Year Two Day 110 Obama Administration May 10, 2010 - History

Year Two Day 110 Obama Administration May 10, 2010 - History


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

10:00AM THE PRESIDENT, THE VICE PRESIDENT and Solicitor General Elena Kagan will attend an event; THE PRESIDENT and Solicitor General Kagan will deliver remarks

10:45AM THE PRESIDENT receives the Presidential Daily Briefing

Oval Office


12:05PM THE PRESIDENT meets with the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board

Oval Office


1:00PM THE PRESIDENT meets with senior advisors

Oval Office

2:30PM THE PRESIDENT holds a meeting to review BP efforts to stop the oil leak

Situation Room

4:00PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Secretary of the Treasury Geithner

Oval Office


4:30PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Secretary of Energy Chu

Oval Office

The days news was domintated by the decision of the President to Nominate Elana Kagan to the Supreme Court.


CIRCULAR A-110 REVISED 11/19/93 As Further Amended 9/30/99

1. Purpose. This Circular sets forth standards for obtaining consistency and uniformity among Federal agencies in the administration of grants to and agreements with institutions of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations.

2. Authority. Circular A-110 is issued under the authority of 31 U.S.C. 503 (the Chief Financial Officers Act), 31 U.S.C. 1111, 41 U.S.C. 405 (the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act), Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1970, and E.O. 11541 ("Prescribing the Duties of the Office of Management and Budget and the Domestic Policy Council in the Executive Office of the President").

3. Policy. Except as provided herein, the standards set forth in this Circular are applicable to all Federal agencies. If any statute specifically prescribes policies or specific requirements that differ from the standards provided herein, the provisions of the statute shall govern.

The provisions of the sections of this Circular shall be applied by Federal agencies to recipients. Recipients shall apply the provisions of this Circular to subrecipients performing substantive work under grants and agreements that are passed through or awarded by the primary recipient, if such subrecipients are organizations described in paragraph 1.

This Circular does not apply to grants, contracts, or other agreements between the Federal Government and units of State or local governments covered by OMB Circular A-102, "Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local Governments," and the Federal agencies' grants management common rule which standardized and codified the administrative requirements Federal agencies impose on State and local grantees. In addition, subawards and contracts to State or local governments are not covered by this Circular. However, this Circular applies to subawards made by State and local governments to organizations covered by this Circular. Federal agencies may apply the provisions of this Circular to commercial organizations, foreign governments, organizations under the jurisdiction of foreign governments, and international organizations.

4. Definitions. Definitions of key terms used in this Circular are contained in Section ___.2 in the Attachment.

5. Required Action. The specific requirements and responsibilities of Federal agencies and institutions of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations are set forth in this Circular. Federal agencies responsible for awarding and administering grants to and other agreements with organizations described in paragraph 1 shall adopt the language in the Circular unless different provisions are required by Federal statute or are approved by OMB.

6. OMB Responsibilities. OMB will review agency regulations and implementation of this Circular, and will provide interpretations of policy requirements and assistance to insure effective and efficient implementation. Any exceptions will be subject to approval by OMB, as indicated in Section ___.4 in the Attachment. Exceptions will only be made in particular cases where adequate justification is presented.

7. Information Contact. Further information concerning this Circular may be obtained by contacting the Office of Federal Financial Management, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503, telephone (202) 395-3993.

8. Termination Review Date. This Circular will have a policy review three years from date of issuance.

9. Effective Date. The standards set forth in this Circular which affect Federal agencies will be effective 30 days after publication of the final revision in the Federal Register. Those standards which Federal agencies impose on grantees will be adopted by agencies in codified regulations within six months after publication in the Federal Register. Earlier implementation is encouraged.

Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations

SUBPART A - GENERAL

SUBPART B - PRE-AWARD REQUIREMENTS

SUBPART C - POST-AWARD REQUIREMENTS

Financial and Program Management

Property Standards

Procurement Standards

Reports and Records

Termination and Enforcement

SUBPART D - AFTER-THE-AWARD REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX A - CONTRACT PROVISIONS

SUBPART A - General

___.1 Purpose. This Circular establishes uniform administrative requirements for Federal grants and agreements awarded to institutions of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations. Federal awarding agencies shall not impose additional or inconsistent requirements, except as provided in Sections ___.4, and ___.14 or unless specifically required by Federal statute or executive order. Non-profit organizations that implement Federal programs for the States are also subject to State requirements.

(a) Accrued expenditures means the charges incurred by the recipient during a given period requiring the provision of funds for: (1) goods and other tangible property received (2) services performed by employees, contractors, subrecipients, and other payees and, (3) other amounts becoming owed under programs for which no current services or performance is required.

(b) Accrued income means the sum of: (1) earnings during a given period from (i) services performed by the recipient, and (ii) goods and other tangible property delivered to purchasers, and (2) amounts becoming owed to the recipient for which no current services or performance is required by the recipient.

(c) Acquisition cost of equipment means the net invoice price of the equipment, including the cost of modifications, attachments, accessories, or auxiliary apparatus necessary to make the property usable for the purpose for which it was acquired. Other charges, such as the cost of installation, transportation, taxes, duty or protective in-transit insurance, shall be included or excluded from the unit acquisition cost in accordance with the recipient's regular accounting practices.

(d) Advance means a payment made by Treasury check or other appropriate payment mechanism to a recipient upon its request either before outlays are made by the recipient or through the use of predetermined payment schedules.

(e) Award means financial assistance that provides support or stimulation to accomplish a public purpose. Awards include grants and other agreements in the form of money or property in lieu of money, by the Federal Government to an eligible recipient. The term does not include: technical assistance, which provides services instead of money other assistance in the form of loans, loan guarantees, interest subsidies, or insurance direct payments of any kind to individuals and, contracts which are required to be entered into and administered under procurement laws and regulations.

(f) Cash contributions means the recipient's cash outlay, including the outlay of money contributed to the recipient by third parties.

(g) Closeout means the process by which a Federal awarding agency determines that all applicable administrative actions and all required work of the award have been completed by the recipient and Federal awarding agency.

(h) Contract means a procurement contract under an award or subaward, and a procurement subcontract under a recipient's or subrecipient's contract.

(i) Cost sharing or matching means that portion of project or program costs not borne by the Federal Government.

(j) Date of completion means the date on which all work under an award is completed or the date on the award document, or any supplement or amendment thereto, on which Federal sponsorship ends.

(k) Disallowed costs means those charges to an award that the Federal awarding agency determines to be unallowable, in accordance with the applicable Federal cost principles or other terms and conditions contained in the award.

(l) Equipment means tangible nonexpendable personal property including exempt property charged directly to the award having a useful life of more than one year and an acquisition cost of $5000 or more per unit. However, consistent with recipient policy, lower limits may be established.

(m) Excess property means property under the control of any Federal awarding agency that, as determined by the head thereof, is no longer required for its needs or the discharge of its responsibilities.

(n) Exempt property means tangible personal property acquired in whole or in part with Federal funds, where the Federal awarding agency has statutory authority to vest title in the recipient without further obligation to the Federal Government. An example of exempt property authority is contained in the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act (31 U.S.C. 6306), for property acquired under an award to conduct basic or applied research by a non-profit institution of higher education or non-profit organization whose principal purpose is conducting scientific research.

(o) Federal awarding agency means the Federal agency that provides an award to the recipient.

(p) Federal funds authorized means the total amount of Federal funds obligated by the Federal Government for use by the recipient. This amount may include any authorized carryover of unobligated funds from prior funding periods when permitted by agency regulations or agency implementing instructions.

(q) Federal share of real property, equipment, or supplies means that percentage of the property's acquisition costs and any improvement expenditures paid with Federal funds.

(r) Funding period means the period of time when Federal funding is available for obligation by the recipient.

(s) Intangible property and debt instruments means, but is not limited to, trademarks, copyrights, patents and patent applications and such property as loans, notes and other debt instruments, lease agreements, stock and other instruments of property ownership, whether considered tangible or intangible.

(t) Obligations means the amounts of orders placed, contracts and grants awarded, services received and similar transactions during a given period that require payment by the recipient during the same or a future period.

(u) Outlays or expenditures means charges made to the project or program. They may be reported on a cash or accrual basis. For reports prepared on a cash basis, outlays are the sum of cash disbursements for direct charges for goods and services, the amount of indirect expense charged, the value of third party in-kind contributions applied and the amount of cash advances and payments made to subrecipients. For reports prepared on an accrual basis, outlays are the sum of cash disbursements for direct charges for goods and services, the amount of indirect expense incurred, the value of in-kind contributions applied, and the net increase (or decrease) in the amounts owed by the recipient for goods and other property received, for services performed by employees, contractors, subrecipients and other payees and other amounts becoming owed under programs for which no current services or performance are required.

(v) Personal property means property of any kind except real property. It may be tangible, having physical existence, or intangible, having no physical existence, such as copyrights, patents, or securities.

(w) Prior approval means written approval by an authorized official evidencing prior consent.

(x) Program income means gross income earned by the recipient that is directly generated by a supported activity or earned as a result of the award (see exclusions in paragraphs ___.24 (e) and (h)). Program income includes, but is not limited to, income from fees for services performed, the use or rental of real or personal property acquired under federally-funded projects, the sale of commodities or items fabricated under an award, license fees and royalties on patents and copyrights, and interest on loans made with award funds. Interest earned on advances of Federal funds is not program income. Except as otherwise provided in Federal awarding agency regulations or the terms and conditions of the award, program income does not include the receipt of principal on loans, rebates, credits, discounts, etc., or interest earned on any of them.

(y) Project costs means all allowable costs, as set forth in the applicable Federal cost principles, incurred by a recipient and the value of the contributions made by third parties in accomplishing the objectives of the award during the project period.

(z) Project period means the period established in the award document during which Federal sponsorship begins and ends.

(aa) Property means, unless otherwise stated, real property, equipment, intangible property and debt instruments.

(bb) Real property means land, including land improvements, structures and appurtenances thereto, but excludes movable machinery and equipment.

(cc) Recipient means an organization receiving financial assistance directly from Federal awarding agencies to carry out a project or program. The term includes public and private institutions of higher education, public and private hospitals, and other quasi-public and private non-profit organizations such as, but not limited to, community action agencies, research institutes, educational associations, and health centers. The term may include commercial organizations, foreign or international organizations (such as agencies of the United Nations) which are recipients, subrecipients, or contractors or subcontractors of recipients or subrecipients at the discretion of the Federal awarding agency. The term does not include government-owned contractor-operated facilities or research centers providing continued support for mission-oriented, large-scale programs that are government-owned or controlled, or are designated as federally-funded research and development centers.

(dd) Research and development means all research activities, both basic and applied, and all development activities that are supported at universities, colleges, and other non-profit institutions. "Research" is defined as a systematic study directed toward fuller scientific knowledge or understanding of the subject studied. "Development" is the systematic use of knowledge and understanding gained from research directed toward the production of useful materials, devices, systems, or methods, including design and development of prototypes and processes. The term research also includes activities involving the training of individuals in research techniques where such activities utilize the same facilities as other research and development activities and where such activities are not included in the instruction function.

(ee) Small awards means a grant or cooperative agreement not exceeding the small purchase threshold fixed at 41 U.S.C. 403(11) (currently $25,000).

(ff) Subaward means an award of financial assistance in the form of money, or property in lieu of money, made under an award by a recipient to an eligible subrecipient or by a subrecipient to a lower tier subrecipient. The term includes financial assistance when provided by any legal agreement, even if the agreement is called a contract, but does not include procurement of goods and services nor does it include any form of assistance which is excluded from the definition of "award" in paragraph (e).

(gg) Subrecipient means the legal entity to which a subaward is made and which is accountable to the recipient for the use of the funds provided. The term may include foreign or international organizations (such as agencies of the United Nations) at the discretion of the Federal awarding agency.

(hh) Supplies means all personal property excluding equipment, intangible property, and debt instruments as defined in this section, and inventions of a contractor conceived or first actually reduced to practice in the performance of work under a funding agreement ("subject inventions"), as defined in 37 CFR part 401, "Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts, and Cooperative Agreements."

(ii) Suspension means an action by a Federal awarding agency that temporarily withdraws Federal sponsorship under an award, pending corrective action by the recipient or pending a decision to terminate the award by the Federal awarding agency. Suspension of an award is a separate action from suspension under Federal agency regulations implementing E.O.s 12549 and 12689, "Debarment and Suspension."

(jj) Termination means the cancellation of Federal sponsorship, in whole or in part, under an agreement at any time prior to the date of completion.

(kk) Third party in-kind contributions means the value of non-cash contributions provided by non-Federal third parties. Third party in-kind contributions may be in the form of real property, equipment, supplies and other expendable property, and the value of goods and services directly benefiting and specifically identifiable to the project or program.

(ll) Unliquidated obligations, for financial reports prepared on a cash basis, means the amount of obligations incurred by the recipient that have not been paid. For reports prepared on an accrued expenditure basis, they represent the amount of obligations incurred by the recipient for which an outlay has not been recorded.

(mm) Unobligated balance means the portion of the funds authorized by the Federal awarding agency that has not been obligated by the recipient and is determined by deducting the cumulative obligations from the cumulative funds authorized.

(nn) Unrecovered indirect cost means the difference between the amount awarded and the amount which could have been awarded under the recipient's approved negotiated indirect cost rate.

(oo) Working capital advance means a procedure where by funds are advanced to the recipient to cover its estimated disbursement needs for a given initial period.

___.3 Effect on other issuances. For awards subject to this Circular, all administrative requirements of codified program regulations, program manuals, handbooks and other nonregulatory materials which are inconsistent with the requirements of this Circular shall be superseded, except to the extent they are required by statute, or authorized in accordance with the deviations provision in Section ___.4.

___.4 Deviations. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) may grant exceptions for classes of grants or recipients subject to the requirements of this Circular when exceptions are not prohibited by statute. However, in the interest of maximum uniformity, exceptions from the requirements of this Circular shall be permitted only in unusual circumstances. Federal awarding agencies may apply more restrictive requirements to a class of recipients when approved by OMB. Federal awarding agencies may apply less restrictive requirements when awarding small awards, except for those requirements which are statutory. Exceptions on a case-by-case basis may also be made by Federal awarding agencies.

___.5 Subawards. Unless sections of this Circular specifically exclude subrecipients from coverage, the provisions of this Circular shall be applied to subrecipients performing work under awards if such subrecipients are institutions of higher education, hospitals or other non-profit organizations. State and local government subrecipients are subject to the provisions of regulations implementing the grants management common rule,"Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments," published at 53 FR 8034 (3/11/88).

SUBPART B - Pre-Award Requirements

___.10 Purpose. Sections ___.11 through ___.17 prescribes forms and instructions and other pre-award matters to be used in applying for Federal awards.

(a) Use of Grants and Cooperative Agreements, and Contracts. In each instance, the Federal awarding agency shall decide on the appropriate award instrument (i.e., grant, cooperative agreement, or contract). The Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act (31 U.S.C. 6301-08) governs the use of grants, cooperative agreements and contracts. A grant or cooperative agreement shall be used only when the principal purpose of a transaction is to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by Federal statute. The statutory criterion for choosing between grants and cooperative agreements is that for the latter, "substantial involvement is expected between the executive agency and the State, local government, or other recipient when carrying out the activity contemplated in the agreement." Contracts shall be used when the principal purpose is acquisition of property or services for the direct benefit or use of the Federal Government.

(b) Public Notice and Priority Setting. Federal awarding agencies shall notify the public of its intended funding priorities for discretionary grant programs, unless funding priorities are established by Federal statute.

(a) Federal awarding agencies shall comply with the applicable report clearance requirements of 5 CFR part 1320, "Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public," with regard to all forms used by the Federal awarding agency in place of or as a supplement to the Standard Form 424 (SF-424) series.

(b) Applicants shall use the SF-424 series or those forms and instructions prescribed by the Federal awarding agency.

(c) For Federal programs covered by E.O. 12372, "Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs," the applicant shall complete the appropriate sections of the SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance) indicating whether the application was subject to review by the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC). The name and address of the SPOC for a particular State can be obtained from the Federal awarding agency or the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. The SPOC shall advise the applicant whether the program for which application is made has been selected by that State for review.

(d) Federal awarding agencies that do not use the SF-424 form should indicate whether the application is subject to review by the State under E.O. 12372.

___.13 Debarment and suspension. Federal awarding agencies and recipients shall comply with the nonprocurement debarment and suspension common rule implementing E.O.s 12549 and 12689, "Debarment and Suspension." This common rule restricts subawards and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities.

___.14 Special award conditions. If an applicant or recipient: (a) has a history of poor performance, (b) is not financially stable, (c) has a management system that does not meet the standards prescribed in this Circular, (d) has not conformed to the terms and conditions of a previous award, or (e) is not otherwise responsible, Federal awarding agencies may impose additional requirements as needed, provided that such applicant or recipient is notified in writing as to: the nature of the additional requirements, the reason why the additional requirements are being imposed, the nature of the corrective action needed, the time allowed for completing the corrective actions, and the method for requesting reconsideration of the additional requirements imposed. Any special conditions shall be promptly removed once the conditions that prompted them have been corrected.

___.15 Metric system of measurement. The Metric Conversion Act, as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act (15 U.S.C. 205) declares that the metric system is the preferred measurement system for U.S. trade and commerce. The Act requires each Federal agency to establish a date or dates in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, when the metric system of measurement will be used in the agency's procurements, grants, and other business-related activities. Metric implementation may take longer where the use of the system is initially impractical or likely to cause significant inefficiencies in the accomplishment of federally-funded activities. Federal awarding agencies shall follow the provisions of E.O. 12770, "Metric Usage in Federal Government Programs."

___.16 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (Pub. L. 94-580 codified at 42 U.S.C. 6962). Under the Act, any State agency or agency of a political subdivision of a State which is using appropriated Federal funds must comply with Section 6002. Section 6002 requires that preference be given in procurement programs to the purchase of specific products containing recycled materials identified in guidelines developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (40 CFR parts 247-254). Accordingly, State and local institutions of higher education, hospitals, and non-profit organizations that receive direct Federal awards or other Federal funds shall give preference in their procurement programs funded with Federal funds to the purchase of recycled products pursuant to the EPA guidelines.

