This Blog Hates America!
Musings of the Bemused, by Michael D. Zungolo. Politics, Food, Film, Music, Passion. Dig In!

 



Subscribe to "This Blog Hates America!" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

 

 

  Tuesday, January 03, 2006


The Photograph That Has Been Keeping Bruce Springsteen Up at Night for Nearly 40 Years Has Finally Been Unleashed.

 

story image

 

Relax, Bruce. We were all young once.

 

 

 


6:10:23 PM     comment []

The enormous US dam problem no one is talking about

By Gaylord ShawTue Jan 3, 3:00 AM ET

The landscape of America, at last count, is dotted with 79,272 large dams. Most of them safely deliver bountiful benefits - trillions of gallons of water for drinking, irrigation, and industrial use, plus flood control, recreation, hydroelectric power, and navigation.

That's the good news.

Here, in my opinion, is the bad news: Disaster lurks in thousands of those dams.

At least 3,500 of America's big dams are unsafe, according to inspection reports filed away in obscure nooks and crannies of government offices across the country. Thousands more dams also are unsafe, the American Society of Civil Engineers concluded this year, but no one knows for certain how many because few states have the funds for even cursory safety inspections.

Thus, every moment of every day, unsafe dams form a vast reservoir of danger throughout America. That's not an overstatement. I'm not a professional engineer, but I've spent nearly two-thirds of my 45-year career in journalism studying unsafe dams. I've done on-the-scene reporting on dam failures that killed 175 people and caused billions of dollars in property damage. I've interviewed scores of victims, dozens of state and federal engineers, inspectors, and officials, and examined records on hundreds of dams.

In my view, the cumulative hazard posed by unsafe dams is huge, but it remains largely unexplored by the media. When a dam fails - and records suggest dozens do each year - the events usually are viewed as local, transitory incidents rather than a symbol of a national problem.

Hurricane Katrina underscored the peril of depending on man-made structures for protection against disaster. Failure of the New Orleans' levee system during the storm this year contributed to prolonged flooding and 1,300 deaths.

Months later, as scenes of misery and dislocation lingered in the public mind, President Bush urgently asked Congress to approve $3 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers to begin rebuilding New Orleans' battered levees. The House of Representatives included that amount in a $29 billion hurricane recovery assistance package it passed three days later.

In concept and construction, levees are close cousins of dams. But while politicians flocked to support repair of New Orleans' levees, they've virtually ignored a proposed Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act which has languished for nearly a year in a House subcommittee. The proposal would authorize the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to disperse $350 million over four years to help states repair unsafe dams. Chances of Congress enacting such a repair program anytime soon are slim.

The $350 million program would be a down payment of less than 10 percent toward the estimated $36.2 billion total cost of repairing America's unsafe dams. It also is approximately one-eighth of the amount the president is seeking for repair of the New Orleans' levees.

This is not to suggest that the New Orleans' levees go unrepaired. But from New England to Hawaii more and more aging dams are experiencing problems, with little public awareness. A few large and small examples:

• Taunton, Mass., got national attention in October when a 173-year-old, 12-foot-tall wooden dam above its business district began to buckle. Stores and schools were closed for a week and townspeople headed for higher ground. The crisis eased when the water level behind the dam was lowered. The federal government is now paying 75 percent of the $189,410 cost of tearing down Whittenton Mills Dam and replacing it with a new one.

• In the placid Schoharie River Valley of upstate New York, a volunteer group calling itself Dam Concerned Citizens was formed last month to press for emergency repairs to 182-foot-tall Gilboa Dam, built 80 years ago to supply drinking water to New York City. The dam has been leaking for years. Now citizens have established their own website which distributes emergency notification plans and publicizes preselected evacuation routes for use should the dam fail (www.gilboadaminfo.com).

• Residents of Denver, Colo., population 2 million plus, were warned last month by the Corps of Engineers that serious safety problems have been detected at Cherry Creek Dam, a 141-foot-tall earthen structure. The dam was built 55 years ago on what was then windswept pastureland 10 miles south of Denver. Now the dam looms above Interstate 225, a cluster of office parks and swank homes, a nationally known golf course, and several schools.

