Tax Deal Done - but How Can Obama Sign It?

Label:

Jan 2, 2013 6:29pm







ap obama ac 130102 wblog Vacationing Obamas Options to Sign Fiscal Cliff Deal Include Air Force Jet, Autopen

AP Photo/Charles Dharapak


Congress officially delivered the bill to avert the fiscal cliff to the White House this afternoon, House Speaker John Boehner’s office told ABC News.


Now the question is when will the President sign it?


The bill, passed late on New Year’s Day, expires tomorrow at 11:59 a.m. when the current session of Congress concludes. If President Obama doesn’t sign it by then, constitutionally the bill is dead.


But this evening, eighteen hours before the deadline, the President is on a golf course in Hawaii.  And the bill is in Washington at the White House.


Administration officials won’t say what they will do despite repeated inquiries from ABC News.


There seem to be two options:  1) An Air Force jet can deliver the bill to Hawaii (better leave quickly!) in time for the President to sign it before 11:59 Eastern Standard Time; or, 2) The White House can use a presidential “auto-pen.”


The simple mechanical device uses a template of the presidential signature to scrawl it on paper if activated by the White House at Obama’s direction.


But would an auto-pen – usually used to sign insignificant correspondence and photographs – pass constitutional muster?  We don’t know.  The question has never been tested by the courts.


A 2005 legal study commissioned by former President George W. Bush determined that use of the autopen is constitutional but acknowledged the possibility that its use could be challenged.  Bush never used the autopen, officials from his administration told ABC.


President Obama is only believed to have used the autopen once to sign a piece of major legislation — the 2011 extension of the Patriot Act — which reached his desk while he was on a diplomatic trip to Europe. Officials invoked national security concerns to justify the move.


Use of the autopen has been controversial.  Conservative groups alleged last summer that Obama used an autopen to sign condolence letters to the families of Navy SEALs killed in a Chinook crash in Afghanistan — a charge the White House disputed flatly as false.


In 2004, then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was criticized for using an autopen to sign condolence letters to the families of fallen troops.


And in 1992 then-Vice President Dan Quayle even got into some hot water over his use of the autopen on official correspondence during an appearance on “This Week with David Brinkley.” More HERE.


ABC News’ Ann Compton and Devin Dwyer contributed reporting.



SHOWS: World News







Read More..

Helping VA rehabilitate those with multiple wounds of war

Label:

Micaela Cornis-Pop oversees more than 110 rehabilitation facilities around the country, helping the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) stay at the forefront of developments in treating traumatic brain injury and other medical injuries and issues facing injured veterans and military service members.


With the increase in battlefield survival rates of military personnel serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, service members live with more complex casualties, which led the VA to coin the word “polytrauma” to describe multiple injuries to one person, the most prevalent of which is traumatic brain injury, but also can include post-traumatic stress disorder, multiple amputations, burns, auditory and visual impairments and mental health issues.


In 2005, Cornis-Pop helped conceive, develop and implement the VA’s Polytrauma System of Care, an integrated network of facilities that provide specialized programs to help wounded men and women recover, and move from acute care to outpatient rehabilitation and reintegration into the community. She now leads and manages the system, developing policies and procedures and monitoring their implementation.

“We have a direct impact on how health care is delivered and is impacting veterans and service members, and that is tremendously gratifying,” said Cornis-Pop, national program manager of the Polytrauma System of Care at the Veterans Health Administration, Rehabilitation and Prosthetic Services, at the VA.

She also is responsible for providing education opportunities for VA health care providers who treat traumatic brain injuries. And the system works with another 39 VA locations that provide some, but not all elements of comprehensive polytrauma rehabilitation care, to define the care those facilities can provide and help make the decision when to refer patients to another level of care.

In addition, Cornis-Pop was the lead author and editor of a “massive project” to publish a 166-page book that came out in April 2010, which serves as an accredited independent study course on traumatic brain injury for members of VA health care teams around the country, said Joel Scholten, director of Special Projects at the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Program Office (PM&R), which manages the Polytrauma System of Care. Nearly 12,000 clinicians have completed the course between April 2010 and July 2012, using either the book or a Web version of it.

Cornis-Pop “has the innate ability to pull people together and get focused on a task and think creatively, and, most amazingly, develop an end product that is useful and veteran-centric,” Scholten said. “She develops programs and projects that have been sustained because they are clinically relevant. It’s not just policy that is developed and sits there.”

