FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Yama Sakura Reflects New Approaches in Historic Alliance
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Dec. 10, 2013 – An exercise underway in Japan is giving U.S. forces an opportunity to apply the leadership and problem-solving skills they developed in Iraq and Afghanistan as they refocus on the Asia-Pacific theater.
Yama Sakura 65, an annual bilateral exercise between U.S. and Japan, kicked off for its 33rd iteration Nov. 29 and will wrap up within the next few days, Army Lt. Gen. Robert B. Brown, the I Corps commander, told American Forces Press Service.
The largest bilateral ground exercise for the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force, Yama Sakura includes about 1,500 U.S. military members and about 4,500 Japanese forces.
For Brown, who first participated in Yama Sakura in the mid-1990s, this year’s exercise represents a tremendous evolution from the one he remembers 17 years ago.
“It’s totally different, like night and day,” he said during a telephone interview today from Japan. “Back then, the Japanese were in one building, planning, and we were in another building. It was really hard to interact.”
Not so today. “Now we are right next to each other, truly working together bilaterally, and learning from each other,” he said.
Working together to confront a notional invasion of Northern Japan, the military forces are maximizing the advantages of technology never dreamed of in the early days of Yama Sakura.
Only about 1,000 of the U.S. participants are on the ground in Japan. The rest, Brown explained, are in simulation centers at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Wash.; in Hawaii, South Korea and several other locations.
“We are much more efficient today than in the past because we put money into simulations. That has really paid dividends in saving money, yet still providing an effective and realistic exercise,” he said. “Instead of everyone having to Japan to participate, they are up on [video teleconferences] at their home bases every single day. So you still have that realism, but in a more efficient manner.”
Another departure for Yama Sakura is that military forces are operating directly with their interagency and intergovernmental counterparts to replicate a joint, interagency, inter-governmental and multinational or “JIIM” domain.
For example, during the course of the execution phase of the exercise wrapping up this week, Japanese civil authorities worked shoulder-to-shoulder with the military participants to conduct a notional civilian evacuation. They hammered out the specifics of how they would conduct it and where they would send the evacuees and planned for some of the complications they would likely confront during a real-world event.
“I wish we had exercises more in the JIIM environment before deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan, because it is more realistic,” Brown said. “We used to say we wouldn’t fight unless we were joint. Well, that is a given now. But I don’t think we will ever fight again unless we are truly joint, interagency, intergovernmental and multinational. It is the way the world has changed.”
Among those changes are the operational challenges posed by cyber threats. “Cyber is something we didn’t use to practice a lot, but now we include it in every exercise,” including Yama Sakura, Brown said.
Participants are practicing defensive cyber operations, which Brown said begins with recognizing attacks or attempted attacks on networks and reporting them to the appropriate authorities.
Many cyber attacks go unrecognized because users mistake temporary outages or unusual activity on their networks for the kind of interruptions they sometimes get on their cell phones, he explained. “It’s often a cyber attack or somebody trying to phish for information and folks don’t even know,” he said. “So the first thing is getting them to pay attention and report it, and we are playing that a lot in the exercise.”
While much has changed in the Yama Sakura exercise, Brown said its goals of promoting communication, understanding and interoperability haven’t.
Although the scenario was based on a fictitious invasion, Brown said the way Japanese and U.S. military and governmental personnel responded could apply to just about any situation – including one like the devastating earthquake-tsunami-nuclear disaster that struck Japan in 2011.
“This really could be about just anything,” he said. “It is putting you in a challenging situation so you learn to work together and build trust and confidence among your allies.”
Like many other U.S. allies and partners in the region, Japan Ground Self-Defense Force members are anxious to learn the lessons U.S. forces have learned over the past 12 years of sustained combat, Brown said.
“This is the most experienced generation, operationally, that we have ever had,” he said. “They bring in incredible experience that our allies are very hungry for….[Those allies] definitely respect that we have been tested in the toughest of conditions in combat, and they really want to learn the lessons.”
Those lessons, he noted, include leadership and problem-solving skills that would apply as much during a humanitarian assistance and disaster response mission as in combat.
U.S. allies “understand that it is not technology, it is our noncommissioned officers that make us the best Army in the world,” Brown said.
As U.S. NCOs partnered extensively with Japanese forces during Yama Sakura, they shared insights into areas beyond traditional military operations, including suicide prevention, resiliency and sexual assault and sexual harassment prevention, he noted.
But the learning wasn’t all one-way. The Japan Ground Self-Defense Force has “tremendous planning skills,” Brown said, and its members happily shared them with the U.S. forces.
“I can’ tell you how excited the soldiers are to be here,” he said. “They are working right next to their Japanese counterparts. They are learning about their culture, their traditions, and learning from them about how they plan and operate. It’s just neat to see.”
Brown said he expects the after-action review to follow the exercise’s conclusion to be “fascinating” as it takes the process from past Yama Sakura exercises to a new level. “I think we are going to get even better lessons learned,” he said.
As I Corps continues to change from its Middle East focus to support the U.S. balance to the Asia-Pacific theater, Brown said the experiences gained during exercises like Yama Sakura will go a long way in promoting the relationships that will allow the U.S.-Japan alliance to continue to grow.
“When you learn about each other and learn how to operate together and cooperate better, you get a personal view of each other than can pay off in the long term,” he said. “And in the future, if something would happen, … we know we could come together and work together well.”
That foundation is critical, he said, borrowing what has become a popular truism, “because you can surge troops and numbers, but you can’t surge trust.”
“We exercise and practice together because you don’t want to learn this the first time in the middle of a crisis,” he said. “You don’t want to go to the Super Bowl without having scrimmaged or worked together. You have to have those repetitions: be together to learn and build trust that enables effective command.
“If you can do it efficiently and effectively in exercises like this, it is worth its weight in gold, because you are training the way you are going to end up fighting or responding to a crisis,” he said.
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
MAN FACES PRISON SENTENCE, FINE FOR CLAIMING FALSE TAX REFUNDS
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, December 9, 2013
Utah Resident Pleads Guilty to Filing False Claims for Tax Refunds Totaling $653,884
Stanley J. Wardle, 65, of Spanish Fork, Utah, pleaded guilty today in the U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City to nine counts of filing false claims for income tax refunds, the Justice Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced. Wardle, who was indicted on Feb. 15, 2012, is scheduled to be sentenced before U.S. District Judge Dee Benson on Feb. 27, 2014.
According to the indictment, on or about Jan. 22, 2009, Wardle prepared and filed a false U.S. Individual Income Tax Return for the year 2008, in which he claimed a tax refund of $32,115. In addition, between Dec. 8, 2008 and May 13, 2009, he caused additional false claims for tax refunds to be made on behalf of others. In total, Wardle was involved in false claims for refunds totaling $653,884.
Wardle faces a statutory maximum sentence of five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss caused by the defendant for each false claim charge.
Assistant Attorney General Kathryn Keneally for the department’s Tax Division commended the special agents of IRS - Criminal Investigation who investigated the case, and Tax Division Trial Attorneys Michael Romano and Stuart Wexler, who prosecuted the case.
Monday, December 9, 2013
Utah Resident Pleads Guilty to Filing False Claims for Tax Refunds Totaling $653,884
Stanley J. Wardle, 65, of Spanish Fork, Utah, pleaded guilty today in the U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City to nine counts of filing false claims for income tax refunds, the Justice Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced. Wardle, who was indicted on Feb. 15, 2012, is scheduled to be sentenced before U.S. District Judge Dee Benson on Feb. 27, 2014.
According to the indictment, on or about Jan. 22, 2009, Wardle prepared and filed a false U.S. Individual Income Tax Return for the year 2008, in which he claimed a tax refund of $32,115. In addition, between Dec. 8, 2008 and May 13, 2009, he caused additional false claims for tax refunds to be made on behalf of others. In total, Wardle was involved in false claims for refunds totaling $653,884.
Wardle faces a statutory maximum sentence of five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 or twice the gross gain or loss caused by the defendant for each false claim charge.
Assistant Attorney General Kathryn Keneally for the department’s Tax Division commended the special agents of IRS - Criminal Investigation who investigated the case, and Tax Division Trial Attorneys Michael Romano and Stuart Wexler, who prosecuted the case.
SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S STATEMENT ON AGREEMENT WITH IRAN ON NUCLEAR PROGRAM
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT,
The P5+1's First Step Agreement With Iran on its Nuclear Program
Testimony
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Opening Remarks Before the House Foreign Affairs Committee
Washington, DC
December 10, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you very, very much. Ranking Member Engel, Members of the Committee, thanks very much for welcoming me back, and I am happy to be back here. There’s no more important issue in American foreign policy than the question of the one we’re focused on here today.
And obviously, from the Chairman’s introduction, you know that I come here with an enormous amount of respect for your prerogatives on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as we did in the Senate. And it’s entirely appropriate that we’re here to satisfy your questions, hopefully allay your concerns and fears, because I believe the agreement that we have ought to do that and I think the path that we’re on should do that. And as I describe it to you, I hope you’ll leave here today with a sense of confidence that we know what we’re doing, our eyes are open, we have no illusions. It’s a tough road. I don’t come here with any guarantees whatsoever. And I think none of what we’ve done in this agreement begs that notion. In other words, everything is either verifiable or clear, and there are a set of requirements ahead of us which will even grow more so in the course of a comprehensive agreement. And we can talk about that – I’m sure we will – in the course of the day.
Let me just begin by saying that President Obama and I have both been very clear, as every member of this committee has been, that Iran must not acquire a nuclear weapon. And it is the President’s centerpiece of his foreign policy: Iran will not acquire a nuclear weapon. This imperative is at the top of our national security agenda, and I know it’s at the top of yours as well. So I really do welcome the opportunity to have a discussion not only about what the first-step agreement does, but also to clarify – I hope significantly – what it doesn’t do, because there’s a certain, as there is in any of these kinds of things, a certain mythology that sometimes grows up around them.
The title of today’s hearing is “The Iran Nuclear Deal: Does It Further U.S. National Security?” And I would state to you unequivocally the answer is yes. The national security of the United States is stronger under this first-step agreement than it was before. Israel’s national security is stronger than it was the day before we entered into this agreement. And the Gulf and Middle East interests are more secure than they were the day before we entered this agreement.
Now, here’s how:
Put simply, once implemented – and it will be in the next weeks – this agreement halts the progress of Iran’s nuclear program – halts the progress – and rolls it back in certain places for the first time in nearly ten years. It provides unprecedented monitoring and inspections. While we negotiate to see if we can conclude a comprehensive agreement – if we can conclude – and I came away from our preliminary negotiations with serious questions about whether or not they’re ready and willing to make some of the choices that have to be made. But that’s what we put to test over the next months. While we negotiate to see if we can conclude a comprehensive agreement that addresses all of our concerns, there’s an important fact: Iran’s nuclear program will not move forward.
Under this agreement, Iran will have to neutralize – end – its entire stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium, which you all know is a short step away from weapons-grade uranium. So if you remember when Prime Minister Netanyahu held up that cartoon at the UN with the bomb in it in 2012, he showed the world a chart that highlighted the type of uranium that he was most concerned about – and he was talking about that 20 percent stockpile. Under this agreement, Iran will forfeit all – not part, all – of that 20 percent, that 200 kilogram stockpile. Gone.
Under this agreement, Iran will also halt the enrichment above 5 percent and it will not be permitted to grow its stockpile of 3.5 percent enriched uranium. Iran cannot increase the number of centrifuges in operation, and it will not install or use any next-generation centrifuges to enrich uranium.
Under this agreement, we will have increased transparency of Iran’s nuclear program, giving us a window into their activities that we don’t have today. We will have access to Fordow, a secret facility in a mountaintop that we’ve never been in. We will now get into it not once or twice – every single day. We will get into Natanz and have the ability to know not once or twice, but every single day what is happening in Natanz. And we will have access each month to the Arak facility, where we will have an extraordinary ability to be able to know through inspections whether or not they are complying with their requirements.
Now, this monitoring is going to increase our visibility into Iran’s nuclear program as well as our ability to react should Iran renege on this agreement. And taken together, these first steps will help prevent Iran from using the cover of negotiations to continue advancing its nuclear program in secret – a concern that everybody on this dais shares.
Now, in addition – this is very important – one of our greatest concerns has been the Arak – A-r-a-k – nuclear reactor facility. And this is a heavy-water, plutonium-capable reactor. That’s unacceptable to us. In the first step, we have now succeeded in preventing them from doing any additional fuel testing, from transferring any fuel rods into the reactor, and from installing any of the uninstalled components which are critical to their ability to be able to advance that particular reactor. So it’s frozen stone cold where it is in terms of its nuclear threat and capacity. Iran will not be able to commission the Arak reactor during the course of this interim first-step agreement. That’s very important.
Now, we have strong feelings about what will happen in a final comprehensive agreement. From our point of view, Arak is unacceptable. You can’t have a heavy-water reactor. But we’ve taken the first step in the context of a first step, and they will have to halt production of fuel for this reactor and not transfer any fuel or heavy water to the reactor site. It cannot conduct any additional fuel testing for this. and Iran is required to give us design information for the site. We’re actually going to have the plans for the site delivered to us. We’ve long sought this information, and it will provide critical insight into the reactor that has not been previously available to us through intel or any other sources.
Now, those are the highlights of what we get in this agreement. And I know many of you have asked, “Well, what does Iran get in return?” And I’ve seen outlandish numbers out there in some articles talking about 30, 40, 50 billion dollars and so forth, or disintegration of the sanctions. My friends, that’s just not true. It’s absolutely not true. We have red-teamed and vetted and cross-examined and run through all the possible numbers through the intel community, through the Treasury Department, through the people in charge of sanctions, and our estimates are that at the end of the six months, if they fully comply, if this holds, they would have somewhere in the vicinity of $7 billion total.
And this is something that I think you ought to take great pride in. I was here as chairman when we put his in place. I voted for these sanctions, like we all did in the United States Senate. I think we were 100 to nothing as a matter of fact. And we put them in place for a purpose. The purpose was to get to this negotiation. The purpose was to see whether or not diplomacy and avoidance of war could actually deliver the same thing or better than you might be able to get through confrontation.
Now, sanctions relief is limited to the very few targeted areas that are specified in this agreement for a total of about the $7 billion that I’ve described. And we will continue to vigorously – Ranking Member Engel, we will absolutely not only will we – I mean, this is going to actually result in a greater intensity of focus on the sanctions because I’ve sent a message to every single facility of the United States anywhere in the world that every agency is to be on alert to see any least movement by anybody towards an effort to try to circumvent or undo the sanctions. We don’t believe that will happen. And one of the reasons it won’t happen is we have a united P5+1. Russia, China, the United States, France, Germany, and Great Britain are all united in this assurance that we will not undo the sanctions and that we will stay focused on their enforcement.
Now, all the sanctions on Iran further on its abysmal human rights record, over its support for terrorism, which you’ve mentioned, and over its destabilizing activities in places like Syria – those sanctions will all remain in effect. They’ve nothing to do with the nuclear. They’re there for the reasons they’re there, and we’re not taking them off. This agreement does provide Iran with a very limited, temporary, and reversible relief. And it’s reversible at any time in the process if there is noncompliance. If Iran fails to meet its commitments, we can and will revoke this relief. And we will be the first ones to come to you if this fails to ask you for additional sanctions.
The total amount of relief is somewhere between the 6 and 7 billion that I described. That is less than one percent of Iran’s $1 trillion dollar economy, and it is a small fraction of the $100 billion-plus of oil revenue alone that we have deprived Iran of since 2012.
I want you to keep in mind this really pales in comparison to the amount of pressure that we are leaving in place. Iran will lose $30 billion over the course of this continued sanctions regime over the next six months. So compare that – they may get $7 billion of relief, but they’re going to lose $30 billion. It’s going to go into the frozen accounts. It will be added to the already 45 billion or so that’s in those accounts now that they can’t access.
