Obama Lies, has Jack Lew Doing the Same on Debt Crisis

Posted on January 31, 2016January 31, 2016 by Denise Simon

Ted Cruz is right, but there is a caveat, a White House cartel inside the Washington cartel.

EXCLUSIVE: Secret Fed Docs Show Obama Misled Congress, Public During Debt Limit Crises

Pollock/DCNF: Federal Reserve Bank of New York officials secretly conducted real-time exercises during the 2011 and 2013 debt-limit crisis that demonstrated the federal government could function during a temporary shutdown by prioritizing spending, even as Treasury Secretary Jack Lew publicly claimed many times that such efforts were “unworkable,” according to a new report by the House Financial Services Committee obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The staff report, to be released Tuesday, charges that Lew and other Obama administration officials deliberately misled Congress and the public during the federal budget and debt limit showdowns in both years. The committee will convene a public hearing on the report Feb. 2.

The report also states that the Obama administration crafted actual contingency plans to pay for Social Security and veterans benefits, as well as principal and interest on the national debt if the government was temporarily unable to borrow more money. The Committee concludes that over the last two years the Treasury Department has “obstructed” congressional efforts to get to the bottom of the administration’s real-time policy during the two showdowns.

The Constitution stipulates that only Congress can determine how much money the federal government can borrow. Presidents thus cannot unilaterally spend beyond congressional debt ceiling limits set. The committee — chaired by Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas — charged that during both confrontations, the Obama administration held the country’s creditworthiness “hostage” by claiming default was the only possibility if the debit ceiling was not raised.

“These internal documents show the Obama Administration took the nation’s creditworthiness and economy hostage in a cynical attempt to create a crisis so the president could get what he wanted during negotiations over the debt ceiling,” Hensarling said in a statement to be released with the report Tuesday.

The report also revealed that the Treasury Department did not publicly divulge its plans to prioritize payments “for the express purpose of creating market uncertainty in an effort to pressure Congress to acquiesce in the administration’s ‘no negotiation’ posture on the debt ceiling.”

Wisconsin Republican Rep. Sean Duffy, the financial services panel’s oversight subcommittee chairman, said the administration “manufactured a crisis to put politics ahead of economic stability.”

The massive, 322-page report chronicles frank, behind-the-scenes discussions among Federal Reserve Board and Federal Bank of New York officials as Congress debated whether to keep existing debt limits or allow Treasury to borrow more money. The House committee and the Treasury Department have been fighting a bitter, two-year battle over Federal Reserve documents.

The report states that “Treasury apparently directed the New York Fed not to answer valid congressional oversight inquiries because Treasury knew the answers would expose the dishonesty of the administration’s public statements.”

A Treasury Department spokesman told TheDCNF, “Treasury has been committed to working cooperatively with the Committee to provide it with the information it needs,” including providing it with the New York Fed documents. The report is based on 3,878 pages of internal documents the committee eventually acquired despite Treasury’s opposition. The panel finally obtained the documents by subpoena. The report contains 41 separate appendices.

The revelations will likely add new intensity to the long-running public debate on the proper level of federal spending as the 2016 election campaign accelerates with Monday’s Iowa presidential caucus and next week’s New Hampshire presidential primary. Obama administration officials repeatedly declared that a complete government shutdown with no partial or interim payments was the only alternative to congressional approval of an increased debt ceiling.

In testimony Oct. 13, 2013, before the Senate Finance Committee, for example, Lew said the government could not “pick and choose” the funding of individual government programs once the debt limit ceiling was reached.

“I do not believe there is a way to pick and choose on a broad basis. The system was not designed to be turned off selectively,” Lew said.

The Federal Reserve documents revealed in the report show the Obama administration was in fact prepared to pick and choose which payments to make “in order to protect the creditworthiness of the United States.”

An internal e-mail from an official in the New York Fed’s Financial Institution Supervision Group states that regardless of the congressional outcome, “Treasury is adamant they will make [Principal and Interest] payments. Not considering possibility of missing debt payments.” The P&I payments are made to Treasury bond holders.

“At the same time that Treasury was insisting to Congress and the American people that prioritization is unworkable, Treasury and New York Fed officials were working behind the scenes on a prioritization plan,” the report charges.

In private, Federal Reserve Board Federal Reserve Bank of New York officials vigorously denounced the administration’s secrecy over its contingency planning, one calling it “crazy, counter-productive, and add[ing] risk to an already risky situation.”

