YCLOAK

General Motors said Tuesday it will close an underutilized factory in Gunsan, South Korea, by the end of May as part of a restructuring of its operations.

 

The move is a setback for the administration of President Moon Jae-in, who has made jobs and wages a priority.

 

A GM statement said Monday the company has proposed to its labor union and other stakeholders a plan involving further investments in South Korea that would help save jobs.

 

“As we are at a critical juncture of needing to make product allocation decisions, the ongoing discussions must demonstrate significant progress by the end of February, when GM will make important decisions on next steps,” Barry Engle, GM executive vice president and president of GM International, said in the statement.

 

The company’s CEO Mary Barra has said GM urgently needs better cost performance from its operations in South Korea, where auto sales have slowed.

 

South Korea’s government expressed “deep regret” over the factory’s closure. It said it plans to study the situation at the business and will continue talks with GM.

Korea’s finance ministry said earlier this month that GM had sought government help. The government has denied reports that South Korea will raise the issue in trade talks with the U.S.

 

The factory in Gunsan, a port city about 200 kilometers (125 miles) southwest of Seoul, has been making the Cruze, a sedan, and the Orlando model SUV. It employs about 2,000 workers, and only used about 20 percent of its full production capacity in 2017, rolling out 33,982 vehicles.

 

GM Korea has made 10 million vehicles since it was set up in 2002. In 2017, it sold 132,377 units in Korea and exported 392,170 vehicles to 120 markets around the world.
…

Companies selling some of the most lucrative prescription painkillers funneled millions of dollars to advocacy groups that in turn promoted the medications’ use, according to a report released Monday by a U.S. senator.

The investigation by Missouri’s Senator Claire McCaskill sheds light on the opioid industry’s ability to shape public opinion and raises questions about its role in an overdose epidemic that has claimed hundreds of thousands of American lives. Representatives of some of the drugmakers named in the report said they did not set conditions on how the money was to be spent or force the groups to advocate for their painkillers.

The report from McCaskill, ranking Democrat on the Senate’s homeland security committee, examines advocacy funding by the makers of the top five opioid painkillers by worldwide sales in 2015. Financial information the companies provided to Senate staff shows they spent more than $10 million between 2012 and 2017 to support 14 advocacy groups and affiliated doctors.

The report did not include some of the largest and most politically active manufacturers of the drugs.

The findings follow a similar investigation launched in 2012 by a bipartisan pair of senators. That effort eventually was shelved and no findings were ever released.

While the new report provides only a snapshot of company activities, experts said it gives insight into how industry-funded groups fueled demand for drugs such as OxyContin and Vicodin, addictive medications that generated billions in sales despite research showing they are largely ineffective for chronic pain.

‘Pretty damning’

“It looks pretty damning when these groups were pushing the message about how wonderful opioids are and they were being heavily funded, in the millions of dollars, by the manufacturers of those drugs,” said Lewis Nelson, a Rutgers University doctor and opioid expert.

The findings could bolster hundreds of lawsuits that are aimed at holding opioid drugmakers responsible for helping fuel an epidemic blamed for the deaths of more than 340,000 Americans since 2000.

McCaskill’s staff asked drugmakers to turn over records of payments they made to groups and affiliated physicians, part of a broader investigation by the senator into the opioid crisis. The request was sent last year to five companies: Purdue Pharma; Insys Therapeutics; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, owned by Johnson & Johnson; Mylan; and Depomed.

Fourteen nonprofit groups, mostly representing pain patients and specialists, received nearly $9 million from the drugmakers, according to investigators. Doctors affiliated with those groups received another $1.6 million.

Most of the groups included in the probe took industry-friendly positions. That included issuing medical guidelines promoting opioids for chronic pain, lobbying to defeat or include exceptions to state limits on opioid prescribing, and criticizing landmark prescribing guidelines from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“Doctors and the public have no way of knowing the true source of this information and that’s why we have to take steps to provide transparency,” said McCaskill in an interview with The Associated Press. The senator plans to introduce legislation requiring increased disclosure about the financial relationships between drugmakers and certain advocacy groups.

‘Front groups’

A 2016 investigation by the AP and the Center for Public Integrity revealed how painkiller manufacturers used hundreds of lobbyists and millions in campaign contributions to fight state and federal measures aimed at stemming the tide of prescription opioids, often enlisting help from advocacy organizations.

Bob Twillman, executive director of the Academy of Integrative Pain Management, said most of the $1.3 million his group received from the five companies went to a state policy advocacy operation. But Twillman said the organization has called for non-opioid pain treatments while also asking state lawmakers for exceptions to restrictions on the length of opioid prescriptions for certain patients.

“We really don’t take direction from them about what we advocate for,” Twillman said of the industry.

The tactics highlighted in Monday’s report are at the heart of lawsuits filed by hundreds of state and local governments against the opioid industry.

The suits allege that drugmakers misled doctors and patients about the risks of opioids by enlisting “front groups” and “key opinion leaders” who oversold the drugs’ benefits and encouraged overprescribing. In the legal claims, the governments seek money and changes to how the industry operates, including an end to the use of outside groups to push their drugs.

U.S. deaths linked to opioids have quadrupled since 2000 to roughly 42,000 in 2016. Although initially driven by prescription drugs, most opioid deaths now involve illicit drugs, including heroin and fentanyl.

Companies and their contributions

Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, contributed the most to the groups, funneling $4.7 million to organizations and physicians from 2012 through last year.

In a statement, the company did not address whether it was trying to influence the positions of the groups it supported, but said it does help organizations “that are interested in helping patients receive appropriate care.” On Friday, Purdue announced it would no longer market OxyContin to doctors.

Insys Therapeutics, a company recently targeted by federal prosecutors, provided more than $3.5 million to interest groups and physicians, according to McCaskill’s report. Last year, the company’s founder was indicted for allegedly offering bribes to doctors to write prescriptions for the company’s spray-based fentanyl medication.

A company spokesman declined to comment.

Insys contributed $2.5 million last year to a U.S. Pain Foundation program to pay for pain drugs for cancer patients.

“The question was: Do we make these people suffer, or do we work with this company that has a terrible name?” said U.S. Pain founder Paul Gileno, explaining why his organization sought the money.

Depomed, Janssen and Mylan contributed $1.4 million, $650,000 and $26,000 in payments, respectively. Janssen and Mylan told the AP they acted responsibly, while calls and emails to Depomed were not returned.
…

U.S. prosecutors on Monday announced charges against five former Venezuelan officials accused of soliciting bribes in exchange for helping vendors win favorable treatment from state oil company PDVSA, the latest case to stem from a $1 billion graft probe.

The indictment by the U.S. Justice Department was filed in federal court in Houston, Texas, and was made public after Spain on Friday extradited one of the former officials, Cesar Rincon, who was a general manager at PDVSA’s, procurement unit Bariven.

Others charged included Nervis Villalobos, a former Venezuelan vice minister of energy; Rafael Reiter, who worked as PDVSA’s head of security and loss prevention; and Luis Carlos de Leon, a former official at a state-run electric company.

Those three like Rincon were arrested in Spain in October at the request of U.S. authorities amid a foreign bribery investigation into the financially struggling PDVSA, or Petroleos de Venezuela SA.

De Leon, Villalobos and Reiter remain in Spanish custody.

The indictment also charged Alejandro Isturiz Chiesa, who was an assistant to Bariven’s president and remains at large.

All five face conspiracy and money laundering charges. De Leon and Villalobos were also charged with conspiring to violate the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

Fred Schwartz, a lawyer for Rincon, said he expected his 50-year-old client would plead not guilty when he is arraigned on March 6. Lawyers for the other defendants could not be immediately identified.

The case flowed out of a U.S. investigation into what prosecutors have previously called a $1 billion bribery plot involving payments to PDVSA officials that became public with the arrest of two businessmen in 2015.

The indictment announced on Monday said that from 2011 to 2013, the five Venezuelans sought bribes and kickbacks from vendors in exchange for helping them secure PDVSA contracts and gain priority over other vendors for outstanding invoices during its liquidity crisis.

The indictment said the five Venezuelans then used various companies and bank accounts in Switzerland, Curaçao and elsewhere to launder the money they received.

Among the vendors that they promised to help in exchange for bribes were Roberto Rincon, who was president of Tradequip Services & Marine, and Abraham Jose Shiera Bastidas, the manager of Vertix Instrumentos, the indictment said.

