понедельник, 12 марта 2012 г.

Walleye aplenty on Wisconsin R.

WISCONSIN DELLS, Wis. Walleye fishing is alive and well on theWisconsin River below the Dells dam, despite cold weather and highwinds.

Daryl Christensen, Scott Hill and I met at the Rivers EdgeResort and headed downriver in search of post-spawn walleye. Thetemperature was in the low 40s with winds of 22 m.p.h.

Christensen and Hill, top fishing guides and tournamentcompetitors, suggested working the eddies behind sandbars andshoreline drop-offs in 10 feet of water. We used 1/8th-ounceyellow/chartreuse jigs dressed with fathead minnows.

We began working a shallow flat rimmed by sandbars with asix-foot drop-off. Christensen caught the first fish, a two-poundwalleye that hit the jig hard. Hill followed with another fish aswe moved along the bar.

I added a sauger as we swung past a rocky shoreline. Boatcontrol was difficult as winds gusted to 30 m.p.h. We had startedfishing at 1 p.m. and added three more walleye to the livewell bymid-afternoon.

We made a pit stop at the resort to warm up and moved up to thedam area at 5 p.m. Christensen put us at the rock pile where the damcurrents form fast and slow eddies, a perfect area for hungry walleyewaiting for dinner.

My first cast produced a fat sauger. Hill made it a double as awalleye took his jig. We worked the jigs from the fast water intothe slack water. Most of the fish were taken in four to six feet of water as the sun started to dip belowthe high bluffs.

We pounded these walleye and sauger for two hours, putting alimit of 15 fish in the livewell, releasing 10 more and losinganother 12 on short hits.

Friday morning was bitter cold. It was 28 degrees with sharpwinds, but we worked the pillars (three fish) and the dam again forfive fish. One walleye we didn't get has my line. The walleyedrag-tested and finally head-shook the jig back to me.

Post-spawn walleye fishing is usually a game of hide and seek asthe fish move downstream to their summer quarters. But it'schallenging and can offer excellent fishing once you learn thetechnique.

Christensen and Hill are tournament fishing partners. They haveperformed well in all tournaments they entered. They are in thirdplace in the Manufacturers Walleye Contest. The two guide on theFox River, the Wisconsin and numerous bass lakes in centralWisconsin. Trips are for 10 hours and they supply everything exceptlunch and tackle.

Fishing with these men is a learning experience for veteranand beginner alike. Information from: Rivers Edge Resort (608) 254-7707,Christensen (608) 296-3068, and Hill (608) 356-7338 for guideservice.

Rivers Edge supplies bait, tackle, food, accommodations,launch ramp and beverages.

Beaches may get Ryan rubble

Rubble generated by Dan Ryan Expy. reconstruction is expected tohelp the Chicago Park District rebuild two washed-out beaches justsouth of Fullerton Avenue.

Traylor Bros. Inc., of Evansville, Ind., contractor for some ofthe Ryan work, has offered to give the Park District 18,000 cubicyards of concrete that will be replaced during the project.

Park commissioners appear to be ready to accept the offer, whichwould save an estimated $200,000.

Edward Uhlir, director of the Park District engineeringdepartment, said district officials hope to dump the concrete in twoareas just south of the Theater on the Lake, at Fullerton.

Later, the two former beaches, which were destroyed by wavesover the last few years, would be covered with large amounts of sand.

Uhlir said the concrete rubble would help diminish wave damageto the seawall and would protect Lake Shore Drive from potentialflooding, which has occurred as a result of high waves.

Deliveries are expected to begin next week after the Park Boardformally approves the deal.

Uhlir said the district would transfer mounds of sand that haveaccumulated under water at North Avenue Beach, eight blocks south ofFullerton, to the Fullerton site.

No other company has made a similar offer, but Park BoardPresident William Bartholomay has asked the district's staff to seekother offers.

Report: US on short end of health care 'value gap'

If the global economy were a 100-yard (90-meter) dash, the U.S. would start 23 yards (21 meters) behind its closest international competitors because of health care that costs too much and delivers too little, a U.S. business group says in a report to be released Thursday.

The report from the Business Roundtable, which represents chief executives of major companies, says America's health care system has become a liability in a global economy.

Concern about high U.S. costs has existed for years, and business executives _ whose companies provide health coverage for workers _ have long called for getting costs under control. Now President Barack Obama says the costs have become unsustainable and the system must be overhauled.

Americans spend $2.4 trillion a year on health care. The Business Roundtable report says Americans in 2006 spent $1,928 per capita on health care, at least two-and-a-half times more per person than any other advanced country.

In a different twist, the report took those costs and factored benefits into the equation.

It compares statistics on life expectancy, death rates and even cholesterol readings and blood pressures. The health measures are factored together with costs into a 100-point "value" scale. That has not been done before, the authors said.

The results are not encouraging.

The United States is 23 points behind five leading economic competitors: Canada, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom and France. The five nations cover all their citizens, and though their systems differ, in each country the government plays a much larger role than in the U.S.

The cost-benefit disparity is even wider _ 46 points _ when the U.S. is compared with emerging competitors: China, Brazil and India.

