along with free trade Senators and Congressmen are worried that without an internationally approved definition, currency manipulation could be used to retaliate against the United States. Remember the Federal Reserve’s Policy of Quantitative Easing.
Regarding China, originally, when the argument was first made in 2004, the Chinese Yuan was worth about 8.2 or 8.3 to the dollar, making the Chinese yuan relatively weak as compared to the US dollar. Since 2004 because of the Currency manipulation argument, China has allowed the Yuan to float within in very short range and gradually strengthened the Chinese yuan to 6.35 yuan today.
Keep in mind that China is worried about strengthening its currency too much, not because of the United States, but because of its Asian competitors. Vietnam, for example, exports more furniture and other products as compared to China because its wages are lower than China. Much of the textile business has now left China to go to Bangladesh, where wages are much lower than China.
For more than 10 years, the US Steel Industry and the Unions have been using the currency manipulation to attack China. But another inconvenient truth is that on May 26, 2015, the International Monetary Fund (“IMF”) determined that China’s currency is no longer unvalued. The IMF specifically stated:
“On the external side, China has made good progress in recent years in reducing the very large current account surplus and accumulation of foreign exchange reserves. . . .While undervaluation of the Renminbi was a major factor causing the large imbalances in the past, our assessment now is that the substantial real effective appreciation over the past year has brought the exchange rate to a level that is no longer undervalued.
In addition, the major argument of many Democratic Senators and Congressmen and even some Republicans is that the Trans Pacific Partnership is not a good deal because there are no enforceable rules against currency manipulation. But the inconvenient truth is that enforceable provisions were not in the Bill because Democratic President Obama and Democratic Secretary of Treasury Lew threatened to veto the TPA bill if enforceable provisions were included.
On May 22, 2015, on the Senate floor during the debate on Trade Promotion Authority (“TPA”) Senator Hatch made a very strong argument against the Currency Amendment proposed by Senators Stabenow and Portman, which would have required enforceable provisions on currency manipulation, stating that the President will veto the TPA bill and if passed could lead to international sanctions against the United States by international tribunals. See Testimony of Senators Wyden and Hatch at http://www.c-span.org/video/?326202-1/us-senate-debate-trade-promotion-authority&live.
As Senator Hatch stated:
Mr. President, I want to take some time today to talk about proposals to include a currency manipulation negotiating objective in trade negotiations and the impact this issue is having on the debate over renewing Trade Promotion Authority, or TPA.
Currency manipulation has, for many, become the primary issue in the TPA debate. . . .
However, I want to be as plain as I can be on this issue: While currency manipulation is an important issue, it is inappropriate and counterproductive to try to solve this problem solely through free trade agreements. . . .
But, first, I think we need to step back and take a look at the big picture. I think I can boil this very complicated issue down to a single point: The Portman-Stabenow Amendment will kill TPA.
Yesterday, I received a letter from Treasury Secretary Lew outlining the Obama Administration’s opposition to this amendment. The letter addresses a number of issues, some which I’ll discuss later. But, most importantly, at the end of the letter, Secretary Lew stated very plainly that he would recommend that the President veto a TPA bill that included this amendment.
at this point, it is difficult – very difficult, in fact – for anyone in this chamber to claim that they support TPA and still vote in favor of the Portman-Stabenow Amendment. The two, as of yesterday, have officially become mutually exclusive. . . .
But, regardless of what you think of Secretary Lew’s letter, the Portman-Stabenow Amendment raises enough substantive policy concerns to warrant opposition on its own. Offhand, I can think of four separate consequences that we’d run into if the Senate were to adopt this amendment, and all of them would have a negative impact on U.S. economic interests.
First, the Portman-Stabenow negotiating objective would put the TPP, agreement at grave risk, meaning that our farmers, ranchers, and manufactures – not to mention the workers they employ – would not get access to these important foreign markets, resulting in fewer good, high-paying jobs for American workers.
We know this is the case, Mr. President. Virtually all of our major negotiating partners, most notably Japan, have already made clear that they will not agree to an enforceable provisions like the one required by the Portman-Stabenow Amendment. No country that I am aware of, including the United States, has ever shown the willingness to have their monetary policies subject to potential trade sanctions. Adopting this amendment will have, at best, an immediate chilling effect on the TPP negotiations, and, at worst, it will stop them in their tracks.
If you don’t believe me, then take a look at the letter we received from 26 leading food and agriculture organizations . . . urging Congress to reject the Portman-Stabenow amendment because it will, in their words, “most likely kill the TPP negotiations” Put simply, not only will this amendment kill TPA, it will very likely kill TPP as well.
Second, the Portman-Stabenow Amendment would put at risk the Federal Reserve’s independence in its ability to formulate and execute monetary policies designed to protect and stabilize the U.S. economy. While some in this chamber have made decrees that our domestic monetary policies do not constitute currency manipulation, we know that not all of our trading partners see it that way.
Requiring the inclusion of enforceable rules on currency manipulation and subsequent trade sanctions in our free trade agreements would provide other countries with a template for targeting U.S. monetary policies, subjecting our own agencies and policies to trade disputes and adjudication in international trade tribunals. We have already heard accusations in international commentaries by foreign finance ministers and central bankers that our own Fed has manipulated the value of the dollar to gain trade advantage.
While we may not agree with those allegations, the point is that, under the Portman-Stabenow formulation, judgments and verdicts on our policies will be taken out of our hands and, rather, can be rendered by international trade tribunals. . . .
Put simply, we cannot enforce rules against unfair exchange rate practices if we do not have information about them. Under the Portman-Stabenow Amendment, our trading partners are far more likely to engage in interventions in the shadows, hiding from detection out of fear that they could end up being subjected to trade sanctions.
Mr. President, for these reasons and others, the Portman-Stabenow Amendment is the wrong approach. Still, I do recognize that currency manipulation is a legitimate concern, and one that we need to address in a serious, thoughtful way.
Toward that end, Senator Wyden and I have filed an amendment that would expand on the currency negotiating objective that is already in the TPA bill to give our country more tools to address currency manipulation without the problems and risks that would come part and parcel with the Portman-Stabenow Amendment. . . .
Why are enforceable provisions against currency manipulation wrong? Because all of “international/WTO” trade law is based on reciprocity. What the United States can do to other countries, those countries can do back to the United States. In effect, if enforceable currency manipulation provisions had been included in the TPP, the United States could be hoisted by its own petard, killed by its own knife.
That is the reason Senator Orrin Hatch, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Congressman Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, are so concerned about currency manipulation. Currency manipulation is a negotiating objective as set forth in the TPA. But enforcing currency manipulation is a problem because there is no internationally accepted definition of currency manipulation. When the US Federal Reserve used quantitative easing in the last financial crisis, was that currency manipulation? Could other countries retaliate against the US for using quantitative easing? That is the fear of free traders. In international trade what goes around comes around.
Currency manipulation was include in the Trade Promotion Authority bill that was passed by Congress and signed into law, but there were no enforceable provisions. The specific provision in the TPA states in part:
“Foreign Currency Manipulation—The principal negotiating objective of the United States with respect to unfair currency practices is seek to establish accountability through enforceable rules, transparency, reporting, monitoring, cooperative mechanisms, or other means to address exchange rate manipulation involving protracted large scale intervention in one direction in the exchange markets and a persistently undervalued foreign exchange rate to gain an unfair competitive advantage in trade over other parties to a trade agreement consistent with existing obligations of the United States as a member of the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organization.”
In the TPP Agreement, which was concluded in Atlanta, in a currency manipulation side deal, apparently the nations pledged not to devalue their currencies in such a way as to gain an edge on their competitors, but it will not have any enforcement provisions. Country representatives will meet at least once a year to discuss the commitments and to try to coordinate macroeconomic policies.
The specific details of the currency manipulation side agreement are still being negotiated so it is difficult to believe that Hilary Clinton has actually read the Agreement, when it has not been finalized yet.
The side agreement, however, apparently centers around three key commitments countries would undertake as part of this side deal. First, the TPP countries would commit to not devalue their currencies so as to make their exports cheaper. Second, they would upgrade the transparency of their respective monetary policies and decision-making. Finally, the countries would set up a multilateral forum to discuss exchange rate policies and broader macroeconomic issues.
It is not clear, however, how often officials would meet in this configuration, or at what level. Government sources, however, indicate that the TPP countries are very close to coming to an agreement on these points and are entering a technical review of the side deal.
On the day the TPP agreement was announced, Treasury released a joint statement by the TPP countries:
“We are pleased to announce today that we are working to strengthen macroeconomic cooperation, including on exchange rate issues, in appropriate fora. The work to be undertaken reflects our common interest in strengthening cooperation on macroeconomic policies, and will help to further macroeconomic stability in the TPP region as well as help ensure that the benefits of TPP are realized. Keeping in mind the diverse circumstances of the TPP countries, we are currently undertaking a technical review.”
On October 19, 2015, Treasury Secretary Lew stated that the TPP provides a “very powerful set of tools,” with tough provisions to get participating countries to “keep their word” on currency.
It is interesting to note that on Tuesday, September 22, 2015, in his Seattle speech, President Xi of China specifically agreed to a similar provision:
“We will stick to the purpose of our reform to have the exchange rate decided by market supply and demand and allow the RMB to float both ways. We are against competitive depreciation or a currency war. We will not lower the RMB exchange rate to boost exports. To develop the capital market and improve the market-based pricing of the RMB exchange, is the direction of our reform. This will not be changed by the recent fluctuation in the stock market.”
In other words, China has agreed to abide by the same currency manipulation deal struck in the TPP Agreement.
But that brings us to another problem, recently China allowed the Yuan to float and it lost 2 to 3% of its value and immediately the China critics in the United States cried currency manipulation. As stated above, the International Monetary Fund has already determined that the Chinese RMB is not undervalued. If anything, with the very difficult economic situation in China right now, the Chinese RMB may be overvalued. In fact, if Chinese RMB were actually floated on the market, there might be a sharp decline.
The natural economic course is for currencies to become weaker when economies become weaker. The IMF has already determined that China’s currency is not undervalued. But right now, China’s economy is going through a downturn.
As Treasury Secretary Lew stated on October 19th regarding China’s currency:
“There’s still room for the renminbi to appreciate. Right now, there’s downward pressure on the renminbi. Some of it is as a result of the policies that they made and the way they announced them over the summer. We have to make sure that China understands that it’s very important that they need to keep their commitment to let the renminbi go up as well as down.”
On October 1, 2015, the Wall Street Journal on its front page, reported “A Painful Quarter for Markets” stated:
“Stocks had their worst quarter since 2011 amid growth worries as daily swings grew bigger as investors fretted over China while a commodity selloff [in part because of China] and rising junk-bond yields added to the anxiety.”
On October 7, 2015, the Wall Street Journal reported that “Chinese Central bank interventions” to shore up the yuan ate into China’s foreign-exchange reserves in September, stating.:
“The People’s Bank of China on Wednesday said currency reserves fell $43.3 billion in September to $3.51 trillion as more funds left the country, the fifth consecutive monthly drop but a less sharp one than the record $93.9 billion plunge the previous month. That came after the central bank first devalued the yuan in a mid-August surprise and then saw itself forced to step up selling of dollar assets, particularly U.S. Treasuries, to prevent a free fall in the currency. . . .”
On October 7th, the Wall Street Journal further reported that, “Once the Biggest Buyer, China Starts Dumping U.S. Government Debt Shift in Treasury holdings is latest symptom of emerging-market slowdown hitting global economy”. The Article states:
“Central banks around the world are selling U.S. government bonds at the fastest pace on record, the most dramatic shift in the $12.8 trillion Treasury market since the financial crisis.
Sales by China, Russia, Brazil and Taiwan are the latest sign of an emerging-markets slowdown that is threatening to spill over into the U.S. economy. Previously, all four were large purchasers of U.S. debt. . . .
In the past decade, large trade surpluses or commodity revenues permitted many emerging-market countries to accumulate large foreign-exchange reserves. Many purchased U.S. debt because the Treasury market is the most liquid and the U.S. dollar is the world’s reserve currency. . . .
But as global economic growth weakened, commodity prices slumped and the dollar rose in anticipation of expected Federal Reserve interest-rate increases, capital flowed out of emerging economies, forcing some central banks to raise cash to buy their local currencies.
In recent months, China’s central bank in particular has stepped up its selling of Treasuries. The People’s Bank of China surprised investors by devaluing the yuan on Aug. 11. The heavy selloff that followed—triggered by concerns that Beijing would permit more weakening of the yuan to help spur growth—caught officials at the central bank somewhat off guard, according to the people.
To contain the selloff, the PBOC has been buying yuan and selling dollars to prevent the yuan from weakening beyond around 6.40 per dollar. Internal estimates at the PBOC show that it spent between $120 billion and $130 billion in August alone in bolstering the yuan’s value, according to people close to the central bank.”
On October 20, 2015, it was reported that total capital outflows from China could have been as high as $850 billion from the start of 2015 to the end of September. This estimate assumes China has had to sell foreign exchange reserves ($329 billion until the end of September, mostly in U.S. Treasuries) to keep the exchange rate stable.
Does this sound like a country that is intentionally trying to undervalue its currency to get a competitive advantage? In fact, China is spending 100s of billions of dollars to prevent the exchange rate from falling by keeping its currency strong and not undercutting the dollar. Why? To keep up the standard of living of its people and to avoid the currency manipulation argument aimed at China by the United States.
Many China critics point to China as the second largest economy, but that is a distortion. When looked at the GDP on a per capita/per person basis, China is much lower. As reported by the International Monetary Fund, the United States is ranked number 10 with a per capita GDP of $54,370GDP, where China is ranked number 88 with a per capita income of $13, 224 after the Maldives. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita#List_of_countries_and_dependencies.
China is the largest country in the World by population with 1.376 billion. The United States has a population of 321 million. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population. In fact, according to the World Economic Forum, when it comes to competitiveness, the United States ranks number 3 and China ranks number 28 after Israel, but before Estonia. See http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-report-2014-2015/rankings/; Global Competitiveness http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-report-2015-2016/economies/#economy=USA.
Why is this important? Because as President Xi recently stated in Seattle, China is still a developing country and it has 100s of millions of people in poverty. As President Xi stated:
“At the same time, we are civilly-aware that China is still the world’s largest developing country. Our per capita GDP is only two-thirds that of global average and one-seventh that of the United States, ranking around 80th in the world. By China’s own standard, we still have over 70 million people living under the poverty line. If measured by world bank standard, the number would be more than 200 million. . . .”
President Xi went on to state that his focus has to be development and raising the standard of living for his people:
“I know that we must work still harder before all our people can live a better life. That explains why development remains China’s top priority. To anyone charged with the governance of China, their primary mission is to focus all the resources on improving people’s living standard and gradually achieve common prosperity.”
The bottom line is that the Chinese leadership knows that it is still a developing country and it needs the relationship with the US to continue to lift is population out of poverty. But China also knows that the US China relationship must be a win-win relationship in which the United States also benefits. That is the reason the US is exporting close $200 billion in exports to China.
On September 26, 2015, while in Beijing I went to a Supermarket in the Guomao, Business District of Beijing. The “Ole” supermarket chain was having a major sales event of US agricultural products, selling US pork, apples, potatoes, seafood, wine, cheese, grapes and raisins. The event was sponsored by USDA, US Commercial Service, US Pork Producers, US Meat, US raisins, Alaska Seafood, Washington Apples, US Potatoes, California Grapes and Raisins. I was the only foreigner in the supermarket and the checkout girls had little US flags on their lapel.
The US China Trade relationship is also why China was quickly willing to negotiate and come to agreement with the United States on Cyber Attacks and Currency manipulation. But willingness to negotiate and discuss the issues is not good enough for the protectionist forces in the United States.
But if cyber-attacks and currency manipulation do not work, the US press and politicians can always argue that the United States is a dumping ground for Chinese products. In fact, the United States presently has antidumping orders blocking more than $20 billion in imports from China, all based on fake numbers.
Antidumping orders cover products as diverse as Furniture ($1 billion), almost all steel products (billions), Solar Cells and Solar Panels ($4 billion), Aluminum Extrusions, including aluminum auto parts, curtain walls, the sides of buildings and lighting equipment (billions), Tires ($7 billion), and Paper (billions), not to mention food products, such as honey, garlic, crawfish and shrimp.
Dumping is generally defined as selling products in the United States at lower prices than in the home/China market or below the fully allocated cost of production. But as readers of this blog know, in contrast to almost every country in the World, including Iran, Syria, Russia, and Ukraine, the Commerce Department considers China to be a nonmarket economy country and refuses to look at actual prices and costs in China. Instead Commerce constructs a cost from consumption factors in China and multiplies those factors times surrogate values, which it obtains from import statistics in five to 10 different countries.
But those surrogate countries can change from preliminary to final determinations and from initial investigation to the multiple review investigations against Chinese products. In the Hardwood Plywood case, for example, Commerce used import statistics in Philippines in the Preliminary resulting in a 0% antidumping rate, and then in the final determination switched to import statistics in Bulgaria, resulting in a 57% antidumping rate. In a Mushrooms review investigation, Commerce switched from India, which it had used in more than five past review investigations, to Columbia and the rate went from single digits to over 400% because of surrogate values for cow manure and hay from Columbia Import statistics.
If you think about it, how much cow manure and hay is imported into Columbia. Because Commerce’s almost always relies on import statistics in one of the 5 to 10 different countries, it always uses inflated surrogate values because imports by definition must be higher priced than the domestic product. By using hyper-inflated surrogate values, it is always easy to find dumping rates against China, but they are not based on reality.
With regards to Countervailing Duty orders against China, Commerce refuses to use benchmark prices in China to value the subsidies. As explained more below, this refusal along with the Commerce Department’s decision that every raw material product supplied by every state-owned company is subsidized, has led to a major loss for the United States at the WTO overturning dozens of Commerce Department CVD determinations for violations of the WTO’s Countervailing Duty Agreement.
More importantly, US importers pay antidumping and countervailing duties, not Chinese companies, and when antidumping and countervailing duties go up in administrative review investigations, US importers are retroactively liable for the difference plus interest. Thus an importer can wake up one morning when an antidumping rate has gone from 0 to 157% and owe millions in retroactive antidumping duties to the US government. But since Commerce does not use real prices and costs in China and can switch from surrogate country to surrogate country, the Chinese companies cannot know whether they are dumping and what the rate will be and neither can the US importers. Thus the Commerce Department fiction exposes US importers to potentially millions of dollars in retroactive liability through no fault of the importer. Thus, when antidumping and countervailing duty orders are issued against China, over time all imports of the specific product stop because importers are scared of the huge risk that could bankrupt their company if they import under an antidumping or countervailing duty order against China.
But the real problem with these three attacks on China is that it encourages a mindset among US producers and US workers of Globalization/International Trade Victimhood, which corrodes the competitive spirit. This phrase was not coined by me, but by the Mid Atlantic Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, which uses the term in a video about how four US companies used the TAA for Companies program to save their business — http://mataac.org/howitworks/.
Moreover, we have a perfect experiment/example to make this point—the US steel industry. This Industry has had some form of protection from steel imports under US antidumping and countervailing duty laws and other trade statutes for 40 years. Is the Steel industry thriving? Is it expanding with all the protection from imports that it has received? No, the industry continues to decline even though US Steel companies and the Unions have spent tens of millions of dollars in legal fees and to keep political pressure up on Congress and the Government.
When I first started work at the International Trade Commission in 1980, there were numerous large steel companies with production operations all over the United States, including Bethlehem Steel, Jones & Laughlin and Lone Star Steel. Those companies had 40 years of protection from steel imports, but that did not stop the decline of the industry.
But what the Steel industry and the Union wants and Congress is prepared to give is more protection from steel and other imports by making it easier to bring antidumping and countervailing duty cases and win them at Commerce and the ITC. The decision apparently is let’s simply build the protectionist walls higher. The scary point is that in many ways the US Steel industry and the Unions have an inordinate impact on US trade policy because of their power in the Democratic party.
But the crown jewels of US manufacturing are not the Steel Industry, but the US High Tech industry, which is among the most efficient in the World. As the Democratic opposition to the TPP indicates, many Democrats in Congress are willing to sacrifice the very successful new High Tech industry, which employs numerous workers, for the benefit of the much older and smaller US Steel industry when the total employment in the US Steel industry is less than one high tech company!
What is the answer to this import problem? Not more protection. Instead, I firmly believe the answer lies in the small program—the TAA for Companies (also called TAA for Firms or TAAF). This is a $12 million program, which helps small and medium size business (SMEs) and helps them adjust to import competition. The Northwest Trade Adjustment Assistance Center (“NWTAAC”), which I have been working with, has an 80% survival rate since 1984, which is certainly a much higher survival rate than US antidumping and countervailing duty cases. If you save the company, you save the jobs that go with the company and all the tax revenue paid into the Federal, State and Local governments. This is the Transformative Power of TAA for Companies. TAA for Companies does not cost the government money. It makes money for the government.
Recently, I have learned that sometimes larger companies through this program can obtain access to more funds to help them adjust and get out of Globalization /International Trade victimhood. The Congress supplies $450 million to retrain workers in the TAA for Workers program, but only $12 million to help the companies adjust. But if you save the company, you save the jobs that go with that company.
Moreover, the TAA video, http://mataac.org/howitworks/, describes one US company, which uses steel as an input, and was getting smashed by Chinese imports. After getting into the program, not only did the company become prosperous and profitable, it is now exporting products to China. This is the transformative power of TAA for Companies and the more important point of changing the mindset from Globalization/International Trade victimhood of US companies and workers so that they become internationally competitive in the World market.
All US antidumping and other trade cases can do is slow the decline in an industry. The only program that cures the disease is the TAA for Companies program . As Ronald Reagan predicted in his attached 1986 speech, BETTER COPY REAGAN IT SPEECH, the problem with antidumping and countervailing duty cases is that they do not work and they invite retaliation:
Sometimes foreign governments adopt unfair tariffs or quotas and subsidize their own industries or take other actions that give firms an unfair competitive edge over our own businesses. On those occasions, it’s been very important for the United States to respond effectively, and our administration hasn’t hesitated to act quickly and decisively. . . .
But I think you all know the inherent danger here. A foreign government raises an unfair barrier; the United States Government is forced to respond. Then the foreign government retaliates; then we respond, and so on. The pattern is exactly the one you see in those pie fights in the old Hollywood comedies: Everything and everybody just gets messier and messier. The difference here is that it’s not funny. It’s tragic. Protectionism becomes destructionism; it costs jobs.
Blaming international trade and other countries and bringing trade case does not solve the business problems of these companies. All the trade cases do is slow the decline and prolong the agony, because the company and the workers have not changed their mindset.
One Economic Development Council here in Washington State has the motto Compete Every Day, with Every One in Every Country Forever. That is the type of mindset that turns companies around. That is the type of mindset TAA for Companies promotes, not US Antidumping and Countervailing Duty laws.
IMPORT ALLIANCE FOR AMERICA
This is also why the Import Alliance for America is so important for US importers and US end user companies. The real targets of antidumping and countervailing duty laws are not Chinese companies. The real targets are US companies, which import products into the United States from China and use raw materials in downstream production process.
There are approximately 130 antidumping and countervailing duty orders against various products from China, but approximately 80 of the orders cover raw material inputs, such as chemicals, metals and steel, which are used in downstream production. Through these orders we spread the Globalization victimhood disease affecting the upstream industry to the higher value added, higher profit downstream industries because the downstream companies cannot compete with Chinese and other foreign companies that have access to the lower cost raw materials.
As mentioned in prior newsletters, we are working with APCO, a well-known lobbying/government relations firm in Washington DC, on establishing a US importers/end users lobbying coalition to lobby against the expansion of US China Trade War and the antidumping and countervailing duty laws against China for the benefit of US companies.
On September 18, 2013, ten US Importers agreed to form the Import Alliance for America. The objective of the Coalition will be to educate the US Congress and Administration on the damaging effects of the US China trade war, especially US antidumping and countervailing duty laws, on US importers and US downstream industries.
See the Import Alliance website at http://www.importallianceforamerica.com.
We will be targeting two major issues—working for market economy treatment for China in 2016 as provided in the US China WTO Agreement for the benefit of importers and downstream companies and working against retroactive liability for US importers. The United States is the only country that has retroactive liability for its importers in antidumping and countervailing duty cases.
On November 17 and 18, 2015, importers in the Alliance will be meeting Congressmen and Congressional Trade Staff in Washington DC to discuss these issues. See the attached announcement. FINAL IAFA_November2015_Flyer The Alliance welcomes all US importers and downstream companies, If you are interested in this effort, please feel free to contact the Import Alliance or myself directly.
IMPRESSIONS OF CHINESE PRESIDENT XI’S TRIP TO THE US—VIEWS FROM BEIJING
During most of September I was in China, and in Beijing during the key week of September 21 to 26th. Watching the US press and listening to US politicians in Washington DC during President Xi’s visit as compared to the Press in China was like watching people on different planets. In the United States, news outlets and politicians were very bellicose, very cynical, and expecting China simply to trick the US and out negotiate them. Shades of Donald Trump. In direct and distinct contrast, China was having a love fest with the United States.
In the United States, especially before and after the Washington DC trip, commentators and newspapers attacked China on cyber-hacking, currency manipulation, foreign policy and every other rock that could be thrown at China.
During that same week that President Xi was in China, Chinese speaking television was running a TV series to every day Chinese, somewhat like Roots, entitled Life and Death Commitment. The series was about how during the War against Japan, which became the Second World War, 100s if not 1,000s of Chinese peasants gave their lives to protect a specific American Flying Tiger pilot that had been shot down. The series showed entire villages and families executed by the Japanese for refusing to reveal the whereabouts of the American pilot. What made the series so powerful is that it is based on a true story.
I realized how powerful an impact this series was having on Chinese people because on Friday September 25th while climbing a mountain at the Red Snail Temple outside Beijing with a Group of Chinese, at a pavilion we ran into a Chinese peasant looking for plastic bottles. He immediately asked the Chinese in my Group, where is the foreigner from. They answered United States and he got excited and said “Flying Tiger”.
As President Xi mentioned in his Seattle speech, China will not forget the sacrifice of American lives in World War 2 against Germany and Japan. Even before World War 2, however, there were many examples of the United States coming to the aide of China. In the early 1900s, the United States was the only foreign country to pay China back for money paid as reparations by the Chinese government as a result of the Boxer rebellion. The US used the Chinese reparations money to establish a famous Chinese university and hospital in Beijing and send Chinese to study in the US. In other words, based on history, the Chinese truly like Americans, and that is a fundamental reason and basis for future US/China cooperation.
In contrast, I was told by one Chinese that Russia and China simply use each other. There is no trust between China and Russia. In the early 1950, because Chairman Mao refused to follow the commands of Joseph Stalin, Russia pulled out of China, destroying all the instruction books to the machinery, rail cars and other products provided to China. That action plus the Great Leap Forward led to a famine in China in which millions died. Chinese do not forget.
In contrast to Washington DC, high tech companies and businessmen in Washington State were very welcoming to President Xi, listening to his every word, because for Washington State China is its largest export market with $20 billion in exports every year to China and that is not just Boeing airplanes.
US High tech companies are making billions in China selling their products and consumer technology to China. Qualcomm’s income was $10 billion with $5 billion coming from China. On the plane to China, I sat next to a Marketing official from a large high tech company that was selling touch screen products to China. He told me that he was on the plane to China every other week.
While in China, on the CCTV English channel I saw one US Administration official stating that we see the US China relationship is “too big to fail”. At least someone in the US government and Obama Administration understands the importance of the US China relationship. In the Bush Administration, Treasury Secretary Paulson stated that he believed the US China relationship was the most important economic relationship in the World.
During my trip to Beijing, Chinese English TV was following the President Xi trip closely putting specific emphasis on the dialogue between the United States. I became convinced that China truly believes in a Win Win situation for China and the United States and that is not just a slogan.
Before President Xi’s trip to China, one article featured a panda and Uncle Sam walking arm and arm together. On September 27, the Chinese Global Times reported on the front page:
China and the US have agreed to continue building a new model for major country relationship based on mutual cooperation. . . .Aside from agreeing to build a new model for major-country relationship, the two countries said they would maintain close communication and exchanges at all levels, further expand practical cooperation at bilateral, regional and global levels and manage differences to a constructive way to achieve new concrete results in Sino-US relations. . . .
Another article in the Global Times urged the United States to reciprocate China’s goodwill. But the cynicism of many in the US press and US politicians seemed to undercut much of the Chinese goodwill.
President Xi’s US trip started well in Seattle. On Tuesday, September 22, 2015, at a speech in Seattle, Henry Kissinger introduced President Xi by stating that his vision of a Win Win scenario, which emphasizes the economic interdependence of China and the United States based on mutual interests and importance of the economic development of the other country was very important. Kissinger specifically stated that partnership between two potential advisories can replace antagonism between them.
As President Xi further indicated in his speech, he understands how important the US China relationship is and his government will do everything in their power to maintain it. President Xi specifically stated in Seattle:
. . . Washington is the leading state in U.S. exports to China and China is the No. 1 trading partner of the Port of Seattle. Washington and Seattle have become an important symbol of the friendship between Chinese and American people and the win-win cooperation between the two countries. As the Chinese saying goes, the fire burns high when everyone brings wood to it. It is the love and care and hard work of the national governments, local authorities, friendly organizations, and people from all walks of life in those countries that have made China-U.S. relations flourish. . . .
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends. Since the founding of the People’s Republic, especially since the beginning of reform and opening up, China has set out on an extraordinary journey. The Chinese of my generation have had some first-hand experience. Toward the end of the 1960s, when I was in my teens, I was sent from Beijing to work as a peasant in a small village, where I spent seven years. At that time, the villagers and I lived in earth caves and slept on earth beds. Life was very hard. There was no meat in our diet for months. . . .
At the spring festival earlier this year, I returned to the village. It was a different place now. I saw black top roads. Now living in houses with bricks and tiles, the villagers had Internet access. Elderly folks had basic old-age care, and all villagers had medical care coverage. Children were in school. Of course, meat was readily available. This made me kindly aware that the Chinese dream is, after all, a dream of the people.
We can fulfill the Chinese dream only when we link it with our people’s yearning for a better life.
What has happened in [my village] is but a microcosm of the progress China has made through reform and opening up. In a little more than three decades, we have turned China into the world’s second largest economy, lifted 1.3 billion people from a life of chronic shortage, and brought them initial prosperity and unprecedented rights and dignity.
This is not only a great change in the lives of the Chinese people, but also a huge step forward in human civilization, and China’s major contribution to world peace and development.
During the past two years, I have been to many poor areas in China and visited many poor families. I wouldn’t forget the look in their eyes longing for distant, happy life.
I know that we must work still harder before all our people can live a better life. That explains why development remains China’s top priority. To anyone charged with the governance of China, their primary mission is to focus all the resources on improving people’s living standard and gradually achieve common prosperity. To this end, we have proposed the two centenary goals mentioned by Dr. Kissinger, namely to double the 2010 GDP and per capita income of the Chinese and complete the building of a moderately prosperous society by 2020 and to build a prosperous, strong, democratic … harmonious, modernist socialist country that realizes the great renew of the Chinese nation by the middle of the century.
Whatever we do now is aimed at fulfilling these goals. To succeed in completing the building of a moderately prosperous society in all respects, we must comprehensively deepen reform, advance the law-based governance, and apply strict … discipline. That is what our proposed 4-pronged strategy is all about. . . .
China’s economy will stay on a steady course with fairly fast growth. The Chinese economy is still operating within a proper range. It grew by 7 percent in the first half of this year, and this growth rate remains one of highest in world. It has not come by easily, given the complex and volatile situation in world economy. At present, all economies are facing difficulties, and our economy is also under downward pressure. But this is only a problem in the course of progress. It will take … steps to achieve stable growth, deepen reform, adjust structure, improve livelihood, and prevent risks while strengthening and innovating macro-regulation to keep the growth at medium-to-high rate.
Currently, China is continuing to move forward in this new type of industrialization, digitalization, urbanization, and agricultural modernization. With a high savings rate, a huge consumption potential, a hard working population, and a rising proportion of middle income people — now we have 300 million middle income earnings in China — China enjoys enormous space … to grow in terms of market size and potential. China will focus more on improving the quality and efficiency of economic growth, and accelerating the shift of growth model and adjustment in economic structure. I will lay greater emphasis on innovation and consumption-driven growth — in this way, we will solve the problem of unbalanced, uncoordinated, and unsustainable development, and enable the Chinese economy to successfully transform itself and maintain strong momentum of growth.
Recent abnormal ups and downs in China’s stock market has caused wide concern. Stock prices fluctuating accordance with your inherent laws and it is the duty of the government to ensure an open, fair, and just market order and prevent massive panic from happening. This time, the Chinese government took steps to stabilize the market and contain panic in the stock market, and thus avoided the systemic risk. Mature markets in various countries have tried similar approaches. Now, China’s stock market has reached the phase of self-recovery, and self-adjustment.
On the 11th of August, China moved to improve its RMB central parity quotation mechanism, giving the market a greater role in determining the exchange rates. Our efforts have achieved initial success in correcting the exchange rate deviation. Given the economic and financial situation at home and abroad, there is no basis for continuous depreciation of the RMB. We will stick to the purpose of our reform to have the exchange rate decided by market supply and demand and allow the RMB to float both ways. We are against competitive depreciation or a currency war. We will not lower the RMB exchange rate to boost export. To develop the capital market and improve the market-based pricing of the RMB exchange, is the direction of our reform. This will not be changed by the recent fluctuation in the stock market.
The key to China’s development lies in reform. Our reform is aimed at modernizing the country’s governance system, and governance capabilities so that the market can play a decisive role in the allocation of resources. The government can play a better role and there is faster progress in building the socialist market economy, democracy, advanced culture, harmonious society, and soundly environment. . . .
We have the results and guts to press ahead, and take reform forward. We will stick to the direction of market economy reform and continue to introduce bold and result-oriented reform measures concerning the market, taxation, finance, investment and financing, pricing, opening up, and people’s livelihood.
China will never close its open door to the outside world. Opening up is a basic state policy of China. Its policies that attract foreign investment will not change, nor will its pledge to protect legitimate rights and interests of foreign investors in China, and to improve its services for foreign companies operating in China. We respect the international business norms and practice of non-discrimination, observe the …principle of national treatment commitment, treat all market players — including foreign-invested companies — fairly, and encourage transnational corporations to engage in all forms of cooperation with Chinese companies.
We will address legitimate concerns of foreign investors in timely fashion, protect their lawful rights and interests, and work hard to provide an open and transparent legal and policy environment, an efficient administrative environment, and a level playing field in the market, with a special focus on IPR protection so as to broaden the space of cooperation between China and the United States and other countries.
China will follow the basic strategy of the rule of law in governance. Law is the very foundation of governance. We will coordinate our efforts to promote the rule of law in governance and administration, for the building of the country, the government and society on solid basis of the rule of law, build greater trust in judicial system, and ensure that human rights are respected and effectively upheld. China will give fair treatment to foreign institutions and foreign companies in the country’s legislative, executive, and judicial practices. We are ready to discuss rule of law issues with the U.S. side in the spirit of mutual learning for common progress.
China is a staunch defender of cybersecurity. It is also a victim of hacking. The Chinese government will not, in whatever form, engage in commercial thefts or encourage or support such attempts by anyone. Both commercial cyber theft and hacking against government networks are crimes that must be punished in accordance with law and relevant international treaties. The international community should, on the basis of mutual respect and mutual trust, work together to build a peaceful, secure, open, and cooperative cyberspace. China is ready to set up a high-level joint dialogue mechanism with United States on fighting cyber crimes. . . .
China will continuing fighting corruption. As I once said, one has to be very strong if he wants to strike the iron. The blacksmith referred to here is the Chinese communist party. The fundamental aim of the party is to serve the people’s heart and soul. The party now has over 87 million members and unavoidably, it has problems of one kind or another. If we let these problems go unchecked we will risk losing the trust and support of the people. That is why we demand strict enforcement of party discipline as the top priority of governance. In our vigorous campaign against corruption, we have punished both tigers and flies —corrupt official — irrespective of ranking, in response to our people’s demand. This has nothing to do with power struggle. In this case, there is no House of Cards. . . .
China will keep to the path of peaceful development. We have just celebrated the 70th anniversary of the victory of the Chinese people’s resistance against Japanese aggression and the world anti-fascist war.
An important lesson history teaches us is that peaceful development is the right path, while any attempt to seek domination or hegemony through force is against the historical trend and doomed to failure.
The Chinese recognized as early as 2,000 years ago that though a country is now strong, bellicosity will lead to its ruin. China’s defense policy is defensive in nature and its military strategy features active defense. Let me reiterate here that no matter how developed it could become, China will never seek hegemony or engage in expansion.
To demonstrate our commitment to peaceful development, I announced not long ago that the size of China’s military will be cut by 300,000. China is ready to work with other countries to build a new type of international relations with win-win cooperation at its core, replacing confrontation and domination with win-win cooperation and adopting a new thinking of building partnerships so as to jointly open a new vista of common development and shared security.
As far as the existing international system is concerned, China has been a participant, builder, and contributor. We stand firmly for the international order and system that is based on the purposes and principles of the UN charter. . . .
China has benefitted from the international community and development, and China has in turn made its contribution to global development. Our Belt and Road initiative, our establishment of the Silk Road fund, and our proposal to set up the AAIB, are all aimed at helping the common development of all countries, rather than seeking some kind of spheres of political influence. The Belt and Road initiative is open and inclusive; we welcome participation of the U.S. and other countries, and international organizations.
We have vigorously promoted economic integration in the Asia Pacific and the Free Trade area of the Asia Pacific in particular because we want to facilitate the shaping of a free, open, convenient, and dynamic space for development in the Asia Pacific. We … for an outlook of common, comprehensive, cooperative, and sustainable security because we want to work with other countries in the region and the rest of the international community to maintain peace and security in the Asia Pacific.
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends. In our Sunnylands meeting in 2013, President Obama and I reached the important agreement to jointly build a new model of major country relationship between the two countries.
This was a major strategic choice we made together on the basis of historical experience, our respective national conditions and the prevailing trend of world. Over past two years and more, the two sides have acted in accordance, with the agreement steadily moving forward by actual coordination and cooperation in various fields, and made important progress. We worked hand-in-hand to cope with aftermath of international financial crisis and promoted global economic recovery. We deepened pragmatic exchanges and cooperation in all fields, which brought about tangible benefits to the two people’s. Last year, actual trade, two-way investment stock, and total number of personnel exchanges all hit a record high. . . .
As an old Chinese saying goes, peaches and plums do not talk, yet a path is formed beneath them. These worthy fruits of cooperation across the Pacific Ocean speaks eloquently to the vitality and potential of China-U.S. relations.
This leads to the question: What shall we do to advance the new model of major country relationship between China and the U.S. from a new starting point and how we can work together to promote world peace and development. The answer is to stick to the right direction of such a new model of relationship and make gradual, solid progress.
An ancient Chinese said, after taking into account the past, the future, and the normal practices, a decision can be made.
A number of things are particularly important for our efforts. First, we must read each other’s strategic intentions correctly. Building a new model of major country relationship with the United States that features no confrontation, no conflicts, mutual respect and willing cooperation is the priority of China’s foreign policy. We want to deepen mutual understanding with the U.S. on each other’s strategic orientation and development path. We want to see more understanding and trust; less estrangement and suspicion in order to … misunderstanding and miscalculation.
We should strictly base our judgment on facts, lest we become victim to hearsay, paranoid, or self-imposed bias. … Should major countries time and again make the mistakes of strategic miscalculation, they might create such traps for themselves.
Second, we must firmly advance win-win cooperation. Cooperation is the only right choice to bring about benefits, but cooperation requires mutual accommodation of each other’s interest and concerns, and the quest of the great common ground of converging interest. If China and the U.S. cooperate well, they can become a bedrock of global stability and a booster of world peace. Should they enter into conflict or confrontation, it would lead to disaster for both countries and the world at large.
The areas where we should and can cooperate are very broad. For instance, we should help improve the global governance mechanism and work together to promote sustained growth of world economy and maintain stability in the global financial market.
We should conclude as soon as possible a balanced and high quality BIT, deepen the building of a new type of mill-to-mill relations, expand pragmatic cooperation on clean energy and environmental protection, strengthen exchanges in law enforcement, anti-corruption, health, and local affairs, and tap the corporation potential in infrastructural development. We should deepen communication and cooperation at the United Nations A-PEC, G-20, and other multi-electoral mechanisms, as well as our major international and regional issues and global challenges so as to make a bigger contribution to world peace, stability, and prosperity.
Third, we must manage our differences properly and effectively. As a Chinese saying goes, the sun and moon shine in different ways yet their brightness is just right for the day and night, respectively. It is precisely because of so many differences that the world has become such a diverse and colorful place, and that the need to broaden common ground and iron out differences has become so important. A perfect, pure world is non-existent, since disagreements are a reality people have to live with. China and the U.S. do not see eye to-eye on every issue and it is unavoidable that we may have different positions on some issues. What matters is how to manage the differences and what matters most is that we should respect each other, seek common ground while reserving differences, take a constructive approach to understanding … and spare no effort to turn differences into areas of cooperation.
Fourth, we must foster friendly sentiments among the peoples. People-to-people relations underpin state-to state relations. Though geographically far apart, our peoples boast a long history of friendly exchanges.
Some 230 years ago, Empress of China, a U.S. merchant ship, sailed across the vast oceans to the shores of China. Some 150 years ago, tens of thousands of Chinese workers joined their American counterparts in building the Transcontinental Pacific Railway. Some 30 years ago, China and the United States, as allies in World War II, fought shoulder-to-shoulder to defend world peace and justice. In that war, thousands of American soldiers laid down their precious lives for the just cause of the Chinese people.
We will never forget the moral support and invaluable assistance the American people gave to our just resistance against aggression and our struggle for freedom and independence. The Chinese people have always held American entrepreneurship and creativity in high regards. . . .
I believe it’s always important to make an effort to get deep a understanding of the cultures and civilizations that are different from our own. The Chinese character Ren, or people, is in a shape of two strokes supporting each other. The foundation of the China-U.S. friendship has its roots in the people and its future rests with the youth. . . .
Ladies and gentlemen. Dr. Kissinger wrote in his book, World Order, that, and I quote, each generation will be judged by whether the greatest and most consequential issues of the human condition have been faced.
And Martin Luther King said, ‘the time is always right to do the right thing. Today we have come once again to a historical juncture. Let us work together to bring about an even better future for China-U.S. relations and make an even greater contribution the happiness of our two people’s and well-being of the world.”
For the full text of President Xi’s speech, see http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/944177.shtml and http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2015xivisitus/2015-09/24/content_21964069.htm To see the entire speech, go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9aQPvus8Tw.
After Seattle, President Xi flew to Washington DC. Although Washington State is not wallowing in international trade victimhood, Washington DC is not Washington State. Just as President Xi Jinping arrived in Washington DC, John Brinkley at Forbes illustrated the hard line on China stating:
Xi Jinping In Washington: No Glad Tidings From The East
WASHINGTON — It’s hard to recall a visit to Washington by a head of state that has aroused as much apprehension and preoccupation as that of Chinese President Xi Jinping, who arrived here Thursday night.
Given the abundance of requests and demands that await him here, you might expect him to be wearing a red suit and a long white beard. But Xi has not come bearing gifts.
Issue No. 1 for the Obama administration is Chinese hacking.
China is the most prolific source of cyber-attacks against the U.S. government and business sector and it costs the U.S. economy billions of dollars every year, according to FBI Director James Comey. Xi has expressed a willingness to combat it, but he denies that his government has anything to do with it. He says China too is a victim of cyber-attacks.
Maybe so, but that’s like saying Microsoft is threatened by Atari.
Last Spring, Chinese hackers broke into the U.S. General Services Administration’s servers and stole Social Security numbers, fingerprints and other identifying data on about 4 million current and former government employees.
President Obama is incensed about this and is expected to read the riot act to Xi. Given the pervasiveness of the problem, though, even Xi’s best efforts are not going to solve it or even make a dent in it anytime soon.
China also leads the world in counterfeiting of consumer products and intellectual property theft. It accounts for 50% to 80% of all IP theft from the United States, according to the Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property.
Since arriving in Seattle on Tuesday, Xi has been getting an earful about this and he’ll get more when he comes to Washington, D.C. . . .
China recently devalued its currency, the renminbi, against the dollar and that caused the American anti-trade camp to scream bloody murder. They said it was a blatant ploy to make Chinese exports to the U.S. cheaper and U.S. exports to China more expensive. A gazillion American jobs would be lost as a result.
They couldn’t have been more wrong. Xi said in a speech in Seattle on Tuesday that the renminbi had been devalued “in order to stabilize the market and contain panic in the stock market,” not to increase exports. “We are against competitive depreciation or a currency war,” he said. “We will not lower the RMB exchange rate to boost exports.” We should take him at his word.
China’s human rights performance continues to be deplorable, but Xi doesn’t seem willing to acknowledge this. His predecessors, when criticized about human rights violations, usually said: mind your own business. Xi’s rhetoric has not been much of an improvement. In Seattle, he said the government would “ensure that human rights are respected and effectively upheld.” Isn’t that comforting? . . . .
One might expect a meeting between the leaders of the world’s two largest economies to produce some tangible outcomes. Don’t bet on it. More likely, they’ll say they had “frank and fruitful” discussions, made “good progress” (isn’t all progress good?), and agreed on “a way forward.”
Making measurable progress on cyber-attacks and intellectual property theft will take years, maybe decades.
Unlike other heads of state, Xi considers his country to be America’s equal. So, he won’t be cowing to Obama or expressing contrition.
On the bright side, Xi is hell-bent on stamping out corruption in his government. That might be a better reason for hope than anything that might transpire during his two days in Washington.
For full article, see http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnbrinkley/2015/09/25/xi-jinping-in-washington-no-glad-tidings-from-the-east/.
The Brinkley Article was followed by strong US press attacks on the Cyber Agreement between the US and China. On September 26, 2015, the International New York Times in an Editorial stated as follows:
DOUBLE TALK FROM CHINA
The Xi government has a long way to go in protecting the rights of foreign companies and fighting cybercrime. . . .
Chinese officials are believed to be behind some of the .many cyberattacks against American companies and government agencies. Some of these hackers clearly work for the government and are stealing corporate secrets to help Chinese companies, American officials and cybersecurity experts say. Mr Xi’s government denies that it is involved in the attacks.
Aside from cybersecurity issues, the Xi government has also proposed regulations that could make it impossible for American technology companies to operate there. They would be forced to store data about Chinese customers in China and provide the Chinese government backdoor access to their systems and encrypted communications.
Mr. Xi and his officials need to realize that trade and investment has to be a two-way street. Many Chinese firms are trying to expand by acquiring companies, real estate and other assets in the United States and elsewhere. But if the Xi government continues to put up roadblocks to foreign companies, China cannot expect the-rest of the world to open its doors to more investment without reciprocity.
On September 27, 2015, the Wall Street Journal stated in an editorial:
The Obama-Xi Cyber Mirage
A digital arms deal that is full of promises but no enforcement.
Not long before Xi Jinping’s state visit to Washington last week, the Obama Administration leaked that it might sanction Chinese companies and individuals for digitally plundering U.S. trade secrets and intellectual property. That followed an April executive order that declared “significant malicious cyber-enabled activities” to be a “national emergency” punishable by visa bans, asset freezes and other means.
“We’re not going to just stand by while these threats grow,” one Administration official told the Washington Post at the time. “If you think you can just hide behind borders and leap laws and carry out your activities, that’s just not going to be the case.”
Well, never mind. On Friday Presidents Xi and Obama announced a new cyber-agreement that is supposed to put the unpleasantness to rest. A White House fact sheet notes that both sides agreed that “neither country’s government will conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information, with the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or commercial sectors.”
Other steps include information exchanges; legal cooperation in investigating cybercrimes “in a manner consistent with their respective national laws”; a “high-level joint dialogue mechanism” with regularly scheduled meetings; a “hotline for the escalation of issues”; and a U.N.-influenced effort to “further identify and promote appropriate norms of state behavior in cyberspace.”
All of this is an elaborate way of saying that the two sides agreed to nothing. Though Mr. Obama hailed the deal for creating “architecture to govern behavior in cyberspace that is enforceable and clear,” it transparently is neither. Mr. Xi still insists that his government “does not engage in theft of commercial secrets in any form,” or encourage Chinese companies to do so, as he told The Wall Street Journal last week. So what’s the problem?
As for enforceability, the line about abiding by “respective national laws” gives the game away. In China the Communist Party is by definition above the law, as are the companies and entities it controls. If Mr. Xi won’t admit to the problem, his minions won’t either. Knowing this, U.S. officials will also be reluctant to disclose much of what they know about Chinese cyber-espionage abuses lest they compromise U.S. sources and methods.
All of this means the Chinese are unlikely to be deterred from engaging in the kind of cybertheft that has served them so well, such as the 2007 hack of one of the military contractors building the F-35 fighter jet, which allowed the Chinese to develop the copycat J-20 and J-31 stealth planes. Other victims of suspected Chinese cyberespionage include Canada’s once-giant Nortel Networks, which was driven into bankruptcy in 2009 partly due to the hacking, as well as media companies like Bloomberg and this newspaper.
The agreement gives Mr. Xi the opportunity to play the diplomatic games China has specialized in for years regarding the South China Sea, known to Beijing-watchers as “talk and take.” In the South China version, Beijing has become adept at negotiating endlessly with its Asian neighbors over disputed claims and codes of conduct—all while seizing control of disputed reefs, building islands, and interfering in maritime traffic. To adapt Clausewitz, diplomacy for the Chinese is the continuation of cyberespionage by other means.
The agreement also ignores China’s cyberassaults on U.S. government targets, such as last year’s mega-hack of the Office of Personnel Management. Washington may have good reasons not to codify principles that would prohibit the U.S. from responding to such an attack, but if so it would be good to know if the Administration is forgiving the OPM hack.
In his press conference with Mr. Xi, Mr. Obama said the U.S. would use sanctions and “whatever other tools we have in our tool kit to go after cybercriminals, either retrospectively or prospectively.” But nearly seven years into his Presidency, Mr. Obama isn’t famous for follow through.
The cyber accord looks like another case of Mr. Obama claiming an imaginary moral high ground that sounds tough but is likely to be unenforceable. Expect more digital theft until Beijing pays a price for it, presumably in a future U.S. Administration.
But on September 29, 2015, in response to specific questions from Senator Manchin in the Senate Armed Services Committee, James R. Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, testified that China cyber- attacks to obtain information on weapon systems are not cyber- crime. It is cyber espionage, which the United States itself engages in. As Dr. Clapper stated both countries, including the United States, engage in cyber espionage and “we are pretty good at it.” Dr. Clapper went on to state that “people in glass houses” shouldn’t throw stones. See http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/15-09-29-united-states-cybersecurity-policy-and-threats at 1 hour 8 minutes to 10 minutes.
In response to a question from Senator Ayotte, Director Clapper also specifically admitted that the attack on OPM and theft of US government employee data is state espionage and not commercial activity, which the US also engages in. See above hearing at 1 hour 18 and 19 minutes. This illustrates the hypocrisy of much of the political attacks on China regarding cyber-attack on OPM, which are based on incorrect definitions as set down by the US government itself.
Senator McCain stated that he was astonished by Director Clapper’s statements. What is astonishing is the at Senior Senators, such as John McCain, which have engaged in relentless attacks on China, do not know the specific policy of the United States government.
During the same hearing, in response to questions from Senator Hirano of Hawaii, Administration officials stated that the Cyber Agreement with China will be very helpful if the Chinese government live up to it. As Senator Hirano stated, now we have an agreement between the US and China to talk about it. The officials stated that the Agreement is a confidence building measure because it requires annual meetings at the very high ministerial level between the United States and China at which the US Attorney General and Head of Homeland Security will participate. In other words, according to Administration officials this is a good first step.
What does this mean? It means that the US government never asked China for a comprehensive agreement to stop cyber hacking, because the US government is engaged in cyber espionage too and “we are pretty good at it. . . . People in glass houses…”. The US government may have already hacked the Chinese government and obtained all the personal information on their government workers. We simply do not and cannot know.
But more importantly, the US government did not request the Chinese government to agree to stop all cyber-attacks on the US government. What the US Government did demand on the threat of economic sanctions was for the Chinese government to stop cyber-attacks on commercial interests, including the theft of intellectual property. The Chinese government agreed, not only because of the threats of economic sanctions but also because they realize how important the US China economic/trade relationship is for China, the Chinese people and the entire World. This Agreement is not just a President Xi face saving gesture. The Chinese government and people understand how important the US China economic relationship is, even if many in the US Congress and US government do not understand the reality of the situation.
What did the Chinese government specifically agree to do on Cyber crime?
As the attached September 25, 2015 White House Fact Sheet Press related to President Xi’s visit,FACT SHEET_ President Xi Jinping’s State Visit to the United States _ whiteh , states:
FACT SHEET: President Xi Jinping’s State Visit to the United States
On September 24-25, 2015, President Barack Obama hosted President Xi Jinping of China for a State visit. The two heads of state exchanged views on a range of global, regional, and bilateral subjects. President Obama and President Xi agreed to work together to constructively manage our differences and decided to expand and deepen cooperation in the following areas: . . .
The United States and China agree that timely responses should be provided to requests for information and assistance concerning malicious cyber activities. Further, both sides agree to cooperate, in a manner consistent with their respective national laws and relevant international obligations, with requests to investigate cybercrimes, collect electronic
evidence, and mitigate malicious cyber activity emanating from their territory. Both sides also agree to provide updates on the status and results of those investigation to the other side, as appropriate.
o The United States and China agree that neither country’s government will conduct or knowingly support cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property, including trade secrets or other confidential business information, with the intent of providing competitive advantages to companies or commercial sectors.
o Both sides are committed to making common effort to further identify and promote appropriate norms of state behavior in cyberspace within the international community. The United States and China welcome the July 2015 report of the UN Group of Governmental Experts in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of
International security, which addresses norms of behavior and other crucial issues for international security in cyberspace. The two sides also agree to create a senior experts group for further discussions on this topic.
o The United States and China agree to establish a high-level joint dialogue mechanism on fighting cybercrime and related issues. China will designate an official at the ministerial level to be the lead and the Ministry of Public Security, Ministry of State Security, Ministry of Justice, and the State Internet and Information Office will participate in the dialogue. The U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security and the U.S. Attorney General will co-chair the dialogue, with participation from representatives
from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Intelligence Community and other agencies, for the United States. This mechanism will be used to review the timeliness and quality of responses to requests for information and assistance with respect to malicious cyber activity of concern identified by either side. As part of this mechanism, both sides agree to establish a hotline for the escalation of issues that may arise in the course of responding to such requests. Finally, both sides agree that the first
meeting of this dialogue will be held by the end of 2015, and will occur twice per year thereafter.
The fact sheet lists other very important areas for further cooperation and discussion, including Nuclear Security, Strengthening Development Cooperation, 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Food Security, Public Health and Global Health Security, and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Response. In addition, with regards to Strengthening Bilateral Relations, China and the United States agreed specifically with regard to Military Relations:
Building on the two Memoranda of Understanding on Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) signed by the United States and China in November 2014, the two sides completed new annexes on air-to-air safety and crisis communications. The two sides committed to continue discussions on additional annexes to the Notification of Major Military Activities CBM, with the United States prioritizing completion of a mechanism for informing the other party of ballistic missile launches. The U.S. Coast Guard and the China Coast Guard have committed to pursue an arrangement whose intended purpose is equivalent to the Rules of Behavior Confidence Building Measure annex on surface-to-surface encounters in the November 2014 Memorandum of Understanding between the United States Department of Defense and the People’s Republic of China Ministry of National Defense.
In other words, in distinct contrast to Russia, the Chinese government agreed to hold periodic high level meetings at the ministerial level to discuss cyber- crime and military issues with the United States. Does this sound like a country that wants to invade other countries and follow Vladimir Putin in a military expansion?
EXIM BANK MAY RISE FROM THE DEAD THROUGH AN EXTRAORDINARY MEASURE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
On October 9, 2015, Republican House Members took a drastic measure filing a discharge petition to fast-track the EX-Im Bank bill to the floor of the US House. The EX-Im Bank provides export financing and credit terms to help US companies export products to other countries. The help provided by the EX-Im Bank is mirrored by export financing and credit terms provided by numerous foreign countries, including the EC, Japan, Korea and China.
To save the Ex-Im Bank, 50 Republicans in the House joined with almost the entire Democratic Caucus to file the discharge petition. This rarely used procedural mechanism allows Representatives in the House to bypass both committees and the leadership to call up legislation signed by a majority of the House. This is procedural measure in the House that was last executed 13 years ago and only five times in the last eight decades.
Congressman Denny Heck of Washington State that led the charge on the Democratic side and is a member of the New Democratic Coalition stated, “This is a once-in-a-generation thing.”
Since 218 members signed the petition, that means a majority of Congressmen support the bill and it should pass on October 26.
Once the Bill passes the House, however, it still has to jump over hurdles in the Senate, which has no equivalent process to quickly force a vote in the upper chamber. Although some have speculated that the Senate will not bring up the bill because Republican Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell does not personally support the bill, McConnell has also stated that he knows that a majority of the Senators that support the Ex-Im Bank have the votes to pass the bill. In fact, the passage of the TPA through the Senate happened only because Washington State Democratic Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell along with Republican Senator Lindsay Graham obtained an agreement from Mitch McConnell for a vote on the Senate floor on Ex-Im bank in exchange for their vote on TPA. Once bipartisan majorities are established in both the House and Senate, final passage should be only a matter of time.
The broader significance of the move is that dozens of House Republicans dared to try it at all and push back the conservative Republicans, who for purist free market ideological reasons have blocked the EX-Im bank.
The little-known lending agency has long supported U.S. jobs by helping companies find markets overseas, but conservatives have turned its demise into a rallying cry against corporate welfare. Jeb Hensarling, the Republican chairman of the Financial Services and Ohio Congressman, has made it a personal mission to kill the bank.
As the three Republican members that led the discharge movement, Stephen Fincher, R-Tenn., Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., and Chris Collins, R-N.Y., stated that they simply had no choice but to pursue the drastic parliamentary move:
“This Republican-led petition is a procedure to stand up to Washington’s broken system that is killing thousands of American jobs and jeopardizing thousands more. Our constituents expect us to fight for them and get the job done, but Congress has failed to even hold a vote to reform and reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank.”
Republican and Democratic Representatives have been under intense pressure from business groups complaining that the expiration of the bank’s charter has resulted in job losses for companies big and small.
It is ironic that a Congressman from Ohio, which is hurting for manufacturing and other jobs, is the one leading the charge to stop the Ex-Im Bank, which will result in thousands of jobs leaving the United States.
Because of the failure to authorize the Ex-IM Bank and its U.S.-based export credit financing, General Electric Co. stated that it would be forced to move 500 turbine manufacturing jobs to China and Europe. The failure to reauthorize the Ex-Im Bank may also explain Boeing’s recent announcement to assemble airplanes in Tianjin, China.
Ideological purity, just like protectionism, destroys jobs in the United States. Just because a Conservative minority with an ideological purity agenda decides the United States should not provide such export financing does not mean that the EC, China, India, Japan, Korea and other countries will make the same decision. A decision not to authorize the Ex-Im Bank simply makes the United States not competitive with other countries. Just as US companies must meet the challenges of global competition so must the United States Government.
