Barclays plc (LON:BARC) has appointment Dennis Watson as its new Head of Asset Finance within the Corporate Bank.Watson is already responsible for the bank’s real estate, project finance and mezzanine debt origination teams and will assume control of the Asset Finance business, taking over from Alex Brown who has moved across to spearhead Barclays representation in the education, local authority and social housing sectors.
The change of leadership comes as Barclays reshapes the way asset finance is delivered to its corporate banking clients.
Dennis Watson explains: “We are not changing our appetite for asset finance, far from it, but what we are doing is bringing asset finance alongside our other asset backed and working capital debt propositions, enhancing the client experience by identifying needs earlier and supporting them with the right capital structure from a wider range of products.
"In today’s uncertain world it is important that a client’s debt needs are viewed in the round rather than on a single asset or transaction basis.
"Alex ran the asset finance business with great success in recent years, putting the business on a solid footing for the future and it is only through the efforts of him and his team that asset finance has become such an important instrument in the debt toolbox for Barclays”.
Open Thred: Obama's Money Problem - News Busters
“The money is a huge problem,” confides a senior campaign maven. “We’ll see how long we can stand it. The money alone can’t beat us, but if we get bad jobs numbers a couple months in a row, then all of a sudden, things could get kinda hairy.”
That Obama should find himself on the losing end of a dash for cash is, to anyone familiar with his 2008 campaign, mind-boggling. Four years ago, the upstart candidate had the temerity to take on not only Hillary Clinton but the Clinton fund-raising juggernaut—and kick its ass. The mythology today is that the prodigiousness of Obama’s buckraking was all due to small donors and the juju of the web. Not so. Obama went toe-to-toe with Clinton in competing for Wall Street donors and whipped McCain among the Masters of the Universe. And the expectation was that his fund-raising prowess would be all the greater as a sitting president. Obama would raise $1 billion. His White House–sanctioned super-PAC would haul in at least another $100 million. Obama might fail to secure reelection, but his team would never find itself in the position of hoarding its pennies.
And yet here we are. Although Obama is surely raising a boatload of dough, it appears his campaign (combined with the DNC) could fall short of its goal of $750 million. (Its April fund-raising total declined to $43.6 million from $53 million in March.) Meanwhile, the pro-Obama super-PAC, Priorities USA Action, has raised less than $10 million since setting up shop more than a year ago—$2 million of it from Jeffrey Katzenberg—leading a highly placed Democrat involved in the reelection effort to describe it to me as a “fucking abysmal failure.”
Bill Burton, the former White House deputy press secretary who is one of two men running the super-PAC, disagrees. It’s still early, he says, and professes “no doubt” that his group will reach its $100 million target. But Burton allows that the task has been harder than he anticipated. “We had to spend a year talking to donors, educating them about why super-PACs would matter, even though in 2008, I, as the president’s spokesperson, and the president himself were saying, ‘Do not give to outside groups,’ ” he says. “And we had to do that with the group of people who are automatically skeptical of money in politics.”
But one of the most vaunted fat-cat-wranglers in Democratic history tells me that this is only part of the story. “There are several things going on,” this person explains. “Number one is the shabby treatment the president has given his donors. Unlike Clinton, who loved them and accommodated them, Obama announced he didn’t like big money and gave them the back of the hand. Point two is the president’s campaign announced—or not announced, they let it out, it got in the press, it got in the ether—that they were going to raise $1 billion. So when they come to you and say, ‘We need two-fifty,’ the answer is, ‘What the [f---] do you need my two-fifty for? You’re going to raise a billion! Not a hundred million. A [f---ing] billion dollars!’ You’re getting into federal-budget territory with that kind of claim.
“Three is the Obama donors aren’t scared. They think this is a slam dunk. They don’t think the president’s in trouble. They look at the Republican-primary process and say, That group of [f---ing] clowns? Fourth, Burton and his partner are great guys, but they have no experience in fund-raising. They thought that with the patina of the White House, the checks would just roll in. Wrong.