Federal Reserve Governor Jerome H. Powell, for example, complained that the administration tactics were part of political brinkmanship. “Treasury wants to maximize pressure on Congress by limiting communications on contingency planning,” he said in an email.

The report noted that both the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and the Federal Bank of New York had “grave concerns with Treasury’s political decision not to inform the public of the administration’s debt ceiling contingency plans.”

The Federal Reserve Board staff “strongly encouraged Treasury to reveal its plan in advance” so that the private sector could prepare properly for a debt ceiling event but Treasury officials were “very reluctant to do so,” according to the report.

The Federal Reserve documents also depict officials at the Federal Bank of New York twice engaging in intense “tabletop exercises” about how government agencies could operate under a spending limit.

A March 16, 2011, table-top exercise included an hour-by-hour simulation of how 29 governmental agencies and market players would react when the federal government reached its debt limit.

At the time, the federal government would be within $25 million of its $14.3 trillion budget limit. The Secretary of the Treasury would invoke the Federal Reserve Debt Ceiling Crisis procedures, which provide that the “The President and the Secretary of the Treasury meet with the Fed Chairman at noon and agree that the Federal Reserve should pursue actions to honor and settle SSI, veterans benefits and P&I payments.” SSI refers to Social Security and disability payments.

A similar April 9, 2013, debt ceiling table-top exercise focused on a “scenario” in which “Treasury begins controlling the flow of payments” and in which ”SSI, veterans benefits and P&I payments [would] be prioritized over all other governmental obligations.” The debt ceiling was $16.3 trillion at the time of the second exercise.

The procedures also state that “based on direction from the President, Treasury will pay only selected type of payments and withhold other government payments.”

Both Moody’s and Goldman Sachs publicly suggested during the 2013 crisis that it was possible the government could assure markets by pledging to pay principal and interest, Social Social and veterans benefits.

When contacted by TheDCNF, the Treasury Department did not directly address the issue of prioritizing payments but forwarded an October 16, 2015 blog, which stated in part, “The New York Fed’s system would be technologically capable of continuing to make principal and interest payment,” but added, “this approach would be entirely experimental and create unacceptable risk to both domestic and global financial markets.”

Multiple think tanks, including the Mercatus Center, have released reports suggesting numerous alternatives to default if the debt limit ceiling is not increased.

The national debt limit has tripled under Obama and now stands at $18.9 trillion.

The ARK in Kentucky, no Really

Posted on January 31, 2016January 31, 2016 by Denise Simon

Ken Ham Wins Million-Dollar Religious Freedom Case for Ark Encounter Theme Park

CP: Answers and Genesis has declared a major victory in its legal case against the state of Kentucky after a federal judge ruled Monday that officials violated the group’s First Amendment rights by denying it participation in a sales tax incentive worth millions.

The Miami Held reported that U.S. District Judge Gregory Van Tatenhove ruled in his decision that Kentucky’s Tourism Cabinet cannot exclude the Ark Encounter from the tax incentive because of its “religious purpose and message.”

Following the decision, AiG CEO and President Ken Ham declared “victory for the free exercise of religion in this country.”

“Atheist organizations and other secular groups have been falsely claiming that AiG/Ark Encounter should not receive a facially neutral tax incentive in Kentucky because of our Christian message,” Ham said in a follow up message on Facebook.

“They have also been wrongly stating that AiG would be breaking the law if we used a religious preference in our hiring at the future Ark. AiG has responded many times to their bogus claims, charges which are nothing more than the secularists’ blatant desire to see religious discrimination be practiced against AiG. Such discrimination against Christianity is growing across America,” he added, directing readers to more information about the issue on the AiG website.

The Ark Encounter, which is a life-sized Noah’s Ark theme park, is set to open July 7 in Williamstown, and cost nearly $90 million to construct.

AiG sued Kentucky in February 2015 after state officials denied it participation in the sales tax tourism incentive that could have been worth up to $18 million, arguing that the Ark Encounter would be an extension of AiG’s Creationist ministry.

Van Tatenhove explained in his decision that the tourism incentive “is neutral, has a secular purpose, and does not grant preferential treatment to anyone based on religion, allowing (Answers in Genesis) to participate along with the secular applicants cannot be viewed as acting with the predominant purpose of advancing religion.”

