An incredibly bad idea

2004 Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry has been accused of having questionable judgment on certain matters. But if the following piece from The New York Post’s Page Six of November 18 is true, this would take the cake in the bad judgment department:

LIBERAL loser John Kerry might be planning to strike back at John O’Neill, the “Unfit for Command” author who claims some of the credit for Kerry’s defeat, sources say.
In the book, published by Regnery not long before the election, O’Neill ? who, like Kerry, commanded swift boats in Vietnam ? attacked Kerry’s war record and branded him a traitor.
O’Neill sold over 800,000 copies and his group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, raised $25 million to battle the Kerry campaign and ran TV ads trashing the candidate. Former Sen. Bob Dole endorsed the group.
O’Neill says he wrote the book because Kerry called his fellow Vietnam vets monsters, terrorists and war criminals, for which he has never apologized. Kerry has called O’Neill’s charges lies, though he made some of the comments in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1971.
“I will leave it to the professionals to decide whether we played a crucial role in defeating Kerry, but I am very satisfied,” O’Neill crowed to the London Sunday Telegraph days after George W. Bush’s victory.
The paper reported Kerry was “furious” at staffers who advised him not to fight back against O’Neill and noted that the nominee was “enraged” over the book.
Now, “the Kerry camp is thinking about filing a libel lawsuit against Regnery and O’Neill,” a source close to the candidate’s inner circle tells PAGE SIX. “I don’t know if they will actually go forward, but consideration is serious. If Kerry plans on running again in 2008 ? and I’m hearing he will ? it would make sense that he’d file the suit.”
Kerry’s rep, David Wade, said he hadn’t heard about any proposed lawsuit, but promised to look into it.
“It would be a lot smarter of Kerry to just apologize,” O’Neill told PAGE SIX. “No lawsuits are going to change the testimony he gave and the impact it had on POWs.”

This defamation lawsuit idea was actually trotted out during the Presidential campaign. “Noted” legal scholar, John Dean — the convicted felon who somehow crafted his legacy of testifying to Congress against his client (former President Richard M. Nixon) into a job as an expert legal commentator — wrote this article opining that Senator Kerry would have a pretty good defamation claim against Mr. O’Neill, who is a longtime and well-regarded Houston attorney.
An unsolicited piece of advice for Senator Kerry — if you thought that the Swift Boat Vets’ accusations were bad and things could not get any worse, then go ahead and sue John O’Neill. That will likely generate a nightmare of Biblical proportions for you. Mr. O’Neill was reasonably effective as an advocate against you during the campaign even though he was out of his element on the public stage. However, Mr. O’Neill is quite comfortable and completely in his element inside a courtroom. Trust me on that one.

The Old Ball Coach is headed to Augusta National . . . er, I mean, South Carolina

This Washington Post article confirms that former University of Florida and Washington Redskins football coach Steve Spurrier is headed to the University of South Carolina to replace Lou Holtz as football coach there. South Carolina apparently sealed the deal with Coach Spurrier — who does not allow his coaching duties to get in the way of playing golf — in the following manner:

Spurrier, 59, agreed to the deal Wednesday, after he and his agent, Jimmy Sexton, met with Holtz and South Carolina alumnus William “Hootie” Johnson at Augusta National Golf Club, where Johnson is chairman . . .
Sources close to Spurrier have said Johnson’s role at Augusta National and Spurrier’s desire to be a member at the exclusive club approximately 70 miles from Columbia, S.C., were a factor in the coach’s decision. Holtz is also a member at the club and Johnson is a former Gamecock fullback. Spurrier received a tour of the club’s facilities Wednesday.

Continental requests employee concessions

Houston-based Continental Airlines — one of the city’s largest employers — announced Thursday that it is asking employees for reductions in pay and benefits effective Feb. 28 of next year as a part of a plan to reduce its annual costs by half a billion dollars.
Continental expects the savings to be generated from a combination of productivity enhancements, benefits changes and wage reductions with each employee group. The cuts would be in addition to $1.1 billion in annual cost savings and revenue enhancements that Continental announced previously this year.
However, even with the cuts, Continental does not expect to return to profitability unless there is a change in the current economic conditions that are depressing the airline industry. Continental has lost about $160 million through the first three quarters of this year and will likely lose more in the fourth quarter. All airlines have been coping with a glut of seats and high fuel prices over the past year, and traditional hub-and-spoke carriers such as Continental have been facing increased competition from discount airlines such as JetBlue Airways and Southwest Airlines. Although relatively healthy in comparison to the reeling legacy airlines, Continental is the last of the “big six” hub-and-spoke airlines to request such employee concessions after the terrorist attacks of 2001 on New York and Washington.
As a part of the plan, Continental President and Chief Operating Officer Larry Kellner agreed to cut both his base salary and annual and long-term performance compensation by 25% effective Feb. 28. Mr. Kellner will replace Gordon Bethune as chairman and CEO of Continental at the end of this year. Likewise, other top Continental management personnel will take similar reductions in compensation and benefits as a part of the plan.