Both pleaded guilty in 2016 to conspiring to pay bribes to secure energy contracts. Eight other people have also pleaded guilty in connection with the U.S. investigation.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday he would push for a “reciprocal tax” against countries, including U.S. allies, that levy tariffs on American products, but officials did not provide details on how such a tax would be structured or what goods it would apply to.

During his populist 2016 presidential campaign, Republican Trump railed at countries that had trade surpluses “taking advantage of the United States” and he revisited the theme Monday.

“We cannot continue to let people come into our country and rob us blind and charge us tremendous tariffs and taxes and we charge them nothing,” Trump told reporters at a White House event to announce a proposed infrastructure plan.

The United States loses “vast amounts of money with China and Japan and South Korea and so many other countries … It’s a little tough for them because they’ve gotten away with murder for 25 years. But we’re going to be changing policy,” he said.

Trump said his administration will impose a “reciprocal tax” to charge other countries — “some of them are so-called allies, but they’re not allies on trade.”

Retailers and trade associations have fought a Republican proposal on how imports are taxed because they believe it hurts their businesses and would lead to higher prices for consumers on basic items such as food and clothing.

Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives, as they began to assemble a tax reform plan last year, proposed imposing a 20 percent border-adjustment tax on imports that was designed to offset the value-added tax refunds that some countries grant to their exporters.

But the idea was dropped after it ran into stiff opposition from retailers and other industries that depend on imported materials. The National Retail Federation called it a “bad tax” that would “drive up the prices of countless products Americans use every day.”

Last April on Fox Business Network, Trump suggested that if he said the U.S. would charge a 10 percent or 20 percent border tax “everyone goes crazy, because they like free trade” and added: “But when you say ‘reciprocal tax,’ nobody can get angry … OK, you say, ‘whatever you charge, we’re charging.'”
…

Uber is testing a service in Nairobi that was inspired by residents’ use of the platform for errands and aims to tap into a new segment of the city’s active ride-hailing market, a regional executive said Monday.

Amid the minibuses, safari 4x4s, taxis and Ubers on the roads of Kenya’s capital, tiny, boxy Suzuki Altos are popping up. They are emblazoned with stickers reading “Uber Chap Chap,” and a slogan in Kiswahili that translates as “Arrive Faster, Save Money.”

That offer is exactly why 24-year-old lawyer Brian Mwirigi said he clicked the new “Chap Chap” option on his Uber app last week when he noticed that his short trip to deliver documents to a client would cost 100 Kenyan shillings ($1) less than with the standard “uberX.”

“It was a bit cramped, but for the price you’re paying, it doesn’t really matter,” he said, adding that he intends to use Chap Chap for trips downtown and in adjacent neighborhoods where it is available during the pilot.

Nairobians such as Mwirigi, who looks for a bargain when hailing a ride on his phone and will shop around, are one of the targets of Chap Chap, Uber’s East Africa general manager Loic Amado said in an interview.

“It’s about giving people choices,” he said. “Kenyans specifically are very open to adapting to new things and are very creative in using Uber for different things.”

The test phase began three weeks ago. More than 200 Altos have hit the roads.

Kenya is Uber’s second-largest market in sub-Saharan Africa, after South Africa. It competes against its global rival Taxify, which has gained popularity in Nairobi in the past year but does not disclose numbers of active riders and users. The Kenyan app Little said in September it has close to the 5,000 drivers that Uber boasts.

Drive-to-buy option

Nairobi is the first city in Africa in which Uber has piloted the low-cost, quick-trip option using small, brand-new vehicles.

If the positive response is sustained, he said, Uber will consider introducing Chap Chap across Nairobi and in the capitals of neighboring Uganda and Tanzania, Amado said.

Uber partnered with a local Suzuki dealer that imported 300 cars. Kenyan bank Stanbic arranged the financing so drivers with high ratings could opt in to the new service and own their Alto in three years.

The company noticed people were using Uber for errands, such as sending packages from office to office or for bank runs.

“There wasn’t a price point that was so affordable or attractive to do these shorter errands,” Amado said. The lower price is possible because the Alto is, at 25 km per liter, twice as fuel-efficient as the average car an Uber driver uses, he said.

Emergency rides

There is another possible market.

Several Nairobians told Reuters they commute to work downtown in packed minibuses but hail Ubers for emergencies.

Harrison Iratenga, a security guard, said Uber had enabled his wife to deliver their third child at a hospital.

“Our first two were born at home, before Uber was invented,” he said.

The cheaper option could make it possible for him to use Uber more frequently, he said, as an Alto with the Chap Chap sticker cruised by.

The new service won’t suit everyone, including middle-class Kenyans who see their car as part of their personal style.

“I wouldn’t be caught dead in one of those,” said Mark Kuria, a 45-year-old civil servant dressed dapperly in a well-cut suit.
…

The invention of a machine that removes pumpkin seeds from the shell and sorts them is being celebrated in Cameroon as traders hope to boost production of the commodity in the Central African Country. Mariama Diallo reports.
…

Federal investigators are still looking at how CSX railway crews routed an Amtrak train into a parked freight train in Cayce, South Carolina, last weekend. But even if CSX should bear sole responsibility for the accident, Amtrak will likely end up paying crash victims’ legal claims with public money.

Amtrak pays for accidents it didn’t cause because of secretive agreements negotiated between the passenger rail company, which receives more than $1 billion annually in federal subsidies, and the private railroads, which own 97 percent of the tracks on which Amtrak travels.

Both Amtrak and freight railroads that own the tracks fight to keep those contracts secret in legal proceedings. But whatever the precise legal language, plaintiffs’ lawyers and former Amtrak officials say Amtrak generally bears the full cost of damages to its trains, passengers, employees and other crash victims — even in instances where crashes occurred as the result of a freight rail company’s negligence or misconduct.

​No ‘iron in the fire’

Railroad industry advocates say that freight railways have ample incentive to keep their tracks safe for their employees, customers and investors. But the Surface Transportation Board and even some federal courts have long concluded that allowing railroads to escape liability for gross negligence is bad public policy.

“The freight railroads don’t have an iron in the fire when it comes to making the safety improvements necessary to protect members of the public,” said Bob Pottroff, a Manhattan, Kansas, rail injury attorney who has sued CSX on behalf of an injured passenger from the Cayce crash. “They’re not paying the damages.”

Beyond CSX’s specific activities in the hours before the accident, the company’s safety record has deteriorated in recent years, according to a standard metric provided by the Federal Railroad Administration. Since 2013, CSX’s rate of major accidents per million miles traveled has jumped by more than half, from 2 to 3.08 — significantly worse than the industry average. And rail passenger advocates raised concerns after the CSX CEO at the time pushed hard last year to route freight more directly by altering its routes.

CSX denied that safety had slipped at the company, blaming the change in the major accident index on a reduction of total miles traveled combined with changes in its cargo and train length.

“Our goal remains zero accidents,” CSX spokesman Bryan Tucker wrote in a statement provided to The Associated Press. CSX’s new system of train routing “will create a safer, more efficient railroad resulting in a better service product for our customers,” he wrote.

Amtrak’s ability to offer national rail service is governed by separately negotiated track usage agreements with 30 different railroads. All the deals share a common trait: They’re “no fault,” according to a September 2017 presentation delivered by Amtrak executive Jim Blair as part of a Federal Highway Administration seminar.

No fault means Amtrak takes full responsibility for its property and passengers and the injuries of anyone hit by a train. The “host railroad” that operates the tracks must only be responsible for its property and employees. Blair called the decades-long arrangement “a good way for Amtrak and the host partners to work together to get things resolved quickly and not fight over issues of responsibility.”

Amtrak declined to comment on Blair’s presentation. But Amtrak’s history of not pursuing liability claims against freight railroads doesn’t fit well with federal officials and courts’ past declarations that the railroads should be held accountable for gross negligence and willful misconduct.

​Maryland crash, backlash

After a 1987 crash in Chase, Maryland, in which a Conrail train crew smoked marijuana then drove a train with disabled safety features past multiple stop signals and into an Amtrak train — killing 16 — a federal judge ruled that forcing Amtrak to take financial responsibility for “reckless, wanton, willful, or grossly negligent acts by Conrail” was contrary to good public policy.

Conrail paid. But instead of taking on more responsibility going forward, railroads went in the opposite direction, recalls a former Amtrak board member who spoke to the AP. After Conrail was held responsible in the Chase crash, he said, Amtrak got “a lot of threats from the other railroads.”

The former board member requested anonymity because he said that Amtrak’s internal legal discussions were supposed to remain confidential and he did not wish to harm his own business relationships by airing a contentious issue.