Dr. David Cifu, national director of the PM&R office, not only relies on Cornis-Pop to coordinate the care programs around the country but also to respond to outside requests for information, including from Congress. “She’s the person who makes it all happen,” he said. “She doesn’t care about getting credit. She just gets things done. That’s gold.”

Read More..

Colorado town in the thick of fracking dispute

Label:





Longmont, COLORADO: The US oil and gas industry is condemning a move by one Colorado town to impose its own ban on the practice of hydraulic fracturing.

Voters in Longmont have chosen to outlaw the controversial practice within city limits, but drillers and the state government said the city has overstepped its bounds.

Space for large houses with mountain views -- one of the reasons the population of the Colorado city of Longmont has grown steadily over the past twenty years. But some residents are not happy with a new neighbour that has moved in recent years.

Natural gas wells and pipelines have sprung up around Longmont - often very close to subdivisions.

Michael Bellmont, one of the activists involved in a recent campaign to ban hydraulic fracturing in Longmont, said modern fracking practices use chemicals that can contaminate surrounding air and water, and is dangerous to health.

He said: "if you live within half a mile of these wells, one is 250 per cent more likely to have negative and chronic health impacts, and 60 per cent more likely to get cancer."

The majority of Longmont voters agree with Bellmont -- in November, they approved the ban on hydraulic fracturing in the city by a 60 to 40 per cent margin.

That ban has triggered a row with the oil and gas industry, which already leases land and drills in Longmont, and maintains fracking is safe.

Colorado governor John Hickenlooper -- a supporter of the oil and gas industry -- expects drilling companies to sue to overturn the ban.

Tisha Conoly Schuller, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, said: "The oil and gas industry -- we're evaluating our options, and then the state government has also been looking at their options. So I imagine we will see a lawsuit in Longmont, and there's lots of different ways it could come about."

Environmentalists are locked in a heated debate with county and state regulators over the issue -- including proposed rules on how far wells should be from people's homes.

Dr William Fleckenstein of the Colorado School of Mines said: "It adds a lot of jobs, there's a lot of rigs that are there. But at the same time, the rigs that are drilling -- the pipelines are going to impact people's lives and the industry has to take into account those impacts."

In Longmont, the city is gearing up for a protracted and expensive legal battle -- one which could set a precedent for other towns and cities that want to take matters regarding fracking into their own hands.

-CNA/ac



Read More..

NHAI slams GMR for termination notice for biggest highway project

Label:
NEW DELHI: National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) has hit back at infrastructure major GMR on its termination notice for the country's biggest highway project worth at least Rs 6,000 crore. The Authority in its reply to GMR has said that the company did not give 90-day cure period (to rectify and address the deficiencies), and how it is in violation of the norms laid down in the concession agreement.

NHAI was to respond to the GMR notice to exit from Kishangarh-Udaipur-Ahmedabad project by January 4. GMR has cited NHAI's failure to get environmental clearance for the 555-km highway project and to notify the revised toll rate on this stretch being widened from four to six lanes.

"The notice served on us had several deficiencies, and we have spelt them out clearly. The revised toll notification has been done and environment clearance will be obtained in the next few days," said a senior NHAI official.

Sources said that the toll notification was done after highways minister C P Joshi held a meeting at his residence on Monday evening and the environment and forest ministry (MoEF) has been approached to convene a special meeting of the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) to grant clearance.

The project has huge significance considering it being the country's first mega highway project. In addition, if the contract gets cancelled, NHAI would directly lose revenue of Rs 636 crore annually, which increases 5% every successive year. The Authority's own estimate shows the total revenue during the entire contract period would be at least Rs 9,000 crore at net present value.

Indications abound that in case GMR still decides to opt out of the project, NHAI would forfeit the company's bank guarantee along with other harsh steps. "We don't want this to be a precedent for other concessionaires who would show delay in environment clearance to exit from the project and consequently forcing us to rebid them," said a senior ministry official.

NHAI also seems to use this case to draw MoEF's attention to fast track green clearance, highlighting the laxity on the green ministry's part to grant such nods. NHAI chairman R P Singh wrote to MoEF secretary V Raja Gopalan on December 24, "Any delay on our part in giving environment clearance can be construed as an indirect support to the contention of the concessionaire" while seeking his personal invention to convene a special meeting of the FAC.