"What's important is that we measure and compare actual value _ not just how much we spend on health care, but the performance we get back in return," said H. Edward Hanway, chief executive of the insurance company Cigna. "That's what this study does, and the results are quite eye-opening."

Higher U.S. spending funnels away resources that could be invested elsewhere in the economy but fails to deliver a healthier work force, the report said.

"Spending more would not be a problem if our health scores were proportionately higher," Dr. Arnold Milstein, one of the authors of the study, said in an interview. "But what this study shows is that the U.S. is not getting higher levels of health and quality of care."

Other countries spend less on health care and their workers are relatively healthier, the report said.

Medical costs have long been a problem for U.S. auto companies. General Motors spends more per car on health care than it does on steel. But as more American companies face global competition, the "value gap" is being felt by more CEOs _ and their hard pressed workers.

One thing the report does not do is endorse the same solution that countries like Canada have adopted: a government-run health care system.

The chief executives of the Business Roundtable believe health care for U.S. workers and their families should stay in private hands, with a government-funded safety net for low-income people.

___

On the Net:

Business Roundtable: http://www.businessroundtable.org

среда, 7 марта 2012 г.

Sudan Leader: No U.N. Troops in Darfur

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia - U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon tried to persuade Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir to accept U.N. peacekeepers in Darfur on Wednesday, hours after al-Bashir flatly rejected the deployment.

Ban met with the Sudanese president for more than three hours in late-night talks joined by Saudi King Abdullah and Arab League chief Amr Moussa on the sidelines of an Arab summit in Riyadh, the Saudi state news agency said.

Ban is seeking Arab help in winning al-Bashir's acceptance of a U.N. force to assist African Union peacekeepers who have been unable to halt the violence in the war-torn region.

In a small sign of cooperation, Sudan and the United Nations signed an agreement in the Sudanese capital Khartoum to ease humanitarian access to Darfur's refugees.

But in a speech earlier in the day at the Arab summit, al-Bashir underlined his objections to a 20,000-strong combined U.N.-AU peacekeeping force, saying the United Nations should only provide financial and technical help to African peacekeepers already on the ground.

Al-Bashir slammed U.N. resolutions calling for U.N. troop deployment in Darfur as "a violation for Sudan's sovereignty" and said they "provoke the conflict in Darfur, instead of finding a solution for it."

But some 7,000 African Union peacekeepers have been unable to put an end to the violence in Darfur, where government forces and ethnic African rebels have been battling for nearly four years.

Al-Bashir's government is accused of backing Arab janjaweed militiamen blamed for widespread atrocities against ethnic African civilians. More than 200,000 people have been killed and more than 2.5 million driven from their homes.

"The people of Darfur have waited too long and suffered too much," Ban said in an address to the Arab summit, adding that Arab leaders could play a "positive role" in helping end Darfur's plight.

Al-Bashir's statements in Riyadh eclipsed the incremental improvement in Khartoum - an agreement that ensures unrestricted travel by international aid workers throughout Sudan, including Darfur, upon notifying the central government of plans.

"I am cautiously pleased that this agreement has been signed and publicized," U.N. humanitarian chief John Holmes told The Associated Press while touring Darfur refugee camps in neighboring Chad. The "important thing is whether they will actually implement what they say."

Last week, Holmes warned that obstruction from Sudan's government and insecurity had created a fragile environment in Darfur that could push aid workers to pull out.

Holmes said the most important aspect of the new deal was a monitoring committee to be jointly chaired by the Sudanese minister of humanitarian affairs and the U.N. humanitarian coordinator in Sudan.

The committee will fast-track visa procedures for Darfur-bound aid workers and process applications for work permits within 15 days and visas within two days. Applications are backlogged until January 2008. The committee will have representatives from international and national aid groups, the Arab League and foreign donors.

---

AP correspondent Alfred de Montesquiou in Abeche, Chad contributed to this report.

Stinky Swarm Wreaks Havoc ; Stink Bug Invasion Is Annoying Homeowners, Damaging Crops

Staff Writer

Brown marmorated stink bugs entered the United States about 12years ago - around Allentown - but they weren't expected to become anuisance.

Wrong.

A year ago, when the shield-shaped, erratically buzzing bugsbegan swarming Lancaster County homes, it was predicted they wouldremain a nuisance for freaked-out homeowners, but wouldn't damagecrops.

Wrong again.

As thousands of local homeowners can attest in recent weeks, theinvasion of the foreign pest is even worse than last year.

One Maryland researcher predicted stink bugs would "go biblicalthis year."

"Last Thursday, that really hot day, we had 30 calls an hour.It's pretty bad," said Ed Saunders of Tele-Pest Inc., a Lancaster-based pest-control company with six offices in the county.

And now, local fruit growers, farmers and backyard gardeners needto worry as well.

Greg Krawczyk, a Penn State Cooperative Extension fruitentomologist, has been at Cherry Hill Orchards in Pequea Townshipalmost weekly this summer, helping the well-known fruit growercombat swarms of the bugs.

Orchard owner Tom Haas estimated Wednesday that about 20 percentof this year's peach crop was damaged to the point it could not beoffered for sale. Some had to be sold for processing into juice,which brings a reduced price, while some was simply thrown out.

