ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL PEREZ ON ALL STUDENTS BEING WELCOMED IN OUR NATIONS SCHOOLS

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia.
FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez Speaks at the American Civil Liberties Union’s Plyler v. Doe 30th Anniversary Event
Washington, D.C. ~ Monday, June 11, 2012
It’s an honor and a pleasure to be here with all of you today to mark the 30th anniversary of Plyler v. Doe, the U.S. Supreme Court’s historic decision making clear that all children, regardless of their immigration status, must be made welcome in our nation’s schools. I want to thank the ACLU for organizing this symposium, and Laura Murphy for the gracious welcome.

At the Civil Rights Division, we work to break down the barriers that keep so many from fully participating in American life - in the voting booth, the workplace, and of course, in the classroom.   For the past three decades, Plyler has kept the door to opportunity open for millions of children across America.   Plyler has stood for the proposition that public schools serve all children in this country, no matter where they were born.  Plyler has represented the promise that the American dream should be accessible to all.

Plyler reflects the deeply American notion that all young people deserve the chance to advance as far as their hard work and talent can carry them. Every day, we hear about and work with students who, thanks to Plyler, are able to complete elementary and high school; who, without the benefit of financial aid, find a way to get a college degree, and who push on to fulfill a dream of becoming an architect, teacher or even a lawyer.   These students are daily beneficiaries of Plyler, and their achievements are an inspiring example of why its holding is so critical.

Just over one year ago, together with our partners at the Department of Education, we issued guidance on the right of all students to enroll in school regardless of their or their parents’ immigration status.   The guidance reminded schools of their obligations under Plyler and federal civil rights laws more generally and made clear that:

A child who resides in a state cannot be denied access to its public schools, whether or not the child is legally in the United States.
Schools cannot have policies that bar or discourage students from attending school based on immigration status.

Schools cannot have enrollment requirements that have the purpose or result of denying children access based on race or national origin.

Schools cannot deny enrollment if students or their parents choose not to provide a social security number or, if a district requests a birth certificate, provide a foreign birth certificate.
   
We issued the Plyler guidance to help schools meet these obligations – because it’s the law, and because there’s so much at stake.   No one benefits when a child is kept out of the classroom.  The cost to that child, and to all of us, is just too great.

Three decades ago, the Plyler court noted the folly of depriving innocent children of the basic tools to contribute to society:

 “By denying these children a basic education,” the court said, “we deny them the ability to live within the structure of our civic institutions, and foreclose any realistic possibility that they will contribute in even the smallest way to the progress of our Nation.”

Thirty years later, countless children have benefited from the Plyler decision, receiving an education and with it, a chance at a better life.   Indeed, throughout this country, we see the promise of Plyler borne out.    We see young people graduating from high school and reaping many of the benefits that come with a high school diploma.   We see students pursuing their dreams of college and beyond, despite sometimes daunting obstacles.   Because of Plyler, these young people are getting the opportunity to advance based on their individual merit – the essence of the American dream.

The benefits of Plyler are felt by all of us, wherever we or our ancestors were born.   Three decades after Plyler, immigrant students have made and continue to make vast and deep contributions to America’s cultural, civic, and economic landscape.  Studies show that over time, the economic contributions of children of immigrants – who enter the labor force and pay far more in taxes than they receive in benefits – are on par with those of their classmates.    In the schools, these children and their classmates reap the documented benefits of a diverse school environment.   All over the country, we see immigrant children and their families contributing richly to their schools and the cultural, social, and economic fabric of this country.  Thirty years after Plyler, the wisdom and moral strength of its holding are clearer than ever.

Undocumented children and c hildren from immigrant families, however, continue to face barriers to enrolling in, and attending, school.  For example, in 2011, Alabama passed a law known as H.B. 56, and in doing so, placed a road block at the school house door.   H.B. 56 is Alabama’s immigration law – a law that, among other things, directly targets students by requiring schools to verify the immigration status of enrolling children and their parents.

Right after H.B. 56 went into effect, the Civil Rights Division had boots on the ground. I attended a town hall meeting at an Alabama elementary school.   There, I listened to parents, students and teachers share the deep and immediate impact H.B. 56 had on their lives.    In Birmingham, which occupies a central place in the history of the civil rights movement, I heard from a diverse group of civil rights, faith and education leaders who were unified in condemning the effect of H.B. 56 on Alabama’s schoolchildren.    
We sought data on enrollment and attendance from the Alabama State Department of Education to get a more systemic sense of the impact of H.B. 56. Just last month, we shared our review with the state.    While H.B. 56 was only in effect for a short time before being enjoined by the courts, the data revealed that the law had a major and lasting impact on Alabama’s schoolchildren, particularly Hispanic students and English Language Learners.   Absences among Alabama’s Hispanic students tripled after the immigration law went into effect, while staying flat for other groups of students.   Withdrawals of Hispanic children also spiked when compared with previous years, with more than 13 percent of the state’s Hispanic students withdrawing between the beginning of the school year and February 2012.

Our conversations with students and parents underscored the dramatic picture painted by the state’s data.  Students told us they stayed home or withdrew from school out of fear that they or their parents would be questioned about their immigration status. Others returned to school but told us they couldn’t concentrate in class and that they no longer felt safe and welcome in their classrooms.   Parents told us about watching their honors students’ grades drop in the aftermath of H.B. 56.

We also met with Alabama teachers and administrators -- educators who know just how much every school day counts in the life of a student.    They are deeply committed to keeping students engaged, to getting parents involved, and to promoting inclusive environments at school.   They felt that H.B. 56 has frustrated their efforts.   And they told us about the tremendous time spent and the emotional toll of comforting children whose schoolmates have disappeared from the classrooms.

We will continue to closely watch and respond to the developments in Alabama as well as in any other states where students’ access to education is curtailed.    Alabama presents a dramatic challenge to the goals and values of Plyler, but across the country we see the persistence of barriers that limit educational opportunities.   At the Civil Rights Division, these are challenges that we are working to address.

In the year since we issued the Plyler guidance, we have provided technical assistance to schools about their responsibility to enroll students regardless of their immigration status.  We have investigated complaints about schools that have requested social security numbers from students and/or parents, thereby discouraging - if not directly prohibiting - many undocumented students from coming to school.   We have also investigated complaints that schools have not made their registration procedures accessible to parents who have limited proficiency in English.   These are the day-to-day barriers that immigrant students face as they try to receive an education and start down the path of a better future.

Our efforts to remove these barriers continue in districts throughout this country.   For example, in states like North Carolina and Kentucky, we have worked with schools to revise enrollment policies and remove requirements that students produce social security numbers.  In the Palm Beach County, Fla. School District, we have worked to ensure that the district’s requirements for proving residency do not create barriers for immigrant students, and that policies and forms are translated for parents who are not proficient in English.   These districts are taking proactive steps to make sure that students and their families are welcomed in school, regardless of background.

To fully realize the goals and the promise of Plyler, we must do even more as a nation. We must come together in honor of the young men and women who were not yet citizens of the U.S. yet risked – and lost - their lives in the Iraq war.    They fought and died for their country before they were allowed to call it their own.

For those young people who hope to continue on to college, or to bravely serve our nation in the armed forces, we must continue to break down barriers.  The President has spoken about the simple justice and common sense of the DREAM Act.  The DREAM Act would provide a path to citizenship for immigrant students who aspire to higher education, or who serve with valor in the U.S. military.  These talented young people truly represent the best of what America has to offer.   More than anything, they want to pursue their dreams and contribute to this country, a country that they know and love as their own.  Passing the DREAM Act, and passing comprehensive immigration reform to fix our broken immigration system, will bring us closer to the ultimate value that underlies the Plyler decision -- that every child should have the chance to succeed to the very limits of his or her talent and ambition.

Plyler represents the best of our collective ideals as a nation.   Those ideals of equality, justice, and fairness are central to the mission of the Civil Rights Division.   Although countless children – and our country as a whole – have directly benefited from Plyler’s holding, the past year has shown us that we still have far to travel.    At the Civil Rights Division, we will continue to use all tools at our disposal to fulfill the promise of Plyler, and to keep the schoolhouse door open to all.