And during the six-month negotiating period, Iran’s crude oil sales cannot increase. Oil sanctions continue as they are today. There’s no diminishment of the oil and banking sanctions that you put in place. We have not lifted them. We haven’t eased them. That means that as we negotiate, oil sanctions will continue to cost Iran about the 30 billion I just described, and Iran will actually lose more money each month that we negotiate than it will gain in relief as a result of this agreement. And while we provide 4.2 billion in relief over the six months, which is direct money we will release from the frozen account, we are structuring this relief in a way that it is tied to concrete, IAEA-verified steps that they’ve agreed to take on the nuclear program. That means that the funds will be transferred not all at once, but in installments, in order to ensure that Iran fulfills its commitments. And it means that Iran will not get the full measure of relief until the end of the negotiating period, when and if we verify, certify, that they have complied.
So now we have committed – along with our P5+1 partners – to not impose any new nuclear-related sanctions for the period of the six months. I’m sure there are questions about this. I know I’ve seen, and there are some in Congress who’ve suggested they ought to do it. I’m happy to answer them. I will tell you that in my 29 years, just about shy of the full 29 I’ve served in the Senate, I was always a leading proponent of the sanctions against Iran. I’m proud of what we did here. But it was undeniable that the pressure we put on Iran through these sanctions is exactly what has brought Iran to the table today, and I think Congress deserves an enormous amount of credit for that.
But I don’t think that any of us thought we were just imposing these sanctions for the sake of imposing them. We did it because we knew that it would hopefully help Iran dismantle its nuclear program. That was the whole point of the regime.
Now, has Iran changed its nuclear calculus? I honestly don’t think we can say for sure yet. And we certainly don’t just take words at face value. Believe me, this is not about trust. And given the history – and Mr. Chairman, you mentioned the question of deception – given the history, we are all rightly skeptical about whether or not people are ready to make the hard choices necessary to live up to this. But we now have the best chance we’ve ever had to rigorously test this proposition without losing anything. At least twice in this agreement, it is mentioned that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, and that is specific as to the final agreement. In addition, where it does talk about the potential of enrichment in the future, it says “mutually agreed upon” at least four times – three or four times in that paragraph. It has to be agreed. We don’t agree, it doesn’t happen.
Every one of us remembers Ronald Reagan’s maxim when he was negotiating with the Soviet Union: Trust, but verify. We have a new one: Test, but verify. Test, but verify. And that is exactly what we intend to do in the course of this process.
Now, we’ve all been through tough decisions. Those of you in the top dais have been around here a long time, and you’ve seen – we all know the kinds of tough decisions we have to make. But we’re asking you to give our negotiators and our experts the time and the space to do their jobs, and that includes asking you while we negotiate that you hold off imposing new sanctions.
Now, I’m not saying never. I just told you a few minutes ago if this doesn’t work, we’re coming back and asking you for more. I’m just saying not right now. Let me be very clear. This is a very delicate diplomatic moment, and we have a chance to address peacefully one of the most pressing national security concerns that the world faces today with gigantic implications of the potential of conflict. We’re at a crossroads. We’re at one of those, really, hinge points in history. One path could lead to an enduring resolution in international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. The other path could lead to continued hostility and potentially to conflict. And I don’t have to tell you that these are high stakes.
We have an obligation to give these negotiations an opportunity to succeed. And we can’t ask the rest of the P5+1 and our partners around the world to hold up their ends of the bargain if the United States isn’t going to uphold its end of the bargain. If we appear to be going off on our own tangent and do whatever we want, we will potentially lose their support for the sanctions themselves. Because we don’t just enforce them by ourselves; we need their help. And I don’t want to threaten the unity that we currently have with respect to this approach, particularly when it doesn’t cost us a thing to go through this process knowing that we could put sanctions in place additionally in a week, and we would be there with you seeking to do it.
I don’t want to give the Iranians a public excuse to flout the agreement. It could lead our international partners to think that we’re not an honest broker and that we didn’t mean it when we said that sanctions were not an end in and of themselves, but a tool to pressure the Iranians into a diplomatic solution. Well, we’re in that. And six months will fly by so fast, my friends, that before you know it we’re either going to know which end of this we’re at or not.
It's possible, also, that it could even end up decreasing the pressure on Iran by leading to the fraying of the sanctions regime. I will tell you that there were several P5+1 partners at the table ready to accept an agreement significantly less than what we fought for and got in the end.
Mr. Chairman, do you want me to wrap?
CHAIRMAN ROYCE: If you could, Mr. Secretary.
SECRETARY KERRY: Okay. Let me just say to you that the Iranians know that this threat is on the table.
I do want to say one quick word about Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu. I speak to the Prime Minister usually a couple times a week or several times. I talked to him yesterday morning, and I am leaving tomorrow and I'll be seeing him Thursday night. We are totally agreed that we need to focus on this final comprehensive agreement. And Yossi Cohen, the national security advisor to the Prime Minister, is here in Washington this week working with our experts. And we will work hand in hand closely, not just with Israel, but with our friends in the Gulf and others around the world, to understand everybody's assessment of what constitutes the best comprehensive agreement that absolutely guarantees that the program, whatever it is to be, is peaceful, and that we have expanded by an enormous amount the breakout time.
This first-step agreement, Mr. Chairman, actually does expand the breakout time. Because of the destruction of the 20 percent, because of the lack of capacity to move forward on all those other facilities, we are expanding the amount of time that it would take them to break out. And, clearly, in a final agreement, we intend to make this failsafe that we can guarantee that they will not have access to nuclear weapons.
So I’d just simply put the rest of my testimony in the record, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to your questions.
The P5+1's First Step Agreement With Iran on its Nuclear Program
Testimony
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Opening Remarks Before the House Foreign Affairs Committee
Washington, DC
December 10, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you very, very much. Ranking Member Engel, Members of the Committee, thanks very much for welcoming me back, and I am happy to be back here. There’s no more important issue in American foreign policy than the question of the one we’re focused on here today.
And obviously, from the Chairman’s introduction, you know that I come here with an enormous amount of respect for your prerogatives on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as we did in the Senate. And it’s entirely appropriate that we’re here to satisfy your questions, hopefully allay your concerns and fears, because I believe the agreement that we have ought to do that and I think the path that we’re on should do that. And as I describe it to you, I hope you’ll leave here today with a sense of confidence that we know what we’re doing, our eyes are open, we have no illusions. It’s a tough road. I don’t come here with any guarantees whatsoever. And I think none of what we’ve done in this agreement begs that notion. In other words, everything is either verifiable or clear, and there are a set of requirements ahead of us which will even grow more so in the course of a comprehensive agreement. And we can talk about that – I’m sure we will – in the course of the day.
Let me just begin by saying that President Obama and I have both been very clear, as every member of this committee has been, that Iran must not acquire a nuclear weapon. And it is the President’s centerpiece of his foreign policy: Iran will not acquire a nuclear weapon. This imperative is at the top of our national security agenda, and I know it’s at the top of yours as well. So I really do welcome the opportunity to have a discussion not only about what the first-step agreement does, but also to clarify – I hope significantly – what it doesn’t do, because there’s a certain, as there is in any of these kinds of things, a certain mythology that sometimes grows up around them.
The title of today’s hearing is “The Iran Nuclear Deal: Does It Further U.S. National Security?” And I would state to you unequivocally the answer is yes. The national security of the United States is stronger under this first-step agreement than it was before. Israel’s national security is stronger than it was the day before we entered into this agreement. And the Gulf and Middle East interests are more secure than they were the day before we entered this agreement.
Now, here’s how:
Put simply, once implemented – and it will be in the next weeks – this agreement halts the progress of Iran’s nuclear program – halts the progress – and rolls it back in certain places for the first time in nearly ten years. It provides unprecedented monitoring and inspections. While we negotiate to see if we can conclude a comprehensive agreement – if we can conclude – and I came away from our preliminary negotiations with serious questions about whether or not they’re ready and willing to make some of the choices that have to be made. But that’s what we put to test over the next months. While we negotiate to see if we can conclude a comprehensive agreement that addresses all of our concerns, there’s an important fact: Iran’s nuclear program will not move forward.
Under this agreement, Iran will have to neutralize – end – its entire stockpile of 20 percent enriched uranium, which you all know is a short step away from weapons-grade uranium. So if you remember when Prime Minister Netanyahu held up that cartoon at the UN with the bomb in it in 2012, he showed the world a chart that highlighted the type of uranium that he was most concerned about – and he was talking about that 20 percent stockpile. Under this agreement, Iran will forfeit all – not part, all – of that 20 percent, that 200 kilogram stockpile. Gone.
Under this agreement, Iran will also halt the enrichment above 5 percent and it will not be permitted to grow its stockpile of 3.5 percent enriched uranium. Iran cannot increase the number of centrifuges in operation, and it will not install or use any next-generation centrifuges to enrich uranium.
Under this agreement, we will have increased transparency of Iran’s nuclear program, giving us a window into their activities that we don’t have today. We will have access to Fordow, a secret facility in a mountaintop that we’ve never been in. We will now get into it not once or twice – every single day. We will get into Natanz and have the ability to know not once or twice, but every single day what is happening in Natanz. And we will have access each month to the Arak facility, where we will have an extraordinary ability to be able to know through inspections whether or not they are complying with their requirements.
Now, this monitoring is going to increase our visibility into Iran’s nuclear program as well as our ability to react should Iran renege on this agreement. And taken together, these first steps will help prevent Iran from using the cover of negotiations to continue advancing its nuclear program in secret – a concern that everybody on this dais shares.
Now, in addition – this is very important – one of our greatest concerns has been the Arak – A-r-a-k – nuclear reactor facility. And this is a heavy-water, plutonium-capable reactor. That’s unacceptable to us. In the first step, we have now succeeded in preventing them from doing any additional fuel testing, from transferring any fuel rods into the reactor, and from installing any of the uninstalled components which are critical to their ability to be able to advance that particular reactor. So it’s frozen stone cold where it is in terms of its nuclear threat and capacity. Iran will not be able to commission the Arak reactor during the course of this interim first-step agreement. That’s very important.
Now, we have strong feelings about what will happen in a final comprehensive agreement. From our point of view, Arak is unacceptable. You can’t have a heavy-water reactor. But we’ve taken the first step in the context of a first step, and they will have to halt production of fuel for this reactor and not transfer any fuel or heavy water to the reactor site. It cannot conduct any additional fuel testing for this. and Iran is required to give us design information for the site. We’re actually going to have the plans for the site delivered to us. We’ve long sought this information, and it will provide critical insight into the reactor that has not been previously available to us through intel or any other sources.
Now, those are the highlights of what we get in this agreement. And I know many of you have asked, “Well, what does Iran get in return?” And I’ve seen outlandish numbers out there in some articles talking about 30, 40, 50 billion dollars and so forth, or disintegration of the sanctions. My friends, that’s just not true. It’s absolutely not true. We have red-teamed and vetted and cross-examined and run through all the possible numbers through the intel community, through the Treasury Department, through the people in charge of sanctions, and our estimates are that at the end of the six months, if they fully comply, if this holds, they would have somewhere in the vicinity of $7 billion total.
And this is something that I think you ought to take great pride in. I was here as chairman when we put his in place. I voted for these sanctions, like we all did in the United States Senate. I think we were 100 to nothing as a matter of fact. And we put them in place for a purpose. The purpose was to get to this negotiation. The purpose was to see whether or not diplomacy and avoidance of war could actually deliver the same thing or better than you might be able to get through confrontation.
Now, sanctions relief is limited to the very few targeted areas that are specified in this agreement for a total of about the $7 billion that I’ve described. And we will continue to vigorously – Ranking Member Engel, we will absolutely not only will we – I mean, this is going to actually result in a greater intensity of focus on the sanctions because I’ve sent a message to every single facility of the United States anywhere in the world that every agency is to be on alert to see any least movement by anybody towards an effort to try to circumvent or undo the sanctions. We don’t believe that will happen. And one of the reasons it won’t happen is we have a united P5+1. Russia, China, the United States, France, Germany, and Great Britain are all united in this assurance that we will not undo the sanctions and that we will stay focused on their enforcement.
Now, all the sanctions on Iran further on its abysmal human rights record, over its support for terrorism, which you’ve mentioned, and over its destabilizing activities in places like Syria – those sanctions will all remain in effect. They’ve nothing to do with the nuclear. They’re there for the reasons they’re there, and we’re not taking them off. This agreement does provide Iran with a very limited, temporary, and reversible relief. And it’s reversible at any time in the process if there is noncompliance. If Iran fails to meet its commitments, we can and will revoke this relief. And we will be the first ones to come to you if this fails to ask you for additional sanctions.
The total amount of relief is somewhere between the 6 and 7 billion that I described. That is less than one percent of Iran’s $1 trillion dollar economy, and it is a small fraction of the $100 billion-plus of oil revenue alone that we have deprived Iran of since 2012.
I want you to keep in mind this really pales in comparison to the amount of pressure that we are leaving in place. Iran will lose $30 billion over the course of this continued sanctions regime over the next six months. So compare that – they may get $7 billion of relief, but they’re going to lose $30 billion. It’s going to go into the frozen accounts. It will be added to the already 45 billion or so that’s in those accounts now that they can’t access.
And during the six-month negotiating period, Iran’s crude oil sales cannot increase. Oil sanctions continue as they are today. There’s no diminishment of the oil and banking sanctions that you put in place. We have not lifted them. We haven’t eased them. That means that as we negotiate, oil sanctions will continue to cost Iran about the 30 billion I just described, and Iran will actually lose more money each month that we negotiate than it will gain in relief as a result of this agreement. And while we provide 4.2 billion in relief over the six months, which is direct money we will release from the frozen account, we are structuring this relief in a way that it is tied to concrete, IAEA-verified steps that they’ve agreed to take on the nuclear program. That means that the funds will be transferred not all at once, but in installments, in order to ensure that Iran fulfills its commitments. And it means that Iran will not get the full measure of relief until the end of the negotiating period, when and if we verify, certify, that they have complied.
So now we have committed – along with our P5+1 partners – to not impose any new nuclear-related sanctions for the period of the six months. I’m sure there are questions about this. I know I’ve seen, and there are some in Congress who’ve suggested they ought to do it. I’m happy to answer them. I will tell you that in my 29 years, just about shy of the full 29 I’ve served in the Senate, I was always a leading proponent of the sanctions against Iran. I’m proud of what we did here. But it was undeniable that the pressure we put on Iran through these sanctions is exactly what has brought Iran to the table today, and I think Congress deserves an enormous amount of credit for that.
But I don’t think that any of us thought we were just imposing these sanctions for the sake of imposing them. We did it because we knew that it would hopefully help Iran dismantle its nuclear program. That was the whole point of the regime.
Now, has Iran changed its nuclear calculus? I honestly don’t think we can say for sure yet. And we certainly don’t just take words at face value. Believe me, this is not about trust. And given the history – and Mr. Chairman, you mentioned the question of deception – given the history, we are all rightly skeptical about whether or not people are ready to make the hard choices necessary to live up to this. But we now have the best chance we’ve ever had to rigorously test this proposition without losing anything. At least twice in this agreement, it is mentioned that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, and that is specific as to the final agreement. In addition, where it does talk about the potential of enrichment in the future, it says “mutually agreed upon” at least four times – three or four times in that paragraph. It has to be agreed. We don’t agree, it doesn’t happen.
Every one of us remembers Ronald Reagan’s maxim when he was negotiating with the Soviet Union: Trust, but verify. We have a new one: Test, but verify. Test, but verify. And that is exactly what we intend to do in the course of this process.
Now, we’ve all been through tough decisions. Those of you in the top dais have been around here a long time, and you’ve seen – we all know the kinds of tough decisions we have to make. But we’re asking you to give our negotiators and our experts the time and the space to do their jobs, and that includes asking you while we negotiate that you hold off imposing new sanctions.
