Pitfalls seen in growth of part-time work

Although the state's unemployment rate is at its lowest level in almost four years and the number of employed Californians is growing, labor experts see a different reality: Full-time work has faded in many industries.

Nubia Calderón Barillas, 32, left a job in retail in May for a housekeeping job at the Holiday Inn LAX that promised better pay and steady work.

But nearly nine months later, the mother of three said, she rarely works more than two days a week. She has asked for more hours, she said, but to no avail, even in an industry that set a new peak employment level last year.

"It's been difficult lately," she said. "I practically didn't work all of December except for the holidays."

California employers picked up the rate of hiring during 2012 — at times at nearly twice the rate of the country as a whole. But a significant portion of those jobs are less than full time, according to federal data released last week.

The number of people involuntarily working part time nationwide has grown to 7.9 million, an 80% increase from 2006, data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show.

That trend is particularly pronounced in the Golden State, which saw the number of involuntary part-time workers swell to 1.3 million, up 126% from 585,100 in 2006. Only four other states, Nevada and Florida among them, had higher rates of involuntary part-time workers.

Various industries are increasingly relying on part-time workers and other contingent employees, such as temporary workers, to save money, said Michael Bernick, a Milken Institute fellow who studies labor markets.

"As you have more and more costs associated with full-time workers in terms of healthcare or other costs, employers look for alternative ways to reduce costs," Bernick said. "One way is on-demand and part-time work."

The increase isn't limited to industries that typically employ part-time workers, such as leisure and hospitality. Other sectors with strong job growth, such as professional and business services, have also seen a rise in part-time workers as employers aim to keep payroll costs down, Bernick said.

Nationwide, the number of involuntary part-time workers in professional and business services, which includes white-collar occupations such as accountants and lawyers, nearly doubled to 711,000 last year from 367,000 in 2007. A sector-by-sector breakdown is unavailable for California because the sample size of the household survey that the federal data rely on is too small.

Part-time work is common in California's leisure and hospitality sector, which added almost 61,000 jobs since December 2011, accounting for more than a quarter of the state's net jobs created in that time period.

Growth of low-wage industries such as hospitality provides work opportunities for people with limited education, even if the work is only part time, said Jerry Nickelsburg, senior economist at the UCLA Anderson Forecast.

"We shouldn't look with dismay" on the rapid growth of a sector that is so dependent on part-time work, he said. "If that were the only sector we were growing, then that would be worrisome."

Tom Walsh, president of Unite Here Local 11, a union representing hospitality workers in Los Angeles and Orange counties, said in negotiations with employers, his group has pushed for workers' hours to be maximized.

Although full-time work sometimes isn't ensured, Walsh said, employers are urged to give part-time workers as many hours as possible.

"I think it's an example of certain employers being penny wise but pound foolish," he said. "They figure they can save money by having more part-time workers and having low pay. If they don't change that, folks are going to take jobs somewhere else the first chance they get."

The long-term implication of part-time work, economists said, is growing wage disparities and the risk of dampening consumer spending, a major driver of the economy. Part-time workers also are more likely to rely on state aid, such as food stamps, to make ends meet.

Kellie Flowers moved to Los Angeles late last year hoping to find work as an event coordinator or wardrobe stylist.

But full-time work has been elusive, even with a college degree.

The 30-year-old Virginia native managed to land two part-time jobs when she first relocated, one at a Manhattan Beach boutique and the other at a running store.

She earned $10 per hour at both jobs but didn't have benefits or health insurance.

"It was very hard working two jobs," she said. "You definitely don't have any spending money."

Flowers recently started a new job, selling spa packages, on commission. She sells between six to 10 a day, earning $15 for each.

"I'm going to look for other jobs that make me happier. Until then I just need to make money," she said.

Meanwhile, Barillas, the Holiday Inn housekeeper, said she hopes she'll eventually work more hours.

She and her husband are falling behind on utility bills at the one-bedroom Koreatown apartment they share with their three children. She recently applied for food stamps, a decision she said was embarrassing.