Damage by stink bugs feeding on the fruit took the form of smallindentations and dark spots inside.

"We still have plenty of good fruit," he said, but added, "It'sgoing to be challenging."

He's not suffering alone. He said he talked to a vegetable growerdown the street whose produce was damaged as well. And he says he'sheard of extensive damage to field corn in Maryland. Others saysweet corn was hit hard this summer.

Maryland's Department of Agriculture warned last week that theinsect is fast becoming a destructive pest for orchard owners andpossibly for soybean growers.

Dairy farmers fret that cows eating field corn or feed with deadstink bugs might make milk smelling like stink bugs - which is tosay, foul.

To meet the fast-arriving threat, for the first time in 10 yearsthe Penn State extension has advised Haas and suffering fruitgrowers to use lethal broad-spectrum pesticides to protect theircrops.

Normally, biological controls - often other predatory bugs - areused to combat individual pests.

But because there are no known natural controls for the foreigninvaders in the U.S. yet, more nondiscriminating chemical killersmay have to be used in the short term, unfortunately killingbeneficial bugs as well.

"The entire southern edge of the state is experiencing injury onfruit, corn and vegetables," Krawczyk reported Wednesday from thePenn State Fruit Research Center in Biglerville, Adams County.

"The fruit is perfectly edible and healthy, but, at the sametime, they're not able to sell at fresh markets. Much of it goes tothe juicer, which brings less money.

"It's a huge economical loss for the growers," Krawczyk said.

Various working groups, headed by the U.S. Department ofAgriculture, are scrambling to research the stink bugs' life cyclein hopes of finding an effective control to turn back the hordes.

This species of stink bug is native to Japan, Korea and eastChina. There are bugs that prey on the stink bugs there and keepthem in check.

But the natural enemies can't be released here until researchersdetermine they don't have unsavory consequences on the environmenthere.

"This will take a lot of time. In the meantime, we have to dowhat we can to help growers and farmers survive," said Krawczyk, amember of the Multi-State Brown Marmorated Stink Bug Working Group.

Last week, 15 members of Congress sent a letter to USDA SecretaryTom Vilsack and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency AdministratorLisa Jackson, calling on them to take immediate action to limit thedamage.

The quest for an antidote has already begun.

At a USDA lab in Newark, Del., researchers are studying parasiticwasps from the stink bugs' home range. But it will likely take twomore years before they can discover if the insects would harm otherspecies here.

A private company is working on an indoors trap for stink bugsthat uses a pheromone chemical as a lure. It might be ready by nextspring.

For farmers and orchardists, work has begun on traps that useattract-and-kill technology that can be sprayed onto crops.

Fast-reproducing stink bugs have been found in 15 states, withsmaller numbers in another 14.

Meanwhile, homeowners are seeing unprecedented waves of stinkbugs trying to get inside this fall.

The bugs, which can constrict themselves to the thickness of asheet of paper, are looking for any way into homes to ride out thewinter.

Some people flush the bugs down toilets or vacuum them up. Butthey smell when you handle them.

Local pest-control companies are doing a booming businessspraying low-level pesticides on the outsides and insides of homes.

But that has limited effectiveness, said Saunders of Tele-Pest.

"We really can't do much for people. There's no guarantee."

Warns Krawczyk, "They can feed on almost anything. There'snothing to stop them."

acrable@lnpnews.com

Stinky Swarm Wreaks Havoc ; Stink Bug Invasion Is Annoying Homeowners, Damaging Crops

Staff Writer

Brown marmorated stink bugs entered the United States about 12years ago - around Allentown - but they weren't expected to become anuisance.

Wrong.

A year ago, when the shield-shaped, erratically buzzing bugsbegan swarming Lancaster County homes, it was predicted they wouldremain a nuisance for freaked-out homeowners, but wouldn't damagecrops.

Wrong again.

As thousands of local homeowners can attest in recent weeks, theinvasion of the foreign pest is even worse than last year.

One Maryland researcher predicted stink bugs would "go biblicalthis year."

"Last Thursday, that really hot day, we had 30 calls an hour.It's pretty bad," said Ed Saunders of Tele-Pest Inc., a Lancaster-based pest-control company with six offices in the county.

And now, local fruit growers, farmers and backyard gardeners needto worry as well.

Greg Krawczyk, a Penn State Cooperative Extension fruitentomologist, has been at Cherry Hill Orchards in Pequea Townshipalmost weekly this summer, helping the well-known fruit growercombat swarms of the bugs.

Orchard owner Tom Haas estimated Wednesday that about 20 percentof this year's peach crop was damaged to the point it could not beoffered for sale. Some had to be sold for processing into juice,which brings a reduced price, while some was simply thrown out.

Damage by stink bugs feeding on the fruit took the form of smallindentations and dark spots inside.

"We still have plenty of good fruit," he said, but added, "It'sgoing to be challenging."

He's not suffering alone. He said he talked to a vegetable growerdown the street whose produce was damaged as well. And he says he'sheard of extensive damage to field corn in Maryland. Others saysweet corn was hit hard this summer.

