DES MOINES, IA (01/29/2013)(readMedia)-- Molly Mayne of Bettendorf was named to the Drake University Dean's List for the Fall 2012 semester. Students must achieve a grade-point average of 3.5 or above to earn this honor.

Drake is a private, independent university in Des Moines, Iowa, with an enrollment of approximately 3,400 full-time undergraduate students and 1,900 graduate students from 49 states and 50 countries. Drake University's mission is to provide an exceptional learning environment that prepares students for meaningful personal lives, professional accomplishments and responsible global citizenship. The Drake experience is distinguished by collaborative learning among students, faculty and staff and by the integration of the liberal arts and sciences with professional preparation.

Senators Question Whether "Too Big to Fail" Status of Some Wall Street Megabanks Undermines Government's Ability to Prosecute Large Financial Institutions, Impose Appropriate Penalties

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) sent a letter today to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder questioning whether the "too big to fail" status of certain Wall Street megabanks undermines the ability of the federal government to prosecute wrongdoing and impose appropriate penalties.  They also requested that the Justice Department disclose the identities of parties with whom prosecutors consult about the appropriate level of penalties for financial institutions.

"Wall Street megabanks aren't just too big to fail, they're increasingly too big to jail," Brown said. "Already, the nation's six largest megabanks enjoy what amounts to taxpayer-funded guarantee by virtue of their size, making it harder for regional and community banks to compete. Now, these megabanks may also enjoy some impunity when they violate the law by laundering money or illegally foreclosing on homeowners. Wall Street should pay the full price of its wrongdoing, not pass the costs along to taxpayers."

"The best deterrent to crime is to put people in prison," Grassley said.  "That includes those at powerful banks and corporations.  Unfortunately, we've seen little willingness to charge these individuals criminally.  The public deserves an explanation of how the Justice Department arrives at these decisions."

Brown, who chairs the Senate Banking Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Protection, is the author the Safe, Accountable, Fair & Efficient (SAFE) Banking Act, legislation that would prevent any one financial institution from becoming so large and overleveraged that its collapse could put our economy on the brink of collapse or trigger the need for a federal bailout. He also passed legislation with Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) to requiring the Government Accountability Office to study how banks with assets of $500 billion or more benefit from the belief that the government would not let them fail in a crisis.

As Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, Grassley has been critical of the Justice Department's decisions against holding people criminally accountable in financial cases.  He called the Justice Department's decision to forego any criminal prosecution of HSBC officials involved in that money laundering scandal inexcusable.  And he has questioned the Justice Department about the number of mortgage fraud cases brought forward, revealing a failure to bring significant criminal cases against any of the major banks or financial institutions that have faced civil actions for various frauds. Grassley is the author of the Fraud Enforcement Recovery Act, signed into law in 2009, that was designed to ramp up the government's response to the crisis and ensure that prosecutors and investigators had the tools needed to combat fraud.

The full text of the letter from Brown and Grassley to Holder can be found below.

January 29, 2013

The Honorable Eric H. Holder, Jr.

United States Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20530

Dear Attorney General Holder:

The large number of private and government lawsuits since the global financial crisis continues to undermine public confidence in our financial markets.  This confidence can only be restored by demonstrating that there are consistent rules in place that provide accountability for wrongdoing and deter financial predators.

Unfortunately, many of the settlements between large financial institutions and the federal government involve penalties that are disproportionately low, both in relation to the profits which resulted from those wrongful actions as well as in relation to the costs imposed upon consumers, investors, and the market.

The nature of these settlements has fostered concerns that "too big to fail" Wall Street banks enjoy a favored status, in statute and in enforcement policy.  This perception undermines the public's confidence in our institutions and in the principal that the law is applied equally in all cases.

On settling with Swiss Bank UBS for Libor manipulation, for example, you said, "[t]he impact on the stability of the financial markets around the world is something we take into consideration.  We reach out to experts outside of the Justice Department to talk about what are the consequences of actions that we might take, what would be the impact of those actions if we want to make particular prosecutive decisions or determinations with regard to a particular institution."

In an interview with Frontline, outgoing Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer defended the Department of Justice's inability to prosecute large financial institutions by saying, "but in any given case, I think I and prosecutors around the country, being responsible, should speak to regulators, should speak to experts, because if I bring a case against institution, and as a result of bringing that case, there's some huge economic effect ? if it creates a ripple effect so that suddenly, counterparties and other financial institutions or other companies that had nothing to do with this are affected badly ? it's a factor we need to know and understand."

These statements raise important questions about the Justice Department's prosecutorial philosophy.  In order to explore the Justice Department's treatment of potential criminal activity by large financial institutions, please answer the following questions and provide the following information:

1. Has the Justice Department designated certain institutions whose failure could jeopardize the stability of the financial markets and are thus, "too big to jail"?  If so, please name them.

2. Has the Justice Department ever failed to bring a prosecution against an institution due to concern that their failure could jeopardize financial markets?