Because Amtrak operates on the freight railroads’ tracks and relies on the railroads’ dispatchers to get passenger trains to their destinations on time, Amtrak executives concluded they couldn’t afford to pick a fight, the former Amtrak board member said.

“The law says that Amtrak is guaranteed access” to freights’ tracks, he said. “But it’s up to the goodwill of the railroad as to whether they’ll put you ahead or behind a long freight train.”

A 2004 New York Times series on train crossing safety drew attention to avoidable accidents at railroad crossings and involving passenger trains — and to railroads’ ability to shirk financial responsibility for passenger accidents. In the wake of the reporting, the Surface Transportation Board ruled that railroads “cannot be indemnified for its own gross negligence, recklessness, willful or wanton misconduct,” according to a 2010 letter by then-Surface Transportation Board chairman Dan Elliott to members of Congress.

That ruling gives Amtrak grounds to pursue gross negligence claims against freight railroads — if it wanted to.

“If Amtrak felt that if they didn’t want to pay, they’d have to litigate it,” said Elliott, now an attorney at Conner & Winters.

Same lawyers

The AP was unable to find an instance where the railroad has brought such a claim against a freight railroad since the 1987 Chase, Maryland, disaster. The AP also asked Amtrak, CSX and the Association of American Railroads to identify any example within the last decade of a railroad contributing to a settlement or judgment in a passenger rail accident that occurred on its track. All entities declined to provide such an example.

Even in court cases where establishing gross negligence by a freight railroad is possible, said Potrroff, the plaintiff’s attorney, he has never seen any indication that the railroad and Amtrak are at odds.

“You’ll frequently see Amtrak hire the same lawyers the freight railroads use,” he said.

Ron Goldman, a California plaintiff attorney who has also represented passenger rail accident victims, agreed. While Goldman’s sole duty is to get the best possible settlement for his client, he said he’d long been curious about whether it was Amtrak or freight railroads which ended up paying for settlements and judgments.

“The question of how they share that liability is cloaked in secrecy,” he said, adding: “The money is coming from Amtrak when our clients get the check.”

Pottroff said he has long wanted Amtrak to stand up to the freight railroads on liability matters. Not only would it make safety a bigger financial consideration for railroads, he said, it would simply be fair.

“Amtrak has a beautiful defense — the freight railroad is in control of all the infrastructure,” he said. But he’s not expecting Amtrak to use it during litigation over the Cayce crash.

“Amtrak always pays,” he said.
…

Increasing demand for long-haul truckers in the United States is drawing more African immigrants onto America’s roads. VOA’s Arzouma Kompaoré hitched a ride with African truckers whose routes to success stretch across the United States.
…

There are growing fears that Britain could be headed for a so-called cliff-edge exit from the European Union, as big differences remain between Brussels and London over the shape of any deal. It comes as Japan warns its businesses may pull out of Britain if they face higher costs after Brexit. A leaked government analysis suggests that economic growth in Britain will decline by up to 8 percent after it leaves the bloc. Henry Ridgwell reports from London.
…

OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma LP said Saturday that it has cut its sales force in half and will stop promoting opioids to physicians, following widespread criticism of the ways that drugmakers market addictive painkillers.

The drugmaker said it will inform doctors Monday that its sales representatives will no longer be visiting physician offices to discuss its opioid products. It will now have about 200 sales representatives, Purdue said.

“We have restructured and significantly reduced our commercial operation and will no longer be promoting opioids to prescribers,” the Stamford, Connecticut-based company said in a statement.

New marketing push

Doctors with opioid-related questions will be directed to its medical affairs department. Its sales representatives will now focus on Symproic, a drug for treating opioid-induced constipation, and other potential non-opioid products, Purdue said.

Opioids were involved in more than 42,000 overdose deaths in 2016, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Amid the opioid epidemic, Purdue and other drugmakers have been fighting a wave of lawsuits by states, counties and cities that have accused them of pushing addictive painkillers through deceptive marketing.

The lawsuits have generally accused Purdue of significantly downplaying the risk of addiction posed by OxyContin and of engaging in misleading marketing that overstated the benefits of opioids for treating chronic, rather than short-term, pain.

Lawsuits in 14 states

At least 14 states have sued the privately held Purdue. Most recently, Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall filed a lawsuit Tuesday accusing Purdue of deceptively marketing prescription opioids to generate billions of dollars in sales.

Purdue is also facing a federal investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Connecticut.

Purdue has denied the allegations in the various lawsuits.

It has said its drugs are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and account for only 2 percent of all opioid prescriptions.

Purdue and three executives previously pleaded guilty in 2007 to federal charges related to the misbranding of OxyContin and agreed to pay a total of $634.5 million to resolve a U.S. Justice Department probe.

That year, Purdue also reached a $19.5-million settlement with 26 states and the District of Columbia. It agreed in 2015 to pay $24 million to resolve a lawsuit by Kentucky.
…

It’s been a tough week on Wall Street. The Dow Jones Industrial average closed more than 300 points higher Friday, after plunging more than 1,000 points the day before, the second steepest decline in history. The biggest dive happened Monday when the blue chip index fell more than 1,100 points. It’s enough to make even the most experienced investors swoon. But does this mean the end of the nine-year bull market? Is it time to worry? Mil Arcega spoke with economic analysts to get some answers.
…

Politicians and public figures suspected of buying property with corrupt money will be forced to explain their wealth, or face the seizure of their assets under new legislation that has come into force in Britain this month. As Henry Ridgwell reports from London, the so-called Unexplained Wealth Orders have been welcomed by activists, who say the British capital is at the center of a global web of corrupt and embezzled money.
…

Commissions that oversee coastal lands and water pushed the Trump administration to leave California out of plans to expand offshore drilling, saying the state will throw up any barriers possible to prevent pumping and transportation of oil.

The warning came weeks after Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said he wants to open nearly all U.S. coastlines to offshore oil and gas drilling.

Since then, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management has proposed six sales of drilling rights off the California coast and a seventh off Oregon and Washington between 2020 and 2023.

“Given how unpopular oil development in coastal waters is in California, it is certain that the state would not approve new pipelines or allow use of existing pipelines to transport oil from new leases onshore,” the State Lands Commission wrote in a letter Wednesday to federal officials.

The commission controls up to 3 miles (4.8 kilometers) offshore, at which point federal jurisdiction kicks in. It has not allowed drilling in the state-controlled waters since a 1969 oil spill near Santa Barbara.

State and local governments could also block the construction of helipads and other infrastructure on land needed to support offshore operations.

Laws from the 1980s

In the 1980s, many coastal cities passed ordinances to block such infrastructure when President Ronald Reagan looked to expand offshore drilling. Many of those laws remain in place.

Drillers could find ways around state and local restrictions — such as pumping oil directly onto ships for transport — but the process is expensive and may not be profitable if oil prices remain relatively low.

A separate letter from the California Coastal Commission warned that an oil spill would devastate the state’s tourism economy and coastal beauty.

The letter pointed to the Santa Barbara spill, which caused severe environmental damage, hurt the fishing industry and dissuaded tourists from visiting.

The commission has authority to review activities in federally controlled waters. It can’t block drilling but could file a lawsuit contending the move doesn’t meet ocean management plans approved jointly by the state and federal governments in the 1970s.

​’We will fight them again’

“We’ve fought similar efforts before, and we will fight them again,” Coastal Commission Chair Dayna Bochco said.

The state agencies weighed in ahead of a public meeting Thursday in Sacramento, the only opportunity for people to register their opinions in person to the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

Fishermen, environmentalists, surfers and other critics demonstrated outside the state Capitol before marching to the meeting at a nearby library.

Several demonstrators chanted in opposition at the open-house style meeting, where bureau scientists talked one-on-one with visitors and collected written comments.

“Why do we want to let someone start drilling for more oil when we need to be putting money into resources for green economy and green fuel,” said Jim Wilson, a 71-year-old retired mail carrier from Placerville, outside Sacramento.

California Assembly opposed

Earlier in the day, the California Assembly voted overwhelmingly to oppose renewed drilling.

“We are California and we will fight back to protect our beautiful coast,” said Assemblyman Al Muratsuchi of Torrance.

Republicans Randy Voepel of Santee and Travis Allen of Huntington Beach said California can safely harvest oil and gas. Allen, a GOP candidate for governor, said that could help lower gasoline prices.

