Group sues NLRB for Boeing documents

A conservative legal watchdog group has sued the National Labor Relations Board for documents related to its case against airplane manufacturer Boeing that the panel has been hesitant to release.
Washington-based Judicial Watch announced Tuesday that it was filing the suit under the Freedom of Information Act in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The group said it submitted a FOIA request to the NLRB last month and has not received the documents.

Judicial Watch, like Republican critics of the lawsuit in Congress, argues that the NLRB’s case against Boeing is politically motivated.

“With its July 14, 2011, FOIA request and related lawsuit Judicial Watch seeks records of internal communications between officials, officers, and employees of the NLRB related to Boeing and the agency’s decision to file a lawsuit,” Judicial Watch said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. “Judicial Watch also seeks records of communication between the NLRB and the Obama White House, the Internal Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, the AFL-CIO, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and any other third party trade union, among others.”

---

The NLRB’s complaint against Boeing argues that the company decided to build a plant in South Carolina — a right-to-work state — to retaliate for labor strikes at its existing facilities in Washington state. 

The case is before an administrative law judge in Seattle now, and the NLRB has resisted efforts to compel the release of some documents because of concerns about affecting the fairness of the proceedings.

Over the objection of Democrats, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) — chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee — has issued subpoenas for documents related to the case, making similar arguments to Judicial Watch.

Issa called the NLRB a “rogue agency” when the panel replied to his subpoena with its concerns about protecting the case.

“The National Labor Relations Board and Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon have thus far failed to comply with a lawful subpoena,” Issa said in a statement released by his office last week. “This refusal by NLRB to abide by the law further heightens concerns that this is a rogue agency acting improperly.”

In a letter to Issa written in response to the subpoenas, the NLRB argued they were unnecessary because the agency has cooperated with Issa’s investigation.

“To date, this office has provided the committee with more than 1,500 pages of documents that should provide sufficient information to allow the committee to assess the legal merit of the Boeing complaint,” Solomon wrote to Issa. “This office has repeatedly pledged to provide information in a manner that protects the rights of the parties to the case. In keeping with our commitment, today we are providing the committee with more than 4,300 pages of additional documents now available to all parties.”

Solomon added that the NLRB was “gravely concerned about the adverse effect any premature release of certain documents subject to the subpoena would have on the rights of the parties to this case to have a fair trial.”

The NLRB did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the Judicial Watch lawsuit Tuesday.

Boeing opened the new plant at issue in June in Charleston, S.C. The company plans to build 787s at the facility, but if the NLRB complaint is ultimately successful, the company could be forced to build them in Seattle instead.


The case before the administrative law judge in Seattle is expected to last several weeks.

TSA changes pat-down rules for children

Bowing to criticism, the Transportation Security Administration said Thursday that it will no longer automatically require pat-downs for children under 12 years old who trigger security concerns.
“As part of our ongoing effort to get smarter about security, Administrator Pistole has made a policy decision to give security officers more options for resolving screening anomalies with young children and we are working to operationalize his decision in airports," TSA spokesman Nicholas Kimball said in a written statement. "This decision will ultimately reduce - though not eliminate - pat downs of children.”
Already widely criticized for the controversial airport security technique, the TSA has come under increased fire after reports surfaced that its officers patted down a 6-year-old girl and an 8-month-old.

In a Senate hearing Wednesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) took the agency to task for the child pat-downs.

"This isn’t to say we don’t believe in safety procedures, but I think I feel less safe when you’re doing these invasive exams on a 6-year-old," Paul said to TSA Administrator John Pistole during a hearing on the security of railway systems.

"It makes me think you’re clueless that you think she’s going to attack our country and that you’re not doing your research on the people who would attack our country," Paul continued. 

Pistole responded that it was difficult to rule out passengers as potential terrorists solely based on their age.

"Unfortunately we know terrorists have used children under 12 years old as suicide bombers in other locations," he said. "Not in aviation, but there's been two 10-year-olds used. We've also know the two grandparents — one grandmother, one grandfather, 64 years old in both situations — have been used." 

Photos and videos of TSA agents patting down children have gone viral on the Internet. The agency has said their workers followed existing procedures.

Senate kills off ethanol tax credits in possible break with tax pledge

The Senate voted 73-27 Thursday to kill a major tax break that benefits the ethanol industry, handing a political win to a bipartisan group of lawmakers that call the incentive needless and expensive.


The vote also could have ramifications on future votes to reduce the deficit. Much of the GOP conference supported Feinstein's bill even though it does not include another tax break to offset the elimination of the ethanol tax credit. As such, the vote could also represent a setback for influential conservative Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), who said a vote for the plan would violate the anti-tax pledge most Republicans have signed unless paired with a separate tax-cutting amendment.

Thirty-three Republicans and 38 Democrats supported the measure along with both of the chamber's Independents, who caucus with Democrats.
Fourteen Republicans and 13 Democrats voted against it.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein's (D-Calif.) measure – which mirrors a bill she offered with Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) – was approved despite opposition from Corn Belt lawmakers who are seeing political support for ethanol wane.


Coburn said the vote sends "a good signal" to ongoing talks to raise the nation's debt ceiling while reducing deficits. He also said he was sure it would be on the table in the deficit-reduction talks led by Vice President Biden.
Feinstein's amendment to an economic development bill would quickly end the credit of 45 cents for each gallon of ethanol that fuel blenders mix into gasoline.
The credit led to $5.4 billion in foregone revenue last year, according to the Government Accountability Office.
The amendment also ends the 54-cent per gallon import tariff that protects the domestic ethanol industry.


