State Department calls for all US citizens to leave Libya

 (Bailey) When Obama did not act on the murders of our people in Benghazi it made America look weak, and this is the results of his stupidity.

The State Department Tuesday urged all U.S. citizens to immediately leave Libya due to security concerns.
The evacuation warning came shortly after the USS Bataan, with about 1,000 Marines aboard, sailed into the Mediterranean Sea to assist Americans in leaving if necessary, according to U.S. military officials. The officials made clear the ship has received no formal orders to conduct new missions.
Officials said the Navy amphibious assault ship sailed from the Arabian Sea and was already scheduled to go to the Mediterranean to participate in a multi-county military exercise in the region. 
The State Department issued a statement Tuesday night saying,"The Department of State warns U.S. citizens against all travel to Libya and recommends that U.S. citizens currently in Libya depart immediately. The security situation in Libya remains unpredictable and unstable. The Libyan government has not been able to adequately build its military and police forces and improve security following the 2011 revolution."
The unrest has caused the State Department to limit staffing at the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, and it is "only able to offer very limited emergency services to U.S. citizens in Libya," according to the release.
The statement added that "various groups" have called for attacks against U.S. citizens and U.S. interests in Libya, and said military-grade weapons remain in the hands of private individuals, including those that are capable of attacking civilian aircraft.
The warning was issued in light of fighting taking place earlier this month in the capital of Tripoli, where renegade Libyan Gen. Khalifa Hifter is waging an offensive against Islamists.
Hifter began his so-called "Dignity Operation" more than 10 days ago to crush Islamist militias and their political backers.
Hifter has the support of politicians, diplomats, army units and tribes that want him to impose order and rein in the country's unruly militias, three years after they toppled and killed longtime dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi.
However, the Al Qaeda-inspired group Ansar al-Shariah has now vowed to fight Hifter, whom it accuses of being an "American agent."
Ansar al-Shariah is believed to have played a role in the deadly Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, in which U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Rural hospitals: on the critical list?

 (Bailey)
The Affordable Care Act sucks but no Democrat will admit it, as in doing so will make them racist.


It’s been “probably a decade” since 68-year-old Tom Howell last saw a doctor. A nagging cough and some chest pain finally prompted him to drive 30 miles from his home in Iowa to the closest medical facility, Midwest Medical Center in Galena, Illinois.
"I've been coughing so hard I couldn’t catch my breath. My wife said I had to see the doc, so here I am” Howell said
He said part of the reason he avoided seeing “the doc” for so long was because he didn't have health insurance. As a self-employed farmer in Iowa, he couldn’t afford it and said he didn’t see a need for it.
But he’s now on Medicare, so doctors bills are less of a concern.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates more than 46 million Americans live in rural areas, working on farms or in small factories that provide resources for the rest of the country.
Often in these less populated areas, there is only one medical facility for the entire community.
Much of the funding for rural hospitals, about 60 percent, comes from Medicare. The rest comes from Medicaid or from general health insurance.
Budgets are so tight for these smaller hospitals, where patients are often older and sicker than the general population, that any changes to these programs -- even slight changes -- can have drastic effects on their budgets.
That's why recent cuts by the Obama administration for Medicare reimbursement funding are a grave concern to rural healthcare administrators. In addition, there's an October deadline for upgrading to electronic medical records. If the deadline isn't met, hospitals risk penalties.
But making the upgrades is not as simple as it sounds, especially for smaller medical offices that are still on pen and paper.
“Going from paper to electronic medical records is a big process," said Dr. Michael Wells of the Midwest Medical Center in Galena. "It takes a lot of personnel and staff and support for information technology just alone, so it's a huge task for a smaller hospital when we don’t have the number of employees to support that."
Midwest Medical Center CEO Tracy Bauer agreed. "It's a huge undertaking. We'll have invested over two million dollars in the project…The expense has been huge, the resources needed for it have also been huge”.
The combination of Medicare cuts and the added expense of transferring to electronic records is part of the reason there has been an epidemic of rural hospital closures. Eighteen have shut their doors since the beginning of 2013, more than closed in the entire decade before then.
“Regulations are always changing, and you look at additional cuts, you look at the federal budget, you look at the state budget and you don’t know when that next cut is going to be" said Bauer. "It’s the difference between you being able to provide access in a rural area to not being able to.”
When rural hospitals close, residents are left with no easy alternative for medical care. Often a drive to a doctor for a checkup can take more than an hour. In an emergency situation, the distance can be a matter of life or death.
"We've saved lives by being here and providing that access here, and a lot times if we're not here, those people unfortunately would not make it in time to the stop that they need to be at, so it's really critical that we're here, able to provide that care," said Bauer.
Care is provided to anybody, regardless of their ability to pay, at many of the critical care centers, which is another reason finances are so tight.
The Affordable Care Act was supposed to alleviate that problem by providing the poor with health insurance and reducing the number of uninsured going to emergency rooms for expensive treatment.
But health experts claim that's not always working out so well.
Brock Slabach from the National Rural Healthcare Association said often poorer people choose the least expensive option among the plans provided under ObamaCare, but still can't afford to pay the deductibles required before doctor visits are covered. As a result, those patients don't go to the doctor regularly, but instead run to the emergency rooms when a medical issue becomes a crisis.
It is the same costly problem that existed before ObamaCare went into effect.
Rural hospital administrators worry the trend of closing hospitals will continue as rules and regulations continue to change.
It is not just the loss of healthcare providers in a community when a rural hospital closes, there also is an economic impact. Medical facilities are often the biggest employer in the countryside, so when one closes, a downward financial spiral for the community begins that could quickly spread into more populated areas.
The National Rural Health Association warned the fate of rural hospitals is a bellwether for the nation's healthcare system.
"I think your rural hospitals are going to be the canaries in the coal mine that lead to disaster for hospitals all over if we continue some of our current trends" Slabach said.
He called it a domino effect: when rural communities suffer, the whole country suffers. "The sustenance of our country's health and well being is produced in the rural areas of our country," he said. "The second we begin to dismiss that is the second that we're going to be very regretful of having lost those resources."

