Living in limbo
Monday, 21 June 2010
Fazal M. Kamal
Since April 1 New York State administration has been facing a crisis. In a reflection of the effects that the Great Recession has had on spending and revenue at the national as well as the local levels this year's budget for the State of New York, which was supposed to have been passed by April 1, has still not been adopted by the state legislature and signed by the governor of the state. Consequently, the state has been functioning on emergency and piecemeal spending bills that have so far been passed from time to time by the lawmakers just when the state government was on the verge of shutting down.
The latest in this series of emergency spending bills was passed by the legislators last week at 11:59 pm, as it were, avoiding a shutdown of many state-funded projects including unemployment payments, lottery games, parks and recreational facilities and welfare payouts, among a plethora of others. The primary problem has been the legislators have been unable to agree on how to pare down the budget given a shortfall in state earnings. The New York State budget deficit is said to total $9.2 billion.
However, Governor David Paterson has emphasised that the lawmakers must adopt an appropriate state budget by his deadline of June 28. Said the Governor, "I'm not threatening anyone. I'm just making a promise." He added that if the legislature does not meet the deadline he would put all spending and revenue items in emergency spending bills. Those would likely include cutbacks in many different areas and result in the loss of jobs for thousands of state employees.
Naturally the proposals for slashing spending and raising taxes have both proponents and opponents, especially with politicians in the state capital of Albany being wary of such cuts and increases in an election year. Therefore, the prospect of more showdowns with regard to the budget is still very real while the people of the state are getting increasingly impatient with the wrangling that continues in Albany.
There is little doubt that there's a lot of misuse of funds in various sectors. There have been persistent reports, for instance, that many state employees have taken thousands of dollars in overtime pay which has been questioned by many. Moreover, there have been reports as well of some people abusing the welfare system and utilising loopholes to enjoy state benefits even though they normally would not qualify for this support. Of course, on the other hand, many such cheats have also been apprehended, tried and awarded punishment. But that certainly has not deterred many others from taking recourse to subterfuge to receive benefits from the government.
Business policies
(or BP)
The explosion on a BP (Beyond Petroleum? British Petroleum?) oil drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, which caused the death of eleven workers and the consequent and continuous spillage of oil from there, has once again underscored the standards that are employed by big businesses for the sake of ever-larger profits, and in the case of the oil companies they can be counted only in millions of dollars. There is no surprise there of course. What, however, is somewhat surprising is that some people often seem to be surprised that such entities adopt a cavalier attitude toward the safety and welfare of those working for them and of people in general.
Following the BP disaster in the gulf, which has had enormous and disturbingly profound repercussions on business, industry, environment and ecology -- and it's certainly going to have a persistent impact for decades to come -- Congressional hearings have highlighted yet again how little emphasis was given to safety measures and emergency preparedness. After testimonies from top executives of the major oil companies members of the U.S. House of Representatives publicly accused the other oil companies of being no better prepared than BP to tackle an environmental calamity and asserted that the companies' plans for similar tragedies were "virtually worthless" and amounted to "paper exercises" that imitated BP's failed attempts.
Nevertheless, the Congressional hearings weren't without some comic relief. One congressman from Texas (where the oil industry plays a huge role in its economy) apologised, profusely, to BP CEO Tony Hayward because, under pressure from the Obama administration, it had set aside $20 billion for compensation, relief and related expenditures. But naturally not all are beholden to Big Oil and a whole lot of people are incensed at BP's way of doing business. Joseph Romm reacting to British complaints about criticisms of BP says in Salon, "We never thought of you [the Brits] as whiners until the CEO of your big oil company started saying stuff like 'I'd like my life back' and 'What the hell did we do to deserve this?' and even 'I'm a Brit. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.' Well, let me tell you, we'd greatly prefer sticks and stones to 100 million gallons of oil and a million gallons of toxic dispersants."
There've been other concerns too. As Stephanie Mencimer wrote in Slate, "After a BP refinery in Texas exploded in 2005, killing 15 workers and injuring scores more, the oil giant paid $1.6 billion in settlements to employees and their families. But the families of the workers killed on BP's Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico probably won't receive a similar windfall. That's because the Deepwater rig is legally considered an oceangoing vessel and was more than three nautical miles offshore at the time of the accident. As a result, the families of the dead workers can only sue BP and its contractors under a 90-year-old maritime law which severely limits liability. In some cases, BP could get away with shelling out sums as paltry as $1,000."