More on playing both sides off against the middle in Washington

This Washington Post article follows up on this earlier post regarding Congressional hearings over Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff and public relations consultant Michael Scanlon‘s shenanigans in 2002 involving the Tigua Indian Tribe’s casino in El Paso.
Playing both sides off against the middle, Messrs. Abramoff and Scanlon originally worked with conservative religious activist Ralph Reed to help the State of Texas shut down the Indian tribe’s casino, and then Messrs. Abramoff and Scanlon’s turned around and persuaded the the tribe to pay them $4.2 million to try to get Congress to reopen it. Messrs. Abramoff and Scanlon are now embroiled in Congressional and grand jury investigations over an incredible $82 million in lobbying and public relations fees they collected from six tribes that operate gambling casinos.
By the way, Mr. Scanlon, 34 is a former aide to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, whose name seems to be bandied about in just about every Congressional scandal in Washington or Austin these days.
Charles Kuffner has been all over this story, so check out his blog for more analysis of the situation.

The Lord of Tax Havens

This NY Times article interviews Jerome Schneider, who for the past 20 years or so made a fortune setting up offshore banks and phony investments in tax havens such as the Cayman Islands, Grenada, Montserratt, Vanuatu, the Cook Islands, and the Pacific Island of Nauru to assist wealthy U.S. citizens in avoiding income taxes.
His handbook, “The Complete Guide to Offshore Money Havens,” became quite popular among wealthy folks who are willing to take such risks. The 2000 edition of the book even carried an endorsement from Louisiana Republican Representative Billy Tauzin, who also spoke at a conferences in which Mr. Schneider promoted his tax evasion schemes.
In at least the understatement of the month, a spokesman for Mr. Tauzin conceded that Mr. Tauzin’s involvement with Mr. Schneider was “a stupid mistake.”
Well, the gig is up for Mr. Schneider, who pled guilty in February to conspiring to help his clients evade the tax laws. And those who invested with Mr. Schneider just might receive an invitation of sorts soon:

Mr. Schneider, who pleaded guilty in February to conspiring to help his clients evade the tax laws, said that he expected “every single one” of his clients to be prosecuted or sued for the taxes they evaded. He said clients sought to evade taxes on incomes ranging from $100,000 to $40 million, though most were from a third to half a million dollars.

Some of those who benefitted from Mr. Schneider’s schemes could prove to be fairly interesting:

[Mr. Schnieder] said that all his clients had two things in common – they were rich and they wanted to escape taxes.
Most of the nation’s major accounting firms worked with one or another of his clients, he said, and he named two law firms that he said were central to his business.
He said one prominent actress sent money to the United International Bank in Nauru, which he said he created. He said the actress paid $50,000 for a legal opinion asserting that the arrangement was legal.
Mr. Schneider also said that in 1988 he arranged for a prominent motivation coach to place $250,000 in an offshore bank without reporting the money to the I.R.S.
In addition, Mr. Schneider said that a billionaire media businessman, one of several clients who he said were on the Forbes 400 list of the wealthiest Americans, sent $40 million to a sham bank in Nauru to pay for a nut-processing company in 1994.

What is perhaps most amazing about Mr. Schneider’s scheme is how long it took federal authorities to investigate Mr. Schneider, even after he plopped the basis for such an investigation in their lap:

The Senate Permanent Investigations subcommittee called Mr. Schneider as a witness in 1983 hearings on offshore tax evasion, and two years later the Comptroller of the Currency warned American banks about dealing with some of the offshore banks Mr. Schneider created.
Mr. Schneider said his undoing began the day more than a decade ago when he asked Jack Blum, a former United States Senate investigator, to speak at one of his offshore seminars. Mr. Blum, who specializes in exposing international financial crimes, wrote a letter to the Justice Department that prompted the investigation that led to Mr. Schneider’s guilty plea.
Mr. Blum said, “That Schneider could operate openly for years, buying ads in the Wall Street Journal and the American Airlines flight magazine, shows the utter failure of tax law enforcement.” He said law enforcement had known about Mr. Schneider for years, but failed to act.
The I.R.S., in court papers, said it began investigating Mr. Schneider in 1997, 14 years after his Senate testimony, because of the letter from Mr. Blum. It took five more years to obtain an indictment.

