UPDATE: TPM reports this disturbingly mushy response from our Senior Senator who is near the top of the list of Democratic Senators being disrespected and disregarded by Majority Leader Reid:

“The Senate should act to add protections for Americans’ rights that were not included in the Protect America Act. I have been consulting with Leader Reid and Chairman Rockefeller about how to proceed, and support the decision to proceed by regular order. Senator Reid is right to bring this legislation to the floor and is doing so in a way that allows consideration of the many improvements made by the bill reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee. I oppose retroactive immunity for the telephone companies that would eliminate the courts as a check on the illegality of the warrantless wiretapping of Americans that the administration secretly engaged in for almost six years. I will continue to work to ensure that the government is held accountable for its actions and that those whose rights were infringed not be left out in the cold. I look forward to a vigorous debate next week and to seeking to make the final bill considered by the Senate as good as it can be.”

Sounds to me like Leahy is laying the groundwork for looking the other way. The fact is, anything short of supporting Dodd’s filibuster is double-talk that should be considered insulting to Vermonters’ intelligence. ( /update)

I hate the celebrity political-blather thing. And I also hated The West Wing (yeah, that’s right, Sorkin’s a poseur who wouldn’t know a real leftist if they laid down in front of his Hummer singing “We Shall Overcome”… so sue me), but if you won’t listen to me, maybe you’ll listen to this West Wing guy:

This may have to be, not your garden variety, vote-against-cloture filibuster, but a good old fashioned, Hollywood, talk-it-to-death and embarrass the leadership filibuster.

Because the problem here, again, is the leadership. Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has upheld the tradition of individual Senators placing holds on legislation on behalf of the craziest Republicans like Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn (who still has a holds on bills, such as the one that would help prevent suicides among veterans), has decided to essentially spit in the eye of Democratic Senator Chris Dodd and ignore his hold on the FISA bill.

What’s wrong with the FISA bill? Well, the one that came out of the Senate Judiciary Committee isn’t quite as bad, as Senator Leahy stripped the provision that allows for retroactive immunity of telephone companies that broke the law doing Bush’s bidding on warrantless wiretaps of American citizens – but for whatever reason, Senator Harry Reid is bound and determined to get his campaign contributors their immunity. Can’t imagine why (/snark).

This cannot stand. And as far as I’m concerned, it’s the last straw for Harry Reid, who has lost any and all moral authority to lead the Senate. He needs to be out on his ass, the sooner, the better. I hope to god somebody finds a primary challenger for him in Nevada.

Contact info below the fold…

Here’s the contact info for Sanders and Leahy:

The Honorable Bernie Sanders

United States Senate

332 Dirksen Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510-4503

DC Phone: 202-224-5141

DC Fax: 202-228-0776

District Offices:

1 Church Street, 2nd Floor

Burlington, VT 05401 Voice: 800-339-9834

FAX: 802-860-6370

Burlington office

36 Chickering Drive, Suite 103

Brattleboro, VT 05301 Voice: 802-254-8732

FAX: 802-254-9207

Brattleboro office

2 Spring Street, Suite 1

Montpelier, VT 05602 Voice: 802-223-2241

FAX: 802-229-5734

---

The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy

United States Senate

433 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510-4502

DC Phone: 202-224-4242

DC Fax: 202-224-3479

Email Address: senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov

District Offices:

199 Main Street, 4th Floor

Burlington, VT 05401 Voice: 800-642-3193

87 State Street, PO Box 933

Montpelier, VT 05602 Voice: 802-229-0569

---

And here’s how to contact Senators Obama, Clinton and Biden, all of whom have said they would support Dodd’s filibuster (we’ll see…)

Obama campaign: (866) 675-2008

Clinton campaign: 703-469-2008

Biden campaign: (302) 574-2008

---

And finally, here’s Reid’s contact info. Give him a piece of your mind, if you’re so inclined:

The Honorable (sic) Harry Reid

United States Senate

528 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510-2803

DC Phone: 202-224-3542

DC Fax: 202-224-7327

Email Address: http://reid.senate.gov/contact…

Well, that’s an interesting question.

I posted about this in June, and this morning I decided to do some follow-up, so I posted a thread over at Daily Kos:

---

There was an article in the Rutland (Vermont) Herald last June which was probably ignored by everyone but me.  In Vt. probes sale of broadcast spectrum, the Herald notes that the Vermont State Colleges did a no-bid deal with Utopian Wireless Corporation which the state is questioning, as it appears that the licenses are worth a lot more than Utopian paid for them:

“We estimate the value of these EBS license to be in excess of $500,000,” Smith wrote. “Vermont is home to numerous wireless broadband companies that are working hard to meet our rural broadband goals. Many of these companies are desperately seeking out licensed spectrum that will ensure their company’s future. It appears that Utopian’s mission is purely speculative in nature, with hopes of selling those assets to a larger national provider. It is unlikely that a national provider would have Vermont as a priority for building a wireless broadband network.”