Two significant issues require to be noted here. For one, obviously, this story is far from over and there is much more to come, with serious ramifications for President Obama. And secondly, there's much for Bangladesh to learn from whatever is happening now involving the oil companies and especially the risks that they are likely to ignore in the interest of enhancing their profits.
Squalid muddle
The ongoing yo-yo drama relating to the cancellation of the declaration of the newspaper Amar Desh and the seamy methods utilised to handle its acting editor Mahmudur Rahman makes for sad reading. It's particularly conspicuous because while charges and cases against those who are in authority now are being dismissed with clockwork regulatory not only are new charges being brought against especially those who are critical of the powers that be but they are also subjected to shamefully shabby treatment. All this certainly doesn't speak very highly of the moral dimensions of the machinery that is being utilised.
Unfortunate as all of this may be -- and however impolitic it maybe to state this -- it has much to do with the unsavoury division along strictly political lines that permeates Bangladesh society today and has done so for the past some years. People in various professions have assumed stances on the basis of who belongs to which camp and consequently members who are seen to be aligned with the group that is not in a position of authority have suffered while perfunctory protests are made and the pernicious processes are then permitted to go on as they may. Though this divide is evidently an extremely shortsighted stand but most unfortunately this has been the situation in almost all segments of society.
Tragically, till the time members of all the professions wake up and realise that this rigid division along purely political alignments is self-defeating, not in the greater interest of the professionals themselves and does not further the core causes of the professions such incidents will continue to occur. However, two facts need to be underlined here. One, is this situation palatable to most members of the different professional groups? Definitely not. But the few who have the support and encouragement of powerful persons blatantly overwhelm the views of the majority and override the feelings of the members. Two, I do not know Mahmudur Rahman, I've never met him and I've had no contact with him ever in any way. But there are questions of principles and morals involved here.
E-mail: fmk222@gmail.com
Since April 1 New York State administration has been facing a crisis. In a reflection of the effects that the Great Recession has had on spending and revenue at the national as well as the local levels this year's budget for the State of New York, which was supposed to have been passed by April 1, has still not been adopted by the state legislature and signed by the governor of the state. Consequently, the state has been functioning on emergency and piecemeal spending bills that have so far been passed from time to time by the lawmakers just when the state government was on the verge of shutting down.
The latest in this series of emergency spending bills was passed by the legislators last week at 11:59 pm, as it were, avoiding a shutdown of many state-funded projects including unemployment payments, lottery games, parks and recreational facilities and welfare payouts, among a plethora of others. The primary problem has been the legislators have been unable to agree on how to pare down the budget given a shortfall in state earnings. The New York State budget deficit is said to total $9.2 billion.
However, Governor David Paterson has emphasised that the lawmakers must adopt an appropriate state budget by his deadline of June 28. Said the Governor, "I'm not threatening anyone. I'm just making a promise." He added that if the legislature does not meet the deadline he would put all spending and revenue items in emergency spending bills. Those would likely include cutbacks in many different areas and result in the loss of jobs for thousands of state employees.
Naturally the proposals for slashing spending and raising taxes have both proponents and opponents, especially with politicians in the state capital of Albany being wary of such cuts and increases in an election year. Therefore, the prospect of more showdowns with regard to the budget is still very real while the people of the state are getting increasingly impatient with the wrangling that continues in Albany.
There is little doubt that there's a lot of misuse of funds in various sectors. There have been persistent reports, for instance, that many state employees have taken thousands of dollars in overtime pay which has been questioned by many. Moreover, there have been reports as well of some people abusing the welfare system and utilising loopholes to enjoy state benefits even though they normally would not qualify for this support. Of course, on the other hand, many such cheats have also been apprehended, tried and awarded punishment. But that certainly has not deterred many others from taking recourse to subterfuge to receive benefits from the government.
