NEW DELHI, India (CNN) -- The economic might of India may bring to mind technological savvy and overseas call centers. But to understand the Indian economy, a visit to a roadside dentist like Raj Kishore is more illuminating.
The Indian economy is fueled by independent workers such as Radha Kumar.

The Indian economy is fueled by independent workers such as Radha Kumar.
Click to view previous image
1 of 2
Click to view next image

"I can extract, I can fill up, I can scale, I can make dentures, I can make bridge metal or non-metal." Kishore said as he fitted dentures for a customer.

One thing he can't do is show a license to practice -- like many roadside dentists sitting on sidewalks awaiting customers.

While information technology and outsourcing has earned India the nickname as "the world's back office," the sector employs a fraction of India's population -- only 2 million of India's more than 500 million workers, according to NASSCOM, an IT and business process outsourcing trade organization.

So where do the majority of people work in India? The International Labor Organization and economists say as many as 95 percent of the workforce makes a living in what is known as the informal or unorganized sector.

"Roughly today about 50 percent of the production is from the unorganized sector," says New Delhi-based economics professor Arun Kumar, referring to jobs and services that exist without a storefront, union to represent the workers, or corporate structure.

Although things are changing and the economy has boomed in recent years, Indians are still emerging from poverty. Finding employment can be tough so people have literally created jobs out of sheer necessity, such as roadside dentist Kishore.

Kishore says he learned his trade from a dentist and a dental course but he does not have a degree in dentistry. He and those around him provide a service to customers who couldn't dream of affording a licensed dentist in an office.

That is just one of thousands of jobs that make up India's informal economy.
Don't Miss

* Timely matters for Bombay Stock Exchange

Radha Kumari is a Mehandi artist. She uses henna to make intricate traditional designs on women's hands and feet. It's an old art that is steeped in tradition and is typically worn by brides the day before the wedding ceremony but is also popular during other Indian holidays and with tourists. She learned the trade from her sister at age 10 and started working as a teenager.

"I started doing this work because I was needy. I have no parents; my sister has done everything for me so it was very important for me to work," said Kumari, a mother of two, while she swirled henna on the hand of a customer.

She makes 25 to 50 rupees (50 cents to $1) per hand, she said. She and other henna artists are often "troubled" by city authorities or police who come to kick them off of the sidewalks or ask for bribes -- technically Kumari and others are breaking the law by setting up shop on government property.

City government authorities showed up while CNN was interviewing Kumari, causing the henna artists around her to pack up and run away.

It's a tough life. "If there can be anything better, I would definitely love to do it," she said. "Here there is no certainty. Today I'm allowed to sit here, tomorrow I may not be." But Kumari says it's better than nothing at all.

Experts say the informal economy helped keep India out of recession, since it is not tied to the global markets. While the ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit has help the Indian economy growing, the largely unregulated workforce promises to have negative impacts on the Indian economy as well, as transactions are often in cash and difficult to trace and tax.
advertisement

But the working conditions and low pay leave millions living in poverty.

"Their conditions are very poor because they have no protective gear of any kind, they have no real social security of any kind," said Arun Kumar, an economics professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University. "They face a lot of hardship of all kinds in terms of their existence, where they stay, what do they do, their health conditions, et cetera."

Now begins another chapter in Schuett's 19-year quest for justice.

Standing in front of the television cameras, Jennifer Schuett blinked back tears.

"This is a huge day for me," she later told CNN over the phone. "And I want to see this through the end. The rest will come out during the trial."

Schuett, 27, joined a multi-agency team of investigators in her hometown of Dickinson, Texas, as they announced the arrest earlier in the day of Dennis Earl Bradford, a 40-year-old welder, in Little Rock, Arkansas.

The arrest came after new DNA testing and other evidence made it possible to identify Bradford as the suspect.

Schuett's boyfriend and two police investigators who kept the case alive stood beside her. Fighting tears, she thanked them for their support.

"Throughout this journey, I've had two main goals," she said. "And they were to find the man who kidnapped, sexually assaulted and attempted to murder me 19 years ago so that he could not hurt anyone else. And to use my voice in telling my story to as many people as I possibly could over the years in hopes that I may encourage other victims of violent crimes to stand up and speak out against criminals." Video Watch Schuett explain why she's speaking out »

She continued, "Today, I can say very proudly that I have accomplished both of these goals."

Schuett spoke with CNN two weeks ago about her 1990 ordeal. CNN normally does not identify victims of sexual assaults. But Schuett decided to go public with her story and her name to increase the chances of finding and prosecuting her attacker.

