Wednesday, September 10, 2014


News Clips For The Day


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/09/08/1328117/-GOP-congressman-calls-firing-gay-people-one-of-the-freedoms-we-enjoy?detail=email


GOP congressman calls firing gay people one of the 'freedoms we enjoy'
Laura Clawson Daily Kos Labor
MON SEP 08, 2014 AT 12:04 PM PDT

Rep. Robert Pittenger thinks it would be terrible, just terrible, if the law prohibited employers from firing people for being gay. Kind of like how smoking bans are terrible:

After assuring ThinkProgress that he “respects everyone” and “loves people,” Pittenger said he believes companies should have the right to fire or refuse to hire someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

“You need to respect the autonomy of somebody running their business,” he said. “It’s like smoking bans. Do you ban smoking or do people have the right to private property? I think people have the right to private property. In public spaces, absolutely, we can have smoking bans. But we don’t want to micromanage people’s lives and businesses. If you have a business, do you want the government to come in and tell you you need to hire somebody? Why should government be there to impose on the freedoms we enjoy?”

Just as we should enjoy the freedom to smoke, we should enjoy the freedom to fire LGBT people, or refuse to hire them, due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Just because someone is the most qualified for the job and the only reason not to hire them is that you are a bigot doesn't mean the federal government should impose laws for equality and against discrimination on the cherished freedoms you are busy enjoying, amiright?

In addition to his horrific position on this issue, Pittenger also showed off some sterling ignorance, telling ThinkProgress "I believe people are already protected." In reality, in North Carolina (along with 28 other states), LGBT people are absolutely not protected under the law and can be legally fired simply because the boss is a bigot.

While Pittenger's logic and language may stand out, his opposition to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is in step with Republican leadership in the House; Speaker John Boehner has refused to even allow a vote on the bill.


http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2014/01/29/3224581/speaker-boehner-employment-non-discrimination-act-pass-year/

Speaker Boehner: ‘No Way’ Employment Non-Discrimination Act Will Pass This Year
BY ZACK FORD  
POSTED ON JANUARY 29, 2014 AT 5:00 PM

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) apparently told the 113-member LGBT Equality Caucus that there is “no way” the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) would pass this year. According to Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA), who spoke with the Washington Blade, Boehner “said it wasn’t going to happen in this session.” The meeting took place sometime last week.

ENDA, which would make it illegal to fire or not hire people for their sexual orientation or gender identity, was notably absent from President Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday night. Obama could issue an executive order protecting at least the LGBT employees of federal contractors, which would also apply to small businesses not covered by ENDA, but the White House insists it prefers a legislative approach. It seems Boehner will not be allowing that approach anytime soon.

Boehner has previously claimed that the LGBT employment protections are “unnecessary.” In the meantime, it remains legal in 29 states to fire people for their sexual orientation and and in 33 states to fire people for their gender identity.




“'Just as we should enjoy the freedom to smoke, we should enjoy the freedom to fire LGBT people, or refuse to hire them, due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Just because someone is the most qualified for the job and the only reason not to hire them is that you are a bigot doesn't mean the federal government should impose laws for equality and against discrimination on the cherished freedoms you are busy enjoying, amiright?'... While Pittenger's logic and language may stand out, his opposition to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is in step with Republican leadership in the House; Speaker John Boehner has refused to even allow a vote on the bill.... Obama could issue an executive order protecting at least the LGBT employees of federal contractors, which would also apply to small businesses not covered by ENDA, but the White House insists it prefers a legislative approach.”

So is Obama afraid of sponsoring this issue himself, also? I thought the existing laws covered LGBT employees, too, but apparently not in many states. The right to be a bigot – that really lays it out baldly – and he links it with the non-smoking ban, which I also thought was nationwide. Smoke-filled air is a known carcinogen, not to mention asthma and COPD cases. I guess I have long since stopped supporting complete personal freedom in the cases when a large group of people are harmed by some behavior or other. I think society has to protect the “greater good.” I do remember the days when I have been in buildings of public use and found a spittoon standing there. That is for men chewing tobacco to spit. Yuck. Quietly, without a law being passed, people have simply stopped providing such receptacles. Looks like LGBT protections will not pass without a fight, though. Heaven help us if we had to treat a gay person with respect and fairness because of a law. How unfair that would be!





