WALGREEN PAYS $7.9 MILLION TO RESOLVE FALSE PRESCRIPTION BILLING ACCUSATIONS

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WEBSITE
Friday, April 20, 2012
Walgreens Pharmacy Chain Pays $7.9 Million to Resolve False Prescription Billing CaseAllegedly Offered Illegal Inducements to Government Health Care Programs Beneficiaries to Transfer Prescriptions to Walgreens
Walgreens, an Illinois-based corporation operating a national retail pharmacy chain, has paid the United States and participating states $7.9 million to resolve allegations that Walgreens violated the False Claims Act, the Justice Department announced today.

The settlement resolves allegations that Walgreens offered illegal inducements to beneficiaries of government health care programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), in the form of gift cards, gift checks and other similar promotions that are prohibited by law, to transfer their prescriptions to Walgreens pharmacies.  The government investigation alleged that Walgreens had offered government health beneficiaries $25 gift cards when they transferred a prescription from another pharmacy to Walgreens.  The company’s advertisements that promoted gift cards and gift checks for transferred prescriptions typically acknowledged that the offer was not valid with Medicaid, Medicare or any other government program.  Nevertheless, the government alleged that Walgreens employees frequently ignored the stated exemptions on the face of the coupons and handed gift cards to customers who were beneficiaries of government health programs, in violation of federal law.

“This case represents the government's strong commitment to pursuing improper practices in the retail pharmacy industry that have the effect of manipulating patient decisions,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.

The allegations were brought to the government by two whistleblowers, known as relators, in two separate whistleblower lawsuits filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act and state False Claims Act statutes.  The relators, Cassie Bass, a pharmacy technician formerly employed by Walgreens, and Jack Chin, an independent pharmacist, will receive $1,277,172 from the United States for their role in filing the qui tam actions.  The federal share of the settlement is $7,298,124.

“This case vindicates and protects the interests of consumers throughout the nation by ensuring that they remain free from undue influence by large retail chains when making decisions about which pharmacies to entrust their own individual health care,” said André Birotte Jr, U.S. Attorney for Central District of California.
   
“The law prohibits pharmacies from using their retail clout to lure patients whose prescriptions are subsidized by the government,” said Barbara L. McQuade, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.  “Continuity with a pharmacist is important to detect problems with dosages and drug interactions.  Patients should make decisions based on legitimate health care needs, not on inducements like gift cards.”

“This settlement makes clear that corporations seeking increased profits over their patients' needs will pay a substantial price,” said Daniel R. Levinson, Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services.  “Violating Federal health care laws, as Walgreens allegedly did by offering incentives for new business, cannot be tolerated.”

This resolution is part of the government's emphasis on combating health care fraud and another step for the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) initiative, which was announced by Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius in May 2009.  The partnership between the two departments has focused efforts to reduce and prevent Medicare and Medicaid financial fraud through enhanced cooperation.  One of the most powerful tools in that effort is the False Claims Act, which the Justice Department has used to recover more than $6.7 billion since January 2009 in cases involving fraud against federal health care programs. The Justice Department's total recoveries in False Claims Act cases since January 2009 are over $9 billion.

This case was investigated jointly by the Commercial Litigation Branch of the Justice Department’s Civil Division, the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Central District of California and the Eastern District of Michigan, the National Association of Medicaid Fraud Control Units and the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General.
           
The claims settled by today’s agreement are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability.

FORMER GATEWAY CFO SETTLES SEC FRAUD ACTION

FROM:  SEC
April 18, 2012
On April 10, 2012, a final judgment was entered against John J. Todd, a former CFO of Gateway, Inc. Todd consented to entry of the final judgment without admitting or denying the allegations made by the Securities and Exchange Commission that he engaged in fraud and other violations of the federal securities laws in connection with Gateway’s recognition of revenue in the third quarter of 2000. This concludes the litigation of this action, brought in 2003 against three former officers of Gateway.

The SEC alleged that Todd falsely represented Gateway’s financial condition in the third quarter of 2000 in order to meet financial analysts’ earnings and revenue expectations. Among other transactions, the SEC alleged that Todd caused Gateway to record $47.2 million in revenue from a one-time sale of fixed assets to Gateway’s third-party information technology services provider in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and that Todd, then Gateway’s CFO, caused Gateway to recognize an additional $21 million in revenue from an incomplete sale of computers to a second entity, also in violation of GAAP. The SEC alleged that absent either of these transactions, Gateway would not have met analysts’ expectations with regard to its third quarter revenue.

Todd consented to a final judgment permanently enjoining him from violations of the antifraud provisions of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and from violations of SEC Rule 13b2-2, which prohibits making misrepresentations and omissions of material fact to company auditors, as well as from aiding and abetting the issuer reporting provisions of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-13 thereunder. Todd further consented to be barred for ten years from acting as an officer or director of a public company, and to pay disgorgement of $165,000, constituting his salary and bonus for the relevant quarter, together with prejudgment interest thereon of $138,162.24 totaling $303,162.24, and a $110,000 penalty.

Previously, on March 7, 2007, a jury had rendered a unanimous verdict finding Todd and defendant Robert D. Manza, Gateway’s former controller, liable for fraud, making false representations to auditors, aiding and abetting issuer reporting violations and other violations following a three week trial. On May 30, 2007, the Honorable Roger T. Benitez overturned the jury verdict as to the fraud and certain other claims. The SEC appealed that ruling, as well as the District Court’s prior August 1, 2006, grant of summary judgment to Gateway’s former CEO, Jeffrey Weitzen, dismissing the SEC’s case as to Weitzen. On June 23, 2011, the Ninth Circuit reversed those rulings and remanded the matter to the District Court. On January 25, 2012, the Court entered final judgments against Weitzen and Manza pursuant to their consents. [LR 22244 (January 31, 2012.]

DOJ AUDIT FINDS $64 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS FROM DEEPWATER HORIZON DISASTER

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Audit of Gulf Coast Claims Facility Results in $64 Million in Additional Payments Department of Justice-Ordered Audit Found the Gccf Marked a Significant Advance in Disaster Response
                                                                                                       Photo:  Wikimedia
WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice today released the executive summary of the report by an independent auditor of the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF), the facility set up to process claims in the wake of the April 20, 2010, Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  The audit found that the GCCF claims process constituted a significant advance in disaster response.  But the audit also identified significant errors that are now being corrected by sending more than $64 million in additional payments to approximately 7,300 individuals and businesses throughout the Gulf region.

“When the Attorney General visited the Gulf last summer, he heard concerns about the GCCF and ordered an independent auditor to evaluate it,” said Acting Associate Attorney General Tony West.  “Approximately 7,300 individuals and businesses throughout the Gulf region will now see the benefits of that action, to the tune of over $64 million in additional payments.  While there’s no question that the independent GCCF labored under extremely challenging circumstances to get a huge number of payments processed successfully, the fact that this audit has resulted in tens of millions of dollars being made available to claimants who were wrongfully denied or shortchanged underscores the importance of the audit.”

Last summer, the Attorney General visited the Gulf and met with individuals and small business owners whose lives were affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.  He acted on those concerns and ordered an independent auditor to evaluate the Gulf Coast Claims Facility.  The evaluation is now complete, and the Department of Justice has released the Executive Summary of the auditor’s report.

As a result of the Attorney General’s acting on those concerns, checks totaling approximately $64 million are now being sent to approximately 7,300 claimants who received less than they were entitled to under the GCCF’s procedures.

The auditor also found claimants who were overpaid as a result of errors applying the GCCF’s procedures, but did not attempt to identify all the claimants who were overpaid or quantify those overpayments.  The GCCF is not making any effort to recover those overpayments.

The report also noted the unprecedented nature of the spill and the context that surrounded the GCCF’s operations:  intense pressure to pay claims quickly, a claimant community that was experiencing significant economic pressures after a very difficult post-spill tourist season, and over a million claims that included many with very complex economic losses.  The GCCF paid out $6.2 billion to more than 220,000 claimants before it closed its doors as a result of the settlement between BP and the private plaintiffs.