"I've always had work," she said. "I used to think people on food stamps just didn't want to work, but now I find myself with the need to ask for help."

ricardo.lopez2@latimes.com

Read More..

Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid shot dead outside home

The Unified Democratic Nationalist Party says Chokri Belaid was shot as he left his house in the capital Tunis. Witnesses say he was taken to a nearby clinic and died. (Hassene Dridi / Associated Press / December 29, 2010)

By Jeffrey Fleishman

February 6, 2013, 3:41 a.m.

CAIRO -- A leading opponent of Tunisia's Islamist-led government was assassinated in front of his home Wednesday, raising fears of sharpening political turmoil in the country that ignited the Arab Spring movement but remains starkly divided between liberals and Islamists.

Chokri Belaid, head of the Unified Democratic Nationalist Party, was shot on his way to work in the capital, Tunis, according to authorities. No one claimed immediate responsibility for the attack, but it comes as Tunisia faces a troubled economy and a restive transition to democracy after decades of dictatorship.  

"This is a criminal act, and act of terrorism not only against Belaid but against the whole of Tunisia," Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali told a radio station. Shortly after the killing, hundreds of protesters gathered outside the Interior Ministry.

An outspoken liberal with a bushy mustache, Belaid often criticized Nahda, the dominant moderate Islamist party for failing to unite the country's political factions. He had accused Ennahda of not clamping down on increasingly violent ultraconservative Salafis from attacking movie houses, art galleries and institutions they deem as against Islam.

Belaid's family told Tunisian media that he had received repeated death threats.

"Chokri Belaid was killed today by four bullets to the head and chest ... doctors told us that he has died. This is a sad day for Tunisia," Ziad Lakhader, a leader of the Popular Front, was quoted as saying to Reuters.

Tunisian President President Moncef Marzouki who was traveling in France said he would cancel a planned trip to Cairo on Thursday and return home.

ALSO:

Bulgarian probe links Hezbollah to Israeli tourist bus attack

Bangladesh war crimes court jails Islamic party leader for life

Ahmadinejad ally linked to human rights abuses arrested in Iran

jeffrey.fleishman@latimes.com

Read More..

Disney working on stand-alone 'Star Wars' films

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Disney is mining The Force for even more new films.

Walt Disney Co. CEO Bob Iger said Tuesday that screenwriters Larry Kasdan and Simon Kinberg are working on stand-alone "Star Wars" movies that aren't part of the new trilogy that's in the works.

"There has been speculation about some standalone films that have been in development, and I can confirm to you today that in fact we are working on a few stand-alone films," Iger told CNBC.

Iger said the movies would be based on "great 'Star Wars' characters that are not part of the overall saga." The films would be released during the six-year period of the new trilogy, which starts in 2015 with "Star Wars: Episode VII."

Disney confirmed last month that "Star Trek" director J.J. Abrams will direct the seventh installment of the "Star Wars" saga.

Disney bought "Star Wars" maker Lucasfilm last year for more than $4 billion.

The last "Star Wars" trilogy, a prequel to the original films, was released from 1999 to 2005.

___

Online:

http://www.starwars.com/

Read More..

Ipswich Journal: Paul Mason Is One-Third the Man He Used to Be

Paul Nixon Photography

Paul Mason in 2012, two years after gastric bypass surgery stripped him of the unofficial title of “the world’s fattest man.”

IPSWICH, England — Who knows what the worst moment was for Paul Mason — there were so many awful milestones, as he grew fatter and fatter — but a good bet might be when he became too vast to leave his room. To get him to the hospital for a hernia operation, the local fire department had to knock down a wall and extricate him with a forklift.

That was nearly a decade ago, when Mr. Mason weighed about 980 pounds, and the spectacle made him the object of fascinated horror, a freak-show exhibit. The British news media, which likes a superlative, appointed him “the world’s fattest man.”