Oh well, better late than never. Read the entire article.

The 2004 Scientific American 50 Award

You can review them here.

Enron pipeline sales close

Enron Corp.‘s liquidating chapter 11 plan accelerated on Wednesday when the company closed the $2 billion sale of its prized remaining assets — its interest in three natural gas pipelines.
Enron’s Bankruptcy Court approved the sale in September of Enron’s interest in the three natural gas pipelines to CCE Holdings LLC, a joint venture of Southern Union Co. and a unit of GE Commercial Finance. CCE Holdings will assume $430 million in debt as a part of the deal.
A $1.25 billion sale of Portland General Electric, which is Enron’s Pacific Northwest utility, is still up in the air pending regulatory approval. If approved, a Texas Pacific Group-backed holding company will acquire the utility and assume $1.1 billion in debt.
Once the Portland General deal closes, the scraps of Enron will become Prisma Energy International Inc., which will own Enron’s remaining pipeline and power assets. When that happens and sufficient claims objections have been resolved (probably sometime in mid to late 2005), Enron will begin distributing dividends to its unsecured creditors. The total amount to be distributed is expected to be approximately $12 billion comprised of 92% in cash and 8% in Prisma stock. That computes to about a 20% dividend on unsecured claims against Enron.
Meanwhile, the Enron name will live on primarily for the benefit of lawyers, who will continue to pursue litigation claims on behalf of the Enron estate for years to come.

TigerHawk pans the St. Regis

The St. Regis Hotel near the Galleria better watch out — the TigerHawk is not pleased.
TigerHawk and other business travelers, next time that you need to stay in that area of Houston, I recommend either The Omni Hotel off of Woodway (which has high speed internet access in all of its rooms) or The Houstonian, but note that the Houstonian has high speed internet access in only their third and fourth floor rooms. Both are better bets than the St. Regis.

Enron’s legal tab

This Atlanta Constitution-Journal (free registration required) article takes the first stab at an issue that deserves more scrutiny — the nearly $1 billion legal fee tab that the attorneys involved in the Enron chapter 11 case are charging the estate in that case:

The lead law firm, Weil, Gotshal & Manges of New York, is seeking $158 million in fees and expenses. Some New York lawyers are charging $15 a minute ? $900 an hour ? for their work. And other law firms have billed hundreds of dollars an hour for time their lawyers spent reading newspapers to keep up with the case.

One of [Atlanta’s] most venerable law firms, Alston & Bird, has billed Enron nearly $90 million for its 18-month examination of the company’s bankruptcy.
If that number seems staggering, consider this: Just preparing its bills in the case took Alston & Bird employees nearly 1,700 hours, for which the firm billed $496,000, according to documents filed with the bankruptcy court.

All told, more than 200 Alston & Bird lawyers, many billing at least $500 an hour, worked on the Enron examination, according to documents the law firm filed with the court. Nineteen of the firm’s attorneys submitted bills for more than $1 million apiece in legal fees.
Eighty-nine of the firm’s paralegals, librarians, analysts and clerks worked on the Enron case. The firm’s lawyers and support staff calculated they spent 264,332 hours on the examination, . . .

The professionals interviewed in the story fall over themselves defending the amount of fees incurred in the Enron case, and the reporter does not try to challenge their assertions much. Certainly the Enron case justified some premium over the normal legal cost of a typical large chapter 11 case because of the size and emergency nature of the case. Moreover, the fact that the Enron Bankruptcy Judge in New York declined early in the case to transfer venue of the case to Houston also contributed to the high cost attributable to attorneys’ fees. Those $900 per hour fees that were routinely approved in New York likely would not have passed muster in Houston.
Nevertheless, the $1 billion legal tab to date is scandalous, and is particularly galling because that tab does not include the additional legal cost that lawyers will incur in the future pursuing claims on behalf of the Enron estate. Moreover, apart from the attorneys’ fees charged to the Enron estate, there are hundreds of millions of additional charges attributable to other professionals (such as accountants and management and investment banking experts) that are being charged to the Enron estate. It would not surprise me to see the ultimate legal tab attributable to lawyers feeding from the Enron trough to climb another 25% before the case is closed.
Here’s hoping that an enterprising investigative reporter or law professor takes on this subject. My sense is that an objective cost-benefit analysis would reflect that the value of benefits truly derived for the Enron estate from the high legal cost incurred is far less than the attorneys involved in the case would lead us to believe.