Dennis Kucinich

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the Victory Arch, which will make its debut after undergoing a two year restoration at the Cuyahoga County Fair in Berea, Ohio. The original Victory Arch was built in 1929 by Fred Hartman and was erected at the main entry to the Berea Fairgrounds on Eastland Road. The arch's columns are 25 feet high and span 35 feet across. For years the Victory Arch served as a beautiful welcoming sign to Cuyahoga County residents coming to enjoy the annual County Fair. Unfortunately, over the years, with the exception of some minimal work in the late 1970s, the arch began to rust and fell into disrepair. A few years ago, Berea's Save Our Arch Committee began advocating for a full restoration of the Victory Arch. Two years ago the project began. The Cuyahoga County Fair Board, American Legion Post 91 and the Berea Historical Society helped to raise money and awareness needed to restore the structure. However, the physical restoration would not have been possible if it had not been for donations, support and countless man hours of the Berea City Club, Iron Workers Local 17 Apprentice Program, Cosmos Industrial Service, Inc., AkzoNobel, eGlobal Construction, Kottler Metal Products, Inc., Ziegler Bolt, Local 17 President Tim McCarthy, Retiree Local 17 Doug McJunkins, Sealcoat, Horizon Metal, Inc., Luna and American International--Michael Petrasek. The Victory Arch was resurrected to its original place on Eastland Avenue on July 12, 2012 just weeks before thousands will visit the Berea Fairgrounds for the 116th Cuyahoga County Fair. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring the reinstatement of the Victory Arch at the Cuyahoga County Fairgrounds.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Article I, section 8, clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the responsibility to establish and ensure operations of the postal service. Today, August 1, 2012, 234 years after the Constitution was ratified, Congress is presiding over the disestablishment of the postal service. Today, a manufactured default created by congressional legislation is pushing the postal service to the brink. Today, the postal service will not make a payment that it should have never had to make in the first place to pay for prefunding 75 years of retiree health benefits in 10 years. A manufactured default, encouraged by banks and other interest groups, a move towards privatization of one of America's most vital services. The Congress has a responsibility to stand up. But here in the USA under Citizens United, everything is up for auction, including the postal service. Wake up, America. Universal service is on the line. Wake up, America, and stand up for the Constitution, the 575,000 postal service workers, and our obligation to the American people to see to it that the postal service is rescued from those who want to push it into default or privatize it for their own profit.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, are we apportioning that 5 minutes from each side?

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Congressman Ron Paul, an American patriot, someone who has been relentless in his efforts to stop America from blundering into foreign adventures.

Mr. KUCINICH. I would like to include for the Record a statement by the Friends Committee on National Legislation, which says that the new sanctions push the U.S. and Iran closer to war. New Iran Sanctions Push U.S., Iran Closer Toward War--Friends Committee on National Legislation Washington, DC.--FCNL's Lobbyist on Middle East issues Kate Gould issued the following statement opposing the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (H.R. 1905) that could reach the House floor as early as today: The Friends Committee on National Legislation strongly opposes the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (H.R. 1905). We believe this legislation would undermine human rights in Iran and cripple the accountability of the diplomatic process now underway to prevent a nuclear- armed Iran, pushing the U.S. and Iran closer toward a devastating war. War is the ultimate human rights violation, and this bill lays the groundwork for war by escalating the scale of economic warfare that Congress would impose on ordinary Iranian citizens. As in the case of the decades of U.S. and U.N. sanctions against Iraq that culminated in a U.S. invasion of that country, economic warfare punishes civilians, emboldens hardliners in Iran's regime, and forecloses diplomatic options to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran and war. Punishing Iranian Civilians FCNL and ten other national advocacy and religious organizations from the human rights and peace and security community wrote to Senator Tim Johnson, Chair of the Senate Banking Committee, last week to oppose this bill, and to highlight the importance of keeping channels open for Iranians to have access to food, medicine, and other humanitarian goods and services. Ordinary Iranians already face tremendous difficulties in accessing basic medicine under sanctions. For example, this week, the board of directors of the Iranian Hemophilia Society informed the World Federation of Hemophilia that the lives of tens of thousands of children are being endangered by the lack of proper drugs, as a consequence of international sanctions. The Iranian Hemophilia Society notes that U.S. and international sanctions technically do not ban medical goods. Yet, despite the `humanitarian exemption' in U.S. sanctions laws, medicine is not getting in to Iran because the ``sanctions imposed on the Central Bank of Iran and the country's other financial institutions have severely disrupted the purchase and transfer of medical goods.'' The humanitarian exemption is of profound importance, as the U.S. business community and humanitarian organizations have pointed out. We are relieved that this legislation does not directly prohibit Iranians from accessing food, medicine, and humanitarian trade. However, if the Iranian civilian economy is destroyed by sanctions, then millions of Iranians will be deprived of their livelihoods, and unable to purchase the food, medicine, and other goods that the humanitarian exemption is supposed to protect. Further destabilization of the Iranian currency and decimation of the Iranian economy will push Iran closer to the state of Iraq when it was under sanctions. During that time, UNICEF estimated that U.N. sanctions contributed to the deaths of half a million children. Emboldening Hardliners in Iran This bill would embolden hardliners in the Iranian regime, at the expense of the civilians who will overwhelmingly bear the brunt of these sanctions. Just as Saddam Hussein never missed a meal under the decades of sanctions against Iraq, top Iranian officials will not have difficulty accessing food and medicine. National security expert Fareed Zakaria has noted that the U.S./U.N. sanctions' ``basic effect has been to weaken civil society and strengthen the state'', and that ``the other effects of the sanctions has been that larger and larger parts of the economy are now controlled by Iran's Revolutionary Guard--the elite corps of the armed forces.'' Foreclosing Diplomatic Options, Laying Groundwork for War As countless U.S. and Israeli security officials have pointed out, diplomacy is the single most effective way to prevent war and a nuclear-armed Iran. This bill would be a setback to achieving a near-term diplomatic resolution of the standoff over Iran's nuclear program, foreclosing diplomatic options to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran and a devastating war. This bill would tie the President's hands, eroding the little flexibility that Congress normally allows the executive branch to conduct negotiations with Iran and allow for sanctions relief in exchange for serious, verifiable Iranian concessions. We are particularly concerned about section 217, which effectively endorses regime change. The provision would prohibit the President from lifting sanctions against the Central Bank of Iran unless Iran agrees to a host of conditions that the Islamic Republic of Iran cannot reasonably be expected to agree to. As veteran intelligence officer Paul Pillar has pointed out, requiring Iran to end efforts to ``acquire or develop ballistic missiles'', [section 217 (d)(1)(A)(iii)] ``goes beyond any United Nations resolutions on Iran, which talk about nuclear capability of missiles, and even beyond anything ever demanded of Saddam Hussein's Iraq, for which range limits were imposed. It would be understandable if Tehran reads such language as further evidence that the United States is not interested in any negotiated agreement but instead only in regime change.'' The bill even requires the President to certify that Iran does not ``construct, equip, operate, or maintain nuclear facilities that could aid Iran's effort to acquire a nuclear capability'' [section 217 (d)(1)(A)(ii.)]: in order to lift sanctions against Iran's Central Bank. It appears that Congress is requiring that t broad indiscriminate sanctions remain in place unless Iran surrenders its nuclear program entirely, even if it is a verifiably peace program. FCNL strongly urges members of Congress to speak out and vote against this broad, indiscriminate sanctions legislation on the House floor today. I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Representative Ron Paul.