“Then, everybody looks to George Soros. ‘Why won’t George throw in?’ I know George pretty well. Early on, he wanted to come in to make his case on the economy. George doesn’t want legislation tweaked. He doesn’t want a rule changed. He wants his ideas heard out. But George couldn’t get a meeting in the White House. And then George is saying, ‘Where are the Obama money people with their 5 and 10 million dollars? Where is Penny Pritzker, Exhibit A? Why isn’t she throwing in 10 million?’ And that is a very good question.”
A prominent private-equity player in Gotham who supports Obama agrees with all of that but adds another insight. “Among rich Republicans, the view of Obama is that he’s the Devil,” this person says. “But on the Democratic side, certainly on Wall Street, there’s no visceral reaction against Romney. So if I give $10 million, I’m out the $10 million, and I’m gonna pay more in taxes if Obama wins. And I’m doing it against somebody who—I may not agree with his social views, but I don’t think he’s a bad person. And I’m not really into negative advertising, which is what a super-PAC would do … Then there’s the fact nobody on Wall Street thinks Obama gives a shit about them. They think his attitude is, ‘If I lose Wall Street, it’s not the end of the world.’ And they’re right.”
Whatever the causes, the consequences for Obama may prove dire. Burton reckons that, in the end, the cumulative spending on the Democratic side will be about $1 billion, compared with maybe $1.6 billion on the Republican side. And while the latter may be exaggerated for effect—other savvy Democrats put the GOP figure at more like $1.3 billion—there’s little doubt in either partisan camp that we are about to witness the improbable development of an incumbent president’s being financially overmatched.
“It concerns me gravely,” Plouffe tells me. “From a political standpoint, I’m almost as worried about that as I am about the question of what the economy’s gonna do over the next three or four months.”
Finance board: Voters should decide energy-saving contract - Eagle-Tribune
NORTH ANDOVER — The battle of the boards over energy saving continues.
While the Finance Committee did not take a formal vote on the issue Tuesday night, the advisory board is moving toward recommending that contracts of more than three years be approved by Town Meeting. The committee is particularly concerned about a proposed $4.3 million contract with Ameresco, a Framingham energy services firm,
Ameresco has said it will reduce the town's energy consumption and costs by making a host of improvements to buildings, including boiler replacements and more efficient lighting. The town would pay back the $4.3 million over 15 years and that bothers Finance Committee members.
The selectmen and School Committee, as well as Town Manager Andrew Maylor and Assistant Town Manager Raymond Santilli, support a pact with Ameresco.
Article 3 on the warrant for the June 12 Town Meeting authorizes the town manager and superintendent of schools to award contracts for more than three years if four selectmen or four School Committee members approve.
Finance Committee member Peter Besen proposed amending the article to require that such contracts be approved by Town Meeting.
"We don't want it to happen administratively," his colleague, Benjamin Osgood, said about the possibility of a contract with Ameresco being approved without voters' approval.
Thomas Dugan, presiding in the absence of Chairman Alan LeBovidge, said board members need to agree on the language of an amendment before moving forward with it.
"We don't have to make a decision tonight," Dugan said. The board invited Ameresco to send a representative to its meeting last night, but the company declined to do so, according to Dugan.
Dugan, Osgood, Matthew Remis and other Finance Committee members have said the board has not been given sufficient information about Ameresco to make an informed decision.
Money Matters: Financial mistakes to avoid in a divorce settlement - WMUR.com
In a divorce settlement, it is common for both parties to focus on immediate financial concerns. Yet it is the long-term financial consequences of divorce that frequently are more devastating. Here are some of the most common concerns and how to avoid them.
Taking the house. The spouse who will have custody of the children typically wants to keep the family home. While this may be desirable emotionally, it can be financially problematic.
A home is an illiquid asset that costs money to pay for and maintain. The parent with the children may not have the income resources to take care of both the home and the children, particularly if they give up other financial resources in return for the house. Consequently, it may be better financially to sell the home, purchase a more suitable residence, and split the balance.
Assuming equal is equal. The family home is a good example of the “dividing things down the middle.” Frequently, one person takes the house and the other keeps the pension and retirement account. Say both are valued at $400,000. The home is a cost-burden, while the retirement account is a liquid asset that can continue to grow tax deferred, probably at a faster growth rate than the home.