Now, I’m not saying never. I just told you a few minutes ago if this doesn’t work, we’re coming back and asking you for more. I’m just saying not right now. Let me be very clear. This is a very delicate diplomatic moment, and we have a chance to address peacefully one of the most pressing national security concerns that the world faces today with gigantic implications of the potential of conflict. We’re at a crossroads. We’re at one of those, really, hinge points in history. One path could lead to an enduring resolution in international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. The other path could lead to continued hostility and potentially to conflict. And I don’t have to tell you that these are high stakes.
We have an obligation to give these negotiations an opportunity to succeed. And we can’t ask the rest of the P5+1 and our partners around the world to hold up their ends of the bargain if the United States isn’t going to uphold its end of the bargain. If we appear to be going off on our own tangent and do whatever we want, we will potentially lose their support for the sanctions themselves. Because we don’t just enforce them by ourselves; we need their help. And I don’t want to threaten the unity that we currently have with respect to this approach, particularly when it doesn’t cost us a thing to go through this process knowing that we could put sanctions in place additionally in a week, and we would be there with you seeking to do it.
I don’t want to give the Iranians a public excuse to flout the agreement. It could lead our international partners to think that we’re not an honest broker and that we didn’t mean it when we said that sanctions were not an end in and of themselves, but a tool to pressure the Iranians into a diplomatic solution. Well, we’re in that. And six months will fly by so fast, my friends, that before you know it we’re either going to know which end of this we’re at or not.
It's possible, also, that it could even end up decreasing the pressure on Iran by leading to the fraying of the sanctions regime. I will tell you that there were several P5+1 partners at the table ready to accept an agreement significantly less than what we fought for and got in the end.
Mr. Chairman, do you want me to wrap?
CHAIRMAN ROYCE: If you could, Mr. Secretary.
SECRETARY KERRY: Okay. Let me just say to you that the Iranians know that this threat is on the table.
I do want to say one quick word about Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu. I speak to the Prime Minister usually a couple times a week or several times. I talked to him yesterday morning, and I am leaving tomorrow and I'll be seeing him Thursday night. We are totally agreed that we need to focus on this final comprehensive agreement. And Yossi Cohen, the national security advisor to the Prime Minister, is here in Washington this week working with our experts. And we will work hand in hand closely, not just with Israel, but with our friends in the Gulf and others around the world, to understand everybody's assessment of what constitutes the best comprehensive agreement that absolutely guarantees that the program, whatever it is to be, is peaceful, and that we have expanded by an enormous amount the breakout time.
This first-step agreement, Mr. Chairman, actually does expand the breakout time. Because of the destruction of the 20 percent, because of the lack of capacity to move forward on all those other facilities, we are expanding the amount of time that it would take them to break out. And, clearly, in a final agreement, we intend to make this failsafe that we can guarantee that they will not have access to nuclear weapons.
So I’d just simply put the rest of my testimony in the record, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to your questions.
FEDERAL AGENCIES RETURN TO WORLD TRADE CENTER IN 2015
FROM: U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Federal Agencies to Move to One World Trade Center
The General Services Administration, Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers slated to move to World Trade Center in 2015
December 10, 2013
NEW YORK -- Today, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) announced that federal agencies will be moving to One World Trade Center in New York City. GSA plans to move its regional headquarters, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) New York District headquarters, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) New York Field Office to six floors of high-quality office space in the iconic building. This move marks the return of the federal government to the site and delivers on the federal government’s commitment to the redevelopment of the World Trade Center.
“We are excited to return to the World Trade Center Complex, which federal agencies have been a part of since 1973. From the day that the Port Authority started planning reconstruction, the federal government committed to remaining an important part of this building and the redevelopment of Lower Manhattan,” said GSA Administrator Dan Tangherlini. “Through this lease agreement, these three federal agencies will have the office space they need to serve the American people in providing goods and services, tackling vital infrastructure projects, and protecting our nation’s borders.”
"I once again applaud GSA and the federal government for committing to the rebuilding of Lower Manhattan,” said Senator Chuck Schumer. “After 9/11 many wondered if Downtown would become a ghost town, but it has flourished with new residents, stores and businesses.”
The agencies are planning to move in late 2015 to floors 50 through 55. Last year, GSA secured a lease agreement for approximately 270,000 feet of space for an initial term of 20 years. GSA will create flexible and collaborative workspaces that reduce these agencies’ footprints by an average of 40 percent.
“For the past twelve years, we have been resilient in our resolve to rebuild and become stronger. Today’s announcement is another important step in rebuilding New York. I am proud to see that U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which had its offices destroyed by the horrific attacks of September 11th, 2001, will be returning to its historic home in Lower Manhattan,” said Congressman Jerrold Nadler (NY-10). “1 WTC will stand as a symbol that our great city and our great nation will never be defeated by those who seek to destroy our way of life. Appropriately, 1 WTC will be one of the world’s finest and most secure new office buildings and will house important offices of the federal government.”
This lease will help the federal government reduce its overall real estate needs in Manhattan as it occupies space in One World Trade Center. In preparation for the move, GSA will offer government-owned space at the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan to other tenants in the region, helping to reduce leased space.
GSA and the USACE will leave the Javits Federal Building and CBP will leave leased space in Midtown Manhattan.
“The GSA has been an important part of Lower Manhattan for many decades,” said Al Sanfilippo, World Trade Center Project Manager for The Durst Organization. “We look forward to working with the GSA, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Customs and Border Protection on their build-out and occupancy at One World Trade Center.”
“When GSA, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and Customs and Border Protection move into One World Trade Center, they will experience world-class transportation, shopping and dining options on the site, in addition to commercial office space in one of the safest and most environmentally friendly structures in the world,” said Port Authority Executive Director Pat Foye.
Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni said, “The GSA’s lease at One World Trade Center is essential in our effort to being one of the most successful commercial developments in the world, and a significant generator of jobs and economic activity.”
The Port Authority is owner and developer of One World Trade Center, the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere. The Durst Organization is an equity partner in the property and bears primary responsibility for leasing, operating and managing the building.
Federal Agencies to Move to One World Trade Center
The General Services Administration, Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers slated to move to World Trade Center in 2015
December 10, 2013
NEW YORK -- Today, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) announced that federal agencies will be moving to One World Trade Center in New York City. GSA plans to move its regional headquarters, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) New York District headquarters, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) New York Field Office to six floors of high-quality office space in the iconic building. This move marks the return of the federal government to the site and delivers on the federal government’s commitment to the redevelopment of the World Trade Center.
“We are excited to return to the World Trade Center Complex, which federal agencies have been a part of since 1973. From the day that the Port Authority started planning reconstruction, the federal government committed to remaining an important part of this building and the redevelopment of Lower Manhattan,” said GSA Administrator Dan Tangherlini. “Through this lease agreement, these three federal agencies will have the office space they need to serve the American people in providing goods and services, tackling vital infrastructure projects, and protecting our nation’s borders.”
"I once again applaud GSA and the federal government for committing to the rebuilding of Lower Manhattan,” said Senator Chuck Schumer. “After 9/11 many wondered if Downtown would become a ghost town, but it has flourished with new residents, stores and businesses.”
The agencies are planning to move in late 2015 to floors 50 through 55. Last year, GSA secured a lease agreement for approximately 270,000 feet of space for an initial term of 20 years. GSA will create flexible and collaborative workspaces that reduce these agencies’ footprints by an average of 40 percent.
“For the past twelve years, we have been resilient in our resolve to rebuild and become stronger. Today’s announcement is another important step in rebuilding New York. I am proud to see that U.S. Customs and Border Protection, which had its offices destroyed by the horrific attacks of September 11th, 2001, will be returning to its historic home in Lower Manhattan,” said Congressman Jerrold Nadler (NY-10). “1 WTC will stand as a symbol that our great city and our great nation will never be defeated by those who seek to destroy our way of life. Appropriately, 1 WTC will be one of the world’s finest and most secure new office buildings and will house important offices of the federal government.”
This lease will help the federal government reduce its overall real estate needs in Manhattan as it occupies space in One World Trade Center. In preparation for the move, GSA will offer government-owned space at the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan to other tenants in the region, helping to reduce leased space.
GSA and the USACE will leave the Javits Federal Building and CBP will leave leased space in Midtown Manhattan.
“The GSA has been an important part of Lower Manhattan for many decades,” said Al Sanfilippo, World Trade Center Project Manager for The Durst Organization. “We look forward to working with the GSA, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Customs and Border Protection on their build-out and occupancy at One World Trade Center.”
“When GSA, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and Customs and Border Protection move into One World Trade Center, they will experience world-class transportation, shopping and dining options on the site, in addition to commercial office space in one of the safest and most environmentally friendly structures in the world,” said Port Authority Executive Director Pat Foye.
Port Authority Deputy Executive Director Bill Baroni said, “The GSA’s lease at One World Trade Center is essential in our effort to being one of the most successful commercial developments in the world, and a significant generator of jobs and economic activity.”
The Port Authority is owner and developer of One World Trade Center, the tallest building in the Western Hemisphere. The Durst Organization is an equity partner in the property and bears primary responsibility for leasing, operating and managing the building.
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP. PAID $11.4 MILLION TO RESOLVE ALLEGATIONS OF IMPROPER CHARGES ON GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Monday, December 9, 2013
Northrop Grumman Corp. Pays $11.4 Million to Resolve Allegations That It Improperly Charged Costs to Government Contracts
The Justice Department announced today that Northrop Grumman Corp. has paid the United States $11.4 million to settle a government claim for penalties provided under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and False Claims Act allegations stemming from its failure to abide by a 2002 settlement agreement with the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). The government alleged that Northrop charged to its federal contracts certain costs for deferred compensation awards to key employees, even though it had promised not to do so as part of the earlier 2002 settlement.
“Federal contractors must abide by the obligations they accept when contracting with the government, including compliance with federal regulations restricting the types and amount of costs they can charge to their federal contracts,” said Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice’s Civil Division Stuart F. Delery. “The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing these fundamental obligations using every available tool, including FAR penalties assessed under the contract and, where appropriate, fraud-based counterclaims.”
Northrop had agreed in its 2002 settlement with DCMA that it would limit the amount of deferred compensation it would include in proposals for subsequent contracts. The government’s contracting officer found that Northrop had failed to honor this commitment and should be assessed a penalty equal to twice the amount of the unallowable costs claimed. Northrop challenged the decision in a complaint filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C. The Department of Justice responded to the suit with counterclaims alleging that in addition to the FAR penalties, Northrop also had violated the False Claims Act by passing along these unallowable costs to the government in indirect rates applicable to hundreds of 2004 contracts with the government. The government alleged that as a consequence of Northrop’s knowing misrepresentations, it was induced to pay more than $1.9 million in unallowable costs in thousands of vouchers and invoices.
The settlement was the result of a consolidated effort spearheaded by the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch in conjunction with the DCMA and the Defense Contract Audit Agency, Western Region Investigative Support Division. The claims settled by this agreement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability. The case is captioned Northrop Grumman Corporation v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 07-482C.
Monday, December 9, 2013
Northrop Grumman Corp. Pays $11.4 Million to Resolve Allegations That It Improperly Charged Costs to Government Contracts
The Justice Department announced today that Northrop Grumman Corp. has paid the United States $11.4 million to settle a government claim for penalties provided under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and False Claims Act allegations stemming from its failure to abide by a 2002 settlement agreement with the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). The government alleged that Northrop charged to its federal contracts certain costs for deferred compensation awards to key employees, even though it had promised not to do so as part of the earlier 2002 settlement.
“Federal contractors must abide by the obligations they accept when contracting with the government, including compliance with federal regulations restricting the types and amount of costs they can charge to their federal contracts,” said Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice’s Civil Division Stuart F. Delery. “The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing these fundamental obligations using every available tool, including FAR penalties assessed under the contract and, where appropriate, fraud-based counterclaims.”
Northrop had agreed in its 2002 settlement with DCMA that it would limit the amount of deferred compensation it would include in proposals for subsequent contracts. The government’s contracting officer found that Northrop had failed to honor this commitment and should be assessed a penalty equal to twice the amount of the unallowable costs claimed. Northrop challenged the decision in a complaint filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C. The Department of Justice responded to the suit with counterclaims alleging that in addition to the FAR penalties, Northrop also had violated the False Claims Act by passing along these unallowable costs to the government in indirect rates applicable to hundreds of 2004 contracts with the government. The government alleged that as a consequence of Northrop’s knowing misrepresentations, it was induced to pay more than $1.9 million in unallowable costs in thousands of vouchers and invoices.
The settlement was the result of a consolidated effort spearheaded by the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch in conjunction with the DCMA and the Defense Contract Audit Agency, Western Region Investigative Support Division. The claims settled by this agreement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability. The case is captioned Northrop Grumman Corporation v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 07-482C.
UNDERSTANDING A STAR'S SURFACE AND THE EXTREME FORCES OF NATURE
Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center
Neutron Stars’ X-ray
STORY FROM: LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY
Superbursts Mystify, Inspire Los Alamos Scientists
New neutrino cooling theory changes understanding of stars’ surface
LOS ALAMOS, N.M., Dec. 6, 2013—Massive X-ray superbursts near the surface of neutron stars are providing a unique window into the operation of fundamental forces of nature under extreme conditions.
“Scientists are intrigued by what exactly powers these massive explosions, and understanding this would yield important insights about the fundamental forces in nature, especially on the astronomical/cosmological scale,” said Peter Moller of Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Theoretical Division.
A neutron star is created during the death of a giant star more massive than the sun, compressed to a tiny size but with gravitational fields exceeded only by those of black holes. And in the intense, neutron-rich environment, nuclear reactions cause strong explosions that manifest themselves as X-ray bursts and the X-ray superbursts that are more rare and 1000 times more powerful.
Los Alamos researchers and former postdocs contributed to the paper “Strong neutrino cooling by cycles of electron capture and beta decay in neutron star crusts” that was published in Nature’s online edition of Dec. 1, 2013.
The importance of discovering an unknown energy source of titanic magnitude in the outermost layers of accreting neutron star surfaces is heightened by the unresolved issue of neutrino masses, the recent discovery of the Higgs boson and the fact that highly-neutron-rich nuclei with low-lying states enable “Weak Interactions,” prominent in stellar explosions. (The weak nuclear force is one of four fundamental sources, such as gravity, which interacts with the neutrinos; it is responsible for some types of radioactive decay.)
These hitherto celestially operative nuclei are expected to be within the experimental reach of the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB), a proposed user facility at Michigan State University funded by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science.
“The terrestrial experimental study of Weak Interactions in highly deformed, neutron-rich nuclei that FRIB can potentially provide is lent support by this ground-breaking Nature letter, since Los Alamos has been one of the few homes to theoretical studies of deformed nuclei and their role in astrophysics, and remains so to this day,” said Moller, who coauthored the paper with a multidisciplinary team including former Los Alamos postdoctoral researchers Sanjib Gupta, now a faculty member at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Ropar and Andrew Steiner, now a research assistant professor at INT, Seattle.
Previously a common assumption was that that the energy released in these radioactive decays would power the X-ray superburst explosions. This was based on simple models of nuclear beta-decay, sometimes postulating the same decay properties for all nuclei. It turns out, however, that it is of crucial importance to develop computer models that realistically describe the shape of each individual nuclide since they are not all spherical.
At Los Alamos scientists have carried out detailed calculations of the specific, individual beta-decay properties of thousands of nuclides, all with different decay properties, and created databases with these calculated properties.
The databases are then used at MSU as input into models that trace the decay pathways with the passage of time in accreting neutron stars and compute the total energy that is released in these reactions.
The new, unexpected result is that so much energy escapes by neutrino emission that the remaining energy released in the beta decays is not sufficient to ignite the X-ray superbursts that are observed. Thus the superbursts’ origin has now become a puzzle.