Most of California’s outer continental shelf — the area that would be opened to drilling — is in shallow water, where operations are not complicated, said Tim Charters, senior director of government and political affairs for the National Ocean Industries Association, a trade group for the offshore energy industry.

“It’s critical to keep the dollars at home, create the jobs locally instead of sending the money overseas and creating jobs in foreign places,” he said.

Zinke angered critics when he said drilling off Florida’s coast would remain off limits, prompting California Gov. Jerry Brown and others to request a similar exemption. Regulators later said no final decision had been made about Florida.

Oregon, New Jersey protests

On Tuesday, more than 100 demonstrators gathered outside Oregon’s state Capitol in Salem to denounce the proposal. A day later in New Jersey, more than a dozen groups held a rally in the driving rain on the Asbury Park boardwalk to demonstrate their opposition.

Twenty-three meetings are planned nationwide in coastal states. Comments can be submitted online through March 9.
…

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Thursday pitched Canadian globalism and the country’s new fast-track visa as reasons why Silicon Valley companies should consider Canada as a place to do business and spend money.

Trudeau brought his charm offensive to the San Francisco Bay Area amid increasing unease over U.S. immigration policy and while talks continue over the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The heated debate over immigration since the election of President Donald Trump has provided a clear opening for Canada to promote itself to Silicon Valley.

As American employers worry about access to foreign workers, Canada is offering a two-week, fast-track employment permit for certain workers, dubbed the “global skills strategy visa.”

Government-sponsored billboards in Silicon Valley pitch: “H1-B Problems? Pivot to Canada.” Recruiters from cities in Canada attend Canadian university alumni events in the valley, urging graduates to come home “to your next career move in the Great White North.”

Trudeau demurred when asked whether Trump’s immigration efforts are making the sales pitch easier, pointing to the power of globalism.

“We know that bringing in great talent from around the world is an enormous benefit, not just to the companies that want to do that, but to Canadian jobs and to our country as a whole, so we’re going to continue to do that,” he said.

Recruiting successes

His stops Thursday were designed to showcase recruiting successes.

Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff announced the online business software company will invest another $2 billion in its Canadian operations.

And San Francisco-based AppDirect, an online management platform whose co-CEO first met Trudeau in political science class at McGill University in Montreal, said it would add another 300 jobs in Canada in the next five years.

Trudeau is also meeting with Amazon Chief Executive Jeff Bezos as Bezos considers the location for its second headquarters. Toronto, which has created a government-sponsored innovation hub for tech companies, was the only one of several Canadian cities that applied to make the shortlist.

The San Francisco Bay Area has become increasingly important to the Canadian government, said Rana Sarkar, the consul general of Canada in San Francisco. He said it fits with the “innovation strategy” the Trudeau government has promoted since its election in 2015.

“It’s the global epicenter for many of these revolutions. We need to be here both offensively to ensure that we’re telling our story. … And we’re also here defensively to ensure that we’re here at the table when the decisions about the next economy are made,” Sarkar said.

Trudeau’s stop in San Francisco also highlights the already strong ties between Canada and California, particularly in research, academia and technology.

NAFTA

While much of the attention on the North American Free Trade Agreement has focused on physical commodities such as vehicle manufacturing, dairy and timber, skilled workers have also become increasingly mobile between the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

Google built its latest DeepMind artificial intelligence facility at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, after several of its graduates came to work on the project.

The next round of talks over the 24-year-old trade pact in Mexico later this month loomed over Trudeau’s visit. Trump has called the agreement a job-killing “disaster” on the campaign trail and has threatened to withdraw from it if he can’t get what he wants.

The lengthy talks have increased the political pressure and the rhetoric in Canada, where the stakes are high.

Trudeau declined to talk about specifics Thursday, but said Canada wants an agreement that is “win-win-win” for all three countries.

“We’re going to continue to make an argument that it’s not enough to just trade, we have to ensure that the benefits of trade are properly and fairly shared,” he said.

There are hundreds, maybe thousands — no one can say for sure — of Canadians in the tech industry in Northern California, many of them on visas made possible through the trade pact.

Without NAFTA, “those [jobs] go away. That could cause immediate disruption for the tech community” on both sides of the border, said Daniel Ujczo, an international trade lawyer based in Columbus, Ohio, who has been part of the talks, now in their sixth round.

“It’s unfortunately not an area that is up for discussion. Canada and Mexico keep raising worker mobility issues, but the U.S. won’t discuss it,” he said.

Trudeau will meet with Gov. Jerry Brown and Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, both Democrats, on Friday before he travels to Southern California to deliver a speech at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

The location is a symbolic choice, referring to the longstanding trade relationship between the U.S. and Canada. In 1988, Reagan and then-Prime Minister Brian Mulroney signed the first free trade agreement — a precursor to NAFTA.
…

U.S. stocks tumbled again Thursday as investors continued to fret about the possibility of rising inflation and higher interest rates. 

For the second time in four days, the Dow Jones industrial average sank more than 1,000 points, or 4.2 percent, to end Thursday day at 23,860.

The Standard and Poor’s Index, the benchmark for many index funds, also shed 100.66 points, or 3.8 percent, to close at 2,581. It last hit that low in mid-November.

The two indexes have dropped 10 percent from their all-time highs, set on January 26. That means they are in what is known on Wall Street as a “correction,” fueled by fears that a long stretch of low interest rates and tame inflation, which helped driven up stock prices, might be coming to an end.

As the day wore on, it became evident major U.S. stock indexes were headed toward their fifth loss in the last six days, erasing big gains in the first weeks of the new year.

Stocks began to tumble last Friday after the U.S. Labor Department reported wages grew rapidly in January, sparking concern of higher inflation and lower corporate profits.

Earlier in Europe, stock prices declined and bond yields increased after the Bank of England said it may boost interest rates in response to a strong global economy. Britain’s FTSE-100 Index fell 1.5 percent and Germany’s DAX plunged 2.6 percent.

The picture was brighter in Asia, where Japan’s Nikkei 225 Index climbed just over 1 percent, South Korea’s Kospi Index rose five-tenths of one percent, and Hong Kong’s Hang Seng Index gained four-tenths of one percent. 
…

Stocks lurched lower again in midday trading on Wall Street Thursday, extending a streak of losses and putting the market on track for its second big weekly decline in a row.

The market got off to a mixed start but fell steadily as the morning wore on. Technology companies, the leading sector over the past year, and banks fell the most.

 

The Standard & Poor’s 500 index, the benchmark for many index funds in 401(k) accounts, is now down 7.7 percent from the latest record high of 26,616 it set January 26. It’s still up 15.5 percent over the past year.  

 

Stock trading turned volatile over the last several days, breaking an unusually long period of calm, and the market is on track for its fifth loss in the last six days. European markets were also lower after the Bank of England said it could raise interest rates in the coming months.

 

After huge gains in the first weeks of this year, stocks tumbled Friday after the Labor Department said workers’ wages grew at a fast rate in January. That’s good for the economy, but investors worried it will hurt corporate profits and that rising wages are a sign of faster inflation. It could prompt the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates at a faster pace, which would act as a brake on the economy.

 

The S&P 500 shed 30 points, or 1.1 percent, to 2,651 as of noon Eastern time.

 

The Dow Jones industrial average lost 342 points, or 1.4 percent, to 24,550. Boeing and Caterpillar took some of the worst losses. The Nasdaq composite fell 89 points, or 1.3 percent, to 6,962.

 

The losses were broad. Three stocks fell for every one that rose on the New York Stock Exchange, and nine out of the 11 industry sectors in the S&P 500 index were down.

 

Bond prices recovered most of an early loss, sending yields slightly higher. The yield on the 10-year Treasury note rose to 2.85 percent from 2.84 percent.

 

Mixed bag for companies

High-dividend stocks including phone companies fell. Those stocks are often seen as substitutes for bonds because they tend not to fluctuate that much in price and provide steady income. Those stocks fall out of favor when bond yields rise, as they have been for the past few months, and many expect the trend to continue. The yield on the 10-year note was as low as 2.04 percent as recently as September.

The market didn’t get much help Thursday from company earnings reports, several of which disappointed investors. While U.S. companies mostly did well at the end of 2018, a number of them had a weak finish to the year.

 

Hanesbrands, which makes underwear, T-shirts and socks, reported a smaller profit than investors expected, and its forecast for the current year didn’t live up to analysts’ estimates either. The company also said it will pay $400 million to buy Australian retailer Bras N Things. The stock dropped $2.02, or 9.2 percent, to $19.94.