The evaluation was conducted by BDO Consulting.  BDO’s team was selected after interviews with the Department of Justice and the attorneys general from the five Gulf states, and drew on previous experience in the Gulf Coast area assisting clients with claims related to Hurricane Katrina, including in the hospitality, retail, commercial and residential properties, seafood processing, consumer products and transportation industries.  As part of this evaluation, BDO evaluated tens of thousands of claims files and searched the GCCF’s entire database of over one million claims to identify other claims that may have suffered from the same errors.  BDO is preparing a full report of its findings that will be published later this spring.

U.S. Navy Photos of the Day Update

U.S. Navy Photos of the Day Update

SPEECH BY KATHLEEN SEIBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Atlantic Health Care Forum
April 19, 2012
Washington, DC
It’s good to be with you this morning to talk about the future of health care at a time when that future looks brighter than ever.
For years, we’ve known that health care costs were rising at an unsustainable rate.  Families saw their health insurance premiums rise three times faster than their wages.  Doctors saw patients go without medications they couldn’t afford.  Businesses saw health coverage grow into one of their biggest expenses.  State and city governments saw rising health care bills crowd out investments in education and public services.
We knew it was possible to do better.  Around the country, leading health systems and forward-looking communities were showing that you could bring costs down by improving care and promoting better health.  There were hospitals cutting readmissions by doing better follow-up care; employers lowering costs with innovative wellness programs; states saving money by giving people more tools to help them quit smoking.  The critical question for our health care system was whether we could help these pockets of excellence spread.

Three years ago, the answer to that question wasn’t clear.  After all, we had been talking about many of these issues for years.   I like to quote a piece from the New York Times.  “Although four fifths of the population is covered by some kind of health insurance, the protection afforded is often skimpy and unreliable….  Close to half the people who file pleas for bankruptcy each year do so because of medical debts….  Americans might bear these medical burdens more cheerfully were they getting their money’s worth; but if the price of health care isn’t right, neither is the product.”

The article goes on to talk about the shortage of primary care physicians, unnecessary procedures, the high number of preventable deaths, and exorbitant out-of-pocket costs.  It sounds very familiar, right?  And it was published in 1977.

So it’s understandable that there was some skepticism about the possibility improving care on a broad scale.  We had been hearing the mantra of better care and lower costs for decades, but we had limited results to show for it.

That’s why the last few years have been so exciting.  From a health policy perspective, they have been the most transformative years in decades.  Everyone knows the Affordable Care Act, the most important health legislation since Medicare and Medicaid.  But we have also had historic tobacco control legislation, major children’s health coverage legislation, the beginning of a national transition to electronic health records, an unprecedented campaign to end childhood obesity led by the First Lady, a first-of-its-kind effort to make health data available to innovators, and the list goes on.

But what’s been even more thrilling is the wave of innovation we’re seeing in state houses, town halls, hospitals, health centers, insurers, schools, and boardrooms across the country.  More than ever before in my lifetime, we are seeing a surge of efforts to shape a better health care system for the future – not just in pockets of excellence, but in cities and towns across the country.

In many cases, these efforts have been encouraged and supported by the policies I just mentioned.  But the driving force behind them has been leaders on the state and local level who want to make health care work better for the people in their communities.  Together, they are starting to answer the question of whether widespread improvement is possible, and the answer is: yes.

This morning, I want to talk briefly about three areas where we’re seeing some of the biggest changes.

I can still remember one of the most heartbreaking letters I got since I took this job.  It was from a woman in Maine whose elderly father had gone to the hospital with a minor infection.  While he was receiving care, he acquired a much more serious infection.  A day and a half after he came home, he collapsed.  Within a couple months, he was dead.
In the US today, these stories are far too common.  At any given time, about one in every 20 patients staying in a hospital has an infection related to their care – even though these infections are largely preventable.

But we are seeing signs that the tide is turning.  Our department recently released new data showing significant nationwide reductions in three common healthcare-associated infections since 2008.  In particular, we’ve seen a nearly one third drop in central line blood stream infections – one of the most common kinds.   This means these infections are now falling at roughly four times the rate we saw a decade ago.  And today, we are announcing new estimates that show that this reduction alone has saved up to 1,250 lives and an estimated $82 million.

Part of this drop can be explained by a national Action Plan for reducing these infections that our department launched in 2009.  But efforts by state health departments and individual health systems and hospitals have been just as important.

The best example is probably the Partnership for Patients.  The Partnership is an alliance created under the Affordable Care Act that seeks to reduce preventable injuries in hospitals by 40 percent and preventable hospital readmissions by 20 percent by the end of next year.  Achieving these goals would save 60,000 lives and reduce Medicare costs alone by $10 billion over a three year period.

When we launched this Partnership a year ago, we weren’t sure what reaction we would get.  It was totally voluntary.  There was no direct financial incentive for joining.  But today, more than two thirds of America’s hospitals – over 4,000 in total – have signed on to do their part to reduce these errors.  And it’s not just hospitals.  We have more than 4,000 additional partners from employers to health insurers.

There is much more work to be done.  But when you visit health systems around the country as I do, it’s hard not to feel the change in the air.   Every day, more and more care organizations are setting the same goal as a doctor I spoke to at Nationwide Children’s Hospital in Columbus, Ohio.  He told me that they did not strive to reduce harmful errors for the children they treat by 20 percent, or 40 percent.  Their goal was to eliminate these preventable errors altogether.   And we have never been moving faster towards that goal as a country than we are today.

Another area where we’ve seen dramatic gains is health information technology.  The promise of electronic health records goes back to the 1960s.  For decades now, Americans have been hearing that the days of musty cabinets and misplaced paper files were coming to an end.  And yet when this Administration came into office, less than a fifth of doctors used even a basic digital record.
What we’ve seen since then is incredible.  In just three years, the share of primary care doctors switching to electronic health records has almost doubled from 20 percent to 39 percent.  The share of hospitals using electronic health records has more than doubled from 16 percent to 35 percent.

The potential health benefits from this shift are huge.  One recent study looked at more than 27,000 adults with diabetes.  Those with paper health records got the best standard of care seven percent of the time.  Those with electronic health records got the best standard of care 51 percent of the time.  That’s a more than 600 percent improvement!

And in the long run, it’s not hard to see how electronic health records might help bring down costs too, by reducing paperwork and helping eliminate duplicate tests and procedures.

This transformation would not be happening without the investments we made in the Recovery Act.   From creating new centers to help small practices make the most of their health records, to working with industry to establish common standards, to providing incentive payments to help offset the upfront cost, we are eliminating many of the obstacles that kept this technology from spreading.

And today, I’m happy to announce that as of this March, nearly 225,000 health care providers and nearly 3,500 hospitals have signed up for these incentive payments, committing themselves not just to adopting electronic health records, but to using them to improve care.

But government action alone cannot explain the change we’re seeing around the country.  As I’ve traveled the country, I’ve seen a new level of interest among providers, driven in part by a new generation of doctors for whom a tablet computer in the pocket of their white coat is just as essential as a stethoscope around their neck.  And there is a new level of excitement among technology developers too.  Since 2009, hundreds of new health IT products have been developed, mostly by small companies with 50 or fewer employees. And venture capital investment in health IT is up more than 60 percent.

We’re witnessing something that’s never been done before: a national transformation in how we store and share health information, all happening in a matter of years.

Finally, a third area where we’re seeing significant movement is the emergence of new care models.  Everyone here understands the limitations of our current system, which rewards increases in the quantity of care, not improvements in the quality.   It’s a system nobody would design today if we started from scratch.  But in the past, many have resisted change.  The attitude was: better the devil we know, than the devil we don’t.

That’s why it’s been so encouraging over the last couple  years to see the response to some of the reforms in the health care law.  This winter, 32 leading health systems and physician groups signed up to be Pioneer ACOs, pledging to lead the way in transforming their practices to emphasize prevention, improve care coordination, and cut waste.  We estimate their efforts will improve care for about 800,000 people with Medicare, while saving up to $1.1 billion over five years.

