Has Wal-Mart captured the "slow decade" consumer? - Money central

Has Wal-Mart captured the "slow decade" consumer? - Money central
February 15, 2010 9:02 AM ET


SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Wal-Mart Stores Inc's quarterly results will show whether the company gained ground during the critical holiday sales period and if its retail strategy is holding onto its shoppers.

The world's largest retailer will report fourth-quarter results on February 18, and investors want to see if it was able to overcome holiday price wars and deflationary pressures to push U.S. same-store sales into positive territory.

Wal-Mart has forecast U.S. sales at stores open at least a year to be flat, plus or minus 1 percent, for the 13 weeks that ended January 29. That would compare with a year-earlier rise of 2.4 percent.

"The single most important number will be same-store sales since they no longer provide monthly same-store sales," said Lauri Brunner, senior equity research analyst at Thrivent Financial for Lutherans.

Investors are also eager to hear if the retailer is holding on to the customers it attracted in the depths of the economic downturn, or if shoppers are favoring competitors now that the worst of the recession has passed.

"Everyone is worried about how Wal-Mart is faring as the economy stabilizes," said Janna Sampson, co-chief investment officer at OakBrook Investments, which owns Wal-Mart shares.

"I'm expecting the numbers will still look pretty good because I really don't think things have improved enough that you would see a huge amount of people stop searching for value," she said.

Wal-Mart may address that in its first-quarter earnings forecast and its commentary on how consumers are faring.

Stifel Nicolaus analyst David Schick said the retailer fits nicely in his firm's "slow consumer 2010-2019 decade" thesis that households are likely to spend less to improve their personal balance sheets.

"The economy in the last couple of years has handed Wal-Mart this opportunity to appeal to people," Schick said. "People want to know if they're capturing more shop from more consumers. That's the core question."

HAPPY HOLIDAYS AT WAL-MART?

Schick upgraded Wal-Mart's shares on February 3 to "buy" from "hold," saying the stock, which trades at 13.5 times full-year earnings, is poised to outperform the S&P 500 Index .

Wal-Mart shares are roughly flat since the company's last earnings report in November, compared with declines of 2.5 percent in the S&P Retail Index and 2.3 percent in the S&P 500.

U.S. total holiday sales in November and December rose 1.1 percent industrywide, according to the National Retail Federation, while it had forecast a 1 percent drop.

Same-store sales reported by major U.S. retail chains were also better than expected in November, December and January, according to Thomson Reuters data.

Many retailers, including TJX Cos Inc and Kohl's Corp , have since raised their earnings forecasts, prompting investors to wonder whether the improved sales meant any lost business at Wal-Mart.

"Did consumers prefer higher-ticket discretionary purchases ... at Macy's because the promotions looked very attractive vs. at Wal-Mart?" Brunner said.

In November, Wal-Mart issued a fourth-quarter earnings forecast of $1.08 to $1.12 per share from continuing operations. Except for announcing a restructuring charge of 4 cents, it has not revised that outlook.

Analysts, on average, currently expect earnings of $1.12 per share excluding the charge, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S.

Wal-Mart's sales have also suffered from deflationary pressures, like bigger-than-expected price drops for food and electronics in its third quarter.

There was probably no let-up in the fourth quarter as Wal-Mart cut prices on food and TVs to draw holiday shoppers. It also slashed prices on popular books and DVDs sold online to win market share, igniting a price war with Amazon.com Inc .

In another effort to draw and keep customers, Wal-Mart is revamping its U.S. stores by widening aisles, reducing clutter and improving merchandise.

James Reed, lead portfolio manager for the Scout Stock Fund, said he was looking for signs that this strategy was working.

"They've been refocusing their stores with more of a Target look, but Wal-Mart prices," said Reed, whose fund owns Wal-Mart shares. "I want to see that they're executing on that U.S. restructuring."

(Reporting by Nicole Maestri; Editing by Michele Gershberg and Lisa Von Ahn)

© 2010 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.

Chiquita finding bittersweet for families of men killed in Colombia - CNN

Chiquita finding bittersweet for families of men killed in Colombia - CNN

(CNN) -- Tania Julin remembers the deep gut pain she felt when she found out nearly three years ago that Chiquita Brands International had paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to a Marxist rebel group in Colombia that had abducted and killed her missionary husband.

The pain remains, but Julin felt some relief last week when a federal judge rejected Chiquita's motion to dismiss a damage suit she and four other widows brought against the Ohio-based company.

"My stomach still turns today at the thought of fellow Americans paying terrorists," Julin said. "It just makes my stomach sick."

Chiquita, which has admitted making payments to the rebels and was fined $25 million by the U.S. Justice Department, says it was victimized.

"Chiquita acquiesced to extortion payments to protect the lives of its employees," company spokesman Ed Loyd said.

To some analysts, the issue highlights the difficulties of conducting business in war-torn areas. Marxist guerrillas who call themselves the Armed Revolutionary Forces of Colombia, commonly known as FARC, declared war on the government in 1964. Chiquita had more than 200 banana farms in Colombia before selling them in 2004.

"It's really tough doing business in an environment that is lawless and the state is largely absent," said Bruce Bagley, professor of international studies at the University of Miami.

For Julin, though, the issue is deeply personal. She had been married to Mark Rich for 3½ years when FARC rebels burst into their home in Pucuro, Panama, across the border from Colombia, on January 31, 1993. The rebels abducted Rich while his wife and two daughters -- ages 11 months and 2½ years -- watched in horror.

The FARC abducted two other members of the New Tribes Mission around the same time and demanded a $5 million ransom for the three men about a week later.

One year later, the rebels abducted two other missionaries belonging to the same Christian group. A $3 million ransom was demanded for their release.

No ransom was paid for any of them.

The families did not know anything about their loved ones for years. It was a tough time for Julin's daughters.

"They went through all of their growing-up years that they can remember asking where their daddy was and if he could come home for their birthdays," Julin said.

She and the wives of the other men abducted in 1993 found out the truth in December 2000, when New Tribes Mission officials told them the FARC had killed the three captives in 1996. The Colombian government confirmed the deaths in February 2007.

The two men who were abducted in 1994 were killed during a firefight between the FARC and the Colombian military in June 1995. Evidence and eyewitness reports obtained by the Colombian National Prosecutor's Office and the U.S. Justice Department confirmed that the FARC executed the missionaries.

The U.S. State Department designated the FARC a foreign terrorist organization on October 8, 1997.

