Date: 11/25/2008
By JIM ABRAMS
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ The federal government’s ledger has gone from a surplus just seven years ago to facing a prospect of a $1 trillion deficit next year.
Given those dire financial straits, President-elect Barack Obama said at a news conference Tuesday, “Budget reform is not an option. It’s a necessity.”
But unlike his predecessor President George W. Bush, who in better economic times talked about returning to surpluses by 2012, “balanced budgets” were not in Obama’s vocabulary.
The government’s first obligation, he said, was to spark an economic recovery and put people back to work. To do that, the Democratic-led Congress is expected to have a new stimulus package, costing in the $500 billion range, ready to go when Obama takes office in January.
That’s on top of the hundreds of billions already spent or committed by Treasury and the Federal Reserve to revive the moribund financial markets. On Tuesday the government announced two new programs providing $800 billion to help unfreeze the market for consumer debt and to make mortgage loans cheaper and more available.
All that, in the short term, will send the deficit into the stratosphere.
Budget hawks were stunned when the federal deficit hit a record $455 billion in fiscal 2008, which ended Sept. 30, more than double the previous year’s deficit. But now, even the fiscally conservative say another doubling, to $1 trillion or more, may be inevitable if the economy is to be rescued.
James Horney, director for federal fiscal policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said it was “pretty likely” that this year’s deficit will approach $1 trillion. Big deficits can’t be helped in bad times, he said, as the government is required to spend more to help the needy and stimulate the economy even as tax revenues decline.
“The question, of course, is what’s the alternative?” Horney said. If the government doesn’t move to stimulate the economy, “the outcome could be much worse.”
Obama made clear Tuesday that he will take a hard look at the budget once the economic ship is righted.
“We can’t sustain a system that bleeds billions of taxpayer dollars on programs that have outlived their usefulness or exist solely because of the power of politicians, lobbyists or interest groups. We simply can’t afford it.
“This isn’t about big government or small government. It’s about building a smarter government that focuses on what works,” he said.
Josh Gordon, policy director of the Concord Coalition, a budget watchdog group, found it encouraging that Obama was discussing reform and noted that — just as Republicans may be in the best situation to cut military spending — “a Democratic president might be in the best position to convince Congress of the need to cut ineffective programs.”
But he also pointed out that domestic discretionary spending is only a small part of the overall federal budget dominated by military and entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and that every program has its “specific patrons and specific interest groups” defending it.
While nobody likes a deficit, many economists agree that heavy federal government spending — on food stamps or unemployment benefits or public works projects — may be necessary to keep economies moving in times of recession or war.
The problem is that this time Washington was racking up massive deficits even before the current economic downturn.
The government recorded surpluses in the fiscal years 1998 through 2001. But that all changed once Bush was in office a year. Saddled with costs from the Sept. 11 attacks plus the tax cuts he pushed through Congress, Bush took the $127 billion surplus he inherited from former President Bill Clinton and turned it into a $159 billion deficit the following year. Then wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and more tax cuts swelled it to $413 billion in 2004, a record until $454.8 billion for the fiscal 2008 year that ended Sept. 30.
The White House Office of Management and Budget in July estimated the 2009 deficit at $482 billion, but that doesn’t take into account possible losses down the road from loans and investments made under the $700 billion financial rescue plan enacted in October or other efforts to bail out stricken financial institutions.
The Congressional Budget Office put the deficit in October, the first month of fiscal 2009, at a staggering $232 billion. Its figure included $115 billion in bank stock purchases the Treasury Department made as part of the financial bailout.
The deficit “could easily exceed $1 trillion in fiscal 2009 and go even higher in 2010,” Mark Zandi, chief economist and co-founder of Moody’s Economy.com, said at Senate Budget Committee hearings last week. He said borrowing by the Treasury could top $2 trillion this year.
Borrowing adds to the national debt, the money the federal government owes to states, corporations, individuals and foreign countries such as China and Japan that buy U.S. Treasury notes, bonds and other debt instruments. The debt, which stood at about $5.7 trillion in 2007, topped the $10 trillion mark in October and now stands at about $10.6 trillion.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Unapproved Drugs
Date: 11/24/2008
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and FRANK BASS
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP) _ The government is paying millions for risky medications that have never been reviewed for safety and effectiveness but are still covered under Medicaid, an Associated Press analysis of federal data has found.
Taxpayers have shelled out at least $200 million since 2004 for such drugs. Yet the Food and Drug Administration says unapproved prescription drugs are a public health problem, and some unapproved medications have been linked to dozens of deaths.
Millions of private patients are taking them as well, and their availability may create a false sense of security.
The AP analysis found that Medicaid, which serves low-income people, paid nearly $198 million from 2004 to 2007 for more than 100 unapproved drugs. Data for 2008 were not available but unapproved drugs still are being sold. The AP checked the medications against FDA databases, using agency guidelines to determine if they were unapproved. The FDA says there may be thousands of such drugs on the market.
The medications are mainly for common conditions like colds and pain. They date back decades, before the FDA tightened its review of drugs in the early 1960s. The FDA says it is trying to squeeze them from the market, but conflicting federal laws allow the Medicaid health program for low-income people to pay for them.
Medicaid officials acknowledge the problem, but say they need help from Congress to fix it. The FDA and Medicaid are part of the Health and Human Services Department, but the FDA has yet to compile a master list of unapproved drugs, and Medicaid — which may be the biggest purchaser — keeps paying.
“I think this is something we ought to look at very hard, and we ought to fix it,” said Medicaid chief Herb Kuhn. “It raises a whole set of questions, not only in terms of safety, but in the efficiency of the program — to make sure we are getting the right set of services for beneficiaries.”
At a time when families, businesses and government are struggling with health care costs and 46 million people are uninsured, payments for questionable medications amount to an unplugged leak in the system.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has asked the HHS inspector general to investigate.
That unapproved prescription drugs can be sold in the United States surprises even doctors and pharmacists. But the FDA estimates they account for 2 percent of all prescriptions filled by U.S. pharmacies, about 72 million scripts a year. Private insurance plans also cover them.
The roots of the problem go back in time, tangled in layers of legalese.
It wasn’t until 1962 that Congress ordered the FDA to review all new medications for effectiveness. Thousands of drugs already on the market were also supposed to be evaluated. But some manufacturers claimed their medications were grandfathered under earlier laws, and even under the 1962 bill.
Then, in the early 1980s, a safety scandal erupted over one of those medications. E-Ferol, a high potency vitamin E injection, was linked to serious reactions in some 100 premature babies, 40 of whom died.
In response, the FDA started a program to weed out drugs it had never reviewed scientifically. Yet some medications continued to escape scrutiny.
Sometimes, the medications do not help patients. In other cases, the FDA says, they have made people sicker, maybe even killed them. This year, for example, the FDA banned injectable versions of a gout drug called colchicine after receiving reports of 23 deaths. Investigators found the unapproved drug had a very narrow margin of safety, and patients easily could receive a toxic dose leading to complications such as organ failure.
Critics say the FDA’s case-by-case enforcement approach is not working.
“The FDA does not appear to have a systematic mechanism to report these drugs out,” said Jon Glaudemans, senior vice president of Avalere Health, a health care industry information company, “and there doesn’t seem to be a systematic process by which health insurance programs can validate their status. And everyone is pointing the finger at someone else as to why we can’t get there.”
In most cases, doctors, pharmacists and patients are not aware the drugs are unapproved.
“Over the years, they have become fully entrenched in the system,” said Patti Manolakis, a Charlotte, N.C., pharmacist who has studied the issue. Only a few unapproved drugs are truly essential and should remain on the market, she added.
Tackling the problem is made harder by confusing — and sometimes conflicting — laws, regulations and responsibilities that pertain to different government agencies.
Medicaid officials said their program, which serves the poor and disabled, is allowed to pay for unapproved drugs until the FDA orders a specific medication off the market. But that can take years.
Compare that with Medicare, the health care program for older people.
Medicare’s prescription program is not supposed to cover unapproved drugs. Medicare has purged hundreds of such medications from its coverage lists, but it continues to find others.
It might be easier to sort things out if the FDA compiled a master list of unapproved drugs, but the agency hasn’t done so. FDA officials say that would be difficult because many manufacturers do not list unapproved products with the agency. Yet, the AP found many that were listed — a possible starting point for a list.
Among the drugs the AP’s research identified were Carbofed, for colds and flu; Hylira, a dry skin ointment; Andehist, a decongestant, and ICAR Prenatal, a vitamin tablet. Medicaid data show the program paid $7.3 million for Carbofed products from 2004 to 2007; $146,000 for Hylira; $4.8 million for Andehist products, and $900,000 for ICAR.
Grassley said the system is failing taxpayers and consumers.