 

IRobot, which makes Roomba vacuums, plummeted 30 percent after projected a smaller annual profit than Wall Street was expecting. The stock dropped $26.64 to $61.40.

 

Twitter had a banner day, soaring 16 percent after turning in a profit for the first time. Its fourth-quarter revenue was also better than expected. The stock rose $4.55, or 15.9 percent, to $31.46.

 

Online delivery company GrubHub soared after it announced a partnership with Yum Brands, the parent of Taco Bell and KFC. GrubHub will provide the delivery people and technology to let people order food from those restaurants. GrubHub jumped $19.46, or 27.8 percent, to $89.37, while Yum Brands dipped 77 cents, or 1 percent, to $79.36.

 

After a sharp loss Wednesday, benchmark U.S. crude lost 97 cents, or 1.6 percent, to $60.82 a barrel in New York. Brent crude, the international standard for oil prices, gave up 85 cents, or 1.3 percent, to $64.66 per barrel in London.

Stocks in Europe declined and bond yields increased after the Bank of England said could raise interest rates in coming months because of the strong global economy. That also sent the pound higher. Britain’s FTSE 100 fell 1.6 percent and the French CAC 40 lost 2.4 percent. Germany’s DAX declined 2.6 percent.

 

In Tokyo the Nikkei 225 index rose 1.1 percent. South Korea’s Kospi gained 0.5 percent and the Hang Seng of Hong Kong rose 0.4 percent.

 
…

China’s export growth accelerated in January amid mounting trade tension with Washington while imports surged as factories stocked up ahead of the Lunar New Year holiday.

Exports rose 11.1 percent compared with a year earlier to $200.5 billion, up from December’s 10.9 percent growth, trade data showed Thursday. Imports surged 36.9 percent to $180.1 billion, up from the previous month’s 4.5 percent.

China’s politically sensitive trade surplus with the United States widened by 2.3 percent from a year ago to $21.9 billion, while its global trade gap narrowed by 60 percent to $20.3 billion.

“Export growth remained robust in January, indicating steady global demand momentum,” said Louis Kuijs of Oxford Economics in a report.

“While we expect the favorable external setting to continue to support China’s exports, rising U.S.-China trade friction remains a key risk,” Kuijs said. “We expect the U.S. administration to scale up on measures impeding imports from China.”

US import duties

Beijing’s steady accumulation of multibillion-dollar trade surpluses with the United States has prompted demands for import controls.

President Donald Trump’s administration has increased duties on Chinese-made washing machines, solar modules and other goods it says are being sold at improperly low prices. It is set to announce results of a probe into whether Beijing improperly pressures foreign companies to hand over technology, which could lead to further penalties.

Exports to the United States rose 12.1 percent in January from the same time last year to $37.6 billion while imports of U.S. goods rose 26.5 percent to $15.7 billion, according to the General Administration of Customs of China.

Exports to the European Union, China’s biggest trading partner, rose 11.6 percent to $33.7 billion while purchases of European goods rose 44.4 percent to $23.8 billion. China reported a $9.9 billion trade surplus with the EU but that was down 29.8 percent from a year earlier.

Trade war accusations

Chinese authorities have accused Trump of threatening the global trade regulation system by taking action under U.S. law instead of through the World Trade Organization. Beijing has filed a challenge in the WTO against Washington’s latest trade measures.

Beijing announced an anti-dumping investigation last weekend of U.S. sorghum exports. In response to suggestions the move was retaliation for Trump’s increase tariffs, Chinese government spokespeople say it is a normal regulatory step.

January’s import growth was driven in part by demand from factories that are restocking before shutting down for the two-week holiday. Each year, the holiday falls at different times in January or February, distorting trade data.

Forecasters expect Chinese demand to weaken this year as Beijing tightens controls on lending to slow a rise in debt. That is a blow to its Asian neighbors, for which China is the biggest export market, and for suppliers of iron ore and other commodities such as Brazil and Australia.
…

Dutch lender Rabobank’s California unit agreed Wednesday to pay $369 million to settle allegations that it lied to regulators investigating allegations of laundering money from Mexican drug sales and organized crime through branches in small towns on the Mexico border.

The subsidiary, Rabobank National Association, said it doesn’t dispute that it accepted at least $369 million in illegal proceeds from drug trafficking and other activity from 2009 to 2012. It pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to defraud the United States for participating in a cover-up when regulators began asking questions in 2013.

The penalty is one of the largest U.S. settlements involving the laundering of Mexican drug money, though it’s still only a fraction of the $1.9 billion that Britain’s HSBC agreed to pay in 2012. It surpasses the $160 million that Wachovia Bank agreed to pay in 2010.

Three execs behind cover-up

Under the agreement, the company will cooperate with investigators. The federal government agreed not to seek additional criminal charges against the company or recommend special oversight.

The settlement describes how three unnamed executives ignored a whistleblower’s warnings and orchestrated the cover-up. Two of the executives were fired in 2015 and one retired that year.

“Settling these matters is important for the bank’s mission here in California,” said Mark Borrecco, the subsidiary’s chief executive.

In 2010, Mexico proposed new limits on cash deposits at the country’s banks, resulting in more tainted deposits at Rabobank branches in Calexico and Tecate, according to the plea agreement. Accounts in the two border towns soared more than 20 percent after Mexico’s crackdown, and bank officials knew the money was likely tied to drug trafficking and organized crime.

Risky customers escaped scrutiny, including one in Calexico who funneled more than $100 million in suspicious transactions. Customers in Tecate withdrew more than $1 million in cash a year from 2009 to 2012, often in amounts just under federal reporting requirements.

“The cartels probably thought these were sleepy towns, no one’s going to notice,” said Dave Shaw, head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations in San Diego. “When you bring in $400 million, someone is going to notice. The bank should have known and they just chose not to report any suspicious activity.”

Punishment for cover-up, not crime

Heather Lowe, legal counsel and government affairs director at research and advocacy group Global Financial Integrity, said the illegal activity bore similarities to what happened with HSBC and Wachovia.

But those banks were charged with laundering Mexican drug proceeds, while Rabobank only acknowledged covering it up.

“It seems in this case we have the bank taking the hit for lying but not for the violations themselves,” said Lowe, who expects the three unnamed executives will be prosecuted.

A whistleblower alerted two of the three executives to suspicious activity in 2012 and shared her concerns with the bank’s “executive management group,” according to the plea agreement. She also spoke with regulators amid concerns in the company that the government scrutiny could endanger a pending merger. She was fired in July 2013.

The government has a cooperating witness in former compliance officer George M. Martin, who agreed in December to cooperate with authorities in a deal that delayed prosecution for two years.

Martin, a vice president and anti-money laundering investigations manager, acknowledged he oversaw policies and practices that blocked or stymied probes into suspicious transactions and said he acted at the direction of supervisors, or at least with their knowledge.

Martin told investigators that he and others allowed millions of dollars to pass through the bank.

Rabobank, based in Utrecht, Netherlands, said last month that it set aside about 310 million euros ($384 million) to settled allegations against its subsidiary. Sentencing is scheduled May 18.
…

In the heartland of the tequila industry, in Mexico’s western state of Jalisco, a worsening shortage of agave caused by mounting demand for the liquor from New York to Tokyo has many producers worried.

The price of Agave tequilana, the blue-tinged, spiky-leaved succulent used to make the alcoholic drink, has risen six-fold in the past two years, squeezing smaller distillers’ margins and leading to concerns that shortages could hit even the larger players.

In front of a huge metal oven that cooks agave for tequila, one farmer near the town of Amatitan said he had been forced to use young plants to compensate for the shortage of fully grown agave, which take seven to eight years to reach maturity.

He asked not to be identified because he did not want his clients to know he was using immature plants.

The younger plants produce less tequila, meaning more plants have to be pulled up early from a limited supply – creating a downward spiral.

“They are using four-year-old plants because there aren’t any others. I can guarantee it because I have sold them,” said Marco Polo Magdaleno, a worried grower in Guanajuato, one of the states allowed to produce tequila according to strict denomination of origin rules.

More than a dozen tequila industry experts interviewed by Reuters said that the early harvesting will mean the shortage is even worse in 2018.

Already, the 17.7 million blue agaves planted in 2011 in Mexico for use this year fall far short of the 42 million the industry needs to supply 140 registered companies, according to figures from the Tequila Regulatory Council (CRT) and the National Tequila Industry Chamber (CNIT).

The shortages are likely to continue until 2021, as improved planting strategies take years to bear fruit, according to producers.

