COMMENTS AT THE RUSSI MISSILE DEFENSE CONVERENCE

Photo:  Missile Tracking System.  From:  U.S. Air Force.
FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Missile Defense Conference
Remarks Ellen Tauscher
Special Envoy for Strategic Stability and Missile Defense 2012 RUSI Missile Defense Conference
London, United Kingdom
May 30, 2012
Thank you, Michael, for that kind introduction.
I am honored to be back here, at RUSI, speaking about my favorite topic, missile defense. I particularly appreciate this year’s program where I get to speak first.
Last year, as many of you may recall, I was the last speaker, which is tough when you follow so many renowned experts in the field. Going first is much easier, so thank you.
Let me acknowledge some of my colleagues that are in attendance today. Without their support and cooperation, much of the progress we have made on these issues would not have been possible.

I want to acknowledge Bogdan Aurescu, who will speak to this group a little later. It was a tremendous honor to work with him so closely in Romania.
I also want to mention Ambassador Daalder and Madelyn Creedon.
Madelyn and I did a similar routine at the Moscow missile defense conference earlier this month.

This conference is particularly well timed, coming just one week after the NATO Summit in Chicago. Instead of just giving my typical Monday, Wednesday, Friday missile defense speech, I would like to discuss some of the areas where we still need to make progress on missile defense.

Let me start with the recent announcement at Chicago of an “interim missile defense capability.”

The progress on missile defense is remarkable given that NATO only made its decision to develop a territorial ballistic missile defense capability 18 months ago. In that year-and-a-half period, the United States and our NATO Allies have achieved an operationally significant peacetime ballistic missile defense capability.

That means that NATO now has its first missile defense radar, its first interceptors, a single commander, and a NATO command and control system for ballistic missile defense.

This progress was only possible because our NATO Allies embraced President Obama’s European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA), which is focused on protecting our European allies and deployed U.S. forces against the existing ballistic missile threats.

It has been a great privilege for me to have worked so closely with all of our Allies over the last couple of years to reach this point, especially my colleagues in Poland, Romania, Spain, and Turkey.

Because of their support and leadership, for which we are incredibly grateful, we were able to reach agreement on the basing of our missile defense assets in Europe.
As you know, last September, we made three big announcements.
First, Turkey agreed to host the Phase 1 ANTPY-2 radar.

Second, we signed the Ballistic Missile Defense Agreement with Romania to host the Phase 2 land-based SM-3 site.

Third, the U.S.-Poland agreement for the Phase 3 land-based site entered into force as well.
And then a few weeks later in early October, Spain agreed to serve as a home port for four Aegis destroyers.

As we like to say in the United States, that’s not bad for government work.
We also appreciate the other contributions by our NATO Allies to this effort. Our NATO Allies will contribute more than $1 billion dollars in NATO Common Funding to the ALTBMD command and control system. The Netherlands has indicated that it will spend close to 250 million Euros to modify the radars on its frigates to detect and track ballistic missiles at long ranges and contribute its Patriot missiles to NATO missile defense.
Germany is also exploring developing an airborne infrared sensor. France has proposed a concept for a shared early warning satellite. There is much that our allies can contribute to NATO’s developing missile defense system.

Of course, the announcement in Chicago is just an initial but important step in implementing NATO’s territorial ballistic missile defense capability.
The Obama Administration is committed to working with NATO on these efforts and deploying all four phases of the EPAA as our voluntary national contribution.
For our part, much work remains to be done on the systems that the United States will deploy as potential contributions to NATO missile defense, but considerable work has already begun.

Just look at the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2013.
Even in a constrained budget environment, the United States has protected the funding for the European Phased Adaptive Approach.

These actions are a clear demonstration of the United Sates’ continued commitment to European security and our Article 5 obligations. At the same time as we are working with our NATO Allies, there is a tremendous opportunity to develop a meaningful strategic partnership with Russia in the area of missile defense cooperation.

Missile defense cooperation can achieve two very important objectives. First, it would allow Russia to see with its own eyes what we are doing on missile defense and it will give us time to demonstrate how our systems operate.

It will allow Russia to see that the European Phased Adaptive Approach is not directed against Russia, but limited regional threats from outside of Europe… not Russia.
Second, it could give the United States, NATO, and Russia the opportunity to forge a true strategic partnership that enhances security for all.

I realize it takes time to build confidence. But, we have that time. Russia has expressed concerns about our plans for Phases 3 and 4 of the EPAA.

There are six years before we deploy Phase 3 in the 2018 timeframe. We should use that time positively on cooperation and not confrontation.

Russia should come inside the missile defense cooperation tent and see what we are doing.
During that time, we will be testing an Aegis BMD site in Hawaii. We will be developing and testing the SM-3 Block IIA and IIB interceptors.

Russia has also observed our intercept tests in the past and the invitation to observe a future test still stands.

We will also be working with our NATO Allies to ensure how to best protect NATO European populations and territory.
At the same time, the U.S., NATO and Russia can work together on a broad range of cooperation: Sharing sensor data, working on developing common pre-planned responses, conducting a joint analysis of missile defense systems, and working together on missile defense exercises.

The United States and NATO have been transparent about our missile defense programs.
We have provided Russia with a number of ideas and approaches for transparency and we are also committed to discussing other approaches to building confidence between our two countries.

At Chicago, NATO Allies made a very clear statement of our intent. NATO declared in the Chicago Summit Declaration “…the NATO missile defense in Europe will not undermine strategic stability. NATO missile defense is not directed against Russia and will not undermine Russia’s strategic deterrence capabilities.”

And, as I have told my Russian colleagues, if Russia doesn’t like what it has learned throughout this period of cooperation, then it can terminate cooperation at any point.
But that means getting Russia inside the missile defense tent now, working alongside the U.S. and NATO, while we are in the initial phases of deploying this capability. It will take time and effort to build the trust that is currently lacking on this issue.

But let me be clear. While we can work cooperatively together, we cannot agree to the pre-conditions outlined by the Russian Government.

We are committed to deploying effective missile defenses to protect the U.S. homeland and our Allies and partners around the world from the proliferation of ballistic missiles.
We will not agree to limitations on the capabilities and numbers of our missile defense systems.

We cannot agree to any “military-technical criteria,” that would, in effect, limit our ability to develop and deploy future missile defense systems that will protect us against regional threats such as Iran and North Korea.

If we can work together on European missile defense, and make this a subject for cooperation rather than competition, that would be a game-changer for our security relationship.

We understand that there are risks involved, and it takes courage to move away from familiar ways and long-held positions. We believe those risks are manageable.
The alternative is competition, something none of us can afford or want.
So we will keep working to see if we can come up with a plan for cooperation.
We will continue to press in the Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Joint Staff channels. We will keep moving forward in the run up to the June G-20 meeting between Presidents Obama and Putin, and we will keep going long after June.

Thank you again for the opportunity to speak here at this impressive gathering of experts. I look forward to answering any questions you might have.

SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON SENDS BEST WISHES ON ITALY'S NATIONAL DAY

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

On the Occasion of Italy's National Day

Press Statement

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Washington, DC

June 1, 2012

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to send best wishes to the people of Italy as you celebrate your national day this June 2. I send my deepest condolences to the family and friends of those who lost their lives in Tuesday’s earthquake. The United States stands by the Italian people as you rebuild and recover.

As we look forward to 2013 as the Year of Italian Culture in the United States, we reflect on the history and shared values that have bound our nations and peoples over the centuries. Americans have long been drawn to Italy to marvel at the art, admire the antiquities, and rediscover their heritage. For years, Italian-Americans have enriched and enlivened American culture in ways large and small.