“The problem I see is bureaucrats don’t want to make a decision,” Grassley said. “There is no reason why this should be such a house of mirrors when so much public money is being spent.” Grassley is considering introducing legislation to ensure that consumers are told when a medication is unapproved.
FDA officials say they tell Medicaid and Medicare when the agency moves to ban an unapproved drug, so the programs can stop paying.
“The situation is complicated by the fact that Medicaid and Medicare have a different regulatory regime than FDA does,” said FDA compliance lawyer Michael Levy. “There are products that we may consider to be illegally marketed that could be legally reimbursed under their law.”
The FDA began its latest crackdown on unapproved drugs two years ago and has taken action against nine types of medications and dozens of companies. Typically, the agency orders manufacturers to stop making and shipping drugs, and it also has seized millions of dollars’ worth of medications. But federal law does not call for fines for selling unapproved drugs, and criminal prosecutions are rare.
Some manufacturers of unapproved drugs say their products predate FDA regulation and are “grandfathered in.”
“These are drugs that don’t require an FDA approval,” said Bill Peters, chief financial officer of Hi-Tech Pharmacal in Amityville, N.Y. “These are products with active ingredients that have been on the market for a long time.” The company is moving away from older products, Peters said, and its new market offerings are FDA-approved.
Levy said the FDA is skeptical that any drugs now being sold are entitled to “grandfather” status. To qualify, they would have to be identical to medications sold decades ago in formulation and other important aspects.
The agency is targeting drugs linked to fraud, ones that do not work and, above all, those with safety risks. While the crackdown has helped, it does not appear to have solved the problem.
The gout drug banned by the FDA this February is not the only recent case involving safety problems.
Last year, the FDA banned unapproved cough medicines containing hydrocodone, a potent narcotic. Some had directions for medicating children as young as age 2, although no hydrocodone cough products have been shown to be safe and effective for children under 6.
In a 2006 case, the agency received 21 reports of children younger than 2 who died after taking unapproved cold and allergy medications containing carbinoxamine, an allergy drug that also acts as a powerful sedative. Regulators banned all products that contained carbinoxamine in combination with other cold medicines.
“We as Americans have a belief that all the prescription drugs that are available to us have been reviewed and approved by the FDA,” said Manolakis, the pharmacist. “I think the presence of these drugs shows we have a false sense of security.”
___
On the Net:
FDA’s unapproved drugs page: http://tinyurl.com/4tv2sb
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Summary
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and FRANK BASS
Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP) _ The government is paying millions for risky medications that have never been reviewed for safety and effectiveness but are still covered under Medicaid, an Associated Press analysis of federal data has found.
Taxpayers have shelled out at least $200 million since 2004 for such drugs. Yet the Food and Drug Administration says unapproved prescription drugs are a public health problem, and some unapproved medications have been linked to dozens of deaths.
Millions of private patients are taking them as well, and their availability may create a false sense of security.
The AP analysis found that Medicaid, which serves low-income people, paid nearly $198 million from 2004 to 2007 for more than 100 unapproved drugs. Data for 2008 were not available but unapproved drugs still are being sold. The AP checked the medications against FDA databases, using agency guidelines to determine if they were unapproved. The FDA says there may be thousands of such drugs on the market.
The medications are mainly for common conditions like colds and pain. They date back decades, before the FDA tightened its review of drugs in the early 1960s. The FDA says it is trying to squeeze them from the market, but conflicting federal laws allow the Medicaid health program for low-income people to pay for them.
Medicaid officials acknowledge the problem, but say they need help from Congress to fix it. The FDA and Medicaid are part of the Health and Human Services Department, but the FDA has yet to compile a master list of unapproved drugs, and Medicaid — which may be the biggest purchaser — keeps paying.
“I think this is something we ought to look at very hard, and we ought to fix it,” said Medicaid chief Herb Kuhn. “It raises a whole set of questions, not only in terms of safety, but in the efficiency of the program — to make sure we are getting the right set of services for beneficiaries.”
At a time when families, businesses and government are struggling with health care costs and 46 million people are uninsured, payments for questionable medications amount to an unplugged leak in the system.
Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, has asked the HHS inspector general to investigate.
That unapproved prescription drugs can be sold in the United States surprises even doctors and pharmacists. But the FDA estimates they account for 2 percent of all prescriptions filled by U.S. pharmacies, about 72 million scripts a year. Private insurance plans also cover them.
The roots of the problem go back in time, tangled in layers of legalese.
It wasn’t until 1962 that Congress ordered the FDA to review all new medications for effectiveness. Thousands of drugs already on the market were also supposed to be evaluated. But some manufacturers claimed their medications were grandfathered under earlier laws, and even under the 1962 bill.
Then, in the early 1980s, a safety scandal erupted over one of those medications. E-Ferol, a high potency vitamin E injection, was linked to serious reactions in some 100 premature babies, 40 of whom died.
In response, the FDA started a program to weed out drugs it had never reviewed scientifically. Yet some medications continued to escape scrutiny.
Sometimes, the medications do not help patients. In other cases, the FDA says, they have made people sicker, maybe even killed them. This year, for example, the FDA banned injectable versions of a gout drug called colchicine after receiving reports of 23 deaths. Investigators found the unapproved drug had a very narrow margin of safety, and patients easily could receive a toxic dose leading to complications such as organ failure.
Critics say the FDA’s case-by-case enforcement approach is not working.
“The FDA does not appear to have a systematic mechanism to report these drugs out,” said Jon Glaudemans, senior vice president of Avalere Health, a health care industry information company, “and there doesn’t seem to be a systematic process by which health insurance programs can validate their status. And everyone is pointing the finger at someone else as to why we can’t get there.”
In most cases, doctors, pharmacists and patients are not aware the drugs are unapproved.
“Over the years, they have become fully entrenched in the system,” said Patti Manolakis, a Charlotte, N.C., pharmacist who has studied the issue. Only a few unapproved drugs are truly essential and should remain on the market, she added.
Tackling the problem is made harder by confusing — and sometimes conflicting — laws, regulations and responsibilities that pertain to different government agencies.
Medicaid officials said their program, which serves the poor and disabled, is allowed to pay for unapproved drugs until the FDA orders a specific medication off the market. But that can take years.
Compare that with Medicare, the health care program for older people.
Medicare’s prescription program is not supposed to cover unapproved drugs. Medicare has purged hundreds of such medications from its coverage lists, but it continues to find others.
It might be easier to sort things out if the FDA compiled a master list of unapproved drugs, but the agency hasn’t done so. FDA officials say that would be difficult because many manufacturers do not list unapproved products with the agency. Yet, the AP found many that were listed — a possible starting point for a list.
Among the drugs the AP’s research identified were Carbofed, for colds and flu; Hylira, a dry skin ointment; Andehist, a decongestant, and ICAR Prenatal, a vitamin tablet. Medicaid data show the program paid $7.3 million for Carbofed products from 2004 to 2007; $146,000 for Hylira; $4.8 million for Andehist products, and $900,000 for ICAR.
Grassley said the system is failing taxpayers and consumers.
“The problem I see is bureaucrats don’t want to make a decision,” Grassley said. “There is no reason why this should be such a house of mirrors when so much public money is being spent.” Grassley is considering introducing legislation to ensure that consumers are told when a medication is unapproved.
FDA officials say they tell Medicaid and Medicare when the agency moves to ban an unapproved drug, so the programs can stop paying.
“The situation is complicated by the fact that Medicaid and Medicare have a different regulatory regime than FDA does,” said FDA compliance lawyer Michael Levy. “There are products that we may consider to be illegally marketed that could be legally reimbursed under their law.”
The FDA began its latest crackdown on unapproved drugs two years ago and has taken action against nine types of medications and dozens of companies. Typically, the agency orders manufacturers to stop making and shipping drugs, and it also has seized millions of dollars’ worth of medications. But federal law does not call for fines for selling unapproved drugs, and criminal prosecutions are rare.
Some manufacturers of unapproved drugs say their products predate FDA regulation and are “grandfathered in.”
“These are drugs that don’t require an FDA approval,” said Bill Peters, chief financial officer of Hi-Tech Pharmacal in Amityville, N.Y. “These are products with active ingredients that have been on the market for a long time.” The company is moving away from older products, Peters said, and its new market offerings are FDA-approved.
Levy said the FDA is skeptical that any drugs now being sold are entitled to “grandfather” status. To qualify, they would have to be identical to medications sold decades ago in formulation and other important aspects.
The agency is targeting drugs linked to fraud, ones that do not work and, above all, those with safety risks. While the crackdown has helped, it does not appear to have solved the problem.
The gout drug banned by the FDA this February is not the only recent case involving safety problems.
Last year, the FDA banned unapproved cough medicines containing hydrocodone, a potent narcotic. Some had directions for medicating children as young as age 2, although no hydrocodone cough products have been shown to be safe and effective for children under 6.
