The Dancing Monkeys of Libor
• August 7, 2012

Aesop tells the fable of a prince who had trained some monkeys how to dance. As natural mimics, they soon proved to be very good dancers. And when dressed in rich clothes and masks, they danced as well as any of the human courtiers. The spectacle at the lavish parties the prince held became wildly popular throughout the land and was repeated each night to great applause from the partygoers.

Applied today, at a time where the extremely affluent are today’s self-appointed royalty, the prince could be the CEO of any of the world’s superbanks: Barclays, JPMorgan Chase, Citibank, or Deutsche Bank. No commercial arena has consolidated more power, influence and wealth. In that glamorous world of hedge fund managers and investment executives, the monkeys—the lowest-of-the-low (with the low bonuses and salaries to prove it)—are the money market traders.

Until the financial boom began to show signs of slowing, there was no real incentive for the royals of finance to pay any attention to their money market traders. With their princes awash in cash, this band roamed the dense jungles of finance from The City of London to Wall Street, happily feeding off scraps. One day in 2007, however, the jungle caught fire and began to consume their collective habitat. Cash flew out of high rise windows. Banks began to fail. Panic ensued.

A few years earlier, Thomas Haye, and Philippe Moryoussef, both former derivatives traders, began to form loose cells of fellow traders from the other superbanks to manipulate interest rates. They had one goal: to obtain advance knowledge of the benchmark interest rate. Together, they communicated with the money market traders—the monkeys—and then colluded to rig the world’s benchmark interest rate, called the “Libor.” The adjustments were slight—usually just fractions of a percentage point—with the specific intent to eliminate any uncertainty in the rise or fall of the core interest rate.

It was a dazzling and grand scheme. Today, the Libor is tied to up to an estimated $800 trillion in financial derivatives and instruments worldwide.

And so it went. Suddenly, the prince’s monkeys found themselves in the spotlight, with a key role in eliminating uncertainty for the superbankers—the princes. They were now thrust on center stage.

The advanced rigging was often done in bars and pubs over champagne.

“Come on over; I’ll open a bottle of Bollinger,” one trader emailed his colleague after a triumphant Libor rigging session. To another monkey trader he exclaimed, “Dude. I owe you big time!

… I’m opening a bottle of Bollinger.”

What’s the harm in a little Bollinger?

When I recently asked one veteran Wall Street friend his thoughts on the Libor scandal, he shrugged. “Nothing significant will be done about it because the adjustments were done mostly on the downside, not the upside.”

It’s taken me a while to frame my thoughts on this, but I’ve come to the conclusion that my Wall Street friend is wrong. Libor matters to everyone. Everyone who borrows money—whether it’s a car loan, student loan, credit card, mortgage or personal loan is affected by what happens to the Libor, because it affects the cost of money for all of us. So, if the Libor rate was artificially high when you took out any of those loans, you were effectively ripped off.

Many pension funds are also pegged to the Libor. Cities like Baltimore are suing the superbanks involved with artificially rigging interest rates because of the adverse affects the rigging had on their city pension funds.

Superbanks who were in relatively weak financial shape arranged through the growing Libor cartel to artificially inflate or deflate their interest rates to give the false impression that they were strong and creditworthy.

What’s perhaps most intriguing about the Libor scandal is how brazenly and open the collusion was:

“Hi Guys, We got a big position in 3m libor for the next 3 days. Can we please keep the lib or fixing at 5.39 for the next few days. It would really help. We do not want it to fix any higher than that. Tks a lot.”

–Senior trader in New York to submitter

Senior Department of Treasury and Federal Reserve Officials openly admitted that the Libor was “deeply flawed,” and yet proceeded to use the same rigged rates for federal bailout programs like TARP, knowing that in doing so, they were saving the superbanks billions and billions of dollars.

So, even if you still don’t know what Libor is, know this: it’s a very big deal, and we’re all affected. “This is the banking industry’s tobacco moment,” said one bank’s CEO. “It’s that big.” An investigating official recently remarked, “It’s hard to imagine a bigger case than Libor.”

Aesop’s fable goes on to relate how the prince’s monkey’s were received with great applause, until on one occasion a courtier, bent on mischief, took from his pocket a handful of nuts and threw them upon the stage. The Monkeys at the sight of the nuts forgot their dancing and became (as indeed they were) Monkeys instead of actors.

Pulling off their masks and tearing their robes, they fought with one another for the nuts. The dancing spectacle came to an end amidst the laughter and ridicule of the audience.

