• What is the standard of proof the government must meet to forfeit a person's property?
  • Who has the burden of prove innocence or mistake—the government or the property owner?
  • What percentage of forfeiture funds are retained by law enforcement?
In case it's not immediately clear, the best states would be ones that require the highest standards of proof of criminal behavior (beyond reasonable doubt) for seizure, states that require the government prove the property was involved in crimes rather than the citizen having to prove innocence, and states where law enforcement retains less (or none) of the forfeited funds, thereby avoiding economic incentives to abuse the system.
As the map below shows, very few states can proudly declare that they've put their citizenry first in the creation of their asset forfeiture laws (click the map for a larger picture):
Click for larger mapFreedomWorks
Note that the top grade goes to New Mexico, which recently passed massive reforms to its civil asset forfeiture rules. They are the only full "A" grade on the map. FreedomWorks' full report explaining each state's grade notes:
The Legislature recently passed reforms and they were signed into law by Governor Martinez. The state now requires a criminal conviction before property can be forfeited and all forfeiture funds now go directly to the state's general fund. Additionally, state and local law enforcement are prohibited from sending seized property to the federal government for "equitable sharing," where they would receive up to 80% of the proceeds.
The only other state on the top of grade chart is North Carolina, which earned an A-. They don't get full credit because the state puts the burden of proof on the property owner to prove his or her innocence. After that, the grades start going downhill very quickly. Only a handful of states (and the District of Columbia) get B's, and the rest are all C's or lower.
FreedomWorks also grades the federal asset forfeiture system and gives it a dreadful D-, something people should keep in mind whenever they think the Department of Justice can fix whatever ails our local law enforcement agencies. The standard of proof for federal asset seizure is low, the property owner bears all the burden of proving innocence, and the feds can keep it all. The "Equitable Sharing Program" allows state and municipal law enforcement agencies to "partner" with federal agencies for busts, allowing (even encouraging) local agencies to bypass whatever restrictions states put into place to cash in on this D- system and keep 80 percent of what they seize. New Mexico's new regulations forbid the law enforcement agencies in the state from participating in this system. California is now poised to possibly do the same. Michigan is working on a package of reforms that don't go nearly as far.
An important note on these grades: The state grades do not take into account whether law enforcement agencies bypass the state laws and use the Department of Justice's program. The Institute for Justice, the legal activists who also help fight for forfeiture reform, had their own set of grades they produced back in 2010. North Carolina, for example, got a lower grade (a C+) because law enforcement agencies would get millions in proceeds from asset forfeiture from the federal government, even though the state itself does not let police keep what they seize.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/06/09/this-map-details-whether-asset-forfeitur

This I guess should not surprise anyone either...

Gas and food surge sends May prices on a tear

U.S. producer prices in May recorded their biggest increase in more than 2-1/2 years as the cost of gasoline and food rose, suggesting that an oil-driven downward drift in prices was nearing an end.
The Labor Department said on Friday its producer price index for final demand increased 0.5 percent last month, the largest gain since September 2012. That followed a 0.4 percent decline in April.
In the year to May, the PPI fell 1.1 percent, marking the fourth straight 12-month decrease. Prices dropped 1.3 percent in the 12 months through April, the biggest fall since 2010.
Economists had forecast the PPI rising 0.4 percent last month and falling 1.1 percent from a year ago.
A sharp decline in crude oil prices since last year and a strong dollar have weighed on producer prices. While rising oil prices are easing some of the downward pressure on inflation, the upward trend in producer prices will be gradual because of the dollar's strength.
The greenback has gained about 13.2 percent against the currencies of the United States' main trading partners since June 2014.
The stabilization in producer prices should support views that the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates this year.
Last month, gasoline prices surged 17 percent, the largest increase since August 2009. Food prices rose 0.8 percent in May, the biggest gain in just over a year, snapping five straight months of declines.
Higher food prices were driven by a shortage of eggs after an outbreak of bird flu led to the culling of millions of chickens. Wholesale egg prices soared a record 56.4 percent last month.
While the spillover from producer prices to consumer prices has weakened, higher gasoline and food prices are likely to feed into the May consumer price index. May consumer price data will be published next week.
The volatile trade services component, which mostly reflects profit margins at retailers and wholesalers, increased 0.6 percent in May after falling 0.8 percent in the prior month.
May's rise likely reflects improving profit margins at services station, which had been pressured by falling gasoline prices.
A key measure of underlying producer price pressures that excludes food, energy and trade services dipped 0.1 percent last month after ticking up 0.1 percent in April. The so-called core PPI was up 0.6 percent in the 12 months through May.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102754716