In a 2006 case, the agency received 21 reports of children younger than 2 who died after taking unapproved cold and allergy medications containing carbinoxamine, an allergy drug that also acts as a powerful sedative. Regulators banned all products that contained carbinoxamine in combination with other cold medicines.
“We as Americans have a belief that all the prescription drugs that are available to us have been reviewed and approved by the FDA,” said Manolakis, the pharmacist. “I think the presence of these drugs shows we have a false sense of security.”
___
On the Net:
FDA’s unapproved drugs page: http://tinyurl.com/4tv2sb
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Summary
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Waxman topples Dingell for key panel chair
Date: 11/20/2008
By ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ Rep. Henry Waxman — a liberal ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi — has wrested the chairmanship of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee from veteran Rep. John Dingell when the new Congress convenes in January.
Waxman, a California liberal and avid environmentalist and booster of health care programs, toppled Dingell Thursday on a vote of 137-122 in the Democratic Party caucus, capping a bitter fight within party ranks.
Dingell has been the top Democrat on the panel for 28 years and is an old-school supporter of the auto industry. Waxman has complained that the committee has been too slow to address environmental issues like global warming.
“The next two years are critical,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., who spoke on Waxman’s behalf in the closed-door caucus. “It’s not personal. It’s about the American people demanding that we embrace change and work with the president on critical issues of climate change and energy and health care.”
Waxman, 69, is an accomplished legislator. He had chaired the Energy and Commerce health and environment subcommittee for 16 years and won a series of piecemeal expansions of the Medicaid health care program for the poor that added many children to the program. He’s also taken on the tobacco companies.
The Energy and Commerce panel is one of the most important House committees, with sweeping jurisdiction over energy, the environment, consumer protection and health care programs such as Medicaid and the popular State Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Waxman has been the top Democrat on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee for the last 12 years. Since Waxman became chairman of that panel two years ago, it has taken the Bush administration to task over global warming and allegations that it muzzled government scientists. It also has investigated the White House’s political operation, the use of steroids in sports and, most recently, abuses behind the financial collapse.
Dingell, 82, has been the committee’s top Democrat for 28 years and is an important ally of automakers and electric utilities. He’s considered one of the House’s premier legislators, with a lengthy track record on health, consumer issues and the environment, among other things.
Dingell’s defenders said he had done nothing to deserve being dumped, pointing to the panel’s busy workload over the last two years, including successfully enacting an energy bill that raised automobile fuel economy standards to 35 miles per gallon by 2010.
“I think it was highly inappropriate,” said Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va. “There was no obvious reason for it other than the desire for another person to chair the committee.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ Rep. Henry Waxman — a liberal ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi — has wrested the chairmanship of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee from veteran Rep. John Dingell when the new Congress convenes in January.
Waxman, a California liberal and avid environmentalist and booster of health care programs, toppled Dingell Thursday on a vote of 137-122 in the Democratic Party caucus, capping a bitter fight within party ranks.
Dingell has been the top Democrat on the panel for 28 years and is an old-school supporter of the auto industry. Waxman has complained that the committee has been too slow to address environmental issues like global warming.
“The next two years are critical,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., who spoke on Waxman’s behalf in the closed-door caucus. “It’s not personal. It’s about the American people demanding that we embrace change and work with the president on critical issues of climate change and energy and health care.”
Waxman, 69, is an accomplished legislator. He had chaired the Energy and Commerce health and environment subcommittee for 16 years and won a series of piecemeal expansions of the Medicaid health care program for the poor that added many children to the program. He’s also taken on the tobacco companies.
The Energy and Commerce panel is one of the most important House committees, with sweeping jurisdiction over energy, the environment, consumer protection and health care programs such as Medicaid and the popular State Children’s Health Insurance Program.
Waxman has been the top Democrat on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee for the last 12 years. Since Waxman became chairman of that panel two years ago, it has taken the Bush administration to task over global warming and allegations that it muzzled government scientists. It also has investigated the White House’s political operation, the use of steroids in sports and, most recently, abuses behind the financial collapse.
Dingell, 82, has been the committee’s top Democrat for 28 years and is an important ally of automakers and electric utilities. He’s considered one of the House’s premier legislators, with a lengthy track record on health, consumer issues and the environment, among other things.
Dingell’s defenders said he had done nothing to deserve being dumped, pointing to the panel’s busy workload over the last two years, including successfully enacting an energy bill that raised automobile fuel economy standards to 35 miles per gallon by 2010.
“I think it was highly inappropriate,” said Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va. “There was no obvious reason for it other than the desire for another person to chair the committee.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Daschle to take health post, another familiar face
Date: 11/19/2008
By KEVIN FREKING
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ Barack Obama is enlisting former Senate leader Tom Daschle as his health secretary, embracing a third Washington insider in the early stages of Cabinet-building by the president-elect who promised change. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the capital’s most famous woman for two decades, seemed ever more likely to be his secretary of state.
Clinton is deciding whether to take that post as America’s top diplomat, her associates said Wednesday. And Obama is poised to announce that his attorney general will be Eric Holder, who was the Justice Department’s No. 2 when Sen. Clinton’s husband was president.
Keeping the seating charts straight is Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff and another veteran of the Clinton White House.
It’s still early in the building of an administration by the candidate who built his campaign on promises of change. But so far fresh faces have been few.
Daschle’s selection to head the Department of Health and Human Services — confirmed Wednesday but not yet announced — isn’t at the same level of Cabinet prestige as the top spots at the State and Justice departments. But the health post could be more important in an Obama administration than in some others, making Daschle a key player in helping steer the president-elect’s promised health care reforms
The former South Dakota senator’s return to the government will be a vindication of sorts. He was the Senate Democratic leader when he was defeated in 2004 by Republican John Thune, who persuaded voters back home that Daschle was more concerned with Washington than with them.
In fact, Daschle stayed in the capital city after his defeat, becoming a public policy adviser and member of the legislative and public policy group at the law and lobbying firm Alston & Bird. Daschle isn’t registered as a lobbyist. He advises clients on issues including health care, financial services, taxes and trade, according to the firm’s Web site.
Health care interests, including CVS Caremark, the National Association for Home Care and Hospice, Abbott Laboratories and HealthSouth, are among the firm’s lobbying clients.
Daschle’s appointment was not formally announced, but Democratic officials said the job was his barring an unforeseen problem as Obama’s team reviews his background. One area of review will include the lobbying connections of his wife, Linda Hall Daschle, who has worked mostly on behalf of airline-related companies over the years. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
Linda Hall Daschle was acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration in the Clinton administration and is one of Washington’s top lobbyists. Her clients over the past year included American Airlines, Lockheed Martin and Boeing, Senate lobbying records show. Daschle’s lobbying firm said Wednesday that she would be leaving the group at the end of the year.
Tom Daschle, who will be 61 next month, was a close adviser to Obama throughout the former Illinois senator’s White House campaign. He recently wrote a book on his proposals to improve health care: “Critical: What We Can Do About The Health-Care Crisis.” He also has been working with former Senate leaders on recommendations to expand health coverage.
An array of consumer groups quickly lined up in support of Daschle as secretary of a department that oversees nearly a quarter of all federal spending.
“Someone with his stature and clout, combined with his passion and expertise in health care, is an exciting choice,” said DeAnn Friedholm, Consumers Union’s campaign director for health care reform.
Said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA: “His new leadership position confirms that the incoming Obama administration has made health care reform a top and early priority for action in 2009.”
Republicans sniped at what they saw as an unwelcome trend.
“Barack Obama is filling his administration with longtime Washington insiders,” said Alex Conant, spokesman for the Republican National Committee. “Since losing his Senate seat, Tom Daschle has worked for a major lobbying firm. For voters hoping to see new faces and fewer lobbyist connections in government, Daschle’s nomination will be another disappointment.”
Daschle will not only work on efforts to reduce the ranks of the uninsured, but he’ll also be tasked with improving the nation’s food and drug safety as well as overseeing safety net programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
Confirmation should be no problem.
“It’s a terrific choice,” said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. “I am elated. As a former member he certainly knows the Congress, he knows the Senate, he is deeply committed to health care reform.”
Daschle is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank run by top Obama transition adviser John Podesta, a former Clinton White House chief of staff. According to his center biography, Daschle serves on the advisory boards of Intermedia Partners and the BP America Inc. external advisory council, and on the boards of CB Richard Ellis, Mascoma Corp., Prime BioSolutions, The Freedom Forum, the Mayo Clinic, the Center for American Progress, the LBJ Foundation and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. He is also a member of the Council of Foreign Relations.
His son, Nathan, is the executive director of the Democratic Governors Association. His daughter, Kelly, is a senior producer for AP television news in Washington.
Daschle’s strong Capitol Hill ties and knowledge of how the Health and Human Services Department works mean “it is a perfect appointment,” said former Republican Rep. John Porter, who chairs the medical research advocacy group Research!America. “He’ll do an outstanding job.”