Now the narrative has shifted to one of redemption and second chances. Since a gastric bypass operation in 2010, Mr. Mason, 52 years old and 6-foot-4, has lost nearly two-thirds of his body weight, putting him at about 336 pounds — still obese, but within the realm of plausibility. He is talking about starting a jewelry business.

“My meals are a lot different now than they used to be,” Mr. Mason said during a recent interview in his one-story apartment in a cheerful public housing complex here. For one thing, he no longer eats around the clock. “Food is a necessity, but now I don’t let it control my life anymore,” he said.

But the road to a new life is uphill and paved with sharp objects. When he answered the door, Mr. Mason did not walk; he glided in an electric wheelchair.

And though Mr. Mason looks perfectly normal from the chest up, horrible vestiges of his past stick to him, literally, in the form of a huge mass of loose skin choking him like a straitjacket. Folds and folds of it encircle his torso and sit on his lap, like an unwanted package someone has set there; more folds encase his legs. All told, he reckons, the excess weighs more than 100 pounds.

As he waits to see if anyone will agree to perform the complex operation to remove the skin, Mr. Mason has plenty of time to ponder how he got to where he is. He was born in Ipswich and had a childhood marked by two things, he says: the verbal and physical abuse of his father, a military policeman turned security guard; and three years of sexual abuse, starting when he was 6, by a relative in her 20s who lived in the house and shared his bed. He told no one until decades later.

After he left school, Mr. Mason took a job as a postal worker and became engaged to a woman more than 20 years older than him. “I thought it would be for life, but she just turned around one day and said, ‘No, I don’t want to see you anymore — goodbye,’ ” he said.

His father died, and he returned home to care for his arthritic mother, who was in a wheelchair. “I still had all these things going around in my head from my childhood,” he said. “Food replaced the love I didn’t get from my parents.” When he left the Royal Mail in 1986, he said, he weighed 364 pounds.

Then things spun out of control. Mr. Mason tried to eat himself into oblivion. He spent every available penny of his and his mother’s social security checks on food. He stopped paying the mortgage. The bank repossessed their house, and the council found them a smaller place to live. All the while, he ate the way a locust eats — indiscriminately, voraciously, ingesting perhaps 20,000 calories a day. First he could no longer manage the stairs; then he could no longer get out of his room. He stayed in bed, on and off, for most of the last decade.

Social service workers did everything for him, including changing his incontinence pads. A network of local convenience stores and fast-food restaurants kept the food coming nonstop — burgers, french fries, fish and chips, even about $22 worth of chocolate bars a day.

“They didn’t deliver bags of crisps,” he said of potato chips. “They delivered cartons.”

His life became a cycle: eat, doze, eat, eat, eat. “You didn’t sleep a normal sleep,” he said. “You’d be awake most of the night eating and snacking. You totally forgot about everything else. You lose all your dignity, all your self-respect. It all goes, and all you focus on is getting your next fix.”

He added, “It was quite a lonely time, really.”

He got infections a lot and was transported to the hospital — first in a laundry van, then on the back of a truck and finally on the forklift. For 18 months after a hernia operation in 2003, he lived in the hospital and in an old people’s home — where he was not allowed to leave his room — while the local government found him a house that could accommodate all the special equipment he needed.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: February 6, 2013

The headline on an earlier version of this article misstated Paul Mason’s current weight relative to what he weighed nearly a decade ago. He is now about one-third, not two-thirds, the weight he was then.

Read More..

Congress' horse-and-buggy computer laws

As martyrs go, Aaron Swartz was an extraordinary example of the breed. A computer programming genius, he had helped develop the social networking site Reddit and became known as a leading advocate for easy and free information sharing on the Web.

When Swartz committed suicide in January, while awaiting trial on federal computer hacking charges that could have landed him in prison for 35 years and cost him fines of $1 million, his death was seen as a reproach to overzealous federal prosecutors in Boston. But the case raises a broader issue: Why is Congress so awful at writing computer and Internet laws?