WTO GIVES UNITED STATES DEADLINE TO SOLVE CVD PROBLEM IN MANY CASES AGAINST CHINA
On October 9, 2015, the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) gave the US government an April 1, 2016 deadline to comply with a WTO decision overturning 17 US countervailing duty determinations against China, including cases against Solar Cells and Solar Products, Wind Towers, Oil Country Tubular Goods, and other Steel cases. The Arbitrator specifically stated:
In the light of the … considerations relating to the quantitative and qualitative aspects of implementation in the present case, and the margin of flexibility available to the implementing member within its legal system, the arbitrator considers that the particular circumstances of this case justify a reasonable period of time for implementation close to the 15-month guideline.
The WTO overturned the Commerce Department CVD decisions on several grounds, but one of the more important was the decision/presumption that Chinese state-owned companies enterprises are “public bodies” under WTO rules. Therefore, according to Commerce, when a Chinese company purchases a raw material input from such state-owned company, by definition the product is subsidized. In contrast, the WTO ruled that the key criterion for evaluating public bodies is not state ownership but whether the entities in question have the authority to carry out governmental functions.
The WTO panel decision in its July 2014 decision found the US Commerce Department in violation of the Subsidies Agreement based on several different principles, including State-Owned Companies and the failure to consider benchmarks in China to value the subsidy. The US appealed, but the WTO Appellate Panel not only affirmed the panel report, but found many other problems with the Commerce Department determinations
On determining the time for Commerce to comply with the WTO determinations, the WTO arbitrator did not have much sympathy for the Commerce Department argument that it should be given more time to comply with the determination, stating:
It is to be recalled that the implementing member is expected to use all available flexibilities within its legal system to ensure ‘prompt compliance’ with the DSB’s recommendations and rulings. Prioritizing these investigations reflects the exercise of a flexibility that is available to the USDOC and which it is expected to utilize.
THE OCTG STEEL STORY — COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE OVERTURNS COMMERCE OCTG DETERMINATION AGAINST KOREA
One of the more interesting cases is the appeal of the Commerce Department’s determination against Korea in the Oil Country Tubular Goods (“OCTG”) case. The OCTG story starts with the US OCTG industry along with the union bringing an antidumping case against China. Since Commerce does not real use real numbers in China cases, it was easy to wipe out $4 billion in Chinese imports by using import statistics in India as surrogate values and coming up with rates ranging from 32 to almost 100%. The Chinese left the US market because of the artificial antidumping rates.
The US Steel Industry and the Union assumed that US companies would get the Chinese tonnage that was blocked by the Commerce Department order and, of course, that is not what happened. Instead, OCTG producers in Korea, India, Taiwan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, Thailand and Turkey replaced the Chinese. Saying that this was unfair and accusing the other companies of dumping, in 2013 the US OCTG industry and Steel Union brought another round of antidumping and countervailing duty cases against these countries.
But since the countries are market economy countries, the Commerce Department had to use real prices and costs in the countries in question to determine whether dumping is taking place. So what were the Antidumping rates in the attached February 2014 preliminary determination fact sheet, OCTG PRELIMINARY AD DETERMINATION FACT SHEET, in the new round of OCTG cases—Korea 0%, India 0% for the company that cooperated, Philippines 8.9%, Saudi Arabia 2.92%, Taiwan 0 and 2.65%, Thailand 118% because they did not cooperate, Turkey 0% and 4.87%, Ukraine 5.31%, and Vietnam 9.57%.
The OCTG case against Korea, in particular, was a very difficult problem for the US Steel industry and Union because if the 0% Korean Preliminary Determination had remained, no antidumping order would be issued against Korean OCTG and they would have been free to continue shipping substantial quantities to the US market. Moreover, the Korean producers were the ones that took most of the Chinese market share.
In looking at these rates, however, one has to keep these cases in perspective. The first OCTG case against Korea was filed in 1983 to 1984. How do I know, because the first OCTG cases were my cases as a line attorney at the US International Trade Commission. The point is that market economy companies can use computer programs to run their prices and costs and make sure they are not dumping and “dump proof” the company. Since the Korean steel companies know that they will be targeted with these cases, this is just what they did.
This is not gaming the system. The Antidumping and Countervailing are unfair trade statues, and the companies simply eliminated their unfair acts.
As a result of the February 2014 preliminary determinations, predictably the US OCTG Industry and Union were outraged and went to Congress. On June 25, 2014 at a hearing in front of the Senate Finance Committee, the most powerful trade committee in the US Congress, the Industry and Union screamed about unfairness. See http://www.finance.senate.gov/hearings/hearing/?id=e2227102-5056-a032-5262-9d177c5f753f Move the buffering slider to minute 41 when the hearing starts. There is a recess in the hearing so you need to move the buffering slider to 1 hour 47 minutes when the hearing resumes.
During the Senate Finance Committee hearing, Senators called for aggressive trade enforcement in antidumping and countervailing duty cases, including Steel and in particular Oil Country Tubular Goods (“OCTG”), and against China. The Senators described the importance of the legislation they have introduced to stop transshipment and make sure that antidumping and countervailing duty laws are enforced.
The two most prominent witnesses at the Senate Finance Committee were Leo Gerard, International President of the United Steel Workers, and Mario Longhi, President of the United States Steel Corporation. Mr. Gerard proudly claimed at the hearing that the USW has brought antidumping and countervailing duty cases blocking billions of dollars in imports from China.
The hearing was stacked with US producers and a union complaining about China and other countries. No US importers were allowed to testify and present the other side of the argument. When Congress decides to listen to only one side of the trade argument, there is no fair and balanced portrayal of trade problems. The trade war simply gets worse and everyone loses.
At the hearing, Leo W. Gerard, International President, United Steelworkers (“USW”), stated:
USW members and non-union workers alike know firsthand the pain inflicted by foreign predatory, protectionist and unfair trade practices. In industry after industry, they have seen other nations target the U.S. market to fuel their own economic policies, to create jobs for their people and capture the dollars of our consumers. These practices have increasingly resulted in the downsizing of manufacturing and the loss of good family supportive jobs, as companies have offshored and outsourced their production.
The USW has been as successful as it can be in its efforts to counter unfair trade, but it’s a losing game. Indeed, the only way we win is by losing. Lost profits, lost jobs, closed factories, hollowed out communities – that is the price the trade laws demand to show sufficient injury to provide relief. In the year or more it takes to bring a trade case and obtain relief, foreign companies can continue to flood the market. By the time that relief may be provided, the industry is often a shadow of its former self, too many workers have lost their jobs and their families and the communities in which they live have paid a heavy, and often irrevocable, price. . . .
First, as many of the Members of the Committee know, the USW is fighting to ensure that the Department of Commerce carefully review the facts in the Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) case in which they issued a preliminary finding that imports from South Korea would not be subject to dumping margins. We believe this preliminary finding is flawed. Indeed, Senators sent a letter to the Administration asking for a careful review and that effort was mirrored by more than one-third of the House joining in that call. . . .
The second issue, and a critical one, is the issue of currency manipulation. China is the worst culprit, but other nations are following their lead. China has been able to essentially subsidize its exports and tax imports into its market through currency cheating.
Mario Longhi, President, United States Steel Corporation, stated:
. . . . The approach and manner in which foreign companies are dumping thousands of tons of products into the U.S. market leads business leaders such as me to conclude that American steel companies are being targeted for elimination. . . .
Let me illustrate for you how this harm occurs. . . . A year ago, U. S. Steel and other domestic Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) producers filed a trade case against nine countries based on the enormous 113-percent increase of imported OCTG products into this market between 2010-2012. Primarily South Korean companies are the main violators, but companies from India, Vietnam, Turkey and several other countries also dump very significant volumes. . . .
China tried to do the same thing in 2008. We fought and won an OCTG dumping case in 2009, but not before many facilities were idled, thousands of steelworkers lost their jobs, and our communities and our families sustained significant and long-lasting injury.
After we won the case, Chinese producers essentially abandoned the U.S. OCTG market, a clear sign that they could not compete when the playing field was leveled.
As the American economy and our energy demands rebounded, American steel companies spent billions of dollars to improve OCTG facilities across the country. In the past 5 years, U. S. Steel spent more than $2.1 billion across our facilities, $200 million on new facilities at our Lorain Tubular Operations in the last two years alone. However, the respite for the OCTG industry from illegally dumped products was short-lived. Foreign producers quickly seized this opportunity and began flooding our market.
The only difference between 2009 and today is that South Korean and other foreign OCTG producers are cleverer. South Korean companies are effectively targeting our market since they do not sell this product in their own home market or (in substantial volumes) to other nation. Over 98% of what is produced in South Korea is exported directly to the U.S.
Earlier this year, the Department of Commerce issued disappointing preliminary findings that failed to recognize and punish illegally dumped South Korean products. After decades of dumping practice, it appears that these companies have learned to circumvent our trade laws and illegally dump massive amounts of steel products in this market with ease and agility.
So it is not surprising that in advance of the impending final decision by the Department of Commerce, last month, the total OCTG imports hit a high of 431,866 net tons, a 77.4% percent change year/year. The South Koreans exported to the U.S. nearly 214,000 net tons of OCTG in May, an increase from the monthly average of 27,000 net tons in the prior 12 months. They are trying to dump as much product as they can before the final ruling.
The South Korean gamesmanship of our system of laws is disquieting. Their efforts are unchecked and repugnantly effective. . . .
So with enormous Congressional pressure on Commerce, in the final determination the rates for the Korean companies went to 9 to 15%. The only problem for US Steel and the Unions is that Commerce Department determinations can be appealed to the Court of International Trade. It is now clear that the only one who gamed the US trade laws was US Steel itself.
In the attached final determination, factsheet-multiple-octg-ad-cvd-final-071114, to push Korean antidumping rate up, instead of using the actual lower profit rates for Korean OCTG producers and Korean sales of other comparable steel products of about 5 to 6%, which Commerce used in the preliminary determination, Commerce used a 26.11% profit for Tenaris, SA (Tenaris), an Argentinian global producer and seller of OCTG, as described in a research paper prepared by a student at the University of Iowa School of Management. Sounds reasonable right?
On September 2, 2015, in the attached Hu Steel v. United States and US Steel et al., CIT KOREA OCTG, Judge Restani in the Court of International Trade reversed the Commerce Department’s determination in the OCTG from Korea case. Judge Restani first noted:
When using constructed value to calculate the normal value, the constructed value is to include “the actual amounts incurred and realized by the specific exporter or producer being examined . . . for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, in connection with the production and sale of a foreign like product, in the ordinary course of trade, for consumption in the foreign country.” 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(e)(2)(A). If such data is unavailable, however, Commerce must resort to one of three alternatives for calculating an appropriate amount for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and profits:
(i) the actual amounts incurred and realized by the specific exporter or producer being examined in the investigation or review for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, in connection with the production and sale, for consumption in the foreign country, of merchandise that is in the same general category of products as the subject merchandise,
(ii) the weighted average of the actual amounts incurred and realized by exporters or producers that are subject to the investigation or review (other than the exporter or producer described in clause (i)) for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, in connection with the production and sale of a foreign like product, in the ordinary course of trade, for consumption in the foreign country,
(iii) the amounts incurred and realized for selling, general, and administrative expenses, and for profits, based on any other reasonable method, except that the amount allowed for profit may not exceed the amount normally realized by exporters or producers (other than the exporter or producer described in clause (i)) in connection with the sale, for consumption in the foreign country, of merchandise that is in the same general category of products as the subject merchandise, [i.e., what is commonly referred to as the “profit cap.”] . . . .
For the Preliminary Determination, Commerce considered three possible options for CV profit: . . . “[(1)] the 5.3% profit reflected in the audited financial statements for seven Korean OCTG producers, [(2)] the profit earned by HYSCO on its home market sales of non-OCTG pipe products, and [(3)] the 26.11% profit for Tenaris, SA (Tenaris), an Argentinian global producer and seller of OCTG,” as described in a research paper prepared by a student at the University of Iowa School of Management.
The Court noted that the domestic industry’s petition itself used a profit number of 7.19 and 7.22%
Judge Restani went to state that US Steel, in effect, gamed the system because it submitted the Tenaris number in the Iowa Student study after the preliminary determination during the final investigation in such a way that the Korean producers could not provide alternative evidence to rebut the Tenaris number:
In conclusion, the court determines that this was not a simple technical violation that can be overlooked, but rather plaintiffs were substantially prejudiced by Commerce’s acceptance and use of U.S. Steel’s untimely submitted new factual information. On remand, Commerce may simply remove this information from the record and reconsider its CV profit determination based on the information that was submitted in accordance with the regulatory deadlines.
Alternatively, Commerce must determine if and how, at this late date, the prejudice caused by accepting the Tenaris financial statement in violation of the regulations can be rectified.
In a footnote, Judge Restani also stated:
Moreover, this appears to be the first time that Commerce had relied upon a CV profit source that was not based on either production or sales in the home market. . . . The court recognizes that Commerce might have legitimate justifications for this departure, but it does not change the fact that Commerce used data that was submitted late to come to a conclusion that was seemingly at odds with its prior practice, with the result being a large increase in the respondents’ dumping margins sufficient to support an order. This is a make or break issue and Commerce should do its utmost to be fair in such circumstances.
Finally Judge Restani also reversed the Commerce Department because it refused to consider the “Profit Cap” in the statute which limits the profit amount so as not to “exceed the amount normally realized by exporters or producers (other than the exporter or producer described in clause (i)) in connection with the sale, for consumption in the foreign country . . . .” Judge Restani stated:
Even when the record evidence is deficient for the purposes of calculating the profit cap, Commerce must attempt to calculate a profit cap based on the facts otherwise available, and it may dispense with the profit cap entirely only if it provides an adequate explanation as to why the available data would render any cap based on facts available unrepresentative or inaccurate.
The use of an appropriate profit cap seems especially important in this case. The goal in calculating CV profit is to approximate the home market profit experience of the respondents. . . . The profit data imbedded in Tenaris’s financial statement does not appear to be based on any sales or production in Korea. It therefore appears to be a relatively poor surrogate for the home market experience. Additionally, record evidence suggests that Tenaris is a massive producer of OCTG with production and associated services around the world. . . . Record evidence also suggests that Tenaris’s profits are among the highest in the world and that this profit figure is due in large part to Tenaris’s sales of unique, high-end OCTG products and global services. . . .
The Korean producers, on the other hand, appear to be rather modest in comparison, both in the size of their operations and in the products and services they offer. . . . As Commerce recognized in the preamble to its own regulations, “the sales used as the basis for CV profit should not lead to irrational or unrepresentative results.” . . . It appears that dispensing with the profit cap requirement entirely in this case could run the risk that the CV profit rate will be unrepresentative of the respondents’ expected home market experience.
This case is a major defeat for the US Steel industry. We still have to wait and see what Commerce does on remand but if they do what they did in the original preliminary determination, the antidumping order will be lifted on OCTG from Korea.
WELDED LINE PIPE FROM KOREA AND TURKEY
On October , 2015, in the attached fact sheet, factsheet-multiple-welded-line-pipe-ad-cvd-final-100615, the Commerce Department announced the preliminary determination in Welded Line Pipe from Korea and Turkey. The Antidumping rates for the Korean companies range from 2.53% to 6.19%. The antidumping rates for Turkey range from 6 to 22.9%.
Commerce also terminated the Countervailing Duty investigation against Korea because it found the subsidies were de minimis.
COLD ROLLED STEEL PRODUCTS FROM BRAZIL, CHINA, INDIA, JAPAN, KOREA, RUSSIA AND UNITED KINGDOM
On September 10, 2015, the US International Trade Commission (“ITC”) issued a preliminary affirmative injury determination and now the case continues at the Commerce Department.
OTHER TRADE CASES AGAINST CHINA
On October 2, 2015, the Commerce Department issued the attached final determination in the 2013 to 2014 antidumping review investigation. Activated Carbon 13-14 AR Decision Memo Final Results AD AR 10-2-15 Activated Carbon 13-14 AR Final Results AD AR 10-5-15 The Antidumping Rates range from 0% to $1.05 a kilogram and increased because Commerce switched surrogate countries from Philippines to Thailand.
Although there are rumbles of possible negotiations of a US China agreement on Solar Cells and Solar Product, there is no concrete evidence of an actual agreement yet.
As stated before, the real victims of US China Trade War and Antidumping and Countervailing Duty cases are upstream and downstream US producers. Of the approximately 130 antidumping and countervailing duty orders against China, approximately 80 of them are raw material inputs, such as chemicals, metals and steel.
In the Solar Cells/Solar Products case, the real victims are the upstream producers, world class US producers of polysilicon, which goes into Chinese and other solar cells. Because, as President Reagan predicted, China reacted to the US Solar Cells/Solar Products cases by bringing their own case against $2 billion in US exports of polysilicon, major US producers, such Dow and REC Silicon, are in serious trouble.
On September 23, 2015, the Montana Standard reported that REC Silicon in Moses Lake, Washington may have to close its production facility:
REC Silicon — which has a production plant near Butte — could lay off 400 workers at its plant in Moses Lake, Washington, if a snarl over Chinese-imposed tariffs isn’t resolved soon.
It’s unclear exactly how the Moses Lake layoff would affect the Butte REC plant, which employs 260 full-time workers about five miles southwest of town. But a company spokeswoman said Moses Lake will “likely” suffer the majority of cuts, if it comes to that.
The potential cuts — and possible shut-down of the Moses Lake plant — are due to a four-year solar trade dispute between China and the United States.
In the Article, Francine Sullivan, REC counsel and vice president of legal and business development, stated:
There are no confirmed layoffs in Butte. “It’s not a shut-down notice, but if the trade case continues, we may be forced to close down Moses Lake. We haven’t made a final decision about Moses Lake. . . . putting the Moses Lake plant at risk because 80 percent of the plant’s polysilicon goes to customers in China.
Tore Torvund, REC Silicon CEO stated that they were looking for a US China Solar agreement every day:
We are at a critical juncture. We are looking at this every day. If we can’t get a resolution in the short term, we will be faced with this tough decision.”
Sullivan further stated:
It’s logical that most of the costs will come out of Moses Lake. We’ll look to do anything we can to keep the plant alive.
BOLTLESS STEEL SHELVING
On October 21, 2015, Commerce published in the Federal Register the attached antidumping and countervailing duty orders in the Boltless Steel Shelving Units from China case, STEEL SHELVING AD ORDER STEEL SHELVING CVD ORDER.
PET RESIN FROM CHINA
In the attached fact sheet, PET RESIN PRELIM CHINA, the Commerce Department issued a preliminary determination in Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Resin from China and a number of other countries. Although the antidumping rates for the other countries were in the single digits, based on surrogate values from import statistics in Thailand, the Commerce Department found antidumping rates ranging from 125.12 to 145.94% for the Chinese companies.
In deciding to use Thailand as the surrogate country, Commerce looked at a list of the following potential surrogate countries: Bulgaria, Ecuador, Romania, South Africa, Thailand, and Ukraine.
OCTOBER ANTIDUMPING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS
On October 1, 2015, Commerce published the attached Federal Register notice, OCT REVIEWS, regarding antidumping and countervailing duty cases for which reviews can be requested in the month of October. The specific antidumping cases against China are: Barium Carbonate, Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide, Helical Spring Lock Washers, Polyvinyl Alcohol, and Steel Wire Garment Hangers.
For those US import companies that imported Barium Carbonate, Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide, Helical Spring Lock Washers, Polyvinyl Alcohol, and Steel Wire Garment Hangers from China during the antidumping period October 1, 2014-September 30, 2015 or if this is the First Review Investigation, for imports imported after the Commerce Department preliminary determinations in the initial investigation, the end of this month is a very important deadline. Requests have to be filed at the Commerce Department by the Chinese suppliers, the US importers and US industry by the end of this month to participate in the administrative review.
In my experience, many US importers do not realize the significance of the administrative review investigations. They think the antidumping and countervailing duty case is over because the initial investigation is over. Many importers are blindsided because their Chinese supplier did not respond in the administrative review, and the US importers find themselves liable for millions of dollars in retroactive liability. In the recent Solar Cells 2012-2013 final review determination, for example, the following Chinese companies were determined to no longer be eligible for a separate antidumping rate and to have the PRC antidumping rate of 238.95%:
(1) Shanghai Suntech; (2) Wuxi Sunshine; (3) Changzhou NESL Solartech Co., Ltd.; (4) CSG PVTech Co., Ltd.; (5) Era Solar Co., Ltd.; (6) Innovosolar; (7) Jiangsu Sunlink PV Technology Co., Ltd.; (8) Jiawei Solarchina Co., Ltd.; (9) Jinko Solar Co., Ltd.; (10) LDK Solar Hi-tech (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.; (11) Leye Photovoltaic Science Tech.; (12) Magi Solar Technology; (13) Ningbo ETDZ Holdings, Ltd.; (14) ReneSola; (15) Shanghai Machinery Complete Equipment (Group) Corp., Ltd.; (16) Shenglong PV-Tech; (17) Solarbest Energy-Tech (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.; (18) Suzhou Shenglong PV–TECH Co., Ltd.; (19) Zhejiang Shuqimeng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd.; (20) Zhejiang Xinshun Guangfu Science and Technology Co., Ltd.; (21) Zhejiang ZG-Cells Co., Ltd.; (22) Zhiheng Solar Inc.; and (23) LDK Hi-Tech (Nanchang Co., Ltd.
RUSSIA—US SANCTIONS AS A RESULT OF UKRAINE CRISIS
On July 30, 2015, OFAC issued an Advisory, entitled “Obfuscation of Critical Information in Financial and Trade Transactions Involving the Crimea Region of Ukraine,” to call attention to practices that have been used to circumvent or evade the Crimean sanctions. While billed as an “Advisory,” the agency’s release stands as a warning to the financial services and international trade sectors of their obligation to implement adequate controls to guard against such evasive practices and ensure compliance with their obligations under the Crimean sanctions.
On May 21, 2015, the Commerce Department filed changes to the export rules to allow unlicensed delivery of Internet technology to Crimea region of Ukraine, saying the change will allow the Crimean people to reclaim the narrative of daily life from their Russian occupants. Under a final rule, which is attached to my blog, www.uschinatradewar.com, individuals and companies may deliver source code and technology for “instant messaging, chat and email, social networking” and other programs to the region without first retaining a license from the federal government, according to Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security.
Commerce stated:
“Facilitating such Internet-based communication with the people located in the Crimea region of Ukraine is in the United States’ national security and foreign policy interests because it helps the people of the Crimea region of Ukraine communicate with the outside world.”
On September 3, 2014, I spoke in Vancouver Canada on the US Sanctions against Russia, which are substantial, at an event sponsored by Deloitte Tax Law and the Canadian, Eurasian and Russian Business Association (“CERBA”). Attached to my blog are copies of the PowerPoint or the speech and a description of our Russian/Ukrainian/Latvian Trade Practice for US importers and exporters. In addition, the blog describes the various sanctions in effect against Russia.
Pursuant to the OFAC regulations, U.S. persons are prohibited from conducting transactions, dealings, or business with Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDNs). The blocked persons list can be found at http://sdnsearch.ofac.treas.gov/. See also: www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/programs/pages/ukraine.aspx . The list includes the Russian company, United Shipbuilding, and a number of Russian Banks, including Bank Rossiya, SMP Bank, Bank of Moscow, Gazprombank OAO, Russian Agricultural Bank, VEB, and VTB Bank. The “Sectoral Sanctions Identification List” (the “SSI List”) that identifies specific Russian persons and entities covered by these sectoral sanctions can be found at www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/SDN-List/pages/ssi_list.aspx.
The sanctions will eventually increase more with the Congressional passage of the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, which is attached to my blog, which President Obama signed into law on December 19, 2014. Although the law provides for additional sanctions if warranted, at the time of the signing, the White House stated:
“At this time, the Administration does not intend to impose sanctions under this law, but the Act gives the Administration additional authorities that could be utilized, if circumstances warranted.”
The law provides additional military and economic assistance to Ukraine. According to the White House, instead of pursuing further sanctions under the law, the administration plans to continue collaborating with its allies to respond to developments in Ukraine and adjust its sanctions based on Russia’s actions. Apparently the Administration wants its sanctions to parallel those of the EU. As President Obama stated:
“We again call on Russia to end its occupation and attempted annexation of Crimea, cease support to separatists in eastern Ukraine, and implement the obligations it signed up to under the Minsk agreements.”
Russia, however responded in defiance with President Putin blasting the sanctions and a December 20th Russian ministry statement spoke of possible retaliation.
One day after signing this bill into law, the President issued an Executive Order “Blocking Property of Certain Persons and Prohibiting Certain Transactions with Respect to the Crimea Region of Ukraine” (the “Crimea-related Executive Order”). President Obama described the new sanctions in a letter issued by the White House as blocking:
New investments by U.S. persons in the Crimea region of Ukraine
Importation of goods, services, or technology into the United States from the Crimea region of Ukraine
Exportation, re-exportation, sale, or supply of goods, services, or technology from the United States or by a U.S. person to the Crimea region of Ukraine
The facilitation of any such transactions.
The Crimea-related Executive Order also contains a complicated asset-blocking feature. Pursuant to this order, property and interests in property of any person may be blocked if determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, that the person is operating in Crimea or involved in other activity in Crimea.
The EU has also issued sanctions prohibiting imports of goods originating in Crimea or Sevastopol, and providing financing or financial assistance, as well as insurance and reinsurance related to the import of such goods. In addition, the EU is blocking all foreign investment in Crimea or Sevastopol.
Thus any US, Canadian or EU party involved in commercial dealings with parties in Crimea or Sevastopol must undertake substantial due diligence to make sure that no regulations in the US or EU are being violated.
CUSTOMS, LACEY ACT VIOLATIONS AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCES THAT LUMBER LIQUIDATORS PLEADS GUILTY TO CUSTOMS AND LACEY ACT VIOLATIONS AND AGREES TO PAY MORE THAN $13 MILLION IN FINES
On October 22, 2015, the Justice Department announced that Lumber Liquidators has pled guilty to a felony conviction for import of illegal timber from China and agreed to pay at $13 million penalty, the largest fine ever under the Lacey Act. In the attached announcement, Lumber Liquidators Inc. Pleads Guilty to Environmental Crimes and Agrees to, the Justice Department states:
Virginia-based hardwood flooring retailer Lumber Liquidators Inc. pleaded guilty today in federal court in Norfolk, Virginia, to environmental crimes related to its illegal importation of hardwood flooring, much of which was manufactured in China from timber that had been illegally logged in far eastern Russia, in the habitat of the last remaining Siberian tigers and Amur leopards in the world. . . .
Lumber Liquidators was charged earlier this month in the Eastern District of Virginia with one felony count of importing goods through false statements and four misdemeanor violations of the Lacey Act, which makes it a crime to import timber that was taken in violation of the laws of a foreign country and to transport falsely-labeled timber across international borders into the United States. The charges describe Lumber Liquidators’ use of timber that was illegally logged in Far East Russia, as well as false statements on Lacey Act declarations which obfuscated the true species and source of the timber. This is the first felony conviction related to the import or use of illegal timber and the largest criminal fine ever under the Lacey Act.
“Lumber Liquidators’ race to profit resulted in the plundering of forests and wildlife habitat that, if continued, could spell the end of the Siberian tiger,” said Assistant Attorney General John C. Cruden for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “Lumber Liquidators knew it had a duty to follow the law, and instead it flouted the letter and spirit of the Lacey Act, ignoring its own red flags that its products likely came from illegally harvested timber, all at the expense of law abiding competitors. Under this plea agreement, Lumber Liquidators will pay a multi-million dollar penalty, forfeit millions in assets, and must adhere to a rigorous compliance program. We hope this sends a strong message that we will not tolerate such abuses of U.S. laws that protect and preserve the world’s endangered plant and animal species.” . . .
“Companies knowingly accepting illegally sourced materials need to recognize there are far-reaching consequences to their actions,” said Special Agent in Charge Clark E. Settles of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Washington, D.C. “In this case, in addition to violating U.S. customs law, Lumber Liquidators contributed to the potential eradication of an endangered species simply to increase profit margins.” . . . .
For example, Lumber Liquidators employees were aware that timber from the Russian Far East was considered, within the flooring industry and within Lumber Liquidators, to carry a high risk of being illegally sourced due to corruption and illegal harvesting in that remote region. Despite the risk of illegality, Lumber Liquidators increased its purchases from Chinese manufacturers using timber sourced in the Russian Far East. . . .
Under the plea agreement, Lumber Liquidators will pay $13.15 million, including $7.8 million in criminal fines, $969,175 in criminal forfeiture and more than $1.23 million in community service payments. Lumber Liquidators has also agreed to a five year term of organizational probation and mandatory implementation of a government-approved environmental compliance plan and independent audits. In addition, the company will pay more than $3.15 million in cash through a related civil forfeiture. The more than $13.15 million dollar penalty is the largest financial penalty for timber trafficking under the Lacey Act and one of the largest Lacey Act penalties ever.
On August 21, 2015, Lusida Rubber Products, Inc. filed the attached trade secret unfair competition case against Point Industrial, LLC, Zu Guo 16 (Michael) Xu, Wei Wei (Jackie). Lusida Shanghai complaint
On August 28, 2015, Willis Electric Co., Ltd. filed the attached patent case against Polygroup Limited (Macao Commercial Offshore), Polygroup Macau Limited (BVI), and Polytree (H.K.) Co. Ltd. POLYGROUP
On September 8, 2015, Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., and Valve Corporation filed the attached copyright case against Lilith Games (Shanghai) Co. Ltd., uCool, Inc., and uCool Ltd. BLIZZARD COPYRIGHT
On September 11, 2015, Segway Inc., Deka Products Limited Partnership and Ninebot (Tianjin_ filed the attached patent complaint against Inventist, Inc. Segway v Inventist complaint
T&D JANUARY REPORT
In September and October T&D also sent us their attached August and September reports on Chinese competition law, T&D Monthly Antitrust Report of August 2015 TD Monthly Antitrust Report of September 2015.
Securities Update October 2015
Recent Developments in Chinese Reverse Mergers and Corporate Governance
A decade after the heyday of “reverse mergers” of Chinese companies who entered the U.S. securities market through U.S. registered companies, some of these deals are beginning to unravel. There are recent federal enforcement actions and prosecution of some key persons who arranged such deals. The U.S. government alleges that the participants violated U.S. securities law by engaging in practices that misrepresented the actual value of the company’s stocks and personally profiting from such practices.
On September 10, 2015, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan announced criminal charges against Benjamin Wey, a New York-based financier.[1] Wey gained a reputation for orchestrating reverse mergers of Chinese companies with publicly traded companies in the United States in order to sell securities in the United States. The charges against Wey include wire fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering. Wey allegedly conspired with family members and a Swiss stock broker to control large blocks of stocks in companies that he helped to engage in reverse mergers from 2007 to 2011. He allegedly manipulated the prices of those stocks in order to sell his shares at a significant profit. U.S. federal agents arrested Wey during a dawn raid on his home, and he posted bail for $10 million, secured in part by his $2 million house.
Also on September 10, 2015, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an order against Shawn A. Becker, an unlicensed broker who participated in the reverse merger of several Chinese firms (China Auto Logistics Inc., Guanwei Recycling Corp., and Kandi Technologies Corp.).[2] These companies entered the U.S. securities market through an engineered acquisition of a U.S. shell company. Becker allegedly drove up the closing price of the company’s unregistered stocks (a practice called, “marking the close”), in order to induce investors to purchase the stocks from 2009 to 2012.
Becker allegedly profited from the arrangement by taking commission from the sales of the pink-sheet stocks, while the principals of the shell company profited by offloading their shares in the company.[3] Under the terms of Becker’s settlement and the S.E.C. order, he is barred from participating in brokerage activities. In order to apply to engage in brokerage services, he would first need to disgorge profits and satisfy any arbitral awards against him as a result of his activities.
There are also developments involving allegations of corporate misgovernance by some companies. On September 30, 2015, Focus Media of Shanghai, a major Chinese digital display advertising company, agreed to a $55.6 million settlement with the SEC.[4] The U.S. government alleges that Focus Media failed to disclose the fact that the company sold shares in a subsidiary to company insiders at a favorable price several months before they resold these shares to a private equity firm at six times the previous price. The investigation allegedly uncovered deficiencies in the company’s books and records for documentation regarding these transactions. It appears that the circumstances of the transactions may not have been properly disclosed to the company’s board of directors. SEC thus accused Focus Media and its Chief Executive Officer, Jason Jiang, with providing materially inaccurate information to the board of directors regarding the transactions and with failure to maintain books and records as required by securities law. Focus Media agreed to pay $34.6 million in penalties. Jiang agreed to pay $21 million in penalties, disgorgement of profits, and pre-judgment interest. The SEC order further notes that Jiang’s liability is a personal debt that is not dischargeable in bankruptcy.
Like Focus Media, some other companies also face accusations that they did not properly maintain books and records. In a recently filed case in the Delaware Court of Chancery, stockholders allege that China Integrated Energy, a Delaware company that registered its common stock with the SEC in 1999, has failed to make required annual and periodic financial disclosures for the years 2012 through 2015.[5] In 2014, the company filed an annual Form 10-K statement that disclosed the fact that the company’s shares fell from $8.30 per share in 2010 to $0.80 per share in 2011. The plaintiffs seek access to the company’s books and records under Delaware law.
These developments involving Chinese companies in the United States come at a time of increasing regulatory scrutiny of the securities market in China. Because of the recent upheavals in stock prices in China, the Chinese government directly intervened in the markets by prohibiting the sales of stocks by major shareholders who hold more than 5% of common stock in companies for a period of six months. The China Securities Regulatory Commission recently announced eight penalty cases against persons who violated that order, totaling RMB 22 million (U.S. $4.5 million) in fines.[6]
Recently, Dorsey& Whitney LLP issued its attached September 2015 Anti-Corruption Digest,AntiCorruptionDigestSept2015. The Digest states with regards to China:
Continental, the German supplier of automobile parts, is reported to have replaced its tire sales management team in China due to allegations of corruption. The new management, which has been in charge since July, is said not to be commenting on the matter while the investigation is in process.
The matter reportedly involves allegations that members of the previous management team gained financial benefits on a personal level through business deals conducted by the company. Further reports state that the extent to which the former employees allegedly enriched themselves is currently unknown.
On September 29, 2015, Malcolm Cork, Vision Capital Advantage Fund LP, et al filed the attached complaint against China Integrated Energy, Inc. in Delaware Court alleging that the company had failed to make required annual and periodic financial disclosures for the years 2012 through 2015. DELAWARE COMPLAINT CHINA ENERGY
On October 5, 2015, Gary Buelow filed the attached partial class action securities case against Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., Jack Ma and a number of banks and securities companies. BUELOWSMA
On October 9, 2015, Guangyi Xu filed the attached class action securities case against China Cache International Holdings Ltd., Song Wang, Jing An, and Ken Vincent Qingshi Zhang. CHINA CACHE CASE
On October 21, 2015 Rustem Nurlybayev filed the attached partial class action securities case against Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., Jack Ma and a number of banks and security companies. RUSTEMSMALL
If you have any questions about these cases or about the US trade, trade adjustment assistance, customs, 337, patent, US/China antitrust or securities law in general, please feel free to contact me.
[1] B. Van Voris, “New York Global Group’s Wey Charged in Reverse-Merger Fraud,” Bloomberg Business, Sept. 10, 2015, available at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-10/new-york-global-group-founder-charged-with-securities-fraud.
[2] In the Matter of Shawn A. Becker, No. 3-16805 (S.E.C. Sept. 10, 2015), available at http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2015/34-75891.pdf.
[3] A. Wolf, “Ex-Stock Broker Sanctioned Over Reverse Merger Scheme,” Law360, Sept. 10, 2015, available at http://www.law360.com/articles/701620/print?section=securities.
[4] E. Beeson, “China’s Focus Media, CEO Settle With SEC For $55.6M,” Law360, Sept. 30, 2015, available at http://www.law360.com/articles/709353/print?section=securities; see In the Matter of Focus Media Holdings, Ltd., No. 3-16852 (S.E.C. Sept. 30, 2015), available at http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2015/33-9933.pdf.
[5] Verified Complaint, Cork v. China Integrated Energy, Inc. (Del. Ch. Ct. Sept. 29, 2015).
[6] A. Rubeinstein, “China Imposes $4.5M In Fines In Illegal Trading Crackdown,” Law360, Sept. 30, 2015, available at http://www.law360.com/articles/709035/print?section=securities.
Filed Under: activated carbon, Agriculture, Alibaba, antidumping duty, antidumping review investigation, antitrust law, Armed Forces Committee, Bernie Sanders, CBP, China Cyber attacks, China Hacking, China Trade Politics, Chinese antitrust law, CIT, class action, Cold Rolled Steel, Congress, Copyright, countervailing duty, currency manipulation, currency manipulation agreement, currency manipulation side deal, custom fraud, Customs, Customs Fraud, cyber agrement, Cyber Attacks, Dave Reichert, Derek Kilmer, DOJ, Donald Trump, Evasion Antidumping Orders, Evasion Trade Laws, Ex-Im Bank, Fast Track, Fast Track Trade Legislation, fcpa, fiduciary duty, foreign corrupt practices act, Fraud, Free Trade, General, Hacking, Hardwood Plywood, Hilary Clinton, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means Committee, India, Infringement, International Trade Commission, ITC, James R. Clapper, Justice Department, Lacey Act, Liability, lobbying, Lumber Liquidators, mandatory respondents, Marco Rubio, Market Economy China, MOFCOM, national security, New Dem Pac, NME, OCTG, Office Paper, Oil Country Tubular Goods, Patent, PET Resin, Politics, polysilicon, President, President Obama, President Xi Jinping, Presidential Primary, Presidential Trade Politics, Protectionism, Reagan, retaliation, retroactive liability, Reverse Merger, Rick Larsen, Ron Kind, Ronald Reagan, Russia, Safeguards, Securities and Exchange Commission, Securities Law, SED, SED talks, Senate, Senate Finance Committee, Shellfish, Smoot Hawley, Solar Cells, Solar Products, Steel, Steel Cases, steel shelving, Steel Sinks, Suzan DelBene, TAAC, TAAF, Tariffs, TPP, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center, Trade Adjustment Assistance Center for Firms, trade law, Trade Legislation, Trade Policy, Trade Promotion Authority, Trade Secrets, Trans Pacific Partnership, Transshipment, Ukraine, undervaluation Yuan, Unions, United States Trade Representative, US China Trade War, US Commerce Department, US Court of International Trade, US Sanctions, US Sanctions Russia, ustr, Washington State, Welded Line Pipe, Wind Towers, World Trade Organization, WTO, Xi Speech Tagged With: activated carbon, agriculture, Alibaba, antidumping, antitrust, cherries, china, Chinese antitrust, CIT, class action, Cold Rolled Steel, Commerce, Commerce Department, Congress, countervailing duty, criminal, currency manipulation, currency manipulation agreement, currency manipulation side deal, customs, customs fraud, cyber hacking, cybersecurity, DOJ, espoinage, evasion, evasion trade laws, fraud, Globalization vitimhood, House of Representatives, House Ways and Means, Import Alliance America, importer of record, India, India Trade Policy, International Trade Victimhood, ITC, Justice Department, Lumber Liquidators, OCTG, Oil Country Tubular Goods, patent, PET Resin, politics, potatos, President Xi Jinping, retroactive liability, reverse merger, Russia, Russia sanctions, SEC, securities, Securities and Exchange Commssion, solar cells, Solar Cells China, steel shelving, subsidy, Tariff Rate Reductions, TPP, TPP benefits, TPP Chapters, TPP Terms, TPP text, trade benefits, trade law, trade war, Trans Pacific Parnership, Treasury Department, Treasury Secretary, Ukraine sanctions, us china trade war, US Court of International Trade, US Sanctions Russia, ustr, Welded Line Pipe, wto
US China Trade War — Stock Market Crash, Presidential Trade Politics, Trade Policy, Customs, Antitrust and Securities
The Chinese stock market crash and world- wide effect on stock markets around the World has created a crisis with day to day developments. The World Stock market crash stated on August 24, 2015 and went through to August 27th and 28th, when World markets recovered. This blog post follows the day to day developments during this period.
The July and early August stock market crash in China was followed by a slight devaluation of the Chinese yuan, which, in turn, created panic as many investors feared that a substantial slow-down in the Chinese market would affect economies world-wide. That in turn triggered more falls in the Chinese stock market and subsequent crashes in stock markets around the World.
The real issue now is what is the real state of the Chinese economy and how that will affect Chinese and US companies in the future.
The parallel story was the US Presidential Primary in which the main contenders as a result of the crash pounded free trade and China in particular provoking a question will the real loser in the 2016 US election be free trade? Although many US politicians may be happy that China is falling economically, the direct impact on the US stock market and other stock markets around the World indicates how the World economy is very interconnected. The more the US pounds China, the more it hurts itself.
As predicted, the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) did not conclude at the Hawaii meeting, but it continues forward. In addition, the EXIM bank has problems and there have been slight technical changes to the US antidumping and countervailing law, which were passed in the African Growth and Opportunity Act. In addition to the China and World Stock Market Crash and Trade Policy, this blog post will cover Trade, Customs, 337, including the Suprema case, IP/patent, antitrust and securities.
I will also be in Hong Kong, Shanghai and Beijing, China from September 7 to 26, first in Hong Kong from Sept 7 to 12, Shanghai 12 to 18th and Beijing from 18th to the 26th. If anyone would like to talk to me about developments in trade and customs law, please feel free to contact me.
CHINA STOCK MARKET CRASH
CHINA STOCK MARKET CRASH—STAGE 2 WORLD MARKETS CRASH
After my last post at the end of July on the Chinese stock market crash, on August 24, 2015, despite assurances from Secretary of Treasury Jack Lew, https://grabien.com/story.php?id=32165&from=allstories, that the fall in the Chinese stock market would not affect world markets, there was a sharp fall in stock exchanges around the World as China’s stock exchange started the day off by falling another 8.5% to put the Chinese exchanges in negative territory for 2015.
On August 24th, the New York Post yelled out, “Wall Street Really Freaked Out This Morning” and went on to state:
An enormous shudder swept through Wall Street on Monday as the Dow Jones industrial average cratered more than 1,000 points, or about 6.2 percent, in early trading — before leveling off at a decline of about 450 points, or 2.7 percent, as fears of a global economic slowdown once again spooked US investors.
The plunge was a wake-up call to Main Street and Wall Street alike. . . .
The huge Dow sell-off follows an 8.5 percent decline in Asia markets. In Europe, markets were down as much a 6 percent. . . . The global market sell-off began earlier this month when China — the world’s No. 2 economy behind the US — devalued its currency twice in a bid to jumpstart its economy.
China’s GDP, which was in the mid- to upper-single digits, had slowed to the lower-single digits. “Nobody really knows for sure, from fundamental perspective, will we go into recession, will China go into recession,” Stovall said. . . .
In fact, at the end of trading on August 24th, Dow Jones lost 588 points, a drop of 3.58%. to close at 15,871.
On August 24th, the Wall Street Journal also reported:
U.S. stocks pared most of Monday’s steep losses after a rocky morning during which the Dow Jones Industrial Average briefly plummeted more than 1,000 points. . . .
The Dow industrials plunged as much as 1,089 points shortly after the open, marking the index’s largest one-day point decline ever on an intraday basis, amid a selloff that has hammered stock markets from Beijing to London to New York. . . .
Fears that China’s economy is slowing dramatically sparked the heavy selling in stocks around the globe in recent days. Beijing’s unexpected move to devalue its currency two weeks ago raised the alarm that the world’s second largest economy may be in worse shape than many had thought. Since then, weak economic data have fueled worries that a drop-off in Chinese growth could cause a global slowdown. . . .
The Wall Street Journal also stated in the August 24th edition:
Beijing’s struggles this summer have spooked many investors into viewing China as a threat to, rather than a rescuer of, global growth. During the financial crisis of 2008 and early 2009, China, with a colossal stimulus plan, acted as a shock absorber. Lately, It Is China that Is providing the shocks.
Over the past week, it has grown clear how dependent a growth-starved world is on China, which accounts for 15% of global output but has contributed up to half of global growth in recent years.
Given this dependency one reason markets have been so unnerved is that China’s economy remains something of a black box. For starters, analysts have long wondered about the accuracy of government economic statistics. And levers pulled by Chinese policy makers can be unconventional.
This is seen in Beijing’s desire to micromanage the yuan’s value, which undercuts its ability to pursue an independent monetary policy because of spillover effects on domestic liquidity.
On the same day, the Washington Post reported:
China’s ‘Black Monday’ spreads stock market fears worldwide….
Stock market jitters spread throughout Asia and the rest of the world, and Wall Street sustained a major plunge, after Chinese stocks recorded their biggest slump in eight years during what China’s state media dubbed “Black Monday.”
The collapse in Chinese stocks was fueled by mounting concerns about an economic slowdown here, but it has fed into a wider sell-off in emerging markets. . . ..
“A lot of questions are being asked by investors,” said Chris Weston, chief markets strategist at IG in Melbourne. “This is a confidence game, and when you don’t have confidence, you press the sell button.” . . ..
“Markets are panicking,” Takako Masai, head of research at Shinsei Bank in Tokyo, told the Reuters news agency. “Things are starting to look like the Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s.
See also following article from Bloomberg on how the slide in the Chinese market has hit global markets– http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-21/these-charts-show-how-hard-china-has-hit-global-markets.
What are the lessons to be learned from the Chinese stock market drop? There are lessons for China and the United States.
The lesson for China is that accurate economic and corporate data, including economic data from village, city and Provincial governments and corporate earnings of listed companies, are incredibly important. Many countries and investors question the accuracy of the Chinese government economic statistics. In fact, one Chinese has told me that based on electricity consumption numbers, the real China growth number is 4%. Other commentators have argued that the real number is a negative number.
The problem is that the 7% economic growth number is not based on hard economic data because Chinese governments at the village, city and the provincial level play with their economic data to make themselves look good.
In addition, as stated in my last newsletter, there is no market regulator in China to protect the integrity of the Chinese stock market, as there is in the US, Europe, Hong Kong and other countries. The market regulators, such as the US Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), make sure that earnings and financial statements issued by listed companies, in fact, are accurate. There is no such assurance in the Chinese market.
Many experts in China have told me that I simply “do not understand the Chinese way.” If the “Chinese way” means having different sets of accounting books and providing different corporate data or economic data depending upon what the government authority wants, the problem with that Chinese way is that it deprives the Chinese government of accurate data it needs to manage its own economy. The Chinese way also encourages wild swings in the Chinese stock market as investors in China and abroad simply do not know what numbers are accurate.
The “Chinese way” of not having a governmental authority to ensure the accuracy of economic data from villages, cities and provinces and corporate data from listed companies has contributed to the sharp fall in the Chinese stock market and the loss of trillions of dollars. China is no longer a developing company. Economic decisions in China impact the rest of the World. Neither the World nor China can afford acting as if China is a developing country. As a modern advanced country, China needs to ensure the accuracy of its economic and corporate data.
For the United States, the lesson is that the World economy is very interrelated and interconnected, and what happens in China affects the US market. It is simply impossible for the US to cut or delink itself from China.
The US market cannot be isolated from China and the rest of the World. When one hits China and other foreign countries, as many politicians do, such as Donald Trump, that in turn can hurt the US. Ira Stoll who writes for the NY Sun blames the US market crash in part on Donald Trump http://www.nysun.com/national/the-trump-recession-markets-start-to-react-to/89263/. See also New York Sun Editorial on Donald Trump at http://www.nysun.com/editorials/an-economic-imbecile/89259/.
Trump reacted by stating that he was not to blame for just pointing out the problems and that the US should delink from China. See http://video.foxnews.com/v/4441195997001/trump-talks-stock-market-slide-biden-and-border-security/?intcmp=hpvid1#sp=show-clips. So that means, as described below, that the US should stop shipping its $123 billion plus in exports to China because it should delink from China. Correct?
Sometimes when you jump up and down on China, you end up hurting the United States. Always blaming China for the US economic problems may feel good and be good election politics, but it is not good economic policy. When Hank Paulson was the Secretary of Treasury under President George W. Bush, he firmly believed that the economic relationship between the US and China was the most important economic relationship in the World. US politicians should understand this important point.
For Republicans, the inconvenient truth is that President Ronald Reagan was a free trader. As President Ronald Reagan stated on June 28, 1986 in a speech from his California ranch, “Protectionism becomes destructionism; it costs jobs.”
CHINA STOCK MARKET CRASH – STAGE 3 MOST WORLD MARKETS RECOVER BUT CHINESE STOCK MARKET CONTINUES TO FALL
On August 25, 2015, World markets, including the US, rebounded, but then fell again as the Chinese stock market continued a straight line fall. After surging through most of the trading day, the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 205 points, or 1.29% to drop to 15,666.
On August 26, 2015, Wall Street recovered as the Dow Jones average went up 620 points to 16,285, but the Shanghai stock market fell again by 1.37% as well as Hong Kong.
After the Chinese government cut its interest rate the fifth time in nine months, on August 25th stocks went up around the World, but then fell back. But in China it continued to be a straight line decline. Shares in Shanghai closed 7.6% lower as the index fell below 3000 for the first time since December, following the worst one-day loss in more than eight years on Monday. China’s stock plunge has wiped out more than $1 trillion in value from equities over the past four days.
The Chinese government apparently has stopped trying to stop the market plunge because it simply costs too much money. As mentioned in prior newsletters, stock market bubbles get so big that no government can control the situation. The Chinese government now appears powerless to prevent a further slide in the country’s stock market, as the country’s main share index plunged for a fourth straight day.
As Wei Wei, an analyst at Huaxi Securities in Shanghai:
“At the moment there’s panic in the market, because we have lots of retail investors. We’ve never experienced anything like this in China’s stock market, the speed of the decline and the scale of it.”
Global markets have lost trillions of dollars in market value over the last few weeks, erasing all gains for the entire year and creating fears of an ever deepening loss.
When the Chinese market first started its drop, authorities unleashed a series of measures to stop the slide, establishing a $400 billion fund to buy stocks, ordering state-owned companies to buy shares, banning large shareholders from selling and even launching criminal investigations into short sellers.
Aside from the central bank’s action, however, the Chinese government authorities appear to be largely standing aside this time, partly because they know they cannot stem a global slide in equity markets, and partly because government intervention to buy shares was simply becoming too expensive.
As Li Jiange, vice chairman of state-owned investment company Central Huijin, stated:
“The trade volume of the market can reach 2 trillion yuan ($300 billion) a day, which means if it collapsed no one could save it. The issues of the market should be handled by the market itself.”
As another Chinese analyst stated:
“The authorities stepped in and tried to save the stock market once. And you can see it is not working. The authorities might step in but probably not in as high profile a way as they did last time. It’s not helpful for them to interfere like that.”
On August 26, 2015, CAIXIN, a well-known newspaper/magazine in China, issued an editorial stating:
Counting the Cost of Gov’t Intervention in Stock Market
Regulators should take a long look at their recent behavior because the bourses’ future depends on government doing its job the right way
Two months into the government’s unprecedented efforts to save the stock market – which had its most turbulent week starting on August 18 since state-backed investors intervened to end volatility in early July – it is time we consider what comes next.
On August 14, the China Securities Regulatory Commission announced that the China Securities Finance Corp. (CSF), which has played a central role in the government’s campaign to bail out the market, sold an unspecified amount of stocks it recently bought to Central Huijin Investment Ltd.
It would be wishful thinking to believe that this means the CSF has more money to continue buying stocks. Rather, the deal marked an end to operations that have plowed nearly 2 trillion yuan into the A share market since it took a nosedive in mid-June.
The sheer volume of the capital involved and the consequences that may follow over a long period demand that we seriously reflect on what was done and what should have been learned.
The money the CSF used to buy the shares primarily came from commercial banks. It will need to repay those loans quickly with the funds it received from Central Huijin, which raised the funds it needed for its purchase by issuing bonds. Costs aside, Central Huijin’s mandate is to hold stakes in financial institutions on behalf of the state. Supporting the stock market is not its job.
When announcing the share transfer, the securities regulator also said “the stock market goes up and down according to its own laws and the government will not intervene under normal circumstances.” Perhaps this statement is intended to signal that the government’s intervention has concluded.
The announcement also said that the CSF “will continue to play a stabilizing role in many ways should the market experience severe and abnormal fluctuations and possibly trigger systemic risk.” The emphasis here should fall on how the government defines “abnormal fluctuations” and “systemic risk.” Ambiguity on these two important questions will have grave consequences.
It is still too early for a thorough review of the costs and benefits of the government’s involvement in the stock market, but some judgments can be made. To start, the regulator should not have tried to get the stock index to go up. Also, the CSF seemed to have picked stocks randomly, pouring capital into valuable and worthless companies indiscriminately. Critics have questioned the wisdom of these actions, and some voiced concerns about insider trading.
Many other issues remain to be resolved. The first is defining the role of the CSF. The institution has become a de facto stock market stabilization fund in that it snaps up shares few others want, and the government has said this will remain its mission for years. Critics say the very existence of the fund distorts the market, not to mention that trillions of yuan are at stake. Deciding what the CSF can do with the money – now that its main job has changed – should be done according to the law. . . .
Also at risk is the sense of rationality that the government has tried for years to instill in stock investors.
Ever since the CSF stepped into the market, speculators have started gambling again, to the detriment of the market. The message some investors took away from the intervention is that the government will always ride to the rescue when the market collapses. The moral hazard this created backtracks on progress that has been made over many years on investor education. . . .
The capital market cannot grow in a healthy manner with the CSF playing the role of savior. It should end this role sooner rather than later. . . .
The regulator must learn the right lessons this time. Reflecting on what it did wrong would be a start. The future of the market depends upon it doing its job right.
For the full editorial, see http://english.caixin.com/2015-08-26/100843837.html.
Pointing to the factory and consumer price data, Mr. Yu Yongding, a prominent Chinese economist and a former adviser to the central bank, stated:
China’s economy will get worse before it gets better. Chinese companies are struggling with high debt loads and low prices. China has entered a stage of deflation.
Although the fundamentals are driving stock prices around the World, no one knows what the fundamentals are in China and that fuels the panic, when it comes to the Chinese stock market. As the Wall Street Journal reported on August 25th:
For All Its Heft, China’s Economy Is a Black Box
For sheer clout, China’s economy outweighs every country in the world save the U.S. But on transparency, it remains distinctly an emerging market, with murky politics, unreliable data and opaque decision making.
This veil dims the understanding of China’s economy and is an important reason its recent slowdown has produced so much turmoil.
Economists widely doubt that China grew at a robust 7% pace in the second quarter, as the country’s official statistics say. Citing other data, such as power generation and passenger travel, some think the rate might be as little as half that.
Similarly, when the People’s Bank of China devalued its currency two weeks ago, a step that sparked much of the recent market upheaval, officials couched the move as part of a long-term effort to align the yuan’s value more closely with market forces. Some outside analysts, noting that the PBOC isn’t independent, saw a more political motive: to boost exports and thus bolster the Communist Party’s credibility and hold on power. . . .
“With my G-7 and many G-20 counterparts there were frank, honest conversations, you were on the phone pretty frequently, often weekly,” recalls one former Treasury official who still deals extensively with China for the financial industry. “With China, you don’t know who to call. It’s hard to know where decision making occurs or who’s calling the shots.” . . . .
no major advanced country’s statistics are viewed as skeptically as China’s.
In 2007 Li Keqiang, now China’s premier, told the U.S. ambassador, according to a memo released by WikiLeaks, that GDP is “man-made” and therefore unreliable.
Mr. Li, who was then Communist Party chief of Liaoning province, said he looked at data on electricity, rail cargo and loans to get a better gauge on economic activity. Several analysts have since come up with indexes based on Mr. Li’s favorite stats.
In London, Capital Economics looks at freight activity, electricity, property development, passenger travel and sea shipments, and concludes China’s economy expanded much more slowly in the second quarter than China reported. Lombard Street Research, another London research outfit, uses another approach, including a different measure of inflation, and comes up with just a 3.7% growth rate.
Chinese statistics are “spookily stable from quarter to quarter,” says Capital Economics analyst Mark Williams. For instance, China’s unemployment rate registers 4.1% nearly every quarter. . . .
China’s leaders are heir to a tradition of secrecy. In 1971, when Mao Zedong’s anointed successor died, the public wasn’t told for nearly two months. In the current corruption crackdown, it can still be weeks or months after senior or retired leaders disappear before their detention is announced. . . .
Daniel W. Drezner, a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, in the August 25th Washington Post stated that the real scary part of the stock market crash was the reaction of the US Presidential candidates:
The truly scary thing about Black Monday
The global sell-off of stocks yesterday was a little worrying. The reaction from some candidates for president was a lot worrying. . . .
China’s Black Monday reveals something useful: how potential U.S. presidents are reacting to the market sell-off. . . .
One Republican candidate, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, called on President Obama on Monday to cancel his plans to meet in Washington next month with President Xi Jinping of China on what will be his first state visit to the United States. Mr. Walker accused Beijing of a range of offenses that have harmed American interests, including manipulating its economy and currency, carrying out cyberattacks and persecuting Christians.
Frankly, at this point both U.S. and Chinese officials wish China could actively manipulate their economy. What’s happening this month is evidence, in fact, that market forces can easily override Chinese government manipulation. To be sure, Walker lists legitimate beefs with the People’s Republic, but I’m pretty sure canceling the state visit would not help at all on any of them. . . .
In response to Trump’s argument that the United States should delink from “China, Mr. Drezner stated:
Oh, for the love of –. Look, I’ll keep this simple. If American voters really want any market volatility to metastasize into an actual Great Depression, then by all means break ties with China and Asia. But the only reason the 2008 financial crisis wasn’t worse was precisely because that didn’t happen. . . .
The same is true for Sanders, who also seized on the market moment in a tweet from the populist left: “For the past 40 years, Wall Street and the billionaire class have rigged the rules to redistribute wealth to the richest among us.”….
and it would be foolish for any of the establishment candidates to go down this rabbit hole.” Except that’s what Scott Walker did. Oh, and then there’s Chris Christie:
“. . .17:08:24 Lots and lots of money from the Chinese and remember that when the Chinese hold this much of our debt, if the Chinese get a cough, we get the flu and that’s what’s happening now right now in my opinion in our financial markets.”
Let’s be clear: China owning lots of U.S. government debt has exactly zero to do with what’s happening right now. If anything, the gyrating Chinese stock market and depreciating yuan, combined with general developing country malaise, will trigger a massive surge of interest in U.S. government debt. So Christie is simply wrong here.
The scariest thing about Black Monday wasn’t the stock market fluctuations. Those will hopefully be temporary enough in the United States. No, the scariest thing was how one day of financial volatility was enough to make four presidential candidates — Christie, Sanders, Trump, and Walker — say really stupid things about the Chinese economy and the Sino-American relationship.
See https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/08/25/the-truly-scary-thing-about-black-monday/?hpid=z3 for the full article.
From an international trade point of view, although China is important, the really scary part is not China, but the global drop in trade. On August 25, 2015 the Financial Times reported that “This year is worst for trade since crisis” of 2009
The volume of global trade fell 0.5 per cent in the three months to June compared to the first quarter . . . also revised down their result for the first quarter to a 1.5 per cent contraction, making the first half of 2015 the worst recorded since the 2009 collapse in global trade that followed the crisis.
“We have had a miserable first six months of 2015,” said Robert Koopman, chief economist of the World Trade Organization, which has forecast 3.3 per cent growth in the volume of global trade this year but is likely to revise down that estimate in the coming weeks.
Much of the slowdown in global trade this year has been due to a halting recovery in Europe as well as a slowing economy in China, Mr Koopman said.
In other words, instead of bashing China and trade in general, maybe the Presidential candidates should talk about boosting trade.
