This Weekend’s Unanswered Questions (070205)

Another installment in a nearly-regular series of mysteries and pseudo-mysteries (usually 3-4) this inquiring mind would like to have answers for (some links included may require free registration):

QUESTION 1: Why Is This Even Being Considered?

But it is:

China’s CNOOC Ltd. on Friday said it asked a top-level U.S. government panel to review its proposed merger with oil and gas producer Unocal Corp. (UCL)in an effort to advance its politically charged $18.5 billion bid.

CNOOC, whose largest shareholder is the Chinese government (actually 70%-Ed.), has said from the outset of its offer that it wanted a review. The interagency committee, known as CFIUS, considers proposed acquisitions of U.S. corporations by foreigners where national security might be a concern.

The vast majority of Americans have always opposed nationalization of companies. So if we don’t want OUR government to run a large percentage of our oil industry, why would we even think of letting a mostly hostile foreign government do it?

Update: Biz Weak (link requires paid subscription) tries to finesse it: It’s okay if we get the Chinese to not subsidize their prices, to sell US oil on US soil, limit job losses, and allow American firms to acquire Chinese ones. (Hmmm–What’s the least-clean word I allow myself to type on this blog?) Horsecrap–Entities controlled by foreign governments shouldn’t be eligible to buy private-sector companies, period. If these kinds of deals are allowed, our national sovreignty is so over.

QUESTION 2: Why hasn’t this government data vulnerability garnered the attention given to private-sector breaches?

The IRS has been shown to be vulnerable, and it would appear that they really don’t have any idea of either the extent of the problem or the amount of data leakage that may already have occurred:

The Internal Revenue Service is investigating whether unauthorized people gained access to sensitive taxpayer and bank account information but has not yet exposed any privacy breaches, an official said on Friday.

The U.S. tax agency — whose databases include suspicious activity reports from banks about possible terrorist or criminal transactions — launched the probe after the Government Accountability Office said in April that the IRS “routinely permitted excessive access” to the computer files.

The GAO team was able to tap into the data without authorization, and gleaned information such as bank account holders’ names, social security numbers, transaction values, and any suspected terrorist activity. It said the data was at serious risk of disclosure, modification or destruction.

“There is no evidence that anyone who was not authorized accessed the data outside the GAO,” said Sheri James, a spokeswoman for the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), which is working with the IRS to address the concerns of the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress.

I get the impression that they don’t really know if any breaches have occurred, and that they may never find out. Tax Prof Blog concurrently wonders if this isn’t the mother of all security breaches.

Meanwhile, Tax Prof Blog also reports that the IRS, in its infinite wisdom, has renewed a 5-year, $20 million contract with ChoicePoint (the link takes you back to Bizzy’s second day on the blog) to provide data processing services to the agency.

Zheesh.

QUESTION 3: How many other people are doing this?

I just decided yesterday to cancel my combination print-online subscription to The Wall Street Journal and replace it with the online version only, saving $136 in the next year. I have found myself reading the dead-tree version less and less. I already get e-mails about the editorials and other key articles. There’s a link to a complete index of the past 30 days’ print-edition articles right there on the Online Journal’s home page. I doubt that I will miss anything I would have picked up by paging through the print edition. I’m wondering why I didn’t do this sooner.

QUESTION 4: Will Anybody Miss Bill Donaldson at the SEC?

Two things are certain: Professor Bainbridge won’t. And neither will The Wall Street Journal. Update: Should have known–Biz Weak (link requires paid subscription) will.