Maryland's Department of Agriculture warned last week that theinsect is fast becoming a destructive pest for orchard owners andpossibly for soybean growers.

Dairy farmers fret that cows eating field corn or feed with deadstink bugs might make milk smelling like stink bugs - which is tosay, foul.

To meet the fast-arriving threat, for the first time in 10 yearsthe Penn State extension has advised Haas and suffering fruitgrowers to use lethal broad-spectrum pesticides to protect theircrops.

Normally, biological controls - often other predatory bugs - areused to combat individual pests.

But because there are no known natural controls for the foreigninvaders in the U.S. yet, more nondiscriminating chemical killersmay have to be used in the short term, unfortunately killingbeneficial bugs as well.

"The entire southern edge of the state is experiencing injury onfruit, corn and vegetables," Krawczyk reported Wednesday from thePenn State Fruit Research Center in Biglerville, Adams County.

"The fruit is perfectly edible and healthy, but, at the sametime, they're not able to sell at fresh markets. Much of it goes tothe juicer, which brings less money.

"It's a huge economical loss for the growers," Krawczyk said.

Various working groups, headed by the U.S. Department ofAgriculture, are scrambling to research the stink bugs' life cyclein hopes of finding an effective control to turn back the hordes.

This species of stink bug is native to Japan, Korea and eastChina. There are bugs that prey on the stink bugs there and keepthem in check.

But the natural enemies can't be released here until researchersdetermine they don't have unsavory consequences on the environmenthere.

"This will take a lot of time. In the meantime, we have to dowhat we can to help growers and farmers survive," said Krawczyk, amember of the Multi-State Brown Marmorated Stink Bug Working Group.

Last week, 15 members of Congress sent a letter to USDA SecretaryTom Vilsack and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency AdministratorLisa Jackson, calling on them to take immediate action to limit thedamage.

The quest for an antidote has already begun.

At a USDA lab in Newark, Del., researchers are studying parasiticwasps from the stink bugs' home range. But it will likely take twomore years before they can discover if the insects would harm otherspecies here.

A private company is working on an indoors trap for stink bugsthat uses a pheromone chemical as a lure. It might be ready by nextspring.

For farmers and orchardists, work has begun on traps that useattract-and-kill technology that can be sprayed onto crops.

Fast-reproducing stink bugs have been found in 15 states, withsmaller numbers in another 14.

Meanwhile, homeowners are seeing unprecedented waves of stinkbugs trying to get inside this fall.

The bugs, which can constrict themselves to the thickness of asheet of paper, are looking for any way into homes to ride out thewinter.

Some people flush the bugs down toilets or vacuum them up. Butthey smell when you handle them.

Local pest-control companies are doing a booming businessspraying low-level pesticides on the outsides and insides of homes.

But that has limited effectiveness, said Saunders of Tele-Pest.

"We really can't do much for people. There's no guarantee."

Warns Krawczyk, "They can feed on almost anything. There'snothing to stop them."

acrable@lnpnews.com

Roll Call: Children's Health Bill

The 273-156 by which the House failed to override President Bush's veto of a bill expanding a government health care program to cover 10 million children. The vote was 13 votes short of the two-thirds majority required. That means the veto stands, killing the measure.

A "yes" vote is a vote to override the veto.

Voting yes were 229 Democrats and 44 Republicans.

Voting no were 2 Democrats and 154 Republicans.

X denotes those not voting.

There are 2 vacancies in the 435-member House.

ALABAMA

Democrats - Cramer, Y; Davis, Y.

Republicans - Aderholt, N; Bachus, N; Bonner, N; Everett, N; Rogers, N.

ALASKA

Republicans - Young, Y.

ARIZONA

Democrats - Giffords, Y; Grijalva, Y; Mitchell, Y; Pastor, Y.

Republicans - Flake, N; Franks, N; Renzi, Y; Shadegg, N.

ARKANSAS

Democrats - Berry, Y; Ross, Y; Snyder, Y.

Republicans - Boozman, N.

CALIFORNIA

Democrats - Baca, Y; Becerra, Y; Berman, Y; Capps, Y; Cardoza, Y; Costa, Y; Davis, Y; Eshoo, Y; Farr, Y; Filner, Y; Harman, Y; Honda, Y; Lantos, Y; Lee, Y; Lofgren, Zoe, Y; Matsui, Y; McNerney, Y; Miller, George, Y; Napolitano, Y; Pelosi, Y; Richardson, Y; Roybal-Allard, Y; Sanchez, Linda T., Y; Sanchez, Loretta, Y; Schiff, Y; Sherman, Y; Solis, Y; Stark, Y; Tauscher, Y; Thompson, Y; Waters, Y; Watson, Y; Waxman, Y; Woolsey, Y.

Republicans - Bilbray, N; Bono, Y; Calvert, N; Campbell, N; Doolittle, N; Dreier, N; Gallegly, N; Herger, N; Hunter, N; Issa, N; Lewis, N; Lungren, Daniel E., N; McCarthy, N; McKeon, N; Miller, Gary, N; Nunes, N; Radanovich, N; Rohrabacher, N; Royce, N.

