Copyright

(c) 2010-2024 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts with label United States Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States Congress. Show all posts

Sunday, June 30, 2013

President Obama Tightens Bangladesh Trade Over Worker Safety Issues

TO MODIFY DUTY-FREE TREATMENT UNDER THE
GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
- - - - - - -
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION
1. Section 502(b)(2)(G) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (the "1974 Act") (19 U.S.C.
2462(b)(2)(G)), provides that the President shall not designate any country a beneficiary developing country under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) if such country has not taken or is not taking steps to afford internationally recognized worker rights to workers in the country (including any designated zone in that country). Section 502(d)(2) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(d)(2)) provides that, after complying with the requirements of section 502(f)(2) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(f)(2)), the President shall withdraw or suspend the designation of any country as a beneficiary developing country if, after such designation, the President determines that as the result of changed circumstances such country would be barred from designation as a beneficiary developing country under section 502(b)(2) of the 1974 Act. Section 502(f)(2) of the 1974 Act requires the President to notify the Congress and the country cocerned at least 60 days before terminating its designation as a beneficiary developing country for purposes of the GSP.
2. Having considered the factors set forth in section 502(b)(2)(G) and providing the notification called for in section 502(f)(2), I have determined pursuant to section 502(d) of the 1974 Act, that it is appropriate to suspend Bangladesh's designation as a GSP beneficiary developing country because it has not taken or is not taking steps to afford internationally recognized worker rights to workers in the country. In order to reflect the suspension of Bangladesh's status as a beneficiary developing country under the GSP, I have determined that it is appropriate to modify general notes 4(a) and 4(b)(i) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS).
3. Section 503(c)(2)(A) of the 1974 Act provides that beneficiary developing countries, except those designated as least-developed beneficiary developing countries or beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries as provided in section 503(c)(2)(D) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(D)), are subject to competitive need limitations on the preferential treatment afforded under the GSP to eligible articles.
4. Pursuant to section 503(c)(2)(A) of the 1974 Act, I have determined that in 2012 certain beneficiary developing countries exported eligible articles in quantities exceeding
the applicable competitive need limitations, and I therefore terminate the duty-free treatment for such articles from such beneficiary developing countries.
5. Section 503(c)(2)(F)(i) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(F)(i)) provides that the President may disregard the competitive need limitation provided in section 503(c)(2)(A)(i)(II) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(A)(i)(II)) with respect to any eligible article from any beneficiary developing country, if the aggregate appraised value of the imports of such article into the United States during the preceding calendar year does not exceed an amount set forth in section 503(c)(2)(F)(ii) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(c)(2)(F)(ii)).
6. Pursuant to section 503(c)(2)(F)(i) of the 1974 Act, I have determined that the competitive need limitation provided in section 503(c)(2)(A)(i)(II) of the 1974 Act should be disregarded with respect to certain eligible articles from certain beneficiary developing countries.
7. Section 503(d)(1) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(1)) provides that the President may waive the application of the competitive need limitations in section 503(c)(2) of the 1974 Act with respect to any eligible article from any beneficiary developing country if certain conditions are met.
8. Pursuant to section 503(d)(1) of the 1974 Act, I have received the advice of the United States International Trade Commission on whether any industry in the United States is likely to be adversely affected by waivers of the competitive need limitations provided in section 503(c)(2), and I have determined, based on that advice and on the considerations described in sections 501 and 502(c) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(c)) and after giving great weight to the considerations in section 503(d)(2) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(2)), that such waivers are in the national economic interest of the United States. Accordingly, I have determined that the competitive need limitations of section 503(c)(2) of the 1974 Act should be waived with respect to certain eligible articles from certain beneficiary developing countries.
9. Section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii)) provides that the President should revoke any waiver of the application of the competitive need limitations that has been in effect with respect to an article for 5 years or more if the beneficiary developing country has exported to the United States during the preceding calendar year an amount that exceeds the quantity set forth in section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(I) or section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(II) of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii)(I) and 19 U.S.C. 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii)(II)).