Our two countries are working together for the future peace and prosperity of our world. As you celebrate this special day with the warmth of good food, family, and friends, know that the United States stands with you.

SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON'S REMARKS WITH DANISH FOREIGN MINISTER

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With Danish Foreign Minister Villy Sovndal
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Eigtveds Pakhus
Copenhagen, Denmark
May 31, 2012
FOREIGN MINISTER SOVNDAL: Yes. Hello and welcome. First of all, I would like to welcome you to Copenhagen. It’s been a pleasure. I’m very happy to be able to return hospitality and generosity you showed when I was in Washington just before Christmas. Thank you very much for that.

And it’s a great pleasure to receive Secretary of State Hillary Clinton here in Copenhagen. One important thing for Secretary Clinton’s visit here will be green growth and the potential for a green transition of our economies. I believe that Denmark has a lot to offer in that regard, and the importance of the United States is hard to overrate. This theme means a lot to both of us.

We had a very fruitful meeting where we discussed a wide range of shared policy priorities. I would like to briefly mention a few of the main items we discussed.

First of all, we had a very frank discussion about Afghanistan. Following up on the NATO Summit, which the United States successfully hosted in Chicago just a few weeks ago, I believe I speak on behalf of both of us when I say that there is a need of realism regarding the prospects for Afghanistan. Transition in Afghanistan is a bumpy road; that’s no secret. But the transition is moving forward, and it will complete by the end of 2014. It is vital that we enable the Afghans to take over full responsibility for their security. I’m therefore very encouraged to note that we have already secured substantial long-term contribution for the Afghan National Security Force, and that was not least a result of the very close cooperation we had between our two countries leading up to Chicago.

We also had an excellent discussion regarding our mutual efforts to help stabilize the Horn of Africa, Libya, and the Sahel region. We agreed on strengthening the U.S.-Danish partnership to prevent and counter terrorism in East Africa. A key focus area will be to prevent the financing of terrorism. We also agreed on the need to strengthen respect for human rights and the rule of law in our effort to counter terrorism. We will launch a joint project focusing on states moving towards democratic governance, including the countries in North Africa. Moreover, we will also jointly provide support for an observation mission to monitor the upcoming elections in Libya. We stand committed to assisting the Libyans in their efforts towards securing a peaceful and democratic future for their elections.

Finally, we discussed the potential for stronger cooperation on promoting green growth. The backdrop of our discussion was the Rio+20 conference on sustainable development, which is just a few weeks ahead. Later today, a strong bilateral green partnership will be kicked off here in Copenhagen. I hope this can also be a driver for an increased investment in trade.

Secretary of State, we must – we meet frequently in different locations around the world. I’m therefore very pleased to be able to receive you here in Copenhagen, so to say, on home ground. I very much appreciate our sincere, frank cooperation, and I hope you’ll enjoy not only this visit, but don’t be shy to come back here once again if you want.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Minister Sovndal, thank you so much for your warm welcome. It is indeed a pleasure to be back here in Copenhagen. This is my first stop on a trip that will take me to several European countries over the next week to underscore America’s commitment to our transatlantic allies and our shared values. You are, after all, our partners of first resort. And together, we are facing the challenges of a complex, dangerous, and fast-moving world. And I’m particularly grateful for Denmark’s leadership in the area of humanitarian and development assistance as well as the staunch contributions to our shared security.

The friendship between our two countries dates back more than two centuries and the bonds between our people have endured over that time. Our commitment to democracy, to human rights, to human dignity is core to all of us. And this morning I had the great privilege of speaking with a group of Danish young people about the kind of future that we hope awaits them.

We had a very productive lunch, talked through a range of issues as the minister has said, because after all we are working together on matters ranging from nuclear proliferation in Iran to global food security.

Regarding Afghanistan I thanked the foreign minister for the leadership of the Danish Government and the sacrifices made by the Danish people, in particular your extraordinary soldiers. Danish soldiers have fought valiantly alongside American and allied forces. And as we prepare for the transition in 2014, when the Afghans themselves will take full responsibility for their own security, Denmark has responded by generously committing to supporting the Afghan National Security Forces after the transition and calling on other nations to do the same through its Coalition of Committed Contributors initiative.

As we look toward the donors’ summit in Tokyo in July, Denmark will continue to play a leading role in helping the Afghan people make progress in governance, on education, healthcare, and other indices of development. Denmark’s commitment to new democracies extends far beyond Afghanistan and into the Middle East and North Africa, where it has pledged money in assistance and working to spark economic growth, especially in the private sector. And I expressed our gratitude for the leadership once again that Denmark is showing, because it is essential that democracies, especially these very young democracies, deliver tangible results for people.

We of course discussed Denmark’s leadership on climate change and the environment. As an Arctic nation, Denmark knows very well how pressing these issues are. And as climate change progresses, its impact will affect the livelihoods of millions of people who are dependent on this region’s natural resources. Denmark is a strong voice for taking aggressive action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and by leading the charge with your own domestic goal of cutting emissions by 40 percent by 2020. And I want to applaud Denmark’s decision to join the Climate and Clean Air Coalition that will help us reduce the short-lived climate pollutants as well as CO2. That’s an important complement to what is being done with respect to carbon emissions.

For our part, the United States has continued to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We’ve established new fuel efficiency standards that will be among the most aggressive in the world. We have invested more than $90 billion in clean energy and energy efficiency. We’ve more than doubled our installed capacity of wind and solar in four years. So I’m looking forward to this afternoon’s Green Partnership for Growth event with the prime minister, and I applaud Denmark’s leadership in creating the Global Green Growth Forum, an innovative platform that encourages leaders across governments, the private sector, and civil society to work together.

And finally, let me say a word about Syria. The world looked on last week at the massacre in Houla with horror, and those responsible must be held to account. We and the world have joined in condemning the brutality of the Assad regime. I spoke with Special Envoy Kofi Annan yesterday about his recent visit to Damascus. We are working with Denmark and others to make sure the international community speaks with a unified voice to increase pressure on Assad from both inside and outside. We have to peel away the regime’s continued support within Syria while bolstering our assistance to the opposition and by isolating the regime diplomatically and economically.

So we have a lot of work ahead of us, Minister, and I want to conclude by thanking you again as well as the people of Denmark for your invaluable partnership and leadership. I look forward to our continuing coordination and collaboration, and it is a great pleasure for me to have this opportunity to be here once again. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. We will now take a few questions. (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Thank you. Madam Secretary, as you have stated, Denmark has played an important role in different missions around the world – in Iraq, Afghanistan, and recently in Libya. Right now, the situation in Syria is on top of the agenda. If – and that’s my question – if an international coalition could – can be formed, could you then see Denmark take play in such a coalition?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think we have to take stock of where we are and what is possible. I see Denmark as a contributor to any mission anywhere be it security, be it development, be it humanitarian, because the track record of Danish participation is exemplary. So of course, if there were such an international coalition to do anything to try to alleviate the suffering of the Syrian people, we would certainly reach out as broadly as possible and be consulting closely with the Danish Government.

Right now, we continue to support Kofi Annan and his efforts. And we do so fully aware that thus far Assad has not implemented any of the six points that are part of the Kofi Annan plan. But we also know that the UN observers have performed two important functions. In many of the areas where they are present, violence has gone down. And they serve as independent observers – the eyes of the world, if you will – in reporting back when terrible events like the recent massacres occur to try to cut through the clutter and disinformation coming from the Syrian Government.