Mr. KUCINICH. I would like to include for the Record a publication from the International Civil Society Action Network, ``What the Women Say: Killing Them Softly: The Stark Impact of Sanctions on the Lives of Ordinary Iranians.'' What the Women Say: Killing Them Softly: The Stark Impact of Sanctions on the Lives of Ordinary Iranians--Brief 3: July 2012 The unprecedented, devastating and counterproductive impact of sanctions, coupled with the on-and-off threat of war, is an ever-growing reality in the lives of ordinary Iranians. For the generation of Iranians whose childhood was punctured by nightly bombings, fear of chemical attacks, and eight years of death and destruction resulting from the Iran-Iraq war, the current state of uncertainty, prospects of hardship and unraveling of the lives they rebuilt is overwhelming. In New York, London, Washington and Brussels the rationale for sanctions vary. Central to the case is the notion that only crippling sanctions can slow Iran's nuclear program and bring about change. A number of the sanctions also target state institutions and individuals implicated in human rights violations. Regardless of their political leanings, among western leaders, policymakers and pundits, no one denies that economic sanctions are blunt instruments that typically harm the civilian population far more than the state. Western policy makers, however, respond that `this is the price that has to be paid'--the questions of price for what, how much, how long and by whom are left hanging. Iranians have the answers. The earliest sanctions imposed in the immediate aftermath of the 1979 Iranian revolution (and American hostage taking) had less direct impact on the public. But since 1995, when the Clinton Administration honed in on the oil and gas sector to the current day where the banking and financial sectors have been targeted, private enterprise and ordinary citizens are the primary and overwhelming victims. Needless to say, they are skeptical of western politicians or institutions that claim to care about the well being, human rights or aspirations of the Iranian populace. It is not uncommon for Iranians in every walk of life to recall the Iran-Iraq war (1980-88), when the Western world was complicit with Saddam's Iraq and its use of chemical weapons. With the impact of current sanctions seeping into every day life now, many Iranians consider them to be a profoundly insidious and destructive force and source of basic human rights violations, affecting a wide cross section of Iranians. As one women's rights activist stated, ``the international community's sole focus on the nuclear issue has resulted in the adoption of policies that inflict great damage on the Iranian people, civil society and women. Militarization of the environment will prompt repressive state policies and the possibility of promoting reform in Iran will diminish.'' Iranians' wariness of the international community, however, has not quelled criticism of their own government. They have neither an appetite for war nor for the bellicose language of the state. They criticize the government's mishandling of the economy in recent years. They balk at the continued imposition of social restrictions. Those involved in civil rights activism including students, workers, women and leaders from ethnic groups and religious minority communities are among the first to feel the endless pressures and limitations imposed on them. Not least because the sanctions and threat of war allow the state to invoke ``a state of emergency'' and in so doing suppress critics and voices of dissent. In its ongoing series of MENA region `What the Women Say' briefs, ICAN provides a gendered analysis of the impact of sanctions, echoing the voices and experiences of Iranians, particularly women's rights activists, regarding the social, economic, political and security consequences. At a time when the United States, the European Union and others are heralding their national action plans on women, peace and security that highlight the need for women's protection in times of crisis and their participation in conflict prevention and peacemaking, this brief offers the international community recommendations on limiting the immediate and long-term damage being wrought on women, Iranian society and ultimately regional security. 1. Current sanctions cut deep and wide into the social and economic life of ordinary Iranians Iranians know war and they know sanctions. The experiences of women, men, the elderly and the young who lived through the eight years of the Iran-Iraq war are rarely recounted today, but the long term impact is still evident. Though their plight is rarely discussed, women of child bearing age and soldiers exposed to chemical warfare still suffer from complex health problems. Similarly the thousands of men handicapped by landmines and war wounds are rarely a topic of conversation. Another long term impact has been the rise of female headed households in part due to war deaths among men. Throughout the 1980s war years, Iranians also suffered from sanctions and lived under a strict rations policy. But it was a very different society then. Some 50 percent of Iranians lived in rural areas and were largely self sufficient through domestic agricultural production. The sanctions too were limited to key sectors pertaining to military equipment. As a result the public impact was less evident. International trade relations were sustained including with the U.S. private sector. Today only 29 percent of Iranians live in rural areas. Continued migration to urban areas has led to the expansion of cities and their peripheries. The majority of migrants eke out their living in the service industry and informal economy on the margins of cities. The sanctions regime is doing most damage to those who are already vulnerable--the urban poor. As the pressures increase, economic class and social divisions are also being exacerbated. 2010 sanctions choking insurance and shipping sectors with implications for public health: Sanctions introduced in the summer of 2010 directly targeted insurance companies that insured Iranian shipping involved in the import and export of products. Despite denials by proponents of the sanctions regime, this round of sanctions directly affected the availability of foreign-made medication and other healthcare products to Iranians including vitamins for children and pregnant women and sanitary products. The implication for serious illnesses including cancer is particularly profound. As one women's rights activists recounted, ``foreign made medicine became difficult to find in 2010, and with the intensification of sanctions this trend has continued. Domestically produced drugs, which are dependent on imported ingredients, are also more expensive and difficult to find.'' Others echo this experience. ``Many Iranians can no longer afford the high cost of cancer treatment drugs that have become hard to find,'' says the daughter of a female cancer patient. ``Family members have to go from one hospital to another and to multiple pharmacies to find and then purchase the medicines at high costs for the treatment and life of their family members. Patients with poorer prognoses or those who cannot afford it are forgoing treatments and opting for an early death so they don't burden their families financially.'' Sanctions targeting Iran's oil and gas sector were also intensified in 2010, through limiting or ending the sale of gasoline products to Iran. In anticipation, the Iranian government initiated a number of steps including ending of subsidies for gasoline, rationing gasoline and increasing domestic refining processes. As a result, the price increase has been significant, with unrationed gasoline costing 4000 Rials per liter in 2009 and projected to increase to 8000 Rials in 2012. Free market prices for gasoline are currently at 7000 Rials per liter. Additionally the quality of the domestic product is much lower than imports, according to experts. One significant impact of the increased use of domestically produced gasoline has been a noticeable decline in air quality, particularly in Tehran. Reports note that Tehran's air quality, which was already poor, has worsened significantly since gasoline imports were sanctioned. Even the New York Times report explained the connection between the ban on gasoline imports, the push to use domestically produced gasoline and the rapid air quality deterioration: ``According to e-mails circulated to industry experts . . . lran's new supply of domestic gasoline may contain high levels of aromatics--more than twice the level permitted by Iranian law. Burning aromatics in car engines produces exhaust packed with high concentrations of ``floating particles'' or ``particulates'' that, added to the typical smog caused by nitrous oxides and ozone, can cause a range of health problems, from headaches and dizziness to more serious cardiac and respiratory complaints.''' In the same year, Mohsen Nariman, MP from Babol said, ``air pollution is on the rise at an unusual rate and it seems that one of the main causes is the substandard gasoline that is being used in Tehran.'' One newspaper, the Hamshahri Daily, reported that 310 persons died per day as a result of poor air quality in Tehran in the months of October and November 2011. The cause of death included increased respiratory complications, heart attacks and stroke. Unprecedented banking sanctions targeting Iranians in all areas of life: The banking sanctions that went into effect in December 2011 have also wreaked havoc in people's lives. The Iranian Rial has almost halved in value against the US dollar and other currencies. With memories of the Iran-Iraq war still fresh for many Iranians, across Tehran and other cities, people, including shopkeepers and merchants reacted by hoarding products. Consequently the price of a wide range of goods and products including foodstuffs rose between 20- 100 percent, and continues to fluctuate. The knock-on effect is evident in all areas of life. While incomes have not increased, rents have doubled in some areas of the city. The price of bread--a staple of the Iranian diet especially for the poor--has increased by some 1500% in the past 2 years, in part due to the removal of state subsidies. The uncertainty is causing stagnation for the private sector, while some businessmen point out that companies affiliated with the state are exploiting the situation as they have access to government exchange rates. Sanctions were imposed to prevent a nuclear weapons program. Instead, as one commentator notes, the price of manure has risen. Iranian students studying abroad have also been impacted seriously. Many are being forced to give up their education as their families can no longer afford the tuition. Some UK universities are refusing to register Iranian students because they cannot prove that they can transfer the necessary fees. But the sanctions--or the way that banks and other bodies currently interpret them--make it impossible for most Iranian students to do so. In addition countless Iranians who have relatives living in the EU and US and those who travel for medical treatment have become entangled in the vast banking sanctions net. Thousands have personal bank accounts and savings in western banks, some dating back decades. Now they are being forced to shut down their accounts and find themselves caught in a financial no-man's land; being forced to close existing accounts, while barred from transferring their savings to other accounts internationally or in Iran. In effect the banking sanctions are forcing massive reliance on a cash based economy, making already vulnerable Iranians dependent on black marketeers for the transfer of funds to cover educational, health or other legitimate costs. It is also fostering the rise of informal power structures and contributing to the lack of accountability and transparency. Even the Iranian Vice President has acknowledged this development, stating, ``in the framework of these sanctions we [the Iranian government] have to begin negotiations with goods traffickers near the borders and use them to buy products which are included in the sanctions.'' Not surprisingly many Iranians are left questioning if the banking sanctions are intent on forcing Iran's rulers to come to the negotiating table or if Iranian society and the country's infrastructure at large are being deliberately targeted and weakened. The timing of the intensification of sanctions is particularly questionable. Iranian observers, notably civil and political activists are asking whether sanctions are in fact intent on balancing power in the region in favor of regimes that ``despite their authoritarian nature accommodate the west and its security agenda in the Middle East, at a time when revolutions may threaten the existing security dynamics in the region.'' In an interview with Radio Farda, Mehrdad Emadi, Economic Consultant to the EU, stressed the destructive nature of these sanctions, noting: ``This particular form of sanctioning a nation has been unprecedented in the history of the world. The only similar type of sanctions, were implemented for a short period of time, and were intended to prevent the illegal transfer of funds by Qaddafi within the framework of the activities of Libya's Central Bank. But even during that time, [the sanctions] weren't implemented in this fashion [as we see against Iran's Central Bank], . . . not all the transactions of the Libyan Central Bank were sanctioned and the sanctions focused only on the illegal transfer of funds and money laundering . . . [The Iranian sanctions] are not related to a specific sector or industry nor to business entities or specific individuals. In this framework, all monetary transactions, currency transactions and business credit accounts for imports as well as exports and for the coverage and payment of insurance, which in every country falls under the responsibilities of the Central Bank of that country, will be made illegal in Iran. Iran's Central Bank will no longer be able to carry-out these duties, because it has now been identified as a center for money laundering. In this framework, international corporations, governmental organizations, non-governmental bodies or security organizations will no longer be able to transfer funds or open credit lines for trade, using the Central Bank.'' In the same interview, Hossein Mansour, a UK-based economist offered a bleaker analysis, noting, ``the negative impact on Iran's economy, especially in the long run, will only be addressed with the expenditure of billions of dollars and after several generations, and will be devastating for the infrastructure of the Iranian economy.'' 