But one interesting point, on August 25, 2015, the New York Times had an article by Joe Nocera entitled The Man Who Got China Right. In the Article, Mr Nocera described Jim Chanos of Kynikos Associates, a $3 billion hedge fund that specializes in short-selling. Mr. Nocera goes on to state:
In the fall of 2009, Jim Chanos began to ask questions about the Chinese economy. What sparked his curiosity was the realization that commodity producers had been largely unaffected by the financial crisis; indeed, they had recorded big profits even as other sectors found themselves reeling in the aftermath of the crisis.
When he looked into why, he discovered that the critical factor was China’s voracious appetite for commodities: The Chinese, who had largely sidestepped the financial crisis themselves, were buying 40 percent of all copper exports; 50 percent of the available iron ore; and eye-popping quantities of just about everything else.
That insight soon led Chanos to make an audacious call: China was in the midst of an unsustainable credit bubble. . . .
Chanos and his crew at Kynikos don’t make big “macro” bets on economies; their style is more “micro”: looking at the fundamentals of individual companies or sectors. And so it was with China. “I’ll never forget the day in 2009 when my real estate guy was giving me a presentation and he said that China had 5.6 billion square meters of real estate under development, half residential and half commercial,”
Chanos told me the other day.
“I said, ‘You must mean 5.6 billion square feet.’ ”
The man replied that he hadn’t misspoken; it really was 5.6 billion square meters, which amounted to over 60 billion square feet.
For Chanos, that is when the light bulb went on. The fast-growing Chinese economy was being sustained not just by its export prowess, but by a property bubble propelled by mountains of debt, and encouraged by the government as part of an infrastructure spending strategy designed to keep the economy humming. (According to the McKinsey Global Institute, China’s debt load today is an unfathomable $28 trillion.)
Chanos soon went public with his thesis, giving interviews to CNBC and Charlie Rose, and making a speech at Oxford University. He told Rose that property speculation in China was rampant, and that because so much of the economy depended on construction — in most cases building properties that had no chance of generating enough income to pay down the debt — China was on “the treadmill to hell.”
He also pointed out that much of the construction was for high-end condos that cost over $100,000, yet the average Chinese household made less than $10,000 a year.
Can you guess how the financial establishment, convinced that the Chinese juggernaut was unstoppable, reacted to Chanos’s contrarian thesis? It scoffed. . . .
As it turns out, China’s economy began to slow right around the time Chanos first made his call. No matter: Most China experts remained bullish. Chanos, meanwhile, was shorting the stocks of a number of companies that depended on the Chinese market. . .
These days, with the markets in free-fall, it certainly looks like Chanos has been vindicated. . . . This loss of confidence in China and its leaders has spooked stock markets around the world.
The moral of today’s story is a simple one. Listen to the skeptics and the contrarians. You dismiss them at your peril.
For the full article, see http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/25/opinion/joe-nocera-the-man-who-got-china-right.html?emc=edit_th_20150825&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=19479910.
CHINA STOCK MARKET CRASH – STAGE 4—MARKETS RECOVER BUT CHINA IS NO LONGER A SURE BET
On August 27 and 28, 2015, World Markets recovered and the Chinese stock exchanges even went up on suspicion of Chinese government buying programs, but the new reality is that China is no longer a sure bet. The focus now is on the true state of China’s economy. As the New York Times stated on August 27th:
China Falters, and the Global Economy Is Forced to Adapt
With deepening economic fears about China, multinational corporations and countries are having to respond to a new reality as a once sure bet becomes uncertain.
China’s rapid growth over the last decade reshaped the world economy, creating a powerful driver of corporate strategies, financial markets and geopolitical decisions. China seemed to have a one-way trajectory, momentum that would provide a steady source of profit and capital.
But deepening economic fears about China, which culminated this week in a global market rout, are now forcing a broad rethinking of the conventional wisdom. Even as markets show signs of stabilizing, the resulting shock waves could be lasting, by exposing a new reality that China is no longer a sure bet.
Smartphone makers, automobile manufacturers and retailers wonder about the staying power of Chinese buyers, even if it is not shaking their bottom line at this point. General Motors and Ford factories have been shipping fewer cars to Chinese dealerships this summer. . . .
The trouble is, the true strength of the Chinese economy — and the policies the leadership will adopt to address any weaknesses — is becoming more difficult to discern.
China’s growth, which the government puts at 7 percent a year, is widely questioned. Large parts of the Chinese service sector, like restaurants and health care, continue to grow, supporting the broader economy. But the signs in industrial sectors, in which other countries and foreign companies have the greatest stake through trade, paint a bleaker picture. . . ..
For entire article, see http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/27/business/international/china-falters-and-the-global-economy-is-forced-to-adapt.html?emc=edit_th_20150827&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=19479910&_r=0.
WILL THE REAL LOSER IN THE 2016 US ELECTION BE FREE TRADE?
In my first July newsletter on Trade Policy, Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) and Trade Promotion Authority (“TPA”), I asked whether the US Congress will follow the siren call of protectionism and take the US backwards or move forward with the Trans Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) to resume its free trade leadership? Truly a question.
As an observer of the Presidential primary right now, free trade and the trade agreements appear to be the latest punching bag, especially among the populist front runners, such as Donald Trump and Bernie Saunders. Using the euphemism of putting America first and protecting workers and US factories at all costs from import competition created by free trade agreements, many candidates apparently are simply engaged in protectionism.
Although the establishment Republicans, such as Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and John Kasich, have all indicated that they are for Free but “Fair” Trade, Donald Trump, the front runner, is a different story.
When asked how the United States could create new jobs in the first Republican debate, Donald Trump, who presently leads the Republican primary field, stated during the first Republican debate, “Well for starters I would negotiate better trade deals. The Chinese are killing us.” Trump further stated:
“This country is in big trouble. We don’t win anymore. We lose to China. We lose to Mexico both in trade and at the border. We lose to everybody,”
On August 24th, Trump warned that because of the Chinese stock market fall, China would bring the US down and the US should delink from China. See https://instagram.com/p/6xT08ZGhQc/
Trump has decreed that he will build a wall to stop illegal immigrants coming in from Mexico and the Mexican government will pay for it. Trump has stated that if the Mexican government does not pay for it, he will raise tariffs on Mexican products. But that would be a violation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (“NAFTA”).
Trump has also threatened that if China takes actions, such as cyber-attacks, on the US, he will raise tariffs on Chinese products, but that would be a violation of the World Trade Organization (“WTO”) Agreement and the WTO Agreement between the US and China.
In other words, it sounds like Trump Administration would create a trade war or trade wars with a number of different countries.
Although Trump and Republican Senator Sessions of Alabama have argued that the US has a free trade agreement with China, it does not. All the US has with China is PNTR, which means permanent normal trade relations with China, just like the normal trade relations the United States has with Russia, Ukraine, Syria, Iran and many other countries.
Although Trump has been bashing China and trade in general, most people thought he could not be elected, but in mid-August, Bloomberg Politics Managing Editor Mark Halperin stated on MSNBC that Trump has “reached a turning point” at which “establishment candidates” think he can win Iowa and added that “most” believe he can win the nomination, and “a significant number think he could win the White House.” As Halpern further stated, “Trump may not end up as the nominee, but right now, he’s changed the race.” The latest Fox News poll shows that Trump is in first place with 25 percent support nationally, more than double the support for Ben Carson who is in second place with 12 percent. The findings mirror recent polls in Iowa.
An August 20, 2015, Rasmussen Report telephone Poll has 57% of Republican voters stating Trump is the likely to be the Republican Presidential Nominee. See http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/trump_change.
On August 27, 2015, Peggy Noonan, a former speechwriter for President Ronald Reagan and a committed Republican, in an article entitled “America Is So in Play” published in the Wall Street Journal stated that she was discovering a distinct change in the electorate towards Donald Trump and the Republican party because the Hispanics and other lower income people that she knows are for Donald Trump:
Second, Mr. Trump’s support is not limited to Republicans, not by any means. . . .
Since Mr. Trump announced I’ve worked or traveled in, among other places, Southern California, Connecticut, Georgia, Virginia, New Jersey and New York’s Long Island. In all places I just talked to people. My biggest sense is that political professionals are going to have to rethink “the base,” reimagine it when they see it in their minds. . . .
Something is going on, some tectonic plates are moving in interesting ways. My friend Cesar works the deli counter at my neighborhood grocery store. He is Dominican, an immigrant, early 50s, and listens most mornings to a local Hispanic radio station, La Mega, on 97.9 FM. Their morning show is the popular “El Vacilón de la Mañana,” and after the first GOP debate, Cesar told me, they opened the lines to call-ins, asking listeners (mostly Puerto Rican, Dominican, Mexican) for their impressions. More than half called in to say they were for Mr. Trump. Their praise, Cesar told me a few weeks ago, dumbfounded the hosts. I later spoke to one of them, who identified himself as D.J. New Era. He backed Cesar’s story. “We were very surprised,” at the Trump support, he said. Why? “It’s a Latin-based market!”
“He’s the man,” Cesar said of Mr. Trump. This week I went by and Cesar told me that after Mr. Trump threw Univision’s well-known anchor and immigration activist, Jorge Ramos, out of an Iowa news conference on Tuesday evening, the “El Vacilón” hosts again threw open the phone lines the following morning and were again surprised that the majority of callers backed not Mr. Ramos but Mr. Trump. Cesar, who I should probably note sees me, I sense, as a very nice establishment person who needs to get with the new reality, was delighted.
I said: Cesar, you’re supposed to be offended by Trump, he said Mexico is sending over criminals, he has been unfriendly, you’re an immigrant. Cesar shook his head: No, you have it wrong.
Immigrants, he said, don’t like illegal immigration, and they’re with Mr. Trump on anchor babies. “They are coming in from other countries to give birth to take advantage of the system. We are saying that! When you come to this country, you pledge loyalty to the country that opened the doors to help you.”
He added, “We don’t bloc vote anymore.” The idea of a “Latin vote” is “disparate,” which he said generally translates as nonsense, but which he means as “bull—-.”
He finished, on the subject of Jorge Ramos: “The elite have different notions from the grass-roots working people.”
Old style: Jorge Ramos speaks for Hispanic America. New style: Jorge Ramos speaks for Jorge Ramos. . . .
I will throw in here that almost wherever I’ve been this summer, I kept meeting immigrants who are or have grown conservative—more men than women, but women too. America is so in play. . . .
Both sides, the elites and the non-elites, sense that things are stuck. The people hate the elites, which is not new, and very American. The elites have no faith in the people, which, actually, is new. Everything is stasis. Then Donald Trump comes, like a rock thrown through a showroom window, and the molecules start to move.
For the entire article, see http://www.wsj.com/articles/america-is-so-in-play-1440715262.
In early August at a Bellevue, Washington Republican event, I heard Congressman Dave Reichert, a former Washington State policeman and sheriff, state that he believes the major issue in the next 2016 election will be “control versus chaos”. He argues that the average American voter is looking for someone who can control the situation in the United States as compared to the chaos we see in the US with illegal immigration, foreign policy and other domestic issues. That may be a reason for Trump’s appeal to the Republican voter.
But what about Democrats? Although Hilary Clinton may be in the lead, as many political experts know, she is wounded because of a number of issues, including e-mail problems she had while Secretary of State that have morphed into a potential FBI criminal investigation. See Reuters report at http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821. But Hilary has not come out in favor of the trade agreements. Why? The labor unions, which are a significant part of the Democratic base and very anti-trade.
The next candidate behind Hilary is Senator Bernie Sanders. Many Democrats are saying that Hilary is “feeling the Bern.” Sanders, however, is very close to the labor unions and, therefore, is vehemently against the Trade Agreements, China and Free Trade in general. See the June 23rd statement by Senator Bernie Sanders in which he denounced Trade Promotion Authority and the Trans Pacific Partnership on the floor of the US Senate at http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4541798/sen-bernie-sanders-tpa-disaster-america.
Bashing international trade and China in particular and blaming trade and China for all the ills in the US economy is common in US elections and may feel good. But reality soon intrudes. In 2014, total US exports, including manufactured products, agricultural products and services to other countries were $2.35 trillion, an increase over the last few years, with exports of US manufactured goods reaching $1.64 trillion. Under NAFTA in 2014 goods exported to Mexico were $240 billion and to China were $123 billion. US exports means US jobs. See https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html.
The reality is that the United States is exporting many products to Mexico and China, including manufactured goods, agricultural products and services. What this means is that the United States is vulnerable to retaliation if it takes trade actions against other countries. Retaliation that will shut down US exports and cost US jobs.
As described above, China right now is going through an economic slowdown. As the New York Times stated on August 18th:
When Prime Minister Li Keqiang convened the Chinese cabinet last month, the troubled economy was the main topic on the agenda. The stock market had stumbled after a yearlong boom. Money was flooding out of the country. Most ominously, China’s export machine had stalled, prompting labor strikes. . . . .
Manufacturing, the core engine of growth in the world’s second-largest economy, is just too critical. And the pressures have been mounting, with exports last month plunging 8 percent compared with 2014.
Across the country, millions of workers and thousands of companies are feeling the pain, as sales slip and incomes drop. . . .Millions of Chinese are looking for work.
See http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/18/business/in
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line893
|
__label__cc
| 0.519672
| 0.480328
|
HANSON QUARTETT | Rezital Haydn
S A 2 3 . M Ä R Z 2 0 1 9 , 1 9 : 3 0
HANSON QUARTETT
Streichquartett ist eines der etabliertesten Genres der Kammermusik. Viele große Komponisten ihrer Zeit widmeten dem Quartett in ihrer Arbeit besondere Aufmerksamkeit. Im letzten Jahrhundert ist Basel ein Schnittpunkt wichtiger Musiker wie Walter Levin, Adolf Bush, Eberhard Feltz, Georgy Kurtag und vielen anderen geworden. Diese Leute haben den Entwicklungsvektor des Streichquartettgenres verändert.
Joseph Haydn (1732-1809) String Quartets
Op. 33 n°5 Op. 54 n°2 Op. 77 n°2
www.quatuorhanson.com
Founded in 2013, the Quatuor Hanson was formed at the behest of Hatto Beyerle (European Chamber Music Academy), the Quatuor Ebène, and Jean Sulem at the Paris Conservatoire. Acting on their advice, they made Haydn string quartets their musical and aesthetic touchstone. The study of classical pieces allows them to reveal Haydn’s rhetorical identity - often whimsical, and always poetic. They have concurrently played works of contemporary composers such as Toshio Hosokawa, Wolfgang Rihm or Mathias Pintscher, whose piece Figura IV they they were the first to play in France at the IRCAM Festival. For them, appropriating the music of their time triggers a reflection on the role of the performing musician and his place in modern times. Through its intertextual links and anachronistic encounters, the Quatuor Hanson has made this overall view of the repertoire the driving force behind a necessary reflection for today’s musician.
Supported by the Banque Populaire Foundation, as well as the Singer-Polignac Foundation in Paris, where they are currently in residence, the four musicians have won many international competitions: 2nd Prize at Geneva International Music Competition in 2016, as well as 2nd Prize at International Joseph Haydn Chamber Music Competition in Vienna in 2016, where they were honoured with several other special prizes (Haydn Prize, Audience Prize and Prize for the Best Interpretation of a Work from the 20th century) and 3rd Prize and Audience Prize at the Lyon International Chamber Music Competition in 2015. They have been invited to many prestigious festivals such as Printemps Musical des Alizés (Morocco), and the Deauville, La Roque d’Anthéron, and Aix-en-Provence festivals (all France). Their concerts at London’s Wigmore Hall, Paris’s Maison de la Radio, Geneva’s Victoria Hall and at Vienna’s ORF Kulturhaus have allowed them to distinguish themselves in Europe and further afield in countries such as China, Morocco and Norway among others. During the 2016/17 season, they played Beethoven’s String Quartet No.7 at the Salle Cortot, organised by the Centre de Musique de Chambre of Paris, and took part in three radio broadcasts of the programme “Plaisir du Quatuor” on France Musique, with the classical aesthetic of Haydn and Mozart as a central theme.
In order to enrich themselves through outside influences, the four musicians have collaborated with some outstanding talent including Mathieu Herzog, Miguel Da Silva, Peter Cropper or Johannes Meissl, and often share the stage with musicians such as Michel Lethiec, Paul Meyer, Bruno Philippe, Vadim Kholodenko, Amaury Viduvier, and Guillaume Bellom. The shared enthusiasm arising from these exchanges opens up for the String Quartet a new land of exploration and discovery. Thanks to these encounters and the search for every work’s essence, the Quatuor Hanson hopes to offer a concert experience that goes beyond the mere performance – an emancipation for performer and spectator alike, both moving towards the liberating essence of all music.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line894
|
__label__cc
| 0.703548
| 0.296452
|
Ben & Stefanie
"Dance is a poem of which each movement is a word" - Mata Hari
Ben & Stefanie are available for teaching and coaching. They have both danced from a very young age and have been lucky enough to have been coached themselves by former world champions. They are currently ranked as one of the top couples in the world. They have also had the honour to repesent the UK in several competitions all over the world. They take a great joy in sharing their dance knowledge, experience and technical expertise with their students.
They are based in the South East of England and coach at varying studios and locations, both in the South East and also in London.
If you would like to book them for class, group or private tuition, and require further information about locations and fees, please contact them through the CONTACT page.
Ben Taylor & Stefanie Bossen
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line899
|
__label__wiki
| 0.538318
| 0.538318
|
Client Resident Portal
Our Practice Philosophy
The E-Myth Revisited - Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and What to Do About It
ISBN: 0887307280, Paperback- $9.60
by Michael E. Gerber
Michael Gerber’s The E-Myth Revisited should be required reading for anyone thinking about starting a business or for those who have already taken that fateful step. The title refers to the author’s belief that entrepreneurs–typically brimming with good but distracting ideas–make poor business people. He establishes an incredibly organized and regimented plan, so that daily details are scripted, freeing the entrepreneur’s mind to build the long-term success of the business. You don’t need an M.B.A. to understand or follow its directives; Gerber takes time to explain buzzwords and complex theories. Read in a clear and well-paced manner, listening to The-E Myth is like receiving advice from an old friend.
Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? Inside IBM's Historic Turnaround
SBN: 0060523794, Hardcover- $17.61
by Louis V. Gerstnerber
Gerstner quarterbacked one of history’s most dramatic corporate turnarounds. For those who follow business stories like football games, his tale of the rise, fall and rise of IBM might be the ultimate slow-motion replay. The book’s opening section snappily reports Gerstner’s decisions in his first 18 months on the job-the critical “sprint” that moved IBM away from the brink of destruction. The following sections describe the marathon fight to make IBM once again “a company that mattered.”
One of Gerstner’s first tasks was to redirect the company’s attention to the outside world, where a marketplace was quickly changing and customers felt largely ignored. He succeeded mightily. Upon his retirement this year, IBM was undeniably “a company that mattered.” Who Says Elephants Can’t Dance? is a well-rendered self-portrait of a CEO who made spectacular change on the strength of personal leadership.
Execution - The Discipline of Getting Things Done
ISBN: 0609610570, Hardcover- $17.33
by Larry Bossidy, Ram Charan, Charles Burck (Contributor)
Disciplines like strategy, leadership development, and innovation are the sexier aspects of being at the helm of a successful business; actually getting things done never seems quite as glamorous. But as Larry Bossidy and Ram Charan demonstrate in Execution, the ultimate difference between a company and its competitor is, in fact, the ability to execute.
Execution is “the missing link between aspirations and results,” and as such, making it happen is the business leader’s most important job.
Get Better or Get Beaten
by Robert Slater
Do business like Jack Welch! When Jack Welch took the reins of General Electric in 1981, he reformulated GE in his own image — tough, smart, competitive, and relentless. First published in 1994, Get Better or Get Beaten became a bestseller as managers sought to understand and mimic the success of the man lauded by Fortune as “…perhaps the most admired CEO of his generation.”
Now, on the eve of his planned April retirement, the new Get Better or Get Beaten, Second Edition shows you how to compete “Welch style” in today’s techologically advanced business arena.
Look to this fast-paced book for:
– Jack Welch’s latest views on management and leadership
– Examples of how Welch transformed GE into an e-business
– Insights into Six Sigma and other successful GE quality initiatives
Jack - Straight from the Gut
by Jack Welch, John A. Byrne
It’s hard to think of a CEO that commands as much respect as Jack Welch. Under his leadership, General Electric reinvented itself several times over by integrating new and innovative practices into its many lines of business.
In Jack: Straight from the Gut, Welch, with the help of Business Week journalist John Byrne, recounts his career and the style of management that helped to make GE one of the most successful companies of the last century. Beginning with Welch’s childhood in Salem, Massachusetts, the book quickly progresses from his first job in GE’s plastics division to his ambitious rise up the GE corporate ladder, which culminated in 1981. What comes across most in this autobiography is Welch’s passion for business as well as his remarkable directness and intolerance of what he calls “superficial congeniality”–a dislike that would help earn him the nickname “Neutron Jack.”
First, Break All the Rules - What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently
by Marcus Buckingham, Curt Coffman
Marcus Buckingham and Curt Coffman expose the fallacies of standard management thinking in First, Break All the Rules: What the World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently. In seven chapters, the two consultants for the Gallup Organization debunk some dearly held notions about management, such as “treat people as you like to be treated”; “people are capable of almost anything”; and “a manager’s role is diminishing in today’s economy.” “Great managers are revolutionaries,” the authors write. “This book will take you inside the minds of these managers to explain why they have toppled conventional wisdom and reveal the new truths they have forged in its place.”
Good to Great - Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don't
Jim Collins asked the question, “Can a good company become a great company and if so, how?” In Good to Great, Collins concludes that it is possible, but finds there are no silver bullets. Collins and his team of researchers began their quest by sorting through a list of 1,435 companies, looking for those that made substantial improvements in their performance over time. They finally settled on 11–including Fannie Mae, Gillette, Walgreens, and Wells Fargo–and discovered common traits that challenged many of the conventional notions of corporate success.
Making the transition from good to great doesn’t require a high-profile CEO, the latest technology, innovative change management, or even a fine-tuned business strategy. At the heart of those rare and truly great companies was a corporate culture that rigorously found and promoted disciplined people to think and act in a disciplined manner. Good to Great is one of those books that managers and CEOs will be reading and rereading for years to come.
A New Brand World - Eight Principles for Achieving Brand Leadership in the Twenty-First Century
by Scott Bedbury, Stephen Fenichell (Contributor)
Bedbury, who headed advertising and marketing divisions for Nike and Starbucks during their phenomenal growth, coaches on establishing a memorable brand. Observing consumers overwhelmed by countless choices, he argues that now’s the time to build a brand that evokes trust from its customers.
“Unless your brand stands for something, it stands for nothing,” he declares, as he explains methods for companies big and small to articulate their essence and ethos to core customers, potential customers and employees. Bedbury elaborates his belief that “the brand is the sum total of everything a company does” with lively anecdotes from the experiences of Harley-Davidson, Microsoft and others. He calls for advertising and marketing that will inspire rather than merely inform (ie: “Just Do It”).
Inside The Magic Kingdom - 7 Keys to Disney's Success
by Thomas K. Connellan
Look in Mickey’s Briefcase . . . Now, an outsider takes you inside the incredible Disney service culture and presents simple, powerful concepts in a fun, memorable way that just may change the way you conduct business. Based on hours of interviews and discussions with present and former Disney employees, Inside the Magic Kingdom discloses the secrets behind Disneys success . . . and explains why, of its more than 30 million guests each year, over two-thirds are repeat customers.
This upbeat, easy-to-read book illustrates clear, solid principles with examples that are well-known to Disney insiders but virtually unknown to outsiders until now. Outlines the seven keys to Disney’s success. Now the principles that drive the culture and phenomenal success of Disney are disclosed in this fun, easy-to-read book. You will learn many insider secrets that will spell success if implemented in any business.
McDonald's - Behind the Arches
ISBN: 0553347594, Paperback- $11.05
by John F. Love
McDonald’s: it is the world’s premier entrepreneurial success story, a company whose growth worldwide continues to be astonishing. In tough financial times, McDonald’s proved that ingenuity, trial and error, and gut instinct were the keys to building a service business the entire world has come to admire. In the years since McDonald’s: Behind The Arches was first published, McDonald’s has been a trendsetter in advertising, focusing on different ethnic groups as well as the physically disabled.
McDonald’s created McJobs, a program that employs both mentally challenged adults and senior citizens. And because its franchisees have their fingers on the pulse of the marketplace, McDonald’s has evolved successfully with the health food revolution, launching dozens of new products and moving toward environmentally-safe packaging and recyclable goods. Inspiring, informative, and filled with behind the scenes stories, this remarkable saga offers an irresistible look inside a great American business success.
How to Make Your Business Run Without You!
by Susan M. Carter
How To Make Your Business Run Without You is a how-to resource for small business owners and entrepreneurs to effectively streamline operations that will pave the way for more business, bigger profits and a business that virtually runs itself. Through step-by-step chapters, Author Susan Carter advances readers from the high-risk potential of ‘owning their own jobs’ to the freedom and control of ‘owning their own businesses.’ A must read for any owner or self-employed professional who is eager to move from start-up status to ongoing success.
The Myth of Excellence - Why Great Companies Never Try to Be the Best at Everything
by Fred Crawford, Ryan Mathews
Crawford is the managing director of the consumer products, retail, and distribution practice at the Cap Gemini Ernst and Young consultancy. Mathews is a futurist specializing in demographics and lifestyle analysis at FirstMatter, another consulting firm. To research purchasing behavior, they surveyed 5,000 consumers, but the responses they got surprised them and prompted their title’s contrary proposition.
They developed a new model of “consumer relevancy.” They explain in detail the importance of price, service, quality, access, and experience for the consumer. They then suggest that for companies to be successful they need to dominate on only one of these five factors. On a second of the five they should stand out or differentiate themselves from their competitors; and on the remaining three they need only to be at par with others in their industry. With dozens of examples, Crawford and Mathews demonstrate the validity of their premise.
Raving Fans - A Revolutionary Approach to Customer Service
by Kenneth H. Blanchard, Sheldon Bowles (Contributor)
Kenneth Blanchard continues his trend of writing easy-to-read books with BIG ideas for making your business better. Raving Fans is a book of stories relating how fictional companies have created an environment of delivering awesome customer service. A guy that has just been put in a managment position requiring a turnaround goes on a fictional trip with his “angel” to visit businesses that have figured out their vision and their system to deliver customer service extraordinary. Based on three simple principles (Decide, Discover, Deliver), each company has created a group of Raving Fans (not just customers, but fans) who wouldn’t consider shopping anywhere else for what one of these companies offers.
Differentiate or Die - Survival in Our Era of Killer Competition
by Jack Trout, Steve Rivkin (Contributor)
There are no two ways about it with Jack Trout. Either you’ve got a product or service that you can say is different, or you don’t have much at all. In today’s global marketplace and at its lightning-fast rate of change, there’s no point in inventing and presenting a product only to sit back and hope that consumers everywhere will discover its greatness. It’s not simply about what you or your product can do, it’s about what you do differently from everyone else. Coauthors Trout and Steve Rivkin say it all in their no-holds-barred title, Differentiate or Die.
Extraordinary Guarantees - Achieving Breakthrough Gains in Quality and Customer Satisfaction
by Christopher Hart
Many leading firms have achieved both these results by offering extraordinary guarantees. You too can boost organizational performance and quality to new levels by following the practical advice offered in the important book, Extraordinary Guarantees. Guarantees were once considered nothing more than a marketing gimmick. But as more and more quality leaders have begun to offer ironclad pledges of total customer satisfaction, the guarantee is now being recognized as an unparalleled tool for gaining a major, often unbeatable, competitive edge-and a host of other benefits.
Competing on Value
by Mack Hanan, Peter Karp (Contributor)
Presents a new approach to selling that emphasizes not competing on the basis of the best price, but the highest value–i.e. demonstrating to current and prospective customers that using your products or services will either cut their costs or improve their revenues. This book discusses VALUE. Value is not what you put INTO your products and services, it is what the customer GETS OUT. Three qualifiers of value are how much, how soon, and how sure–these are what the customer needs to know. In summary, this is highly recommended for every company that sells products and/or services.
Practice What You Preach - What Managers Must Do to Create a High-Achievement Culture
by David H. Maister
Maister, a professional service consultant, surveyed 6,500 employees at 50 worldwide companies to evaluate the relationship between company financial performance and employee satisfaction and loyalty. He found a direct and dramatic correlation. Here, he offers detailed commentary from CEOs, managers and staffers, and analysis of the survey results. Bosses in all kinds of companies will benefit from his solid advice, which should be required reading for executives and upper level managers.
by Rudolph W. Giuliani, Ken Kurson
This highly anticipated book from New York’s once controversial, now beloved former mayor opens with a gripping account of Giuliani’s immediate reaction to the September 11 attacks, including a narrow escape from the original crisis command headquarters, and closes with the efforts to address the aftermath during his remaining four months in office. But, he argues, he did not suddenly become a great leader on September 11, and “had been doing [my] best to take on challenges my whole career.”
Throughout, he displays the hands-on management that marked his administration, including his willingness to respond swiftly and in person to crises, to prove that he could be relied on when the city needed him most. While some critics found his style too aggressive, he has an effective counterargument: “Before September 11, there were those who said we were being overly concerned [about security],” he observes. “We didn’t hear that afterwards…”
Why We Buy - The Science of Shopping
by Paco Underhill
In an effort to determine why people buy, Paco Underhill and his band of retail researchers have camped out in stores over the course of 20 years, dedicating their lives to the “science of shopping.” Armed with an array of video equipment, store maps, and customer-profile sheets, Underhill and his consulting firm, Envirosell, have observed over 900 aspects of interaction between shopper and store. They’ve discovered that men who take jeans into fitting rooms are more likely to buy than females (65 percent vs. 25 percent).
They’ve learned how the “butt-brush factor” (bumped from behind, shoppers become irritated and move elsewhere) makes women avoid narrow aisles. They’ve quantified the importance of shopping baskets; contact between employees and shoppers; the “transition zone” (the area just inside the store’s entrance); and “circulation patterns” (how shoppers move throughout a store). And they’ve explored the relationship between a customer’s amenability and profitability, learning how good stores capitalize on a shopper’s unspoken inclinations and desires.
Underhill, whose clients include McDonald’s, Starbucks, Est?Lauder, and Blockbuster, stocks Why We Buy with a wealth of retail insights, showing how men are beginning to shop like women, and how women have changed the way supermarkets are laid out. He also looks to the future, projecting massive retail opportunities with an aging baby-boom population and predicting how online retailing will affect shopping malls. This lighthearted look at shopping is highly recommended to anyone who buys or sells.
by Spencer Johnson, Kenneth H. Blanchard
Change can be a blessing or a curse, depending on your perspective. The message of Who Moved My Cheese? is that all can come to see it as a blessing, if they understand the nature of cheese and the role it plays in their lives. Who Moved My Cheese? is a parable that takes place in a maze. Four beings live in that maze: Sniff and Scurry are mice–nonanalytical and nonjudgmental, they just want cheese and are willing to do whatever it takes to get it. Hem and Haw are “littlepeople,” mouse-size humans who have an entirely different relationship with cheese. It’s not just sustenance to them; it’s their self-image.
Their lives and belief systems are built around the cheese they’ve found. Most of us reading the story will see the cheese as something related to our livelihoods–our jobs, our career paths, the industries we work in–although it can stand for anything, from health to relationships. The point of the story is that we have to be alert to changes in the cheese, and be prepared to go running off in search of new sources of cheese when the cheese we have runs out.
The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People - Restoring the Character Ethic
by Stephen R. Covey
The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change was a groundbreaker when it was first published in 1990, and it continues to be a business bestseller with more than 10 million copies sold. Stephen Covey, an internationally respected leadership authority, realizes that true success encompasses a balance of personal and professional effectiveness, so this book is a manual for performing better in both arenas.
Covey, the author of the New York Times number 1 bestseller The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, has struck a chord with millions of readers with his insights into human nature and values. Now he tells them how to apply his theories to everyday life, focusing primarily on the world of business.
The Power Principle - Influence With Honor
by Blaine Lee, Stephen R. Covey
This self-help book reflects Lee’s views on various types of power and how to develop principle-centered power in your life, which he defines as power that inspires loyalty and devotion, transcending time and place. Such power is based on trust and respect and survives even after one dies. Lee describes three types of power: coercive, which relies on the premise of control and uses fear as its instrument; utility, which is based on fairness, the exchange of what you can do for me with what I can do for you; and principle-centered, which is based on what you can do with others. The author tells us that his purpose in writing this book is to encourage us in our work with people, and he recommends that we choose principle-centered power as the primary way to influence others in our key relationships. Such power requires us to grow, to challenge our assumptions, and often to change our whole orientation in life.
by George S. Clason
I often give this book out as a gift whenever a person younger than me asks for my advice on money. I always present this book to them saying “if you read it and do as it says, it will work magic.” It really contains excellent, time tested advice, and would make a good gift for someone in their early 20s who is on their own for the first time, and struggling.
The book is a series of parables about money written in the 1920s by George Clason. They were written as individual essays of a few thousand words, but the theme throughout them is consistent — save 10% of your money, give 10% away, use 10% to reduce your debt load, and live on the remaining 70%.
The stories in the book are entertaining; they are reminiscent of some of the parables in the Bible, such as the Prodigal Son or the story of the Workers in the Vineyard. I think this is intentional on the part of the author; certainly readers in the 1920s had an appreciation for “old fashioned stories with a moral” that people today seem to have lost. I enjoy the book greatly, though, and any thoughtful person who reads the book should find it interesting, especially if they are trying to get their finances in order.
The Wealthy Barber, Updated 3rd Edition
by David Chilton
In this revised and expanded edition of one of the biggest-selling financial-planning books ever, David Chilton, president of Financial Awareness Corporation, shows readers how to achieve the financial independence they’ve always dreamed of. With the help of his fictional barber, Roy, and a large dose of humor, Chilton encourages readers to take control of their financial future and build wealth slowly, steadily, and with sure success.
The E-Myth Manager - Why Management Doesn't Work-And What to Do About It
More than ten years after his first bestselling book, The E-Myth, changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of small business owners, Michael Gerber – entrepreneur, author, and speaker extraordinaire fires the next salvo in his highly successful E-Myth Revolution. Drawing on lessons learned from working with more than 15,000 small, medium-sized, and very large organizations, Gerber has discovered the truth behind why management doesn’t workand what to do about it.
Unearthing the arbitrary origins of commonly held doctrines such as the omniscience of leader (Emperor) and the most widely embraced myth of all. The E-Myth Manager offers a fresh, provocative alternative to management as we know it. It explores why every manager must take charge of his own life, reconcile his own personal vision with that of the organization, and develop an entrepreneurial mind-set to achieve true success.
by Napoleon Hill
Is it true that by simply changing your thoughts you can completely change what you have in life? How could it be that simple? It is, but first you have to believe.
Most people want to see something happen, then believe in it. To be succesful you have to do the opposite. Believe in it first, then you will see it. That’s is one of the key messages in this book written almost 70 years ago…. It reads like it was written yesterday.
The title says it all. “Think and Grow Rich”, but it is NOT just a book about making money. I am certain many people from all walks of life could benefit from this work, regardless of their opinion of money and riches. The message is clear: You may have whatever you want in life… if you can discover the secret within its pages.
I first read this book when I was a teenager. I am not sure it made much of an impression on me. I picked it up recently and I can’t believe how much it has changed. Of course, that’s nonsense. The book is the same, only my mind is now ready to see what the secret is…
Get this book and see if you can unlock the Secret to finding ‘riches’ for yourself.
Want to Work
with Benton Bray?
We offer prospective clients to come to our office for an introductory meeting.
Schedule a Consultant
Contact Benton Bray
We Are Business & Profit Advisors.
info@bentonbray.com
© 2020 Benton Bray PLLC- All Rights Reserved.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line900
|
__label__cc
| 0.601993
| 0.398007
|
Obregon Speaks to Fellow Students about Mexico
Home » Home » Obregon Speaks to Fellow Students about Mexico
Last week, students in Rachel Koon’s Principles of Sociology class at BRTC were educated and entertained by student Carlo Obregon, a native of Mexico. “The class is currently discussing different practices and customs of other countries including such things as dating rituals, arranged marriages, religious practices, cultural symbolism, and class systems,” Koons explained. “Mr. Obregon was asked to give a speech on how these practices in his native Mexico compare to those of the United States.”
Obregon talked to the class about arranged marriage practices, the significance of Catholicism in his daily life as a child, the different class systems in his native town, and even how vastly different the jailing practices are as opposed to the U.S. At the age of 14, Obregon was “arranged” to marry another girl from a nearby town. The pairing was orchestrated by his grandparents and the young girl’s family based on their personalities and class status of both families. The young girl’s family had been watching Obregon since he was a young boy to learn about his personality. After years of observation, they decided his personality, along with his family’s wealth, would make him a suitable matc h for their daughter. At the time the marriage was announced, Obregon was courting another young girl whom he claimed to truly be in love with. His family was outraged by the relationship and demanded he marry the young girl they had “selected” for him.
After a few months of dating the selected young girl, he made up his mind that he was not going to marry her. This decision was unheard of at the time and both families were outraged. Shortly after his decision, around the age of 15, Obregon left his family’s ranch in Leon Guanajuato and set out for the United States with a few friends. After a few failed attempts at gaining citizenship, he finally became a citizen of the United States and has been here ever since.
Obregon also discussed the class systems in Mexico. As mentioned prior, he was born into a very wealthy ranching family who had many servants and workers of the house. This, however, did not stop him from having “lower class” friends. He described how he got into serious trouble from his grandfather because he was caught delivering newspapers. His “lower class” friends at the time had various jobs around town, so he decided he wanted a job too. When he was caught, he was punished and ordered to never work that kind of job again because “those types of jobs were meant for the lower class families.”
Catholicism was part of the Obregon family’s everyday lives. They went to church almost daily and that is where most of their social life occurred. Catholicism is still the primary religion in Mexico. “The jailing system in Mexico is vastly different than in the United States,” said Obregon. “The Mexican Jail System requires the inmates to pay for their incarceration on a daily basis, and the amount of money they are required to pay is based on the particular crime they committed. If they do not pay, they could go without a roof over their head and the possibility of no food or water.” He went on to explain that there are no means of entertainment, books, or other recreational activities in the Mexican Jail System like there are in the United States. “They are strictly there for punishment!”
“Students were highly entertained and engaged by Mr. Obregon’s lecture,” Koons stated. “They asked many questions and found the information to be a great example of the class material. I appreciate Mr. Obregon for sharing his story.”
Obregon is married to Norma Obregon, also a student at BRTC, and together they have seven children. Three of their children have also been students at BRTC. He is currently seeking a degree in Criminal Justice and “is a joy to have in class,” said Koons. “He brings his cultural heritage and ideas to each class and helps give other students a better perspective of the Mexican culture.”
May 14, 2012 Mike Greene
BRTC Calendar
BRTC in the Press
The River’s Edge
The River’s Edge Archives
BRTC Mascot
Subscribe to BRTC News
Administration Building, Room 130
1410 Highway 304 East
Pocahontas, AR 72455
Karen P. Liebhaber
Vice President of Institutional Advancement
Shawna Lepard
Mandated Info
Paragould Location
1 Black River Drive
Paragould, AR 72450
Copyright © 2021 Black River Technical College - All Rights Reserved
BRTC is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission
To read more about our values, ethics and the protection of your privacy, please view our Privacy Policy.
Institutional Transparency
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line903
|
__label__wiki
| 0.809977
| 0.809977
|
Gadgets & Hardware
Internet & Search
Similar VPN
Best 7 Reviews
Home Lifestyle Complete Guide to the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU): Watch Marvel Movies in...
Complete Guide to the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU): Watch Marvel Movies in the Best Order
This article has been just updated: May 2, 2020
It has been over a decade since the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first captivated audiences around the world with the release of the first Iron Man movie. After more than 20 movies, Avengers: Endgame and Spider-Man: Far From Home concluded the Phase Three of Marvel’s cinematic universe, which means that now is the best time to embark on an MCU marathon before Black Widow kicks off Phase Four in November 2020.
Marvel Movies in Order of Release
Upcoming Marvel Movies: Phase Four of the Marvel Cinematic Universe
Marvel Movies in Chronological Order
Marvel Movies Ranked from Best to Worst
Top 10 Essential Marvel Movies Available on Disney+
But what’s the best order to watch Marvel movies? Is it better to watch them in release order or chronologically? Are there any Marvel movies that are not worth watching at all? To help you answer these and other questions, we’ve put together a complete guide to the Marvel Cinematic Universe so that you can experience it in the order that makes the most sense to you.
Since Disney launched its own streaming service, called Disney+, on November 12, 2019, fans of the Marvel franchise have become able to easily stream almost all Marvel movies (Spider-Man movies with Tom Holland are owned by Sony, and the same goes for Hulk) from a single place and for a single subscription fee.
If you’d like to experience Marvel movies in the same order in which all the fans who have been with the franchise since the first Iron Man movie experienced them, your only option is to watch them in order of release.
While this approach may seem almost too straightforward, it actually makes more sense than you might think, considering that some Marvel movies take place in the past. Why? Because post-credit scenes in Marvel movies blend nicely into the next release, giving a little tease of what’s to come next.
1. Iron Man (May 2, 2008)
Available on: Disney+
The first Marvel movie ever released introduces the now-famous philanthropist, playboy, and genius, Tony Stark, as he invents a high-tech suit and uses it to fight evil. Despite being the oldest movie in the franchise, Iron Man is just as entertaining today as it was when it the cinema screens.
2. The Incredible Hulk (June 13, 2008)
Available on: Amazon Video
Unfortunately, the second MCU movie wasn’t nearly as popular as the first one. In fact, The Incredible Hulk is the worst-rated Marvel movie ever released. Considering that it’s also not available on Disney+, we think that you can safely skip it unless you really want to see how Edward Norton portrayed Bruce Banner before he was replaced by Mark Ruffalo in 2012.
3. Iron Man 2 (May 7, 2010)
Iron Man 2 takes place shortly after the events of the first Iron Man. The entire world has learned that Tony Stark is, in fact, Iron Man, which puts a huge target on his back. In addition to more Tony Stark charm and wit, this movie also introduces Black Widow and War Machine.
4. Thor (May 6, 2011)
While the first Marvel movies take place on Earth, Thor takes us to Asgard, a realm where a race of beings recognized on Earth by humans as the deities of their Norse mythology, Asgardians, live. The star of this movie is Chris Hemsworth as Thor, whose goal is to earn back his powers after being cast out of Asgard.
5. Captain America: The First Avenger (July 22, 2011)
Taking place during the Second World War, Captain America: The First Avenger is the first Marvel movie to watch if you want to stick to the MCU timeline. It introduces Steve Rogers as a US army soldier who turns into Captain America after getting accepted into an experimental program.
6. The Avengers (May 4, 2012)
The Avengers is the last movie of Phase One of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Stakes quickly escalate when an alien horde decides to invade New York City, forcing Nick Fury to form a counter-terrorism agency called S.H.I.E.L.D.
Iron Man 3 is the first movie of Phase Two, and it takes place directly after the events of The Avengers. After what happened in New York City, Tony Stark is consumed by anxiety, which pushes him to create a small army of Iron Man suits to defend the Earth.
8. Thor: The Dark World (November 8, 2013)
Thor: The Dark World might not be one of the more popular Marvel movies, but its importance shouldn’t be underestimated because it provides the first glimpse at the Infinity Stones, laying the foundation for the epic two-part finale.
9. Captain America: The Winter Soldier (April 4, 2014)
Introducing several new characters, Captain America: The Winter Soldier has a different tone than previous Marvel movies because the filmmakers were strongly influenced by ’70s conspiracy movies. As its title suggests, it centers around Captain America, who is starting to question the motives of the agency he’s been working for since the events of The Avengers, S.H.I.E.L.D.
10. Guardians of the Galaxy (August 1, 2014)
Guardians of the Galaxy is one of the most beloved Marvel movies, following a band of intergalactic misfits led by Chris Pratt as Peter Quill. Despite the catchy soundtrack, which became hit no. 1 on the Billboard charts, the stakes in this movie are high because our unlikely heroes must keep the Power Stone out of the wrong hands.
11. Avengers: Age of Ultron (May 1, 2015)
What happens when an artificial intelligence created by Tony Stark to protect the world becomes evil? Plenty of thrilling moments—that’s for sure. Introduced in Avengers: Age of Ultron are several new characters, including Scarlet Witch, who is played by Elizabeth Olson.
12. Ant-Man (July 17, 2015)
Even though Ant-Man seemed like a minor character in 2015, we now know that he plays an essential role in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and this movie introduces him in a hilarious fashion. Paul Rudd really captured the character of Ant-Man brilliantly, making this one of the funniest Marvel movies ever made.
13. Captain America: Civil War (May 6, 2016)
The Avengers are divided into two different factors, which is bad news for our heroes but great news for us, the fans of Marvel movies. Captain America: Civil War is packed with so many epic super-hero fights that you’ll find yourself at the edge of your seat the entire time.
14. Doctor Strange (November 4, 2016)
The universe can be pretty strange, and nobody knows this better than Stephen Strange, played by Benedict Cumberbatch. In this movie, we get to see how he transformed from a neurosurgeon into a Sorcerer Supreme capable of using ancient magic and glimpsing into infinite timelines.
15. Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (May 5, 2017)
The Guardians are back, and they must once again confront dangerous enemies and fight to keep their unlikely family together. You can expect a fantastic soundtrack, epic space adventures, and tender moments that reveal the human side of our beloved super-heroes.
16. Spider-Man: Homecoming (July 7, 2017)
Even though there had been a number of Spider-Man movies before this one, Spider-Man: Homecoming is the first to officially become a part of the MCU universe. It stars Tom Holland as young Peter Parker, who’s willing to do whatever it takes to become an Avenger.
17. Thor: Ragnarok (November 3, 2017)
In Thor: Ragnarok, the Asgardian god of thunder teams up with Hulk to defend his home against Hella, the Asgardian goddess of death is based on the Norse goddess, Hel. Director Taika Waititi brings his signature sense of humor, making Thor: Ragnarok one of the most entertaining Marvel movies ever produced.
18. Black Panther (February 16, 2018)
If you’ve ever heard the phrase “Wakanda forever,” you should know that it comes from Black Panther, a movie about T’Challa, the King of Wakanda. Challenged by Killmonger for the role of king, T’Challa must fight his own blood to take what’s rightfully his.
19. Avengers: Infinity War (April 27, 2018)
Available on: Netflix and Amazon Video
After 18 movies, characters from all corners of the MCU must stand together and protect the universe against the greatest threat it has ever seen: Thanos, a genocidal warlord who wants to wipe out half of all life in the universe. Even though all Marvel movies feature epic battles, Avengers: Infinity War takes things to a whole new level. Unfortunately, Avengers: Infinity War isn’t available on Disney+ yet, but it should be soon.
20. Ant-Man and the Wasp (July 6, 2018)
Marvel decided to make the timeline of this movie ambiguous on purpose, but it’s not difficult to figure out that it takes place before or during the events of Avengers: Infinity War. Paul Rudd is back in his Ant-Man suit, fighting alongside Wasp in the Quantum Realm.
21. Captain Marvel (March 8, 2019)
Captain Marvel is the first female-led movie in the Marvel franchise, starring Brie Larsen as Carol Danvers. The movie takes place in the ’90s, so it shouldn’t surprise you that there’s a lot of nostalgia crammed in it, which is one reason why it’s one of the worst-rated Marvel movies.
22. Avengers: Endgame (April 26, 2019)
Will half of all life in the universe be wiped out with a snap of Thanos’ finger, or will our heroes save the day and defeat the mighty Titan? Unless you’ve been living under a rock or actively avoiding spoilers, you probably already know the answer, but that doesn’t mean that you should skip Avengers: Endgame. As far as conclusions to epic sagas go, this movie shows how to do it right.
23. Spider-Man: Far From Home (July 2, 2019)
In a way, Spider-Man: Far From Home can be seen as an epilogue to the Phase One, Two, and Three of the MCU. It’s a smaller story with a lots of heart in it, and it servers as a bridge between the MCU post-Infinity War and Phase Four. Just like Spider-Man: Homecoming, you can’t watch it on Disney+ because it’s owned by Sony.
Phase Four of the Marvel Cinematic Universe is set to kick off later this year with Black Widow (November 6, 2020), starring Scarlett Johansson as Natasha Romanoff, a spy and an expert hand-to-hand combatant.
Black Widow was supposed to be released on May 1st, but it was delayed, along with the rest of the upcoming Marvel movies, amid the novel coronavirus pandemic.
In February 12, 2021, there will be The Eternals, followed by Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (May 7th, 2021), Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (November 5th, 2021), untitled Spider-Man: Far from Home Sequel (July 16, 2021), Thor: Love and Thunder (February 18, 2022), and Black Panther 2 (May 6, 2022).
Unlike the previous three phases of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Phase Four won’t have any Stan Lee cameos due to his death in 2018. However, there are rumors of Tony Stark making a cameo in Black Widow.
Watching Marvel movies in chronological order can be a fun way for die-hard fans of the franchise to experience the epic story spanning nearly a century in a novel way.
It can also be an exciting way how to experience Marvel movies for the first time, but you need to keep in mind that things won’t always make much sense because some movies contain flashbacks.
The good news is that most Marvel movies have been released in the correct chronological order, with only a few notable exceptions.
Timeline (Start)
Now that you know the correct order of Marvel movies according to their theatrical release and MCU timeline, it’s time to rank them from best to worst so that you can decide which Marvel movies are 100% worth watching and which can be skipped.
Marvel Movies in Order of Their IMDb Rating
As the world’s most popular and authoritative source for movie and TV show ratings, IMDb has thousands and thousands of user reviews for all Marvel movies, which is why IMDb ratings typically reflect the opinions of the Marvel fanbase.
Marvel Movies in Order of Their Rotten Tomatoes Rating (Tomatometer)
If you’re not interested in what regular moviegoers think and want to know how professional movie critics have rated Marvel movies, you should pay attention to the Tomatometer score, which is published by American review-aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes and represents the percentage of professional critic reviews that are positive for a given movie or TV show.
Tomatometer Score
Don’t have time to watch all 23 Marvel movies? Here are the top 10 essential Marvel movies available on Disney+ right now. After watching these movies, you’ll be ready for Phase Four in November 2020.
Unfortunately, one of the most important Marvel movies ever released, Avengers: Infinity War, is not yet available on Disney+, but it should be in July, so create a reminder and make sure to watch it when it finally becomes available.
Top 10 essential Marvel movies:
Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)
The Avengers (2012)
Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)
Captain America: Civil War (2016)
Thor: Ragnarok (2017)
Thanks to streaming services like Disney+, it has never been easier to experience the magic and thrill of the Marvel Cinematic Universe in your preferred order. If you start watching today, you’ll have plenty of time to finish Phase One, Two, and Three before Phase Four begins in November with the release of Black Widow.
Previous articleTop 7 Best Credit Cards You Should Consider in Dec 2019
Next article7 Best Free Video Editing Software in 2019
Aadhaar Card: Everything You Need to Know about It
Top 5 Airbnb Trends in 2019 and Beyond
Top 7 Profitable eBay Niches and How to Find Them
5 Best Updated USB Flash Drive Recovery Tools for Windows
super admin - January 7, 2021
Top 7 Best Fully Tested SD Card Data Recovery For Windows
Top 5 Best External Hard Drive Recovery Tools For Mac Users
The Definitive 5 Best SD Card Data Recovery Tools on Mac
12 Best ExtraTorrent Alternatives in May 2020
Max - May 16, 2020
© Bestsevenreviews.com. All Rights Reserved. We cover P2P topics and tech related stuff. All votes are made by real users. We sometimes earn affiliate commissions that support our work, but our rating is not based on affiliate commission.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line906
|
__label__wiki
| 0.948825
| 0.948825
|
UK High Court refuses to release money for Vijay Mallya
By Poonam JoshiLondon [UK], January 13 (ANI): Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya has been denied access by a UK court to a significant chunk of his cash held by the UK court funds office as part of the wider bankruptcy proceedings against him launched by a consortium of Indian banks.
A judge at the Insolvency and Companies Court at the High Court in London refused to release the funds, saying that Mallya had failed to provide the necessary information to permit the release of the funds.
Judge Sebastian Prentis however, agreed to allow sufficient funds to Mallya to cover an appeal he is expected to file against the refusal on Wednesday (January 13).
Mallya, 65, was ordered extradited to India in 2018 to face charges of defrauding a consortium of Indian banks out of more than British Pounds 1 billion relating to the now-defunct Kingfisher Airlines in 2009. That extradition order was upheld on appeal all the way to the UK High Court in April 2020.
However, the UK Home Secretary Priti Patel has held off on signing the extradition order due to a legal technicality currently being dealt with by the UK Home Office.
Mallya is also thought to have sought political asylum in the UK.
He had sought the release of the funds as he continues his legal battles. The tycoon had sought the court's approval to use part of the British pounds 2.9 million in proceeds from the sale of a mansion on the island of Ile St Marguerite, a Mediterranean island off the southern coast of the plush French Riviera, within sight of Cannes.
The proceeds from the sale and other assets are held by Mallya are held within the Court Funds Office (CFO) while Mallya battles bankruptcy proceedings against the consortium of banks which includes the State Bank of India (SBI), Punjab National Bank (PNB) and United Bank of India as they try to recoup their losses.
Mallya's lawyer, Philip Marshall, told the court that his client urgently needed the money in order to pay legal fees. He also said that income that Mallya had depended on through "consultancy" work had also ceased.
Justice Prentis, in denying the motion, questioned as to what had happened to other assets held by Mallya, including jewellery and a string of luxury cars - including valuable vintage Ferraris. Marshall claimed that all his assets were under "control orders" and Mallya was down to just over British pounds 250,000 held in a bank account.
Tony Beswetherick, the barrister representing the Indian banks, said releasing the funds would give Mallya the opportunity to disperse the funds that were meant to be paid towards the debt owed to the banks.
A full hearing on the release of any funds to Mallya to pay for legal fees as well as living expenses is expected to take place at the High Court on 22 January. (ANI)
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line914
|
__label__wiki
| 0.549488
| 0.549488
|
Tonbridge man completes London Marathon after family’s tragic loss
A man who lost his sister-in-law to an aggressive brain tumour has completed the London Marathon to raise funds for vital research into the disease.
Adam Ramadhen joined tens of thousands of runners taking part in the world’s biggest running event on Sunday 22nd April for the charity Brain Tumour Research after Ria Kelly, sister of Adam’s wife, Aissa, passed away from a brain tumour in 2013 at the age of 31.
Ria, who lived in Coxheath, Maidstone, was just 27 and given only six months to live when she was diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a high-grade brain tumour in 2009. Over a period of four years, Ria had brain surgery on two occasions, as well as gruelling radiotherapy and numerous rounds of chemotherapy.
Adam, 31, who lives in Tonbridge, Kent, and has never run a marathon before said: “Completing the London Marathon is such a personal achievement for me. I watched Ria fight this cruel disease with true determination and even with the odds against her, she still managed to smile every day, be extremely positive and try to bring happiness to all those around her. My marathon was all about her.”
“Cancer is such a horrible disease and although over 16,000 people are diagnosed with a brain tumour each year in the UK, little is still known about the disease. Just knowing I’ve raised over £6,500 so far for Brain Tumour Research is such a great feeling.”
Adam was one of 40,000 runners taking part in the event which was started by The Queen from the grounds of Windsor Castle. It was the 38th London Marathon to take place since the first on 29th March 1981.
The money Adam has raised will go towards the pioneering charity Brain Tumour Research which funds a network of dedicated Centres of Excellence where scientists are focused on improving outcomes for patients and, ultimately, finding a cure.
Tim Green, Community Fundraising Manager for Brain Tumour Research, said “Brain tumours kill more children and adults under the age of 40 than any other cancer - and more women under 35 than breast cancer, yet just 1% of the national spend on cancer research has been allocated to this devastating disease.
“For too long, brain tumours have been a neglected cancer. Stories like Ria’s remind us all that we cannot allow this desperate situation to continue. We are extremely grateful for Adam’s support and offer our congratulations to everyone who took part in this year’s event to raise money for charity.”
Make a donation to Brain Tumour Research via Adam’s JustGiving
Lexie Jenkins at Brain Tumour Research on 01908 867222 or 07591 206545 or Lexie.Jenkins@braintumourresearch.org
Brain Tumour Research is the only national charity in the UK focused on funding sustainable research to find a cure for brain tumours. We have established a game-changing network of world-class Research Centres of Excellence in the UK. Embracing passionate member charities nationwide, over £6 million was raised towards research and support during 2017.
We are campaigning to see the national spend on research into brain tumours increased to £30 - £35 million a year, in line with breast cancer and leukaemia. The unprecedented success of our 2015 petition led to the 2016 Westminster Hall debate and Brain Tumour Research taking a leading role in the Government’s Task and Finish Working Group convened to tackle the historic underfunding for research with the report being published in 2018.
In the UK, 16,000 people each year in the UK are diagnosed with a brain tumour
Brain tumours are indiscriminate; they can affect anyone at any age
Incidences of and deaths from brain tumours are increasing
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line919
|
__label__wiki
| 0.739407
| 0.739407
|
CMO of the Week: Mint Mobile’s Aron North
Andrew Hampp
Entertainment Marketing Consultant, Brand Innovators
As the star of the “Ghostbusters” and “Honey, I Shrunk The Kids!” franchises, Rick Moranis was one of the most ubiquitous actors of the ‘80s. But after 1997’s straight-to-video threequel “Honey, We Shrunk Ourselves!”, Moranis all but vanished from public life and consciousness, reappearing here and there with the occasional voice-acting gig.
So it was only a given that his first on-camera appearance in 23 years would go viral on September 9, co-starring in a surprise ad for direct-to-consumer wireless carrier Mint Mobile alongside its new owner, Ryan Reynolds. In the first eight days of its release, the spot has been viewed more than 2.4 million times on YouTube, garnering earned media coverage from national outlets including CNN, NBC’s “Today” and People.com, among many others. As Vanity Fair quipped in its article about the campaign, “The famously picky actor…stepped back in front of the camera to stump for cell phones. It’s 2020, why not?”
Aron North, who’s been chief marketing officer of Mint Mobile and its sister company Ultra Mobile since a month before Mint was founded in August 2016, says although outreach to Moranis was all Reynolds’ idea, the stunt was necessary to draw attention to Mint’s first widespread offering of unlimited data for $30/month to new subscribers. “We’re still a small brand, so we saw an opportunity to create some familiarity with the customer through our ad campaign to drive our message,” North says.
After quietly rolling out the Moranis spot online late into the night of September 8 before any PR or official announcement, North could already tell the campaign was going to connect, based on one key early indicator. “Reddit caught on to it quickly without any public messaging around it,” he says. “We had been working all year to launch unlimited in September to validate that people are shopping again. So by the time we officially announced, it was quite a day.”
Reynolds stars in two additional spots with unexpected guests — Avery Revere, the great-great-great-great-granddaughter of Paul Revere, and 2019 Teacher of the Year Rodney Robinson — to help kick off a series of future ads that will be released under the “Ryan &” banner. And despite the green-screened set, each commercial was filmed live with Reynolds and his guests under extra-safe conditions to comply with the new COVID-19 production guidelines.
As an online-only D2C wireless company that operates on the T-Mobile network, Mint Mobile is a uniquely positioned challenger brand in a crowded category dominated by brick-and-mortar retail. North joined Ultra Mobile to help launch Mint Mobile in July 2016 after a five-year stint with Taco Bell, where he was part of the team that launched Doritos Locos tacos, breakfast and other new menu items that brought strong business growth and endless buzz to the legacy QSR brand.