In his book, Daschle reviewed how he believed the health care reform effort failed during the Clinton administration — an effort that was led by Sen. Clinton, who was then first lady. He bemoaned the complexity of the legislation before Congress then and the time it took to put it together.
“Everybody was in favor of health care reform. But when it came down to the details, few groups were willing to tolerate provisions that might harm them, to swallow new regulations or to sacrifice some profits for the greater good,” Daschle wrote. “Instead of seeing the broad picture, each stakeholder focused on its own narrow interests and dug in for battle. The result is that the great health care debate of the early 1990s expired with barely a whimper.”
As secretary, he will also deal with the growing budgetary woes of some of the nation’s most important health agencies.
One example: Years of funding that didn’t keep up with inflation mean the National Institutes of Health has lost 14 percent of its buying power, said Dr. Harold Varmus, NIH’s former director and now a science adviser to Obama’s campaign. That has left promising disease research without money to move forward.
Obama also announced several transition working group leaders on Wednesday, including Daschle, who will oversee the health policy working group. Others include former Environmental Protection Agency administrator Carol Browner on energy and environment, and former Clinton White House adviser Jim Steinberg and Obama campaign senior foreign policy adviser Susan Rice on national security.
___
Associated Press writers Sharon Theimer, Lauran Neergaard and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By KEVIN FREKING
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ Barack Obama is enlisting former Senate leader Tom Daschle as his health secretary, embracing a third Washington insider in the early stages of Cabinet-building by the president-elect who promised change. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the capital’s most famous woman for two decades, seemed ever more likely to be his secretary of state.
Clinton is deciding whether to take that post as America’s top diplomat, her associates said Wednesday. And Obama is poised to announce that his attorney general will be Eric Holder, who was the Justice Department’s No. 2 when Sen. Clinton’s husband was president.
Keeping the seating charts straight is Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s chief of staff and another veteran of the Clinton White House.
It’s still early in the building of an administration by the candidate who built his campaign on promises of change. But so far fresh faces have been few.
Daschle’s selection to head the Department of Health and Human Services — confirmed Wednesday but not yet announced — isn’t at the same level of Cabinet prestige as the top spots at the State and Justice departments. But the health post could be more important in an Obama administration than in some others, making Daschle a key player in helping steer the president-elect’s promised health care reforms
The former South Dakota senator’s return to the government will be a vindication of sorts. He was the Senate Democratic leader when he was defeated in 2004 by Republican John Thune, who persuaded voters back home that Daschle was more concerned with Washington than with them.
In fact, Daschle stayed in the capital city after his defeat, becoming a public policy adviser and member of the legislative and public policy group at the law and lobbying firm Alston & Bird. Daschle isn’t registered as a lobbyist. He advises clients on issues including health care, financial services, taxes and trade, according to the firm’s Web site.
Health care interests, including CVS Caremark, the National Association for Home Care and Hospice, Abbott Laboratories and HealthSouth, are among the firm’s lobbying clients.
Daschle’s appointment was not formally announced, but Democratic officials said the job was his barring an unforeseen problem as Obama’s team reviews his background. One area of review will include the lobbying connections of his wife, Linda Hall Daschle, who has worked mostly on behalf of airline-related companies over the years. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly.
Linda Hall Daschle was acting administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration in the Clinton administration and is one of Washington’s top lobbyists. Her clients over the past year included American Airlines, Lockheed Martin and Boeing, Senate lobbying records show. Daschle’s lobbying firm said Wednesday that she would be leaving the group at the end of the year.
Tom Daschle, who will be 61 next month, was a close adviser to Obama throughout the former Illinois senator’s White House campaign. He recently wrote a book on his proposals to improve health care: “Critical: What We Can Do About The Health-Care Crisis.” He also has been working with former Senate leaders on recommendations to expand health coverage.
An array of consumer groups quickly lined up in support of Daschle as secretary of a department that oversees nearly a quarter of all federal spending.
“Someone with his stature and clout, combined with his passion and expertise in health care, is an exciting choice,” said DeAnn Friedholm, Consumers Union’s campaign director for health care reform.
Said Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA: “His new leadership position confirms that the incoming Obama administration has made health care reform a top and early priority for action in 2009.”
Republicans sniped at what they saw as an unwelcome trend.
“Barack Obama is filling his administration with longtime Washington insiders,” said Alex Conant, spokesman for the Republican National Committee. “Since losing his Senate seat, Tom Daschle has worked for a major lobbying firm. For voters hoping to see new faces and fewer lobbyist connections in government, Daschle’s nomination will be another disappointment.”
Daschle will not only work on efforts to reduce the ranks of the uninsured, but he’ll also be tasked with improving the nation’s food and drug safety as well as overseeing safety net programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
Confirmation should be no problem.
“It’s a terrific choice,” said Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. “I am elated. As a former member he certainly knows the Congress, he knows the Senate, he is deeply committed to health care reform.”
Daschle is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank run by top Obama transition adviser John Podesta, a former Clinton White House chief of staff. According to his center biography, Daschle serves on the advisory boards of Intermedia Partners and the BP America Inc. external advisory council, and on the boards of CB Richard Ellis, Mascoma Corp., Prime BioSolutions, The Freedom Forum, the Mayo Clinic, the Center for American Progress, the LBJ Foundation and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs. He is also a member of the Council of Foreign Relations.
His son, Nathan, is the executive director of the Democratic Governors Association. His daughter, Kelly, is a senior producer for AP television news in Washington.
Daschle’s strong Capitol Hill ties and knowledge of how the Health and Human Services Department works mean “it is a perfect appointment,” said former Republican Rep. John Porter, who chairs the medical research advocacy group Research!America. “He’ll do an outstanding job.”
In his book, Daschle reviewed how he believed the health care reform effort failed during the Clinton administration — an effort that was led by Sen. Clinton, who was then first lady. He bemoaned the complexity of the legislation before Congress then and the time it took to put it together.
“Everybody was in favor of health care reform. But when it came down to the details, few groups were willing to tolerate provisions that might harm them, to swallow new regulations or to sacrifice some profits for the greater good,” Daschle wrote. “Instead of seeing the broad picture, each stakeholder focused on its own narrow interests and dug in for battle. The result is that the great health care debate of the early 1990s expired with barely a whimper.”
As secretary, he will also deal with the growing budgetary woes of some of the nation’s most important health agencies.
One example: Years of funding that didn’t keep up with inflation mean the National Institutes of Health has lost 14 percent of its buying power, said Dr. Harold Varmus, NIH’s former director and now a science adviser to Obama’s campaign. That has left promising disease research without money to move forward.
Obama also announced several transition working group leaders on Wednesday, including Daschle, who will oversee the health policy working group. Others include former Environmental Protection Agency administrator Carol Browner on energy and environment, and former Clinton White House adviser Jim Steinberg and Obama campaign senior foreign policy adviser Susan Rice on national security.
___
Associated Press writers Sharon Theimer, Lauran Neergaard and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Supporters ask court to uphold malpractice caps
Date: 11/13/2008
By JOHN O’CONNOR
AP Political Writer
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) _ A 2005 law limiting the amount of money juries may award in medical malpractice cases unfairly targets those most seriously injured who deserve the most compensation, lawyers told the Illinois Supreme Court Thursday.
Proponents of the law asked the court not to limit what they called lawmakers’ attempt to stem a health care crisis.
The law restricts awards on non-economic damages such as pain and suffering to $500,000 against doctors and $1 million against hospitals. It was aimed at lowering medial insurance rates blamed for driving physicians, particularly specialists, out of the state.
A trial court ruled last year that the law violates the Constitution’s separation of powers clause by allowing the General Assembly to restrict deliberations by judges and juries. The Supreme Court will study the matter and issue an opinion later.
Supporters argued Thursday that courts should allow lawmakers to impose reasonable remedies to problems.
“This court should not adopt an absolute limit on legislative authority. People have got to go to the Legislature,” said former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, who is defending a doctor accused of malpractice in the brain damage suffered at birth by 3-year-old Abigaile LeBron. The case is one of three out of Cook County testing the three-year-old law.
“The Legislature is equipped — this court is not equipped — to hold hearings, take testimony, and set the policy for the state,” Olson said.
The law not only limits damages, it gives state regulators more power to review and change malpractice insurance rates and tougher oversight of doctors to punish mistakes.
“Everyone has been asked to give something, including those who have suffered injury,” said Michael Scodro, solicitor general for the Illinois attorney general.
But the sacrifice is uneven, said Michael Gottesman, a Georgetown University law professor representing Abigaile LeBron and her mother. Past court decisions, he said, have ruled that laws cannot differentiate between levels of injury, which Illinois’ does.