___.17 Certifications and representations. Unless prohibited by statute or codified regulation, each Federal awarding agency is authorized and encouraged to allow recipients to submit certifications and representations required by statute, executive order, or regulation on an annual basis, if the recipients have ongoing and continuing relationships with the agency. Annual certifications and representations shall be signed by responsible officials with the authority to ensure recipients' compliance with the pertinent requirements.

SUBPART C - Post-Award Requirements

Financial and Program Management

___.20 Purpose of financial and program management. Sections ___.21 through ___.28 prescribe standards for financial management systems, methods for making payments and rules for: satisfying cost sharing and matching requirements, accounting for program income, budget revision approvals, making audits, determining allowability of cost, and establishing fund availability.

(a) Federal awarding agencies shall require recipients to relate financial data to performance data and develop unit cost information whenever practical.

(b) Recipients' financial management systems shall provide for the following.

(1) Accurate, current and complete disclosure of the financial results of each federally-sponsored project or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in Section ___.52. If a Federal awarding agency requires reporting on an accrual basis from a recipient that maintains its records on other than an accrual basis, the recipient shall not be required to establish an accrual accounting system. These recipients may develop such accrual data for its reports on the basis of an analysis of the documentation on hand.

(2) Records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federally-sponsored activities. These records shall contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, obligations, unobligated balances, assets, outlays, income and interest.

(3) Effective control over and accountability for all funds, property and other assets. Recipients shall adequately safeguard all such assets and assure they are used solely for authorized purposes.

(4) Comparison of outlays with budget amounts for each award. Whenever appropriate, financial information should be related to performance and unit cost data.

(5) Written procedures to minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds to the recipient from the U.S. Treasury and the issuance or redemption of checks, warrants or payments by other means for program purposes by the recipient. To the extent that the provisions of the Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA) (Pub. L. 101-453) govern, payment methods of State agencies, instrumentalities, and fiscal agents shall be consistent with CMIA Treasury-State Agreements or the CMIA default procedures codified at 31 CFR part 205, "Withdrawal of Cash from the Treasury for Advances under Federal Grant and Other Programs."

(6) Written procedures for determining the reasonableness, allocability and allowability of costs in accordance with the provisions of the applicable Federal cost principles and the terms and conditions of the award.

(7) Accounting records including cost accounting records that are supported by source documentation.

(c) Where the Federal Government guarantees or insures the repayment of money borrowed by the recipient, the Federal awarding agency, at its discretion, may require adequate bonding and insurance if the bonding and insurance requirements of the recipient are not deemed adequate to protect the interest of the Federal Government.

(d) The Federal awarding agency may require adequate fidelity bond coverage where the recipient lacks sufficient coverage to protect the Federal Government's interest.

(e) Where bonds are required in the situations described above, the bonds shall be obtained from companies holding certificates of authority as acceptable sureties, as prescribed in 31 CFR part 223, "Surety Companies Doing Business with the United States."

(a) Payment methods shall minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds from the United States Treasury and the issuance or redemption of checks, warrants, or payment by other means by the recipients. Payment methods of State agencies or instrumentalities shall be consistent with Treasury-State CMIA agreements or default procedures codified at 31 CFR part 205.

(b) Recipients are to be paid in advance, provided they maintain or demonstrate the willingness to maintain: (1) written procedures that minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds and disbursement by the recipient, and (2) financial management systems that meet the standards for fund control and accountability as established in Section ___.21. Cash advances to a recipient organization shall be limited to the minimum amounts needed and be timed to be in accordance with the actual, immediate cash requirements of the recipient organization in carrying out the purpose of the approved program or project. The timing and amount of cash advances shall be as close as is administratively feasible to the actual disbursements by the recipient organization for direct program or project costs and the proportionate share of any allowable indirect costs.

(c) Whenever possible, advances shall be consolidated to cover anticipated cash needs for all awards made by the Federal awarding agency to the recipient.

(1) Advance payment mechanisms include, but are not limited to, Treasury check and electronic funds transfer.

(2) Advance payment mechanisms are subject to 31 CFR part 205.

(3) Recipients shall be authorized to submit requests for advances and reimbursements at least monthly when electronic fund transfers are not used.

(d) Requests for Treasury check advance payment shall be submitted on SF-270, "Request for Advance or Reimbursement," or other forms as may be authorized by OMB. This form is not to be used when Treasury check advance payments are made to the recipient automatically through the use of a predetermined payment schedule or if precluded by special Federal awarding agency instructions for electronic funds transfer.

(e) Reimbursement is the preferred method when the requirements in paragraph (b) cannot be met. Federal awarding agencies may also use this method on any construction agreement, or if the major portion of the construction project is accomplished through private market financing or Federal loans, and the Federal assistance constitutes a minor portion of the project.

(1) When the reimbursement method is used, the Federal awarding agency shall make payment within 30 days after receipt of the billing, unless the billing is improper.

(2) Recipients shall be authorized to submit request for reimbursement at least monthly when electronic funds transfers are not used.

(f) If a recipient cannot meet the criteria for advance payments and the Federal awarding agency has determined that reimbursement is not feasible because the recipient lacks sufficient working capital, the Federal awarding agency may provide cash on a working capital advance basis. Under this procedure, the Federal awarding agency shall advance cash to the recipient to cover its estimated disbursement needs for an initial period generally geared to the awardee's disbursing cycle. Thereafter, the Federal awarding agency shall reimburse the recipient for its actual cash disbursements. The working capital advance method of payment shall not be used for recipients unwilling or unable to provide timely advances to their subrecipient to meet the subrecipient's actual cash disbursements.

(g) To the extent available, recipients shall disburse funds available from repayments to and interest earned on a revolving fund, program income, rebates, refunds, contract settlements, audit recoveries and interest earned on such funds before requesting additional cash payments.

(h) Unless otherwise required by statute, Federal awarding agencies shall not withhold payments for proper charges made by recipients at any time during the project period unless (1) or (2) apply.

(1) A recipient has failed to comply with the project objectives, the terms and conditions of the award, or Federal reporting requirements.

(2) The recipient or subrecipient is delinquent in a debt to the United States as defined in OMB Circular A-129, "Managing Federal Credit Programs." Under such conditions, the Federal awarding agency may, upon reasonable notice, inform the recipient that payments shall not be made for obligations incurred after a specified date until the conditions are corrected or the indebtedness to the Federal Government is liquidated.

(i) Standards governing the use of banks and other institutions as depositories of funds advanced under awards are as follows.

(1) Except for situations described in paragraph (i)(2), Federal awarding agencies shall not require separate depository accounts for funds provided to a recipient or establish any eligibility requirements for depositories for funds provided to a recipient. However, recipients must be able to account for the receipt, obligation and expenditure of funds.

(2) Advances of Federal funds shall be deposited and maintained in insured accounts whenever possible.

(j) Consistent with the national goal of expanding the opportunities for women-owned and minority-owned business enterprises, recipients shall be encouraged to use women- owned and minority-owned banks (a bank which is owned at least 50 percent by women or minority group members).

(k) Recipients shall maintain advances of Federal funds in interest bearing accounts, unless (1), (2) or (3) apply.

(1) The recipient receives less than $120,000 in Federal awards per year.

(2) The best reasonably available interest bearing account would not be expected to earn interest in excess of $250 per year on Federal cash balances.

(3) The depository would require an average or minimum balance so high that it would not be feasible within the expected Federal and non-Federal cash resources.

(l) For those entities where CMIA and its implementing regulations do not apply, interest earned on Federal advances deposited in interest bearing accounts shall be remitted annually to Department of Health and Human Services, Payment Management System, Rockville, MD 20852. Interest amounts up to $250 per year may be retained by the recipient for administrative expense. State universities and hospitals shall comply with CMIA, as it pertains to interest. If an entity subject to CMIA uses its own funds to pay pre-award costs for discretionary awards without prior written approval from the Federal awarding agency, it waives its right to recover the interest under CMIA.

(m) Except as noted elsewhere in this Circular, only the following forms shall be authorized for the recipients in requesting advances and reimbursements. Federal agencies shall not require more than an original and two copies of these forms.

(1) SF-270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement. Each Federal awarding agency shall adopt the SF-270 as a standard form for all nonconstruction programs when electronic funds transfer or predetermined advance methods are not used. Federal awarding agencies, however, have the option of using this form for construction programs in lieu of the SF-271, "Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursement for Construction Programs."

(2) SF-271, Outlay Report and Request for Reimbursement for Construction Programs. Each Federal awarding agency shall adopt the SF-271 as the standard form to be used for requesting reimbursement for construction programs. However, a Federal awarding agency may substitute the SF-270 when the Federal awarding agency determines that it provides adequate information to meet Federal needs.

(a) All contributions, including cash and third party in-kind, shall be accepted as part of the recipient's cost sharing or matching when such contributions meet all of the following criteria.

(1) Are verifiable from the recipient's records.

(2) Are not included as contributions for any other federally-assisted project or program.

(3) Are necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient accomplishment of project or program objectives.

(4) Are allowable under the applicable cost principles.

(5) Are not paid by the Federal Government under another award, except where authorized by Federal statute to be used for cost sharing or matching.

(6) Are provided for in the approved budget when required by the Federal awarding agency.

(7) Conform to other provisions of this Circular, as applicable.

(b) Unrecovered indirect costs may be included as part of cost sharing or matching only with the prior approval of the Federal awarding agency.

(c) Values for recipient contributions of services and property shall be established in accordance with the applicable cost principles. If a Federal awarding agency authorizes recipients to donate buildings or land for construction/facilities acquisition projects or long-term use, the value of the donated property for cost sharing or matching shall be the lesser of (1) or (2).

(1) The certified value of the remaining life of the property recorded in the recipient's accounting records at the time of donation.

(2) The current fair market value. However, when there is sufficient justification, the Federal awarding agency may approve the use of the current fair market value of the donated property, even if it exceeds the certified value at the time of donation to the project.

(d) Volunteer services furnished by professional and technical personnel, consultants, and other skilled and unskilled labor may be counted as cost sharing or matching if the service is an integral and necessary part of an approved project or program. Rates for volunteer services shall be consistent with those paid for similar work in the recipient's organization. In those instances in which the required skills are not found in the recipient organization, rates shall be consistent with those paid for similar work in the labor market in which the recipient competes for the kind of services involved. In either case, paid fringe benefits that are reasonable, allowable, and allocable may be included in the valuation.

(e) When an employer other than the recipient furnishes the services of an employee, these services shall be valued at the employee's regular rate of pay (plus an amount of fringe benefits that are reasonable, allowable, and allocable, but exclusive of overhead costs), provided these services are in the same skill for which the employee is normally paid.

(f) Donated supplies may include such items as expendable equipment, office supplies, laboratory supplies or workshop and classroom supplies. Value assessed to donated supplies included in the cost sharing or matching share shall be reasonable and shall not exceed the fair market value of the property at the time of the donation.

(g) The method used for determining cost sharing or matching for donated equipment, buildings and land for which title passes to the recipient may differ according to the purpose of the award, if (1) or (2) apply.

(1) If the purpose of the award is to assist the recipient in the acquisition of equipment, buildings or land, the total value of the donated property may be claimed as cost sharing or matching.

(2) If the purpose of the award is to support activities that require the use of equipment, buildings or land, normally only depreciation or use charges for equipment and buildings may be made. However, the full value of equipment or other capital assets and fair rental charges for land may be allowed, provided that the Federal awarding agency has approved the charges.

(h) The value of donated property shall be determined in accordance with the usual accounting policies of the recipient, with the following qualifications.

(1) The value of donated land and buildings shall not exceed its fair market value at the time of donation to the recipient as established by an independent appraiser (e.g., certified real property appraiser or General Services Administration representative) and certified by a responsible official of the recipient.

(2) The value of donated equipment shall not exceed the fair market value of equipment of the same age and condition at the time of donation.

(3) The value of donated space shall not exceed the fair rental value of comparable space as established by an independent appraisal of comparable space and facilities in a privately-owned building in the same locality.

(4) The value of loaned equipment shall not exceed its fair rental value.

(5) The following requirements pertain to the recipient's supporting records for in-kind contributions from third parties.

(i) Volunteer services shall be documented and, to the extent feasible, supported by the same methods used by the recipient for its own employees.

(ii) The basis for determining the valuation for personal service, material, equipment, buildings and land shall be documented.

(a) Federal awarding agencies shall apply the standards set forth in this section in requiring recipient organizations to account for program income related to projects financed in whole or in part with Federal funds.

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (h) below, program income earned during the project period shall be retained by the recipient and, in accordance with Federal awarding agency regulations or the terms and conditions of the award, shall be used in one or more of the ways listed in the following.

(1) Added to funds committed to the project by the Federal awarding agency and recipient and used to further eligible project or program objectives.

(2) Used to finance the non-Federal share of the project or program.

(3) Deducted from the total project or program allowable cost in determining the net allowable costs on which the Federal share of costs is based.

(c) When an agency authorizes the disposition of program income as described in paragraphs (b)(1) or (b)(2), program income in excess of any limits stipulated shall be used in accordance with paragraph (b)(3).

(d) In the event that the Federal awarding agency does not specify in its regulations or the terms and conditions of the award how program income is to be used, paragraph (b)(3) shall apply automatically to all projects or programs except research. For awards that support research, paragraph (b)(1) shall apply automatically unless the awarding agency indicates in the terms and conditions another alternative on the award or the recipient is subject to special award conditions, as indicated in Section ___.14.

(e) Unless Federal awarding agency regulations or the terms and conditions of the award provide otherwise, recipients shall have no obligation to the Federal Government regarding program income earned after the end of the project period.

(f) If authorized by Federal awarding agency regulations or the terms and conditions of the award, costs incident to the generation of program income may be deducted from gross income to determine program income, provided these costs have not been charged to the award.

(g) Proceeds from the sale of property shall be handled in accordance with the requirements of the Property Standards (See Sections ___.30 through ___.37).

(h) Unless Federal awarding agency regulations or the terms and condition of the award provide otherwise, recipients shall have no obligation to the Federal Government with respect to program income earned from license fees and royalties for copyrighted material, patents, patent applications, trademarks, and inventions produced under an award. However, Patent and Trademark Amendments (35 U.S.C. 18) apply to inventions made under an experimental, developmental, or research award.

(a) The budget plan is the financial expression of the project or program as approved during the award process. It may include either the Federal and non-Federal share, or only the Federal share, depending upon Federal awarding agency requirements. It shall be related to performance for program evaluation purposes whenever appropriate.

(b) Recipients are required to report deviations from budget and program plans, and request prior approvals for budget and program plan revisions, in accordance with this section.

(c) For nonconstruction awards, recipients shall request prior approvals from Federal awarding agencies for one or more of the following program or budget related reasons.

(1) Change in the scope or the objective of the project or program (even if there is no associated budget revision requiring prior written approval).

(2) Change in a key person specified in the application or award document.

(3) The absence for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator.

(4) The need for additional Federal funding.

(5) The transfer of amounts budgeted for indirect costs to absorb increases in direct costs, or vice versa, if approval is required by the Federal awarding agency.

(6) The inclusion, unless waived by the Federal awarding agency, of costs that require prior approval in accordance with OMB Circular A-21, "Cost Principles for Educational Institutions," OMB Circular A-122, "Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations," or 45 CFR part 74 Appendix E, "Principles for Determining Costs Applicable to Research and Development under Grants and Contracts with Hospitals," or 48 CFR part 31, "Contract Cost Principles and Procedures," as applicable.

(7) The transfer of funds allotted for training allowances (direct payment to trainees) to other categories of expense.

(8) Unless described in the application and funded in the approved awards, the subaward, transfer or contracting out of any work under an award. This provision does not apply to the purchase of supplies, material, equipment or general support services.

(d) No other prior approval requirements for specific items may be imposed unless a deviation has been approved by OMB.

(e) Except for requirements listed in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(4) of this section, Federal awarding agencies are authorized, at their option, to waive cost-related and administrative prior written approvals required by this Circular and OMB Circulars A-21 and A-122. Such waivers may include authorizing recipients to do any one or more of the following.

(1) Incur pre-award costs 90 calendar days prior to award or more than 90 calendar days with the prior approval of the Federal awarding agency. All pre-award costs are incurred at the recipient's risk (i.e., the Federal awarding agency is under no obligation to reimburse such costs if for any reason the recipient does not receive an award or if the award is less than anticipated and inadequate to cover such costs).

(2) Initiate a one-time extension of the expiration date of the award of up to 12 months unless one or more of the following conditions apply. For one-time extensions, the recipient must notify the Federal awarding agency in writing with the supporting reasons and revised expiration date at least 10 days before the expiration date specified in the award. This one-time extension may not be exercised merely for the purpose of using unobligated balances.

(i) The terms and conditions of award prohibit the extension.

(ii) The extension requires additional Federal funds.

(iii) The extension involves any change in the approved objectives or scope of the project.

(3) Carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent funding periods.

(4) For awards that support research, unless the Federal awarding agency provides otherwise in the award or in the agency's regulations, the prior approval requirements described in paragraph (e) are automatically waived (i.e., recipients need not obtain such prior approvals) unless one of the conditions included in paragraph (e)(2) applies.

(f) The Federal awarding agency may, at its option, restrict the transfer of funds among direct cost categories or programs, functions and activities for awards in which the Federal share of the project exceeds $100,000 and the cumulative amount of such transfers exceeds or is expected to exceed 10 percent of the total budget as last approved by the Federal awarding agency. No Federal awarding agency shall permit a transfer that would cause any Federal appropriation or part thereof to be used for purposes other than those consistent with the original intent of the appropriation.

(g) All other changes to nonconstruction budgets, except for the changes described in paragraph (j), do not require prior approval.

(h) For construction awards, recipients shall request prior written approval promptly from Federal awarding agencies for budget revisions whenever (1), (2) or (3) apply.

(1) The revision results from changes in the scope or the objective of the project or program.

(2) The need arises for additional Federal funds to complete the project.

(3) A revision is desired which involves specific costs for which prior written approval requirements may be imposed consistent with applicable OMB cost principles listed in Section ___.27.