Swartz was indicted in 2011 under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, a 1984 law that has struggled to keep up with the times. It's been amended seven times and is more outdated than ever. The charges stemmed from his efforts to allegedly break into MIT's computer network and use it to download millions of academic articles kept by JSTOR, a nonprofit, fee-based service. Legitimate MIT users could access JSTOR articles for free. (JSTOR advocated dropping the case, but MIT did not.)

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, or CFAA, may be the worst of the statutes Congress has passed or debated as ways to address what is vaguely shoveled into a bin labeled "computer crime." But others are nearly as frightful. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or DMCA, of 1998 imposes excessive civil and criminal penalties for activities engaged in by many users of digital books, movies and music in the real world.

In 2011, Congress contemplated a bill called the Stop Online Piracy Act, or SOPA, which would have given the owners of supposedly pirated or counterfeited property nuclear-scale weapons to use against websites they didn't like, by allowing them to simply assert rights infringement to shut down a site. SOPA was derailed by an online campaign spearheaded by, among others, Aaron Swartz.

The three laws had much in common. They were written broadly, in a fruitless effort to "future-proof" them against new technologies. They imposed excessive penalties, on the reasoning that if a crime is bad, it's much worse when committed with these mysterious devices called computers. And they offered special interests such as copyright claimants, corporations facing trade competition, and media conglomerates opportunities to assert new legal rights they were denied in the world of old technologies.

"Congress tries to write technology-neutral laws," says Jennifer Granick, an Internet law expert at Stanford, "but there's been a wholesale change in how we interact with computers" that renders these laws quickly anachronistic.

Clever lawyers and aggressive prosecutors often rush in to fill the gaps. The DMCA was originally aimed to discourage hackers from copying code-protected DVDs; but it's been cited by a garage door-opener company against a rival making universal clickers, and by desktop printer makers against knock-off toner cartridges. (Both those efforts failed in court, but the potential for expansive interpretation remains.) The recording industry threatened to prosecute Princeton computer expert Edward Felten under the DMCA if he reported publicly on how he had broken the industry's digital protection technology — an effort he undertook at the industry's invitation. The threat prompted Felten to withdraw a planned public presentation.

By imposing extra penalties for using a computer to do things that have traditionally been handled in civil court, "these broader laws have criminalized things that are of dubious criminality," Granick told me.

The CFAA is a perfect example. The measure was written as a cyberspace analogue to trespass laws. Its broadest provision says that anyone who intentionally "exceeds authorized access and thereby obtains information from any protected computer" has committed a federal crime.

This is a wide-open definition that prosecutors have used very aggressively. A "protected computer," by Justice Department definition, can be almost anything with a microchip, including your Internet-savvy refrigerator or your car. "Unauthorized access" could mean viewing a website in violation of its terms of use, that mass of impenetrable legalese that most of us click on blithely without reading, just to use the site. Do that to obtain or read any "information," and you've committed a federal crime.

If you think this is an alarmist interpretation, consider the Lori Drew case — the "poster child" for CFAA overreaching, in the words of Orin Kerr, a Georgetown University cyber-law expert who argued Drew's side. She was the Missouri mother who was accused of helping set up a fake Myspace page to bully a classmate of her daughter. The classmate later committed suicide. Since there is no federal cyber-bullying statute, prosecutors charged Drew under the CFAA for violating the Myspace terms of use, which requires users to provide only accurate information about themselves. A Los Angeles jury found her guilty.

Los Angeles District Judge George Wu overturned the verdict, observing that a website's term of use, which can be altered without notice, are too flimsy to carry the weight of criminal liability, and almost never enforced by the website. But as Kerr notes, federal prosecutors have not abandoned their expansive interpretation despite its obvious absurdities: Until they were changed in March 2012, Google's terms of service required users to be of "legal age," meaning that a middle school child conducting a Google search was theoretically committing a federal crime. So are users of dating websites who exaggerate their good points, in violation of terms of use requiring rigorous accuracy about their height, weight, physical condition and charm.