AFTER 50 YEARS THE U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE STILL LOOKING FOR ALCATRAZ ISLAND ESCAPEES

FROM:  U.S. MARSHALS SERVICE
After 50 Years, the U.S. Marshals Remain Diligent in Hunt for Renowned Alcatraz Escapees 
FRANK MORRIS (Left)
WASHINGTON – Fifty years after their escape from U.S. Penitentiary Alcatraz on June 11, 1962, the U.S. Marshals Service remains diligent in the manhunt for Frank Morris and brothers Clarence and John Anglin. They are the only men to escape from Alcatraz Island in San Francisco who remain unaccounted for.

The elaborate escape plan was the result of more than one year of planning and included the design of a life raft and life preservers fashioned from more than 50 raincoats, the fabrication of lifelike dummies to ruse guards on night bed checks and enlarged ventilation holes in their cell walls, which they used spoons to create and concealed with cardboard replicas of vent covers.
JOHN ANGLIN (Below)
On the night of June 11, 1962, the three escaped through the vents and made their way to the northeast part of the island, where they inflated the makeshift raft and three life preservers and slipped into the water. Varied reports stated that the inmates either drowned or made their escape via nearby Angel Island. A fourth inmate, Allen West, was involved in planning the escape, but he never made it out of his prison cell. The known details of the escape were provided by West during several interviews.

The Marshals Service adopted the case from the FBI in 1979. Since that time, countless deputy U.S. marshals have worked the case and investigated thousands of leads in almost every state in the country and a few foreign countries. They used media venues such as the TV show America’s Most Wanted to generate tips and additional investigative information. In a 1993 interview with that program, U.S. Marshals Service Acting Director John Twomey said, “We know they were young and vigorous, that they had the physical ability to survive and that they had a well-thought-out scheme.”

The possibility of survival steered investigators to unusual and detailed leads to suspected whereabouts of the escapees. One example occurred in 2010, when an unmarked grave, claimed to be that of an escapee, was exhumed but failed to offer positive identification. The 1962 escape remains one of the best known unsolved crimes in American history. “No matter where the leads take us, or how many man hours are spent on this historic case, the Marshals Service will continue to investigate to the fullest extent possible,” said David Harlow, assistant director, U.S. Marshals Investigative Operations Division.

The Marshals will continue to pursue the escapees until they are either arrested, positively determined to be deceased or reach the age of 99. “The ongoing U.S. Marshals investigation of the 1962 escape from Alcatraz federal prison serves as a warning to fugitives that regardless of time, we will continue to look for you and bring you to justice,” said U.S. Marshal Don O’Keefe of the Northern District of California. If the inmates survived the escape and are alive today, Frank Morris would be 85 years old, Clarence Anglin would be 81 and John Anglin would be 82.

The U.S. Marshals have a long history of successfully tracking, locating and apprehending prison escapees. In August 2011, Frederick Barrett, a convicted murderer wanted in Florida for escape, was apprehended after 32 years on the lam. He was found hiding in a remote cabin in the mountains of Colorado.

CLARENCE ANGLIN (Left)

U.S. STILL WORKING TO OPEN SUPPLY ROUTES IN PAKISTAN

Photo Credit:  U.S. Navy.
FROM:   AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Work Continues Toward Opening Pakistan Supply Routes
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
WASHINGTON, June 11, 2012 - Though a team of U.S. negotiators is returning home after several weeks of discussing reopening ground supply routes in Pakistan, the talks are not mired, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said here today.

In November, Pakistan closed ground routes that had been used to resupply forces in Afghanistan after a NATO airstrike accidentally killed 24 Pakistani soldiers earlier in the month.

"The [ground lines of communication] remain an open issue," Little told reporters. "We've not reached a resolution yet with the Pakistanis on reopening the ground supply routes. We hope to resolve the issue soon. We haven't gotten to 'yes' yet, but this is something we're going to continue to work very hard [on] with our Pakistani counterparts."

Officials will continue to work through the office of the defense representative in Pakistan to try to resolve the matter, Little said. "We will continue to have dialogue," he added, "so while the issue is not resolved, the talking has not stalled."

The press secretary emphasized that the negotiating team's departure from Pakistan shouldn't be taken as a sign of unwillingness to continue the dialogue.

"The members of the team that are leaving, or have left, are prepared to return to Islamabad at any moment to continue discussions in person," he said. Little said he thinks there is agreement, in concept, that the supply routes can be reopened. "Both sides would like to be able to reopen the ground supply routes," he said. "There are some specific issues that need to [be] worked through."

Although it's possible to continue the mission in Afghanistan without the Pakistani ground supply routes, Little said, having them open would provide more options and would be less expensive.

"The more options you have available to you when you're mounting a major logistics effort like supplying the war effort in Afghanistan, and in bringing people and equipment out, the better," he said.

Little said the decision for the U.S. team to leave Pakistan was independent of Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta's comments reflecting frustration over Pakistan serving as a safe haven for terrorists.

"The comments ... were largely directed at the problem of the Haqqani network and the safe haven in Pakistan," he noted. "We've made our concerns known for a very long time about the safe havens in Pakistan, and the ability of the Haqqani network to cross the border and conduct attacks inside Afghanistan. The secretary's remarks on the trip were focused [on that]."

Little said the Haqqani network's ability to conduct operations inside Afghanistan remains a "very serious concern" for the United States.

"We believe that it's important, as [Panetta] indicated, that the Pakistanis do their part, on their side of the border, to stop the Haqqanis from mounting operations," he said.
"This is something we need to work through with the Pakistanis," he added. "We believe that we can establish a relationship that produces the kind of action we believe is required on their side of the border."

ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER SPEAKS OF THE FUTURE AT LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS CONVENTION

FROM:  U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the League of Women Voters Convention Washington, D.C. ~ Monday, June 11, 2012
Thank you, Elisabeth – for your kind words and for the outstanding leadership that you are providing – not only for the League of Women Voters, and its ever-expanding network of allies and supporters, but also in our nation’s ongoing struggle to protect the strength, the integrity, and the future of our democracy.

This is the cause that, more than 90 years ago, inspired the founding of this organization.   And it’s the cause that brings us together today.

I am honored to be part of this annual convention – and to be among so many friends.   And I especially am grateful for the opportunity to tell each of you, in person, how much I appreciate your partnership – as well as your dedicated, tireless contributions – in protecting the most fundamental, and most powerful, right of American citizenship: the right to vote.

Since its establishment in 1920, the League of Women Voters has been on the front lines of our nation’s fight to expand the franchise, to ensure that all eligible citizens have access to the ballot box, and to uphold this country’s founding and enduring promise of “government of, by, and for the people.”

Today, this work goes in your efforts to educate, mobilize, and register voters – in more than 800 state and local chapters in all 50 states and here in Washington D.C.   It goes on in the innovative programs and resources you’ve developed, including the High School Voter Registration Manual – which is now available to students nationwide – and, of course, Vote411.org – a cutting-edge website for voting information that, in the 2008 election season alone, received more than 20 million hits.

And this work continues in your ongoing calls for improvements and updates in our voting systems; your advocacy for commonsense, cost-effective modernization; your outreach to aspiring young leaders – from all political parties – who view LWV as a “training ground” for civil engagement and public service at the highest levels; and, of course, in your work – in statehouses and courthouses nationwide – to speak out, and even to take legal action against, legislative efforts that could threaten voting access – and undermine the central provisions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

Fifty years ago, this organization played a key role in advocating for the passage of this groundbreaking legislation.   Despite the decades that have passed, and the progress that’s been achieved, since then – 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 – your mission, in many ways, has never been more important.   We saw the important value in your work several days ago, in an important ruling in the case that LWV helped to bring against the state of Florida, in which you have successfully challenged the state’s new voter registration statute, and in so doing protected the rights of perhaps millions of eligible voters.