After the fold, I’ll continue my Kos dairy plus add some comments about what I’ve found out since posting it.

There are some obvious questions here about the propriety of the no-bid contract and the financial issues, and that’s was the focus of the Herald article.  However, I’m much more interested in another aspect of the story.  Who is “Utopian Wireless” and what are they after?

I tried finding out about Utopian Wireless and came up blank, except for one interesting fact: they appear all over the country in meeting minutes from local school boards which are discussing similar deals: buying wireless networks from local school districts.  Web searches for Utopian yield nothing in the way about the corporation, who’s in it, no way of verifying whether any of the officials involved in these transactions have any connection to the company, etc.

Here are some examples:

Pangburn School Board:

NEW BUSINESS:  Mr. Wood informed the board that Utopian Wireless Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Utopian”), would like to enter into an ESB lease agreement with Pangburn School District for the B channel group in Searcy, Arkansas, call sign WND586.  This matter will be tabled at this time.

Jasper  (IL) (link to pdf file):

Motion by Wes Pitcher, second by Gordon Millsap to approve the Education Broadband Service Lease Agreement with Utopian Wireless corporation as recommended. Ayes: Richards, Millsap, Pitcher, Huddlestun, Barthelme, Allison, Weber. Nays: None. Motion carried.

Also, the FCC has a daily release of transfers.  One from September 17, 2007 shows several transfers of leases involving Utopian Wireless that suggest a transfer from a Denver school as well as a couple other entities.

So while I don’t know who they are, I do know they’re not local to Vermont (they appear to be from Delaware), and I think that there’s real question as to whether or not a state entity should be making choice deals with out-of-state businesses without even giving local companies a chance to bid on the deal.  It could end up happening that Utopian just turns around and sells the networks to someone else for a profit, a profit that could have stayed in Vermont’s hands.  I’ve tried my best at sleuthing this out in Vermont and came up with nothing.  

There is a website — http://utopianwireless.com — that may or may not be connected with this company.  It’s a stub of a site without any real content and no contact information, a bookmarked “coming soon” site from Network Solutions, which tells us nothing.

Here’s why I’m interested: I don’t know who these people are but I know they’re doing deals by approaching local school systems, many of whom are strapped for cash.  I don’t know if they’re making good deals or bad deals, but I know they’re making deals and expect some profit off of those deals and I want to know what their intent is: to do some good for schools while making a profit?  To make a profit at the expense of schools?  I just don’t know and I’m having real trouble finding out anything.

So I’m hoping maybe some other Kossacks have a clue about this.  I know this is a long shot, and for all I know, this diary will die within minutes after it’s posted, but I figure it’s worth a shot– anyone have a clue as to who this company is and what they’re all about?  

---

Okay, so here is what I learned since posting that:

1. WHOIS info suggests that Utopian Wireless is owned by RJGLaw LLC, a law firm which works with telecomm companies;
2. SEC info suggests that this company is connected with Clearwire, a company which is summarized by this comment from Jessical on Kos: “They basically go in, blanket an area with marginal routers, and then hard sell “instant connect, wireless broadband internet”.  On Capitol Hill in Seattle, they actually come up and attempt to get signups on the street;”


3. Clearwire is, apparently, connected with Craig McGraw, a guy who hosts great big pro-Bush events in Colorado every couple of years;

So this is what it looks like: VSC turned over their lease to an out of state company for lot less money than that lease was worth, so that that company could try to make a profit selling sub-standard service to Vermonters.  

Great.  Just… great.

I’m very curious to see how this plays out, but in the meantime, keep the name “Clearwire” in your minds.  If you see it pop up in your area, let me know.  

 

“It's a wholly rational panic.” 

In today's NYTimes OP-Ed, Krugman informs us that the Fed on Wednesday attempted to rescue the financial system for the fourth time in five months via a $40 billion loan to US banks.

4 rescue attempts in 5 months?  This is starting to look like a polar bear trying to find another melting chunk of ice to rest it's limbs on.

Reading Paul Krugman's ongoing assesments of the mortgage crisis can be a lot like watching “An Inconvenient Truth”, minus the package appeal.  Krugman pens an evolving, complicated, abstract story of high finance in the form of a serial op/ed in the New York Times.  Conversely, AIT's 90 minute Hollywood docu-drama about imminent climate change is accesible from a fold-down theatre seat with buttered popcorn readily available.