Not examining earning potential. Often one spouse has minimized a career in order to raise children. The settlement needs to take this into account, perhaps by providing extra money to the homemaking spouse to pay for additional career training or education.
Not thinking about taxes. Say it is proposed that one spouse keeps a $150,000 individual retirement accounts and the other keeps a $150,000 taxable investment account. Sounds fair. But it is not. The owners of the IRA will have to pay taxes on the money when it’s withdrawn at higher ordinary income rates while the other pays at capital gains tax rates on the investment gains as the assets are sold.
Not following through with your attorney on the QDRO. A spouse who will be receiving part of his or her spouse’s qualified retirement accounts will need a court order called a “qualified domestic relations order.” To avoid mistakes here make certain the attorney is aware of all retirement accounts and examine each plan for their rules regarding QDROs. Have the QDRO pre-approved by the plan before the settlement is final and start early in the approval process. Consider any available survivor benefits in the process.
Not insuring a divorced spouse. If you will be relying on your ex-spouse for any financial benefits take out a life insurance policy on your spouse to ensure the money will be there when the time comes. You should own the policy, so you know the premiums are paid. And buy the policy before the settlement becomes final so you know the spouse is insurable.
Finally, include your accountant and financial planner in the discussions as well as your attorney. That way long range ramifications can be thoroughly thought through and discussed before the divorce is final.
Money has changed – that’s the issue - New Statesman
Peter Selby responds to Nelson Jones's article Money and Morality.
When the St Paul’s Institute, working with JustShare, Penguin Books and the LSE, brought nearly 2000 people into St Paul’s for a public debate on the theme of Michael Sandel’s book, What Money Can’t Buy: the Moral Limits to Markets (see Nelson Jones, NS 25 May) it was because we knew the theme touched a nerve, not because we have an answer to peddle. The Institute has been engaged for some years, as an agency of the Cathedral, in seeking to get into debate with the financial institutions which are its ‘parish’; as such we could hardly think Sandel’s book unimportant, and we were delighted so many others thought the same.
That’s not the same as signing up to his thesis about the moral corrosion brought about by the intrusion of the market into all sorts of spheres to which it is not appropriate. Certainly we are signed up to the desire to get people thinking hard about which are the things that should be for sale and which should not be and, as Rowan Williams says in his review of What Money Can’t Buy, to do so on the basis of rational reflection rather than relying in feelings of revulsion when we see certain things getting a price.
Nelson Jones in his NS piece wonders whether things have deteriorated from some golden age when money didn’t play the part it now does, and points to many areas where things were much more monetised in the past than they are now. Tellingly, if slightly optimistically, he says we no longer sell people, and however bad the euro crisis gets we still won’t be doing that. There are examples he cites in the ancient world that are at least as unpleasant to think about as some of the examples Sandel gives of the intrusion of market thinking.
In my comments in the debate I voiced my own reservations about Sandel’s thinking, so much of which seems to me to address symptoms without digging deeper into causes. When he gives the example of prisoners being able to buy a cell upgrade, and when Nelson Jones points out that that has historical precedent, the deeper issue is not being faced by either of them: the selling off of incarceration as a business is common policy in the USA as it is increasingly in Britain. In the process of creating that market a financial interest is being created in locking people up. That can’t be unconnected with the fact that we in Britain lock up more people than other European countries and that a quarter of the rising number of prisoners in the world – and a third of all incarcerated women in the world, whose number has increased by a sixth in five years – are in the USA.
The figures that became a matter of public scandal during the Jubilee 2000 campaign for the relief of unrepayable third world debt showed all too clearly that the escalating power fo financial debt was depriving children worldwide of education, healthcare and life itself. The situation is infinitely worse than either Sandel or Jones portrays: the issue is not the buying and selling of things that should, or should not, be free, or whether people value things they pay for more than things they receive for nothing; in the end it is not about getting people to think more clearly than they do about whether markets should have moral limits though all these questions are important. What really matters is that in everything from the depletion of the planet’s resources to the requirement on Greek citizens to sell their democratic birthright to have their debts rescheduled money is deciding matters of life and death, and doing so more and more.