Bruce Tschantz, professor emeritus at the University of Tennessee who 25 years ago helped establish the first Office of Dam Safety in the then-nascent FEMA, reached back into classical mythology to fetch a phrase - "the sword of Damocles" - to express his concern about the dangers posed by deficient dams perched above developed areas. (Damocles was a courtier at the court of Dionysius I in the 4th century BC. He was so gushing in his praise of the power and happiness of Dionysius that the tyrant, to illustrate the precariousness of rank and power, gave a banquet and had a sword suspended above the head of Damocles by a single hair.)

"We know what the problems are, we know where they are, and we know how to fix them," Dr. Tschantz said in a telephone interview. It's that next step - actually getting the money to fix them - where we're stalled."

Tschantz doesn't point fingers of blame. But it's clear to me that Congress and several presidents, including the current occupant of the White House, share culpability on the national level, and that too many state and local officials have grown weary of trying to find sources of financing to make dams safer.

Jimmy Carter was the last president to display serious and sustained interest in the issue. He had been in office less than a year when, in the early morning darkness of a Sunday in November 1977, a never-inspected dam in the mountains of his home state of Georgia collapsed and sent a wall of water crashing down upon the campus of Toccoa Falls Bible College - a campus he had visited several times.

The Kelly Barnes Dam on Toccoa Creek dated back to 1899, when a rock-and- timber structure was built across a fast-flowing mountain stream to impound water for a small hydroelectric plant. Later, Toccoa Falls Bible Institute chose the valley below as the site for its campus, took over the power plant and, in 1937, decided to construct an earthen embankment over the original dam, eventually raising the structure's height to 42 feet.

Twenty years later, in 1957, the school abandoned the power plant. For the next two decades, the dam was neglected, visited only by an occasional fisherman or hiker. Pine trees grew to maturity on its downstream slope, sending roots deep into the dam's core. Portions of the steep embankment vanished in a landslide, but there were no repairs, even though water seeped almost continuously from the base of the dam. Finally, the weakened 78-year-old dam collapsed during a rainy night in Georgia.

In the valley below, Eldon Elsberry and two friends were on patrol in the campus fire department's Jeep. When the wall of water hit, it overturned the vehicle. "One minute the water [in the creek] was inches deep, and the next I was swimming for my life," Mr. Elsberry said. "I saw the bank and made for it." He turned and saw one of his friends struggling in the water. "I reached for his hand. He went by so fast I couldn't touch him."

Experts later calculated that the water released by the dam's collapse weighed approximately the same as 7,500 locomotives. As the water crashed across the campus, it destroyed a dormitory and crushed a cluster of mobile homes where married students lived.

Later, in the mud and tangled debris, 39 bodies were found. Twenty were children. College officials said they never hired a private consulting engineer because they had no idea it had safety problems. The state of Georgia never inspected the dam because, at the time, there was no state law requiring such inspections. Few other states had dam safety laws then, either. Pennsylvania was one of the exceptions. Its tough law was spurred by memories of the 1889 collapse of South Fork Dam above Johnstown that killed 2,209 people. Yet even with the strong state law requiring regular safety inspections, another 55 people in the same community died in July 1977 after the failure of Laurel Run Dam, just a few miles from where South Fork Dam triggered the disaster 88 years earlier.

While all states except Alabama now have laws or regulations establishing dam safety programs, enforcement is spotty, largely because of the paucity of inspectors. In Texas, for example, there are only six state employees to inspect nearly 7,500 dams. One Texas official noted that with the current staff level "some dams would not be examined for three centuries."

Let's do the math. Two of my teenaged grandchildren live in Texas. If we count 30 years for each generation, that means all the dams in Texas will be inspected by the time my grandchildren's great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren ring in a new year in 2306. Reassuring, isn't it?

• Gaylord Shaw won a Pulitzer Prize for a series investigating the state of the nation's dams for the Los Angeles Times in 1978.


10:29:07 AM     comment []

The Sunday Times January 01, 2006


Nixon's Revenge: The Return of the Wiretappers



"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed.” Those are the words of President George Bush on April 20, 2004. He reiterated them in a press conference the following July: “The government can’t move on wiretaps or roving wiretaps without getting a court order.”