We’re also aware that there is still a fear among many elements of the Syrian society and the Syrian Government that as bad as the Assad regime is, it could get worse. And we therefore continue to call upon the business leadership, the religious leadership, the military leadership, those voices within the government that know what is going on is leading to the very outcome they fear most, which is a sectarian civil war, to stand up now and call a halt to further support for this regime.

So we’re nowhere near putting together any kind of coalition other than to alleviate the suffering, which we are all contributing to, but we are working very hard to focus the efforts of those, who like Denmark and the United States, are appalled by what we see going on, to perhaps win over those who still support the regime inside and outside of Syria to see what options are available to us.

QUESTION: Jim Mannion from Agence France Presse. Madam Secretary, again on Syria, at this point with the Russians refusing a budge on Syria and with the country appearing to tip towards civil war, is it now a live option to move beyond the requirement of an explicit UN mandate to some sort of action outside of the UN? Is that something the U.S. is considering? Is that a possibility at this point?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Jim, we consider all contingencies at all time. I mean, we plan against everything in order to be prepared in the event that action is called for. But I can tell you that right now, we are focused on supporting Kofi Annan, reaching out both inside and outside of Syria, bringing together those who are most directly affected, particularly in the region. In the last several days, I’ve had numerous conversations – I will have many more over the next few days – with particular attention paid on – to the Russians. Because the Russians keep telling us they want to do everything they can to avoid a civil war because they believe that the violence would be catastrophic. They often, in their conversations with me, liken it to the equivalent of a very large Lebanese civil war, and they are just vociferous in their claim that they are providing a stabilizing influence.
I reject that. I think they are, in effect, propping up the regime at a time when we should be working on a political transition. So I look forward to working with Kofi Annan, with likeminded nations like Denmark and many others, and with the Russians to see if we can’t get a way forward.

MODERATOR: Oliver.

QUESTION: Oliver Skov with the Danish Broadcasting Corporation. The Danes are very curious and interested in the – in U.S. politics and the upcoming elections. (Laughter.) I was hoping you would comment on the upcoming elections and, on a more personal level, your own role after the elections in November.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I am, as Secretary of State, out of politics. And that’s a rule that we have in our system, that because I have international responsibilities, I cannot participate in the political process. So for the first time in my adult life, I will not be actively engaged in this election.

Clearly, I anticipate and expect the President to be reelected, and the policies that have been pursued in this Administration to continue. But the voters, as in any democracy, will have the final word on the outcome. But I’m looking forward to working as hard as I can until the end of my tenure as Secretary of State, and then will look forward to some time to collect myself and spend it doing just ordinary things that I very much am looking forward to again, like taking a walk without a lot of company – not that I don’t love seeing you all – but just having the time to set my own schedule and pursue a lot of the interests that I have pursued my entire life, particularly on behalf of women and children.

QUESTION: No politics?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No politics.

MODERATOR: One final question. Brad.

QUESTION: Yes, Brad Klapper from Associated Press. Madam Secretary, there’s been increasing talk in Israel, including yesterday from the defense minister, about unilateral action or interim solution in the West Bank in lieu of progress in the peace process. Would you encourage or discourage unilateral withdrawal by Israel from some land, even if it’s not all the Palestinians seek? And what would the unilateral aspect of such a move mean for the chances of establishing a long-lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Brad, the United States believes there is no substitute for direct talks between the parties. It is the only route to achieving what has long been not only a Palestinian goal and an American goal, but an Israeli goal, which are two states living side by side in peace and security. We have discouraged unilateral action from both sides, and in fact, we think that this new coalition government in Israel provides the best opportunity in several years to reach such a negotiated agreement. In fact, when the coalition was formed, there were four pillars of agreement, and one of them was pursuing the two-state solution.

So we very much want to encourage the Israelis and the Palestinians to do that, and in fact, they have recently exchanged letters, from President Abbas to President – to Prime Minister Netanyahu, and Prime Minister Netanyahu to President Abbas that have outlined the conditions for dialogue. And in recent weeks, I’ve called both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas urging them to take this opportunity, to use this new opening that has come about because of the broad coalition that now exists that has pledged itself to pursuing a negotiated resolution. And we’re going to continue to urge them to do so.

We greatly appreciate the role that Jordan has played. King Abdullah of Jordan has been extraordinarily forceful in urging the parties to come to the negotiating table. I spoke with Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh over the weekend about the status of the discussions. So we believe that there is an opportunity for direct negotiations, and we hope it was enhanced by the release of bodies today by the Israelis of Palestinians whom they had either killed or who had been suicide bombers going back many years as a sign of confidence building. But they need to get to the table and start dealing with all the very hard issues we know have to be resolved.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. We’re out of time.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER SOVNDAL: Thank you.

U.S.-PERU HOLD ENVIRONMENTAL MEETINGS

Photos:  Peruvian Mask (Left) and Peruvian Art Object (Below).  Credit:  Wikimedia.
FROM:  U.S.  DEPARTMENT OF STATE
United States and Peru Hold Environmental Meetings
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
May 31, 2012
The Governments of the United States and Peru convened a series of environmental meetings related to the U.S. - Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA) from May 29-31 in Washington, D.C. The governments also held a public session, providing interested stakeholders with the opportunity to raise issues and ask questions about implementation efforts.

Peru and the United States reviewed the progress that has been made to ensure effective implementation of, and compliance with, the obligations under the Environment Chapter of the PTPA. They highlighted key steps each country has undertaken in the past year to strengthen efforts to provide for high levels of environmental protection and discussed details of an independent secretariat called for under the PTPA to receive and consider submissions claiming that a party is failing to effectively enforce its environmental laws.
Officials discussed progress implementing the Annex on Forest Sector Governance (Annex) of the Environment Chapter of the PTPA, including Peru’s efforts to develop regulations to implement its new Forestry and Wildlife Law and processes to audit and verify timber producers and exporters.

The governments reviewed implementation of the Environmental Cooperation Agreement, in particular the status of cooperative environmental activities under the 2011-2014 Work Program, which focuses primarily on implementing the Annex. They also outlined a process for the coordination of future activities, discussed mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation, and shared experiences about the implementation of environmental cooperation work programs pursuant to other free trade agreements.

GEAR UP PROGRAM WILL PROVIDE $8.7 MILLION FOR LOW-INCOME STUDENT COLLEGE SAVINGS ACCOUNTS

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia
FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Education Department Releases Proposal to Help Thousands of Disadvantaged Students Access College Through Savings Accounts
Project encourages students and families to develop key financial skills and invest in higher education
MAY 31, 2012
The U.S. Department of Education today announced that it will further help thousands of disadvantaged students access higher education through investing in college savings accounts. The College Savings Account Research Demonstration Project will commit $8.7 million of federal GEAR UP funds to support college savings accounts for students participating in the GEAR UP program, which is designed to increase the college readiness of low-income middle school and high school students.

The project will provide about 10,000 high school students with savings accounts as well as counseling to develop smart financial habits. In addition, the project will research the impact of savings accounts on college access and success by comparing the outcomes of students receiving savings accounts with a control group, which will allow the project to inform strategies at the federal, state and local level.

"We believe that savings accounts play a key role in helping all students—especially those from low-income families—access and succeed in college," said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. "Empowering disadvantaged students with financial resources and skills will enable them to make smart investments in higher education—and we'll gain valuable knowledge about how to best serve these students in the future."

Initial research suggests students with savings accounts are much more likely to enroll in college than students without one. In fall 2010, Duncan joined the chairmen of the FDIC and National Credit Union Administration in a commitment to increase the number of students with savings accounts. The draft notice for the College Savings Account Research Demonstration Project outlines a plan for providing 10,000 ninth-grade students and their parents with college savings accounts, financial incentives to save and targeted financial counseling.