COLORADO

Democrats - DeGette, Y; Perlmutter, Y; Salazar, Y; Udall, Y.

Republicans - Lamborn, N; Musgrave, N; Tancredo, N.

CONNECTICUT

Democrats - Courtney, Y; DeLauro, Y; Larson, Y; Murphy, Y.

Republicans - Shays, Y.

DELAWARE

Republicans - Castle, Y.

FLORIDA

Democrats - Boyd, Y; Brown, Corrine, Y; Castor, Y; Hastings, Y; Klein, Y; Mahoney, Y; Meek, Y; Wasserman Schultz, Y; Wexler, Y.

Republicans - Bilirakis, N; Brown-Waite, Ginny, N; Buchanan, Y; Crenshaw, N; Diaz-Balart, L., N; Diaz-Balart, M., N; Feeney, N; Keller, N; Mack, N; Mica, N; Miller, N; Putnam, N; Ros-Lehtinen, N; Stearns, N; Weldon, N; Young, Y.

GEORGIA

Democrats - Barrow, Y; Bishop, Y; Johnson, Y; Lewis, Y; Marshall, N; Scott, Y.

Republicans - Broun, N; Deal, N; Gingrey, N; Kingston, N; Linder, N; Price, N; Westmoreland, N.

HAWAII

Democrats - Abercrombie, Y; Hirono, Y.

IDAHO

Republicans - Sali, N; Simpson, Y.

ILLINOIS

Democrats - Bean, Y; Costello, Y; Davis, Y; Emanuel, Y; Gutierrez, Y; Hare, Y; Jackson, Y; Lipinski, Y; Rush, Y; Schakowsky, Y.

Republicans - Biggert, N; Hastert, N; Johnson, N; Kirk, Y; LaHood, Y; Manzullo, N; Roskam, N; Shimkus, N; Weller, N.

INDIANA

Democrats - Carson, X; Donnelly, Y; Ellsworth, Y; Hill, Y; Visclosky, Y.

Republicans - Burton, N; Buyer, N; Pence, N; Souder, N.

IOWA

Democrats - Boswell, Y; Braley, Y; Loebsack, Y.

Republicans - King, N; Latham, Y.

KANSAS

Democrats - Boyda, Y; Moore, Y.

Republicans - Moran, Y; Tiahrt, N.

KENTUCKY

Democrats - Chandler, Y; Yarmuth, Y.

Republicans - Davis, N; Lewis, N; Rogers, N; Whitfield, N.

LOUISIANA

Democrats - Jefferson, Y; Melancon, Y.

Republicans - Alexander, N; Baker, N; Boustany, N; Jindal, X; McCrery, N.

MAINE

Democrats - Allen, Y; Michaud, Y.

MARYLAND

Democrats - Cummings, Y; Hoyer, Y; Ruppersberger, Y; Sarbanes, Y; Van Hollen, Y; Wynn, Y.

Republicans - Bartlett, N; Gilchrest, Y.

MASSACHUSETTS

Democrats - Capuano, Y; Delahunt, Y; Frank, Y; Lynch, Y; Markey, Y; McGovern, Y; Neal, Y; Olver, Y; Tierney, Y; Tsongas, Y.

MICHIGAN

Democrats - Conyers, Y; Dingell, Y; Kildee, Y; Kilpatrick, Y; Levin, Y; Stupak, Y.

Republicans - Camp, N; Ehlers, Y; Hoekstra, N; Knollenberg, N; McCotter, N; Miller, Y; Rogers, N; Upton, Y; Walberg, N.

MINNESOTA

Democrats - Ellison, Y; McCollum, Y; Oberstar, Y; Peterson, Y; Walz, Y.

Republicans - Bachmann, N; Kline, N; Ramstad, Y.

MISSISSIPPI

Democrats - Taylor, N; Thompson, Y.

Republicans - Pickering, N; Wicker, N.

MISSOURI

Democrats - Carnahan, Y; Clay, Y; Cleaver, Y; Skelton, Y.

Republicans - Akin, N; Blunt, N; Emerson, Y; Graves, N; Hulshof, N.

MONTANA

Republicans - Rehberg, Y.

NEBRASKA

Republicans - Fortenberry, N; Smith, N; Terry, N.

NEVADA

Democrats - Berkley, Y.

Republicans - Heller, N; Porter, Y.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Democrats - Hodes, Y; Shea-Porter, Y.

NEW JERSEY

Democrats - Andrews, Y; Holt, Y; Pallone, Y; Pascrell, Y; Payne, Y; Rothman, Y; Sires, Y.

Republicans - Ferguson, Y; Frelinghuysen, N; Garrett, N; LoBiondo, Y; Saxton, N; Smith, Y.

NEW MEXICO

Democrats - Udall, Y.

Republicans - Pearce, N; Wilson, Y.

NEW YORK

Democrats - Ackerman, Y; Arcuri, Y; Bishop, Y; Clarke, Y; Crowley, Y; Engel, Y; Gillibrand, Y; Hall, Y; Higgins, Y; Hinchey, Y; Israel, Y; Lowey, Y; Maloney, Y; McCarthy, Y; McNulty, Y; Meeks, Y; Nadler, Y; Rangel, Y; Serrano, Y; Slaughter, Y; Towns, Y; Velazquez, Y; Weiner, Y.