The result is agave prices at 22 pesos ($1.18) per kilo – up from 3.85 pesos in 2016.

Those higher prices mean that low-cost tequila producers, which make a cheaper, less pure drink that once dominated the market, find it harder to compete with premium players.

“It doesn’t make sense for tequila to be a cheap drink because agave requires a big investment,” said Luis Velasco, CNIT’s president.

Small-scale distillers of quality tequilas are also feeling the pinch and some warn that drinkers are seeking alternative tipples.

“At more than 20 pesos per kilo, it’s impossible to compete with other spirits like vodka and whisky,” said Salvador Rosales, manager of smaller producer Tequila Cascahuin, in El Arenal, a rural town in Jalisco.

“If we continue like this a lot of companies will disappear,” he said.

Exports to the United States of pure tequila jumped by 198 percent over the past decade, while cheaper blended tequila exports rose by just 11 percent, CNIT data shows.

Over the same time, Mexican production declined 4 percent, with blended tequila leading the fall.

Global Demand

As it sheds its image as a fiery booze drunk by desperados and fratboys, while moving into the ranks of top-shelf liquors, the tequila industry has seen a flurry of deals in recent years.

In January, Bacardi Ltd. said it would buy fine tequila maker Patron Spirits International for $5.1 billion.

In 2017, after years of speculation, Mexico’s Beckmann family launched an initial public offering of Jose Cuervo, raising more than $900 million.

And Britain’s Diageo Plc swapped its Bushmills Irish whiskey label for full ownership of the high-end Don Julio tequila in 2014.

The question posed by many distillers is how to keep pace with tequila’s success.

“The growth has overtaken us. It’s a crisis of success of the industry,” said Francisco Soltero, director of strategic planning at Patron, which buys agave under various contracts.

“We thought that we were going to grow a certain amount, and we’re growing double,” he said.

Large sellers such as Patron and Tequila Sauza say they have not experienced problems paying for agave, and forecast that their inventories will keep growing.

“If you sell value, the costs don’t worry you,” Soltero said.

Tequila Sauza, which mostly grows its own agave, does not foresee supply problems, chief executive Servando Calderon said.

But some think it is simply a matter of time before the higher production costs and scarcity pressures bigger players.

“We are sure this will have a strong impact on the big firms such as Cuervo or Sauza,” said Raul Garcia, President of the National Committee for Agave Production in Tequila, a group that includes most agave producers in the country.

“We don’t see that the problem will be resolved soon, and that’s what worries us.”

Demand is also being driven by other, fashionable agave-derived products, including agave syrup and health supplement inulin, which use the equivalent of 20 percent of the plants needed in 2018, the CRT said.

And rising prices are leading to growing theft, driving out smaller producers, said Jose de Jesus, a producer of blue agave in Tepatitlan. Criminals come to the area with large trucks in the middle of the night to steal agave, he said.

According to the CRT last year 15,000 plants were reported stolen, more than triple the number in 2016.

($1 = 18.7096 Mexican pesos)
…

Peru’s trade minister defended China as a good trade partner on Tuesday, after U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned Latin American countries against excessive reliance on economic ties with the Asian powerhouse.

Eduardo Ferreyros said Peru’s 2010 trade liberalization deal with China had allowed the Andean nation of about 30 million people to post a $2.74 billion trade surplus with Beijing last year.

“China is a good trade partner,” Ferreyros told foreign media, as Tillerson met with President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski in Lima, a stop on Tillerson’s five-nation Latin American tour.

“We’re happy with the results of the trade agreement.”

The remarks were the Peruvian government’s first signal since Tillerson’s warning that it does not share Washington’s concerns about growing Chinese influence in the region.

Before kicking off his trip to Latin America on Friday, Tillerson suggested that China could become a new imperial power in the region, and accused it of deploying unfair trade practices.

“I appreciate advice, no matter where it comes from. But we’re careful with all of our trade relations,” Ferreyros said, when asked about Tillerson’s remarks.

Ferreyros also praised Peru’s trade relationship with Washington, despite a trade deficit with the United States. “I’m not afraid of trade deficits,” Ferreyros said.

Since China first overtook the United States as Peru’s biggest trade partner in 2011, thanks mostly to its appetite for Peru’s metals exports, bilateral trade has surged and diplomatic ties have tightened.

Kuczynski, a former Wall Street banker, made a point of visiting China before any other nation on his first official trip abroad as president in 2016.

Under former president Barack Obama, the United States had hoped to counter China’s rise in the fast-growing Asia-Pacific region, which includes large parts of Latin America, with the sweeping Trans-Pacific trade deal known as the TPP.

While President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the TPP upon taking office, the 11 remaining signatories, including Peru and Japan, have struck a similar deal that they plan to sign without the United States in March.

Tillerson, who left Peru for Colombia on Tuesday, said on Monday that Trump was open to evaluating the benefits of the United States joining the so-called TPP-11 pact in the future, which Ferreyros called “a good sign.”

All countries in the Asia-Pacific region, including China, were welcome to join TPP-11, Ferreyros said. “But the deal has closed and countries that want to join obviously can’t renegotiate the whole agreement,” he added.
…

Among the countless Puerto Rico neighborhoods battered by Hurricane Maria is one named after another storm: Villa Hugo. The illegal shantytown emerged on a public wetland after 1989’s Hurricane Hugo left thousands homeless.

About 6,000 squatters landed here, near the El Yunque National Forest, and built makeshift homes on 40 acres that span a low-lying valley and its adjacent mountainside. Wood and concrete dwellings, their facades scrawled with invented addresses, sit on cinder blocks. After Maria, many are missing roofs; some have collapsed altogether.

Amid the rubble, 59-year-old Joe Quirindongo sat in the sun one recent day on a wooden platform — the only remaining piece of his home. Soft-spoken with weathered skin and a buzzcut, Quirindongo pondered his limited options.

“I know this isn’t a good place for a house,” said Quirindongo, who survives on U.S. government assistance. “Sometimes I would like to go to another place, but I can’t afford anything.”

Villa Hugo reflects a much larger crisis in this impoverished U.S. territory, where so-called “informal” homes are estimated to house about half the population of 3.4 million.

Some residents built on land they never owned. Others illegally subdivided properties, often so family members could build on their lots.

Most have no title to their homes, which are constructed without permits and usually not up to building codes. The houses range in quality and size, from one-room shacks to sizable family homes. Many have plumbing and power, though not always through official means.

The concentration of illegal housing presents a vexing dilemma for local and federal authorities already overwhelmed by the task of rebuilding an economically depressed island after its worst natural disaster in nine decades.

Puerto Rico Governor Ricardo Rosselló has stressed the need to “build back better,” a sentiment echoed by U.S. disaster relief and housing officials. But rebuilding to modern standards or relocating squatters to new homes would take an investment far beyond reimbursing residents for lost property value. 

It’s an outlay Puerto Rico’s government says it can’t afford, and which U.S. officials say is beyond the scope of their funding and mission. Yet the alternative — as Villa Hugo shows — is to encourage rebuilding of the kind of substandard housing that made the island so vulnerable to Maria in the first place.

“It’s definitely a housing crisis,” said Fernando Gil, Puerto Rico’s housing secretary. “It was already out there before, and the hurricane exacerbates it.”

In Puerto Rico, housing is by far the largest category of storm destruction, estimated by the island government at about $37 billion, with only a small portion covered by insurance.

That’s more than twice the government’s estimate for catastrophic electric grid damage, which was made far worse by the shoddy state of utility infrastructure before the storm.

Puerto Rico officials did not respond to questions about how the territory estimated the damage to illegally built homes.

Maria destroyed or significantly damaged more than a third of about 1.2 million occupied homes on the island, the government estimates. Most of those victims had no hazard insurance — which is only required for mortgage-holders in Puerto Rico — and no flood insurance. Just 344,000 homes on the island have mortgages, according U.S. Census Bureau data.

Officials at the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Small Business Administration (SBA) acknowledged the unique challenges of delivering critical housing aid to Puerto Rico. Among them: calculating the damage to illegal, often substandard homes; persuading storm victims to follow through on application processes that have frustrated many into giving up; and allocating billions in disaster aid that still won’t be nearly enough solve the island’s housing crisis.

By far the most money for Puerto Rico housing aid is expected to come from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

HUD spokeswoman Caitlin Thompson declined to comment on how the agency would spend billions of dollars in disaster relief funds to rebuild housing, or how it planned to help owners of informally built homes. Two HUD officials overseeing the agency’s Puerto Rico relief efforts, Todd Richardson and Stan Gimont, also declined to comment.