(i) No other prior approval requirements for specific items may be imposed unless a deviation has been approved by OMB.

(j) When a Federal awarding agency makes an award that provides support for both construction and nonconstruction work, the Federal awarding agency may require the recipient to request prior approval from the Federal awarding agency before making any fund or budget transfers between the two types of work supported.

(k) For both construction and nonconstruction awards, Federal awarding agencies shall require recipients to notify the Federal awarding agency in writing promptly whenever the amount of Federal authorized funds is expected to exceed the needs of the recipient for the project period by more than $5000 or five percent of the Federal award, whichever is greater. This notification shall not be required if an application for additional funding is submitted for a continuation award.

(l) When requesting approval for budget revisions, recipients shall use the budget forms that were used in the application unless the Federal awarding agency indicates a letter of request suffices.

(m) Within 30 calendar days from the date of receipt of the request for budget revisions, Federal awarding agencies shall review the request and notify the recipient whether the budget revisions have been approved. If the revision is still under consideration at the end of 30 calendar days, the Federal awarding agency shall inform the recipient in writing of the date when the recipient may expect the decision.

(a) Recipients and subrecipients that are institutions of higher education or other non-profit organizations (including hospitals) shall be subject to the audit requirements contained in the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (31 USC 7501-7507) and revised OMB Circular A-133, "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations."

(b) State and local governments shall be subject to the audit requirements contained in the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (31 USC 7501-7507) and revised OMB Circular A-133, "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations."

(c) For-profit hospitals not covered by the audit provisions of revised OMB Circular A-133 shall be subject to the audit requirements of the Federal awarding agencies.

(d) Commercial organizations shall be subject to the audit requirements of the Federal awarding agency or the prime recipient as incorporated into the award document.

___.27 Allowable costs. For each kind of recipient, there is a set of Federal principles for determining allowable costs. Allowability of costs shall be determined in accordance with the cost principles applicable to the entity incurring the costs. Thus, allowability of costs incurred by State, local or federally-recognized Indian tribal governments is determined in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-87, "Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments." The allowability of costs incurred by non-profit organizations is determined in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-122, "Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations." The allowability of costs incurred by institutions of higher education is determined in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-21, "Cost Principles for Educational Institutions." The allowability of costs incurred by hospitals is determined in accordance with the provisions of Appendix E of 45 CFR part 74, "Principles for Determining Costs Applicable to Research and Development Under Grants and Contracts with Hospitals." The allowability of costs incurred by commercial organizations and those non-profit organizations listed in Attachment C to Circular A-122 is determined in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR part 31.

___.28 Period of availability of funds. Where a funding period is specified, a recipient may charge to the grant only allowable costs resulting from obligations incurred during the funding period and any pre-award costs authorized by the Federal awarding agency.

(a) OMB authorizes conditional exemption from OMB administrative requirements and cost principles circulars for certain Federal programs with statutorily-authorized consolidated planning and consolidated administrative funding, that are identified by a Federal agency and approved by the head of the Executive department or establishment. A Federal agency shall consult with OMB during its consideration of whether to grant such an exemption.

(b) To promote efficiency in State and local program administration, when Federal non-entitlement programs with common purposes have specific statutorily-authorized consolidated planning and consolidated administrative funding and where most of the State agency's resources come from non-Federal sources, Federal agencies may exempt these covered State-administered, non-entitlement grant programs from certain OMB grants management requirements. The exemptions would be from all but the allocability of costs provisions of OMB Circulars A-87 (Attachment A, subsection C.3), "Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments," A-21 (Section C, subpart 4), "Cost Principles for Educational Institutions," and A-122 (Attachment A, subsection A.4), "Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations," and from all of the administrative requirements provisions of OMB Circular A-110, "Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations," and the agencies' grants management common rule.

(c) When a Federal agency provides this flexibility, as a prerequisite to a State's exercising this option, a State must adopt its own written fiscal and administrative requirements for expending and accounting for all funds, which are consistent with the provisions of OMB Circular A-87, and extend such policies to all subrecipients. These fiscal and administrative requirements must be sufficiently specific to ensure that: funds are used in compliance with all applicable Federal statutory and regulatory provisions, costs are reasonable and necessary for operating these programs, and funds are not be used for general expenses required to carry out other responsibilities of a State or its subrecipients.

Property Standards

___.30 Purpose of property standards. Sections ___.31 through ___.37 set forth uniform standards governing management and disposition of property furnished by the Federal Government whose cost was charged to a project supported by a Federal award. Federal awarding agencies shall require recipients to observe these standards under awards and shall not impose additional requirements, unless specifically required by Federal statute. The recipient may use its own property management standards and procedures provided it observes the provisions of Sections ___.31 through ___.37.

___.31 Insurance coverage. Recipients shall, at a minimum, provide the equivalent insurance coverage for real property and equipment acquired with Federal funds as provided to property owned by the recipient. Federally-owned property need not be insured unless required by the terms and conditions of the award.

___.32 Real property. Each Federal awarding agency shall prescribe requirements for recipients concerning the use and disposition of real property acquired in whole or in part under awards. Unless otherwise provided by statute, such requirements, at a minimum, shall contain the following.

(a) Title to real property shall vest in the recipient subject to the condition that the recipient shall use the real property for the authorized purpose of the project as long as it is needed and shall not encumber the property without approval of the Federal awarding agency.

(b) The recipient shall obtain written approval by the Federal awarding agency for the use of real property in other federally-sponsored projects when the recipient determines that the property is no longer needed for the purpose of the original project. Use in other projects shall be limited to those under federally-sponsored projects (i.e., awards) or programs that have purposes consistent with those authorized for support by the Federal awarding agency.

(c) When the real property is no longer needed as provided in paragraphs (a) and (b), the recipient shall request disposition instructions from the Federal awarding agency or its successor Federal awarding agency. The Federal awarding agency shall observe one or more of the following disposition instructions.

(1) The recipient may be permitted to retain title without further obligation to the Federal Government after it compensates the Federal Government for that percentage of the current fair market value of the property attributable to the Federal participation in the project.

(2) The recipient may be directed to sell the property under guidelines provided by the Federal awarding agency and pay the Federal Government for that percentage of the current fair market value of the property attributable to the Federal participation in the project (after deducting actual and reasonable selling and fix-up expenses, if any, from the sales proceeds). When the recipient is authorized or required to sell the property, proper sales procedures shall be established that provide for competition to the extent practicable and result in the highest possible return.

(3) The recipient may be directed to transfer title to the property to the Federal Government or to an eligible third party provided that, in such cases, the recipient shall be entitled to compensation for its attributable percentage of the current fair market value of the property.

(a) Federally-owned property.

(1) Title to federally-owned property remains vested in the Federal Government. Recipients shall submit annually an inventory listing of federally-owned property in their custody to the Federal awarding agency. Upon completion of the award or when the property is no longer needed, the recipient shall report the property to the Federal awarding agency for further Federal agency utilization.

(2) If the Federal awarding agency has no further need for the property, it shall be declared excess and reported to the General Services Administration, unless the Federal awarding agency has statutory authority to dispose of the property by alternative methods (e.g., the authority provided by the Federal Technology Transfer Act (15 U.S.C. 3710 (I)) to donate research equipment to educational and non-profit organizations in accordance with E.O. 12821, "Improving Mathematics and Science Education in Support of the National Education Goals.") Appropriate instructions shall be issued to the recipient by the Federal awarding agency.

(b) Exempt property. When statutory authority exists, the Federal awarding agency has the option to vest title to property acquired with Federal funds in the recipient without further obligation to the Federal Government and under conditions the Federal awarding agency considers appropriate. Such property is "exempt property." Should a Federal awarding agency not establish conditions, title to exempt property upon acquisition shall vest in the recipient without further obligation to the Federal Government.

(a) Title to equipment acquired by a recipient with Federal funds shall vest in the recipient, subject to conditions of this section.

(b) The recipient shall not use equipment acquired with Federal funds to provide services to non-Federal outside organizations for a fee that is less than private companies charge for equivalent services, unless specifically authorized by Federal statute, for as long as the Federal Government retains an interest in the equipment.

(c) The recipient shall use the equipment in the project or program for which it was acquired as long as needed, whether or not the project or program continues to be supported by Federal funds and shall not encumber the property without approval of the Federal awarding agency. When no longer needed for the original project or program, the recipient shall use the equipment in connection with its other federally-sponsored activities, in the following order of priority: (i) Activities sponsored by the Federal awarding agency which funded the original project, then (ii) activities sponsored by other Federal awarding agencies.

(d) During the time that equipment is used on the project or program for which it was acquired, the recipient shall make it available for use on other projects or programs if such other use will not interfere with the work on the project or program for which the equipment was originally acquired. First preference for such other use shall be given to other projects or programs sponsored by the Federal awarding agency that financed the equipment second preference shall be given to projects or programs sponsored by other Federal awarding agencies. If the equipment is owned by the Federal Government, use on other activities not sponsored by the Federal Government shall be permissible if authorized by the Federal awarding agency. User charges shall be treated as program income.

(e) When acquiring replacement equipment, the recipient may use the equipment to be replaced as trade-in or sell the equipment and use the proceeds to offset the costs of the replacement equipment subject to the approval of the Federal awarding agency.

(f) The recipient's property management standards for equipment acquired with Federal funds and federally-owned equipment shall include all of the following.

(1) Equipment records shall be maintained accurately and shall include the following information.

(i) A description of the equipment.

(ii) Manufacturer's serial number, model number, Federal stock number, national stock number, or other identification number.

(iii) Source of the equipment, including the award number.

(iv) Whether title vests in the recipient or the Federal Government.

(v) Acquisition date (or date received, if the equipment was furnished by the Federal Government) and cost.

(vi) Information from which one can calculate the percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the equipment (not applicable to equipment furnished by the Federal Government).

(vii) Location and condition of the equipment and the date the information was reported.

(viii) Unit acquisition cost.

(ix) Ultimate disposition data, including date of disposal and sales price or the method used to determine current fair market value where a recipient compensates the Federal awarding agency for its share.

(2) Equipment owned by the Federal Government shall be identified to indicate Federal ownership.

(3) A physical inventory of equipment shall be taken and the results reconciled with the equipment records at least once every two years. Any differences between quantities determined by the physical inspection and those shown in the accounting records shall be investigated to determine the causes of the difference. The recipient shall, in connection with the inventory, verify the existence, current utilization, and continued need for the equipment.

(4) A control system shall be in effect to insure adequate safeguards to prevent loss, damage, or theft of the equipment. Any loss, damage, or theft of equipment shall be investigated and fully documented if the equipment was owned by the Federal Government, the recipient shall promptly notify the Federal awarding agency.

(5) Adequate maintenance procedures shall be implemented to keep the equipment in good condition.

(6) Where the recipient is authorized or required to sell the equipment, proper sales procedures shall be established which provide for competition to the extent practicable and result in the highest possible return.

(g) When the recipient no longer needs the equipment, the equipment may be used for other activities in accordance with the following standards. For equipment with a current per unit fair market value of $5000 or more, the recipient may retain the equipment for other uses provided that compensation is made to the original Federal awarding agency or its successor. The amount of compensation shall be computed by applying the percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the original project or program to the current fair market value of the equipment. If the recipient has no need for the equipment, the recipient shall request disposition instructions from the Federal awarding agency. The Federal awarding agency shall determine whether the equipment can be used to meet the agency's requirements. If no requirement exists within that agency, the availability of the equipment shall be reported to the General Services Administration by the Federal awarding agency to determine whether a requirement for the equipment exists in other Federal agencies. The Federal awarding agency shall issue instructions to the recipient no later than 120 calendar days after the recipient's request and the following procedures shall govern.

(1) If so instructed or if disposition instructions are not issued within 120 calendar days after the recipient's request, the recipient shall sell the equipment and reimburse the Federal awarding agency an amount computed by applying to the sales proceeds the percentage of Federal participation in the cost of the original project or program. However, the recipient shall be permitted to deduct and retain from the Federal share $500 or ten percent of the proceeds, whichever is less, for the recipient's selling and handling expenses.

(2) If the recipient is instructed to ship the equipment elsewhere, the recipient shall be reimbursed by the Federal Government by an amount which is computed by applying the percentage of the recipient's participation in the cost of the original project or program to the current fair market value of the equipment, plus any reasonable shipping or interim storage costs incurred.

(3) If the recipient is instructed to otherwise dispose of the equipment, the recipient shall be reimbursed by the Federal awarding agency for such costs incurred in its disposition.

(4) The Federal awarding agency may reserve the right to transfer the title to the Federal Government or to a third party named by the Federal Government when such third party is otherwise eligible under existing statutes. Such transfer shall be subject to the following standards.

(i) The equipment shall be appropriately identified in the award or otherwise made known to the recipient in writing.

(ii) The Federal awarding agency shall issue disposition instructions within 120 calendar days after receipt of a final inventory. The final inventory shall list all equipment acquired with grant funds and federally-owned equipment. If the Federal awarding agency fails to issue disposition instructions within the 120 calendar day period, the recipient shall apply the standards of this section, as appropriate.

(iii) When the Federal awarding agency exercises its right to take title, the equipment shall be subject to the provisions for federally-owned equipment.

(a) Title to supplies and other expendable property shall vest in the recipient upon acquisition. If there is a residual inventory of unused supplies exceeding $5000 in total aggregate value upon termination or completion of the project or program and the supplies are not needed for any other federally-sponsored project or program, the recipient shall retain the supplies for use on non-Federal sponsored activities or sell them, but shall, in either case, compensate the Federal Government for its share. The amount of compensation shall be computed in the same manner as for equipment.

(b) The recipient shall not use supplies acquired with Federal funds to provide services to non-Federal outside organizations for a fee that is less than private companies charge for equivalent services, unless specifically authorized by Federal statute as long as the Federal Government retains an interest in the supplies.

(a) The recipient may copyright any work that is subject to copyright and was developed, or for which ownership was purchased, under an award. The Federal awarding agency(ies) reserve a royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use the work for Federal purposes, and to authorize others to do so.

(b) Recipients are subject to applicable regulations governing patents and inventions, including government-wide regulations issued by the Department of Commerce at 37 CFR part 401, "Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts and Cooperative Agreements."

(c) The Federal Government has the right to:

(1) obtain, reproduce, publish or otherwise use the data first produced under an award and

(2) authorize others to receive, reproduce, publish, or otherwise use such data for Federal purposes.

(d) (1) In addition, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for research data relating to published research findings produced under an award that were used by the Federal Government in developing an agency action that has the force and effect of law, the Federal awarding agency shall request, and the recipient shall provide, within a reasonable time, the research data so that they can be made available to the public through the procedures established under the FOIA. If the Federal awarding agency obtains the research data solely in response to a FOIA request, the agency may charge the requester a reasonable fee equaling the full incremental cost of obtaining the research data. This fee should reflect costs incurred by the agency, the recipient, and applicable subrecipients. This fee is in addition to any fees the agency may assess under the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(A)).

(2) The following definitions apply for purposes of paragraph (d) of this section:

(i) Research data is defined as the recorded factual material commonly accepted in the scientific community as necessary to validate research findings, but not any of the following: preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific papers, plans for future research, peer reviews, or communications with colleagues. This "recorded" material excludes physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples). Research data also do not include:

(A) Trade secrets, commercial information, materials necessary to be held confidential by a researcher until they are published, or similar information which is protected under law and

(B) Personnel and medical information and similar information the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, such as information that could be used to identify a particular person in a research study.

(ii) Published is defined as either when:

(A) Research findings are published in a peer-reviewed scientific or technical journal or

(B) A Federal agency publicly and officially cites the research findings in support of an agency action that has the force and effect of law.

(iii) Used by the Federal Government in developing an agency action that has the force and effect of law is defined as when an agency publicly and officially cites the research findings in support of an agency action that has the force and effect of law.

(e) Title to intangible property and debt instruments acquired under an award or subaward vests upon acquisition in the recipient. The recipient shall use that property for the originally-authorized purpose, and the recipient shall not encumber the property without approval of the Federal awarding agency. When no longer needed for the originally authorized purpose, disposition of the intangible property shall occur in accordance with the provisions of paragraph ___.34(g).

___.37 Property trust relationship. Real property, equipment, intangible property and debt instruments that are acquired or improved with Federal funds shall be held in trust by the recipient as trustee for the beneficiaries of the project or program under which the property was acquired or improved. Agencies may require recipients to record liens or other appropriate notices of record to indicate that personal or real property has been acquired or improved with Federal funds and that use and disposition conditions apply to the property.

Procurement Standards

___.40 Purpose of procurement standards. Sections ___.41 through ___.48 set forth standards for use by recipients in establishing procedures for the procurement of supplies and other expendable property, equipment, real property and other services with Federal funds. These standards are furnished to ensure that such materials and services are obtained in an effective manner and in compliance with the provisions of applicable Federal statutes and executive orders. No additional procurement standards or requirements shall be imposed by the Federal awarding agencies upon recipients, unless specifically required by Federal statute or executive order or approved by OMB.

___.41 Recipient responsibilities. The standards contained in this section do not relieve the recipient of the contractual responsibilities arising under its contract(s). The recipient is the responsible authority, without recourse to the Federal awarding agency, regarding the settlement and satisfaction of all contractual and administrative issues arising out of procurements entered into in support of an award or other agreement. This includes disputes, claims, protests of award, source evaluation or other matters of a contractual nature. Matters concerning violation of statute are to be referred to such Federal, State or local authority as may have proper jurisdiction.

___.42 Codes of conduct. The recipient shall maintain written standards of conduct governing the performance of its employees engaged in the award and administration of contracts. No employee, officer, or agent shall participate in the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by Federal funds if a real or apparent conflict of interest would be involved. Such a conflict would arise when the employee, officer, or agent, any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an organization which employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for an award. The officers, employees, and agents of the recipient shall neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors, or parties to subagreements. However, recipients may set standards for situations in which the financial interest is not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal value. The standards of conduct shall provide for disciplinary actions to be applied for violations of such standards by officers, employees, or agents of the recipient.

