Oh, THAT Kind of Financial Incentive
I asked a while back what the TrooperGate investigator, Stephen Branchflower, might have meant when he said a key witness–whom he believes lied to him in an interview–had a "financial incentive" to do so.
It appears that Murlene Wilkes, who handles the state’s workers comp claims, was pressured by the governor’s office to deny a claim from Trooper Wooten. Yet, when Branchflower asked whether she had been pressured, she said "no." So Branchflower subpoenaed her (and she gave a deposition, on Friday), to find out whether she continued to say "no" under oath.
But it wasn’t clear why Branchflower believed that Wilkes had had a financial incentive to lie to him.
Andrew Halcro clears that up for us. Apparently, the state is fighting to keep the workers comp contract in Wilkes’ hands–and they’re willing to pay her $300,000 more than they otherwise would have to do so.
Regarding the Harbor Adjustment issue and "open govt" policy. The adjusting contract for the State is currently under dispute- the State is trying to renew Harbor Adjustment’s contract for over $300,000 per year (1.5 million dollars) over the life of the contract, more than the next highest bidder. Harbor bid approx $1.5 million per year for the contract. the next highest was $1.2 million per year. Harbor won the bid; why?
Harbor Adjustments is the company at the center of the controversy surrounding former State Trooper Mike Wooten’s injury claim. The company has a contract with the state to process workers compensation claims and has been reported to have been pressured by the governor’s office to deny the claim back in the spring of 2007.
At first, company owner Murlene Wilkes told special investigator Steve Branchflower that no such pressure occured. Shortly thereafter, an employee of Harbor Adjustments called Branchflower and ended up giving a sworn deposition that the governor’s office did pressure the firm to deny the claim.
It appears that the state is trying to stick with Murlene Wilkes’ company–the witness in question–in spite of the fact her bid for that contract came in $300,000 higher than the next highest bidder.
$300,000. I’d say that’s a financial incentive alright.
photo by crazyneighborlady
Why does Branchflower hate America? /s
Please digg this story.
Only $300,000? Sarah needs to get to the big leagues where $700,000,000,000 can be used as “financial incentives”/s
Ya beat me to it…
Heh, heh. Small potatoes. Paulson wouldn’t tell that lie for under $300 million.
EW,
The comments need a spew alert. I’m cleaning up coffee right now…
Thank you for the update…So “it” begins to hit the fan…Finally.
well, following the money didn’t take too long
$300,000 in taxpayers’ money
to buy perjury
that ain’t reform you can believe in
PS: I read somewhere that liddy dole is down by six points to Hagen
SIXTYSEVEN, FOLKS
Boy, does she know how to cut spending and end corrupt practices or what?
I think it’s the “or what?”
EW,
Is this related to that governor (Sarah something)? I did not know she was of any importance anymore as I haven’t her anything about how great or how beloved she is in over a week. Is she still McCain’s running mate? I think her 15 minutes of fame lasted longer than expected and now they are over.
ah, this is good, very good. corruption we can believe in.
ok, sorta OT, in that this addresses the US and global financial crisis and the bailout in particular.
in the form of a question for the atty types out there:
it seems generally understood that the foreclosure nightmare is basically due to corrupt lending practices by these mega-mortgage companies, unregulated and undeterred.
would it be possible for the victims of these lending practices and foreclosures to enter into a class action lawsuit against these institutions to at least freeze the foreclosures?
could such a suit also name federal regulators as co-defendants for failure to fulfill their official responsibilities in such a way that would have at least nipped these practices in the bud a while back when it could have mattered?
how far does caveat emptor really fly, really?
someone here shared that amazing info-cartoon on ‘money as debt’ from breadwithcircus, and i have to say, all the questions i’ve been having about the absurdities of the economy started to make ’sense’, at least in a perverse sort of way. i mean, i’ve been wondering for a good while why inflation should ever happen, how can loan interest ever exceed the principal, and how is it banks always make out like bandits, no matter what? such as that…. you know, not economically savvy questions, but basic, arithmetical, and moral questions.
anyway, thanks for that video; it should be shared far and wide. and someone should make sure obama sees it. the corrections for these problems will take even more radical steps than FDR ever dreamed of. (like, not slaughtering livestock to bring prices down; get to the core of the pricing problem without starving people!)
meanwhile, there are blessings in these times. the long history of banking corruption exposed in that video emphasizes even more profoundly for me the need to starve the beast. and we all know that means ceasing our unbridled consumerism.