Republicans - Fossella, Y; King, X; Kuhl, N; McHugh, Y; Reynolds, N; Walsh, Y.

NORTH CAROLINA

Democrats - Butterfield, Y; Etheridge, Y; McIntyre, Y; Miller, Y; Price, Y; Shuler, Y; Watt, Y.

Republicans - Coble, N; Foxx, N; Hayes, N; Jones, N; McHenry, N; Myrick, N.

NORTH DAKOTA

Democrats - Pomeroy, Y.

OHIO

Democrats - Jones, Y; Kaptur, Y; Kucinich, Y; Ryan, Y; Space, Y; Sutton, Y; Wilson, Y.

Republicans - Boehner, N; Chabot, N; Hobson, Y; Jordan, N; LaTourette, Y; Pryce, Y; Regula, Y; Schmidt, N; Tiberi, Y; Turner, Y.

OKLAHOMA

Democrats - Boren, Y.

Republicans - Cole, N; Fallin, N; Lucas, N; Sullivan, N.

OREGON

Democrats - Blumenauer, Y; DeFazio, Y; Hooley, Y; Wu, Y.

Republicans - Walden, N.

PENNSYLVANIA

Democrats - Altmire, Y; Brady, Y; Carney, Y; Doyle, Y; Fattah, Y; Holden, Y; Kanjorski, Y; Murphy, Patrick, Y; Murtha, Y; Schwartz, Y; Sestak, Y.

Republicans - Dent, Y; English, Y; Gerlach, Y; Murphy, Tim, Y; Peterson, N; Pitts, N; Platts, Y; Shuster, N.

RHODE ISLAND

Democrats - Kennedy, Y; Langevin, Y.

SOUTH CAROLINA

Democrats - Clyburn, Y; Spratt, Y.

Republicans - Barrett, N; Brown, N; Inglis, N; Wilson, N.

SOUTH DAKOTA

Democrats - Herseth Sandlin, Y.

TENNESSEE

Democrats - Cohen, Y; Cooper, Y; Davis, Lincoln, Y; Gordon, Y; Tanner, Y.

Republicans - Blackburn, N; Davis, David, N; Duncan, N; Wamp, N.

TEXAS

Democrats - Cuellar, Y; Doggett, Y; Edwards, Y; Gonzalez, Y; Green, Al, Y; Green, Gene, Y; Hinojosa, Y; Jackson-Lee, Y; Johnson, E. B., X; Lampson, Y; Ortiz, Y; Reyes, Y; Rodriguez, Y.

Republicans - Barton, N; Brady, N; Burgess, N; Carter, N; Conaway, N; Culberson, N; Gohmert, N; Granger, N; Hall, N; Hensarling, N; Johnson, Sam, N; Marchant, N; McCaul, N; Neugebauer, N; Paul, N; Poe, N; Sessions, N; Smith, N; Thornberry, N.

UTAH

Democrats - Matheson, Y.

Republicans - Bishop, N; Cannon, N.

VERMONT

Democrats - Welch, Y.

VIRGINIA

Democrats - Boucher, Y; Moran, Y; Scott, Y.

Republicans - Cantor, N; Davis, Tom, Y; Drake, N; Forbes, N; Goode, N; Goodlatte, N; Wolf, Y.

WASHINGTON

Democrats - Baird, Y; Dicks, Y; Inslee, Y; Larsen, Y; McDermott, Y; Smith, Y.

Republicans - Hastings, N; McMorris Rodgers, Y; Reichert, Y.

WEST VIRGINIA

Democrats - Mollohan, Y; Rahall, Y.

Republicans - Capito, Y.

WISCONSIN

Democrats - Baldwin, Y; Kagen, Y; Kind, Y; Moore, Y; Obey, Y.

Republicans - Petri, Y; Ryan, N; Sensenbrenner, N.

WYOMING

Republicans - Cubin, N.

вторник, 6 марта 2012 г.

BANK DIRECTORS WORK MORE HOURS FOR LESS PAY

Slow growth, low margins and new regulations add to the burdens that directors bear.

It's not easy being a bank director these days. Bank Director magazine's annual compensation survey co-sponsored with Blanchard Consulting Group bears that out.

Board members at smaller banks are, in some cases, working longer hours than last year. Fewer banks are compensating bank directors for attending meetings or offering benefits. And fewer directors think their organization is doing a good job handling compensation issues than last year.

The survey, conducted in July and August, came in the midst of an economic slump and fears of a double dip recession. Boards at many banks are contending with slow growth, low margins and still struggling loan portfolios. Plus, they have a host of new federal government regulations that must be addressed at the board level, including a new rule that boards must review incentive compensation policies for all staff.

The compensation survey was sent to 8,675 U.S. bank CEOs and directors via e-mail on July 21, Aug. 4 and Aug. 18. Surveys were returned by 617 people, for a response rate of 7.1 percent. Because of rounding, not all responses in the survey add up to 100 percent.

Longer hours on the job

The median number of hours board members spend on the job for all asset sizes is the same as last year, 15 hours per month, according to the survey.