2. Women are bearing the brunt of the economic and social impact of sanctions Women are especially affected by the economic fall out of the sanctions. They are being pushed out of the job market and bearing the brunt of increased unemployment. Women's rights experts recognize socio-economic pattern emerging similar to those in Iraq when sanctions were imposed. In Iraq sanctions and the ensuing poverty resulted in the withdrawal of girls from education and increases in child marriage (families were forced to marry off their young daughters to reduce the number of mouths to feed). Iranian girls are at risk of similar developments.'' Moreover, women's rights experts believe that the externally imposed sanctions will allow conservatives to further their regressive social agenda by relegating women back to the domestic sphere, limiting their access to education and the job market and couching it as an attempt to increase male employment. Despite significant societal changes, Iran remains a male dominated culture, reinforced by the government's conservative ideology that considers men as the heads of households and primary breadwinners. Programs in line with this ideology, seeking to relegate women to the home as wives and mothers only have been stepped up in recent years. Indirect and immeasurable consequences of sanctions: stifling women's education, a key engine of socio-political change: Women's rights activists are also wary of the indirect impact of sanctions--and the manipulation of the economic hardships by conservatives--on women's access to higher education. Educated women from middle and traditional working classes across rural and urban areas, among the rich and the poor, have been the primary engine of socio-political change in Iran. The demand for equal rights and equal socio- political, economic and cultural rights permeates every level of society. From the outset of the Islamic republic, the status of women has been a critical and contentious issue. In 2003, conservatives proposed the imposition of quotas to limit women's access to higher education and the measures were briefly implemented across some medical fields in the 2004 national university entrance exams. Massive outcry among students and women's rights activists forced the withdrawal of the quotas. Conservatives have not backed down however. They continue to argue that when women are more educated than men, traditional family values are undermined, as women prefer to marry at an older age, seek similarly educated (or more educated spouses) and have higher expectations. These traditionalists also posit that women in the work force take away men's jobs. Concerns about the impact of women being more educated than men have prompted some conservative lawmakers to reinstate quotas limiting women's participation in higher education. Women and student's rights activists believe that during President Ahmadinejad's second term the quotas have been introduced with greater zeal and less accountability. They coincide with the intensification of sanctions and increased economic hardships. As the economic situation worsens, women's access to higher education, will likely endure further limitations. Even school age girls are at risk as economic pressures may force families to make choices and opt for boys' schooling. This may lead to diminished literacy rates among girls in the near future. In effect, the marginalization of women from education and employment enables extreme conservatives to kill many birds with one stone. They prevent a high rate of women's entry into the public space (via universities). They eliminate women from the economy and job market, particularly, higher earning and more influential positions. They sustain and revive the power imbalance between women and men, as women will have fewer choices in life, limited control of resources and become (and remain) more economically dependent on men at greater rates than already exist. Ultimately they may quash the force of women's demands--the next generation's voices--for progressive change in society at large. As one conservative member of parliament and staunch supporter of limiting women's presence in university has put it: ``when women can't travel to far away cities without the permission of their husbands, their expertise has no impact on improving the situation of the country!'' There is also a significant reduction in women's share of the national budget. In the past for example, housewives received national insurance, but this has been eliminated, while the military budget has doubled for next year. Downturns in domestic production, increases male unemployment and violence against women: There are also more insidious effects, difficult to quantify but increasingly evident. The sanctions have caused massive downturns in domestic production. The fledgling private sector is unable to import the necessary raw materials for manufacturing. The banking sanctions are causing a virtual standstill in imports and exports by legitimate businesses. Even domestic agriculture will lose its markets. Meanwhile those with political connections are exploiting the situation often by importing cheaper Chinese products. This downward trend in domestic production will give rise to lower wages, increase unemployment among men and women and ultimately put pressure on families. As evident in other settings, women will bear the brunt of dealing with their unemployed spouses and the men of the family within the home. These new dynamics are likely to lead to increased incidences of domestic violence and family conflicts, as men's inability to live up to social expectations can lead to depression and attacks on women. Reduction in family income inevitably is forcing women to find new sources of income. Their coping strategies will likely include cutting back on their own health, wellbeing and dietary needs to provide for their dependents. As in other countries, for the most vulnerable, poverty will likely lead to risky survival strategies including child labor and sex work--informal sectors which have expanded in Iran in recent years. The most vulnerable are at the greatest risk: Afghan refugee women and children: Vulnerable groups, such as Afghan refugees and migrants who have been living in Iran legally and illegally as a result of decades of war and unrest in their own country, are also at greater risk. The situation is most severe for Afghan women and children refugees or Iranian women married to Afghan men and their children who do not have identity cards. The intensification of government crackdowns and forced repatriation programs, against Afghans (including their Iranian wives and children) with illegal status in Iran, has already had a negative impact on the livelihood of these groups, but as the economy has worsened the hostility they face from Iranian society and the government has also increased. Afghans have been targeted with segregation programs in public spaces and are facing increased state and other forms of violence, while their access to income and jobs has also been severely limited. Comprising a large percent of those employed in the informal sector as household help, street peddlers and in the service industry Afghan women and children are at risk of facing worsening working conditions and abuse in their place of employment. 3.Independent civil society and civic activism are among the first casualties of current international policies Many of the men and women who founded and run Iran's civil rights movements including human rights and women's rights activists, workers unions and journalists spent their childhood or young adulthood at war. They have tasted and experienced the impact of war and sanctions on a personal level. They are also fierce advocates of international human rights and humanitarian norms and ideals. The public outpouring in the aftermath of the disputed 2009 presidential elections prompted the state to impose heavy security measures against civic actors. But debilitating sanctions coupled with the daily rhetoric of war has elevated national security concerns and further diminished the state's tolerance of dissent internally. Activists are regularly accused of working in concert with the west to destroy the Islamic Republic. The uncertainty and fear has also affected the public's receptivity to social activism. It is seen as a secondary issue compared to the urgent realities of poverty and prospect of war. The sanctions are having a long-term negative impact on the source of societal change in Iran. The urban middle class that has historically played a central role in creating change and promoting progress in Iran are key casualties of the sanctions regime. Many civil society organizations and charities survive on the basis of voluntary activism and support. But facing economic uncertainty, many people are retreating from public voluntary work. Even the most committed have less time, as they are working longer hours and often at multiple jobs to meet their economic needs. Moreover with private enterprise in demise, more people will become dependent on the state and thus unable and fearful of engaging in civil activism. Additionally, sanctions and in particular the limitations placed on transfer of funds, has created serious impediments for charity organizations engaged in health and medical services, education efforts, support for orphans and disadvantaged women and children to carry-out their work. Many of these organizations have ceased their activities. Sanctions are isolating Iranians from international forums: Beyond the economic impact, civil society, including the women's movement in Iran has been further isolated from their international counterparts, as a result of the sanctions. Security challenges imposed by their own government already curtail civil society's ability to attend regional and international conferences, workshops and other events. But the policies of other governments further complicate their lives. Visas that Iranian passport holders need to travel internationally, take considerable amount of time and resources. The new banking sanctions have ended the possibility of financial exchanges, while the falling price of the Rial has increased the financial burden for those activists who want to participate in conferences and training opportunities. Activists, like regular Iranians, cannot use banks to transfer funds for conference participation, hotel reservations, or to attend courses abroad. Finally, for years despite state restrictions, activists have used the internet as a critical tool for communication. But the sanctions policies have led many large hardware and software manufacturers in the United States to deny services and products to Iranians. Thus just when contact with and solidarity from the outside world are most needed, Iranians are faced with the greatest level of isolation. 4. What Women Do: resilience, courage, voices of peace and a window to the future Women's rights activists have never had it easy. They have fought against an assault on their legal and political rights as well as their demand for equal opportunities in the economic, social and cultural life of the country. In 2006, when a group of women initiated the Million Signatures Campaign to demand the reform of laws that discriminate against women, they immediately faced state scrutiny and obstruction. The movement thrived however, transcending age, economic, rural, urban and even political and religious divisions to draw in a mix of volunteers. Using new and old media, improvised street theater and small group education and outreach initiatives they raised public awareness about the impact of gender based discriminatory laws and called on people to sign up and join their campaign in favor of legal changes. Despite security pressures the movement elevated issues of gender equality to the national level both politically and within wider society. After the summer of 2009, and the mass post-election protests, women's rights activists faced increased restrictions as the space for dissent became ever more limited. With the rise of sanctions and ratcheting up of the war rhetoric, these activists are under immense pressure to become silent and conform. Countless social and political activists have been imprisoned and or forced into exile. Students--female and male have been expelled from universities because of their civil activism. Under these circumstances, with economic hardships and prospects of yet another devastating war, longterm planning and the development of sustainable programs to maintain the gains already made and push for basic rights are increasingly difficult, if not impossible. Women's Demands: no sanctions, no war, talk it out! Despite these pressures, the Iranian women's movement has not been silenced. The call against war, in favor of a negotiated settlement, and an end to sanctions has become a primary issue for many, despite the risks they incur. They are using every opportunity to send their message to the world. Women's rights activists now living outside of Iran draw on international platforms to echo the concerns and voices of their counterparts inside the country. Meanwhile, despite the risks, women in Iran have not been silenced either. One group, the Mothers for Peace, representing different sectors and ideologies began its activities in 2008, with the aim of preventing war and violence in the country and promoting peace regionally. They, along with other women's groups, have issued several statements opposing the possibility of war. Echoing this, in 2011, on the International Day to Fight Violence Against Women (November 25th), another group of Iranian activists issued their antiwar and violence statement, noting: ``We a group of women's rights activists in Iran, are worried about the increasing violence against women and children [that is the result] of the polarized and hostile atmosphere [and] dead-end national and international politics of tension and violence. As a result of these policies, violence against women and children infiltrates the deepest social and political and familial layers of Iranian society.'' On March 8, 2012, in honor of International Women's Day, several activists involved in the One Million Signatures Campaign recorded video messages opposing war. They reject the official narratives that often pose the problems in the terms of good and evil, just and unjust, and call on all sides--including their own government--to engage in constructive dialogue rather than the rhetoric of war and threats. Recommendations to the international community, particularly the US and European countries Fundamentally rethink policy on Iran: 1. End the sanctions policy against Iran. Recognize that sanctions as a general rule have a poor record of influencing the behavior of states and in many situations have severely harming the population at large, particularly vulnerable groups and democratic movements. Ninety-nine percent of the current sanctions against Iran are too broad to impact the behavior of the government, instead they target the population. 2. Sanctions are not a substitute for war. they are a step closer to war. Failed sanctions will only work to strengthen the position of those advocating for another war in the region. Resolve to address the differences in a mutually respectful manner immediately. 