Thursday’s vote was a turnaround from Tuesday, when just 40 senators voted for Coburn’s identical amendment, well shy of the 60 needed to advance it.
But the politics of Tuesday’s battle were clouded by Democratic anger at Coburn’s surprise procedural move last week that set up the vote. Democratic leaders had whipped against the amendment heading into Tuesday’s vote, but two aides said they did not do so ahead of the vote Thursday.
The vote is also tied up in a battle among conservatives about whether Republicans who voted with Feinstein and Coburn had abandoned ATR’s anti-tax pledge that most Republicans have signed. Thirty-four Republicans voted in favor of Coburn's amendment on Tuesday, which signaled many Republicans saw the ethanol tax credit as wasteful and were willing to kill it.
The Club for Growth lobbied in favor of the measure and said senators who voted for it deserved credit for ridding the tax code of "market-distorting tax credits and subsidies."
Norquist had said voting for Coburn would not be a violation of the tax pledge if the amendment paired with Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-S.C.) amendment that would repeal the estate tax and end the national renewable fuels mandate. But a vote on DeMint's amendment has not been scheduled.
"As long as the Taxpayer Protection Pledge signers that voted for the Feinstein/Coburn amendment also vote for the DeMint amendment, they will be in keeping wit the pledge they made to their constituents," ATR said in a statement. "Taken together, this elimination of favoritism toward ethanol is not a violation of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), on the Senate floor Wednesday night, said the agreement to have a vote on the Feinstein plan “does not preclude the Senate from considering his amendment.”
DeMint, an ally of Norquist, pledged Thursday to use every tool possible to secure a vote on his amendment.
The politics of ethanol are more regional than partisan, and ethanol backers are floating plans aimed at thwarting efforts to kill the incentives outright.
Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) – joined by other ethanol allies – are floating legislation that would end the 45-cent per gallon ethanol blender’s credit (which along with the import tariff is slated to expire at year’s end), but maintain a smaller and “variable” blender’s credit for three years when oil prices are below certain levels.


It would steer some savings from ending the credit to deficit reduction while also extending credits for cellulosic ethanol production, small ethanol producers, and installing alternative fuel pumps.
Despite the vote, Feinstein is still seeking to negotiate with industry supporters. Feinstein said that she and Coburn are meeting with Thune and Klobuchar, noting they are "trying to see if there is a compromise in this thing that does what we need to do vis-a-vis deficit reduction and in some way eases it a bit."
Coburn said Reid had offered ethanol supporters a vehicle to try and move a plan that would seek to boost ethanol infrastructure and cellulosic ethanol, a next-wave fuel.
While the White House supports including tax increases as part of a plan to reduce the budget deficit, it supported the ethanol tax credits.
It issued a statement this week against killing the blender’s credit outright while acknowledging that reforms are needed. 
“With respect to incentives, the administration is open to new approaches that meet today’s challenges and save taxpayers money. We oppose a straight repeal of the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit,” White House spokesman Clark Stevens said this week.
The 14 Republican senators voting against Feinstein's amendment were Sens. Roy Blunt (Mo.), Saxby Chambliss (Ga.), Daniel Coats (Ind.), Thad Cochran (Miss.), Chuck Grassley (Iowa), John Hoeven (N.D.), Mike Johanns (Neb.), Mark Kirk (Ill.), Richard Lugar (Ind.), Jerry Moran (Kan.), Rob Portman (Ohio), Pat Roberts (Kan.) , John Thune (S.D.), and Roger Wicker (Miss.).
The ethanol industry fared better on a second vote. Lawmakers voted 41-59 against Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) amendment to prohibit use of federal funds to build ethanol blender pumps or storage facilities.

Pelosi's wealth grows by 62 percent

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) saw her net worth rise 62 percent last year, cementing her status as one of the wealthiest members of Congress.
Pelosi was worth at least $35.2 million in the 2010 calendar year, according to a financial disclosure report released Wednesday. She reported a minimum of $43.4 million in assets and about $8.2 milion in liabilities.
For 2009, Pelosi reported a minimum net worth of $21.7 million. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) also remained a multimillionaire. He reported that his minimum net worth in 2010 was close to $2.1 million, with zero liabilities. His 2009 minimum net worth was more than $1.8 million.

Forms disclosing the assets and liabilities of lawmakers for the 2010 calendar year were released Wednesday. The forms give a good estimate of lawmaker wealth, though they show ranges and not precise values for stocks, pension plans, vacation homes and other assets of lawmakers.
Pelosi saw her wealth rise due to some stock gains and real estate investments made by her husband, Paul.
Apple stock owned by Pelosi's spouse rose from at least $500,000 in 2009 to $1 million in 2010. The minority leader's husband also took a bigger stake in Matthews International Capital Management — worth at least $5 million last year, compared to $1 million in 2009 — and his investment in some undeveloped residential real estate in Sacramento, Calif., jumped to at least $5 million in value.
Paul Pelosi also has sizable assets in the United Football League, including $1 million in a partnership interest in a Jacksonville, Fla., franchise and $5 million in a partnership interest for the Sacramento Lions.