The LeBron family’s non-economic damages, for example, might far exceed the caps, Gottesman said. In the case of a wealthy person whose injury causes millions of dollars in lost income, he would recover all of it because the law puts no restrictions on jury awards of economic damages.
“Even though the attorney general says health care consumers ought to contribute to the solution, the only people being asked to contribute to this solution are the most seriously injured people — almost by definition the people least capable of making this contribution,” Gottesman said.
Under questioning by justices, Gary Feinerman, who represents defendant Gottlieb Memorial Hospital in the LeBron case, said the court must reject Gottesman’s argument that the law must be nullified just because caps affect severely injured patients.
Rather, the court must focus on why lawmakers acted.
“The General Assembly had a very good reason. There was a health care crisis and the General Assembly chose a multifaceted solution to that problem,” Feinerman said.
___
The case is LeBron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital.
___
On the Net
Illinois State Medical Society: http://www.realitymedicine.com/
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By JOHN O’CONNOR
AP Political Writer
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) _ A 2005 law limiting the amount of money juries may award in medical malpractice cases unfairly targets those most seriously injured who deserve the most compensation, lawyers told the Illinois Supreme Court Thursday.
Proponents of the law asked the court not to limit what they called lawmakers’ attempt to stem a health care crisis.
The law restricts awards on non-economic damages such as pain and suffering to $500,000 against doctors and $1 million against hospitals. It was aimed at lowering medial insurance rates blamed for driving physicians, particularly specialists, out of the state.
A trial court ruled last year that the law violates the Constitution’s separation of powers clause by allowing the General Assembly to restrict deliberations by judges and juries. The Supreme Court will study the matter and issue an opinion later.
Supporters argued Thursday that courts should allow lawmakers to impose reasonable remedies to problems.
“This court should not adopt an absolute limit on legislative authority. People have got to go to the Legislature,” said former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson, who is defending a doctor accused of malpractice in the brain damage suffered at birth by 3-year-old Abigaile LeBron. The case is one of three out of Cook County testing the three-year-old law.
“The Legislature is equipped — this court is not equipped — to hold hearings, take testimony, and set the policy for the state,” Olson said.
The law not only limits damages, it gives state regulators more power to review and change malpractice insurance rates and tougher oversight of doctors to punish mistakes.
“Everyone has been asked to give something, including those who have suffered injury,” said Michael Scodro, solicitor general for the Illinois attorney general.
But the sacrifice is uneven, said Michael Gottesman, a Georgetown University law professor representing Abigaile LeBron and her mother. Past court decisions, he said, have ruled that laws cannot differentiate between levels of injury, which Illinois’ does.
The LeBron family’s non-economic damages, for example, might far exceed the caps, Gottesman said. In the case of a wealthy person whose injury causes millions of dollars in lost income, he would recover all of it because the law puts no restrictions on jury awards of economic damages.
“Even though the attorney general says health care consumers ought to contribute to the solution, the only people being asked to contribute to this solution are the most seriously injured people — almost by definition the people least capable of making this contribution,” Gottesman said.
Under questioning by justices, Gary Feinerman, who represents defendant Gottlieb Memorial Hospital in the LeBron case, said the court must reject Gottesman’s argument that the law must be nullified just because caps affect severely injured patients.
Rather, the court must focus on why lawmakers acted.
“The General Assembly had a very good reason. There was a health care crisis and the General Assembly chose a multifaceted solution to that problem,” Feinerman said.
___
The case is LeBron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital.
___
On the Net
Illinois State Medical Society: http://www.realitymedicine.com/
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Former member: Ky. Klan plotted to kill attorney
Date: 11/13/2008
By BRETT BARROUQUERE
Associated Press Writer
BRANDENBURG, Ky. (AP) _ The head of a Kentucky-based Ku Klux Klan organization led a failed plot to kill the co-founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups and challenges white supremacists, a former Klan member testified Thursday.
Kale Todd Kelly testified as part of the center’s lawsuit seeking to bankrupt the Imperial Klans of America, the nation’s second-largest Klan group.
Kelly said imperial grand wizard Ron Edwards wanted to kill civil rights attorney Morris Dees over a suit he brought against another white supremacist group, Aryan Nations, in 1999. The plot failed when the FBI infiltrated the group. Edwards was never charged.
“It was all planned,” said Kelly, 48, who served three years in federal prison for weapons offenses related to the plot against Dees.
He said Edwards was supposed to meet him in Idaho with a weapon. Then, Kelly said, he was to shoot Dees.
Kelly is one of several witnesses who have testified that Edwards tends to push for violent acts against opponents.
The Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center is suing Edwards, lieutenant Jarred Hensley of Cincinnati and the Klan on behalf of Jordan Gruver, a Latino teen severely beaten at a county fair by two Klan members in 2006.
The suit seeks a “substantial judgment.” Hensley and fellow Klansman Andrew Watkins were convicted in the beating, but Watkins and other members initially named in the civil lawsuit have reached undisclosed settlements with the law center.
Dees, also the lead attorney in this case, contends Edwards incited Klan members to violence through speeches and music. Edwards maintains his group isn’t typically violent.
Kelly’s testimony came on the second day of the trial, which was attended by nearly a dozen self-identified skinheads and Klansmen, several dressed in black jackets with Nazi symbols. Kentucky State Police have stationed officers on the courthouse roof.
Edwards and Hensley, who are representing themselves, clashed with Meade Circuit Judge Bruce Butler, who repeatedly admonished them to stop arguing with witnesses.
“Mr. Edwards, you ask questions, he answers them. But you don’t comment on the answers,” Butler said.
“I’m trying,” Edwards said.
“Try harder,” Butler responded.
Two other former Klan members, Joshua Edward Cowles and Matthew Roberts of Ohio, testified that Edwards encouraged recruiting and violence but did not tell them to attack Gruver at the fair.
But both described Edwards as a greedy coward who used the Klan to intimidate enemies and make money.
“It was an absolute obsession with money and greed,” Cowles said. “The IKA is about one man and one man only. That’s Ron Edwards.”
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By BRETT BARROUQUERE
Associated Press Writer
BRANDENBURG, Ky. (AP) _ The head of a Kentucky-based Ku Klux Klan organization led a failed plot to kill the co-founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups and challenges white supremacists, a former Klan member testified Thursday.
Kale Todd Kelly testified as part of the center’s lawsuit seeking to bankrupt the Imperial Klans of America, the nation’s second-largest Klan group.
Kelly said imperial grand wizard Ron Edwards wanted to kill civil rights attorney Morris Dees over a suit he brought against another white supremacist group, Aryan Nations, in 1999. The plot failed when the FBI infiltrated the group. Edwards was never charged.
“It was all planned,” said Kelly, 48, who served three years in federal prison for weapons offenses related to the plot against Dees.
He said Edwards was supposed to meet him in Idaho with a weapon. Then, Kelly said, he was to shoot Dees.
Kelly is one of several witnesses who have testified that Edwards tends to push for violent acts against opponents.
The Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center is suing Edwards, lieutenant Jarred Hensley of Cincinnati and the Klan on behalf of Jordan Gruver, a Latino teen severely beaten at a county fair by two Klan members in 2006.
The suit seeks a “substantial judgment.” Hensley and fellow Klansman Andrew Watkins were convicted in the beating, but Watkins and other members initially named in the civil lawsuit have reached undisclosed settlements with the law center.
Dees, also the lead attorney in this case, contends Edwards incited Klan members to violence through speeches and music. Edwards maintains his group isn’t typically violent.
Kelly’s testimony came on the second day of the trial, which was attended by nearly a dozen self-identified skinheads and Klansmen, several dressed in black jackets with Nazi symbols. Kentucky State Police have stationed officers on the courthouse roof.
Edwards and Hensley, who are representing themselves, clashed with Meade Circuit Judge Bruce Butler, who repeatedly admonished them to stop arguing with witnesses.
“Mr. Edwards, you ask questions, he answers them. But you don’t comment on the answers,” Butler said.
“I’m trying,” Edwards said.
“Try harder,” Butler responded.
Two other former Klan members, Joshua Edward Cowles and Matthew Roberts of Ohio, testified that Edwards encouraged recruiting and violence but did not tell them to attack Gruver at the fair.
But both described Edwards as a greedy coward who used the Klan to intimidate enemies and make money.
“It was an absolute obsession with money and greed,” Cowles said. “The IKA is about one man and one man only. That’s Ron Edwards.”
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Gen. Tommy Franks: Obama will ‘do the right thing’
Date: 11/12/2008
By ROCHELLE HINES
Associated Press Writer
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) _ Retired U.S. Army Gen. Tommy Franks, who developed and executed the Iraq invasion plan, said President-elect Obama will “do the right thing” when it comes to the war.
Franks, who spoke with reporters before being inducted into the Oklahoma Military Hall of Fame, said that as a senator, Obama had limited access to those who conducted day-to-day military operations. As president, Franks said, Obama will gain a different perspective.