It’s clear that your actions in that case, and your similar efforts nationwide, have been fueled by both growing concerns that essential voting rights could be limited because of recent state-level legislative changes; and by a deep commitment – to upholding the values that have long distinguished our nation as a global leader and example, and that continue to define who we are as Americans.

Now, I realize that some have questioned your motives and mischaracterized your efforts.  Believe me, I know how you feel.   But the clear and simple fact is that this work never has been – and never should be – about politics or partisan maneuvering.   This work is about honoring our most basic principles – of inclusion and opportunity, of equal treatment and fair representation.  And it’s about fulfilling the most essential, and most sacred, obligations of American citizenship.   That’s true for the League of Women Voters.   And it’s also true for the United States Department of Justice.

As Attorney General, it is my obligation – and solemn duty – to ensure that the rights of all Americans are protected.   And I’m proud that, under this Administration, our Civil Rights Division – and its Voting Section – have taken meaningful steps to ensure integrity, independence, and transparency in our enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.

As you, we have reviewed – and, in some cases, denied administrative preclearance – to recent state-level voter identification laws.   We are actively litigating voter ID laws passed in Texas and South Carolina because – based on each state’s own data – we determined that those laws disproportionately and adversely affect the rights of minority voters.

It is an, “undeniable fact that voter ID laws can burden some citizens’ right to vote.”   Now, that’s not only my opinion – that’s a direct quote from one of my predecessors – former Attorney General Michael Mukasey – which he provided after the Supreme Court’s decision in the Indiana voter ID case.   He went on to observe, and I quote again, that, “It is important for states to implement and administer voter ID laws in a way that minimizes that possibility [of a burden].  And it is important for the Department to do its part to guard against that possibility.   We will not hesitate to use the tools available to us – including the Voting Rights Act – if these laws, important though they may be, are used improperly to deny the right to vote."

Today’s Justice Department is committed to these ideals – and to this work.   As you all know – and will be discussing in greater detail throughout this convention – our voting rights enforcement efforts have never been stronger, more important – or more effective.   We have worked successfully and comprehensively to protect the voting rights of citizens with disabilities, language minorities, and Americans living and serving abroad.   During the 2010 election cycle, the Civil Rights Division obtained court orders, court-approved consent decrees, or out-of-court agreements in 14 jurisdictions, which ensured that thousands of military and overseas voters had the opportunity to vote and to have that vote counted.   In fact, in just the past four months, we've filed three different lawsuits – in Alabama, Wisconsin, and California – to protect the voting rights of servicemembers and overseas citizens.

We’re also actively and aggressively enforcing the “Motor Voter” law – which this organization helped to advance – and working to make certain that voter registration opportunities be made available at a wider variety of government offices – beyond just the local department of motor vehicles.   Over the last year and a half, we filed two lawsuits to enforce Section 7 of the NVRA – the first lawsuits filed by the Department to enforce this critical provision in seven years.   We’ve also filed amicus briefs in five cases raising NVRA claims in the past year.   We recognize that LWV thinks we should do more in this area- and we will - but we can all be encouraged by the steps that have been taken – and by the their promising results.   For example, after filing a lawsuit in Rhode Island last year, we reached an agreement with state agencies that resulted in more voters being registered in the first full month after our lawsuit than in the entire previous two-year reporting period.

We’re also working to ensure that the protections for language minorities – another LWV priority – which are included in the Voting Rights Act, are aggressively enforced.   These protections now apply to more than 19 million voting-age citizens.   In the last year and a half, we’ve resolved eight different cases to protect the rights of Spanish-speaking, Chinese-speaking, and Native American voters in communities all around the country – from New York to Ohio to California to South Dakota to Nebraska.   And, today, we’re actively reviewing nationwide compliance.

But the Justice Department can’t do it all.   Ensuring that every veteran, every senior, every college student, and every eligible citizen has the right to vote must become our common cause.  And, for all Americans, protecting this right, ensuring meaningful access, and combating discrimination must be viewed, not only as a legal issue – but also as a moral imperative.

Today, I’d like to highlight three areas where public support will be crucial in driving progress – and advancing much-needed reforms.   The first involves deceptive election practices – and dishonest efforts to prevent certain voters from casting their ballots.

Throughout our history we’ve unfortunately seen all sorts of efforts to keep people away from the polls – from literacy tests and poll taxes, to misinformation campaigns telling people that Election Day has been moved, or that only one adult per household can cast a ballot.   Before the 2004 elections, fliers were distributed in minority neighborhoods in Milwaukee, falsely claiming that “[I]f anybody in your family has ever been found guilty [of a crime], you can’t vote in the presidential election” – and that you risk a 10-year prison sentence if you do.   Two years later, 14,000 Latino voters in Orange County, California received mailings, warning in Spanish that, “[If] you are an immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that can result in jail time.”  Both of these blatant falsehoods likely deterred some eligible citizens from going to the polls.

And, at the end of last year, the campaign manager of a Maryland gubernatorial candidate was convicted on election fraud charges for approving anonymous “robocalls” that went out on Election Day last year to more than 100,000 voters in the state’s two largest majority-black jurisdictions.   These calls encouraged voters to stay home – telling them to “relax” because their preferred candidate had already wrapped up a victory.

In an effort to deter and punish such harmful practices, during his first year in the U.S. Senate, President Obama introduced legislation that would establish tough criminal penalties for those who engage in fraudulent voting practices – and would help to ensure that citizens have complete and accurate information about where and when to vote.   Unfortunately, this proposal did not move forward.   But, last December, Senators Schumer and Cardin re-introduced this legislation, in an even stronger form.  As it continues to move toward committee consideration, it has sparked and helped to advance a critically important dialogue across – and beyond – Capitol Hill.

The second area for reform is the need for neutrality in redistricting efforts.   Districts should be drawn to promote fair and effective representation for all – not merely to undercut electoral competition and protect incumbents.   If we allow only those who hold elected office to select their constituents – instead of enabling voters to choose their representatives – the strength and legitimacy of our democracy will suffer.

One final area for reform that merits our strongest support is the growing effort – which is already underway in several states – to modernize voter registration.   Today, the single biggest barrier to voting in this country is our antiquated registration system.   According to the Census Bureau, of the 75 million adult citizens who failed to vote in the last presidential election, 60 million of them were not registered and, therefore, not eligible to cast a ballot.

All eligible citizens can and should be automatically registered to vote.   The ability to vote is not merely a privilege – it is an essential Constitutional right.   Under our current system, many voters must follow cumbersome and needlessly complex and varied voter registration rules.  And every election season, state and local officials have to manually process a crush of new applications – most of them handwritten – leaving the system riddled with errors, and, too often, creating chaos at the polls.

Fortunately, modern technology provides a straightforward fix for these problems – if we have the political will to bring our election systems into the 21st century.   We should automatically register citizens to vote, by compiling – from relevant databases that already exist – a list of all eligible residents in each jurisdiction.   Of course, these lists would be used solely to administer elections – and would protect essential privacy rights.

We must also address the fact that, although one in nine Americans move every year, their voter registration often does not move with them.   Many would-be voters don’t realize this until they’ve missed the deadline for registering, which can fall a full month before Election Day. Election officials should work together to establish a program of permanent, portable registration – so that voters who move can vote at their new polling place on Election Day.  Until that happens, we should implement fail-safe procedures to correct voter-roll errors and omissions, by allowing every voter to cast a regular, non-provisional ballot on Election Day.  Several states have already taken this step, and it’s been shown to increase turnout by at least three to five percentage points.

These modernization efforts would not only improve the integrity of our elections, they would also save precious taxpayer dollars.