According to NHAI, the project got environment clearance in early June, with a rider that stage-1 of forest clearance for the venture is obtained. This requires diversion of 37.62 hectares reserved forest and 40.39 hectares of protected forest that fall in Rajasthan. The state government has processed and sent its proposal in mid-November. Even after some of the queries of MoEF were cleared, the proposal was not placed before the FAC that met on December 21 and 22.

A part of the project also falls in Gujarat, and hence forest diversion is required for 173.39 hectares. NHAI officials said that the Gujarat government has given its nod after the poll code for the assembly election was lifted.

Read More..

Space Pictures This Week: Ice “Broccoli,” Solar Storm

Label:








































































































');

























































































































 $'+ doc.ngstore_price_t +'';
html += ' $'+ doc.ngstore_saleprice_t +'';
} else {
html += ' $'+ doc.ngstore_price_t +'';
}
html += '
';

$("#ecom_43331 ul.ecommerce_all_img").append(html);




o.totItems++;

}// end for loop
} // end if data.response.numFound != 0

if(o.totItems != o.maxItems){
if(o.defaultItems.length > 0){
o.getItemByID(o.defaultItems.shift());
} else if(o.isSearchPage && !o.searchComplete){
o.doSearchPage();
} else if(!o.searchComplete) {
o.byID = false;
o.doSearch();
}
}// end if
}// end parseResults function

o.trim = function(str) {
return str.replace(/^\s\s*/, '').replace(/\s\s*$/, '');
}

o.doSearchPage = function(){
o.byID = false;

var tempSearch = window.location.search;
var searchTerms ="default";
var temp;

if( tempSearch.substr(0,7) == "?search"){
temp = tempSearch.substr(7).split("&");
searchTerms = temp[0];
} else {
temp = tempSearch.split("&");
for(var j=0;j 0){
o.getItemByID(o.defaultItems.shift());
} else if(o.isSearchPage){
o.doSearchPage();
} else {
o.doSearch();
}

}// end init function

}// end ecommerce object

var store_43331 = new ecommerce_43331();





store_43331.init();









































































































































































Read More..

House Plans Up-or-Down Vote on 'Cliff' Deal

Label:












House Republicans have agreed to have an up-or-down vote on the bipartisan Senate deal to avert the "fiscal cliff," rather than trying to amend the Senate bill with more spending cuts before voting, according to a senior GOP leadership aide.


The vote will likely come tonight despite top House Republicans' earlier opposition to the deal, which the Senate passed in the wee hours of New Year's Day, because of concerns about the cost of the deal's spending provisions.


If House Republicans had tweaked the legislation, there would have been no clear path for its return to the Senate before a new Congress is sworn in Thursday.


The Republican-controlled House was expected to launch into procedural steps leading up to a vote, which was possible late this evening.


Before deciding on the up-or-down vote, GOP leaders had emerged from a morning conference meeting disenchanted by the legislative package devised by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Mo., and Vice President Biden early this morning, with several insisting they could not vote on it as it stood.


"I do not support the bill," House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said as he left the meeting. "We're looking for the best path forward. No decisions have been made yet."






Bill Clark/Roll Call/Getty Images













'Fiscal Cliff' Negotiations: Congress Reaches Agreement Watch Video









Fiscal Cliff Countdown: Missing the Deadline Watch Video





House Speaker John Boehner refused to comment on the meeting, but his spokesman said, "the lack of spending cuts in the Senate bill was a universal concern amongst members in today's meeting."


"Conversations with members will continue throughout the afternoon on the path forward," Brendan Buck said in a statement.


As lawmakers wrestled with the legislation, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the bill's added spending combined with the cost of extending tax cuts for those making under $400,000 would actually add $3.9 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. The Joint Committee on Taxation reached a similar conclusion.


The impasse once again raised the specter of sweeping tax hikes on all Americans and deep spending cuts' taking effect later this week.


"This is all about time, and it's about time that we brought this to the floor," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said after emerging from a meeting with Democrats.


"It was a bill that was passed in the U.S. Senate 89-8. Tell me when you've had that on a measure as controversial as this?" she said of the overwhelming vote.


Pelosi could not say, however, whether the measure had the backing of most House Democrats.


"Our members are making their decisions now," she said.


Biden, who brokered the deal with McConnell, joined Democrats for a midday meeting on Capitol Hill seeking to shore up support for the plan.