3. Recognize that sanctions weaken society not the state. Iranian society is already witnessing the emergence of radical groups. As one women's rights activist notes, in countries of this region, including Iran, growing gaps between the rich and poor do not make governments vulnerable, rather they make the population vulnerable to increased radicalization against the West as a way of coping with humiliation. In border areas, where poverty is severe, we already witness the increasing influence of terrorist groups. If this trend continues we will be faced with a weakened Iranian society--at risk of being radicalized, with detrimental consequences for regional security in the medium and long term. 4. Recognize that sanctions undermine women's security and empowerment. The US and EU have been strong proponents of the global women, peace and security agenda with the development of priorities and action plans to ensure women's empowerment. But sanctions undermine and contravene these policies. The contradictory nature of US and EU rhetoric, policies and actions increase the Iranian public's suspicion about them, and credence to charges of hypocrisy. On negotiations with the Iranian government: 5. Engage Iran on the full range of issues. including regional security, economic issues. human rights, culture. etc. Incentives, especially those that reduce the hardship of ordinary Iranians, should be put forth to encourage a peaceful settlement to the disputes of the international community with Iran. 6. Call for the inclusion of civil society in engagement with Iran. Should Iran and the international community reach an agreement that would allow for negotiations and dialogue on a wider set of issues, civil society, including women's groups, human rights groups and peace activists, should participate. On immediate steps for redressing the impact of sanctions on ordinary citizens: 7. Do not force an entire nation to adopt nontransparent means of financial transactions. Revise the banking sanctions so that ordinary people are not caught in them. Specifically, adopt measures to facilitate the transfer of funds by ordinary Iranian citizens and Iranians with dual nationality (EU, US, UK etc) for travel, tuition, and medical care, in the case of sale of property, inheritance or for other personal and familial purposes. Forcing Iranians to move toward a cash economy reduces transparency and fosters the growth of shadowy actors. 8. Address the adverse healthcare impact of sanctions immediately. Sanctions including limitations impacting the import of medicines, medical equipment and forced usage of substandard gasoline are affecting people's health and lives. These issues should be investigated and alleviated immediately with cooperation between the US, European and Iranian governments. 9. Help ease and enable visa applications for Iranians seeking to visit relatives. Throughout the EU, US, Canada and Australia there are millions of citizens of Iranian descent. They have elderly parents and relatives living in Iran who visit them regularly. Visas for relatives should be expedited and offered for longer periods. 10. Encourage student visas and conference attendance. Student visas and visas for conference participation should be processed more quickly and with less financial burden on applicants. 11. Facilitate free and safe access to the internet to help foster independent civil society. Sanctions have severely limited Iranian civil society's safe access to the internet including necessary software and hardware. The international community should help provide this access and limit the imposition of sanctions in this sector.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself 30 seconds. The Senate Banking Committee summarized this bill by saying that it ``aims to prevent Iran from repatriating any of the revenue from sale of its crude oil, depriving Iran of hard currency earnings and funds to run its state budget.'' Spoken plainly, this bill would destroy the Iranian economy and further hurt the Iranian people that we claim to support. Iranians are already suffering under stifling sanctions as they experience rising food prices and lack of access to basic medicine. For example, the sanctions against the Iranian banking sector have greatly diminished the value of Iranian currency and have a negative effect on nearly every aspect of the lives of ordinary Iranians. The price of rent, education, and bread have all increased. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself 30 seconds. We went to war against Iraq under the assumption they had weapons of mass destruction. Iran doesn't have weapons of mass destruction. One of the problems with this bill is that it effectively states that sanctions on Iran's Central Bank would not be lifted unless there's a regime change. So we're bringing a whole new dimension here. It's about even more than nuclear weapons; now we're talking about regime change, because this resolution creates a new requirement for the termination of sanctions that are dependent on the cessation of the Central Bank's financing of the Revolutionary Guard, and it imposes new restrictions on the President's ability to waive sanctions. So, what are we doing here? Setting the stage for another war. Regime change, and then upping the bar for Iran and essentially laying the groundwork for a conflict. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself 30 seconds. Collectively, the provisions in this bill move the goalpost from negotiations over Iran's nuclear enrichment program to regime change. I just want to point out that the record of our country on regime change isn't all that good. Yes, we knocked out Saddam Hussein under the lie that he had weapons of mass destruction, and now al Qaeda is all over Iraq. So, what are we about here? We're setting the stage for another war where we syphon the revenue out of this country, send it to war machines, can't meet our own needs. Since when does Iran achieve greater importance than our own country? That's what I want to know. I want somebody to explain that to me. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself 1 minute. These sanctions are hurting ordinary people in Iran. I pointed out earlier, matters like the price of rent, bread--Americans can understand that--education, all of these things are increasing. And these sanctions then directly undermine Iran's civil society by giving the regime a chance to crack down even harder on internal dissent. These sanctions will ensure that those crackdowns continue. Ordinary Iranians are struggling simply to make ends meet under this sanctions regime that already exists. They cannot afford to suspend the time necessary to participate in social movements which provide basic social services to push for democratic change in their country. Are these the intended effects that we wish to have on the Iranian people and Iranian Americans? And if not, passing this kind of a broad, indiscriminate sanctions bill sends the wrong message. If the sanctions imposed on Iraq are any precedent, we know that sanctions are not an effective tool in promoting or supporting domestic democracy movements. We also know those sanctions did not prevent an unnecessary and wasteful war with Iraq. In effect, the expansion of the broad and indiscriminate sanctions, including this legislation, hurts our ability to negotiate with Iran, imposes long-term harm detrimental to the Iranian people. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself 1 minute. Sanctions are a form of war in this case, and it will lead to war. And remember, we're not talking about--some time ago we were talking about if Iran would have a nuclear weapon, but then the bar's been lowered to say nuclear weapon capability. And now the game's being changed to say not just nuclear weapon capability, but we want regime change as well. I mean, if this isn't a prescription for war, then I didn't participate in the debate in this House of Representatives in October of 2002 warning this Congress, chapter and verse, that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, no role with al Qaeda in 9/11, did not have any intention or capability of attacking the United States. This is a version of that debate all over again. I mean, come on. What are we doing here? Why is this more important than our country? You know, our postal service is going into default tonight, a manufactured default, mind it. No debate on the House floor about this today, but an attempt to manufacture a war with Iran. What are we about? I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. Could I ask how much time remains?

Mr. KUCINICH. And how much time does the gentlelady have?

Mr. KUCINICH. I yield myself 1 minute. This legislation also requires the President to impose sanctions on those who are responsible for or are complicit in certain human rights abuses in Syria, but it fails to acknowledge that our own country and a number of our allies are actively participating and stoking the violence on the ground. Divisions and infighting within the various militias operating on the ground are already occurring. And we also read that al Qaeda's also been involved in Syria. So, look, we have to get serious about what America's purpose is in the world. It's not to be a heavy foot. It's not to proliferate wars all over. The first thing we have to do is take care of things here at home: jobs for all, health care for all, education for all, retirement security for all. When we can do those kinds of things, then we can pretend that we can be the policeman of the world. But until we've done that, we don't have any right to go all around the world trying to tell people how to live. And we can settle this matter with Iran without war. We can settle it through diplomacy. Diplomacy. It would be real interesting to try it. And we ought to support any efforts of the Obama administration to use diplomacy here. Let's not use this political climate to push us into a war. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you very much, Mr. Cummings, Mr. Issa, and Members of the House. I've read this bill. There is something about it that we really need to understand, and that is that we just got through having a debate about the Federal Reserve. One of the reasons the Fed should be audited is that it is not fulfilling its responsibility for bringing about employment in this country. Now, this bill exempts the Federal Reserve. Think about it. We say we want to bring unemployment down to 6 percent. The Fed, if you look at the Board of Governors' report, has basically jettisoned the whole idea about bringing unemployment down. Right now, they're establishing what I would call a new threshold of 5 to 6 percent unemployment. So, if our friends are successful with their bill, we won't have jobs, and we won't have regulations either. Hello? Read the report. I mean, we ought to be investigating why has the Fed stepped back from its job creation, and why are we exempting them from a bill in which we are actually taking the pressure off them for job creation. Now, look, we should be creating jobs. No question about it. I have a bill, H.R. 2990, that puts the Fed under Treasury and that let's the government spend money into circulation and create millions of jobs. Put America back to work. Prime the pump of the economy, a full employment economy. It goes way past Humphrey-Hawkins. Get America back to work. America needs to get back to work. If that's what my friends on the other side of the aisle are saying, we're together on that. America has to get back to work--but we're going to get back to work while having water that's not safe to drink? air that's not safe to breathe? We're going to get back to work by having products that you don't know your pets can consume? Are we going to get back to work by having to worry about, when we go to various salad bars, if it's something we can consume and whether or not there are proper food inspections? Are we going to get America back to work by not checking on airplane safety? Is that how we get America back to work? Come on. Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, there are certain regulations that are absolutely fundamental to running an organized society. I understand wedge issues--this is a political climate--but let's not mix up this mutual concern that we have about creating jobs in this country by trying to score some points by saying, well, there are regulations that are bad. I'm sure there are regulations that don't work. I'm not somebody who believes that government has the solution to everything. I know better than that. I've been here for 16 years. I understand that much. Yet I know one other thing, which is, when you take a broad approach in trying to knock out regulations, you're looking for trouble. You're going to create trouble. That's what this does. So I am urging a ``no'' vote, and I'll have more to say on an amendment that I have.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I offer a sensible amendment to improve this bill. My amendment exempts from the moratorium any significant regulatory action that is specifically aimed at limiting speculation in the oil markets. Now, think of a gas pump this way: if you look at a gas pump, it's got that nozzle like that--it is actually a holdup device. Every time our constituents pull up to the pump and say ``fill it up,'' the oil companies are saying ``stick 'em up.'' That's what's happening. So, do we really want to tell these speculators in oil markets that we don't have any interest in stopping their speculation? Do we really want this bill to do that? Because if we do that, what we are, in effect, causing is, we're giving the oil companies carte blanche to steal from our constituents. I am sure my friends on the other side of the aisle don't want that to happen, which is why I brought this amendment forward to help you. Today, financial speculators have overwhelmed commodity markets and have driven out bona fide market participants who seek to reduce the risk of their investment by making offsetting investments. Excessive speculation in oil markets has come about as a result of the financialization of commodity markets. Financialization means that the prices of a commodity like oil are being set not by supply and demand but by financial concerns and by manipulation. Financialization has increased volatility, increased prices in the futures market and needlessly inflated the price all of our constituents pay at the pump-- stick 'em up--and pay for products like heating oil. Now, let's not forget that the financial crisis of 2008 was caused, in part, by commodity swaps, most of which are oil swaps. In July of 2008, traders pushed the price of a barrel of oil to a record $145. The wild price fluctuation was not caused simply by changes in supply or demand or by events in the Middle East. There was a worldwide recession in 2008. Weak economies usually mean weaker demand for oil. But thanks to Wall Street, that's not the case. They find a way to make a profit at the expense of consumers and businesses. For decades, bona fide commercial hedgers made up about 70 percent of the commodities market activity, with speculators making up the other 30 percent. Now the speculators make up about 70 percent of the activity, and commercial hedgers are 30 percent. Do we really want to provide an opportunity for these speculators to cause our constituents to have to stick 'em up again?

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, could I ask how much time I have remaining?

Mr. KUCINICH. Okay. I will yield 45 seconds to my friend.