That entrepreneurial spirit carried over to his role with Ultra Mobile, where he built the marketing department for Mint from scratch to a growth trajectory that exceeded first full-year forecasts by 500% in 2017 and has doubled in size in 2018 and 2019, respectively. The company has not shared subscriber figures publicly.
Brand Innovators caught up with North from his home near Mint Mobile’s headquarters in Costa Mesa, Calif., to learn more about his path from agencies to Taco Bell and Mint Mobile, the creative contributions of a superstar like Reynolds and the benefits of being direct-to-consumer. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
Brand Innovators: You worked for a lot of big-name agencies like Y&R and brands like Taco Bell prior to joining Ultra Mobile. What appealed to you about the opportunity to join a wireless startup?
Aron North: I got my start for a decade at agencies and really loved that opportunity. I recommend people do it before they go client side. You get multiple years of experience in every year you put in. I ended up leaving and I joined Taco Bell at an amazing point with the team that rebranded and repositioned Taco Bell coming out of the bogus beef lawsuit.
So to turn the brand from when it had decreasing sales the year I got there because of the lawsuit to adding almost a billion dollars in topline every year after that was just phenomenal. It was just the best gig ever as I thought at the time, and one day I got a cold call from a headhunter who said, “How would you like to work for the fastest growing company in America and build them a marketing department?” I said, “That sounds amazing but I don’t want to move.” And when I heard the job was in Costa Mesa, which was 10 minutes down the street from where I was working at Taco Bell, I thought, “There’s no way the fastest growing company is right down the street.” At the time it was only Ultra Mobile, there was no Mint Mobile. It just felt like it would be something really good for me to grow from a career standpoint, and when I got there we birthed Mint. It has just been one of the most exciting things I’ve ever done in my life from a career standpoint. It’s been phenomenal and insane.
Ryan Reynolds became an owner of Mint Mobile in November 2019 after Ultra and Mint became separate business units. Beyond the obvious capital and name recognition he brings to the table, what sweat equity is he putting in as a fellow marketer?
Ryan is actively involved in the marketing and strategy of the brand. We use his agency Maximum Effort as one of our agencies, so we get not only his fantastic creativity, thinking, strategy and marketing ideas, we get to use a small but highly qualified group of agency individuals. It’s been just incredible to work with them.
You debuted three new buzzy spots this month, including one with Rick Moranis that garnered a lot of media buzz. How did you shoot these safely, given the new guidelines for shoots during COVID-19?
Safety is our utmost concern. Our companies Mint and Ultra Mobile have taken this very, very seriously. We were ahead of the game when it came time to letting people work from home in early March, so that when the mandatory state order came out we were ready to send people home and had already built the infrastructure to do it.
For these “Ryan &” campaigns, we shoot everything union and we abide by union rules, so we couldn't do production during the stay-at-home orders — which is why we had a television ad of slides. But with this campaign, we were more strict than even what the SAG protocols called for. We shot it in New York on a stage, I flew out a week before, quarantined while in New York and was taking COVID tests daily, making sure you get consistent negative readings. It's a different world being on set. Everybody’s masked, everybody’s getting temperature checked. All the safety precautions you can imagine, very few people on set, lighting folks and camera operators. From a marketing perspective, it was very narrow. It was talent, myself and key folks from Maximum Effort. Everybody's away, everybody’s apart.
The interesting thing was Ryan and whomever he’s shooting with, they’re about six feet apart anyway, so it just sort of worked out that way. But still, it was completely different than any shoot I’ve been on in my life. It’s a bummer because you want your broader team to be there but it’s just not safe. I didn’t want my team flying across the country and having to self-isolate and do this and that. Even when I came back, I had to quarantine away from my family for a week and get negative testing before I re-inserted myself back into the North family bubble. But it was important to figure out a way to do this all in-person safely, because you can feel it when it’s not. I’ve seen work from other brands where the green screen is too distracting.
Of course, Mint Mobile isn’t the only Ryan Reynolds-affiliated brand that’s made headlines in the past month following the recent acquisition of his Aviation Gin by Diageo, valued at an estimated $610 million. Are there any crossover campaigns or collabs with that brand in the works as part of the Ryan Reynolds meta-verse?
We haven’t done any yet. It's really important for me that we launch our brand as a standalone, but what they have done with Aviation is amazing. It’s one of the reasons we were so excited to partner with Ryan. What he's able to do to classic marketing and how he’s turning it on its head is really exciting for us.
We’re a fairly unconventional brand. We’re in a space dominated by traditional retail and we don’t own a store, so we are unconventional. And having him and what he was able to do with Aviation and bring that creativity and innovation in our space is really magnificent. But it’s important to launch us standalone separate from Aviation. And then yeah, I’m sure there’s gonna be opportunities to do stuff together. They’re a very fun brand, we love what they do. And as it turns out, we have the same owner.
Because your business was less vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic than others in terms of temporary closures of physical retail locations, has it been relatively steady in the whole of 2020 so far?
We were not impervious to a global pandemic. The way our business has been affected is different from most. We’ve had to deal with government intervention. When everybody got the stay at home order, the FCC came out with a strong recommendation that even if the customers don’t pay their bills, you should not kick them off your cellular service. And there are no new cell phone users coming into the market — the market is saturated, we’re in a “steal share” game. So what happens when you don’t have to pay your bill and you still continue your service is nobody switches. Our business took a hit because there was some outside intervention that made our product unattractive because you could get service for free. That ended, so what we did was say, “Look, we're not gonna get a bunch of new customers right away, let’s be smart, let’s lower our acquisition spend and focus on our current customers and take care of them.”
We were able to come up with a concept of unlimited data for $15/month on the Friday night of stay-at-home orders and by Monday morning extended it all to our customers. And we ended up extending it twice. That was an important move for us to take care of our customers. It also allowed us to focus internally on what our customers need and where we should go next. We’re able to not spend above the line, we’re saving money and using that money to reduce churn. Our business wasn’t growing during that time, but once that order lifted from the government our business took off. The company had been growing exponentially until the pandemic hit. It’s too soon to call it, but we’re still gonna have a good year.
How else has being a direct-to-consumer brand since the inception of your business been an advantage?
People don’t believe me when I tell them I have the same service as others, it’s just so much cheaper. There is still so much doubt that you can have high quality items at low cost. That does not compute in the American psyche, we’ve been told all our lives that expensive has to be better. It’s not in this case. You can’t touch, taste or smell wireless. It is as commoditized as anything in the market. For us if you have the right phone, the service will work great for you.
Our business is very different. Not having stores is incredible. We don't have the costs. I know what stores cost to build. It’s millions of dollars and then you gotta light it, employ it, et cetera. To be big you have to have 10,000 plus stores like the big brands. That's billions of dollars in investment. We’re able to do premium wireless and keep the costs down. It’s the classic d-to-c approach, innovate the process and create a better mouse trap.
Andrew Hampp is an entertainment marketing consultant for Brand Innovators and the founder of consultancy 1803 LLC, based in Berkeley, California.
Interested in our events?
Pepsi to Focus on Halftime Show & Activations During Super Bowl
Innovator Insights: Cadent’s Jes Santoro on Moving From Demo-Based Buying to an Audience-Based, Flexible Approach to Reaching TV Viewers
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line920
|
__label__cc
| 0.722679
| 0.277321
|
Syria: Kofi Annan’s Wishful Thinking
Kofi Annan - Former Secretary General of the United Nations
Syria – With the fighting now raging in the northern region of Idlib, in an attempt to stop the ongoing carnage, United Nations envoy, Kofi Annan, is meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to mediate an end to the country’s yearlong conflict.
Today, in negotiations aimed at pushing the Syrian leader to order a ceasefire and begin talks with the opposition, former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan met with al-Assad in Damascus but no signs of progress were evident on the streets where security forces continued to kill with impunity.
Al-Assad told Annan that “any political dialogue or action cannot take place or succeed if there are terrorist armed gangs on the ground that are working on spreading chaos and target the stability of the homeland”.
While the two men spoke, hundreds, if not thousands of Syrians, mostly civilians were still dying in villages, towns and cities across the nation.
Again, what about the one bullet solution?
#BasharalAssad #KofiAnnan #Syria
Société / Society
Tomorrow’s Most In-Demand Skills
Avoid the Unhappy and Unlucky
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line923
|
__label__wiki
| 0.759206
| 0.759206
|
Road to the White House 2016
WMUR-TV Interview with Senator Bernie Sanders
2015-04-30T01:39:29-04:00https://images.c-span.org/Files/960/20150430015643001_hd.jpgSenator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, was interviewed March 16, 2015, as part of WMUR-TV’s “Conversation with the Candidate” series, co-sponsored by the New Hampshire Institute of Politics and Political Library (NHIOP). After the interview he responded to questions from the studio audience, as well as questions submitted online. Topics included foreign policy, immigration, education, and energy sources.
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, was interviewed March 16, 2015, as part of WMUR-TV’s… read more
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), a potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, was interviewed March 16, 2015, as part of WMUR-TV’s “Conversation with the Candidate” series, co-sponsored by the New Hampshire Institute of Politics and Political Library (NHIOP). After the interview he responded to questions from the studio audience, as well as questions submitted online. Topics included foreign policy, immigration, education, and energy sources. close
Filter by Speaker All Speakers Josh McElveen Bernie Sanders
Josh McElveen Political Director WMUR-TV (Manchester, NH)
Bernie Sanders U.S. Senator (Class 1) [I] Vermont
WMUR-TV (Manchester, NH)WMUR-TV (Manchester, NH)
New Hampshire Institute of PoliticsNew Hampshire Institute of Politics
More Videos From This Event
WMUR-TV Interview with Senator Rand Paul
WMUR-TV Interview with Donald Trump
WMUR-TV Interview with Former Governor George Pataki
Manchester, New Hampshire, United States
May 02, 2015 | 4:04pm EDT | C-SPAN 1
Apr 30, 2015 | 12:19pm EDT | C-SPAN 3
May 01, 2015 | 12:40am EDT | C-SPAN 2
WMUR-TV Interview with Former Governor Bob Ehrlich
Former Governor Bob Ehrlich (R-MD), a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, was interviewed May 1, 2015, as part of…
WMUR-TV Interview with Carly Fiorina
Carly Fiorina, a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, was interviewed April 17, 2015, as part of WMUR-TV’s…
WMUR-TV Interview with Governor John Kasich
Governor John Kasich (R-OH), a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, was interviewed May 6, 2015, as part of WMUR-TV’s…
WMUR-TV Interview with Jeb Bush
Former Governor Jeb Bush (R-FL), a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, was interviewed May 21, 2015, as part of…
User Clip: Bernie Sanders talks about Foreign Policy
User Clip: Bernie Sanders talks about immigration
User Clip: Bernie Sanders on Education
Sanders NH
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line924
|
__label__cc
| 0.710918
| 0.289082
|
A Step Forward Toward Better Characterization of Ovarian Cancer
Anna Azvolinsky
A new study has made a step forward toward better characterization of sporadic ovarian tumors by identifying their DNA repair protein expression profile.
It has been difficult to identify subcategories in ovarian cancer that can be used to tailor treatment. However, a new study has taken a step forward toward better characterization of sporadic ovarian tumors by identifying their DNA repair protein expression profile.
The molecular characterizations of tumor samples from 186 women were analyzed for specific protein expression levels by Tanja Pejovic, a gynecologic oncologist at the Knight Cancer Institute in Portland, Oregon, and colleagues. Their work is published in the Public Library of Science online journal PloS One.[1]
The study shows that patients with simultaneously high expression levels of the DNA repair proteins PARP, FANCD2, and p53 have a higher risk of early ovarian cancer recurrence and resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy.
Ovarian cancer is the most common cause of death among women with a gynecological cancer, with approximately 14,000 ovarian cancer deaths occurring every year and 21,000 new diagnoses. Many patients are not diagnosed with ovarian cancer until an advanced stage of disease. Standard of care is cytoreductive surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy, which has not significantly improved long-term survival.
The study by Pejovic et al shows that patients with simultaneously high expression levels of the DNA repair proteins PARP, FANCD2 (part of the Fanconi’s anemia [FA] gene group), and p53 have a higher risk of early ovarian cancer recurrence and resistance to platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients who had high levels of all three proteins were twice as likely to have earlier recurrence within 3 years compared with all other patients after adjustment for age, cancer status, and time of diagnosis (P = .03).
The authors suggest that dual inhibition of the FA/BRCA pathway and PARP may be effective in these triple-profile ovarian cancers. Poly(ADP ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors emerged as a promising treatment, showing promising results in patients who have BRCA1- or BRCA2-positive ovarian cancer. Approximately 10% to 15% of ovarian tumors harbor germline mutations in either of these two genes, but sporadic mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 and other DNA repair genes are also prevalent. As many as 20% of high-grade serous sporadic ovarian tumors have BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. The study by Pejovic et al now shows that PARP inhibitors may work in a broader range of ovarian cancers, ones that have mutations in other DNA repair genes besides BRCA1 and BRCA2.
PARP inhibitors are thought to be effective in ovarian cancer because they prevent DNA repair that might otherwise keep cancerous cells alive. The set of DNA repair genes that are mutated, including PARP, PTEN, RAD51, and the FA genes in the tumor is known as its “BRCAness profile.”
The rationale is that adding a PARP inhibitor on top of platinum-based chemotherapy will specifically kill cancer cells that are already sensitive to a platinum treatment regimen. This is the concept of synthetic lethality, according to which targeting two components of the same pathway should result in cell death rather than adaptation because blocking another repair pathway in cells already deficient in DNA repair (that’s the BRCAness profile) and simultaneously increasing DNA damage via platinum-based chemotherapy results in a lethal phenotype. Or at least that is the hope.
The trouble with ovarian tumors is their characteristic genomic instability, which may contribute to evolving mutations in DNA repair genes. The variation in DNA repair genes can influence whether a tumor responds to treatment.
This may be the reason for the recent setbacks in the development of PARP inhibitors. The class of drugs has just not been studied in the correct subpopulation. The PARP inhibitor olaparib had shown promise in a phase II trial, exhibiting a significantly prolonged progression-free survival in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed serous ovarian cancer, as reported at ASCO last year. Unfortunately, at the end of 2011, the company developing the drug announced that the progression-free survival seen was not likely to translate to an overall survival benefit. The drug was given in combination with a platinum-based chemotherapy regimen; however, patients were not specifically selected based on a BRCAness profile or reduced DNA repair profile of their tumors.
“The judgment on PARP inhibitors in ovarian cancer is still pending. We still do not have all the data we need. Certainly identifying the right group of patients who are likely to benefit from these drugs has been one of the challenges,” Tanja Pejovic commented.
Larger cohort studies that molecularly define ovarian tumors and correlate the profiles to treatment response and recurrence are necessary to better classify ovarian cancers and tailor treatments, as has been done for other types of tumors. The current study only analyzed a subset of DNA repair proteins, while others may play a major role in disease development and response to treatment.
“Identifying alterations in DNA repair proteins beyond BRCA proteins may give access to clinical trials-with PARP inhibitors, for example-to many more women with ovarian cancer,” said Dr. Pejovic.
Dr. Pejovic is already thinking about the next step-to perform functional assays and understand what the differences in protein expression and tumor mutations actually mean for the tumor cell’s ability to repair DNA damage. “We need to perform functional studies to confirm that these patients that we identified with high PARP, FANCD2, and p53 protein expression indeed have defective homologous recombination [HR],” she explained. “The testing for defects in HR has not been standardized, so I am working with a colleague here on developing a RAD51 foci formation test as a surrogate for HR status,” she added.
There have not been many new treatments developed for ovarian cancer in the last 20 years. The molecular characterization of these tumors should facilitate a more targeted approach that may identify the patients who will most benefit from the drugs currently in development for ovarian cancer.
1.Wysham WZ, Mhawech-Faucedia P, Li H, et al. BRCAness profile of sporadic ovarian cancer predicts disease recurrence. PLoS One. 2012;7:e30042.
Ovarian Cancer | Gynecologic cancer | Oncology Journal
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line925
|
__label__wiki
| 0.880244
| 0.880244
|
2 Arrested in Samsung Bioepis Accounting Probe
On Monday, the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office in the Republic of Korea arrested an executive and another employee at biosimilar developer Samsung Bioepis for falsifying and destroying evidence and for violating audit law.
According to the Financial Times and other sources, on Monday, the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office in the Republic of Korea arrested an executive and another employee at biosimilar developer Samsung Bioepis for falsifying and destroying evidence and for violating audit law.
In November 2018, Korean regulators from the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) said that, in 2015, Samsung BioLogics used accounting methods that allegedly misrepresented the value of the biosimilar maker prior to an initial public offering in 2016.
According to officials, Samsung BioLogics changed the way it accounted for its stake in Samsung Bioepis, a partnership with Biogen, by recognizing the partnership’s market value instead of its book value, thereby inflating its valuation.
According to Korea Biomedical Review, the arrest warrants that were executed this week are the first to be filed in the case and relate to data that may have been deleted from computers and mobile phones.
These data could be relevant, said officials, to determining whether Biogen’s contractual option to increase its share in the Samsung Bioepis partnership to 49.9% was hidden from accountants who were responsible for a merger between Cheil Industries and Samsung in 2015. Biogen announced in 2018 that it would exercise its option.
The arrests are the latest development in the probe that, last year, resulted in a $7.05 million fine, the suspension of Samsung BioLogics’ stock trading, and calls for the firing of the firm’s chief executive officer as well as the chief financial officer.
The company’s stock subsequently resumed trading in December 2018 after officials ruled that the company’s shares could remain listed while the case played out.
Then, in January of this year, a Korean court ruled that penalties against Samsung BioLogics should be suspended pending a final court determination on whether the company had indeed violated accounting standards.
For its part, Samsung BioLogics has maintained that it has not breached any accounting rules. In late 2018, the company launched an administrative lawsuit with the aim of proving the legality of its actions.
News | Regulatory | Business
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line928
|
__label__wiki
| 0.637953
| 0.637953
|
With 8 Weeks Left Before Brexit, Stakeholders Urge Action
Kelly Davio
Conference | Medicines For Europe Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Conference
One of the most time-sensitive topics at this week’s Medicines for Europe 18th Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Conference, held January 31 to February 1 in London, United Kingdom, was preparing for the United Kingdom’s upcoming withdrawal from the European Union.
One of the most time-sensitive topics at this week’s Medicines for Europe (MFE) 18th Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Conference, held January 31 to February 1 in London, United Kingdom, was preparing for the United Kingdom’s upcoming withdrawal from the European Union.
Moderator Beata Stepniewska, MPharm, deputy director general and head of regulatory affairs at MFE, opened the panel by saying that “we would have preferred to delete this session and forget the word ‘Brexit,’” referring to recent UK political developments that could have—but failed to—bring clarity to the Brexit landscape. She added that with just 59 days to go before Brexit, the organization has a responsibility to guide its members through what is shaping up to be a “quite painful process.”
The European Commission’s Perspective
Beginning the discussion and providing a view from the European Commission (EC)’s perspective was Florian Schmidt, legal advisor in the directorate general for health and food safety in the EC.
According to Schmidt, one thing about Brexit is clear: regardless of whether a deal is ratified or the United Kingdom leaves the European Union without an agreement, Brexit will cause “significant disruption,” and the fallout is “one that both sides have to deal with” through action from regulatory authorities.
In the case of a ratified UK—EU agreement, a transition period, extending to the end of 2020, will be instituted to ease the process of moving to separate regulation. However, in the event of a no-deal outcome, there will be no transition period, and all administrative actions needed to prepare for Brexit—such as moving marketing authorizations to remaining member states, making changes to clinical trials, and adapting labeling for medicines—will have to be completed prior to March 30, 2019.
The bottom line, said Schmidt, is that no drug maker can rely on the transition period.
Where the United Kingdom Stands
Giving the UK regulator’s perspective was Keith McDonald, deputy director of the licensing division of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
“Everybody who reads a newspaper or watches the news is as well informed as I am” about where the political process related to Brexit stands, said McDonald. While MHRA’s preferred outcome would be a deal to minimize disruption, in a no-deal scenario, MHRA’s priority will be to ensure timely patient access to medicine and while maintaining standards of safety, quality, and efficacy.
To that end, the UK Human Medicines Regulation was amended to harmonize with current EU legislation. Additionally, EU marketing authorizations will be automatically granted UK status, the MHRA will roll out new review procedures for biosimilars and new active substances, incentives for orphan drug development will be put forth, and data and marketing exclusivity will be provided. Furthermore, batch testing will take a “whitelist” approach to EU and European Economic Area sites, parallel imports will be allowed, and importation of investigational medicinal products will be permitted for clinical trials.
MHRA’s no-deal plans also include transitional marketing authorization provisions under which legal establishment of a marketing authorization holder in the UK will be allowed to take place until the end of 2020, and package leaflets can be updated prior to the end of 2021.
Handling Centrally Authorized Products
Marie-Helene Pinheiro, PharmD, industry stakeholder liaison for the European Medicines Agency (EMA), reported that the reallocation of duties for evaluating centrally authorized products (CAPs) “seems, as far as we know, to have been implemented quite smoothly.”
Pinheiro explained that UK rapporteurs have been reallocating duties to EU rapporteurs through a “shadowing” program and collaborating on reports. The shadow rapporteurs will become the new leads starting on March 30, and marketing authorization holders have been informed of the reassignments.
While the reallocation of duties has progressed smoothly, CAPs themselves are another matter. According to Pinheiro, only 27% of all affected CAPs have completed all of the necessary pre-Brexit changes. Among companies that have not completed all steps for their CAPs, 76% need to submit manufacturing site changes and 87% need to submit qualified person for pharmacovigilance changes. As of November 2018, there were 19 products for human use that appeared to be at risk of not making changes in time.
With just 8 weeks to go before Brexit, she said, it is crucial that companies engage with the EMA swiftly and make all changes as soon as possible.
Reference Member State Changes and Marketing Authorizations
Kora Doorduyn-van der Stoep, PharmD, member of The Coordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralised Procedures: Human (CMDh) and the Medicines Evaluation Board of the Netherlands, explained that drug makers need to submit changes on time to member states whom they would like to serve as new Reference Member States (RMS) for regulatory procedures.
While a marketing authorization will not be invalidated if an RMS is not transferred in time, it will be impossible to submit a new regulatory procedure until the transfer is complete.
If a company uses the UK as an RMS and the transfer is not complete at the time of Brexit, the drug maker must find a new member state and resubmit an application. For critical products, CMDh will publish further advice on how these procedures will be handled.
Currently, 3 companies have 13 ongoing marketing authorization applications with UK as an RMS that are at high risk of not being finalized by March 30, and what will become of those applications is an “ongoing discussion.”
The Potential for Supply Disruption
Britt Vermeij, PharmD, deputy chair of the regulatory and scientific committee at Teva, said that supply disruption could result from delays to the site transfer for batch testing. Currently, based on a survey of industry, it has become clear that products used in immunology, oncology, and metabolic disorders, among others, could be impacted, and these may be “the tip of the iceberg.”
Paul Fleming, technical director of the British Generic Manufacturers Association, added that the industry is working hard to minimize the impact of Brexit on the supply of medicine. Generic and biosimilars makers, as well as other areas of industry, have begun to stockpile at least 6 extra weeks’ worth of medicines.
“This is not a last-minute activity” that will start in March, he explained, but an ongoing effort that includes weekly meetings with MHRA, the department of transport, and other parts of the government, as well as logistics firms.
While the current supply “looks good” from a UK perspective, however, it is becoming clear that disruptions could last as long as 6 months, not just 6 weeks. Furthermore, given that the supply chain is increasingly global, the effects of a disruption may be felt worldwide, not just in the UK and EU context.
The Need for Action
Rita Purcell, deputy chief executive of Ireland’s Health Products Regulatory Authority, urged drug makers to take swift action to prepare for Brexit and not wait any further for political developments to provide clarity.
“We’ve been told all along to prepare for the worst,” she said, but emphasized that a no-deal outcome is even worse for industry than a “hard Brexit,” and she fears that industry’s hopes for a transition period could mean that few are fully prepared for the realities of a no-deal scenario.
Companies urgently need to review their supply chains for capacity as well as compliance and transit documentation in addition to reviewing their regulatory compliance. Above all, she said, if in doubt about their readiness, drug makers must get in touch with regulators immediately to seek solutions.
Medicines For Europe Regulatory and Scientific Affairs Conference | Conference
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line929
|
__label__cc
| 0.599707
| 0.400293
|
February 5, 2016 5:00PM
You Ought to Have a Look: Dr. John Christy’s House Testimony
By Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. "Chip" Knappenberger
You Ought to Have a Look is a feature from the Center for the Study of Science posted by Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. (“Chip”) Knappenberger. While this section will feature all of the areas of interest that we are emphasizing, the prominence of the climate issue is driving a tremendous amount of web traffic. Here we post a few of the best in recent days, along with our color commentary.
If you read only one thing this week that falls within the realm of human-caused climate change, we strongly suggest this one—Dr. John Christy’s written testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space & Technology.
In it, he produces clear, strong evidence that the climate models are producing too much warming from greenhouse gas emissions and that there exists a concerted effort to try to downplay this fact to policymakers and the general public.
Christy’s Feb. 2nd testimony is an expansion of his earlier testimony Dec. 8th before the Senate’s Commerce, Science & Transportation’s Subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness.
The central element of his December testimony was that climate models are failing miserably at simulating the actual temperature rise in the earth’s lower atmosphere. The models produce about 2.5 times as much warming from human greenhouse gas emissions than has actually been observed by satellites and weather-balloons.
This fact caught Senator (and current presidential hopeful) Ted Cruz’s fancy and he included it in several post-hearing communications on the topic of human-caused global warming—which of course got the global warming alarmist fanbase in a tizzy. So much so that they went so far as to produce a snazzy video aimed to shoot down Christy’s satellite observations as unreliable and untrustworthy.
In his testimony this week, Christy shoots back—with a big gun.
Here are some of his zingers.
“It is a bold strategy in my view to actively promote the output of theoretical climate models while attacking the multiple lines of evidence from observations.”
“Investigations of us by congress and the media are spurred by the idea that anyone who disagrees with the climate establishment’s view of dangerous climate change must be on the payroll of scurrilous organizations or otherwise mentally deficient.”
“[T]hese models failed at the simple test of telling us ‘what’ has already happened, and thus would not be in a position to give us a confident answer to ‘what’ may happen in the future and ‘why.’”
“The information in this figure provides clear evidence that the models have a strong tendency to over-warm the atmosphere relative to actual observations. On average the models warm the global atmosphere at a rate 2.5 times that of the real world.”
“Because this result challenges the current theory of greenhouse warming in relatively straightforward fashion, there have been several well-funded attacks on those of us who build and use such datasets and on the datasets themselves. As a climate scientist I’ve found myself, along with fellow like-minded colleagues, tossed into a world more closely associated with character assassination and misdirection, found in Washington politics for example, rather than objective, dispassionate discourse commonly assumed for the scientific endeavor.”
And, these are just the tip of the iceberg, you really ought to have a look at Dr. Christy’s entire testimony in which he touches on topics that, in addition to the abject failure of climate models, include deficiencies in surface temperature compilations, problems with sea surface temperature observations, and the (non) impact of the Paris Climate Accord.
A highly informative, enlightening, and entertaining read!
Saving Cities from Bad Federal Policies
Celebrate, Don’t Mourn, the Decline of Public Transit
LA Metro’s Climate Strategy
150 Years of Boondoggles
Cato Publications
Constitution, the Law, and the Courts
Criminal Law and Civil Liberties
Education and Child Policy
Finance, Banking & Monetary Policy
Foreign Policy and National Security
International Economics, Development & Immigration
Regulatory Studies
Telecom, Internet & Information Policy
Sign up to have Cato At Liberty posts delivered straight to your inbox!
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line932
|
__label__cc
| 0.502165
| 0.497835
|
Claremont Symphony Orchestra
Video Clips of CSO
Youth Symphony
About CSO
Conductors & Admin
Donate online or via check
Contact CSO
In Memoriam - Dr. James Fahringer
Photos of Jim
In Memoriam - CSO Members
61st Season, 2013-2014
Sunday, October 20, 2013, 3:30 p.m.
Centennial Celebrations
Benjamin Britten: Simple Symphony
Giuseppe Verdi: Overture to Nabucco, Prelude to Act I of La traviata, Overture to La forza del destino
Richard Wagner: Overture to Tannhaüser, "Ride of the Valkyries" from Die Walküre, Prelude to Act I of Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg
Sunday, December 1, 2013, 3:30 p.m.
Russian Tableau
Joseph Ognibene, French Horn
Modeste Moussorgsky: Dawn on the Moskva River, from Khovanschina
Reinhold Glière: Concerto for Horn and Orchestra in B-flat major, Op. 91
Nicolai Rimsky-Korsakov: Suite from The Tale of Tsar Saltan
Alexander Borodin: Polovtsian Dances, from Prince Igor
Sunday, December 22, 2013, 1:30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m.
Annual Messiah Community Singalong
Coril Prochnow, Soprano
Virginia Stewart, Mezzo-Soprano
Omar Crook, Tenor
Alex Britton, Bass
George Frideric Handel: Messiah
Saturday, January 25, 2014, 10:30 a.m.
Concert for Young People with CYSO Concerto Competition winners
Gaeun Moon, Violin
ShihZan Yao, Cello
Philip Nash, Narrator
Camille Saint-Saëns: Cello Concerto No. 1 in A minor, first movement
Sergei Prokofiev: Peter and the Wolf
Camille Saint-Saëns: Introduction and Rondo Capriccioso, Op. 28
John Philip Sousa: The Stars and Stripes Forever
Sunday, March 16, 2014, 3:30 p.m.
Let's Dance!
Ruth Charloff, Conductor
Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky: Waltz from Eugene Onegin
Malcolm Arnold: Four Cornish Dances, Op. 91
Zoltán Kodály: Marosszek Dances
Percy Grainger: Shepherd's Hey
Gabriel Fauré: Pavane in F-sharp minor, Op. 50
Léo Delibes: Sylvia Ballet Suite
Marvin Hamlisch, arr. Robert Lowden: Selections from A Chorus Line
Sunday, May 4, 2014, 3:30 p.m.
Tchaikovsky Spectacular
Joyce Geeting, Cello
Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky: Variations on a Rococo Theme, Op. 33
Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 3 in D major, Op. 29 "Polish"
Sunday, June 8, 2014, 3:30 p.m.
Beethoven Symphony Cycle Continues
Robert Sage, Piano
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Piano Concerto No. 23 in A major, K. 488
Ludwig van Beethoven: Symphony No. 3 in E-flat major, Op. 55 "Eroica"
Summer Concert in Ganesha Park
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line933
|
__label__wiki
| 0.507192
| 0.507192
|
The Truth Has No Place in Kaplan's Court
Reposted from Eye on the Amazon
You likely already know that Chevron (as Texaco) admitted to deliberately dumping close to 18 billion gallons of toxic foundation waters into the pristine Ecuadorian Amazon over several decades (1964-1992). The company split from Ecuador in 1992, conducted a "remediation" proven to have been a complete sham, and got a $40 million "get out of jail free" card from the government of Ecuador (which specifically did NOT exempt them from any third party action). The results of their malicious acts to save just a few dollars per barrel? A wave of cancers and birth defects (incidentally, a Texaco engineer estimated in the 60's that about $4 million would cover the costs of building industry-standard lined waste pits but Texaco thought that was too costly) and a horrific health crisis that continues to this day.
In what is one of the most unlikely and significant victories in environmental and human rights history, 30,000 indigenous people and campesinos won a $9.5 billion judgment in a class action suit after 20 years of ugly legal battles (now upheld by Ecuador's highest court). Unlikely because of the unprecedented and overwhelming pressure placed on the plaintiffs, their supporters, Ecuador and the Ecuadorian judicial system. And significant as it sets an encouraging precedent that those victimized by powerful corporate forces have hope for justice and a way to fight back.
So how on Earth could this victory be so ridiculously, unethically and illegally turned on its head and evolve into the shocking display that just played out in a US Federal Court? And what repercussions and worrisome precedents could such reckless actions hold for corporate accountability and legal processes around the world?
I just spent most of the last two weeks in that New York City courtroom, where U.S. lawyer Steven Donziger and the Ecuadorian Lago Agrio plaintiffs found themselves accused of extortion and racketeering by the 3rd largest corporation in America. Chevron's sham trial will wrap up today, but thanks to Kaplan's inexplicable decision not to allow any testimony related to Chevron's contamination of the Ecuadorian Amazon – the actual issue here and disaster from which all this started – there's a lot that will never be discussed in the courtroom.
Unfortunately, there's even more going on here than a Chevron-friendly judge misusing his power to the detriment of 30,000 long-suffering people in Ecuador. This is the furthering of a strategy that corporations will continue to develop to crush the free speech of critics and limit our chances to fight back on anything resembling a level playing field. This RICO suit and everything Kaplan has allowed Chevron to get away with in its wake is a serious threat to open society and due process of law.
In 2010, before the Lago Agrio court had even issued a judgment (which Chevron now claims was "ghost written" by the legal team for the Ecuadorians), U.S. Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan had already made up his mind about the case. By issuing a worldwide injunction (later overturned by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals) Kaplan began a twisted journey through the looking glass and dragged the United States with him. Based on Chevron's trumped-up charges pieced together from edited Crude outtakes and thousands of emails between an international team constantly battling Chevron pressure tactics, Kaplan decided that a fraud had taken place and encouraged Chevron to file a RICO suit.
Kaplan has never been to Ecuador, knows nothing about its legal system and didn't even consider key evidence or hold a hearing to determine the facts. He doesn't even speak Spanish. His order, according to Professor Burt Neuborne, an extremely well-regarded human rights and civil liberties lawyer who is also the Legal Director of the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School, "[sent] an unmistakable message of American judicial arrogance to the rest of the world that can only result in increased levels of reciprocal judicial suspicion and hostility, with negative consequences for the transnational rule of law."
There will more than a few law journal articles about what Kaplan has done here (much of which is in direct contrast to some of his prior rulings). But here are just a few highlights of the violations of civil rights and perversion of legal power Kaplan allowed or encouraged:
Forced independent filmmaker Joe Berlinger to turn over more than 600 hours of outtakes despite protest from Leonardo DiCaprio, Woody Allen, Bill Moyers, Robert Redford, Mikhail Gorbachev, Michael Moore, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, and many others;
Allowed discovery to include every single email in Steven Donziger's possession going back decades, including his private journal and all materials properly contained with attorney client privilege between him and his clients in Ecuador;
Allowed unprecedented widespread discovery to include the communications of more than 50 other non-parties considered "co-conspirators" by Chevron, including Amazon Watch, Rainforest Action Network, Trillium Asset Management, among many others;
Permitted testimony from Doug Beltman after Chevron's extreme economic and legal pressure on Stratus Consulting, threatened to destroy the company if they did not disavow their previous findings;
Forced Ecuadorian citizen Donald Moncayo who appeared as a witness to turn over his computer and all his email within hours of taking the stand or suffer arrest.
Permitted testimony from a witness who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in compensation by the prosecution for his testimony.
Each of these pieces of Chevron's scorched-earth legal strategy is part of a specific approach to suppress free speech, scare off supporters, create and expand negative rumors, to divide and conquer the opposition. It's already been criticized by criminal defense lawyers familiar with RICO as a way to "send a message to a lawyer who wants to take up a cause for an underdog that Big Brother, the big corporate entity, is going to start coming after you for criminal conduct."
Even with Kaplan clearly on their side, Chevron does still have to do some of the work. There's a significant difference in the law between extortion by force and extortion by pressure. One allows a meritorious claim as a defense and the other doesn't. Yet, if the trial record does not allow for evidence of the reasons Donziger and the LAPs initially filed their suit – the toxic contamination – how can anyone make a judgment on whether their claims against Chevron have merit? Chevron has to affirmatively prove that the LAPs have no right to recovery, yet they never submitted any evidence related to the actual contamination.
If you cut through the theatrics that have little or nothing at all to do with the claims, Chevron is left with absolutely nothing more than a triple hearsay statement from an admitted liar and corrupt judge, who was paid more than $300,000 by Chevron for his testimony. There's not a single piece of evidence to prove in even the slightest that Judge Zambrano did not write the verdict. Everything Chevron has introduced has been done so to suggest that something nefarious happened without actually proving the claims. Mix that with Kaplan's attitude towards Donziger and all things Ecuador and you have a show trial and nothing more.
Even Kaplan himself appeared frustrated that Chevron's lawyers have not made his task easy by giving him a solid case to base his judgement upon. That is why they dropped the damages claim to ensure no jury would ever hear their case – they'd never swallow it. Nevertheless, most are confident Kaplan will complete the task he set out before the Lago Agrio judgment was even issued – he will hand Chevron a ruling they can tout to anyone who will listen.
It's no matter that it will not be based on the facts. No matter that it will not contain any evidence of actual extortion or illegal acts. No matter that it will be used expressly to violate the order of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals when they directed Kaplan not to act as an enforcement court.
Truth is stranger than fiction. These events would seem too outlandish to be true had I not witnessed them with my own eyes. And that is exactly what Chevron is hoping for. They will use Kaplan's verdict for years to come (though the verdict itself will inevitably be faced with legal problems that will likely cause it to fall apart quickly under appeal), and possibly spend billions more hoping empty words based on lies and manufactured "facts" will drown out the voices of the tens of thousands who continue to live with the harsh reality of Chevron's despicable acts in the Amazon.
Posted: Tuesday, November 26, 2013
"Welcome to America – Now Give Us Your Property or...
Through the Looking Glass in Chevron's Delusional ...
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line936
|
__label__wiki
| 0.849041
| 0.849041
|
NHL takes labor battle to courts
Chris Kuc
The NHL beat the players' association into the court system when it filed a class action suit in U.S. District Court in New York on Friday seeking to confirm the legality of the lockout that reached its 90th day.
"In response to information indicating (the players) have or will be asked to vote to authorize (its union) to proceed to 'disclaim interest' in continuing to represent (them), the (NHL seeks) a Declaration confirming the ongoing legality of the lockout," the league's announcement said.
It also filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board claiming players association "has engaged in an unlawful subversion of the collective bargaining process and conduct that constitutes bad faith bargaining."
The NHL's action came in response to a TSN report that the players' executive board had voted Thursday to allow the players to vote on whether they should authorize it to go ahead with a disclaimer of interest. A disclaimer could lead to decertifying the union, allowing players to file antitrust lawsuits against the league.
The NHLPA issued a statement that read: “The NHLPA has just received a copy of the National Labor Relations Board charge and has not yet been served with the lawsuit. However, based on what we’ve learned so far, the NHL appears to be arguing that players should be stopped from even considering their right to decide whether or not to be represented by a union. We believe that their position is completely without merit.”
Chicago Blackhawks defenseman Steve Montador, a member of the NHLPA's negotiating committee, is reportedly one of 36 players named in the NHL's lawsuit as a defendant.
ckuc@tribune.com
Twitter @ChrisKuc
‘I feel like I’m built to do shows in an environment like this’: Laurence Holmes zigs when others zag — and it makes for must-listen sports radio
WSCR bosses talk risk-reward of rehiring Dan McNeil, diversity, politics and more
Column: Drivers, don’t start your engines. NASCAR, put your money where your mouth is and cancel today’s race after the noose incident involving Bubba Wallace.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line937
|
__label__wiki
| 0.72295
| 0.72295
|
A short history of Christ Church
Built on a site given by John Dawes, a local landlord and benefactor, Christ Church was completed and consecrated in 1848 to the design of the architect Thomas Allom. It was originally built as a preaching church in a cruciform shape with short chancel, transepts and nave. There is a framed invitation to the opening ceremony in the Fellowship Room at the back of the church which shows the shorter nave and the original west entrance as seen from Highbury Fields.
In 1872 the west front was demolished and the building extended by two bays exactly matching the style of the original to the design of Williams and Crouch with side entrance vestibules and stairs leading to further seating in a balcony above.
At about the same time a site for the vicarage and garden was enclosed which removed the fine vista and approach to the main west doors from the Fields leaving only a narrow path for access.
In the 1980s following the amalgamation of the parishes of Christ Church, St John’s and St Saviour’s, an extensive programme of repair and re-ordering was begun. The top of the spire was rebuilt and the roofs and stonework were repaired. A wall was built across the nave so that the worship area reverted to the original cruciform shape. The extension was converted into two storeys of rooms for church and community use. Below is the Fellowship Room with the Angel Room above.
The worship area was simplified and the pews removed and replaced with chairs to allow flexibility. The pipe organs were repositioned to where the choir had been in the chancel allowing more room for the congregation. The timber vestries and other clutter were removed simplifying the shape.
The pine timber roof above the central octagon is particularly impressive and there are fine stained glass windows in the chancel and north and south transepts by Francis Spear. These date from 1955 and replace the original glass destroyed during the Second World War
Click button below to
View latest notice sheet
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line938
|
__label__wiki
| 0.563931
| 0.563931
|
Children put stamp on new Gateshead care centre
THE children of some of the staff at a Tyneside hospital have been putting their stamp on a £32m project to build a new emergency care centre.
The youngsters, aged between five and 11, attend the Holiday Den, a subsidised childcare programme which runs during the school holidays for the children of staff who work for Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust, other NHS organisations or the private sector.
During the Christmas holidays, they received a visit from Miller Construction, the main contractor, currently delivering the QE’s new £32m Emergency Care Centre.
The children learned about the work that is being done at the hospital where most of their parents work and found out more about the variety of career opportunities available in the construction industry.
They also took part in a competition to design some new hoardings to go round the Queen Elizabeth Hospital site while the building work is on-going and on Wednesday got to see their artwork go up on display at the hospital.
Julia Hickey, chairwoman for the Queen Elizabeth, said: “The standard of entries was fantastic and the children put their heart and souls into illustrating what the hospital meant to them.”
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line940
|
__label__cc
| 0.673471
| 0.326529
|
Centre's taste of Honey
Young dancers were given a taste of Honey Kalaria this weekend when the Indian actress singer and model dropped into Tyneside.
The Indian dance expert is currently a panelist on Channel 4's Bollywood Star choosing the Indian film stars of the future but she took time out to pass on her experience to teenagers in Newcastle.
Co-ordinated by Newcastle City Council arts development team, the Inter Great event aimed to encourage youngsters to get more involved in cultural activities on offer in the city as well as dance and drama.
Honey, appearing in collaboration with Dance City, led a series of Bollywood dance workshops and also gave an exclusive performance supported by Asian hip hop group Exile.
Head of arts and culture at the council, Paul Rubinstein said: "By bringing Honey Kalaria to Newcastle - Britain's top modern Indian dance expert - it will provide a showcase for Asian music and dance, which is one of the many cultures which add to the city's diversity and vibrancy."
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line941
|
__label__wiki
| 0.952762
| 0.952762
|
Join ClinTrial Refer
Mentors and Expertise
Awards/Abstracts
Patient's Support
Patient's Testimonial
Heiko Spallek
Professor Heiko Spallek serves as Academic Lead Digital Health and Health Service Infomatics of The University of Sydney. In 1993, Professor Spallek graduated from the School of Dentistry, Humboldt University Berlin where he continued his career and was appointed in the Department of Periodontology and also received his PhD in the field of dental material sciences. While at Temple University School of Dentistry, Philadelphia, he earned an MSBA with a concentration in Computer and Information Science from the Fox School of Business and Management at Temple in 2000.
Dr Jeremy Hammond is the Director, Strategic Ventures at the University of Sydney, where he leads university-wide transformation initiatives. He is a linguist by trade, with a PhD from the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics specialising in field experiments on indigenous languages in Southern Vanuatu and has experience in developing capabilities in high performance computing, informatics, and data services. These days, both his coding and Austronesian languages are rusty with his focus now on transforming the University for the next generation of researchers and students.
Michael Winlo
Dr. Michael Winlo has served as the CEO at Linear Clinical Research since April 2016. In that time, WA’s only dedicated early phase clinical research unit has grown significantly with clientele including innovative biotech start-ups and multinational pharmaceutical companies from the USA, Europe, Japan and China. Linear was the first site in Australia to successfully launch electronic source capture and earned a national Business Services Award in 2017. Prior to Linear, Michael was based in Silicon Valley as the health lead for Palantir Technologies - one of the largest privately held big data companies in the world. There, Michael led deployments for some of the largest health companies and government organisations in the US and UK. Michael holds an Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) from the University of Western Australia as well as an MBA from Stanford University Graduate School of Business where he also completed the Stanford Biodesign Cours.
Gordon McGurk
Dr Gordon McGurk is currently the chair of the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee, and Director of OmniAdvisory Consulting. His background is in science, public policy development, and corporate governance having spent 15 years in the Commonwealth Public Service.
He holds a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Genetics from the University of Edinburgh and is in the final year of a Juris Doctor through the University of Southern Queensland. He is also completing the qualifications for a Post-Graduate Diploma in Corporate Governance through the Governance Institute of Australia. He is also a Graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.
Professor Lisa Askie
Professor Askie leads a team at the NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, which manages the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, undertakes Health Technology Assessments for the Australian Federal Government, hosts two Cochrane Collaboration entities (Breast Cancer Review Group, Prospective Meta-analysis Methods Group) and has an extensive test evaluation research program.
Lisa’s clinical background is in perinatal medicine and she has worked in healthcare systems in Asia, Australia, UK and USA. She has Masters and Doctoral qualifications in epidemiology from Sydney Medical School, is a Senior Principal Research Fellow at the University of Sydney and has held an NHMRC Postgraduate Scholarship, a Sidney Sax Postdoctoral Fellowship, a Career Development Fellowship and currently, a Translating Research Into Practice (TRIP) Fellowship.
Prof Askie has a long standing interest in the conduct and methodology of clinical trials and systematic reviews, especially regarding increasing research transparency and reducing waste. She has been involved with the Cochrane Collaboration since 1996 as a systematic review author and trainer. Lisa is the co-convenor of the Cochrane Prospective Meta-analysis Methods Group and member of the Cochrane Methods Editorial Board. Prof Askie has published over 100 scientific papers and is a member of various academic advisory boards.
James Lynam
Dr Lynam is a Medical Oncologist specialising in the care of patients with gastro-intestinal, genitourinary and brain cancers. He is a principal and sub investigator in numerous Phase I to III clinical trials spanning multiple tumour types. He is also an early career researcher with a particular interest in predictive biomarkers of drug toxicity and efficacy and in integrating novel technologies into oncological care and clinical trial conduct.
Adam Stoneley
Adam is the Research Operation Manager for the Icon Group providing line management and operational oversight of the research activities undertaken at Icon Cancer Centres across Australia. Adam is a firm advocate of the Group’s simple vision to deliver the best care possible to as many people as possible, as close to home as possible. Innovations such as ClinTrial Refer and the uptake of the Tele-Trials initiative further enable the awareness of clinical research opportunities to a wider community and the referral and potential accrual of patients to clinical trials across Australia.
ClinTrial Refer Copyright © 2016 HCRN, All Rights reserved Spark Interact Sydney
Home | About | Resources | Newsletter | For Clinicians | For Patients | Our Supporters | Latest News | Gallery | Forum| Privacy Policy
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line943
|
__label__cc
| 0.635082
| 0.364918
|
Official Website of Shelby County Indiana Government
My Taxes
HomeJune 15, 2015
Shelby County Commissioners
25 W. Polk Street
©2020 Shelby County Commissioiners.
COVID-19 Court Notice
In the Indiana Supreme Court
In the Matter of the Petition of the Shelby County Courts for Administrative Rule 17 Emergency Relief
Supreme Court Case No. 20S-CB-143 Order
The courts of Shelby County (hereinafter “courts”) en banc have petitioned this Court for emergency relief pursuant to Indiana Administrative Rule 17. The petition states that the World Health Organization has determined the outbreak of COVID-19 (“virus”) is a worldwide pandemic; national and Indiana states of emergency have been declared a a result; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) has determined that “social distancing” among other preventative measures is necessary for the prevention of further spreading the virus, including cancellation of in-person gatherings of fifty (50) people or more for the next eight (8) weeks and other drastic steps.
The petition further states that due to a shortage of cleaning and sanitation products, the courts find that Shelby County does not possess adequate hygiene stations or sanitation supplies for the large volumes of people who regularly appear at the Shelby County courthouse.
The Honorable R. Kent Apsley has been appointed as the presiding Judge for this emergency. It appears from the petition that this emergency inhibits litigants’ and courts’ ability to comply with statutory deadlines and rules of procedure.
The Court therefore finds that good cause exists for granting emergency relief. Being duly advised, the Court GRANTS the petition, DECLARES pursuant to Indiana Administrative Rule 17 that an emergency exists in Shelby County, and APPROVES the plan as submitted.
The Court further ORDERS as follows to ensure the orderly and fair administration of justice during this emergency, effective March 17, 2020:
1. The Court authorizes the tolling, from the effective date of this order through May 4, 2020, of all laws, rules, and procedures setting time limits for speedy trials in criminal and juvenile proceedings, public health, mental health, and appellate matters; all judgments, support, and other orders; and in all other civil and criminal matters before the courts of Shelby County. Further, no interest shall be due or charged during this tolled period.
2. Through May 4, 2020, this Court authorizes immediate suspension of all criminal and civil jury trials, including those with a “fast and speedy” setting requested, beginning March 13, 2020 through May 4, 2020. The courts are directed to review no later than 2 April 17, 2020 whether continued suspension is necessary; and if it is not, to resume jury trials no later than May 4, 2020 to allow adequate notification of the jury pool. If the courts believe continued suspension is necessary, they may petition this Court to extend the suspension.
3. Through May 4, 2020, this Court authorizes the courts to continue all pre-trial conference and non-essential hearings, hold hearings by counsel only whenever possible, and allow counsel to appear remotely.
4. Through May 4, 2020, the courts may consider (a) the existence of flu or flu-like symptoms in any attorney, self-represented litigant, or witness expected to testify; or (b) exposure of such individuals to anyone who has or may have COVID-19; to constitute “good cause” to either appear remotely or continue a court setting, to the extent possible without violating statutory or constitutional rights.
5. Through May 4, 2020, the courts, as directed by each court’s presiding judge, are authorized to reduce the number of court staff members working and/or to permit working remotely if feasible; provided, however, that the courts shall maintain sufficient operations to handle emergency matters.
6. Through May 4, 2020, the courts are authorized, in their discretion and subject to applicable Constitutional limitations, to limit spectators (other than parties to the litigation and their attorneys) in courtrooms to the extent necessary to provide adequate social distancing.
7. The courts shall file a status update no later than April 29, 2020 to inform this Court of whether there is an ongoing need for emergency relief. Done at Indianapolis, Indiana, on 3/18/2020.
Loretta H. Rush
Chief Justice of Indiana Supreme Court
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line947
|
__label__cc
| 0.649504
| 0.350496
|
Sydney Harbour Bridge Protest: Will it work?
As Sydney ground to a halt in peak hour on Friday 13 May, everyone wondered why someone would go to such dangerous lengths as to stage a protest on top of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. It quickly became clear that the protestor, ‘Michael’, was a father raising his concerns over the systems we have in place to resolve family law issues and children’s services. Obviously in this situation, the father involved is feeling helpless and frustrated by his perceived lack of access to his children and the ways in which he feels the ‘system’ is letting him down. But can a protest on top of the Harbour Bridge make a difference?
Tagged: children safety, Coleman Greig Lawyers, dispute, Divorce, family dispute, family law, Parenting arrangement, separation
Who’s looking after the children?
Posted by on 9 May 2011
Unfortunately many family law matters today involve allegations of violence or abuse. Whilst some of these allegations may be unfounded, it has been reported that one in three Australian women will be assaulted or abused in their lifetime. Whilst this figure seems unbelievable to most of us, the sad truth is that we are hearing about more and more cases in which families, and in some cases whole communities, have been destroyed by acts of domestic violence. Earlier this month, a man was arrested in Perth over the murder of his former partner and mother of his child, after a history of violence in the relationship had led her to take out a Violence Restraining Order against him.
Tagged: AVO, Child Abuse, Domestic violence, family break down, family dispute, personal safety, Restraining Order
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line949
|
__label__wiki
| 0.929942
| 0.929942
|
Will restaurants feel like hospital cafeterias in the future? Chefs struggle to bring dining out back
Trevor Hughes / USA TODAY
Jun 9, 2020 at 12:01 AM Jun 9, 2020 at 4:03 PM
BOULDER, Colo. — Former "Top Chef" contestant Carrie Baird's new restaurant was open for just seven days when the coronavirus outbreak prompted health officials to order an immediate halt to in-person dining across Colorado.
She was still finessing the menu at Rose's Classic Americana, including her signature Fancy Toast, when she was forced to close. Now, she's trying to figure out how to reopen as health rules relax and diners begin returning to restaurants across the country.
For many Americans tired of baking sourdough and eating their own cooking, those restaurants reopening in the coming weeks will look different than before.
"We always say that food's the easy part," says Baird, 40, who was also a 2019 finalist for a James Beard "Best Chef" award. "I'm confident I can deliver you a meal you can't recreate at home. But all the other parts? That's a lot harder. The days of 'Cheers' and sitting down at a bar and rubbing elbows with a stranger and shooting the s--- are going to be over."
A study by reservation service OpenTable indicated that as many as 25% of restaurants nationally may never reopen, the victim of razor-thin margins even under the best of times.
The National Restaurant Association says its members lost $30 billion in March and $50 billion in April, staggering losses for an industry that employed about 12 million people before the outbreak. Many of the country's restaurant employees were the first to lose their jobs and some restaurateurs are struggling to entice back workers who've found the $600 weekly federal unemployment payments — on top of their state's unemployment payment — more lucrative, never mind safer.
Experts say most restaurants will need to find a happy medium between taking safety precautions and creating a welcoming environment. After all, most people who eat out are seeking a social experience.
"It will be different. It will feel different. It will look different," said Larry Lynch, a longtime food-safety expert and a senior vice president of the National Restaurant Association. "It's already proven that restaurants can effectively and safely prepare food. In terms of the actual preparation of food, we know that works. It's the front of the house where the changes become more obvious."
The federal government has issued broad guidelines for restaurants and bars that call for them to follow state and local rules, encourage social distancing while dining, and recommends checking workers for illness when feasible.
The Restaurant Association has now released its own guidelines and a training video explaining what it considers to be best practices, including cleaning regimens, distancing suggestions and mask protocols. And states are developing their own rules: Florida, for instance, has already permitted restaurants to reopen as long as they limit occupancy to 25% of their usual capacity. And in Wyoming, restaurants must limit groups to no more than six, and tables must be at least six feet apart.
Almost every state allowing restaurants to reopen is also requiring frequent cleaning and sanitation, although Wisconsin reopened with no restrictions in place after a judge overruled the governor's quarantine orders.
Lynch and other experts described how a typical sit-down dining experience might unfold for most diners across the country: You'll make a reservation in advance, and potentially even place your order then. Once you arrive at the restaurant, you'll wait in your vehicle or outside until a text tells you it's time to come in, and you'll be immediately seated at a table with hand sanitizer, distanced from other diners.
Your server, who might bring your utensils only after you've been seated, may only return to clear the table once, and perhaps another time to ensure you've got water to drink. There won't be any self-service buffets or soda machines. Once you've paid — preferably with a credit card or phone — you might leave the restaurant by a different door than the one you entered.
And pretty much every person you see will be wearing a mask.
Everything, Lynch said, will be designed to reduce interactions between and among guests and staff.
"We'll lose some of that face-to-face contact but we'll make sure you're feeling safe," he said. "Every conversation I've had since we started working on this is 'how do I reassure the customers.' "
Some restaurants see safety concerns as a way to differentiate themselves. The company that owns Burger King, Tim Hortons and Popeyes, for instance, wants the public to know that every worker has their temperature taken when arriving.
"We have fully embraced the notion that parts of our restaurants need to change — certainly, for the foreseeable future and possibly forever. For instance, while we have mandated masks and gloves in the short-term, our brand and operations teams are now evaluating more comfortable and reusable masks that may become part of our standard uniforms," Jose Cil, who runs Restaurant Brands International, wrote in an open letter.
Experts say full-service restaurants will likely struggle at first because they require patrons to step into a space that's been off-limits for months: a dining room. Prominent New York restaurateur Danny Meyer, who founded Shake Shack, recently said some of his company's two dozen higher-end eateries may not reopen until there's a vaccine because there's no way to turn a profit with half-full dining rooms.
In Denver, chef Caroline Glover is struggling with the same choices: When should she reopen her award-winning restaurant Annette for in-person dining? During the shutdowns, she and her staff switched to serving takeout meals of fried chicken, burgers and pork chops at about half their normal volume. A Small Business Administration loan has helped keep her afloat, but she worries that reopening too soon could expose a customer or employee to infection.
"Everybody's scared, and for good reason," she said. "People might feel they are literally risking their lives to eat out."
Still, Glover remains optimistic that if there's any industry able to adjust to the new normal, it's scrappy restaurateurs hustling to serve the people they love.
"We're all trying to figure out how to we can make people feel special and comfortable and safe," she said. "I think it's going to happen in waves and stages. Because at the end of the day, there's a need for restaurants, a want for them."
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line953
|
__label__wiki
| 0.881159
| 0.881159
|
Dr. Mysheika Roberts: 'Please listen to us'
By Laurie Allen
The Columbus Health Commissioner says: “I know it can be difficult for people to change their lives as dramatically as we have over the last couple of weeks, but in the big scheme of things, you're just being asked to stay in the safety of your home."
Columbus Health Commissioner Dr. Mysheika Roberts is passionate about public health and the role it plays in achieving the greatest good. She could not have foreseen the impact it now has as the city confronts the coronavirus contagion, getting closer to Columbus each day.
“I feel a tremendous amount of responsibility as city health commissioner, and that responsibility feels even more significant at a time like this. When I signed up to go into public health and to be the health commissioner, I knew there would be some tough days and there would be some tough decisions to make,” Roberts says. “Never in my wildest dreams did I think I’d encounter a worldwide pandemic.
“Today I feel good about where we’re at. At this point, hospital capacity looks good, but we have not hit the worst of it. We are still at the very beginning. If you talk to me in two weeks, I might have a very different answer.”
We're here to help you stay in touch with what's going on out there. Read our latest reporting on the coronavirus response here.
As is oft-noted, a spirit of collaboration serves Columbus well in times of crisis. “I’ve been working with many of our response partners for years. The four health systems have a really good relationship with us and with each other. It allows us to respond collectively. Not all communities have that,” Roberts says.
Twice a week, she confers with them and others on the front lines, such as the Ohio Hospital Association, the Central Ohio Trauma System and the Ohio Health Care Association, which represents elder-care facilities. Seven days a week, the city health department’s incident command center shares updates on case numbers, supply needs and issues that have arisen in the last 24 hours. The department keeps tabs on the city’s homeless shelters and whether its employees who work in sensitive areas may have been exposed to the virus.
Pandemic or not, the city must maintain its essential public health services, such as its STD and tuberculosis clinics, the latter being operated remotely in most cases. The women’s clinic remains open by appointment only, and the Women Infant and Children clinic area is roped off into social-distancing sections, with signs for instruction. In some cases, “We put a mask on mom and get them in and out as quickly as possible,” Roberts says
Everyone entering the Columbus Public Health building on Parsons Avenue is screened, including the more than 250 staff members who still come to work every day. Employees with temperatures or respiratory problems are sent home. The city still performs inspections at restaurants offering pick-up or delivery.
Stay up to date with the region’s business scene. Subscribe to Columbus CEO’s weekly newsletter.