But the disaster aid package currently under consideration by the U.S. Congress would provide far less housing aid than Puerto Rico officials say they need. Governor Rosselló is seeking $46 billion in aid from HUD, an amount that dwarfs previous allocations for even the most destructive U.S. storms.

That’s nearly half the island’s total relief request of $94 billion.

The U.S. House of Representatives instead passed a package of $81 billion, with $26 billion for HUD, that still needs Senate and White House approval. The money would be divided between regions struck by several 2017 hurricanes — including Maria, Harvey in Texas and Irma in Florida — as well as the recent California wildfires. Congress could also decide to approve additional aid later.

‘My mother is scared’

A generation ago, Maria Vega Lastra, now 61, was among the estimated 28,000 people displaced by Hurricane Hugo. Neighbors helped her build a new home in what would become Villa Hugo, in the town of Canóvanas.

Her daughter, 34-year-old Amadaliz Diaz, still recalls her older brother grinning as he sawed wood for the frame of their self-built, one-floor house, with a porch and three bedrooms.

Now, Vega Lastra’s roof has holes in it, and her waterlogged wooden floorboards buckle with each step.

Vega Lastra has been staying with her daughter, who lives in Tampa, as the family waits on applications for FEMA aid. The agency initially denied her application in December, saying it could not contact her by phone, Diaz said.

Vega Lastra is returning to her home this week, uncertain if its condition has gotten worse. Her daughter bought her an air mattress to take with her.

“My mother is scared,” Diaz said. “I hope the government helps her. I work, but I have three kids to take care of.” The island’s housing crisis long predated the storm.

According to Federal Housing Finance Agency data, Puerto Rico’s index of new home prices fell 25 percent over the last decade, amid a severe recession that culminated last May in the largest government bankruptcy filing in U.S. history.

Legal home construction, meanwhile, plummeted from nearly 16,000 new units in 2004 to less than 2,500 last year, according to consultancy Estudios Tecnicos, an economic data firm.

A 2007 study by environmental consultant Interviron Services Inc., commissioned by the Puerto Rico Builders Association, found that 55 percent of residential and commercial construction was informal. That would work out to nearly 700,000 homes.

That figure might be high, said David Carrasquillo, president of the Puerto Rico Planning Society, a trade group representing community planners. But even a “every conservative” estimate would yield at least 260,000 illegally built houses, he said.

Generations of Puerto Rican governments never made serious efforts to enforce building codes to stop new illegal housing, current and former island officials said in interviews. Past administrations had little political or economic incentive to force people out of neighborhoods like Villa Hugo.

Former Governor Rafael Hernandez Colon, in office during Hurricane Hugo, said he tried to help informal homeowners without policing them. 

“Our policy was not to relocate, but rather improve those places,” Hernandez Colon said in an interview.

Subsequent administrations advocated similar policies; none made meaningful headway, partly because of Puerto Rico’s constant political turnover.

Today, informal communities provide a stark contrast to San Juan’s glittering resorts and bustling business districts. San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz pointed to poor barrios like those near the city’s Martín Peña Channel, hidden behind the skyscrapers of the financial hub known as the Golden Mile.

“It’s not something I’m proud of, but we hide our poverty here,” Cruz said in an interview.

Recovery dilemma 

The task of rebuilding Puerto Rico’s housing stock ultimately falls to the territory government, which has no ability to pay for it after racking up $120 billion in bond and pension debt in the years before the storm. 

That leaves the island dependent on U.S. relief from FEMA, the SBA and HUD.

The SBA offers low-interest home repair loans of up to $200,000. FEMA provides homeowners with emergency grants, relocation assistance and other help. HUD is focused on long-term rebuilding efforts, working directly with local agencies to subsidize reconstruction through grants. 

FEMA’s cap for disaster aid to individuals is $33,300, and actual awards are often much lower. Normally, FEMA eligibility for housing aid requires proving property ownership, but the agency says it will help owners of informal homes if they can prove residency.

How exactly to help gets complicated. For example, someone who builds their own home with no permits on land they own is more likely to be treated as a homeowner, said Justo Hernandez, FEMA’s deputy federal coordinating officer. Squatters who built on land they didn’t own, however, would likely only be given money to cover lost items and relocate to a rental, he said.

Several Villa Hugo residents said they received money from FEMA, but many didn’t know what it was for and complained it wasn’t enough.

Lourdes Rios Romero, 59, plans to appeal the $6,000 grant she got for repairs to her flooded home, citing a much higher contractor’s quote. Neighbor Miguel Rosario Lopez, a 62-year-old retiree, showed a statement from FEMA saying he was eligible for $916.22, “to perform essential repairs that will allow you to live in your home.”

Without money for major changes, most homeowners said they planned to combine the aid they might get from FEMA with what little money they could raise to rebuild in the same spot.

FEMA does not police illegal building. Code enforcement is left to the same local authorities who have allowed illegal construction to persist for years.

Quirindongo is planning to buy materials to rebuild his Villa Hugo home himself with about $4,000 from FEMA. It will be the third time he has done so, having lost one home to a 2011 flood, another to a fire.

“I just want to have something that I can say, ‘This is mine,’” Quirindongo said.

Giving up

Many others appear to have given up on FEMA aid because the agency’s application process is entangled with a separate process for awarding SBA loans to rebuild homes.

FEMA is legally bound to assess whether applicants might qualify for SBA loans before awarding them FEMA grants. If an applicant passes FEMA’s cursory eligibility assessment, they are automatically referred to SBA for a more thorough screening.

Applicants are not required to follow through on the SBA process — but they cannot qualify for FEMA aid unless they do.

FEMA only provides a grant when the SBA denies the applicant a loan.

FEMA said it has referred about 520,000 people out of 1.1 million total applicants so far to the SBA. But as of Monday, only 59,000 followed through with SBA applications. Of those, some 12,000 later withdrew, SBA data shows.

“As soon as people see SBA they say, ‘I give up, I don’t want a loan — I can’t afford a loan,’” FEMA’s Hernandez said.

SBA spokeswoman Carol Chastang said the agency is working with FEMA to educate flood victims on available benefits and the application process, including sending staffers to applicants’ homes.

330,000 vacant homes

Before the storm hit, Puerto Rico already had about 330,000 vacant homes, according to Census Bureau 2016 estimates, resulting from years of population decline as citizens migrated to the mainland United States and elsewhere. Puerto Ricans are American citizens and can move to the mainland at will.

Puerto Rico and federal officials have considered rehabilitating the vacant housing for short- and long-term use, along with building new homes and buying out homeowners in illegally built  neighborhoods, according to Gil and federal officials.

Rosselló, the Puerto Rican governor, has said the rebuilding plan must include a fleet of properly built new homes. Gil, the housing secretary, said the administration would like to build as many as 70,000 properties.

HUD officials declined to comment on whether the agency would finance new housing. Its Community Development Block Grant program allows for local governments to design their own solutions and seek HUD approval for funding.

The cost of constructing enough new, code-compliant properties to house people displaced by Maria could far exceed the available federal aid. Making them affordable also presents a problem.

Puerto Rico’s subsidized “social interest housing,” geared toward low-income buyers, typically provides units that sell in the mid-$100,000 range, with prices capped by the government.

That’s beyond the means of many displaced storm victims.

Gil offered little detail on a solution beyond saying it will include a mix of new development, buyout programs for owners of illegally built homes and other options.

The answer will come down to how much Washington is willing to pay, he said. He invoked the island’s territorial status and colonial history as a root cause of its poor infrastructure and housing stock before the storm.

“It is precisely because we have been neglected by the federal government that the island’s infrastructure is so weak,” he said.

Many Puerto Rico officials continue to advocate for bringing relief and legitimacy to squatter communities like Villa Hugo, rather than trying to relocate their residents.

Canóvanas Mayor Lornna Soto has been negotiating with island officials to provide property titles to Villa Hugo’s population.

The vast majority still don’t have them.

“It’s long overdue to recognize that they are not going anywhere and their communities need to be rebuilt with proper services,” Soto said.

Diaz said she supports her mother’s decision to return to Villa Hugo, regardless of what aid the government ultimately provides.

“I grew up there,” Diaz said. “Everyone knows us there.”
…

Shaken out of many months of calm, Wall Street braced for a higher level of volatility in the days ahead, after a roughly 2 percent rebound in U.S. stocks on Tuesday followed the biggest one-day selloff in more than six years.