Despite these benefits, there will always be those who say that easing registration hurdles will only lead to voter fraud.   Let me be clear: voter fraud is not acceptable – and will not be tolerated by this Justice Department.   But as I learned early in my career – as a prosecutor in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, where I actually investigated and prosecuted voting-fraud cases – making voter registration easier is simply not likely, by itself, to make our elections more susceptible to fraud.   Indeed, those on all sides of this debate have acknowledged that in-person voting fraud is uncommon.   We must be honest about this.   And we must recognize that our ability to ensure the strength and integrity of our election systems – and to advance the reforms necessary to achieve this – depends on whether the American people are informed, engaged, and willing to demand commonsense solutions that make voting more accessible.   Politicians may not readily alter the very systems under which they were elected.   Only we, the people, can bring about meaningful change.   And, because of this, the League of Women Voters continues to be – not just relevant, but absolutely vital in strengthening our democracy.

Through a range of efforts, you are calling on the citizens of this country to consider what kind of a nation – and what kind of a people – we want to be; and to ask some important questions: Are we willing to allow this era – our era – to be remembered as the age when our nation’s proud tradition of expanding the franchise was cut short?   Are we willing to allow this time – our time – to be recorded in history as the age when the long-held belief that, in this country, every citizen has the chance – and the right – to help shape their government, became a relic of our past, instead of a guidepost for our future?

For me, for each of you – and for our nation’s Department of Justice and the National League of Women Voters – the answers are clear.   But, unfortunately, the road ahead is far from certain.

That’s why you must keep up – and expand – your critical work.   Continue to speak out; to raise awareness about what’s at stake; to call on all political parties and leaders to resist the temptation to suppress certain votes in the hope of attaining electoral success – and challenge and encourage them, instead, to work to achieve success by appealing to more voters.   Keep urging policymakers at every level to reevaluate our election systems – and to reform them in ways that encourage, not limit, participation.   And, above all, keep seeking out and seizing opportunities to build upon the remarkable, transformative progress that the League of Women Voters has helped to make possible.

In advancing these efforts, the people in this room are part of an extraordinary legacy.   The arc of American history has always bent toward the expansion of the franchise.   This organization has served as a key component for this most noble – and uniquely American – endeavor.   But never forget – your vital work is not just historically relevant.   You are also a vital, contemporary part of what makes our nation truly exceptional.   I urge you – regardless of the opposition you face – to stay true, and remain fiercely committed, to the principles that have always guided the League of Women Voters and that can ensure that the 21st will be another "American century."

Thank you.

PARTNERSHIPS TO COMBAT THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION THREAT

Photo:  ICBM Test.  Credit:  U.S. Air Force.
FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
New Partnerships for Combating the Threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction
Remarks Rose Gottemoeller
Acting Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Joseph Rotblat Memorial Lecture, Hay Festival
Hay-on-Wye, Wales, United Kingdom
June 10, 2012

“Above all, remember your humanity.” Sir Joseph Rotblat recalled these words from the 1955 Manifesto of Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein when he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in 1995, on behalf of the International Pugwash Movement. For Jo, they reflected very well the frame of mind we must have when we confront the problem of nuclear weapons.

I was honored to know Joseph Rotblat, and these words have stuck with me. When we talk about creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons, we are not talking about some remote utopia, we are talking about preventing the use of the most powerful weapon ever conceived by man. We are talking about protecting humanity.

The idea of a world free of nuclear weapons is nothing new. It was upon us almost as soon as scientists realized the feasibility of nuclear weapons. Sir Joseph was one of this community. As a leader of the Pugwash Movement, he was instrumental in making nuclear elimination a legitimate topic for policymakers around the world. When he was pushing for reductions at the height on the Cold War, Jo saw an opening for conversation – not one in English and Russian across the negotiating table, but one in the universal languages of math and science, a conversation among scientists. This open forum for scientific dialogue, which became the Pugwash Movement, led to some of the first arms control and nonproliferation treaties.

Through his work, Sir Joseph played a big role in making the goal of “zero” an acceptable goal of security policy. Two years after his death, four venerable Cold Warriors – former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense William Perry and former Senator Sam Nunn – published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journalcalling for a world without nuclear weapons. The group, often called “the Four Horsemen” saw it as “a bold initiative consistent with America’s moral heritage.” Two years later, President Obama spoke to thousands of people in Prague, stating that the United States would seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. That speech was the foundation for what we in Washington call the Prague Agenda.

Even with the massive shift in accepting nuclear elimination as a policy worth pursuing, Sir Joseph warned us, “the Cold War is over, but Cold War thinking survives.” When it comes to the next steps in nuclear reductions, this is undoubtedly true. In order to dismantle this dangerous legacy, we have to change the way we think about these weapons. And we have to be ready to challenge our notions of how they might be eliminated.

We are entering unknown terrain. As we steadily reduce nuclear weapons toward zero, the more cheating matters. Consider, if you will: if a country can stash away just a few nuclear weapons while others continue to eliminate them, that country can spring a significant and dangerous surprise on the world community. To counter this possibility, we will need innovative approaches. Finally to achieve zero, we will need a truly global effort involving thousands and thousands of people. I am guessing you are asking yourself, “How on Earth can an ordinary person such as I help with a problem like this?”

Joseph Rotblat considered this challenge decades ago. He developed the concept called “societal verification,” which he defined as the involvement of whole communities in monitoring compliance with treaties, in contrast to using the highly specialized teams of experts such as we use to verify the New START Treaty. Sir Joseph argued that technological verification of the New START kind was sufficient for reducing arsenals to lower numbers. However, the prospect of a state clandestinely acquiring only a few nuclear weapons in a disarmed world requires greater confidence and verification. Sir Joseph believed societal verification would bring us this increased confidence. Such a societal regime, he said, would be essential in achieving the goal of zero.

Today, we have the information revolution to lend to this task, and Sir Joseph’s concept is closer to reality. Our enviornment today is a smaller, increasingly-networked world where the average citizen connects to others in cyberspace hundreds of times each day. We exchange and share ideas on a wide variety of topics. Citizens are armed with more information tools than ever before. Why should we not put this vast problem solving entity to good use?

Think about this: Any event, anywhere on the planet, has the potential now to be broadcast globally in mere seconds. The implications for arms control monitoring and verification are compelling. It is harder to hide things nowadays. When it is harder to hide things, it is easier to be caught. The neighborhood gaze is a powerful tool.

The Possibilities
Open source information technologies can improve arms control verification in at least two ways: either as a way of generating new information, or as analysis of information that already is out there.

Let me give you some examples, to give you an idea what I’m talking about.
In 2009, in recognition of the 40th anniversary of the Internet, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) held a competition where 10 red weather balloons were moored at visible fixed locations around the continental United States. The first team to identify the location of all 10 balloons won a sizable cash prize--$40,000. Over 4,300 teams composed of an estimated 2 million people from 25 countries took part in the challenge. A team from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology won the challenge, identifying all of the balloon locations in an astonishing time of 8 hours and 52 minutes. Of course, to win in such a short time or complete the challenge at all, the MIT team did not “find” the balloons themselves. They tapped into social networks using a unique incentive structure that not only incentivized people to identify a balloon location, but also incentivized people to recruit others to the team. Their win showed the enormous potential of social networking, and also demonstrated how incentives can motivate large populations to work toward a common goal.

Social networking is already being incorporated into local safety systems. RAVEN911—the Regional Asset Verification & Emergency Network—is a multilayer mapping tool that supports emergency first response in Cincinnati, Ohio. RAVEN911 uses live data feeds and intelligence gathered through Twitter to provide details that cannot be given on an everyday geographic map, such as the location of downed electric power lines and flooded roads. Authorities are cooperating with communities in Southwestern Ohio, Southeastern Indiana and Northern Kentucky to develop and implement this emergency management system, in order to help fire departments assess the risks and potential dangers before arriving on the scene of an accident. This open source system gives emergency responders a common operating picture, to better execute time critical activities, such as choosing evacuation routes out of flooded areas.

In addition to collecting useful data, the ability to identify patterns and trends in social networks could aid the arms control verification process. In the most basic sense, social media can draw attention to both routine and abnormal events. We may be able to mine Twitter data to understand where strange effluents are flowing, to recognize if a country has an illegal chemical weapons program; or to recognize unexpected patterns of industrial activity at a missile production plant. In this way, we may be able to ensure better compliance with existing arms control treaties and regimes such as the Chemical Weapons Convention.