Business policies
(or BP)
The explosion on a BP (Beyond Petroleum? British Petroleum?) oil drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, which caused the death of eleven workers and the consequent and continuous spillage of oil from there, has once again underscored the standards that are employed by big businesses for the sake of ever-larger profits, and in the case of the oil companies they can be counted only in millions of dollars. There is no surprise there of course. What, however, is somewhat surprising is that some people often seem to be surprised that such entities adopt a cavalier attitude toward the safety and welfare of those working for them and of people in general.
Following the BP disaster in the gulf, which has had enormous and disturbingly profound repercussions on business, industry, environment and ecology -- and it's certainly going to have a persistent impact for decades to come -- Congressional hearings have highlighted yet again how little emphasis was given to safety measures and emergency preparedness. After testimonies from top executives of the major oil companies members of the U.S. House of Representatives publicly accused the other oil companies of being no better prepared than BP to tackle an environmental calamity and asserted that the companies' plans for similar tragedies were "virtually worthless" and amounted to "paper exercises" that imitated BP's failed attempts.
Nevertheless, the Congressional hearings weren't without some comic relief. One congressman from Texas (where the oil industry plays a huge role in its economy) apologised, profusely, to BP CEO Tony Hayward because, under pressure from the Obama administration, it had set aside $20 billion for compensation, relief and related expenditures. But naturally not all are beholden to Big Oil and a whole lot of people are incensed at BP's way of doing business. Joseph Romm reacting to British complaints about criticisms of BP says in Salon, "We never thought of you [the Brits] as whiners until the CEO of your big oil company started saying stuff like 'I'd like my life back' and 'What the hell did we do to deserve this?' and even 'I'm a Brit. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.' Well, let me tell you, we'd greatly prefer sticks and stones to 100 million gallons of oil and a million gallons of toxic dispersants."
There've been other concerns too. As Stephanie Mencimer wrote in Slate, "After a BP refinery in Texas exploded in 2005, killing 15 workers and injuring scores more, the oil giant paid $1.6 billion in settlements to employees and their families. But the families of the workers killed on BP's Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico probably won't receive a similar windfall. That's because the Deepwater rig is legally considered an oceangoing vessel and was more than three nautical miles offshore at the time of the accident. As a result, the families of the dead workers can only sue BP and its contractors under a 90-year-old maritime law which severely limits liability. In some cases, BP could get away with shelling out sums as paltry as $1,000."
Two significant issues require to be noted here. For one, obviously, this story is far from over and there is much more to come, with serious ramifications for President Obama. And secondly, there's much for Bangladesh to learn from whatever is happening now involving the oil companies and especially the risks that they are likely to ignore in the interest of enhancing their profits.
Squalid muddle
The ongoing yo-yo drama relating to the cancellation of the declaration of the newspaper Amar Desh and the seamy methods utilised to handle its acting editor Mahmudur Rahman makes for sad reading. It's particularly conspicuous because while charges and cases against those who are in authority now are being dismissed with clockwork regulatory not only are new charges being brought against especially those who are critical of the powers that be but they are also subjected to shamefully shabby treatment. All this certainly doesn't speak very highly of the moral dimensions of the machinery that is being utilised.
Unfortunate as all of this may be -- and however impolitic it maybe to state this -- it has much to do with the unsavoury division along strictly political lines that permeates Bangladesh society today and has done so for the past some years. People in various professions have assumed stances on the basis of who belongs to which camp and consequently members who are seen to be aligned with the group that is not in a position of authority have suffered while perfunctory protests are made and the pernicious processes are then permitted to go on as they may. Though this divide is evidently an extremely shortsighted stand but most unfortunately this has been the situation in almost all segments of society.
Tragically, till the time members of all the professions wake up and realise that this rigid division along purely political alignments is self-defeating, not in the greater interest of the professionals themselves and does not further the core causes of the professions such incidents will continue to occur. However, two facts need to be underlined here. One, is this situation palatable to most members of the different professional groups? Definitely not. But the few who have the support and encouragement of powerful persons blatantly overwhelm the views of the majority and override the feelings of the members. Two, I do not know Mahmudur Rahman, I've never met him and I've had no contact with him ever in any way. But there are questions of principles and morals involved here.
E-mail: fmk222@gmail.com