Mr. KUCINICH. I thank the gentleman. How much more time would you like? I thank you sincerely. The New England Fuel Institute published a list of 100 studies--100 studies, my friends--showing the impact of commodity speculation. This is entitled, ``Evidence on the Negative Impact of Commodity Speculation by Academics, Analysts and Public Institutions.'' These studies show the harms of unchecked financial speculation on all commodity markets, not just oil. And though my amendment is focused on retaining the power of our regulatory agencies to address oil speculation, the fact is that excessive speculation hampers the proper function of all derivative markets, not just energy markets. Today, the average price of gas in America is about $3.50 a gallon-- higher than it ought to be--and that's because of excessive speculation. [June 14, 2012] Evidence on the Negative Impact of Commodity Speculation by Academics, Analysts and Public Institutions (Compiled by Markus Henn) 1) Adammer, Philipp/Bohl, Martin T./Stephan, Patrick M. (University of Munster) (2011): Speculative Bubbles in Agricultural Prices: ``The empirical evidence is favorable for speculative bubbles in the corn and wheat price over the last decade.'' 2) Agriculture and food policy centre (Texas University) (2008): The effects of ethanol on Texas food and feed: ``Speculative fund activities in futures markets have led to more money in the markets and more volatility. Increased price volatility has encouraged wider trading limits. The end result has been the loss of the ability to use futures markets for price risk management due to the inability to finance margin requirements.'' 3) Algieri, Bernardina (Zentrum fur Entwicklungsforschung Bonn) (2012): Price Volatility. Speculation and Excessive Speculation in Commodity Markets: Sheep or Shepherd Behaviour?: . . . this study shows that excessive speculation drives price volatility, and that often bilateral relationships exist between price volatility and speculation. (. . .) excessive speculation has driven price volatility for maize, rice, soybeans, and wheat in particular time frames, but the relationships are not always overlapping for all the considered commodities.'' 4) Aliber, Robert Z. (University of Chicago) (2008): Oil Rally Topped Dot-Com Craze in Speculators' Mania (Bloomberg article): ``You've got speculation in a lot of commodities and that seems to be driving up the price. (. . .) Movements are dominated by momentum players who predict price changes from Wednesday to Friday on the basis of the price change from Monday to Wednesday.'' 5) Baffes, John (The World Bank)/Haniotis. Tassos (European Commission) (2010): Placing the 2006/08 Commodities Boom into Perspective. World Bank Research Working Paper 5371: ``We conjecture that index fund activity (one type of ``speculative'' activity among the many that the literature refers to) played a key role during the 2008 price spike. Biofuels played some role too, but much less than initially thought. And we find no evidence that alleged stronger demand by emerging economies had any effect on world prices.'' 6) Bass, Hans H. (Univ. Bremen) (2011): Finanzmsrkte als Hungerverursacher? Studie fur Welthungerhilfe e.V.: ``Das Engagement der Kapitalanleger auf den Getreidemarkten fuhrte nach unseren Berechnungen in den Jahren 2007 bis 2009 im Jahresdurchschnitt zu einem Spielraum fur Preisniveauerhohungen von bis zu 15 Prozent.'' 7) Basu, Parantap/Gavin. William T. (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Loius) (2011): What explains the Growth in Commodity Derivatives? ``Banks argue that they need to use commodity derivatives to help customers manage risks. This may be true, but the recent experience in commodity futures did not reduce risks but exacerbated them just at the wrong time.'' 8) Berg, Ann (former CME trader and director, now FAO advisor) (2010): Agricultural Futures: Strengthening market signals for global price discover. Paper to the FAO's Committee on Commodity Problems Extraordinary meeting: ``. . . over 150 years of futures trading history demonstrates that position limits are necessary in commodities of finite supply to curb excessive speculation and hoarding.'' 9) Berg, Ann (former CME trader and director. now FAO advisor) (2011): The rise of commodity speculation: from villainous to venerable: ``Structural changes in global commodity markets have greatly contributed to rising prices and increased price variability. These fundamental trends toward higher prices have been a key lure for increased speculative activity on the major futures exchanges.'' 10) Bicchetti, David/Maystre, Nicolas (2012) (UNCTAD): The synchronized and long-lasting structural change on commodity markets: evidence from high frequency data: ``we document a synchronized structural break, characterized by a departure from zero, which starts in the course of 2008 and continues thereafter. This is consistent with the idea that recent financial innovations on commodity futures exchanges, in particular the high frequency trading activities and algorithm strategies have an impact on these correlations.'' 11) Buyuksahin, Bahattin (IEA)/Robe, Michel A. (American University) (2010): Speculators, Commodities and Cross-Market Linkages: ``We then show that the correlations between the returns on investable commodity and equity indices increase amid greater participation by speculators generally and hedge funds especially.'' 12) Chevalier, Jean-Marie (ed.) (Ministere de l'Economie. de l'Industrie et de l'Emoloi) (2010): RaDDOrt du groupe de travail sur la volatilite des prix du petrole: ``On peut raisonnablement avancer en conclusion que le jeu de certains acteurs financiers a pu amplifier les mouvements a la hausse ou a la baisse des cours, augmentant a volatilite naturelle des prix du petrole...'' 13) Cooke, Bryce/Robles. Miguel (IFPRI) (2009): Recent Food Prices Movements. A Time Series Analysis: ``Overall, our empirical analysis mainly provides evidence that financial activity in futures markets and proxies for speculation can help explain the observed change in food prices; any other explanation is not well supported by our time series analysis.'' 14) Cooper, Marc (Consumer Federation of America) (2011): Excessive Speculation and Oil Price Shock Recessions: A Case of Wall Street ``Deja vu all over again'': ``the paper shows that excessive speculation, not market fundamentals caused the spike in oil prices. The movement of trading and prices in the three years since the speculative bubble in oil burst in 2008 provides even stronger evidence that excessive speculation is a major problem that afflicts the oil market and the economy.'' 15) Deutsche Bank Research (2009): Do speculators drive crude oil prices? Dispersion in beliefs as price determinants. Research Notes 32: ``The econometric estimates can reject the null hypotheses that the dispersion in beliefs of speculators has no influence on the crude oil price and its volatility. Both the Granger causality tests and the distributed lag models, which also include lagged regressors that measure the dispersion in beliefs of speculators, confirm moreover the role of speculation as a precursor to price movements.'' 16) Dicker, Dan (former NYMEX trader) (2011): ``I wrote Oil's Endless Bid to show how the treatment of oil as a stock by investors, far more than any number of globally significant competing factors, causes the dramatically higher prices that we've seen in recent years. I've witnessed seismic changes to the oil markets during my many years as a trader, and it's the everyday consumer who shoulders the burden.'' 17) Du, Xiaodong/Yu, Cindy L./Hayes. Dermott J. (Iowa State University) (2009). Speculation and Volatility Spillover in the Crude Oil and Agricultural Commodity Markets: A Bayesian. Evidence on the Negative Impact of Commodity Speculation by Academics, Analysts and Public Institutions--14 June 2012_ markus.henn@weed-online.org Analysis. Working Paper No. 09-WP 491, 2009: ``Speculation, scalping, and petroleum inventories are found to be important in explaining oil price variation.'' 18) Eckaus. R.S. (MIT) (2008): The Oil Price Really Is A Speculative Bubble. ``Since there is no reason based on current and expected supply and demand that justifies the current price of oil, what is left? The oil price is a speculative bubble.'' 19) Einloth. James T. (FDIC) (2009): Speculation and Recent Volatility in the Price of Oil: ``The paper finds the evidence inconsistent with speculation having played a major role in the rise of price to $100 per barrel in March 2008. However, the evidence suggests that speculation did play a role in its subsequent rise to $140.'' 20) Evans, Tim (Citigroup energy analyst) (2008): The Official Demise of the Oil Bubble (Wall Street Article): ``This is a market that is basically returning to the price level of a year ago which it arguably should never have left. (...) We pumped up a big bubble, expanded it to an impressive dimension, and now it is popped and we have bubble gum in our hair.'' 21) Frenk, David (Better Markets Inc.) (2010): Review of Irwin and Sanders 2010 OECD report: 1) The statistical methods applied are completely inappropriate for the data used. 2) The study is contradicted by the findings of other studies that apply more appropriate statistical methods to the same data. 3) The overall analysis is superficial and easily refuted by looking at some basic facts.'' 22) Frenk, David/Turbeville, Wallace C. (Better Markets Inc.) (2011): Commodity Index Traders and the Boom/Bust Cycle in Commodities Prices: ``We find strong evidence that the CIT Roll Cycle systematically distorts forward commodities futures price curves towards a contango state, which is likely to contribute to speculative ``boom/bust'' cycles by changing the incentives of producers and consumers of storable commodities, and also by sending misleading and non- fundamental, price signals to the market.'' 23) Gheit, Fadel/Katzenberg, Daniel (2008) (Oppenheimer & Co.): Surviving lower oil prices: ``The investment banks that hyped oil prices using voodoo economics have suddenly reversed their position and now expect much lower oil prices. They helped cause excessive speculation, create the oil bubble, and contributed to the global financial crisis. They have changed their tune in exchange for a government bailout, not because of changes in market fundamentals.'' 24) Gilbert, Christopher (Trento University) (2010): How to understand high food prices: ``By investing across the entire range of commodity futures, index-based investors appear to have inflated food commodity prices.'' 25) Gilbert, Christopher (Trento University) (2010): Speculative Influences on Commodity Futures Prices: ``The results ... indicate that index-based investment in commodity futures may have been responsible for a significant and bubblelike increase of energy and non-ferrous metals prices, although the estimated impact on agricultural prices is smaller.'' 26) Ghosh, Jayati (Jawaharlal Nehru University) (2010): Commodity speculation and the food crisis: ``Thus international commodity markets increasingly began to develop many of the features of financial markets, in that they became prone to information asymmetries and associated tendencies to be led by a small number of large players. Far from being `efficient markets' in the sense hoped for by mainstream theory, they allowed for inherently `wrong' signalling devices to become very effective in determining and manipulating market behaviour. The result was the excessive price volatility that has been displayed by important commodities over the recent period--not only the food grains and crops mentioned here, but also minerals and oil.'' 27) Global Hunger Index 2011 (IFPRI, Welthungerhilfe, Concern Worldwide) (2011): ``Price increases and volatility have arisen for three main reasons: increasing use of food crops for biofuels, extreme weather events and climate change, and increased volume of trading in commodity futures markets.'' 28) Goldman Sachs (2011): Global Energy Weekly March 2011: ``We estimate that each million barrels of net speculative length tends to add 8-10 cents to the price of a barrel of oil.'' 29) Greenberger, Michael (University of Maryland) (2010): The Relationship of Unregulated Excessive Speculation to Oil Market Price Volatility. Paper for the International Energy Forum: ``When speculators make up too large a share of the futures market, they have the potential to upset the healthy tension between consumers and producers and resulting adherence of prices to market fundamentals. The resulting volatility makes it more difficult for commercial consumers and producers to successfully hedge risk, because prices do not reflect market fundamentals, and so they abandon the futures market and risk shifting--thereby further destabilizing the price discovery influence of these markets.'' 30) Hamilton, James (Department of Economics, UC San Diego) (2009) Causes and Consequences of the Oil Shock of 2007-08: ``With hindsight, it is hard to deny that the price rose too high in July 2008, and that this miscalculation was influenced in part by the flow of investment dollars into commodity futures contracts.'' 