However, for some smaller banks, those under $100 million in assets, the median number of hours on the job went from 10 hours per month last year to 15 hours. Banks between $251 million and $500 million in assets are spending 16 hours on the job, three more than last year.

However, larger banks, from $500 million in assets or more, do not report an increase in hours on the job.

Matt Brei, senior vice president and partner at Blanchard Consulting Group, says he sees compensation committees are having much more comprehensive conversations than they used to have, in part because of increased regulatory requirements resulting from the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the Dodd-Frank Act, to name a few.

"(Compensation committees) don't have to be experts on compensation in all levels of the bank, but they certainly need to know what's going on and be comfortable with the risk that is being taken," Brei says.

Fewer board members are getting paid

The difficult financial condition of some banks also may contribute to fewer bank directors getting paid for board meetings. The most common form of compensation for outside directors is board meeting fees, with 51 percent of all banks paying them. That was down from 62 percent of respondents who said their bank paid meeting fees last year.

Twenty-eight percent also get a cash retainer, down from 32 percent last year. However, for the banks that continue to pay fees and retainers, the median amounts stayed the same as last year, $600 for a full board meeting and $10,000 for an annual retainer.

Fifteen percent of respondents to the survey say they get some sort of equity compensation, compared to 16 percent last year.

The bigger the bank, the more likely it will pay equity compensation or retainers. Not surprisingly, few privately owned banks compensate directors with equity, only 6 percent. Twenty-three percent of public banks, on the other hand, pay equity compensation.

Benefits also appear to have eroded. Thirty-nine percent of banks offer no benefits at all to board members, up from 28 percent last year, with the percentage of private banks offering no benefits higher than public, 44 percent to 35 percent.

Nineteen percent of bank boards pay directors' travel expenses, compared to 20 percent last year. Fifteen percent offered a deferred compensation plan, compared to 13 percent last year. Six percent offer life insurance, compared to nine percent last year.

"Benefits are the first to go," says Mike Blanchard, CEO of Blanchard Consulting Group. "If net income is down and the company is not performing well, and executives are being asked to be more frugal, to not travel as much and reduce expenses, then boards are going to say, 'We should do so as well."'

Brei says this trend of flat or lower compensation for directors has been consistent during the last three or four years.

"What the challenge is, with the increased scrutiny (of board decisions) and the expertise that's needed, how do you get the right people to serve on the board?" he says. "A community banker can still find a business owner or someone with a strong presence in the community to serve on the board, but now you need someone who has risk expertise and compensation expertise, and that can get more difficult."

Blanchard worries t�iat some banks may have trouble attracting good directors when they don't pay anything.

"There is a perception of risk out there, that it is risky to be in the banking industry," he says. "I believe it's going to be difficult to attract directors if you're not competitive with other organizations out there."

Banks by and large don't plan to increase director pay next year, either. Nearly three-quarters, or 71 percent, plan to keep director pay the same next year. Twenty-eight percent plan to increase it.

Job satisfaction falls

Satisfaction with the board's job of handling compensation issues also has gone down. This year, 63 percent of respondents give their board high marks for managing the executive compensation program. That compares to 74 percent last year who said their bank was managing executive compensation well or very well. This year, 56 percent think the board is managing director compensation well or very well, compared to 68 percent last year.

Blanchard says this decline in satisfaction might have to do with the host of new regulations on the table, including compensation regulations coming out of the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act last year.

"With all the scrutiny and the new guidelines, it may be (directors) are unsure if their changes are appropriate with the guidelines," he says.

Only 34 percent made any changes to their compensation this year. Twenty-nine percent say tfiey have implemented a dawback provision on executive pay. Of those who do have a clawback provision, 65 percent have one for the management team, and 60 percent have one for the CEO.

The lack of changes surprises Blanchard.

He says part of the new regulations require bank boards to review all incentive pay policies, including those for mortgage officers at the bank. New rules strictly prohibit certain kinds of incentive pay for mortgage officers and brokers, which was thought to encourage risk-taking during the financial crisis.

Top problems for compensation committees

Despite all the frustrations about new regulations, the two top challenges for compensation committees are the same as they were last year. Pay-for-performance metrics and the gathering/understanding of peer comparison data were both rated by 26 percent of the respondents as die most challenging issue.

Blanchard and Brei say having a good strategic plan will help align pay with performance.

"You really need to look at what the strategy is," says Brei. "What's your long-term strategy and how are you going to get there? I really don't think setting performance metrics is a one-size-fits-all. You need to make it make sense for your bank, not what the bank is doing across the street. It may be reducing your non-performing (assets). It may be something that's more discretionary without a hard number on it. Maybe it's creating a certain culture at die bank."

Half of all respondents in the survey this year say they link CEO pay to the strategic plan. Sixty-eight percent say they link CEO pay to performance metrics. Of those who link CEO pay to performance, 66 percent use asset quality, 59 percent use return on assets and 62 percent use return on equity. Only 35 percent tie CEO pay to total shareholder return and 37 percent tie it to earnings per share growth.

The industry has shifted over time toward using other kinds of performance metrics rather than just profitability, says Blanchard.