The five widows found out another hurtful truth in March 2007, when Chiquita pleaded guilty to violating U.S. antiterrorism laws by providing payments to another Colombian terrorist organization, the paramilitary right-wing United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, known as the AUC. Chiquita made more than 100 payments to the AUC totaling at least $1.7 million, the Justice Department said.

As part of those proceedings, Chiquita acknowledged that it had also made payments to the FARC from 1989 to at least 1997. That period included the span during which the five missionaries were abducted and killed.

That knowledge still pains Julin.

"I just can hardly stand to think about it too much," she said. "They're like a household name. You feel like you can trust them.

"It's just horrible to think about."

Chiquita's Loyd said the company's sole motivation was to protect the lives of its employees. He cited a 1995 incident in which a bus transporting Chiquita employees was attacked and 25 people aboard it died. In total, he said, more than 50 Chiquita employees were killed in Colombia in the 1990s.

"We're sympathetic to the families," he said, "but Chiquita was being extorted by right-wing groups and left-wing groups. There was a very real fear, a very real threat to U.S. citizens."

That argument does not wash with Gary M. Osen, an attorney for the families.

"There's no law that says you have to operate in areas where you have to pay terrorists," Osen said. "That's something they chose to do."

Julin, a 40-year-old kindergarten teacher at a church school near Orlando, Florida, filed suit in March 2008. Civil provisions of the U.S. Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991 allow American citizens, their heirs and their estates to be paid compensation for injuries suffered as a result of international terrorism.

The families "allege that Chiquita, knowing that FARC was a terrorist organization, intentionally agreed to provide money, weapons and services to it as part of a common scheme to subvert local trade unions, protect Chiquita's farms and shipments, harm Chiquita's competitors, [and] strengthen FARC's military capabilities, and that [the families] were injured by overt acts done in furtherance of the common scheme," U.S. District Judge Kenneth A. Marra wrote in his 34-page ruling allowing the suit to go forward.

Court records show that Chiquita initially made monthly cash payments to the FARC ranging from $20,000 to $100,000. Eventually, Chiquita's payments were fixed to a percentage of the company's gross revenues from its Colombia banana business. Ultimately, up to 10 percent of those revenues were diverted to the FARC.

The company also supplied weapons, ammunition and other supplies to the rebels, the victims' families allege.

The families also said "Chiquita went to great lengths to hide its relationship with FARC," Marra noted in the February 4 ruling.

"The payments were often delivered by a former American military pilot known as 'Kaiser,' who held a management position with Chiquita in Colombia," the judge said the families allege.

According to the families, Marra said, Chiquita placed false names and nonexistent employees on its payroll, providing the money on local paydays to regional FARC commanders. The company also helped the FARC create front organizations to which Chiquita could channel money, the victims' families said.

In addition, the judge said, the families accuse Chiquita of working with FARC-controlled labor unions as another way to channel payments to the guerrillas.

Chiquita spokesman Loyd and one of the company's attorneys, Jonathan M. Sperling, declined to discuss Friday whether the families' allegations noted by Marra are factual.

The judge's ruling means the case can go to the discovery phase, in which each party can obtain documents and evidence from the other side.

"We needed to pass this hurdle in order to go forward," said Steven M. Steingard, another attorney for the families.

Loyd expressed confidence that the company will be exonerated.

"It makes no sense to make Chiquita or Chiquita employees liable for the horrible crimes that those groups committed," Loyd said.

Said Osen, the attorney for the other side, "Chiquita is intent on defending what we consider the indefensible."

No amount for monetary damages has been asked, Osen and Steingard said.

Julin, who has remarried, says she has a reason beyond dollars and cents.

"All those years of not knowing if he was alive or dead," she said. "There never has been any closure."

San Dimas students load up on fruits and vegetables through new salad bar

San Dimas students load up on fruits and vegetables through new salad bar

SAN DIMAS - Bernard Maroun loaded up his plastic tray with a mound of romaine lettuce, a handful of English peas, broccoli florets, and slices of kiwi and strawberries.

Bernard, a third-grade student at Shull Elementary School, said he's always loved vegetables, but recently discovered a new-found love - crisp, green English snap peas.

"I love them," he said, as he broke one in half, dunked it in some ranch dressing and crammed it into his mouth. "I also love this salad bar because I know I'm getting a healthy lunch."

Since early January, Shull Elementary School students twice a week are treated to a full salad bar with locally grown produce.

The salad bar program was put in place with help from Advocates for Healthy Living Inc., a non-profit group headquartered in San Dimas.

Maurice Cuellar, the organization's founder, approached Shull and nearby Gladstone elementary school officials, and Bonita Unified School District officials a few months about piloting the salad bar.

A $5,000 grant awarded to each school paid for extra kitchen utensils and a stylish navy blue food bar complete with small compartments of varying sizes to be filled with different fruits and vegetables.

With his association with 15 different farms throughout Southern and Central California, Cuellar's long-term plan is to expand the program to more than two days at the schools, and to have salad bar programs in low-income schools in the
Advertisement
Click here to find out more!
San Gabriel Valley.

"I believe the better brain food, the better the students perform in the classroom," he said last week during Shull's lunch time.

Cuellar rattled off the origins of all the vegetables and fruits available to Shull students that day - the strawberries were from Industry, the broccoli, carrots, naval oranges and English snap peas came down the road from from Cal Poly Pomona, kiwi from Redlands, spinach came in from Costa Mesa, and the romaine lettuce was brought in from Santa Maria.

"Everything's local and fresh," he said, adding that otherwise the students would be getting bagged vegetable from Texas or Florida or worse - canned varieties.

ChrisAnn Horsley, Shull's principal, said the new salad bar fulfills a long-term goal of hers.

"We have always wanted something like this," Horsley said, adding that school officials are enforcing a rule of fresh fruits and vegetables at all times. That means high fat and sugary cupcakes and other treats are out.

Horsley said that most amazing part is seeing just how much students enjoy eating vegetables.

"It's just incredible to see how much they put on their plates," she marveled.

As he watched Shull students pile romaine and spinach leaves on their plastic trays, Cuellar stood by and encouraged students to sample slices of blood oranges. The deep red color was off-putting to some students, he said.

"Try it. It's just like a regular orange. It tastes the same," he said.

Third-grader Tsai Arellano grabbed a blood orange wedge, and just to be safe, a naval orange slice, too.