Schuett was in her bed when a man crept in through a window on August 10, 1990. She remembers waking up in a stranger's arms as he carried her across a dark parking lot. She said he told her he was an undercover cop and knew her family.

He drove her through the streets of Dickinson, pulling into an overgrown field where, she said, he sexually assaulted her.

She passed out. When she regained consciousness, she was lying on top of an ant hill with her throat slashed and her voice box torn. She spent about 14 hours in the field before she was found and rushed to the hospital in critical condition.

"Three days after the attack, I started giving a description. The doctors told me I would never be able to talk again, but I proved them all wrong," Schuett said. She believes she got her voice back so she could tell her story.

At the news conference, a driver's license photo of the suspect was shown next to the 1990 sketch based on her description. There was a clear resemblance.

Shauna Dunlap, a spokeswoman for the FBI's Houston office, said Bradford lived in North Little Rock, with his wife and two children -- a boy, 12, and a girl, 15. He also has three adult stepchildren.

Bradford worked as a welder for United Fence in North Little Rock. A company representative said Bradford had been working there for 10 years and was a "good guy" who had mended "his old ways" and "changed his life." He wouldn't go into specifics about what those "old ways" were. Court documents give some indication.

In 1996, Bradford was accused of kidnapping, sexually assaulting and cutting the throat of a female victim. He was initially charged with attempt to commit first-degree murder, but prosecutors amended the charges to rape and kidnapping.

A Garland County Circuit Court jury found him guilty of kidnapping but was not able reach a verdict on the rape charges. Arkansas corrections officials said he entered prison in March 1997, facing a 12-year-sentence, and was paroled in February 2000. Investigators also found Bradford lived slightly more than two miles from Schuett's residence and just a mile and a half from where she was found, according to an affidavit released Tuesday.

"It's truly a rare occasion when we have the opportunity to prosecute a case like this," said Galveston County District Attorney Kurt Sistrunk. His office is charging Bradford with attempted capital murder.

"Jennifer has been a tremendous asset to this investigation from the beginning, an inspiration to all of us, and we are going to be very proud to have Jennifer by our side as we continue with our efforts to seek justice for you in the courtroom," said Sistrunk.

The break in the case came after FBI agent Richard Rennison and Dickinson police Detective Tim Cromie persuaded the FBI's Child Abduction Rapid Deployment (CARD) team to get involved.

"The main reason the CARD team picked this case was because she was alive," Rennison said. "In cases of child abduction, it is rare that the child is recovered alive. Frequently, you recover a body. And most times, you never find them."

In March 2008, the investigators found evidence collected 19 years ago -- the underwear and pajamas Schuett was wearing, as well as a man's underwear and T-shirt, which were found in the field where Schuett was left for dead.

The clothes had been tested in 1990, but the sample wasn't large enough for conclusive results. But newer techniques allow DNA to be isolated from a single human cell.
advertisement

The FBI lab recently informed Rennison that the DNA in the man's underwear matched Bradford's DNA profile. He was entered into the database after the 1997 kidnapping conviction in Arkansas.

Bradford was arrested on Tuesday morning on his way to work. He awaits extradition to Texas.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The health care reform debate reached a new milestone Tuesday as a key congressional committee passed an $829 billion plan projected to extend coverage to an additional 29 million Americans.
"Now's not the time to pat ourselves on the back," President Obama says at the White House on Tuesday.

"Now's not the time to pat ourselves on the back," President Obama says at the White House on Tuesday.
Click to view previous image
1 of 2
Click to view next image

The Senate Finance Committee's bill would subsidize insurance for poorer Americans, establish nonprofit health care cooperatives, and create health insurance exchanges to make it easier for small groups and individuals to purchase coverage.

Among other things, it would cap annual out-of-pocket expenses and prevent insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.

The plan is financed by a combination of reductions in spending for Medicare and other government programs, as well as higher taxes on expensive insurance policies and new fees on the health industry.

The committee passed its long-awaited plan Tuesday with a 14-9 vote. Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, was the lone committee member to cross party lines, breaking with other Republicans to vote for the measure. All the committee's Democrats supported the bill. Video Watch why there was applause after the vote »

The Finance Committee was the last of five congressional panels to consider health care legislation before formal debate begins in the full House and Senate.

President Obama expressed satisfaction, but said more work remains.
Don't Miss

* Industry group: Rates to rise under Senate health plan
* Tort reform could save $54 billion, CBO says
* Agency predicts health care bill will cost $829 billion
* In Depth: Health Care in America

"We are now closer than ever before to passing health reform, but we're not there yet," he told reporters in the White House Rose Garden. "Now's not the time to pat ourselves on the back."