10. Pursuant to section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii) of the 1974 Act, I have determined that in 2012 certain beneficiary developing countries exported eligible articles for which a waiver has been in effect for 5 years or more in quantities exceeding the applicable limitation set forth in section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(I) or section 503(d)(4)(B)(ii)(II) of the 1974 Act, and I therefore revoke said waivers.
11. Section 604 of the 1974 Act (19 U.S.C. 2483) authorizes the President to embody in the HTS the substance of the relevant provisions of that Act, and of other Acts affecting import treatment, and actions thereunder, including removal, modification, continuance, or imposition of any rate of duty or other import restriction.
12. Presidential Proclamation 6763 of December 23, 1994, implemented the trade agreements resulting from the Uruguay Round of multilateral negotiations, including Schedule XX—United States of America, annexed to the Marrakesh Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Schedule XX). In order to maintain the intended tariff treatment for certain products covered in Schedule XX, I have determined that technical corrections to the HTS are necessary.
13. Presidential Proclamation 7011 of June 30, 1997, implemented modifications of the World Trade Organization Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products (the "ITA") for the United States. Products included in Attachment B to the ITA are entitled to duty-free treatment wherever classified. Presidential Proclamation 8840 of June 29, 2012, implemented certain technical corrections are necessary to the HTS in order to maintain the intended tariff treatment for certain products covered in Attachment B. I have determined that certain additional technical corrections are necessary to conform the HTS to the changes made by Presidential Proclamation 8840.
14. Presidential Proclamation 8818 of May 14, 2012, implemented U.S. tariff commitments under the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement and incorporated by reference Publication 4320 of the United States International Trade Commission, entitled "Modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to Implement the United States-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement." Presidential Proclamation 8894 of October 29, 2012, made modifications to the HTS to correct technical errors and omissions in Annexes I and II to Publication 4320. I have determined that a modification is necessary to correct an additional omission.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including but not limited to title V and section 604 of the 1974 Act, do proclaim that:
(1) The designation of Bangladesh as a beneficiary developing country under the GSP is suspended on the date that is 60 days after the date this proclamation is published in the Federal Register.
(2) In order to reflect the suspension of benefits under the GSP with respect to Bangladesh, general notes 4(a) and 4(b)(i) of the HTS are modified as set forth in section A of Annex I to this proclamation by deleting "Bangladesh" from the list of independent countries and least developed countries, effective with respect to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the date that is 60 days after the date this proclamation is published in the Federal Register.
(3) In order to provide that one or more countries should no longer be treated as beneficiary developing countries with respect to one or more eligible articles for purposes of the GSP, the Rates of Duty 1–Special subcolumn for the corresponding HTS subheadings and general note 4(d) of the HTS are modified as set forth in sections B and C of Annex I to this proclamation.
(4) The modifications to the HTS set forth in sections B and C of Annex I to this proclamation shall be effective with respect to the articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the dates set forth in the relevant sections of Annex I.
(5) The competitive need limitation provided in section 503(c)(2)(A)(i)(II) of the 1974 Act is disregarded with respect to the eligible articles in the HTS subheadings and to the beneficiary developing countries listed in Annex II to this proclamation.
(6) A waiver of the application of section 503(c)(2) of the 1974 Act shall apply to the articles in the HTS subheadings and to the beneficiary developing countries set forth in Annex III to this proclamation.
(7) In order to provide the intended tariff treatment to certain products as set out in Schedule XX, the HTS is modified as set forth in section A of Annex IV to this proclamation.
(8) In order to conform the HTS to certain technical corrections made to provide the intended tariff treatment to certain products as set out in the ITA, the HTS is modified as set forth in section B of Annex IV to this proclamation.
(9) In order to provide the intended tariff treatment to certain goods from Colombia, the HTS is modified as set forth in section C of Annex IV to this proclamation.
(10) The modifications to the HTS set forth in Annex IV to this proclamation shall be effective with respect to the articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the dates set forth in the relevant sections of Annex IV.
(11) Any provisions of previous proclamations and Executive Orders that are inconsistent with the actions taken in this proclamation are superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-seventh day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand thirteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.
BARACK OBAMA