“I give him a lot of credit for being a very, very bright man,” Franks said Tuesday. “Nobody will have to give him instructions. He’ll figure it out all by himself. And at the end of the day, he’ll do the right thing.”
Obama pledged during the campaign to bring all combat troops home within 16 months of his inauguration Jan. 20.
Franks was commander in chief of the U.S. Central Command when the United States began military action in Afghanistan in 2001 and invaded Iraq in 2003. He retired in August 2003.
The Oklahoma-born, Texas-bred four-star general said the United States has 230 years of experience in changing administrations. “Sen. Barack Obama is going to be the next president of the United States and I’m going to support him.”
Franks said he would have to “wait and see” what a Democratic-controlled House and Senate would do to funding for the military, but hoped there wouldn’t be a decrease in money to upgrade equipment for the troops.
“What we need to do with our military is spend as necessary to get the right size force with the right kind of equipment,” he said.
“It seems to me it would be a little disingenuous for the Democrats on the one hand to complain that not all American soldiers have the very best body armor or the very best Humvees … and then all of a sudden decide they need even less than they have now.”
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By ROCHELLE HINES
Associated Press Writer
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) _ Retired U.S. Army Gen. Tommy Franks, who developed and executed the Iraq invasion plan, said President-elect Obama will “do the right thing” when it comes to the war.
Franks, who spoke with reporters before being inducted into the Oklahoma Military Hall of Fame, said that as a senator, Obama had limited access to those who conducted day-to-day military operations. As president, Franks said, Obama will gain a different perspective.
“I give him a lot of credit for being a very, very bright man,” Franks said Tuesday. “Nobody will have to give him instructions. He’ll figure it out all by himself. And at the end of the day, he’ll do the right thing.”
Obama pledged during the campaign to bring all combat troops home within 16 months of his inauguration Jan. 20.
Franks was commander in chief of the U.S. Central Command when the United States began military action in Afghanistan in 2001 and invaded Iraq in 2003. He retired in August 2003.
The Oklahoma-born, Texas-bred four-star general said the United States has 230 years of experience in changing administrations. “Sen. Barack Obama is going to be the next president of the United States and I’m going to support him.”
Franks said he would have to “wait and see” what a Democratic-controlled House and Senate would do to funding for the military, but hoped there wouldn’t be a decrease in money to upgrade equipment for the troops.
“What we need to do with our military is spend as necessary to get the right size force with the right kind of equipment,” he said.
“It seems to me it would be a little disingenuous for the Democrats on the one hand to complain that not all American soldiers have the very best body armor or the very best Humvees … and then all of a sudden decide they need even less than they have now.”
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
A tough time for comics with Obama as president?
Date: 11/10/2008
By FRAZIER MOORE
AP Television Writer
NEW YORK (AP) _ Where’s the funny in Barack Obama?
That question, which dogged TV humorists throughout the presidential race, has gained new urgency now that Obama is headed for the White House.
His victory last week signaled imminent hardship for comics who lampoon political leaders for a living. The laugh-a-minute 2008 campaign is history, and soon there’ll be no President Bush to kick around in comedy sketches or talk-show monologues.
Adding to the jesters’ plight: Obama will soon be sworn in as the next Punch-Line-In-Chief.
Here is a man who inspires admiration, excitement or, maybe, suspicion. What he doesn’t inspire (in any measurable quantity, so far) are cheap laughs.
“A dignified, thoughtful, charismatic, smart man who doesn’t run at the mouth,” summed up Craig Ferguson, host of CBS’ “Late Late Show,” in the aftermath of eight go-go Bush years for comics. “Is it a challenge to our creative juices to find something funny about Obama? God, yes!”
Right after the election, some TV wags were even waxing nostalgic on the air, however tongue-in-cheek.
On Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” Jon Stewart said he was already missing the Bush administration — and his own George W. Bush impression, which had served him so well at the anchor desk.
“As a comedian,” NBC’s Jay Leno echoed to his “Tonight Show” audience, “I’m going to miss President Bush. Barack Obama is not easy to do jokes about. He doesn’t give you a lot to go on. See, this is why God gave us (Vice President-elect) Joe Biden.
“When one door closes, another one opens up.”
True, as a six-term U.S. Senator and lately as Obama’s running mate, Biden has cemented his reputation for blurting out remarks before they’re vetted by his brain. (Item: Biden declared that “Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television” to address the nation when the stock market crashed in October 1929 — even though Herbert Hoover was president then and TV was barely invented.)
“He’s a little more gregarious, runs around and slaps people on the back, he’s cheery-looking,” said Ferguson, who agreed that Biden is the comics’ consolation prize. “You can at least put him in a sketch.”
The host of HBO’s “Real Time,” comic Bill Maher describes himself as “a policy guy who tries to stick more to what politicians do than who they are.” But that doesn’t mean he’s immune to the problem Obama represents.
“It’s always better if the president is stupid, or fat, or cheating on his wife, or angry, or a phony. This guy is none of those things. And that,” said Maher with a laugh, “is really unfair.
“But, c’mon, on balance, aren’t we all happier that we have somebody who isn’t such an easy target? I mean, comedians have had it really easy for the last eight years.”
Humor often relies on stereotypes and caricature, but comics haven’t yet sussed out how to caricature Obama, and so far he has defied any categorical stereotypes — even that of a black man.
Magician-comedian Penn Jillette recalled how “there have been jokes about Bush that had nothing to do with him being stupid or wrong — just about his being from Texas, since he has a slight Texas accent.
“But if you wanted to do black jokes about Obama, none of them are applicable: It’s as if he were from Texas, but without the Texas accent.”
Jillette ventured an idea for putting Obama in the comic cross-hairs: Crack wise about his notion “that government can solve a lot of the problems that were previously left to the individual. I would be talking about the audacity of government giving people that kind of hope.”
Ferguson proposed poking fun at Obama’s “deification” by his more fervent supporters. It’s no long-term solution for comedians, but it might buy them some time.
Obama’s do-no-wrong aura is sure to be short-lived, as Americans observe him no longer full-tilt on the campaign trail but instead slogging through each presidential workday.
And humor springs from increased familiarity with the target of the jokes.
“In time, that will happen,” said “Saturday Night Live” cast member Fred Armisen, who last February scored the show’s plum role impersonating Obama — “in time, not just with me, as we see more and more of him.”
And as comedians search for Obama’s laughs-generating sweet spot, they should fight the urge to go easy on him out of misconceived racial sensitivity, said D.L. Hughley.
“If you call yourself a comic, you can’t excuse the most powerful man in the world,” said Hughley, who is black and host of “D.L. Hughley Breaks the News” on CNN. “He is the most powerful man on the face of the planet. He is The Man!”
And many changes await in an Obama presidency that will serve the cause of humor. Meanwhile, much about the comedy landscape will be the same, as Hughley was reminded as he headed home on election night.
“I had watched it in Harlem,” he said. “I was elated, smiling from ear-to-ear, excited that the country I love now decided that they love people like me back, and in a major way. And I flagged a cab. And that cab drove right by me. Then I tried to flag another one, and it drove right by.”
Recalling the experience, he couldn’t help laughing that a black man couldn’t get a cab to stop in Obama’s America. Until comics find the key to the funny in Obama, they’ll have plenty else to make jokes about.
___
AP Entertainment Writer Jake Coyle contributed to this report.
___
CBS is owned by CBS Corp; CNN and HBO are owned by Time Warner; Comedy Central is owned by Viacom; NBC is owned by General Electric.
EDITOR’S NOTE — Frazier Moore is a national television columnist for The Associated Press. He can be reached at fmoore(at)ap.org
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By FRAZIER MOORE
AP Television Writer
NEW YORK (AP) _ Where’s the funny in Barack Obama?
That question, which dogged TV humorists throughout the presidential race, has gained new urgency now that Obama is headed for the White House.
His victory last week signaled imminent hardship for comics who lampoon political leaders for a living. The laugh-a-minute 2008 campaign is history, and soon there’ll be no President Bush to kick around in comedy sketches or talk-show monologues.
Adding to the jesters’ plight: Obama will soon be sworn in as the next Punch-Line-In-Chief.
Here is a man who inspires admiration, excitement or, maybe, suspicion. What he doesn’t inspire (in any measurable quantity, so far) are cheap laughs.
“A dignified, thoughtful, charismatic, smart man who doesn’t run at the mouth,” summed up Craig Ferguson, host of CBS’ “Late Late Show,” in the aftermath of eight go-go Bush years for comics. “Is it a challenge to our creative juices to find something funny about Obama? God, yes!”
Right after the election, some TV wags were even waxing nostalgic on the air, however tongue-in-cheek.
On Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” Jon Stewart said he was already missing the Bush administration — and his own George W. Bush impression, which had served him so well at the anchor desk.