GOP hopes renewed probes into Benghazi, IRS will fire up conservatives and not annoy centrists

WASHINGTON –  Republican strategy for the fall elections seemed set: hammer Democrats on the health care law and "jobs, jobs, jobs."
As Democrats show increasing confidence on those fronts, however, House Republicans are gambling that ramping up new inquiries into old controversies involving the Internal Revenue Service and Libya will energize conservative voters without turning off moderates.
Over Democrats' heated objections, House Republicans voted this month to hold an IRS official in contempt for refusing to testify. They also launched a new investigation into the September 2012 terrorist attack on a diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, which killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.
Democrats say the moves reek of political opportunism and desperation.
Criticizing the president's health care law "has run its course," said House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, and Republicans "have to find something else to talk about." She called the new Benghazi inquiry a "political stunt."
Republicans say their actions are serious and justified, even if they also might be good politics.
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the select committee on Benghazi will not be partisan or involve political "sideshows." But he declined to tell Republicans to stop using the Benghazi tragedy to raise campaign money.
Republicans acknowledge the hearings could backfire if their select committee members appear overly zealous.
"There's a real burden on us," said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla. "We need to not overreach" and simply "figure out what the truth is." He predicted the select committee chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., will "lean over backward to be fair."
Democrats spend little time defending the Obama administration's role in Benghazi or the IRS' actions in scrutinizing conservative groups that sought tax-exempt status. Instead, they cite the multiple hearings and inquiries already conducted into the matters, which were fading from national headlines except on outlets such as Fox News.
An inspector general's report blamed poor management in an IRS office that gave special scrutiny to conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. But it found no evidence of political conspiracy.
The division's director, Lois Lerner, infuriated Republicans a year ago by proclaiming her innocence at a House Oversight Committee hearing and then declining to answer questions, citing her constitutional right against self-incrimination. In a mostly party-line vote, the House voted May 7 to hold Lerner in contempt. It wants a U.S. attorney to take steps to force her to testify.
As for Benghazi, at least half a dozen inquiries have probed the terrorist assault of Sept. 11, 2012, generating more than 25,000 pages of documents. Main questions include: Did the Obama administration do enough to get military relief to those under attack? And did it try to mislead Americans about the attack's origins to protect President Barack Obama's record on terrorism with two months left in his re-election campaign?
Opinions mostly fall along partisan lines, although some Republicans express more outrage than others. House Armed Services Chairman Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., said the military did what it reasonably could.
The attack's origins were murky at first. At the time, Egyptians were rioting over an amateur American-made video mocking Islam's prophet Mohammad.
Then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice cited Islamic outrage over the video when she appeared on talk shows the Sunday after the Benghazi attack. Administration officials later said the assault was a calculated terrorist action, not a direct response to the video.
House Republicans have seized on a recently divulged White House "talking points" memo written to help Rice prepare for her TV appearances. The memo said one goal was "to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video and not a broader failure of policy" by the administration.
Republicans say the White House deliberately hid the memo from investigators.
Many Democrats say congressional Republicans want to injure Hillary Rodham Clinton, a possible 2016 presidential candidate, who was secretary of state during the Benghazi tragedy.
Several GOP political strategists said revived inquiries into Benghazi and the IRS will probably do their party more good than harm, provided their lawmakers appear more professional than partisan.
Undecided voters might not get excited about GOP accusations regarding the IRS and Benghazi, said Dan Schnur, a former Republican consultant who teaches political science at the University of Southern California. But given the administration's questionable behavior in both areas, he said, "They certainly don't line up on the other side."
GOP strategist Terry Holt agrees. The Benghazi assault, he said, was "the phone call Hillary Clinton warned us about in 2008 when she was running against Obama. They both blew it."
Democrats are banking on public revulsion.
"To make use politically and financially of the tragedy of the loss of four great Americans is beneath contempt," said Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y.
___