While it just isn't practical to eat popcorn while purusing Krugman on line, it might be a good idea to replace your cup of regular Joe with a good strong soup-bowl of Dark Magic Espresso Blend — hold the cream and sugar — 'cause it looks like it's gonna take some hoo-doo dark magic from the inner workings of the Fed, Wall Street, and foreign backers to kick our economy back in gear.

Everything — even complicated things — are easier to comprehend from the perspective of history.  Here's how I hope the story is told:  “How 13 million suburban home defaults ALMOST knocked over the US financial system — and how American fortune survived a staggering financial crisis.

Even if you're not an Econ 101 kinda person, this is something we all need to pay attention to — because it's not just about homeowner defaults.  The evolving financial crisis is on the cusp of evolving from a “mortgage crisis” to a large-scale banking meltdown. For those of us who are thinking about growing Vermont's economy, don't count on lending liquidity anytime soon.

“After the Money's Gone” is well worth the time it takes to read.  But just in case you don't click the link, here's the crux of the essay, minus Krugman's  easy-to-understand lead-in regarding investor confidence, the consequence of handing out bad loans, and the dynamic of a good 'ol run on the bank.

Enjoy.  And maybe you better get the popcorn after all.

It’s easy to get lost in the details of subprime mortgages, resets, collateralized debt obligations, and so on. But there are two important facts that may give you a sense of just how big the problem is.

First, we had an enormous housing bubble in the middle of this decade. To restore a historically normal ratio of housing prices to rents or incomes, average home prices would have to fall about 30 percent from their current levels.

Second, there was a tremendous amount of borrowing into the bubble, as new home buyers purchased houses with little or no money down, and as people who already owned houses refinanced their mortgages as a way of converting rising home prices into cash.

As home prices come back down to earth, many of these borrowers will find themselves with negative equity — owing more than their houses are worth. Negative equity, in turn, often leads to foreclosures and big losses for lenders.

And the numbers are huge. The financial blog Calculated Risk, using data from First American CoreLogic, estimates that if home prices fall 20 percent there will be 13.7 million homeowners with negative equity. If prices fall 30 percent, that number would rise to more than 20 million.

That translates into a lot of losses, and explains why liquidity has dried up. What’s going on in the markets isn’t an irrational panic. It’s a wholly rational panic, because there’s a lot of bad debt out there, and you don’t know how much of that bad debt is held by the guy who wants to borrow your money.

How will it all end? Markets won’t start functioning normally until investors are reasonably sure that they know where the bodies — I mean, the bad debts — are buried. And that probably won’t happen until house prices have finished falling and financial institutions have come clean about all their losses. All of this will probably take years.

Has the modern GOP devolved into a party of monsters?

In the face of yet another Republican (Missouri Senator Kit Bond) not merely tolerating torture, but actually celebrating it, Hunter at dKos has a grim diary up that poses the question. Here’s an excerpt:

The Republican party has devolved into unapologetic supporters of violence on all levels. Torture, war: it is all the same. Watching the Republican primaries, what stands out the most is how eager to please all candidates are, when it comes to issues of violence, and how ravenously the audiences consume any such expressions. You will get applause for declaring that you will double the internment of prisoners; you will be booed if you dare say you will reform it. You will get applause for spinning tales of ticking clocks, imminent mushroom clouds, and the justifications for torturing anyone who may yet turn out to be entirely innocent and unknowledgeable; you will be a lone, fuming onstage exception, if you object to such tactics. It is not that Republicans are merely supportive of detention without charge, or of torture, or of prisoner abuse, or of war itself; they have given themselves over to all those things in service of pandering to a more base primality. It does not pay to think, anymore, only to passionately hate, and wound, and seek revenge. That is what it takes, to rally the God party.

Yesterday, Jonah Goldberg gave one of his charming College Republicans presentations, “All I am Saying is Give War a Chance”, in which he was to give forth on the “costs, necessities, consequences, and benefits of war”. This should be mildly eyebrow raising, as I have never once heard anyone give a student lecture exploring “The Case For Rape”, or “The Case For Mugging”, even though I would imagine you could reuse most of the same material: each uses violence to unapologetically force a weaker party into doing what you want of them. If you wanted to make a case for mere self defense, you would not make a case for the benefits of war — for bloodshed as a way to gain actual advantage.

Where are the Republicans who still pretend at morality? Why don’t we hear from them? Human nature being what it is, I’m sure they’re out there. How can they allow themselves to be cowed into this kind of grisly party line?

I honestly don’t understand it.