Ham, who is also the CEO and President of the Creation Museum in Kentucky, said that his organization took the state to court “for the sake of Christian freedom in the nation.”

“AiG wanted to ensure that the U.S. Constitution and its First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of religion would be upheld. The federal judge ruled late Monday, and it’s a victory for AiG. Really, this court decision is precedent-setting and a triumph for the First Amendment’s promise of the free exercise of religion in America,” he added.

Groups such as Americans United for Separation of Church and State put pressure on the state last year to keep denying the Ark Encounter the tax incentives, arguing that it wants to “prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to unconstitutionally finance a religious ministry.”

Ham has denied those suggestions as well, insisting that “absolutely no unwilling taxpayers will see a single penny of their tax dollars go toward the Ark Encounter.”

Gag Order: Fired Employees vs. Foreign Workers

Posted on January 30, 2016January 30, 2016 by Denise Simon

Laid-off IT workers muzzled as H-1B debate heats up

ComputerWorld: IT workers are challenging the replacement of U.S. employees with foreign visa holders. Lawsuits are on the rise and workers are contacting lawmakers. Disney workers who lost their jobs on Jan. 30, 2015, are especially aggressive.

There’s a reason for this.

The Disney severance package offered to them did not include a non-disparagement clause, making it easier for laid-off workers to speak out. This is in contrast to the severance offered to Northeast Utility workers.

The utility, now known as Eversource Energy and based in Connecticut and Massachusetts, laid off approximately 200 IT employees in 2014 after contracting with two India-based offshore outsourcing firms. The employees contacted local media and lawmakers to pressure the utility to abandon its outsourcing plan.

Some of the utility’s IT employees had to train their foreign replacements. Failure to do so meant loss of severance. But an idea emerged to show workers’ disdain for what was happening: Small American flags were placed in cubicles and along the hallway in silent protest — flags that disappeared as the workers were terminated.

The utility employees left their jobs with a severance package that included this sentence: “Employee agrees that he/she shall make no statements to anyone, spoken or written, that would tend to disparage or discredit the Company or any of the Company’s officers, directors, employees, or agents.”

That clause has kept former Eversource employees from speaking out because of fears the utility will sue them if they say anything about their experience. The IT firms that Eversource uses, Infosys and Tata Consultancy Services, are major users of the H-1B visa.

But staying silent is difficult, especially after Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) co-sponsored legislation in January 2015 that would hike the 65,000 H-1B base cap hike to as high as 195,000. The measure, known as the I-Squared Act, left some of the former utility IT employees incredulous. They were far from alone.

The 200,000-member engineering association, IEEE-USA, said the I-Squared bill would “help destroy” the IT workforce with a flood of lower paid foreign workers.

Eventually, Blumenthal’s staff did learn, confidentially, about the experiences of former Eversource IT workers.

In November, Blumenthal co-sponsored new H-1B legislation by longtime program critics, Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), designed to prevent the replacement of U.S. workers by H-1B visa holders.

Nonetheless, Blumenthal remains a co-sponsor of the I-Squared Act, which raised questions among those laid off about his intentions.

“He is still co-sponsoring everything,” one former Connecticut utility worker said about Blumenthal. The worker asked not to be identified because of severance package limitations. “He is totally unbelievable.” Blumenthal was not immediately available for comment.

Leo Perrero, an IT worker at Disney who was laid off after training his foreign replacement, says non-disparagement agreements hinder the debate over the H-1B visa. Without such agreements, “you would have a lot more people speaking out – real human beings with real stories, not just anonymous persons speaking out,” said Perrero.

“Their freedom of speech is being taken away from them with the non-disparagement agreements,” he said.

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee wanted to hear, last year, from IT employees who had been displaced by H-1B workers. It also wanted them to testify. It reached out nationally to affected employees, but had to settle for written testimony that was kept anonymous by the committee. The workers were too afraid to speak publicly.

In December, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who is also the chairman of the Immigration subcommittee, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), introduced an H-1B reform bill that includes a prohibition against non-disparagement clauses.

The bill “would prevent employers who seek access to the (H-1B) program from requiring American employees to sign so-called non-disclosure and non-disparagement agreements.” The agreements can prevent “American employees from discussing potential misuse of the program publicly.”