The law places a powerful weapon in the hands of employers, who routinely forbid workers from using their computers for personal business. "The computer gives employees new ways to procrastinate by chatting with friends, playing games, shopping or watching sports highlights," wrote Appellate Judge Alex Kosinski in a ringing denunciation of the CFAA last year. "Under the broad interpretation of the CFAA, such minor dalliances would become federal crimes." Kosinski's ruling upheld the dismissal of CFAA charges against a corporate headhunter who used information from his old employer's computer system to start a competing company.

Efforts are underway in Congress to pare back the CFAA. Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) has proposed a draft "Aaron's Law," which would ban prosecutions based strictly on violations of a website's terms of service or an employer's policies. She would also make clear that tweaking a computer's digital signature — as Swartz did to conceal his identity in a weeks-long cat-and-mouse game with MIT network overseers — is not in itself a crime.

Yet nothing in Lofgren's bill would address the fundamental problem of Congress writing nonsensically broad laws to govern cyberspace and letting the Justice Department work out the kinks. But prosecutors always agitate for more discretion and stiffer penalties, Kerr says; that's how we end up with criminal penalties for lying about one's age on a dating site.

It's also how Swartz gets threatened with 35 years in jail for downloading academic papers that MIT students could access for free. The prosecutors' goal was to pressure him to take a plea, but the instrument was put in their hands by a Congress that couldn't be bothered to educate itself about the real world of computers and networks before legislating about it. That's the type of legislating that has to change to avoid more cases like Swartz's.

Michael Hiltzik's column appears Sundays and Wednesdays. Reach him at mhiltzik@latimes.com, read past columns at latimes.com/hiltzik, check out facebook.com/hiltzik and follow @latimeshiltzik on Twitter.

Read More..

GOP lawmakers want probe of Cal Fire over off-budget account

State Republican legislators want federal prosecutors to investigate the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection for putting $3.6 million from legal settlements into an off-budget account.

"This subterfuge money has been spent on a wide array of questionable expenditures that has nothing to do with reimbursing the state for firefighting costs," the legislators wrote in a Friday letter to Gov. Jerry Brown, asking him to request an investigation by the U.S. attorney.

The letter follows a story in The Times that found that from 2005 to 2012, Cal Fire, as the department is commonly known, placed funds with the California District Attorneys Assn. to use for training and equipment. Cal Fire regulations say the money is supposed to be sent to the state general fund.

The legislators said the state attorney general had authorized sending the money to the California District Attorneys Assn. Brown served as attorney general from 2007 to 2011.

Lynda Gledhill, a spokeswoman for the current attorney general, denied that claim.

"The California Department of Justice did not endorse placement of settlement money into an account outside of the budget process," Gledhill said. "Atty. Gen. [Kamala] Harris has directed her office to examine the state's settlement practices to ensure all settlements are not only lawful, but fully transparent to the public."

The state Department of Finance has begun an audit of the fund, which is expected to take about two months, spokesman H.D. Palmer said.

In addition, a joint Assembly and state Senate committee announced last week that it will conduct a hearing to determine the extent California agencies are using off-budget accounts to hold money outside the state system.

The GOP letter was signed by 25 members of the Senate and Assembly. They also are using the issue to call for an end to a law the Legislature passed last year requiring rural homeowners who rely on state firefighters to pay $150 a year for fire prevention services.

"It is clear that the state has not been judicious in its use of taxpayer dollars," the lawmakers' letter said. "The state must stop these outrageous duplicitous tactics."

Senate Republican leader Robert Huff of Diamond Bar and Assembly GOP leader Connie Conway of Tulare sent a letter last week asking the attorney general to refer the matter to the U.S. attorney. A spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney in Sacramento said no information about the fund had been brought to her office.

Janet Upton, a Cal Fire spokeswoman, said the agency would welcome an investigation.

"We stand by the intent of this fund and have many examples of good things it's done that benefit the taxpayers of this state," she said.

Cal Fire's own audit, released in 2009, raised questions about whether the fund was allowed. But many of the critical comments were dropped from the audit's final version.