Then, earlier this month, another 27 organizations signed on for a different version of the ACO model.  They represent almost every kind of health organization you could imagine.  And we’ve already received another 150 applications for a July start date.  ACOs used to be a kind of code for the cutting edge care that could only be practiced at certain elite health systems.  Now, it’s a model that health organizations around the country are embracing as the best path forward.

And this isn’t the only area where providers are stepping up.  One recent survey of 69 hospital executives found that just one in six have bundled payments to pay for episodes of care in place now.  But five in six expect to have them in place within two years.  And health insurers are also taking the initiative, providing more support for models like medical homes that emphasize primary care and helping patients manage chronic conditions.

Change is sweeping our health care system.  Across the country, health organizations are showing that high quality, low cost care isn’t like being an NBA star, restricted only to those with special genes.  Instead, it’s more like being a great free throw shooter.  Anyone can do it if they put in enough work.

Of course, we have a long way to go.  The process of improving care is always incremental and changes in the health care system are never easy.  It can be hard to focus on long-term reforms when there is always another patient to see.

But in many cases, the cost involved in these improvements is small: one of the most effective interventions for reducing healthcare-associated infections is a simple checklist.  And in cases where change is more expensive, like adopting an electronic health records system, people are increasingly realizing that the cost of not changing is even higher.

After all, the alternative to lowering costs through improvement is lowering costs through blunt cuts.  That would simply put more strain on a system that already is coming up short for doctors and patients.

The better path forward is improving care.  And communities across America are showing it can be done.  What we need to do now is make sure we continue to spur them on, whether it’s by creating new incentives, providing technical assistance, or just helping them learn from each other.  That’s what this Administration has been working to do over the last three years.  And it’s what we’ll continue to do with your help in the months to come.

Thank you.

Presseeinladung: ISS-Symposium in Berlin

Presseeinladung: ISS-Symposium in Berlin

GENERAL DEMPSEY VISITS AFGHANISTAN

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Chairman's Afghanistan Visit Focuses on Afghan Forces' Progress

By John D. Banusiewicz
American Forces Press Service

KABUL, Afghanistan, April 22, 2012 - The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff  will focus on progress in Afghanistan's national security forces during a visit here.

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey arrived this evening, and after a private dinner with a small group of field grade officers, met for about an hour with Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen, commander of the International Security Assistance Force.

Discussions here also will center on Allen's plan to draw down the U.S. presence in Afghanistan to 68,000 troops by the end of September, the chairman told American Forces Press Service during the flight here from Amman, Jordan.

Dempsey's visit to Afghanistan comes between last week's meetings in Belgium among NATO foreign and defense ministers and the alliance's summit in Chicago next month.

"The ministers get together and provide [the defense chiefs] with political guidance, and we discuss how we turn that into military advice and planning," the chairman explained. But the summit will focus on the way ahead after 2014, when Afghan forces will have security responsibility for all of Afghanistan, he added.

In the meantime, Dempsey said, the key for military leaders is to work along with their Afghan partners to ensure Afghanistan's national security forces continue their progress toward full security responsibility and to work together in addressing the challenges that lie ahead in that effort.

Earlier today, Dempsey met in Amman with Lt. Gen. Mashal al-Zaben, Jordan's defense chief. They discussed the long-standing U.S. Jordanian partnership and regional security issues, including Jordan's perspective on the situation in neighboring Syria.

U.S. CONCLUDES REVIEWING BILATERAL INVESTMENT TREATY

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
United States Concludes Review of Model Bilateral Investment Treaty
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
April 20, 2012
The following is the text of a joint statement issued by the U.S. Department of State and the Office of the United States Trade Representative.
Begin Text:

Today, the U.S. Department of State and the Office of the United States Trade Representative announced the conclusion of the Administration’s review of the United States’ model bilateral investment treaty (BIT) and the release of the revised 2012 model BIT.

International investment is a significant driver of America’s economic growth, job creation, and exports. The 2012 U.S. model BIT text will help achieve several important goals of the Obama Administration ensuring that U.S. companies benefit from a level playing field in foreign markets, providing effective mechanisms for enforcing the international obligations of our economic partners, and creating stronger labor and environmental protections.

The 2012 model BIT also supports our strategic international commitment to a robust economic agenda. It will play a critical role in ensuring that American firms can rely on strong legal protections when competing for the 95 percent of the world’s consumers who live outside the United States, as well as in promoting good governance, the rule of law, and transparency around the world.

Like the predecessor 2004 model BIT, the 2012 model BIT continues to provide strong investor protections and preserve the government’s ability to regulate in the public interest. The Administration made several important changes to the BIT text so as to enhance transparency and public participation; sharpen the disciplines that address preferential treatment to state-owned enterprises, including the distortions created by certain indigenous innovation policies; and strengthen protections relating to labor and the environment.

BACKGROUND
Since February 2009, when the Administration initiated a review of the United States’ (2004) model BIT to ensure that it was consistent with the public interest and the Administration’s overall economic agenda, the Administration has sought and received extensive input from Congress, companies, business associations, labor groups, environmental and other non-governmental organizations, and academics. While revisions to the model BIT do not require Congressional action, negotiated BITs require advice and consent of two thirds of the Senate.

A BIT is an international agreement that provides binding legal rules regarding one country’s treatment of investors from another country. The United States negotiates BITs on the basis of a high-standard “model” text that provides investors with improved market access; protection from discriminatory, expropriatory, or otherwise harmful government treatment; and a mechanism to pursue binding international arbitration for breaches of the treaty. High-standard BITs, such as those based on the U.S. model, improve investment climates, promote market-based economic reform, and strengthen the rule of law. The United States has more than 40 BITs in force with countries around the world, and the investment chapters of U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) contain substantially similar rules and protections. USTR and the Department of State co-lead the U.S. BIT program.

THE CIVIL WAR AND HONORING THE WAR DEAD

FROM:  VETERANS AFFAIRS
PHOTO: AFTERMATH AT GETTYSBURG
The Civil War’s Legacy of Honoring War Dead
April 18, 2012 by Alex Horton
We’ve all been taught the consequences of the U.S. Civil War since childhood. How it led to the emancipation of slaves, solidified state and federal rights, and further made the case for women’s suffrage. But the unprecedented carnage of the war also transformed the attitude of how the nation honors its military dead; a tradition now indelible to the American spirit.

That was the premise behind a talk given by Harvard University President Dr. Drew Faust at VA central office in Washington today. Through her research, Dr. Faust found that the Civil War fundamentally changed the way our country handled death on the battlefield. Both the Union and Confederacy were ill equipped to bury fallen troops in a dignified manner, and death notifications sent to families were informal and happenstance, if they happened at all. Unmarked and hasty graves littered fields and farms near battlefields where hundreds of thousands of men struggled and died.

Humanitarian ideas and the dignity of the human spirit were transformed in the crucible of war, and an emerging sense of responsibility for our war dead led to drastic shift in government obligations.

Edmund Whitman, an Army officer and a quartermaster during the war, led the effort. Whitman inspected cemeteries and battlefields across the south from 1865-1869, examined informal records, and conducted interviews to find out locations of fallen troops. He oversaw the reinterment of over 100,000 Union soldiers. About 300,000 were reburied in 74 national cemeteries, which now fall under the purview of the National Park Service.
As Dr. Faust noted, it was Whitman’s mission to put human faces and human cost to the war, and to recognize the sacrifices of so many of our own. His work helped to establish the notion that those who fell in battle are to be honored, and it’s our duty as citizens to remember and cherish that.

It’s difficult to fathom the damage of the war. An estimated 600,000 soldiers from both sides were killed; if the war were fought today with the same casualty rate, six million would lay dead. But it’s also hard to imagine a time when the care of our slain troops was an afterthought—an annoyance to both troops in the field and folks in the halls of government. It’s now one of VA’s most sacred obligations, but it took a war of staggering magnitude for our nation to realize it had a duty to honor the dead as much as they honored us.