Non-disparagement clauses are common in severance agreements. But the Disney severance did not have one, and had no prohibition against any claims or lawsuits, said Sara Blackwell, an attorney representing former Disney IT workers. It is unclear why the company went this route.

Fear of jeopardizing new employment also keeps many displaced IT workers quiet. But lawsuits alleging discrimination and racketeering are being filed on behalf of displaced IT workers.

Brian Buchanan, a former Southern California Edison IT worker, is another who trained his foreign replacements. He is now part of a lawsuit alleging discrimination by Tata Consultancy Services, one of the IT services firms used by Edison. He is also included in a lawsuit challenging the U.S. government’s decision to allow spouses of some H-1B workers to seek employment. That lawsuit argues that the added workers will hurt the job market for U.S. workers.

Buchanan, who has contacted lawmakers about the impact of the H-1B programs, sees “little progress” in the past year. “Americans are going to have to act and they are going to have to act in mass, because we are fighting a huge, unseen force,” said Buchanan.

Eversource was asked about the non-disparagement agreement, and had this response: “These are private arrangements between affected employees and our company that were made more than two years ago during a period of transition and change in support of our merger. We have successfully moved on to form a new organization focused on providing superior service and value to our customers.”

But many IT workers hurt by offshore outsourcing have not been able to move on.

Former employees at Disney, Edison and Eversource tell of financial strains, tapped retirement funds and an inability to find a job, or to find one that pays close to what they once made.

Workers will say, anecdotally, that they know of many former co-workers who are now struggling. The H-1B workers tend to be younger, and the displaced ones, older, they say.

“It’s hard to start over at 50 when no one wants you,” said one former Edison IT worker. That worker is still searching for a job.

Major Gang Arrests in Boston, Immigrant MS-13

Posted on January 29, 2016January 29, 2016 by Denise Simon

El Salvador:

Gangs like the MS13 and Barrio 18 in El Salvador are rigid about enforcing the boundaries of their territory. This has dramatic repercussions for both the bus drivers who drive and the students who walk across these borders.

“This street is the limit — look. The frontline of the war is right here. Here there are gunshots every so often. Down there are MS13. Up there are Barrio 18 Revolucionarios. It is an L. And we are in the middle.”

So says a middle-aged man. He is the extortion negotiator for a bus and minibus route. That is his job. In a country where even Coca Cola or Tigo pay extortion, in El Salvador there are architects, street vendors, shoemakers, teachers, and extortion negotiators. The country’s reality creates jobs. More details here.

Dozens said to be linked to El Salvador gang indicted in Boston area

Reuters:

Dozens of Boston-area residents linked to the Central American-based MS-13 street gang were being rounded up by law enforcement authorities on Friday after their indictments on racketeering conspiracy charges related to murders and other crimes, federal prosecutors said.

The indictment of 56 members, leaders and associates of “one of the largest criminal organizations in the United States” alleges that several of the accused played a role in the murders of at least five people since 2014 in Chelsea, Massachusetts, and East Boston, as well as at least 14 attempted murders.

In Massachusetts, MS-13 is largely composed of immigrants and descendants of immigrants from El Salvador, recruited through intimidation in local high schools in towns with heavy concentrations of residents with ties to Central America, prosecutors said.

“Violence is a central tenet of MS-13, as evidenced by its core motto – ‘mata, viola, control,’ translated as, ‘kill, rape, control,'” the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Massachusetts said in a statement.

The indictment also accuses Massachusetts-based members of MS-13, also known as “La Mara Salvatrucha,” of selling narcotics and committing robberies to raise money to send to leaders of the gang jailed in El Salvador.

It was not immediately clear how many of the 56 people indicted were under arrest on Friday afternoon. The statement said that 15 of the accused were already in custody on federal, state or immigration charges.

A representative of the U.S. attorney’s office could not be reached immediately for comment.

The racketeering conspiracy charge – under the federal law known as RICO – alone carries a maximum prison sentence of 20 years, or even life if the underlying criminal activity carries the maximum penalty of life imprisonment, prosecutors said.

***

There is more to the story and here are some other chilling facts:

CIS.org: Since the recent surge in Central American immigrants crossing the southern border illegally, many have had questions about the Central American community in the United States. News accounts indicate that, in recent months, some 290,000 illegal immigrants (primarily from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador) have been settled, or will soon be settled, by the federal government.¹ Listed below are some basic socio-demographic statistics for immigrants in the United States from these countries.