In both cases he was referring to the Patriot Act, which expanded the federal government’s powers for surveillance in the war on terror. But his statements were broad ones, designed to reassure Americans that their constitutional rights were protected, and we now know the president was not telling the truth.

It turns out the president has authorised thousands of wiretaps of American citizens’ phones without any court order for the past four years, clearly violating a 1978 law that set up a special court to monitor and approve such taps.

The wiretaps were restricted — or at least we are told they are restricted — to domestic recipients of foreign phone calls, and so could be viewed as falling within the remit of the president’s foreign policy, rather than his domestic one. They are also unobjectionable to most Americans. A recent poll showed 64% were fine with wiretapping Americans if they might have contacts with terrorists abroad.

When the news broke before Christmas, the administration quickly explained that it avoided the court because speed was of the essence in fighting terrorism. But the court was set up to examine such taps retroactively if necessary and presented no impediment to quick monitoring of possible terrorist communication. So what was going on? Why not simply ask Congress in the days after 9/11 to adjust the law? Or use the same court previous presidents had?

The answer has to do with the Vietnam syndrome. No, I don’t mean the idea that the Vietnam war traumatised America so deeply that it deterred the use of military force for a generation. I mean the other Vietnam syndrome: the one held by conservative supporters of the Vietnam war, men and women who were outraged by the way in which Congress challenged the president in that previous war and are determined to restore presidential power to its pre-Vietnam condition.

Ignoring the 1978 law, bypassing Congress, and wiretapping American citizens’ phones by presidential prerogative were deliberate policy shifts by Bush. Practically speaking, they may have been unnecessary, even pointless. But in the mind and psyches of Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney, it was payback time.

Call it Nixon’s revenge. The combination of Watergate and Vietnam created an environment in which executive power was deemed too dangerous to be trusted. President Ford, for whom Rumsfeld also worked, inherited a crippled presidency. Carter brandished his constitutional crutches as a matter of pride. But many conservatives seethed and waited a long time for a chance to reverse what they saw as a dangerous concession to the legislative branch.

It’s clear now that 9/11 was seen by Cheney and Rumsfeld not simply as a catastrophe but as an opportunity. Just as Karl Rove shrewdly exploited the war to divide and defeat the Democrats, so Cheney and Rummy saw a chance to reverse decades of post-Vietnam executive branch erosion.

The war against terror, they argued, was an opportunity to insist the president was answerable to no court and no legislature in war-making. If he found laws that inhibited his range of action, he could simply ignore them. As commander-in-chief he wasn’t so much above the law as he was the law. The brightest legal stars in the conservative intelligentsia were drafted to write legal memos justifying an extraordinary expansion of presidential power. He could ignore any treaties; he could violate any US law; he could upend decades of military justice; he could tell the UN to stuff it. And he did.

If you wonder how the US military got away with violating American law and torturing detainees in secret sites, wonder no longer. In wartime, Bush’s lawyer John Yoo argued, the president could authorise the torture of anyone. In a recent debate at Notre Dame University, Yoo even claimed no treaty or law could definitively prevent the president from authorising the torture of a terrorist’s child if he thought it was necessary for national security. If the president could legally and constitutionally do that, wiretapping American citizens is a no-brainer.

The great paradox of the Bush presidency is why a wartime commander-in-chief decided, in an hour of national emergency, not to ensure maximum consensus behind the war but in fact to push the very limits of ideological and partisan combat. The wiretaps are, to my mind, unobjectionable. In a war where intelligence is vital, where the US has terrible human intelligence but superb technological capacities, it makes a lot of sense to expand phone surveillance.

But when you could have done all of that in line with precedent and under existing law, why take this moment to push the constitutional envelope? Why undermine public trust and bipartisan consensus when you gain nothing but making an old point in an ancient, bitter argument?

The added irony is that Bush’s unilateral expansion of presidential power has backfired. His insistence on the right to torture detainees deeply wounded American moral standing, outraged allies, set back democratisation in Iraq, and yielded useless intelligence. Moreover, the president was forced into a humiliating defeat in December when Congress insisted that detainees be treated humanely.