Because many GEAR UP grantees may be more readily able to establish and manage savings accounts for GEAR UP students, the Department is proposing that state GEAR UP grantees that received new awards in FY 2011 or FY 2012 and that are participating in the cohort model would be eligible to apply for the project. Each student will receive $200 in seed funding to start the account, which the state will open automatically. Students will have a chance to earn an extra $10 per month in a dollar-for-dollar savings match program over the next four years, ultimately giving them the opportunity to save more than $1,000 for college. Savings will be available for students to use for educational expenses upon enrolling in an institution of higher education.

For more information on the project, including a copy of the Notice of Proposed Priorities, visit:http://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/applicant.html.

New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms

New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms

HUMMINGBIRD FOOD SUPPLY WITHERS AWAY

Photo Credit:  U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service.
FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Where Have All the Hummingbirds Gone?
May 30, 2012
The glacier lily as it's called, is a tall, willowy plant that graces mountain meadows throughout western North America. It flowers early in spring, when the first bumblebees and hummingbirds appear.

Or did.
The lily, a plant that grows best on subalpine slopes, is fast becoming a hothouse flower. In Earth's warming temperatures, its first blooms appear some 17 days earlier than they did in the 1970s, scientists David Inouye and Amy McKinney of the University of Maryland and colleagues have found.

The problem, say the biologists, with the earlier timing of these first blooms is that the glacier lily is no longer synchronized with the arrival of broad-tailed hummingbirds, which depend on glacier lilies for nectar.

By the time the hummingbirds fly in, many of the flowers have withered away, their nectar-laden blooms going with them.

Broad-tailed hummingbirds migrate north from Central America every spring to high-mountain breeding sites in the western United States. The birds have only a short mountain summer to raise their young. Male hummingbirds scout for territories before the first flowers bloom.

But the time between the first hummingbird and the first bloom has collapsed by 13 days over the past four decades, say Inouye and McKinney. "In some years," says McKinney, "the lilies have already bloomed by the time the first hummingbird lands."

The biologists calculate that if current trends continue, in two decades the hummingbirds will miss the first flowers entirely.

The results are reported in a paper in the current issue of the journal Ecology. In addition to McKinney and Inouye, co-authors of the paper are Paul CaraDonna of the University of Arizona; Billy Barr of the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory in Crested Butte, Colo.; David Bertelsen of the University of Arizona; and Nickolas Waser, affiliated with all three institutions.

"Northern species, such as the broad-tailed hummingbird, are most at risk of arriving at their breeding sites after their key food resources are no longer available, yet ecologists predict that species will move northward as climate warms," says Saran Twombly, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Environmental Biology, which funded the research.

"These conflicting pressures challenge society to ensure that species don't soon find themselves without a suitable place to live."

Broad-tailed hummingbirds that breed farther south have fewer challenges.
"In Arizona, for example," says Inouye, "there's no obvious narrowing of the timing between the first arriving males and the first blooms of, in this case, the nectar-containing Indian paintbrush."

Higher latitudes may be more likely to get out of sync ecologically because global warming is happening fastest there.

As the snow continues to melt earlier in the spring, bringing earlier flowering, says Inouye, the mountains may come alive with glacier lilies long before hummingbirds can complete their journey north.
"Where have all the flowers gone?" then will be "where have all the hummingbirds gone?"

CHAIRMAN CFTC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED VOLKER RULE TO CURB FINANCIAL RISKS

FROM:  COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Statement Regarding Public Roundtable to Discuss the Proposed Volcker Rule
Chairman Gary Gensler
May 31, 2012
Welcome to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) roundtable on the proposed Volcker Rule. Thank you, Dan, for that introduction, and thank you for working with the rest of the team, particularly Steven Seitz from your office and Steve Kane from the Office of the Chief Economist, to put together this important roundtable.

I’d like to thank the Treasury Department staff and the staff of the financial regulators tasked with implementing the Volcker Rule for joining us for this roundtable and for your efforts in coordinating with the CFTC on the rule. I’d also like to thank Sheila Bair, the former Chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, for participating today.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker was unfortunately on international travel today, but I’d like to acknowledge his many years of public service.

In 2008, the financial system and the financial regulatory system failed. The crisis – caused in part by the unregulated swaps market -- plunged the United States into the worst recession since the Great Depression with eight million Americans losing their jobs, millions of families losing their homes and thousands of small businesses closing their doors. The financial storms continue to reverberate with the debt crisis in Europe affecting the economic prospects of people around the globe.

In 2010, Congress and the President came together to pass the historic Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), to promote transparency in the markets and to lower risk to the public from large, complex financial institutions. Amongst these protections is the Volcker Rule, which prohibits banking entities from proprietary trading, an activity that may put taxpayers at risk.

This is the CFTC’s 17th roundtable on important topics related to Dodd-Frank reforms. These roundtables are an additional opportunity – beyond the 30,000 comments we’ve received and 1,600 meetings with the public we’ve held -- for dialogue and helpful input from market participants and the public. Our 18th roundtable related to promoting the price discovery function on designated contract markets and related issues of swap execution facilities will be on June 5.

In adopting the Volcker rule, Congress prohibited banking entities from proprietary trading while at the same time permitting banking entities to engage in certain activities, such as market making and risk mitigating hedging. One of the challenges in finalizing this rule is achieving these multiple objectives.

I’m looking forward to a lively discussion. I’d like to highlight three main issues that I’m particularly interested in getting feedback on today.

First, as prescribed by Congress, the Volcker rule prohibits proprietary trading while permitting risk-mitigating hedging. These two provisions are consistent with each other in that they are both meant to lower the risks of banking entities to the broader public. The question is how we as regulators achieve both of these risk-lowering provisions in a balanced way.

Some commenters have said if we’re too prohibitive in one area, we may limit banking entities ability to engage in risk-mitigating hedging. On the other hand, if we follow comments of some of the banking entities, then the rule’s allowance for permitted hedging might swallow up Congress’ intent to limit the risk of proprietary trading.

Specifically, under the statute, banking entities may engage in “risk-mitigating hedging activities in connection with and related to individual or aggregated positions, contracts, or other holdings.”

To qualify as hedging, these activities must be “designed to reduce the specific risks to the banking entity in connection with and related to such positions, contracts, or other holdings.”

The criteria for the hedging exemption as included in the proposed Volcker Rule are the following: hedges must mitigate one or more specific risks on either individual positions or aggregated positions, they cannot generate significant new exposures, they must be subject to continuous monitoring and management, compensation for hedging cannot reward proprietary trading, and the hedges must be reasonably correlated to the specific risks of the positions.

A further question about hedging activity that was asked by the agencies ( question 109 of the CFTC’s proposal) is whether “certain hedging strategies or techniques that involve hedging the risk of aggregated positions (e.g. portfolio hedging) create the potential for abuse of the hedging exemption.”

A related question on which it would be helpful to hear from the panel: is it possible, and if so how, could a separate trading desk with its own profit and loss statement engage in risk-mitigating hedges?

The further removed hedging activities are from the specific positions the banking entity intends to hedge, is it not more likely that such trading activity is prone to express something other than hedging?

As Dan will explain in a moment, we’re not going to be speaking about the specifics of the credit derivative product trading of JPMorgan Chase’s Chief Investment Office. I do think, though, it may be instructive for regulators as we finalize key reforms.

Second, in addition to hedging, Dodd-Frank permits market making, which is important to well-functioning markets as well as to the economy. The question for regulators once again is finding a balance, but this time between prohibiting proprietary trading and permitting market making. The agencies ask in the proposal (question 89 in the CFTC’s proposal): “Is the proposed exemption overly broad or narrow? For example, would it encompass activity that should be considered proprietary trading under the proposed rule?”