While Congress technically missed the midnight Dec. 31 deadline to avert the so-called cliff, both sides have expressed eagerness to enact a post-facto fix before Americans go back to work and the stock market opens Wednesday.


"This may take a little while but, honestly, I would argue we should vote on it today," said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., who sits on the Budget Committee. "We know the essential details and I think putting this thing to bed before the markets is important.


"We ought to take this deal right now and we'll live to fight another day, and it is coming very soon on the spending front."






Read More..

White House, Republicans seal deal on fiscal cliff crisis

Label:





WASHINGTON: The White House and top Republicans struck a deal late Monday to avert huge New Year tax hikes and spending cuts known as the "fiscal cliff" that had threatened to send the US economy into recession.

The pact would raise taxes on the richest Americans -- those earning over $450,000 a year -- but exempt everyone else, and will put off $109 billion in budget cuts across the government for two months, top congressional aides said.

Vice President Joe Biden, who negotiated the deal with Republican Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell, was on Capitol Hill to sell it to Democratic senators, a White House source added.

Tax hikes and spending cuts were due to come into force on January 1. But as global markets, sure to be rocked by a failure to head off the fiscal cliff, are closed for New Year's day, lawmakers have time to vote the deal into law.

A Senate vote was expected overnight on Monday while the House of Representatives was expected to follow suit on Tuesday after a display of dramatic New Year's Eve brinkmanship.

The deal would mean a return to Bill Clinton-era tax rates for top earners to 39.6 percent, starting at a threshold of annual household earnings of $450,000 and above.

Obama had originally campaigned for tax hikes to kick in for those making $250,000 and above and his acceptance of a higher threshold has already angered liberals, though still represents a political victory.

The president said it would extend tax credits for clean energy firms and also unemployment insurance for two million people due to expire later Monday.

It was also expected to include an end to a temporary two percent cut to payroll taxes for Social Security retirement savings and Medicare health care programs for seniors and changes to inheritance and investment taxes.

The president angered Republicans in remarks in which he warned -- in what is certain to be a bitter fight over cutting the deficit -- that he was not done with seeking higher taxes for the rich.

"Now, if Republicans think that I will finish the job of deficit reduction through spending cuts alone... then they've another thing coming," Obama said, and also poked fun at the glacial pace of Congressional deliberations.

Republicans immediately took to the floor of the Senate to complain.

Senator John McCain accused Obama of ridiculing Republicans and of needlessly antagonizing House of Representatives' members required to vote for the deal.

Republican Senator Bob Corker said his heart was pounding with disappointment at Obama's remarks.

"I know the president has fun heckling Congress. I think he lost probably numbers of votes with what he did," he said.

"It's unfortunate he doesn't spend as much time solving problems as he does with campaigns and pep rallies."

Signs that a deal could be close cheered investors Friday as US markets rose before closing for the year. The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed up 166.03 points (1.28 percent) at 13,104.14.

Both sides were Monday already gearing up for the next legislative showdown over the need to lift the government's statutory borrowing limit of $16.4 trillion, which was reached Monday.

The Treasury will now take extraordinary measures to keep the government afloat for an undisclosed period of time until the ceiling is raised. Republicans are already demanding spending cuts in return.

"I think there is going to be a pretty big showdown next time when we go to the debt limit," McCain told CNN.

-AFP/ac



Read More..

Global rights bodies slam India for 'weak' rape laws

Label:
NEW DELHI: The Indian government has come under attack from global human rights bodies for its inadequate laws against sexual violence or treatment of survivors.

Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said, "The government needs to act now to prevent sexual assault, aggressively investigate and prosecute perpetrators, and ensure the dignified treatment of survivors."
The US embassy, in a statement, also mourned the death of the victim — ""We are deeply saddened to learn that the victim of a horrific assault in New Delhi Dec 16 has died," an embassy statement said. "As we honour the memory of this brave young woman, we also recommit ourselves to changing attitudes and ending all forms of gender-based violence which plagues every country in the world."

Meanwhile, UNICEF drew attention to the fact that an alarmingly large number of victims of sexual violence in India are children. "It is alarming that too many of these cases are children. One in three of the rape victims is a child. More than 7,200 children , including infants are raped every year. Given the stigma attached to rapes, especially when it comes to children, this most likely is only the tip of the ice berg," said Mr. Louis-Georges Arsenault, UNICEF Representative to India.