That’s why as a Christian and a theologian I am convinced money has acquired all the characteristics of an idol, aggrandising its power and claiming more and more of people’s lives. And that’s why, because of faith’s commitment to raise fundamental questions about anything that has the potential to be an idol, the St Paul’s Institute will go on engaging that debate at an ever more fundamental level. When it recently commissioned a report on the attitudes of those working in the financial sector (see Value and Values) we learned that most did not think the City should listen more to the Church’s guidance. But we now know, since the Sandel debate came to St Paul’s, that many people do want to know whether pressing economic questions have something to say about the meaning of life and whether those who profess faith are prepared to get involved in relating that faith to those questions.
Because, make no mistake, money did not acquire this power by accident. The last four decades, roughly since the massive oil price rises of the early 1970s, have seen vast increases in the amount of money in circulation, and technological advance has multiplied its speed of circulation. In the absence of means of regulating that the dominant policy has been one of deregulation, allowing the power of money to grow with its quantity. The results are not just the life and death issues I have described, but a situation in which all of us, rich or poor, are compelled to worry more and more about money and think more and more about it.
The issues of monetary reform, dismissed even by the independent commission on banking and widely ignored, are ones we need to press: just as ‘home ownership’ is a euphemism for housing debt, so ‘fractional reserve’ is now a synonym for debt multiplication: is one of the questions we need to ask about the post-2008 crisis whether the system on which we have relied for money creation for nearly a century fraught with inherent instability? I ask the question not because the Institute has a recipe or a policy to commend, but because it is our passion as a community of faith to ensure that these questions are honestly faced. The Sandel debate, and the Jones response are just a start.
Peter Selby is one of the interim directors of the St Paul’s Institute, and author of Grace and Mortgage: the Language of Faith and the Debt of the World. He was until retirement Bishop of Worcester, and Bishop to HM Prisons.
Small businesses subject to credit ratings "lottery" - Daily Telegraph
The research, by accountancy firm Shelley Stock Hutter, found the agencies also failed to agree whether small companies’ credit risk is improving or deteriorating. A company given a credit limit of £67,000 last year by D&B has seen its recommendation improve to £108,000 this year. However, Experian’s recommended limit of £25,000 for the same firm last year has declined by almost two thirds to £8,400.
The issue isn’t isolated to small firms – a medium-sized business was given a credit limit of £400,000 by Experian, while D&B suggested £5.7m.
Bobby Lane, a partner at Shelley Stock Hutter, called for a Government “code of transparency” to force agencies to be more open about how they arrive at their recommendations. “Some small businesses could be forced to cease trading due to the effects of these inconsistent ratings.”
Banks use external credit reference agencies to inform small business lending decisions but the impact of inaccurate ratings is likely to be most severe in trade credit provided to small businesses by suppliers.
Research by the CBI and the ACCA, the accountancy body, has found that the trade credit market is more important than bank lending for small companies, but firms are relying on incomplete and dated information to measure risk.
Philip King, chief executive of the Institute of Credit Management, the credit industry’s professional body, said Government drives to reduce small companies’ accounting requirements were partly to blame for “skewed” ratings.
“Suppliers need to get something off the shelf to decide if a company is credit worthy or not. Agencies all use their own different models but the fact that there isn’t much information from Companies House means they rely more on other information – and that can skew [ratings].”
The Government is considering plans to let companies with sales of less than £440,000 or 10 staff file a simplified trading statement rather than accounts. Mr King said that would “stifle credit and growth”.
“If no information is filed, nothing is available and that’s a real risk. We’ve already got small companies filing abbreviated accounts, which frankly makes them not that useful – but at least it’s something.”
A spokesman for Credit Safe said: “There are always going to be discrepancies between ratings because different credit reference agencies use different pieces of information and different models [to measure] different outcomes.”
D&B said agencies’ “methodologies ... are different enough to produce different scores and credit limits for the same business” and it supplies customers with a “rating guide” to help them understand how scores are arrived at.
Experian said the discrepancies are partly down to its use of payment performance data and consumer credit information “to provide a more comprehensive picture on the business and the people behind [it].”