Instead, he said, it is time to "dig in and work even harder to get this done." Video Watch Obama laud action, call for more work »

Obama singled out Snowe "for both the political courage and the seriousness of purpose that she's demonstrated throughout this process."

Democratic leaders in each chamber have now started the politically delicate task of melding together five pieces of legislation -- two in the Senate and three in the House.

Last week, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the Finance Committee's bill would cut the national deficit by roughly $80 billion over the next 10 years while expanding coverage to 94 percent of the country's non-elderly population.

"Ours is a balanced plan," said committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Montana. "Now is the time that will tell whether things are merely said, or whether something is actually done. Now is the time to get this done."

Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, the committee's top Republican, said he wished he "felt better about the substance of the bill," which is "moving on a slippery slope to more and more government control of health care." Video Watch what Grassley had to say about health care reform before the vote »

Snowe indicated she has concerns with several aspects of the bill, but didn't want to see the reform process derailed.

"Is this bill all that I would want? Far from it," she said. "Is it all that it can be? No. But when history calls, history calls. And I happen to think that the consequences of inaction dictate the urgency of Congress [taking] every opportunity to demonstrate its capacity to solve the monumental issues of our time."

On Monday, an insurance industry trade group questioned several of the assumptions underpinning the bill. America's Health Insurance Plans released a report stating that, if enacted, the bill would increase premiums for families by an extra $4,000 by 2019. It said premiums for individuals would rise by an additional $1,500.

The analysis, conducted by the firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, threatens to undermine Obama's assertion that it is possible to expand coverage while slowing the rate of medical inflation.

A Finance Committee spokesman slammed the analysis, calling it "a health insurance company hatchet job, plain and simple." Snowe said it was "surprising" the insurance industry "would issue that kind of condemnation when you are trying to create a constructive approach" potentially worth billions of dollars to private companies.

The committee's plan, initially drafted by Baucus, is the only one under serious consideration that excludes a government-run public health insurance option. Several top Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, have questioned whether it is possible to contain costs without creating a public option to serve as a check on private insurers.

Republicans and some conservative Democrats oppose the government-run insurance option, saying it would drive private insurers from the market and eventually bring a government takeover of the health care system.

Baucus has said the more conservative Senate lacks the votes to pass a public option; Pelosi has repeatedly insisted the more liberal House will pass a bill that includes one.

The Finance Committee plan was partly the result of months of negotiations between Baucus and five other panel members -- three Republicans and two Democrats. The proposal from the "Gang of Six" has been widely viewed as the only one with the potential of attracting any Republican support.

The vote came after the committee spent two weeks debating 130 amendments. Committee members boosted the bill's overall price by more than $50 billion in part by expanding insurance subsidies for individuals and families with lower incomes.

They also voted to exempt senior citizens from higher taxes on medical expenses.

The sweeping bill would be paid for in part by cutting spending on several health care programs -- including Medicare -- by roughly $400 billion. Another $200 billion would be generated by imposing a new tax on high-end health care policies, dubbed "Cadillac" plans by critics.

At the same time, new fees would be imposed on drug and insurance companies, medical device manufacturers and other industries tied to the health care sector.

Individuals would be required to purchase coverage or face a fine of up to $750.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's goal is to emerge with a single bill that can overcome a potential filibuster by winning at least 60 votes in the Senate. He wants to meet Obama's goal of designing a bill that will cost no more than $900 billion over the next decade.

Senate aides expect that effort to take a couple of weeks.

Joining Reid in the decision-making will be Baucus; Sens. Christopher Dodd of Connecticut and Tom Harkin of Iowa; senior Democrats on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee; and Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff.

Other key senators -- including Snowe, one of the Gang of Six -- are also expected to be involved.

Aside from wrestling with the public option, Democratic leaders have to resolve sharp differences over how to pay for a reform plan. Top House Democrats oppose a tax on high-cost policies, which they fear would affect many union members. They have instead proposed a tax surcharge on individuals with annual incomes over $500,000, or families earning more than $1 million.

To get a bill passed, Reid could implement a legislative option known as reconciliation, which would require only 50 votes instead of 60. However, Republicans have promised a "minor revolution," in the words of GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, if Democrats resort to that rarely used tactic.
advertisement

Republican leaders, who have criticized the various Democratic plans for their size and scope, won't be involved in the upcoming negotiations. One senior Republican leadership aide recently quipped that she would be in her office with her feet on her desk during the talks because she wasn't going to be invited to offer suggestions.