Ferguson City Council meeting turns raucous
CBS/AP September 10, 2014, 2:04 AM

FERGUSON, Mo. -- Elected leaders in the St. Louis suburb where an unarmed black 18-year-old was fatally shot by a white police officer hoped to use their first public meeting since Michael Brown's death as a chance to promote community healing.

Instead, they were greeted Tuesday night with anger, outrage and warnings of voter retribution at the ballot box. Proposals to overhaul the municipal courts and create a citizen police review board were greeted warily, if not with outright skepticism.

"You've lost your authority to govern this community," said St. Louis activist John Chasnoff. "You're going to have to step aside peacefully if this community is going to heal."

The shooting last month exposed an undercurrent of racial unrest in Ferguson and other nearby suburbs in mostly black communities of north St. Louis County, and prompted days of sometimes-violent protests.

Ferguson officials have pledged to boost minority hiring in a 53-person police force that has just three black officers, and to meet informally in city neighborhoods to promote a public dialogue.

But within minutes of the start of the City Council meeting, where the proposals were briefly discussed, several demonstrators stood up and shouted as the council tried to cover some routine business. Later, others stood and chanted, "Shut it down!" while raising their hands in the air. Protesters have used the gesture because several witnesses say Brown had raised his hands as officer Darren Wilson shot him.

The first person to take the microphone during the public comment period said he was there for the mayor's job. It was a theme echoed throughout, as speaker after speaker expressed doubt about the city's planned reforms - and anger at the government officials on the stage.

"I heard the mayor say Ferguson doesn't have a race problem," said Taurean Russell, 30. "There must be two Fergusons."

Before the meeting, the Ferguson council announced the proposals to reduce revenue from court fines used for general city operations and more broadly reform court procedures. Critics say reliance on court revenue and traffic fines to fund city services more heavily penalizes low-income defendants who can't afford private attorneys and who are often jailed for not promptly paying those fines.

In the last fiscal year, court fines and fees accounted for $2.6 million, or nearly one-fifth of the city budget. That's nearly twice as much as the city collected two years earlier.

The meeting, held exactly one month after Brown's death, was held in a local church to accommodate a crowd of several hundred who had to walk through metal detectors at entrances guarded by a heavy police presence.

Several speakers reiterated plans to block part of Interstate 70 in Ferguson on Wednesday in an act of civil disobedience. Organizers say they want to bring rush-hour traffic to a standstill.

The U.S. Justice Department announced last week that it was launching a broad investigation into the Ferguson Police Department, looking for patterns of discrimination.

Ferguson, a city of 21,000, is about 70 percent black. The mayor and five of the six City Council members are white. A 2013 report by the Missouri attorney general's office found that Ferguson police stopped and arrested black drivers nearly twice as often as white motorists, but were less likely to find contraband among the black drivers.

The investigation of the police department is separate from a federal inquiry into Brown's death, which a local grand jury is also investigating.

Police have said the shooting of Brown followed a scuffle after Wilson told Brown and a friend to move out of the street and onto a sidewalk. Autopsies concluded Brown was shot at least six times.

Brown's parents joined about 20 supporters and activists outside police headquarters earlier Tuesday to reiterate calls for Wilson's immediate arrest.

Brown family attorney Anthony Gray said enough witnesses have come forward to arrest Wilson, reports CBS St. Louis affiliate KMOV-TV.

"He should be in handcuffs, he should be photographed, he should be fingerprinted, and he should be booked immediately, and that's what this family is calling for," Gray said.

Brown's family reiterated their call for peace.

Also Tuesday, a St. Louis County family court judge denied the St. Louis Post-Dispatch's request for any juvenile records Brown might have had. It's not known if Brown had such a record, and a juvenile court system lawyer said at a hearing last week that Brown never was convicted of a serious felony such as murder or burglary.