3. Are there any entities the Justice Department has entered into settlements with, in which the amount of the settlement reflected a concern that markets could be impacted by such a settlement?  If so, for which entities?

4. Please provide the names of all outside experts consulted by the Justice Department in making prosecutorial decisions regarding financial institutions with over $1 billion in assets.

5. Please provide any compensation contracts for these individuals.

6. How did DOJ ensure that these experts provided unconflicted and unbiased advice to DOJ?

Our markets will only function efficiently if participants believe that all laws will be enforced consistently, and that violators will be punished to the fullest extent of the law.  There should not be one set of rules that apply to Wall Street and another set for the rest of us.

Thank you for your cooperation and attention in this matter.  We would appreciate a response by February 8, 2013.  If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Graham Steele for Senator Brown at (202) 224-2315 or Chris Lucas for Ranking Member Grassley at (202) 224-5225.

Sincerely,

Sherrod Brown                          Charles E. Grassley

Chairman                                     Ranking Member

Banking Committee,                     Judiciary Committee

Subcommittee on Financial Institutions

and Consumer Protection

Before Washington officials said that women could go into combat, they were out there in battle, but just not getting credit for it. Armed with M16's and more robust firepower, women support troops backed up infantry units and got into the thick of it when called up to lend support. Transportation troops, in Iraq and Afghanistan, driving the IED laden roads with critically needed ammunition and supplies were always in the combat zone, explosive devices frequently causing the loss of limb and life attested to that.

Miyoko Hikiji, a young woman from Iowa knows well of it?well enough to write a book about it.  All I Could Be?My Story as a Woman Warrior in Iraq tells it just the way it was when, as a young woman in the Iowa National Guard, she was deployed to Iraq after the invasion ten years ago and discovered that the peaceful world she knew amid the Midwestern farmland had been replaced by the wind driven sand dunes of Iraq. Peace she discovered had become a pleasant and distant memory. Armed with an M16 and the equipment of the modern warrior, Miyoko was told to take her weapon into the cab of a truck, sit behind the wheel, and join a series of convoys. Each day she drove deeper into harm's way.

And each night was a nightmare in the making.  Miyoko writes of one such night,

"The infantry's mortar platoon, just down the street, zeroed in and returned fire. The opposite bank exploded.  Then, two patrol boats fixed with automatic weapons screamed by opening fire along the bank. The radio on the patio lit up with chatter but we couldn't make out details.    Moments later it was silent again.  Voices on the radio became clear--all clear.  Reluctantly we climbed out of the hole and returned to our tents.  No one could sleep but no one wanted to talk.  We lay silently in our bunks until the sun beckoned us to start another day."

And, another day always brought stress, fear and all that war brings. "It is my war story," writes Miyoko, "it is part military history, part personal revelation, part therapy," the stuff of so many war stories that have become a vital part of the great American tradition. All I Could Be is a fascinating beginning to a new chapter in that great tradition: the recognition of the woman warrior in America. All I Could Be ?My Story as a Woman Warrior in Iraq. #9781933909585 will be published by History Publishing Company in March 2013.

WASHINGTON, D.C.–U.S. Senators John Thune (R-S.D.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today expressed concern over the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States' (CFIUS) decision to approve the China-based Wanxiang Group Corps.' investment in failed stimulus-funded battery company, A123. Thune and Grassley, who have taken the lead in seeking answers from both the Obama administration and A123 on the use of taxpayer dollars to fund the now-bankrupt green energy company, had urged CFIUS to protect U.S. national security and taxpayer interests as part of the transaction. A123 received over $130 million in taxpayer funds through the president's stimulus bill, including $1 million the day it declared bankruptcy.

"I am troubled by the Obama administration's approval of the Wanxiang purchase of A123," said Thune. "Technology produced by A123 and funded by U.S. taxpayers should not simply be shipped off to China so that the military applications for these materials can be reproduced abroad. Senator Grassley and I remain concerned about the national security implications of this transaction and have called on CFIUS for a full briefing of the review. We will continue to press for answers regarding our national security and taxpayer interests."

"We don't have any answers on what will happen to the technology funded by the U.S. taxpayers," Grassley said. "We don't have any answers on whether U.S. national security concerns are protected. The only thing that's clear is a foreign-owned company will benefit from the millions of dollars given to A123 through the President's stimulus package. That's troubling."

On August 14, 2012, Thune and Grassley sent a letter to the Department of Energy after A123 announced a $450 million investment deal with Wanxiang to express concern about tax dollars going to a struggling company. There were clear indications that A123 was having financial problems even as the administration continued to pour millions of taxpayer dollars into the failing company.

On October 9, 2012, Thune and Grassley sent a letter to A123 expressing their concerns regarding the company's potential agreement to grant Wanxiang majority control of the company. On October 16, 2012, A123 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and appeared to withdraw from the deal with Wanxiang. Instead, Wanxiang went to auction and bid on A123's assets to acquire the company as part of the bankruptcy proceedings. CFIUS, which is charged with reviewing foreign investments, approved the transaction, according to an announcement today from Wanxiang.