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Federal Push to Cap Workers' Compensation Based on Age

Sen. Susan M. Collins (R-Maine) has asked for an investigation by the Government Accounting Office to determine if too many Federal employees of retirement age are receiving workers' compensation benefits.

She stated, ""I am increasingly concerned that individuals with no intention of returning to work continue to receive these benefits," said Senator Collins. "At the U.S. Postal Service, for example, 1,000 employees currently receiving federal workers' compensation benefits are 80 years or older. Incredibly, 132 of these individuals are 90 and older and there are three who are 98. This abuse may extend across the government where the Department of Labor regularly pays benefits to employees in their 70s, 80s, 90s, and even 100s. The lack of benefit caps and requirements for regular third-party certifications of continued need further expose the FECA program to possible fraud. If recipients are gaming this crucial benefit at taxpayers' expense, they must be exposed and the underlying program must be reformed.""

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

High Workers Compensation Costs May Force County to Layoff 100 Workers

Citing the high workers compensation costs, Passaic County NJ is seriously considering laying off more than 100 workers in an effort to balance its budget. The Counting is facing a $7 Million dollar budget cap.

High costs for workers' compensation  coverage has been a critical budget issue for many governmental entities. Last month the United States Postal Service reported that it may consider filing for bankruptcy as a result of high workers' compensation costs.  Some public entities are considering privatizing workers' compensation inorder to reduce mounting workers compensation costs.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Congressional Deficit Reform May Incorporate Workers Compensation Awards

Congressional deficit reform may encompass workers' compensation awards as an element for deficit reduction. National Underwriter (NU) reports that the proposal is supported by the co-chairman of the budget deficit commission (National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility)  that was appointed by President Barach Obama. A vote of the full committee is scheduled for Friday.

A proposal was also made to impose caps on punitive and non-economic damages in tort claims.

NU reported, "On tort reform, the co-chairmen recommended that among the policies that should be pursued, state and federal governments should consider modifying the “collateral source” rule to allow outside sources of income collected as a result of an injury (for example, workers’ compensation benefits or insurance benefits) to be considered in deciding awards."

Commission's report stated:
"Among the policies pursued, the following should be included: 1) Modifying the “collateral source” rule to allow outside sources of income collected as a result of an injury (for example workers’ compensation benefits or insurance benefits) to be considered in deciding awards; 2) Imposing a statute of limitations – perhaps one to three years – on medical malpractice lawsuits; 3) Replacing joint-and-several liability with a fair-share rule, under which a defendant in a lawsuit would be liable only for the percentage of the final award that was equal to his or her share of responsibility for the injury; 4) Creating specialized “health courts” for medical malpractice lawsuits; and 5) Allowing “safe haven” rules for providers who follow best practices of care."


Related articles

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

AIG -The Inside Job




Advertised as 'The movie that took over $20 Trillion dollars to make", Inside Job, is now on the screens of theaters throughout the nation. The movie's premise is that the recent,  systemic,   financial collapse was founded upon AIG's  feared inability to payout on the claims for failed sophisticated financial instruments that AIG insured. The resulting consequences of the AIG bailout  became a vehicle to shelter and fund Wall Street at enormous taxpayer expense.

The lack of criminal accountability for AIG, and the insurance industry's inadequate disclosures, poor ratings and reserves, bad investments and resulting political cover, left the industry destitute and unable to meet its fiduciary obligations to its insureds. Despite all of the bad news, AIG continued to pay bonuses to its executives, scheduled junkets and act as a conduit for payments. The movie questions who is actually regulating the financial/insurance industry, and whether the industry has now become so fused with American politics that Wall Street is insulated no  matter which political party is at the helm.

Workers' Compensation insurance coverage is premised on the legislative intent to provide remedial coverage and summary benefits. When major players in the insurance industry jeopardize that coverage, then the result impacts the ability of the system to function and causes lingering inability to pay. Government regulators have the moral, if not the legal obligation, to protect the system.

Monday, November 22, 2010

Iowa Workers' Compensation Commissioner Tells Congress AMA Guides Are Objectionable

The Commissioner of the Iowa Division of Workers' Compensation, Christopher James Godfrey, recently testified before Congress that AMA Guides 6 Ed. were problematic. The Commissioner cited the 2008 Iowa Task Force report that found multiple errors and cultural bais in the AMA Guides.

An additional objection made was that the Guides were in conflict with both Iowa statutory and case law. The Commissioner stated, "With all due respect to Dr. Brigham, the Iowa Workers’ Compensation system will evolve and improve when it is decided by the citizens of Iowa that it will evolve and improve. The system will not evolve at the whim or business opportunity of either one physician, one medical association, or a small consensus of the two."


Enhanced by Zemanta

Congress Told Workers Compensation is a Deteriorating System

The former chair of the 1972 National Commission on Workers' Compensation told Congress that the present system is deteriorating and a new course of action is warranted. Profession Emeritis John F. Burton, Jr., last Wednesday testified before The Subcommittee on Workforce Protections of the Congressional Committee on Education and Labor.

Professor Burton told Congress that during the last 20 years he has observed the "...deterioration in adequacy and equity of state workers' compensation programs..." He reported that "the decline in workers' compensation cash benefits in the states during the 1990's is explained by ....changes in workers' compensation provisions and practice than  is explained by the drop in workplace injuries and disease during the decade."