The criteria for market making in the proposed rule included seven requirements. A number of commenters suggested that these requirements may be more applicable to the listed securities markets than to the swaps market. During the second panel today, we are looking for your input on this issue. If some of these requirements are not appropriate, what would be more appropriate with regard to market making in swaps?

Third, I’m particularly interested in hearing about how the prohibition on proprietary trading should best be applied to banking entities transacting in futures and swaps. The CFTC’s role with regard to the Volcker Rule and banking entities is primarily with regard to these derivatives traded by swap dealers and futures commission merchants within the banking entity.

In particular, banking entities’ market making in swaps is likely to leave them with significant open positions for many years in customized swaps. When would a banking entity’s decision not to hedge or to only partially hedge open swaps positions be considered prohibited proprietary trading? We at the CFTC will benefit from your input on how the Volcker Rule can best protect the public against risk in the swaps and futures markets.

Thank you again for coming, and I’ll turn it back to Dan.

COMMANDER U.S. STRATEGIC COMMAND'S REMARKS ON NATION'S NUCLEAR STRATEGIC FORCE .

Photo:  Missile Tracker.  Credit:  U.S. Navy.
FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
WASHINGTON, May 30, 2012 - Air Force Gen. Robert Kehler, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, described the shaping of the nation's nuclear strategic force in the current global environment during remarks at the Council on Foreign Relations here today.

"Really, of all the important mission responsibilities assigned to the United States Strategic Command by the president, none is more important than our responsibility to deter a strategic attack on the United States and our allies and partners," Kehler said.

Deterrence and assurance "have been part of the national lexicon for well over half a century, and for many of those decades, strategic deterrence focused solely on leveraging U.S. nuclear capabilities to deter a massive nuclear or conventional attack on the U.S. or our allies," he said.

Kehler noted the era of "one size fits all" deterrence passed with the end of the Cold War. In today's world, some regimes, such as those in North Korea and Iran, as well as terrorist groups are said to be seeking to acquire nuclear arms and possibly other weapons of mass destruction.

"Strategic deterrence and assurance remain relevant concepts today, but we are shaping those concepts toward a broader array of individual actors, each with their own unique context," the general explained. What Kehler called tailored deterrence requires a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of today's multi-faceted threats and the decision-making processes of threatening regimes and groups.

"To be sure, deterrence is still fundamentally about influencing an actor's decisions," Kehler said. "It is about a solid policy foundation, it is about credible capabilities, it is about what the U.S. and our allies, as a whole, can bring to bear in both a military and non-military sense."

Kehler pointed out deterrence planning and forces must fit today's unique global security environment, which he described as an enormously complex and uncertain world that includes nuclear weapons and nuclear armed states "where several of those nuclear armed states are modernizing both their arsenals and their delivery systems," he added. "The threat of proliferation of nuclear weapons and delivery systems, the growing potential for disruption or attack through cyberspace and the danger of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of violent extremists."

Kehler said this is the context for today's nuclear deterrence and pointed to the Nuclear Posture Review which recognized the need to maintain a capable force and modern infrastructure for as long as nuclear weapons exist.

The general quoted the remarks of former Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates: "'As long as nuclear weapons exist, the United States must maintain a safe, secure and effective nuclear arsenal to maintain strategic stability with other major nuclear powers, deter potential adversaries, and reassure our allies and partners of our security commitments to them.'" The new U.S. defense strategy released in January contains similar language, Kehler said, but noted "This is not your father's nuclear-deterrent force."

The United States has witnessed an impressive 67-year period without nuclear use, Kehler said, noting the nation has regularly adjusted its nuclear capabilities to match U.S. national security needs in the global environment. Some of these adjustments made over the years, he said, include reduction of the number of ballistic missile submarines, conversion of four Ohio-class submarines to carry conventional cruise missiles, and affirmation of the B-1 bomber's non-nuclear role, among other changes.

"In total, our [nuclear weapons] stockpile is down 70 percent from the day the Berlin Wall fell. These are significant changes. At each decision point along the way, the U.S. carefully accounted for potential impacts on deterrent capability and strategic stability," he added.

Kehler said the end result is a smaller force still capable of deterring adversaries and assuring allies of U.S. capability to maintain strategic stability in a future crisis. He also noted President Barack Obama's Fiscal Year [2013] Budget "continues to sustain the essential investment to keep the nuclear deterrent force able and ready to do its job."

PENTAGON SAYS IRAN IS HELPING SYRIA AND AL-QAIDA HAS PRESENCE

Photo Credit:  U.S. Department of Defense  

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Pentagon: In Syria, Iran Helps Asad, al-Qaida Foments Violence

By Cheryl Pellerin

WASHINGTON, May 31, 2012 - In Syria, where Bashar al-Asad's government continues to massacre its population, Iran is supporting the regime and members of al-Qaida are in the country for their own purposes, Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt. John Kirby told reporters today.

"We remain deeply troubled and concerned by the ongoing violence in Syria and by the horrific acts of the Asad regime against its own people," Kirby told reporters at a Pentagon press briefing.

"And we certainly have seen reports and have reason to believe that Iran continues to assist the Asad regime in committing these acts of atrocities against the Syrian people," he added.

Other nations share that concern, the Pentagon spokesman said, and some are providing lethal assistance to opponents of the Syrian regime.

Kirby said defense officials have seen but cannot confirm reports that the Iranians are using commercial airliners to move arms into Syria.

"The larger issue here is that the Iranian regime, Tehran, continues to support, in tangible and intangible ways, the Asad regime," he added, "and that needs to stop."

At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney said the administration has been focused on the need to bring about a political transition in Syria sooner rather than later.

"The longer that Asad and his thugs are allowed to brutally murder the Syrian people, the more likely it becomes a sectarian civil war; the more likely that it spills over Syrian borders; the more likely that it transforms into a proxy war with different players," Carney said, "including ... Iran, which is already engaging in malignant behavior with regards to the Syrian situation, stepping up that kind of activity and not being alone in doing that."

What's happening in Syria, he added, "only underscores the urgent need to take action to prevent further devolution of the situation there, take action to support the process of political transition, to isolate and pressure Asad into taking himself out of power so that that transition can proceed."

At the Pentagon, Kirby said defense officials believe "al-Qaida has some presence inside Syria and interest in fomenting violence in Syria."

He added, "We do not believe they share the goals of the Syrian opposition or that they are even embraced by the opposition ... The sense that we get is that it is primarily members of [al-Qaida in Iraq] that are migrating into Syria."

Syria drew renewed world attention following a massacre May 25 of more than 100 people north of the city of Homs which international observers largely blamed on forces linked to the government.

U.S. policy on Syria is to work with international partners to put diplomatic and economic pressure on Damascus to help stem the humanitarian crisis.

The Defense Department supports the administration's position, Kirby said, while providing options to the nation's leaders for other potential responses.

"That's what we do and we would be irresponsible if we weren't thinking about options, whether or not they're called for, he said"

The military can be valuable in any number of scenarios, not all of which involve combat, Kirby added.

"The point is we're doing the prudent thing that we're supposed to do, which is to think through options. But we've not been called to present any," the Pentagon spokesman said.

"These are decisions that only the policymakers can make," Kirby said. "And again, we're supporting the commander in chief's intent, which is to keep the pressure on [the Asad regime] diplomatically and economically."

ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER SPEAKS TO CONFERENCE OF NATIONAL BLACK CHURCHES

Photo:  Attorney General Holder Holding A Press Conference.  Credit:  U.S. Department Of Justice. 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the Conference of National Black Churches Annual Consultation Washington, D.C. ~ Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Thank you, Congressman Cleaver.   It is a privilege to join with you – and with Dr. Richardson and Dr. Burton – in opening the 2012 Consultation.   And I want to thank you for your kind words, for your leadership and partnership, and – of course – for your prayers.   Please, keep them coming.   Let me also thank the members and supporters of the Conference of National Black Churches and the Congressional Black Caucus for your work in bringing us all together today – and bringing renewed attention to the growing need to protect the voting rights of every eligible citizen.

It is a pleasure to be part of this discussion – and to be among so many friends, allies, and dedicated leaders.   I am grateful, in particular, for the opportunity to salute the important work that the people in this room are doing each day – all across the country – to enrich our communities and to improve lives.

Since its official establishment in 2009, CNBC’s efforts have reached more than 10 million people.   And, in partnership with the Congressional Black Caucus – a group that, over the last 40 years, has established itself as the “Conscience of Congress” – you have emerged as a powerful force for positive change.   Together, your organizations are not only providing a voice for the most vulnerable among us, you are shining a light on the problems we must solve and the promises that we must fulfill.

In so many different ways – in classrooms and courtrooms, in houses of worship and halls of justice, and in your own homes and neighborhoods – you are working to protect the progress that has marked our nation’s past, and to strengthen its future.   And your efforts honor America’s most noble and enduring cause – of security, opportunity, and justice for all.

Despite all that you’ve done to advance this cause – and the transformative progress that many of us have witnessed within our own lifetimes – as you know, this is no time to become complacent.   Yes, we have walked far on the long road toward freedom – but we have not yet reached the Promised Land.   And, in too many places, it’s painfully clear that our nation’s long struggle to overcome injustice, to eliminate disparities, to bridge long-standing divisions, to eradicate violence, and to uphold the civil rights of all citizens has not yet ended.

That means it is time, once again, to ask Dr. King’s most famous and enduring question: Where do we go from here?   It is time to consider – and to discuss – where we should focus our energies and where we must place our priorities.

Like many of you, I would argue that – of all the freedoms we enjoy today – none is more important, or more sacred, than the right to vote.   And I’m hardly the first to make such an assessment.   In July of 1965, when President Johnson signed the landmark Voting Rights Act into law, he proclaimed that, “the right to vote is the basic right, without which all others are meaningless.”

Today, as Attorney General, I have the privilege – and the solemn duty – of enforcing this law, and the other civil rights reforms that President Johnson, Dr. King, and so many other courageous leaders and activists once championed.   For our nation’s Department of Justice, and for our government and law enforcement partners across the country, this is among our highest priorities.   And it is evident in the historic progress that’s been made by this Administration – especially when it comes to expanding access to legal services; to combating hate crimes, community violence, and human trafficking; and to strengthening law enforcement efforts so that – in our workplaces and military bases; in our housing and lending markets; in our schools and places of worship; in our immigrant communities and our voting booths – the rights of all Americans are protected.

Our efforts honor the generations who have taken extraordinary risks, and willingly confronted hatred, bias, and ignorance – as well as billy clubs and fire hoses, bullets and bombs – to ensure that their children, and all citizens, would have the chance to participate in the work of their government.   And our efforts reflect the fact that the right to vote is not only the cornerstone of our system of government, it is – and always has been – the lifeblood of our democracy.   In fact,no force has proved more powerful – or more integral to the success of the great American experiment – than efforts to expand the franchise.

Despite this history, and despite our nation’s long tradition of extending voting rights – to non-property owners and women, to people of color and Native Americans, and to younger Americans – today, a growing number of our fellow citizens are worried about the same disparities, divisions, and problems that – nearly five decades ago – so many fought to address.  In my travels across this country, I’ve heard a consistent drumbeat of concern from citizens, who – often for the first time in their lives – now have reason to believe that we are failing to live up to one of our nation’s most noble ideals; and that some of the achievements that defined the civil rights movement now hang in the balance.

Congressman John Lewis may have described the reason for these concerns best, in a speech on the House floor last summer, when pointing out that the voting rights he worked throughout his life – and nearly gave his life – to ensure are, “under attack… [by] a deliberate and systematic attempt to prevent millions of elderly voters, young voters, students, [and] minority and low-income voters from exercising their constitutional right to engage in the democratic process.”   Not only was he referring to the all-too-common deceptive practices we’ve been fighting for years.    He was echoing more recent fears and frustrations about some of the state-level voting law changes we’ve seen this legislative season.

Let me assure you: for today’s Department of Justice, our commitment to strengthening – and to fulfilling – our nation’s promise of equal opportunity and equal justice has never been stronger.

Nowhere is this clearer than in current efforts to expand access to, and prevent discrimination in, our election systems.   We are dedicated to aggressively enforcing the Voting Rights Act – and to fulfilling our obligations under Section 2 and Section 5 of this vital law.

Under Section 2, which prohibits racially discriminatory practices that amount to either vote denial or vote dilution, we have opened a record number of new investigations – more than 100 in the last fiscal year.   We’ve also had success – without litigation – in encouraging voluntary improvements and compliance.

At the same time, Section 5 – which requires preclearance of proposed voting changes in parts or all of sixteen states where discrimination was deeply rooted – continues to be a critical tool in the protection of voting rights.   Under that important provision, certain “covered jurisdictions” are prevented from altering their voting practices until it can be determined that any proposed changes would have neither a discriminatory purpose nor effect.   This process, known as “preclearance,” has been a powerful tool in combating discrimination for decades.   And it has consistently enjoyed broad bipartisan support – including in its most recent reauthorization, when President Bush and an overwhelming Congressional majority came together in 2006 to renew the Act’s key provisions – and extend it until 2031.

Yet, in the six years since its reauthorization, Section 5 has increasingly come under attack by those who claim it’s no longer needed.   Between 1965 and 2010 – nearly half a century – only eight challenges to Section 5 were filed in court.   By contrast, over the last two years alone, we’ve seen no fewer than nine lawsuits contesting the constitutionality of that provision.   Four of these currently are in litigation.   Each of these challenges to Section 5 claims that we’ve attained a new era of electoral equality, that America in 2012 has moved beyond the challenges of 1965, and that Section 5 is no longer necessary.

I wish this were the case.   But the reality is that, in jurisdictions across the country, both overt and subtle forms of discrimination remain all too common – and have not yet been relegated to the pages of history.

As we’ve seen over the years, the Voting Rights Act – including Section 5 – consistently has been upheld in court.    In fact, several days ago, the D.C. Circuit rejected one of the latest challenges to Section 5, reaffirming its continued relevance as a cornerstone of civil rights law, and underscoring the fact that it remains critical in combating discrimination – and safeguarding essential voting rights that, for many Americans, now are at risk.

As you know – and have worked to draw attention to – the past two years have brought nearly two dozen new state laws and executive orders, from more than a dozen states, that could make it significantly harder for many eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.    In response to some of these changes – in areas covered by Section 5 – the Justice Department has initiated careful, thorough, and independent reviews.   We’re now examining a number of redistricting plans in covered jurisdictions, as well as other types of changes to our election systems and processes – including changes to the procedures governing third-party voter registration organizations, to early voting procedures, and to photo identification requirements – to ensure that there is no discriminatory purpose or effect.  If a state passes a new voting law and meets its burden of showing that the law is not discriminatory, we will follow the law and approve the change.    And, as we have demonstrated repeatedly, when a jurisdiction fails to meet its burden of proving that a proposed voting change would not have a racially discriminatory effect – we will object, as we have in 15 separate cases since last September.