Solving the puzzle will require that we calculate in detail the consequences of shapes of neutron-rich nuclei, the authors said, and it requires that they simultaneously analyze the role played by neutrinos in neutron star X-ray bursts whose energetic magnitudes are exceeded only by explosions in the nova/supernova class.
The strong nuclear deformations that formed the basis for the neutrino cooling in neutron star crusts also play a role in a number of astrophysical settings, and have been taken into account in studies of supernovae explosions and subsequent collapses, funded by Los Alamos’ Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) programs.
Nuclear-structure databases valued worldwide
The large databases compiled by use of these and other nuclear-structure models are also used in several other Los Alamos programs. For example in modeling nuclear-reactor behavior, researchers have had to take into account beta-decay both because delayed neutrons are emitted, which governs the criticality of the reactor, and because it generates heat, just as in the neutron star.
Another current application is in nuclear non-proliferation programs. One method for detecting clandestine nuclear material in cargo shipments is to bombard cargoes with a small number of neutrons. If emission of delayed neutrons is detected after neutron bombardment, scientists have a sure signature of fissile nuclear material. The theoretical databases compiled at Los Alamos are not just used internally but are also part of nuclear-structure databases maintained by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The authors, an international team
The authors on the paper are Hendrik Schatz from MSU; Sanjib Gupta from IIT Ropar; Peter Mller from LANL; Mary Beard and Michael Wiescher from the University of Notre Dame; Edward F. Brown, Alex T. Deibel, Laurens Keek, and Rita Lau from MSU; Leandro R. Gasques from the Universidade de Sao Paulo; William Raphael Hix from Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the University of Tennessee; and Andrew W. Steiner from the University of Washington.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S STATEMENT ON THE VOLCKER RULE
FROM: THE WHITE HOUSE
Statement by the President on the Volcker Rule
Five years ago, a financial catastrophe on Wall Street was rapidly fueling a punishing recession on Main Street that ultimately cost millions of jobs and hurt families across the country. So as we prepared steps to rescue our economy and put Americans back to work, we also put in place tough rules of the road to make sure a crisis like that never happened again – rules that reward sound financial practices, allow honest innovation and strengthen the financial system’s ability to support job creation and durable economic growth.
As part of this Wall Street reform, we fought to include the Volcker Rule – a rule that makes sure big banks can’t make risky bets with their customer’s deposits. The Volcker Rule will make it illegal for firms to use government-insured money to make speculative bets that threaten the entire financial system, and demand a new era of accountability from CEOs who must sign off on their firm’s practices.
Our financial system will be safer and the American people are more secure because we fought to include this protection in the law. I thank Paul Volcker, a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve and advisor I trust, for helping to create this important safeguard. I also thank Secretary Lew and the regulators who worked diligently to finalize the rule by the end of this year as we called on them to do. I encourage Congress to give these regulators adequate funding to effectively and efficiently implement the rule, which will help protect hardworking families and business owners from future crisis, and restore everyone’s certainty and confidence in America’s dynamic financial system.
Statement by the President on the Volcker Rule
Five years ago, a financial catastrophe on Wall Street was rapidly fueling a punishing recession on Main Street that ultimately cost millions of jobs and hurt families across the country. So as we prepared steps to rescue our economy and put Americans back to work, we also put in place tough rules of the road to make sure a crisis like that never happened again – rules that reward sound financial practices, allow honest innovation and strengthen the financial system’s ability to support job creation and durable economic growth.
As part of this Wall Street reform, we fought to include the Volcker Rule – a rule that makes sure big banks can’t make risky bets with their customer’s deposits. The Volcker Rule will make it illegal for firms to use government-insured money to make speculative bets that threaten the entire financial system, and demand a new era of accountability from CEOs who must sign off on their firm’s practices.
Our financial system will be safer and the American people are more secure because we fought to include this protection in the law. I thank Paul Volcker, a former Chairman of the Federal Reserve and advisor I trust, for helping to create this important safeguard. I also thank Secretary Lew and the regulators who worked diligently to finalize the rule by the end of this year as we called on them to do. I encourage Congress to give these regulators adequate funding to effectively and efficiently implement the rule, which will help protect hardworking families and business owners from future crisis, and restore everyone’s certainty and confidence in America’s dynamic financial system.
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL FINISHES VISITS WITH TROOPS, NATIONS
FROM: U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT
Hagel Concludes Six-day Troop, Partner Nation Visits
By Karen Parrish
American Forces Press Service
DOHA, Qatar, Dec. 10, 2013 – Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel wrapped up a dual-purpose six-day trip to the Middle East and Southwest Asia here today.
As the secretary told troops at his last stop here, “The first priority and the real reason I was out here and spent time was to thank our troops, thank our men and women who do so much for all of us.”
Hagel also spent time engaging with allies and partners to assure them of the United States’ commitment to the region. He delivered a speech on the U.S. regional force posture in Manama, Bahrain. Hagel also spent two days in Afghanistan talking with Afghan military leaders and U.S. troops and ground commanders. And, he attended high-level meetings in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and here.
The secretary’s day in Qatar started at a palace and concluded at a semi-secret military facility. In the interim, Hagel and Qatari Defense Minister Maj. Gen. Hamad bin Ali Al Attiyah formally renewed the U.S.-Qatar Defense Cooperation Agreement. The agreement governs training, exercises and other cooperative interactions between U.S. and Qatari forces.
“This agreement promotes cooperation and is a testament to the longstanding security partnership enjoyed by the United States and Qatar,” Assistant Pentagon Press Secretary Carl Woog said in a written statement.
Woog added that the accord “underscores the close partnership between the United States and its [Gulf Cooperation Council] partners, which Secretary Hagel highlighted in his remarks at the Manama Dialogue this past weekend.”
The secretary’s first stop today was the Sea Palace, where he met with Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad, Qatar’s emir. He then moved on to the signing ceremony at Qatar’s government headquarters, and then paid a visit to U.S. and coalition forces at the Combined Air and Space Operations Center, located at Al Udeid Airbase, a Qatari base that hosts the U.S. command-and-control facility.
Addressing service members there -- his fourth troop talk this week -- Hagel thanked them and their families, offering his and President Barack Obama’s best wishes for the holiday season.
“I know occasionally you’re stuck in remote places and you wonder if anybody even knows where you are or who you are or what you’re doing,” the secretary said. “Let me assure you, we do.”
The center where they work coordinates military air operations in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility by integrating nearly 30 nations’ capabilities into a complete, real-time overview of mission execution. Hagel told troops that multinational approach is “where the world’s going.”
A senior defense official traveling with the secretary told reporters on background that the center might be unique in the degree of talent it brings together.
“[There’s] probably no other facility where you can go and see so many partners operating together at once,” the official said. “So that’s a story that is important, to reassure our allies and our partners.”
The official added that the center, which military leaders have in the past been reluctant to publicize because of regional sensitivities, makes it “visible to the world that we’re working together on common defense.”
Hagel told the airmen, sailors, soldiers and Marines at Al Udeid that the experience and training Gulf nation representatives receive there, along with integrated allied participation from the United Kingdom and Canada, furthers U.S. aims to build partner capacity.
“Our partners are going to be as important, and probably more so, than they’ve ever been, for our own national security [and] for their national security,” the secretary said, emphasizing a message he has delivered throughout his time in office.
“The more we can understand each other [and] work with each other, the better the world is going to be,” Hagel told the troops. “I’m particularly impressed with that part of what you’re doing here.”
The secretary began his trip telling delegates to the Manama Dialogue in Bahrain that the United States will maintain its troop posture in the region and that it seeks to strengthen coalitions there. He repeated that message today.
“We’re not going to get disconnected from our allies in this region,” he told reporters traveling with him before boarding the plane for Washington. “Our common interests are very clear here.”
Hagel Concludes Six-day Troop, Partner Nation Visits
By Karen Parrish
American Forces Press Service
DOHA, Qatar, Dec. 10, 2013 – Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel wrapped up a dual-purpose six-day trip to the Middle East and Southwest Asia here today.
As the secretary told troops at his last stop here, “The first priority and the real reason I was out here and spent time was to thank our troops, thank our men and women who do so much for all of us.”
Hagel also spent time engaging with allies and partners to assure them of the United States’ commitment to the region. He delivered a speech on the U.S. regional force posture in Manama, Bahrain. Hagel also spent two days in Afghanistan talking with Afghan military leaders and U.S. troops and ground commanders. And, he attended high-level meetings in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and here.
The secretary’s day in Qatar started at a palace and concluded at a semi-secret military facility. In the interim, Hagel and Qatari Defense Minister Maj. Gen. Hamad bin Ali Al Attiyah formally renewed the U.S.-Qatar Defense Cooperation Agreement. The agreement governs training, exercises and other cooperative interactions between U.S. and Qatari forces.
“This agreement promotes cooperation and is a testament to the longstanding security partnership enjoyed by the United States and Qatar,” Assistant Pentagon Press Secretary Carl Woog said in a written statement.
Woog added that the accord “underscores the close partnership between the United States and its [Gulf Cooperation Council] partners, which Secretary Hagel highlighted in his remarks at the Manama Dialogue this past weekend.”
The secretary’s first stop today was the Sea Palace, where he met with Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad, Qatar’s emir. He then moved on to the signing ceremony at Qatar’s government headquarters, and then paid a visit to U.S. and coalition forces at the Combined Air and Space Operations Center, located at Al Udeid Airbase, a Qatari base that hosts the U.S. command-and-control facility.
Addressing service members there -- his fourth troop talk this week -- Hagel thanked them and their families, offering his and President Barack Obama’s best wishes for the holiday season.
“I know occasionally you’re stuck in remote places and you wonder if anybody even knows where you are or who you are or what you’re doing,” the secretary said. “Let me assure you, we do.”
The center where they work coordinates military air operations in the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility by integrating nearly 30 nations’ capabilities into a complete, real-time overview of mission execution. Hagel told troops that multinational approach is “where the world’s going.”
A senior defense official traveling with the secretary told reporters on background that the center might be unique in the degree of talent it brings together.
“[There’s] probably no other facility where you can go and see so many partners operating together at once,” the official said. “So that’s a story that is important, to reassure our allies and our partners.”
The official added that the center, which military leaders have in the past been reluctant to publicize because of regional sensitivities, makes it “visible to the world that we’re working together on common defense.”
Hagel told the airmen, sailors, soldiers and Marines at Al Udeid that the experience and training Gulf nation representatives receive there, along with integrated allied participation from the United Kingdom and Canada, furthers U.S. aims to build partner capacity.
“Our partners are going to be as important, and probably more so, than they’ve ever been, for our own national security [and] for their national security,” the secretary said, emphasizing a message he has delivered throughout his time in office.
“The more we can understand each other [and] work with each other, the better the world is going to be,” Hagel told the troops. “I’m particularly impressed with that part of what you’re doing here.”
The secretary began his trip telling delegates to the Manama Dialogue in Bahrain that the United States will maintain its troop posture in the region and that it seeks to strengthen coalitions there. He repeated that message today.
“We’re not going to get disconnected from our allies in this region,” he told reporters traveling with him before boarding the plane for Washington. “Our common interests are very clear here.”
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT BEGINS PRINCIPAL AMBASSADOR FELLOWSHIP WITH SELECTION OF THREE PRINCIPALS
FROM: U.S. EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
Education Secretary Arne Duncan Launches Principal Ambassador Fellowship with Three Principals Selected for Inaugural Program
DECEMBER 9, 2013
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan today announced the names of three principals selected to participate in the U.S. Department of Education's first Principal Ambassador Fellows (PAFs) program. They are:
Sharif El-Mekki, Mastery Charter School - Shoemaker Campus, Philadelphia, Pa.;
Jill Levine, Normal Park Museum Magnet, Chattanooga, Tenn.; and,
Rachel Skerritt, Eastern Senior High School, Washington, DC.
The principals will serve from now until August 2014 as part-time employees to lend the perspective of school principals to the work of the Department. As the first PAFs, they will also help design the fellowship program for future participants.
"Each year I have the opportunity to visit schools and meet with leaders across the country who are committed to improving educational outcomes for our nation's students," said U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan. "Principals are a linchpin in the effort to improve student success and raise achievement at any scale, and I look forward to working with the 2013 Principal Ambassador Fellows to continue a thoughtful conversation on the best ways to sustain and support school leaders for the long haul. Their firsthand knowledge of the challenges principals face will help shape policy and programs across the country to better prepare our nation's children for college and career."
Beginning today, the PAFs are participating in a two-day summit at the Department's headquarters in Washington, DC to become more familiar with federal education policy and Department staff, as well as to begin exchanging ideas for enhancing communication between school and education policy leaders.
Launched last February, the PAF program was created in recognition of the vital role principals play in every aspect of a school's success – from instruction to the school environment to staff performance -- and to better connect their expertise and talent with education policymakers. The principal fellows, in turn, will have the opportunity to lend their perspective on the best ways to implement policies at the school level and engage local communities in the outcomes.
Principals El-Mekki, Levine, and Skerritt were selected from a pool of over 450 applicants who serve in a wide variety of traditional public and charter schools, as well as alternative and private schools. Applications came from principals in nearly every state working in a range of urban, rural and suburban settings. The Principal Ambassador Fellowship program will complement and build on the benefits of the Department's Teaching Ambassador Fellowship, now in its sixth year.
Education Secretary Arne Duncan Launches Principal Ambassador Fellowship with Three Principals Selected for Inaugural Program
DECEMBER 9, 2013
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan today announced the names of three principals selected to participate in the U.S. Department of Education's first Principal Ambassador Fellows (PAFs) program. They are:
Sharif El-Mekki, Mastery Charter School - Shoemaker Campus, Philadelphia, Pa.;
Jill Levine, Normal Park Museum Magnet, Chattanooga, Tenn.; and,
Rachel Skerritt, Eastern Senior High School, Washington, DC.
The principals will serve from now until August 2014 as part-time employees to lend the perspective of school principals to the work of the Department. As the first PAFs, they will also help design the fellowship program for future participants.
"Each year I have the opportunity to visit schools and meet with leaders across the country who are committed to improving educational outcomes for our nation's students," said U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan. "Principals are a linchpin in the effort to improve student success and raise achievement at any scale, and I look forward to working with the 2013 Principal Ambassador Fellows to continue a thoughtful conversation on the best ways to sustain and support school leaders for the long haul. Their firsthand knowledge of the challenges principals face will help shape policy and programs across the country to better prepare our nation's children for college and career."
Beginning today, the PAFs are participating in a two-day summit at the Department's headquarters in Washington, DC to become more familiar with federal education policy and Department staff, as well as to begin exchanging ideas for enhancing communication between school and education policy leaders.
Launched last February, the PAF program was created in recognition of the vital role principals play in every aspect of a school's success – from instruction to the school environment to staff performance -- and to better connect their expertise and talent with education policymakers. The principal fellows, in turn, will have the opportunity to lend their perspective on the best ways to implement policies at the school level and engage local communities in the outcomes.
Principals El-Mekki, Levine, and Skerritt were selected from a pool of over 450 applicants who serve in a wide variety of traditional public and charter schools, as well as alternative and private schools. Applications came from principals in nearly every state working in a range of urban, rural and suburban settings. The Principal Ambassador Fellowship program will complement and build on the benefits of the Department's Teaching Ambassador Fellowship, now in its sixth year.
DEPUTY AG COLE'S REMARKS AT DRUG POLICY REFORM CONFERENCE
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole Delivers Remarks at the Office of National Drug Control Policy Drug Policy Reform Conference
~ Monday, December 9, 2013
Thank you Gil for that introduction, for your partnership, and for your tireless work on drug prevention, drug treatment, and criminal justice strategies to break the cycle of drug use and crime. It is an honor to be among this dedicated and diverse group of professionals, policymakers and community leaders whose work promotes public health and safety. The agenda for this conference is both important and timely.