“Instead, they were greeted Tuesday night with anger, outrage and warnings of voter retribution at the ballot box. Proposals to overhaul the municipal courts and create a citizen police review board were greeted warily, if not with outright skepticism. 'You've lost your authority to govern this community,' said St. Louis activist John Chasnoff. 'You're going to have to step aside peacefully if this community is going to heal.'.... Before the meeting, the Ferguson council announced the proposals to reduce revenue from court fines used for general city operations and more broadly reform court procedures. Critics say reliance on court revenue and traffic fines to fund city services more heavily penalizes low-income defendants who can't afford private attorneys and who are often jailed for not promptly paying those fines. In the last fiscal year, court fines and fees accounted for $2.6 million, or nearly one-fifth of the city budget. That's nearly twice as much as the city collected two years earlier.... Ferguson, a city of 21,000, is about 70 percent black. The mayor and five of the six City Council members are white. A 2013 report by the Missouri attorney general's office found that Ferguson police stopped and arrested black drivers nearly twice as often as white motorists, but were less likely to find contraband among the black drivers.

The Ferguson citizens aren't going to be pacified easily, I see. Of course, they don't trust the council to follow through and clamp down on police abuse. The fact that such a large amount of their city budget is derived from police tickets and court fines shows that oppressive actions are more than the whim of an officer's rancorous mood, but are in fact a city sponsored financial plan. They need to raise taxes on the home owners and businesses, like most cities do. They could also have a sales tax. “'You're going to have to step aside peacefully if this community is going to heal.'” I wonder if the council members will actually step aside? That will make the news if they do!





Ukraine leader says Russian troops on the move
CBS/AP September 10, 2014, 5:38 AM

KIEV, Ukraine -- Ukraine's president said Wednesday that 70 percent of Russian troops on Ukrainian territory had been withdrawn since the cease-firebegan Friday, as he vowed to introduce a bill to parliament offering more autonomy to rebellious regions in the pro-Russia east; both signs that the fragile truce could be morphing into a durable chance at peace.

Petro Poroshenko also said that 700 Ukrainian prisoners had been freed from rebel captivity, and expressed hope that another 500 would be freed by the end of the week.

He promised Wednesday to introduce a bill to parliament as early as next week that would offer greater autonomy to eastern regions, where separatists have been battling government troops for almost five months.

EU formally adopts new sanctions against Russia

Ukraine leader makes surprising visit to embattled city

Violence tests eastern Ukraine cease-fire

Poroshenko said the regions would remain part of Ukraine and rejected the idea of federalization, something both Russia and pro-Moscow separatists have continued to push for even after a cease-fire agreement took effect Friday.

The agreement, which was reached in Belarus, "envisages the restoration and preservation of Ukrainian sovereignty over the entire territory of Donbas, including the part that is temporarily under control of the rebels," Poroshenko said during a televised Cabinet meeting. "Ukraine has made no concessions with regards to its territorial integrity."

Ukraine and the West have repeatedly accused Russia of fueling the pro-Russian separatists with arms, expertise, and even its own troops, something Russia denies. In late August, NATO estimated that more than 1,000 Russian troops were operating on Ukrainian soil, coinciding with a major rebel campaign to push back Kiev's troops.

The president admitted that "implementing the cease-fire is very difficult," and accused separatists of "provoking" the Ukrainian troops. There have been numerous violations of the cease-fire, and Ukraine says that five servicemen have been killed and 33 injured since Friday. A volley of rocket fire could be heard in Donetsk late Tuesday, although the local city council didn't report any casualties overnight.

Poroshenko was vague on the specifics of his bill in his speech Tuesday. But a previous peace plan laid out in June envisaged protection of the Russian language, joint patrols of federal and local police, and allowing local representatives to give their approval for governors, who are appointed by Kiev.

All of those concessions are minor in comparison to what the separatists want. Many have demanded full independence from Kiev, but even their calls for federalization of Ukraine would require local control over security forces and elections for governor.
But Poroshenko may have difficulty in formulating a bill that is palatable to both the separatists and his parliament, which is gearing up for October elections in a political climate in which the public has been largely supportive of the war in the east.