Let’s hope that the Libor Cartel Show has come to an end, and that the Glass–Steagall Act is being brought back to replace it.

JACK EVANS REPORT: TAXICAB BILL’S UBER AMENDMENT KEEPS D.C. TECH-FRIENDLY
• July 27, 2012

Last week, the Council received an unusual
amount of attention when it considered
how a pending bill regarding taxicab
modernization might impact a new car service
called “Uber.” Anyone who was not familiar
with Uber before the debate likely is by now, and
I personally received about 5,000 emails from
concerned residents who want to make sure they
can continue to enjoy this transportation option.

Though there were strong opposing views on
the underlying taxicab bill, it sought to address
issues of importance to anyone who has ever
ridden in a D.C. taxi and wished for a better
experience. For example, the bill would move us
toward credit/debit card readers in all taxicabs, a
passenger information monitor displaying a trip
map and other content, and a driver information
monitor with an electronic manifest and GPS
navigation. In other words, as in so many areas
of our government, the District is finally moving
toward meeting baseline expectations that even
much smaller jurisdictions have been requiring
for years.

So how does this impact Uber? Uber is
a technology company that connects licensed
sedan drivers with consumers who want a convenient,
high-quality transportation option, through
the use of a smartphone app. Apparently, Uber’s
pricing model, which uses both a time and distance
factor for calculating rates, has been viewed
by the taxicab commission as operating in a legal
gray area despite existing regulations seeming
to permit such a rate. It was my position that
Uber’s status should be clarified in order to make
the service explicitly legal, but I disagreed with
Councilmember Cheh’s approach, which would
have mandated a minimum price for Uber that is
a full 5 times that of a taxi.

Councilmember Cheh presented her goal as being to simply maintain
status quo by memorializing the pricing structure
currently in place, but her draft would have also
subjected many other aspects of the business,
such as advertising and types of vehicles offered,
to taxicab commission regulation. Uber asserted
that any price floor would be counterproductive,
preventing them from being able to provide
lower costs to consumers if possible within their
business model.

I agree. When Councilmember Cheh was confronted
by other Councilmembers about the significance of making
this type of change to the proposed law
without an additional public hearing,
she removed all Uber provisions from the
bill pending further discussion in the fall.

Unfortunately, unless another change was
made to the bill, Councilmember Cheh’s action
would have forced Uber not only to continue to
operate in this gray area, subject to unfair ticketing
by the taxicab commission, but also subjected
them to additional regulation contained
in the larger taxi bill being passed that day.

To fix this situation, I offered an amendment, with
the support of my colleagues Tommy Wells,
David Catania, and Michael Brown, to explicitly
authorize Uber’s operations while providing
reasonable safeguards to protect the public.
Specifically, my amendment requires that: (1)
an estimated fare is available to the user when
the application is used to book a sedan; (2) the
method for calculating the fare structure is provided
by the business to the user of the mobile
application prior to booking a sedan; (3) upon
completion of the trip, the customer is provided
a receipt that lists the pick-up point, drop-off
point, and total fare paid; and (4) the business
providing the mobile application uses sedans that
are licensed.

After extensive debate and minor tweaks, my
amendment was accepted by the full Council,
with the exception of Councilmember Graham.
This part of the law will sunset on December
31, 2012, however, at which time we will have
to either extend the law or move a new consensus
legislative solution for Uber.

Advocates for additional government regulation will say that
all transportation services need to be heavily
regulated, but I would point out that the service
offered by Uber is a far cry from the days when
any D.C. resident or tourist getting a ride
to the airport in a taxi could count on only one
thing – that they would be charged a different
fare than the last time they went, even
from the same location, with no articulated rationale.

Uber provides clear pricing details tied to time and GPS
tracking, as well as a receipt containing a map of
the actual route taken, and its future competitors
undoubtedly will provide that level of information
as well. Inefficient routes are scrutinized by
customer support staff and adjusted if necessary.

Any attempts to overcharge would quickly be
remedied as consumers voted with their feet by
choosing other companies, filing a class action
lawsuit, or simply filing a complaint with their
credit card company. Absent that, it is not much
more difficult to file a suit in small claims court
than to make a taxicab commission complaint,
and by all accounts the outcomes are fairer in
the former venue.