As a steward of public health, Roberts feels frustrated when she sees people disregarding Gov. Mike DeWine’s stay-at-home order. “I know it can be difficult for people to change their lives as dramatically as we have over the last couple of weeks, but in the big scheme of things, you’re just being asked to stay in the safety of your home. You’re not being asked to go out on the frontlines and battle this, she says. “Please listen to us. We have your health, your life and our community’s livelihood at the forefront of our minds. In thinking about the future, what does it look like after this?”
What worries her most are the unknowns. “We don’t know how long we’re going to be in this. For all of us really, our lives are on hold, our lives are in limbo.” While people probably feel powerless, “We do have a lot of power. We have control over our behaviors, both as individuals and as families.”
She says Ohio Department of Health Director Dr. Amy Acton “is serving as a great model. She is being honest with people while being supportive and caring. I think that is something that we as women have the ability to do, and she is doing it and leading the way.”
The support Roberts receives from her team, city leaders and family helps sustain her during trying times. Her faith carries her through.
“As a public health leader in this community I have tremendous hope, and I would hope that everyone has a tremendous amount of hope that we will get through this. “I truly believe that when we get to the other end of this we will be stronger.”
Laurie Allen is a freelance writer for Columbus CEO.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line954
|
__label__wiki
| 0.811206
| 0.811206
|
PrevKidnap & Ransom update September 9th, 2018
Kidnap & Ransom Update September 13, 2018Next
Kidnap & Ransom update September 11, 2018
1. (US, 10/09/18) Man pleads guilty of kidnapping and robbery in New York
A man pleaded guilty in the New York Supreme Court to the charges of organizing the kidnapping of a man and the robbery of cryptocurrency. The incident took place in November 2017 after the victim met with the accused, who told him he had hired a car to take him back home. In the said vehicle were the man’s accomplices, who at gunpoint took the victim away and forced him to give away the access code for his digital wallet. The mastermind then proceeded to transfer to his own account approximately USD 1.8 million in cryptocurrency Ether. The victim managed to escape his captors and report the incident to the police. According to police records, the defendant has been linked to a number of previous similar instances, in which he stole over USD 1 billion in cryptocurrency. FULL ARTICLE
2. (CANADA, 10/09/18) Ontario town to pay ransom after cyber-attack
The Ontario town of Midland is preparing to pay a ransom after hackers locked down a portion of its computer system more than a week ago. The payment is to take place in spite of the town having hired IT security experts to deal with the issue. “Although it is not ideal, it is in our best interest to bring the system back online as quickly as possible”, said the statement. Hackers illegally accessed the town’s network on 1 September and infected it with a virus which encrypted a number of systems. The hackers have since been demanding a ransom to hand over the decryption key. The town will not say how much it will pay the hackers, but local media affirmed the demand was made in Bitcoin. Town officials have said the incident will be covered by an insurance and as such, there will be no financial impact to the town. The officials said they are expecting to have the computer systems fully restored this week. Authorities are currently investigating if residents’ privacy or town information was breached. This incident comes just a few months after the municipality of Wasaga Beach paid 3 bitcoins (nearly USD 19,000) to cybercriminals to unlock their servers, which had been locked in a similar cyberattack. FULL ARTICLE (1) (2)
3. (COLOMBIA, 11/09/18) Rancher rescued after kidnapping in la Guajira
Kidnapped rancher Haison José Fuenmayor Escobar, husband of the former secretary of indigenous affairs of La Guajira Yelenca Gutiérrez Fajardo, was released by his captors on 8 September, reportedly following heavy police pressure. Another man who was kidnapped with the rancher was also set free. According to police reports, their kidnappers had demanded a ransom of COP 2 billion (USD 651,000). The hostages were found in a mountainous area of the municipality of Riohacha, where they were kept for seven days. After their release, the victims said they had been mistreated by the kidnappers, who often threatened to kill them. The Colombian authorities affirmed a criminal gang was behind the abduction. FULL ARTICLE (1)
4. (MOLDOVA, 10/09/18) Turkish nationals abducted by Turkish intelligence in Moldova
At least six Turkish nationals, employed in Moldova at a chain of private high schools linked to the Gülenist movement, have reportedly been illegally arrested and taken back to Turkey in an operation carried out by the Turkish intelligence services in alleged complicity with Moldovan authorities. Details remain sketchy, but Moldova’s secret service, the SIS, stated that its anti-terror arm had carried out an “operation” today in “several localities” to “prevent threats to national security”. The Turkish media has confirmed the detentions and various social media accounts have shown evidence of the arrests, allegedly linked to Ankara’s campaign to seize all individuals linked to exiled Turkish cleric Fethullah Gülen. Amnesty International confirmed the individuals’ deportation to Turkey and in a press release accused the Moldovan authorities of ignoring their international human rights obligations. Some media sources have speculated Moldovan officials may have received bribes to facilitate the operation. FULL ARTICLE (1)
5. (CAMEROON, 07/09/18) Release of five students after abduction in Bafut
On 7 September, five of the six kids kidnapped from the Bafut Presbyterian College by suspected Anglophone separatists on 3 September, regained their freedom. Their release comes two days after the release of their headmaster and one of their classmates, who had been captured at the same time. The circumstances of the release are not known as the families have shown very hermetic on the issue, concerned about their safety. FULL ARTICLE
6. (NIGERIA, 10/09/18) Family of kidnappers arrested in Lagos
On 7 September, the Lagos State Police Command arrested a family engaged in kidnapping for ransom in the city of Lagos. The gang consisted of a 60-year-old woman, who is a chief priestess at her community, and her two sons, who reportedly used social media to lure out their victims. The trio were arrested after a woman reported the kidnapping of her brother to the police. The woman stated she had been demanded 1.5 million naira for the release of the victim. The police managed to locate the kidnappers’ hideout, where they found the woman’s brother and two other hostages, who said having been in captivity for weeks. One of the victims reported he had been lured from Anambra with the promise of a job placement at an oil company. The other man said he had been lured on a fake relationship. FULL ARTICLE
7. (MALAYSIA, 11/09/18) Three Indonesian fishermen kidnapped off Sabah
Three Indonesian fishermen were kidnapped on 11 September by armed men off Semporna, Sabah. The three victims and another person were on their docked fishing vessel when the kidnapping took place, during curfew hours at around 1am. According to reports, the vessel was boarded by at least two masked men carrying M16 rifles. The assailants reportedly spoke Suluk, a dialect used in the Philippines’ Sulu province. The fourth person, who escaped the abduction by hiding in a compartment, reported the incident to the police. The Sabah police have said not having information on any ransom calls related to the incident, although they do not rule out the possibility that the abduction was carried out by a kidnap for ransom group. This is the first kidnapping to take place in Sabah in two years. FULL ARTICLE
8. (INDIA, 11/09/18) Police officer among arrested for abduction of executives
The anti-extortion cell arrested six people, including a Mumbai constable, for the kidnapping of two directors of a credit firm from Rajasthan. According to reports, the victims had been lured by one of the accused, who showed at the victims’ office in Mumbai, pretending to be seeking for a loan. Following that first meeting, the suspect set a second gathering with the victims in Thane, at the property he was alleged to be giving as collateral for the loan. Upon arrival on 7 September, the executives were met by the rest of the gang and held hostage. The kidnappers reportedly demanded a ransom of Rs 1 crore (USD 138,000) from the victims’ employer, who finally agreed on the payment of Rs 25 lakh (USD 34,500). The person sent by the company to pay the ransom wrote down the plates of the car in which the criminals left, giving then the information to the authorities. The police managed to locate the vehicle, rescuing the victims and arresting the six gang members. The ransom was also recovered in full. FULL ARTICLE
AMERICAS Chile (Security threat level – 2): On 14 January...
AMERICAS Colombia (Security threat level – 4): On 13 January...
AMERICAS Canada (Security threat level – 2): ): On 12...
AMERICAS Dominican Republic (Security threat level – 3): As of...
AMERICAS Honduras (Security threat level – 4): On 10 January...
AMERICAS Colombia (Security threat level – 4): On 8 January...
AMERICAS Bolivia / Peru (Security threat levels – 3 /...
AMERICAS Bermuda / Colombia / Costa Rica / Guatemala /...
AMERICAS United States (Security threat level – 2): Various groups...
AMERICAS Barbados / Colombia / Dominican Republic (Security threat levels...
AMERICAS Canada (Security threat level – 2): On 30 December...
AMERICAS Chile / Colombia (Security threat levels – 2 /...
AMERICAS Argentina (Security threat level – 3): On the night...
AMERICAS Panama (Security threat level – 3): On 27 December...
AMERICAS Bolivia (Security threat level – 3) : As of...
AMERICAS Honduras / United Kingdom / South Africa (Security threat...
AMERICAS Americas: As of 22 December 2020, governments in the...
ASIA India / Australia (Security threat levels – 3 /...
AMERICAS Mexico (Security threat level – 4): At approximately 0140...
AMERICAS Suriname / Uruguay (Security threat levels – 2 /...
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line959
|
__label__wiki
| 0.988629
| 0.988629
|
National League Playoffs
Los Angeles vs. St. Louis Wed., Oct. 9 at Los Angeles, 8:35 p.m.
Thurs., Oct. 10 at Los Angeles, 8:35 p.m.
Sat., Oct. 12 at St. Louis, 1:05 p.m.
Sun., Oct. 13 at St. Louis, 8:15 p.m. (if necessary)
Mon., Oct. 14 at St. Louis, 3:05 p.m.
Wed., Oct. 16 at Los Angeles, 3:05 p.m.
(All times EDT)
Baseball playoffs: Win and you're in on Wild Card Friday
NL playoffs: A look at Giants-Nationals and Cardinals-Dodgers
MLB playoffs: Chicago Cubs vs. Pittsburgh Pirates in NL Wild Card game
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line960
|
__label__wiki
| 0.853311
| 0.853311
|
(720) 504-7300 Sales@DACdb.com
Log into DACdb
District Grants (DDF)
PETS Registration
RLYA
RLI (Rotary Leadership Institute)
Easy & Beautiful
Time to Elect Officers!
It’s THAT time of year again!
It’s time to kick off the election process for club officers and directors for the coming Rotary year (beginning July 1). Your club bylaws require that a least four officers plus directors for the coming year be elected no later than December 31. Those officers are president, president-elect (to follow the elected president), secretary and treasurer. Excerpts from the relevant section of the Standard Club Bylaws are at the end of this article.
Start right away – you need time to assemble a nominating committee, confirm with possible nominees their willingness to serve, present a slate of candidates at a meeting and publish the slate in a bulletin — all at least one month before the election at a meeting (in December.)
An effective Rotary club has its president line in place for at least 2 years in the future, so it’s important to not only elect a president for the coming year, but also a president-elect.
An effective Rotary club also has a Board rotation/replacement process in place. Depending on Board terms (2 or 3 years), some number of seats need to be replaced every year. A Board position is a good way to get an emerging leader up to speed on the workings of the club.
The president, immediate past president, president-elect, secretary, and treasurer are automatically members of the Board.
IMPORTANT: The nomination process, securing commitments from those nominated and the election process are all responsibilities of the Board of Directors — it’s not the incoming president’s responsibility to fill any of these positions. The president is responsible only for securing committee chairs.
Excerpts from Recommended Rotary Club Bylaws:
Article 2 Board The governing body of this club is its board of directors, consisting of, at a minimum, the president, immediate past president, president-elect, secretary, and treasurer.
Article 3 Elections and Terms of Office Section 1 — One month before elections, members nominate candidates for president, vice president, secretary, treasurer, and any open director positions. The nominations may be presented by a nominating committee, by members from the floor, or both.
Article 5 Meetings Section 1 — An annual meeting of this club is held no later than 31 December to elect the officers and directors who will serve for the next Rotary year.
NEW! PText: Texting Your Members
Welcome Chris Jones to DACdb
Speaker Listing Improvements
Finance Extension Improvement: P&L by Period Report
© 2021 DACdb, LLC | all rights reserved Privacy Policy Cookie Policy
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line963
|
__label__cc
| 0.622535
| 0.377465
|
DaduBuzz
Rock star Steven Tyler showed that every fan is important to him! And what he did for this sick boy is amazing!
Rock stars usually have one trait in common, and it’s that they’re often spoiled and nonchalant. After achieving international success, they have little care for fans, which makes no sense since without them, they would’ve reached nothing. However, this is what happens when one has a pocket full of money and people can go to great lengths, if not do anything, to get an autograph or take a picture with a celebrity.
Fortunately, not every star of rock or any other musical genre is completely deprived of empathy for their fans. One of these stars is Steven Tyler, the lead singer of Aerosmith, which undeniably was very successful. Together with his group, he has sold 150 million albums worldwide.
It is very difficult to persuade celebrities of this rank to meet with their fans, not to mention their reactions when someone accidentally meets them in a store or restaurant and wants to take a picture with them. That’s why, when 23-year-old Anthony, who suffers from Down syndrome met Steven in the store, he was hesitant to even approach him. The boy is a big fan of the band and finally overcame his shyness and approached his idol. Tyler’s reaction was amazing! Not only did they take some photos together and talk for a while, but he also asked Anthony if he’s coming to their concert that evening. When the boy admitted that he wasn’t able to get any tickets, he said that it wasn’t a problem and invited him backstage! The boy was very happy, and when it turned out that he’ll be onstage performing with his idol, playing the maracas during the song “Sweet Emotion,” he couldn’t hide his joy.
A moment of the vocalists’ time given to his fan gave the boy wonderful memories that will last a lifetime. The rock legend knows that without his fans, he wouldn’t have achieved much, even if he had recorded the greatest albums of all.
Page 1 / 2Next >
When buying vegetables, stick to regional suppliers. The amount of impurities in foreign products can reach 92%!
9 ways to save time in the kitchen! I didn’t know that it’s so simple!
When an online troll attacked participants of the paralympics, Arnold Schwarzenegger did not hesitate to crush him in the comment section
Identify in this graphic one of the seven animals and see what your choice says about you. Only the first answer counts!
This Lion Will Make You Laugh Until You Cry!
An Old Man Regained His Youth! He Threw The Crutches And Did Something Unusual!
DaduBuzz Copyright © 2021.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line964
|
__label__wiki
| 0.987467
| 0.987467
|
WATCH LIVE:
Premier Ford, Mayor Tory tour Toronto immunization clinic
David Dinkins, first Black mayor of New York City, dies at age 93
In this Oct. 15, 2015, file photo, former New York City Mayor David Dinkins, right, and his wife, Joyce Dinkins, stand at attention as they listen to " The Star-Spangled Banner," during a ceremony renaming the Manhattan Municipal Building to the David N. Dinkins Building, in New York. David Dinkins was New York City's first Black mayor, serving from from 1990 to 1993. Joyce Dinkins, 89, died Sunday, Oct. 11, 2020, according to her family. (AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, File)
Deepti Hajela, The Associated Press
Published Tuesday, November 24, 2020 7:10AM EST
Last Updated Tuesday, November 24, 2020 5:25PM EST
NEW YORK - Few American leaders have faced the battery of urban ills that confronted David Dinkins when he became New York City's first Black mayor in 1990.
AIDS. Crack cocaine. A soaring murder rate. Rampant homelessness. Racial discord.
Dinkins was elected with high hopes of turning things around, but he became a lightning rod for criticism in his one tumultuous term in office, especially for his handling of a riot in Brooklyn.
It wasn't until years later that he started getting credit for his efforts to reduce crime, heal divisions and lay the groundwork for the prosperous, tourist-friendly place that New York City became.
Dinkins died Monday night at age 93, according to his assistant at Columbia University, where he taught after leaving office, and by Mayor Bill de Blasio, his onetime staffer. The former mayor's death came just weeks after the death of his wife, Joyce, who died in October at age 89.
“David Dinkins believed that we could be better, believed we could overcome our divisions,” de Blasio said at a news briefing Tuesday. “He showed us what it was like to be a gentleman, to be a kind person no matter what was thrown at him. And a lot was thrown at him.”
A calm and courtly figure with a penchant for tennis and formalwear, Dinkins was a stark departure from both his predecessor, Ed Koch, and his successor, Rudy Giuliani - two combative and often abrasive politicians in a city with a world-class reputation for impatience and rudeness.
But the city he inherited had an ugly side, too, and Dinkins' low-key, considered approach quickly came to be perceived as a flaw. Critics said he was too soft and too slow.
“Dave, Do Something!” screamed one New York Post headline in 1990, Dinkins' first year in office.
In recent years, he has gotten more credit for those accomplishments, credit de Blasio said Dinkins should have always had. De Blasio, who worked in Dinkins' administration, named Manhattan's Municipal Building after his mentor in October 2015.
Dinkins took office during a time of racial discord following the 1989 shooting death of Yusuf Hawkins, a Black teenager who was attacked by youths in a predominantly white Brooklyn neighbourhood.
“In that climate, he preached a gorgeous mosaic and proved that we could achieve the highest levels of municipal power in the nation's largest city, and he did it when the city was torn apart, the Rev. Al Sharpton said in an interview Tuesday. “He did it by having a balance of understanding the community's needs and the needs of the city.”
Dinkins didn't get fast enough results, though, to earn a second term.
After beating Giuliani, a Republican, by only 47,000 votes out of 1.75 million cast in 1989, Dinkins, a Democrat, lost a rematch by roughly the same margin in 1993.
Political historians often trace the defeat to Dinkins' handling of the Crown Heights riot in 1991.
The violence began after a car in the motorcade of an Orthodox Jewish religious leader struck and killed 7-year-old Gavin Cato, who was Black. During the three days of anti-Jewish rioting by young Black men that followed, a rabbinical student was fatally stabbed. Nearly 190 people were hurt.
A state report issued in 1993 cleared Dinkins of the persistently repeated charge that he intentionally held back police in the first days of the violence - but criticized him for not stepping up as a leader.
In a 2013 memoir, Dinkins accused the police department of letting the disturbance get out of hand, but also took a share of the blame, on the grounds that “the buck stopped with me.” He also blamed his election defeat on prejudice: “I think it was just racism, pure and simple.”
Giuliani, now President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, tweeted his condolences to Dinkins' family.
“He gave a great deal of his life in service to our great City,” the former mayor wrote. “That service is respected and honoured by all.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James, who herself shattered barriers as the state's first Black woman elected to statewide office, said the example Dinkins set inspired her throughout her own political career.
“I was honoured to have him hold the bible at my inaugurations because I, and others, stand on his shoulders,” she said in a statement.
Born in Trenton, New Jersey, on July 10, 1927, Dinkins moved with his mother to Harlem when his parents divorced but returned to his hometown to attend high school. There, he learned an early lesson in discrimination: Black people were not allowed to use the school swimming pool.
During a stint in the Marine Corps as a young man, a Southern bus driver barred him from boarding a segregated bus because the section for Black people was filled.
“And I was in my country's uniform!” Dinkins recounted years later.
While attending Howard University, the historically Black university in Washington, D.C., Dinkins said he gained admission to segregated movie theatres by wearing a turban and faking a foreign accent.
Back in New York with a degree in mathematics, Dinkins married his college sweetheart, Joyce Burrows, in 1953. His father-in-law, a power in local Democratic politics, channeled Dinkins into a Harlem political club. Dinkins paid his dues as a Democratic functionary while attending Brooklyn Law School, then went into private practice.
He was elected to the state Assembly in 1965, became the first Black president of the city's Board of Elections in 1972 and went on to serve as Manhattan borough president.
Dinkins' election as mayor in 1989 came after two cases under Koch exacerbated racial tensions: the rape of a white jogger in Central Park - for which five Black teenagers were convicted and later exonerated - and Hawkins' killing.
Dinkins defeated Koch, 50% to 42%, in the Democratic primary. But in a city where party registration was 5-to-1 Democratic, Dinkins barely scraped by Giuliani in the general election, capturing only 30% of the white vote.
His administration had one early high note. Newly freed Nelson Mandela made New York City his first stop in the U.S. in 1990. Dinkins had been a longtime, outspoken critic of apartheid in South Africa.
In that same year, though, Dinkins was criticized for his handling of a Black-led boycott of Korean-operated grocery stores in Brooklyn. Critics contended he waited too long to intervene. He ultimately ended up crossing the boycott line to shop at the stores - but only after Koch did.
During Dinkins' tenure, the city's finances were in rough shape because of a recession that cost New York 357,000 private-sector jobs in his first three years in office.
Meanwhile, the city's homicide toll soared to an all-time high, with a record 2,245 during his first year as mayor. There were 8,340 New Yorkers killed during the Dinkins administration - the bloodiest four-year stretch since the New York Police Department began keeping statistics in 1963.
In the last years of his administration, homicides began a decline that continued for decades. In the first year of the Giuliani administration, they fell from 1,946 to 1,561.
One of Dinkins' last acts in 1993 was to sign an agreement with the United States Tennis Association that gave the organization a 99-year lease on city land in Queens in return for building a tennis complex. That deal guaranteed that the U.S. Open would remain in New York City for decades, and tennis aficionado Dinkins was a regular attendee.
After leaving office, Dinkins was a professor at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs.
He had a pacemaker inserted in August 2008 and underwent an emergency appendectomy in October 2007. He also was hospitalized in March 1992 for a bacterial infection that stemmed from an abscess on the wall of his large intestine. He was treated with antibiotics and recovered in a week.
Survivors include his son, David Jr.; daughter, Donna; and two grandchildren.
Associated Press writers David B. Caruso and Karen Matthews and former AP writer Larry McShane contributed to this report.
In this Monday, Jan. 2, 1990, file photo, David Dinkins delivers his first speech as mayor of New York, in New York. (AP Photo/Frankie Ziths, File)
LIVE: Ont. Premier Ford speaks at vaccine clinic
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line965
|
__label__wiki
| 0.96539
| 0.96539
|
'MVP' chants, flowers strewn: Fans, musicians mourn Kobe Bryant at Grammys
Andrea Mandell, Bryan Alexander, David Oliver and Carly Mallenbaum, USA TODAY
LOS ANGELES – News of Kobe Bryant's death had Grammy attendees reeling on Sunday.
Flags were at half-staff at Staples Center, where Bryant long played for the Lakers, as guests began trickling in. Bryant's face, along with the message "In loving memory,” covered digital billboards that wrapped the surrounding buildings at L.A. Live.
A somber Ryan Seacrest opened E!'s Grammy's red carpet with a tribute to Bryant. "His loss will be felt even more deeply tonight at a place he considered home," Seacrest told the camera. "It's unthinkable," Seacrest said. "He was on the phone with me a few months ago, talking about the love of being a father, talking about his daughters so pridefully, and I think so many artists here tonight will be thinking about this, and wanting to share their stories."
As of 3 p.m. PT, 1,000 fans had quietly gathered around a memorial at Staples, where memorabilia included a signed basketball, hundreds of lit candles and red rose petals spelling ‘Kobe’ and ‘Gia,’ in honor of Bryant's 13-year-old daughter Gianna who also died in the helicopter crash. A woman could be heard crying loudly near a barricade.
Fan Jerry Montero, 53, from LA, cried as he knelt in the front row of the memorial for almost 30 minutes. He finally stood and yelled, “We love you, Kobe!”
“It’s not just Kobe,” he’s mourning, Montero said. “It’s everyone who was in that crash. It’s terrible. But what got me was the thought of Kobe being with his daughter on that helicopter, hugging her and telling her everything is going to be OK.” Tears fell down his face. “And they are OK. They are in heaven. He was a wonderful human being.”
'He meant so much more than basketball'
Joshua Gonzalez, 24, held a heavy black framed photo of a Game 4 championship above his head. "It's heavy. But if Kobe can play with a broken finger, I can handle this," said the lifelong Lakers fan, before beginning a "MVP" chant. "He meant so much more than basketball to me. That Mamba mindset he had. I apply it to everything."
Fan Michael Aparicio, 27, wearing a purple Lakers jacket and a No. 24 T-shirt, pushed his five-month-old daughter in her stroller through the crowd. “We’re paying tributes to one of the greats,” he said, placing flowers at the impromptu Staples Center memorial. "It’s about showing respect. He gave his life to the Lakers. We wanted to be here.”
Kelan Parker, 21, from Southern California says when he heard the news from a cousin he checked Twitter, thinking Bryant's death was a hoax. He arrived at Staples to pay his respects. “He’s been a Laker his whole career so it just hurts SoCal, because it’s all we’ve known growing up for the past 20 years,” said Parker, adding that he thinks the Grammys needs to take time out of show to pay tribute to Bryant.
Victor Rodriguez, a 27-year-old youth counselor from LA, weaved through the crowd carrying a bouquet of purple and gold carnations, looking for a place to put them. "I want to pay my respects to my favorite player," he said. "He brought me so much joy. My mom was playing the TV and I heard the news. I was so shocked, I just started crying."
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Kobe and Gia written in red rose petals in memorial. Surrounded by lit candles. Some people are kneeling silently on the side. <a href="https://t.co/Ta2OqqspCL">pic.twitter.com/Ta2OqqspCL</a></p>— Bryan Alexander (@BryAlexand) <a href="https://twitter.com/BryAlexand/status/1221589388267671553?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 27, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
'We are in his house'
Before starting the non-televised pre-ceremony, interim Recording Academy interim CEO Harvey Mason Jr acknowledged losing Bryant. "Since we are in his house, I ask you to join us for a moment of silence," he said.
On the red carpet, Rick Ross, who is nominated for rap song for "Gold Roses," said he's hoping someone pays tribute to Bryant during the show.
“Just getting the news of Kobe Bryant, I want to see someone most definitely celebrate the legacy of Black Mamba tonight, because that’s what he would want to see. The true champion would want to see his legacy celebrated and it’s somebody’s responsibility to do that. We should recognize his greatness. (It’s) a great loss.”
YBN Cordae, who’s nominated for best rap album and best rap song, said everyone is in mourning today.
“Everybody’s a fan of Kobe Bryant," said Cordae on the red carpet. "You shoot a paper ball in the trash can, we all say (‘Kobe’). The Mamba mentality — keep going, overwork, beat your best— is something that everybody should aspire to live by. Rest in peace.”
Accepting best music film on behalf of Beyonce, who won for her Netflix movie "Homecoming," producer Steve Pamon is the first to reference Bryant's death during the pre-show, which had hit like a shockwave just an hour prior. "Rest in peace, Kobe, we love you," he said onstage.
Christian Scott aTunde Adjuah, contemporary instrumental album nominee, said the mood at the Grammys feels “a little bit different" after news of Bryant's death.
"The air is a little heavier," he said. "I bleed purple and gold. Obviously today is a sad day because we lost a legend and my favorite athlete of all time."
News of his death permeated the pre-show, where attendees began filling the Microsoft Theater ahead of the live show.
“You can still see him in the back of your head crushing people on the court," said recording artist Cecil Parker.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line967
|
__label__cc
| 0.703206
| 0.296794
|
DEANPARISIAN.COM
Retired CEO of CHIPPEWA PARTNERS, Native American Advisors, Inc., now CEO of the Parisian Family Office. A White Earth Chippewa, Dean helped Native Americans for decades. Raised conservative, began Wall Street career in 1982, met game changer William O'Neil in 1984. In a world on a dopamine, hypomanic binge, this is his take on financial chicanery, political crime and life well lived at their Ghost Ranch in MT or Pamelot, the Parisian's TN farm.
And so it begins...............1984 is here...............
They are not after me. They are after you. I am just in the way.
........... President Donald J. Trump
Native American Advisors CHIPPEWA PARTNERS
Dean Parisian, Founder & Chairman
DEAN THOMAS PARISIAN
GO IN LIGHT......
COME OUT HEAVY.....
Dean Parisian Daily Speculations
Dean Parisians 60th Birthday
Dean T. Parisian Native American Scholarship Donation
Hillary Clinton Cattle Trading
Jordan Parisian HS OUTDOORS
And so it begins...............1984 is here..........
Ashli Barritt
Dean Parisian founded CHIPPEWA PARTNERS, Native American Advisors, Inc. a Registered Investment Advisor, in 1995 and closed in 2019.The firm was a manager to an exclusive clientele and was closed to new clients for many years. As a Registered Investment Advisor, their expertise developed over 35 years balanced experience, integrity and tremendous work ethic. Dean Parisian is a member at the White Earth Reservation of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, a former NYSE and FINRA arbitrator and trader who began his career with Kidder Peabody and later worked for Drexel Burnham Lambert in LaJolla, CA. His philanthropic interest is in Native American education and he's endowed a significant scholarship for Native Americans at the University of Minnesota. His greatest accomplishment includes raising two sons and 28 years of marriage. The Parisian family enjoys outdoor pursuits at Pamelot, their farm in Tennessee and at the Ghost Ranch, their ranch on the Yellowstone River in Montana. For media requests contact Dean via email: ChippewaPartners (at) gmail dot com, on Twitter: @DeanParisian. Global 404-202-8173
The Parisian Family Office with interests in real estate, consulting and investments . Watermark theme. Powered by Blogger.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line969
|
__label__wiki
| 0.952968
| 0.952968
|
Value City closing its doors
Kathleen Carey,
SPRINGFIELD -- The Value City Department Store at 721 Sproul Road will close by the end of the month and it may be replaced by a Burlington Coat Factory, a company official confirmed Thursday."It will be no later than March 30," Robin Hepler, spokeswoman for VCHI Acquisition Co., said of the Delaware County retailer. "It's one of the stores that Burlington is considering. This one is still in the pipeline."Value City had been owned by Retail Ventures Inc., the owners of DSW and Filene's Basement. Retail Ventures disposed of its 81 percent ownership in Value City to Columbus, Ohio-based VCHI Acquisition Co. in January.Hepler said VCHI is working with a number of liquidators and the store may close earlier, but said the doors would close no later than the end of the month.She said employees were given an explanation of their severance package, although the details were not released.Managers at the store Thursday referred comments to corporate headquarters.Customers, on the other hand, were disappointed the store was closing.Neon-colored signs offering 25 to 40 percent off also read "Everything on Sale" and "All Sales are Final; No Returns.""That's a shame," Pauline Hutchinson said. "You can get everything there and the prices are good, too."The Clifton Heights resident said she liked Value City's rugs and had one in her living room.The self-proclaimed "Queen of the Bargain Shopping," Colleen Ciavola of Newtown Square was also disheartened to hear about its closure."I love it here," she said. "The prices are fabulous."Ciavola said she visited the store at least once a month and bought a refurbished VCR from Value City as a gift at Christmas."You know what it's good for too?" she asked. "Odd knickknacks that nobody else has."Ciavola said she honed her shopping preferences a while ago."I was quite annoyed," she said. "I bought a dress at Sears. I came here and saw the same brand for $20 less. Now, I come here first."Hepler said Burlington Coat Factory has agreed to convert 24 of the Value City stores into their prototype.Audrey Shapiro, a spokeswoman for Burlington Coat Factory, said the Springfield Value City is not yet on their list, although it receives additions weekly."Every week, I get an update with the Value City situation," she said.How this would impact the existing Burlington Coat Factory on Baltimore Pike in Clifton Heights is unknown at this time.Traveling salesman Ephraim Schottenstein founded Value City in 1917 in Ohio. The store was known for selling clothing, jewelry and household goods at steep discounts.Value City's total sales for the quarter ending Jan. 22 were $317 million, compared to $415 million in February 2007. Its annual figures were $1.1 billion, or almost $200 million less than its $1.3 billion reported for the year ending February 2007.At the time of the January acquisition, Value City had operated 113 stores in the Midwest, mid-Atlantic and Southeastern states.The Value City in the Tri-State Mall in Claymont, Del. closed Feb. 7 and is expected to become a Burlington Coat Factory.Hepler said 52 Value City stores will remain in operation, seven of which will be in Pennsylvania.
Insurrectionist arrested after carrying Confederate flag through US Capitol is from Laurel, feds say
Officers describe tense moments during riot at Capitol
Aston man charged with near decade of sexual assaults
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line970
|
__label__wiki
| 0.940416
| 0.940416
|
Backpass: The Colorado Rapids may be lousy, but…
Backpass: The Colorado Rapids may be lousy, but it could always be worse — at least there’s no relegation
David Zalubowski, The Associated Press
Sporting Kansas City midfielder Roger Espinoza, right, passes the ball as Colorado Rapids midfielder Jack Price covers in the first half of an MLS soccer match Sunday, March 17, 2019, in Commerce City, Colo.
By Mark Goodman | Special to The Denver Post
April 26, 2019 at 9:24 a.m.
Among my favorite books to read to my kids at bedtime is the Dr. Seuss classic “Did I ever tell you how lucky you are?”
It’s the story of a guru that sits upon a cactus, telling his young protege about all the ways in which things could be a lot worse. From lawnmowers responsible with Sisyphean lawns in constant need of trimming to a forgotten and forlorn coat-hanger rusting on a far off telephone line, the message is clear — be happy where you are, because it could be lot worse.
Supporters of the Colorado Rapids might need some convincing to believe that things are incapable of getting worse, though. The Rapids have just gone through the worst start in club history, going through the first eight matches of the season without a win, an ignominious mark which only seven other clubs in MLS history have ever reached.
Only six MLS teams have started the season winless after 8 games. Colorado #Rapids96 are now the seventh. The teams are:
-> 2017 Philadelphia Union
-> 2014 Chicago Fire
-> 2014 Portland Timbers
-> 2012 Toronto
-> 2007 RSL
-> 2003 LA Galaxy
— Mark Asher Goodman (@soccer_rabbi) April 20, 2019
With only two points collected through eight games, Colorado is on track to have just 8.5 points for the 2019 season, which would be the worst season in MLS history. The team has also conceded 23 goals to date — on pace to concede an unbelievably bad 98 goals on the year, which would be the worst defense in MLS history by more than 20 goals. The terrible 2019 season is following a terrible 2018 season in which the team finished second-to-last, and another terrible season in 2017 where the team also finished second-to-last. As a writer that has covered the team through this entire two-and-a-half year spell, I’ve run out of synonyms for the word terrible and prefer to just use it in an almost mantra-like way to give my prose a sense of rhythm and meter.
So, yes, things look catastrophically bad to the fanbase. But let’s attempt to cheer ourselves up by imagining that it could always be worse.
What Could Possibly Be Worse?
With only four games left to go in their soccer season, German football club Hannover 96 is utterly and completely without hope. Having collected a paltry 15 points through 30 games, the historic 123-year-old team is firmly rooted to the bottom of the Bundesliga. But unlike in MLS, where the last-placed team has only to endure the shame and ridicule of domestic fans, German football operates on a promotion and relegation system. The two worst teams in the Bundesliga each season are demoted to the 2.Bundesliga; with a third team needing to play a playoff match against a lower-division side to determine their fate. Hannover sits six points off even from a possible worst fate. Short of a miracle, when the season concludes in four weeks, they will drop down a league.
“It’s been kind of a disaster,” Ansgar Löcke tells me.
Ansgar has been a fan of Hannover since he was 12 or 13 years old. Löcke now lives in Berlin, and has seen the team through good times — like their 2011-2012 season in which they made a deep run into the Europa League; and bad times — like the club’s relegation at the end of the 2015-2016 season. Through success and failure and chaos and suffering and demotion, Löcke has pretty much seen it all.
In 2009, the team’s starting goalkeeper, Robert Enke, took his own life. It was later revealed that Enke had battled depression throughout his life. The club struggled to recover from his loss. Löcke explains, “The club struggled to really deal with it correctly. Because, how would you? They had a whole memorial with 40,000 people in the stadium and the coffin in the middle of the pitch. I think, as well-intentioned as it was, it put a huge shadow over the rest of the season.”
After the memorial, a pall was cast on the club and its players which left them in a funk for months. Hannover lost eight straight matches and was looking at relegation. Only a win on the final matchday of the season kept them from going down.
The team was nearly relegated again in 2015 but survived. The 2015-2016 edition of the team was so poorly assembled that most fans could anticipate their fate from day one of the season. “The 2016 relegation, well it wasn’t heartbreaking because it was so obvious that we would go down pretty early on. Everyone knew that this team wasn’t good enough to stay up.”
That year, Hannover went through three different coaches in just a ten-month season – Michael Frondzeck, Thomas Schaaf, and Daniel Stendel. Stendel stayed with the team as they were demoted, and led them to a 2nd place finish in the lower league – good enough to return them to the top-flight. A mid-table 13th place finish in 2017-2018 had fans feeling OK going into this season. Fans had reason to be confident.
“Oddly enough, it started not too badly” Löcke said. “Second matchday against Borussia Dortmund, we managed to get a 0-0 draw.” That draw against Dortmund, one of the more powerful and glamorous clubs in all of world football, gave the impression that Hannover fans had much to look forward to. The wheels, however, came off quickly. The club lost six of their next eight matches.
In response, manager Andre Breitenreiter benched his goalkeeper and stripped him of his captaincy — moves that were supposed to inspire the players to fight harder for their spots in the club, but likely had the opposite reaction. The new captain, 21-year-old centerback Waldemar Anton, had a string of bad games, but the coach couldn’t bench him for fear of further alienating the team and undermining his own decisions.
In December, the coach would sabotage himself again. Leading up to the winter break in the Bundesliga between Christmas and mid-January, Breitenreiter threatened to hold practice on Christmas Day if the team did not record a win in its final three matches of 2018. The team lost two matches and recorded a tie in a third, but the coach vacillated and let the players have Christmas off and instead planned to have training on Dec. 30. When it became known to the players that two Brazilian players were permitted to go home over the break rather than attend training, mutiny ensued. With all confidence in the manager lost, Breitenreiter was fired two weeks later.
Unprepared for a manager change, the team found one of the few coaches that was both available and willing to take a job with a moribund and low-prestige team that was perpetually mired at the bottom of the league. The new coach, Thomas Doll, hadn’t coached in the Bundesliga in 10 years and had previously been a TV commentator. Löcke describes him as “not a tactician, more of a talker and motivator.”
It didn’t translate to success. In their last 14 games, Hannover has 1 win, 1 draw, and 12 losses.
Despite all that, despite a history of mediocrity and sadness and instability and chaos, Löcke is fully committed to being a Hannover fan — win, lose, or relegation.
“It’s not logical to follow Hannover. It’s emotional,” he said. “I’ve seen them play well. I know that they’ll be better again.”
For as bad as the Rapids have been, and for as bad as the season could go over the next 26 matches, there is still hope. They can still pull out of this eight-game nosedive. Tim Howard will still put on a show in his final professional season. Kei Kamara is still banging in goals at a furious rate. Youngsters Cole Bassett and Sam Vines can still use this season as a chance to develop and grow as professionals, without the desperate need to win changing their approach.
And even without hope, there is at least no fear of relegation. The team almost certainly won’t make the playoffs, but they also won’t be dropped into a lower league — a netherworld of suffering through bus rides to second-rate stadia in far-flung corners of the U.S.
The Rapids may stink. But, unlike poor Hannover 96, at least they’ll continue to stink in the first division.
More Rapids news
Mark Goodman | Special to The Denver Post
Mark writes a regular soccer column for The Denver Post.
Follow Mark Goodman @soccer_rabbi
More in Colorado Rapids
Rapids acquire wing Michael Barrios in trade with FC Dallas
Rapids agree to deal with forward Jonathan Lewis that runs through 2024 season
Rapids sign defender Auston Trusty to new contract through 2023
Rapids agree to deal with defender Lalas Abubakar that keeps him in Colorado through 2024
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line972
|
__label__wiki
| 0.565675
| 0.565675
|
Skills Lacking to Produce Low-Carbon Buildings
21 January 2010 (Last Updated January 21st, 2010 18:30)
The UK lacks the skills to produce low-carbon buildings, according to a report by the Royal Academy of Engineering. These issues need to be addressed, as does awareness in the sector to meet its target of reducing carbon emission by 80% by 2050, the report says. The report has
The UK lacks the skills to produce low-carbon buildings, according to a report by the Royal Academy of Engineering.
These issues need to be addressed, as does awareness in the sector to meet its target of reducing carbon emission by 80% by 2050, the report says.
The report has been authored by Doug King, who is also the founder of King Shaw Associates and a visiting professor in building engineering physics at the University of Bath.
He points out that the building energy regulations are not consistent with the construction sector’s ability to deliver zero-carbon new buildings by 2020.
King called for the introduction of a new discipline: building engineering physics.
The new discipline of study will probe areas of natural science relating to the energy performance of buildings and their indoor and outdoor environments.
Roof Window Solutions and Entry Way Mailboxes
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line973
|
__label__wiki
| 0.751594
| 0.751594
|
Detroit Regional Chamber > 2018 > November
American Society of Employers (ASE) Releases Preliminary Results to its Drug Testing and Marijuana Legalization Survey – Employers are Confident in Responding to New Marijuana Law
Media Contact: Heather Nezich, Communications Manager, ASE, 248.223.8040, hnezich@aseonline.org
Livonia, Mich. —November 26, 2018 — The American Society of Employers (ASE), one of the nation’s oldest and largest employer associations, has released a new survey around the legalization of Marijuana in Michigan – its Drug Testing and Marijuana Legalization Survey. The survey results were released by ASE President & CEO, Mary E. Corrado.
“ASE has reacted swiftly to this new law with this survey as well as several briefings for our members,” stated Corrado. “We don’t expect employers to make any sweeping changes to their drug policies and our preliminary results confirm that.”
Michigan is the first Midwestern state to legalize the use of recreational marijuana by a vote of 56% to 44%. What does that mean for Michigan employers? The preliminary data from ASE’s Drug Testing and Marijuana Legalization Survey provides insight into employers’ first thoughts on where their policies and practices currently stand and what changes, if any, they are considering.
183 organizations from across Michigan have participated in ASE’s Drug Testing and Marijuana Legalization Survey. 66% of these organizations are located in the metro Detroit region. 90% of the organizations that responded have 1-500 employees, and nearly 66% of the respondents are classified as manufacturers.
68% of employers have confidence that their organizations’ policies will be able to successfully address their employees’ marijuana usage. Additional insights include:
15% of employers will likely change their policies, while 51% of employers will not.
Of those contemplating change, 42% will remove marijuana testing from their policies altogether, and 31% will ignore any positive marijuana results.
Similar to the stance taken with drug testing policies, half of surveyed employers will not consider making changes to their workplace drug or substance abuse polices/practices. 36% remain unsure, and only 14% will consider making a change.
Although the Michigan Regulation and Taxation of Marihuana Act has triggered much interest amongst businesses in Michigan, employers feel confident that their current policies and practices are equipped to handle this new law. “ASE recommends that employers treat marijuana similar to how they treat the use of alcohol amongst employees. Any substance abuse policies should refer to working while under the influence of marijuana, since it will now be a legal substance similar to alcohol,” stated Mary E. Corrado, ASE President & CEO. “We don’t advise employers to alter their current polices at this time.”
Some additional points to consider:
Workers’ Compensation – Employers will have to consider the impact that their drug testing policies may have on Workers’ Compensation premiums. The removal of marijuana testing could lead to hesitation from the carrier to provide the best rates. This will most certainly lead to higher premiums.
Medical Review Officer – When conducting a drug test, results should be certified by a Medical Review Officer who will analyze and validate the results.
Safety Sensitive Positions – If an employee is hired into a safety sensitive position, it would be beneficial to continue drug testing, including marijuana.
About the American Society of Employers (ASE) – a Centennial Organization
The American Society of Employers (ASE) is a not-for-profit trade association providing people-management information and services to Michigan employers for over 115 years. Since 1902, member organizations have relied on ASE to be their single, cost-effective source for information and support, helping to grow their bottom line by enhancing the effectiveness of their people. Learn more about ASE at www.aseonline.org.
Butzel Long attorneys named to DBusiness magazine’s Top Lawyers in metro Detroit 2019
DETROIT, Mich. – Forty-two Butzel Long attorneys have been named Top Lawyers in metro Detroit 2019 by DBusiness magazine. The list appears in the November/December 2018 edition. The attorneys and their practice areas are listed below:
Ann Arbor office
— Jennifer A. Dukarski
— Mark W. Jane
Employee Benefits Law
— Lynn F. McGuire
— Mark T. Nelson
Litigation – Labor Employment Benefits
— Claudia Rast
Litigation – Intellectual Property
— Angela Emmerling Shapiro
Information Management & Discovery Law
Bloomfield Hills office
— Mark E. Crane
— Carey A. DeWitt
— Debra A. Geroux
— Beth S. Gotthelf
— D. Stewart Green
— Robert A. Hudson
— Susan L. Johnson
— Sheldon H. Klein
Litigation – Antitrust
— Max J. Newman
Bankruptcy and Creditor /Debtor Rights Law
— Thomas Radom
Bankruptcy and Creditor/Debtor Rights Law
— Joseph E. Richotte
— Craig S. Schwartz
— Robert H. Schwartz
— Thomas L. Shaevsky
— Daniel B. Tukel
— Linda J. Armstrong
— James C. Bruno
— George B. Donnini
— Arthur Dudley, II
— David F. DuMouchel
Professional Malpractice Law
White-Collar Criminal Defense
— Eric J. Flessland
Litigation – Construction
— Bernard J. Fuhs
— John P. Hancock
Litigation – Labor and Employment Benefits
— Justin G. Klimko
— Phillip C. Korovesis
Litigation – Commercial
— Mark R. Lezotte
Nonprofit/Charities Law
— Clara DeMatteis Mager
— Paul M. Mersino
— Donald B. Miller
— Reginald A. Pacis
— James S. Rosenfeld
— Bruce L. Sendek
— Ivonne M. Soler
— Nicholas J. Stasevich
— James E. Wynne
— James J. Urban
For the list, DBusiness magazine polled 19,000 attorneys in Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Washtenaw and Livingston counties among 50 legal specialties.
Butzel Long is one of the leading law firms in Michigan and the United States. It was founded in Detroit in 1854 and has provided trusted client service for more than 160 years. Butzel’s full-service law firm offices are located in Detroit, Bloomfield Hills, Lansing and Ann Arbor, Mich.; New York, NY; and, Washington, D.C., as well as alliance offices in Beijing and Shanghai. It is an active member of Lex Mundi, a global association of 160 independent law firms. Learn more by visiting www.butzel.com or follow Butzel Long on Twitter: https://twitter.com/butzel_long
Katherine M. Gehl
Katherine Gehl is a business leader, author, and speaker. She was president and CEO of Gehl Foods, a $250 million high-tech food manufacturing company before selling the company in 2015 to focus her career on political reform.
Gehl’s career includes roles in the private and public sectors including at Oracle Corporation, Bernstein Investment Research and Management, Mayor Richard M. Daley’s Office at the City of Chicago, and Chicago Public Schools. Most recently, she co-authored with Michael Porter Why Competition in the Politics Industry Is Failing America: A strategy for reinvigorating our democracy which reveals their findings and analysis on innovation to America’s divided political system.
In 2018, Gehl co-founded Democracy Found, a Wisconsin-based initiative mobilizing a bipartisan group of leaders to implement electoral innovations in Wisconsin. Gehl graduated from the University of Notre Dame and earned a master’s degree from Catholic University.
Jim Fitterling
Jim Fitterling is the chief executive officer of Dow, a global material science company with 2018 sales of $49 billion.
Fitterling was named chief executive officer-elect of Dow in March 2018, prior to becoming CEO in July 2018. Before that he served as president and chief operating officer of Dow. From September 2017 through March 2019, he also served as chief operating officer for the Materials Science Division of DowDuPont, which separated from Dow in April 2019.
During his 35-year career at Dow, Fitterling has held leadership positions in many of the company’s business units, in corporate development, and in business operations. In addition, he served as the business lead in Dow’s launch of its next-generation sustainability goals. At his direction, in January 2019, Dow became a founding member of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, an initiative to accelerate efforts to drive innovation, provide much-needed resources, and take decisive action to put an end to plastic waste in the environment.
Nolan Finley
Nolan Finley is editorial page editor of The Detroit News, where he directs the expression of the newspaper’s editorial position on various national and local issues and writes a column in the Sunday newspaper. Prior to that, Finley was the newspaper’s deputy managing editor, directing the newsroom. He previously served as business editor, and in various editing positions on the city, state and metro desks. Finley also co-hosts the “MiWeek” show on Detroit Public Television and often appears on “Flashpoint” on WDIV. In 2012, Finley was inducted into the Michigan Journalism Hall of Fame.
Clayton & McKervey named a Top Workplace by the Detroit Free Press for 8th consecutive year
Southfield, Mich.—Nov. 19, 2018—Clayton & McKervey, an international certified public accounting and business advisory firm located in metro Detroit, is pleased to announce it has been awarded a 2018 Top Workplaces honor by the Detroit Free Press. It is the eighth ear Clayton & McKervey has been included on the Detroit Free Press list, which ranks the best places to work in Michigan.
“The Detroit Free Press Top Workplaces award is very important recognition for our firm and we are thrilled with our longevity on the list,” Clayton & McKervey President Robert Dutkiewicz said. “Attracting and retaining high achieving, happy staff is critical to our success. Public accounting is a competitive field for talent, and our client service efforts depend on staff that view Clayton & McKervey as a positive place to work and build a long-term career.”
The Top Workplaces list is based solely on employee feedback gathered through a third-party survey administered by research partner Energage, LLC. The survey gathers employee responses and measures organizational health in four categories:
1. Alignment – where the company is headed; its values; cooperation
2. Effectiveness – doing things well; sharing different viewpoints; encouraging new ideas
3. Connection – employees feel appreciated; their work is meaningful
4. My Manager – cares about concerns; helps employees learn and grow.
The survey also asks about employee engagement, where Clayton & McKervey scored above the CPA profession average, confidence in company leadership and general questions about pay, benefits, flexibility and training.
Clayton & McKervey promotes a collegial and responsive work environment. The firm, an industry leader in promoting women to partnership and other roles of high-level responsibility, uses its Women’s Network program to engage female leadership talent with a four-tier approach that increases access to role models; improves marketing opportunities; provides education and support for career advancement; and enhances the culture of the firm to ensure the successful retention and recruitment of women.
In addition, Clayton & McKervey’s young leadership training program taps employees before they are managers and turns them into the firm’s leaders of tomorrow through technical training and leadership conferences, off-site learning, daily mentoring and in-house coaching, and community involvement. The firm also emphasizes the importance of making time to have fun and connect outside of working hours to foster visible, deeper levels of engagement with each other and the community.
To see all Top Workplace rankings, click here.
About Clayton & McKervey
Clayton & McKervey is a full-service certified public accounting and business advisory firm helping closely held businesses compete in the global marketplace. The firm is headquartered in metro Detroit and services clients throughout the world. To learn more, visit claytonmckervey.com.
’Tis the season…for personal injury claims? As office holiday parties get more adventurous, risk of harm to employees rises
Detroit –Nov. 20, 2018– In recent years, holiday parties have caused increased anxiety for many employers trying to share seasonal joy and good tidings with their employees while putting safeguards in place to avoid sexual harassment claims and drinking and driving infractions and injuries. That’s why Deborah Brouwer, a partner with Detroit-based labor and employment law firm Nemeth Law, says it’s curious to note a national trend of employers hosting holiday parties at potentially risky venues and, in at least one case, offering controversial and sometimes downright dangerous holiday gifts.
“A Wisconsin employer recently gave its employees a $500 gift certificate valid towards the purchase of a firearm,” Brouwer said. “Those not interested could substitute the gift card for a different purchase, but the majority said they plan to use the gift certificate for its intended purpose. This practice could put employers directly in harms’ way from a legal standpoint should the employee injure herself or another individual with the weapon, regardless of whether such an incident occurs in the workplace.”
Brouwer added that holiday parties hosted at the newly popular axe-throwing establishments pose similar risks.
“Employers may be inviting trouble by holding their holiday gatherings at any venue where a weapon is involved – and axe throwing, for example, involves weaponry regardless of how novel and safe it may be positioned as a corporate experience,” Brouwer said. “Axe throwing, racing venues and other recreational activities that pose inherent risk of harm should not be hosted by employers in general, and certainly not when alcohol is served.”
Brouwer says employer holiday party guidelines are generally consistent each year, and that this year’s mention of safe venues is an anomaly.
“We are adding the strong suggestion of hosting parties in a safe place when advising employers on holiday party best practices this year,” Brouwer said. “There are still several guidelines for parties that remain constant from year to year.”
Brouwer offers the following considerations:
• Senior management and HR representatives from the organization should attend the party, follow all company policies and set an example for the organization in terms of appropriate behavior.
• The company’s sexual harassment policy should be reviewed prior to the party – and enforced on the spot if questionable behavior becomes evident.
• Remind employees that while the holiday party is meant to celebrate the season and/or their contributions from the past year, the event is still a business function and inappropriate behavior may result in discipline, including termination.
• Ditto for party pictures and social media party posts. Remind staff in advance of the celebration that the company’s social media policy still applies at the event, and that actions will be taken against those who don’t follow the spirit of the policy.
• If alcohol is served and employees (including interns) under the age of 21 will be present, be sure to implement and follow a “We ID” policy.
• For crowd control and better monitoring of party activities, consider limiting parties to employees rather than adding clients and vendors.
• Consider moving celebratory events to Monday or Tuesday evenings rather than Thursday or Friday evenings.
• Invite all employees to the party, but make it clear that attendance is voluntary. Not everyone celebrates the holidays and employees should not feel pressured to attend.
• Don’t drink and drive should be the mantra. If possible, arrange for transportation in advance for employees who may not be able to drive. Shuttles and car services are an excellent option, but can be costly. Consider alternatives, including offering to reimburse employees for cab fares or ride-hailing services.
If your workplace has no definite holiday plans this year – and the aforementioned guidelines haven’t scared you off – Brouwer suggests holding a less formal, alcohol-free breakfast or lunch event on-site and then closing the office early.
“Less formal parties can be a two for one; staff get to celebrate the season with colleagues while also getting paid time off during the busy holiday season – and employers avoid the pitfalls of events where alcohol is served – or weapons are thrown,” Brouwer said.
About Nemeth Law, P.C.
Nemeth Law specializes in arbitration, mediation, workplace investigations, employment litigation, traditional labor law and management consultation/training for private and public sector employers. It is the largest woman-owned law firm in Michigan to exclusively represent management in the prevention, resolution and litigation of labor and employment disputes.
The Parade Company Named Member of the Month: Honoring Art Van’s Legacy, Contribution to City
In recognition of its commemoration of Art Van Elslander, a longstanding icon in the Detroit community, the Detroit Regional Chamber has chosen The Parade Company as the Member of the Month for November. The Member of the Month is awarded to Chamber members that are working to uplift Southeast Michigan.
The Parade Company is honoring the memory of Van Elslander, who passed away earlier this year, during the 2018 America’s Thanksgiving Parade® presented by Art Van. Van Elslander’s company, Art Van Furniture was the primary benefactor of The Parade for nearly 30 years. He is often credited with saving the Parade since underwriting a $200,000 check when The Parade was struggling financially.
The Parade Company will honor Van Elslander with the 2018 theme, “Art!! Heart & Soul!”
For nearly 100 years, America’s Thanksgiving Parade® presented by Art Van has been a one-of-a-kind spectacle, bringing pride and joy to the Motor City. Since its founding in 1924, The Parade has grown to include more than 60 floats, balloons, equestrian units, marching bands, the famous papier-mache heads and the Distinguished Clown Corps and has always served as a positive reminder of what the city has to offer. The Grand Marshal for the 2018 Parade is famed NFL sportscaster Jim Nantz. The Parade will include classic floats from partners such as Art Van Furniture, Ford Motor Company, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, Strategic Staffing Solutions, The Detroit Jazz Festival, and Huntington Bank as well as new floats from Wayne State University, Lear Corporation, Children’s Hospital of Michigan, Henry Ford Health Systems, Delta Dental of Michigan and The Skillman Foundation and more.
The Parade kicks off from the corner of Kirby and Woodward Avenue at 8:45 a.m. on Thanksgiving morning with the live broadcast on WDIV Local 4 at 10 a.m. and online at www.clickondetroit.com.
There will also be a live play-by-play of the parade from 10 a.m. to noon on 104.3 WOMC
To learn more, visit The Parade Company’s website.
Darienne Driver Hudson
Darienne Driver Hudson has been president and CEO of United Way for Southeastern Michigan since July 2018. She led the Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) as superintendent from October 2014 to May 2018.
She served as chair of the Council of Great City Schools, a policy-making body of the 70 largest urban school districts in the country committed to improving academic achievement and organizational effectiveness. Prior to her role as superintendent, Driver Hudson was appointed MPS’ first chief innovation officer. In that role, she was successful in narrowing the achievement gap in MPS’ Commitment Schools.
Driver Hudson served as deputy chief of empowerment schools for the School District of Philadelphia. Prior to that role, she served as coordinator of strategic management and accountability and special assistant to the superintendent in Clayton County Public Schools in Georgia. She began her career as an elementary school teacher in Detroit Public Schools. She serves on the Board of Overseers for Harvard University.
Driver Hudson’s academic achievements include a doctorate degree from Harvard University, where she completed an urban superintendents’ program. She also earned a master’s degrees in education from Harvard University and in curriculum development from the University of Michigan, and an undergraduate degree from Spelman College in child development.
Matthew Dowd
Matthew Dowd is the chief political analyst for ABC News, a best-selling author, and a campaign strategist for more than 100 campaigns. In his position with ABC News, he appears on “This Week,” “Good Morning America,” and “Nightline.” He is a regular contributor to leading national publications and is also the author of the 2017 book “A New Way: Embracing the Paradox as We Lead and Serve,” which examines the role of leadership in disruptive times. In addition, Dowd is the co-author of the New York Times best-seller “Applebee’s America: How Successful Political, Business, and Religious Leaders Connect with the New American Community,” which examines the tactics used to thrive in an era of immense change.
Dowd previously created the online community “Listen.To.Us.,” which brings like-minded individuals together to discuss politics and government. His political work includes serving as the chief strategist for two winning reelection efforts—Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 2006 campaign and President George W. Bush’s second White House bid. Dowd also provided strategic advice to Former President Barack Obama, Bono at the One Campaign, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Prior to his work for President Bush, Dowd worked for 25 years for Democratic candidates around the country, including Senator Lloyd Bentsen and former Texas Lieutenant Governor Bob Bullock.
Dowd has taught seminars on campaigns and communication at Stanford, Harvard, Yale, and the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. He is currently a senior fellow at the University of Chicago and the University of Southern California.
Over the last 20 years, he has been an active entrepreneur, founding three highly successful companies including Vianovo and Public Strategies. He recently founded Paradox Capital, a social impact venture fund which is focused on for-profit social good companies.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line974
|
__label__cc
| 0.543983
| 0.456017
|
DESIGNS/ COMMERCIAL WORK
WHERE THE LONELY ONES GATHER
UNCONVENTIONAL FAMILIARITIES
Persingen
Ho’ olaule’ a (: a celebration) : Group show celebrating endangered species at Cactus Gallery LA
By Dewi Plass11/05/2018Art, Exhibitions
I’m happy to announce that I’ve been invited to be a part of Cactus Gallery’s newest group show: Ho’ olaule’a (:a celebration). This exhibition gives a voice to a wide selection of animals that unfortunately find themselves on the endangered species list.
Join the gallery on May 12 for the opening night of this show, or visit their website for more information on this show and the available pieces in it.
Silence: the story behind this piece
Nature’s splendor never ceazes to amaze me, and to think that there are so many species that struggle to survive, is a scary yet very real thing. An event that, I feel, is somewhat muted in the media that surround us. This is especially the case fors ome of the ‘lesser’ known species out there, which is why I chose the following endangered species – species from all around the world.
First, there’s the Gharial. This crocodile can be found in Asia, native to India, and is now critically endangered. This Gharial is accompanied by the Cinnamon-breasted Tody-tyrant, that can be found in Ecuador and Peru, but unfortunately is now classified as vulnerable do to habitat loss. The same applies to the butterflies that surround them. They, to me, represent the fragility of the situation, and signify the liminal space between the here and the afterlife, which is why I chose them to represent the “muting” of this silent tragedy.