Document: Money found in Price's safe proceeds of conspiracy - WFAA
DALLAS – Federal authorities say that $229,590 in cash found in a safe in John Wiley Price’s Oak Cliff home last summer, as well as another $230,000 in money from a land deal, were all proceeds of conspiracy to commit money laundering, bankruptcy fraud and bribery, according to a document filed Thursday in Dallas federal court.
FBI agents found the money in Price’s safe while serving search warrants on his home last June. They also served search warrants on his assistant, Daphne Fain, and political consultant Kathy Nealy.
Agents also seized $50,000 and $180,763 from a Dallas County builder who was set to pay that money to Price for the purchase of a vacant nine-acre tract on Grady Niblo Road in Dallas. The builder’s attorney has said he did nothing wrong.
Billy Ravkind, Price’s attorney, said Thursday morning that he was still reading the government’s filing and had no comment.
No one has been charged with any crime in the investigation, which is ongoing.
The U.S. attorney’s office made the allegations in a civil lawsuit filed to keep the seized money. In it, they detail how agents found the money in the safe, stashed in various envelopes. Documentation found with the money bundles includes various banks and addresses in Dallas, Forney and elsewhere.
Price filed for bankruptcy in 1996, and it was discharged in 2001.
Price, according to the government’s filing, has claimed ownership to $115,000 of the seized money. Fain, Price’s assistant, has claimed $114,590.
Price and his attorneys have fought the seizure of the money, prompting the government to have to file documentation of why they believe it was proceeds from criminal activity.
The FBI’s investigation went public last summer with the serving of search warrants.
FBI agents are investigating Price’s use of campaign funds, his land deals, the African heritage festival he founded known as KwanzaaFest, his expensive car collection, as well as various businesses controlled by his associates.
Agents are also examining his role in in the much-publicized controversy involving an alleged shakedown scheme that targeted the California developer behind a massive logistics center in southern Dallas County known as an inland port.
Money Flies Out Of Spain as Regions Pressured - Moneynews (blog)
Spain is the next country in the firing line of the eurozone's debt crisis, with spendthrift regions and shaky banks threatening to blow a hole in state finances and pushing funding costs towards levels that signal the need for a bailout.
The European Commission gave new help on Wednesday, offering direct aid from a eurozone rescue fund to recapitalize Spanish banks and more time for Madrid to reduce its budget deficit.
That helped lower the risk premium investors demand to hold Spanish 10-year debt rather than the German benchmark on Thursday, but it remained close to the euro-era record, at 520 basis points.
Bank of Spain data showed a net 66.2 billion euros ($82.0 billion) was sent abroad last month, the most since records began in 1990. The figure compares to a 5.4 billion net entry of funds during the same month one year ago.
Spaniards are worried about the health of their banks, hit by their exposure to a 2008 property crash, and have been sending money to deposit accounts in stronger economies of northern Europe.
The capital flight data predates the nationalization of Spain's fourth biggest lender Bankia in May when it became clear the bank could not handle losses from bad real estate investments, compounded by a recession.
Spain's centre-right government has contracted independent auditors to assess the health of its financial system in an effort to restore faith in its banks.
Spain must lay out its restructuring plans for Bankia to the European Commission (EC), a spokesman for the EU executive arm said on Thursday. He added that a domestic solution to the country's bank crisis would be better than a European rescue.
The government said on Wednesday it would finance a 23.5 billion euro rescue of the bank through the bank fund, FROB but senior debt bankers said that the syndicated bond market is currently closed for Spanish agencies.
REMOVING UNCERTAINTIES
The prospect that Spain might not be able to handle losses at its banks has pummeled shares and the euro, although both regained some stability on Thursday.
"What we need first of all is for the Spanish government to tell us its restructuring plans for Bankia, what options it is considering," said European Commission spokesman Amadeu Altafaj in a radio interview.
"From there, we will study the plans and see whether they comply with requirements for public aid."
Spain should carry out the refinancing of its banking sector, laid low by a decade of unsustainable lending during a property boom, by market mechanisms or government funds, rather than a European rescue which would have negative connotations, Altafaj said.
"The sooner uncertainties are removed the better," he added.
The government also hopes to clear doubts on Friday about how it plans to ease financing problems among its 17 autonomous regions.