The synergy is stunning: private citizens may contribute to monitoring for illicit weapons of mass destruction wherever they are found.

Now, how could approaches such as this work specifically in the arms control context? I’ve been thinking about the notion of verification challenges.

Let’s just imagine that a country, to establish its bona fides in a deep nuclear reduction environment, may wish to open itself to a verification challenge, recruiting its citizens and their i-Phones to help prove that it is not stashing extra missiles in the woods, for example, or a fissile material production reactor in the desert. Of course, some form of international supervision would likely be required, to ensure the legitimacy of the challenge and its procedures. And we would have to consider whether such a challenge could cope with especially covert environments, such as caves or deep underground facilities.


Sound far-fetched? Just consider that even today, tablets such as your iPad have tiny accelerometers installed – that’s what tells the tablet which way is up. But the accelerometers also have the capability of detecting small shakes, like an earth tremor.

Now, imagine a whole community of tablet users, all containing an “earth shake” app, dispersed randomly around the country, and connected into a centralized network node. An individual shake could be something as simple as bumping your iPad on a table. But a whole network of tablets, all shaking at virtually the same time? That tells you that something happened; knowing where all the tablets are and the exact time they started shaking can help you to geo-locate the event. It could be an earthquake, or it could be an illegal nuclear test. Of course, other sensors and analysis would have to be brought to bear to figure out the difference.

This is called “ubiquitous sensing,” that is, collecting data and basic analysis through sensors on smartphones and other mobile-computing devices. These sensors would allow citizens to contribute to detecting potential treaty violations, and could build a bridge to a stronger private-public partnership in the realm of treaty verification.

Would private citizens be willing to participate in such a community? We’ve never tried it in the arms control setting, but consider the SETI on-line community – the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence community – with somewhere between 300,000 and 3 million active users worldwide. It may not be an accident that the scientist who proposed the tablet seismography concept to me is an astrophysicist who worked with SETI. He knows the value of citizen participation.

The Challenges Ahead
Of course, for any of this to work, there are technical, legal and political barriers ahead that would need to be overcome—no easy feat to be sure.
On the technical front, it would be necessary to work together to make sure nations cannot spoof or manipulate the public verification challenges that they devise. We also have to bear in mind there could be limitations based on the freedoms available to the citizens of a given country.

On the legal front, there are many questions that must be confronted about active vs. passive participation. How can we prevent governments from extracting information from citizens without their knowledge, or manipulating results collected in databases? Further, in some circumstances, how can active participants be sheltered from reproach by authorities? It may be possible, through careful handling and management, to mask sources, even if locations are public.

On the political front, we cannot assume that information will always be so readily available. As nations and private entities continue to debate the line between privacy and security, it is possible to imagine that we are living in a golden age of open source information that will be harder to take advantage of in future. In the end, the goal of using open source information technology and social networks should be to add to our existing arms control monitoring and verification capabilities, not to supersede them.

It is also important to remember that while we spend a lot of time focusing on nuclear weapons, the other weapons of mass destruction—particularly biological weapons—pose even greater challenges for arms control policy, because they are inherently dual use assets and, thus, difficult to disentangle from normal industrial or commercial processes. Here, too, we need creative thinking about how to facilitate transparency in the biotech sector without compromising sensitive research and industrial practices, or proprietary information.

Joining Forces
Even with the great ideas and fool-proof planning, another issue that we have to consider is how do we create, organize and, when necessary, fund efforts such as these. Developing partnerships among government, civil society groups, philanthropic organizations and private businesses will be the key to moving ahead.

These alliances, sometimes surprising and uncommon, can produce some extraordinary results. The makers of the first artificial heart worked with National Air and Space Administration ( NASA) engineers to develop the technology. Surgeons created arthroscopic methods for heart surgery by talking to engineers who fix jet engines.

We are now just starting to brainstorm about ideas for our partnerships in the arms control arena. The idea of public verification challenges needs developing by considering a straightforward question: Can a government actively enlist its public to help prove it is in compliance with its arms control and nonproliferation obligations?

Closing
Since this is an ideas festival, I have come to the right place. We need your ideas. We need your ideas if we are to take the dream of Bertrand Russell, Albert Einstein, Sir Joseph Rotblat, and so many more, and turn it into reality. We need scientists, diplomats, teachers, religious leaders, soldiers and advocates working together, but most importantly, we need young people. Young adults finishing their undergraduate studies this year have lived their entire lives in the years since the Cold War ended, yet they have inherited thousands and thousands of nuclear weapons. We need to spur their interest–and creativity– in solving the problem of combating weapons of mass destruction. Approaching the rising generation on this issue through the lens of the information age may be one way to engage them. I do believe that our young will rise to the occasion and respond to President Obama’s words, spoken in Seoul earlier this year:

“I see the spirit we need in this endeavor -- an optimism that beats in the hearts of so many young people around the world. It’s that refusal to accept the world as it is, the imagination to see the world as it ought to be, and the courage to turn that vision into reality.”

I think he is right, and I intend to help them on their way.
Thank you for your attention, and I look forward to your questions.

SCIENTISTS BELIEVE LOSS OF BIO-DIVERSITY IS BAD FOR HUMAN WELL-BEING

Photo Credit:  lcb.
FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Ecologists Call for Preservation of Planet's Remaining Biological Diversity
Two decades after Rio Earth Summit, scientists recommend international efforts to halt biodiversity losses

June 6, 2012
Twenty years after the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, 17 ecologists are calling for renewed international efforts to curb the loss of Earth's biological diversity.
The loss is compromising nature's ability to provide goods and services essential for human well-being, the scientists say.

Over the past two decades, strong scientific evidence has emerged showing that decline of the world's biological diversity reduces the productivity and sustainability of ecosystems, according to an international team led by the University of Michigan's Bradley Cardinale.

It also decreases ecosystems' ability to provide society with goods and services like food, wood, fodder, fertile soils and protection from pests and disease.

                                             Photo Credit:  lcb

"Water purity, food production and air quality are easy to take for granted, but all are largely provided by communities of organisms," said George Gilchrist, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Environmental Biology, which funded the research.

"This paper demonstrates that it is not simply the quantity of living things, but their species, genetic and trait biodiversity, that influences the delivery of many essential 'ecosystem services.'''

Human actions are dismantling ecosystems, resulting in species extinctions at rates several orders of magnitude faster than observed in the fossil record.

If the nations of the world make biodiversity an international priority, the scientists say, there's still time to conserve much of the remaining variety of life--and possibly to restore much of what's been lost.

The researchers present their findings in this week's issue of the journal Nature.
The paper is a scientific consensus statement that summarizes evidence from more than 1,000 ecological studies over the last two decades.

"Much as consensus statements by doctors led to public warnings that tobacco use is harmful to your health, this is a consensus statement that loss of Earth's wild species will be harmful to the world's ecosystems and may harm society by reducing ecosystem services that are essential to human health and prosperity," said Cardinale.
"We need to take biodiversity loss far more seriously--from individuals to international governing bodies--and take greater action to prevent further losses of species."
An estimated nine million species of plants, animals, protists and fungi inhabit the Earth, sharing it with some seven billion people.

The call to action comes as international leaders prepare to gather in Rio de Janeiro on June 20-22 for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, known as the Rio+20 Conference.

The upcoming conference marks the 20th anniversary of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, which resulted in 193 nations supporting the Convention on Biological Diversity's goals of biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of natural resources.

The 1992 Earth Summit caused an explosion of interest in understanding how biodiversity loss might affect the dynamics and functioning of ecosystems, as well as the supply of goods and services of value to society.

In the Nature paper, the scientists review published studies on the topic and list six consensus statements, four emerging trends, and four "balance of evidence" statements.

The balance of evidence shows, for example, that genetic diversity increases the yield of commercial crops, enhances the production of wood in tree plantations, improves the production of fodder in grasslands, and increases the stability of yields in fisheries.