© 2021 . Artist Copyright - All produced works within this website are protected. The artist retains all copyright and moral rights attached to these works. The works may not be used, downloaded, reproduced or copied without prior written permission from the artist
error: Artist Copyright
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line975
|
__label__cc
| 0.687219
| 0.312781
|
Data diplomacy and knowledge management – key skills for the next generation of diplomats
Katharina Hone 16 Dec 2016 Data Reflections, Diplomacy, Webinars
Our December WebDebate focused on knowledge management and data diplomacy and the mind-set and skills that the next generation of diplomats needs in order to be effective in these areas. One of the key functions of diplomacy is to generate, manage, and use knowledge (Hocking & Melissen, 2015, p. 34). The WebDebate addressed this directly by providing a holistic picture on data, information, and knowledge.
Dr Petru Dumitriu and Prof. Raymond Saner, the speakers for this debate, took a critical look at data diplomacy and knowledge management tools. Dr Dumitriu is a diplomat specialising in multilateral diplomacy who currently coordinates the review of the Joint Inspection Unit on Knowledge Management in the UN system. Prof. Saner teaches international and multistakeholder negotiations at the University of Basel (Switzerland) and at Sciences Po, Paris, and is Director of Diplomacy Dialogue at the Centre for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development (CSEND) in Geneva (Switzerland).
Data and the sustainable development goals (SDGs)
Prof. Saner began by reminding us of the complexity of the SDGs and the 2030 development agenda and argued that in light of this, the big question is how to measure progress. While a set of targets and indicators is in place, there is no agreed-upon methodology that countries can use when charting their progress every four years. Key questions include: What data is collected? How is it analysed? How is it presented to the public?
He also reminded us that there is a strong emphasis in the SDGs on participation, inclusiveness, and transparency. In this regard, we need to wonder how the complexity of the findings of the four-year reviews can be reported to the citizens. Experts are needed to collect and analyse the data, but we also need to ensure that citizens are not left behind and are engaged and informed. Regarding the latter, diplomats can play an important role.
For the complex implementation process, he suggested continuing in line with the idea of major stakeholder groups, which was utilised during the negotiation of the SDGs.
Knowledge management and the UN system
Dr Dumitriu highlighted the important work of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), which, under his leadership, conducts a review of knowledge management in the UN system. His review uses the knowledge pyramid to narrow the scope of the investigation, distinguishing between data, information, and knowledge. Information is data presented in a specific context and with additional meaning. Knowledge adds layers of understanding in context, insights about relationships, and value judgements. As we move from data to knowledge the human factor becomes more important in order to create understanding and interpretation.
Dumitriu stressed that UN organisations should be viewed as knowledge-based organisations. Yet, they face particular challenges when using knowledge management tools. The UN system is incredibly complex; it faces institutional fragmentation, a variety of governance approaches, and diverse mandates. It suffers from the tendency to work and act in silos. In contrast to, for example, the private sector, the UN system faces greater challenges in making a compelling case that funds and resources should be allocated to develop and implement knowledge management tools.
Dumitriu also highlighted two different ways in which knowledge can be approached that are utilised in the JIU report. First, knowledge can be understood as a resource. The various organisations in the UN system are more than executers of tasks; they are conveyors of knowledge and implementers. Yet, knowledge comes at a price; it demands the sufficient allocation of human and financial resources. Second, knowledge should also be seen as a service for member states and other institutions. This is, potentially, an important contribution of the UN system.
Recommendations for initiatives, training, and skills needed for data diplomacy and knowledge management
Saner stressed transparency, openness, and interest in the inputs of a diversity of actors as key factors for successful data diplomacy. Diplomats play an important role in managing the flows of information from and to international agencies. They are important in sharing knowledge and conveying the highly complex and technical elements of the SDGs to domestic constituencies. As such, they can contribute to a democratisation of data collection and processing.
Saner also pointed out that diplomats need to have the skills to organise engagement with key stakeholders and allow for their participation in consultation, dissemination, and implementation.
Lastly, he underscored the importance of inter-ministerial policy coordination and the inclusion of various ministries when negotiating abroad as well as the inclusion of the foreign ministry in domestic dialogues and implementation.
Dumitriu stressed the importance of the human factor in knowledge management and called for engaging UN staff through awareness raising and training to avoid duplication of effort.
Similarly, institutional mechanisms that work to preserve and facilitate access to knowledge, when personnel change or retire, need to be built. Dumitriu highlighted the Knowledge Centre for Sustainable Development as a good example. To overcome silo approaches, he recommended staff training to create a common language and holistic approaches. Communities of practice should be supported and fostered. Dialogue platforms, which bring together individuals and institutions across the UN system, and the engagement of knowledge management champions were also recommended.
Additional resources on science diplomacy by DiplomacyDialogue: http://www.diplomacydialogue.org/publications/science-diplomacy.html
‘Organisational culture of UN agencies: The need for diplomats to manage porous boundary phenomena’ book chapter by Raymond Saner and Lichia Yiu in Intercultural Communication and Diplomacy (ed by Hannah Slavik): https://www.diplomacy.edu/resources/general/organisational-culture-un-agencies-need-diplomats-manage-porous-boundary-phenomena
The WebDebates on the future of diplomacy are organised by DiploFoundation within the framework of the International Forum on Diplomatic Training (IFDT), which gathers close to 100 diplomatic training institutions worldwide. Join us on the first Tuesday of each month.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line981
|
__label__cc
| 0.596135
| 0.403865
|
Disability Rights Treaty Gains Support
by Shaun Heasley | May 29, 2012
In a rare show of bipartisan support, a group of senators said they want the United States to ratify an international convention on the rights of people with disabilities.
The U.S. already signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2009, but approval from the U.S. Senate is needed to make the move official.
President Barack Obama transmitted the treaty to the Senate earlier this month and asked the body to ratify it.
Now, a group of seven senators representing both political parties is voicing support for the treaty as well.
“All people deserve to be granted full and equal basic human rights, regardless of their physical or mental capabilities. I strongly support ratification of this critical treaty, and urge my colleagues to do the same,” said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del.
The treaty calls for greater community access and a better standard of living for the estimated 650 million people around the world with disabilities.
In addition to Coons, other lawmakers coming out in support of the convention include Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa; Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.; Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.; Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan.; Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo.; and Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M.
Currently, 153 countries have signed the disability treaty and 112 have ratified it, according to the U.N.
More in Politics & Law Comments
View this article online at https://www.disabilityscoop.com/2012/05/29/disability-treaty-support/15735/
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line982
|
__label__wiki
| 0.714463
| 0.714463
|
Environmental issues figured nowhere in Uttarakhand elections
Around 170 hydropower and a number of sand mining projects in the pipeline or underway
NEXT NEWS ❯
By Sonal Matharu
Published: Wednesday 08 February 2012
Though rampant industrialisation is putting the environment at risk in Uttarakhand, the issues surrounding it hardly figured in the state Assembly elections.
More than 170 hydropower projects and a number of sand mining projects have been approved and some of them are underway in the state. Environmental activists and residents have already expressed their reservations on the projects. But the two main political parties–the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the opposition Congress–chose to keep silent on the controversies surrounding the projects. Uttarakhand went to polls on January 30.
“Despite the opposition, the political parties took no clear stand on whether they support or oppose the projects. They made no commitments on the two issues on paper,” says Hemant Dhyani of Ganga Ahvaan, a non-profit.
Dhyani adds that so far there has been no report on what development these projects have brought in the regions where some of these projects were implemented. The residents of villages affected by such projects have yet not been rehabilitated, he notes.
Politicians don’t differentiate good and bad development
“Rahul Gandhi came for campaigning here and said if Congress comes to power it will bring development in the state. He said we will get electricity and water but he did not say anything about the dam,” says Geeta Wati Bahuguna, whose house on the banks of Alaknanda river bank was relocated because of the upcoming Srinagar Hyroelectric Power project in Doogri Pant village in Pithoragarh district. The construction of the Srinagar dam with a capacity of 330 MW started in 2007 and was to be completed by 2012. But the construction was put on hold after an Uttarakhand high court order on a public interest litigation filed by Bharat Jhunjhunwala, former professor at IIM Bangalore and now a resident of the area. In his petition, Juhunjhunwala contended that the dam would submerge the Dhara Devi temple on the bank of the river.
Like many others in the village, Bahuguna had to move her house up the hill to escape submergence once the dam is complete. She notes it has become very difficult to have access to clean water for household purposes. “Whether the dam comes up or not, we will not benefit from it,” she says. “I have been living here for 45 years. I have seen political leaders come and go but nothing changes. If the government has invested money in the dam, they will construct it,” rues Bahuguna.
“The leaders did not talk about the dams during campaigning but they are in favour of the projects,” says Sanjay Rawat, a resident of Sweet village in Srinagar, who is a contractor with GMR, the company that has the contract to build the dam on the Alaknanda. “It will only bring development in the state. There is power shortage here. Once the construction of the dam is complete, people will benefit,” he adds.
Vote politics
But Vimal Bhai of Matu Jansangthan, a non-profit, disagrees. “Parties just want votes. Throughout the year they support the construction of dams in the state and during campaigning they change their stand to go with people’s sentiments. No matter who wins, they will go ahead with the dams. This is not an election issue for the leaders,” he says.
The candidates also softened their stand on mining to win votes. “But with so much money already invested in the projects whichever party comes to power it will support sand mining,” says Vipin Pawar, a resident of Haridwar.
“Illegal mining is happening in the basin of the Ganga river. Boulders and stones are being pulled out from the river bed and crushed at several sites. After the high Court order the mining that was happening openly stopped but illegal mining continues,” says Dhyani.
Web Specials Web Specials Web Specials Uttarakhand High Court Uttarakhand elections sand mining hydropower projects Haridwar GMR Ganga Ahvaan Environmental issues Congress Bharatiya Janata … Alaknanda
Subscribe to Weekly Newsletter :
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line986
|
__label__cc
| 0.6844
| 0.3156
|
Posted by: Kevin Tumlinson 1 month, 1 week ago
Terry Odell began writing by mistake, when her son mentioned a television show and she thought she’d be a good mom and watch it so they’d have common ground for discussions. Little did she know she would enter the world of writing, first via fan fiction, then through Internet groups, and finally in groups with real, live partners. Her first publications were short stories, but she found more freedom in longer works and began what she thought was a mystery. Her daughters told her it was a romance so she began learning more about the genre and craft. Now a multi-published, award winning author, Terry resides with her husband and rescue dog in the mountains of Colorado.
//Draft2Digital is where you start your Indie Author Career//
Looking for your path to self-publishing success? Draft2Digital is the leading ebook publisher and distributor. We’ll convert your manuscript, distribute it online, and support you the whole way, and we won’t charge you a dime. We take a cut of royalties on each sale you make through us, so we only make money when you make money!
• Get started: https://Draft2Digital.com
Get insider info on indie author success from our blog.
• Visit: https://Draft2Digital.com/blog
Tune in to our monthly livestreams and ask us anything!
• D2D Live: https://D2DLive.com
Promote your books with our Universal Book Links!
• Books2Read: https://books2read.com
//Get ahead of the Self-Publishing game with our Amazing Partners//
Findaway Voices || Find a narrator, produce your audiobook, and distribute it to retailers worldwide, including Audible.com and Apple Books.
• http://findawayvoices.com/d2d
Reedsy || Assemble your team of publishing professionals! Find editors, cover designers, marketing experts, ghostwriters and more.
• https://reedsy.com
BookBrush || Build graphics and video that help you market and promote your books.
• https://bookbrush.com/d2d-mockups/
//Join the D2D Community Online//
Facebook || https://facebook.com/draft2digital
Twitter || https://twitter.com/draft2digital
SUMMARY KEYWORDS
book, people, mystery, romance, read, author, started, write, romantic suspense, reader, cover, audiobooks, writer, blackthorn, writing, publisher, narrator, years, important, find
Mark Lefevbre 00:01
Hello, this is Mark Lefevbre from Draft2Digital, but you can call me Mark2Digital, that's so much easier. I am delighted to have in the virtual studio with me today, Terry O'Dell. Terry, welcome to the Draft2Digital Spotlight.
Terry Odell 00:17
Thank you for having me. This should be fun.
Yeah, I'm really looking forward to this, because—I'm gonna pop a little something else up on the screen just to show people, because I'm really … I was intrigued, the first time I met you, of your brand. You started off with Terry, obviously Terry Odell, romance with a twist of mystery. Before we get into specific questions about your writing. I really want to find out, was it mystery or was it romance that you were first drawn to when you knew you wanted to be a writer?
I was a mystery reader. I loved mystery books. I read nothing but mystery books. And one day on a whim, I thought I'd see if I could write. I mean, I had no background in writing, no education in writing, other than, I could put words together in a sentence. I was a reader. I started writing this book that was gonna be this mystery. And my kids, my daughters were grown, but I would send them chapters and they reached a point where they said, "Mom, this is a romance." And I said, "Romance, how can I possibly be writing a romance?" And they gave me a paragraph, they both quoted the same paragraph, when the cop took her out after her store had been robbed. He took her out to calm her down, and she looked into his eyes and noticed, the brown eyes were really flecked with hazel. I tried to learn how to write description and it turned my book into a romance. So then I had to start reading some romances, and I didn't like them. I found romantic suspense. And that seemed to be the way to blend mystery with romance. And I realized that when I read mysteries, I was reading series, and I was reading them twice usually. Once to follow with the character: what's Spencer doing with Susan in this book? And then go back and read, you know, "Oh, wait, there's a crime. I should know about that too." So that's how I got that started.
Really? Wow. And so, this is funny, When you were talking about that scene, was that the first book in the Pine Hills Police series?
That was Finding Sarah.
That was Finding Sarah. Yeah, because I read that, I love that book. I was like, I know that scene. So I find it funny that you kind of accidentally found that you were writing romance in the mystery. That was just part of what you were sharing. It seemed to be natural, but you didn't even know the tropes you were playing off of.
Not at all. You know, trope is still like a weird word to me. It's like, I just do whatever I want. Nobody ever told me how I had to do it, so I took it to a writing group in Orlando when we lived there, a live group. And they were all going back to school as changing careers, or mature women looking for a new outlet. So they were giving me all of their class information. It was like I was getting that course for free, because I'd write something and they'd go "No, no, you know, you can't do that," or "Just because it's right doesn't mean it's good, you've got to fix it." So, that's basically how I got everything going.
Okay, that's fascinating. So, we mentioned the Pine Hill Police series, which I have enjoyed the least the beginning of that series. I haven't made it all the way through yet. But you have three other universes or three other series that you write in. Are they all mystery, or romantic suspense? Mystery with a romantic twist?
No. I have four, I think, because I wrote a trilogy that was a romantic suspense mystery, because it's a good excuse to go on a cattle ranch and spend a week there and write it off because you're researching.
Sounds like a good tax write-off for research.
Yeah. Well, the next book, that was my trip to the British Isles. Then the Pine Hills, those are romantic suspense. The Blackthorn are covert ops romantic suspense. But the Mapleton mysteries are straight mystery, although they don't follow any of the rules there either, because they're sort of police procedurals, but a cozy feel, and I don't read cozies either, so I didn't know that.
You'd accidentally realized you were writing something. And your daughter said, "Wait a second, I know what's going on here."
Yeah, that book was the one where I thought, well, now I can really write in mystery. I've written eight other books, I knew how to write a book, and I could write a mystery. And then when I was trying to get it published, the agents and the editors that I would spoke to said, "It's really good, but we can't sell it, because we don't know if it's a cozy or mystery. So make up your mind and rewrite it." And I go, "No." You know, by then you could indie publish. And readers don't care what shelf it came off of in the bookstore.
They just want to enjoy what they enjoy, right? So a mystery with a twist of romance is exactly the drink they ordered, right?
Or romance with a twist of mystery.
So, was there a time that you were interested in traditional publishing, and then did you move into indie? How and when did that happen for you?
Okay, I started writing probably around 2003-ish. Maybe before that, just playing with it, because I was goofing off with fan fiction because of my son. I first got into—well, there was no indie publishing, so you did have to go out and try. So, you know, you try to find an agent and you try to find a publisher. And that was when e-publishers were springing up. Ellora's Cave was huge. They started the ebook craze, revolution, whatever you call it. Because they wrote erotica, and readers of erotica did not want to walk into the bookstore and grab the book and carry it up to the counter where a kid they knew was working summers behind the counter. So they were reading on … not iPads. Rocket book was the format … Now I'm drawing a total blank. What did you call them? PDAs.
Yeah. Oh yeah. Those little PDA devices, yeah.
And that was how you read the book, or you sat in front of your computer and read them. And if you wanted to buy one, you went to the website of that publisher and downloaded the book. When Ellora's Cave decided they were going to try a new imprint … Mainstream, not erotica, you know, just romance but mainstream romance, they accepted Finding Sarah. Their marketing idea tanked because people that were reading erotica did not cross over. So you weren't selling like those erotica authors were. But it was getting in the door, and then there was Wild Rose Press. And I got, they took short stories. I had written this wonderful little, I don't know, 1800-word short story. It had been approved for a magazine that went out of business before it was published. So here I had something that had validation. And I didn't know where to put it. And then Wild Rose came up and they were doing short stories. So I kind of got into that. And then when I had a traditional publisher, five star, hardcover, library focus, and they didn't understand the marketing trends that were coming up, so I had the e-rights to those books. So when they remaindered them, I had to wait a year, and then I could do it. And then that's when the Kindle showed up. And that's when Jay Conrad said, "Hey, put your books up for 99 cents. You know, people buy them." Well, they bought his books, but it took more than just putting them up there before people bought mine.
You know, I think they were buying your books too, because I have to share this comment that Ray had popped up early in the conversation saying, "I just finished listening to What's in a Name," one of your novels. "I absolutely loved it. Thanks for writing this wonderful book." So obviously there are people buying and reading and enjoying your novels. Thanks for sending that, Ray.
Yeah, but it wasn't just a matter of popping it up there and the next morning you would, you know, sell thousands and thousands of copies. It's slow.
So let's talk about the process then. How did you begin that process of getting folks like Ray, who obviously you've just listened to, obviously you have an audiobook? Or maybe he was lucky enough to have someone read it to him? That would be awesome.
Yeah, I doubt that. No, I have 15 audiobooks.
Okay. And we're gonna get into that. We're gonna get into that soon. I want to ask you about that process. But the process, how did you start? You obviously must have an author newsletter.
I have a newsletter. That wasn't the start. When I had my short story accepted by Wild Rose. And, you know, no idea, they just wanted to try something. And they're one of the few that is still in business, still doing well. They said, "You need a web page, you need a blog." So, you know, they were my publisher. So I created a blog and just started chatting, just putting stuff up. And I still have that blog. It's changed a lot. But that's a way I catch readers. And then Facebook showed up. And so I had a profile, and then they allowed you to do an author page. So I have an author page on Facebook. And that's where we have a lot of fun. Every day I put up the word of the day from dictionary.com and everybody makes up crazy definitions. And it's a great game and it gets, those people have started to know each other, and they start commenting back and forth, you know. "I was gonna say that! How could you do that?" So that's, I put that out first thing in the morning. And then in the evening, on that page, I post some stupid meme that's caught my eye. So, usually funny. And I just put those up. And then in between I may talk about, you know, this is the last sentence I wrote, I don't know what's coming next. Or I need a character name. Always. Always looking for character names. So that's kind of like my playground, is my author page on Facebook.
Really? Oh, that is cool. I love that. It seems like the engagement then obviously is really, really valuable to you as an author.
Yeah, and when you live where I do, that's like the only engagement you get.
Well, let's talk about where you live because I am jealous. Because, I think you sent me a picture that I want to share with people here. I think this is your, is this your view that we're seeing?
Yeah, that was morning before last on my back porch, sunrise.
Oh my goodness. Oh my God. That is gorgeous. Morning before last sunrise. Oh. How do you get any writing done when you can just be sitting there looking at a view like that?
Close the blinds. Yeah, right now I've got, the hummingbirds are just starting to come back in the feeders outside one of my office windows, and I [inaudible] let my husband know and he runs out with the camera. So we can speak about the wildlife in my yard.
Yeah, yeah. Tell me. Again, I've got more images to share as you're sharing the story. So let's talk about, was it a visitor you had?
Yeah, yeah. A little kid came by and climbed our tree.
This guy here?
Yeah. My husband took the picture. The dog has learned, when she hears the camera shutter, because he puts it on motor and it goes [clicking sound]. And she goes running into his office to look out the window. She's like, what are you taking pictures of? And so when I wrote Deadly Places, I needed a cover. And so we, I got with my cover artist, and he took that.
So this was a photo your husband took of your friendly neighborhood Yogi Bear that came to check things out? And then your cover designer …
[inaudible] and then the cover artist adds the background, and it was a fall set book around Halloween. So we added the pumpkin. You know, I can't do that. My son could do that, but he doesn't want to. That's not what he does.
And you know what I never even noticed is, on the cover the "l" in deadly is a knife. I never even noticed that before. That is awesome.
Yeah, that was, the cover artist that I was using at that time, he's retired since then, but he's been generous enough to say, "Sure, you can have the fonts and all of that." So that "deadly" is in all the Mapleton books.
Now, speaking of brand, I believe there was a time when you had to re-update your covers. I remember reading that, either on your blog or something way back. So what was that experience like, where you'd had a bunch of books out and then you had to redo them all? What was that all about?
Um, the publisher that I had for my hardcover, for the library books, they bought one book at a time, their art department did a cover based on that book. There was no connection to them. There was nothing that said they were the same author, they were related. So I went through and said, "Okay, let's try to take the same covers, or as close as we can get." Because, you know, the publisher owned the artwork. I got the rights back to the inside of the book, not the outside.And we did, came up with the fontfor my name that's consistent all the way through, all of them have.
Oh, there. With the same font, etc. Yeah.
So, the series title might be different, but my name is the same on every book, regardless of what series it's in. That was better. I liked, you know, it gave the continuity. And then I just got to the point where, you have to reach a point where you're, it's not about you. What you like is not marketing. I, you know, I hated the romance covers with a couple at the top, floating in air kissing or something like that. I didn't want a floating heads cover and I didn't want this and I didn't want that. And I didn't want people on my covers at all. Because I didn't like the clinches. But they weren't selling as romance, they weren't automatically obvious that they were romance. And I could see that in the reviews. "There's sex in this book." Or what my husband calls, "There's mushy stuff." So we went, and I got with my current cover artist and I said, "Okay, it's not about me. It's not about what I like. Let's put a hunk on all the Blackthorn books, so that it's pretty obvious what they're getting." And then we went through with the Pine Hills book. And it's really hard to find a couple on a cover that looks like what you've written. Unless you're smart enough to find the couple and then write the book. I can't do that. It just doesn't occur to me. So we I went with shadowy figures, a couple in shadow so that it didn't matter what they looked like. You could just tell there's people in the story and it's likely to be a romance. And then for the mysteries, they all have that crime scene tape on them.
Oh, yeah, I know. The crime scene tape is for the mysteries, right? Or right across the … Yeah, there you go. Deadly Bones. Okay, cool. Excellent. And that really is part of the genre. So when people see the crime scene tape they know they get some police procedural, some mystery.
Yeah, exactly. And then the logo, I think you've got a slide of it but I have my …
Oh, you've got your mug, your logo everywhere. Yeah, there's the romance with a twist of mystery, as you wreck everything in the background there. I hope the mug's still okay.
Yeah, the mug is fine.
So yeah, where did that come from?
That was a gift from my daughter. I had a, you know, when Wile Rose said, "You gotta have a website," and I go, "I don't know," and you come up with something. And so, my son, who is a photographer, put together a twist of mystery with the lemon twist like in a martini. And that was my cover for, or my logo for a while. And then when I started moving into more books, and it became serious, and this wasn't just a fun little thing, I asked my daughter if she could do anything with it. And she had a friend who's a graphic artist over, either in England or Ireland. And he designed that and I love it. You know, it's just perfect. It's got that heart and the dagger. And so that's where, and that was just a birthday present one year.
Oh my god, I really like your daughter. Not only did she help you identify that, but then the … That is really cool. So any children or siblings or spouses of authors who happen to be listening to this, a really great gift for an author is either, you know, some professional design for a logo, for a branding. So branding is obviously very important to you. You've got the mug. Now, is that stuff for the, is that for your fans as well when they, when you're at events, or how does that work?
If I'm at events, not the mug, because those are too fragile and costly.
As we saw, yes.
I have notepads, I have post-its, I have pens. The one that people love the most is my lip balm.
Yes. Especially where you live, right? It can be dry
Yes, in Colorado you can give that stuff out like crazy. So if I go somewhere where I'm going to see people, yes. Or if I have a giveaway, I'll tuck one of those in, throw in some swag and give it away. So you just figure, I know that they'll buy the book, but if they see your name on a 25 sheet notepad, that's 25 times they've seen your name.
That's awesome. So let's, we hinted at audiobooks. You have15 audiobooks. How many books do you have published, actually in total?
You know, I was thinking of that before we started, saying, he's going to ask me how many …
More than 15, I'm assuming, right?
Right. I think I have 21 novels. And then there's shorts, novellas, I've got a couple of short, two collections of short stories. And then I've got some bundles. So I don't know if you can call that … You know, I wrote those books individually, and then I put them together a couple of years later. So …
25 titles, roughly, I'm guessing? Something like that?
Okay. And 15 audiobooks?
Mm-hmm. Yeah, I did not put the Blackthorns into audio, simply because at the time there were already six or seven of them. And it's just too expensive. You know, because if you do one book [inaudible], one leads to the next. So if you can't get all, and now there's nine of them. And if you can't get nine of them up there … It's a long time to get your money back on an audiobook.
Well and that's … Yeah, so you must have started this way back, actually.
Yeah I just looked, my first audio book is coming up to the seven year mark with ACX.
Seven years. So you were initially, you're counting that because initially you did the royalty share, is that how you did it?
Yeah, because at the time, I got an email from an author friend who said, "Terry, you've got to do this. You know, it doesn't cost you anything. And you know, it's an extra few hundred dollars a month in your pocket," which was all my goal ever was, then. I thought, you know, okay, an extra hundred bucks and there was no investment. I paid $25 for the cover. But, you got royalty share, it gave something the narrators to type in. So the narrator eager to do it, because they knew they were going to make money, so it wasn't a gamble. Now that there's so many other gateways into audio, I wouldn't recommend going that way.
What would you recommend? What's the process that you're using now?
Right now I'm using Findaway Voices. And I'd done that kind of through the backdoor as well. They are more expensive, to get a narrator through them, they tack on like 15% of what the narrator would charge. But they will take a book, and I've worked with my mystery narrator long enough that he trusts me. And I say, you know, will you narrate this book? And I'll pay you, but not until it's done.And he said, sure.
Because you've worked together before?
Yes, he's done all my Mapletons. And he's also very good about not wanting or requiring money, when I had one of the Mapletons in royalty share, he did not ask me to buy him out. He just said, you know, because he's smart, he looked back and said, you know, in four years we've sold 89 copies. I'm not making any money anyway.
I'll take the money up front, thank you.
All the rest he did, I did as per finished hour with him.
Okay, that's cool. So it sounds like trust and relationships with people in the industry, like your narrator, editor, designers, the people that you work with, that's obviously really important to you?
I think you need a relationship with them. They have to know that you're good for whatever you're coming up with, and that you're … You know, with my cover, the cover artist, she doesn't charge until she's done and you say okay.It's not like you know, give me a hundred bucks up front and I'll see what I can do for you. My editor, I've been with her since the Five Star books. I think there are only two books that I used a different editor for, when she was not taking on clients.So, yeah, I mean, she knows me, and she knows when I say I've got a book for you, she knows about how much work it's going to be.
Because you've done that repeatedly, right?
So it's correcting my grammar and my typos. But there won't be a lot of them.
That's fantastic. And so the audiobooks, in all realistic fashion, it's not like you made an audiobook on kind of like the Jay Conrad stage, where you stuck it up and a bazillion people bought it and you became rich. You're in this for the long run?
You have to you know, you have to be. I went to a Novelists, Inc. conference when audiobooks were just starting and they had several authors up there with the ACX rep, and they were talking about how, you know, I'll mortgage my house to pay for my audiobook or whatever else. And then the next year they're going, well, I haven't made my money back yet. And they're looking, and they're, you know, general opinion if you're a midlist wannabe, five years.
Okay, so it's, yeah, you're thinking of a longer term. Yeah. Which is probably why ACX has that seven year contract. One of the reasons is, well, you got to give it some time if they're going to to get their money back, right?
Yeah, yeah. The royalty share is the one that really locks you in. That's a toughy. I went through nightmares trying to get the one book, the one Mapleton book, Deadly Bones, out of the royalty share and it was a nightmare.
Do you have any opinions about exclusivity versus wide?
Wide.
And why is that?
First off, you never know where you're going to find a reader. But I have to be fair and honest. I'm retired. My house is paid for, my cars are paid for, I don't have kids living at home. I don't put a roof over my head or food on my table with my royalties. But so, I am the kind of person who, back in the day when somebody asked me if one of my books would be on all romance ebooks, she said, because that's where I buy my books. And my answer to her was tomorrow. And [inaudible]. Because she's a reader, and who knows how many other readers she's going to tell about it. And I also just, quite honestly, I'm just very concerned that the big guy can change the terms at any time. You're locked in there and you say you've got all the rights, and, you know, I'm making all my money on page reads. And then they say, well, we're not going to pay that much money for page reads. It's still my biggest income source, not the page read thing. I, you know, I don't have my books there. You have to buy them. But I have four free ones, first in series is free. So, I just make most of my money there, but I make enough from Apple and Kobo and Barnes and Noble that I couldn't give that income up. I wouldn't risk it. And I think that's what the people say going the other way. I'm making this much money with Kindle Unlimited, I can't risk taking them down.
Right. Okay. So let's talk a little bit about that. Oh, sorry, what was that?
No, that's that was nothing.
Oh, okay. I know you're in the mountains and the signal seems to be just wavering there. It's like a Star Trek transmission. But that's okay. We'll keep going. I do know because, that's the price you pay for all that beauty I guess. But you talked about free first books. And so you have four series, and the first book in each series is free. That's like permafree everywhere?
Uh, three of the series. The Pine Hills Police, the Mapleton, and the Blackthorn. My cowboy books, there's only three of them and it really doesn't pay to knock the price down until you have enough other books.I, yes. I mean, those things bring in people. It's not immediate. When you advertise and you promote free in some of the sweepstakes type deals,you know, here, you can sign up for the newsletter and you can have 30 authors and 30 books and all of that. There's a lot of glommers out there. There's people who go, I've got more books on my Kindle than I can read in my lifetime, and I haven't paid for one of them. That's not my audience. You know, but I'm willing to say, you've never heard of me. Here's a book, read it. If you like it, there'll be a whole lot more. And they're good for giveaways and for prizes, or whatever. You can just tell people look, here's a free book. And yes, they're permafree.
Cool. Well, I think I discovered Pine Hills Police because book one was free. But because I was commuting a lot, I ended up going and buying the audiobook anyways. Which was, yeah.
Yeah. And that's the other thing too, is, those first in series free books in audio tend to sell better than the rest because if you buy the ebook and the audiobook, and the ebook is free, so the audio book only cost you five or six bucks. My best-selling audio book at ACX is the bundle, because it's a subscription service. So people are going, why should I use my credit for a $12 book when I can use it for a $25 book? So the bundles do much better at ACX.
Oh, that's fantastic. Yeah, cuz it's way a better deal for the $15 a month, right? That's fantastic. Cool. So we're at the half hour mark. So we're going to start taking some questions from our live audience. And the first question comes from Carla. And Carla asks, "How long does it take you to write a book and how do you decide what to write next?"
Okay, on a non-stressful universe, about three or four months to write a book. They average about 100,000 words. I shoot for 80 and I end up at 100. And I publish them at 90. As far as deciding what to write next, it's whatever strikes my fancy. Right now, what I decided to write next was a book set in the British Isles, so I can write off my trip. But it's a standalone, and then that's not going to be fun. But for variety, I tend to bounce my series around. So I go, okay, I've been you know, I need a new Blackthorn guy or you know, I've just spent too much time with Gordon, he's got to have a break before his next case. And so, yeah, every now and again, I think I've had you know, like a reader say, "I really liked this series. When is your next one going to be out?" And I'll think, well, I can write that.
So the readers that you engage with asking questions is sometimes a prompt to say, "Oh, I guess I should revisit them"?
Yeah. I mean, I'll just look at just about anything. Anything to avoid cleaning toilets.
So I have to ask, because we've talked about the British Isles twice. Was it the characters and the setting and the idea that brought you there? Or was it, Terry and her husband really want to go there and this is a great tax write off? Don't worry, the IRS is not listening.
I hope not. One of my daughters lives in Northern Ireland. She was here visiting and pointed out that she's lived in Northern Ireland for 12 years we had never visited. We had a 50th anniversary coming up. And we said, let's go visit Jess, but let's take a tour. And we got with the travel agent, who set us up on a tour. Which then, nobody else signed up for the tour, so we ended up with a private driver and got to do a lot of stuff. And it was fun because they would take us places where they'd say,
Oh, you got to see this, there's this guy with the sheepdogs. And one speaks Gaelic and one speaks English." And, you know, "Okay, we'll go see her." So yeah, and then I asked my, you know, tax guy and said, "Can I really write off this whole trip?" Basically, because you don't have a plot in mind when you go, so you're looking at things where every day, everything you see is a plot idea, so it's important. So he said go for it.
So let's talk about that. You say everything you see is a plot idea. Is that true for you as a writer?
Oh, a lot of times, yeah. I mean, some of it you look and say, oh, that'd be boring. But you know what, when we go places with my husband and we meet people and he will say, "Watch what you say. She's a writer and it'll end up in a book." So, you know.
Does he have a t-shirt that says that, or do you say that? You know, "Don't annoy me, I might kill you in my next book"?
Yeah, careful or you'll end up in my novel.
Is there a setting, like Pine Hills or Mapleton, are they places … Are they based on places that you've actually lived, or are familiar with?
Pine Hills is based on visits to my husband's sister in Salem. So I did that, and then I thought she was getting sick of me having to keep emailing her. "It's May, what trees are blooming in the streets?" and all that. So I set the next one in Orlando and found that was harder because it was real. You know, I made the character a deputy with the Orlando PD.
So it was like a real location, not a fictional … Okay.
And that was real. And that was spooky because, you know, I met this guy who was teaching SWAT aerobics or something like that at the Y. And so I asked him questions and I called him one day and I said, you know, what color's the carpet? And he goes, "I don't know. Gray, or whatever? You want to come for a tour? And I said sure, you know. She walked me through everything and let me ask all the questions and all that. So I try to be accurate. But I felt like it had to be much more accurate than saying okay, this police, you know, that's where my Blackthorns came in. They need a fancy-ass helicopter, I can give them one. I don't have to worry about that the Police Department can't afford that.
Oh, that's fantastic. So for the research that you do, because it's police and mysteries and stuff like that, how often are you reaching out to experts in the field to kind of glean their insights and, you know, not just the color of the carpet, but maybe investigations and things like that?
Whenever I need it. You know, I get to the point in the book where I go, well, wait a minute. You know, how can this guy, you know … He's gonna get stabbed in the liver. You know, I'm gonna stab, you know, how long will it take? You know, and you just ask. I've called up to the coroner in Jefferson County. The fun part is, is that they normally will tell you much more, they'll tell you how to solve the thing. "Well just send it all to Texas," and they'll tell you who, you know. The book is over in chapter three. You can't identify them, you know?
Yeah. Maybe like you come up with a reason why they can't do the thing and so it just sort of drags on, right? So another reader might go, "Wait a second. Why didn't they just send it to Texas?"
Right. Yeah. And you say well, because there were no teeth left.
Are there any times when you've reached out to a coroner or investigator or a law enforcement officer where they wondered? Do you just go, like, "Hi, I'd like to inquire about some murders?"
I normally lead off with, I am a writer working on a novel.
Okay. Yeah. Usually you let them know that up front.
Right up front. That's my lead-in.
What's the response? How do they normally respond to that? Is it, "Oh, I'm too busy. I can't talk to you because it's just this writing, this fluffy writing thing you're doing"? Or do they actually take care of you?
Most of the time they're flattered that you want their opinion, and they want to help and make sure you get it right. They don't want to be portrayed in a bad light. So they will go on and on, and tell you stuff that you may never even be able to use, but. I've never really had some … I usually start with email now. I figure if they're busy, they just don't answer.
So for other writers who are interested in reaching out and talking to experts. It doesn't have to be, you know, law enforcement officials. What do you recommend? How do you approach that as a writer?
I … use a contact. I've found people on Facebook, I needed to know stuff about flying. And I put something, you know, I think I typed pilots and I got names and looked at their profiles or whatever. And messaged one, and he came back, he was great. And gave me all the information that I would need, I thought. And then he called me on the phone. He got my number, and he called me, and he said, "I told you something wrong. The plane you're using, you know, that requires a copilot. You have to have two people up there." That kind of thing. So you either get another character or you change the pieces, you could make it this kind of a plane. So, you know. It's cool. People just like to help.
And Is that a thing where you have an acknowledgement section and you talk about …? And whether or not they allow you to say their name?
Yeah. I will ask first and say, you know, can I use your name and how would you like it? Because sometimes they want you to say, you know, detective retired de-da-de-da enlisted, and sometimes they go, I don't care, whatever you think is just fine.
I just want to read the book when it's done. I want to make sure you got it right.
Yeah, well, my Orlando cop, he does read them, and he says, you know, I've got enough of a relationship with him that I can send him a scene, and say, how is this? I wouldn't do that with a stranger. You know, I would go through with scenarios and ask questions, and we would do it all by email. But with Mark, I can just email it to him and say, "Did I get this right?" You know. And he'll say, you know, the other guy needs to go in the back door. You know. They don’t both go in the front. Or whatever.
Oh, that's fantastic. Cool. Well, thank you. This is awesome. I'm getting all kinds of great material here. We have another question from the live audience we have. Danielle asks, "Do you have any tips for aspiring first time authors?"
Write and read. And read. Read what you like, read what you want. Right now, with the ability to publish, you have to decide if you want to do it traditionally, if you want to do itthrough indie. If you're going to do it indie, don't be in a hurry. Because it won't be as good as you think it is. Get an editor, get somebody professional to look at it, because that's your only chance. Your first and last chance. If you put up stuff that you think is good, because you speak English, so why can't you write English?You'll kill your career.Find critique partners, find critique groups. It was pointed out to me, one of my critique partners lives in London. So we actually got together for fish and chips and beer at a pubacross the road from where Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin. And yes, that is in the book.
Yeah, you added that to the book, right?
Oh, I absolutely did. I hadn't written the book yet, but I went, this is gonna be in there. And he said, we've been together 14 years now. It's amazing, you know, I can't imagine, but I've been with this critique group for up to 14 years.And, you know, we pull no punches.
I guess that's really, that honesty is very important, because you don't want to put out an inferior product, right?
Right. If you've got people who are saying, "Oh, this is great. This is wonderful. This is wonderful," you know, that's not your group. I got into the group because I was writing Finding Sarah, and the moderator of the group, it was online, and she says, "Oh, don't let anything bad happen to Sarah. Don't let anything else happen to her." And well, that's you know.
Doesn't make for an interesting story, then.
Happy people in happy land does not sell books. Except maybe kids' books.
But no, but that's true. I mean, two important things happen there, right? People in peril and turmoil change, very valuable. The stakes need to be important. But then you also have the flip side is, wow, they care that much about Sarah. That's a pretty awesome thing.
Yeah. And I do appreciate that. You know, I'm really glad. Usually now it's the reviews who will tell me something. I got one, "No person in her right mind would do that. Sarah should never have done that," you know,and the only answer you can get is, I'm glad she was real for you. I made her up and she did what I wanted.
So you've got 25ish books out there. How important is continuing to go—you talked about going to Novelists, Inc. I know that I met you at Superstars writing seminars in Colorado. And how important is that writer community to a writer?
When you're starting, it's very, very important, both for just walking into a room and saying, "God, all these people are in the same boat." You know, they understand what I'm saying. It was sort of like the first time I walked into a mothers of twins meeting and saw people still alive. I thought, "Oh," you know, "there's hope."I have gone to fewer of them at this point, because you reach a point where you're saying, I'm spending a lot of time and a lot of money. None of them are cheap, especially if you have to fly and stay in a hotel, and all of that. I want to either be able to give, so I want to do a presentation, I want to be able to share what I have, or feel like I'm going to get back more. I reached the point, quite honestly, with some of the local conferences and stuff where, it was, I could have given that talk and I could have done it better. But until you reach that point, you're learning. And so that's why I used to go to conferences all over the place, and take in, you know, how to write craft and marketing and all that stuff. Because I didn't go to school and get an MFA or study marketing or any of that, you know, it's all absorbed over the years.
Well Terry, thank you so much. This has been really insightful, you shared all kinds of wonderful things that I wasn't even expecting that we were going to be talking about, which was fantastic. Where can people find out more about you, about your books, check out your blog? Because I know you have stuff for writers on there.
They can get started on my website, which should be right there at the bottom of your screen. Terryodell.com. And the blog is a link there. It's got a page on my books, it's got extra stuff, and follow my blog. We have a lot of fun on that. And at Facebook, you know, as well. It's author Terry O'Dell at Facebook.
Excellent. And lots of "thank you"s popping up. Terry, I want to also say thank you so much for spending the time with me today and everyone, have a wonderful weekend.
Self Publishing Insiders Podcast
D2D Live
D2D Spotlight
← Collaborative Writing with Zach Bohannon // Self Publishing Insiders // EP025
The History You Made: The D2D 2020 End-of-Year Roundup →
Absolutely Prolific Writing with Dean Wesley Smith // Self Publishing Insiders // EP029
Announcing D2D Payment Splitting!
Writing Humor with Terry Fallis // Self Publishing Insiders // EP023
Building the Self-Publishing Future with Joanna Penn // Self Publishing Insiders // EP022
How to schedule promotional pricing on Draft2Digital
Chilling with Author Nathan Van Coops // Self Publishing Insiders // EP021
Apple Formatting Rules & Guidelines You Should Know
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line988
|
__label__wiki
| 0.674132
| 0.674132
|
Boys & Girls Clubs - Suffolk Unit
Suffolk, VA 23434
Current Inspector: Melinda Popkin (757) 802-5281
Inspection Date: March 14, 2016 and March 16, 2016
Discussed with the Director of Operations the qualifications for a Program Director and a Program Leader.
An unannounced monitoring inspection was conducted on 3/14/16 from 4:00pm - 6:15pm. At the time of entrance there were 30 school age children in care with eight staff. An additional 55 children and two staff arrived during the inspection. Children were observed completing homework, participating in different activities in various classrooms, playing games in the gym and eating dinner in the cafeteria. Records were reviewed for five children while at the facility. The records for six staff were reviewed on 3/16/16 at the central office. There was no medication at the facility. Emergency procedures and emergency supplies were reviewed during the inspection. Areas of non-compliance are identified on the violation notice and were discussed during the exit interview. Please complete the ?plan of correction? and ?date to be corrected? for each violation cited on the violation notice and returned it to me within 10 calendar days from today. You will need to specify how the deficient practice will be or has been corrected. Just writing the word ?corrected? is not acceptable. Your plan of correction must contain: 1) steps to correct the noncompliance with the standard(s), 2) measures to prevent the noncompliance from occurring again; and 3) person(s) responsible for implementing each step and/or monitoring any preventive measure(s).
Description: Based on a review of five children's records, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that they maintain and keep at the center a complete record for each child enrolled that contains all required information. Evidence: 1. The record for child #1, present during the inspection, did not contain the addresses for the two designated people to call in an emergency in a parent can not be reached. 2. The record for child #4, present during the inspection, did not contain the addresses for the two designated people to call in an emergency in a parent can not be reached.
: Training will be held with all Front Desk qualified personnel the procedure for registering new members, including obtaining the proper documentation, acceptable application completion, and the proper place to store records. At the end of each month, Front desk supervisor will walk through to check that all new membership files are intact and signed off after review by Service Director by the 28th of each month. A licensing meeting will be held on April 1st with the Director of Operations to go over all the new licensing standards as well as any licensing updates
Description: Based on a review of the facility's emergency supplies, it was determined that the facility did not ensure that all required emergency supplies are kept at the facility. Evidence 1. There was not a working battery-operated radio at the facility during the inspection. 2. Staff #7 (Program Director) stated he was unable to locate the radio during the inspection.
: A new battery-operated radio will be purchased and kept locked in a designated area within the Program Director?s office. A monthly inventory of emergency supplies will be conducted to include radios, flashlights, and first aid kits to ensure that all supplies are accounted for and in proper working condition.
Description: Based on a review of the emergency drill log, the facility did not ensure that a record of the shelter-in-place drills were maintained for one year. Evidence: 1. There was no written documentation on the emergency drill log to demonstrate that an emergency practice drill was completed during the month of February 2016. 2. Staff #1 and staff #7 (Program Director) confirmed that an emergency practice drill had been completed during the month of February 2016, but they forgot to record it.
: Date of emergency drill will be recorded in log based on known documented date. Future emergency drill logs will be documented immediately after drill is completed. At the end of each month, Front desk supervisor and Program Director will ensure that emergency drill logs are kept current based on scheduled monthly drill requirements.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line990
|
__label__cc
| 0.733567
| 0.266433
|
U.S. greenhouse gas emissions fell in 2019, but face a future bump from oil and gas
Posted in Environment and Emissions, Generation, Oil and Natural Gas, Trending Topics
Energize Weekly, January 15, 2020
The burgeoning U.S. oil and gas and petrochemical sectors are set to add greenhouse gas emissions over the next five years – even as they decline for the power sector, according to two analysis of the country’s emissions.
In 2019, U.S. greenhouse gas emissions fell 2.1 percent, a decline almost entirely due to a record 18 percent drop in coal consumption, according to an analysis by the Rhodium Group. Coal demand was at its lowest level since 1975.
As the utility industry shifted to natural gas generation, some of the drop in coal emissions was offset, but power sector emissions still dropped overall by nearly 10 percent.
The performance of other sectors and the prospects for the future are more problematic, according to Rhodium and a second study by the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).
In 2019, the other economic sectors showed far less progress in curtailing emissions. Transportation emissions were down 0.3 percent over 2018 emissions, but industrial emissions were up 0.6 percent. Direct emissions from buildings rose 2.2 percent, and emissions from sectors including agriculture, land use and waste were up 4.4 percent.
At 5,783 million metric tons, 2019’s U.S. greenhouse gas emissions were up slightly from 2016 and were about 12 percent below 2005 levels.
Rhodium said the U.S. is at risk of missing its Copenhagen Accord target of a 17 percent reduction by 2020 and the Paris Agreement target of 26 to 28 percent by 2025.
That will be made all the more difficult by a projected boom in oil and gas activity and a surge in emissions from those sectors, according to the EIP.
The two sectors reported emitting 764 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gases in 2018, an 8 percent increase since 2016. Projected growth in oil and gas production and new chemicals plants could add another 227 million tons of emissions by 2025, based on federal data.
That would bring total emissions close to one billion tons annually, equal to the greenhouse gas output from 218 large, coal-fired power plants, according to the report.
The EIP’s projections were made using the maximum allowable emissions under the permits issued or requested for new facilities between 2012 and November 2019 under the federal Clean Air Act.
Oil production is projected by the U.S. Energy Information Administration to increase 31 percent between 2018 and 2025, and natural gas production to rise 24 percent during the same period.
Production and emissions are focused in shale basins centered in Texas, Oklahoma, North Dakota and Pennsylvania. The Permian Basin in Southeast New Mexico and West Texas is now the world’s most productive oil field, with an output of more than 4.3 million barrels per day on average in 2019, accounting for about 50 percent of U.S. oil production.
In 2018, the oil and gas industry accounted for 349 million tons of emissions, a 13 percent increase over two years.
Among the actions driving a projected increase in emissions are:
Plans by liquefied natural gas (LNG) companies for 18 new export terminals which could add 80 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions. In 2018, LNG terminals accounted for just 7.4 million tons of emissions.
Permits for 15 new refineries, which could add 12.8 million tons of greenhouse gases a year. Between 2016 and 2018, annual refinery emissions remained relatively flat at about 205 million tons.
Permits issued or requested for 37 petrochemical or plastics projects that could add another 63.5 million tons of emissions annually. Between 2016 and 2018, emissions from the sector rose 8 percent to 209.2 million tons.
“The U.S. is already struggling to meet climate commitments and transition to a low-carbon future,” the report contends. “The industries responsible for driving fossil fuel extraction and production need to be held more fully accountable for their actions and the consequences of those actions.”
Global energy consumption set to rise 50 percent by 2050 led by rapid growth in Asia, EIA says
Tri-State, facing economic, political pressures, moves to close its last two coal-fired plants
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line997
|
__label__cc
| 0.530796
| 0.469204
|
PECIUKAS, VAIDOTAS
Zalgiris 7 Guard
Height: 1.99 Born: 3 April, 1982 Nationality: Lithuania
Totals 3 0 11:30 0 0/0 0/0 0/0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
Averages 3 0 3:50 0 0% 0% 0% 0.3 0 0.3 0.7 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0.7
2 vs Eldo Napoli 1:00
10 at Winterthur FC Barcelona 5:15 1 -1
12 at CSKA Moscow 5:15 1 1 2 3
3 Totals 11:30 0 0/0 0/0 0/0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 2
Average 3:50 0 0% 0% 0% 0.3 0 0.3 0.7 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0.7
Index rating 3 CSKA Moscow vs. Zalgiris Kaunas 1/17/2007
Points 0 Zalgiris Kaunas vs. Cedevita Olimpija Ljubljana 11/15/2007
Offensive rebounds 1 CSKA Moscow vs. Zalgiris Kaunas 1/17/2007
Defensive rebounds 0 Zalgiris Kaunas vs. Cedevita Olimpija Ljubljana 11/15/2007
Total rebounds 1 CSKA Moscow vs. Zalgiris Kaunas 1/17/2007
Assists 2 CSKA Moscow vs. Zalgiris Kaunas 1/17/2007
Steals 0 Zalgiris Kaunas vs. Cedevita Olimpija Ljubljana 11/15/2007
Blocks 0 Zalgiris Kaunas vs. Cedevita Olimpija Ljubljana 11/15/2007
Minutes 5 CSKA Moscow vs. Zalgiris Kaunas 1/17/2007
Played high-school basketball at Montgomery Catholic HS.
Played college basketball at Weatherford JC (2001-02) and at Hawaii (2002-05).
Moved to Lithuania for the 2005-06 season, signed by Neptunas Klaipeda.
Signed for the 2006-07 season by BC Zalgiris Kaunas.
Won the 2006-07 Lithuanian National Championship with BC Zalgiris Kaunas.
Won the 2007 Lithuanian Federation Cup with BC Zalgiris Kaunas.
Has been member of the Lithuanian U-18 and U-20 National Team.
Played at the 2000 European Championship.
Played at the 2002 European U-20 Championship.
Has been member of the Lithuanian University National Team.
Played at the 2005 World University Games.
2006-07 Zalgiris 3 0 0 0/0 0 0/0 0 0/0 0 1 0 2 0
Totals 3 0 0 0/0 0 0/0 0 0/0 0 1 0 2 0
Averages 3 0 0 0/0 0 0/0 0 0/0 0 0.3 0 0.7 0
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line998
|
__label__cc
| 0.722674
| 0.277326
|
Bosnia?s first wind farm
To be located at Tomislavgrad in the west of the country, the wind farm is to comprise 22 wind turbines with the output of 2MW each, thus generating a total of 44 MW. The farm, called Mesihovina, is planned for construction near the southern town of Tomislavgrad. It will include 22 wind turbines with an expected annual production capacity of 128,527 MW. Over the past few years Germany has provided more than 200 million euros for the development of Bosnia’s energy sector.
Construction of the proposed project is planned in the district of Tomislavgrad. The wind energy park consists of three main rows stretching from the south-east to the north-west, following the highest points of a ridge. 22 turbines of around 2 MW are proposed, with a total wind power of 44 MW.
The towers, turbines and accompanying plant will be transported to the location by special lorries able to carry extreme loads. The towers will be transported in parts and assembled on the site with the help of a crane. Each wind turbine will need a total of 8-9 lorries and a minimum road width of 5 metres to allow the lorry to manoeuvre.
An approximate surface area of 15x15x2.5 m will be excavated in order to lay the foundation for each wind turbine. This will allow full earth encapsulation of the foundation. A so-called plateau (flat area) will be made at the installation site of each wind turbine. The purpose of the plateau is to facilitate assembly by ensuring sufficient space for fitting of the tower, generators and propellers. The space is also useful for movement of the lorries and crane. The surface area of the plateau will be approximately 50×50 m in diameter for each assembly location.
The parts of the wind turbines and accompanying plant will be transported by special lorries to the assembly location. A purpose-built crane, able to lift heavy loads, will be used to lift the parts and will facilitate installation of the wind turbines on their sites. A trench will be dug along the internal road linking the wind turbines in the wind park to contain medium tension cables and other electric connections. This trench is typically 80 cm wide and 1 m deep. The building to contain the control and measuring instruments, the switchboard for medium tension, the remote monitoring and control system, telecommunications and other equipment will take up an area of around 120 m2.
The production of electric energy, on the basis of the proposed turbine type, wind farm type, spatial arrangement of the turbines and wind assessment carried out, is assessed at 128,527 GWh.
The Mesihovina wind farm is situated immediately below Duvanjsko Polje in a region of the Grabovica mountain range. This area falls within the sub-mediterranean landscape, i.e. the sub-mediterranean rocky ground ecosystem. A layer of dense thickets at the location contains hazel (Corylus avellana). The layer of thickets also sporadically contains the following species: spindle (Evonymus europea), wild rose (Rosa arvensis), and hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna). Herbaceous plants present here are hellebore (Helleborus multifidus), horse-tail (Equisteum sp.), plantain (Plantago holosteum), milfoil (Achillea millefolium), lady’s bedstraw (Galium verum), clustered bellflower (Campanula glomerata), fens ruby (Euphorbia cyparissias) and others. Endemic species have not been noted at this location.
The location for construction of the wind park is in south-western Bosnia, a mountainous region made up of karst valleys: the Glamoè, Livanj i Duvanjska valleys. Mesihovina is part of the Dinara mountain, in which can be distinguished anticline, syncline groups of flexure and individual flexure. The Midena mountain range represents the south-eastern part of the Dinara tectonic unit. Mesihovina includes the hilly areas of the Midena mountain range, made of upper thick layered cretaceous limestone with chondrodont. The layers are 30-50 cm deep.
Hydro-geologically the karst is permeable, with fractured rocks and porous permeability. The dolomites are a partial hydro-geological barrier which, depending on their position in relation to the geological pole, may play a role as supporting layered barriers. The ground represents a firm and hard base for works and a suitable foundation for the work. The firmness of the limestone varies from 80 to 110 MPa. The dynamic quality is well balanced and dolomites can be distinguished where the significant variability of those parameters is directly related to the degree of grusification of the rocks.
The operation of a wind turbine creates sound due to the flow of air around the blades and the column (aerodynamic noise) and sound from movement of the mechanism (mechanical noise). Modern wind turbines are extremely quiet and as a rule the noise of a large modern wind turbine is completely obscured by the noise of the wind at a distance of 200 metres.
Computer modelling was carried out in order to assess the real impacts of noise on the nearest settlements. The results showed that the noise level in the nearest settlements will be under 35 dB(A) except for the settlements of Æuræiæa and Gornji Brišnik where the sound level may reach 44 dB(A), which is still below the permitted limit of 50 dB(A). It can be concluded that noise will not have negative impacts on the local population and environment.
The proposed project comprises the construction of the Mesihovina wind farm with an installed capacity of 44 MW at a location in the district of Tomislavgrad. The project is particularly significant as it allows the investor, JP EP HZHB, to better satisfy the electric energy supply requirements of the area it services, without excess reliance on importation.
The chosen location is registered in the district registers as a forestry land area – even though vegetation is limited – far from protected areas or areas of special ecological interest. Therefore very limited impacts on the natural environment can be expected. The visual impacts, and impacts arising as a result of shadow flickering and the emission of noise have been assessed using computer models and taking account of the proximity of neighbouring settlements. In all cases such impacts have been assessed as negligible.
http://www.eib.org/attachments/pipeline/20070438_nts2_en.pdf
http://www.bei.org/attachments/pipeline/20070438_eia_en.pdf
Previous PostBasin Electric purchases doubled Wilton wind production in North DakotaNext PostMitsubishi makes history by supplying mass produced electric vehicles
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line999
|
__label__cc
| 0.642819
| 0.357181
|
Theolia: Strong increase in sales of electricity
Increase in installed capacities managed for own account and on behalf of third parties
During the year 2011, THEOLIA commissioned for own account the Gargouilles wind farm for a capacity of 18.4 MW in France. The commissioning has been progressive between June and September 2011.
At the same time, the Group commissioned on behalf of a third party, in September 2011, a 18.4 MW wind farm on sites next to the Gargouilles one.
In the context of its activity of "trading" of operational wind farms in Germany, the Group commissioned 3 wind farms during the first quarter of 2011, for a cumulative capacity of 8 MW for own account. At the end of December 2011, the Group sold a 4 MW operating wind farm.
In total, THEOLIA commissioned a net capacity of 22.4 MW for own account during 2011. Installed capacities for own account thus reached 306 MW as of December 31, 2011, compared with 283 MW as of December 31, 2010.
Capacities managed for third parties rose from 586 MW as of December 31, 2010 to 604 MW as of December 31, 2011.
Pursuing a dynamic development
To maintain a sustained pace in the commissioning of wind farms, THEOLIA started, during the second half of 2011, the construction of a 10 MW wind farm in Italy and a 15 MW wind farm in France. The one in France has been sold, in December 2011, to the investment vehicle THEOLIA Utilities Investment Company, of which THEOLIA holds a 40% interest.
During the second half of 2011, the Group also secured a new building permit to install a wind farm with an estimated capacity of 18 MW in France.
Finally, THEOLIA launched the development of a 300 MW wind project in Morocco, jointly with the Moroccan Office National de l’Electricité. Tenders for turbine supply and construction works will be launched soon.
The revenue from the Sales of electricity for own account activity reached 47.1 million euros in 2011, an increase of +26% compared to 2010. This strong growth reflects the dynamism of the pace of the Group’s wind farm commissioning in 2010 and 2011. The Sales of electricity for own account activity thus benefitted, for the first time, from a full year of operation of the Giunchetto wind farm, with a net capacity of 15 MW for the Group, that has been commissioned in October 2010, as well as from the effect of the commissioning of wind farms carried out in 2011.
In 2011, the Group’s installed capacities for own account grew by +8%. The trend that appeared in the first half of 2011 showing that the revenue from the Sales of electricity for own account grows faster than the installed capacity, is confirmed and speeds up.
The revenue from the Operation activity amounted to 6.2 million euros in 2011, up by +26%. As for the Sales of electricity for own account activity, the Operation activity benefitted from the full year operation of wind farms managed on behalf of third parties since 2010, as well as from the effect of the commissioning on behalf of a third party of a 18.4 MW wind farm in September 2011 in France.
The revenue for the Development, construction, sale activity amounted to 12.6 million euros in 2011. The revenue from this activity over the period mainly includes the sale to a third party of a 12 MW wind project in France, the sale of a 4 MW operating wind farm in Germany, as well as development and construction services for third parties in France. Wind farm and project sale prices are not disclosed.
It is reminded that during 2010, THEOLIA sold 72 MW. Since the second half of 2010, the Group has reduced the pace of disposals in order to favor sustainable revenue generated from the sales of electricity for own account.