For example, in Texas, the Justice Department has argued that proposed redistricting plans for both the State House and the U.S. Congress are impermissible, based upon evidence suggesting that electoral maps were manipulated to give the appearance of minority control while minimizing minority electoral strength.   We argued – as we have successfully in the past – that this is precisely the type of discrimination that Section 5 was intended to block.   This case has been tried and we are now awaiting the court’s decision.

Unfortunately, electoral redistricting is far from the only area of concern in covered jurisdictions.    The recent wave of changes to state-level voter identification laws also has presented a number of problems requiring the Department’s attention.   In December, we objected to South Carolina’s voter ID law, after finding – based on the state’s own data – that the proposed change would place an unfair burden on non-white voters.   And this past March, we objected to a photo ID requirement in Texas because it would have had a disproportionate impact on Hispanic voters.

The Justice Department also is taking important steps to protect the voting rights of our men and women fighting overseas and our veterans returning home – as well as Americans living abroad, citizens with disabilities, college students, and language minorities.   Just a few days ago, we filed a lawsuit and proposed consent decree against the state of California to remedy the state’s failure to send absentee ballots on time to its overseas citizens and military voters for the state’s June 5th primary election.   This is the eighth such lawsuit the Department has filed in the last two years to protect the voting rights of service members and overseas citizens.   We also will continue working to enforce provisions like the “Motor Voter” law – and, to that end, have recently filed two lawsuits to increase access to registration opportunities.   In one of those cases, we reached a settlement with the State of Rhode Island that resulted in more voters being registered in the first full month after our lawsuit than in the entire previous two-year period.

In addition to these and other efforts to ensure access to the ballot box, we’re also working to uphold the integrity of our elections systems.   And, on this front, I want to be clear that no form of electoral fraud ever has been – or ever will be – tolerated by the United States government.

From my early days as a trial attorney in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, I’ve been proud to stand on the front lines of this fight – and I fully understand the importance of investigating and prosecuting fraud cases whenever and wherever they arise.   I also know firsthand what so many studies and assessments have shown – that making voter registration easier is not likely, by itself, to make our elections more susceptible to fraud.   And while responsible parties on all sides of this debate have acknowledged that in-person voting fraud is uncommon – any allegation of its occurrence is, and will continue to be, taken seriously.

As we continue working to expand – and to protect – the voting franchise, we’re fortunate to have strong allies in the Congressional Black Caucus whose members – just a few months ago – introduced legislation which opposes any state election law that would disproportionately impact vulnerable communities.   We’re also privileged to have committed partners in, and beyond, this room who are – in a very real sense – the stewards of our democracy.   That means you have a critical responsibility to help identify and implement the most effective ways to safeguard the “most basic” of all American rights.   You have a thoughtful voice to add to discussions about voting access – what the struggle for freedom has long been about ensuring: the opportunity for citizens to voice their opinions, and – through the casting of their ballots – to signal their priorities and shape their own futures.   Since its earliest days, the American people have worked and fought for such a system.   And, now, with each of us – this fight goes on.   The progress we hold dear is in our hands.   And the democracy we hold sacred is our responsibility to carry forward.

In driving these efforts, I am privileged to count you as partners.   And I am grateful for the leadership, commitment, and courage you’ve shown in keeping faith in the promise of this nation – and in the power of what its people can achieve together.

Thank you.

SAILORS AND MARINES FROM USS MAKIN ISLAND DELIVER FOOD TO THE ELDERLY IN HONG KONG

FROM:  U.S. NAVY
Photo:  USS Makin Island.  Credit:  U.S. Navy.
Makin Island Sailors and Marines Help Deliver Food to the Elderly during Hong Kong Port Visit
By Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class David McKee, USS Makin Island (LHD 8) Public Affairs
HONG KONG (NNS) -- A group of Sailors and Marines from USS Makin Island (LHD 8) and the embarked 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) joined local volunteers to help deliver bags of food to residents of the Kwai-Chung Elderly Center in Hong Kong during a community service project May 26.

A group of 35 Sailors and Marines participated in the event as part of the ship's May 25-28 port visit to Hong Kong.

The project also coincided with local observances of Mother's Day, Father's Day and the upcoming Dragon Boat festival in June.

Aviation Boatswain's Mate (Handing) 1st Class Mark Higgenbottom, one of the Sailors volunteered for the project, said that in addition to bringing food and sundry items to the residents he shared his time with men like Cheung Kin Yip.

Through a translator, Higgenbottom said he got to know the 70 year-old man and found out that he enjoys table tennis and the Internet.

"Mr. Yip was hip for an old guy," said Higgenbottom. "The guy had a lot of energy and went out of his way to show us he stayed active playing table tennis and using the Internet to stay in touch with his family and friends."

Yip lives alone in his apartment, which is about the size of a large bedroom in a typical American home and contains a living area, bathroom and kitchen.

Through the translator, he told Higgenbottom that he enjoys a simple life of getting up in the morning and checking the stock market on the Internet and checking his email and Facebook page.

"It's easier to live on my own," said Yip through the translator. "I like my independence."

Lt. Jeff Perry, a chaplain aboard Makin Island who organized the community service project, said he thinks community relations projects like helping the elderly foster good relations in the communities that the Navy and Marine Corps visits.

"Projects like this put a face on the Navy and Marine Corps and helps build a truer and broader image of us and shows another side of the military that isn't often shown by the media," said Perry.

The group of Makin Island Sailors and Marines delivered food to two communities and another group of volunteers spent time at a local dog shelter. More than 2,000 Sailors and Marines were able to experience the Hong Kong culture during the four-day port visit.

Makin Island is the first U.S. Navy ship to deploy using a hybrid-electric propulsion system. By using this unique propulsion system, the Navy expects over the course of the ship's lifecycle, to see fuel savings of more than $250 million, proving the Navy's commitment to energy awareness and conservation.

This initiative is one of many throughout the Navy and Marine Corps that will enable the Department of the Navy to achieve the Secretary of the Navy's energy goals to improve our energy security and efficiency afloat and ashore, increase our energy independence and help lead the nation toward a clean energy economy.

Makin Island is the flagship of the Makin Island Amphibious Ready Group that is currently deployed to the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations.

The 7th Fleet area of operations includes more than 52 million square miles of the Pacific and Indian oceans, stretching from the international date line to the east coast of Africa, and from the Kuril Islands in the north to the Antarctic in the south.

DEPUTY DEFENSE SECRETARY CARTER DISCUSSED DOD BUDGET PRIORITIES IN 21ST CENTURY

Photo:  Missile Interceptor Test.  Credit:  U.S. Navy.

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Carter: DOD Puts Strategy Before Budget for Future Force

By Cheryl Pellerin

WASHINGTON, May 30, 2012 - The Defense Department has placed strategy before budget in facing present and anticipated threats while building its joint force for the future, Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said here today.

Carter discussed DOD's budget priorities for the 21st century at the American Enterprise Institute's Marilyn Ware Center for Security Studies, as President Barack Obama's fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act makes its way through Congress.

"While we've been fighting [in Iraq and Afghanistan] the world has not stood still, our friends and enemies have not stood still, and technology has not stood still," the deputy defense secretary said.

"Now we must meet these changes and ... in some places, catch up with them," Carter added. "To do that we must let go of the old and familiar and grab hold of the new to build what [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Army Gen. Martin E.] Dempsey calls the Joint Force 2020, an agile and technologically advanced force of tomorrow."

The present time is one of great consequence for U.S. security because two forces are coming together simultaneously, Carter said.

"The first is obviously the Budget Control Act but the deeper, more fundamental force is the force of strategic history," he said.