that situation will likely be forced upon us, which will not be pretty. before the 29 crash, over 90% of the US population was rural. hardly anyone had electricity or plumbing or sewage, which is now considered so backward, but they were able to subsist (except in the dust bowl; nature compounding human folly) for the most part. my folks talked about the depression years very differently. my dad lived in a city and said they often went hungry. his mom used a razor to slice fatback to pass as bacon for most of their breakfasts. my mother’s family, in contrast, lived on a dirt farm in mississippi and did not have indoor running water (only in the kitchen) until i was in high school, and never had indoor toilets, though they always had electricity. but my mom said they never went hungry; they felt the difference in not getting flour or sugar so easily, stuff like that, but otherwise, life went on with their garden and their fields and their chickens and pigs and their canning and smokehouse.
that ratio is now reversed. most folks are so utterly dependent on the grid, it’s not just dangerous, it’s mayhem chomping at the bit. i don’t think i need to conjure up the nightmarish images for anyone, it’s all so obvious.
i find myself wondering what life was like just before the big crash, in the days of the sticky slide when the thin and shallow upper crust were busy ignoring reality and making fodder for hollywood films and fitzgerald novels.
it was also a time when more and more little folks were forced out on the streets and into shanty towns we’ve come to associate with third world countries.
if you haven’t done it lately, everyone should reread ‘grapes of wrath’ about now. utterly chilling in its prescience, even for these times. but also oddly hopeful, in the end…..
A lot of truth in what you say. That is one reason that “roadside commercial” zoning has been short-sighted and destructive; it has robbed us of roadside fields and second growth that could, in a pinch, have been farmed. Now, if we need to grow food locally, we first have to heave up all that asphalt and scramble for some way to rebuild topsoil. Good. Luck. We have used our lifeboats for kindling.
“if you haven’t done it lately, everyone should reread ‘grapes of wrath’ about now. utterly chilling in its prescience, even for these times. but also oddly hopeful, in the end”
My most poignant moment in the movie is the look on Tom Joad’s face, that crazed driven to the edge look played by Henry Fonda.
I have been preparing for this scenaio. Moved away fro the city back to my rural roots for many of the reasons you cite so well.
You’ve hit the coffin nail on the head. The current financial crisis resembles the old banker’s saw: when a debtor owes you a thousand, the bank owns him; when he owes the bank a billion, he owns the bank.
If effectively defrauded home mortgage holders could temporarily act as a class — demanding that government redress wrongs done to them rather than act to save the lenders who did the wrong — they would own the banks. In this case, the government treasury. After all, they more aptly represent the mass of taxpayers, from whom the cure will come, than do the banks; it’s their defaulting on rapacious, incomprehensible mortgage obligations that is the source of the flame. It is logically where the legal and political hoses should be directed to put it out, not at the hands burning in the flames.
Bush & Co., are keen to say, KISS, keep it simple. We “know” how to fix banks, just give ‘em no strings money and they’ll keep themselves solvent. Bush leaves out that taxpayers get nothing in return, not even knowing what happened to their money or how long they’ll have to keep paying it. (Exactly like GWOT and Iraq, non?) By definition, that would be exactly the wrong thing to do, not to mention being morally reprehensible, economically foolish, and financially reckless.
The financial crisis derives from a cornucopia of debt instruments, trillions of dollars worth, that emerge from a single source: unregulated predatory lending to unqualified borrowers and from lending to qualified borrowers on rapacious, unscrupulous terms that are virtually impossible to meet, making defaults, with their attendant exorbitant fees, inevitable. (That’s also the business model for credit card lending.)
The magical element in all that was the belief that booking the loans, which immediately generated billions in fees (and nominal profits), was all that counted. The need for full and timely repayment of principal and interest over the life of the loan was imagined away, a problem that endless refinancing, on ever more usurious terms, would cure. No water into wine here, boys. Being GOP’ers, these lenders want gubmint, that’s your and my pocketbooks, to bail them out of jail. I say throw away the key.
In this case, Gubmint can do the most good at the least cost by helping debtors keep their homes and families and the communities dependent on them whole by helping them refinance into manageable loans. Or by helping them get out from under mortgages and homes and back into the rental market with their families and credit intact and communities intact. That minimizes losses and their ripple effects across every town in America, while not letting Buffy and Franklin in the Hamptons off the hook. It requires more and harder work, the road less traveled by Bush and McCain, but would put America on a sounder financial footing. We can then get back to worrying about jobs continuing to depart for Ireland and China, to stopping our foreign wars of choice, helping our Vets, and sorting out everything else bequeathed to us by the Bush dynasty and the neocons.
“In this case, Gubmint can do the most good at the least cost by helping debtors keep their homes and families and the communities dependent on them whole by helping them refinance into manageable loans. Or by helping them get out from under mortgages and homes and back into the rental market with their families and credit intact and communities intact. That minimizes losses and their ripple effects across every town in America….”
you seem to channeling roubini here. check this out:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=858667820
of course, the most obvious – and most moral – solution. which is why we should never expect it from bush et al.
we all need to get on the horn and do our own lobbying of congress, demanding they do as frankprobst suggests and let wall street drown.