It is also noted that the sale of the Magremont project to the investment vehicle THEOLIA Utilities Investment Company, that occurred in December 2011, is not recognized as revenue. The impact of this sale will be recorded in the "Other operating income" item in the 2011 consolidated income statement. For wind projects sold by THEOLIA to the investment vehicle, THEOLIA carries out the construction and operation of the wind farms on behalf of the vehicle. The Group will be paid for these tasks which will be registered as revenue.
The Non-wind activity registered a revenue of 1.6 million euros in 2011, produced by the solar park in Germany.
Next financial publication
THEOLIA will publish its 2011 annual results on March 29, 2012 after market.
THEOLIA is an independent producer of wind energy, active over the entire wind power value chain. The Group develops, builds and operates wind farm plants in four main countries: France, Germany, Italy and Morocco. In total, the Group operates 910 MW for its own account and for third parties.
www.theolia.com
Previous PostEnvia Systems claims energy density record for lithium-ion batteriesNext PostElectric vehicles can cost 9 to 12 percent less to operate than diesel engines
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1000
|
__label__wiki
| 0.564669
| 0.564669
|
Google DoubleClick Event Looks at Future of Digital Advertising
By: Todd R. Weiss | May 26, 2014
Jeffrey Katzenberg, the CEO of DreamWorks Animation, will be one of the guest speakers at the annual DoubleClick event on June 4, which will explore the future of digital advertising.
Google's DoubleClick unit will hold its annual online DoubleClick event on June 4 for advertising executives and digital marketers, including guest speaker Jeffrey Katzenberg, the CEO of DreamWorks Animation.
The free event, which will be live streamed online, will run from 12:30 p.m. EDT to 1:45 p.m. EDT and will also include presentations from Nikesh Arora, the chief business officer at Google, and Neal Mohan, the vice president of display advertising at Google, according to a recent post on the Google DoubleClick Advertisers Blog.
"Digital is no longer just another marketing channel," the post states. "It's a medium that's changing the art of storytelling and reinventing the way companies connect with consumers."
This year's event will look at how the medium will continue to evolve in the future, according to event organizers.
Why Site Search Can Make or Break a Business
Elastic NV Search: Product Overview and Insight
To participate, virtual attendees can register to watch the live stream broadcast or receive a link to watch the recorded event at a later time, according to Google.
Viewers can also watch last year's Think DoubleClick event to learn about last year's theme, Think DoubleClick, which focused on helping online advertisers gain insights into the latest online ad trends. The 2013 event featured speakers from myriad successful online advertisers and publishers, including Coca-Cola, Omnicom Digital, Forbes Media and CBS Interactive, according to an earlier eWEEK report.
Google's DoubleClick unit, which serves up graphical ads to users as they conduct searches, makes the bulk of its revenue on search ads. The annual event was formerly known as DoubleClick Insights.
Google acquired DoubleClick after making a $3.1 billion bid for the company back in 2007. Acquiring DoubleClick provided digital ad and search leader Google with plenty of new firepower, including the ability to serve graphical display ads in addition to the company's text-based links. DoubleClick's technology lets advertisers and publishers deliver ads once they have agreed to terms, and provides statistics relating to those ads.
Privacy and Internet advocates were not happy about the acquisition of DoubleClick and its approval by the Federal Trade Commission at the time, citing concerns that it would give Google too much power over the data around search.
When DoubleClick was first on the market in 2007, reports circulated that Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL were also interested in buying the company, according to an earlier eWEEK report.
Google regularly offers special events and training sessions for digital marketers as part of its ongoing services to its clients.
In April 2014, Google enhanced its AdWords features for digital marketers with improved customer re-engagement features, enhanced conversion measurement tools and other key enterprise tools to help digital marketers get more out of their ad-based campaigns, especially those aimed at mobile users. The improved re-engagement features were aimed at helping digital marketers keep their customers involved with using an app even after they download and install it on their mobile devices. The enhanced measurement tools allow digital marketers to measure conversions across the entire lifecycle of the app, from installation by the consumer to re-engagement when they use it again and for measuring their in-app purchases.
In March 2014, Google announced a series of online webinars to teach new skills to digital marketers who use Google's DoubleClick ad platform. The webinars, which continue through June, aim to help teach digital marketers how to use DoubleClick more effectively to enable their businesses to generate more clicks and more revenue. The webinars range from the fundamentals of DoubleClick Campaign Manager (DCM) for rookies to presentations on platform changes from previous versions and advanced sessions on reporting, using in-stream video and more, according to an eWEEK report.
In June 2013, Google bolstered its DoubleClick digital advertising and marketing platform with some key upgrades, including a new ad campaign manager and social media integration with Wildfire. The new features were aimed at helping online advertisers use digital media more effectively and successfully, according to Google.
The first part of the improvements was the replacement of the former DoubleClick for Advertisers interface with a new DoubleClick Campaign Manager, which Google called the biggest upgrade to the platform's core ad server in the 15 years since it was begun. The new social media features have been added to the DoubleClick platform through integration that's being built using Wildfire's social media platform, which Google acquired in 2012.
In September 2013, Google launched a new DoubleClick for Advertisers (DFA) Academy to provide more advice and self-paced training for its DoubleClick advertising service customers to reap even better results from their online ads in Google Search and elsewhere. The online academy provides help for general questions as well as more detailed, specific inquiries. The online DFA Academy is a self-paced learning path designed to guide users through core help articles and online training courses. It is designed around "checklists" that participants can use to mark their progress and new competencies before moving on to the next lessons and skills.
Previous Why Vint Cerf Thinks Net Security Should Go Back to...
Next Microsoft Offering Tablet Makers 'Free' Windows 8.1...
Yahoo's Earnings Exceed Expectations but Ad Revenue...
DAILY VIDEO: Yahoo's earnings report shows ad revenue is still eroding; Intel's record Q3 revenue...
Google Rolls Out 'Rich Cards' Search Results Format
DAILY VIDEO: Google introduces 'rich cards' for content previews in Search; Dell launches new...
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1001
|
__label__cc
| 0.609701
| 0.390299
|
← Jackson, Wyoming: “Slowly rotating block slide” begins on recently developed butte above town transportation artery
Today, the day before the Cardinal Grand Cross takes effect: New false flag psyops distraction foreshadowed? →
Lots of references to “multipolar,” “multicultural” “multilateral” etc. BUT: world still trembles on the brink.
Posted on April 19, 2014 by Ann Kreilkamp
Which made me decide to reblog a post from two years ago and one month ago, exactly: March 19, 2012. The world is still hesitating, it appears. Empires do not go down with but a whimper.
Here’s one of the current “multi” posts. Via Rose.
Press TV: Dollar Dying: Multipolar world in the offing
BTW: That rapidly approaching “multi” world? Hmmm. It may turn out to be other than it seems. Check out various posts on the new site philosophyofmetrics.com for a profound look at centralizing forces at the heart of the coming “multi-lateral” world.
What has changed in the last two years? Well, take me for example: I can still laugh and cry and sing, though I’m hopefully a bit less naive and yes, decidedly more weary of bullshit, my own and others. Plus, my perspective has grown much more complex, intricate and kaleidoscopic. Hopefully my heart is open and expanding. I still have trouble sleeping . . .
And you? How have you and your perspective changed in the last two years? I’d love to see your comments.
Are we all still trembling on the brink?
Vaclav Havel, prophet: Now, as our world (finally) blossoms into multipolarity, it hesitates between confrontations and partnerships
by Ann Kreilkamp
exopermaculture
Back in 1989 when the Berlin Wall fell, humanity was stunned into the realization of its own oneness. The tense bi-polar standoff between the U.S. and its mirror image, the S.U. (Soviet Union) that had defined the geo-political “balance of power” had suddenly blinked out. No longer divided by that rigid, symbolic, and very real, high, thick stone wall, the world unexpectedly, and with a great shout and shudder, collapsed into unity.
That same transcendent year, poet and playwright Vaclav Havel led Czechoslovakia in its non-violent “Velvet Revolution” and then stepped up to be his country’s first non-Communist elected president since 1948.
I remember a speech that he gave, not long afterward. He spoke of how we had now shifted from a “bi-polar” to a “multipolar” world. His speech was electric. It made me cry. I thought he was right. I was so thrilled.
Then something none of us foolish idealists expected happened. Instead of allowing unity’s natural diffraction into ever-arising multiplicity, neo-cons in the U.S. government and military took advantage of humanity’s sudden vulnerability, its innocence. Eisenhower’s predicted “Military Industrial Complex” stepped into the vacuum and took control. Within a few years, the world would derisively label the U.S. a “hyperpower,” its hundreds upon hundreds of bases all over the world and its endless wars all enshrined within the Defense Department’s Vision 2020: Full Spectrum Dominance.
But of course, sooner or later, all empires collapse, as this one now seems to be doing, after a singularly short run! Yes!
Now, now the world trembles on the brink of change, hesitating. Can we trust each other? Better: can we trust the universe? Can we really go there? What if? How to shift out of conflict into cooperation? How to remember the better angels of our own nature, humankind, human kind, not just individually and in our families and communities, but as those great conglomerates we call corporations and trading blocs and nation-states and regional alliances.
Let us hold all of us and all of the artificial forms we dream up to “organize” the continuously emergent, messy, patterned play of the multiverse in our trembling full hearts as we endure this great and historic shift into the paradoxical inhabitation of multi-colored, multicultural oneness.
Meanwhile, Vaclav Havel’s multipolar vision was, indeed, predictive. What brought me to think of him and and about doing this post now was a small quote buried a technical, densely written geo-political article on the website, www.leap2020.eu. Here is the quote, and I put it in bold.
March 2011 was still the unipolar world of after 1989. March 2012 is already the post-crisis multipolar world hesitating between confrontations and partnerships.
I couldn’t find the speech Havel gave in the early ’90s. But here are excerpts from a 2001 speech called, fittingly, “The Need for Transcendance in the Post-Modern World:”
The time of the domination of the white man, the European, the American or the Christian over the entire globe is over. We are now entering a new era, and it is our duty to respect one another and to work together for the benefit of all.
The fall of Communism – unexpectedly fast – brought with it an equally speedy disintegration of the bipolar division of the world. As it soon turned out, that division had concealed — like a thick curtain — the true multicoloured diversity of the contemporary world. When the curtain rose humanity suddenly found itself face-to-face with a truly multicultural and multipolar world. And more than that: we have found ourselves in a world whose only chance lies in a sensitive perception of its multipolar character; in a genuine respect for it; and, in its acceptance as the only valid point of departure toward a new type of human coexistence on this planet.
The advancement of our civilisation in the past few years — amazing and risky at the same time — has greatly added to this imperative. The world’s population continues to grow, while non- renewable resources are quickly dwindling. The world suffers from an increasing gap between the rich and the poor nations. The only global civilisation that now envelops the whole world, forcing upon it the same products, the same habits, the same patterns of behaviour and the same models of communication, brings us closer to one another but, at the same time, provokes a counter-reaction in the form of a growth of various nationalisms, fundamentalisms or fanaticisms, be they ethnic, religious, social or ideological. The information revolution enhances our global interconnection and eliminates all censorship; at the same time, however, it opens up a vast expanse of human irresponsibility. An enumeration of these global ambiguities of the contemporary development of civilisation could go on without end.
The two circumstances I have just mentioned — the end of the bipolar division of the world and the progress of our civilisation along the course that we now call globalisation — urge us to engage in a radically new way of thinking about the future world order.
It seems to me that one of the characteristic features of that order will consist of the advancement of large regional groupings, into which the nation-states of today will transfer an increasing portion of their powers. At the same time, they will apparently be compelled to pass on another segment of their powers, in an ever more distinct manner, down to a variety of smaller regions within states and self-governing bodies of those regions; to towns and villages; as well as to a number of other structures of civil society. Decentralisation and integration should thus be de facto two sides of a coin, or two pans on a pair of scales, each balancing the other. The way to confront the double-edged nature of global economic pressures, and of the momentum of our civilisation, is not an ostrich policy, isolationism, chauvinism or egocentrism, but an objective reflection of global development and a common commitment of people and nations to combating all its unfortunate and dangerous features.
This entry was posted in 2014, new economy, Reality Ramp-Up, unity consciousness, visions of the future, wild new ideas, zone zero zero. Bookmark the permalink.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1003
|
__label__cc
| 0.650648
| 0.349352
|
12 December, 2017 News 0
Bootstrapped Farmgirl Flowers Is Taking On The Flower Industry And A Host Of Venture-Backed Rivals
Christina Stembel, 39, grew up on an Indiana corn and soybean farm and didn’t go to college. Now she’s building Farmgirl Flowers in San Francisco, which will clock $15 million in revenue this year. When she launched the company in 2010, the $18 billion U.S. flower industry was dominated by four big players who offered huge selections, mostly made up of flowers shipped from overseas to small shops where about 40% of the inventory wound up in the trash because it spoiled before it could be sold. Stembel’s strategy: source flowers locally and slash waste by selling a very limited number of arrangements direct to consumers from her website. She wraps her bouquets in distinctive burlap donated by nearby coffee roasters. When she tried to raise money, she was dismissed by VCs, but she managed to bootstrap the business and now has investors approaching her. In this interview, which has been edited and condensed, she explains the impact legal marijuana is having on her business and why she thinks the company could ultimately produce $1 billion in revenue.
Susan Adams: Where did you get the idea for Farmgirl Flowers?
Christina Stembel: I was director of alumni relations at Stanford Law School and during the economic downturn in 2007 and 2008, we were doing a lot of events but the budgets were getting cut. We were spending between $100 and $200 on centerpiece flower arrangements. I started to research why the flowers cost so much, and I found that just four companies did three quarters of the flower business.
Adams: What made you think you could compete with them?
Stembel: I’d send flowers to my mom in Indiana and I was always left dissatisfied with the whole process, not just the product. I spent an hour online looking at options, to find the least ugly one. Then I’d spend $80 to $90 on that, and when she received it, it wouldn’t look anything like what I ordered. There’s even a hashtag, #flowerfail. My research also showed that younger consumers were purchasing fewer flowers.
Adams: Why would you enter a shrinking market?
Stembel: The most recent innovation was in the ’90s with ProFlowers, which started sourcing from South America instead of North America. They didn’t do anything to fix the problems I saw.
Adams: What role did waste play in your decision to start a flower company?
Stembel: Flower shops waste between 40% and 60% of their inventory. They have so many options and the owner doesn’t know what people are going to order so the flowers go bad. I came up with a model that I thought would solve all the problems. Instead of having 100 choices, we offer only a few curated options. You just get to pick the size you want. We have less than 1% waste.
Adams: How did you know your model would work as a business?
Stembel: I didn’t know, but I thought it was a great idea. I did one focus group before I quit my job. I gathered almost 50 people and showed them a bouquet I made versus three or four from the top four florists. Eighty-six percent of the people in the focus group chose my bouquet.
Adams: What are margins like?
Stembel: I think at scale, we can get them to 25%. We’re at a 2.9% net profit margin now but that’s because we’re investing all of our profit back into the company so we can grow. If we weren’t doing that we’d have a 10% to 12% net profit. 1800Flowers had a profit margin of 8% last year.
Adams: Was there anything else you considered before starting the business?
Stembel: It had to check four boxes for me. With no college degree and no network, I had to be able to bootstrap. I wanted the ability to scale big if I was going to work that hard at something. It needed to solve a real problem. And I wanted to do something good in the world, which for me was sourcing flowers locally.
Adams: Why did you care about local sourcing?
Stembel: In my research, I learned that 50% of U.S. flower farmers had gone out of business. Growing up in the agricultural industry, it was important to me to support local agriculture.
Adams: How did you fund your launch?
Stembel: I had $49,000 in my bank account. I thought it was a lot of money. It’s not. But I’d been at Stanford for seven-and-a-half years and I thought, if it’s not now, it’s never. I gave myself two years.
Adams: Where did you get your flowers?
Stembel: San Francisco has a great flower market where I could get great prices for flowers in small quantities directly from wholesalers and directly from farmers. But one of the early problems I ran into was that some farmers wouldn’t sell to me. They’d only sell to wholesalers.
Adams: Why wouldn’t farmers sell to you?
Stembel: Because their dad didn’t and their grandpa didn’t. A lot of them were like, this Internet thing, I don’t know if it’s going to be long term.
Adams: How did you market the business?
Stembel: I would take flower arrangements to coffee shops in San Francisco with little marketing cards on them. Then I’d go back to the shops and see how many cards had been taken to see if it was worth the $20 flower cost.
Adams: How was your first year?
Stembel: I did $56,000 in revenue. The second year was $276,000. The third year I started to be able to spend more money on marketing with Facebook and some with Yelp. That took us to $920,000 the third year.
Adams: How long did you work out of your apartment?
Stembel: In November 2012, my landlord found out I was running a business illegally and I had to move out. It was scary. That’s when I hired my first employee and we moved into a stall at the San Francisco flower mart.
Adams: You only hire full-time employees. Why do that when so many startups use contract workers?
Stembel: When I first started, I used an outsourced courier company for deliveries. I found they didn’t care about the product or the experience. Uber was just coming on the scene and there was a lot of discussion about independent contractors. I just didn’t feel good about it in my gut. The golden rule for me is that I want to create a company that I want to work at, that I would want to sell to, and that I would want to buy from. I wouldn’t want to work for a company that didn’t pay me well and give me benefits. We just started a 401(k) program this year. The next thing I want to provide is subsidized child care.
Adams: Was there a point when you felt you needed to raise money?
Stembel: In 2014, we had a lot of similar-looking companies popping up. There were tech guys who saw what we were doing. They were wrapping burlap bags around their flowers and delivering by bike couriers and their designs looked like ours. Even the copy on their websites looked like ours. All of them had a minimum of $9 million in venture capital. Cash flow has been a challenge for us. I honestly thought I was going to be the Friendster to their Facebook. I thought we’d be out of business in 12 months. But I was unsuccessful at raising money.
Adams: Why do you think you couldn’t raise money?
Stembel: I was asked many questions I didn’t think were appropriate. Like my age in almost every pitch. When I told them my age, they’d say, you’re older than I thought. I was told by a couple of female VCs that I should take my husband with me to pitches because it would give me more clout to have a man with me. I know there was implicit bias. Also, they weren’t the target customers. Eighty percent of people who buy flowers are women and I was pitching to a bunch of 50-something guys. And I made it very clear that all my employees were full time with benefits, I was a purpose-driven company, and that was non-negotiable.
Adams: How did funders react to your terms?
Stembel: Not well. I talked to one investor in Indiana on the phone who supposedly had a social bent. He told me that when I decided to run my company in a professional way, to give him a call, but before that he didn’t have anything to say to me. I said, why isn’t this professional? We won’t constantly be losing people and rehiring and our employees will be dedicated to us.
Adams: How long before you gave up on fundraising?
Stembel: Seven or eight months. I was spending 50% of my time on it and realized I had less than a 2% chance. Now that we’re at almost $15 million in revenue, people are coming to us. If we find the right partner who agrees with all the things we’re doing and wants to help us grow, we may bring in capital.
Adams: How much would you like to raise?
Stembel: We’ve been working on a $10 million round and they’ve been coming in at $15 million because they want more of the company. We’re trying for a $39 million to $40 million valuation.
Adams: Why do you think your competitors were able to raise money?
Stembel: For a few reasons. They were all men, and had larger founder teams than I have, and many of them have tech pedigrees. A few were communicating that they were logistics companies that just happened to be using flowers as their “test,” and on-demand delivery was a big focus among the investment community back then. So their messaging about what they were building was very different from ours. Their margins probably looked better than ours given that we make all the bouquets in-house with team members who are full-time employees with benefits.
Adams: How do you feel about the competition now?
Stembel: I was so worried a couple of years ago, I was making some decisions out of fear. Now the way I figure it is if we have the best product out there and the best customer experience, I think we’ll be OK.
Adams: Why have you stopped sourcing all your flowers locally, when you made such a big deal out of that in the beginning?
Stembel: It’s the thing that’s caused me the most angst and stomach issues. I knew when marijuana was legalized we’d have a big problem because flower farmers can lease out their greenhouse space for $1.50 to $2 a square foot for cannabis growing whereas it’s five cents a square foot for flowers. In five years, I think as many as 90% of our suppliers won’t be growing flowers for us. Also, when we order domestically, we often receive 26% of the flowers we’ve confirmed. The growers blame the weather. Now we source from farms in Latin America where they treat their employees as well or better than our U.S. farms. In Quito, Ecuador, one of the farms where we get our roses is building a school for the children of the women who work there. Our international growers deliver 99% of what we order.
Adams: Do flowers from overseas cost less than domestic flowers?
Stembel: Because of shipping, they cost about the same as if we sourced them here.
Adams: How did your customers react to you canceling one of your prime selling points?
Stembel: In January 2017, I sent a letter to our mailing list and I put it out on social media. I just explained the why and kept to the high road. I didn’t say that the flower business is an old boy’s network and some domestic suppliers were selling to my male counterparts and not to me. Then I held my breath. I was so blessed and grateful that we didn’t get a single negative response.
Adams: When did you expand deliveries beyond San Francisco, and why?
Stembel: In May 2015, but the shipping cost is high. We charge $25 but we subsidize $7.40 per package. In the first year, we couldn’t afford to ship more than 200 long-distance orders a day. So I’d have to cut off orders. When we started long-distance shipments, we didn’t even announce it and we sold out in 14 minutes.
Adams: Why subsidize shipping when you could just charge the full amount to your customers?
Stembel: Nobody is going to pay $40 for shipping. I did some focus groups and really $18 is what we need to charge for shipping. When we do, our sales will probably increase by 20%. We want to open a distribution center in the East.
Adams: What’s been your most effective marketing strategy now that you’ve expanded?
Stembel: Digital. Mostly Facebook and Instagram.
Adams: How big do you want to be?
Stembel: I think we can get to $1 billion in revenue.
Adams: That’s a lot of revenue. How would you defend that number to a VC?
Stembel: With a financial model that shows how we get there.
Original post from Forbes
Publication date: Dec-03-2017
Laws of attraction: Pollinators use multiple cues to identify flowers across continents
Carpinteria still rosy after California wildfires spare flower farms
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1004
|
__label__wiki
| 0.550777
| 0.550777
|
The first flexible, fiber-optic solar cell that can be woven into clothes
By Sebastian Anthony on December 7, 2012 at 8:13 am
An international team of engineers, physicists, and chemists have created the first fiber-optic solar cell. These fibers are thinner than human hair, flexible, and yet they produce electricity, just like a normal solar cell. The US military is already interested in weaving these threads into clothing, to provide a wearable power source for soldiers.
In essence, the research team started with optical fibers made from glass — and then, using high-pressure chemical vapor deposition, injected n-, i-, and p-type silicon into the fiber, turning it into a solar cell. Functionally, these silicon-doped fiber-optic threads are identical to conventional solar cells, generating electricity from the photovoltaic effect. Whereas almost every solar cell on the market is crafted out of 2D, planar amorphous silicon on a rigid/brittle glass substrate, though, these fiber-optic solar cells have a 3D cross-section and retain the glass fiber’s intrinsic flexibility.
The lead researcher, John Badding of Penn State University, says the team has already produced “meters-long fiber,” and that their new technique could be used to create “bendable silicon solar-cell fibers of over 10 meters in length.” From there, it’s simply a matter of weaving the thread into a fabric. Badding says that the military is “interested in designing wearable power sources for soldiers in the field,” but unfortunately he falls short of actually demonstrating some woven fabric. As we can see in the picture above, the solar cell fiber certainly looks flexible — but we’ll have to take Badding’s word for it that it can turn right angles, and withstand everyday garment stresses, without shattering.
Moving forward, the potential for flexible, woven solar cells is enormous. On the most basic, immediate level, you can imagine a baseball cap or t-shirt that can recharge your smartphone. As we move towards bionic implants and other biomedical devices, though, there is a very pressing need to develop a wearable power source — and fiber-optic solar cells could certainly be it.
These fibers also have two other intriguing properties that still need to be investigated. Due to their three-dimensional cross-section, they can absorb sunlight from any direction — unlike their conventional, 2D siblings that lose much of their efficiency when the sun sinks below a certain angle. Further, according to Pier Sazio, another member of the research team, they used the same silicon injection method to embed photodetectors inside the fiber. Sazio doesn’t extrapolate on what this might lead to, but it’s fun to speculate: A wearable computer with built-in solar charging and high-speed networking? Neat.
Now read: LG produces the first flexible cable-type lithium-ion battery, or Creating cheap solar panels with an ion cannon
Research paper: DOI: 10.1002/adma.201203879 – “Silicon p-i-n Junction Fibers”
fiber solar cell
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1006
|
__label__cc
| 0.64349
| 0.35651
|
Cardzone To Open In Frenchgate
Frenchgate Shopping Centre has announced that a brand new Cardzone store will be opening on Saturday 8th August.
The new store will be located on the Upper Mall next to River Island – in the unit previously occupied by Clintons.
Cardzone specialise in greeting cards and gifts – and is also home to a wide variety of popular brands, including Yankee Candle, TY, Disney and Willow Tree.
Originally founded in Sheffield in 2005, the family-run business now has over 600 employees at locations all over the country.
To celebrate the opening, Cardzone is providing several introductory offers including two Yankee Candle Large Jars for £30 and 20% off the Disney Traditions and Willow Tree Figurine ranges.
Karen Staniforth, Assistant General Manager at Frenchgate, said: “We are thrilled to welcome Cardzone into the centre – a fellow Yorkshire-based business is the ideal addition for Frenchgate.
“We’re looking forward to having one of the largest card retailers in the UK amongst us and we believe Cardzone will be a big hit among our customers.”
Alice Bartlett, Design and Marketing Executive at Cardzone, said: “We are excited to be opening up again in Doncaster. We are proud to offer a huge range of greeting cards, home fragrance and gifts.
“We pride ourselves on offering top brands at affordable prices and will be offering exclusive cards, Yankee Candles, Disney Traditions and many more big brand names.”
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1020
|
__label__wiki
| 0.725856
| 0.725856
|
Senator tapped for panel on Dodd-Frank
State Sen. Jack Murphy of Cumming has been invited as a panelist to discuss the Dodd-Frank Act and its impact on federal and state law’s relationship with national banking institutions.
The panel discussion is scheduled for Thursday, the first day of a two-day conference in Orlando, Fla., sponsored by the American Conference Institute.
The event is the 12th National Conference on Consumer Finance Class Actions and Litigation, according a news release.
The Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act is federal legislation signed into law by President Obama on July 21, 2010.
In part, it says that states are closer to the areas where banking abuses occur, therefore state law rather than federal law should take precedence when investigating banks.
Murphy, a Republican who represents District 27, serves as chairman of the Banking and Financial Institutions Committee.
According to the release, Murphy disagrees with Dodd-Frank and says national banks operate over state lines and clearly should be regulated by federal law.
"Although, in most cases, I would agree that states’ decisions should be considered before federal decisions, interstate banking is a big exception," he said.
"I agree with the [Office of the Comptroller of Currency] that says national banks are not subject to state laws when those laws obstruct the abilities of banks to do their business."
The OCC is a division of the U.S. Department of Treasury that supervises national banks.
Murphy said the Dodd-Frank Act is unconstitutional and likely will be overturned or repealed.
"When the banking crisis hit, the federal government began to look for scapegoats," he said. "Although I don’t want to see the rapid, no-holds-barred banking expansion that we saw in the 1990s, over-regulation is not the answer."
To Murphy, rebounding from this recession "will not come from stifling banks’ activities."
"Banks do not want to close their doors. They do not want to fail," he said. "We must trust the free market — and trust the regulations that were ignored in the 1990s and 2000s — to regain our financial strength.
"New regulations will only slow the process, as we are seeing by the lack of loans currently on the market."
Woman opens new business selling homemade caramel corn
Here’s how you can help convince Trader Joe’s to come to Forsyth County
This Forsyth County company is creating parts for the “most lethal” fighter jet in history
Here’s the new name for Country Folks Superstore
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1023
|
__label__cc
| 0.738035
| 0.261965
|
Home Our people Why people are returning home: four unsuccessful emigration stories
Why people are returning home: four unsuccessful emigration stories
02.08.2018, 09: 00 EST A source: Big Village
Emigration beckons today more than ever: fabulous opportunities for education and careers, crazy parties in European clubs, good weather, picturesque cityscapes and no burden in the form of tedious relatives with their problems and deadly bureaucracy. The majority understands that all this is just a billboard, and the reality is harsh for those who have come.
Edition "Big Village»Talked to people who returned to Russia after living abroad, and found out how good the guests were and why they returned.
Nurlan Eraliev, USA
I first came to the USA in 2007 under the Work & Travel program. A year after returning, acquaintances unexpectedly offered a job in an American company with a three-year contract. I just graduated from the university and, of course, agreed - if not now, then never. I was appointed a social worker: I helped families who took adopted children from the countries of the former USSR. My girlfriend went to the States with me.
Everything that is in the USA is made for people, from convenient parking of a cafe to perfectly trimmed lawn at home. You come out - everything is beautiful, people are smiling, but it seems that this is all unreal. Just did not get used to local food. Sweets are always sugary, meat - very fat. Natural products are much more expensive, and you can get them only in special stores.
In the US, stress levels are much lower than in Russia. Many Americans older than 50 never left their hometown and even more so from the country. You reach some comfortable level and this is enough for you: home - work - gas station - mall, everything.
In émigrés, those who you have not communicated with even for a thousand years suddenly remember about you
Nevertheless, I liked it in the States, but soon we had to part with the girl, and starting a new relationship turned out to be a problem. Russian-speaking women refused the relationship: they did not come here for this. I didn’t want to get acquainted with American women. Then I stopped liking what I was doing. I even began to compare myself with friends from Russia: they say, the guys are growing up there, and you spend time incomprehensibly on what.
Life in emigration is not beautiful photographs that are not related to reality. When you are in another country, all comrades suddenly remember you, with whom you have not talked for a thousand years. As soon as I came back, my success among friends was lost. I became mine again, and many people stopped communicating with me.
In general, my main mistake was the thought that it would be easier abroad. As a result, I was tormented by loneliness and the feeling that I was not doing what I should do. That's why I came back. Almost immediately I met my future wife, and now I am absolutely happy. I have a family, and I no longer want to run somewhere.
Nikita Artemyev, Morocco
My wife and I left for Morocco in 2008, on the initiative of my mother, who had lived in two countries for a long time and constantly invited me to visit her. In Samara, I was engaged in repairing telephones and opened points throughout the city - there were enough skills to work in another country. Generally, in Morocco, an extensive job market, and, for example, doctors who work in Russia for 20 thousand rubles, they will swim in luxury. The country has a very bad education system, and our diplomas are quoted in almost all areas. It is even a shame that so many graduates in their homeland cannot find a job, and somewhere in Africa they are super-demanded. Elementary French and technical specialty - the perfect combo. But I had it all a little different.
Morocco is a former colony of France. I came to the country with English, which almost nobody speaks there. I had to sit down for three months in a suburb of Casablanca and learn French from scratch. In addition, Arabic is in demand in everyday life, and, willy-nilly, you begin to adapt.
In the country of oranges, I decided to do what I can best, and with a familiar Arab I opened a shop for repairing and selling phones in the center of Rabat. Marrokantsy adore Europeans, and I became something of a walking advertisement - everyone came to look at the Russian blonde, as a wonder, and was often invited to visit. While communicating with local people, I found an investor who wanted to open terminals all over Africa and was looking for software engineers. Then I left my store and joined his startup.
Nobody cares much about their careers here, and I was scared with this measured way of life.
As part of the economy, Marroko lags behind Russia by 5-10 years, so any marketing ideas here are received with enthusiasm. It’s quite easy to make money in the country, but no one shows off from it - religion does not encourage. There is no reason to live for show. Bought bananas, and already happy. You can’t buy today - Inshallah (“God forbid” - ed.), Buy tomorrow.
Local, by the way, tend to emigrate to France, Germany and Norway, plow for little-paid jobs, for example, nannies, and then build two-storeyed mansions at home. French, on the contrary, is profitable to work in Morocco. They open their cafes and restaurants, which combine innovative ideas and excellent quality local products.
Here, no one is particularly soared about his career, and this terrible lifestyle scared me terribly. I was thinking about something like that in retirement, but now I want to fuss, run, earn. In Morocco, I had a pool near the house, an ocean near by and money in my pocket, but I didn’t feel very much. First, the language barrier was clearly felt, which I was tired of. Secondly, life was too slow. My wife and I returned to Russia, to friends, but now we would like to live in two states - in Russia and where there is more sun.
Maria Bikbulatova, Czech Republic
I decided to go to the Czech Republic, because I thought that Russian realities were taking too much time and effort. Our cities are an obstacle course between points that need to be hit, and this is exhausting, as is the rudeness of those around us. I wanted to live in a friendlier city, and I chose Prague, where I went to study. It was not easy to collect the documents on time and comply with a bunch of formalities - one mistake, and you will be denied a visa.
It's one thing to come to the Czech Republic on vacation, quite another to live and work. Behind the routine to feel the unhurried rhythm of the city is almost impossible. Clean streets, people with an innate sense of tact, convenient transportation, quality products - everything is good, but, having received it, I did not become happier.
Many cannot return because they do not want to admit that they did not receive what they wanted in emigration.
I don’t know if this can be called separation from language, family and friends, but despite the fact that there are quite a lot of Russians in the Czech Republic, you feel like a stranger, and this feeling increases over time. At some point it became particularly difficult, and I decided to return.
It seems to me that many find it difficult to return, because they burned the bridges, lost their jobs, spent a lot of money and effort, and it’s just hard for them to admit that they didn’t get what they wanted. Personally, I do not feel like a loser: it just seems to me that in Russia I am more efficient and can do more. Therefore, it was easy and joyful to return, although I was sure that nostalgia in the evenings, when you could just go out and walk around the magical city, would still catch up with me.
Olga Shirokova, France
I graduated from Samara Pedagogical University and taught English and French, but I always wanted something more. So I became interested in marketing and decided to get additional education. In Russia, it is too expensive and long, so I turned to foreign programs, and eventually found an affordable option in France. Perhaps, this is the only country in Europe where you can complete a master's degree program almost for free. I remember, then paid only 400 euros per year. I collected a dossier, interviewed in four languages on the phone, and I was enrolled.
Finding cheap official housing is almost impossible, you must have a person with French citizenship and income of several thousand euros.
I came to Paris, having in my pocket only 1000 euros that I spent in two weeks. Left with an empty wallet, I went to the nightclub for a part-time job as a dressmaker. Then in addition - a babysitter, translator, teacher. Students in France cannot work more than 20 hours a week, and while documents were being prepared for formal employment, all my part-time jobs were illegal.
Finding official housing in France is almost impossible - you need to have a guarantor, that is, a person with French citizenship and income of several thousand euros. Usually, students do not have such acquaintances, and all rent housing in university dormitories, where the room costs 700 euros. But I was lucky: through the Samara girlfriend I found a room for 350 euros per month with a view of the Eiffel Tower, but with a shared toilet and without a shower.
I looked at the French and did not understand how with such a relaxed lifestyle they manage to have a strong economy.
After six months, I managed to get an internship in the marketing department of a large company that organized fashion shows. Faced with the French at work, I was surprised how lazy they were. Sometimes their working day comes down to endless discussions and planning. Sometimes I looked at them and did not understand how with such a relaxed lifestyle they manage to have a strong economy in the country.
In general, I have always wanted to live in Moscow, so I did not plan to stay in France - emigrants are not expected anywhere, unless, of course, there is no good rear for you in the person of your husband or a large fortune. Did I feel good in France? Definitely, yes. Life in another country is an invaluable experience that you will not get by reading books or watching movies. When you are alone with yourself in another country, you begin to appreciate what you left at home. I consider myself a man of the world, and I feel good everywhere, but home is best - where my family is and where I am in harmony with myself. For me, this is definitely Russia.
Why did I win the green card, but two months later I returned home
Personal experience: five stages through which most immigrants to the USA pass
Why are our in the US always unhappy with everything
stdClass Object ([term_id] => 662 [name] => return [taxonomy] => post_tag [slug] => vozvrashhenie)
stdClass Object ([term_id] => 13337 [name] => Our people [taxonomy] => category [slug] => nashi-ludi)
stdClass Object ([term_id] => 13378 [name] => emigration [taxonomy] => post_tag [slug] => emigratsiya)
Martin Luther King Day: Interesting Facts About the Freedom Fighter
9 Jews who survived the Holocaust and became famous
How to write a resume to go through machine screening
Climate, taxes, entertainment: why it is worth moving to Florida in 2021
Ten best sights of the United States
The brainchild of the Stalin era: how the 'Book of tasty and healthy food' became the kitchen bible in the USSR
How long does immunity last for those who have already had COVID-19?
We ran to Obama: Ivanka Trump forbade guards to use toilets in her house
How to act if a child licks metal in the cold and stuck
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1024
|
__label__wiki
| 0.798263
| 0.798263
|
Barbara Sinatra, wife of Frank Sinatra, dead at 90
Barbara Sinatra at the National Italian American Foundation's 33rd Anniversary Awards Gala in October 2008 (left) and with her husband Frank Sinatra at a dinner table in May 1959 (right) (Photos by Hulton Archive and Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images).
FOX NEWS - Barbara Sinatra, the wife of late-singer Frank Sinatra, died Tuesday morning at her Rancho Mirage, California, home, a family spokesman told Fox News. She was 90.
The Barbara Sinatra Children’s Center director John Thoresen told Fox News Sinatra died of natural causes, and she was "comfortably surrounded by family and friends" at the time of her death.
She is survived by her son Robert Oliver Marx, his wife Hillary Roberts and her granddaughter Carina Blakeley Marx.
More from Fox News.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1025
|
__label__cc
| 0.607093
| 0.392907
|
Fort Worth officer, wife killed in motorcycle crash
FORT WORTH, Texas - A veteran Fort Worth police officer and his wife were killed Friday morning in a motorcycle crash.
It’s an emotional loss for both the department and relatives of the victims. The Fort Worth Police Department has chosen not to make any public comment on the fatal accident, which occurred when the officer was off duty. But there is no doubt the loss is weighing heavily on those who knew and respected the officer.
Husband and wife Michael and Mary Valdez took a photo Thursday night a short time before they died in a motorcycle accident.
44-year-old Michael was a veteran Fort Worth police officer and was most recently working with the departments' intelligence unit.
After a night out in Fort Worth's cultural district, the officer and his wife lost control of the Harley bike in the 3300 block of Trail Drive around 2 a.m. Both of them were riding near the street drainage opening.
Michael died at the scene. Mary passed away a short time later at the hospital.
Mary's brother from San Antonio, where the couple was from, says Michael was a very experienced rider, and the family can't imagine why he lost control.
"They've been on the bike forever. They've gone on long journeys,” Sid Ramos said. “It was just shocking when we heard how they had died on the bike. What happened to lose control of the bike?"
Michael's adult son was nearby in another vehicle when the accident happened. The couple was also parents to a 15-year-old daughter, who was home at the time.
The family says Mike and Mary enjoyed their precious moments together and helping others. They had plans to go to San Antonio this weekend for a family reunion. Now, that gathering will be a celebration of their lives.
Dallas location of Carlo's Bakery, from 'Cake Boss', has closed
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1026
|
__label__wiki
| 0.989868
| 0.989868
|
5 children, 2 adults hospitalized after driver slams into Florida school bus stop
Tribune Media Wire
TAMPA, Fla. -- Seven people were rushed to the hospital Thursday after a car struck students at a school bus stop in Tampa, police said. It was at least the fifth time in three days that children were hurt or worse at a bus stop.
The other crashes occurred in Mississippi, Indiana and a second Florida city; in another Thursday incident, a second-grader was found dead on the side of the road by his house after being run over by a vehicle traveling at a slow speed.
In the Tampa crash, witnesses said a Ford Escort driving at a high rate of speed in a residential area hit several pedestrians on the side of the street, Tampa police spokesman Eddy Durkin said. Police later said it was unclear whether the driver was speeding.
Images from the scene show backpacks scattered on the shoulder.
Two adults and five children — two with serious injuries were taken to hospitals, Durkin said. One child is in critical condition. None of the injuries are considered life-threatening, he said. Three of the children are 6 years old, one in 9 and the eldest is 12.
The 47-year-old man who was driving and who stayed at the scene has not been charged, officials said.
The students attended a combined elementary/middle school about 16 or 17 blocks — a five-minute ride — from the bus stop, fire officials told CNN affiliate WFLA.
A fire truck responding to the scene crashed en route, and two first responders were taken to a hospital, a Tampa Fire Rescue representative told WFLA.
In central Pennsylvania, authorities reported that a 7-year-old Franklin Township boy Thursday morning was found dead at a bus stop.
At first, authorities thought a passing vehicle might have hit him and the driver fled, but later they said they had ruled that out.
“Evidence has shown that the child was run over at a slow speed,” the state patrol said on Troop G’s twitter feed. “A search warrant was obtained for a vehicle that was in the area at the time. The driver has been interviewed.”
“The bus driver on route arrived at the stop discovering the situation, contacted 911 and remained at the scene until first responders arrived,” Tyrone Area School District Superintendent Cathy Harlow said on Facebook.
Thursday’s incidents come two days after a driver killed a 9-year-old girl and her two brothers who were crossing the street to catch a school bus in rural Indiana, police said.
Alivia Stahl tried to shield her younger brothers when they were struck, her uncle told CNN affiliate WRTV in Indianapolis. Another student was airlifted to a hospital in Fort Wayne.
A woman was arrested and charged with three counts of felony reckless homicide in connection with the deaths. She was released on $15,000 bail.
On Wednesday, a kindergartner was injured crossing the street to board a school bus in Tallahassee, Florida, when a 19-year-old man hit the child after realizing too late that the bus was stopped and its crossing arm was extended, police told CNN affiliate WCTV.
The teen driver was issued two traffic citations, the station reported. The boy is home and doing well, his family told WCTV.
Also Wednesday, a 22-year-old Marietta, Mississippi, man was charged with aggravated assault after fatally striking a child on a state road north of Tupelo, Mississippi Highway Patrol Capt. Johnny Poulos said.
The man, who was driving a pickup truck, hit a 9-year-old as the youngster crossed the road to get onto a school bus, police said. His bail was set at $10,000.
From 2006 to 2015, there were 1,313 people killed in school transportation-related accidents, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The majority killed were occupants in other vehicles, while about 102 victims were classified as school-age pedestrians, the agency said.
Sixty-four percent of the children killed were stuck by a bus or a vehicle serving as a bus, while 36% were hit by other vehicles, it said.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1027
|
__label__cc
| 0.710939
| 0.289061
|
Detroit teen in custody after younger brother fatally shot
Emma Ockerman
An 18-year-old man is being held by Detroit police following the fatal shooting of his 16-year-old brother early this morning.
Police were dispatched to the 700 block of Tennessee Street on the city's east side at about 1:45 a.m. Wednesday, Detroit police spokesman Dan Donakowski said. The 16-year-old suffered a fatal gunshot wound to the shoulder and was transported to an area hospital, where he died from his injuries.
►Related: On snow day, teen shoots, kills 13-year old boy in Detroit
►Related: Police: Accidental shooting prompts teen to kill himself
The 18-year-old was taken into police custody shortly after officers arrived, and is being held for questioning. He has not been charged with a crime.
Contact Emma Ockerman: eockerman@freepress.com
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1029
|
__label__wiki
| 0.566764
| 0.566764
|
Healthy Humor
The Garrett
THE GARRETT B. SMITH FOUNDATION
The Garrett B. Smith Foundation attracted the Clown Program to Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital over 20 years ago. It is currently managed by Healthy Humor and its complete funding is the Foundation's largest annual commitment.
What is a smile on a child's face worth, especially if that child is ill and in the hospital? Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital (YNHCH) knows how hard it is for children and their families to deal with an illness and hospitalization. That's why, in 1997, Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital was proud to become the first hospital in Connecticut to present the Big Apple Circus Clown Care program.
Special kind of medicine
Three days a week, a team of two professionally-trained clowns come to Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital and offer their own special type of medicine to the children, their families and the staff. The "Doctors of Humor, Laughter and Hilarity" as the clowns call themselves.
Humor offers a way for children to cope with the intrusive atmosphere of a hospital. As one clown said, "We don't do this because we get paid. It comes from inside of us. You see the corner of a child's mouth turn up and that's it. That's why we're here."
Roots in the Big Apple Circus
The Clown Care program began as a community outreach program of the Big Apple Circus, whose co-founder established the clown program in 1986 in New York after losing a brother to cancer. The program at Yale-New Haven Children's Hospital was managed by the Big Apple Circus for more than 20 years. Currently the program is managed by Healthy Humor. Healthy Humor has programs in 7 children's hospitals across the country with more than 50 clowns making children and families smile.
Clown of the Year Award
Better known to sick kids and employees around YNHCH as "Dr. Chester Drawers," Leo Desilets was honored in 2005 with the first Clown of the Year award from the Annual Professional Development Conference of the Big Apple Circus Clown Care program.
Desilets was chosen for the award over 92 other professional entertainers who worked for the Clown Care program in 16 hospitals nationally. He was presented with a golden "Leonard" award - a rubber chicken similar in design to an Oscar.
The Healthy Humor Red Nose Docs Clown Program at Yale-New Haven's Children's Hospital
Clown Guidelines:
The clowns never enter a room without permission, and know it's important to know when not to be funny. They follow all hospital policies and procedures strictly and work with staff, parents and procedures.
The GBS Foundation was featured in the Spring 2010 issue of Impact, Yale-New Haven Hospital's quarterly magazine.
Photos Courtesy of Big Apple Circus Clown Care Unit and Yale New Haven's Childrens Hospital.
Logo Designed by KEMorganbesser
© 2019 The Garrett B. Smith Foundation created with Wix.com
The Garrett B. Smith Foundation is a 501 (c) (3) public charity, Tax I.D. 06-6411358.
Email Us at info@garrettsmithfdn.org.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1032
|
__label__wiki
| 0.811275
| 0.811275
|
(Shutterstock)
With Obama's Climate Rules in Limbo, Some States Face Tough Decisions
The U.S. Supreme Court has put the Obama administration's plan to cut carbon emissions on hold.
J.B. Wogan | February 11, 2016
In a surprise move, the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday temporarily blocked new rules meant to cut carbon emissions while the legal battle over them ensues.
The Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan gives states until 2030 to reduce their carbon emissions by a third from 2005 levels. President Obama described the plan as "the single most important step America has ever taken in the fight against global climate change."
But attorneys general from 26 states, plus utilities and coal companies, immediately challenged the federal rules last year, arguing that the EPA overstepped its legal authority in regulating air pollution. The Republican Attorneys General Association, whose membership has been leading the fight against the rules, celebrated the Supreme Court’s decision as "a watershed moment in [their] fight against the overreaching Obama administration."
Most States Are Combating Climate Change and Growing Their Economies
Washington State Rejects What Would Have Been Nation's First Carbon Tax
From Freight Shipping to Farming, California's New Emissions Law Will Impact Many Industries
California's New Climate Change Law Will Be Watched Around the World
U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Reconsider Decision on EPA Regulations
The long-term implications of the court's action aren't known.
It's not a clear-cut victory for either side, as the court didn't elaborate on why it froze the rules. But opponents of the Clean Power Plan are interpreting the temporary hold as a sign that a majority of the court has serious concerns about the regulations. The justices split along the usual ideological lines, with the conservative majority granting the stay over the objections of the four liberal justices.
Amid the uncertainty, states face difficult questions about whether to prepare for the Clean Power Plan or wait for courts to weigh in. "For the time being, it’s like the regulations don’t exist," said Lisa Soronen from the State and Local Legal Center. “[But] what if the [Supreme] Court upholds these regulations and now you don’t have enough time to prepare?"
If upheld, the regulations require states to present an initial plan for how they will achieve reductions by September and a final plan by 2018. By 2020, they have to show progress in reducing carbon emissions.
Under the Coal Power Plan, states have several options for cutting carbon emissions from coal plants, such as expanding the use of renewable energy and setting up market-based systems for carbon trading. If states refuse to submit a plan, as some governors have already threatened to do, then the EPA would impose a federal plan instead.
Last summer, Governing reported that many states were simultaneously challenging the rules in court while developing strategies to meet the EPA’s requirements.
“Developing a [state] plan was a far better choice to the states and the utilities than the alternative, which is a federal plan,” said Bill Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. The federal option, by comparison, would be “less flexible, costlier and more difficult to implement.”
States appear to be split on whether it's prudent to keep working on state power plans in case the EPA regulations survive legal challenges. During a press conference on Wednesday, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morissey recommended that states and legislatures should "put down your pencils" and stop preparing for the regulation deadlines. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton agreed, adding that in his state, "we’re not moving forward with anything until this case is resolved." Still, some states -- such as California, Colorado and Pennsylvania -- have already announced that they will continue preparing their plans, despite the Supreme Court’s decision.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is scheduled to hear the case in June. Whichever side loses would almost certainly appeal, sending the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Litigation probably won’t finish until 2017 -- after Obama has left office.
J.B. Wogan Staff Writer
jwogan@governing.com | @jbwogan
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1038
|
__label__wiki
| 0.888118
| 0.888118
|
Universities Unite to Expose Deepfakes before 2020 Vote
Two Washington state universities have partnered to take on misinformation and digital counterfeiting hoping to help the public “sort fact from fakery.”
Jim Brunner, The Seattle Times | December 5, 2019
(TNS) — If you were under any illusion that online hooey peaked with the 2016 election, brace yourself for the era of “deepfakes” — fabricated videos so realistic they can put words in the mouths of politicians or anyone else that they never said.
As the 2020 election approaches, a new University of Washington initiative aims to combat the wave of increasingly sophisticated digital counterfeiting and misinformation coursing through social media and give the public tools to sort fact from fakery.
The Center for an Informed Public (CIP) has been seeded with $5 million from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, part of a $50 million round of grants awarded this year to 11 U.S. universities and research institutions to study how technology is transforming democracy.
Deepfakes Are on the Rise — How Should Government Respond?
The mission is to use the new research to help everyone vulnerable to being fooled by online manipulation — whether it’s schoolkids unsure about which news sites are trustworthy or baby boomers uncritically sharing fraudulent news stories on Facebook.
“It’s not a K-12 problem. It’s a K-99 problem,” said Kate Starbird, a UW associate professor and one of the CIP’s principal researchers, who has spent years studying the spread of conspiracy theories and deliberate misinformation in the wake of crisis events like school shootings and the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.
At a formal launch ceremony Tuesday, the UW announced the center will partner with Washington State University faculty as well, bringing a cross-state approach to a problem that affects people in conservative and liberal areas alike.
“This is about our democracy, no question,” UW President Ana Mari Cauce said before a crowd of about 400 at the launch event at the UW Husky Union Building, where she and WSU President Kirk Schulz signed letters signaling their universities’ intent to collaborate.
“In a politically divided state, if we can do it right here, maybe we can get this right for the rest of the country,” said Jevin West, CIP’s director and an associate professor in the UW Information School.
In interviews this week, West and other CIP founders said a major goal is to bring their academic research out of the universities and to the wider public. They’ll start with a series of town halls, beginning with one in Seattle next month, and other events across the state over the coming months, and envision partnerships with schools and public libraries.
“This is an opportunity to take what we are doing out of the ivory tower,” said Bruce Pinkleton, dean of the Edward R. Murrow College of Communication at WSU, who is working on the new collaboration, which brings together disciplines including the information school, law and journalism.
Starbird and other researchers have examined millions of tweets and discovered how various actors, including foreign intelligence operatives, have worked to intensify political divisions in America.
In 2016, for example, Twitter accounts associated with Russia’s Internet Research Agency impersonated activists supportive and critical of the #BlackLivesMatter movement. Tweets from those accounts became some of the most widely shared. “Russian agents did not create political division in the United States, but they were working to encourage it,” Starbird recounted in a Medium post about the research.
Starbird said she hopes the UW’s new center can “help people better understand how misinformation and disinformation work, and how they function to undermine democratic institutions.”
West said the new center will seek to help “create a culture where we pause a little before sharing something online… once you put [false information] out there, it’s so hard to clean up.”
That’s going to be increasingly difficult as advances in video gamelike technology have enabled creation of lifelike faces generated by computer algorithms. Those representations have surmounted what some call the “uncanny valley” — meaning the fake faces no longer fill viewers with an instinctively creepy feeling because they do not look quite human, West said.
“The technology is getting so good that we are not that far from simply not being able to distinguish” between real and fake images, said West. UW researchers themselves have created fabricated faces to show how difficult they can be to spot, with a popular website called “Which Face Is Real?”
Which face is real? One of these images is computer-generated and one is a real photograph. Can you tell the difference?
The CIP grew in part out of the UW’s popular course, “Calling BS in the Age of Big Data,” created two years ago by West and biology professor Carl Bergstrom. The course is in such demand that its 160 seats filled within one minute of registration opening this quarter, West said.
Sam Gill, who leads community and national initiatives for the Knight Foundation, said he sees the new UW center as “sort of like the first public health school in the country for the Internet.”
The link between quality information and public health is not merely metaphorical, as Internet-fueled misconceptions about vaccines have contributed to outbreaks of measles and other diseases once thought eradicated. An ongoing measles outbreak in Samoa has killed 50 children.
Similarly, misinformation has made it harder for the U.S. to combat climate change, which scientists predict will wreak havoc in the coming decades unless big cuts are made in greenhouse-gas emissions. Emma Spiro, an assistant professor in the Information School and another CIP researcher, said there is already talk of collaboration with the UW’s EarthLab research institute to address climate knowledge.
Pinkleton, the WSU dean, said he’s realistic about hostility from some quarters toward academics, journalists and others who trade in factual information. “There are some people who frankly don’t want to know the truth. Those people, I am not sure we are ever going to reach,” he said.
But Pinkelton said quality information is not partisan and people of all political persuasions should be concerned with the breakdown in shared facts. “The reality is truth benefits us all. Whether you are conservative or liberal is unimportant,” he said.
©2019 The Seattle Times. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
More From Latest News
Washington State Uncertain if New COVID Strain Has Arrived
Public officials are nervous about the presence of new strains of the coronavirus and the potential to have yet another spike in case contractions and deaths. But without the proper detection tools, the state can’t do much.
SolarWinds Says It’s Closer to Finding Source of Cyberattack
The Austin-based software company at the center of the data breach that impacted hundreds of companies, including several government agencies, continues to find pieces of malware that may have led to the hack.
Kansas Researchers to Help Rural Communities Thrive
Four researchers will focus on the future of food, energy and water in a new project that could help rural communities capitalize on wind energy opportunities.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1039
|
__label__wiki
| 0.742478
| 0.742478
|
Rep. Henry Cooper
Former Representative for Wisconsin
Cooper was the representative for Wisconsin and was a Republican. He served from 1931 to 1933.
He was previously the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1927 to 1931; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1925 to 1927; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1923 to 1925; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1921 to 1923; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1915 to 1919; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1907 to 1915; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1905 to 1907; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1903 to 1905; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1901 to 1903; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1899 to 1901; the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1895 to 1899; and the representative for Wisconsin’s 1st congressional district as a Republican from 1893 to 1895.
Contact Rep. Henry Cooper
I want to urge Cooper to take an action on a bill.
Visit Rep. Henry Cooper’s website »
Look for a contact form on Rep. Henry Cooper’s website to express your opinion.
Visit Cooper’s Website »
Head over to Rep. Henry Cooper’s website. If you are having a problem with a government agency, look for a contact link for casework to submit a request for help. Otherwise, look for a phone number on that website to call his office if you have a question.
Not all Members of Congress will accept messages from non-constituents. You can try your luck by visiting Cooper’s website. Otherwise, try contacting your own representative:
Find Your Representative »
I am not sure.
I’m not sure if I live in his district.
You are currently on the website GovTrack.us, which has no affiliation with Cooper and is not a government website. Choose from the options above to find the right way to contact Cooper.
Henry Cooper is pronounced:
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1040
|
__label__wiki
| 0.888162
| 0.888162
|
Real story of Article 15 movie: Here's the true crime story that inspired Ayushmann Khurrana's next film
By Shabdita Pareek 27 June 2019
Two grisly murders that shook the nation
Five years ago, on a Tuesday night in the peak summer of May, two teenage girls went missing from their home in Katra Sadatganj village of UP’s Badaun district. When hours of frantic search yielded no result, desperate family members of the two girls, aged 14 and 15, approached the police. As it happens in the majority of cases in India, the police is reluctant to cooperate unless the victim has an influential backing or there's a pressure from above. In this case too, the police refused to carry out an official search, much less file an FIR. The next morning unfolded a horrifying crime, one that shook both the villagers and the whole nation.
The bodies of two teenage girls, who were cousins and belonged to a lower caste, were found hanging from a mango tree in an orchard. The postmortem report of their bodies confirmed that they were raped before being murdered.
Five persons, including two policemen accused of covering up the details of the gruesome murder were arrested. The two constables who refused to file the first information report (FIR) when the victims' family approached them, were sacked and a case of criminal conspiracy was filed against them. As more and more pressure started building up on the government over the inefficiency and apathy from local police in investigating the case, Akhilesh Yadav's government recommended that the case be given to the CBI.
Such was the reluctance of the police in bringing the perpetrators to justice that even as the investigation was on and the police were in the process of collecting "concrete" evidence of foul play, two of the persons arrested in the case confessed to the crime.
In a strange turn of events, CBI came up with an entirely opposing narrative of the case stating that the girls were neither raped nor murdered; in fact they committed suicide as the older girl was caught in a compromising position with one of the accused named Pappu Yadav. As a result, rape and murder charged were dropped against him.
In a country like India where misogyny, patriarchy and upper caste hegemony isn't a hidden reality, attacks and assaults on Dalits, especially women is unfortunately, a sad truth. If the police had reacted immediately and assisted the family in searching for the girls, there was a possibility that they could have been saved.
Ayushmann Khurrana's upcoming film Article 15 is inspired from this case, where two innocent girls had to lose their lives because we live in a country that's deeply embroiled in caste-divide and gender bias. Even after every citizen is entitled to basic fundamental rights such as Right to Equality, women and marginalised communities are still suffering. In such a scenario, Article 15 is a much-required confrontation with the ground reality of our nation which needs some major fixing.
What is Article 15? Know about your fundamental right before you watch the film
In the biggest land deal of the year, Japanese MNC buys 3-acre plot in Mumbai for ₹2,238 crore
The controversial history of the Gupta Family, that left Auli in a state of mess
> More on Get Smart
Article 15Ayushmann KhurranaNew moviesBOLLYWOOD
Good news for The Family Man fans as Season 2 release date is finally out
By Rimi Chakraborty 7 January 2021
Has 2020 changed our drinking habits as well as everything else?
By Kerry McDermott 3 December 2020
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1041
|
__label__wiki
| 0.986503
| 0.986503
|
N.W.A's DJ Yella, Ice Cube, Dr. Dre, and MC Ren
Photo: Kevin Winter/Getty Images
For The Record: N.W.A's 'Straight Outta Compton' nwa-are-straight-outta-compton-record
N.W.A Are 'Straight Outta Compton': For The Record
What started as an attitude that helped put Compton on the map grew into a worldwide music revolution celebrating the streets
Philip Merrill
A debut album that landed like a sledgehammer, 1988's Straight Outta Compton has become a legend in its own right. The featured N.W.A lineup was Dr. Dre, Eazy-E, Ice Cube, and MC Ren. The album was produced by Dr. Dre and DJ Yella, and released on Ruthless Records, the label co-founded by Eazy-E and N.W.A manager Jerry Heller two years before.