“Ukraine's president said Wednesday that 70 percent of Russian troops on Ukrainian territory had been withdrawn since the cease-firebegan Friday, as he vowed to introduce a bill to parliament offering more autonomy to rebellious regions in the pro-Russia east; both signs that the fragile truce could be morphing into a durable chance at peace. Petro Poroshenko also said that 700 Ukrainian prisoners had been freed from rebel captivity, and expressed hope that another 500 would be freed by the end of the week.... Poroshenko said the regions would remain part of Ukraine and rejected the idea of federalization, something both Russia and pro-Moscow separatists have continued to push for even after a cease-fire agreement took effect Friday. The agreement, which was reached in Belarus, 'envisages the restoration and preservation of Ukrainian sovereignty over the entire territory of Donbas, including the part that is temporarily under control of the rebels,' Poroshenko said during a televised Cabinet meeting. 'Ukraine has made no concessions with regards to its territorial integrity.'... Poroshenko was vague on the specifics of his bill in his speech Tuesday. But a previous peace plan laid out in June envisaged protection of the Russian language, joint patrols of federal and local police, and allowing local representatives to give their approval for governors, who are appointed by Kiev.... But Poroshenko may have difficulty in formulating a bill that is palatable to both the separatists and his parliament, which is gearing up for October elections in a political climate in which the public has been largely supportive of the war in the east.”

There have been shots exchanged a few times, despite the ceasefire, but the Russians have pulled back 70% of their troops. That is definite progress. An article several days ago was about the fact that the population in Russia is mounting a significant movement against the increasing deaths of Russian soldiers in Ukraine, especially since the government refuses to admit where they were killed. Putin has his supporters, but also his detractors. I also think he probably doesn't really want a full-scale war, especially with the possibility of NATO forces being involved. At any rate, things seem to be moving toward a genuinely peaceful situation, with Ukrainian sovereignty intact. Hopefully progress will continue in this vein.





"De-extinction": Bringing species back from the dead
CBS NEWS September 7, 2014, 9:51 AM

Gone, but not forgotten . . . the extinct passenger pigeon may be making a comeback, which got contributor and National Geographic photographer Joel Sartore thinking:

When I was a boy, I had a Time-Life book called "The Birds." In it was a section showing the few U.S. species we'd already lost to extinction: the Great Auk, the Carolina Parakeet, the Heath Hen. The biggest picture, though, was reserved for the Passenger Pigeon.

Once numbering three billion or more, this species flew in vast flocks, passing overhead for days at a time. Witnesses described seeing a "feathered river in the sky."

Our hungry, growing nation also saw them as delicious, and inexhaustible, and hunted them to near extinction in about 50 years.

In the book was a picture of the very last one, named Martha, stuffed and sitting on a perch in the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History. Next to her was a sign that said "Extinct."

From three billion passenger pigeons to none. I still can't believe it.

Martha died one hundred years ago, on September 1, 1914. Her demise proved to be a watershed event.

People finally began to care about the fate of our nation's wildlife. Conservation groups sprang up, including those formed by hunters to protect habitat, allowing many species to flourish, including grassland birds and waterfowl.

This pigeon's story doesn't end there, though.

In a scene somewhat out of "Jurassic Park," scientists today are actually trying to resurrect this grand bird.

Starting with DNA from preserved museum specimens, the passenger pigeon's genetic code will eventually be spliced into the living cells of a close cousin, the Band-Tailed Pigeon, with the hope of creating something that looks, sounds and perhaps even acts like the real thing.

They're calling the process "De-extinction," and it's not science fiction at all.

Laboratories around the world are working to bring back other long-gone species as well, such as the Pyrenean Ibex, the Tasmanian Tiger, and the Woolly Mammoth.

Scientists say it's not just a matter of if, but when.

Should we be doing this at all, though? That's the question that nags me when we could be trying to save the rare creatures that are still here.

Species like the Florida Grasshopper Sparrow, the Poweshiek Skipperling, and the Relict Darter are all on the very brink of extinction, as are the Florida Panther, the Mountain Yellow-Legged Frog, and the Mississippi Sandhill Crane. Each and every one deserves our full attention.

And doesn't reviving extinct species send a strong signal to the public that they can just relax -- that extinction isn't really forever?

Proponents would argue quite the opposite -- that the excitement surrounding de-extinctions could finally get people to wake up and pay attention to what's happening in the natural world.

To be honest, I don't really know what to think about this impending test-tube menagerie. Are we going back in time to make things right for a few precious species? Or are we doing this just because we can?

What I do know is that second chances are very rare things. So when a new Martha is resurrected, I won't avert my eyes. And I'll be the first in line to bear witness, camera in hand.