At the Department of Justice, we have undertaken a number of initiatives that address the law enforcement, public safety, and public health aspects of drug policy reform. Law enforcement plays an indispensable part in protecting communities from drug-related crime and violence. We know that there are dangerous people out there, running drug organizations and committing murders as part of the drug trade. Those individuals need to be incarcerated for the crimes they commit.
But there are also lower level drug defendants. Many suffer from their own drug abuse issues, and fall into a vicious cycle of drug abuse, criminal behavior, incarceration, and release. Too often, this cycle repeats. But recognizing that these lower level drug defendants don’t present the same public safety risks as the more serious criminals, our approach to dealing with the problems posed by drugs should not be one-size-fits-all. Instead, we should look to provide a range of responses that include the chance to overcome an addiction, provide the opportunity to get help before going to prison, and provide an off-ramp from the vicious cycle of drugs and crime.
This approach could result in the avoidance of a criminal conviction in the first place or it could positively affect the defendant’s ability to successfully reintegrate into society in years to come. It shifts the paradigm by providing treatment and services to individuals who are motivated and truly want to turn their lives around. The advantages to this approach are many: we not only assist individuals and their families, but we gain the ability to improve public safety and public health, directly benefiting our citizens and our society and more efficiently using taxpayer dollars.
Together with our state and local law enforcement partners in the field -- whose tireless work keeps our communities safe -- we continue to make real inroads in protecting public safety. Even within limited budgets, we have been able to focus our efforts on prevention and reentry, as well as enforcement. For example, through the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, the Department has brought state leaders, local stakeholders, private partners, and federal officials together to reform corrections and criminal justice practices. In recent years, no fewer than 17 states – supported by the Department, and led by governors and legislators of both parties – have directed funding away from prison construction and toward evidence-based programs and services that are designed to allow states to provide drug treatment and reduce recidivism. And the results are telling: many participating states have seen drops in recidivism rates and prison populations, while still maintaining public safety.
We are doing the same thing in the federal system because it has become clear that the trajectory of the federal criminal justice system, left unaltered, is unsustainable. Dollars are finite and the increasing costs of the federal prison and detention population drain funds from other enforcement priorities. They take dollars away from the Department’s prevention and recidivism reduction programs, and limi our capacity to fund other pressing criminal justice and national security priorities, such as hiring more agents and prosecutors or providing support to state and local partners to help in the fight against violent crime. Put simply, if we don’t find a way to reduce the federal prison population, public safety is going to suffer.
To try to address this problem, earlier this year the Department embarked on a review of its criminal justice policies. We made some specific changes to existing policy and strengthened our commitment to our prevailing goals. We modified the Justice Department’s charging policies so that certain low-level, non-violent drug defendants who have no significant ties to large-scale organizations, gangs, or cartels, will no longer be charged with offenses that impose mandatory minimum sentences. Instead, these low-level drug defendants will be charged with offenses for which the accompanying sentences are better suited to their individual conduct. By reserving the most severe prison terms for serious, high-level, or violent drug traffickers or kingpins, we enhance public safety.
The Department is also promoting and strengthening its diversion programs – such as drug treatment initiatives – to provide more effective alternatives to incarceration for some individuals. This summer, the Department issued a “best practices” memorandum to encourage more widespread adoption by prosecutors of programs such as drug courts, specialty courts and other treatment courts.
And to make sure these programs are a top priority, every U.S. Attorney now must designate a Prevention and Reentry Coordinator in his or her district to ensure that this work is done.
In addition, the Bureau of Prisons has expanded capacity for its Residential Drug Abuse Program, which provides important treatment to inmates. This expansion will provide more non-violent inmates with the opportunity to deal with their drug and mental health issues that are so often at the root of criminal behavior, so they can successfully re-enter and become productive members of society.
Our reforms also include changes in the Department's framework for considering compassionate release requests. We expanded the medical criteria that can be considered and announced new criteria including allowing consideration for elderly inmates and certain inmates who are the only possible caregiver for their dependents.
And finally I want to talk about the Federal Interagency Reentry Council. Created by the Attorney General, it brings together over 20 federal departments and agencies to focus an all of government approach to helping those coming out of prison. This collaboration works to reduce barriers to housing, employment and education and increase access to healthcare and treatment for those re-entering society. And this collaboration has borne fruit – not only by increasing the chances of successful re-entry for those leaving federal prison, but also helping incarcerated veterans get back on track, assisting children of the incarcerated, and reducing the unnecessary collateral consequences of a conviction. Across the federal government, we are partnering to strengthen communities, reduce recidivism, and improve public safety.
This morning, I’ve discussed several steps the Department has taken to build upon successes and make changes to our criminal justice system. In light of our limited resources, we have had to take a hard look at our policies and our priorities, and have recommitted to maintaining public safety in a manner that is both smart and efficient when battling drug related crime and the conditions that breed it.
As we move forward with these and other reforms, we will continue to stand and work alongside you, drawing upon your experience, relying on your expertise, and depending on your engagement to refine and strengthen each new proposal. Today’s conference -- and the exchange of ideas it will foster among our Nation’s drug policy experts -- is a necessary and important step in this process.
Thank you.
Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole Delivers Remarks at the Office of National Drug Control Policy Drug Policy Reform Conference
~ Monday, December 9, 2013
Thank you Gil for that introduction, for your partnership, and for your tireless work on drug prevention, drug treatment, and criminal justice strategies to break the cycle of drug use and crime. It is an honor to be among this dedicated and diverse group of professionals, policymakers and community leaders whose work promotes public health and safety. The agenda for this conference is both important and timely.
At the Department of Justice, we have undertaken a number of initiatives that address the law enforcement, public safety, and public health aspects of drug policy reform. Law enforcement plays an indispensable part in protecting communities from drug-related crime and violence. We know that there are dangerous people out there, running drug organizations and committing murders as part of the drug trade. Those individuals need to be incarcerated for the crimes they commit.
But there are also lower level drug defendants. Many suffer from their own drug abuse issues, and fall into a vicious cycle of drug abuse, criminal behavior, incarceration, and release. Too often, this cycle repeats. But recognizing that these lower level drug defendants don’t present the same public safety risks as the more serious criminals, our approach to dealing with the problems posed by drugs should not be one-size-fits-all. Instead, we should look to provide a range of responses that include the chance to overcome an addiction, provide the opportunity to get help before going to prison, and provide an off-ramp from the vicious cycle of drugs and crime.
This approach could result in the avoidance of a criminal conviction in the first place or it could positively affect the defendant’s ability to successfully reintegrate into society in years to come. It shifts the paradigm by providing treatment and services to individuals who are motivated and truly want to turn their lives around. The advantages to this approach are many: we not only assist individuals and their families, but we gain the ability to improve public safety and public health, directly benefiting our citizens and our society and more efficiently using taxpayer dollars.
Together with our state and local law enforcement partners in the field -- whose tireless work keeps our communities safe -- we continue to make real inroads in protecting public safety. Even within limited budgets, we have been able to focus our efforts on prevention and reentry, as well as enforcement. For example, through the Justice Reinvestment Initiative, the Department has brought state leaders, local stakeholders, private partners, and federal officials together to reform corrections and criminal justice practices. In recent years, no fewer than 17 states – supported by the Department, and led by governors and legislators of both parties – have directed funding away from prison construction and toward evidence-based programs and services that are designed to allow states to provide drug treatment and reduce recidivism. And the results are telling: many participating states have seen drops in recidivism rates and prison populations, while still maintaining public safety.
We are doing the same thing in the federal system because it has become clear that the trajectory of the federal criminal justice system, left unaltered, is unsustainable. Dollars are finite and the increasing costs of the federal prison and detention population drain funds from other enforcement priorities. They take dollars away from the Department’s prevention and recidivism reduction programs, and limi our capacity to fund other pressing criminal justice and national security priorities, such as hiring more agents and prosecutors or providing support to state and local partners to help in the fight against violent crime. Put simply, if we don’t find a way to reduce the federal prison population, public safety is going to suffer.
To try to address this problem, earlier this year the Department embarked on a review of its criminal justice policies. We made some specific changes to existing policy and strengthened our commitment to our prevailing goals. We modified the Justice Department’s charging policies so that certain low-level, non-violent drug defendants who have no significant ties to large-scale organizations, gangs, or cartels, will no longer be charged with offenses that impose mandatory minimum sentences. Instead, these low-level drug defendants will be charged with offenses for which the accompanying sentences are better suited to their individual conduct. By reserving the most severe prison terms for serious, high-level, or violent drug traffickers or kingpins, we enhance public safety.
The Department is also promoting and strengthening its diversion programs – such as drug treatment initiatives – to provide more effective alternatives to incarceration for some individuals. This summer, the Department issued a “best practices” memorandum to encourage more widespread adoption by prosecutors of programs such as drug courts, specialty courts and other treatment courts.
And to make sure these programs are a top priority, every U.S. Attorney now must designate a Prevention and Reentry Coordinator in his or her district to ensure that this work is done.
In addition, the Bureau of Prisons has expanded capacity for its Residential Drug Abuse Program, which provides important treatment to inmates. This expansion will provide more non-violent inmates with the opportunity to deal with their drug and mental health issues that are so often at the root of criminal behavior, so they can successfully re-enter and become productive members of society.
Our reforms also include changes in the Department's framework for considering compassionate release requests. We expanded the medical criteria that can be considered and announced new criteria including allowing consideration for elderly inmates and certain inmates who are the only possible caregiver for their dependents.
And finally I want to talk about the Federal Interagency Reentry Council. Created by the Attorney General, it brings together over 20 federal departments and agencies to focus an all of government approach to helping those coming out of prison. This collaboration works to reduce barriers to housing, employment and education and increase access to healthcare and treatment for those re-entering society. And this collaboration has borne fruit – not only by increasing the chances of successful re-entry for those leaving federal prison, but also helping incarcerated veterans get back on track, assisting children of the incarcerated, and reducing the unnecessary collateral consequences of a conviction. Across the federal government, we are partnering to strengthen communities, reduce recidivism, and improve public safety.
This morning, I’ve discussed several steps the Department has taken to build upon successes and make changes to our criminal justice system. In light of our limited resources, we have had to take a hard look at our policies and our priorities, and have recommitted to maintaining public safety in a manner that is both smart and efficient when battling drug related crime and the conditions that breed it.
As we move forward with these and other reforms, we will continue to stand and work alongside you, drawing upon your experience, relying on your expertise, and depending on your engagement to refine and strengthen each new proposal. Today’s conference -- and the exchange of ideas it will foster among our Nation’s drug policy experts -- is a necessary and important step in this process.
Thank you.
CFTC CHAIRMAN GENSLER'S STATEMENT BEFORE FINANCIAL STABILITY OVERSIGHT COUNCIL
FROM: COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Statement of Chairman Gary Gensler before the Financial Stability Oversight Council
December 9, 2013
I want to thank Secretary Lew for his kind words.
Five years ago when President-elect Obama asked me to serve, the economy was in a free fall. Americans were paying for the crisis with their jobs, their pensions and their homes.
Our financial system and our financial regulatory system had failed the American public.
Since then, the dedicated staffs of the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s (FSOC) member agencies have been hard at work to ensure finance better serves the economy.
Finance is but one part of our interconnected economy. The vast majority of opportunity, growth and innovation are outside of finance. In fact, 94 percent of private sector jobs are not in finance.
Finance best serves the economy when markets operate under common-sense rules of the road.
President Roosevelt understood this when he, along with Congress, transformed markets. Their reforms – enhancing transparency, access, and competition in the futures and securities markets and overhauling the nation’s banking laws – established the foundation for the U.S. economic growth engine for decades.
Five years ago President Obama and Congress faced similar challenges in the aftermath of this era’s financial crisis – how to modernize finance’s rules of the road so they work best for the public.
Through Dodd-Frank reforms, many of which now have been implemented by FSOC member agencies, much progress has been made.
First, at the heart of reform is ensuring that the largest financial institutions in our free-market system have the freedom to fail. That was true for my dad’s small family business in Baltimore. Nobody would have bailed him out if he didn’t make payroll each Friday.
That’s why I was pleased last month when Moody’s removed the uplift in credit ratings of the largest bank holding companies that had come from perceived government support. This is a real testament to the work of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Reserve, under the leadership of Chairmen Martin Gruenberg and Ben Bernanke and Governor Daniel Tarullo.
Second, due to the U.S. banking regulators working hand-in-hand with international regulators, tougher capital and liquidity standards are becoming a reality. Further, annual stress tests of large banks determine if capital levels are sufficient.
Third, we now have an agency – with the energetic leadership of Richard Cordray – whose key mission is ensuring consumers are protected from predatory lending practices and get a fair deal on financial products from mortgages to credit cards.
Fourth, thanks to the leadership of Chairs Mary Schapiro and Mary Jo White at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), we now have real transparency into the hedge fund world and are addressing the risks of potential runs on money market funds.
Fifth, the swaps market, which was at the heart of the crisis, has been completely transformed. Bright lights of transparency now are shining on the $380 trillion market. The public can see the price and volume of every transaction, like a modern-day tickertape. Regulated trading platforms are trading a quarter of a trillion dollars in swaps each day. And more than 70 percent of the interest rate swaps market is now in central clearing – lowering risk and bringing access to everyone wishing to compete.
Sixth, each of us has been vigorous cops on the beat going after bad actors in the markets. The CFTC, working with the Department of Justice and the SEC, exposed the pervasive rigging of interest rate benchmarks and changed the entire public debate regarding LIBOR and other benchmarks.
I particularly want to thank the members of this council for the strong public policy statements included in the FSOC annual report calling for international regulators and market participants to find and transition to a replacement for LIBOR.
Lastly, is the benefit of this council. Through the leadership of Secretaries Geithner and Lew, and the collaboration of everyone around this table, we have become a real deliberative body. We have enhanced the lines of communication between the agencies, whether it’s the day to day assessing of risks in our financial system or working through the reform agenda. This week, for example, the Volcker Rule will be finalized based on our collaborative work.
Taken as a whole, the Dodd-Frank common-sense rules of the road have been truly transformative. These reforms are helping finance better serve the rest of the economy.
Once again, I want to thank all of you. It has been a real honor to serve with each of you on this council. It’s also an honor to share my last FSOC meeting with my fellow outgoing council member and seatmate, Ben Bernanke.
Statement of Chairman Gary Gensler before the Financial Stability Oversight Council
December 9, 2013
I want to thank Secretary Lew for his kind words.
Five years ago when President-elect Obama asked me to serve, the economy was in a free fall. Americans were paying for the crisis with their jobs, their pensions and their homes.
Our financial system and our financial regulatory system had failed the American public.
Since then, the dedicated staffs of the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s (FSOC) member agencies have been hard at work to ensure finance better serves the economy.
Finance is but one part of our interconnected economy. The vast majority of opportunity, growth and innovation are outside of finance. In fact, 94 percent of private sector jobs are not in finance.
Finance best serves the economy when markets operate under common-sense rules of the road.
President Roosevelt understood this when he, along with Congress, transformed markets. Their reforms – enhancing transparency, access, and competition in the futures and securities markets and overhauling the nation’s banking laws – established the foundation for the U.S. economic growth engine for decades.
Five years ago President Obama and Congress faced similar challenges in the aftermath of this era’s financial crisis – how to modernize finance’s rules of the road so they work best for the public.
Through Dodd-Frank reforms, many of which now have been implemented by FSOC member agencies, much progress has been made.
First, at the heart of reform is ensuring that the largest financial institutions in our free-market system have the freedom to fail. That was true for my dad’s small family business in Baltimore. Nobody would have bailed him out if he didn’t make payroll each Friday.
That’s why I was pleased last month when Moody’s removed the uplift in credit ratings of the largest bank holding companies that had come from perceived government support. This is a real testament to the work of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Reserve, under the leadership of Chairmen Martin Gruenberg and Ben Bernanke and Governor Daniel Tarullo.