The scrutiny follows similar revelations that the state Department of Parks and Recreation hid $20 million as budget cuts were forcing the closure of parks. Although the Department of Finance looked for other secret funds, it did not find Cal Fire's account with the prosecutors' association.

jeff.gottlieb@latimes.com

Read More..

NJ Gov. Christie, Letterman laugh about fat jokes

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and David Letterman have shared some laughs about the many fat jokes the comedian has made about the lawmaker's ample girth.

Christie has termed his plumpness "fair game" for comedians. And during his first appearance on "Late Show with David Letterman" on Monday, the outspoken Republican and potential 2016 presidential contender read two of Letterman's jokes that he said were "some of my personal favorites."

The governor also drew loud laughs when he pulled out a doughnut and started eating it while Letterman asked him if he was bothered by the digs that have been made about his weight. Christie said he wasn't, noting that he laughs at the jokes if he finds them funny.

"Late Show" airs on CBS at 11:35 p.m. Eastern time.

Read More..

The New Old Age Blog: In Blended Families, Responsibility Blurs

Every year, Fran McDowell waited for the summer week when she would sing in a choral festival in the North Carolina mountains, then spend a few days in a lakeside cabin with close women friends.

That getaway grew more complicated to arrange — but perhaps more necessary — after her husband, Herb Beadle, was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease. They had a “gloriously happy” marriage — her first, his second — for 11 years, and she was more than willing to care for him in sickness as in health. But he could no longer manage alone in their Atlanta home.

For a few years, other family members pitched in to allow Ms. McDowell her cherished vacation. Eventually, though, she had to ask her husband’s daughter, a medical professional in another state, to take him into her home for a week.

She said no, then yes. Then, the day before Ms. McDowell was to drive him there, her stepdaughter again refused, leaving no time for alternate arrangements. If this had been her biological child, “I would have said, ‘Come on, don’t do this to me,’” Ms. McDowell said. Instead, reluctant to make waves, she canceled her trip.

“I think confrontation is riskier for stepparents,” she told me. “I was the compliant one who would bite my tongue rather than say what I thought.”

Ms. McDowell never told her stepdaughter, or anyone in the family, how angry and disappointed she was, or how difficult it was becoming to care for their father, who died three years ago at 86. She told the members of her dementia caregivers support group instead.

It was that group’s leader, Moira Keller, who e-mailed me to suggest this topic. A clinical social worker with the Sixty Plus program at Piedmont Atlanta Hospital, she wrote that “one of the biggest challenges I have is blended families in later life.”

Though I’ve written about the way the 1970s’ spike in divorces could complicate caregiving for adult children — more households to sustain, more siblings to either help or hinder — I hadn’t considered the impact on the older people themselves.

But Ms. Keller seems to be onto something. “The generation most likely to have stepchildren” — the boomers — “don’t need much care yet,” said Merril Silverstein, a Syracuse University sociologist co-editing a coming issue of the Journal of Marriage and the Family on stepfamilies in later life. “The crunch will come in 10 or 20 years.”

Initially, many adult children whose divorced or widowed parents remarry seem delighted, Ms. Keller said when we spoke. “They’re thrilled that Mom or Dad isn’t alone,” she said. “It’s a wonderful thing — until somebody gets sick.”

Then, she has found, “it gets really blurry. Who’s going to do what?” Grown children don’t have much history with these new spouses; they often feel less responsibility to intervene or help out, and stepparents may be unwilling to ask. Perhaps it’s unclear whether children or new spouses have decision-making authority.

“Older couples in this situation fall through the cracks,” Ms. Keller said.

Research shows that the ties which lead adult children to become caregivers — depending on how much contact they have with parents, how nearby they live, how obligated they feel — are weaker in stepchildren, Dr. Silverstein said. Money sometimes enters the equation too, Ms. Keller added, if biological children resent a parent’s spending their presumed inheritance on care for an ailing stepparent.

Adela Betsill, another of Ms. Keller’s support group members, married her longtime partner five years ago — her second marriage, his third. She has since given up her interior design business to care for Robert who, at 72, has also developed Alzheimer’s disease. His two children have had little involvement — perhaps because she’s just 49 and presumed able to handle everything.