“This pigeon's story doesn't end there, though. In a scene somewhat out of "Jurassic Park," scientists today are actually trying to resurrect this grand bird. Starting with DNA from preserved museum specimens, the passenger pigeon's genetic code will eventually be spliced into the living cells of a close cousin, the Band-Tailed Pigeon, with the hope of creating something that looks, sounds and perhaps even acts like the real thing. They're calling the process 'De-extinction,' and it's not science fiction at all.... 'Should we be doing this at all, though? That's the question that nags me when we could be trying to save the rare creatures that are still here.'”

I must say, I would like for the Tasmanian Tiger and the Woolly Mammoth to be revived. They were not especially dangerous animals – as the flesh eating dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were – and I've always had a great fondness for both of them. The photograph of the last Tasmanian Tiger was thrilling to me as a child, as it stood in its prehistoric glory in a zoo, and the mammoth which has recently been found fully preserved in the permafrost in Siberia, with its auburn colored hair intact. I also remember seeing small flocks of bluebirds in NC when I was a kid, which were really beautiful, and I would love to see wild parakeets roaming the South. As the writer says, though, if this effort to revive extinct species interferes with the goal of preserving the last bluebird from extinction, it would be a poor tradeoff. Just because we spend money to revive some doesn't mean we should stop preservation efforts. If the government is funding such projects, let it fund both of them.





Body donation programs draw FBI scrutiny in 3 states – CBS
AP September 9, 2014, 9:55 PM

SALEM, Ore. - Authorities are investigating programs in at least three states that collect bodies donated for scientific research, medical training and other purposes.

An FBI official in Detroit confirmed that the bureau is looking at an Oregon research center, and investigators have raided facilities in Michigan and Arizona. Besides confirming the existence of an investigation, authorities have been tight-lipped about what they are examining and why.

In February, Michigan suspended the mortuary license of Arthur Rathburn, alleging that he embalmed bodies at a Detroit address that doesn't have a funeral home license. The move came after FBI agents in hazmat suits searched the site in December.

Phone numbers for Rathburn and his business, International Biological, were disconnected.

The FBI and the Arizona attorney general's office raided Biological Resource Center in January, owner Steve Gore says in a letter on the front page of the firm's website. The company accepts donations of dead bodies and links tissues with researchers and educators, according to its website.

"Please be assured that the staff of Biological Resource Center of Arizona works diligently each day to serve and honor our donors and their families with dignity and respect," Gore wrote. "We adhere to the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, which governs anatomical donation."

A woman who answered the phone at the center, who said she worked for the firm's answering service, said the business has been suspended because of the investigation and nobody was in the office. A spokeswoman for the attorney general's office did not respond to calls from The Associated Press on Tuesday.

Authorities subpoenaed records from Portland, Oregon-based Legacy Health, a hospital chain that also operates Legacy Research Institute in Portland. The institute uses cadavers for research and to train doctors and nurses for surgery.

Legacy said it cooperated with the subpoenas, issued in conjunction with a federal grand jury investigation in Michigan.

"Health care is highly regulated by both state and federal agencies," said Brian Terrett, a spokesman. "Legacy Health is regularly contacted by state and federal agencies for documents, and we completely comply with those requests."

Authorities requested that Legacy not share information about the investigation, Terrett said.

FBI officials will say little about their investigations.

"We have an investigation with respect to, out in Oregon ... the Legacy donation program," said Special Agent David Porter, a spokesman for the FBI's Detroit field office. "That is literally all I have said and that's literally all I will say."

Porter also confirmed that agents executed a search warrant at the Michigan facility. He said he was unaware of the search of the Arizona site.



Phoenix body-donation center target of federal raid
Inside a whole-body donation center
By D.S. Woodfill The Republic | azcentral.com
Wed Jan 22, 2014 11:38 PM

A Phoenix body-donation center has been wrapped in crime-scene tape and swarming with federal agents in hazardous-materials suits and respirators since Tuesday.
The raid marked the second time in as many months that federal investigators have targeted a business in the biological-research business, but the FBI and the Arizona attorney general’s office provided little information on why agents were raiding the Biological Resource Center, near 24th Street and University Drive.