A better arena for regulation is to address
the real need of preventing discrimination by
drivers in passengers picked up or destinations
serviced–unfortunately for those who are
pro-taxi commission, this factor also counsels
against subjecting Uber’s full business to taxi
commission oversight. While I hear anecdotal
evidence of taxi drivers making discriminatory
decisions as to which potential riders to stop and
pick up, Uber cannot be “hailed” but is rather is
pre-arranged at a pickup location. And while taxi
drivers concentrate their services in the central
business district and popular evening entertainment
areas, Uber will service any location within
the District. As Councilmember Alexander said
on the dais, Uber will pick up passengers east of
the Anacostia River routinely, and their final destination
is already confirmed before the pickup is
made. With a taxi dispatch, despite rules to the
contrary, I hear stories of folks waiting for two
hours, never to be picked up. And as to safety, all
of Uber’s drivers are licensed as sedan or limo
drivers in D.C., Virginia, or Maryland, and drive
routes predetermined through an iPhone application
and logged in the company’s GPS tracker
– adding an additional layer of regulation would
be akin to making lawyers pass bar exams, and
then saying their law firms have to somehow
take the exam, too, rather than simply apply for
the appropriate type of business license.

In addition to looking at Uber, it is important
to study the full landscape of transportation
options, including taxis, and I am pleased that
Councilmember Cheh is planning an additional
hearing in the fall. If the argument for a more
regulated Uber is that it otherwise places taxicabs
at a competitive disadvantage, perhaps we
need to explore ways to improve the quality and
thus competitive position of our taxis. I understand
that Uber partners with taxi drivers in
Chicago to accomplish this very purpose, which
might be a positive development here as well.
As with the LivingSocial debate, I would rather
encourage technology companies to have a presence
in the District than create incentives for
them to leave. Please let Councilmember Cheh
and your other elected representatives know of
your support for Uber’s service, and the need to
allow a new business to create jobs and operate
without unnecessary government interference. ?

Gray’s Smoke Becomes a Fire: Time to Evacuate?
•

In politics, it’s often amazing how fast a political scandal can turn into a firestorm.

In the District of Columbia, the bubbling, ever ongoing Vincent Gray mayoral campaign scandal has heated up big-time, in the space of a few days. If the scandal were a forest fire, you could call it Colorado. In other words, there’s a hot time in the old town tonight.

Consider this: Tuesday, Jeanne Clarke Harris admitted in U.S. District Court that she helped distribute funds in the amount of more than $600,000 from D.C. Jeffrey Thompson to the late-charging 2010 mayoral campaign of then D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray in what turned out to be a convincing win over incumbent Mayor Adrian Fenty. Harris, a 75-year-old public relations professional, made the admissions in a plea bargain with the office of U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Machen, Jr., who had called these efforts, already part of the ongoing scandal, as a “shadow campaign” for Gray, with undocumented and unaccounted for donations.

Harris was the third person to plead guilty to some form of campaign irregularity. Thomas W. Gore and Howard L. Brooks, both members of the Gray campaign, admitted to planning and executing a scheme which saw minor candidate Sulaimon Brown being paid to stay in the race and attack Fenty.

Just like that, the story heated up. Gray, during a bi-weekly press conference, answered some questions about the latest developments in a half-hearted manner, asking the press to separate the campaign from the record of the administration. He also said, when asked if would finish his term in office, that he had “no plans to do otherwise.”

By nightfall, things had changed rapidly, as in the Channel 9 anchor who opened with “Should Mayor Vincent Gray resign? News 9 wants to know.”

Well, who doesn’t? Only now has the “R” word — only whispered about or gossiped about at Starbucks and street corner chit chat in various neighborhoods or not for quotation talk among politicians — gotten bandied about in a serious way. No less than three council members called for Gray’s resignation.

At-large councilman David Catania charged that the Gray campaign was “involved in the largest single criminal conspiracy in the history of modern home rule” and said Gray should resign. Ward 4 councilwoman Muriel Bowser also called for Gray’s resignation. Bowser, a Fenty choice to succeed him in his ward has also made noises that she has mayoral ambitions.

Most difficult and problematical for Gray is the fact that Ward 3 councilwoman Mary Cheh also called for his resignation, in what seems to the most difficult and perhaps most principled of such calls. Cheh, after all, backed Gray in his run against Fenty, while her constituency in the end voted overwhelmingly for Fenty. She did so with obvious reluctance but without any doubt.

The Washington Post, went into full-pads, full-court press mode on the story by July 12, with editorials blasting Gray and calling for a full accounting by him and what it headlined — on its editorial page — as “A Tainted Administration” along with further damaging stories and details and a column in which the writer called him “mayor-for-now.”