Thus, though Robert’s son works from an office in their home, if Ms. Betsill needed to go out and asked him to remind his father to eat lunch, “he might, or he might not,” she said. “I don’t think he realizes it’s a burden.” So she has not asked.

Would it be different if she were his biological mother and he saw her wearing out under the strain? She thinks so, but it’s hard to know. After all, biological families also experience plenty of conflict and avoidance as elders age.

Still, that sense of reciprocity we often hear from caregivers — she took care of me when I was young, so I need to help out now that she’s old — doesn’t apply in late-life stepfamilies. Ms. Betsill didn’t raise this man, or his half sister.

Older couples who marry or remarry often discuss their finances, Ms. Keller has found. (An elder attorney, Craig Reaves, discussed the legal consequences here.) But illness and dependence may prove even more difficult subjects to broach.

“If I could yell one thing from a mountaintop,” Ms. Keller said, “it’s to talk about this stuff, too. Who’s going to take care of you if you become sick? Talk about that while you’re still healthy.”

---

Paula Span is the author of “When the Time Comes: Families With Aging Parents Share Their Struggles and Solutions.”

Read More..

Justice Department sues S&P over mortgage bond ratings

The federal government is embarking on one of its most ambitious efforts to assign blame for the financial crisis, going after Wall Street's biggest credit rating firm for its role in pumping up the housing bubble.

The Justice Department filed a lawsuit late Monday in Los Angeles federal court against Standard & Poor's Corp. The suit accuses the company's analysts of issuing glowing reviews on troubled mortgage securities whose subsequent failure helped cause the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

The action marks the first federal crackdown against a major credit rater, and it signals an untested legal tack after limited success in holding the nation's banks accountable for the part they played in the crisis.

The government selected Los Angeles as the venue to file the lawsuit in part because it was one of the regions hardest hit when the bottom fell out of the housing market. Hundreds of thousands of California residents lost their homes to foreclosure, and others saw their wealth evaporate as properties plummeted in value.

"The DOJ is playing hardball and they're coming at the ratings agency in a very different direction with a potentially very powerful weapon to push S&P to the settlement table," said Jeffrey Manns, a law professor at George Washington University.

In addition to the Justice Department, several state attorneys general are investigating the ratings agency. States such as California and New York are expected to pursue their own investigations and legal action, people familiar with the matter said.

S&P has faced other lawsuits from investors and the states of Illinois and Connecticut.

California is expected to sue S&P under the state's False Claims Act, one person familiar with the matter said. The law makes it a crime to defraud the state, and damages of up to three times the amount of the claim can be awarded if the victim was an institutional investor, such as one of the state's pension funds.

The federal action does not involve any criminal allegations. Critics have complained that the government has yet to send any senior bankers or Wall Street executives to jail for potential illegal behavior that led to the crisis.

But civil actions typically require a much lower burden of proof.

Investors rely in part on rating agencies to decide what stocks, bonds or other securities to buy based on the agencies' recommendations about their safety. The three major raters – S&P, Moody's Investors Service and Fitch Ratings — have all been criticized for giving perfect AAA ratings to complex bonds in 2007 that later turned out to be nearly worthless.

It was not known why Standard & Poor's was singled out in the federal lawsuit.

The government and S&P have tangled before. The rating agency in August 2011 issued a historic downgrade of U.S. creditworthiness and threatened to lower it even further.

The two sides were reportedly in settlement talks that broke down during the past week. The ratings firm could face hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and new restrictions on its business model if found liable of civil violations.

S&P, which is a unit of publisher McGraw Hill, denounced the lawsuit in a detailed and strongly worded response. The company said the claims were unjustified, adding that it acted in "good faith" to warn the world about some of the securities that went belly up.

"A DOJ lawsuit would be entirely without factual or legal merit," the company said, adding that even the U.S. government "publicly stated that problems in the subprime market appeared to be contained."

