Which bolgia?

Where in the Inferno would Dante place Massey Energy chairman and CEO Don L. Blankenship? With the indifferent or the avaricious? Those violent against their neighbor? Falsifiers? Traitors?

According to federal records, MSHA cited the Upper Big Branch mine for more than 1,300 safety violations from 2005 through Monday. Fifty citations came in the last month alone. [source]

Given the track record of safety violations in mines for which he is responsible, I suspect Dante would not be kind.

Many of those fifty citations were for poor ventilation of dust and methane, failure to maintain proper escape ways, and the accumulation of combustible materials. The Charleston Gazette reports that last year, more than ten percent of the enforcement actions taken by MSHA at the Upper Big Branch mine were for unwarrantable failure to follow safety rules, compared to about two percent at mines nationwide.

The CEO of Massey Energy, Don Blankenship, has denied any wrongdoing and said that any suspicion the mine was improperly operated was unfounded. [ibid.]

Blankenship hates unions and only 1.8 % of Massey's workers are unionized. If you have union workers they can report unsafe conditions and refuse unsafe work, which would cut into Blankenship's relentless drive to keep the bottom line where he wants it.

Jason Linkins writes at HuffPost:

Over at ThinkProgress, Brad Johnson pulls video of Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship registering complaints in June of 2009 that the safety rules governing mines were "difficult to comply with" and "nonsensical."

Maybe this was a big red flag that something terrible would one day happen?

Why should anyone comply with regulations when there is no serious consequence for non-compliance?

The agency has the power to seek federal court orders or injunctions against mines showing a pattern of violation and posing a hazard to the health and safety of miners. The agency has never used that authority, officials said. [WaPo cited in Linkins' article]

Ah, the mining companies had figured out how to stymie the regulators... and the feds did not tighten the rules. (Well, if you're a free market fundamentalist you assume regulation is bad and unregulated production and commerce work things out. This raging liberal does not have that much faith in human goodness, believe me.) The Obama Administration knew the rules were being gamed and, besides appointing more judges to adjudicate appeals, has seemingly done nothing to tighten the rules.

You all know where the lobbying money is going to come from. Yep, the coal industry. And, thanks to SCOTUS, corporations are entitled to lobby all they want.

Know any regulators who can stand against that? Of congresscritters?

Consensus and secrecy?

Leon Panetta seems still to be playing the "trust us" card on behalf of the CIA. Uh, Leon? That's why we call it oversight.

You may read emptywheel's post by clicking the link above.
--the BB

Time for the gummint to kick some ass

This is appalling.

The Treasury plans to invest up to $250 billion in a wide swath of U.S. banks in return for ownership stakes, which the government will relinquish when it is repaid.

Among other restrictions, participating institutions cannot increase dividend payments without government permission. They also are barred from repurchasing stock, which increases the value of outstanding shares.

The 33 banks signed up so far plan to pay shareholders about $7 billion this quarter. Companies generally try to pay consistent dividends and, at the present pace, those dividends will consume 52 percent of the Treasury's investment over the initial three-year term.

You mean that instead of using the money to increase lending and inject capital - the ostensible purpose of the bailout - they are planning on using 52% of that money to pay dividends? In which case they don't really need the fucking money from the Treasury, do they?

Banks have been making money hand over fist in recent years; look at the outrageous fees they charge and the low interest they pay the customers. I am of the opinion that their investors, having had such a cushy ride for a while at customer expense can bloody well feel some of the pain now.

Put another way, why do GOP politicians and servile pundits raise a hue and cry about redistribution of wealth only when it is distributed downward and not upward, as it has been quite rapaciously since reaganomics took over? Gross hypocrisy of the first order.

I wish Waxman and Cuomo every success:

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is demanding information about executive compensation and bonuses at nine banks that have received federal funds under TARP, the U.S. Treasury's Troubled Asset Relief Program.

In a letter to each institution's Board of Directors, Cuomo warns the bonuses could violate New York's state fraudulent conveyance law.

"Obviously," he writes, "we will have grave concerns if your expected bonus pool has increased in any way as a result of your receipt or expected receipt of taxpayer funds from TARP."

Indeed.

h/t to Chris in Paris at Americablog for pointing all this out (here and here)
--the BB