"The color is a little weird," Tsai said, eyeing the crimson colored blood orange slice.

After taking a bite, Tsai's verdict was "it's good."

"However, I think I'll stick with naval oranges anyway," he said.

$57.7-million fence added to an already grueling illegal immigration route

$57.7-million fence added to an already grueling illegal immigration route
Some question the cost, effectiveness and environmental effect of erecting a fence on Otay Mountain, where those who hiked three days up a steep, arid peak were often met by border agents anyway.

Reporting from San Diego - The border barrier dips and curves, zigs and zags, hugging the mountain's contours like a slimmed-down version of the Great Wall of China.

Among the costliest stretch of fencing ever built on the U.S.-Mexico border, the 3.6-mile wall of steel completed last fall is meant to block trafficking routes over Otay Mountain, just east of San Diego.

People seeking to enter the country illegally have hiked the scrub-covered, tarantula-infested peak for years, trying to get to roads leading to San Diego.

"We're no longer conceding this area to smugglers," said Jerome C. Conlin, a U.S. Border Patrol spokesman.

But critics are bewildered. Why, they ask, would people determined to scale a rugged, 3,500-foot peak be deterred by an 18-foot-high fence? They also point out that the Department of Homeland Security deemed it unnecessary in 2006.

"I think it's a Bush-era boondoggle that will have almost no consequence in terms of stemming the flow of immigration," said Char Miller, director of the environmental analysis program at Pomona College. "It was a political decision that took in no account of the environment itself, and in the process damages what was once a pretty remarkable landscape."

The $57.7-million project is one segment in the massive expansion of border infrastructure approved by Congress during George W. Bush's presidency. Homeland Security has erected fencing in small towns, remote valleys and high-desert mesas from the Pacific Ocean to Texas.

At about $16 million a mile, the Otay Mountain barrier cost about four times as much as similar border fencing built during this expansion, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office.

The Border Patrol's San Diego sector was already one of the country's most heavily fortified frontiers before the mountain fence was constructed, with about 40 of the sector's 60 miles lined with vehicle or pedestrian barriers.

The fencing shifted immigrant flows to remote areas in the backcountry east of San Diego. But some migrants decided to climb Otay Mountain because of its proximity to a warehouse district in San Diego and its easy access on the Mexican side, where the Tijuana-Tecate toll road lies only a few hundred yards away.

Immigrants dropped off at staging grounds off the toll road headed up steep trails into the U.S. Their hikes through canyons and over the arid peak could take up to three days. With limited road access on the mountain, agents simply waited for people to descend to make arrests.

The lack of fencing did not seem to be a problem, said then-U.S. Border Patrol spokesman Richard Kite, interviewed in a 2006 article in the Arizona Daily Star. At Otay Mountain, "you simply don't need a fence. It's such harsh terrain it's difficult to walk, let alone drive," Kite said. "There's no reason to disrupt the land when the land itself is a physical barrier."

The agency said it changed course after reevaluating conditions in the area. Daryl Reed, a current Border Patrol spokesman, said strategies are in constant flux depending on quickly shifting migrant flows and smuggler activity.

"As we continue in our mission, we're always reevaluating situations," Reed said. "We're always going to adapt and change."

One analyst suggested that pressure from Congress to complete about 700 miles of fence led federal officials to approve some questionable projects.

"There's no question that there's tactical justification for certain fencing, but when you set up a target like that, it inevitably means that they're going to build fencing where the tactical justification is weak, and this sounds like one of those places," said Edward Alden, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

But others doubted that border authorities would spend resources in an area that didn't need it.

"If there were other better places to build fencing, then I'm confident the Border Patrol would build it there," said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies.

When the federal government broke ground last year, environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, said the project would damage the Otay Mountain Wilderness. Portions of the fence and the 5-mile access road lie in the federally protected area.

The federal government, trying to expedite construction of border fencing, waived more than 30 environmental laws in 2008, including the Wilderness Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act and others that environmentalists said applied to the Otay area.

Contractors had to cut roads, remove boulders, bulldoze hillsides and remove about 530,000 cubic yards of rock to build the Otay fence, which consists of steel posts 4 inches apart topped with metal plates.

It's not clear whether the fence has been a deterrent.

Since the barrier's completion in October, illegal activity has declined and there have been few signs of people trying to cut or breach the fence, authorities say.

"Having this fence here is definitely going to slow them down. . . . It increases our probability of catching them," said Conlin, the Border Patrol spokesman.

But others say the fence's effectiveness hasn't been truly tested because fewer immigrants have been attempting to cross anywhere on the border due to the economic slowdown.

The funding, they said, could have been better spent hiring more agents or building infrastructure in other areas.

When the economy improves, the mountain will once again draw immigrants, fence or no fence, said Pedro Rios, director of the American Friends Service Committee in San Diego.

"It seems to me, if someone is able to climb the mountains in the Otay Wilderness, a 15-foot wall will not make a difference," he said.

FSIS Curious, Not Too Curious Food Safety News

FSIS Curious, Not Too Curious Food Safety News
by Dan Flynn | Feb 15, 2010
When tests for the deadly E. coli O157:H7 pathogen come back with positive results, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) makes sure the product does not reach consumers, but that's about it.

Nobody tracks down the source of contamination or figures out if there might be additional meat that is contaminated and making its way to consumers.

"Why are they doing these investigations if they're not doing them to put their arms around all the product and finding out what went wrong?" Donna Rosenbaum asked the Chicago Tribune. She is executive director of Safe Tables Our Priority, the food safety group based in Northbrook, IL.

According to the Chicago newspaper, full-blown investigations only occur if there is an outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 illnesses. Outbreaks occur only when contaminated meat has reached consumers.

When tests for E. coli O157:H7 are positive outside of an outbreak scenario, USDA does not conduct such an investigation. The contaminated product may not be shipped, but that's it.

"We're paying so much money for the (testing) program, and it's not being used to protect the public to the best of its ability," Rosenbaum added.

USDA says the reason positive test results do not trigger a full-blown investigation is that the risk is low. The number of positive test results not associated with outbreaks is also low--less than 60 a year since 2001. Food safety advocates say that would not add that much to FSIS's investigative load.

Consumer groups want Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to step-up investigations for routine tests that come back positive. The American Meat Institute, however, says a "test and hold" requirement would be more effective. That would require meat processors to have test results in hand before shipping their product.