Raises all around? Federal agency scraps employee rating system

 (Bailey) Come on lets spend some more money, after all it ain't ours it's just the taxpayers!


WASHINGTON –  America's new consumer watchdog agency has come up with a unique solution for its troubled employee-rating system: Give almost everyone a gold star. 
The independent Consumer Financial Protection Bureau -- created under the 2010 "Dodd-Frank" financial industry overhaul to serve as a consumer watchdog -- says it's scrapping its system of employee ratings in response to concerns that it was discriminatory. 
That rating system assigned workers a score of between one and five. Due to concerns with the system, everyone who scored a three or above, regardless of performance, will now be getting the top rating of five -- along with the corresponding retroactive pay raises that the top rating brings. 
Those raises will likely cost more than $5 million, according to the American Banker, which first reported on the ratings troubles in a March 6 article. 
Going forward, the bureau is looking at using a new two-tiered rating system for at least two years while officials evaluate the old system. 
But the retroactive payments raise the possibility that workers who slacked off could be rewarded the same as top performers. 
“To give an across-the-board raise slaps the face of the people who deserve it,” said Linda Swindling, author of “Stop Complainers and Energy Drainers: How to Negotiate Work Drama to Get More Done," 
The changes come after American Banker found that minority employees were likely to receive lower evaluations than their white counterparts. A 2013 internal agency report found 74.6 percent of white employees received ratings of four or five compared with 65.2 percent of Hispanics and 57.6 of black employees. 
In a May 19 email sent to staff members and made available to FoxNews.com, CFPB Director Richard Cordray said the agency conducted a thorough audit of how employees were given raises.
He said “broad-based disparities” in the way employees were rated in 2012 and 2013 had been uncovered in several areas including: race/ethnicity, age, bargaining unit membership eligibility, location in the field or at headquarters, and tenure as a CFPB employee.
“These differences indicate a systemic disadvantage to various categories of employees that persisted across divisions, offices and other employee characteristics,” Cordray wrote. 
The changes are being billed as a way to correct the wrongs of 2012 and 2013. Every rank-and-file CFPB worker who received a three or four summary performance rating in 2012 or 2013 under the previous program will be given raises as if they had received the highest rating at the time of evaluation. Senior management is excluded from the process.
But others aren’t buying it.
Swindling recommended the agency work to let employees know that managers are working toward changing the office culture and rating system -- not pay off employees who may or may not have deserved a merit raise.
Bankstocks.com columnist Thomas Brown called it “a pathetic bow to political correctness.”
“Hard-working, conscientious workers (and, yes, the federal government does have those) deserve to be treated better and paid more than workers who, say, persistently show up late and turn in shoddy work,” Brown said.
Cordray said the agency recognizes the change does not address the underlying system itself. Describing this as a temporary change, he said the agency is committed to rooting out problems but it will take time.
The CFPB was created as a new-era regulator responsible for keeping consumers safe, rather than nursing big banks back to health. The sign outside its Washington office even looked edgier than the typical D.C. office -- with the name “cfpb” in lowercase letters on a bright green background.
The bureau was championed early on by Harvard University professor Elizabeth Warren, before she was elected to the U.S. Senate.