The rating firm has steadfastly maintained that it was protected under the 1st Amendment to state an opinion about certain financial products. That argument may not hold up if federal or state investigators are able to prove that the ratings agency knowingly gave improper evaluations.

The lawsuit zeros in on a series of collateralized debt obligations that were created at the height of the housing boom in 2007, according to S&P. The value of these exotic mortgage securities was nearly wiped out when the subprime mortgages they were tied to imploded.

Lawrence J. White, an economics professor at New York University's business school, believes that the housing crisis could have been more contained if ratings agencies had been more careful.

"If they had been more conservative in their ratings, fewer bonds would have been sold, the interest rates would have been higher, fewer mortgages would have been granted," White said. "There would still have been a housing bubble, but it might not have been quite so severe."

Read More..

Scientists identify remains as those of King Richard III

LONDON – More than 500 years after his death in battle, scientists announced Monday that they had definitively identified a skeleton unearthed in northern England last summer as that of Richard III, the medieval king portrayed by Shakespeare as a homicidal tyrant who killed his two young nephews in order to ascend the throne.

DNA from the bones, found beneath the ruins of an old church, match that of a living descendant of the monarch’s sister, researchers said.

"Rarely have the conclusions of academic research been so eagerly awaited," Richard Buckley, the lead archaeologist on the excavation, told a phalanx of reporters Monday morning. "Beyond reasonable doubt, the individual exhumed…is indeed Richard III, the last Plantagenet king of England."

The dramatic announcement capped a brief hunt for Richard's remains whose progress has been closely charted by international media and whose success has been barely short of miraculous.

Working from old maps of Leicester, about 100 miles northwest of London, archaeologists from the local university had less than a month to dig in a small municipal parking lot -- one of the few spaces not built over in the crowded city center. The team stumbled upon the ruins of the medieval priory where records say Richard was buried, then found the bones a few days later last September.

"It was an extraordinary discovery that stunned all of us," said Buckley.

The nearly-intact skeleton bore obvious traces of trauma to the skull and of scoliosis, a curvature of the spine that matched contemporary descriptions of Richard’s appearance. The feet were missing, almost certainly the result of later disturbance, and the hands were crossed at the wrist, which suggests that they may have been tied.

Scientists at the University of Leicester, which pioneered the practice of DNA fingerprinting, were able to extract samples from the bones and compare them to a man descended from Richard III's sister Anne. The match through the maternal line was virtually perfect.

"The DNA evidence points to these being the remains of Richard III," said Turi King, the project’s geneticist.

Richard reigned from 1483 to 1485, and occupies a unique place in England's long line of colorful rulers. He was the last king to be killed in combat, at the Battle of Bosworth Field, by his successor, Henry VII. His death ended the Plantagenet dynasty and ushered in the long era of the Tudors, including Henry VIII and Elizabeth I.

Jo Appleby, an osteologist at the university, said the skeleton belonged to an adult male in his late 20s to late 30s; Richard III was 32 when he died. The man would have stood 5-foot-8 at full height, but the curved spine would have made him appear shorter.

The skull was riddled with wounds strongly indicative of death in battle, including two blows from bladed weapons, either of which would have been fatal, Appleby said.

Richard III is one of England's most controversial monarchs, reviled by some as a bloodthirsty despot who stopped at nothing to gain power but revered by others who insist that he has been unfairly maligned. His supporters note that the repugnant portrait of Richard in today's popular imagination is based almost entirely on accounts from the time of the usurping Tudors, especially Shakespeare's indelible characterization of him as a "deform'd, unfinish'd" man without scruples.

Fans say Richard III was an enlightened, capable ruler whose important social reforms included the presumption of innocence for defendants and the granting of bail, which remain pillars of the legal system in both Britain and the U.S.

What happened to Richard's two nephews, however, who were his rivals for the throne and who were shut up in the Tower of London as young boys, never to be seen again, remains a mystery.

ALSO:

Race to unearth a royal mystery

Bones found in hunt for King Richard III's remains

Netanyahu officially asked to put together new Israeli government

Read More..