AIR FORCE WEEK IN PHOTOS

Air Force Week in Photos

EXERCISE FOAL EAGLE IN S. KOREA SHOWS U.S. AND KOREAN FORCES READINESS

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Korea Exercise Lets Battalion Stretch Its Wings
By Jim Garamone
WASHINGTON, April 19, 2012 - Exercise Foal Eagle – an annual training exercise in South Korea – has given a Hawaii-based battalion an opportunity to spread its wings.
The exercise, which ends April 30, allows U.S. and South Korean service members to work together in defense of the Korean peninsula.

The exercise has added impetus this year, as North Korea launched a missile in defiance of United Nations agreements, said Army Lt. Col. Tim Hayden, commander of the 1st Battalion, 25th Infantry. His unit traveled to South Korea from its base in Hawaii to be part of the exercise.

"[The launch] did serve a strong point to remind us of our responsibility to maintain our readiness and our partnership with our Korean allies," he added.
The battalion focused on both the training mission and the combined mission with South Korean partners. The unit worked closely with South Korean army units as the exercise unfolded. It is a type of mission the unit, which has deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, has not practiced for years, Hayden said.

The battalion started preparing for movement last year and deployed in March. The unit has been able to train on everything from individual skills up through platoon and company level, the colonel said, and conducted combined training with the South Koreans.

"One of the events I'd like to highlight was a combined defensive live-fire shot here on Rodriguez Range," Hayden said from South Korea. "It was a great event, because we partnered with a Korean tank platoon."

The South Korean tankers partnered with the battalion's mobile gun systems – a 105 mm main gun on a Stryker vehicle variant. This allowed the troops of both nations to fight a defensive live-fire battle together.

"What we found was through our troops leading procedures and our rehearsals was both the Korean army and our Army have a lot in common – we have high-caliber leaders, we have well-trained soldiers, we have very good equipment," he said. "We can communicate and fight on the battlefield today as allies and partners."

Many of the American soldiers are veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, Hayden noted.
"What this has been able to do for us is focus on a higher-intensity fight, more of a decisive action, and fight in the terrain that we would have to fight here on the peninsula should a contingency arise," he said. "The change of terrain has forced my leaders to think beyond the standard mission set they are used to in Iraq or Afghanistan."

The colonel said his unit is ready for the type of combat that could happen in Korea. "We are ready," he said. "We've mastered the basics, and we're focused on our core competencies and our fundamental warfighting skills, and we remain disciplined in what we do."

DAVE CAMP, CHAIRMAN OF THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE CALLS FOR LESS SPENDING, GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY

FROM:  CONGRESSMAN DAVE CAMP’S NEWSLETTER
April 17, 2012
Highlights from the House: Highlights from the House: Camp Calls for Less Spending, Greater Accountability & Comprehensive Tax Reform
Congressman Dave Camp met with constituents across Michigan’s Fourth District last week to listen first hand to their concerns. Camp answered questions about how economic uncertainty continues to dampen the nation’s economic recovery. Residents agreed with  Congressman Camp’s plan to advance comprehensive tax reform to restore economic growth and job opportunities for hardworking Americans. Coupled with tax reform, Washington must be held accountable for the use of taxpayer dollars  rein in out-of-control federal spending, which remains a significant threat to America’s economic future. AsCBS recently reported, the national debt has now increased more during President Obama's three years and two months in office than it did during George W. Bush’s presidency.

With spending and debt at record levels, it is no wonder that more than three-quarters of Americans believe the country is still in a recession. Historically, Small businesses have led the country out of recessions.  Congressman Camp knows their recovery plays a key role to unlocking job growth and getting Americans back to work.

A recent survey shows that with taxes due tonight, cash-strapped small businesses are putting their scarce resources towards tax compliance, rather than growth and hiring. The good news is: the Senate rejected a tax hike yesterday. The better news is: Camp is leading House Republicans in tax reform efforts to boost small business job creation. On Thursday, the House will vote on Camp’s Small Business Tax Cut Act (H.R. 9) to give small businesses a 20% tax deduction. A Fiscal Associates study shows the Small Business Tax Cut with help create more than 100,000 new jobs a year once fully in place, directly benefitting 22 million small businesses. The president has called small businesses the "anchors of our Main Streets" hopefully he and will join the House to provide lower taxes and higher growth to America’s job creators.

SENATOR CARL LEVIN'S SPEECH ON INVEST IN AMERICA ACT

FROM:  SENATOR CARL LEVIN’S NEWSLETTER
Senate Floor Speech on INVEST in America Act
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Mr. President, there is no state that has suffered more from the job losses of the Great Recession than the state of Michigan. You do not have to ask a Michiganian twice if he or she believes Congress should take action to increase the speed of the jobs recovery. I am ready to consider any legislation that promises more opportunity for the workers of Michigan and the nation.

Unfortunately, the legislation the House has sent to us, promoted as a job creation bill, is no such thing. In the name of job creation, the House bill would severely weaken investor and taxpayer protections in the nation’s securities laws. In the name of putting Americans to work, the House bill would hand a series of special favors to influential special interest groups.

The House bill reflects a disturbing failure to learn the lessons of the recent and all-too-painful past. It defies belief that after the worst financial crisis in generations, a crisis brought on by the failure to effectively police our financial markets, Congress would consider removing vital obstacles to fraud and abuse.

The House bill would take a series of steps that would undermine the integrity of the financial markets. We should not go down that road, and we need not. Working with Senator Reed, Senator Landrieu, Senator Brown and others, I have participated in an effort to make common-sense changes that would give small, innovative companies more tools to access the capital they need. But we do that without putting the stability of our economy and the interests of American investors and taxpayers at risk. Let me lay out some of the problems with the House bill and how the Reed-Landrieu-Levin amendment would address them.

The House bill would lower barriers to fraud that are now present in so-called “Regulation A” stock offerings. These are offerings that are exempt from SEC registration requirements. The House bill would expose retail investors, those with no expertise or resources to assess the risks of participating in the unregulated market, to massive potential fraud and abuse. It does not even require that companies making offerings under Regulation A provide audited financial statements. The Regulation A process may be appropriate for very small companies, but the House bill provides few meaningful limits to its use. Instead, the House bill would allow even large companies to avoid meaningful ovI’ve worked with my colleagues to fix this problem by ensuring that these offerings are limited to only once every three years, and that investors in these offerings get an accurate picture of the company’s finances through audited financial statements.

In the name of giving smaller companies greater access to the initial public offering market, the House bill would create a new class of company, called an “emerging growth company,” and would strip from investors in such companies more than a dozen important investor protections.

Some of these protections involve transparency.  The House bill would weaken corporate governance provisions that we enacted less than two years ago in the Dodd-Frank Act, including disclosures on executive pay. The House bill would exempt these companies from having to comply with changes to accounting standards. It would repeal the protections put in place after the dotcom bubble burst. These protections require financial firms to separate research analysts who advise clients on whether to invest in initial public offerings from sales teams. The House bill provides that companies with up to $1 billion in annual revenues would not have to get an outside auditor to check their internal controls.  So, what happens if one of these companies is cooking the books?  Who’s going to catch it?

We learned with Enron and Worldcom why we need meaningful checks on how companies prepare their financial statements. The vast majority of financial restatements –corrections to bad information given to the investing public – are made by medium and small companies. Investors in these companies should have the confidence that the financial statements on which they base their decisions are accurate.
 
These provisions of the House bill are bad enough, given the chronic problem in financial markets with poor and misleading financial disclosure. But to make matters worse, the bill would open this collection of loopholes to companies with up to $1 billion in annual revenues – a level that would include well over 80% of all IPOs. Financial regulators, associations of individual investors, many of the largest pension plans in the country, securities experts, and the Chamber of Commerce all have raised alarm bells about that $1 billion threshold as well as the many problems that would follow from the House bill.
ersight year after year.

Just this week the SEC took a series of enforcement actions against fraudsters seeking to victimize investors in pre-IPO offerings. As one SEC official noted: “The newly emerging secondary marketplace for pre-IPO stock presents risk for even savvy investors.” The House bill threatens to bring the same level of risk and instability that plagues pre-IPO trading to the IPO market itself, changes that, rather than building support for IPOs, might make the IPO market so risky that it dampens investor interest.