31) Henderson, Brian J. (George Washington University)/ Pearson, Neil D./Wang, Li (2012) (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign): New Evidence on the Financialization of Commodity Markets: ``this paper examines the price impact of commodity investments on the commodities futures markets using a novel dataset of Commodity-Linked Notes (CLNs). CLN issuers hedge their liabilities by taking long positions in the underlying commodity futures on the pricing dates. These hedging trades are plausibly exogenous to the contemporaneous and subsequent price movements, allowing us to identify the price impact of the hedging trades. We find that these hedging trades cause significant price changes in the underlying futures markets, and therefore provide direct evidence of the impact of ``financial'' trades on commodity futures prices.'' 32) House of Commons Select Committee on Science & Technology of the United Kingdom (2011). ``While the debate on the relative importance of the multiple factors influencing commodities prices is still open, it is clear that price movements across different commodity markets have become more closely related and that commodities markets have become more closely linked to financial markets.'' 33) Hunt, Simon (Simon Hunt Strategic Services) (2011): ``Slowly, the truth on whether the global copper market is really tight is coming out. It illustrates just how large an involvement the financial institutions have become to the copper industry. It shows, too, that by throwing money at a market, prices can be driven higher. In the process, however, the delicate balance between supply and the industry's requirements for a basic material used to produce a range of essential products is destroyed. In short, copper is becoming a financial asset in place of its historic role as an industrial metal.'' 34) Inamura, Yasunari/Kimata, Tomonori/Takeshi, Kimura/ Muto, Takashi (Bank of Japan) (2011): Recent Surge in Global Commodity Prices--Impact of financialization of commodities and globally accommodative monetary conditions. Bank of Japan Review March 2011: ``While the strong increase in commodity prices has been driven by global economic growth propelled by emerging economies, speculative investment flows into commodity markets have amplified the intensity of the price surge. (...) global commodity markets have become more sensitive to portfolio rebalancing by financial investors, which has made commodity markets more correlated with other asset markets, including major equity markets.'' 35) institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (2009): Betting Against Food Security: Futures Market Speculation. Trade and Global Governance Programme Paper: ``A large share of the commodity exchange price volatility resides not so much in supply and demand of the commodity traded as in the fund formulas for buying and selling the bundled futures contracts.'' 36) International Monetary Fund (2008): Regional Economic Outlook: Middle East and Central Asia: ``In summary, it appears that speculation has played a significant role in the run-up in oil prices as the U.S. dollar has weakened and investors have looked for a hedge in oil futures (and gold).'' 37) Jalali-Naini. Ali bin Ibrahim (Economic Research Forum Cairo) (2009): The Impact of Financial Markets on the Price of Oil and Volatility: Developments since 2007: ``Causality tests indicate that changes in speculative positions-- resulting from the entry and exit of non-commercials--can generate price volatility. When used in conjunction with a number of other variables, including commercial stocks and product prices to explain variations in the price of oil, the speculative length in the futures market has a positive and significant coefficient.'' 38) Jickling, Mark/Austin, Andrew D. (Congressional Research Service) (2011): Hedge Funds Speculation and Oil Prices: ``A statistically significant correlation is evident between changes in positions held by ``money managers'' (a category of speculators that includes hedge funds) and the price of oil. In other words, during weeks when money managers have been net buyers of oil futures and options (or increased the size of their long positions), the price has tended to rise. Price falls, conversely, have tended to coincide with reductions in money managers' long positions.'' 39) Jouyet, Jean-Pierre (President de l'Autorite des marches financiers)/de Boissieu, Christian (President du Conseil d'analyse economique)/Guillon. Serge (Controleur general economigue et financier) (2010): Rapport d'etape--Prevenir et gerer l'instabilite des marches agricoles: ``Les marches agricoles sont confrontes a une mondialisation et a une financiarisation qui influencent leur fonctionnement. La volatilite naturelles des prix qui caracterise ces marches est amplifiee par de nouveaux facteurs et notamment par une speculation excessive.'' 40) Juvenal, Luciana/Ivan, Petrella (Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis) (2011): Speculation in the Oil Market: ``We find that the increase in oil prices in the last decade is mainly due to the strength of global demand, consistent with previous studies. However, financial speculation significantly contributed to the oil price increase between 2004 and 2008.'' 41) Kaufmann, Robert (Boston University) (2010): The role of market fundamentals and speculation in recent price changes for crude oil: ``I hypothesize that the price spike and collapse of 2007-2008 are driven by both changes in both market fundamentals and speculative pressures.'' 42) Kawamoto, Takuji/Kimura, Takeshi/Morishita, Kentaro/ Higashi, Masato (Bank of Japan (2011): What has caused the surge in global commodity prices and strengthened cross- market linkage?: ``Moreover, we find quantitative evidence that an increase in cross-market linkage between commodity and stock markets was caused by the markets' increased comovements due to large fluctuations in the global economy during the financial crisis as well as by the ``financialization of commodities,'' that is, financial investors are increasingly treating commodities as an investment asset class.'' 43) Kemp, John (Reuters) (2008): Crisis remakes the commodity business: ``It does not alter the fact most of the upsurge in futures and options turnover on commodity exchanges and in OTC markets over the last five years has come from investment-related rather than trade-related business.'' 44) Khan, Mohsin S. (Petersen Institute) (2009): The 2008 Oil Price ``Bubble'': ``While market fundamentals obviously played a role in the general run-up in the oil prices from 2003 on, it is fair to conclude by looking at a variety of indicators that speculation drove an oil price bubble in the first half of 2008. Absent speculative activities, the oil price would probably have been in the $80 to $90 a barrel range.'' 45) Korzenik, Jeffrey (CIO. Caturano Wealth Management) (2009): Fundamental Misconceptions in the Speculation Debate: `` `Overspeculation' or `excessive speculation' exists when speculators become primary drivers of price. When this happens, commodities are no longer efficiently allocated--if prices are driven below the point where commercial supply and demand meet, shortages result.'' 46) Krugman, Paul (Columbia University) (2009): Oil speculation: ``Last year I was skeptical about claims that speculation was central to the price rise, because what I considered the essential signature of a speculative price rise . . . just wasn't showing. This time, however, oil inventories are bulging, with huge amounts held in offshore tankers as well as in conventional storage. So this time there's no question: speculation has been driving prices up.'' 47) Lagi, Marco/Bar-Yam, Yavni/Bertrand, Karla Z./Bar-Yam, Yaneer (New England Complex Systems Insitute, Cambridge MA) (2011): The Food Crises A Quantitative Model of Food Prices Including Speculators and Ethanol Conversion: ``The two sharp peaks in 2007/2008 and 2010/2011 are specifically due to investor speculation, while an underlying upward trend is due to increasing demand from ethanol conversion. The model includes investor trend following as well as shifting between commodities, equities and bonds to take advantage of increased expected returns. Claims that speculators cannot influence grain prices are shown to be invalid by direct analysis of price setting practices of granaries.'' and the UPDATE from February 2012: ``we extend the food prices model to January 2012, without modifying the model but simply continuing its dynamics. The agreement is still precise, validating both the descriptive and predictive abilities of the analysis.'' 48) Lines, Thomas (commodity consultant) (2010): Speculation in food commodity markets: ``These are the main problems that are caused by long-only index trading: It pushes prices up, irrespective of the market situation. It disrupts the rolling over of futures contracts when the nearest month expires.'' 49) Lombardi, Marco J./Van Robays, Ine (ECB) (2011): Do financial investors destablize the oil price?: ``We find that financial investors in the futures market can destabilize oil spot prices, although only in the short run. Moreover, financial activity appears to have exacerbated the volatility in the oil market over the past decade, particularly in 2007- 2008. However, shocks to oil demand and supply remain the main drivers of oil price swings.'' 50) Luciani, Giacomo (Gulf Research Center Foundation) (2009): From Price Taker to Price Maker? Saudi Arabia and the World Oil Market: ``The inflow of liquidity, the increasing role played by the futures market (paper barrels) over the spot (wet barrels), and the proliferation of derivatives which encourage betting on price changes rather than on the absolute level of prices all contribute to worsen the situation, amplifying price oscillations.'' 51) Masters, Michael W. (Masters Capital) (2009): Testimony before the Commodities Futures Trading Commission: ``In summary, passive investors compete with physical commodity consumers and make it much more difficult for them to hedge. (. . .) They provide no benefits whatsoever to the markets because they consume liquidity. And most importantly, they drive up commodity prices, which hurts everybody on the planet.'' 52) Masters, Michael W. (Masters Capital)/White, Adam K. (White Knight Research) (2008): How institutional investors are driving up food and energy prices: ``Unfortunately, this price discovery function of the commodities futures markets is breaking down. With the advent of financial futures, the important distinctions between commodities futures and financial futures were lost to regulators. Excessive speculation gradually became synonymous with manipulation, and speculative position limits were raised or effectively eliminated because they were not deemed necessary to prevent manipulation.'' 53) Mayer, Jorg (2009): The Growing Interdependence between Financial and Commodity Markets. UNCTAD Discussion Paper 195: ``The increasing importance of financial investment in commodity trading appears to have caused commodity futures exchanges to function in such a way that prices may deviate, at least in the short run, quite far from levels that would reliably reflect fundamental supply and demand factors. Financial investment weakens the traditional mechanisms that would prevent prices from moving away from levels determined by fundamental supply and demand factors--efficient absorption of information and physical adjustment of markets. This weakening increases the proneness of commodity prices to overshooting and heightens the risk of speculative bubbles occurring.'' 54) Medlock, Kenneth B./Jaffe, Amy M. (Rice University) (2009): Who is in the Oil Futures Market and How Has It Changed?: ``. . . trading strategies of some financial players in oil appears to be influencing the correlation between the value of the U.S. dollar and the price of oil. (. . .) We also find that the correlation between movements in oil prices and the value of the dollar against the trade- weighted index of the currencies of foreign countries has increased to 0.82 (a significant measure) for the period between 2001 and the present day, compared to a previously insignificant correlation of only 0.08 between 1986 and 2000.'' 55) Miller, Marcus (University of Warwick) (2011) Interview with Al-Jazeera. ``A disturbing amount of price increases, I fear, is being driven by speculative activity. Bets [on future price rises or declines] can become self-fulfilling if you are big enough to affect the market.'' 56) Morse, E. (former Lehman Brothers chief energy economist) (2008): Oil Dotcom. Research Note: ``Fundamental changes cannot explain sudden, severe price or curve movements. (. . .) Our conclusion from this study is that we are seeing the classic ingredients of an asset bubble.'' 57) Mou, Yiqun (Columbia University) (2010): Limits to Arbitrage and Commodity Index Investment: Frontrunning the Goldman Roll: ``This paper focuses on the unique rolling activity of commodity index investors in the commodity futures markets and shows that the price impact due to this rolling activity is both statistically and economically significant.'' 