___.43 Competition. All procurement transactions shall be conducted in a manner to provide, to the maximum extent practical, open and free competition. The recipient shall be alert to organizational conflicts of interest as well as noncompetitive practices among contractors that may restrict or eliminate competition or otherwise restrain trade. In order to ensure objective contractor performance and eliminate unfair competitive advantage, contractors that develop or draft specifications, requirements, statements of work, invitations for bids and/or requests for proposals shall be excluded from competing for such procurements. Awards shall be made to the bidder or offeror whose bid or offer is responsive to the solicitation and is most advantageous to the recipient, price, quality and other factors considered. Solicitations shall clearly set forth all requirements that the bidder or offeror shall fulfill in order for the bid or offer to be evaluated by the recipient. Any and all bids or offers may be rejected when it is in the recipient's interest to do so.

(a) All recipients shall establish written procurement procedures. These procedures shall provide for, at a minimum, that (1), (2) and (3) apply.

(1) Recipients avoid purchasing unnecessary items.

(2) Where appropriate, an analysis is made of lease and purchase alternatives to determine which would be the most economical and practical procurement for the Federal Government.

(3) Solicitations for goods and services provide for all of the following.

(i) A clear and accurate description of the technical requirements for the material, product or service to be procured. In competitive procurements, such a description shall not contain features which unduly restrict competition.

(ii) Requirements which the bidder/offeror must fulfill and all other factors to be used in evaluating bids or proposals.

(iii) A description, whenever practicable, of technical requirements in terms of functions to be performed or performance required, including the range of acceptable characteristics or minimum acceptable standards.

(iv) The specific features of "brand name or equal" descriptions that bidders are required to meet when such items are included in the solicitation.

(v) The acceptance, to the extent practicable and economically feasible, of products and services dimensioned in the metric system of measurement.

(vi) Preference, to the extent practicable and economically feasible, for products and services that conserve natural resources and protect the environment and are energy efficient.

(b) Positive efforts shall be made by recipients to utilize small businesses, minority-owned firms, and women's business enterprises, whenever possible. Recipients of Federal awards shall take all of the following steps to further this goal.

(1) Ensure that small businesses, minority-owned firms, and women's business enterprises are used to the fullest extent practicable.

(2) Make information on forthcoming opportunities available and arrange time frames for purchases and contracts to encourage and facilitate participation by small businesses, minority-owned firms, and women's business enterprises.

(3) Consider in the contract process whether firms competing for larger contracts intend to subcontract with small businesses, minority-owned firms, and women's business enterprises.

(4) Encourage contracting with consortiums of small businesses, minority-owned firms and women's business enterprises when a contract is too large for one of these firms to handle individually.

(5) Use the services and assistance, as appropriate, of such organizations as the Small Business Administration and the Department of Commerce's Minority Business Development Agency in the solicitation and utilization of small businesses, minority- owned firms and women's business enterprises.

(c) The type of procuring instruments used (e.g., fixed price contracts, cost reimbursable contracts, purchase orders, and incentive contracts) shall be determined by the recipient but shall be appropriate for the particular procurement and for promoting the best interest of the program or project involved. The "cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost" or "percentage of construction cost" methods of contracting shall not be used.

(d) Contracts shall be made only with responsible contractors who possess the potential ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of the proposed procurement. Consideration shall be given to such matters as contractor integrity, record of past performance, financial and technical resources or accessibility to other necessary resources. In certain circumstances, contracts with certain parties are restricted by agencies' implementation of E.O.s 12549 and 12689, "Debarment and Suspension."

(e) Recipients shall, on request, make available for the Federal awarding agency, pre-award review and procurement documents, such as request for proposals or invitations for bids, independent cost estimates, etc., when any of the following conditions apply.

(1) A recipient's procurement procedures or operation fails to comply with the procurement standards in the Federal awarding agency's implementation of this Circular.

(2) The procurement is expected to exceed the small purchase threshold fixed at 41 U.S.C. 403 (11) (currently $25,000) and is to be awarded without competition or only one bid or offer is received in response to a solicitation.

(3) The procurement, which is expected to exceed the small purchase threshold, specifies a "brand name" product.

(4) The proposed award over the small purchase threshold is to be awarded to other than the apparent low bidder under a sealed bid procurement.

(5) A proposed contract modification changes the scope of a contract or increases the contract amount by more than the amount of the small purchase threshold.

___.45 Cost and price analysis. Some form of cost or price analysis shall be made and documented in the procurement files in connection with every procurement action. Price analysis may be accomplished in various ways, including the comparison of price quotations submitted, market prices and similar indicia, together with discounts. Cost analysis is the review and evaluation of each element of cost to determine reasonableness, allocability and allowability.

___.46 Procurement records. Procurement records and files for purchases in excess of the small purchase threshold shall include the following at a minimum: (a) basis for contractor selection, (b) justification for lack of competition when competitive bids or offers are not obtained, and (c) basis for award cost or price.

___.47 Contract administration. A system for contract administration shall be maintained to ensure contractor conformance with the terms, conditions and specifications of the contract and to ensure adequate and timely follow up of all purchases. Recipients shall evaluate contractor performance and document, as appropriate, whether contractors have met the terms, conditions and specifications of the contract.

___.48 Contract provisions. The recipient shall include, in addition to provisions to define a sound and complete agreement, the following provisions in all contracts. The following provisions shall also be applied to subcontracts.

(a) Contracts in excess of the small purchase threshold shall contain contractual provisions or conditions that allow for administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances in which a contractor violates or breaches the contract terms, and provide for such remedial actions as may be appropriate.

(b) All contracts in excess of the small purchase threshold shall contain suitable provisions for termination by the recipient, including the manner by which termination shall be effected and the basis for settlement. In addition, such contracts shall describe conditions under which the contract may be terminated for default as well as conditions where the contract may be terminated because of circumstances beyond the control of the contractor.

(c) Except as otherwise required by statute, an award that requires the contracting (or subcontracting) for construction or facility improvements shall provide for the recipient to follow its own requirements relating to bid guarantees, performance bonds, and payment bonds unless the construction contract or subcontract exceeds $100,000. For those contracts or subcontracts exceeding $100,000, the Federal awarding agency may accept the bonding policy and requirements of the recipient, provided the Federal awarding agency has made a determination that the Federal Government's interest is adequately protected. If such a determination has not been made, the minimum requirements shall be as follows.

(1) A bid guarantee from each bidder equivalent to five percent of the bid price. The "bid guarantee" shall consist of a firm commitment such as a bid bond, certified check, or other negotiable instrument accompanying a bid as assurance that the bidder shall, upon acceptance of his bid, execute such contractual documents as may be required within the time specified.

(2) A performance bond on the part of the contractor for 100 percent of the contract price. A "performance bond" is one executed in connection with a contract to secure fulfillment of all the contractor's obligations under such contract.

(3) A payment bond on the part of the contractor for 100 percent of the contract price. A "payment bond" is one executed in connection with a contract to assure payment as required by statute of all persons supplying labor and material in the execution of the work provided for in the contract.

(4) Where bonds are required in the situations described herein, the bonds shall be obtained from companies holding certificates of authority as acceptable sureties pursuant to 31 CFR part 223, "Surety Companies Doing Business with the United States."

(d) All negotiated contracts (except those for less than the small purchase threshold) awarded by recipients shall include a provision to the effect that the recipient, the Federal awarding agency, the Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, shall have access to any books, documents, papers and records of the contractor which are directly pertinent to a specific program for the purpose of making audits, examinations, excerpts and transcriptions.

(e) All contracts, including small purchases, awarded by recipients and their contractors shall contain the procurement provisions of Appendix A to this Circular, as applicable.

Reports and Records

___.50 Purpose of reports and records. Sections ___.51 through ___.53 set forth the procedures for monitoring and reporting on the recipient's financial and program performance and the necessary standard reporting forms. They also set forth record retention requirements.

(a) Recipients are responsible for managing and monitoring each project, program, subaward, function or activity supported by the award. Recipients shall monitor subawards to ensure subrecipients have met the audit requirements as delineated in Section ___.26.

(b) The Federal awarding agency shall prescribe the frequency with which the performance reports shall be submitted. Except as provided in paragraph ___.51(f), performance reports shall not be required more frequently than quarterly or, less frequently than annually. Annual reports shall be due 90 calendar days after the grant year quarterly or semi-annual reports shall be due 30 days after the reporting period. The Federal awarding agency may require annual reports before the anniversary dates of multiple year awards in lieu of these requirements. The final performance reports are due 90 calendar days after the expiration or termination of the award.

(c) If inappropriate, a final technical or performance report shall not be required after completion of the project.

(d) When required, performance reports shall generally contain, for each award, brief information on each of the following.

(1) A comparison of actual accomplishments with the goals and objectives established for the period, the findings of the investigator, or both. Whenever appropriate and the output of programs or projects can be readily quantified, such quantitative data should be related to cost data for computation of unit costs.

(2) Reasons why established goals were not met, if appropriate.

(3) Other pertinent information including, when appropriate, analysis and explanation of cost overruns or high unit costs.

(e) Recipients shall not be required to submit more than the original and two copies of performance reports.

(f) Recipients shall immediately notify the Federal awarding agency of developments that have a significant impact on the award-supported activities. Also, notification shall be given in the case of problems, delays, or adverse conditions which materially impair the ability to meet the objectives of the award. This notification shall include a statement of the action taken or contemplated, and any assistance needed to resolve the situation.

(g) Federal awarding agencies may make site visits, as needed.

(h) Federal awarding agencies shall comply with clearance requirements of 5 CFR part 1320 when requesting performance data from recipients.

(a) The following forms or such other forms as may be approved by OMB are authorized for obtaining financial information from recipients.

(1) SF-269 or SF-269A, Financial Status Report.

(i) Each Federal awarding agency shall require recipients to use the SF-269 or SF-269A to report the status of funds for all nonconstruction projects or programs. A Federal awarding agency may, however, have the option of not requiring the SF-269 or SF-269A when the SF-270, Request for Advance or Reimbursement, or SF-272, Report of Federal Cash Transactions, is determined to provide adequate information to meet its needs, except that a final SF-269 or SF-269A shall be required at the completion of the project when the SF-270 is used only for advances.

(ii) The Federal awarding agency shall prescribe whether the report shall be on a cash or accrual basis. If the Federal awarding agency requires accrual information and the recipient's accounting records are not normally kept on the accrual basis, the recipient shall not be required to convert its accounting system, but shall develop such accrual information through best estimates based on an analysis of the documentation on hand.

(iii) The Federal awarding agency shall determine the frequency of the Financial Status Report for each project or program, considering the size and complexity of the particular project or program. However, the report shall not be required more frequently than quarterly or less frequently than annually. A final report shall be required at the completion of the agreement.

(iv) The Federal awarding agency shall require recipients to submit the SF-269 or SF-269A (an original and no more than two copies) no later than 30 days after the end of each specified reporting period for quarterly and semi-annual reports, and 90 calendar days for annual and final reports. Extensions of reporting due dates may be approved by the Federal awarding agency upon request of the recipient.

(2) SF-272, Report of Federal Cash Transactions.

(i) When funds are advanced to recipients the Federal awarding agency shall require each recipient to submit the SF-272 and, when necessary, its continuation sheet, SF-272a. The Federal awarding agency shall use this report to monitor cash advanced to recipients and to obtain disbursement information for each agreement with the recipients.

(ii) Federal awarding agencies may require forecasts of Federal cash requirements in the "Remarks" section of the report.

(iii) When practical and deemed necessary, Federal awarding agencies may require recipients to report in the "Remarks" section the amount of cash advances received in excess of three days. Recipients shall provide short narrative explanations of actions taken to reduce the excess balances.

(iv) Recipients shall be required to submit not more than the original and two copies of the SF-272 15 calendar days following the end of each quarter. The Federal awarding agencies may require a monthly report from those recipients receiving advances totaling $1 million or more per year.

(v) Federal awarding agencies may waive the requirement for submission of the SF-272 for any one of the following reasons: (1) When monthly advances do not exceed $25,000 per recipient, provided that such advances are monitored through other forms contained in this section (2) If, in the Federal awarding agency's opinion, the recipient's accounting controls are adequate to minimize excessive Federal advances or, (3) When the electronic payment mechanisms provide adequate data.

(b) When the Federal awarding agency needs additional information or more frequent reports, the following shall be observed.

(1) When additional information is needed to comply with legislative requirements, Federal awarding agencies shall issue instructions to require recipients to submit such information under the "Remarks" section of the reports.

(2) When a Federal awarding agency determines that a recipient's accounting system does not meet the standards in Section ___.21, additional pertinent information to further monitor awards may be obtained upon written notice to the recipient until such time as the system is brought up to standard. The Federal awarding agency, in obtaining this information, shall comply with report clearance requirements of 5 CFR part 1320.

(3) Federal awarding agencies are encouraged to shade out any line item on any report if not necessary.

(4) Federal awarding agencies may accept the identical information from the recipients in machine readable format or computer printouts or electronic outputs in lieu of prescribed formats.

(5) Federal awarding agencies may provide computer or electronic outputs to recipients when such expedites or contributes to the accuracy of reporting.

(a) This section sets forth requirements for record retention and access to records for awards to recipients. Federal awarding agencies shall not impose any other record retention or access requirements upon recipients.

(b) Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other records pertinent to an award shall be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, as authorized by the Federal awarding agency. The only exceptions are the following.

(1) If any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the 3-year period, the records shall be retained until all litigation, claims or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken.

(2) Records for real property and equipment acquired with Federal funds shall be retained for 3 years after final disposition.

(3) When records are transferred to or maintained by the Federal awarding agency, the 3-year retention requirement is not applicable to the recipient.

(4) Indirect cost rate proposals, cost allocations plans, etc. as specified in paragraph ___.53(g).

(c) Copies of original records may be substituted for the original records if authorized by the Federal awarding agency.

(d) The Federal awarding agency shall request transfer of certain records to its custody from recipients when it determines that the records possess long term retention value. However, in order to avoid duplicate recordkeeping, a Federal awarding agency may make arrangements for recipients to retain any records that are continuously needed for joint use.

(e) The Federal awarding agency, the Inspector General, Comptroller General of the United States, or any of their duly authorized representatives, have the right of timely and unrestricted access to any books, documents, papers, or other records of recipients that are pertinent to the awards, in order to make audits, examinations, excerpts, transcripts and copies of such documents. This right also includes timely and reasonable access to a recipient's personnel for the purpose of interview and discussion related to such documents. The rights of access in this paragraph are not limited to the required retention period, but shall last as long as records are retained.

(f) Unless required by statute, no Federal awarding agency shall place restrictions on recipients that limit public access to the records of recipients that are pertinent to an award, except when the Federal awarding agency can demonstrate that such records shall be kept confidential and would have been exempted from disclosure pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) if the records had belonged to the Federal awarding agency.

(g) Indirect cost rate proposals, cost allocations plans, etc. Paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) apply to the following types of documents, and their supporting records: indirect cost rate computations or proposals, cost allocation plans, and any similar accounting computations of the rate at which a particular group of costs is chargeable (such as computer usage chargeback rates or composite fringe benefit rates).

(1) If submitted for negotiation. If the recipient submits to the Federal awarding agency or the subrecipient submits to the recipient the proposal, plan, or other computation to form the basis for negotiation of the rate, then the 3-year retention period for its supporting records starts on the date of such submission.

(2) If not submitted for negotiation. If the recipient is not required to submit to the Federal awarding agency or the subrecipient is not required to submit to the recipient the proposal, plan, or other computation for negotiation purposes, then the 3-year retention period for the proposal, plan, or other computation and its supporting records starts at the end of the fiscal year (or other accounting period) covered by the proposal, plan, or other computation.

Termination and Enforcement

___.60 Purpose of termination and enforcement. Sections ___.61 and ___.62 set forth uniform suspension, termination and enforcement procedures.

(a) Awards may be terminated in whole or in part only if (1), (2) or (3) apply.

(1) By the Federal awarding agency, if a recipient materially fails to comply with the terms and conditions of an award.

(2) By the Federal awarding agency with the consent of the recipient, in which case the two parties shall agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date and, in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated.

(3) By the recipient upon sending to the Federal awarding agency written notification setting forth the reasons for such termination, the effective date, and, in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. However, if the Federal awarding agency determines in the case of partial termination that the reduced or modified portion of the grant will not accomplish the purposes for which the grant was made, it may terminate the grant in its entirety under either paragraphs (a)(1) or (2).

(b) If costs are allowed under an award, the responsibilities of the recipient referred to in paragraph ___.71(a), including those for property management as applicable, shall be considered in the termination of the award, and provision shall be made for continuing responsibilities of the recipient after termination, as appropriate.

(a) Remedies for noncompliance. If a recipient materially fails to comply with the terms and conditions of an award, whether stated in a Federal statute, regulation, assurance, application, or notice of award, the Federal awarding agency may, in addition to imposing any of the special conditions outlined in Section ___.14, take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances.

(1) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the recipient or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency.

(2) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance.

(3) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the current award.

(4) Withhold further awards for the project or program.

(5) Take other remedies that may be legally available.

(b) Hearings and appeals. In taking an enforcement action, the awarding agency shall provide the recipient an opportunity for hearing, appeal, or other administrative proceeding to which the recipient is entitled under any statute or regulation applicable to the action involved.

(c) Effects of suspension and termination. Costs of a recipient resulting from obligations incurred by the recipient during a suspension or after termination of an award are not allowable unless the awarding agency expressly authorizes them in the notice of suspension or termination or subsequently. Other recipient costs during suspension or after termination which are necessary and not reasonably avoidable are allowable if (1) and (2) apply.

(1) The costs result from obligations which were properly incurred by the recipient before the effective date of suspension or termination, are not in anticipation of it, and in the case of a termination, are noncancellable. <

(2) The costs would be allowable if the award were not suspended or expired normally at the end of the funding period in which the termination takes effect.

(d) Relationship to debarment and suspension. The enforcement remedies identified in this section, including suspension and termination, do not preclude a recipient from being subject to debarment and suspension under E.O.s 12549 and 12689 and the Federal awarding agency implementing regulations (see Section ___.13).

SUBPART D - After-the-Award Requirements

___.70 Purpose. Sections ___.71 through ___.73 contain closeout procedures and other procedures for subsequent disallowances and adjustments.