Watching a video of the press conference, you have to wonder what is going on with Gray. He held the conference in Northeast, presenting a report on greening of the city’s alleys, made jokes about so many reporters showing up for this event. But, Gray, who has never talked in detail about the ongoing scandal on advice of his attorney, other than at first to say he was innocent, and then not to say anything at all, answered a few questions. Asked about the campaign, Gray replied, quietly, that “This was not the campaign we set out to run.” His separation of his campaign and his administration struck some observers as odd. Nevertheless, that’s what’s been happening during the course of the Gray era — which may yet turn out to be one of the shortest ever.

Since Gray’s January 2011 inauguration, the ensuing two and a half years or so have been characterized by an influx of new residents, the balancing of the budget and successes in crime fighting. However, the foreground has always been seized by indictments, the departure of two prominent members of the District Council, including its chairman Kwame Brown, and sporadic news about charges and indictments into the mayor’s campaign. The fire kept right on burning.

With the indictment and admissions of Harris, it appears a kind of Rubicon has been crossed — or a flashpoint reached. Gray’s silence throughout this mess has been oppressively loud and deafening. Asked to comment on talk that “the mayor is corrupt,” Gray responded: “I know who I am. I get up every morning and look in the mirror, and I see someone I respect.”

The fire storm is still burning. For Gray, it must feel as if his political house is burning down around him. Is it time for him to evacuate? People want to know.

Aurora: Is This the Price That We Must Pay?
•

It is now day five of the national, Colorado and personal tragedy to which we—all of us, we pundits the least of them—are responding to the horror that occurred at a movie theatre at a screening of the new Batman movie in Aurora, Colo.

On Friday, in the a.m. minutes of midnight, a lone gunman, armored to the max in protective gear, and armed with two glocks, a shotgun and an assault rifle, commenced on a shooting rampage which ended up with 12 persons dead and 58 wounded.

Because we live in a time when communication is instant, terrifically mobile, digitalized, able to leap from cellphone to iPad to cellphone to computer by tweet and text, we became enveloped a little faster on our screens, large, flat or telephone sized. The tragedy this way becomes more fluid, the static impenetrable, the desire to guess, gauge our feelings, voice our opinions, our anger growing, until it is stifled by the over all sadness.

But here were are, thinking of past events, watching what’s going on now. This, like Columbine and Virginia Tech, before it, is a different event, in magnitude, in speed of information travel, in reaction, in just about anything you can think of.

This was an event that occurred in the middle of a national election campaign and several things happened because of that. Both campaigns immediately curtailed the airing of political commercials, most of which these days are attack ads from both the Romney and Obama campaigns but only in Colorado. The ads played endlessly in the rest of the country, interrupting and trailing the tragedy like a surreal pack of feral and viral dogs. Even the reaction to the tragedy statements by Romney and Obama seemed appropriately solemn and similar.

The fact that the president came to Aurora to comfort the victims on Sunday was not nearly as important as the fact that Brian Williams was there on Friday, along with all the other anchors, reporters, experts and intoners. The experts—shrinks, psychologists, criminologists, profilers—were on hand, trotting briskly out of some generic office to offer their opinions about the suspect, and clarifying nothing much.

The appearance of James Holmes in court on Monday—bewildered, sleepy, apparently, disengaged, likely—did not help matters, and whatever details emerged about his life and childhood in the end matter very little. He is who he is, and he is not the two kids at Columbine, the shooter at Virginia Tech or the officer at Fort Hood.

Warner Brothers, which produced the Batman series and the midnight showings, offered to participate in a fund for victims. Midnight screenings are a lucrative, and deliberate experience created as a kind of communal event in which audience goers get to be first to see and interact, with people dressing up in costumes waiting in hours in line.

Here’s a thought for Warner Brothers: why don’t you give ALL of the midnight screening receipts (reported to be more than $30 million) as a show of empathy, and sympathy for the victims. It would be a smart and right thing to do.

Here’s another suggestion. Can we see a few politicians (including President Obama and Mr. Romney) stand up even if their knees are shaking and take on the National Rifle Association and propose a ban on automatic firearms and better screenings for gun purchases? The NRA is not some universal rod and gun club, it’s a very, powerful lobbying group and it’s about money, not Second Amendment rights.

And speaking of that, all you principled folks who see a conspiracy to take away your hunting rifle, your home and person protection glock or your anti-tank weapon, and who think that the occasional crazy event with multiple victims is the price we pay for liberty, here’s a suggestion.