The industry-led AMI figures "test and hold" could have prevented 80 percent of the E. coli O157:H7 recalls last year, and all 2009 recalls for Listeria.

US troops fight, then work to win hearts, minds AP

US troops fight, then work to win hearts, minds AP

By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA (AP) – 1 day ago

BADULA QULP, Afghanistan — As U.S. Marines fought Taliban insurgents down the road, Army 1st Lt. Daniel Hickok hunted Afghan men willing to repair an irrigation canal for cash.

It's a tall order in a Taliban-controlled area where some villagers are scared to take money from the Americans.

Yet in the revised U.S. war strategy, the fight against the insurgents is as important as winning the allegiance and confidence of Afghan citizens. For American soldiers here, their days are often a mix of winning hearts and minds and fighting a determined enemy.

A rumble of explosions could be heard shortly before Hickok, of Puyallup, Wash., and his soldiers from the 4th Battalion, 23rd Infantry, left their Stryker armored vehicles Saturday and walked into farm fields in search of laborers.

Repairing the irrigation canals is an important step toward reviving agriculture in the area. And the Americans were offering hard cash for anyone willing to work.

But conditions for sustained economy-building appeared a long way off.

"Once we're up here, just kind of spread out and try not to look menacing," Hickok told his men as they approached a home near the canal.

The area is about six miles (10 kilometers) from Marjah in Helmand province where thousands of Marines and Afghan soldiers launched a massive offensive on Saturday to break the insurgents' grip over a wide swath of southern Afghanistan.

The conversation with a farmer seemed positive at first. But it was ultimately inconclusive — an illustration, perhaps, of the difficulty of winning over civilians who know the Taliban are a longterm presence, and that the Americans will eventually leave.

Staff Sgt. Christopher Wootton of Richmond, Va., serving with the 422nd Civil Affairs Battalion, asked the farmer if he could fix a stretch of canal road — a dirt, uneven, narrow track that became unstable in recent rains and restricted movement of the heavy Stryker infantry vehicles.

An Afghan interpreter, known colloquially by the Americans as a "terp," translated into the local language, Pashto.

But the discussion progressed haltingly, with the "terp" seeming to have trouble keeping up with the conversation.

"You might want to stick with shorter sentences," Hickok suggested to Wootton.

Eventually, the farmer, whose construction skills seemed a big question mark, agreed to travel to the provincial capital of Lashkar Gah about 15 miles (24 kilometers) away to buy pipes and other building materials for the road. Wootton gave him 7,500 Afghanis in banknotes, or about $160, filled out a receipt and photographed the man as he took it.

The farmer, however, wasn't sure whether American troops on the road to Lashkar Gah would allow him to pass, and whether there were roadside bombs, a lethal threat to American forces.

"He's going to have to do the best he can do to get down to Lashkar Gah as safely as possible," Wootton said to the interpreter. He gave the man an English-language note of safe passage, and warned him to conceal it in case any Taliban found it and called him a collaborator.

In a parting gesture, Wootton cleaned and bandaged the injured finger of an elderly man at the farmhouse. Later, he said the meeting was the most positive in several days of interviewing villagers.

"A lot of guys are unwilling to do anything," he said. "They're worried about the Taliban."

Hours later, soldiers from the same company got into a firefight further up the road with insurgents who ducked in and out of buildings, and moved around on motorcycles. Fragments of military radio chatter played out the confrontation.

"Can you shoot him with a 50 cal?" someone asked, a reference to a 50-caliber machine gun.

"I don't have a shot," came the reply.

Then news came that a suspected insurgent was down.

And the fight went on:

"There's a guy in the second-floor window who's playing peekaboo with us."

Then came a report that a U.S. Army sniper was shot in the hand, and that the bullet had apparently deflected into his shoulder. A chopper was called in to evacuate him.

In this one village in southern Afghanistan, a day that began with a peace gesture ended on a note of war.

The pros and cons of non-CO2 sustainability - Tree Hugger

The pros and cons of non-CO2 sustainability - Tree Hugger

From my musings on whether environmentalism is a movement or not to Brian's piece on why religious language on Global Warming is a mistake, it's common for commenters to argue that greens focus too much on climate change. After all, everyone can get behind energy efficiency, cleaner air and water, and prestine nature—whether or not they believe that manmade global warming is a real and present danger. So should we be focusing more on non-CO2 benefits of sustainability, and does climate change even matter?

On the surface of things, these commenters have a point. Sustainability has always had so much more to offer than a simple cut in carbon emissions. One editorial cartoon I saw recently made the case perfectly. Of course I now can't find the original to share, so I'll paraphrase:

(Question to climate change speaker from audience.) "Excuse me. But what if we do build walkable communities? What if we do create an energy independent nation? What if we do clean our air and our water? What if we regenerate our forests, protect wilderness and improve the performance of our buildings? What if we create fertile, productive soils? What if we do all that, and Global Warming turns out to be a hoax?! Won't it all have been for nothing?"

Certainly, we need to be careful not to focus entirely on carbon emissions. We must make the case for sustainability as an opportunity to rethink every aspect of our 20th Century infrastructure. Even if someone believes that climate "gate" (anyone else sick of "gates"?) really did expose the biggest and most implausibly intricate conspiracy ever conceived of, it is hard to argue against the fact that America would be better off if it was less dependent on foreign oil, and wasn't reliant on blowing up its mountain tops to create electricity. At the heart of it, sustainability is nothing more than solid, strategic common sense.

Having said that, I think it would be foolish to ignore the pressing need to cut carbon emissions, just because a certain segment of the population (and vested interest climate lobby groups) believe it to be a contentious issue. It's true that the behavior of a few scientists at CRU has proven to be disappointing, to say the least, and that the IPCC has exhibited some shoddy procedures to identify non-peer reviewed literature, but that doesn't change the fact that a vast majority of the world's climate scientists believe that climate change is real. (To those who argue that appeals to expertise and consensus mean nothing in science, they are right—but they mean everything in scientifically-informed policy making.)

There is a strong moral case for continuing to push for CO2 reductions, even if it is harder work in the short term. As someone recently argued to me, if someone was about to get on a plane which 9 out of 10 aeronautical engineers said was unsafe, but which 3 chiropractors, a nuclear physicist and the owner of the airline said was just fine, there would be a strong moral compunction for us to continue to warn the passengers—even if they didn't want to hear it.