Much of many “Farmer’s Markets’” inventories consist of the same imported poor quality produce that large grocery retailers carry. They often carry a niche product or two (my local outfit has decent tomatoes) with most of the rest of their product line being South American and the worst of American lines.
My local farmers’ market is all local, and boy is it good. The guy who does the organic heirloom tomatoes loves to talk about how he farms, and I’m going to visit it next spring before he gets really busy.
Nice reporting on financial incentive – final nail would be if an independent review of the workers comp claim would have resulted in a favorable disposition for the claimant. Also, which official decides who gets this particular contract award?
The Alaskan legislature owes it to our country to come back and address Palin Troopergate; especially, now that it seems McCain camp has successfully “shut” everything down.
The Troopergate Investigation appears to be knocking at the door of Big Time Government Corruption – Evading the Rules of Open, Honest and Fair Government, to instead direct Taxpayer Dollars for Political Gain and Political Expediency.
Murlene Wilkes could be only the tip of the iceberg so far as ‘contracting’ irregularities go.
And, I wouldn’t be surprised, in the least, to see Palin get linked collaboratively to Stevens through the Crony-istic manipulation of the State Purchasing and Contracting Office.
Thanks EW. Troopergate and Andrew Halcro are the gifts that keeps on giving.
How does one assess for them self the necessity of a $700 billion government buyout of the shit pile or whether there is another way to address the problem without writing another blank chack?
Seeing Paulson barnstorming all the Sunday shows reminded me of the fateful aluminum tubes – leaked through the Judy Miller cutout – and mushroom clouds – who can we credit for that?
Come to Jesus, Murlene. Because you can bet your ass you’re going to lose that contract now.
the State is trying to renew Harbor Adjustment’s contract for over $300,000 per year (1.5 million dollars) over the life of the contract, more than the next highest bidder.
Someone donate some writing classes to that guy.
My understanding of public works contracts is that the financial incentive is bigger than $300,000. Generally, unless there is reason to do otherwise, the low bidder is awarded the contract. If the low bidder were awarded the contract, Harbor would not only not have gotten the $300,000.00 they would not have gotten any money at all. So, the question is, what public good was served by awarding the contract to someone who is $300,000 higher. For instance, was the low bidder a financially unstable question. Awarding or attempting to award a contract to a firm because they helped you with your personal vendettas is abuse of power and not in the legitimate public good. However, from Harbor’s standpoint, getting that good will to be awarded a contract despite not being the low bidder seems like a financial
incentive to deny Wooten the claim.Also the contract leaves an audit trail, including an award spreadsheet, award justification and signature trail.
Silly me. I remember when a politician’s blatant self-dealing, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of scarce tax dollars, was grounds for derision and contempt, recall or impeachment. Palin and her McSame Minders seem eager to dole it out as if it were standard operating procedure, a Bush era rite, a financial prima nocta, with taxpayers as the bride.
Obama may not look like William Wallace, but the peasantry bestirring itself, causing the GOP’ers to metaphorically quake in their silk slippers and golf shoes, would seem to be a healthy thing for the body politic.
Juan Cole let’s it rip today, making Glennzilla seem like a puppy. In an articulate tirade against the neocons and the Bush years, he describes the longing for McBush as masochistic erotic asphyxiation. A snippet on the Bush Bailout:
http://www.juancole.com/
A good example of why certain governmental functions should not be privatized.
I know – his handle is FormerFed – can’t trust anything those people say.
But there really are things that a government employee should handle rather than contract it out. There are different rules and different attitudes involved.
Government employees understand their role as the shepherds of the taxpayers money. (at least this is what I’ve seen in the local employees I work closely with, and in my former life as a Dept of Ed contractor in DC). That’s the critical difference I think. The public good does not always factor into the profit motive.
A settlement on terms is already being reported… how that have happened so fast?
AP: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s…..TE=DEFAULT
Easy. The mating dance was effectively choreographed ahead of time, just like it was in FISA. Both sides knew the soft center where they could pull this shit off, both knew that their respective sides would demand some ideological battle, so they stake out their somewhat polar positions so they could quickly come to “a resolution” they can slam down our throat. Works every time on the duped public. We are idiots.
& bmaz,
I think there’s no settlement yet.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26836295
just a quick driveby – wanted to make sure everyone knows about the hearing tomorrow with bernanke and paulson, as well as Cox (SEC) and Lockhart (FHFA), who will be testifying before the senate banking committee at 9:30am. webstream available on their website and c-span3 (confirmed by phone with both the committee and c-span).
wednesday there will be a similar hearing with the house financial services committee.
i’ll post this again tonight at the mother ship and in the am.