Second, due to the U.S. banking regulators working hand-in-hand with international regulators, tougher capital and liquidity standards are becoming a reality. Further, annual stress tests of large banks determine if capital levels are sufficient.
Third, we now have an agency – with the energetic leadership of Richard Cordray – whose key mission is ensuring consumers are protected from predatory lending practices and get a fair deal on financial products from mortgages to credit cards.
Fourth, thanks to the leadership of Chairs Mary Schapiro and Mary Jo White at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), we now have real transparency into the hedge fund world and are addressing the risks of potential runs on money market funds.
Fifth, the swaps market, which was at the heart of the crisis, has been completely transformed. Bright lights of transparency now are shining on the $380 trillion market. The public can see the price and volume of every transaction, like a modern-day tickertape. Regulated trading platforms are trading a quarter of a trillion dollars in swaps each day. And more than 70 percent of the interest rate swaps market is now in central clearing – lowering risk and bringing access to everyone wishing to compete.
Sixth, each of us has been vigorous cops on the beat going after bad actors in the markets. The CFTC, working with the Department of Justice and the SEC, exposed the pervasive rigging of interest rate benchmarks and changed the entire public debate regarding LIBOR and other benchmarks.
I particularly want to thank the members of this council for the strong public policy statements included in the FSOC annual report calling for international regulators and market participants to find and transition to a replacement for LIBOR.
Lastly, is the benefit of this council. Through the leadership of Secretaries Geithner and Lew, and the collaboration of everyone around this table, we have become a real deliberative body. We have enhanced the lines of communication between the agencies, whether it’s the day to day assessing of risks in our financial system or working through the reform agenda. This week, for example, the Volcker Rule will be finalized based on our collaborative work.
Taken as a whole, the Dodd-Frank common-sense rules of the road have been truly transformative. These reforms are helping finance better serve the rest of the economy.
Once again, I want to thank all of you. It has been a real honor to serve with each of you on this council. It’s also an honor to share my last FSOC meeting with my fellow outgoing council member and seatmate, Ben Bernanke.
FDA APPROVES NEW DRUG FOR TREATING CHRONIC HEPATITIS C
FROM: U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
For Immediate Release: Dec. 6, 2013
FDA approves Sovaldi for chronic hepatitis C
Drug is third with breakthrough therapy designation to receive FDA approval
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today approved Sovaldi (sofosbuvir) to treat chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Sovaldi is the first drug that has demonstrated safety and efficacy to treat certain types of HCV infection without the need for co-administration of interferon.
“Today’s approval represents a significant shift in the treatment paradigm for some patients with chronic hepatitis C,” said Edward Cox, M.D., director of the Office of Antimicrobial Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Sovaldi is the second drug approved by the FDA in the past two weeks to treat chronic HCV infection. On November 22, the FDA approved Olysio (simeprevir).
Hepatitis C is a viral disease that causes inflammation of the liver that can lead to diminished liver function or liver failure. Most people infected with HCV have no symptoms of the disease until liver damage becomes apparent, which may take several years. Some people with chronic HCV infection develop scarring and poor liver function (cirrhosis) over many years, which can lead to complications such as bleeding, jaundice (yellowish eyes or skin), fluid accumulation in the abdomen, infections or liver cancer. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 3.2 million Americans are infected with HCV.
Sovaldi is a nucleotide analog inhibitor that blocks a specific protein needed by the hepatitis C virus to replicate. Sovaldi is to be used as a component of a combination antiviral treatment regimen for chronic HCV infection. There are several different types of HCV infection. Depending on the type of HCV infection a patient has, the treatment regimen could include Sovaldi and ribavirin or Sovaldi, ribavirin and peginterferon-alfa. Ribavirin and peginterferon-alfa are two drugs also used to treat HCV infection.
Sovaldi’s effectiveness was evaluated in six clinical trials consisting of 1,947 participants who had not previously received treatment for their disease (treatment-naive) or had not responded to previous treatment (treatment-experienced), including participants co-infected with HCV and HIV. The trials were designed to measure whether the hepatitis C virus was no longer detected in the blood at least 12 weeks after finishing treatment (sustained virologic response), suggesting a participant’s HCV infection has been cured.
Results from all clinical trials showed a treatment regimen containing Sovaldi was effective in treating multiple types of the hepatitis C virus. Additionally, Sovaldi demonstrated efficacy in participants who could not tolerate or take an interferon-based treatment regimen and in participants with liver cancer awaiting liver transplantation, addressing unmet medical needs in these populations.
The most common side effects reported in clinical study participants treated with Sovaldi and ribavirin were fatigue and headache. In participants treated with Sovaldi, ribavirin and peginterferon-alfa, the most common side effects reported were fatigue, headache, nausea, insomnia and anemia.
Sovaldi is the third drug with breakthrough therapy designation to receive FDA approval. The FDA can designate a drug as a breakthrough therapy at the request of the sponsor if preliminary clinical evidence indicates the drug may demonstrate a substantial improvement over available therapies for patients with serious or life-threatening diseases. Sovaldi was reviewed under the FDA’s priority review program, which provides for an expedited review of drugs that treat serious conditions and, if approved, would provide significant improvement in safety or effectiveness.
Sovaldi is marketed by Gilead, based in Foster City, Calif. Olysio is marketed by Raritan, N.J.-based Janssen Pharmaceuticals.
For Immediate Release: Dec. 6, 2013
FDA approves Sovaldi for chronic hepatitis C
Drug is third with breakthrough therapy designation to receive FDA approval
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today approved Sovaldi (sofosbuvir) to treat chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Sovaldi is the first drug that has demonstrated safety and efficacy to treat certain types of HCV infection without the need for co-administration of interferon.
“Today’s approval represents a significant shift in the treatment paradigm for some patients with chronic hepatitis C,” said Edward Cox, M.D., director of the Office of Antimicrobial Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Sovaldi is the second drug approved by the FDA in the past two weeks to treat chronic HCV infection. On November 22, the FDA approved Olysio (simeprevir).
Hepatitis C is a viral disease that causes inflammation of the liver that can lead to diminished liver function or liver failure. Most people infected with HCV have no symptoms of the disease until liver damage becomes apparent, which may take several years. Some people with chronic HCV infection develop scarring and poor liver function (cirrhosis) over many years, which can lead to complications such as bleeding, jaundice (yellowish eyes or skin), fluid accumulation in the abdomen, infections or liver cancer. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 3.2 million Americans are infected with HCV.
Sovaldi is a nucleotide analog inhibitor that blocks a specific protein needed by the hepatitis C virus to replicate. Sovaldi is to be used as a component of a combination antiviral treatment regimen for chronic HCV infection. There are several different types of HCV infection. Depending on the type of HCV infection a patient has, the treatment regimen could include Sovaldi and ribavirin or Sovaldi, ribavirin and peginterferon-alfa. Ribavirin and peginterferon-alfa are two drugs also used to treat HCV infection.
Sovaldi’s effectiveness was evaluated in six clinical trials consisting of 1,947 participants who had not previously received treatment for their disease (treatment-naive) or had not responded to previous treatment (treatment-experienced), including participants co-infected with HCV and HIV. The trials were designed to measure whether the hepatitis C virus was no longer detected in the blood at least 12 weeks after finishing treatment (sustained virologic response), suggesting a participant’s HCV infection has been cured.
Results from all clinical trials showed a treatment regimen containing Sovaldi was effective in treating multiple types of the hepatitis C virus. Additionally, Sovaldi demonstrated efficacy in participants who could not tolerate or take an interferon-based treatment regimen and in participants with liver cancer awaiting liver transplantation, addressing unmet medical needs in these populations.
The most common side effects reported in clinical study participants treated with Sovaldi and ribavirin were fatigue and headache. In participants treated with Sovaldi, ribavirin and peginterferon-alfa, the most common side effects reported were fatigue, headache, nausea, insomnia and anemia.
Sovaldi is the third drug with breakthrough therapy designation to receive FDA approval. The FDA can designate a drug as a breakthrough therapy at the request of the sponsor if preliminary clinical evidence indicates the drug may demonstrate a substantial improvement over available therapies for patients with serious or life-threatening diseases. Sovaldi was reviewed under the FDA’s priority review program, which provides for an expedited review of drugs that treat serious conditions and, if approved, would provide significant improvement in safety or effectiveness.
Sovaldi is marketed by Gilead, based in Foster City, Calif. Olysio is marketed by Raritan, N.J.-based Janssen Pharmaceuticals.
SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT AMERICAN JEWISH JOINT DISTRIBUTION COMMITTEE 100TH ANNIVERSARY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks at the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee's 100th Anniversary Celebration
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
National Women in the Arts Museum
Washington, DC
December 9, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you. Thank you very, very much. I much appreciate your welcome. I will inform you that Winston Churchill once said the only reason people give a standing ovation is they desperately need an excuse to shift their underwear. (Laughter.) But I will believe that you had a much more noble goal. (Laughter.)
Stuart, thank you. Stu, you are a marvel. And I tell you, I’m honored to be introduced by Stu Eizenstat. He is a great, really one of our sort of unsung heroes and treasures in our country for the remarkable work that he has always done and – (applause). Absolutely. I got to know him pretty well. His pro bono work that he’s done for years to help Holocaust victims and their families be able to recover the assets that were taken from them during the horrors of World War II is one mark. But I’ve seen him in his roles at the White House with the Carter Administration, the Clinton Administration.
And I will never forget when I was in Kyoto working on the global climate change treaty, Stu came flying in, literally, I think from Switzerland, where he’d been negotiating to pick up the negotiation responsibilities, which had, frankly, not been thoroughly and properly prepared in an appropriate way. And he kind of picked up this negotiation at half capacity, and I was stunned by his negotiating skill, his ability, and he put together an agreement – it’s now a matter of history that we had a difficult Senate that never did what it should have done, but this guy did what he was supposed to do and he did it brilliantly. And we are lucky to have public servants like him, so I thank him again for his great work. (Applause.)
President Penny Blumenstein, thank you very much. She was telling me back there that nobody gets her name right. I told her I will. (Laughter.) But she says she’s called Bloomberg and Blumenthal and a whole bunch of things whenever she gets introduced. Alan Gill, thank you for your great stewardship as CEO. And to every single one of you, thank you for an extraordinary job as civic-minded, good citizens of our nation who recognize a global responsibility. It’s an honor for me to be to be here to help you mark 100 years of the Jewish Joint Distribution Committee. And I said to Penny when I came in here, I said, “You don’t look 100 years old.” She said, “I feel it some days.” (Laughter.) So we thank her for her commitment to this effort. I know what it takes to do this.
Some of you may know that the bond between the State Department – and Stuart referred to this a little bit in his introduction of me. The bond between the State Department and the JDC has been a longtime association and it runs deep. Stu described to you how Henry Morgenthau had a profound impact on the startup and what happened, and it responded to the needs of Jews at that time who were locked in the struggle of the Ottoman Palestine and Eastern Europe. And ever since then, it has performed – you have performed – brilliantly.
Today, you work alongside the State Department, USAID, and Congress, and embassies on a worldwide basis – the 70 nations that Stuart mentioned a minute ago – is really quite extraordinary. We collaborate superbly on infrastructure programs that foster economic development and growth in communities in Africa, Europe, Middle East, and Latin America. We work side by side and provide humanitarian relief. And again, Stu talked for a moment about what happened. I am heading to the Philippines the day after tomorrow and to Vietnam, where we are engaged. But obviously, Typhoon Haiyan has left just stunning devastation across the Philippines, and your relief effort – JDC effort – in a short span of time has already contributed $1.4 million in aid to that effort.
We, the United States – I speak for President Obama, who as you all know has gone off to Nelson Mandela’s funeral – I gather tomorrow you will hear from the Vice President and then later from Jack Lew, Secretary Lew. But all of us are deeply, deeply grateful for the incredible sense of responsibility that is manifested in your generosity and in your commitment in order to make a difference around the world. You have provided relief to millions of people from every corner of the globe, all of whom are in desperate need of a helping hand. And part of the mission – and I should thank, actually, Chair Andrew Tisch, who – where did Andrew go? He’s sitting somewhere. Andrew, thank you for your great friendship to me and many years of involvement in this kind of thing.
But the ways in which all of you in the doing of this also support Jewish life around the world. Throughout history, of course, but particularly right now you are involved in ways that connect young Jewish men and women to their communities and that inspire them to address social challenges. The job training programs that you’re creating to address unemployment, the steps that you’re taking to alleviate hunger and poverty among the neediest Jews in the world, including in Israel, where despite the stunning growth and amazing prosperity that has been reached by so many, still sees about 25 percent of the country living under the poverty line. And the contributions that you continue to make to the Jewish community are changing lives everywhere.
I want to say a few words to you about another way in which hopefully we in the government are trying to also preserve and nurture Jewish life. And I’m talking about Jewish life in the state of Israel. I know this is not a political group in any way, but it would be a shameful omission if I didn’t honor the fact that everybody here obviously comes here with a passion for the preservation of life in Israel, and more importantly for the long term, the possibility of peace and of stability.
We are deeply committed to the security of Israel and of the well-being of the Jewish people by virtue of that. (Applause.) From the support that we’ve provided as a nation before I was in government, shortly after I’d come back from Vietnam, from the support we provided during the Yom Kippur War in 1973, to the hundreds of millions that we have contributed to help develop weapons systems like the Iron Dome as well as the military technology that we provide the Israelis with today, the United States has long viewed Israel’s security as absolutely fundamental to our own.
So when it comes to the range of issues that face the region today, there can be, in my judgment, no doubt – there should be no doubt – about where the United States stands. We stand squarely beside our Israeli friends and allies, and that bond is ironclad; it will never be broken. (Applause.)
This morning, I talked to Prime Minister Netanyahu. Bibi and I know each other really well now. We’ve known each other for about 25 years, maybe even 30. I knew him when he was in Cambridge, Massachusetts on an interval in politics that some of us have had occasionally. And I have visited with him many, many times, both when he was in office and out of office, and likewise for me. I just got back from what I think was my eighth trip to Israel since becoming Secretary of State, and I leave the day after tomorrow and I will be having dinner with Bibi again on Thursday night. So this is a commute, folks, nowadays. (Laughter.)
I want you to know that every single time that big blue and white plane that lugs me over there comes in for a landing at Ben Gurion Airport, I truly feel in my gut, for reasons of friendship as well as affiliation that Stu mentioned, how precious and how vulnerable and how real the security challenge of Israel is. It’s an extraordinary nation which, when you fly over it and you see what has been blooming out of a desert and built in this short span of time, is absolutely stunning. And when you compare GDPs and per capita incomes and other things to other nations that were in the same place in 1948 and 1950 and ’52 and see the differential today, it tells you a remarkable story of accomplishment and capacity.
I want to make it clear today that we are deeply committed going forward to honoring the bond and honoring those security needs. And I want to reiterate something that President Obama and I have said many times, and I underscored last week when I was in Israel and I underscored again two days ago when I spoke to the Saban Forum here in Washington. And that is: We will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon – not now, not ever. And I promise you that. (Applause.)
Now, I know that some people are apprehensive and wonder sort of have we somehow stumbled into something or created something where in fact the Iranians have pulled the wool over our eyes and we’re going to not know what they’re doing. Let me just say to you very simply: I’ve spent, as Stu said, almost 30 years in the Senate. I chaired the Foreign Relations Committee. I understand military and security issues. And I understand the fundamental basics of – as does the President and most of the people around us – what is necessary for a nation to prove it has a peaceful nuclear program. And I can’t stand here today and tell you that the Iranians are going to do what they need to do. But I do know that Israel is actually safer today than it was the day before we made the deal, because in this deal they have to destroy all of their 20 percent enriched uranium; they have to hold their 3.5 percent low enriched at the current level; they are not allowed to install any new centrifuges; they have to allow us daily inspection inside that secret mountaintop, Fordow; they have to allow us daily inspection in Natanz in the nuclear plant; they have to allow us regular inspection in the heavy water reactor that has the potential of plutonium; they are not allowed to install any further nuclear components into that construction site; they cannot test additional fuel; and we are allowed to go into the storage sites and manufacturing facilities of all of their centrifuge production facilities – all things we couldn’t do before we made this first step agreement.