Read More..

Space Pictures This Week: Ice “Broccoli,” Solar Storm

Label:








































































































');

























































































































 $'+ doc.ngstore_price_t +'';
html += ' $'+ doc.ngstore_saleprice_t +'';
} else {
html += ' $'+ doc.ngstore_price_t +'';
}
html += '
';

$("#ecom_43331 ul.ecommerce_all_img").append(html);




o.totItems++;

}// end for loop
} // end if data.response.numFound != 0

if(o.totItems != o.maxItems){
if(o.defaultItems.length > 0){
o.getItemByID(o.defaultItems.shift());
} else if(o.isSearchPage && !o.searchComplete){
o.doSearchPage();
} else if(!o.searchComplete) {
o.byID = false;
o.doSearch();
}
}// end if
}// end parseResults function

o.trim = function(str) {
return str.replace(/^\s\s*/, '').replace(/\s\s*$/, '');
}

o.doSearchPage = function(){
o.byID = false;

var tempSearch = window.location.search;
var searchTerms ="default";
var temp;

if( tempSearch.substr(0,7) == "?search"){
temp = tempSearch.substr(7).split("&");
searchTerms = temp[0];
} else {
temp = tempSearch.split("&");
for(var j=0;j 0){
o.getItemByID(o.defaultItems.shift());
} else if(o.isSearchPage){
o.doSearchPage();
} else {
o.doSearch();
}

}// end init function

}// end ecommerce object

var store_43331 = new ecommerce_43331();





store_43331.init();









































































































































































Read More..

What Happens If We Go Over the Fiscal Cliff?

Label:











America is swiftly approaching the fiscal cliff.


President Obama and congressional leaders have talked for weeks with varying degrees of frequency and success at compromising, and one precept resonates throughout the public statements of politicians and economists: the so-called "fiscal cliff" would be a very bad thing.


But what actually happens if Washington takes us over it?


As has been well documented, the "cliff" is not one thing, but a ball of expiring economic provisions that lead to automatic policy changes at year's end, loosely grouped under the catch phrase. They fall into two categories, taxes and spending.


Should we fall off the cliff, the tax code would change most dramatically with the expiration of the so-called "Bush tax cuts," which created new brackets and lowered tax rates for both middle-class and high earners. According to the Tax Policy Center at the Washington, D.C.-based Brookings Institution, the average American taxpayer would see a tax hike of $3,446, ABC's David Muir reported for "World News."


Where do the hikes fall, exactly? For many tax brackets, rates would jump by at least three percentage points. The middle class would see the worst of it, according to analysis from the Congressional Research Service, the nonpartisan research arm that studies policy changes at Congress's request.






Charles Dharapak/AP Photo|Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images







For high earners, married couples making more than $222,300 but less than $397,000, rates would jump from 33 percent to 36 percent. For the highest earners, couples making over $397,000, taxes would rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent.


But they'd rise for almost everyone else, too. Couples making $145,900 - $222,300 would see a rate jump from 28 percent to 31 percent. Couples making $72,300 - $145,900 would see rates jump from 25 percent to 28 percent.


The middle class would take the biggest hit: Married couples earning $60,350 - $72,300 would see tax rates jump from 15 percent to 28 percent. That means that without any credits or deductions, a couple making $65,000 would go from taking home $55,250 to taking home $46,800 next year if Congress and the president fail to strike a deal.


The cliff's tax implications go beyond the simple income-tax rate: The Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) and the estate tax are also on the table with year-end deadlines.


The AMT is a tax that prevents high earners from escaping income-tax liability by claiming too many deductions. Taxpayers over a certain income add back certain deductions to see if they must pay a minimum rate. Ever since Bush's tax cuts, Congress has repeatedly extended an "AMT patch" to maintain the income threshold. According to the Congressional Research Service, if Congress doesn't act again this year, that threshold will drop from $74,450 to $45,000 for married couples and from $48,450 to $33,750 for individuals, exposing more people to the alternative minimum.


The estate tax, demonized by Republicans as the dreaded "death tax," would change significantly. Right now, estates of over $5.12 million are taxed at a maximum of 35 percent. If Congress doesn't act, next year estates of over $1 million will be taxed at 55 percent.


No one likes paying taxes, but the spending side of the cliff isn't supposed to be all that fun, either.






Read More..

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)