OT on the bailout: Paulson says no deal. Here’s a newsflash to Paulson and Wall Street: It’s not a “deal”. It’s a “life preserver”. You’re not in a position to negotiate here. If you don’t want it, feel free to drown.
Revising and adapting my previous edit of the McCain campaign theme:
Country First > Crony First > Cover-up First
1,773 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen emptywheel and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
This old lutefisk eater has been yellin’ at the top of his lungs that the Palin story is really all about the Alaskan Independence Party and the ownership of the sovereign state of Alaska by Exxon Mobil. What we are seein’ in Palin’s elevation to the VP candidacy is the split between the old Republican Party elite (old eastern bankin money) and the corporate fascists (read oil money)who have taken complete control of the party since 1980. Exxon owns the Alaska Independence Party and they used the Independence Party base ta run Palin against the old Republican machine after they bankrupted those same folks. When Palin was elected they bought off the rest of the electorate with increased payoffs from the increase in the price of oil.
Now the Alaska Independence Party is a krypto fascist bunch who are ideologically unAmerican and have more in common, ideologically, with the Old Confederacy or the Aryan Nation than with either the Republican or Democratic Party. It’s right out there in the open folks, let’s keep our eyes on the target, Palin was chosen because she represents the fascist junta that has been runnin our country since 2000 and her history in office as mayor and governor are a libretto for the opera the fascists have in store for us.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE FUCKIN’ AMMUNITION, THIS IS THE LAST BATTLE!!
Bingo!
Do the Alaska investigators plan on questioning anyone else? Who needs the Palin gang, when there seem to be so many available players to set up the likely scenario under the right questioning…
Let the Palins hang out in the wind while they stack up evidence. Sounds like the story is juicy enough that the MSM will even cover it, despite the Palin gang’s conspicuous absence.
I say, “Alaska,GO FOR IT!” start the investigation sans-Palins, to great public fanfare, and ceremonioulsy reveal the evidence for all the world to watch.
…can someone do a new Sarah Palin popularity poll in Alaska for us? …after about a week of her detractors lining up to spill the beans about her egregious “expreience” as both a mayor and Governor in Alaska.
She’s burned every bridge to nowhere she ever might have built, and stepped on more fingers than toes in her ambitious scramble to the top of the ladder, so there is no lack of detractors.
It’s important not to adopt the actions of the D.C. Democrats as a standard by which to judge Steve Branchflower, who appears to have a handle on how to manage this situation. Branchflower appears to be savvy, and not easily intimidated.
When stonewalled, he didn’t whine, didn’t bargain, didn’t cave and, most important, didn’t accept delay. Like any good investigator, he recognizes that the investigative picture will always be somewhat incomplete. He has simply taken note of the fact that x, y and z won’t be providing new testimony and moved on. He appears to have taken note of line from the Stones, which might be the investigator’s creed: “You can’t always get what, but if you try sometime, you just might find, you get what you need.”
Recall that the investigation was underway before McCain Inc took over; Branchflower no doubt has a great deal of information, probably plenty to make out a basic case of abuse of authority. The smart investigator in this situation simply presents what he can dead solid prove or solidly infer. He notes at each point that opportunity was presented to the target of the investigation to explain or provide context, and that, at each point and at their option, they refused. The investigator can also do the old ‘I support the 5th Amendment’ thing, which is, of course, a backdoor way of pointing out that the investigating party is, in essence, ‘taking the 5th’ (call it refusal to honor a subpeona, tomato, tomahto).
Of course McCain et al will go nuts, characterize the investigation as a witchhunt, and (as hypocrisy is no barrier at all to this crowd) complain bitterly that the findings don’t contain the defense or context (which, of course, they refused to provide). Branchflower can and, I believe, will anticipate that, and be careful to mention at each point that Palin, staff or spouse wouldn’t provide testimony, documents or emails in their own defense. He will, I bet, make a version of that statement in virtually every paragraph of his findings.
Properly configured, the report will be just as effective as if Palin and pals had testified.
Am not quite sure where you have such knowledge of Branchflower from, but hope you are right. However, in a civil matter, which this most certainly is, it is well established that the trier of fact is permitted to make negative inferences from refusal to testify (your 5th Amendment argument) so it is not even necessary to hint, he can flat out infer if he so wishes.
i’ve actually seen references to interviews with him (days ago; not sure i could find them), and i got the same impression. if i’m not mistaken, he may have already said something about none of this looking good for her.
hm, not likely anyone is still feeding this thread, but this is an interesting graphic of the various bailouts over the last 30+ years:
http://www.propublica.org/spec…..t-bailouts
take note; this lists 13 since 1970. of those 13, only ONE occurred during a democratic administration (carter signed the bailout of chrysler).
the repugs whine about welfare….