“As a comedian,” NBC’s Jay Leno echoed to his “Tonight Show” audience, “I’m going to miss President Bush. Barack Obama is not easy to do jokes about. He doesn’t give you a lot to go on. See, this is why God gave us (Vice President-elect) Joe Biden.
“When one door closes, another one opens up.”
True, as a six-term U.S. Senator and lately as Obama’s running mate, Biden has cemented his reputation for blurting out remarks before they’re vetted by his brain. (Item: Biden declared that “Franklin D. Roosevelt got on the television” to address the nation when the stock market crashed in October 1929 — even though Herbert Hoover was president then and TV was barely invented.)
“He’s a little more gregarious, runs around and slaps people on the back, he’s cheery-looking,” said Ferguson, who agreed that Biden is the comics’ consolation prize. “You can at least put him in a sketch.”
The host of HBO’s “Real Time,” comic Bill Maher describes himself as “a policy guy who tries to stick more to what politicians do than who they are.” But that doesn’t mean he’s immune to the problem Obama represents.
“It’s always better if the president is stupid, or fat, or cheating on his wife, or angry, or a phony. This guy is none of those things. And that,” said Maher with a laugh, “is really unfair.
“But, c’mon, on balance, aren’t we all happier that we have somebody who isn’t such an easy target? I mean, comedians have had it really easy for the last eight years.”
Humor often relies on stereotypes and caricature, but comics haven’t yet sussed out how to caricature Obama, and so far he has defied any categorical stereotypes — even that of a black man.
Magician-comedian Penn Jillette recalled how “there have been jokes about Bush that had nothing to do with him being stupid or wrong — just about his being from Texas, since he has a slight Texas accent.
“But if you wanted to do black jokes about Obama, none of them are applicable: It’s as if he were from Texas, but without the Texas accent.”
Jillette ventured an idea for putting Obama in the comic cross-hairs: Crack wise about his notion “that government can solve a lot of the problems that were previously left to the individual. I would be talking about the audacity of government giving people that kind of hope.”
Ferguson proposed poking fun at Obama’s “deification” by his more fervent supporters. It’s no long-term solution for comedians, but it might buy them some time.
Obama’s do-no-wrong aura is sure to be short-lived, as Americans observe him no longer full-tilt on the campaign trail but instead slogging through each presidential workday.
And humor springs from increased familiarity with the target of the jokes.
“In time, that will happen,” said “Saturday Night Live” cast member Fred Armisen, who last February scored the show’s plum role impersonating Obama — “in time, not just with me, as we see more and more of him.”
And as comedians search for Obama’s laughs-generating sweet spot, they should fight the urge to go easy on him out of misconceived racial sensitivity, said D.L. Hughley.
“If you call yourself a comic, you can’t excuse the most powerful man in the world,” said Hughley, who is black and host of “D.L. Hughley Breaks the News” on CNN. “He is the most powerful man on the face of the planet. He is The Man!”
And many changes await in an Obama presidency that will serve the cause of humor. Meanwhile, much about the comedy landscape will be the same, as Hughley was reminded as he headed home on election night.
“I had watched it in Harlem,” he said. “I was elated, smiling from ear-to-ear, excited that the country I love now decided that they love people like me back, and in a major way. And I flagged a cab. And that cab drove right by me. Then I tried to flag another one, and it drove right by.”
Recalling the experience, he couldn’t help laughing that a black man couldn’t get a cab to stop in Obama’s America. Until comics find the key to the funny in Obama, they’ll have plenty else to make jokes about.
___
AP Entertainment Writer Jake Coyle contributed to this report.
___
CBS is owned by CBS Corp; CNN and HBO are owned by Time Warner; Comedy Central is owned by Viacom; NBC is owned by General Electric.
EDITOR’S NOTE — Frazier Moore is a national television columnist for The Associated Press. He can be reached at fmoore(at)ap.org
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Politicians Are The Same Everywhere
http://www.blogger.com/img/videoplayer.swf?videoUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fv21.nonxt4.googlevideo.com%2Fvideoplayback%3Fid%3D6962a582692961aa%26itag%3D5%26begin%3D0%26len%3D86400000%26app%3Dblogger%26et%3Dplay%26el%3DEMBEDDED%26ip%3D0.0.0.0%26ipbits%3D0%26expire%3D1269889202%26sparams%3Did%252Citag%252Cip%252Cipbits%252Cexpire%26signature%3D6BE3F23D0A223BF20927115BE4979E981B5C25CB.56B5D2BF694A1D6214064858EC6DD740A6D3716%26key%3Dck1&nogvlm=1&thumbnailUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2FThumbnailServer2%3Fapp%3Dblogger%26contentid%3D6962a582692961aa%26offsetms%3D5000%26itag%3Dw320%26sigh%3DIfGsXUBwE8t3gsBcwjTGzbcTjMA&messagesUrl=video.google.com%2FFlashUiStrings.xlb%3Fframe%3Dflashstrings%26hl%3Den
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
Health care, defense poised to weather recession
Date: 11/1/2008 11:11 PM
By MATTHEW PERRONE
AP Business Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ With the global economy at risk of a deep recession, many battered areas of the U.S. economy stand to suffer more damage in coming months. Other industries, though, seem poised to withstand even a severe downturn.
The health care sector should hold up especially well even in a recession, along with defense and a few other industries. Still, analysts say a unique collision of economic and political challenges means many businesses might not be as well-insulated as they were in past recessions. Here’s a look at major industries that, if not exactly recession-proof, seem best able to endure the downturn:
—Health care
With an aging population and the largest health care spending in the world, the U.S. medical sector could fare perhaps best of all. During economic downturns, sales of prescription drugs and medical devices tend to hold up better than nonessential goods, noted David Wyss, chief economist of Standard and Poor’s.
“Generally, you’re looking for things that are necessities, not luxuries,” Wyss said. “People get sick and need medical care regardless of the state of the economy.”
But recent earnings show that drug makers are not immune from slumping sales that have plagued their peers in the retail and auto industries. Pfizer said last month that U.S. sales of its best-selling product, the cholesterol drug Lipitor, fell 13 percent in the last quarter as some financially struggling patients stopped filling their prescriptions.
“The typical safe harbors (for investors) have been pharmaceuticals,” said analyst Steve Brozak of WBB Securities. “They’re no longer safe; they’re now the least bad choice.”
Pfizer and Schering-Plough Corp. were able to offset weak revenue in the U.S. with higher sales abroad. But other companies, such as Merck & Co. Inc., have been less successful. Merck said recently it will cut 7,200 jobs after reporting sales declines.
Experts say pharmaceuticals are more vulnerable to economic cycles because employers have shifted more of the financial burden for paying for medications to patients.
“With consumers having more cost-sharing in their benefits, you’re going to see a greater effect on their health care spending right away,” said Paul Ginsburg, president of the nonprofit Center for Studying Health System Change.
The lagging economy and rising unemployment have made it harder for health insurers such as UnitedHealth Group Inc. and Humana Inc. to raise prices to offset higher costs and investment losses.
Health care companies least affected are those that sell inexpensive medical products directly to hospitals, bypassing cash-strapped consumers.
Becton, Dickinson & Co. and Baxter International Inc., for example, reported sharp profit gains for the most recent quarter and boosted their full-year earnings estimates. Becton Dickinson specializes in syringes and surgical tools; Baxter sells drugs to treat blood and immune disorders.
“The products they offer aren’t high-tech things,” said Aaron Vaughn, an analyst with Edward Jones. “They are health care staples that people need.”
A focus on lifesaving medicine is also expected to reward makers of high-priced biotechnology drugs. Genzyme Corp. and Celgene Corp., for example, have built businesses around niche drugs for life-threatening diseases. Health care investment firm Leerink Swann gives both companies an “outperform” rating, along with peers Amgen Inc., Biogen Idec Inc. and Gilead Sciences Inc.
—Defense
With the government spending hundreds of billions of dollars to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, most big defense-related companies should also be able to withstand recessionary pressures.
Military spending has soared about 40 percent during the Bush administration, pushing up the stocks of General Dynamics Corp. and its competitors. The company’s chief executive, Nicholas Chabraja, has pointed to General Dynamic’s backlog of orders — totaling $60.5 billion at the end of the quarter — as a sign of the company’s long-term strength.
Rivals such as Northrop Grumman Corp. and Lockheed Martin Corp. also have contracts that stretch decades into the future, as well as large cash reserves.
Analysts caution, though, that long-term problems loom for the sector. Both presidential candidates have called for reforms on how defense contracts are awarded, and many analysts see the government’s $700 billion bailout plan as a crimp on future spending.
It seems “nearly impossible” that future military budgets “will remain unscathed by the current fiscal reality,” Ronald Epstein, a Merrill Lynch analyst, wrote in a recent note.
