TheTip.org
Username:
Password:

Not a member?
Signup!
Polls Members Refer Forums Write for TheTip! Home Impeach Bush




Impeach George Bush


Last but not Least

Riggs Bank: The Pinochet Connection and how can we forget: Wal-Mart: The Workfare Company

Source: Alternet, 2005-01-26

Candidate: Big Business

Riggs Bank: The Pinochet Connection

An explosive report from the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Governmental Affairs, issued in July, revealed that Riggs Bank in Washington, D.C. illegally operated bank accounts for former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, and routinely ignored evidence of corrupt practices in managing more than 60 accounts for the government of Equatorial Guinea.

An ongoing internal investigation by Riggs has revealed that the bank's dealing with Pinochet dates back to 1985, while the Chilean despot remained in power, according to a November Washington Post report.

Riggs has not so far been cited for civil or criminal violations in connection with the Pinochet money-laundering scheme. In May, the bank paid $25 million in fines in connection with money-laundering violations related to the Equatorial Guinea and Saudi Arabian governments.

The bank capitalized on its venerable reputation in Washington to become the ba
nker to the embassies that dot the city and the large foreign diplomatic corps resident in the U.S. capital. Riggs eagerly sought to service them all, apparently even when dictators and their families requested the bank engage in illegal activities to launder money.

The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report found that from 1994 until 2002, Riggs opened at least six accounts and issued several certificates of deposit (CDs) for Pinochet while he was under house arrest in the United Kingdom and his assets were the subject of court proceedings. The aggregate deposits in the Pinochet accounts at Riggs ranged from $4 million to $8 million at a time.

What is now becoming apparent is that Riggs was collaborating with Pinochet even a decade earlier, with a scale of activity not yet clear.

Riggs was not a passive or unknowing actor in this drama. According to the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report, high bank officials solicited Pinochet's business, the bank helped
Pinochet set up offshore shell corporations and open accounts in the names of those corporations to disguise his control of the accounts, altered the names of his personal accounts to disguise their ownership, and otherwise worked to help him hide his money flow.

Although these activities seem to violate U.S. banking rules, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) did not take enforcement action against the bank after it learned of these matters in 2002. That presumably was not unrelated to the fact that the OCC examiner at Riggs soon thereafter went to work for Riggs.

Pinochet is not the only dictator for whom Riggs undertook money laundering.

Equatorial Guinea is a small, oil-rich West African country dominated by a dictator, President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasago. Obiang, his family and cronies live a life of luxury, while the rest of the country remains desperately poor.

The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report found that from 1995 until 2004, Ri
ggs Bank administered more than 60 accounts and CDs for the government of Equatorial Guinea, Equatorial Guinea government officials or their family members. Money laundering to cover up corruption appeared to be routine.

Combined, these accounts represented the largest relationship at Riggs Bank, with aggregate deposits ranging from $400 to $700 million at a time.

Riggs does not deny these activities took place, and its internal investigation is continuing. A number of Riggs employees involved in the scandals have been fired or demoted. In July, Riggs announced that it was going to be acquired by PNC Financial Services Group (see profile of AIG above) for more than $700 million. Ongoing legal problems at Riggs could derail the deal, which is supposed to be consummated early in 2005, but for now both parties say it remains on.

Wal-Mart: The Workfare Company

Wal-Mart faces a class action lawsuit on behalf of 1.6 million women workers, alleging rampant employment discriminatio
n at Wal-Mart.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) has announced plans to spend $25 million a year with the ultimate goal of unionizing Wal-Mart, the largest private U.S. employer.

And the company – which has already lost more than 200 site fights – faces an even more-intensified resistance to its efforts to locate new stores, as it increasingly seeks to enter markets in more urban areas.

But while on a bit of a public relations defensive, the company remains the colossus of U.S. – and increasingly global – retailing. It registers more than a quarter trillion dollars in sales. Its revenues account for 2 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

A February 2004 report issued by Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) encapsulated the ways that Wal-Mart squeezes and cheats its employees, among them: blocking union organizing efforts, paying employees an average $8.23 an hour (as compared to more than $10 for an average supermarket worker), allegedly extracting off-the-clock
work, and providing inadequate and unaffordable healthcare packages for employees.

Miller's report's innovation was in documenting how Wal-Mart's low wages and inadequate benefits not only hurt workers directly, but impose costs on taxpayers. The report estimated that one 200-person Wal-Mart store may result in a cost to federal taxpayers of $420,750 per year – about $2,103 per employee. These public costs include: $36,000 a year for free and reduced lunches for just 50 qualifying Wal-Mart families. $42,000 a year for Section 8 housing assistance, assuming 3 percent of the store employees qualify for such assistance, at $6,700 per family. $125,000 a year for federal tax credits and deductions for low-income families, assuming 50 employees are heads of household with a child and 50 are married with two children. $100,000 a year for the additional Title I [educational] expenses, assuming 50 Wal-Mart families qualify with an average of two children. $108,000 a year for the additional f
ederal healthcare costs of moving into state children's health insurance programs (SCHIP), assuming 30 employees with an average of two children qualify.

Wal-Mart's abuses are giving rise to countervailing efforts, but it is an open question whether the company has amassed such power that it will be able to defeat such initiatives.

In California, in November, the company was able to stave off by a 51-to-49 percent margin a proposition that would have required every large and medium employer in the state to provide decent healthcare coverage for their workers, with the employer contribution set at a minimum of 80 percent of costs.

Wal-Mart dumped a half million dollars into the anti-Proposition 72 campaign just a week before the vote.

"As one of California's leading employers, we care about the health of our 60,000 employees here," said Wal-Mart spokesperson Cynthia Lin, in celebrating the defeat of Proposition 72. "That's why we provide our employees with affordable, qualit
y health care coverage."