For The Record: N.W.A's 'Straight Outta Compton'
Although it sold well initially, its landmark status rested on the controversies surrounding its gangsta lifestyle themes and attitudes. Its provocative tracks described the world N.W.A knew through their own eyes, including the title track, which elevated the group's hometown of Compton, Calif., "Express Yourself" and "Gangsta Gangsta." The album also included "F*** Tha Police," which resulted in the FBI and U.S. Secret Service sending threatening letters to Ruthless Records and the group's banishment from many venues.
Credited as one of the most influential hip-hop records of all time, in 2015, Straight Outta Compton the film appeared, dramatizing the 1988 impact of the album, with Ice Cube portrayed by his son O'Shea Jackson Jr. Confrontations with law enforcement and antagonism based on "F*** Tha Police" form a core element of both the 2015 drama as well as the drama on the streets that has never stopped.
Among the album's many aftermaths, Eazy-E died in 1995, Ice Cube went on to produce and star in his extensive filmography and the adventures of Dr. Dre touch on many other histories, including those of Eminem and Kendrick Lamar. Meanwhile, in recognition of its critical importance to music history, Straight Outta Compton was inducted into the Recording Academy's GRAMMY Hall Of Fame as well as the Library of Congress' National Recording Registry.
Nirvana's 'Nevermind': For The Record
David Bowie's '…Ziggy Stardust…' | For The Record
Revisit The Beatles' 'Revolver'
Revisit Janet Jackson's 'Rhythm Nation 1814'
Bob Marley & The Wailers' 'Exodus': For The Record
Metallica: "One" | For The Record
Pearl Jam: 'Ten' | For The Record
For The Record: John Coltrane's 'A Love Supreme'
Madonna: 'Ray Of Light' | For The Record
For The Record: Little Big Town’s 'The Road ..."
For The Record: Linda Ronstadt’s 'Canciones ...'
Alanis Morissette: 'Jagged Little Pill'
For The Record: 'The Miseducation Of Lauryn Hill'
For The Record: Amy Winehouse's 'Back To Black'
For The Record: 'From A Room: Volume 1'
For The Record: CeCe Winans, 'Let Them Fall … '
Dave Chappelle For The Record: 'The Age Of Spin …'
Kendrick Lamar, 'DAMN.': For The Record
For The Record: Bruno Mars' '24K Magic'
For The Record: Adele, '25'
For The Record: Taylor Swift's '1989'
For The Record: Beck's 'Morning Phase'
Daft Punk For The Record: 'Random Access Memories'
For The Record: B.B. King's "Auld Lang Syne"
For The Record: Cole's "The Christmas Song"
For The Record: 'A Charlie Brown Christmas'
For The Record: 'O Brother, Where Art Thou?'
For The Record: Harrison's 'All Things Must Pass'
For The Record: Pink Floyd's 'The Wall'
For The Record: Bee Gees' 'Saturday Night Fever'
For The Record: Eminem's "Lose Yourself"
For The Record: Michael Jackson
For The Record: Jennifer Lopez And Marc Anthony
For The Record: Calle 13
For The Record: Juan Gabriel
For The Record: Shakira
For The Record: Carlos Santana
Catching Up On Music News Powered By The Recording Academy Just Got Easier. Have A Google Home Device? "Talk To GRAMMYs"
Photo: Al Pereira/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images
Dr. Dre's 'The Chronic' | For The Record dr-dres-chronic-record
Dr. Dre's 'The Chronic' | For The Record
Roll back to 1992 and revisit the legendary debut solo album that has served as a blueprint for West Coast rap
Ana Monroy Yglesias
In 1991 Dr. Dre helped form Death Row Records, shortly after the disbanding of N.W.A., the rap group that launched him into music stardom. A year later he released his debut solo album, The Chronic. With the influential album came an innovative mix of the Funkadelic sound, G-funk and rap, the introduction of Snoop Dogg, and an era-defining blueprint for West Coast rap.
Dr. Dre's 'The Chronic': For The Record
The GRAMMY-winning rapper/producer extraordinaire, then just 27, released The Chronic on December 15, 1992 via his newly-formed record label, with distribution through Interscope Records. While Dre has had an incredibly impactful career in music and business, and both directly and indirectly influenced many other successful hip-hop artists, he has only released three studio albums of his own.Following The Chronic, his much-anticipated follow-up wasn't released until 1999 – 2001 (sometimes referred to as The Chronic 2001), now another classic. In the documentary The Defiant Ones, he cites his perfectionism as a major factor in holding up 2001, and in putting out more solo releases.
The Chronic brought us several classic hip-hop tracks and won Dre his first GRAMMY. The album's third single "Let Me Ride" won Best Rap Solo Performance, and the first single "Nuthin' but a 'G' Thang" was nominated for Best Rap Performance By A Duo or Group at the 36th GRAMMY Awards. A then-unknown 20 year-old Snoop Doggy Dogg rapped on many of the tracks, receiving his first GRAMMY nomination for his feature on "Nuthin' but a 'G' Thang," and launching his solo career shortly after.
Snoop, introduced to Dre through his stepbrother Warren G, brought the laid-back 420-vibes that infused the album. Their collaboration, along with the others who worked on the album, including Warren G and Nate Dogg, created a classic sound that would define West Coast rap for the years to come. Dre's message was still from the California "gangsta" perspective, but with a slower flow and somewhat more laid-back vibe, producing a ground-breaking sound and a growing fan base.
"I think the beauty of The Chronic was that each song carried a message that all together made up the culture of the West Coast," said rapper Sauce Money.
Many hip-hop artists – Kanye West included – and fans point to the album as one of the most influential hip-hop albums of all time.
"It's the benchmark you measure your album against if you're serious," West wrote in 2010 for Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Artists list, which covered all genres and ranked Dre at No. 56.
Recognizing its immense influence, The Chronic was inducted into the GRAMMY Hall of Fame in 2018, an honor limited to "recording[s] of lasting qualitative or historical significance."
Aretha Franklin in 1970
Ron Howard/Redferns/Getty Images
Artists Who've Amplified Social Justice Movements aretha-franklin-public-enemy-heres-how-artists-have-amplified-social-justice-movements
From Aretha Franklin To Public Enemy, Here's How Artists Have Amplified Social Justice Movements Through Music
We also examine powerful protest songs from Mahalia Jackson, Harry Belafonte, Pete Seeger, Bob Dylan, James Brown and N.W.A
Jul 2, 2020 - 10:39 am
The year 2020, as difficult (and deadly) as its been for so many, has become a moment of reckoning. The nation is facing the shutdown and health crisis of coronavirus, pervasive acts of racist violence against unarmed Black people, and countless injustices for people of color, LGBTQI individuals and women and those within the intersectionality of these identifies. Today, in this climate of social unrest, powerful protest music of the past resonates once again.
As we stand in this pivotal moment, let's look back on some of the songs and moments that defined the civil rights movement and beyond, as Black artists and allies reflected the dire need for justice and inclusive representation, and protestors took their music to new heights.
Known as the Queen of Gospel, Mahalia Jackson is credited as one of the first artists to take gospel music out of the church. She used her powerful voice to record a massive catalog of religious music during her career, choosing to never dip her toes in secular music. Jackson befriended Martin Luther King Jr. at the 1956 National Baptist Convention and later performed before many of his speeches, in Selma, Montgomery and, most famously, immediately before his famous "I Have A Dream" speech at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963, which she directly inspired.
She was the final musical guest during at the March, singing "How I Got Over," a powerful gospel song, popularized by the Famous Ward Sisters, about overcoming racial injustice. Not only did the song have deep resonance with the Black audience members, it was Jackson herself who moved King to improvise the most famous "dream" passage of his speech. According to King's adviser Clarence Jones, Jackson shouted out; "Tell them about the dream, Martin! Tell them about the dream!" King pushed his notes to the side and Jones told the person next to him, "These people out there, they don't know it, but they're about ready to go to church."
Given its power, Jackson sang the song many times during her career, earning a GRAMMY for Best Soul Gospel Performance at the 1977 GRAMMYs for it.
Did You Know That Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Won A GRAMMY?
18-time GRAMMY winner Aretha Franklin was one of the many successful soul and gospel singers inspired by Jackson and the path she paved, even performing at her funeral in 1972. The Queen of Soul got her start in music singing in her minister father's church. It was there where Franklin was introduced to civil rights activism. While many of her most beloved hits were covers, she had a unique power to reimagine a song all her own and resonate with so many. "Respect," originally recorded by Otis Redding in 1965, is one of these, which became her first No. 1 hit when she released it in 1967. A powerful anthem asking the listener for "a little respect," it became a protest song for both the feminist and civil rights movements of the time. As Pacific Standard states, "it captured a cultural moment Franklin had herself been fighting to achieve."
The outlet also notes that "Chain Of Fools," an original song, followed in 1967 as another feminist anthem, but found new meaning among Black U.S. soldiers fighting "a white man's war" in Vietnam. In 1972, Franklin recorded a rousing rendition of Nina Simone's 1969 civil rights anthem "Young, Gifted and Black," giving her album the same name, a powerful symbol of Black pride. That same year, Franklin later released live gospel album, Amazing Grace, including renditions of "How I Got Over" and "Amazing Grace." "Respect," "Chain Of Fools, "Young, Gifted and Black" and "Amazing Grace" all earned Franklin GRAMMY wins, evident of how deeply they resonated with America.
'Black Gold' At 50: How Nina Simone Refracted The Black Experience Through Reinterpreted Songs
At 93, Jamaican-American actor, singer and activist Harry Belafonte has been a powerful force and barrier-breaker in U.S. culture since the '50s. Inspired by the emerging social justice-minded folk music of the turn of the century, he made it his life mission to "sing the song of anti-racism," as he said in 2017, to use his voice to highlight the music of the oppressed. Seeing Woody Guthrie perform lit this fire within the Harlem-born artist, inspiring him to visit the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. to listen to Alan Lomax's field recordings.
His third album, 1956's Calypso, was led by one of his most beloved songs, "Banana Boat (Day-O)," a call-and-response Jamaican folk song sung by dock workers (he spent part of his childhood living with his grandmother there). His version took the U.S. by storm, hitting No. 5 and inspiring five other artists to cover it, who all earned Top 40 hits in 1957. The album, as its title suggests, was filled with upbeat calypso music, a genre with roots stemming from those enslaved by the 17th century Caribbean slave trade. At a time when Elvis Presley and other White rock artists ruled, Belafonte's Calypso outsold both of his records that year, spending thirty-one weeks on top of the Billboard 200.
Belafonte also became a pivotal member of the civil rights movement, as a close friend of King, performing at many of his events and offering financial support to fund voter-registration drives, Freedom Rides and even the March on Washington. "I was angry when I met [King]. Anger had helped protect me. Martin understood my anger and saw its value. But our cause showed me how to redirect it and to make it productive," Belafonte writes in his 2011 memoir.
"For Mr. Seeger, folk music and a sense of community were inseparable, and where he saw a community, he saw the possibility of political action," the New York Times wrote in Pete Seeger's obituary in 2014. "His agenda paralleled the concerns of the American left: He sang for the labor movement in the '40s and '50s, for civil rights marches and anti-Vietnam War rallies in the '60s, and for environmental and antiwar causes in the '70s and beyond."
In the '50s, the folk artist adapted "We Shall Overcome" with several other activist, including Zilphia Horton, who taught an updated version of the gospel spiritual "I'll Overcome" to union organizers. Seeger's version became an important rallying cry of the civil rights movement. Many other activist/artists of the time recorded and sang the powerful song at various events, including Jackson and folk acts Peter, Paul and Mary and Joan Baez, the latter who sang it during the March on Washington.
Seeger always used his music to speak up on the big issues of the time; in 1941 he wrote "Talking Union" with members of The Almanac Singers (both acts recorded it), "an almost literal guide to union-building," as Time put it. During Vietnam and the Cold War, respectively, he released anti-war anthems "Waist Deep in the Big Muddy" (1967) and "Where Have All The Flowers Gone" (1955). The latter has been covered many times over the years by Earth, Wind & Fire, Dolly Parton and more, with folk/pop act Kingston Trio's 1962 version first hitting the mainstream and reaching the Top 40.
"How many roads must a man walk down / Before you call him a man?" a 21-year-old Bob Dylan begins on his beloved 1963 song, "Blowin' In The Wind," another anthem of the civil rights movement. It is the opening track of his second album The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan, which also features "The Death of Emmitt Till," "Oxford Town," "Masters of War" and other explicitly political songs examining injustices of the time.
Like Belafonte, he was inspired by Guthrie's political brand of folk, but it was his then-girlfriend, Suze Rotolo (pictured on The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan album cover), who moved him towards activism and playing political rallies. He wrote "The Death of Emmitt Till" in 1962, about the Black teen that was brutally murdered by White men for alleged whistling at a White woman, shortly before singing it at a fundraiser for the Congress of Racial Equality, which Rotolo was involved with.
During the March on Washington the next year, Dylan performed several songs, including "Only a Pawn in Their Game," which he had recently written about the civil rights activist Medgar Evers killed just months earlier. He also performed the heart-breaking song at a voter registration rally for Black farmers in Mississippi later that year. In January 1964 he would release the track on his next album, another socially conscious project, this one earning a GRAMMY nomination, The Times They Are A-Changin'.
Bob Dylan Announces New Double Album 'Rough And Rowdy Ways,' Releases New Single "False Prophet"
In August 1968, a year before Simone released "Young, Gifted & Black" and just four months after King was assassinated, the Godfather of Soul James Brown delivered the funky Black pride anthem "Say It Loud – I'm Black And I'm Proud." As UDiscoverMusic notes, "The tone of the civil-rights movement had so far been one of a request for equality. Brown, however, came out defiant and proud: he isn't asking politely for acceptance; he's totally comfortable in his own skin. The song went to No. 10 on the Billboard [Hot 100] chart and set the blueprint for funk. Like later Stevie Wonder classics of the '70s, it was a political song that also burned up the dancefloor; an unapologetic stormer that would influence generations."
In 2018, on 50 years after the song's release, Randall Kennedy, a Black law professor at Harvard, explained the power of the song in that moment, and today: "It was precisely because of widespread colorism that James Brown's anthem 'Say It Loud, I'm Black and I'm Proud' posed a challenge, felt so exhilarating, and resonated so powerfully. It still does. Much has changed over the past half century. But, alas, the need to defend blackness against derision continues."
The iconic song recently saw a massive boost in streaming numbers as part of Spotify's Black Lives Matter playlist.
Black Pride Anthems From Kendrick Lamar, Childish Gambino, 2Pac, James Brown & More See Big Streaming Spikes
N.W.A, Ice Cube & Dr. Dre
When N.W.A released "F*** Tha Police" in 1988, their hometown of Compton, in South Los Angeles, was rife with police brutality and racial profiling. One of the hardcore rap group's most controversial songs, it struck a chord with in their community, as well as with other Black people living in over-policed inner-cities around the country and frustrated youth of all colors. Directly denouncing the police's abuse of power, the song was largely condemned by the mainstream, causing the group to receive a cease-and-desist letter from FBI and to be arrested for playing it at a Detroit show in 1989, as shown in the Straight Outta Compton biopic.
"We had lyrics. That's what we used to combat all the forces that were pushing us from all angles: Whether it was money, gang-banging, crack, LAPD. Everything in the world came after this group," Ice Cube said in an interview. "We changed pop culture on all levels. Not just music. We changed it on TV. In movies. On radio. Everything. Everybody could be themselves. Before N.W.A … you had to pretend to be a good guy."
In 1992, Rodney King was brutally beaten by LAPD officers who were later acquitted, sparking the 1992 Los Angeles uprising. This not only highlighted the truth and urgency of N.W.A's lyrics, it further solidified it as a rallying cry against the daily violence and racism Black people across the country faced. That year, Ice Cube released his third solo album Predator, along with its biggest hit, the laidback "It Was A Good Day." As HuffPost notes, "he raps about how to cherish moments like chilling with your homies to enjoying your mom's food to NOT get harassed by the police." Dr. Dre followed with his 1debut solo album The Chronic in 1994, and on "Lil' Ghetto Boy" he and Snoop Dogg rap about the dark challenges faced by a formerly incarcerated Black man on parole, powerfully sampling Donny Hathaway's 1972 classic "Little Ghetto Boy."
"Fight The Power": 7 Facts Behind Public Enemy's Anthem | GRAMMY Hall Of Fame
New York political hip-hop outfit Public Enemy originally recorded "Fight The Power" at the request of then-emerging filmmaker Spike Lee, for his 1989 film Do The Right Thing. It plays a prominent role in the poignant film that explores racial tensions in Brooklyn's Bedford-Sty neighborhood, as the only song character Radio Raheem plays from the boombox he proudly carries at all times. As HipHopDX writes, the song is "indisputably a call to action, [as] Chuck [D] commanded people to stand up against systematic oppression." "Elvis was a hero to most / But he never meant sh*t to me you see / Straight up racist that sucker was / Simple and plain. / Mother f*** him and John Wayne / 'Cause I'm Black and I'm proud," Chuck D raps with authority, both calling out White heroes and nodding to a Black hero, the Godfather Of Soul.
The powerful track finds inspiration from both Brown and the Isley Brothers, who released a song called "Fight The Power" in 1975, it also takes direct influence from them. According to Genius, it features around 20 samples, including Brown's "Say It Loud" and "Funky President (People It's Bad)," and interpolates The Isley Brothers' song. "I wanted to have sorta the same theme as the original 'Fight the Power' by the Isley Brothers and fill it in with some kind of modernist views of what our surroundings were at that particular time," Chuck D explained. The music video (watch above) begins with news footage from the March on Washington, followed by Public Enemy organizing their own march and rally in Brooklyn.
The song was released on the film soundtrack and on their 1990 album, Fear Of A Black Planet, on which they also called out racism in Hollywood and in the police on "Burn Hollywood Burn" (featuring Cube and Big Daddy Kane) and "911 Is A Joke," respectively. This summer, Public Enemy returned with the fiery "State Of The Union (STFU)," calling out the rampant racism of the current White House administration.
How Black Trans Artists Are Fighting To Achieve Racial Justice & Amplify Queer Voices
Grammys Newsletter
Be the first to find out about winners, nominees, and more from Music's Biggest Night.
Photo: Jeffrey Mayer/WireImage
Here's What Made 1993 A Special Year In Music flashback-1993-good-year-music-or-best-year-music
Flashback To 1993: A Good Year In Music Or The Best Year In Music?
Revisit the highlights of a year that gave us classic after classic at a pivotal time in music, culture and the industry
Nov 13, 2018 - 5:57 pm
Looking back from 25 years later, a case is being made for 1993 as a remarkable year in music. There are so many ways to look at it, but NPR's World Cafe is definitely a fan, recently posing the question, "Was 1993 the greatest year in music?" While the world may never agree, it's certainly worth exploring...
Early in the year, looking back at 1992, the Record Of The Year at the 35th GRAMMY Awards went to Eric Clapton's "Tears In Heaven." At the 36th GRAMMY Awards for 1993, Record Of The Year went to Whitney Houston for "I Will Always Love You" from the soundtrack to The Bodyguard. Much of the music from that year is still dearly loved.
It was also the year Wu-Tang Clan debuted with Enter The Wu-Tang (36 Chambers). It was the year of Bjork's Debut, after the break-up of her group, The Sugarcubes. Her Best Music Video-Short Form nomination for "Human Behavior" at the 36th GRAMMY Awards was her first of 14 career-total nominations to date.
Noteworthy first-time GRAMMY winners for 1993 include Toni Braxton and Dr. Dre. The soundtrack to the movie Boomerang produced "Another Sad Love Song" winning Best R&B Performance, Female for Braxton, who also won Best New Artist. The ultimate cruising anthem "Let Me Ride" from The Chronic gave Dr. Dre his first GRAMMY win for Best Rap Solo Performance. Toni Braxton has won a total of seven GRAMMY Awards to date and Dr. Dre has won six.
https://twitter.com/WorldCafe/status/1062112946627715073
Where does 1993 stack up in your Greatest Year In Music List? https://t.co/SABp6MATbb
— World Cafe (@WorldCafe) November 12, 2018
NPR went ahead to round up a great many more classics and choice little-known tracks.. For example, more 1993 artists that were just beginning to come into GRAMMY focus were Sheryl Crow and Sarah McLachlan. It is amazing to explore one year in music with such a lasting impact on today and so many tracks that one can close one's eyes and remember hearing so many meaningful times.
Whitney Houston Exhibit Opens At Newark's GRAMMY Museum Experience Prudential Center
Photo: The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images
Nas' 'Illmatic' | For The Record nas-illmatic-record
Nas' 'Illmatic' | For The Record
Revisit the streets of New York City in 1994 when the rapper's debut album set the stage for the resurgence of East Coast hip-hop
Oct 5, 2018 - 6:46 pm
The GRAMMY-nominated rapper Nas is nothing short of legendary, giving the world plenty of his smooth lyricism and iconic verses in his releases over the years. To date, he has released 11 studio albums, the most recent being the Kanye West-produced Nasir, which dropped this summer as part of West's Wyoming sessions releases. Since the start Nas has been turning heads and paving the way for other hip-hop artists. His debut LP, Illmatic, not only put him firmly on the map, but also provided a revitalization of the East Coast rap sound.
Nas' 'Illmatic': For The Record
A 20-year-old Nas released his first full-length album, Illmatic on April 19, 1994, to much critical acclaim. Source blessed it with a rare 5 Mic rating when it came out, an honor they had only given to 15 albums at the time of release. The LP was a work of love. It was produced by DJ Premier, Pete Rock, Q-Tip, Large Professor, L.E.S. and Nas, in the rapper's hometown of New York City and shared a snapshot of life in the streets of NYC, set to melodic hip-hop beats. Nas shared his experience with the world in a raw yet refreshing way. As he raps on "N.Y. State of Mind," "Life is parallel to hell but I must maintain."
Source's Shortie captured the anticipation and excitement around the album in her 1994 review. "After peeping his soul on 'Live at the BBQ,' 'Back to the Grill,' and the official bomb, 'Halftime,' street dwellers and industry folks alike were predicting Nas' first album to be monumental," she shared. "I must maintain that this is one of the best hip-hop albums I have ever heard. Musically, when Nas hooked up with four of hip-hop's purest producers, it seems like all of the parties involved took their game to a higher level of expression," she furthered. Those would be echoed by countless fans and critics at the time and retrospectively.
As the rapper said himself when explaining the meaning of the title, the album most definitely is "supreme ill" or "as ill as it gets." The album debuted and peaked at No. 12 on the Billboard 200, and although its singles surprisingly did not chart, the songs, including "The World Is Yours" and "One Love," featuring co-producer Q-Tip, have had a long-lasting impact and staying power through speakers and in the hip-hop arsenal of records. These tracks, and the album as a whole, are often credited as creating the blueprint for the new East Coast hip-hop sound that thrived following its release.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1042
|
__label__wiki
| 0.915633
| 0.915633
|
Home Residents
Halfway house residents struggle to buy food, medicine after facility issues run of bad checks | Premium
Residents of a private halfway house in Colorado Springs say they struggled for weeks to access personal funds for food, medication and other necessities while their halfway house-issued checks were rejected by banks and check-cashing services.
The snag at Community Alternatives of El Paso persisted despite administrators’ promises to fix the problem and held up money that belongs to residents, who are required to hand over their paychecks and other income as a condition of their incarceration. The halfway house takes out money for rent and restitution and issues residents periodic allowances.
Remaining funds in the residents’ accounts are returned, minus any rent and restitution, after their release.
Starting in late August, CAE’s bank, Community Banks of Colorado, repeatedly refused to honor the allowance checks, but not before some residents believed they had successfully deposited them.
The resulting confusion caused some residents to overdraw their personal checking accounts, deepening their financial woes as they prepared for release, several residents told The Gazette. Others were turned away from check-cashing services, forcing them to borrow money from family members and friends to cover their expenses.
Colorado Watch | Colorado halfway houses: Violence, sex and drugs as promised reforms lag
Although food is provided at CAE, many residents leave on work release and eat outside the facility, and others avoid the food that’s served, which comes from the El Paso County jail.
For Robert Thompson, the issue was the latest hurdle to obtaining a critical seizure medication while incarcerated at CAE.
After being transferred to CAE from the El Paso County jail in July, Thompson said he went two days without his daily medication. When administrators took him to an urgent care center after his repeated complaints, a provider there prescribed him half of his normal dose of 1,000 mg twice daily.
Thompson attributes his struggle over medications for contributing to seizures while in CAE custody that led to two trips by ambulance to UCHealth Memorial Hospital Central, where doctors restored his normal prescription and said his seizures could cause brain damage and even death.
“They are endangering my life,” said Thompson, 59, who estimated that up to a third of the population — about 170 people as of August — struggled to access their money.
Thompson provided receipts from Walmart and King Soopers showing that his CAE checks were rejected by check-cashing services at a time he said he needed to refill his prescription. He eventually received a new check from CAE and purchased a refill two days before running out.
He said Walmart and King Soopers had so many problems with checks from CAE that they stopped accepting them.
In a memo posted Sept. 23 at CAE, and obtained by the newspaper, administrators instructed inmates not to cash checks issued between Aug. 20-Sept. 22, citing a “system error at the bank.”
Two other residents said they had checks returned prior to that period, and receipts examined by the newspaper showed problems continued afterward.
Coronavirus outbreak at Colorado Springs halfway house widens,
on October 10, 2020 October 10, 2020 health
Around 1 In 5 Chicago Residents May Have Already Had Coronavirus
EVANSTON, IL — Preliminary findings from a Northwestern University coronavirus study suggest that far more Chicago residents have been infected with COVID-19 than previously believed, with nearly 20 percent of the first group of people tested showing antibodies for the virus.
The Screening for Coronavirus Antibodies in Neighborhoods, or SCAN, project has so far tested the 1,000 blood samples for evidence of an immune response to exposure to the new coronavirus, according to researchers.
The samples were provided by residents of 10 ZIP codes in the city. With additional funding secure, the study has expanded to collect more than 3,000 more samples from across Cook County.
Thom McDade, principal investigator for the project, said the study was not designed to pick a fully representative sample of the city. Instead, researchers picked pairs of adjacent ZIP codes where the infection rate was above average in one and below average in the other.
“There are a large proportion of people who have been exposed but never had any symptoms and never got sick, so we’re using the antibody test to identify where the virus has spread in the community and how it’s been transmitted,” McDade told Patch. “But it also tells me that there’s probably been a higher level of exposure than previously thought. “
About 5 percent of participants reported having been diagnosed with COVID-19 or having tested positive, while the city’s overall rate of confirmed cases is just over 3 percent.
Still, if the early results were to hold true for the rest of the city, hundreds of thousands more Chicagoans have been exposed to the the virus than have tested positive for an active infection. Viral testing has detected 83,000 confirmed cases in the city as of Friday, according to the Chicago Department of Public Health.
Thom McDade, a biological anthropologist and lead investigator in the Screening for Coronavirus Antibodies in Neighborhoods project, works on a COVID-19 antibody test that requires only a single drop of blood. (Northwestern University)
Co-Investigator Dr. Elizabeth McNally, director of the Center for Genetic Medicine at Northwestern’s medical school, told the Chicago Tribune, which first reported the preliminary results, that the testing method the study uses is more sensitive than commercial antibody tests, which could be missing one in four cases. Other studies have found that the actual rate of COVID-19 infections were 10 times higher, at least, than the number of detected cases reported by public health officials.
The project’s antibody, or serological, testing requires participants only to prick their finger and mail in a drop of their dried blood, with results provided online within about a month.
“Widespread serological testing is essential for figuring out how the virus is spreading in the community, but it is very hard to screen large numbers of people when the tests require people to come to a health care provider,” McNally said in a May announcement the new one-drop test.
McDade said his Evanston lab has developed about 10 previous blood-spot tests
on October 9, 2020 October 9, 2020 health
Residents urged to stay home as second wave widens
Canadian public health officials are warning residents to stay home as much as possible, saying the next few weeks will be critical to the country’s efforts to contain Covid-19.
© Steve Russell/Toronto Star/Getty Images
People wait for Covid-19 tests in Toronto in September.
Last month, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared that a second wave of the coronavirus was already underway in most of the country. Canada is at a “tipping point” in the pandemic, Trudeau said Friday.
“Not only is the second wave underway, yesterday we hit the highest daily recorded cases, well above what saw this spring,” said Trudeau during a press conference in Ottawa Friday.
The national daily case counts continue to increase sharply, with an average of about 2,000 new cases every day for the past week. That’s a 40% rise in the last week alone, according to government statistics.
Since the Covid-19 outbreak started, Canada has had a total of 175,380 cases and 9,593 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University.
Hospitalizations and deaths continue to creep upward as well, with more than 600 patients currently in hospitals in Canada with Covid-19 and an average of about 18 deaths reported daily.
More than 80% of new infections are from Ontario and Quebec, and those under 40 account for 60% of the cases.
The province of Quebec is of particular concern, with urban hotspots in Montreal and Quebec City. Dine-in restaurants and bars were closed in those cities last week as new daily cases continue to climb.
Quebec reported 1,364 new cases of the virus on Tuesday alone, the highest daily case total since the pandemic began. That prompted a blunt warning to young people in Quebec to take the virus seriously and stay home.
Ontario joined Quebec Friday with targeted closures in its largest urban centers that include a ban on dine-in restaurants and the closure of bars. Both Toronto and Montreal, Canada’s two largest cities, have now shuttered restaurants and bars as hospitalizations increase.
“The young people that are not respecting the rule, they will have an impact on the system,” Christian Dube, Quebec’s health minister, said during a press conference in Quebec City Tuesday. “Don’t take the risk, please don’t test the hospital system.”
As recently as last month, Canada was being lauded for its efforts to flatten the curve.
Trudeau said more targeted closures, instead of a lockdown, are now possible during this second wave because more is known about how the virus is transmitted.
Despite the increase, Canada has had a small fraction of the cases of the United States, which has had 7.5 million cases and nearly 212,000 deaths.
Stay home for Thanksgiving
On Monday, Trudeau warned Canadians to stay home even for the Thanksgiving holiday next week, saying if Canada can once again flatten the curve that the country can “turn things around for Christmas.”
“We are going in the wrong direction now, which is why it is so important for Canadians to do what is necessary, to wear a
D.C. residents to see small increase in health insurance marketplace rates
Rates for individual coverage will increase overall by 0.2 percent and rates for small-group coverage, such as small businesses, will decrease by 0.5 percent, according to the D.C. Department of Insurance, Securities and Banking, which reviews and approves rates for the online marketplace.
The 2021 rates are a “big win for D.C. residents in making health care more affordable and accessible,” said William Borden, a professor of medicine and health policy at George Washington University. He pointed to how people struggled to keep up with rising health insurance premiums even before the novel coronavirus took hold.
“Having health insurance is clearly associated with better health outcomes, and so if there was going to be a sharp increase in insurance premiums that really could be devastating, especially as individuals, small businesses are already struggling financially,” Borden said.
Insurers initially asked for rate increases as high as 30 percent, but most of the insurers decreased their initial rate filings after a virtual public hearing in September.
During that hearing, leaders of the D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority, which operates D.C. Health Link, the online health insurance marketplace, advocated premium reductions or freezing rates at 2020 levels. More than 30 people signed up to testify.
The gap between what insurers initially proposed and what the DISB approved after the hearing will save D.C. residents more than $17 million, according to the department’s news release Friday.
Open enrollment in the District runs from Nov. 1 through Jan. 31.
Other jurisdictions also have moved to limit increasing rates.
Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan (R) approved an average 11.9 percent premium rate decrease for individual health insurance plans through Maryland Health Connection, the state-based health insurance marketplace, in 2021. This is the third consecutive year that individual premium rates have gone down in Maryland. Open enrollment in Maryland runs from Nov. 1 through Dec. 15.
The open enrollment period for all three jurisdictions will begin just as the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on a case to overturn the Affordable Care Act, which could leave more than 23 million people without health care, according to a report from the liberal think tank Center for American Progress.
Colorado one of just six states where Latinos are more likely to die prematurely than white residents
Colorado has a reputation as a healthy place to live, but that doesn’t seem to benefit the state’s Hispanic residents, who are more likely to die of causes that could have been treated or prevented.
In all but six states, Hispanic Americans are less likely to die of potentially preventable causes than white Americans, according to a Denver Post analysis of data from the Commonwealth Fund’s state health system scorecard.
In Colorado, however, Hispanic residents are about 20% more likely than white residents to die of treatable conditions, such as asthma attacks, diabetes complications, appendicitis or certain cancers. Deaths of people older than 75 aren’t included in the data.
The information was collected before the pandemic, so it doesn’t reflect COVID-19’s disproportionate hit on communities of color.
Colorado’s Hispanic population is more likely to be uninsured and to go without health care, but that’s also true of the rest of the country, including states where they’re less likely to die prematurely.
There’s no one explanation for the disparity in deaths, experts say, with factors including a history of discrimination, Colorado’s high cost of living and unequal access to quality jobs, education and housing playing a role.
Colorado’s white population has one of the lowest rates of premature death in the country, but that doesn’t fully explain the gap. Some other states, like Minnesota and Massachusetts, have lower-than-average rates of preventable deaths for both their white and Hispanic populations. In Colorado, the Hispanic population actually has more preventable deaths than the national average.
The things that make Colorado a healthy place, like the abundant opportunities for outdoor exercise, aren’t equally available to people who work lower-paying jobs and don’t have the money or free time to enjoy them, said Patricia Valverde, a faculty member at the Colorado School of Public Health’s Latino Research and Policy Center. And who works in low-wage jobs, which also tend to be more dangerous and may not offer health insurance, isn’t random, she said.
Denver was a center of a civil rights movement in the 1960s and ’70s because of widespread discrimination against Latinos in education and other parts of public life, Valverde said. While much has improved since then, people who were discriminated against in school were less able to pursue higher education, which then reduced how much they earned later in life and what opportunities they could give their children — all of which contributes to worse health, she said.
“With each generation, their economic opportunities increase, but you’re already starting behind,” she said.
Some parts of the state, like many of the southern counties, have high rates of premature deaths for all ethnic groups, according to data from the Colorado Health Institute. Others, like Denver and Mesa counties, have relatively low rates for white residents, but high ones for Hispanics.
In Denver, predominantly Latino neighborhoods tend to have less access to healthy food and more pollution, said Emily Cervantes, program manager for public policy research and analysis at the Colorado Latino Leadership, Advocacy
Impact of wildfires affecting residents’ mental health
Paulie Hawthorne is used to fire. She grew up in southeastern Oregon, long a hotbed for wildfires.
“I can remember, even as a kid, there were fires. I mean, it was just kind of a thing that happened,” Hawthorne, 47, said. Hawthorne and her husband had to evacuate in 2017 from their old home in Brookings, Oregon, during the 2017 Chetco Bar wildfire, which burned through more than 190,000 acres, including about 80,000 acres in the Kalmiopsis Wilderness. Today she lives in Klamath Falls, Oregon, a small city about 280 miles south of Portland that has seen frequent, low-intensity fires over the years. While her current exposure has been mild, when she smells smoke in the air or simply sees ashy skies, it pulls her back.
“The hardest part about evacuating is you just think it’s gonna be like a couple days, and we were out for almost a month,” she explained.
Paulie Hawthorne (Courtesy of Paulie Hawthorne)
The lingering dread associated with fires isn’t unique to Hawthorne, and the wildfires that have devastated large chunks of Oregon and California aren’t just decimating towns and driving residents away. Mental health experts say the fear and uncertainty that comes with wildfires can cause long-term psychological impact on residents. Worse yet, just as the region is seeing a growing increase in people seeking therapy, there is a deficit in available therapeutic resources.
Darla Gale, a licensed marriage and family therapist specializing in trauma and founder of Heartstrings Counseling in Loomis, California, said it is the unknown that is causing an abundance of stress and anxiety.
“We have had a tremendous increase in calls just in the last few months. It’s been overwhelming. I’ve had to hire seven more therapists to handle the load,” she said.
Many of her clients were previously victims of the 2018 Camp Fire, a deadly and damaging California fire that took nearly 90 lives.
“For the fire survivors, it’s the PTSD because of the smoke,” she said, using the acronym for post-traumatic stress disorder. But she also noted that some who survived the Camp Fire have now had to re-evacuate. It’s trauma on top of trauma.
Darla Gale, of Lumos, Calif., in her office. (Courtesy of Darla Gale)
Even residents who did not lose their homes say these wildfires have a lasting impact on their ability to manage daily life, even outside the direct path of destruction.
During the Two Four Two wildfire — which ravaged Klamath County, Oregon, in September — Hawthorne said she and her husband had trouble sleeping and were obsessively checking the sky and internet for information. Though they live some 15 miles away from the path of the fire, they simply didn’t feel safe.
“We both almost felt a compulsion to start getting our stuff together,” she said.
Hawthorne, who is a social worker and mental health therapist, said she is very familiar with the symptoms of trauma and PTSD. But that knowledge has not made dealing with wildfire anxiety any
Leaders in several states warn residents to be on guard as worrying Covid-19 trends emerge
Leaders in states across the country are sounding the alarm about rising Covid-19 cases that experts say could foreshadow a coming surge.
© Brendan McDermid/Reuters
Medical technicians work at a drive-thru coronavirus disease (COVID-19) testing facility at the Regeneron Pharmaceuticals company’s Westchester campus in Tarrytown, New York, U.S. September 17, 2020. Picture taken September 17, 2020. Brendan McDermid/Reuters
In New York, several Covid-19 clusters have created “hotspot” zip codes, the governor said, with a positivity rate about five times more than the statewide figure. The clusters are a “stark reminder” that New Yorkers need to stay vigilant, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said.
“Wear a mask, socially distance, follow the public health guidance — because this thing is not over,” Cuomo said in a statement.
Leading health officials including Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, have also warned that the US could see an especially challenging fall and winter this year. They say cities and counties should prepare by keeping safety measures and guidelines in place.
“We are still knee-deep in the first wave of this,” Fauci said in a Facebook and Twitter livestream.
In Kentucky, Gov. Andy Beshear urged the state to stop a recent “escalation” of cases after reporting more than 1,000 new infections for the second day in a row.
“Today’s daily report is too high,” the governor said. “I need your help. It’s up to us and we’ve got to get this done.”
Wisconsin reported its highest number of Covid-19 hospitalizations on record, with hospitalized patients nearly doubling in the state since September 18, according to hospital officials. And in Illinois, the governor is tightening restrictions in one part of the state after an increase in positivity rates.
At least 27 states have reported more new cases since the previous week and only nine are reporting a decline, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. Nationwide, more than 7.2 million people have been infected and more than 206,000 Americans have died.
When a vaccine could be available to US population
On Wednesday, Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel said if its Covid-19 vaccine is proven safe and effective, it could be available to the general population by late March or early April.
Moderna began its Phase 3 clinical trial for a Covid-19 vaccine in the US in July. It’s one of four companies that have begun Phase 3 Covid-19 vaccine trials in the US — the others are Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer/BioNTech and AstraZeneca. The AstraZeneca trial was paused after an unexplained illness in a volunteer, and US health authorities are still considering crucial questions that remain around the injections of the experimental vaccine.
“I think a late Q1, early Q2 approval is a reasonable timeline, based on what we know from our vaccine,” Bancel said at a conference hosted by the Financial Times.
But there are several steps that will have to come before that.
If the safety and efficacy data checks out, Bancel says he expects Moderna will be
on September 30, 2020 September 30, 2020 health
WilCo Health Officials Urge Residents To Get Flu Shots
WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TX — Ahead of the upcoming flu season, county officials are urging residents to get vaccinated toward protecting themselves and their families, officials announced Wednesday.
To that end, the Williamson County and Cities Health District urges residents from six months old and older to get vaccinated. Urgency in the advice is heightened given a decrease in use of preventive medical services in light of stay-at-home and shelter-in-place orders that have kept residents largely at home in efforts to blunt the spread of illness, officials noted.
Who Should Get the Flu Shot?
Annual flu vaccination is recommended for everyone six months of age and older, with rare exceptions, because it is an effective way to decrease flu illnesses, hospitalizations and deaths:
Essential workers: Including healthcare personnel (including nursing home, long-term care facility, and pharmacy staff) and other critical infrastructure workforce.
Persons at increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19: Including adults aged 65 years and older, residents in a nursing home or long-term care facility, and persons of all ages with chronic disease and certain underlying medical conditions.
Persons at increased risk for serious influenza complications: Including infants and young children, children with neurologic conditions, pregnant women, adults aged 65 years and older, and other persons with chronic disease and certain underlying medical conditions.
“Take precautions to reduce your chance of getting the flu this season by getting vaccinated in the fall, washing hands frequently, covering coughs and sneezes and staying home if you’re sick,” officials wrote in an advisory. Health officials added that influenza circulates heavily in Central Texas from typically September through April each year.
Flu information and a vaccine finder are available at TexasFlu.org.
This article originally appeared on the Austin Patch
Here’s Why Some Cities Are Giving Cash to Residents
Cities including Stockton, Calif. and Hudson, N.Y. are experimenting with different models related to universal basic income. In Stockton, a program that allocated $500 a month to 125 randomly selected households in low-income neighborhoods was scheduled to end in July has been extended until January. Meanwhile, Hudson is launching a pilot program to give $500 a month to randomly selected residents for five years.
1. The funds have helped recipients get through the pandemic.
More than half of the funds from Stockton’s $3.8 million experiment have been spent on food and utilities, according to preliminary findings. Stockton’s 30-year-old mayor, Michael Tubbs, who pioneered the project, said of the spending, “What we found is that you can trust people to make good decisions.”
2. Critics are skeptical about the concept.
Some economists argue that no-strings-attached cash could be a disincentive for people to find work—especially if the money is only given to low income households. However, studies of universal cash transfers in Alaska and among the Eastern Band of Cherokees in North Carolina found no negative effect on work. On a national level, a similar program targeting households within certain income brackets could cost as much as $1.2 trillion, according to economists Melissa Kearney and Magne Mogstad. Kearney said it would likely have to replace existing safety net programs.
3. Some mayors are still willing to give it a shot
Roughly two dozen mayors from cities as large as Los Angeles and as small as Holyoke, Mass., have signed on to a newly formed coalition advocating for a nationwide guaranteed income. “This Covid[-19] economy has just yanked the rug out from our communities across the country in a way we’ve never experienced before,” said Melvin Carter, mayor of Saint Paul, Minn., and a member of the group. He said his city is working with donors to set up its own experiment similar to the one in Stockton.
Read the original article by David Harrison here.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1046
|
__label__wiki
| 0.741979
| 0.741979
|
Home righttodie
righttodie
Frenchman in right-to-die case to stop food, medicine
Issued on: 10/10/2020 – 17:29
Dijon (France) (AFP)
A terminally ill Frenchman who had planned to live stream his death on social media told AFP Saturday that he would refuse all food and medication “until the very end”.
Alain Cocq, 57, had earlier announced he was refusing all food, drink and medicine from September 5 after French President Emmanuel Macron turned down his request for euthanasia.
But he accepted palliative care after refusing food and medication for over three days because the pain had become unbearable.
“From midnight on Monday, October 12, I will stop all hydration, food and treatment apart from painkillers,” he told AFP.
“I will go right till the end.”
Cocq suffers from a rare genetic condition which causes the walls of his arteries to stick together.
He has used his plight to draw attention to the situation of terminally ill patients in France who are not allowed to die in line with their wishes.
Cocq said that when he had accepted palliative care after his abortive first attempt, the medical emergency team had to put him back on hydration and food for the pain killers to work.
He said he had drawn a lesson from that.
“This time round, I will put my wish in writing … even if I seek medical aid at a given moment, it does not mean I wish to live.
“It would mean that I cannot bear the suffering any longer and that I seek a deep and continued sedation,” he said.
Right-to-die cases have long been an emotive issue in France.
Most polarising was the case of Vincent Lambert, who was left in a vegetative state after a traffic accident in 2008 and died in July last year after doctors removed life support following a long legal battle.
The case divided the country as well as Lambert’s own family, with his parents using every legal avenue to keep him alive but his wife and nephew insisting he must be allowed to die.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1047
|
__label__cc
| 0.633685
| 0.366315
|
Green Mountain Energy Company Donates $20,000 Solar Array to Habitat for Humanity Rice Centennial House
This is the first ever Houston Habitat House designed solely by students with a solar array design element
HOUSTON, TEXAS – In conjunction with Earth Month and in celebration of Rice University’s 100th anniversary, Green Mountain Energy Company proudly presents a check in the amount of $20,000 to the Houston Habitat for Humanity Rice Centennial House for a solar installation. The Centennial House is a Houston Habitat for Humanity home designed and built by Rice University students and will be provided to a deserving local family later this year. The donation is made possible through Green Mountain EnergyTM Sun ClubTM, a program where customer contributions provide solar-powered installations for non-profit organizations.
The house, designed with a focus on energy-efficiency, is being built by volunteers over ten build dates in March and April 2012. The Rice Centennial House Project allows Rice faculty, staff, alumni, students and community members to contribute to the university’s enduring legacy of service. Green Mountain’s donation of a solar array adds another element of sustainability to this environmentally-friendly home.
“We wanted the house to be sustainable for the long term, so we created a design around a solar array that would provide a renewable, affordable source of electricity,” said Tawfik Jarjour, a Senior at Rice University, and Director of the Centennial House Project. “This is the first Houston Habitat house built with solar array as a key design element, let alone one designed and built by students, which is something that makes us really proud.”
The solar panels will be situated at an optimum angle to allow them to pick up the most sunlight possible. Following the build, the students are donating usage of the blueprints of the house to Habitat so that future homes can follow this same concept.
In addition to the check presentation, Green Mountain employees participated in one of the Habitat Build Days, working alongside students and other community members constructing the home.
“The Centennial House is such an incredible gift to the Houston community and we’re proud to contribute to this effort,” said Helen Brauner, senior vice president, Marketing and Strategic Planning, Green Mountain Energy Company. “As a Rice Alumna, I’m especially proud to be here working alongside my fellow Owls and Green Mountain colleagues to help build the Centennial House today.”
Celebrate Earth Month in Houston
Earth Day takes place every year on April 22, but why celebrate just one day? Earth Day has turned into a month-long celebration where people all over the world attend events, participate in helping the Earth, and put the environment’s well-being at the top of their priority lists. Many communities across the world come together through different conservation methods including planting trees, recycling and providing educational material on sustainability.
Celebrate Earth Month throughout April at the local events listed below. While there, make sure to stop by the Green Mountain table to learn more about bringing renewable energy to your home or business. Whether you attend one, a few, or all of the events, you are sure to have a great time and learn more about reducing your carbon footprint!
DCAC Fitness Convention (4/12-4/14)
Houston Home and Garden Show (4/ 13 – 4/15)
Houston Pet Expo (4/14)
Galveston Grand Kids Festival (4/14)
Texas Crawfish & Music Festival (4/20 -22, 4/27-29)
Epicurean Evening (4/21)
Houston International Festival (4/21-22, 28-29)
About the Rice Centennial House
The Rice Centennial House is being built in the Fifth Ward of Houston. The 1,300 square foot house has three bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a combined living room and kitchen space. The house will also boast front and back porches and a garage.
For more information on the Rice Centennial House or to view virtual images of the house, visit http://habitat.rice.edu/rch.
About Habitat for Humanity
Habitat for Humanity was founded in 1976 with the mission to provide simple, decent affordable housing for all. In the United States alone, 95 million people have housing problems including unattainable housing payments, overcrowding, poor quality shelter and homelessness. Through the work of Habitat, thousands of low-income families have found new hope in the form of affordable housing. Churches, community groups and others have joined together to successfully tackle this significant social problem. Today, Habitat for Humanity has built more than 500,000 houses, sheltering 2.5 million people worldwide.
Houston Habitat for Humanity has built more than 880 homes in the area since the affiliate was established in 1987. Rice Habitat for Humanity is a non-profit student organization, which works toward Habitat’s goal of eliminating inadequate housing. It was founded in the early 1990’s and has been very active ever since, with our group fundraising for and building its own homes in 1997, 2000, and 2001.
For more information on Habitat for Humanity and how you can help provide housing for deserving families, visit www.habitat.org.
Green Mountain EnergyTM Sun ClubTM
Green Mountain EnergyTM Sun ClubTM is a program where Green Mountain residential customers have the opportunity to give back to deserving non-profit organizations through the promotion of solar power. Direct monthly contributions from customers go toward the funding of solar installations. Since the program’s founding in 2002, Sun Club members have helped install almost 500kW of solar power, preventing over 3.3 million pounds of carbon dioxide emissions. That equals 3.6 million miles not driven or 8.1 million aluminum cans recycled. For more information, visit www.greenmountainenergysunclub.com.
Green Mountain, the nation’s leading competitive retail provider of cleaner energy and carbon offset solutions, was founded in 1997 to “change the way power is made.” The company is the longest serving green power marketer in the U.S. Green Mountain offers consumers and businesses the choice of cleaner electricity products from renewable sources, such as wind, as well as a variety of carbon offset products. Green Mountain’s largest customer is the “world’s most famous office building,” the Empire State Building in New York City. Green Mountain customers have collectively helped avoid over 14.8 billion pounds of CO2 emissions. As a wholly owned subsidiary of NRG Energy (NYSE:NRG), Green Mountain is backed by one of the nation’s largest renewable power producers. For more information, visit www.GreenMountain.com.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1049
|
__label__cc
| 0.708425
| 0.291575
|
Hello Newport
Newport Photos
Newport Videos
Newport Rhode Island
Newport is located at the southern end of Aquidneck Island and has a lot of history, including an old fort. From a castle on a hill to an island lighthouse, the discerning traveler will find luxurious accommodations in Newport, Rhode Island. Narragansett, RI - Rhode Island is awaiting you with its beautiful beaches, beautiful scenery and great ocean views.
Newport is connected to the mainland by three bridges and ferries and is occupied by the Claiborne - Pell Bridge, Newport Bridge and Jamestown Bridge. To get to Newport from anywhere on Aquidneck Island, you have to take one of the three bridges, and many locals know it as the "Newton Bridge." Newport is located at the southern end of a small island in the eastern part of Rhode Island and It houses a number of historic buildings, including a castle, lighthouse and fortress, and from there the bridge over the river that forms a bridge to Jamestown.
If you are visiting Newport for a day trip from Boston and do not have a car, you can catch the train. If you don't want to rent a car, there is a bus service from Newport to Boston via Boston.
In addition, the Jamestown - Newport ferry service offers a ferry service from Newport via Boston to Providence, Rhode Island. It would be worth visiting Newport just to see the site of the colonial houses, not to mention the beach, restaurants and shops. There are many other things to do in Newport, RI, even though you don't like to do it, but it's worth a visit.
If you're on holiday in Narragansett, take a trip to nearby Newport, which is just a 30-minute drive away. If you only have a day trip from Newport to Rhode Island, this guide will make sure your time is maximized. So, relax, know what you're going to do, and plan to come back to Newport and other parts of the state to do other things.
Newport's fun is right next to Cliff Walk and there are plenty of amenities here, including shops where you can rent everything from boogie boards to umbrellas. Easton Beach (also called First Beach) is the largest public beach in Newport, located at the beginning of Cliff Walk. I like it because it's the smallest of the Newport funspots, but has a ton to do, including aquarium and playground.
There are many things to do and see in Narragansett, from visiting Point Judith Lighthouse to exploring Port Galilee. There are a lot of great restaurants, shops and attractions in Newport, as well as great beaches, making it a great place to visit. It is the perfect place to explore with family and friends, and it is just a short drive from Providence, the capital of Rhode Island.
Many of the beaches in Newport and Middletown are just a few blocks apart and have a variety of different features. Surfers of all abilities are encouraged to surf at one of Newport's many beaches, such as Newport Beach, Narragansett Beach and Point Judith Beach.
Newport is also home to the Newport Country Club, which hosts a variety of events including the Rhode Island State Fair and the New England Country Music Festival. Newport is also known for hosting the annual Newport County Fair, one of the state's most popular events. There are also shows in Newport, as well as Newport Beach, Narragansett, Middletown, Newport and Providence.
The Midtown Oyster Bar is the perfect place to have lunch, as it is one of the best oyster bars in Rhode Island and its outpost in Gurney, Montauk, is also a New York institution that will certainly appeal to Manhattans. The Italian restaurant is a delicious restaurant, but also home to a number of great craft beers and wine bars. If you want more information on what to do in this wonderful little state, read our guide to Newport's best restaurants, bars, hotels, restaurants and more. Subscribe to all our new posts from Rhode Island in your inbox and join us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram for the latest news and updates on all the things Newport has to offer and all the great things you can do in our amazing state.
Adams State Park is worth a visit for New England - a taste-filled experience, especially for those who love nature. Overlooking First Beach and Rhode Island Sound, this luxury hotel is just a short walk from the Newport Convention Center and the New York City skyline.
If you're looking for a holiday like a gilded footballer from the age of football, Rhode Island City by the Sea is your best choice. You will see the New York City skyline, as well as the Newport Convention Center, to name a few. When visiting Newport, you should visit some of the city's most popular attractions, such as Newport Beach, Newport Harbor and Newport State Park.
www.HelloWarwick.com
www.HelloCranston.com
www.HelloProvidence.com
www.HelloPawtucket.com
www.HelloTaunton.com
www.HelloNewLondon.com
© 2021 Hello Newport - All Rights Reserved.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1052
|
__label__wiki
| 0.795383
| 0.795383
|
Berlin: Oscar Isaac to Star in WWII Thriller 'The Garbo Network'
11:34 AM PST 2/10/2017 by Rebecca Ford
Isaiah Trickey/FilmMagic
He'll play Juan Pujol Garcia, an eccentric double-agent with no military or covert training.
Oscar Isaac is set to star in WWII thriller The Garbo Network as a real-life double agent.
William Wheeler wrote the script, which is based on the true story of Juan Pujol Garcia, an eccentric double agent who, with no military or covert training, somehow persuaded both the Germans and the British to hire him as a spy. As it turned out, his real allegiance was to England, and working closely with MI-5, he created a fictional network of 27 spies said to be spread out over England, Scotland and Ireland, supplying him with critical information about British troop movements and military planning. He actually made the whole thing up, but it was a turning point in the war, enabling the English to deceive the Germans about the invasion of Normandy.
Garcia is the only man in the history of World War II to receive distinguished Medals of Honor from opposing sides: the German Iron Cross and the Member of the Order of the British Empire.
A director is not yet attached to the project.
Storyscape Entertainment's Bob Cooper and Richard Saperstein, Chuck Weinstock, Jason Spire and Isaac are producing. Cooper will be in Berlin for the premiere of Storyscape’s Maudie at the Berlinale and will be meeting with buyers regarding The Garbo Network.
"This is a tricky part. There are very few actors who can do both pathos and comic grandiosity," said Weinstock. "Oscar is one of them, and we feel very lucky to have him."
Isaac recently joined Dan Fogelman’s Life Itself, which is also selling in Berlin, and is attached to the George Clooney-directed Suburbicon. He next will be seen starring in Star Wars: Episode VIII — The Last Jedi and in the Alex Garland-directed Annihilation. Isaac also will be returning to the stage this summer to star as the titular character in Hamlet at NYC’s Public Theatre. He is repped by UTA and Inspire Entertainment.
Rebecca Ford
Rebecca.Ford@thr.com beccamford
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1053
|
__label__cc
| 0.58654
| 0.41346
|
Design & Fit Out
Leaders Forum
Contact & Advertise
FDA Food Safety Blueprint underway
by Hospitality Business May 21, 2019
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration will develop a “Blueprint for a New Era of Smarter Food Safety” for how the agency applies new and emerging technologies to advance food safety.
Traceability, digital technologies and evolving food business models are among the areas the blueprint will address, the agency explained, and a public meeting scheduled for later this year will be a platform for stakeholders to share ideas about the agency’s strategy. The F.D.A. said “…we’re announcing a ‘New Era of Smarter Food Safety’ to augment our efforts implementing important FSMA requirements while also leveraging, among other things, the use of new and emerging technologies.”
In the area of food traceability, the agency seeks to transition to digital tracking from the paper-based systems currently in use throughout food supply chains.
“The use of new and evolving digital technologies may play a pivotal role in tracing the origin of a contaminated food to its source in minutes, or even seconds, instead of days or weeks, when contamination does occur,” the agency said. “Access to information during an outbreak about the origin of contaminated food will help us conduct more timely root cause analysis and apply these learnings to prevent future incidents from happening in the first place.”
Other digital technologies the F.D.A. is considering include blockchain, sensors, the Internet of Things and artificial intelligence. Officials proposed an assessment of how these technologies and others will help create a more digital and transparent food safety system. As part of this strategy, the F.D.A. will conduct a new pilot that leverages artificial intelligence and machine learning to review imported foods at U.S. ports of entry.
“The number of import food lines is increasing year after year and applying the best predictive and analytical tools will help ensure we’re targeting the greatest risks to protect consumers,” the F.D.A. said. “This pilot will build upon F.D.A. initiatives already underway, which are also looking at how use of these new technologies may be able to help us continue meeting our public health mission.”
Finally, the F.D.A. will look for opportunities to collaborate with stakeholders in the e-commerce space for food to account for the increase in home delivery of foods.
“These evolving business models present food safety challenges as well as novel considerations around regulatory framework and oversight at the federal, state and local level,” the F.D.A. noted. “Our blueprint will discuss areas for collaboration in this space as we work to identify the appropriate standard of care in this rapidly growing sector.”
Tagged: hb-nl4
10 must-visit eateries
7 silver linings from 2020
4 Top Hospitality Survival Tips
How to hit the ground running in 2021
Schweppes launches 1783
© 2021 Hospitality Business. Owned by The Intermedia Group.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1054
|
__label__cc
| 0.687084
| 0.312916
|
The school has a clear behaviour policy, and a series of expectations of the way that students should behave when at school. For transgressions of expectations that attract more serious sanctions, these will generally reflect those values upheld by our society. i.e treating each other with respect, care and tolerance; avoiding prejudice, abuse of others and/or criminal acts.
Why have school sanctions?
In the same way that parents or carers use praise, reward and the removal of privileges to encourage their children to behave in the way that they would wish, the school also uses rewards and sanctions.
For many minor matters, a discussion of the issues and the way to address these is sufficient. Where there is an ongoing problem, or the misbehaviour is more serious, then this discussion will be accompanied by sanctions.
The purpose of sanctions is to reinforce that certain behaviours or attitudes are not acceptable. For more serious ongoing matters, sanctions also serve as a form of warning that failure to correct misbehaviour could lead to temporary or, in extreme cases, permanent removal from the school in order to protect others’ education or well-being.
Deciding the sanction that applies
When an incident occurs, then a sanction will be set by the relevant member of staff in line with the school behaviour policy and the HACH Sanctions chart.
There are times when an incident needs investigation before a decision can be made. This may be because it is a reported concern without direct evidence as yet and/or because student accounts are at variance with other reports. In these instances, the following general procedure is followed:
1. Students concerned are asked to give an account through writing a statement and investigatory staff will ask additional questions to clarify sequencing, detail or any apparent discrepancies
2. Any witnesses will be asked for their account; this will include students and staff. Where possible, witnesses who are neutral i.e. not part of involved students’ friendship groups, will be used.
3. Any camera footage of the area at the time will be viewed
4. A decision will be made as to the likely pattern of events based on the evidence collected.
The school will make the final decision of the sanction that applies in any situation; this is its responsibility. Any decision is not subject to parental/carer approval, though the school would make every effort for parents/carers to understand the reasons behind its decision and how this complies with its behaviour policy.
The school will not accept that any individual student should be exempt from school sanctions. All students must comply with sanctions set by the school.
|
cc/2021-04/en_head_0048.json.gz/line1055
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.