The amendment some of us have been working on would accept the premise that some small, newly public companies could benefit from somewhat relaxed requirements as they adjust to the public marketplace. But our amendment would limit these benefits to smaller companies, those with under $350 million in annual revenues. And our amendment would not exempt these companies from nearly so many critical investor protections. For example, we would not remove protections designed to protect the integrity of the research that’s available to investors. Nor would it exempt them from any new accounting rules. Nor would it exempt them from requirements regarding important executive pay disclosures and shareholder input on executive pay packages. Our amendment would provide flexibility for smaller, newly public companies to adjust to the public markets, but leave in place the investor protections that ensure our public markets remain the best in the world.

The House bill would also allow companies – or fraudsters posing as legitimate companies – to solicit investors directly through the Internet. As written, the House bill would offer investors almost no protection from fraudulent schemes and fake investment opportunities. Although these websites (often called “intermediaries” or “funding portals”) are the only entities capable of making sure that a company seeking to sell stock on its site is real, the House exempts them from any real regulation or liability. And the same is true with the issuing company. Labor groups, seniors organizations, regulators, and securities experts all warn us that this measure is an open invitation to fraud. One group calls it the “boiler room legalization act.”

So we have many problems with these provisions of the House bill. But we also believe that so-called “crowdfunding” – in which small start-ups can access pools of capital from small investors, usually over the Internet – has the potential to provide opportunity for truly small businesses to get additional capital they need to grow.  That’s why we build upon the work of Senators Merkley and Bennet to create a platform for raising money through the Internet, but we make sure that it has the necessary investor and consumer protections.

In fact, legitimate crowdfunding sites have made it clear to us that they, like us, are concerned about the House bill, and they too want the additional protections we provide. Our amendment makes sure that funding portals are subject to meaningful regulation, and that the companies that use them to raise capital are too. Our amendment would — unlike the House bill — require comprehensive disclosures to investors about the company and the risks of such investments. If this new way of investing in small companies is to succeed, then investor protections like the ones embodied in the Merkley-Bennet provisions, which we included in our amendment, are vital to giving investors the confidence to participate.

The House bill also attempts to remove regulations on so-called private offerings. By allowing issuers of private offerings to market their stock to the general public – on billboards and the Internet, in visits to retirement homes or late-night television ads – this provision would dangerously lower our defenses against fraud. We’ve seen this movie before – in the 1990s, regulators lowered the barriers to general solicitation for private offerings, and within years reversed their error because of widespread fraud and abuse.
Some have complained that the existing restrictions on solicitation for private offerings are too narrow and impede business’s access to capital. That seems unlikely given the nearly $1 trillion a year in private offering activity. If there are yet more worthy investments going unfunded because of unneeded investor protections, the SEC’s regulations should be updated for the internet age.

The Reed-Landrieu-Levin amendment would direct the SEC to revise its rules to allow companies to offer and sell shares to accredited investors.  It then directs the SEC to make sure that those who offer or sell these securities take reasonable steps to verify that the purchasers actually are accredited investors.  It requires the SEC to revise its rules to make sure that these sales tactics are appropriate. There will be no billboards or cold calls to senior living centers under our amendment. I wish I could say the same about the House bill.

There is little evidence that the reduced investor protections and invitations to fraud in the House bill will make any meaningful contribution to job growth. We do not have one study on any of the provisions of the House bill establishing that even one job would be created. If such a study existed, I’m sure we would have seen it. The simple reality is that repealing federal securities laws—and that is clearly the intent of the House bill—does not create jobs.

In fact, a former chief accountant of the SEC was quoted recently as saying this jobs bill was no jobs bill at all. He said: “This would be better known as the bucket-shop and penny-stock fraud reauthorization act of 2012.”

Taken together, these and other provisions in the House bill send a false message: that in order to grow the economy, we must subject our senior citizens to more fraud, we must put pension funds and church endowments at greater risk of fleecing, we must create more threats to the financial stability of American families.. The America I know and believe in is capable of growing its economy without these unnecessary risks.

Indeed, it is fraud and financial abuse that have repeatedly brought our economy to its knees. We opened the door to fraud and abuse in the savings and loan industry, and precipitated a crisis that destroyed 750 financial institutions, cut the number of new homes built in this country by nearly half, and devastated entire communities. We dropped the barriers to fraud through financial statements and in swaps markets, opening the door to the predations of the so-called “smartest guys in the room” – the criminal executives of Enron. We lowered the barriers to heedless risk and conflicts of interest in the financial system, and paved the road to the greatest financial crisis since the 1930s.

Over the last ten years, on a bipartisan basis, the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which I chair, has held hearing after hearing and issued report after report on the Enron crisis, accounting and securities fraud, and the more recent subprime mortgage crisis. Our investigations exposed how some American corporations, their accountants, and banks were willing to dupe investors and, even after their wrongdoing came to light, walk away with huge paychecks, while workers, investors, and the American economy at large paid the price.  Enron was the seventh largest U.S.

corporation before its crash bankrupted employees, pensions, and investors. It lied about its earnings and did so with the help of its accountants and banks.  Goldman Sachs sold securities through public and private offerings that didn’t fully inform investors about what they were buying.  The wrongdoing our subcommittee has uncovered over the years is as powerful reminder that investors deserve protection against abuses when they invest their hard-earned dollars in U.S. capital markets.

There is a rising wave of concern among market experts that the House legislation’s effect might be precisely the opposite of its supporters’ stated intent; that instead of boosting the ability of companies to find capital so they can grow, these changes would hurt the market for investing in new companies by making that market too risky. If we remove meaningful transparency and fraud safeguards, SEC Chairman Schapiro wrote just a few days ago, “investors will lose confidence in our markets, and capital formation will ultimately be made more difficult and expensive.”

The question for the champions of ever-lower regulatory barriers is this: Did those rollbacks of regulatory protections help our economy grow? Did they create jobs? Ask a family that was wiped out in the financial crisis. Ask an investor who lost everything to Enron. Ask one of the 8.6 million American workers who lost their jobs in a financial crisis created on Wall Street, one we have yet to fully overcome.

Mr. President, in November of 1999, this body debated another piece of financial legislation, one whose supporters claimed would lead to boundless new economic opportunities for our country. That bill repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, lowered barriers to concentration in the financial industry, and removed the wall that had separated investment banking from commercial banking since the aftermath of the Great Depression.

Senator Byron Dorgan came to this floor and issued a warning. “It may be that I am hopelessly old-fashioned,” he said. “But I just do not think we should ignore the lessons learned in the 1930s. … I also think we will, in 10 years time, look back and say: We should not have done that because we forgot the lessons of the past.”

Ten years after Senator Dorgan’s remarks, almost to the day that he predicted, America’s economy hit rock-bottom, with the lowest mark of employment during the Great Recession.

Old fashioned sounds pretty good these days. I hope to be as old fashioned as Senator Dorgan, who warned us that lowering the barriers that protect us from financial catastrophe can only destroy jobs. I hope the Senate will turn away from the House bill that threatens fraud, abuse and renewed crisis, and embrace reforms that give our innovative companies the chance to compete without endangering investor confidence or the stability of our economy.

ALABAMA REAL ESTATE INVESTOR AGREES TO PLEAD GUILTY TO CONSPIRACIES TO RIG BIDS AND COMMIT MAIL FRAUD FOR THE PURCHASE OF REAL ESTATE AT PUBLIC FORECLOSURE AUCTIONS

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANTITURST DIVISION
WASHINGTON — An Alabama real estate investor has agreed to plead guilty and to serve prison time for his role in conspiracies to rig bids and commit mail fraud at public real estate foreclosure auctions in southern Alabama, the Department of Justice announced today. To date, as a result of the ongoing investigation, three individuals and one company have pleaded guilty.