Treasury ministry sources said a mechanism to back the regions' debt would be agreed at the weekly's cabinet meeting and figures showing they were on track to meet their spending cuts targets would be released.
Fitch Ratings downgraded eight regions on Thursday, warning that a failure from the government to adopt new measures would result in further ratings cuts.
Spain's Deputy Prime Minister Soraya Saenz de Santamaria is due to meet U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and International Monetary Fund Director General Christine Lagarde in Washington on Thursday.
The deputy PM will outline Spain's measures to tackle its crisis during the meetings, which were convened before Spain's situation reached boiling point, a government spokesman said.
© 2012 Thomson/Reuters. All rights reserved.
The Wait is Over -- 21st Century Personal Finance Tools Have Finally Arrived! - YAHOO!
DebtorWise Foundation Revolutionizes Household Budgeting
Rochester, NY (PRWEB) May 31, 2012
With tens of millions of Americans struggling with consumer debt burdens and millions trying to save their homes from foreclosure, it is shocking that 19th Century personal finance tools remain the primary option for distressed households. Indeed, the lack of precise and realistic money management tools characterizes the personal finance education industry that is dominated by private banks, credit unions, higher education, nonprofit foundations, personal finance gurus, and especially federal and state government agencies. Even the President’s Advisory Council on Financial Capability has ignored its leadership responsibility to develop and promote more accurate and innovative approaches to personal finance in general and household budgeting in particular. Americans need and deserve so much more during this period of economic uncertainty.The key question is why are financial institutions and even public agencies continuing to use antiquated personal finance software/methods and related budgeting/money management curricula rather than more practical approaches that address the complexity of contemporary household finances? In particular, why are American households encouraged to use gross income assessment tools when their economic reality is that household expenses must be paid from net income? Is there a reason that these personal finance tools provide the illusion of greater financial control and yet lead the average American to higher levels of consumption and ultimately consumer debt?
With this ongoing leadership crisis in the personal finance education industry, the DebtorWise Foundation is pleased to announce the release of its pathbreaking, net cash-flow budgeting/ personal finance Credit Counseling course that is based on the IRS 1040 federal tax guidelines. Rather than a “one size fits all” approach to personal finance with its inherent imprecision, the DebtorWise Foundation’s money management software/curriculum enable consumers to: (a) specify the unique economic characteristics of their household, (b) calculate their monthly net income, and (c) customize a household budget based on the financial constraints of their net cash-flow. The key features include household size/structure, tax filing status, and state and local income tax liabilities. Furthermore, the DWF budgeting software is accompanied with a state-of-the art document management/data verification system.
According to Dr. Anita Butera, Esq, Director of Bankruptcy Education, “it is striking that Americans are berated over their lack of personal finance skills. Yet, the so-called experts promote personal finance tools that are more appropriate for the age of the horse and buggy than the Ipad generation. At DebtorWise, we have harnessed the scholarly vision and academic precision of our founder—Dr. Robert D. Manning —to better serve those Americans that desperately need our practical guidance and innovative budgeting software/courses/assistance.”
As Dr. Butera explains, “Imagine trying to develop a budget based on gross income that ignores state and local taxes, itemized tax deductions, and even homeowner status. You can easily overestimate available household income to pay monthly expenses by 20% - 25%. And, try evaluating whether a mortgage modification is affordable when you don’t know the net cost of lower loan (tax deductible) interest rates. No wonder so many hard working families are confused over balancing their budget --with gross income—when they realize that they don’t have enough money to pay their bills at the end of the month! Is it surprising that so many people give up on their personal finances?” With the goal of bridging this informational deficiency, the DebtorWise Foundation is offering the first net cash-flow budgeting curriculum that is based on the IRS 1040 federal tax guidelines.
The DebtorWise Foundation is the nation’s leading innovator in online financial education courses and personal finance software. Founded by Dr. Manning, an internationally recognized consumer finance scholar, the DebtorWise Foundation is a nonprofit organization dedicated to providing affordable financial education to financially distressed and low-income households. It provides the pre-filing Credit Counseling and pre-discharge Debtor Education courses that are required by the Federal Court for filing consumer bankruptcy. Dr. Manning's most recent monograph examines Walmart's expansion into consumer financial services in the United States with a case-study of Banco Walmart de Mexico.