There is also the fact that we have limited time, and resources, to pursue sustainability, so we need to target our efforts effectively. If a majority of scientists, including some of the most esteemed National academies of countries across the Globe, tell us that cutting carbon emissions is a precondition for stable and prosperous future generations, then we would be foolish to concentrate purely on energy independence, or any other pillar of sustainability. From coal gasification to tar sands there are plenty of sources of domestic fossil fuels that could helps us achieve energy independence. Sadly, they would do so at the cost of the climate.

In the end, it comes down to "both-and", not "either-or". By all means, we need to keep pushing the idea that sustainability is a win-win situation, and that green development brings so much more than low carbon emissions. It also makes sense to hone our message to our audience—if someone I know is pre-disposed to believe that Al Gore really is out to run the world, and I am just one of his satanic minions, then of course I am more likely to make the case that sending money to Saudi Arabia is stupid, whichever way you look at it.

But until there is some compelling evidence, not just that certain climate scientists have acted foolishly, but that climate change is not, and is not likely to be, a clear and present danger, we need to keep pushing for CO2 cuts. Let's just make sure that's not all we do.

USDA announces new framework for animal disease traceability - FeedStuffs

USDA announces new framework for animal disease traceability - FeedStuffs

(2/5/2010)

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced Feb. 5 that it will develop "a new, flexible framework for animal disease traceability" in the U.S. and undertake several other actions to further strengthen its disease prevention and response capabilities.

"After concluding our listening tour on the National Animal Identification System in 15 cities across the country, receiving thousands of comments from the public and input from states, tribal nations, industry groups and representatives for small and organic farmers, it is apparent that a new strategy for animal disease traceability is needed," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "I've decided to revise the prior policy and offer a new approach to animal disease traceability with changes that respond directly to the feedback we heard."

The framework, announced at the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) mid-year meeting, provides the basic tenets of an improved animal disease traceability capability in the U.S. USDA said its efforts will:

* Only apply to animals moved in interstate commerce;
* Be administered by the states and tribal nations to provide more flexibility;
* Encourage the use of lower-cost technology, and
* Be implemented transparently through federal regulations and the full rulemaking process.

One of USDA's first steps will be to convene a forum with animal health leaders for the states and tribal nations to initiate a dialogue about the possible ways of achieving a flexible, coordinated approach to animal disease traceability. Additionally, USDA will be revamping the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health to address specific issues, such as confidentiality and liability.

More information on USDA's new direction on animal traceability and the steps to improve disease prevention and control is available at www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability.

Grandparent care 'could increase risk of obesity' - Bounty

Grandparent care 'could increase risk of obesity' - Bounty


Youngsters who are often looked after by their grandparents could have a higher risk of developing weight problems as they grow older, it has been reported.

According to a study published in the International Journal of Obesity, children could be at a 34 per cent higher risk of being overweight if they are regularly cared for by their granddad and grandma, reported the BBC.

In total, 12,000 three-year-old children were studied for the research, which also found that those youngsters who go to nursery or had a childminder had no increased risk of becoming obese later in life.

The study also looked at the background and social demographic of the children and found that children with mothers who work in a managerial or professional job, who also have a university degree and who live with their partner, had a higher risk of obesity.

New rules around school dinners were recently introduced in England and are designed to help children eat healthily and avoid sugary and fatty foods.

Global Warming Skeptics Lambaste Plan to Increase Funding for Climate Change Research - FoxNews

Global Warming Skeptics Lambaste Plan to Increase Funding for Climate Change Research - FoxNews

By Gene J. Koprowski

- FOXNews.com

Global warming skeptics are agog that President Obama is seeking to dramatically increase federal funding for global warming research in the wake of the Climate-gate scandals that have emerged during the last three months.

Global warming skeptics are agog that President Obama is seeking to dramatically increase federal funding for global warming research in the wake of the Climate-gate scandals that have emerged during the last three months.

The federal budget for 2011 proposes $2.6 billion for the Global Change Research Program, a 21 percent boost over 2010. It will bring funding to a level higher than under any administration dating back to 1989 -- when global warming first attracted federal budget funds.

In fact, critics note, overall climate funding is approximately as large as the entire federal government's budget was in 1932 -- $3.994 billion. (Additional money for climate science is apportioned to a number of federal agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation.)

Critics are lambasting the Obama administration, saying it remains unfazed by the revelations of Climate-gate: doctored research statistics by British environmental scientists, attempts to discredit skeptics of global warming science, and disclosures that the U.N.'s own Nobel-Prize-winning climate science research was based on faulty research about the Amazon rain forest and Himalayan ice caps.

Some public policy experts are expressing outrage that the White House is seeking to boost global warming research funding. "Spending more money on research does not necessarily lead to concrete results," Norm Rogers, a senior policy adviser at the Chicago think-tank The Heartland Institute, told FoxNews.com.

He said tens of billions of dollars have been spent on climate research in the last 20 years, and there remains no consensus on the science.

Another expert, Professor Don Easterbrook at Western Washington University's department of geology, said the federal money "ought to be spent carrying out real research on the climate."

Easterbrook said most of the federal funds so far have been spent on what he terms "political science," which aims to find a manmade cause of global warming when there are any number of ways to investigate the causes of temperature change. These are political motivations rather than purely scientific reasons, he said.

"This is a travesty," he told FoxNews.com.

But other scientists applauded the proposed boost in federal money for climate research.

"Funding for neglected basic research in geophysics, climate, and allied sciences is welcome," said Dallas C. Kennedy, a physicist with a doctorate from Stanford University. Kennedy believes those fields have seen dwindling resources in recent years, and money spent on them will yield better science.

The administration's proposed changes include the creation of a new federal agency that will serve as a clearinghouse for climate-change data and resources. U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke explained the potential benefits, saying "we'll discover new technologies, build new businesses and create new jobs."

Howard Hayden, a professor of physics at the University of Connecticut who runs a newsletter called The Energy Advocate, said he believes good data has been gleaned from 20 years of global warming research. "The data collection is useful and necessary," he said.

Another scientist, Dr. Mitchell Taylor of the department of geography at Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, Ont., said funding priorities for the federal government need to be reshaped. There should be an "independent reconciliation" of the climate-change data that has been researched by the government and private institutions, he told FoxNews.com. He is calling for an independent body of experts -- including critics of the global warming hypothesis -- to sort through all the conflicting research.

What's more, he said, the government should re-frame research to look critically at the global warming hypothesis in light of the recent data and "investigate in a fair and balanced manner alternative explanations for climate change."