Charges were filed today in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama in Mobile, Ala., against Lawrence B. Stacy of Mobile. Stacy was charged with one count of bid rigging and one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud. According to the plea agreement, which is subject to court approval, Stacy has agreed to serve six months in prison. Additionally, Stacy has agreed to pay a $10,000 criminal fine and to cooperate with the department's ongoing investigation.

According to court documents, Stacy conspired with others not to bid against one another at public real estate foreclosure auctions in southern Alabama. After a designated bidder bought a property at the public auctions, which typically take place at the county courthouse, the conspirators would generally hold a secret, second auction, at which each participant would bid the amount above the public auction price he or she was willing to pay. The highest bidder at the secret, second auction won the property.

Stacy was also charged with conspiring to use the U.S. mail to carry out a scheme to acquire title to rigged foreclosure properties sold at public auctions at artificially suppressed prices, to make and receive payoffs to co-conspirators and to cause financial institutions, homeowners and others with a legal interest in rigged foreclosure properties to receive less than the competitive price for the properties. Stacy participated in the bid-rigging and mail fraud conspiracies from at least as early as May 2002 until at least January 2007.

“The Antitrust Division will continue to pursue vigorously the perpetrators involved in these real estate foreclosure auction schemes,” said Sharis A. Pozen, Acting Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division. “Those who eliminate competition from the marketplace and prey on the misfortune of others will be held accountable for their actions.”

FBI Special Agent in Charge of the Mobile FBI office, Lewis M. Chapman recognized the perseverance of agents and prosecutors in this complex investigation. Chapman stated, “This investigation sends the message that real estate fraud including antitrust violations will continue to be pursued in these tough economic times, no matter how intricate the scheme.”

Each violation of the Sherman Act carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $1 million fine for individuals. The maximum fine for a Sherman Act charge may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by the victim if either amount is greater than the statutory maximum fine. Each count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a fine in an amount equal to the greatest of $250,000, twice the gross gain the conspirators derived from the crime or twice the gross loss caused to the victims of the crime by the conspirators.

COMPANY PAYS PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF CHILD LABOR RULES

FROM:  DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Candyopolis assessed $12,000 in penalties for child labor violations, pays more than $6,700 in back wages following US Labor Department investigations

Various FLSA violations found at 13 candy stores in Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma
KANSAS CITY, Kan. -- The U.S. Department of Labor has assessed a total of $12,000 in civil money penalties against Candyopolis, a retail confectionary chain in the Midwest, after investigations by the department’s Wage and Hour Division found teens at seven stores were allowed to perform hazardous jobs prohibited by the Fair Labor Standards Act’s child labor provisions. The investigations – conducted at 13 stores in Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma – also disclosed violations of the FLSA’s minimum wage, overtime pay and record-keeping requirements, resulting in back wages totaling $6,737.40 recovered for 275 employees.

Investigators found that three stores in Kansas (two in Wichita and one in Manhattan) and four in Oklahoma (two in Oklahoma City, one in Enid and one in Norman) allowed minor employees to load and operate trash and box compactors in violation of the FLSA’s Hazardous Occupations Order No. 12, which generally prohibits workers under 18 from operating, loading or unloading paper balers or trash compactors.
Minimum wage violations were found at all 13 stores, resulting in $2,048 owed to 256 employees. The violations stem from the company requiring each employee to pay $8 for uniform shirts from his or her first paycheck, which caused pay to fall below the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.

Overtime violations were found at 11 stores in all three states, resulting in a total of $4,689.40 owed to 19 employees. These violations were due to Candyopolis incorrectly classifying managers as exempt from the requirements of the FLSA. Consequently, managers were paid a salary without being paid the half-time due on the overtime hours worked.

Finally, the company failed to keep accurate records of time worked by employees at 12 stores in the three states, as required by the FLSA.
The Kansas stores investigated are located in Manhattan, Salina, Topeka and Wichita (two). The Oklahoma stores are located in Enid (two), Lawton, Norman and Oklahoma City (two). Both of the Nebraska stores are in Omaha. All back wages owed have been paid in full.

“Businesses that employ minors are legally and ethically obligated to abide by child labor standards, and to ensure minors are protected on the job,” said Susana Rincon, director of the Wage and Hour Division’s San Francisco District Office. “The penalties imposed as a result of these violations are indicative of the Wage and Hour Division’s efforts to combat systemic violations found in the retail industry. We are committed to educating employers about wage laws and to enforcing them. The division will ensure that workers receive their fair and rightful wages, and that minors are protected in the workplace.”

Candyopolis is operated by Meetha Ventures of Fremont, Calif. The Wage and Hour Division’s district office in Kansas City, Kan., initiated the investigations and the division’s San Francisco District Office became involved when systemic violations were found because it has jurisdiction over the company’s corporate office.

The FLSA establishes a minimum age of 18 for workers in those nonagricultural occupations that the secretary of labor declares to be particularly hazardous for 16- and 17-year-old workers or detrimental to their health or well-being. The FLSA also requires that covered, nonexempt employees be paid at least the federal minimum wage for all hours worked, as well as one and one-half times their regular rates for hours worked over 40 per week. Additionally, accurate records of employees’ wages, hours and other conditions of employment must be maintained.

U.S. RELATIONS WITH JORDAN, GEN. DEMPSEY PAYS A CALL

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin E. Dempsey introduces himself to Jordanian National Security leaders in Amman, Jordan, Apr. 21, 2012. DOD photo by D. Myles Cullen

Dempsey Visits Jordan to Reaffirm Partnership
By John D. Banusiewicz
American Forces Press Service
AMMAN, Jordan, April 21, 2012 - The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff arrived here today to visit his Jordanian counterpart and to meet with officials at the U.S. Embassy.
Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey kicked off his first visit to Jordan as chairman with private meetings with U.S. Ambassador to Jordan Stuart E. Jones and members of the embassy's staff, followed by a Jordanian-hosted dinner. Tomorrow, he'll meet with Jordan's chief of defense, Lt. Gen. Mashal al-Zaben.

The chairman took time after his embassy meetings to mix and mingle informally with service members stationed here.

"This is a counterpart visit and a chance to thank the Jordanians for their critical support in Operation Enduring Freedom, as well as to discuss regional security issues," said Marine Corps Col. David Lapan, Dempsey's spokesman. "We remain firmly committed to our partnership with Jordan's armed forces and greatly appreciate their contributions in support of coalition operations."

Jordan is one of the most vital U.S. allies in the region, Lapan said. "We are fully committed to our partnership during this time of dynamic change," he added.
The world is closely watching developments in Syria, Lapan said, and the United States shares Jordanian concerns regarding the deteriorating situation there.

"The Jordanian military continues to display exceptional leadership throughout the region," Lapan said. For example, he said, the United States and Jordan will conduct Exercise Eager Lion 12 from May 7 to May 28.

The exercise will bring together more than 8,000 participants from more than 15 countries over five continents. Its focus is to strengthen military-to-military relationships of participating partner nations through a joint, whole-of-government, multinational approach, the chairman's spokesman said.

DOD, NAVY, TEXAS WIND GROUP, SIGN AGREEMENT OF A MUTUAL APPROACH FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY

FROM:  U.S. NAVY

By Kenneth Hess, Chief of Naval Operations Energy and Environmental Readiness Division Public Affairs

NAVAL AIR STATION (NAS) KINGSVILLE, Texas (NNS) -- The Navy released today a memorandum of agreement (MOA) signed by officials from the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of the Navy and Texas Wind Group (TWG) that outlines a mutual approach to enable a renewable energy developer to build and operate wind turbines at planned locations in Kleberg County, Texas, while reducing the potential for those turbines to affect flight operations at NAS Kingsville.

"Sustaining military readiness is the number one priority of everyone in the Navy chain of command," said Capt. Mark McLaughlin, commanding officer of NAS Kingsville. "This agreement helps preserve NAS Kingsville's capability to train naval aviators, while enabling the compatible development of new energy sources."