The question that vexed traders: were the wild swings of the past two days the start of a deeper move down or just clearing the way to the resumption of the aging bull market, which would turn nine on March 9.

“Today’s market action is a classic of a market that has searched for a bottom,” said Peter Cardillo, chief market economist at First Standard Financial In New York, who predicted a rebound back to record levels.

Bulls argue that strong U.S. corporate earnings, including a boost from the Trump administration’s tax cuts, will ultimately support market valuations. Bears, including short sellers that bet on the market decline, say that the market is over-stretched in the context of rising bond yields as central banks withdraw their easy money policies of recent years.

“The markets went into being religiously over-bought to deeply over-sold in a matter of four trading days,” said Adam Sarhan, chief executive of 50 Park Investments, an investment advisory service. “New buyers are showing up, who were waiting for the prices to go down.”

Tuesday’s wild trading session saw the Dow swing more than 1,100 points from its low to its high and ended with the benchmark S&P 500 tallying its best day since just before President Donald Trump’s November 2016 election.

“I don’t think the volatility is over,” said JJ Kinahan, chief market strategist at TD Ameritrade in Chicago. “These types of moves tend to take about three weeks to get through the system … and volatility just doesn’t suddenly settle down.”

Investors were eyeing the recent steep slide as an opportunity, an extreme example of the “buying the dip” that has symbolized the market’s steady climb to record highs.

“We’ve been looking at this as an opportunity to incrementally add a little bit of risk – not get over our skis, but a little bit,” said Erin Browne, head of asset allocation at UBS Asset Management in New York.

During the trading day, stocks swung from negative to positive after indexes started the session 2 percent lower. The S&P 500 ended 6.2 percent below its Jan. 26 peak.

The sharp declines in recent days marked a pullback that had been long awaited by investors after the market minted record high after record high in a relatively calm ascent.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 567.02 points, or 2.33 percent, to 24,912.77, the S&P 500 gained 46.2 points, or 1.74 percent, to 2,695.14 and the Nasdaq Composite added 148.36 points, or 2.13 percent, to 7,115.88.

After the end of regular trading on Tuesday, S&P 500 e-mini futures were down 0.4 percent.

Technology, materials and consumer discretionary were the top-performing sectors on Tuesday. Defensive sectors utilities and real estate were the only major S&P groups to end negative.

Apple climbed 4.2 percent, while Microsoft and Amazon gained 3.8 percent each.

The U.S. stock market has climbed to record peaks since Trump’s election on the prospect of tax cuts and corporate deregulation as well as optimism over corporate earnings.

The S&P 500 remains up 26 percent since his election, and on Tuesday clawed back into positive territory for 2018, up 0.8 percent.

“We had gone very far, very fast,” Matthew Cheslock, a trader at Virtu Financial, said from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. “But I don’t think anyone expected the velocity or the ferocity that we saw on the downside.”

The market’s pullback came amid concerns about rising bond yields and higher inflation. These were reinforced by Friday’s January U.S. jobs report that prompted worries the Federal Reserve will raise benchmark interest rates at a faster pace than expected this year.

Traders had speculated that Monday’s selling was spurred by automated programs, and had called Monday’s session busy but orderly.

Market experts also attributed the selloff, including the overnight slide in S&P 500 futures, to the violent unwind of a trade betting on volatility in U.S. stocks staying low as the CBOE Volatility index, known as the VIX, notched its biggest one-day jump on Monday in over two years.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Jay Clayton said he “can’t really say” what caused the dramatic drop in stock prices during recent trading sessions, but that all signs indicate financial markets are functioning normally.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said recent volatility was not enough to rock market fundamentals.

Tuesday’s rebound came a day after a steep selloff that brought the biggest percentage daily declines for the S&P 500 and the Dow since August 2011 and a near 1,600 point intraday loss for the Dow.

Trading volume of more than 12.3 billion shares marked the busiest trading day since just after the November 2016 election, and topped Monday’s volume of 11.7 billion.
…

Will Disney’s upcoming streaming services be the mouse that roared … or squeaked?

Disney already owns enviable entertainment properties including Pixar, Marvel and Star Wars. Now, it’s looking to add Fox’s TV and movie studios as it prepares to launch two streaming services, one for sports and another focused on entertainment.

In announcing first-quarter earnings Tuesday, CEO Bob Iger said he was “excited about what lies ahead” including the sports streaming service and the pending deal for Fox. Adjusted income of $1.89 per share beat analyst expectations, as did revenue of $15.35 billion, a 4 percent increase.

But the same financial report hints at trouble with the lucrative ESPN cable channel. Revenue in the cable networks business fell 1 percent to $4.5 billion, hurt by an ESPN revenue decline. The ESPN decline resulted from lower ad revenue, though that was partly offset by growth in fees from cable distributors and lower programming costs.

Disney announced a $5-a-month price for the ESPN Plus streaming service, which is coming this spring.

The services represent Disney’s big bet on what the next generation of entertainment will look like: more streaming and more choices. A streaming business is critical for Disney because the ESPN channel has been losing subscribers as more people ditch cable and satellite TV services and stream video on Netflix, Amazon and Hulu instead.

While Disney is trying to brace for the future with the streaming services, questions remain about whether they will offer enough to take on well-established services such as Netflix.

Rich Greenfield of BTIG Research said the ESPN streaming service seems more like a niche offering because it won’t have any content from the ESPN channel.

Stuck in the past?

And while the Disney-branded entertainment service could be a hit, with classic and upcoming movies from the studio, shows from Disney Channel, and the Star Wars, Marvel and Pixar movies, that service isn’t launching until late 2019.

“Our fear is that they’re just not all in on streaming,” Greenfield said. “If they want to be successful, they have to bring all their content to streaming.”

Instead, he said, Disney is dipping its toes in streaming while trying to preserve its traditional business models.

To boost revenue from theatrical screenings, studios such as Disney typically wait months to sell or rent movies on DVDs and a year to make them available through subscription services such as HBO. But such a timeline is quickly becoming a relic of the past. People now expect things immediately, like being able to watch a Disney movie on an Xbox right after it is released in the theater.

“That’s very hard to balance and be successful,” Greenfield said.

The Fox factor

The Fox content could help give viewers more reason to subscribe to yet another streaming service. Disney has offered $52.4 billion to buy the bulk of 21st Century Fox in a deal expected to close in the next 12 to 18 months. When that happens, Disney will own the Fox movie and television studios, cable TV networks such as FX and National Geographic, and 22 regional sports networks.

But many of the movies and shows from those businesses are already licensed out in the short term; for example, HBO gets Fox movies until 2022.

RBC Capital Markets analyst Steven Cahall is more positive about the prospects. Notably, Disney gets Fox’s share in Hulu, giving it a controlling stake. Cahall said the Fox video will help both Hulu and the upcoming Disney-branded streaming service.

“Disney is likely to be a global player in streaming in the coming years given the breadth and depth of its content,” he said.

In a call with investors, CEO Iger offered some details on what Disney’s streaming service might look like once it launches in late 2019.

He said Disney will “have an opportunity to spend more” on original programs for the service, but won’t have to be as aggressive as Netflix because Disney already has popular brands like Marvel and Pixar. He said the company is developing original shows around Star Wars, High School Musical and Pixar’s Monsters Inc.
…

Asia’s benchmark stock indexes collapsed Tuesday, as Monday’s massive selloffs on Wall Street rolled across the globe. 

Japan’s Nikkei 225 index lost as much seven percent of its value at one point during the trading session, before closing at 21,610 points, a loss of nearly five percent. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng index followed suit, dropping just over five percent in its worst trading day since August 2015. 

The benchmark indexes Australia and South Korea also suffered serious losses.

In early Europe trading London’s FTSE 100 was down 3.5 percent at 7,081 points.

Asian markets were caught in the ripple effect of Monday’s 1,175-point loss on the Dow Jones Industrial Average, marking the biggest point decline in history. The S&P (Standard and Poor’s) 500 also had a bad day, losing just over four percent to finish at 2,648 points. 

The stock market has now lost about a trillion dollars in value since Friday, when the Dow lost 666 points. That drop followed a solid jobs report that showed the U.S. economy adding 200 thousand jobs and wages rising at the fastest pace in a decade. The tighter labor market and rising wages prompted investor fears of higher inflation and the possibility that the U.S. Federal Reserve would raise interest rates faster and higher than they have in recent years. 

Analysts who spoke with VOA had been expecting a stock market “correction” (a decline of about 10% from recent highs) as a result of the record run up in stock prices this year.
…