"Three years ago, all these plans were driven by profitability, return on equity, shareholder return, net income, return on assets," he says. "I see that asset quality has moved up to number one. It's a good thing for them to say they are focused on asset quality. You need to incorporate more strategic goals. You also have to have good asset quality."

Brei says he advises clients to look at more than just profit metrics.

"If you're purely pushing profits, you might be encouraging people just to get loans, but not necessarily good loans," he says.

Compensation committee practices

Sixty-six percent of respondents say their bank reviewed director compensation within the last six months or a year. Twelve percent say they had done reviews more than a year ago and 19 percent say it has been more than two years since they reviewed compensation practices.

Fifty-two percent say they do not use a compensation consultant. Twelve percent say they used consultants on an ongoing basis and 36 percent used them on a project basis.

Forty-two percent say the compensation committee is responsible for setting director compensation, the same as last year. Nine percent say the CEO sets director pay, about the same as last year. Thirty-eight percent this year say the full board sets director pay.

For most banks, 82 percent, the compensation committee meets quarterly. The median number of compensation committee meetings per year is four, with smaller banks meeting less often than large banks. The median number of full board meetings is 12, which was consistent across all asset sizes.

Elements of director pay

Board meeting fees are the most popular way to compensate directors. The fees vary widely based on the size of the bank and whether it is public or private. For those who say they are paid, banks with less than $100 million in assets paid a median of $375 per meeting, as of fiscal year 2010, according to the survey. Banks with $1 billion to $5 billion in assets who did pay compensated at a median of $700 per meeting.

Publicly traded banks paid a median of $650 per meeting, compared to $500 for private banks.

The median cash retainer was $10,000 as of the last fiscal year. Only 28 percent of respondents say their bank pays a cash retainer.

As far as committees go, 70 percent of banks say they paid fees for serving on a committee. The chairmen of holding bank committees were paid more than the lead bank chairmen. The chairmen of publicly traded bank committees were paid more than for private banks.

The highest paid bank holding committee chairman is the chairman of the audit committee, who was paid a median of $5,000 per year.

Sixteen percent of banks also paid a cash retainer for committee work.

Equity compensation

Sixteen percent of respondents say their bank gave equity compensation for serving on the board.

The median holding company stock option/restricted stock grant for those who were paid in fiscal year 2010 was $11,135. The median lead bank fully equity grant value was $11,500 in fiscal year 2010.

Forty-one percent of respondents say their banks had stock ownership guidelines for directors.

"That's a good thing," says Blanchard, "to say: 'If we give you stock, we want you to hold on to it a certain amount and not sell it, so you can participate in the future success of the company."

Public banks are more likely to have stock ownership guidelines, at 53 percent, compared to only 31 percent of private banks who have guidelines. Smaller banks are less likely to have ownership guidelines.

Of those that have guidelines, 52 percent require directors to own a minimum or fixed number of shares, down from 67 percent last year. Thirty-one percent have a minimum share value and 13 percent have a multiple of the annual retainer requirement.

Not all banks compensate directors with stock, retainers or even fees. For those that do, there is a wide difference in compensation for small banks compared to larger banks. Not counting committee work, the median total compensation during die most recent fiscal year to serve on a bank and holding company board with less than $100 million in assets was $10,500. For banks with more than $1 billion in assets, it was $43,800. The median for all banks was $35,335.

Factors to serve on bank boards

To attract board members, banks ought to consider what directors most want to see in the form of compensation. According to the survey, the most important forms of compensation when considering a board seat are cash fees/retainers and whether the bank pays for board-related expenses, such as travel.

These were the most important considerations for board seats last year as well. However, there was a slight decline in importance in these factors compared to last year. Last year, 67 percent said they rated cash fees/ retainers as important or very important considerations. This year, 64 percent do. Last year, 64 percent rated paid expenses as important or very important. This year, 60 percent do. The percentage of respondents that rated bonus or performance pay as important or very important is higher this year, at 40 percent, compared to 31 percent last year. This year, 31 percent rate insurance as an important or very important factor; and 27 percent rate a retirement plan as important.

About the survey respondents

Of the respondents, 55 percent said they were from private companies and the rest were from publicly traded institutions. Eighty-eight percent were from banks older than five years. The majority of respondents, 61 percent, said they were from banks with $500 million in assets or below. Most of the respondents were bank directors. Fortysix percent were outside directors, 22 percent were inside directors, 21 percent were board chairman and 37 percent were CEOs.

[Sidebar]

The Board Compensation Survey was co-sponsored by Blanchard Consulting Group.

Matt Brei is a senior vice president and partner with the national compensation consulting company Blanchard Consulting Group. His office is in Minneapolis. He has more than 10 years of experience in compensation consulting, with clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to community banks throughout the country. Since 2002, Matt has focused exclusively on the banking industry.

Michael Blanchard is the CEO of the national compensation consulting company Blanchard Consulting Group and he works in Atlanta. He has extensive experience in the human resources field and has conducted or supported over 500 compensation planning, market research and organizational development projects during the past 15 years, with more than twelve years specific to the banking industry.

[Author Affiliation]

Naomi Snyder is Senior Editor for Bank Director