(a) Recipients shall submit, within 90 calendar days after the date of completion of the award, all financial, performance, and other reports as required by the terms and conditions of the award. The Federal awarding agency may approve extensions when requested by the recipient.

(b) Unless the Federal awarding agency authorizes an extension, a recipient shall liquidate all obligations incurred under the award not later than 90 calendar days after the funding period or the date of completion as specified in the terms and conditions of the award or in agency implementing instructions.

(c) The Federal awarding agency shall make prompt payments to a recipient for allowable reimbursable costs under the award being closed out.

(d) The recipient shall promptly refund any balances of unobligated cash that the Federal awarding agency has advanced or paid and that is not authorized to be retained by the recipient for use in other projects. OMB Circular A-129 governs unreturned amounts that become delinquent debts.

(e) When authorized by the terms and conditions of the award, the Federal awarding agency shall make a settlement for any upward or downward adjustments to the Federal share of costs after closeout reports are received.

(f) The recipient shall account for any real and personal property acquired with Federal funds or received from the Federal Government in accordance with Sections ___.31 through ___.37.

(g) In the event a final audit has not been performed prior to the closeout of an award, the Federal awarding agency shall retain the right to recover an appropriate amount after fully considering the recommendations on disallowed costs resulting from the final audit.

(a) The closeout of an award does not affect any of the following.

(1) The right of the Federal awarding agency to disallow costs and recover funds on the basis of a later audit or other review.

(2) The obligation of the recipient to return any funds due as a result of later refunds, corrections, or other transactions.

(3) Audit requirements in Section ___.26.

(4) Property management requirements in Sections ___.31 through ___.37.

(5) Records retention as required in Section ___.53.

(b) After closeout of an award, a relationship created under an award may be modified or ended in whole or in part with the consent of the Federal awarding agency and the recipient, provided the responsibilities of the recipient referred to in paragraph ___.73(a), including those for property management as applicable, are considered and provisions made for continuing responsibilities of the recipient, as appropriate.

(a) Any funds paid to a recipient in excess of the amount to which the recipient is finally determined to be entitled under the terms and conditions of the award constitute a debt to the Federal Government. If not paid within a reasonable period after the demand for payment, the Federal awarding agency may reduce the debt by (1), (2) or (3).

(1) Making an administrative offset against other requests for reimbursements.

(2) Withholding advance payments otherwise due to the recipient.

(3) Taking other action permitted by statute.

(b) Except as otherwise provided by law, the Federal awarding agency shall charge interest on an overdue debt in accordance with 4 CFR Chapter II, "Federal Claims Collection Standards."

Appendix A

Contract Provisions

All contracts, awarded by a recipient including small purchases, shall contain the following provisions as applicable:

1. Equal Employment Opportunity - All contracts shall contain a provision requiring compliance with E.O. 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity," as amended by E.O. 11375, "Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity," and as supplemented by regulations at 41 CFR part 60, "Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity, Department of Labor."

2. Copeland "Anti-Kickback" Act (18 U.S.C. 874 and 40 U.S.C. 276c) - All contracts and subgrants in excess of $2000 for construction or repair awarded by recipients and subrecipients shall include a provision for compliance with the Copeland "Anti-Kickback" Act (18 U.S.C. 874), as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 3, "Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States"). The Act provides that each contractor or subrecipient shall be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction, completion, or repair of public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he is otherwise entitled. The recipient shall report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency.

3. Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 276a to a-7) - When required by Federal program legislation, all construction contracts awarded by the recipients and subrecipients of more than $2000 shall include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a to a-7) and as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 5, "Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction"). Under this Act, contractors shall be required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the minimum wages specified in a wage determination made by the Secretary of Labor. In addition, contractors shall be required to pay wages not less than once a week. The recipient shall place a copy of the current prevailing wage determination issued by the Department of Labor in each solicitation and the award of a contract shall be conditioned upon the acceptance of the wage determination. The recipient shall report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency.

4. Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-333) - Where applicable, all contracts awarded by recipients in excess of $2000 for construction contracts and in excess of $2500 for other contracts that involve the employment of mechanics or laborers shall include a provision for compliance with Sections 102 and 107 of the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-333), as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR part 5). Under Section 102 of the Act, each contractor shall be required to compute the wages of every mechanic and laborer on the basis of a standard work week of 40 hours. Work in excess of the standard work week is permissible provided that the worker is compensated at a rate of not less than 1 ½ times the basic rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in the work week. Section 107 of the Act is applicable to construction work and provides that no laborer or mechanic shall be required to work in surroundings or under working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous or dangerous. These requirements do not apply to the purchases of supplies or materials or articles ordinarily available on the open market, or contracts for transportation or transmission of intelligence.

5. Rights to Inventions Made Under a Contract or Agreement - Contracts or agreements for the performance of experimental, developmental, or research work shall provide for the rights of the Federal Government and the recipient in any resulting invention in accordance with 37 CFR part 401, "Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms Under Government Grants, Contracts and Cooperative Agreements," and any implementing regulations issued by the awarding agency.


Contents

Background

Obama gave his first major foreign policy speech of his campaign on April 23, 2007 to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, in which he outlined his foreign policy objectives, stressing five key points:

  1. "bringing a responsible end to this war in Iraq and refocusing on the critical challenges in the broader region,"
  2. "by building the first truly 21st century military and showing wisdom in how we deploy it,"
  3. "by marshalling a global effort to meet a threat that rises above all others in urgency – securing, destroying, and stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction,"
  4. "rebuild and construct the alliances and partnerships necessary to meet common challenges and confront common threats", and
  5. "while America can help others build more secure societies, we must never forget that only the citizens of these nations can sustain them."

President-elect Obama nominated former rival, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to serve as his Secretary of State on December 1, 2008, and chose to keep Secretary of Defense Robert Gates as his Secretary of Defense. He would appoint General James L. Jones to serve as his National Security Advisor and nominate Governor of Arizona Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security.

Clinton stated during her confirmation hearings that she believed that "the best way to advance America's interests in reducing global threats and seizing global opportunities is to design and implement global solutions." She stated, "We must use what has been called "smart power", the full range of tools at our disposal – diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal and cultural – picking the right tool or combination of tools for each situation. With smart power, diplomacy will be the vanguard of our foreign policy." [13]

During the last weeks before his inauguration, in addition to the several major conflicts in the world, fighting related to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict erupted anew, specifically in Gaza, between Israel and the Hamas-led government. The 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict ended in an uneasy cease-fire on January 18, 2009, two days prior to Obama's inauguration.

Initial themes

In his inaugural address, Obama, elaborating on his foreign policy, suggested that he hoped to begin the process of withdrawing from Iraq and continuing to focus on the conflict in Afghanistan. He also mentioned lessening the nuclear threat through "working tirelessly with old friends and former foes." He spoke about America's determination to combat terrorism by proclaiming that America's spirit is "stronger and cannot be broken – you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you." To the Muslim world, Obama extended an invite to "a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect." He also said we would be willing to "extend a hand" to those "who cling to power through corruption and deceit" if they "are willing to unclench" their fists. [14]

On his first full day as president, Obama called on Israel to open the borders of Gaza, detailing early plans on his administration's peace plans for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. [15] Obama and Secretary of State Clinton named George Mitchell as Special Envoy for Middle East peace and Richard Holbrooke as special representative to Pakistan and Afghanistan on January 23, 2009. [16] The Mitchell appointment signaled that Clinton might stay away from the direct Secretary-level negotiating that her predecessor, Condoleezza Rice, had spent much effort on during the previous two years. [17]

Within less than a week in her new position, Secretary of State Clinton already called almost 40 foreign leaders or foreign ministers. [18] She said the world was eager to see a new American foreign policy and that, "There is a great exhalation of breath going on around the world. We’ve got a lot of damage to repair." [18] She did indicate that not every past policy would be repudiated, and specifically said it was essential that the six-party talks over the North Korean nuclear weapons program continue. [19]

His trip to Denmark, that failed to convince the International Olympic Committee to award the 2016 Summer Olympic games to Chicago, made Denmark the sixteenth country Obama visited since becoming President on January 20, 2009. This edged out President's Gerald Ford and George H.W. Bush (both tied at 15 visits in their first year) to make Obama the most traveled first year President. [20]

Appointments

The administration appointed, or allowed to remain in office, 2,465 ambassadors. Most were career diplomats. 805 were political appointees. 110 of 150 ambassadorships were political in the Caribbean 259 out of 358 appointees in Western Europe were political. Career diplomats dominated all other areas including: North and Central America, South America, Africa, Eastern Europe, Middle East, East Asia, South Asia and Oceania. In Central Asia, all appointees were career. [21]

Although he regards Obama's foreign policy stance as pragmatic and dovish, Robert Dreyfuss is concerned that several of Obama's top advisers have hawkish stances or connections. These include Tony Lake, United Nations ambassador-designate Susan Rice, Tom Daschle and Dennis Ross, along with leading Democratic hawks like Richard Holbrooke, close to vice president-elect Joe Biden or secretary of state-designate Hillary Clinton [22] Dreyfuss claims that Dennis Ross is the "inside man for the neoconservatives" in the Obama administration. [23]

Obama administration foreign policy personnel
Vice President Biden
(2009-)
Secretary of State Clinton
(2009-2013)
Kerry
(2013-)
Secretary of Defense Gates
(2006-2011)
Panetta
(2011-2013)
Hagel
(2013-2015)
Carter
(2015-)
Ambassador to the United Nations Rice
(2009-2013)
Power
(2013-)
Director of National Intelligence Blair
(2009-2010)
Gompert
(2010)
Clapper
(2010-)
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency Panetta
(2009-2011)
Morell
(2011)
Petraeus
(2011-2012)
Morell
(2012-2013)
Brennan
(2013-)
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Jones
(2009-2010)
Donilon
(2010-2013)
Rice
(2013-)
Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Donilon
(2009-2010)
McDonough
(2010-2013)
Blinken
(2013-)
Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and Speechwriting Rhodes
(2009-)
Trade Representative Kirk
(2009-2013)
Marantis
(2013)
Sapiro
(2013)
Froman
(2013-)
Current ・ Former ・ Acting


Forget ‘Better Off’

In his closing statement of the final presidential debate in October 1980, Ronald Reagan told prospective voters that before heading to the polls: "It might be well if you would ask yourself: Are you better off than you were four years ago?" This month, Republicans borrowed this question from the Great Communicator as a litmus test for President Barack Obama’s term in office. In a recent poll, a slight plurality of prospective voters said they were not better off now than in 2008.

However, Republicans shied away from the other query Reagan raised in 1980: "Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we’re as strong as we were four years ago?" This omission reflected two realities facing the Republican presidential candidate. First, Obama consistently outpolls Mitt Romney by 6 to 10 percentage points when asked who would be better at "protecting the country," who could be "a good commander in chief," and who would be better at "handling foreign policy." Second, only 4 percent of Americans polled believe that "foreign affairs," which includes wars, terrorism, immigration, and other subjects, is the most important issue facing the United States — the lowest percentage since Obama entered office.

Despite the American public’s puzzling disinterest in foreign policy and national security, Reagan’s second question is worth a closer look. Both political parties paint starkly different pictures. Romney told a Memorial Day commemoration in San Diego: "I wish I could tell you that the world is a safe place today. It’s not." Meanwhile, Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council (NSC), said, "The U.S. is absolutely safer now than four years ago." This Sept. 11, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said, "I think the bottom-line implication is that America is safer."

It is unlikely that Obama’s signature foreign-policy successes — authorizing the raid to kill Osama bin Laden and providing the essential military and intelligence capabilities that led to the downfall of Muammar al-Qaddafi — singlehandedly made the United States safer. By 2011, bin Laden played a minor role in core al Qaeda operations, which had been diminished by relentless CIA drone strikes in Pakistan. At the same time, until the Libyan crisis imploded, Qaddafi was viewed by U.S. officials as a shining star for his cooperation on terrorism matters. According to the State Department‘s "Country Reports on Terrorism 2010," released in August 2011: "The Libyan government continued to demonstrate a strong and active commitment to combating terrorist organizations and violent extremism through bilateral and regional counterterrorism and security cooperation." It is plain that the current Libyan government is — so far — either unable or unwilling to take on terrorist organizations with the same intensity and brutality as Qaddafi.

The reality is that, across a range of criteria, Americans are indeed safer and more secure than four years ago. However, the primary reasons predate Obama and instead reflect long-term social, economic, and demographic trends. Consider just a few indicators from 2008, the year before Obama entered office and the latest year for which data is available.

War. The number of active intra- and interstate "armed conflicts" (having over 25 battle-related deaths) has remained constant since 2008 at 37. Six conflicts reached the intensity of "war" (over 1,000 deaths) in the past year, as Libya and Yemen joined the list. The number of armed conflicts in which the United States is directly involved increased in 2011 due to U.S. military personnel or assets involved in hostilities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya. However, the number of active-duty service-member deaths (including in war, from accidents, or self-inflicted) remained relatively constant between 2008 and 2010 (1,440 and 1,485).

Freedom. As Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld observed in April 2003: "Freedom’s untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things." Nevertheless, over time, democracies tend to have healthier and better-educated citizens, almost never go to war with other democracies, and are less likely to fight wars than non-democracies. There has been little change on this indicator since 2008, as the outcomes of the Arab Spring are far from settled. According to Freedom House, there were 119 electoral democracies in 2008 and 42 autocracies. In 2011, there were 117 and 48, respectively.

Terrorism. According to the National Counterterrorism Center, while 33 U.S. citizens died from terrorism in 2008, that number decreased to 17 in 2011 (15 in Afghanistan, one in Iraq, and one in Jerusalem). This reduced threat is reflected in the global downward trend of deaths due to terrorism, with 15,732 fatalities in 2008 and 12,533 fatalities in 2011, largely as a result of the increased attention and enforcement efforts in Iraq, Somalia, and Pakistan. Meanwhile, terrorist deaths increased by almost 60 percent in Afghanistan between 2008 and 2011.

Nuclear weapons. The number of global nuclear weapons declined from about 23,360 in 2009 to 19,000 in 2012. At the same time, global stockpiles of highly enriched uranium (HEU) decreased from 1,670 tons to 1,440 tons between 2008 and 2011, while stockpiles of separated plutonium remained constant at 500 tons. However, this good news is tempered by the growth in India’s and Pakistan’s nuclear arsenals, from 60 to 70 in India to 80 to 100, and from 60 in Pakistan to 90 to 110. Obama reportedly told his staff that loose Pakistani nuclear weapons "was his biggest single national security concern." Moreover, North Korea allegedly built a uranium-enrichment facility estimated to be capable of producing a bomb’s worth of HEU per year, and U.S. officials have warned there are other clandestine enrichment sites.

Nuclear security. Building on the strong records of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, Obama declared in April 2009 that his greatest foreign-policy priority was to "secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years." Obama administration officials acknowledge that they will fall short of this lofty goal in March, the Government Accountability Office reported, "NSC officials did not consider the 4-year time frame to be a hard and fast deadline." Nevertheless, important reductions in weapons-capable fissile material were sustained under Obama’s watch, including the removal of all HEU from Mexico, Chile, Serbia, Romania, Taiwan, and Turkey. While there were 53 countries with at least 1 kilogram of weapons-usable fissile material in 2005, today there are 34.

Life expectancy. Even before the supposed benefits of Obamacare have been phased in, U.S. life expectancy has continued to increase, from 78.0 years in 2008 to 78.49 years in 2011. In contrast, the average global life span is 69.6 years. Health metrics such as child mortality decreased slightly from a rate of 7.7 per 100,000 in 2008 to 7.5 in 2010, though obesity rates expanded from 33.7 percent in 2008, to 35.7 percent in 2010. Two weeks ago, first lady Michelle Obama declared that obesity was "absolutely" a national security threat to the United States.

Daily life. Although this is a foreign-policy column, it is worth noting that this is the safest time in history to live in the United States. The FBI’s (Preliminary Annual) Uniform Crime Report for 2011 shows continued decline in nearly all major crime categories — including violent crime, motor vehicle theft, and arson — with only a slight 0.3 percent increase in burglary. Moreover, getting from point A to point B has never been safer. Comparing 2008 to the most recent equivalent data, fewer Americans are dying in motor vehicles, in airplanes, as pedestrians from motor vehicles, or on bicycles.

Both Obama and Romney pepper their stump speeches with explicit and implicit invocations of America as an "exceptional nation." Yet if recent presidents have taught us anything, it is that presidential foreign-policy choices either result in big, intractable catastrophes (see Iraq) or simply maintain an even keel. The first point of wisdom in analyzing U.S. foreign policy is to recognize that very little of what happens on the other 91.77 percent of the Earth’s surface has anything to do with the United States. The second is that the ability of any U.S. president to shape, compel, or direct foreign-policy events is both limited and diminishing. On Sept. 24, Romney told an audience in Pueblo, Colorado, that the anti-Western protests "represent events that are spinning out of the kind of influence we’d like to have. We’re at the mercy of events rather than shaping the events in the Middle East." The era of American mastery in world affairs was always a myth and has now all but collapsed. All largely positive developments outlined above reflect the complex, interconnected decisions of billions of people. So far, so good.

In his closing statement of the final presidential debate in October 1980, Ronald Reagan told prospective voters that before heading to the polls: "It might be well if you would ask yourself: Are you better off than you were four years ago?" This month, Republicans borrowed this question from the Great Communicator as a litmus test for President Barack Obama’s term in office. In a recent poll, a slight plurality of prospective voters said they were not better off now than in 2008.

However, Republicans shied away from the other query Reagan raised in 1980: "Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we’re as strong as we were four years ago?" This omission reflected two realities facing the Republican presidential candidate. First, Obama consistently outpolls Mitt Romney by 6 to 10 percentage points when asked who would be better at "protecting the country," who could be "a good commander in chief," and who would be better at "handling foreign policy." Second, only 4 percent of Americans polled believe that "foreign affairs," which includes wars, terrorism, immigration, and other subjects, is the most important issue facing the United States — the lowest percentage since Obama entered office.