Signing for DoD was David Belote, director of the DoD Energy Siting Clearinghouse. Signing for the Navy were Roger Natsuhara, principal deputy assistant secretary of the Navy for Energy, Installations and Environment; John Quinn, acting director of the Chief of Naval Operations Energy and Environmental Readiness Division; Vice Adm. William French, commander, Navy Installations Command; Rear Adm. John Scorby, commander, Navy Region Southeast; Capt. Douglas Edgecomb, commanding officer, Naval Air Station Corpus Christi, and McLaughlin. Dru Steubing signed on behalf of Texas Wind Group Managing.

"The Navy recognizes the strategic and fiscal importance of developing domestic sources of energy for use both ashore and at sea," said Quinn. "As we develop new sources of energy, it is critical that we not create a new problem as we solve another. This agreement with the Texas Wind Group is proof that when energy developers and the military work together, it is possible to achieve a win-win for both national security and energy security. This agreement allows the military mission and alternative energy production to co-exist in South Texas, and may pave the way for similar agreements elsewhere."

TWG's Riviera I wind farm project will be comprised of 83 turbines between nine and 11.5 nautical miles south of NAS Kingsville's radars and navigation aids. Electromagnetic interference (EMI) from the turbines has the potential to impact those systems. However, the MOA describes technical solutions for this, such as connecting NAS Kingsville's air surveillance radar system with the radar at Corpus Christi International Airport and optimizing radars to "ignore" signals received from wind turbines. TWG will contribute $500,000 to help pay for these technical upgrades to Navy radar systems. Under the MOA, TWG also agreed to reposition certain turbines that would have caused interference with the Kingsville precision approach radar. TWG also agreed to temporarily curtail the operation of certain turbines if the precision approach radar is negatively affected.

"The Texas Wind Group is delighted to be the first wind energy company to finalize an agreement of this type with the Navy," said Steubing. "We are fully committed to protecting the capability of our nation's military, and we appreciate the opportunity to work with the Navy to make our development compatible with the Navy mission in South Texas."

The Navy and the Department of Defense will continue working closely with renewable energy developers and local communities in South Texas to ensure local wind turbine projects can coexist with the Navy mission.

INCAE AND WOODROW WILSON PRIVATE SECTOR INITIATIVE

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
INCAE and Woodrow Wilson Private Sector Initiative to Address Crime and Insecurity in Central America
Remarks Maria Otero
Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights World Bank
Washington, DC
April 19, 2012
(As Delivered)
Thank you, Cynthia. It is an honor to attend the third meeting of the INCAE and Woodrow Wilson Center project here in Washington, DC. I also want to thank the World Bank and the Central American Private Sector Initiative for co-hosting today’s event. I especially want to thank INCAE and the Woodrow Wilson Center for bringing together the private sector to help create practical solutions to the security challenges in Central America – because we know that governments cannot do this work alone. Your contribution is critical to help build safe, prosperous, and democratic societies in Central America.

Today, I want to talk about three key areas of the U.S. strategy to combat crime and insecurity in Central America: First, what the U.S. is doing to reduce the demand for illicit drugs in our own country, which we know is a major factor in this transnational issue. Second, how the U.S. is utilizing new international partnerships to address transnational organized crime and citizen security. And lastly, the need for a comprehensive, community-based approach to address citizen security in each country in Central America.
At the Summit of the Americas, President Obama and Secretary Clinton engaged with the leaders of the region in a robust and healthy dialogue on a range of issues, including the U.S. strategy on drugs. The U.S. has acknowledged that the high demand for drugs in our own country is a major contributing factor to drug trafficking and its effects in the region. In response to this concern, President Obama charted a new direction for our efforts to reduce illicit drug use and its consequences by launching a National Drug Control Strategy in 2010. This week, he announced a revised strategy that provides a review of our progress, and looks ahead to continued reform.

This new strategy rejects the false choice between an enforcement-centric “war on drugs” on the one hand and the notion of drug legalization on the other, an issue that was also addressed in Cartagena.

While the United States remains open to engaging in discussion on this issue, we do not believe that legalization is the path towards a holistic solution to combat drug trafficking and organized crime and improve citizen security across the region.

The United States believes there must be a balanced approach to reducing illicit drug use, and our efforts are yielding results. The rate of overall drug use in America has dropped by roughly one-third over the past three decades. Since 2006, meth use in America has been cut by half and cocaine use has dropped by nearly 40 percent. In 2011, the United States spent over 10 billion dollars on drug prevention and treatment; 9.4 billion dollars on domestic law enforcement; 3.6 billion on interdiction, and 2.1 billion on international drug control programs. The President’s revised National Drug Control Strategy seeks to redouble our efforts, and employs a balance of evidenced-based public health and safety reforms.
Another pillar of this strategy is strengthening international partnerships – and at the leadership of Secretary Clinton, we have created new partnerships to address the security challenges in Central America.

The United States has developed new modes of cooperation starting by addressing security issues that are identified by Central Americans themselves. Secretary Clinton firmly believes that the solutions to the problems in Central America must come from Central Americans – that is why the U.S. supports the Central American Integration System, commonly known as SICA. I cannot stress the importance – however difficult and slow it may be – to have the government leaders of Central America agree upon the primary security challenges and then identify as a group the specific areas of cooperation needed to create the solution. Today’s event further contributes to the Central American-led effort to identify practical solutions to the security challenges facing the region.

The U.S. programmatic efforts are funneled through our Central America Regional Security Initiative – known as CARSI – which is an integrated, collaborative program designed to disrupt and dismantle the gangs and transnational criminal organizations. From 2008 to 2011, the United States has allocated over 361 million dollars to CARSI efforts.

At the Summit of the Americas, President Obama announced that the U.S. will allocate 130 million dollars for CARSI in fiscal year 2012.

Our support is focused not just on helping security forces track down criminals. We are working to address the root causes of violence, from impunity to lack of opportunity. We are working to build accountable institutions free from corruption that respect human rights and enhance the rule of law. We are building partnerships to improve courts and prisons, train police and prosecutors, and enhance education systems and job-training centers. We are working towards building partnerships with political leaders, but also with civil society, businesses and with the elite, who have a special obligation to help confront these challenges.

The U.S. welcomes the progress on tax reform in some countries, such as President Perez Molina’s tax reform in Guatemala and the recently passed security taxes in Costa Rica and Honduras. The fact that so many of the wealthy in Latin America have not paid their fair share of taxes is one of the many reasons why the services that are necessary to protect citizen security and enhance educational opportunities have not been available. Fora such as the one today are critical to ensure the voices of the private sector are part of the solution.

In addition to new partnerships with Central Americans, we are building partnerships across the Americas. One example is our cooperation with Colombia in Central America. Presidents Obama and Santos announced a new Action Plan on Regional Security Cooperation earlier this week in Cartagena. These coordination efforts will initially focus on Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Panama with the goal of expanding to the rest of the Americas and West Africa. Both countries will develop complementary security assistance programs and operational efforts to support partner nations afflicted by effects of transnational organized crime.

Lastly, I want to talk about the progress we are seeing on the ground. I have seen the most progress during my visits to Central American countries when there is a multi-faceted, community-based approach that empowers all actors in society – including municipal and state government officials, members of the private sector and civil society, and individual citizens, with a focus on young people who are not only the most at-risk, but who have the most potential to change their communities for the better.

We are seeing progress clearly demonstrated in the Model Precinct Program which has significantly aided in reducing homicides, robberies, and burglaries throughout the region. The program uses community-based policing techniques and youth drug prevention programs like the Gang Resistance Education and Training – or GREAT - and the Police Athletic League to build local support. Police officers assigned to the unit receive several years of classroom and on-the-job training, greatly increasing their investigative and patrolling capabilities.

I recently visited the Model Precinct in Lourdes, El Salvador, where new police leadership was installed in the spring of 2010. The new commander of the Lourdes precinct fully embraced and implemented best practices for policing. By adopting an intelligence-led policing philosophy for crime prevention and targeted enforcement, the Lourdes precinct reduced the number of homicides from 287 in 2010 to 170 in 2011 -- a 40 percent reduction. All other major crimes were also reduced by more than 40 percent. By comparison, the national homicide rate in El Salvador rose by 9 percent in 2011.