Because of what we’ve done while we negotiate the final comprehensive agreement, which is what Bibi wanted in the first place, we will actually be setting their program backwards, expanding the amount of time that it might take if they were to try to break out. That means we have more time to respond, more time to know what is going on. That is why I can say to you in good conscience I believe Israel is safer today than it was before. Now, does that mean this will be successful in the long run? I don’t know. But here’s what else I do know: If we aren’t successful, if we get to the end of these six months and they don’t do the simple things you need to do to prove your program is peaceful, then we will have kept united the P5+1, we will have shown the global community our bona fides to attempt to give them an opportunity through diplomacy to do what they need to do, and we will not have taken any sanction off the table. We can ratchet them up when we want. We will go back to Congress, we will ratchet them up, we will ask for additional sanctions. And if needs be, if we cannot get this done on time, we will take no other option, military or otherwise, off the table. So I am confident that we are going to approach this with a view to making Israel more secure.
Let me also say to all of you there are other issues that go to Israel’s existential security, and none more so than the ticking time bomb of demographics in the region and the realities of the de-legitimization campaign that has been taking place for some period of time. I believe, as President Obama does, that Israel will be far more secure if we can also put to test the possibilities of the two-state solution. And so we will continue to attempt to do that despite the skepticism, despite the cynicism in some quarters, that that day can never come where you would actually achieve a two-state solution with two peoples living side by side in peace and security.
I believe, though, that it remains a possibility. And it seems to me that for all of you, for anyone who cares about the security of Israel – and all of you do – for anyone who cares about the future, as I know all of you do, and engaged in the activities you are here at the JDC, you must also believe that peace is possible. And as these tough but very critical negotiations continue, I hope that you will understand we will continue to consult, we will continue to work closely, we will do everything in our power to make sure that our friends in Israel are comfortable with the direction we’re moving in and are part of it.
And I talk to Bibi at least two or three times a week. We are hand in hand and mind in mind trying to figure out how to do this in a way that protects the security of Israel, that establishes the sovereignty and dignity of an independent and viable Palestinian state. If it was easy, it would’ve done a long time ago. It isn’t. But I think the effort is worth it.
And I know why it’s worth it. I spent a lot of time – when I first went to Israel in 1986, I spent an entire week, and I traveled everywhere. And this wonderful fellow by the name of Yadin Roman, who’s the publisher of Eretz Israel magazine, was my guide and took me around. And he was brilliant, and he knew the history of everything and told me all the details of everything I was seeing. And I went up to Kiryat Shmona, and I went down into a bomb shelter where kids had to run and side from the Katyusha rockets. And I visited all the different religious sites – Christian and Muslim and Jewish, obviously. Went to the Wailing Wall, left my note, which I’m still working on. And visited – tried to swim in the Dead Sea, cloaked in black mud, everything else. And climbed Masada, which is one of the most stirring things I’ve ever done in my life, because we had this huge debate on top of Masada. And Yadin provoked us, purposefully. And he gave us the whole history of Josephus Flavius and told us all the writings in this great contentious debate about had these Jews really died there, had they in fact been there at this moment, or did they escape because they didn’t find a whole lot of skeletons, and people were wondering what happened.
Well, we had this long debate. And I’ll tell you, even before that, I had this marvelous experience of flying a jet out of (inaudible) air base. I’m a pilot. I love to fly. And I persuaded this ace colonel from the war to take me up in a jet, and he got it cleared in Tel Aviv. Somehow they let me do it. And they won’t let me do it now, but it was fun then. And I remember taking off, and he said, “Okay, it’s your airplane the minute you get up in the air.” I went up above the air, and I remember he – I was turning, and he said, “Senator, you better turn faster; you’re going over Egypt.” And so I turned the airplane and came back. And we did some aerobatics, and I was doing a loop, and I went up – way up high and came down. And as you look, you put your head back and catch the horizon underneath you. And I looked, and I looked out and I could see all the way out in the Sinai, all the way down in the Gulf of Aqaba. I could see all the way over into Jordan. And I said to myself, “This is perfect. I’m looking at the Middle East the right way, upside down – (laughter) – and I can understand it now.”
But after the debate on Masada, we took a vote, and we all voted unanimously that it happened exactly the way it is recorded, that they had fought and died. And at the end, Yadin took us to the edge of the precipice. And there, where a lot of the air force, I understand, and other military are sworn in and take the oath, we yelled across the chasm, “Am Yisrael chai.” (Applause.) And the echo came back. And I will tell you, it was stunning to hear that echo. You sort of felt like you were listening to the souls of the past tell you Israel is going to survive. And that’s why, my friends, you have a Secretary of State who gets it, who understands this mission. And with your help and your support, we’ll get it done the right way.
Thank you. (Applause.)
Remarks at the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee's 100th Anniversary Celebration
Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
National Women in the Arts Museum
Washington, DC
December 9, 2013
SECRETARY KERRY: Thank you. Thank you very, very much. I much appreciate your welcome. I will inform you that Winston Churchill once said the only reason people give a standing ovation is they desperately need an excuse to shift their underwear. (Laughter.) But I will believe that you had a much more noble goal. (Laughter.)
Stuart, thank you. Stu, you are a marvel. And I tell you, I’m honored to be introduced by Stu Eizenstat. He is a great, really one of our sort of unsung heroes and treasures in our country for the remarkable work that he has always done and – (applause). Absolutely. I got to know him pretty well. His pro bono work that he’s done for years to help Holocaust victims and their families be able to recover the assets that were taken from them during the horrors of World War II is one mark. But I’ve seen him in his roles at the White House with the Carter Administration, the Clinton Administration.
And I will never forget when I was in Kyoto working on the global climate change treaty, Stu came flying in, literally, I think from Switzerland, where he’d been negotiating to pick up the negotiation responsibilities, which had, frankly, not been thoroughly and properly prepared in an appropriate way. And he kind of picked up this negotiation at half capacity, and I was stunned by his negotiating skill, his ability, and he put together an agreement – it’s now a matter of history that we had a difficult Senate that never did what it should have done, but this guy did what he was supposed to do and he did it brilliantly. And we are lucky to have public servants like him, so I thank him again for his great work. (Applause.)
President Penny Blumenstein, thank you very much. She was telling me back there that nobody gets her name right. I told her I will. (Laughter.) But she says she’s called Bloomberg and Blumenthal and a whole bunch of things whenever she gets introduced. Alan Gill, thank you for your great stewardship as CEO. And to every single one of you, thank you for an extraordinary job as civic-minded, good citizens of our nation who recognize a global responsibility. It’s an honor for me to be to be here to help you mark 100 years of the Jewish Joint Distribution Committee. And I said to Penny when I came in here, I said, “You don’t look 100 years old.” She said, “I feel it some days.” (Laughter.) So we thank her for her commitment to this effort. I know what it takes to do this.
Some of you may know that the bond between the State Department – and Stuart referred to this a little bit in his introduction of me. The bond between the State Department and the JDC has been a longtime association and it runs deep. Stu described to you how Henry Morgenthau had a profound impact on the startup and what happened, and it responded to the needs of Jews at that time who were locked in the struggle of the Ottoman Palestine and Eastern Europe. And ever since then, it has performed – you have performed – brilliantly.
Today, you work alongside the State Department, USAID, and Congress, and embassies on a worldwide basis – the 70 nations that Stuart mentioned a minute ago – is really quite extraordinary. We collaborate superbly on infrastructure programs that foster economic development and growth in communities in Africa, Europe, Middle East, and Latin America. We work side by side and provide humanitarian relief. And again, Stu talked for a moment about what happened. I am heading to the Philippines the day after tomorrow and to Vietnam, where we are engaged. But obviously, Typhoon Haiyan has left just stunning devastation across the Philippines, and your relief effort – JDC effort – in a short span of time has already contributed $1.4 million in aid to that effort.
We, the United States – I speak for President Obama, who as you all know has gone off to Nelson Mandela’s funeral – I gather tomorrow you will hear from the Vice President and then later from Jack Lew, Secretary Lew. But all of us are deeply, deeply grateful for the incredible sense of responsibility that is manifested in your generosity and in your commitment in order to make a difference around the world. You have provided relief to millions of people from every corner of the globe, all of whom are in desperate need of a helping hand. And part of the mission – and I should thank, actually, Chair Andrew Tisch, who – where did Andrew go? He’s sitting somewhere. Andrew, thank you for your great friendship to me and many years of involvement in this kind of thing.
But the ways in which all of you in the doing of this also support Jewish life around the world. Throughout history, of course, but particularly right now you are involved in ways that connect young Jewish men and women to their communities and that inspire them to address social challenges. The job training programs that you’re creating to address unemployment, the steps that you’re taking to alleviate hunger and poverty among the neediest Jews in the world, including in Israel, where despite the stunning growth and amazing prosperity that has been reached by so many, still sees about 25 percent of the country living under the poverty line. And the contributions that you continue to make to the Jewish community are changing lives everywhere.
I want to say a few words to you about another way in which hopefully we in the government are trying to also preserve and nurture Jewish life. And I’m talking about Jewish life in the state of Israel. I know this is not a political group in any way, but it would be a shameful omission if I didn’t honor the fact that everybody here obviously comes here with a passion for the preservation of life in Israel, and more importantly for the long term, the possibility of peace and of stability.
We are deeply committed to the security of Israel and of the well-being of the Jewish people by virtue of that. (Applause.) From the support that we’ve provided as a nation before I was in government, shortly after I’d come back from Vietnam, from the support we provided during the Yom Kippur War in 1973, to the hundreds of millions that we have contributed to help develop weapons systems like the Iron Dome as well as the military technology that we provide the Israelis with today, the United States has long viewed Israel’s security as absolutely fundamental to our own.
So when it comes to the range of issues that face the region today, there can be, in my judgment, no doubt – there should be no doubt – about where the United States stands. We stand squarely beside our Israeli friends and allies, and that bond is ironclad; it will never be broken. (Applause.)
This morning, I talked to Prime Minister Netanyahu. Bibi and I know each other really well now. We’ve known each other for about 25 years, maybe even 30. I knew him when he was in Cambridge, Massachusetts on an interval in politics that some of us have had occasionally. And I have visited with him many, many times, both when he was in office and out of office, and likewise for me. I just got back from what I think was my eighth trip to Israel since becoming Secretary of State, and I leave the day after tomorrow and I will be having dinner with Bibi again on Thursday night. So this is a commute, folks, nowadays. (Laughter.)
I want you to know that every single time that big blue and white plane that lugs me over there comes in for a landing at Ben Gurion Airport, I truly feel in my gut, for reasons of friendship as well as affiliation that Stu mentioned, how precious and how vulnerable and how real the security challenge of Israel is. It’s an extraordinary nation which, when you fly over it and you see what has been blooming out of a desert and built in this short span of time, is absolutely stunning. And when you compare GDPs and per capita incomes and other things to other nations that were in the same place in 1948 and 1950 and ’52 and see the differential today, it tells you a remarkable story of accomplishment and capacity.
I want to make it clear today that we are deeply committed going forward to honoring the bond and honoring those security needs. And I want to reiterate something that President Obama and I have said many times, and I underscored last week when I was in Israel and I underscored again two days ago when I spoke to the Saban Forum here in Washington. And that is: We will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon – not now, not ever. And I promise you that. (Applause.)
Now, I know that some people are apprehensive and wonder sort of have we somehow stumbled into something or created something where in fact the Iranians have pulled the wool over our eyes and we’re going to not know what they’re doing. Let me just say to you very simply: I’ve spent, as Stu said, almost 30 years in the Senate. I chaired the Foreign Relations Committee. I understand military and security issues. And I understand the fundamental basics of – as does the President and most of the people around us – what is necessary for a nation to prove it has a peaceful nuclear program. And I can’t stand here today and tell you that the Iranians are going to do what they need to do. But I do know that Israel is actually safer today than it was the day before we made the deal, because in this deal they have to destroy all of their 20 percent enriched uranium; they have to hold their 3.5 percent low enriched at the current level; they are not allowed to install any new centrifuges; they have to allow us daily inspection inside that secret mountaintop, Fordow; they have to allow us daily inspection in Natanz in the nuclear plant; they have to allow us regular inspection in the heavy water reactor that has the potential of plutonium; they are not allowed to install any further nuclear components into that construction site; they cannot test additional fuel; and we are allowed to go into the storage sites and manufacturing facilities of all of their centrifuge production facilities – all things we couldn’t do before we made this first step agreement.
Because of what we’ve done while we negotiate the final comprehensive agreement, which is what Bibi wanted in the first place, we will actually be setting their program backwards, expanding the amount of time that it might take if they were to try to break out. That means we have more time to respond, more time to know what is going on. That is why I can say to you in good conscience I believe Israel is safer today than it was before. Now, does that mean this will be successful in the long run? I don’t know. But here’s what else I do know: If we aren’t successful, if we get to the end of these six months and they don’t do the simple things you need to do to prove your program is peaceful, then we will have kept united the P5+1, we will have shown the global community our bona fides to attempt to give them an opportunity through diplomacy to do what they need to do, and we will not have taken any sanction off the table. We can ratchet them up when we want. We will go back to Congress, we will ratchet them up, we will ask for additional sanctions. And if needs be, if we cannot get this done on time, we will take no other option, military or otherwise, off the table. So I am confident that we are going to approach this with a view to making Israel more secure.
Let me also say to all of you there are other issues that go to Israel’s existential security, and none more so than the ticking time bomb of demographics in the region and the realities of the de-legitimization campaign that has been taking place for some period of time. I believe, as President Obama does, that Israel will be far more secure if we can also put to test the possibilities of the two-state solution. And so we will continue to attempt to do that despite the skepticism, despite the cynicism in some quarters, that that day can never come where you would actually achieve a two-state solution with two peoples living side by side in peace and security.
I believe, though, that it remains a possibility. And it seems to me that for all of you, for anyone who cares about the security of Israel – and all of you do – for anyone who cares about the future, as I know all of you do, and engaged in the activities you are here at the JDC, you must also believe that peace is possible. And as these tough but very critical negotiations continue, I hope that you will understand we will continue to consult, we will continue to work closely, we will do everything in our power to make sure that our friends in Israel are comfortable with the direction we’re moving in and are part of it.
And I talk to Bibi at least two or three times a week. We are hand in hand and mind in mind trying to figure out how to do this in a way that protects the security of Israel, that establishes the sovereignty and dignity of an independent and viable Palestinian state. If it was easy, it would’ve done a long time ago. It isn’t. But I think the effort is worth it.
And I know why it’s worth it. I spent a lot of time – when I first went to Israel in 1986, I spent an entire week, and I traveled everywhere. And this wonderful fellow by the name of Yadin Roman, who’s the publisher of Eretz Israel magazine, was my guide and took me around. And he was brilliant, and he knew the history of everything and told me all the details of everything I was seeing. And I went up to Kiryat Shmona, and I went down into a bomb shelter where kids had to run and side from the Katyusha rockets. And I visited all the different religious sites – Christian and Muslim and Jewish, obviously. Went to the Wailing Wall, left my note, which I’m still working on. And visited – tried to swim in the Dead Sea, cloaked in black mud, everything else. And climbed Masada, which is one of the most stirring things I’ve ever done in my life, because we had this huge debate on top of Masada. And Yadin provoked us, purposefully. And he gave us the whole history of Josephus Flavius and told us all the writings in this great contentious debate about had these Jews really died there, had they in fact been there at this moment, or did they escape because they didn’t find a whole lot of skeletons, and people were wondering what happened.