Despite the American public’s puzzling disinterest in foreign policy and national security, Reagan’s second question is worth a closer look. Both political parties paint starkly different pictures. Romney told a Memorial Day commemoration in San Diego: "I wish I could tell you that the world is a safe place today. It’s not." Meanwhile, Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the National Security Council (NSC), said, "The U.S. is absolutely safer now than four years ago." This Sept. 11, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said, "I think the bottom-line implication is that America is safer."

It is unlikely that Obama’s signature foreign-policy successes — authorizing the raid to kill Osama bin Laden and providing the essential military and intelligence capabilities that led to the downfall of Muammar al-Qaddafi — singlehandedly made the United States safer. By 2011, bin Laden played a minor role in core al Qaeda operations, which had been diminished by relentless CIA drone strikes in Pakistan. At the same time, until the Libyan crisis imploded, Qaddafi was viewed by U.S. officials as a shining star for his cooperation on terrorism matters. According to the State Department‘s "Country Reports on Terrorism 2010," released in August 2011: "The Libyan government continued to demonstrate a strong and active commitment to combating terrorist organizations and violent extremism through bilateral and regional counterterrorism and security cooperation." It is plain that the current Libyan government is — so far — either unable or unwilling to take on terrorist organizations with the same intensity and brutality as Qaddafi.

The reality is that, across a range of criteria, Americans are indeed safer and more secure than four years ago. However, the primary reasons predate Obama and instead reflect long-term social, economic, and demographic trends. Consider just a few indicators from 2008, the year before Obama entered office and the latest year for which data is available.

War. The number of active intra- and interstate "armed conflicts" (having over 25 battle-related deaths) has remained constant since 2008 at 37. Six conflicts reached the intensity of "war" (over 1,000 deaths) in the past year, as Libya and Yemen joined the list. The number of armed conflicts in which the United States is directly involved increased in 2011 due to U.S. military personnel or assets involved in hostilities in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya. However, the number of active-duty service-member deaths (including in war, from accidents, or self-inflicted) remained relatively constant between 2008 and 2010 (1,440 and 1,485).

Freedom. As Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld observed in April 2003: "Freedom’s untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things." Nevertheless, over time, democracies tend to have healthier and better-educated citizens, almost never go to war with other democracies, and are less likely to fight wars than non-democracies. There has been little change on this indicator since 2008, as the outcomes of the Arab Spring are far from settled. According to Freedom House, there were 119 electoral democracies in 2008 and 42 autocracies. In 2011, there were 117 and 48, respectively.

Terrorism. According to the National Counterterrorism Center, while 33 U.S. citizens died from terrorism in 2008, that number decreased to 17 in 2011 (15 in Afghanistan, one in Iraq, and one in Jerusalem). This reduced threat is reflected in the global downward trend of deaths due to terrorism, with 15,732 fatalities in 2008 and 12,533 fatalities in 2011, largely as a result of the increased attention and enforcement efforts in Iraq, Somalia, and Pakistan. Meanwhile, terrorist deaths increased by almost 60 percent in Afghanistan between 2008 and 2011.

Nuclear weapons. The number of global nuclear weapons declined from about 23,360 in 2009 to 19,000 in 2012. At the same time, global stockpiles of highly enriched uranium (HEU) decreased from 1,670 tons to 1,440 tons between 2008 and 2011, while stockpiles of separated plutonium remained constant at 500 tons. However, this good news is tempered by the growth in India’s and Pakistan’s nuclear arsenals, from 60 to 70 in India to 80 to 100, and from 60 in Pakistan to 90 to 110. Obama reportedly told his staff that loose Pakistani nuclear weapons "was his biggest single national security concern." Moreover, North Korea allegedly built a uranium-enrichment facility estimated to be capable of producing a bomb’s worth of HEU per year, and U.S. officials have warned there are other clandestine enrichment sites.

Nuclear security. Building on the strong records of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, Obama declared in April 2009 that his greatest foreign-policy priority was to "secure all vulnerable nuclear material around the world within four years." Obama administration officials acknowledge that they will fall short of this lofty goal in March, the Government Accountability Office reported, "NSC officials did not consider the 4-year time frame to be a hard and fast deadline." Nevertheless, important reductions in weapons-capable fissile material were sustained under Obama’s watch, including the removal of all HEU from Mexico, Chile, Serbia, Romania, Taiwan, and Turkey. While there were 53 countries with at least 1 kilogram of weapons-usable fissile material in 2005, today there are 34.

Life expectancy. Even before the supposed benefits of Obamacare have been phased in, U.S. life expectancy has continued to increase, from 78.0 years in 2008 to 78.49 years in 2011. In contrast, the average global life span is 69.6 years. Health metrics such as child mortality decreased slightly from a rate of 7.7 per 100,000 in 2008 to 7.5 in 2010, though obesity rates expanded from 33.7 percent in 2008, to 35.7 percent in 2010. Two weeks ago, first lady Michelle Obama declared that obesity was "absolutely" a national security threat to the United States.

Daily life. Although this is a foreign-policy column, it is worth noting that this is the safest time in history to live in the United States. The FBI’s (Preliminary Annual) Uniform Crime Report for 2011 shows continued decline in nearly all major crime categories — including violent crime, motor vehicle theft, and arson — with only a slight 0.3 percent increase in burglary. Moreover, getting from point A to point B has never been safer. Comparing 2008 to the most recent equivalent data, fewer Americans are dying in motor vehicles, in airplanes, as pedestrians from motor vehicles, or on bicycles.

Both Obama and Romney pepper their stump speeches with explicit and implicit invocations of America as an "exceptional nation." Yet if recent presidents have taught us anything, it is that presidential foreign-policy choices either result in big, intractable catastrophes (see Iraq) or simply maintain an even keel. The first point of wisdom in analyzing U.S. foreign policy is to recognize that very little of what happens on the other 91.77 percent of the Earth’s surface has anything to do with the United States. The second is that the ability of any U.S. president to shape, compel, or direct foreign-policy events is both limited and diminishing. On Sept. 24, Romney told an audience in Pueblo, Colorado, that the anti-Western protests "represent events that are spinning out of the kind of influence we’d like to have. We’re at the mercy of events rather than shaping the events in the Middle East." The era of American mastery in world affairs was always a myth and has now all but collapsed. All largely positive developments outlined above reflect the complex, interconnected decisions of billions of people. So far, so good.

Micah Zenko is the co-author of Clear and Present Safety: The World Has Never Been Better and Why That Matters to Americans.


Fact-check: Did Obama leave Trump with 128 judges to appoint?

Here’s why: President Donald Trump often celebrates the large number of judicial appointments he’s been able to make. Federal judges are lifelong appointments, and filling the district and circuit courts leaves a legacy that lasts well beyond any presidency.

In the first debate, Trump faulted President Barack Obama for giving him a golden opportunity.

"I’ll have so many judges because President Obama and (Biden) left me 128 judges to fill," Trump said Sept. 29. "You just don’t do that."

Did Obama, and by extension Joe Biden, drop the ball on judicial appointments?

There’s broad agreement that their problem was the power of a Republican Senate to bottle up their nominees.

"Scholars have referred to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's actions during this time as a blockade of judicial appointments," said Michigan State political scientist Ian Ostrander.

Republicans won control of the Senate in 2014. From that point on, the numbers show how hard it was for Obama to seat the people he put forward.

The bad, the good and the ugly: Obama’s judicial saga in three acts

We don’t know where Trump got his figure of 128 vacancies, but it’s wrong. The accurate number is 105. That said, the fundamental point remains the same. Obama had a hard time getting judges confirmed.

A key part of understanding judicial confirmations lies in the Senate. The Senate is the gatekeeper and, without its nod, no nomination goes through. The party that holds the Senate wields final control.

During the two years before Republicans took the Senate, Obama had a confirmation success rate of nearly 90%. Afterward, the confirmation rate fell to 28%.

It always makes a difference when the opposing party holds the Senate in the last two years of any presidency, but Presidents Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush faced that situation, too, and still had much higher success rates. The Senate of 2015 and 2016 was nearly impenetrable.

"The 114th Senate both confirmed far fewer judges than its recent other-party predecessors and stopped confirming them at a much earlier point," wrote Brookings governance fellow Russell Wheeler.

The trajectory of confirmations passed through three phases during the Obama years.

In the first four years, while Democrats retained control, Republicans used the Senate rules to slow down the process.

Sheldon Goldman, professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, said geography played a big role.

"A large number of vacancies were from states with two Republican senators or one Republican and one Democrat," Goldman explained. "Until McConnell and the Republicans upended the practice of senatorial courtesy, both senators had to sign off on the recommended judicial nominees. Republican senators did their best to delay the process. As we now know, that tactic of obstruct and delay was successful."

Not only could individual Republicans block nominees to courts in their states, there was always the threat of a filibuster.

That lasted until 2013, when Democratic Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., invoked what is called the "nuclear option." For district and circuit court appointments, debate was limited to 30 hours and after that, a simple majority would carry the day.

The nuclear option opened up the second phase that lasted from 2013 to 2014, when nearly 90% of nominations sailed through. Even with that, Ostrander said there was only so much Democrats could do, because of the backlog created during the previous four years.

The final phase came when Republicans won the Senate. The period wasn’t totally devoid of confirmations.

We reached four experts in the politics of the federal judiciary. In one way or the other, they all agreed on the broad reason why Trump saw so many vacancies after he won.

"That Obama left office with so many unfilled vacancies was largely by design — by Mitch McConnell," said the University of Vermont’s Lisa Holmes.

Trump said Obama left him 128 judgeships to fill.

The actual number is 105, but the bigger flaw is that Trump ignores the successful effort of Republicans to block the people Obama put forward.

We rate this claim Mostly False.

PolitiFact Texas is a partnership of the Austin American-Statesman, Houston Chronicle and the San Antonio Express-News to help you find the truth in Texas politics.


Barack Obama

Barack Hussein Obama II ( US born August 4, 1961) is an American politician serving as the 44th President of the United States. He is the first African American to hold the office, as well as the first president born outside of the continental United States. Born in Honolulu, Hawaii, Obama is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he served as president of the Harvard Law Review. He was a community organizer in Chicago before earning his law degree. He worked as a civil rights attorney and taught constitutional law atUniversity of Chicago Law School between 1992 and 2004. He served three terms representing the 13th District in theIllinois Senate from 1997 to 2004, and ran unsuccessfully in the Democratic primary for the United States House of Representatives in 2000 against incumbent Bobby Rush.

Obama lies about place of birth, Kenya?, Hawaii?, Obama registered as foreign student?, Selective Service Application fraud?, CDR Charles Kerchner responds

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

I heard Rush Limbaugh yesterday echo my position that Obama may have said he was born in Kenya to get foreign student aid. This is plausible. Obama has lied and consistently made statements for political expediency, and often reversed earlier positions.

Obama has lied about his place of birth. He has even provided conflicting information about hospitals in Hawaii.

Was Obama born in Hawaii or Kenya?

Documented. Obama has used taxpayer dollars to hide his birth certificate, college and other records.

And now he is apparently using the director of the Selective Service System, who Obama appointed, to keep his selective service application hidden.

From CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret) May 18, 2012.
“Not only are there pre-2007 U.S. accounts that Obama was born in Kenya, but pre-2007 African newspaper accounts too. Are newspapers on two continents published over many, many years all wrong? Common sense tells us that Obama is a fraud:

College admission records will likely show he attended as a foreign born student. That is why Obama is hiding his college records. Obama likely never registered for the draft since he was a foreign student and did not have to. Thus the need in 2008 to forge and back date a draft registration card. Hawaiian laws allowed children born abroad to a Hawaiian citizen to be registered as born in Hawaii. Obama could have been physically born in Kenya and yet registered by the maternal grandmother in Hawaii as born there which would trigger the standardized newspaper birth registration accounts in the Hawaii newspapers in 1961. With no Hawaiian hospital generated birth registration documents, or other contemporaneous records of his physical place of birth except in Kenya, there was the need to forge the short-form birth document in June 2008 and the long-form birth certificate PDF file put on the White House servers in April 2011 to backup his concocted life narrative.

Was Obama lying about his physical place of birth then or is he lying now? Either way he’s a liar. He’s also a felony draft registration evader, government document forger, and identity thief using someone else’s CT Social Security Number.”

Share this:

Like this:

Related

63 responses to &ldquo Obama lies about place of birth, Kenya?, Hawaii?, Obama registered as foreign student?, Selective Service Application fraud?, CDR Charles Kerchner responds &rdquo

“Why Kenyan Birth Claim Was No ‘Fact Checking Error'”

“No sooner did the literary agency brochure in which Barack Obama was said to be Kenyan-born surface than the media went to work to deep-six it.

“This was nothing more than a fact checking error by me – an agency assistant at the time,” Miriam Goderich, now a named partner in the literary agency, Dystel & Goderich, wrote in an emailed statement to Yahoo News, which was then picked up ABC News. “There was never any information given to us by Obama in any of his correspondence or other communications suggesting in any way that he was born in Kenya and not Hawaii. I hope you can communicate to your readers that this was a simple mistake and nothing more.”

Former publisher Tom Lipscomb does not buy Goderich’s explanation for a New York minute. “As someone who has run a number of top bestseller publishers, I think this is an amazing MIRACLE,” writes Lipscomb emphatically on Power Line. “It is the ONLY case I have ever heard of in which an editorial assistant INVENTED a biographical detail. I have heard of typos, wrong dates, misspellings of names. But to pick a really weird country of origin like Kenya for an author?””

“Obama’s conspiracy to change the meaning of Natural-Born Citizen”

Gordo,
The worst part about this whole Obama fantasy is, they think we are stupid enough to believe it.

Please pass this along and spread the word.
.
Dear Secretary Bennett:
.
I listened to Mike Broomhead yesterday on radio 550 AM. The one thing that struck me in your answers was that you seemed genuinely puzzled that the state of Hawaii had not responded to you in 8 weeks to your request for verification for Barack Hussein Obama II’s birth information. I’m sure you are now beginning to understand the frustration many have gone through over the last 4 years attempting to discover who is our president. We now are reading that a recently discovered biography lists Barack Hussein Obama as being “born in Kenya” and raised in Hawaii and Indonesia. This whole thing is starting to look like a really bad dream.
For several years I was in banking. When people became delinquent on their loans, I took action and recovered the past due amounts. In my opinion, the citizens of Arizona have now waited an additional 8 weeks too long. The information is past due. It’s now time for the Secretary of State’s office to collect this long past due account. In emails transmitted across the state of Arizona and across the country, you wrote on April 27, 2012:
“..if Hawaii can’t or won’t provide verification of the President’s birth certificate, I will not put his name on the ballot.”
Mr. Secretary, Hawaii and Obama’s accounts are past due. Time is up. It’s time to collect. I would request that that you hold to your word and keep Barack Hussein Obama II off the 2012 Arizona ballot. The time for talk is over. It’s time for action. I would respectfully ask that you keep your word and keep Mr. Obama off the 2012 ballot until there is some form of resolution regarding the criminal investigation or until Mr. Obama provides documentation that certifies who he is. It’s time to ACT!
I’ve included news articles from a national news organizations that have covered your efforts and Obama’s recently discovered Kenyan birth biography and Arizona, Leading the Fight.
Denise Reilly
Surprise Tea Party

Friday, May 18, 2012
Obama Born in Kenya -in 1991 we got it wrong – OOPS we got it wrong in 2003 – OOPS we got it wrong again in 2007
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/

Karl Rove said: “I think places like Iowa and Colorado are in danger of floating into the Republican column.” What? Why would a Republican call it a “danger” for a state to go the way of Republicans?

Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalili, Louis Farrakhan “Operation Board Games”, “We Will Not Be Silenced”, sealed records, forged documents, a little blow in college and trips to Pakistan, support of Odinga, silence on the Green Revolution in Iran, suing States, lobbyists, cornhusker kickback, Pigford debacle, Fast and Furious, DOE loans to campaign-bundling green energy companies, continued destruction of economy, continued high unemployment, continued breakdown of National Defense, continued war on fossil fuels, class warfare, religious warfare………..and the media is silent?

AMAZING! You might could overlook 1 maybe 2, ok 3 of the above but when you look at the big picture, it can’t all be a lie, a mistake, or unintentional

bo Criminal cohorts burglarizing the Offices of Republican Congressman

“The evidence points to someone with access to my office, and other offices in the Capitol complex, as the perpetrator,” freshman Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., surmised in a letter to the House’s Office of the Chief Administrative Officer.

Other offices hit—many of which handle information dealing with issues of national security, though nothing of a sensitive nature was reportedly taken—include those of Reps. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., and Jon Runyan, R-N.J. the Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security and the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. …

All Cultures Are NOT Equal

Host of CBN’s “Stakelbeck on Terror” and author of “The Terrorist Next Door: How the Government is Deceiving You About the Islamist Threat.” He’s also a GBTV contributor.

Video: Geert Wilders – The number one most important treasure for people is freedom and freedom of speech ….

House Of Rothschild: No One Can Understand What Has Happened To The Planet Without Reading This

RT News: Ron Paul going full force to Republican National Convention

Keiser Report: Guernica of Financial War (E290)

Although my candidate was Newt, I will throw my full support to Romney and to maintaining the House and taking the Senate. Those “other candidate” die-hards are not helping the cause. Even if you don’t prefer Romney, you could at the very least help to take control of Congress…a conservative body will keep the prez in check, no matter who wins the WH… The prez race IS between Mitt and Barf, deal with it.

Honor First, I concur wholeheartedly.

Remember the FLAGS at (half-staff until sunset)

and….171 days until the Kenyan fraud is voted out!…. or mabe his favorite toys Air Force One and or the helicopter drops from the sky with a ball of fire! Sorry it is the way I feel!

It seems that in 1991, Barack Obama was indeed representing himself to his literary agency as “born in Kenya, raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”

Would you re-elect Obama?Take our survey and let us know. Rewards after just ten surveys! yougov.com
Will You Boldly Proclaim”I am a Christian”? Sign the pledge now! billygraham.org/I-am-a-Christian

This documented revelation is one more of many smoking guns that expose Obama’s tendency to revise his personal narrative as a matter of convenience and for personal advantage.

The question is: Was he lying then or now?