Burton proposed that Congress consider new legislation to prohibit costs shifting from workers' compensation to Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). He advised the Subcommittee that cost shifting was continuing because 15 states were permitted to continue "reverse offset" provisions, the Social Security Administration (SSA) was paying benefits to workers who were not totally disabled under workers compensation acts, and a larger number injured workers were not qualifying for workers' compensation benefits.


As Professor points out, the aging workforce further complicates the burden placed upon the nation's Medicare system. With the erosion of the doctrine that workers' compensation takes the worker as it finds him or her, medical treatment for pre-existing conditions will be a growing cost for Medicare and a cost-shift from the workers' compensation system. The NY Times reported that, "Nearly one-fourth of Medicare beneficiaries have five or more chronic conditions. They account for two-thirds of the program’s spending."

A "reaffirmation" of "Federal standards" as enunciated in the 1972 National Commission report were recommended by Burton.  Additionally, he called upon Congress to enact legislation requiring employers and/or their insurance carriers reimburse Social Security for permanent disability cash benefits paid by Social Security for disability flowing from a work related event or disability.

Monday, November 15, 2010

Congress to Hear Experts on New State Workers' Compensation Limitations

A sub-committee of the Committee on Education and Labor, chaired by the Congressman George Miller, will be hearing testimony from national experts concerning the new limitations being imposed on State workers' compensation systems. The systemic problems to be examine include the delivery of medical benefits and the assessment of the nature of disability.

On Wednesday, November 17, the Workforce Protections Subcommittee of the House Education and Labor Committee will examine state workers’ compensations systems. Workers’ compensation traditionally provides financial assistance and job training to workers injured on the job and aid to the surviving family of a worker killed on the job.

Not only are the state systems drawing the attention of the US Congress, but also the federal programs are becoming problematic. The United States Postal Service announced last week that workers' compensation costs are so high that the quasi-governmental agency may have to declare bankruptcy.

With the newly elected Republican majority in Congress, the water ahead may be rough for workers' compensation. The last time the Republican's held the majority in Congress, Newt Gingrich , the former Speaker, was entertaining dramatic changes in the program. Those appear to have been refreshed in recent comments about a year ago.

These systems have undergone numerous changes in the past decade as many states have begun strictly limiting workers’ compensation benefits – changes that may be stressing the Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) program. Additionally, the American Medical Association’s (AMA) guide to assessing injured workers has undergone significant changes in its latest edition, which has made consequential changes to injured workers’ evaluation procedure.

Workforce Protections Subcommittee Hearing
2:00 PM, November 17, 2010
2175 Rayburn H.O.B.
Washington, DC

Additional witnesses TBA.

Witnesses:
Emily SpielerDeanNortheastern University School of LawBoston, MA
John BurtonProfessor Emeritus, School of Management and Labor Relations, Rutgers UniversityProfessor Emeritus, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell UniversityPrinceton, NJ
Christopher GodfreyIowa Workers Compensation CommissionerDes Moines, IA
Dr. John NimlosOccupational Medicine ConsultantShoreline, WA

Sunday, November 14, 2010

USPS May Declare Bankruptcy Citing High Workers Compensation Costs

A small United States Postal Service truck see...
The Washington Post reported Saturday that the US Postal Service (USPS) may declare bankruptcy and cited high combined benefit costs as a major cause for its financial instability.  The quasi-governmental agency is running into problems it claims because of its requirement to to pre-fund $5.4 billion to a retiree health benefit fund and pay $2.5 billion to the federal workers' compensation fund.

The USPS's troubles mirror that difficulties stangulating the nation's network of state workers' systems caused by the inability to fund soaring medical costs enhanced by complications caused by duplicate administrative costs engulfed by a multiplicity of collateral programs. In contested claims injured workers are shifted to other benefit programs to pay for medical costs. Those secondary programs ultimately seek reimbursement from the primary benefit program, workers' compensation coverage, and literally clog up administrative dockets and create greatly enhanced processing costs and monumental delays.

While the USPS will seek assistance from the Republican majority in
US Congress, it is uncertain what financial aid will be forthcoming, or whether Congress will take a deeper look at the nation's workers' compensation entirely. The last time the Republican's dominated Congress proposals were suggested by the former Speaker, Newt Gingrich, to over haul the national system entirely.

The medical component is now in critical condition. It remains uncertain if it will addressed in the next congressional term, or whether it will be the can that is kicked down the road to be dealt with in the future. The growing trend remains, that Federalization of the medical delivery component is the probable  solution to both the USPS's compensation difficulties as well as the the nation's.

...
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered work related accident and injuries.