Go to Aurora, visit the friends, loved ones, relative, father, mother, wife, children of one of the victims, and you make that argument in person. Look them in the face. You tell them that the death of that little girl, or the death of the person they love, or the memories that will never leave them is the price we pay for liberty. You might want to bring a gun. Things could get dicey. ?

Court Ruling on Obamacare Gets Personal for This Father
•

“Don’t worry, Dad. I’m OK,” my son slurred into my phone.

I was at lunch with a friend. It was THE call every parent fears.

“What’s wrong, Ari? Where are you?”

“I can’t talk,” he mumbled. “Here’s Mom. Your bike’s OK.”

“My bike?”

“Ari was hit by a car while riding his bike to work about two hours ago,” Fiona said. “We’re in the trauma unit at George Washington Hospital.”

“Huh?” I stammered.

“His helmet saved his life. There’s a spot on his brain. He’ll have another MRI in six hours. The doctors think it’s just a bruise and not brain damage. His upper jaw is crushed, and he lost all his front teeth. He’s got years of dental problems. But he’s alive.”

Ari was a hit and run victim on a street with a marked bike lane. He dragged himself onto grass, found his cell, called 911, and memorized the car’s tag as it drove away. A nearby taxi did the same.

A spot on his brain, a crushed jaw, four to six front teeth gone? I was numb.

I excused myself from lunch and headed to Washington.

For the next 375 miles, my mind was a jumble of thoughts. My son? What if the spot on his brain doesn’t go away? What if he’s brain damaged? Will he have headaches forever? What do you fix a crushed palate? Can he chew? How are teeth attached to a crushed palate? What else is broken? What’s he going to look like? What will he look like when it’s over? How much pain is he in? How is he going to eat? How long will he be in the hospital? Have the police been notified? Have they found the driver?

By the time I arrived, the second MRI showed no spot. No brain damage. He’s alive. All else was irrelevant. Either of those would have changed his life, and mine, irreparably worse forever.

Ari was released that night. Immediate attention by the trauma dentist was recommended. The next day, with incredible skill and an array of unimaginable technology, Dr. Singer reconstructed a temporary palate with bone tissue from a cow and six temporary teeth within two hours. It’s not as pretty as thousands of dollars of orthodontia, but it’s better than no front teeth.

The dental bill that day: $15,000. Cash. Money Ari didn’t have. (My bank floated me an immediate loan.) The estimated cost to finish his oral reconstruction: another $30,000 to $80,000.

I’ve not seen the bill for the ambulance, 14 hours in the trauma unit at George Washington University Hospital, two MRIs, several ER docs, X-rays, readings and exams by a radiologist, neurologist, orthopedist, and trauma dentist, and a gaggle of IVs, wires, and tubes.

Certainly, not cheap. Call his mom and me poor health care consumers, but it never occurred to us to enter “the market” to shop for the right—best or cheapest or most convenient or other market factor—hospital, ambulance, trauma unit, specialty doctors and so on.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court was preparing to issue its opinion on Obamacare. Ari will be 26 in a few months. Suddenly, Obamacare became very personal.

If the Court threw out Obamacare, would it be retroactive? Would Ari, who is on his mother’s health care plan, suddenly have no insurance?

Would Ari suddenly be saddled with more than a hundred thousand dollars of medical bills?
Is this now a pre-existing condition? When he turns 26 in a few months, would he be able to get health insurance? At what cost?

Will his insurance company be allowed to cancel his insurance? Will his insurance have a maximum coverage limit?

Ironically, opponents of Obamacare support those key provisions. A number of Congressmen who voted against and openly oppose Obamacare use it to cover their children between ages 21 and 26.

Obamacare was the brainchild of conservative Republicans who opposed President Clinton’s health care plan. Insurance companies bought in. Governor Romney proposed and adopted it in Massachusetts. President Obama decided that the only way to reform health care for the nation was to follow the Republican approach. Most parents embrace their children, but because Republicans oppose Obama, they now oppose the health care solution they conceived.

If the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare, my son was OK. If it didn’t, he wasn’t.

Thank you, John Roberts. My son is covered. I have peace of mind.

No parent wants their child to be in my son’s situation without Obamacare. ?

Weather or Not, Count Your Blessings
• July 11, 2012

Throw in one heat wave that just went on and on and on, in the end resulting in a record-breaking four days of 100-plus-degrees temperatures. Throw in a sudden, swift line of storms on a hot June 29th night in the area which upended trees, resulted in power outages that left thousands in the city and area without electric power.