For more information contact:
Donna Slavin,
Director of Special Programs
d.slavin(at)debtorwise(dot)org
(585) 270-8398
###
Share:
Donna Slavin
DebtorWise Foundation
(585) 563-7715
Email Information
Money challenge to tribes' sentencing authority - MSN Money
FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. (AP) - American Indian tribes authorized to triple the amount of time tribal members can spend in jail say they're challenged by a lack of funding.
The increase in tribal courts' sentencing authority from one year to three years for a single crime came two years ago under the federal Tribal Law and Order Act. But a U.S. Government Accountability Office report released Wednesday showed that none of the 109 tribes who responded to a survey about the sentencing increase were taking advantage of it.
Nearly all of those tribes said they need more money and technical help from the federal government to provide public defenders, establish or update criminal codes, and have sufficiently trained judges as the law requires.
The report shows 36 of the tribes surveyed are working toward the new authority. Another 34 tribes were unsure whether they would go in that direction, while 31 said they had no plans to do so, the report said. The enhanced sentencing isn't mandatory for tribes.
Troy Eid, chairman of the Indian Law and Order Commission born out of the Tribal Law and Order Act, said tribes across the country are exploring the authority but it will take time to get all the elements in place if that's the path they choose.
"My impression is that within the next year, you'll start to see some tribes actually implementing the system," he said. "Tribes are being super careful. No tribe wants to get this issue wrong; it has to be legally correct."
The GAO cautioned the report isn't representative of all tribes. Congressional investigators identified 171 of the 566 federally recognized tribes that received federal funding for tribal courts to include in the survey, but not all of them responded.
Tribal leaders have said a year in jail for any crime under tribal law, including homicide, hasn't served as much of a deterrent on reservations. Members of the Navajo Nation Council have been debating whether the enhanced sentencing provision would help send a message that tribal officials are serious about combatting crime.
"The bad guys are saying they could get away with anything on the rez, which now pretty much is true," said Edmund Yazzie, chairman of the Navajo Nation Council's Law and Order Committee, and a former sheriff's deputy. "But now the committee is trying to take another look at it."
Seventy of the tribes surveyed said they had at least half the requirements in place to hand down lengthier sentences, but some are choosing not to because of associated costs, like probation. One unnamed tribe said it has had an effective criminal and civil justice system for 40 years without the requirement of a law-trained judge, and that hiring one from outside the community would be unreasonable.
The Hopi Tribe in Arizona set aside funds from its own budget to hire law-trained judges and a prosecutor last year to meet the requirements of the tribal law and order act, said tribal Chairman Le Roy Shingoitewa. The tribal council is expected to vote on an updated criminal code next month that Shingoitewa says could help ensure that victims get justice.
"Now we have some teeth in enforcing our laws. Previous to this, all we did is slap the hands of perpetrators," he said.
Tribes receive funding, training and other assistance through the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs and the U.S. Department of Justice, but it's not always enough.
The BIA said it has provided more than 60 recording devices to tribes to help them meet another requirement that they maintain a record of criminal proceedings. The agency said it has plans to give 15 more to tribes that request them and also has asked for $1 million more in funding for tribal courts in its 2013 budget justification.
The GAO recommended that the federal government clarify to tribes the funding sources available to help them pursue the enhanced sentencing.
Mato Standing High, attorney general of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe in South Dakota, said the tribe is fortunate in that it has the financial resources to meet many of the requirements under the Tribal Law and Order Act. The only thing missing is an updated tribal code that would reflect a new class of crimes, like rape, arson or homicide, with lengthier sentences, he said.
The tribe hasn't decided officially whether to move forward with the enhanced sentencing authority, he said, but is considering how to classify crimes after comparing them to state and federal crimes and penalties.
"Tribes really need to see it as an opportunity to exercise sovereignty and have more local control," Standing High said. "That's the goal of it, and I understand also that it takes a lot of resources that a lot of tribes don't have."
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
No comments:
Post a Comment