Increased plant diversity results in greater resistance to invasion by exotic plants, inhibits plant pathogens such as fungal and viral infections, increases above-ground carbon sequestration through enhanced biomass, and increases nutrient remineralization and soil organic matter.

"No one can agree on what exactly will happen when an ecosystem loses a species, but most of us agree that it's not going to be good," said Shahid Naeem of Columbia University, a co-author of the paper. "And we agree that if ecosystems lose most of their species, it will be a disaster."

"Twenty years and a thousand studies later, what the world thought was true in Rio in 1992 has finally been proven: biodiversity underpins our ability to achieve sustainable development," Naeem said.

Despite far-reaching support for the Convention on Biological Diversity, biodiversity loss has continued over the last two decades, often at increasing rates.
In response, a new set of diversity-preservation goals for 2020, known as the Aichi targets, was recently formulated.

And a new international body called the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services was formed in April 2012 to guide a global response toward sustainable management of the world's biodiversity and ecosystems.

Significant gaps in the science behind biological diversity remain and must be addressed if the Aichi targets are to be met, the scientists write in their paper.

"This paper is important both because of what it shows we know, and what it shows we don't know," said David Hooper of Western Washington University, one of the co-authors.

"Several of the key questions we outline help point the way for the next generation of research on how changing biodiversity affects human well-being."

Without an understanding of the fundamental ecological processes that link biodiversity, ecosystem functions and services, attempts to forecast the societal consequences of diversity loss, and to meet policy objectives, are likely to fail, the ecologists write.

"But with that fundamental understanding in hand, we may yet bring the modern era of biodiversity loss to a safe end for humanity," they conclude.

In addition to Cardinale, Naeem and Hooper, co-authors of the Nature paper are: J. Emmett Duffy of The College of William and Mary; Andrew Gonzalez of McGill University; Charles Perrings and Ann P. Kinzig of Arizona State University; Patrick Venail and Anita Narwani of the University of Michigan; Georgina M. Mace of Imperial College London; David Tilman of the University of Minnesota; David A. Wardle of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; Gretchen C. Daily of Stanford University; Michel Loreau of the National Centre for Scientific Research in Moulis, France; James B. Grace of the U.S. Geological Survey; Anne Larigauderie of the National Museum of Natural History in Rue Cuvier, France; and Diane Srivastava of the University of British Columbia.

PRIORITY SETTING OF THE U.S. AFRICA COMMAND

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Members of the U.S. Africa Command headquarters staff at Kelley Barracks in Stuttgart, Germany, as Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, Africom commander, shares his priorities during his first all-hands meeting, March 28, 2011. DOD photo by Army 1st Class Claude Dixon  

Priorities Set U.S. Africa Command's Agenda
By Donna Miles
STUTTGART, Germany, June 11, 2012 - After a year of significant change sweeping the African continent – a wave of democratic movements, the emergence of South Sudan as the world's newest nation and an increase in violent extremism, among them – U.S. Africa Command is using the new defense strategic guidance to shape its engagement in the theater.

"In line with the new strategic guidance, we've prioritized our efforts, focusing on the greatest threats to America, Americans and American interests," Army Gen. Carter F. Ham, Africom commander, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March.
Ham's strategy, encapsulated in an eight-page command strategy document published in September, is based on four top priorities:
-- Countering terrorism and violent extremist organizations;
-- Countering piracy and illicit trafficking;
-- Partnering to strengthen defense capabilities; and
-- Preparing for and responding to crises.
All support two guiding principles, Ham explained during an interview with American Forces Press Service at his headquarters here: that a safe, secure and stable Africa is in the United States' national interests, and that Africans are best suited to address African security challenges.

No Africom effort gets higher billing than its initiatives aimed at eliminating terrorist safe havens and support for terrorist organizations intent on attacking the United States and its citizens, allies and interests abroad.

"Countering the threats posed by al-Qaida affiliates in East and Northwest Africa remains my No. 1 priority," Ham said.

But for security to take hold in Africa for the long-term, Ham also recognizes the importance of strengthening African partners' defense capabilities so they can address their own security challenges. He noted ongoing efforts to increase capacity in peacekeeping, maritime security, disaster response and other key areas. The general noted the value of this investment, from "train-the-trainer" sessions conducted at the tactical level to leader development programs that will have positive long-term strategic implications.
"We are planting seeds, if you will, and allowing those to develop and grow," he said, noting that it's all being done with no permanently assigned forces and limited forces on the ground.

"I think we get a disproportionate positive effect for a relatively small investment," Ham said. "We don't use lots of troops. Generally, our exercises and engagements are pretty small-scale." They typically involve an individual ship, a small group of Marines, Seabees or veterinarians, or a maintenance detachment, he explained.

"But the effect is multiplied, because our focus is on training and enabling the Africans to do things for themselves," he said. "So there is a compounding effect that results from our engagement."

Army Maj. Gen. Charles Hooper, Africom's director of strategy, plans and programs, said Africom's small force structure, limited assets and relatively small budget makes it a Defense Department model as it puts into practice new strategic guidance that emphasizes leaner, more agile operations.

"If you look at the strategic guidance, it talks about a small footprint," he said. "And I would say that Africa Command is the quintessential small footprint, providing the maximum return and the maximum impact for our national policies with limited resources. We have become masters at providing the maximum return on investment."

BUILDING STRONGER RELATIONSHIPS

FROM:  U.S. NAVY
Hospitalman David Looney shows a local Indonesian child how to listen to the heart while conducting rounds for a surgery screening at Siloam Hospital during Pacific Partnership 2012. Now in its seventh year, pacific partnership is an annual U.S. Pacific Fleet humanitarian and civic assistance mission U.S. military personnel, host and partner nations, non-governmental organizations and international agencies designed to build stronger relationships and develop disaster response capabilities throughout the Asia-Pacific region. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Laurie Dexter (Released) 120606-N-GI544-141

FEMA RELEASES MONEY TO FIGHT HYDE PARK FIRE

Photo:  File, C-130 Fighting Fire.  Credit:  U.S. Air Force
FROM:  FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
FEMA Authorizes Funds to Help Fight Colorado's Hyde Park Fire
DENVER, Co. -- The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has authorized the use of federal funds to help with firefighting costs for the Hyde Park Fire located in Larimer County.
FEMA Regional Administrator Robin Finegan approved the state’s request for a Federal Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) at 7:19 p.m on June 9, 2012. The fire has burned in excess of 4,000 acres of federal and state/private lands.

At the time of the request the fire was threatening 150 homes in and around Fort Collins, population 299,630. The fire is also threatening campgrounds in the area, the Stove Canyon and Poudre Canyon watersheds and an unknown amount of other infrastructure.

The authorization makes FEMA funding available to pay 75 percent of the state’s eligible firefighting costs under an approved grant for managing, mitigating and controlling designated fires.

FMAGs are provided through the President's Disaster Relief Fund and made available by FEMA to assist in fighting fires that threaten to cause a major disaster. Eligible items can include expenses for field camps; equipment use, repair and replacement; mobilization and demobilization activities; and tools, materials and supplies.

These grants do not provide assistance to individual home or business owners and do not cover other infrastructure damage caused by the fire.

SEC. OF STATE CLINTON'S REMARKS ON CUTBACKS IN IRANIAN CRUDE OIL PURCHASES

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Regarding Significant Reductions of Iranian Crude Oil Purchases
Press Statement Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateWashington, DC
June 11, 2012
Today I have made the determination that seven economies—India, Malaysia, Republic of Korea, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Turkey and Taiwan--have all significantly reduced their volume of crude oil purchases from Iran. They join the 11 countries for which I made this determination in March. As a result, I will report to the Congress that sanctions pursuant to Section 1245(d)(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 will not apply to their financial institutions for a potentially renewable period of 180 days.

We have implemented these sanctions to support our efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and to encourage Iran to comply with its international obligations. Today’s announcement underscores the success of our sanctions implementation. By reducing Iran’s oil sales, we are sending a decisive message to Iran’s leaders: until they take concrete actions to satisfy the concerns of the international community, they will continue to face increasing isolation and pressure.