The 2011 Budget Control Act is a U.S. federal statute that seeks to reduce the national deficit. A "sequestration" mechanism in the law automatically takes more cuts out of federal spending, including another $500 billion from the Defense Department, which would mean a total defense budget reduction of more than $1 trillion over 10 years.

The result of the Budget Control Act and the new defense strategy, Carter said, was a balanced strategic package in three parts.

First was continued DOD discipline in spending taxpayer dollars, Carter said. Second, he added, was to retain taxpayer confidence that DOD was putting its money to good use. Third, Carter said, was what DOD called rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific region.

"The Pacific region has enjoyed peace and stability for over 60 years, and in that climate, first Japan, then Korea, and even China have had an environment in which they could develop economically and politically without war or conflict, the deputy defense secretary said.

"That's not a birthright," he added. "That is something that was guaranteed [and] reinforced by the pivotal military power of the United States in that region."

The Defense Department now is bolstering defense capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region, Carter said.

Meanwhile, the Air Force is continuing on with the new stealth bomber, the KC-46 tanker and a host of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, or ISR, platforms, he said. Other capabilities going forward, he added, include a payload module for the Virginia-class submarines, conventional prompt strike and a host of upgrades in radars, electronic protection, electronic warfare, new munitions of various kinds and more.

Cyber security is another area where DOD will spend more in the future, Carter said, along with certain aspects of the defense science and technology base, special operations forces, unmanned aerial systems, space initiatives, and countering capabilities for terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, including bioterrorism.

In the time since DOD released its carefully balanced budget proposal, Carter said, Congress has marked up the document, adding and subtracting programs and equipment.

"We made decisions within the constraints of the Budget Control Act. We had to. And when additions are made to that package in one area, we of necessity have to take something out elsewhere," he said.

Altering DOD's proposed budget package "could lead to an unbalanced portfolio, for example, a hollowing of the force," Carter said, noting he wanted "to specifically call out a couple of important decisions in that regard."

Congress, he said, is resisting several changes proposed for cost savings by DOD to the following programs:

-- TRICARE, for which premiums would rise slightly for retirees;

-- Aircraft retirements, for some aging single-purpose aircraft in favor of newer multi-role aircraft;

-- Reductions in intra-theater strategic lift, for which modeling indicates is in excess of current need;

-- Reductions in size for the Army and Marine Corps to accommodate a wider spectrum of future combat capability; and

-- A somewhat larger and decidedly more capable Navy.

"In all our services and in all of our activities in national security, we're embarked on a strategic transition following the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan," Carter said.

"This is just the beginning," he added. "This ship is making a very big turn, and we need to follow through on our plan and keep moving toward the future."

FORMER NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION PROGRAM DIRECTOR PLEADS GUILTY TO FRAUD

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
National Science Foundation Program Director Pleads Guilty in Connection with Scheme to Conceal Received Benefits

WASHINGTON – A former program director at the National Science Foundation (NSF) pleaded guilty today in the Eastern District of Virginia to engaging in a scheme to conceal gifts and fraudulent payments he received, Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Neil H. MacBride for the Eastern District of Virginia announced.

Dr. Shih Chi Liu, 73, of Silver Spring, Md., pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge James C. Cacheris.  Liu was charged in a criminal information filed today.

According to a statement of facts filed with his plea agreement, Liu served in various program director positions in the NSF Engineering Directorate from 1981 until December 2011.  The NSF is an independent federal agency whose mission is to fund research and education in science and engineering disciplines.  Liu was required in his official position to submit a yearly financial disclosure report detailing travel-related reimbursements and gifts totaling more than a particular amount that he received during the reporting period.  In the years 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, Liu filed false reports that failed to report payments and gifts he had received.  In doing so, he concealed that he had arranged for an accredited university to pay false invoices for services that the university did not receive, pocketing the fraudulently obtained money himself.  He also concealed that he had received money for international travel from an accredited university, at times simultaneously requesting and receiving reimbursements from NSF for that same travel.

Liu faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 when he is sentenced on Aug. 22, 2012.
This case was investigated by the NSF Office of the Inspector General.  Deputy Chief Peter Koski and Trial Attorney Monique Abrishami of the Public Integrity Section in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Jasmine Yoon of the Eastern District of Virginia are prosecuting the case.

TWO FLORIDA MEN CHARGED WITH RUNNING $173 MILLION PONZI-LIKE SCHEME IN FORT LAUDERDALE AREA

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
May 31, 2012
On May 22, 2012, The Securities and Exchange Commission charged two individuals who provided the biggest influx of investor funds into one of the largest-ever Ponzi schemes in South Florida. The SEC alleges that George Levin and Frank Preve, who live in the Fort Lauderdale area, raised more than $157 million from 173 investors in less than two years by issuing promissory notes from Levin’s company and interests in a private investment fund they operated. They used investor funds to purchase discounted legal settlements from former Florida attorney Scott Rothstein through his prominent law firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt and Adler PA. However, the settlements Rothstein sold were not real and the supposed plaintiffs and defendants did not exist. Rothstein simply used the funds in classic Ponzi scheme fashion to make payments due other investors and support his lavish lifestyle. Rothstein’s Ponzi scheme collapsed in October 2009, and he is currently serving a 50-year prison sentence.

According to the SEC’s complaint filed in federal court in Miami, Levin and Preve began raising money to purchase Rothstein settlements in 2007 by offering investors short-term promissory notes issued by Levin’s company – Banyon 1030-32 LLC. In 2009, seeking additional funds from investors, they formed a private investment fund called Banyon Income Fund LP that invested exclusively in Rothstein’s settlements. Banyon 1030-32 served as the general partner of the fund, and its profit was generated from the amount by which the settlement discounts obtained from Rothstein exceeded the rate of return promised to investors.

The SEC alleges that the offering materials for the promissory notes and the private fund contained material misrepresentations and omissions. They misrepresented to investors that prior to any settlement purchase, Banyon 1030-32 would obtain certain documentation about the settlements to ensure the safety of the investments. Levin and Preve, however, knew or were reckless in not knowing that Banyon 1030-32 often purchased settlements from Rothstein without obtaining any documentation whatsoever.

Furthermore, Banyon Income Fund’s private placement memorandum misrepresented that the fund would be a continuation of a successful business strategy pursued by Banyon 1030-32 during the prior two-and-a-half years. Levin and Preve failed to disclose that by the time the Banyon Income Fund offering began in May 2009, Rothstein had already ceased making payments on a majority of the prior settlements Levin and his entities had purchased. They also failed to inform investors that Levin’s ability to recover his prior investments from Rothstein was contingent on his ability to raise at least $100 million of additional funding to purchase more settlements from Rothstein.

The SEC’s complaint charges Levin and Preve with violating Section 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The SEC is seeking disgorgement of ill gotten gains, financial penalties, and permanent injunctive relief against Levin and Preve to enjoin them from future violations of the federal securities laws.

The SEC's investigation, which is continuing, has been conducted by senior counsels D. Corey Lawson and Steven J. Meiner and staff accountant Tonya T. Tullis under the supervision of Assistant Regional Director Chad Alan Earnst. Senior trial counsels James M. Carlson and C. Ian Anderson are leading the litigation.

The SEC acknowledges the assistance of the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Internal Revenue Service.

GUIDED-MISSILE DESTROYER USS MCCAMPBELL, FIRES GUN.

FROM:  U.S. NAVY
The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS McCampbell, fires the Mark 45 five-inch gun during a naval surface fire support exercise. McCampbell is forward deployed to Yokosuka, Japan and is underway in the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Declan Barnes (Released) 120525-N-TG831-417