A spokeswoman for Attorney General Tom Horne issued a brief statement that said the yearlong investigation involving the business would continue for several more weeks.
Stephanie Grisham, Horne’s spokeswoman, also sought to reassure the public that the hazmat suits and breathing masks investigators wore did not signal a danger to the general public.

The office provided a hotline — 602-542-8888 — that residents with family members who have donated their bodies to the center can call for more information.

Federal investigators in Michigan spent hours last month digging for human remains and bone remnants as part of an investigation into a similar incident, according to articles published in the Detroit Free Press.

The probes have highlighted an industry that remains largely out of the public eye despite efforts from companies, including the Biological Resource Center, to raise awareness of their cause and generate new clients.

In a 2011 profile of the business that ran in The Arizona Republic, a business representative said donated bodies are harvested within three weeks of death, with tissue going to medical researchers and organs being used by surgeons to practice techniques. Loved ones receive a polished wooden box with cremated remains in return.
The company’s principals did not respond to calls and emails Wednesday, and the business owner, Stephen Gore, did not answer the door at his home in northeast Phoenix.
It is not the first time Gore has faced legal scrutiny.

Maricopa County Superior Court records show Gore worked for the Donor Network of Arizona, a non-profit organ-harvesting organization that was named in a negligence lawsuit in 1997, after a man who died while undergoing knee-replacement surgery had his genitals removed along with his eyes. He had previously consented to donating his eyes.
Gore was deposed in the civil suit and was identified in court documents as the person responsible for harvesting Dominic Marion Jr.’s eyes.

The jury found the hospital responsible, according to media reports at the time, and awarded the family $2 million.

The Marion family could not be reached for comment, and Donor Network of Arizona spokeswoman Jacqueline Keidel said the organization’s on-site records only go back to 2005.

The Biological Resource Center is among several Arizona businesses that accept whole-body donations. Others include the University of Arizona’s Willed Body Program, Banner Sun Health Research Institute, LifeLegacy Foundation, Research for Life, and the Mayo Clinic.

According to LifeLegacy, organs are typically harvested from donated bodies within 24 hours of the donor’s death.

Some of the organizations use the body donations to teach medical students, while others use donated bodies to research diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and arthritis.

State law allows organizations to charge for services such as the removal, preservation, storage and transportation of parts from donated bodies. However, selling or purchasing body parts for transplantation or therapy is illegal.
Clarissa Cooper contributed to this report.



http://www.transplantliving.org/before-the-transplant/financing-a-transplant/the-costs/

Costs

The cost of a transplant, including preliminary testing, the surgery itself and post-operative recovery costs vary across the country and depend on the hospital and organ type. These costs start to add up, even before your transplant. Therefore, patients commonly rely on several sources to help pay for their medical and non-medical costs of pre- and post-transplantation.

Estimated U.S. Average 2011 Billed Charges Per Transplant:

Procurement Heart Only $80,400 Total Costs $997,700




“Authorities are investigating programs in at least three states that collect bodies donated for scientific research, medical training and other purposes. An FBI official in Detroit confirmed that the bureau is looking at an Oregon research center, and investigators have raided facilities in Michigan and Arizona. Besides confirming the existence of an investigation, authorities have been tight-lipped about what they are examining and why.... The FBI and the Arizona attorney general's office raided Biological Resource Center in January, owner Steve Gore says in a letter on the front page of the firm's website. The company accepts donations of dead bodies and links tissues with researchers and educators, according to its website.... 'We adhere to the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, which governs anatomical donation.' … Authorities subpoenaed records from Portland, Oregon-based Legacy Health, a hospital chain that also operates Legacy Research Institute in Portland. The institute uses cadavers for research and to train doctors and nurses for surgery.... 'We have an investigation with respect to, out in Oregon ... the Legacy donation program,' said Special Agent David Porter.... ”

This is really interesting. I have always had a fear that if I listed myself as a donor my life might be cut short by an unscrupulous doctor or hospital board. That thought came to me when I read a report several years ago about the prices that organ recipients have to pay for their organs, and the idea that such large sums of money could cause some corruptible medical people to terminate a brain damaged patient in a coma rather than waiting until they actually died. The article above states that the sale of organs is illegal, but the "procurement cost" is still very high. Drug companies pay doctors to prescribe their new drugs and give speeches praising them. Why wouldn't a body or organ company pay a doctor for delivering it. What constitutes the "procurement" costs? Fodder for a murder mystery, no? Whether or not that is true, I will be fascinated to see any follow up stories on this FBI investigation. This is clearly a major FBI investigation, and it must have an important reason behind their efforts. I hope to see more about it soon.





