Mark WeisbrotThe Guardian Unlimited, 16 de agosto, 2012En Inglés

CEPR released a new report on Wednesday in conjunction with Rights Action on the circumstances and aftermath related to the May 11 shooting incident in Ahuas, Honduras, involving the Honduran police and DEA agents. Four local members of communities in this part of the Moskitia region were killed in the episode, and four others shot and injured. As was reported by the Associated Press in May, residents of the nearby village of Paptalaya were subsequently besieged by armed men whom residents described as wearing U.S. Army-style uniforms and speaking to each other in English.

CEPR’s Senior Associate for Policy Analysis Alexander Main traveled to Ahuas and Paptalaya, along with Rights Action’s Annie Bird and Karen Spring, and others, to investigate. During their July trip, they interviewed numerous survivors and eyewitnesses to the traumatic events, as well as U.S. Embassy officials and Honduran authorities. They also examined evidence, and talked to legal experts regarding the current progress, challenges and faults with the Honduran government’s delayed and flawed investigation into the incident. Their findings are the basis of the new 54-page report, “Collateral Damage of a Drug War: The May 11 Killings in Ahuas and the Impact of the U.S. War on Drugs in La Moskitia, Honduras.” It provides what is probably the most detailed account of the events so far. Among its key findings:

•    U.S. Embassy officials contradict what State Department officials had previously stated about the DEA's role in the operation. Whereas State had said the DEA played a "supportive role only," both the former head of the DEA for Honduras, Jim Kenney, and U.S. Ambassador to Honduras Lisa Kubiske told the report's authors in separate conversations that Honduran police in these operations respond in practice directly to DEA officials. In addition, many eyewitnesses say it was North Americans, in uniforms with US flags on them, who were in the middle of everything, and that it was North Americans who besieged the Paptalaya village, holding residents at gunpoint and assaulting some of them. This would also contradict the “supportive role only” description.

Dean Baker
Yahoo! Finance, August 17, 2012

This week, the Department of Labor (DOL) posted an invitation to states to apply for federal funds to promote work-sharing (officially called "short-time compensation") programs.  The total amount available is almost $100 million, with the largest amount -- over $11.5 million -- available for California (see this chart for how much each state could get).

Only states that have work-sharing programs that fit the new federal definition  in the Middle Class Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Act) can apply for these grants. The Act places states into 3 categories:

1. states with existing work-sharing programs that fit the new definition
2. states with existing programs that don't conform to the new definition
3. states that don't have work-sharing programs

The federal grants to promote work sharing are divvied up for 2 purposes:

1. 1/3 for implementation or improved administration of their programs -- such as upgrading processing systems
2. 2/3 for promotion and enrollment activities -- such as outreach to and education of employers about work-sharing

Since work sharing is voluntary on the part of employers, publicity and outreach by states is key to improving participation rates. These grants should help jumpstart such efforts. DOL provides a handy application checklist and sample quarterly progress report, along with other useful information about applying. If states fail to take advantage of these grants and the federal reimbursements, they'll be leaving significant funding on the table, at a time of tight state budgets.

Mark WeisbrotThe Guardian Unlimited, August 16, 2012En Español