But this development illustrates something else – why such a huge story of constitutional import could be neglected so badly by practically everyone in the media for four years.

I knew the late Andrew Breitbart well. He hated the eligibility story. He personally condemned me for chasing it relentlessly. We fought about it – even famously in a recorded debate in which I made it the cornerstone of my speech at the Tea Party Convention a couple years ago.

“It’s not a winning issue,” insisted Breitbart.

I explained that, as a journalist, pursuing the truth is all that matters. And if you fail to pursue the truth, everyone loses.

Free Speech | May 19, 2012 at 2:32 pm |

The media no longer cares about “the truth”. It’s insanity that they have a shred of credibility left amongst the populace.

Creative Cause to win the Preakness

Obama impeachment bill gaining steam

Obama Impeachment Bill Goes Viral! Tell Everyone!

Check out this article and video!!

It is insanity that the media is worried about a prank Romney played when he was 15 years old, but the media is not worried if Obama is eligible for POTUS, or what his ties were to radicals like Wright or Ayers when he was an adult.

Obama Blackmailed by the Clintons?

Published on May 19, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel

“The establishment media hastily seized on yesterday’s explosive story about a literary publication listing Barack Obama’s birthplace as Kenya in an effort to claim that the 1991 brochure was the “origin” of the entire ‘birther’ issue. In reality, evidence that Obama was born in the African country is abundant.

A literary agent’s promotional text for a 1991 brochure released yesterday by Breitbart.com states Obama was “born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”

Yahoo News, along with a deluge of other mainstream news outlets, responded by reporting that the document was potentially the “source” of the birther controversy and had merely been a mistake.

The literary agent who wrote the description, Miriam Goderich, now works with Dystel & Goderich agency, which lists Obama as one of its clients. Unsurprising therefore that Goderich hastily claimed listing Obama’s birthplace as Kenya was “nothing more than a fact checking error.”

However, evidence to indicate that Obama was born in Kenya is plentiful and it goes significantly beyond the 1991 version of the brochure.

– Despite claiming the passage about Obama’s birthplace being Kenya was a mistake, the listing still maintained that Obama’s birthplace was Kenya until after Obama became a U.S. Senator. “Goderich’s statement fails to explain why the “fact checking error” persisted for sixteen years, through at least three different versions of Jane Dystel’s website, and through at least four different versions of Obama’s biography,” reports Breitbart.com.

– The literary agency also updated the text in June 1998, but the part about Obama being born in Kenya was retained.

– The text was again updated in February 2005 to reflect the fact that Obama had become a Senator, but Kenya was still listed as his birthplace.

– After an April 2007 modification of the text, the passage still read Obama, “was born in Kenya.”

“EVIDENCE OBAMA BORN IN KENYA GOES BEYOND 1991 BROCHURE”

By Dr. Michael S. Coffman Ph. D.
February 15, 2011
NewsWithViews.com

“Multi Billionaire George Soros is waging a war on America’s Constitution to transform the freest people in the history of the earth into a hedonistic/socialistic nation ruled by global governance.

Almost unknown until recently, multi-billionaire George Soros has been quietly bringing down governments around the world. He has now turned his attention to the United States and unleashed a firestorm of activity intent on destroying the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. dollar.”

Alex Responds To Obama’s Text Editor’s So Called ‘Mistake’

Published on May 18, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel

Despite the msm desperately trying to cover it up Goggle, Yahoo etc are being bombarded with searches about bo’s bogus bios.
http://www.yahoo.com/?fr=fptb-yie9&r706=1337460907

01 Bodemeister
02 Paul Konerko
03 Zynga stock
04 What to Expect When You’re Expecting
05 Obama’s literary agent
06 Romney Day One
07 Andre Berto
08 Health care
09 Camp David
10 Fixed mortgages

UMMMM….very interesting…..I think most of us who are awake already figured this out…..however I believe Osama was dead before that….I think he died in 2001 just like Pakistan Presidential Candidate Bhutto said before she was assassinated by the CIA to shut her up…..

Former CIA Agent Claims Americans Did Not Kill bin Laden
19.05.2011

Osama bin Laden died a natural death nearly 5 years before it was announced that he was eliminated by the American commandos. This sensational statement was made by a Turkish politician, and a former U.S. intelligence agent. In an interview with Russia’s Channel One, he said that the Americans simply found and opened the tomb of the leader of al-Qaeda.

“How Much Do Americans REALLY Know About Obama?- Michelle Fields – Sean Hannity – 5-18-12”

They keep showing Obama dancing on the Ellen show back in 2007. I don’t know why they do that. It just reinforces for me how gay he looks. Just me.

The Government Is Raping You: Sibel Edmonds

Published on May 19, 2012 by TheAlexJonesChannel

“In this startling new memoir, Sibel Edmonds—the most classified woman in U.S. history—takes us on a surreal journey that begins with the secretive FBI and down the dark halls of a feckless Congress to a stonewalling judiciary and finally, to the national security whistleblowers movement she spearheaded.

Having lived under Middle East dictatorships, Edmonds knows firsthand what can happen when government is allowed to operate in secret.

Hers is a sobering perspective that combines painful experience with a rallying cry for the public’s right to know and to hold the lawbreakers accountable.

With U.S. citizens increasingly stripped of their rights in a calibrated media blackout, Edmonds’ story is a wake-up call for all Americans who, willingly or unwillingly, traded liberty for illusive security in the wake of 9/11.”

The searches are about Ed Klein’s book and his claim the BO’s were close to divorce.

“Several international terrorist groups have elevated Chicago in their mind to their No. 1 target for terrorist attack,” Rice said in an interview at the U.S. government’s nerve center inside a non-descript suburban Chicago office complex. Reporters were asked to keep the location secret.

http://truthernews.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/assassination-of-obama-and-nato-officials-planned-for-chicago/
Whether people like Obama or not, an Obama assassination must be stopped at all costs. The murder of Obama would divide America between black and white, Democrat and Republican, and would inevitably cause riots, looting, violence, bloodshed, and chaos across America. It is still unclear whether the U.S. government will attempt to resurrect Obama politically in the aftermath of an assassination event or assassinate Obama for real, declare martial law, and suspend the U.S. Constitution.

Potential Obama Assassination “Event” Scenarios

1. Obama may be targeted and killed.
2. Obama may be targeted and injured.
3. Obama may be targeted and come away unscathed.
4. Obama may also be targeted, injured, come away unscathed, only to be assassinated later.
5. Obama may be targeted, only to be replaced with a stunt double as to give the appearance that he was killed.
6. There are more potential scenarios, but an assassination “event” scenario would consist of some sort of major “event” in which the safety or life of Obama is publicly put at risk.

Will Farrakhan assassinate bo like he assassinated X?

Farrakhan Unleashed: Obama Will Be Assassinated

In a considerable setback for a president eager to ravage the due process rights of the American people, Federal Judge Kathleen Forrest granted a preliminary injunction on Wednesday, striking down those sections of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 which sought to provide Barack Obama the power to indefinitely detain citizens without benefit of their 5th Amendment rights.
////////////////////////
Read the rest at the above link

Francine Torge introduced the former first lady saying, “Some people compare one of the other candidates to John F. Kennedy. But he was assassinated. And Lyndon Baines Johnson was the one who actually” signed the civil rights bill into law.

The Kennedy insider says Senator Kennedy was deeply offended that Clinton remained silent and “sat passively by” rather than correcting the record on his slain brother’s civil rights record.

Kennedy was also apparently upset that Clinton said on the same day: “Dr. [Martin Luther] King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Ac. It took a president to get it done.”

Both comments that day, by Clinton and her supporter, were meant to make the point that Clinton would be better equipped to get things done as president than Obama, her chief Democratic rival.

Peter B. Collins & Sibel Edmonds: Naomi Wolf (5-20-10) [1 of 2]

Uploaded by XToups on Nov 5, 2011

“Secret Society” Bilderberg conspiracy “North American Union” tyranny dissent dissident totalitarian socialism imperialism fascism globalism patriotism conservatism “Trilateral Commission” CFR “One World Government” “Shadow Government” cabal propaganda “New World Order” Freemasonry “Skull & Bones” Illuminati “Sibel Edmonds” “Naomi Wolf”

Uploaded by RealCatholicTV on Oct 3, 2011

The battle has finally erupted into the public between Obama and the Catholic Church. Time for Catholics to choose sides – once and for all.

New Book: David Axelrod Privately Calls Obama ‘Black Jesus’

Arizona Secretary of State Threatens To Remove Obama From Ballot

Arizona Secretary of State Threatens To Remove Obama From Ballot

– by KEITH KOFFLER on MAY 18, 2012, 8:25 AM –

Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett is threatening to keep President Obama’s name off the state’s ballot in November unless he receives confirmation from Hawaii that it has a valid birth certificate on file for him.

Bennett, who spoke to Arizona radio host Mike Broomhead Thursday, said he requested the confirmation eight weeks ago and has not gotten it. Hawaii, he said, does not have to supply a certified copy of the birth certificate, merely send him an email confirming that it has one.

Asked by Broomhead if he would remove Obama’s name from the ballot if Hawaii fails to comply, Bennett said: “That’s possible. Or the other option would be that I would ask all the candidates, including the president, to submit a certified copy of their birth certificate.”

MAJOR ENDORSEMENT FOR DR. ORLY TAITZ FOR US SENATE FROM PUBLISHER OF LIBERTARIAN REPUBLICAN, FOUNDER OF REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS, SENIOR AID TO CONGRESSMAN RON PAUL
Posted on | May 19, 2012 | No Comments
Eric Dondero 10:28 AM (3 hours ago)
Hi Orly,
We spoke briefly yesterday. Twas a pleasure. You have my official endorsement for your US Senate race.
Eric Dondero, Senior Aide, US Congressman Ron Paul 1997-2003
Founder, Republican Liberty Caucus
Publisher, LibertarianRepublican.net
“Yes, when she first burst on the scene, many conservatives and libertarians were a little skeptical. But Orly Taitz has been completely vindicated. Whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii, or whether he was born in Kenya and then was flown by his mother to Hawaii a couple weeks later to gain U.S. citizenship, may never be known for sure. Perhaps Obama himself doesn’t know. But, those like Orly who were way out front on this issue the last couple years, have now been proven right. Obama was not fully vetted. And now with the author booklett that lists Obama’s birthplace as “Kenya”, the truth is out.
Orly deserves to be our Republican nominee for US Senate in California. She may have a tough fight against Feinstein. However, it’s an opportunity to bring the issue of Obama’s birthplace out in the media. She is also a dedicated free market anti-nanny-state GOPer.
I enthusiastically endorse Orly Taitz for US Senate.”
Please add LibertarianRepublican.net to your Daily Favorites!
http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

clintons blackmailing bo

The “arranged” diploma? But without the transcript of actually taken courses and grades?

The Vetting – Exclusive Document Debunks Myth About Obama’s Columbia Years

**OBAMA COLUMBIA DOCUMENT RELEASED** The image above–never before released–is from public records at Columbia University that prove that Obama did, in fact, graduate in 1983 from the Ivy League school. Contrary to some conspiracy theories, Obama was a student within the Faculty of Arts and Sciences–not the less selective, “nontraditional” Columbia University School of General Studies (which only merged with the Faculty of Arts and Sciences in 1990). All of that is to Obama’s credit. Yet Obama has not released his college transcripts from Columbia, which certainly do exist. The mainstream media has clamored for, and investigated, and leaked information about other presidential candidates. But not Barack Obama–not in 2008, and not now.

Tina | May 19, 2012 at 5:53 pm |

They keep showing Obama dancing on the Ellen show back in 2007. I don’t know why they do that. It just reinforces for me how gay he looks. Just me.

(Oh, even worse that video of him throwing a ball at a game. That was definitely a gay pitch. )

observer | May 19, 2012 at 10:40 pm —

“The “arranged” diploma? But without the transcript of actually taken courses and grades?”
===================
From September 5, 2008:

“Matt Welch: So tell us what we should know about Barack Obama that we don’t?

Wayne Allyn Root: I think the most dangerous thing you should know about Barack Obama is that I don’t know a single person at Columbia that knows him, and they all know me. I don’t have a classmate who ever knew Barack Obama at Columbia. Ever!”

“Welch: Were you the exact same class?

Root: Class of 󈨗 political science, pre-law Columbia University. You don’t get more exact than that. Never met him in my life, don’t know anyone who ever met him. At the class reunion, our 20th reunion five years ago, 20th reunion, who was asked to be the speaker of the class? Me. No one ever heard of Barack! Who was he, and five years ago, nobody even knew who he was.

Other guy: Did he even show up to the reunion?

Root: I don’t know! I didn’t know him. I don’t think anybody knew him. But I know that the guy who writes the class notes, who’s kind of the, as we say in New York, the macha who knows everybody, has yet to find a person, a human who ever met him. Is that not strange? It’s very strange.”

OBAMA CAMPAIGN RESPONDS TO BREITBART ‘KENYA’ BOOKLET STORY

(quote by Breitbart)
We’ve since learned that the agency in question, Dystel & Goderich, asks writers to submit their own bios and if our President had an “R” after his name, this is the thread that would be pulled to launch a thousand mainstream media questions, the most obvious among them being: Did Obama submit his own bio? If so, what did it say? How in the in the world does someone mistakenly assume an American citizen was born in Africa? This may well be a “fact checking error,” but it’s an awfully bizarre one with an origin that deserves an explanation. Moreover, did Obama ever see the 16 year-long error and request it be fixed? Was he ever asked to proof the bio?

“GOV. BREWER: ERIC HOLDER NEEDS TO BE ‘HELD ACCOUNTABLE’ FOR OPERATION FAST AND FURIOUS”

Published: 11:25 PM 11/02/2011
By Matthew Boyle – The Daily Caller

—-> “At least 34 members of Congress have called for Holder to resign immediately over the scandal.” “The crisis is here, and we’d better wake up,” Brewer said. “This is a wake up call, in regards to an arrogant, out-of-control federal government that isn’t enforcing the rule of law.” Brewer also said California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s argument that gun control laws would have stopped Fast and Furious from happening is bogus. <—-

“You know, here we go with the left-leaning politicians — that’s their answer to everything,” Brewer told TheDC. “It’s ridiculous. I’m so tired of them using that lame excuse for everything that happened that it’s just ridiculous to even comment on it.”

“GOV. BREWER: ERIC HOLDER NEEDS TO BE ‘HELD ACCOUNTABLE’ FOR OPERATION FAST AND FURIOUS”

Published: 11:25 PM 11/02/2011
By Matthew Boyle – The Daily Caller

—-> “At least 34 members of Congress have called for Holder to resign immediately over the scandal.” “The crisis is here, and we’d better wake up,” Brewer said. “This is a wake up call, in regards to an arrogant, out-of-control federal government that isn’t enforcing the rule of law.”
Brewer also said California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s argument that gun control laws would have stopped Fast and Furious from happening is bogus. <—-

“You know, here we go with the left-leaning politicians — that’s their answer to everything,” Brewer told TheDC. “It’s ridiculous. I’m so tired of them using that lame excuse for everything that happened that it’s just ridiculous to even comment on it.”

“HOW FAR WILL OBAMA GO TO GET RE-ELECTED”

Read the Entire Article Here:

“THE EVIDENCE: OBAMA IS UNDERMINING U.S. TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN TO PUT THE TALIBAN IN POWER”

May 9, 2012
By Tara Servatius

“pResident Obama has spent the last three years trying to figure out how to turn over Afghanistan to the Taliban without taking the political heat for it.

In the process, the Obama Administration has committed a betrayal of our troops so stunning that anything done to them in or after Vietnam pales in comparison.

While the Taliban kills our troops and innocent bystanders in Afghanistan, the Obama Administration is fighting to give them the one thing they can’t seem to win on the battle field: control over the whole country.”

“The only reason the Obama Administration has failed to put the Taliban in power in Afghanistan so far is because Taliban leaders refuse to make progress in peace talks that were supposed to “integrate” them into the national government. That is because Taliban leaders refuse to “negotiate” until Obama releases their buddies from Guantanamo.

Problem is, Obama can’t do that without the approval of Congress. So he’s stuck releasing the lower level terrorist thugs our troops risk their lives to capture from our Afghan jails to placate the Taliban into negotiations.

It is the ultimate betrayal not just of our troops, who spend their days battling the Taliban while the Obama Administration undermines them at the negotiating table, but of the Afghan people, who were led to believe they could freely elect the leaders who would govern them.

If Obama and the State Department get their way, the Afghan people will once again have Taliban overlords forced upon them for the first time since 2001, when US troops gave their lives to set the Afghan people free of Taliban rule.

If they succeed, our entire war effort there will have been for nothing. In fact, it’s worse than that. The Taliban would not only regain control of a centralized Afghan government, they’d also get something else they weren’t able to achieve when they controlled the country before the 2001 invasion: international recognition of a Taliban-run Afghan government.”

Read The Entire Article Here:

Two ob bo’s musBros arrested in beating of US Soldier

Limbaugh speculates Clintons could be behind new Wright revelations [AUDIO]

Was Barack actually born in Kenya? I seriously doubt it, even though Michelle Obama has publicly stated that Kenya is her husband’s “home country”.

No, my suspicion is that Mr. Obama manipulated his birthplace intentionally (and cynically) to take advantage of certain benefits unavailable to those born in the United States.

My best guess is that, denied an opportunity to use quota systems to parlay a lousy academic record into a quality college admission, Obama searched around for other means of bypassing his academic failings. It was this search that led him to announce that he was Kenyan. Obama was happy to oblige the universities in this effort by co-opting his father’s nationality, and burying the fact that he was a garden-variety American black kid.

There’s the nexus — In 1978, Obama, who already then was willing to lie to achieve his goals, created a false identity to deal with the changes the Bakke decision wrought on college admissions.

By John Griffing
May 15, 2012

“Over the past three years, pResident Obama has demonstrated his willingness to lie about anything and everything if it leads to the acquisition and retention of maximum power for himself and his cohorts.

Obama follows a pattern of overloading the system with deception, making responses to every individual distortion impractical or outright impossible.

While Obama’s opponents spend their precious time addressing each new lie, Obama keeps the focus off the end-zone, and seizures of power previously unthinkable are accomplished.”