White House scrambles to contain damage after outing CIA chief in Afghanistan

The White House is scrambling to contain the damage from inadvertently outing the top CIA official in Afghanistan, a rare blunder that potentially puts that individual at risk. 
The official's name, identified as "chief of station," was included in the White House press office's basic list of senior officials President Obama met with during his surprise visit to Afghanistan on Sunday. The list of 15 names apparently came first from the military, and was circulated by the White House press office. 
The list then went to a much wider audience when it was included as part of what's known as a "pool report," which in this case was filed by The Washington Post's Scott Wilson. 
It was only after Wilson raised the issue with the White House, according to the Post, that officials sought to circulate a new list without the officer's name. But by that point, the mistake already had been noted on Twitter. 
"There's simply no excuse for it," John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, told Fox News on Tuesday, saying the blunder left him "speechless." 
"In a White House that is filled with press flacks ... was there no one who understood the significance of what they were doing?" he said. "Somebody's head should roll for this. ... This is utter incompetence." 
FoxNews.com is not publishing the name of the chief of station. 
The fact that it was circulated at all, though, raises security concerns -- and distracts from Obama's visit to Bagram air base meant to honor troops in advance of Memorial Day. 
Several CIA station chiefs in Pakistan have been exposed during the course of the war in Afghanistan. One of them had to be removed from the country in 2010. 
It's unclear whether the administration will be forced to take that step here. Bolton noted that the official's identity would have been known to some in the Afghan government anyway -- though the exposure could also damage intelligence operations. 
The most recent high-profile incident of a U.S. official exposing a CIA agent was the outing of operative Valerie Plame's identity in 2003. 
In this case, the original list circulated by the White House included several names of well-known public officials, including National Security Adviser Susan Rice and U.S. Ambassador James Cunningham, as well as that of the chief of station. 
According to the Post, Wilson noticed the reference to the station chief after he had already sent out the pool report. 
When he raised the issue, the press office did not raise any objection, according to the Post. But the office later reportedly scrambled to send around a new list, without the officer's name -- apparently realizing the error. 
"Soon after, I think that they talked to their bosses, and realized that it was not OK," Wilson told The Guardian. "And they tried to figure out what to do about this, if there was a way to kind of un-ring the bell." 
Wilson said it appeared "very junior people" were just trying to follow an order without realizing the "ramifications." 
Wilson also said he wishes he had caught the mistake before sending out the list in the pool report. 
"I wish I had, I regret it," he reportedly said.