Now these programs occur on a municipal-level; the challenge is how to scale up these efforts and replicate them across each nation and the region. In Guatemala, the new tax reform funds will go to support community-based policing programs building upon the Model Precinct in other parts of the country. For example, I visited the Mixco Model Precinct earlier this year. The local mayor, police chief, priest and community leaders worked together to create a new level of trust and collaboration that resulted in a significant decrease in the levels of crime and violence.

And it was clear that these efforts were not only difficult, but dangerous. In this particular case, the police chief had to release a high percentage of the police force due to corruption and train an entire new cadre of young police officers. So we see that even these models are not simple, and take a great deal of time, effort and personal investment by many actors. I am pleased that we will now expand this program in Honduras, which has launched the first Model Precinct Program. President Lobo has indicated that funds from the new security tax will go towards the expansion of these efforts.

Solving the crime and insecurity that plagues Central America requires a set of multi-faceted responses that include involvement by every sector of society. My message to those of you here today is that your governments need you – they need your investment in the country. And more importantly, they need your support to help increase the political will needed to face these tough issues head-on. They need your help to rebuild weak institutions, to strengthen the judicial system, to build capacity through the government, all essential for a meaningful and long lasting response.

U.S. GOVERNMENT FEARS GROWING BALLISTIC MISSILE THREAT

FROM U.S. AIR FORCE

Commander of Air Combat Command, Gen. Mike Hostage, and his wife, Kathy, look on as 2nd Lt. Suzanne Sparks, 7th Space Warning Squadron crew commander, demonstrates a mock missile detection sequence in the Missile Warning Operations Center at Beale Air Force Base, Calif., Nov. 6, 2011. 7th SWS operates 24/7 and Airmen are responsible for up channeling an event analysis to the Missile Warning Center at Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado Springs, Colo., within 60 seconds of the initial detection. (U.S. Air Force photo by Mr. John Schwab)

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

U.S. Missile Defense Counters Growing Threat

By Cheryl Pellerin

WASHINGTON, April 19, 2012 - Six days after North Korea's failed long-range rocket launch, the head of the Defense Department's Missile Defense Agency testified on Capitol Hill about bolstering U.S. defenses against a growing ballistic missile threat.

Agency Director Army Lt. Gen. Patrick J. O'Reilly appeared yesterday before the Senate Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee to discuss the administration's fiscal 2013 budget request of $7.75 billion for his agency.

The request is a reduction of more than $650 million from the fiscal 2012 appropriation. Since 1999, the United States has invested more than $90 billion in missile defense.

The latest request, O'Reilly said, "balances our policies as documented in the 2010 Ballistic Missile Defense Review [with] U.S. Strategic Command's integrated air and missile defense priorities, [Missile Defense Agency] technical feasibility assessments, affordability constraints and current intelligence community estimates of the ballistic missile threat."

But the director expressed concern to the panel about two critically needed programs that are in jeopardy because of past congressional funding reductions.

The first, he said, is a missile defense sensor capability provided by the precision tracking space system, which allows space-based tracking of ballistic missiles. The second is the need to develop a second independent layer of homeland defense with the SM-3 IIB interceptor, a highly deployable missile that would destroy threat missiles earlier in their flight paths than the current architecture.

"I request your support for these programs," O'Reilly said, "so that our homeland benefits from the same layered missile defense approach that we successfully employ in our regional defenses."

The director described improvements made last year to the complex ballistic missile defense system designed to protect the United States and its allies. These include activating a new missile field and a fire-control node at Fort Greely, Alaska; activating an upgraded early warning radar in Thule, Greenland; and upgrading the reliability of three ground-based interceptors, or GBIs, he said.

"This year," O'Reilly told the panel, "we continue to aggressively pursue the agency's highest priority -- to conduct a missile intercept with the newest version of the GBI's exo-atmospheric kill vehicle after two previous flight-test failures."

A failure review board of government and industry experts redesigned critical GBI kill vehicle components and established more stringent manufacturing and component requirements, he added.

"These requirements have previously not been encountered anywhere in the aerospace industry," O'Reilly noted, adding that these have caused delays in preparing for the next flight tests.

"We will fly a nonintercept test by the end of this year to verify we have resolved all issues, and then we will conduct our next intercept flight test early next year to reactivate the {ground-based midcourse defense] production line," the director said. "We will not approve the execution of a flight test until our engineers and independent experts are convinced that we have resolved all issues discovered in previous testing."

Also this year, the agency will activate a hardened power plant at Fort Greely, increase the firepower of fielded GBIs by testing and upgrading GBI components, and boost the capability of sea-based X-band radar, the tracking and discrimination radar used for the GMD element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System.

"Regional defense highlights over the past year include the on-time deployment of the first phase of the European Phased Adaptive Approach," O'Reilly said, "consisting of the command-and-control node in Germany, forward-based radar in Turkey and an Aegis missile defense ship on station in the Mediterranean Sea."

The agency also demonstrated the first Aegis intercept of a 3,700-kilometer target using remote forward-based radar, he said, and the simultaneous intercept of two missiles by the terminal high-altitude area defense system, called THAAD.

The THAAD element gives the missile defense system a globally transportable, rapidly deployable ability to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles in or out of the atmosphere during the final, or terminal, flight phase.

"This year the first two THAAD batteries will be available for deployment, increasing the number of Aegis-capable ships to 29," the director said, and three SM-3 Block IB flight tests will show that last year's flight-test failure is resolved.

Coming up, he said, the largest missile defense tests in history will involve the first simultaneous intercepts of multiple short and medium-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles by Patriot forward-based radar.

The United States has missile defense cooperative programs with the United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, Israel, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, Poland, Italy and many other nations. O'Reilly said the agency works with more than 20 countries, "including our cooperative development programs with Israel and Japan and our first foreign military sale of THAAD to the United Arab Emirates," and supports technical discussions with the Russians on missile defense.

Phases 2 and 3 of the European phased, adaptive approach to missile defense are on track to meet the 2015 and 2018 deployment dates, the director said.

STUDY TO DETERMINE IF HYPERTENSION AND RESPIRATORY DISEASES RELATED TO VIETNAM WAR HERBICIDE AGENT ORANGE

FROM: U .S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
The Army Chemical Corps Vietnam-Era Veterans Health Study is designed to learn if high blood pressure (hypertension) and some chronic respiratory diseases are related to herbicide exposure during the Vietnam War.

Background
This study follows a request by Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric K. Shinseki for VA to conduct research on the association between herbicide exposure and high blood pressure (hypertension), as a basis for understanding if hypertension is related to military service in Vietnam.  VA is also interested in learning more about the relationship between herbicide exposure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
This study is a follow-up of a similar study conducted between 1999-2000. We have examined the health status of individuals who served in the Army Chemical Corps since the 1990s.

Goals
Researchers have two questions:
Is the risk of high blood pressure (hypertension) related to Agent Orange exposure during service in Vietnam?
Is the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), including chronic bronchitis and emphysema, related to Agent Orange exposure during service in Vietnam?

Participants
Researchers are asking approximately 4,000 Veterans who served in the U.S. Army Chemical Corps sometime during the Vietnam era (1965-1973) to participate in this study.  Army Chemical Corps personnel were responsible for the maintenance and distribution or application of chemicals for military operations. Army Chemical Corps personnel who served in Vietnam during the Vietnam War constitute the largest group of Army Vietnam Veterans who were thought to have had the greatest potential exposure to herbicides.

We have already selected participants from earlier Army Chemical Corps study rosters, and researchers cannot accept volunteers for this study. Each Veteran selected for this study represents other Veterans with similar characteristics.

Methods
We are conducting telephone interviews, reviewing medical records, and measuring the blood pressure and lung function of these Veterans.

Investigators
Han Kang, Dr.P.H.
Aaron Schneiderman, Ph.D., M.P.H., R.N.
Yasmin Cypel, Ph.D.
Amii Kress, M.P.H.
Stephanie Eber, M.P.H.