Tax Breaks May Turn San Francisco's Vacant Lots Into Urban Farms – NPR
by ALASTAIR BLAND
September 09, 2014

In San Francisco, there's a new program aimed at property owners who can resist the temptations of the sky-high real estate development market and turn their vacant lots into agricultural oases instead.

Many sustainability advocates have applauded the creation of the tax incentive, announced in August. But critics say there is no room in San Francisco to devote space to corn, beans and kale when homes cost millions and rent is at least $2,000 per bedroom in desirable areas.

Here's how the tax break works: Property owners who are willing to turn uninhabited land into farms would get that land assessed at the going tax rate for the state's irrigated farmland. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, that was about $12,500 per acre in 2013.

If accepted into the program, the property owner's annual dues to the city would drop from $10,000 or more to roughly $100. But the landowner would have to keep the land as an agricultural operation for at least five years or pay back the balance of the tax reduction, plus interest.

To qualify, the farm must also sell or donate produce to local residents, offer school tours or some other educational benefit or serve as a community-run garden space.

"The city legislation requires that there be some sort of public interface," says Eli Zigas, an urban agriculture advocate with the San Francisco-based nonprofit SPUR who helped develop the ordinance. Zigas feels urban farms can, to a small degree, increase a region's food security. But their primary value is to raise awareness among city slickers otherwise disconnected from food production systems, Zigas says.

The city law's author David Chiu, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, tells The Salt there is currently nowhere near enough garden space in San Francisco to accommodate locals who want to grow their own food. He says the waiting list for some city residents hoping to get their hands into the soil of local community gardens is as long as two years.

"There is enormous demand for this, in every single neighborhood," Chiu says, adding that, nonetheless, some public gardens have been lost to development projects. "So we want to create incentive for property owners to preserve their land by using it for farming."

San Francisco's ordinance follows passage of a state law,Assembly Bill 551, in 2013 that gave cities and counties the authority to create tax incentives to start urban farms. While San Francisco is out in front, activists in Los Angeles, Oakland, San Jose, Sacramento and Fresno have all discussed creating similar incentive programs that would foster urban farming and rid their cityscapes of blighted vacant lots, according to Zigas.

Nationally, too, interest in urban farming is on the upswing, and many states have passed laws to promote city farms. In New Jersey, property used for urban agriculture is exempted from property taxes as long as a nonprofit organization runs the farm.

In Utah, urban land may be zoned for agriculture if the lot is between two and five acres.

Missouri, Hawaii, Texas and other states have created their own urban farming support programs. In 2010, Cleveland updated its zoning code to permit agriculture on all vacant residentially-zoned lots while creating a grant program for farmer co-ops and community-supported agriculture.

In Maryland, counties and the city of Baltimore may now offer tax credits for land used exclusively for farming. Baltimore officials have drafted a billto take advantage of the state law.

Urban farming advocate Megan Wakefield with the Community Law Center in Baltimore says growing crops in the city is important because it revitalizes abandoned lots, allows people to experience cultivation of food and helps foster a sense of community among neighbors.

"From an environmental perspective," Wakefield adds, "urban farming projects throughout the city help reduce the distance food has to travel to get to the consumer and provide pervious ground that helps reduce storm water runoff."

But in San Francisco, at least, not everyone likes the idea of using valuable real estate to grow food.

"It's not like we have a food shortage in California ... but we certainly have a housing shortage," says David Sobel, the executive director of the San Francisco Housing Development Corporation, a nonprofit that helps lower-to middle-income people find affordable housing.

Sobel says he would like to see initiatives that support rooftop farming or encourage residents to grow backyard gardens. He says lower-income neighborhoods, especially, could benefit from having access to such greenery. "That could help meet two needs at once, without precluding people from living there," he says.

Aaron Roland owns a two-lot property in San Francisco's Potrero Hill neighborhood that has been used as a farm for years. While he recognizes there's a housing shortage, he'd like to keep the property the way it is.