58) Muller, Dirk (Finanzethos) (2011): Unschuldsmythen, Wie die Nahrungsmittelspekulation den Hunger anheizt: ``Wie die folgende Analyse zeigt, ist der zentrale Einfluss der Spekulation auf die Preisentwicklung bei Grundnahrungsmittel in Entwicklungslandern kaum zu leugnen.'' 59) Naylor, Rosamund L./Falcon. Walter P. (Stanford) (2010). Food Security in an Era of Economic Volatility: ``Uncertainty surrounding exchange rates and macro policies added to price misperceptions, as did flurries of speculative activity in organized futures markets. Events since 2005-- including the most recent period of price variability in 2010--underscore the point that uncertainty and expectations can be as important as or even more important than actual changes in grain demand and supply in driving price variability.'' 60) Newell, J. (Probability Analytics Research) (2008): Commodity Speculation's ``Smoking Gun'': ``Real market forces in these diverse markets are largely independent of one another, and therefore price changes should be essentially uncorrelated. This was clearly true historically; from 1984 through 1999 average correlation between all commodities was only 7%. In the last 12 months this average rose to 64%. Correlation with the GSCI was 23% historically, and rose to 76% in the last year. Index speculation has swamped real market forces.'' 61) Nissanke, Machiko (University of London) (2010): Commodity Markets and Excess Volatility. Sources and Strategies to Reduce Adverse Development Impacts. Paper presented at the CFC Conference in Brussels December 2010: ``It can be argued that asset prices, including commodity prices, traded globally are largely influenced by market liquidity cycles in global finance. From this particular perspective, we can have a plausible narrative of the recent episode of commodity pricey cycle. (. . .) Clearly, trading activities in world commodity markets have undergone some fundamental change, as the links between activities in commodity and financial markets has further intensified.'' 62) Ortiz, Isabel/Chai, Jingqaing/Cummins. Matthew (2011): Escalating Food Prices--the threat to poor households and policies to safeguard a Recovery for All. Unicef Social and Economic working paper. ``Such activities [trading futures contracts for speculative gains] have contributed to excessive fluctuations in food commodity futures prices and distorted signals for expected prices. By doing to, speculation impedes practical hedging strategies and imposes significant unanticipated costs and undue burden on food farmers, processors and distributors, potentially contributing to unwarranted changes in local food costs.'' 63) Petzel, Todd E. (Offit Capital Advisors) (2009): Testimony before the CFTC: ``I believe these investors in aggregate have had a material impact on price levels, price spreads and the level of inventories being held.'' 64) Phillips, Peter C. B. (Yale University)/Yu, Jun (Singapore University) (2010): Dating the Timeline of Financial Bubbles During the Subprime Crisis: ``a bubble first emerged in the equity market during mid-1995 lasting to the end of 2000, followed by a bubble in the real estate market between September 2000 and June 2007 and in the mortgage market between August 2005 and July 2007. After the subprime crisis erupted, the phenomenon migrated selectively into the commodity market and the foreign exchange market, creating bubbles which subsequently burst at the end of 2008, just as the effects on the real economy and economic growth became manifest.'' 65) Pollin, Robert/Heintz. James (University of Massachusetts)(2011): How Wall Street Speculation is Driving Up Gasoline Prices Today: ``A major additional factor is the rapid growth in large-scale speculative trading around oil prices through the oil commodities futures market. Indeed, we estimate that, without the influence of large-scale speculative trading on oil in the commodities futures market, the average price of gasoline at the pump in May would have been $3.13 rather than $3.96.'' 66) Ray, Darryl E/Schaffer, Harwood D. (University of Tennessee) (2010): Index funds and the 2006-2008 run-up in agricultural commodity prices: ``the fundamentals and/or expectations in the energy and mineral markets rein supreme-- grains are along for the ride with little-to-no regard to what is happening in the grain sector. Worries during the period about the availability of oil drove up the price of crude, which caused index funds to rebalance their portfolios by making additional purchases of the other commodities to maintain the specified balance. Since the resulting price increases in agricultural commodities had virtually nothing to do with their market conditions, the record level of activity in the futures market by index funds would seem to make index funds a logical source of possible price overshooting.'' 67) Robles, Miguel/Torero, Maximo/Braun. Joachim von (IFPRI) (2009): When speculation matters. IFPRI Issue Brief 57: ``Changes in supply and demand fundamentals cannot fully explain the recent drastic increase in food prices. Rising expectations, speculation, hoarding, and hysteria also played a role in the increasing level and volatility of food prices.'' 68) Roubini, Nouriel (New York University) (2009): The risk of a double-dip recession is rising (Financial Times Article): ``Another reason to fear a double-dip recession is that oil, energy and food prices are now rising faster than economic fundamentals warrant, and could be driven higher by excessive liquidity chasing assets and by speculative demand.'' 69) Sachs, Jeffrey D. (Columbia University) (2008): Corn Futures Spark Riots as Speculators Take Trading to Limit (Bloomberg article): ``The fact that prices soared and then they came down so much really does suggest that there was a speculative element to it.'' 70) Schulmeister, Stephan (Vienna University) (2009): Trading Practices and Price Dynamics in Commodity Markets. Study commissioned by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Finance and the Austrian Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour: ``Based on the ``bullishness'' in commodity derivatives markets, short-term oriented speculators reacted much stronger to news in line with the expectation of rising prices than to news which contradicted the ``market mood''. Hence, they put more money into long positions than into short positions and held long positions longer than short positions. Due to this trading behavior, upward commodity price runs lasted longer in recent years than downward runs causing prices to rise in a stepwise process. Commodity price runs were lengthened by the use of trend-following trading systems of technical analysis. These systems try to exploit price runs by producing buy (sell) signals in the early stage of an upward (downward) run. The aggregate trading signals then feed back upon commodity prices.'' 71) Schumann, Harald (2011): Die Hungermacher. Wie Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs & Co. auf Kosten der Armsten mit Lebensmitteln spekulieren. ``Die verantwortlichen Manager der Finanzbranche argumentieren, es gebe keine Beweise dafur, dass Finanzinvestoren auf den Rohstoffmarkten einen mehr als nur kurzfristigen Einfluss auf das Preisniveau haben. Diese Behauptung ist nicht haltbar. Fur den Roholmarkt 1st dieser Zusammenhang sogar unter den Fachleuten der Finanzbranche selbst nicht mehr umstritten.'' 72) Schutter, Olivier de (UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food) (2010): Food commodities speculation and food price crises: Regulation to reduce the risks of financial volatility: ``The global food price crisis that occurred between 2007 and 2008, and which affects many developing countries to this day, had a number of causes. The initial causes related to market fundamentals, including the supply and demand for food commodities, transportation and storage costs, and an increase in the price of agricultural inputs. However, a significant portion of the increases in price and volatility of essential food commodities can only be explained by the emergence of a speculative bubble.'' 73) Shiller, Robert J. (Yale University) (2008): Commodity Prices Tumble (New York Times article): ``Commodities followed the euphoria cycle that we had along with housing.'' 74) Silvennoinen Annastiina (Queensland University) / Thorp, Susan (Sydney University) (2010): Financialization crisis and commodity correlation dynamics: We observe higher and more variable correlations between commodity futures and stock returns from mid-sample, with many series showing a structural break in the conditional correlation processes from the late 1990s.'' 75) Singleton, Kenneth J. (Stanford University) (2010): The 2008 Boom/Bust in Oil Prices: ``In my view, while spot-market supply and demand pressures were influential factors in the behavior of oil prices, so were participation in oil futures markets by hedge funds, long-term passive investors, and other traders in energy derivatives.'' 76) Singleton, Kenneth J. (Stanford University) (2011): Investor Flows And The 2008 Boom/Bust in Oil Prices: ``I present new evidence that there was an economically and statistically significant effect of investor flows on futures prices . . . The intermediate-term growth rates of index positions and managed-money spread positions had the largest impacts on futures prices.'' 77) Soros, George (2008): Interview with Stem: ``Speculators create the bubble that lies above everything. Their expectations, their gambling on futures help drive up prices, and their business distorts prices, which is especially true for commodities. It is like hoarding food in the midst of a famine, only to make profits on rising prices. That should not be possible.'' 78) Tanaka, Nobuo (head International Energy Agency) (2009): IEA says speculation amplifying oil prices moves (Reuters article): ``Our analysis shows that the fundamentals are deciding the direction of the price while these funds or speculations . . . are amplifying the movement.'' 79) Tang, Ke (Princeton University) / Xiong. Wei (Renmin University) (2011): Index Investment and The Financialization of Commodities. ``This paper finds that concurrent with the rapid growing index investment in commodities markets since early 2000s, futures prices of different commodities in the U.S. became increasingly correlated with each other and this trend was significantly more pronounced for commodities in the two popular GSCI and DJUBS commodity indices. This finding reflects a financialization process of commodities markets and helps explain the synchronized price boom and bust of a broad set of seemingly unrelated commodities in the U.S. in 2006-2008. In contrast, such commodity price comovements were absent in China, which refutes growing commodity demands from emerging economies as the driver.'' 80) Timmer, C. Peter (FAO) (2009): Peter Timmer: Peter Timmer: Did Speculation Affect World Rice Prices? ``Speculative money seems to surge in and out of commodity markets, strongly linking financial variables with commodity prices during some time periods. But these periods are often short and the relationships disappear entirely for long periods of time.'' 81) Trostle, Ronald (2008): Global Agricultural Supply and Demand: Factors Contributing to the Recent Increase in Food Commodity Prices. USDA Economic Research Service: ``It is unclear to what extent the effect these new investor interests had on prices and the underlying supply and demand relationships for agricultural products. However, computerized trend-following trading practices employed by many of these funds may have increased the short-term volatility of agricultural prices.'' 82) Tudor Jones, Paul (Tudor Investment Corporation) (2010): Price Limits: A Return to Patience and Rationality in U.S. Markets. Speech to the CME Global Financial Leadership Conference. October 18, 2010: ``Every exchange traded instrument including all securities, futures, options and any other form of derivatives should have some form of a price limit. And this is all the more urgently needed now that electronic execution dominates trading.'' 83) Turbeville, Wallace C. (former Goldman Sachs vice- president) Critique of Irwin and Sanders 2010 OECD report (2010): ``The issue is so important that scepticism of conventional beliefs, not faith in the perfection of free markets, is appropriate for any study of the issue.'' 84) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2009): Trade and Development Report. Chapter II-- The Financialization of Commodity Markets: ``The financialization of commodity futures trading has made commodity markets even more prone to behavioural overshooting. There are an increasing number of market participants, sometimes with very large positions, that do not trade based on fundamental supply and demand relationships in commodity markets, but, who nonetheless, influence commodity price developments.'' 85) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2009): The global economic crisis: Systemic failures and multilateral remedies. ``The evidence to support the view that the recent wide fluctuations of commodity prices have been driven by the financialization of commodity markets far beyond the equilibrium prices is credible. Various studies find that financial investors have accelerated and amplified price movements at least for some commodities and some periods of time. (. . .) The strongest evidence is found in the high correlation between commodity prices and the prices on other markets that are clearly dominated by speculative activity.'' 86) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) (2011): Price Formation in Financialized Commodity Markets: the Role of Information. ``Due to the increased participation of financial players in those markets, the nature of information that drives commodity price formation has changed. Contrary to the assumptions of the efficient market hypothesis (EMH), the majority of market participants do not base their trading decisions purely on the fundamentals of supply and demand; they also consider aspects which are related to other markets or to portfolio diversification. This introduces spurious price signals to the market.'' 87) United Nations Commission of Experts on Reforms of the International and Monetary System (2009): Reoort: ``In the period before the outbreak of the crisis, inflation spread from financial asset prices to petroleum, food, and other commodities, partly as a result of their becoming financial asset classes subject to financial investment and speculation.'' 88) United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) (2010): Final report of the committee on commodity problems: Extraordinary joint intersessional meeting of the intergovernmental group (IGG) on grains and the intergovernmental group on rice: ``Unexpected crop failure in some major exporting countries followed by national responses and speculative behaviour rather than global market fundamentals, have been amongst the main factors behind the recent escalation of world prices and the prevailing high price volatility.'' 89) United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) (2010). Price Volatility in Agricultural Markets. Economic and Social Perspectives Policy Brief 12. December 2010. ``Financial firms are progressively investing in commodity derivatives as a portfolio hedge since returns in the commodity sector seem uncorrelated with returns to other assets. While this `financialisation of commodities' is generally not viewed as the source of price turbulence, evidence suggests that trading in futures markets may have amplified volatility in the short term. 90) United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), IFAD, IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, WFP. The World Bank, The WTO, IFPRI, UN HLTF (2011): Price Volatility in Food and Agricultural Markets: Policy Responses: ``While analysts argue about whether financial speculation has been a major factor, most agree that increased participation by non- commercial actors such as index funds, swap dealers and money managers in financial markets probably acted to amplify short term price swings and could have contributed to the formation of price bubbles in some situations.'' 91) United Nations High Level Task Force on the global food security crisis (2008): ``The impact of speculation in futures and commodity markets on food prices has also highlighted the importance of appropriate regulatory measures to ensure that on-going integration of financial markets provides the basis for increased benefits, rather than risks, for the poor.'' 92) United States Senate, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (2007): Excessive Speculation in the Natural Gas Market: ``Amaranth's 2006 positions in the natural gas market constituted excessive speculation. (. . .) Purchasers of natural gas during the summer of 2006 for delivery in the following winter months paid inflated prices due to Amaranth's speculative trading.'' 93) United States Senate, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (2009): Excessive Speculation in the Wheat Market ``This Report concludes there is significant and persuasive evidence that one of the major reasons for the recent market problems is the unusually high level of speculation in the Chicago wheat futures market due to purchases of futures contracts by index traders offsetting sales of commodity index instruments.'' 94) United States Senate, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (2006): The Role of Market Speculation in Rising Oil and Gas Prices: ``The large purchases of crude oil futures contracts by speculators have, in effect, created an additional demand for oil, driving up the price of oil to be delivered in the future in the same manner that additional demand for the immediate delivery of a physical barrel of oil drives up the price on the spot market.'' 95) Urbanchuk, John M. (Cardno ENTRIX) (2011): Speculation and the Commodity Markets: ``A careful examination of activity by non-commercial and index traders (i.e. speculators) in the corn futures market in the context of supply and demand fundamentals strongly suggests that speculation is a major factor behind the sharp increase in both the level and volatility of corn prices this year.'' 96) Van der Molen, Maarten (University of Utrecht) (2009): Speculators invading the commodity markets: a case study of coffee: ``Various analyses were performed to investigate these effects [i.e. effects that index speculators have on the futures market]. The results indicate that index speculators frustrated the futures market in the period between 2005 and 2008. This conclusion is based on the following indications: fundamentals have a lower impact on the price, the volume of index speculators has increased and their ability to influence the futures market has increased.'' 97) Vansteenkiste, Isabel (ECB) (2011): What is driving oil price futures? Fundamentals versus Speculation: ``We find that for the earlier part of our sample (up to 2004) that fundamentals have been the key driving force behind oil price movements. Thereafter, trend chasing patterns appear to be better in capturing the developments in oil futures markets.'' 98) Von Braun, Joachim (Bonn University) (2010). Time to regulate volatile food markets (Financial Times article): ``The setting of prices at the main international commodity exchanges was significantly influenced by speculation that boosted prices. Not only are food and energy markets linked, but also food and financial markets have become intertwined-- in short, the ``financialisation'' of food trade. There are increasing indications that some financial capital is shifting from speculation on housing and complex derivatives to commodities, including food.'' 99) Woolley, Paul (former fund manager. York University/ London School of Economics) (2010). Why are financial markets so inefficient and exploitative--and a suggested remedy. ``Before the middle of the last decade the prices of individual commodities could be explained by the supply and demand from producers and consumers. With the flood of passive and active investment funds going into commodities from 2005 onwards, prices have been increasingly driven by fund inflows rather than fundamental factors. Prices no longer provide a reliable signal to producers or consumers. More damagingly, commodity prices have a direct impact on consumer price indices and the role of central banks in controlling inflation is made doubly difficult now that commodity prices are subject to volatile fund flows from investors.'' 100) Wray, Randall L. (University of Missouri-Kansas City) (2008) The Commodities Market Bubble--Money Manager Capitalism and the Financialization of Commodities. Public Policy Brief No 96. The Levy Economics Institute of Bard College: ``There is adequate evidence that financialization is a big part of the problem, and there is sufficient cause for policymakers to intervene with sensible constraints and oversight to reduce the influence of managed money in these markets.'' So with that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. I just want to say to my friend that if the Commodity Futures Trading Commission isn't really sure of the impact of speculation, I have 100 different studies here--100. And if you would like, if you have a budget for copy, we'll be glad to bring it over to the CFTC so they can see that speculation is undermining markets and undermining consumers. Also, none other than Goldman Sachs did a study on the impact of speculation. If you translate their study, our constituents are paying a 56-cent-per-gallon increase on the price at the pump for speculation. Stick `em up? No. We have to make sure that we hold the speculators to an accountability, and particularly in oil markets. I ask everyone to support this amendment, something we should be able to agree on on a bipartisan basis. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of St. James' Church, one of the 11 Cleveland Catholic Diocese parishes that will be reopening this year. In 2009 it was announced that several of the Cleveland Catholic Diocese's area churches, including St. Barbara's, were to close. However, just months ago, the Vatican overruled this decision and St. James' will be reopening its doors on Wednesday, July 25, 2012. St. James Church was founded in 1908 as the founding parish for the cities of Lakewood and Rocky River. For more than a century, St. James has been a house of worship and gathering for the Catholic residents of Lakewood, Ohio. After Bishop Lennon's 2009 announcement parishioners gathered together and formed Friends of Saint James/Save Saint James in an effort to stop the closing of their church. The members of Friends of Saint James/Save Saint James are committed to the preservation of Saint James as a parish and an architecturally significant structure in the City of Lakewood. They have dedicated themselves to the development of a long range financial plan for capital improvements and maintenance of the church and its programs. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in recognizing the reopening of St. James' Church, a beloved parish that has returned to the City of Lakewood.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of publicist, William A. Silverman. Born in Toledo, Ohio, Bill was the son of an editor at the Cleveland News. Upon graduating from Centre College of Kentucky and the University of Madrid, he wrote for the Army's Stars and Stripes publication during the Korean War. He also spent five years covering the police beat, and worked for several different public relations firms before opening his own firm, Silverman and Co. In the 1960s, Bill worked on the mayoral campaigns of Ralph Perk and Seth Taft; his work on Taft's campaign earned him a public relations position with Mayor Stokes and a grant from the nonprofit Greater Cleveland Associated Foundation. Soon after beginning work with Stokes, Silverman opened the Silverman and Co. public relations firm in downtown Cleveland, OH. Together with Stokes, he helped pass a clean water bond issue, and created Cleveland: NOW! Throughout the years, Silverman and Co. grew and opened branches in Toledo, Columbus, and Charleston, West Virginia. By 1996, the PR firm was the third largest in the region and ranked 40th in the country. Throughout Silverman's career, some of his clients included Blue Cross; Don King; BBC Industries; Mayor George Voinovich; and Democratic Council President George Forbes. After more than 30 years in business, Bill retired and the firm closed in 1997 and 1998 respectively. I offer my condolences to his wife, Sandy; children, Alexander, Beth Ann, Frances, William, Jeffrey, and Jenny; and sixteen grandchildren. Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring the life and accomplishments of Mr. William A. Silverman.

Mr. KUCINICH

Mr. KUCINICH. On a day Congress will decide whether to audit the Fed, The Washington Post reports that the New York Fed ``did not communicate in key meetings with top regulators that British bank Barclays had admitted to Fed staffers that it was rigging Libor,'' the index which sets interest rates worldwide. The Fed wants to be spared a full audit. They want monetary deliberations private. Then they use that privacy shield to keep irregularities from regulators and from congressional view, exposing investors and consumers to massive losses. Of course the Fed wants to continue a system where there is no transparency, no accountability, where they can cover up manipulations of markets and interest rates. But should we endorse this system? When things fall apart, who do the banks come to clean up the mess? Congress. The Fed creates trillions of dollars out of nothing and gives it to banks; Congress is in the dark. The Fed sets the stage for the subprime meltdown; Congress is in the dark. The Fed takes a dive on Libor; Congress is in the dark. The Fed doesn't tell regulators what's going on; Congress is in the dark. It's time to bring the Fed into the sunshine of accountability. Vote for the audit.