If the House and Senate manage to pass health care reform bills, a conference committee would then negotiate a final version requiring approval from both chambers before going to Obama for his signature.

The federal pay czar is trying to force the American International Group to reduce $198 million in bonuses promised to employees of its trading unit, where problems posed a threat to the global financial system last year.
Skip to next paragraph
Related
Times Topics: Kenneth R. Feinberg | American International Group Inc.
Add to Portfolio

* American International Group

Go to your Portfolio »

But the Treasury’s special master for compensation, Kenneth Feinberg, is running into legal hurdles because those bonuses fall outside new rules against bonus payments at companies receiving government assistance. The bonus agreements at issue were struck before last year’s emergency rescues by the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, and thus are not directly covered by the new rules.

The problem is a recurring one. A.I.G. payments early this year to the same employees elicited public outrage, though government officials said then that they had little legal authority to rescind pre-existing contracts.

To strengthen his hand, Mr. Feinberg is threatening to reduce the compensation packages he does control, according to a person close to the talks. That could mean shrinking the pay of other A.I.G. executives — including its new chief, Robert Benmosche — if the firm does not claw back part of the bonuses for the people in its trading unit, known as A.I.G. Financial Products.

At companies that received extraordinary government support, Mr. Feinberg’s task is to monitor and enforce rules governing new pay packages. He can approve or reject cash pay that exceeds $500,000 for top executives.

Mr. Benmosche, hired by A.I.G. late this summer, received a compensation package that includes $3 million initially and about $4 million in stock that he must hold for five years, as well as annual bonuses based on performance.

A.I.G. has a variety of employee bonus programs. The Financial Products group began a two-year retention program in January 2008, before its government rescue, designed to keep skilled employees from leaving and jeopardizing its derivatives portfolio .

After A.I.G. paid $165 million in retention bonuses to that group in March, it promised to try to recover much of the money to quell the uproar that ensued.

But the insurance company has recovered only $19 million of the $45 million it asked the recipients to repay, according to an audit of its compensation program and the government’s oversight.

A company spokeswoman, Christina Pretto, said in a statement that the people who had received that money had “until the end of the year to fulfill their commitments,” and that the company believed those people would honor them.

But the special inspector general for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, Neil M. Barofsky, who conducted the audit, said some of the money appeared to be unrecoverable, because the employees had resigned rather than return the pay.

Other people are still weighing tax issues arising from those bonuses, and some have asked the insurer to dock their paychecks in the future, rather than make a single payment now.

The inspector general’s audit will be the subject of a hearing Wednesday by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The report stated that Mr. Feinberg had “informally advised A.I.G. not to pay the full $198 million,” scheduled for payment next March, but did not reveal how sharply Mr. Feinberg hoped to pare the bonuses.

The amount of the bonuses at A.I.G. is quite small relative to the record amount of government assistance received by the firm over the last year, roughly $182 billion.

The $165 million in bonus pay made last March coincided with the news that A.I.G. had just posted the biggest loss in American history and would need a bigger rescue package. That led to stormy Congressional hearings and tours of the suburbs where some bonus recipients lived.

Company officials argued at the time that only a handful of the employees of financial products bore responsibility for the disastrous derivatives trading, and it was unfair to blame everybody for the harm caused by a few. The company also said it wanted to honor its commitments because skilled people might resign en masse if bonuses were rescinded.

The new audit pointed out that the bonus program for the Financial Products unit was unusual because it included payments to unessential people. It cited a $7,700 bonus for a kitchen assistant, a $7,000 bonus for a mailroom assistant and $700 for a file administrator.

The audit also described the lack of coordination between the Federal Reserve and the Treasury over A.I.G.’s compensation program. It said Fed officials had their own conversations with company officials about compensation last fall, and were further briefed over the winter by compensation specialists at Ernst & Young brought in to help.

But the Fed did not convey any of the information it had gathered to the Treasury until just before the bonuses were scheduled to be paid in March. Then, the Fed sent an e-mail message to the general counsel at the Treasury, the report stated, warning that the looming bonuses had “garnered press and congressional attention” and would “not be easy for Treasury and the Fed to defend.”

That message promised to supply more detail, but nothing followed for about a week.

“Despite the strong language” of the Fed’s messages, the audit found “that the e-mail did not raise any flags in Treasury.”

Stephen Labaton contributed reporting.