As time passed, people without power, people carefully making their way through streets blocked off by the presence of fallen trees, people waiting endlessly in lines at gasoline stations (many stations were closes due to electric outages), people and restaurant owners who had to throw away food going bad for lack of refrigeration, people unable to use their advanced fone and computer tools and toys, the elderly suffering in homes without air conditioning, all made their feelings known.

A great daily and plaintive note began to be heard in our area, over the airwaves, in tweets and toots and blogs and e-mails.

Most of us experienced the discomforts of the storm and the heat wave which have made their presence know all the way across the country, and we can be excused if things just got plain frustrating. The ongoing television commentary, often hysterical warnings and coverage from self-styled storm centers and watches didn’t help much: one weatherman kept telling us that such and such a place was getting “hammered” by hail and thunderstorms while another displayed his gift for making the word “huge”—as in huge storms, huge hail, huge heat—sound even, well, huger, than it was.

But as one local commentator says, “Folks, let’s get real.”

Things can always be worse. Can’t get your e-mails or tweet or text your friends: read a newspaper (ours, included), or, use the phone, if it works. If not, send a card. Did that falling tree across the street scare you? Be glad it didn’t hit the place where you live, and we can tell stories about that.

More important—like snowmageddon and other natural disasters that are increasingly more a part of our daily lives—you survived. Sure, times are a little more anxious, given that we’re only in early July with lots of good old summertime left with all its attendant climatic dangers. But you survived, and not so much worse for wear.

Some were not so lucky. The storm—and the heat—caused fatalities across the country, including in this region.

Two elderly women in the area were killed when trees struck their home. A man on his way home from school died when his car was struck by a tree.

Mohammad Ghafoorian who lived near Woodley Park died that Friday night. Power lines hit his Maserati, and it went up in flames. He ran out of his home to put the fire out but stepped on a live power line on the ground. The story, told in the Washington Post, was filled with irony. But his son summed all it up best, when he told the newspaper of his larger-than-life father who emigrated here from Iran: “He lived like a storm, and a storm took him. I think only a storm like that could take him.”

And then there’s Carolina Alcalde, a D.C. resident, native of Peru, office manager for a national consulting firm and avid motorcyclist who was struck by a tree on the night of the storm near Meridian Park. She suffered a severed spinal cord, broken rib and fractures and was paralyzed below the waist. A special fund has been set up for Alcade and her family by friends. We encourage our readers to help if they can. Visit their fundraising website: https://www.wepay.com/donations/camp-carolina.

Let us count our blessings.

Our Summer of Waiting for the Other Shoe to Drop
• June 27, 2012

Around here, and everywhere else, people spend an awful lot of time waiting for the other shoe to drop. Shoeless Joe Jackson did it all his life.

No, it’s not going to rain Christian Louboutins tomorrow.

It’s just that feeling you get that some- thing big-bad or just big, or just dumb and stupid is going to happen very soon — after something big-bad, or just big, or just dumb and stupid has already happened.

So, we thought we’d give some notice of possible shoe droppings. I mean shoes have already dropped on or been dropped by Kwame Brown and Harry Thomas, Jr .

Still waiting to hear from the feds and what’s left of their investigation into Mayor Vincent Gray’s election campaign after two of his aides have pleaded guilty and blabbed to the feds. If I had anything to do with that campaign, I’d walk around town with a shoe-deflective umbrella.

One big shoe’s going to drop Thursday. That’s when the Supreme Court delivers its decision on Obama’s Health Care Reform plan. What are the odds that the shoe will fall on the mandate? If I were a betting man, and I’m not, but still, I’d say they’re pretty good.

How many more shoes are going to drop on the hopes of the Washington Nationals? There’s Zimmerman (Ryan), the hitter, not the pitcher, and his anemic, un-franchise-player-like batting average, there’s Zimmermann (Jordan), the pitcher and his lack of support from his teammates, there’s Werth, out with an injury, there’s Ramos, out with an injury, there’s the top reliever, out with an injury, there’s the 0-7 in a Yankee game by future franchise Harper, and now our ace hits a guy on the noggin and unravels.

But we’re still in first place. Amazing.

Elections campaigns are, of course, the big shoes altogether. Who will have both of his shoes on after the election — I’m betting it’s Romney because he has so many to spare.