“Obama lies about everything. Opposition to taxpayer-funded birth control and government-mandated funding of abortion by churches is depicted as a “war on women.”

This from the president who last Ramadan praised the idea of hijabs and niqabs as defenses against male lust.

Obama’s lies are so pervasive that listing them all requires data-mining, so, for efficiency, those interested in a somewhat thorough catalog of Obama’s lies may follow this link.

Obama is clever, and he is manipulative. He will often avoid the direct approach and will instead opt for insinuation and implication — e.g., when he stood before Congress at the 2010 State of the Union shortly before the narrow passage of his majority-opposed health care reform bill and intimated that if Republicans would merely provide alternatives to his reform proposal, he would look at them. This statement carries the implication that Republicans had no alternative reform proposals and were merely taking cheap shots at the president’s “perfect” plan. But Republicans had in fact provided numerous alternatives, none of which pResident Obama would acknowledge or give the time of day.

Similarly, when observers challenge Obama’s power-grabs, Obama utilizes redirection and name-calling to divert public attention from his massive constitutional overreach.

He will accuse Republicans of “dividing” instead of “uniting” or, worse, release ads tarring anyone who opposes government expansion at the expense of liberty as “the mob.”

A sitting pResident of the United States referring to his fellow citizens as a “mob” is unprecedented in American history and would likely not be tolerated if the pResident hadn’t neutralized all criticism by branding it ‘racist.'”

Please See The Entire Article Here:

Obama Admits He Is A Muslim

Uploaded by FeelTheChangeMedia on Aug 7, 2009

“Obama admits that he is a Muslim. Obama bowing before a Muslim king. Obama talking about his Muslim family. Obama quoting from the Koran. Obama defending Islam. Obama visiting a Mosque. And many more clips of Obama and his Muslim connections.”

“Back in stock! Shocking, connect-the-dots exposé of globalist plot

Do world events seem like they’re spinning out of control?

Do the explanations you hear from government officials sound like they’re meant to mislead?

Does the establishment news media leave you feeling like you’ve only heard part of the story – maybe even the wrong part?

Why are groups like the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Bilderbergers – groups whose members are obviously powerful with connections to wealth and political influence – never the subject of the evening news?

Something’s happening here.

Find out what in Dr. Stanley Monteith’s blockbuster exposé, Brotherhood of Darkness.

Is there a grand conspiracy at work to move the world toward global government and a universal religion?

Who or what is actually behind these sinister forces?

Dr. Stanley Monteith, a medical doctor by training, set out on a mission to answer those questions some 40 years ago.

The results of his startling research is this amazing, little book, a shocking exposé that shines the light of day on the secret societies – some of which have been at work on the world stage for centuries.

“Most people don’t realize they exist because their minds have been conditioned to reject any thought of such organizations,” explains Monteith.

This hard-hitting book names names, places, dates and full citations from primary sources. Monteith reveals the identity of the mysterious forces behind the men who rule the world, and why some U.S. leaders have dedicated their lives to destroying their own nation.

Many times he uses the words and actual documents of the individuals and groups behind the plotting to reveal their aims, goals and intent.

Are they all working together? Who are they ultimately serving? Is there a grand architect? You will be shocked and disturbed at the answers.

As President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, “In politics there are no accidents. If it happens you can bet it was planned that way.”

You may not accept everything Monteith offers, but one thing is for sure: After reading Brotherhood of Darkness, you will never look at the world in the same way again.

It’s a fast, lively read – not the kind of heavy lifting you might expect as a result of the research behind it.

Brotherhood of Darkness is available only through WND’s online store – and in limited quantities. This book generally sells out within 24 hours of delivery – so act fast.

Click to Get “Brotherhood of Darkness” Today:”

“HOPE OF THE WICKED: THE MASTER PLAN TO RULE THE WORLD”

“Ted Flynn’s book, Hope of the Wicked: The Master Plan to Rule the World, will open your eyes to the greatest deception in modern history.

It explores the convergence on a global basis of multinational corporations, foundations and the political and sociological instruments of a one-world government to bring about a New World Order.

The book is 550 pages with 82 photographs and 1,200 footnotes, with a strong historical basis to show that there is a global elite working to end the sovereignty of nations, to place all under the United Nations.

In this well-documented book, readers will learn the following:

* Is there a conspiracy to rule the world?
* What is the plan to bring America into a one-world order?
* Hundred of quotes from world leaders
* The utopian dream of the United Nations
* The long tentacles of the United Nations in your life
* World taxes and a world court for world citizens
* What is the Federal Reserve and who owns it?
* The links of world businesses, foundations and governments
* What are the Bilderbergers, Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission?
* What are the authority and mission of FEMA?
* What is the role of the New Age movement and environmentalism in a world religion?
* The erosion of rights, freedom and national sovereignty
* The need to create chaos to usher in a new world order
* The subversion of the Constitution by Executive Order
* What is the real agenda of secret societies?
* Technology’s theft of privacy: chips, satellites and tracking
* Is artificial weather modification real?
* Who was the most influential woman of the 20th Century?
* Who are the world players trying to bring change?
* Pulling the plug on the world economy – nearer than you may think
* How will the global elite’s plans affect you and your family in the near future?

The New World Order is not coming – it is here with a vengeance!

Click to Get “Hope of the Wicked” Today”

There are several videos that I recommend people watch here including:

* “The Final Prophecies”: This documentary examines the secrets of Middle Eastern prophecy and the shocking statistical evidence that suggests there is much more going on regarding past prophetic fulfillment than mere chance. Surprising new research reveals that prophetic events foretelling future devastating political, financial and environmental change on a global scale may be closer and more real than many believe. No matter what your belief system, this film may change your view of the future forever. This documentary represents a great way to introduce the subject of biblical prophecy to the uninitiated.

* “Prophecy 101” by Chuck Missler: The Bible contains 8,362 predictive verses about 737 different matters and yet prophecy is one of the most neglected subjects in the church today. Understanding prophecy is an essential and fundamental issue for every serious Christian. But where do we start? This video series has been designed to give you a strategic overview of prophecy past, present and future. This series will encourage the new believer and strengthen the faith of all who study it. Now, more than ever, it is important that we have answers for people who are seeking the truth. We need to equip ourselves to be ready to give an answer to every man for the hope that lies within us. Missler addresses questions such as “How is prophecy possible?” and “What does prophecy show about the nature of God?” – and many more. This DVD will encourage the new believer and will strengthen the faith of all who study it.

* “Apocalypse and the Endtimes”: There have always been catastrophes in the world… but never before have there been so many, so frequently! Earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, famine, disease and war… Are we simply experiencing the natural order of things, or are the signs we see all around us the warnings of the end times? In this 21st century, are science and technology confirming the prophecies of old? This video documentary will give you plenty to consider.”

* “Islam and the Endtimes”: If you’re looking for a great teaching video series on the link between Islam and the endtimes, you can do no better than this one. Joel Richardson is the author of the best-selling “The Islamic Antichrist,” published by WND Books, and co-author with former Palestinian terrorist Walid Shoebat of “God’s War On Terror.” He is also the co-editor of “Why We Left Islam: Former Muslims Speak Out.” Since living in the nations of Egypt, Jordan, Israel and the Palestinian Territories in the early 󈨞s, Richardson, a pseudonym to protect himself and his family, has continued to pursue his passion of studying Islam and the politics of the Middle East. He has been deeply involved in outreach to Muslims for many years and has a passion to alert the church regarding the true nature of fundamentalist Islam. This series and Richardson’s book will change your eschatological view forever.”


CLIZBIZ

My good friend, Mark Dowdy, participated in the Iowa Caucus last week. Here's his take on the action:

The excitement is palpable this year, as we choose between a number of decent Dems, all of which would be a vast improvement over the imbecile currently squatting in the Oval Office. But there is no doubt that most of the excitement this year is due to the "surging" campaign of Sen. Barack Obama. Compared to the buzz created by Obama, Sen. Hillary Clinton's bid to become the first female president has faltered considerably. She simply doesn't inspire the way Obama does, partly due to her hawkish voting record, but mostly because she's about as charismatic as a reptile. (Props to Donegan for the simile.)

There is, of course, former Sen. John Edwards. Many progressives prefer him to Obama because he has staked more progressive positions. I seriously considered supporting Edwards (as well as Dodd) at various points. But while I like the message coming from the 2007 Edwards, I wasn't down with the 2002 Edwards and his vote in support of the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act.

Frankly, I don't trust Edwards. He talks a real good anti-corporate game for a former hedge fund manager. In fact, I think his wife would be a better, more credible candidate than he, were she not stricken with a terminal disease. Moreover, at this early stage of the campaign, Edwards has also taken serious hits from the Right Wing Hate Machine, which has portrayed him as pretty boy "faggot" with a $400 haircut, so I don't have much faith in his ability to counter the inevitable shit thrown at him by the bigots of the GOP. (They cannot -- absolutely cannot -- say what they want to say about Obama. I'm guessing many of them will push loose their buckteeth in their attempts to stifle the "N" word.)

Still, I wasn't sure. None of these candidates were perfect to me. Obama's unity message wasn't my cup of tea, and he sounded dangerously like a milquetoast moderate with no real conviction. But that's me, and if the average American voter was like me, the two major parties would be the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks. I'd seen Obama speak last year stumping for my congressional representative in the 2006 election, and it seemed like so much feel good rhetoric, with very little substance. So it was with these reservations in mind that I attended one of his rallies the day before the caucus.

I arrived a chary skeptic, and departed another giddy ObamaHead.

First off, the man is funny. Really funny. In a subversive, smart way. He repeatedly referred to Dick Cheney as "my cousin," and at one point he remarked, "You know, when people do genealogical studies of your family, you hope to find out you're related to someone cool. You know, Abraham Lincoln or Willie Mays, not Dick Cheney."

He's also, of course, an amazing orator, and I have to admit, I was impressed with the way he coasts along in a light and engaging fashion, only to turn on the gravitas at the right moment. He made an excellent case, in fact, that his so-called lack of experience was a canard, that what matters most is how you deal with the people you encounter in your formative years. He reminded us that if we voted for him, we'd be voting for a man who wouldn't just uphold the Constitution, but who had actually taught it.

After speaking for about 45 minutes (it seemed like 15 minutes), Barack wrapped things up. All the talk about the energy of one of his rallies is true - it took another 45 minutes just to get out of the parking lot. And all of that talk about reaching out to red state voters is apparently also true. The car in front of me sported a Fred Thompson sticker on its bumper. I left thinking this man has the political gifts of Bill Clinton, but that he had more of a conscience and better priorities. He wasn't a triangulating Republicrat. He was a real Democrat, only he wanted to move beyond the usual Bush-bashing.

The next day I arrived at the caucus. Usually, this is a fairly mundane affair: it involves standing around for about an hour with your fellow supporters and then heading home to catch the returns on television. Not this time.

On the way in, I got lost and walked by the Republican caucus, where there was a fairly modest line. "Is this the Democratic caucus?" I asked. "No, this is the Republican one. Yours as at City High, two blocks that way." The nice Republicans who gave me directions looked envious, like they wanted to come along with me. (Many Republicans, in fact, did participate in the Democratic caucus, which allows voters to register at the door.)

When I arrived at City High, I encountered chaos. There were throngs everywhere pushing and shoving. People were afraid they wouldn't get in (the doors officially close at 7), and some in fact did not. I myself was feeling the stress. I had postponed my move to Florida just so I could participate in this caucus, and I didn't want to be shut out.

Luckily, after a spell, I made it in to City High's packed auditorium. There was no more room for the Obama people, so us latecomers were directed to the balcony. The only other candidate with that many supporters was Edwards, who had a smaller contingency up in the balcony.

Here's how the caucus works: On your way in you are handed an index card with a number written on it. If you know who you're supporting, you give your card to one of your candidate's group leaders. If you don't, you stand apart and await the onslaught of appeals from the various campaigns. In our case, there were only about six undecideds among 500 + voters.

After all of the cards -- excluding the undecideds' -- are counted, leaders from each party come up to the podium, announce the number of supporters they have, and then make a pitch for their candidate. Here's the gist of their appeals: Richardson was the only candidate to call for a carbon tax, Kucinich the only one to call for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Biden had more foreign policy experience than the others, while Dodd had stood strong against Bush's attempts to spy on Americans. Clinton was lauded as the most competent of the gang, Edwards as the one to take on corporate interests and lobbyists, and Obama as the Great Uniter.

In order to be "viable" and thereby receive a proportion of the eight delegates from our precinct, each candidate had to receive at least 82 votes. The vote tally went something like this: Richardson: around 30 Kucinich: ? (His representative, Brandon Ross, a former city councilman who had clearly seen his share of Dead shows, wouldn't say) Biden: around 20 Dodd 6 Edwards 110 Obama: 234, and Clinton: 70. When Hillary's numbers were announced, an audible gasp filled the room. She wasn't even viable yet. Meanwhile, the growing sense of inevitability was emerging around Obama: he had gotten twice as many supporters as Edwards, who has always been popular in Johnson County.

But there was still one more round. For the next half hour, supporters of non-viable candidates could either stand behind a viable one or attempt to make their own candidate viable. Meanwhile, the undecideds had to make up their goddamn minds. It is here that the wooing began. One of Clinton's supporters came up the balcony and was greeted with guffaws. She saw one of her friends up there and said "Sally, wanna come over and support Hillary?" Sally just smiled and said she'd support Edwards before she'd do that. "Geez," said the Hillary supporter, flummoxed by the degree of disdain many Dems hold for Mrs. Clinton.

Among the undecideds, the Biden, Richardson, and Edwards’s people had enacted the full-court press. My lovely ex was among them: she delighted in telling the Biden and Edwards’s people that the white man had had 43 turns as leader of the free world and that this election cycle would coronate either a black man or a white woman. Always the contrarian, she threw her weight behind Hillary, since, in her mind, Obama clearly didn't need any more help.

After a seemingly interminable period in which I devoured all of the free food and beverages available (mmm . brownies, sandwiches, and bottled water) while supporters of unviable candidates sought to drum up support, we finally reached a finally tally: The Hillary people had managed to get the 12 votes needed to make her viable. The Biden, Kucinich, Dodd, and Richardson people had not. The 8 delegates were divided as such: 4 for Obama, 3 for Edwards, and 1 for Clinton.

I left happy to see Obama on top. Text messages from friends in other precincts had been pouring in, with similar results. There was a growing sense of elation among everyone, even those who didn't support Obama.

It wasn't until, hours later, in a hotel room in Moline, IL, watching the news coverage as I prepared for a flight to Florida the following morning, that I realized the full historical import of this event. Obama was the first African-American to win the Iowa caucus , and the buzz over him was growing even more (and still is).

I'm a little surprised, however, that others are so surprised that a state as white as Iowa would support a black man: Iowa Democrats are more liberal than most Democrats, just as its Republicans are more knuckle-draggingly conservative than most Republicans. Nevertheless, I'm happy to have participated in this historical event, and sincerely "hope" he becomes the nation's first African-American president.

In the meantime, I need to get back to California. The last thing I want, as an ultra enfranchised Iowa voter*, is to become a disenfranchised Florida Democrat during the general election.

Meanwhile, there has been a great deal of debate over the undue influence of Iowa and New Hampshire in our nation's electoral process. Frankly, I agree with this criticism. Iowans like to argue that they are more politically engaged than other states' citizens. This, to me, is downright arrogant. Who wouldn't be more politically engaged if they had various presidential candidates dropping by their diner every other day for a year or two before the election? Do Iowans feel they're entitled to this privilege?

Mostly, Iowans feel neglected and ignored by the nation most of the time, and feel like this is the state's time to shine on the national stage. Whatever. It seems to me a state like Idaho is more overlooked than Iowa. Iowa spawned Ashton Kutcher, Elijah Wood, Tom Arnold, Johnny Carson, and John Wayne. Iowa killed Buddy Holly, Richie Valens, and the Big Bopper. It is the future birthplace of Capt. Kirk. Geez, Iowa, stop worrying about the provincial bi-coasters and what they think of you.

As a Californian, I had grown accustomed to having the primary race decided by the time I got to vote. It was fun voting for Jerry Brown or whatever protest candidate du jour was on the ballot, but it stood in stark contrast to my Iowa experiences, where I saw more movie stars than I ever saw in California -- and they were groveling at me! I know it's hard Iowa to let go of such a luxury, but, really, as fair-minded, common-sensical Midwesterners, you have to acknowledge that the present system's kinda whack.


Historiography

Scholars of U.S. LGBT history

  • Nan Alamilla Boyd
  • Julio Capó, Jr.
  • Margot Canaday
  • George Chauncey
  • Madeline Davis
  • John D'Emilio
  • St. Sukie de la Croix
  • Martin Duberman
  • Lisa Duggan
  • Jules Gill-Peterson
  • Lauren Jae Gutterman
  • Chad Heap
  • Emily K. Hobson
  • John Howard
  • John Ibson
  • David K. Johnson
  • Jonathan Ned Katz
  • Regina Kunzel
  • Elizabeth Lapovsky Kennedy
  • Eithne Luibhéid
  • Jen Manion
  • Esther Newton
  • Horacio Roque Ramírez
  • Leila Rupp
  • Clare Sears
  • Emily Skidmore
  • Siobhan Somerville
  • C. Riley Snorton
  • Dean Spade
  • Marc Stein
  • Susan Stryker
  • Timothy Winter-Stewart

Google is not a conventional company, and we don’t intend to become one. True, we share attributes with the world’s most successful organizations – a focus on innovation and smart business practices comes to mind – but even as we continue to grow, we’re committed to retaining a small-company feel. At Google, we know that every employee has something important to say, and that every employee is integral to our success. We provide individually-tailored compensation packages that can be comprised of competitive salary, bonus, and equity components, along with the opportunity to earn further financial bonuses and rewards.

Google has offices around the globe, from Bangalore to Zurich, but regardless of where we are, we nurture an invigorating, positive environment by hiring talented, local people who share our commitment to creating search perfection and want to have a great time doing it. Googlers thrive in small, focused teams and high-energy environments, believe in the ability of technology to change the world, and are as passionate about their lives as they are about their work.