What, exactly, will the American taxpayer get for its global warming research dollars? The EPA is spending $43 million to implement the greenhouse-gas reporting rule, to perform regulatory work for the largest stationary sources of greenhouse gases, and to develop new standards for cars and trucks.

Research being funded at the National Science Foundation seeks to promote "discoveries needed to inspire societal actions leading to environmental and economic sustainability," according to an agency statement. The NSF's portfolio for global warming will reach $766 million.

NSF and EPA spokesmen in Washington did not return e-mails requesting additional comment on the increased spending. But a fact sheet from the White House Office of Management and Budget portrays the global warming funding as part of the Obama administration's new jobs-creation policy, which aims at making the U.S. "the world leader in developing the clean energy technologies that will lead to the industries and jobs of tomorrow."

Last year's budget provided $2.0 billion for the climate science program, a figure that doesn't include the half a billion in stimulus money that the White House directed to global warming, as Obama's science adviser recently told Congress.

"Investments in climate science over the past several decades have contributed to an improved understanding of the global climate," said John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, in testimony before a House committee.

Bryan Murphy and Sueanne Lee contributed to this report.

Social media is just another way to report, take in events

Social media is just another way to report, take in events

by Bill Goodykoontz - Feb. 14, 2010 12:00 AM
The Arizona Republic

For me, the social-media progression was typical.

When I started blogging, my stories seemed long. When I started using Facebook, my blog posts seemed long. Then I started using Twitter, and my Facebook updates seemed long.

Eventually we'll probably be pared down to using telepathy to transmit a single word that will represent our thoughts and moods.

Or not.

Whatever the case, once you really buy into social media, you usually do so in a big way.

Case in point: For the first time in more than 15 years, I didn't have to work on Super Bowl Sunday.

So, like most football fans, I attended a Super Bowl party to watch the New Orleans Saints defeat the Indianapolis Colts. Good friends, excellent food and an entertaining game. Pretty much all you could ask for in a sports-related social occasion.

Naturally, I spent a lot of time tweeting.

Yes. On Twitter, sitting on a couch sending 140-character dispatches into the ether, where those who follow me could read them; I, likewise, could do the same with the messages sent by those whom I follow. Happily, I wasn't sending tweets, as the messages are known, to anyone else in the room; that would have been, you know, sad. We can still talk, after all, and we did.

But social media - Twitter, Facebook and the like - are clearly having an impact on how we experience events, big and small. The Golden Globes spawned a steady stream of updates in January. When Tracy Porter intercepted a Peyton Manning pass in the Super Bowl, so many people were tweeting about it that the service reportedly overloaded for a few minutes. And you can bet the upcoming Academy Awards will leave smartphone users with sore thumbs the next day, as movie fans critique the broadcast and bellyache about the winners and losers in real time.

It's like a virtual party. It's not a substitute for genuine human interaction - no cold beer available on the Twitter universe's Super Bowl celebration, to give one example - but it is a valuable tool, both socially and otherwise. And if you're missing out, well, you're missing out.

Social media is undergoing both an enormous boom in popularity as well as the predictable backlash. The common complaint is echoed in everything involving the Internet, which can be boiled down to these three words: Get a life.

Who cares what you had for breakfast? Why would anyone want to know that your adorable toddler spit up all over Santa's beard? Are we supposed to be fascinated by the fact that you are having a cup of coffee at your favorite shop?

In a word: no. And it's true, there is plenty of navel-gazing involved in social media. It's a free world, after all, and no one can prevent you from posting self-important minutiae. But that freedom is also what's great about services like Twitter and Facebook. For all the seconds of life you waste reading about someone's decision to go with the purple sweater instead of the orange one, you'll more than make up for it in more-valuable interaction.

Take the Super Bowl. As Keith Marder, a real-estate agent living in New York City, put it: "My iPhone feels like a sports bar in the palm of my hand, as opposed to Sarah Palin, who keeps crib notes in hers."

That response, fittingly, was delivered over Twitter, and it encapsulates the experience nicely. Marder, whom I follow on the service, answered a question I have about whether it had changed the way people experience these events, and he also worked in a snarky political comment, all in 140 characters or less. It's fun.

But it's not just fun. Social media is also evolving into a way of reporting - and reading about - quickly developing stories, as well as commenting on them as they happen.

Mark McGuire, a New York sports columnist, said by way of Facebook: "It has certainly changed the way I report things, especially breaking stuff. There is something lost in depth (less time), but the immediacy and interaction are valuable for both the writer and the reader - who, when you think about it, alternate roles."

Again, particularly when it comes to reporting, social media is no substitute for a fully formed story. But it is a convenient way to keep up with news as it's happening, whetting the appetite for the in-depth reporting that will come later.

Ultimately, social media isn't a better form of communication than any other, nor is it necessarily a worse one. It's simply a different one, another source to enjoy and from which to glean information. How can you argue with that?

On Twitter or Facebook, of course, for all the world to see.

The Year in Foreclosures NYT

The Year in Foreclosures NYT


Last week offered some sobering news on the housing market: Even with broad government support for housing, data from the National Association of Realtors showed that the median price of single-family homes continued to decline in 2009. RealtyTrac, an online marketer of foreclosed properties, said foreclosure filings rose by 15 percent in January compared with a year ago.
Skip to next paragraph
Related
Select Editorials on Financial Regulation

Foreclosure is generally a long process, with multiple filings as delinquent borrowers fall ever further behind. What is most ominous about the latest RealtyTrac numbers is that nearly 88,000 people had their homes repossessed in January, a 31 percent increase from a year ago. The big jump indicates that many foreclosures that were in process in 2009 are now beginning to move to repossession and, eventually, auction. With more than four million homes in that pipeline, the foreclosure crisis shows no sign of abating.

Worse, as The Times’s Peter Goodman recently reported, the Obama administration’s antiforeclosure plan (which pays cash incentives to mortgage companies that lower monthly payments for troubled borrowers) may be doing more harm than good for some borrowers.

Before a lender will permanently modify a loan under the plan, eligible borrowers must go through a trial period — several months in which they keep current on reduced monthly payments. For some borrowers, even a reduced payment is too onerous, leading to redefault. Others reported being denied a permanent modification even after keeping up the trial payments. In both cases, the borrowers do not avoid foreclosure, and are out the money they have paid during the trial period. That is money they could have spent moving to a rental home or for other purposes.