The biggest immediate challenge facing Wal-Mart is the class action lawsuit filed by its women workers. The women allege that Wal-Mart pays female workers less than men, promotes men faster than women and men above more competent women, and fosters a hostile work environment.

While Wal-Mart is willing to bend to consumer demand on marginal issues like covering over the headlines on Cosmopolitan magazine, it is not so flexible on respect for worker rights. Nor is there any sign of a consumer rebellion on anything like the scale necessary to make the company revisit its employment policies.

The full-length version of this piece can be found at The Multinational Monitor.

Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman are co-authors of On the Rampage: Corporate Predators and the Destruction of Democracy (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press). Robert Weissman is general counsel for Essential Inventions, a nonprofit mentioned in the Abbott profile.

Add a comment to this Message in our Forums.
While you're at it, check out our forums too!
Add your Comments to this article
Display Name:


User Originated Comments:


Send this article to:
Your Email:

Related News

12-22-2007
Biofuels Could Kill More People Than the Iraq War
9-24-2007
Is Health Care the same as Health Insurance?
11-23-2006
Outsourcing Phase II: Senior Management
6-30-2005
The New York Times
2-10-2005
Universal HealthCare
2-6-2005
Metaphors
10-26-2004
KERRY WINS!
10-3-2004
Drug ReImportation Laws Vetoed
8-30-2004
Why We Persevere
6-4-2004
The Employment Game
5-25-2004
Nepotism is Never a Good Idea
2-29-2004
Bush stands there like Alfred E. Neuman, saying, "What, me worry?"
2-29-2004
The MAD MBA
2-27-2004
Where have all the flowers gone? Gone to Iraq, everyone...
2-12-2004
Where Has All the $$$ Gone?
1-27-2004
CBS - SuperBowl Sunday no Freedom of Speech
1-23-2004
Men in Suits
1-22-2004
CBS Gags Your Freedom of Speech
1-21-2004
Privatizing Social Security
1-9-2004
Class Warfare
1-9-2004
Take Back America
12-15-2003
The Capitalist Threat
12-12-2003
Merry Christmas - Ralphs, Vons, Albertsons.
11-25-2003
Carlyle Group Expanding
11-13-2003
Cynics, it's a great time to be alive
11-6-2003
In Case You Missed It
11-3-2003
The Worlds Largest Skimming Operation
10-21-2003
Why Has Our Discourse Fallen Apart? For One Thing, Millionaires Run Your Press Corps
10-17-2003
The Next Banker's Scandal
9-1-2003
G8 Gives Go-Ahead for Iran/North Korea Threats
8-31-2003
Investigate? Why Bother
8-24-2003
What God Told Al Franken
8-1-2003
Iraqi Governing Council
7-24-2003
Operation Oily Immunity
6-19-2003
Bush's Clairvoyance on the Economy
6-9-2003
Don't say no one warned you.
6-6-2003
Don't Say No One Warned You
5-30-2003
Iran, the New Iraq - Propaganda a Prelude to War
5-22-2003
Touchdown, KBR/Cheney Gets the Oil
4-30-2003
FCC - Stop William Powell from letting Major Media Companies Own ALL of the Media
4-28-2003
FCC to Rule on Media Consolidation
4-28-2003
Bankers, Advisers and Traders caught in Biggest Investment Scam EVER
4-23-2003
Lying to the Public - Bush and Nike
4-23-2003
The Crook List
4-22-2003
Who's going to OPEC
4-16-2003
Selling Weapons
4-12-2003
Maxxam / Pacific Lumber Fraud
4-10-2003
America the Jobless and Penniless
4-9-2003
Fox to Acquire Hughes / DirectTV
4-4-2003
60% of 750 People think that Bush is Doing a Great Job
3-21-2003
What Liberal Media?
3-19-2003
Blaming Bush
3-13-2003
Boycott Exxon, Mobil, Shell
3-4-2003
One Hundred Thousand
1-30-2003
DOW DOWN
1-3-2003
Predatory Lending
12-30-2002
Greenspan - Economic Woes and Real Money
12-20-2002
1.4 Billion to Cover The Biggest Conflict of Interest EVER?
11-1-2002
Edison Threatens Legal Action Against Corona using California State Money
9-25-2002
Citigroup Settles Predatory Lending Lawsuit











Donate some Clicks!













This RingSurf The Political Science and Politics Webring Net Ring
owned by TheTIP.

[ Skip Next | Next | Random Site | List Sites |Previous ]

NEWS | ACTION | RESULTS | POLLS | MEMBERS | SEARCH

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Thetip.org assumes no responsibility for any errors or omissions in these materials. Thetip.org makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Further, Thetip.org cannot edit, control, review for truth or accuracy, or screen for defamation or obscenity any content provided to the Website by a third party through postings, uploaded files, or any other form of communication, nor can Thetip.org ensure prompt removal of defamatory, obscene, inappropriate or unlawful content after transmission. Any such third party postings, files or other communications do not necessarily represent the opinions, beliefs, or positions of Thetip.org.

Thetip.org makes no, and expressly disclaims any, representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the Website, including, without limitation, any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Thetip.org makes no, and expressly disclaims any, warranties, express or implied, regarding the correctness, accuracy, completeness, timeliness, and reliability of the text, graphics, links to other sites and any other items accessed from or via this Website or the Internet, or that the services will be uninterrupted, error-free or free of viruses or other harmful components. Under no circumstances shall Thetip.org, its affiliates, or any of their respective partners, officers, directors, employees, agents or representatives be liable for any damages, whether direct, indirect, special or consequential damages for lost revenues, lost profits, or otherwise, arising from or in connection with this Website, the materials contained herein, or the Internet generally.