$15 Hour

Justice Department price-fixing probe rattles auto industry worldwide

An investigation into price-fixing and bid-rigging in the auto parts industry has mushroomed into the Justice Department's largest criminal antitrust probe ever, and it's not over yet.
The investigation, made public four years ago with FBI raids in the Detroit area, has led to criminal charges against dozens of people and companies, stretched across continents and reverberated through an industry responsible for supplying critical car components.
The collusion has also saddled U.S. drivers with millions of dollars in extra costs.
"It's a very, very safe assumption that U.S. consumers paid more, and sometimes significantly more, for their automobiles as a result of this conspiracy," Brent Snyder, a deputy assistant attorney general in the antitrust division, said in an interview.
So far, 34 individuals have been charged and 27 companies have pleaded guilty or agreed to do so, the Justice Department says.  Collectively, they have agreed to pay more than $2.3 billion in fines. New cases have arisen with regularity, with Attorney General Eric Holder promising last September that investigators "would check under every hood and kick every tire."
The most recent development came Thursday, when an executive from a Japanese company was charged with conspiring to fix the prices of heater control panels sold to Toyota and with persuading workers to destroy evidence.
Officials say the investigation stands out not just for its scope but also for the cooperation the authorities have received from Japan, Australia and other countries. Despite the challenges of prosecuting foreign nationals, the Justice Department has won guilty pleas from a series of Japanese executives who opted to get their punishment over with rather than remain under indictment in their home countries and subject to career-crippling travel restrictions.
Though the techniques and strategies sometimes differed, the executives generally carried out the collusion by trading coded emails, meeting at remote locations and destroying documents to avoid paper trails.
With an eye toward eliminating competition and maximizing profits, they exploited an industry that experts say is in some ways vulnerable to collusion: There are a finite number of purchasers and suppliers, there's steady pressure among companies to cut prices -- and car parts, unlike certain products that have a great deal of variability, are generally standardized and homogeneous.
"The firms will just make more money if they're able to reach and stick to an agreement to collectively charge higher prices so that customers can't get them to bid against each other," said Spencer Weber Waller, director of the Institute for Antitrust Consumer Studies at the Loyola University Chicago law school. "The problem is, of course, it's a felony in the United States."
The Justice Department first publicly surfaced aspects of the investigation when FBI agents in Detroit raided the offices of Denso Corp, Yazaki North America and Tokai Rika. All three companies have pleaded guilty to their roles in price-fixing and bid-rigging schemes.
Since the raids, the probe has broadened to encompass about $5 billion worth of auto parts, including seat belts, ignition coils, steering wheels, air bags, windshield wipers and rubber parts that dampen vibration.
Similar cartels have formed in industries ranging from oil and gas to cement and vitamins, though there's debate among economists about how long they can last, given the constant incentive for one member to cheat the others and the tendency to collapse under their own weight as they keep growing, said Daniel Crane, a University of Michigan law professor.
But the collusion in these cases, which in some instances lasted more than a decade, was "deftly done," said Joe Wiesenfelder, executive editor of Cars.com, who has followed the auto parts investigation.
"If they get too greedy and they make their prices too high, then someone smells a rat," he said. "When they set their prices and fixed their prices, they had to do it in a way that wasn't obvious and that took into account the entire market, including suppliers that weren't involved."
Wiesenfelder said that while the collusion affected car consumers, it's hard to tell how much the investigation has been noticed by the average driver.
"It's kind of abstract to consumers," he said. "It's not that prices were fixed on cars. That would really hit home."
But there are indications the industry is chastened.
For instance, Bridgestone Corp., a tire and rubber company that pleaded guilty this year, announced that it would strengthen its compliance, discipline employees and that certain board members and executives would forfeit a portion of their compensation.
Meanwhile, the Justice Department says it's looking into additional misconduct in an investigation that bears all the hallmarks of classic antitrust law-breaking.
"This one," Snyder said, "has it all."

Unions, employers square off over ObamaCare costs in collective bargaining

Disputes between unions and employers over paying for new costs associated with the Affordable Care Act are roiling labor talks nationwide.
Unions and employers are tussling over who will pick up the tab for new mandates, such as coverage for dependent children to age 26, as well as future costs, such as a tax on premium health plans starting in 2018. The question is poised to become a significant point of tension as tens of thousands of labor contracts covering millions of workers expire in the next several years, with ACA-related cost increases ranging from 5 percent to 12.5 percent in current talks.
In Philadelphia, disagreement over how much workers should contribute to such health-plan cost increases has stalled talks between the region's transit system and its main union representing 5,000 workers as they try to renegotiate a contract that expired in March.
Roughly 2,000 housekeepers, waiters and others at nine of 10 downtown Las Vegas casinos voted this month to go on strike June 1 if they don't reach agreements on a series of issues, the thorniest of which involve new ACA-related cost increases, according to the Unite Here union.
Flight attendants at Alaska Airlines voted down a tentative contract agreement with management in February, in part because it didn't provide enough protection against a possible surge in ACA-related costs, union members said. They are still without a new contract.
Labor experts on both sides say the law doesn't take into account that health benefits have been negotiated by employers and unions over decades, and that rewriting plans to meet new requirements can affect wages and other labor terms.
"It's been a challenge for even some of the stronger unions to maintain the quality health plans that they have offered over the years," said Daniel Murphy, an attorney in New York who represents employers in labor talks.
Among the earliest supporters of the health-care law, unions have unsuccessfully tried to win concessions from the Obama administration on some issues now involved in the labor talks.
An Obama administration official said: "We have worked hard to smooth implementation" of the health law.
One pressure point is the higher costs of new mandates, especially the requirement that health plans expand coverage for dependents. For Unite Here, adding that coverage for 14,000 dependents raised costs in the health-care fund run by the union's Las Vegas local by $26 million since 2011, said union spokeswoman Bethany Khan.
The union plan covers 55,000 workers and 120,000 people in total. Casinos on the Strip have agreed to pay more to meet the higher health-care costs, according to contract summaries. Unite Here President D. Taylor called the rising costs tied to the health law the biggest hurdle to reaching settlements in Las Vegas.