There is an emerging consensus among financial experts and policy makers that the key to successful modifications is to reduce the amount of the borrower’s loan balance, rather than merely reducing the monthly payment. The goal is to lower the payment while restoring equity, thus giving borrowers both the means and the incentive to keep up with their payments.

Administration officials have resisted that approach, in part because they believe it would be too expensive. Another obstacle is the lenders themselves. In general, a lender is unwilling to take losses by reducing principal unless the owners of the second mortgage on a home also take a hit. For banks that own the second mortgages, such losses would be huge — something they clearly would prefer not to face up to.

Banks’ unwillingness to take losses on second mortgages may also be holding up so-called short sales, in which a lender agrees to retire a first-mortgage debt by taking the proceeds from the sale of the home, even when the amount is less than the mortgage balance.

Last April, the Treasury detailed a plan to get second-mortgage owners to write down their debt once the first mortgage is modified. But until recently, when Bank of America signed on, no banks had cooperated.

Unless the banks can be compelled to get on board — allowing principal reductions to become the norm — the antiforeclosure effort may have more success in letting banks postpone their losses than in helping Americans keep their homes.

How supermarkets can cut 'thousands of prices' but your bills may go up - The Guardian

How supermarkets can cut 'thousands of prices' but your bills may go up - The Guardian

Christmas would not be Christmas without a supermarket price war, and last November two of the leading UK retailers duly kicked off the battle for the nation's festive spend by announcing that they were cutting millions of pounds off prices in their stores.

Tesco said it was cutting its prices by £250m and Asda said it would roll back prices to the tune of £150m.

Persuading customers that they represent better value for money than their rivals, at a time of year when people traditionally increase their grocery spending significantly, is vital to supermarkets meeting their end-of-year profit targets. But it has become almost impossible for shoppers to know what, if anything, the discounts actually mean for them.

The Guardian looked at data provided by third party analysts on thousands of prices in Tesco and Asda between 9 and 22 December, when most people will have done their big Christmas shop. As well as the thousands of price cuts promoted by the supermarkets, we identified thousands of price rises – some of them more than doubling the price of key purchases. The list of increases, taken from information on the supermarkets' online stores which they say is reflected nationally in their shops, is published on our website.

We asked Professor John Bridgeman, who as director of the Office of Fair Trading led official inquiries into the big UK supermarkets, to analyse and interpret the figures for us. The data shows that between 9 and 22 December Asda increased prices on more than 2,000 lines while Tesco upped the price of over 1,500 lines. Bridgeman's view was that the rises we found represented "a systematic, cynical and aggressive attempt to exploit demand over Christmas and force prices up".

The net effect of these rises and cuts on consumer bills is hard for anyone outside the industry to say. Whether you benefited or lost out depends on what you put in your basket over that period. Of the goods that increased, the average price rise in Tesco was 29p on 16 December and 35p on 22 December. In Asda, the average rise on those products going up was 48p over the period. Tesco pointed out that it cut the prices of 2,638 food and non-food products with an average decrease of 54p over the same period and that 180 of these products had their price halved.

Averages for price increases and cuts are difficult to read, as they can be skewed by dramatic changes on high value items. If a supermarket cuts the price of a crate of beer in half as a loss leader, for example, offering a saving of several pounds, and cuts thousands of other products by just 1p, the number of cuts and the average saving may look attractive but give virtually nothing to those not buying the beer. Average price rises may look more or less dramatic for the same reason.

Asda said the majority of price increases we had identified were on products that had been on a four-week promotion that finished before Christmas when they reverted to "their original low price". It said shoppers could now check all its prices against those of its rivals by using online comparison sites such as mysupermarket.com "which proves that Asda has more low prices every single week in 2009" than any other supermarket.

Tesco also rejected Bridgeman's interpretation of the data, saying it was totally wrong to suggest that it had a policy of forcing prices up for consumers in the runup to Christmas. It said the price rises were explained by a variety of factors: in the majority of cases by products that had been discounted coming off promotion in the weeks we checked, or by suppliers increasing wholesale prices to the retailer, or by Tesco changing prices to bring them in line with the market. As some promotions ended, others began.

"The Guardian has used a skewed and unrepresentative sample of products to makes a series of partial and misleading accusations which misrepresent Tesco and the highly competitive market in which we operate. It is wrong to seek to draw broad conclusions from a small number of products," it said in a statement.

Bridgeman accepts that price rises are sometimes a reflection of increased costs from suppliers, but believes the number and size of the rises we have found shows Tesco and Asda using the Christmas period to "extract maximum profit" from shoppers who are too busy to go elsewhere. The rises are targeted, he points out, at heavy store cupboard goods and essentials for the holiday period. He said the Guardian investigation stood out in a field where there was very little independent tracking of supermarkets pricing strategies.

A clearer picture of the impact of supermarket pricing policies should emerge soon from Loughborough University where Paul Dobson, professor of retailing, has been conducting a five-year study of prices at Tesco, Sainsbury's, Asda and Morrisons. His research has found that the most common price cut among the big four is just 1p. Such low cuts that have little impact on the price of a full basket might seem pointless, but introducing small changes on large numbers of goods enables the supermarkets to claim that they are cutting thousands of lines. Over the five years, according to Dobson, these small cuts have been used to mask serious price hikes on a smaller number of lines with a big net effect on bills. "In the big inflationary period of 2008, there were two and a half times the numbers of price cuts in the big four as price rises, but in fact prices overall were rising very rapidly," he told us.

Dobson has also tracked supermarket behaviour in the Christmas period over the five years. He has observed heavy discounting on headline, loss-leading products such as turkey and alcohol, but significant price rises on other goods being imposed at the same time.

"Retailers are happy to tell us about their price cuts but they forget to tell us about the price rises. We keep hearing about a price war but it's the most curious price war I've ever heard of, where you can't detect an overall drop in price levels or a fall in profits."

Galvin votes for school nutrition bill - Canton Journal

Galvin votes for school nutrition bill - Canton Journal


By Staff reports
Canton Journal


State Rep. Bill Galvin, D-Canton, joined his colleagues in the Massachusetts House of Representatives in passing legislation that would ban the sale of unhealthy competitive foods and drinks in state public schools.

The bill – modeled after the recommendations of a 2007 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report – calls for a ban on unhealthy competitive foods and beverages that do not meet scientifically-based nutritional standards and are not part of federal meal programs. It also would require schools to sell non-fried foods and vegetables at any location where foods are sold.