Congress refused in the same month to extend the Patriot Act and will re-examine the issue in the next few weeks. Many Republicans are troubled by some of the powers now granted to the president in a war that has no formal end-point and no formal enemy.

On the bright side, of course, Rummy and Cheney get to stick their fingers in a few judges’ and senators’ and liberals’ eyes.

They’ve waited three decades to get their revenge on all those Vietnam peacenik hippies; and they’ll be damned if they give an inch now. Who says old men don’t bear grudges? And who says they don’t eventually get to carry them out?

 

>


10:04:08 AM     comment []

Christmas Isn't Over Yet

 

Jan. 2, 2006, 11:44PM

Abramoff plea bargain announcement expected

Deal may give prosecutors a view into possible favors

By MICHAEL HEDGES
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - A plea agreement between prominent lobbyist Jack Abramoff and federal prosecutors is expected this week, bringing a wide-ranging corruption probe to the doors of Congress, according to sources close to the investigation.

Abramoff, who collected millions of dollars in controversial fees from Indian tribes with interests in the gambling industry, reached a tentative deal with prosecutors in a Washington-based investigation late last week, according to one of the sources. The lobbyist has given expensive gifts to several members of Congress, including Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land, and prosecutors are examining whether lawmakers improperly aided Abramoff clients in return.

Barring a last-minute snag, the terms of Abramoff's plea bargain were expected to be announced in Washington as early as today or Wednesday. People close to the case spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Abramoff also was working toward a deal with prosecutors in South Florida on an indictment there that was to go to trial Monday, according to a source. A federal judge in South Florida has a hearing set for today in the case in which Abramoff was charged with fraud in connection with the takeover of a fleet of gambling ships.

By reaching an agreement with Abramoff, federal investigators would gain the ultimate insider witness in a probe into any possible favors the one-time king of Washington lobbyists gave members of Congress and their staff members.

The terms of the plea deals, and whether they will be formally announced separately or together, could not be determined Monday.

Attorneys for Abramoff could not be reached for comment Monday. An Abramoff spokesman repeatedly has declined to comment on the investigation.

Cooperation offered

Abramoff would join former DeLay aide Michael Scanlon as critical guides for federal prosecutors. Scanlon, a former Abramoff business partner, has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to bribe public officials.

DeLay attorney Richard Cullen declined to comment Monday. He has said previously that there was no indication the congressman is in jeopardy from the Abramoff investigation.

"Mr. DeLay is not concerned about the potential of Mr. Abramoff cooperating with the government," Cullen said in a recent interview. "Mr. DeLay thinks everybody should be cooperating (with investigators) and telling the truth."

Cullen said he met with federal prosecutors early in the probe and offered them DeLay's cooperation. Asked if any DeLay records or documents had been subpoenaed by investigators, Cullen said no records were sought.

An Abramoff plea will finish a crucial phase of an investigation that began more than a year ago into charges that Abramoff and Scanlon cheated Indian tribes out of about $82 million after being hired to pave the way for gambling casinos. Prosecutors would be left with deciding whether to charge members of Congress and top present and former staff aides with accepting gifts from in return for illegally helping lobbyists' clients.

The Florida charges revolved around allegations that Abramoff and business partner Adam Kidan defrauded a business rival, Konstantinos "Gus" Boulis, out of the SunCruz fleet of gambling boats.

Kidan has pleaded guilty in the case and agreed to cooperate, increasing the pressure on Abramoff.

Trips reviewed

Kidan pleaded guilty to a number of federal fraud charges and is facing a lengthy prison term when sentenced in early 2006. He has been cooperating with federal investigators since June.

DeLay and Abramoff went on two trips together that have been reviewed by investigators, one to Britain in 2000 and one to the Northern Mariana Islands during the New Year's holiday of 1998. Also, Abramoff clients made donations to DeLay political organizations.

The two men are also linked through several former DeLay staff members who eventually became wealthy working with Abramoff.


9:57:48 AM     comment []


Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website. © Copyright 2006 Michael D. Zungolo.
Last update: 2/1/2006; 9:23:37 AM.

January 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        
Dec   Feb