Here’s a shoe for blue jeans. Win or lose, how long will Mitt Romney go on wearing blue jeans in public and then cause the blue jean industry to collapse after he stops, causing the loss of 100,000 jobs and pushing the unemployment rate over 10 percent?

Big-time shoe:

That’s when the Ken Cuccinelli presidential campaign begins.

Shoe time:

The day Lindsay Lohan as Elizabeth Taylor debuts on Lifetime Television.

Shoe time two:

The next time Lindsay Lohan goes into rehab.

Shoe time:

When the Republicans sweep the House of Representatives, the Senate, the presidency and the nationwide cupcake concessions.

Shoe time:

When the Nationals win the World Series, in spite of all the shoes that have dropped on them, shocking the world.

Shoe time:

When the new Redskin rookie sensation throws seven interceptions in the first half of the season opener, is replaced by Rex Grossman, who throws seven more, setting an NFL record, whereupon the Redskins fire Shannon, try to get the Joe Gibbs man back into harness for $20 million.

Shoe time:

The race between Vincent Orange and Phil Mendelson for City Council Chairman ends in a tie after ten recounts of all of the 1,399 votes cast. The final results: someone wins by a shoe.

Rumored shoe drop:

There are rumors that plans exist to make Avengers II with 350 superheroes, including the Katzenjammer Kids, Homer Simpson, Little Lulu, Mutt and Jeff, the Range Rider and Brenda Starr, thus resulting in a possible film in which every comic character every drawn will be in a movie.

And last, but not least, the biggest shoe drop of all.

There is, of course, December 21 on the Mayan calendar. (Are do new archeological discoveries say otherwise?)

Still, you know the drill. It’s all over, Baby Blue. ?

Church of Francis Scott Key to Take Delivery of a New Pipe Organ on Eve of July 4th
•

The day before July 4, bands will likely be rehearsing the national anthem for Independence Day celebrations. But in the Georgetown church where Francis Scott Key, the author of “The Star- Spangled Banner,” worshipped, a parade of workers will be busy delivering an exquisite new pipe organ, designed specifically for the historic St. John’s Episcopal Church on O Street.

The July 3 arrival of the new organ, coinciding with holiday traffic and extensive Georgetown street reconstruction, will force a temporary traffic disruptions on Wisconsin Avenue, N Street and Potomac Street to accommodate the tractor-trailer hauling the organ components.

At about 7 a.m., the tractor trailer is expected to enter onto Wisconsin Avenue and turn onto N Street. It will travel up the street and back almost a block to park on Potomac Street NW alongside St. John’s, forcing parking limitations along both routes. Off-loading the organ console with its 2,262 wooden and metal pipes from the 53 foot trailer will take hours.

Every effort to minimize inconveniences to neighbors and businesses will be taken, said Interim Rector Bruce McPherson. “We realize this is going to be one more element of complication in an already challenging parking and traffic situation, but we also believe this organ and the concert series it will inspire will greatly enhance the community’s artistic and musical cultural climate long into the future.”

The new organ will be dedicated Sept. 29 by the Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, Bishop of the Washington, D.C. Episcopal Diocese.

Historic St. John’s was founded in 1796, with early donations to the building fund from Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Corcoran. An early vestryman was Francis Scott Key and Dolley Madison was a regular attendee.?

Passing A Budget in Difficult Times
• June 18, 2012

Given recent events and the attendant media scrutiny on the Council, I wanted to take a moment to highlight some of the positive things our government is doing and assure you all that I will continue to work hard for my constituents and the city as a whole. On Tuesday, June 5, the Council had its second and final vote on the Budget Support Act, and I think that it was a definitive improvement over last year’s budget and I want to highlight a few areas of interest.

First, I was pleased that this year’s budget proposal included no tax increases. One of the primary reasons I was unable to support last year’s budget was the inclusion of unnecessary tax increases to support our ever-expanding government. I believe the Mayor and my colleagues should find efficiencies within the agencies they oversee rather than asking our residents to pay continually higher taxes in the face of a recession. We are the only local government in the country to continue to pass the largest budget in our history every year despite the economic slowdown.

Within my committee, for example, I was able, in consultation with our Chief Financial Officer, to identify millions of dollars of unallocated funding through savings achieved in the Gallery Place tax increment refinancing. I was pleased to allocate some of these funds toward enhanced arts programming, which fills a gap in our public education system and supports our small business community. I also recommended additional funding toward marketing dollars that encourages additional tourism in the District. Studies have shown that both of these uses of government funds generate several dollars in new tax revenues for each dollar spent, which increases the pool of money we have for other items of importance to me, such as our libraries, parks, public safety, and education.