The figures below are for both legal and illegal immigrants from the public-use files of the 2012 American Community Survey, collected by the Census Bureau:

Population Totals: In 2012 there were 2.7 million immigrants from El Salvador (1.3 million), Guatemala (880,000), and Honduras (536,000) in the United States. Combined, the immigrant population from these three countries has grown 234 percent since 1990.

The Top-10 States of Settlement: California, Texas, New York, Florida, Maryland, Virginia, New Jersey, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Georgia.

Illegal Immigrants: Department of Homeland Security estimates indicate that about 60 percent of immigrants from these three countries (1.6 million) are in the United States illegally.²

Language: Of immigrants from El Salvador, 70 percent report they speak English less than very well; for immigrants from Guatemala, it is 72 percent; and for immigrants from Honduras, it is 69 percent.

Home-ownership: Of households headed by Salvadoran immigrants, 41 percent are owner-occupied, as are 28 percent of Guatemalan households, and 29 percent of Honduran immigrant households. The corresponding figure for natives is 66 percent.

The figures below are for both legal and illegal immigrants from the public-use files of the March 2013 Current Population Survey, collected by the Census Bureau:

Educational Attainment: 54 percent of Guatemalan immigrants (ages 25 to 65) have not graduated high school. The figure for Salvadorans is 53 percent, and for Hondurans, 44 percent. The corresponding figure for native-born Americans is 7 percent.

Welfare Use: 57 percent of households headed by immigrants from El Salvador use at least one major welfare program, as do 54 percent of Honduran households, and 49 percent of Guatemalan immigrant households. Among native households it is 24 percent.³

Poverty: 65 percent of Honduran immigrants and their young children (under 18) live in or near poverty (under 200 percent of the poverty threshold). For Guatemalan and Salvadoran immigrants and their children, it is 61 percent. The corresponding figure for natives and their children is 31 percent.⁴

Health Insurance: 47 percent of Guatemalan immigrants and their young children (under 18) do not have health insurance. The figure for both Salvadoran and Honduran immigrants and their young children is 41 percent. The corresponding figure for natives and their children is 13 percent.⁵

Share Working: 77 percent of immigrants from El Salvador (ages 25 to 54) have a job, as do 74 percent of Guatemalan immigrants and 73 percent of Honduran immigrants. The corresponding figure for natives is 76 percent.

Brazil, What the Heck, Has Most Dangerous Cities

Posted on January 28, 2016January 28, 2016 by Denise Simon

The 50 most violent cities in the world are revealed, with 21 of them in Brazil… but Venezuela’s capital Caracas is named the most deadly

Latin America is home to 41 of the 50 most dangerous cities in the world
Caracas in Venezuela is now the most violent, according to homicide rate
Took the top spot from San Pedro Sula, in Honduras, now in second place
Drug trafficking, gang wars, political instability and corruption are blamed
U.S. cities St Louis, Baltimore, Detroit and New Orleans are also named

DailyMail: The 50 most dangerous cities in the world have been named and shamed, and an astonishing 21 of them are in Brazil.

Latin America features highly in the ranking, released by Mexico’s Citizens’ Council for Public Security and Criminal Justice, as it is home to some 41 of the cities listed.

Drug trafficking, gang wars, political instability, corruption and poverty are to blame for the high homicide rates across the region, which has just 8 per cent of the world’s population, according to UN data.

But the list doesn’t just include Latin America, with U.S. cities St Louis, Baltimore, Detroit and New Orleans also featuring.

Venezuela’s capital city Caracas has taken the top spot for the ranking – which is based on the number of homicides per 100,000 inhabitants of the city in 2015, and doesn’t take war zones into account.

Just this month, Venezuelan first lady Cilia Flores insisted that two of her nephews have been kidnapped by the U.S. authorities, after they were indicted on drug trafficking charges. Franqui Flores de Freitas, 30, and Efrain Campo Flores, 29, sparked a public scandal when they were arrested in Haiti in November in an operation involving the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

Caracas snatched the Number One place from San Pedro Sula, in Honduras, which had been in first place for the past four years. Venezuela’s increasingly volatile political and economic situation has been blamed for the spike in violent crime.

The notoriously dangerous city of San Pedro Sula dropped to second place, after slashing its homicide rate from 171.20 to 111.03.