JSA Research analyst Paul Nisbet said that even a partial withdrawal from Iraq would hurt ammunition manufacturers such as Alliant Techsystems Inc. and General Dynamics. Democratic candidate Barack Obama has also expressed skepticism about the level of spending on missile defense — a revenue generator for Raytheon Co. and Boeing Co.
By contrast, Nisbet said companies such as Boeing and Goodrich Corp. are better positioned to weather defense cuts because much of their business involves the private aviation market.
—Food and consumer staples
While health insurers and defense contractors are subject to policy changes in Washington, other sectors are more stable. Food companies such as Kraft Foods Inc. and Kellogg Co. tend to perform fairly consistently, even during tough times, which is why their stocks are holding up well, analysts say.
General Mills, maker of Cheerios and Pillsbury products, is one of the best-performing stocks in the S&P; 500. Its strong brands have helped it outperform competitors for years.
As consumers begin eating at home more often, they are boosting sales at chains such as BJ’s Wholesale Club Inc. that can deliver groceries at the lowest price, often at the expense of more high-end companies. Shares of Whole Foods Market Inc. have lost three-quarters of their value this year as the organic-food retailer lowered its outlook and suspended its quarterly dividend indefinitely.
At the same time, chains such as Costco Wholesale Corp. and Kroger Co. have reported rising earnings as shoppers trade down to lower-budget store brands.
—Tobacco and alcohol
Beer and cigarettes do not seem as indispensable as food and medicine, but demand for tobacco and alcohol tends to remain strong in tough economic times.
Last month, Philip Morris International Inc. and Reynolds American Inc. reported results that topped Wall Street expectations. Executives said steady sales show consumers remain loyal to tobacco products even as they cut back on other expenses.
“No business in the world is actually recession-proof, but I am convinced that our business is very recession-resilient,” said Hermann Waldemer, chief financial officer of Philip Morris.
The company, which reported it had $1 billion more in cash than short-term debt in June, said it generates more than $10 billion in operating cash per year.
The beer industry has proved nearly as elastic. Its sales to retailers have risen about half a percent for the year, according to trade publication Beer Marketer’s Insights. Though that’s down from last year’s 1.4 percent growth rate, analysts say the business is still performing relatively well.
“Vices tend to be a good place to seek shelter because people pretty much support their vices — at least the cheaper ones,” said S&P;’s Wynn.
___
AP Business Writers Stephen Manning in Washington, Emily Fredix in Milwaukee and Vinnee Tong in New York contributed to this report.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.
By MATTHEW PERRONE
AP Business Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ With the global economy at risk of a deep recession, many battered areas of the U.S. economy stand to suffer more damage in coming months. Other industries, though, seem poised to withstand even a severe downturn.
The health care sector should hold up especially well even in a recession, along with defense and a few other industries. Still, analysts say a unique collision of economic and political challenges means many businesses might not be as well-insulated as they were in past recessions. Here’s a look at major industries that, if not exactly recession-proof, seem best able to endure the downturn:
—Health care
With an aging population and the largest health care spending in the world, the U.S. medical sector could fare perhaps best of all. During economic downturns, sales of prescription drugs and medical devices tend to hold up better than nonessential goods, noted David Wyss, chief economist of Standard and Poor’s.
“Generally, you’re looking for things that are necessities, not luxuries,” Wyss said. “People get sick and need medical care regardless of the state of the economy.”
But recent earnings show that drug makers are not immune from slumping sales that have plagued their peers in the retail and auto industries. Pfizer said last month that U.S. sales of its best-selling product, the cholesterol drug Lipitor, fell 13 percent in the last quarter as some financially struggling patients stopped filling their prescriptions.
“The typical safe harbors (for investors) have been pharmaceuticals,” said analyst Steve Brozak of WBB Securities. “They’re no longer safe; they’re now the least bad choice.”
Pfizer and Schering-Plough Corp. were able to offset weak revenue in the U.S. with higher sales abroad. But other companies, such as Merck & Co. Inc., have been less successful. Merck said recently it will cut 7,200 jobs after reporting sales declines.
Experts say pharmaceuticals are more vulnerable to economic cycles because employers have shifted more of the financial burden for paying for medications to patients.
“With consumers having more cost-sharing in their benefits, you’re going to see a greater effect on their health care spending right away,” said Paul Ginsburg, president of the nonprofit Center for Studying Health System Change.
The lagging economy and rising unemployment have made it harder for health insurers such as UnitedHealth Group Inc. and Humana Inc. to raise prices to offset higher costs and investment losses.
Health care companies least affected are those that sell inexpensive medical products directly to hospitals, bypassing cash-strapped consumers.
Becton, Dickinson & Co. and Baxter International Inc., for example, reported sharp profit gains for the most recent quarter and boosted their full-year earnings estimates. Becton Dickinson specializes in syringes and surgical tools; Baxter sells drugs to treat blood and immune disorders.
“The products they offer aren’t high-tech things,” said Aaron Vaughn, an analyst with Edward Jones. “They are health care staples that people need.”
A focus on lifesaving medicine is also expected to reward makers of high-priced biotechnology drugs. Genzyme Corp. and Celgene Corp., for example, have built businesses around niche drugs for life-threatening diseases. Health care investment firm Leerink Swann gives both companies an “outperform” rating, along with peers Amgen Inc., Biogen Idec Inc. and Gilead Sciences Inc.
—Defense
With the government spending hundreds of billions of dollars to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, most big defense-related companies should also be able to withstand recessionary pressures.
Military spending has soared about 40 percent during the Bush administration, pushing up the stocks of General Dynamics Corp. and its competitors. The company’s chief executive, Nicholas Chabraja, has pointed to General Dynamic’s backlog of orders — totaling $60.5 billion at the end of the quarter — as a sign of the company’s long-term strength.
Rivals such as Northrop Grumman Corp. and Lockheed Martin Corp. also have contracts that stretch decades into the future, as well as large cash reserves.
Analysts caution, though, that long-term problems loom for the sector. Both presidential candidates have called for reforms on how defense contracts are awarded, and many analysts see the government’s $700 billion bailout plan as a crimp on future spending.
It seems “nearly impossible” that future military budgets “will remain unscathed by the current fiscal reality,” Ronald Epstein, a Merrill Lynch analyst, wrote in a recent note.
JSA Research analyst Paul Nisbet said that even a partial withdrawal from Iraq would hurt ammunition manufacturers such as Alliant Techsystems Inc. and General Dynamics. Democratic candidate Barack Obama has also expressed skepticism about the level of spending on missile defense — a revenue generator for Raytheon Co. and Boeing Co.
By contrast, Nisbet said companies such as Boeing and Goodrich Corp. are better positioned to weather defense cuts because much of their business involves the private aviation market.
—Food and consumer staples
While health insurers and defense contractors are subject to policy changes in Washington, other sectors are more stable. Food companies such as Kraft Foods Inc. and Kellogg Co. tend to perform fairly consistently, even during tough times, which is why their stocks are holding up well, analysts say.
General Mills, maker of Cheerios and Pillsbury products, is one of the best-performing stocks in the S&P; 500. Its strong brands have helped it outperform competitors for years.
As consumers begin eating at home more often, they are boosting sales at chains such as BJ’s Wholesale Club Inc. that can deliver groceries at the lowest price, often at the expense of more high-end companies. Shares of Whole Foods Market Inc. have lost three-quarters of their value this year as the organic-food retailer lowered its outlook and suspended its quarterly dividend indefinitely.
At the same time, chains such as Costco Wholesale Corp. and Kroger Co. have reported rising earnings as shoppers trade down to lower-budget store brands.
—Tobacco and alcohol
Beer and cigarettes do not seem as indispensable as food and medicine, but demand for tobacco and alcohol tends to remain strong in tough economic times.
Last month, Philip Morris International Inc. and Reynolds American Inc. reported results that topped Wall Street expectations. Executives said steady sales show consumers remain loyal to tobacco products even as they cut back on other expenses.
“No business in the world is actually recession-proof, but I am convinced that our business is very recession-resilient,” said Hermann Waldemer, chief financial officer of Philip Morris.
The company, which reported it had $1 billion more in cash than short-term debt in June, said it generates more than $10 billion in operating cash per year.
The beer industry has proved nearly as elastic. Its sales to retailers have risen about half a percent for the year, according to trade publication Beer Marketer’s Insights. Though that’s down from last year’s 1.4 percent growth rate, analysts say the business is still performing relatively well.
“Vices tend to be a good place to seek shelter because people pretty much support their vices — at least the cheaper ones,” said S&P;’s Wynn.
___
AP Business Writers Stephen Manning in Washington, Emily Fredix in Milwaukee and Vinnee Tong in New York contributed to this report.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.
Attorney Gordon Johnson
Past Chair Traumatic Brain Injury Litigation Group, American Association of Justice
g@gordonjohnson.com :: 800-992-9447 :: Attorney Gordon S. Johnson, Jr.