The United States remains committed to a dual-track policy that offers Iran the chance to engage seriously with the international community to resolve our concerns over its nuclear program through negotiations with the P5+1. Iran has the ability to address these concerns by taking concrete steps during the next round of talks in Moscow. I urge its leaders to do so.

U.S. EXPORT-IMPORT BANK GETS BEST ECA IN THE AMERICAS AWARD

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia. 
FROM:  EXPORT-IMPORT BANK
Ex-Im Recognized as Best ECA in the Americas
Washington, D.C. – The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) has received the Best Export Credit Agency (ECA) in the Americas Award from Trade Finance Magazine for the third year in a row.

“Being voted Best ECA in the Americas again this year demonstrates the respect that the trade finance industry has for Ex-Im Bank, its innovative products, and its ability to give U.S. exporters the edge they need in highly competitive overseas markets. Also reflected here is the vocal support that the market provided Ex-Im Bank during its challenging reauthorization process,” said Oliver O’Connell, the editor of Trade Finance.

The Bank also placed second in the Best Global ECA category and second in the Best ECA in Africa category.

“The award really goes to the employees of Ex-Im for their work on behalf of our customers’ exports and the U.S. jobs they create,” said Ex-Im Bank Chairman Fred P. Hochberg. “We will continue to aim for excellence and look forward to competing for next year’s awards.”

Additionally, the Bank was recognized by Trade Finance for its involvement in five deals of the year, including the export of oil and refinery equipment and services from more than 150 firms to Colombia’s Refinería de Cartagena S.A. (Reficar); oil and refinery equipment and services to Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. (Petrobras), Brazil's national oil company; oil and refinery equipment and services to Pemex, a Mexican state-owned petroleum company; telecommunications satellites to Avanti Communications of London; and aero-derivative gas turbine generators manufactured by GE Packaged Power Inc (GEPPI) to Aydin, Turkey.

Trade Finance Awards for Excellence have been annually awarded for the last 15 years and represent a comprehensive poll of the global trade finance market.
According to its website, Trade Finance will officially confer the award at the Trade Finance Magazine Americas Awards dinner at the Roosevelt Hotel in New York City June 26, and the write-up of the award will appear in the July/August edition of the magazine.

About Ex-Im Bank:
Ex-Im Bank is an independent federal agency that helps create and maintain U.S. jobs by filling gaps in private export financing at no cost to American taxpayers. In the past five years, Ex-Im Bank has earned for U.S. taxpayers $1.9 billion above the cost of operations. The Bank provides a variety of financing mechanisms, including working capital guarantees, export-credit insurance, and financing to help foreign buyers purchase U.S. goods and services.

Ex-Im Bank approved $32.7 billion in total authorizations in FY 2011 -- an all-time Ex-Im record. This total includes more than $6 billion directly supporting small-business export sales -- also an Ex-Im record. Ex-Im Bank's total authorizations are supporting an estimated $41 billion in U.S. export sales and approximately 290,000 American jobs in communities across the country.

FROM OCEAN BOTTOM TO OCEAN SURFACE, LIFE FINDS A WAY

Photo:  Divers.  Credit:  NASA
FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
June 8, 2012
"Don't panic," Douglas Adams might have said.
Author of the sci-fi novel Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Adams advised "don't panic" whenever facing invaders. What Adams might not have known is that the inner space of the oceans conceals aliens every bit as resourceful as any that might lurk in outer space.

"And now these deep-sea-dwellers have turned the tables on us," says Janet Voight, a biologist at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago.

Voight and other scientists studying deep-ocean hydrothermal vents have discovered that some life forms can survive the extreme pressure change from ocean-floor to sea surface.

On a recent dive in the deep-ocean research submersible Alvin, some unexpected companions--38 of them, to be exact--found their way topside.

Lepetodrilus gordensis, the invader is named. It's a type of marine snail called a limpet, well-known for its ability to stick like glue to surfaces.

"No one thought that included the gear of a submersible, however," says Voight.
The fauna at deep-sea hydrothermal vents is among the most isolated and inaccessible on Earth. Life at "vents" is based on a process called chemosynthesis, which, unlike photosynthesis, doesn't depend on sunlight. Rather, it survives on chemicals spewed from the vents themselves.

"Hydrothermal vents can only be visited by subsea vehicles, which can and do move freely among them," wrote Voight and colleagues in a paper published recently in the journalConservation Biology.

Co-authors of the paper are Raymond Lee of Washington State University, Abigail Reft of Ohio State University and Amanda Bates of the University of Tasmania.

"Researchers assumed that individual animals in the vent fauna, if brought to the surface, would be killed by the change in water pressure," says Voight. "Clearly it's not so."

After one Alvin dive, Voight found the 38 vent limpets in samples taken from an undersea locale where there are no hydrothermal vents--and therefore no vent limpets.

The scientists had collected samples from a non-limpet habitat along the Juan de Fuca Ridge, deep under the surface of the Northeastern Pacific Ocean. But when Voight looked at the treasure trove, it contained limpets.

"What's wrong with this picture?" she asked. "Well, that limpet species was known only from the vents of the Gorda Ridge, 635 kilometers south of Juan de Fuca."

The question became: how did the limpets get more than 600 kilometers from their habitat? "The only answer was that they must have been transported by the sub."

Which just goes to show, says Chuck Lydeard, program director in the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Division of Environmental Biology, which funded the research, "that humans cannot assume anything about the dispersal capabilities of other organisms, including those thought to be restricted to the most extreme environments on the planet."

The inadvertent introduction of a new species to an ecosystem is a major challenge to conservation efforts.

How a species will react to new surroundings, and the effect it has if it begins to reproduce and take over, is unpredictable.

"Deep-sea drilling and submersible activity can increase the probability of such introductions," says Voight, "but until now hydrothermal vents were considered too isolated to be a source of invaders."

In coastal areas, one of the biggest threats from invasive species is the introduction of diseases. Newly introduced pathogens can cause mass mortality in native species. Diseases that may exist in extreme environments such as hydrothermal vents have not been well-studied, says Voight.

"It's clearly possible to accidentally introduce a species--and any potential diseases it may carry--from a deep-sea vent to a new location," she says. "That has implications for the future exploration of hydrothermal vents. It reveals the potential risk of human-driven change to ecosystems, even those ecosystems most of us will never see."

The discovery is a valuable lesson to the scientists and vehicle operators who work in the deep sea, says Brian Midson of NSF's Division of Ocean Sciences.

"Potential cross-fertilization and contamination of hydrothermal vents and other sites need to be considered during pre and post-dive activities," says Midson. "This new information will result in future discussions between shipboard crew and research scientists about the need for rigorous cleaning and inspection of sampling gear and vehicles, before and after every dive."

The limpets Voight found hitched a ride somewhere in the sub's suction sampler, she believes, "perhaps in the corrugated hose, where enough water pooled to keep them alive.
"Replacing the corrugated hose with a smooth hose may help prevent inadvertent transplants of biota, but any surface or crevice on the submersible or its gear could provide a refuge."

The scientists urge other researchers to assume that "physiologically tough" stowaways are present on deep-sea research instruments and to guard against transport of non-native species--from or to The Deep.

"Preventing introductions is of paramount importance," says Voight, "in maintaining intact hydrothermal vent ecosystems."

Plan ahead for invaders, Douglas Adams might have suggested, but "don't panic."
At least not yet.

ALLEGED COMMODITY POOL FRAUD IN FLORIDA

FROM:  U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
CFTC Charges Jose S. Rubio and his Florida firm, Rubio Wealth Management, LLC, with Commodity Pool Fraud
Defendants also charged with misappropriation, false statements, commingling investor funds, and failure to register
Defendants allegedly fraudulently solicited over $1.8 million from at least 21 individuals
Washington, DC – The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today announced that it filed a civil enforcement action against Jose S. Rubio (Rubio) and Rubio Wealth Management, LLC (RWM) of Surfside and Coral Gables, Fla., respectively. The CFTC complaint charges Rubio and RWM with defrauding investors in connection with operating a commodity pool to trade commodity futures and off-exchange foreign currency (forex) contracts. The CFTC complaint also charges Rubio with making false statements to pool participants, misappropriating pool funds, commingling investor funds with those of RWM, failing to register as a commodity pool operator, and failing to produce documents to the CFTC.