Honduras hit headlines last month after the violent killing of Rangers football star Arnold Peralta at the hands of gangsters.

He was gunned down in broad daylight while sitting in his car at a shopping mall in La Ceiba.

Journalist Sonia Nazari told the U.S. Congress last year how ‘people are found hacked apart, heads cut off, skinned alive’, and described hijackers who thought little of slaughtering a bus full of people if they didn’t hand over their money quick enough.

El Salvador’s San Salvador, Acapulco in Mexico and Maturin in Venezuela make up the rest of the top five.

Although the list is almost entirely made up of cities in Latin America, it also features Cape Town, in South Africa, in ninth place; St Louis, in Missouri, in 15th; Baltimore, Maryland, in 19th; Detroit, Michigan, in 28th; New Orleans, in Louisiana, in 32nd; Kingston in Jamaica in 33rd; Durban, South Africa, in 41st; Nelson Mandela Bay, in South Africa, in 42nd; and Johannesburg, South Africa, in 47th.

‘We make this ranking with the political objective of calling attention to the violence in the cities, particularly in Latin America, so that their governments are under pressure to improve their obligation to protect their citizens, to guarantee their right to public security,’ said Citizens’ Council in the report.

Mexico is home to the most number of cities which dropped off the list this year, with five cities no longer featuring. The cities of Chihuahua, Cuernavaca, Juarez, Nuevo Laredo and Torreon are no longer included on the list, thanks to significant decreases in their homicide rates.

Meanwhile, Palmira in Colombia saw the most dramatic increase, rising from 32nd place in last year’s list to eighth. Its homicide rate almost doubled in 2015, rising from 37.66 to 70.88.

The ranking only takes into account cities with a population of more than 300,000, and doesn’t include deaths in combat zones or cities with unavailable data – this explains why some cities that would be expected on the list don’t feature.

***

THE 50 MOST DANGEROUS CITIES IN THE WORLD – BY HOMICIDES PER 100,000 INHABITANTS IN 2015

1. Caracas, Venezuela – 119.87

2. San Pedro Sula, Honduras – 111.03

3. San Salvador, El Salvador – 108.54

4. Acapulco, Mexico – 104.73

5. Maturin, Venezuela – 86.45

6. Distrito Central, Honduras – 73.51

7. Valencia, Venezuela – 72.31

8. Palmira, Colombia – 70.88

9. Cape Town, South Africa – 65.53

10. Cali, Colombia – 64.27

11. Cuidad Guayana, Venezuela – 62.33

12. Fortaleza, Brazil – 60.77

13. Natal, Brazil – 60.66

14. Salvador, Brazil – 60.63

15. St Louis, Missouri, U.S. – 59.23

16. Joao Pessoa, Brazil – 58.40

17. Culiacan, Mexico – 56.09

18. Maceio, Brazil – 55.63

19. Baltimore, Maryland, U.S. – 54.98

20. Barquisimeto, Venezuela – 54.96

21. Sao Luis, Brazil – 53.05

22. Cuiaba, Brazil – 48.52

23. Manaus, Brazil – 47.87

24. Cumana, Venezuela – 47.77

25. Guatemala City, Guatemala – 47.17

26. Belem, Brazil – 45.83

27. Feira de Santana, Brazil – 45.5

28. Detroit, Michigan, U.S. – 43.89

29. Goiania, Brazil – 43.38

30. Teresina, Brazil – 42.64

31. Vitoria, Brazil – 41.99

32. New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S. – 41.44

33. Kingston, Jamaica – 41.14

34. Gran Barcelona, Venezuela – 40.08

35. Tijuana, Mexico – 39.09

36. Vitoria da Conquista, Brazil – 38.46

37. Recife, Brazil – 38.12

38. Aracaju. Brazil – 37.7

39. Campos dos Goytacazes, Brazil – 36.16

40. Campina Grande, Brazil – 36.04

41. Durban, South Africa – 35.93

42. Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa – 35.85

43. Porto Alegre, Brazil – 34.73

44. Curitiba, Brazil – 34.71

45. Pereira, Colombia – 32.58

46. Victoria, Mexico – 30.50

47. Johannesburg, South Africa – 30.31

48. Macapa, Brazil – 30.25

49. Maracaibo, Venezuela – 28.85

50. Obregon, Mexico – 28.29