Another very positive development is that we were able to push back the implementation of the municipal bond tax another year. If you recall, the initial bond tax proposal initially considered last year would have been retroactive to interest earned on or after January 1, 2011. This was a shocking and unfair proposal. After some amendments, the tax was subsequently set to go into effect for interest earned on or after January 1, 2012, to be included in one’s tax filing in the spring of 2013 if a taxpayer files on an annual basis. As a result of the fiscal year 2012 supplemental budget bill, which we also passed on Tuesday, we were able to push back implementation an additional year, to interest earned beginning January 1, 2013, for inclusion in your tax filing in the spring of 2014. This is great in and of itself, as it provides relief for another year of this tax, and it also gives us another opportunity to seek to fully repeal the tax in next year’s budget prior to it taking effect. While I was disappointed that the municipal bond tax was not fully repealed in the budget, particularly after I had identified approximately $800,000 of the $1.1 million necessary for this repeal within my own committee, I am still hopeful for full repeal the next time we revisit the budget.

Thank you for all your letters of support during this difficult time, and let me again commit to you that our work will remain uninterrupted as we move forward with selecting an interim Council Chair pending a special election. ?

D.C. Political Corruption? Get a Grip, People
•

There has been a lot of media head-scratching, pondering, pandering and pontification, and deep thinking about a so-called culture of corruption in District of Columbia politics.

You can hardly blame folks for thinking along those lines: I mean, look what’s happened. Just last week, after a lengthy investigation into his financial activities, District Council Chairman Kwame Brown resigned his position and pleaded guilty to a felony bank fraud charge and a misdemeanor charge.

Earlier, the federal investigation into Mayor Vincent Gray’s mayoral campaign, produced two guilty pleas from campaign aides for making illegal campaign contributions to a third and minor candidate, which has been the subject of investigations since almost the beginning of Gray’s term. The federal investigation is still in progress, resulting in a gloomy, expectant political atmosphere about what else may be coming. Everyone is hearing the sound of shoes dropping.

In the spring, Ward 5 Councilman Harry Thomas, Jr., pleaded guilty to embezzling $350,000 of money meant for nonprofit youth programs and was sentenced to three years in prison by a federal judge.

The name of former “mayor for life” Marion Barry, now and perhaps for always Ward 8 Councilman came up often in discussions. Barry, after all, went to jail on a single drug charge after a tumultuous, divisive trial and then returned to become mayor yet again.

People are now talking about all of that as if it was one big bag of bad coals, a black mark for D.C. politics. There are fears that Congress will take up its anti-D.C. cudgel again and beat down home rule.

It’s always trendy to see trends where none exist. But let’s take a look at things. Mayor Barry’s history in this city—and it’s a history of great accomplishments as well as transgressions, past and continuing —is fit subject for a novel, but not any part of a trend.

Vincent Gray’s election was supposed to be about bringing the city together: “One City,” remember? But his problems are about his election, or more accurately, his election campaign. What we know is that his aides, at the very least, lacked any sort of respect for the electoral process and were none too sharp in how they went about it, enlisting a known political loose cannon to assist them.

The acts of Brown and Thomas destroyed two promising political careers and the faith their communities had in them. It’s not fair, however, to suggest that what has happened—and that includes Barry—is indicative of the D.C. political culture, which grew out of the late arrival of home rule in the 1970s. The city was lucky, in fact, to have for a first mayor a man like Walter Washington, who had size, common sense and authority to which every D.C. candidate for anything ought to aspire.

We’ve had what were basically successful terms as mayor by Anthony Williams, the sometimes maligned but very pragmatic, effective and even visionary mayor, who changed the D.C. landscape in his two terms. Williams was not especially popular with the public, but won two terms easily, in spite of not having a natural gift for politics.

There are plenty of good and fine people on the current council, as there have been in the past—chairpersons like John Wilson, Linda Cropp, David Clarke, and Gray, the popular Republican Carol Schwartz, Bill Lightfoot, Hilda Mason, and others, none of whom came close to dishonoring their offices.

So, we should get a grip. We might remember one other thing, besides the problems of lacking statehood: It’s that often you get the government you deserve. And when you repeatedly have miniscule and embarrassing voter turnouts that send individuals to the council, or to high office, then maybe the results that we see now should not be so surprising. ?