Thanks to the new tax break, Roland will begin saving about $6,000 per year. (Roland is paying especially low taxes because he bought the property 17 years ago.)

"Is there $6,000 in value to the people of San Francisco in having this land used for agriculture? I think there is," says Roland. He estimates he would reap about $2 million if he sold the land for development, rather than use it as a garden.

Karen Heisler, owner of the restaurant Mission Pie, sources some of her produce from a San Francisco urban farm. She says she supported the state law passed in 2013. Heisler says encouraging temporary gardens does not prevent a house from eventually taking its place on an undeveloped property— it just encourages property owners to do something productive with their land while possibly making development plans. For properties that are unsafe for building due to instability or erosion issues, the city's tax break offers owners an alternative long-term use plan, she says.

"[Assembly Bill] 551 does nothing to impede the development of housing," she writes in an email. "If a developer has a site and resources ready for development, she or he will simply go forward and develop."

Sobel, though, expects any efforts to replace a beloved community garden with homes will meet with fierce resistance.

"I think a temporary garden could easily become permanent," he says. "I hope people's expectations are shaped around the eventuality that these properties could eventually be developed."




“In San Francisco, there's a new program aimed at property owners who can resist the temptations of the sky-high real estate development market and turn their vacant lots into agricultural oases instead. Many sustainability advocates have applauded the creation of the tax incentive, announced in August.... Here's how the tax break works: Property owners who are willing to turn uninhabited land into farms would get that land assessed at the going tax rate for the state's irrigated farmland. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, that was about $12,500 per acre in 2013. If accepted into the program, the property owner's annual dues to the city would drop from $10,000 or more to roughly $100. But the landowner would have to keep the land as an agricultural operation for at least five years or pay back the balance of the tax reduction, plus interest.... "The city legislation requires that there be some sort of public interface," says Eli Zigas, an urban agriculture advocate with the San Francisco-based nonprofit SPUR who helped develop the ordinance. Zigas feels urban farms can, to a small degree, increase a region's food security. But their primary value is to raise awareness among city slickers otherwise disconnected from food production systems, Zigas says.... San Francisco's ordinance follows passage of a state law,Assembly Bill 551, in 2013 that gave cities and counties the authority to create tax incentives to start urban farms. While San Francisco is out in front, activists in Los Angeles, Oakland, San Jose, Sacramento and Fresno have all discussed creating similar incentive programs that would foster urban farming and rid their cityscapes of blighted vacant lots, according to Zigas.... 'From an environmental perspective," Wakefield adds, "urban farming projects throughout the city help reduce the distance food has to travel to get to the consumer and provide pervious ground that helps reduce storm water runoff.'... Karen Heisler, owner of the restaurant Mission Pie, sources some of her produce from a San Francisco urban farm.

The placing of a group of farm plots where there has been nothing but an unused vacant lot gathering trash, would provide some locally produced food and keep the land plowed, so that it will absorb rainwater rather than having the water run off into the gutters. I experienced one such city farm when I lived in Washington, DC, and it was cheering to see. I have always loved the green of growing crops, and the freshness of the genuinely “vine ripened” fruit. Besides, there are poor people who could make some of their daily food needs on such a neighborhood farm. If you plant the very prolific crops of turnips, tomatoes, squash, green beans and okra you will get a large amount of produce off a very few short rows of plants. The farms are fertile teaching exhibitions for kids, too, who can see a little biology in action rather than being merely described in those often very dry passages in a textbook.

But to David Sobel, of a nonprofit that helps lower-to middle-income people find affordable housing, the land could be better used for housing, of which there is a great shortage, while rooftops and back yards could be used for gardens. I am reminded of the Victory Garden movement of Franklin Roosevelt's administration, in which he encouraged citizens to grow their own food in their backyard, and a recent news article about a disused city building several stories high that had been converted into an indoor farming project. The soil had to be carted in and lights had to be provided, of course, but marijuana growers in the city do that all the time! That particular indoor farm made quite a bit of produce and sold it at several nearby farmers markets. It can be done, and it will help ease the pressure in the “food deserts” that have been described in the inner cities, where the only neighborhood store has junky food that is largely composed of sugar and starch with no vegetables or meat. A high rise farm could really help in such a place.