The CFTC complaint, filed June 7, 2012, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, alleges that from at least January 2008 through the present, Rubio and RWM solicited and accepted at least $1.8 million from at least 21 individuals in connection with their commodity pool. According to the complaint, Rubio and RWM lost in excess of $900,000 through trading and misappropriated at least $820,000 of participants’ funds.

Rubio allegedly made misrepresentations when soliciting and accepting pool participants’ funds. Rubio and RWM allegedly misappropriated some of those funds and used some investor funds to repay other investors, in the manner of a Ponzi scheme. The complaint also alleges that Rubio commingled investor funds with those of RWM, failed to register with the CFTC, and failed to produce documents to the CFTC.

The complaint alleges that, to conceal and perpetuate the fraud, Rubio failed to provide annual financial statements to pool participants and provided at least one pool participant with false investment performance documents that failed to disclose trading losses and misappropriation.

In its continuing litigation, the CFTC seeks civil monetary penalties, restitution, trading and registration bans, and preliminary and permanent injunctions against further violations of the federal commodities laws, as charged.

The CFTC appreciates the assistance of the Florida Office of Financial Regulation and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members responsible for this case are Christopher Giglio, David Oakland, Nathan Ploener, Manal Sultan, Lenel Hickson, Steve Obie, and Vincent McGonagle.

U.S.-MACEDONIA RELATIONS

Photo:  Seaside View Of Ohrid in Republic of Macedonia.  Credit:  Wikipedia.
FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
U.S.-Macedonia Relations
Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs
Fact Sheet
June 5, 2012
U.S.-MACEDONIA RELATIONS
Macedonia and the United States enjoy a cooperative relationship across a broad range of political, economic, cultural, military, and social issues. The two have had good bilateral relations since Macedonia gained its independence from Yugoslavia in 1991. The United States formally recognized Macedonia in 1994, and the countries established full diplomatic relations in 1995. The United States strongly supports Macedonia's aspirations for full integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions and is committed to helping Macedonia strengthen rule of law; improve education; promote media freedom; and build greater democratic foundations in a full, inclusive multi-ethnic society.

The United States and its European allies strongly condemned the initiators of the 2001 insurgency in Macedonia, which grew from ethnic tensions, and closely supported the government and major parties' successful efforts to forge a peaceful, political solution to the crisis through the Ohrid Framework Agreement. In partnership with the European Union and other international organizations active in Macedonia, the United States continues to facilitate the Macedonian Government's implementation of the Framework Agreement and fostering long-term peace and stability in the country..

U.S. Assistance to Macedonia
U.S. Government assistance to Macedonia focuses on facilitating Macedonia’s continued development on the path toward full integration into the Euro-Atlantic community and assisting the Macedonian Government’s efforts to sustain economic and democratic reforms to build stability and prosperity.

Bilateral Economic Relations
The United States supports Macedonia's transition to a market-oriented economy. Macedonia is a member of the World Trade Organization seeks to join the European Union (EU); a starting date for accession negotiations has been deferred by the EU.
In 2010, total trade between Macedonia and the United States was $116.6 million, and in the first 8 months of 2011 it was $65 million. U.S. electrical machinery and equipment have been particularly attractive to Macedonian importers. Principal Macedonian exports to the United States are tobacco, apparel, iron, and steel.

Macedonia's Membership in International Organizations
Macedonia and the United States belong to a number of the same international organizations, including the United Nations, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Adriatic Charter, International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and World Trade Organization.

Macedonia seeks to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).In 2008, NATO Allies noted that Macedonia met NATO membership criteria and in2012 reconfirmed the commitment to invite Macedonia to join NATO as soon as a solution is reached in Macedonia's dispute with NATO member Greece over Macedonia's name. Macedonia continues to make an important contribution to regional stability by supporting the logistical supply of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (including U.S.) peacekeepers in Kosovo. Macedonia participated in OIF and currently participates in ISAF, the EU Althea Mission in Bosnia and Herzgovina, and the UN’s observer mission in Lebanon.

GENERAL ALLEN APPOLGIZES FOR AIRSTRIKE

 Photo: Marine Corps General John R. Allen.  Credit:  U.S. Department of Defense.
FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
Allen Visits Afghan Officials, Families of Dead
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.

WASHINGTON, June 8, 2012 - The commander of International Security Assistance Forces today visited Afghan officials and the families of civilians reportedly killed during a June 6 airstrike and issued an apology for the attack, a senior Pentagon official said.
Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen "did render his apologies for the civilian casualties that we caused," Navy Capt. John Kirby said in response to a reporter's question. "We know that we did cause a number of civilian casualties in this air strike, and he also made it clear that we would make good in terms of compensation to the families."

News reports say 18 Afghan civilians were killed in the airstrike, but Kirby noted an assessment team continues to investigate. "It would be premature and irresponsible" to discuss specific numbers, he said.

Kirby explained the incident leading to the airstrike which came after ISAF troops were fired upon while tracking Taliban fighters in eastern Logar province.
"As the joint Afghan-U.S. force approached the building, a number of our forces were taken under fire," he said. "A hand grenade was thrown and some of our people ... were wounded."

"Those forces called out to the people who were shooting at them to come out," he added. "They refused."

The coalition force used procedures in the tactical directive that seek to limit deadly force until there were no further alternatives, Kirby said.
"Unfortunately, the situation became worse and eventually air support was requested," he said. "And then, sadly, innocent people were killed, along with insurgents who were in the building when that air support was used."

Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, explained in a press briefing yesterday how knowledge of potential civilian casualties came about.

"At the time, there were two civilians who came forward declaring that they'd been wounded in the action," the general said. "We did a sweep of the area and did not, at that time, find any other civilian casualties in the rubble."

Following the search, Dempsey said, a leader of the province came forward and said further searching in the rubble yielded more civilian casualties.

"We don't know, at this point, the scope and scale of it," he said. "As you know, we do our very best to avoid civilian casualties, so this investigation will try to determine if there were civilian casualties and then we will take the appropriate actions."

Kirby pointed out while there was a loss of civilian lives, "we also know that we killed a number of insurgents, as well."

"[But] as I said before, we take these allegations – if they're proven that we have harmed innocent civilians – very seriously, as evidenced by General Allen's trip there today," he said.

"But we also work very hard to limit civilian casualties and when they're caused, we atone for that," Kirby said. "The Taliban doesn't. The Taliban causes far more civilian casualties than we do, and oftentimes, it's deliberate and malicious."

CHAIRMAN OF CFTC BLASTS CONGRESS FOR PUTTING WALL STREET INTEREST AHEAD OF THE PUBLICS

Photo Credit:  U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission  
FROM:  U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 
Statement of CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler Regarding House Appropriations Subcommittee’s Vote on the CFTC Budget
Washington, DC – Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Chairman Gary Gensler today released the following statement after the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies voted to cut the CFTC budget.

“The result of the House bill is to effectively put the interests of Wall Street ahead of those of the American public by significantly underfunding the agency Congress tasked to oversee derivatives – the same complex financial instruments that helped contribute to the most significant economic downturn since the Great Depression.

“The CFTC’s hardworking staff is just 10 percent more in numbers than at our peak in the 1990s, yet Congress has now directed the agency to oversee the swaps market that is eight times larger than the futures market. Picture the NFL expanding eightfold to play more than 100 football games in a weekend, leaving just one referee per game, and, in some cases, no referee. Imagine the mayhem on the field, the resulting injuries to players, and the loss of confidence fans would have in the integrity of the game.

“We would not want similar mayhem and loss of confidence in markets so critical to farmers, ranchers and end users that may result from this bill’s significant underfunding of the CFTC.”