“I am confident that the legislation approved by the House today will achieve real progress in the efforts to improve student health and fight childhood obesity and the health problems associated with it,” Galvin said.

The bill’s provisions will apply to public elementary schools, middle schools and high schools. The legislation does not prohibit high school students from purchasing food sold off school ground during breaks. Additionally, parents will be allowed to give their children any type of food to bring to school.

Other provisions of the bill include: continuing education of school nurses, nutrition and exercise instruction in schools, collection and reporting of obesity trends and the establishment of a farm to school program developed by the Departments of Elementary and Secondary Education and Agricultural Resources.

The legislation establishes nutrition standards as set by the IOM’s April 2007 report, “Nutrition Standards for Foods in Schools: Leading the Way Toward Healthier Youth.” This groundbreaking report was commissioned by Congress and was written in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in order to make recommendations for the appropriate nutritional content of foods sold in competition with federal meal programs.

The American Heart Association has confirmed that childhood obesity is one of the most critical public health issues facing our nation today, threatening to reverse the last half century’s gains in reducing cardiovascular disease and related deaths. One-third of children aged two to five years are either at risk for being overweight or are already overweight. In Massachusetts, 29 percent of middle school students are overweight or obese. Studies show that these children are more likely than their peers to be absent from school, experience low self-esteem and become obese adults.

Obesity-related diseases such as Type II diabetes and heart disease will ultimately require life-long chronic disease management that can significantly reduce quality of life while increasing health care costs. From 1979 to 1999, obesity-associated hospital costs tripled for children and youth.

Schools face big budget holes as stimulus runs out- AP

Schools face big budget holes as stimulus runs out- AP

By TERENCE CHEA (AP) – 15 hours ago

SAN FRANCISCO — The nation's public schools are falling under severe financial stress as states slash education spending and drain federal stimulus money that staved off deep classroom cuts and widespread job losses.

School districts have already suffered big budget cuts since the recession began two years ago, but experts say the cash crunch will get a lot worse as states run out of stimulus dollars.

The result in many hard-hit districts: more teacher layoffs, larger class sizes, smaller paychecks, fewer electives and extracurricular activities, and decimated summer school programs.

The situation is particularly ugly in California, where school districts are preparing for mass layoffs and swelling class sizes as the state grapples with another massive budget shortfall.

The crisis concerns parents like Michelle Parker in San Francisco, where the school district is preparing to lay off hundreds of school employees and raise class sizes because it faces a $113 million budget deficit over next two years.

"I'm worried they're not going to have the quality education that's going to make them competitive in a global society," said Parker, who has three kids in district elementary schools.

Around the country, state governments are cutting money for schools as they grapple with huge budget gaps triggered by high unemployment, sluggish retail sales and falling real estate prices. A recent report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that 41 states face midyear budget shortfalls totaling $35 billion.

"The states are facing a dismal financial picture," said Jack Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy.

The Obama administration's $787 billion federal stimulus package provided roughly $100 billion for education, including $54 billion to stabilize state budgets. In October the White House said the stimulus created or saved 250,000 education jobs.

But many states have used most of their stimulus money, leaving little to cushion budget cuts in the coming fiscal year.

Experts say the looming cuts could weaken the nation's public schools, worsen unemployment, undermine President Obama's education goals and widen the achievement gap between students in rich and poor districts.

Wealthier communities are filling school budget gaps with local tax increases and aggressive fundraising, but could worsen inequality and undermine the larger system for paying for public schools, said John Rogers, who heads the UCLA Institute for Democracy, Education and Access.

In Michigan, which has the nation's highest unemployment rate, school districts lost 2 percent of their state money this year and could lose another 4 percent next year because of a projected government shortfall of $1.6 billion. Most of more than $1 billion in federal stimulus money is gone.

Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm has proposed an incentive program to entice about 39,000 public school employees to retire, but that plan has been criticized by the state's largest teachers union.

"Our districts don't know what the next step is," said Don Wotruba, deputy director with the Michigan Association of School Boards.

In Washington state, school districts that lost $1.7 billion in state money over the past two years are bracing for another round of cuts as lawmakers try to plug a $2.8 billion state deficit.

Seattle Public Schools, the state's largest district, plans to lay off nonunion staff, freeze hiring, create more efficient bus routes and increase class sizes further to close an expected budget shortfall of $24 million.

In Florida, public schools are being squeezed by state budget cuts and an unexpected increase in student enrollment, including an influx of Haitian students in the aftermath of Haiti's devastating earthquake.

Districts have been coping by closing schools during breaks, cutting energy costs and changing transportation routes, but the next round of cuts is expected to hit classrooms.

"We're at a point now where you just can't stretch that rubber band any further," said Bill Montford, CEO of the Florida Association of District School Superintendents.

In California, school districts have already laid off thousands of teachers, increased class sizes and slashed academic programs.

But state officials are warning the worst is yet to come because the state has already handed out most of its $6 billion in stimulus money.

Per-pupil spending for K-12 schools fell 4 percent last year and would be slashed another 8 percent under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed budget for 2010-2011, according to the state Legislative Analyst's Office.

"It's cataclysmic. It hasn't been seen since the Great Depression," said Bruce Fuller, an education professor at the University of California, Berkeley. "Now you're talking about sizable layoffs and further increases in class sizes."

More districts are expected to look like Vallejo City Unified School District, which has laid off most of its middle school guidance counselors and no longer offers music or art in elementary school. Last year it laid off 60 of its 860 teachers and raised K-3 class sizes from 20 to 28 students, and officials are considering more layoffs and even bigger class sizes this year, said Christal Watts, who heads the teachers union.

Lori Peck, a first-grade teacher at Vallejo's Patterson Elementary School, said the larger class size means she can no longer give her students the individual attention they need.

"I feel like my class in general is further behind where they should be," Peck said. "My concern is they don't reach the standards by the end of the year."

In San Francisco, Superintendent Carlos Garcia said he's worried the cuts will reverse the district's progress in narrowing the achievement gap between black and Hispanic students and their white and Asian classmates.

"These cuts hurt some of our poorest and neediest kids," Garcia said. "The decisions that school boards and superintendents have to make pretty much go against the grain of everything we believe in."

Associated Press Writers Tim Martin in Lansing, Mich., Donna Gordon Blankinship in Seattle, and Christine Armario in Miami contributed to this story.