Well, we had this long debate. And I’ll tell you, even before that, I had this marvelous experience of flying a jet out of (inaudible) air base. I’m a pilot. I love to fly. And I persuaded this ace colonel from the war to take me up in a jet, and he got it cleared in Tel Aviv. Somehow they let me do it. And they won’t let me do it now, but it was fun then. And I remember taking off, and he said, “Okay, it’s your airplane the minute you get up in the air.” I went up above the air, and I remember he – I was turning, and he said, “Senator, you better turn faster; you’re going over Egypt.” And so I turned the airplane and came back. And we did some aerobatics, and I was doing a loop, and I went up – way up high and came down. And as you look, you put your head back and catch the horizon underneath you. And I looked, and I looked out and I could see all the way out in the Sinai, all the way down in the Gulf of Aqaba. I could see all the way over into Jordan. And I said to myself, “This is perfect. I’m looking at the Middle East the right way, upside down – (laughter) – and I can understand it now.”
But after the debate on Masada, we took a vote, and we all voted unanimously that it happened exactly the way it is recorded, that they had fought and died. And at the end, Yadin took us to the edge of the precipice. And there, where a lot of the air force, I understand, and other military are sworn in and take the oath, we yelled across the chasm, “Am Yisrael chai.” (Applause.) And the echo came back. And I will tell you, it was stunning to hear that echo. You sort of felt like you were listening to the souls of the past tell you Israel is going to survive. And that’s why, my friends, you have a Secretary of State who gets it, who understands this mission. And with your help and your support, we’ll get it done the right way.
Thank you. (Applause.)
SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S REMARKS ON INTERNATIONAL ANTICORRUPTION DAY
FROM: U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
International Anticorruption Day
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
December 9, 2013
The United States joins the international community today in saluting individuals, governments, businesses, civil society organizations, and international organizations dedicated to preventing and combating the scourge of corruption.
It is difficult to overstate the profoundly negative impact that corruption has on society. The abuse of entrusted power for private gain does violence to our values, our prosperity, and even our security.
Having spent two years of my own life as a young prosecutor in Massachusetts, where I focused on white-collar and organized crime, this issue is especially personal. And it’s a responsibility I take seriously as someone who spent years in the Senate leading difficult, sensitive, and comprehensive investigations on everything from the Bank of Credit and Commerce International to illegal money laundering.
During my travels as Secretary of State, especially to countries that are in the midst of political transitions, I underscore the importance of fighting corruption and promoting good governance. I do so proudly, knowing that we strengthen our credibility and our foreign policy when we make these issues a priority in our relationships.
That’s why the United States and 167 other countries have ratified the United Nations Convention against Corruption, the world’s broadest framework for tackling corruption.
That’s why we worked with the G8 Deauville Partnership with Arab Countries in Transition to launch the Arab Forum on Asset Recovery, which has helped to stimulate the return of more than $70 million in stolen assets to the transition countries in the Middle East.
And that’s why the United States is deeply committed to the mission of the Open Government Partnership, an innovative multi-stakeholder initiative of governments, civil society, and business.
On this International Anticorruption Day, we call on all governments to implement their commitments under the UN Convention Against Corruption and to afford civil society a meaningful role in anti-corruption and transparency efforts.
This is an issue that matters greatly to all of us, which makes even greater our shared responsibility to fight corruption and promote free, open societies anywhere and everywhere they are threatened.
International Anticorruption Day
Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
December 9, 2013
The United States joins the international community today in saluting individuals, governments, businesses, civil society organizations, and international organizations dedicated to preventing and combating the scourge of corruption.
It is difficult to overstate the profoundly negative impact that corruption has on society. The abuse of entrusted power for private gain does violence to our values, our prosperity, and even our security.
Having spent two years of my own life as a young prosecutor in Massachusetts, where I focused on white-collar and organized crime, this issue is especially personal. And it’s a responsibility I take seriously as someone who spent years in the Senate leading difficult, sensitive, and comprehensive investigations on everything from the Bank of Credit and Commerce International to illegal money laundering.
During my travels as Secretary of State, especially to countries that are in the midst of political transitions, I underscore the importance of fighting corruption and promoting good governance. I do so proudly, knowing that we strengthen our credibility and our foreign policy when we make these issues a priority in our relationships.
That’s why the United States and 167 other countries have ratified the United Nations Convention against Corruption, the world’s broadest framework for tackling corruption.
That’s why we worked with the G8 Deauville Partnership with Arab Countries in Transition to launch the Arab Forum on Asset Recovery, which has helped to stimulate the return of more than $70 million in stolen assets to the transition countries in the Middle East.
And that’s why the United States is deeply committed to the mission of the Open Government Partnership, an innovative multi-stakeholder initiative of governments, civil society, and business.
On this International Anticorruption Day, we call on all governments to implement their commitments under the UN Convention Against Corruption and to afford civil society a meaningful role in anti-corruption and transparency efforts.
This is an issue that matters greatly to all of us, which makes even greater our shared responsibility to fight corruption and promote free, open societies anywhere and everywhere they are threatened.
IRS ANNOUNCES INTEREST RATES WILL REMAIN THE SAME FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2014
FROM: U.S. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Interest Rates Remain the Same for the First Quarter of 2014
WASHINGTON – The Internal Revenue Service today announced that interest rates will remain the same for the calendar quarter beginning Jan. 1, 2014. The rates will be:
three (3) percent for overpayments [two (2) percent in the case of a corporation];
three (3) percent for underpayments;
five (5) percent for large corporate underpayments; and
one-half (0.5) percent for the portion of a corporate overpayment exceeding $10,000.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, the rate of interest is determined on a quarterly basis. For taxpayers other than corporations, the overpayment and underpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points.
Generally, in the case of a corporation, the underpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points and the overpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 2 percentage points. The rate for large corporate underpayments is the federal short-term rate plus 5 percentage points. The rate on the portion of a corporate overpayment of tax exceeding $10,000 for a taxable period is the federal short-term rate plus one-half (0.5) of a percentage point.
The interest rates announced today are computed from the federal short-term rate determined during Oct. 2013 to take effect Nov. 1, 2013, based on daily compounding.
Interest Rates Remain the Same for the First Quarter of 2014
WASHINGTON – The Internal Revenue Service today announced that interest rates will remain the same for the calendar quarter beginning Jan. 1, 2014. The rates will be:
three (3) percent for overpayments [two (2) percent in the case of a corporation];
three (3) percent for underpayments;
five (5) percent for large corporate underpayments; and
one-half (0.5) percent for the portion of a corporate overpayment exceeding $10,000.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, the rate of interest is determined on a quarterly basis. For taxpayers other than corporations, the overpayment and underpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points.
Generally, in the case of a corporation, the underpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points and the overpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 2 percentage points. The rate for large corporate underpayments is the federal short-term rate plus 5 percentage points. The rate on the portion of a corporate overpayment of tax exceeding $10,000 for a taxable period is the federal short-term rate plus one-half (0.5) of a percentage point.
The interest rates announced today are computed from the federal short-term rate determined during Oct. 2013 to take effect Nov. 1, 2013, based on daily compounding.
BUSINESSMAN SENTENCED TO PRISON TERM FOR ROLE IN CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE IRS
FROM: U.S. JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Thursday, December 5, 2013
California Businessman Sentenced to Prison for Conspiring to Defraud the IRS
Gary Mach, of Palm Desert, Calif., was sentenced to 16 months in prison, two months of house arrest, and 18 months of probation and ordered to pay $270,725 in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Justice Department and IRS announced today. Mach previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States on Aug. 18, 2013.
Court documents state that, beginning around January 2002 and continuing through December 2010, Mach failed to report substantial income he earned from CSPS, a pool-servicing business operated throughout Riverside County. Mach and others established fictitious trusts which they used to receive income and hold assets in an attempt to conceal the assets and income from the IRS.
According to court documents, Mach purported to operate a trust called “Quintessential,” and directed that his paychecks be made payable to Quintessential. He also opened a bank account in the name of Quintessential where he deposited CSPS proceeds. Mach admitted that he did not report to the IRS any of the income he earned from CSPS between 2002 and 2010, and used Quintessential to conceal income from the IRS. In furtherance of the conspiracy, Mach also attempted to impede an IRS summons issued to a bank for business account records. Mach closed his bank account after the bank complied with the IRS summons. As set forth in the plea agreement, Mach admitted that his total unreported income for the tax years 2002 through 2010 was $1,410,430, upon which the total tax due and owed to the IRS is $270,275.
Assistant Attorney General Kathryn Keneally of the department’s Tax Division, commended the investigative efforts of the special agents of IRS-Criminal Investigation, who investigated the case, Tax Division Trial Attorneys Sonia M. Owens and Mark L. Williams, who prosecuted the case, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sandra R. Brown and Paul Rochmes of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, who assisted in the prosecution.
Thursday, December 5, 2013
California Businessman Sentenced to Prison for Conspiring to Defraud the IRS
Gary Mach, of Palm Desert, Calif., was sentenced to 16 months in prison, two months of house arrest, and 18 months of probation and ordered to pay $270,725 in restitution to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Justice Department and IRS announced today. Mach previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States on Aug. 18, 2013.
Court documents state that, beginning around January 2002 and continuing through December 2010, Mach failed to report substantial income he earned from CSPS, a pool-servicing business operated throughout Riverside County. Mach and others established fictitious trusts which they used to receive income and hold assets in an attempt to conceal the assets and income from the IRS.
According to court documents, Mach purported to operate a trust called “Quintessential,” and directed that his paychecks be made payable to Quintessential. He also opened a bank account in the name of Quintessential where he deposited CSPS proceeds. Mach admitted that he did not report to the IRS any of the income he earned from CSPS between 2002 and 2010, and used Quintessential to conceal income from the IRS. In furtherance of the conspiracy, Mach also attempted to impede an IRS summons issued to a bank for business account records. Mach closed his bank account after the bank complied with the IRS summons. As set forth in the plea agreement, Mach admitted that his total unreported income for the tax years 2002 through 2010 was $1,410,430, upon which the total tax due and owed to the IRS is $270,275.
Assistant Attorney General Kathryn Keneally of the department’s Tax Division, commended the investigative efforts of the special agents of IRS-Criminal Investigation, who investigated the case, Tax Division Trial Attorneys Sonia M. Owens and Mark L. Williams, who prosecuted the case, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sandra R. Brown and Paul Rochmes of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, who assisted in the prosecution.
STUDY LOOKS AT TOMATOES ON THE WILDSIDE TO EXAMINE BIODIVERSITY
(NRCS_Photo_Gallery)Natural+Resources+Conservation+Service,+part+of+the+United+States+Department+of+Agriculture,+taken+or+made+as+part+of+an+employee's+official+duties..jpg) |
| Supermarket Tomatoes. Credit: USDA-Wikimedia. |
Staple of recipe favorites--the tomato--reveals processes that maintain biodiversity
No hothouse plants: Study examines supermarket tomatoes' wild relatives, which live in Earth's most extreme environments
Tomatoes are in almost everything we eat, from salad and soup to chili and pizza. For some, tomato-based dishes are featured during the holiday season.
Most people don't realize, however, that there are more than a dozen wild tomato species, or that wild tomatoes grow in the deserts, rainforests and highlands of South America and on the Galapagos Islands.
These wild species don't have the big, bold fruits we're used to seeing in the supermarket, though. Wild tomato fruits are smaller, from the size of a pea to that of a large marble and are sometimes green and bitter when they're ripe.
But compared with their domesticated relatives, wild tomatoes are more diverse in many hidden and not-so-hidden ways.
Now scientists are using the genomes of wild tomatoes to study the processes that drive Earth's biodiversity.
Their goal is to learn how species cope with differences in climate and natural enemies, and what might happen in this time of environmental change.
Wild tomato genomes as a framework for understanding biodiversity
To study natural trait and genome diversity in wild tomatoes, scientists Leonie Moyle, David Haak and Matthew Hahn of Indiana University Bloomington received a grant from the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Dimensions of Biodiversity program.
Dimensions of Biodiversity is part of NSF's Science, Engineering and Education for Sustainability investment and is supported by NSF's Directorates for Biological Sciences and Geosciences.
Scientists funded through Dimensions of Biodiversity integrate genetic, taxonomic and functional approaches in their research.
"The resulting discoveries go beyond expanding our knowledge of the depth and breadth of life on Earth," says John Wingfield, NSF assistant director for Biological Sciences.
"They have the potential to revolutionize the way we manage agriculture, practice medicine, address global climate change and develop new technologies."
The award to Moyle's team funds sequencing of the complete set of all expressed genes (the transcriptome) in populations of wild tomato species.
"Variations within and between these wild tomato genomes can be compared by using the genome sequence of the domesticated tomato as a 'backbone,'"says Moyle.
By linking this genome-wide sequence data with information on wild tomato trait variation, the biologists hope to identify the genes responsible for adaptation to environmental change.
The research focuses on the role of drought and of defense against herbivores, or plant-eaters, in the diversity of wild tomatoes.
"These factors," says Haak, "capture two of the most important aspects of any plant's environment: climate and natural enemies."
Wild tomatoes: From hothouse to deep freeze
While domesticated tomatoes thrive only in agricultural irrigation, wild tomatoes live in some of the planet's most extreme environments.
They're among the few plants found in the driest place on Earth--the Atacama Desert in Chile. Other wild tomatoes blossom along the rocky, salty shores of the Galapagos Islands, and in the daily rains of Ecuador's rainforests.
But it's not just the climate in which they grow that varies among wild tomatoes.
The plants bristle with an array of natural defenses, from dense coverings of plant hairs to toxins deadly against insect attackers.
Measuring biodiversity in plant defenses
In a forthcoming paper in the journal Ecology, Haak, Moyle and colleagues document large differences in defenses among wild tomatoes.
They used bioassays--experiments in which living organisms are used to reveal the potency or concentration of a substance.
In this case, they fed leaf samples of different wild tomato species to tobacco hornworms.
The tobacco hornworm--also known as the tomato hornworm--is an enemy of both domesticated and wild tomatoes. It rapidly eats its way through the plants' leaves.
Each hornworm caterpillar was weighed before and after feeding to determine how much it had gained on a diet of wild tomato leaves.
Those tomatoes on which caterpillars gained little or no weight, says Haak, have more natural defenses than those on which the caterpillars gained weight.
In one wild tomato species, caterpillars lost significant weight; they refused to consume the plant's toxic leaves.
The researchers showed that the level of natural defense varies widely among wild tomato species.
"Although all wild tomatoes are closely related, these patterns of defense variation don't simply follow historical, evolutionary relationships," says Moyle. "The defense level of each wild tomato population is likely shaped by responses to local herbivores."
Linking biodiversity to genomics to understand environmental responses
Moyle and Haak are using DNA sequencing to look at the genes that are expressed differently in wild tomatoes with varying levels of natural defenses, and with differences in responses to drought.
Genes that are consistently up- or down-regulated in these conditions, says Moyle, can reveal the changes important for responding to and coping with environmental stresses.
"By linking data on DNA sequence variation, and on variation in gene expression, with wild tomatoes' responses to drought and natural enemies," she says, "we may find a powerful model for understanding the genetics of responses to environmental change."
The study could also uncover genetic variations helpful in improving domesticated tomatoes and their cultivated relatives, including potatoes and peppers.
"This research on tomatoes' wild relatives offers insights into the huge reservoir of genetic information available to ensure our future food security," says Simon Malcomber, lead NSF program director for Dimensions of Biodiversity.
"Tomatoes are one of the most widely consumed foods around the world," he says. "Studies such as this provide important information that could be used to improve herbivore resistance in crop cultivars."
Next time you're in the supermarket, tomatoes are worth a closer look. These common plants may offer a glimpse of our global food security, and of Earth's environmental future.
-- Cheryl Dybas, NSF
Investigators
David Haak
Leonie Moyle
Matthew Hahn
Related Institutions/Organizations
Indiana University
Related Programs
Dimensions of Biodiversity
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)