Health bill passes 219-212
March 22, 2010

A sweeping bill overhauling the U.S. medical system goes to President Obama's desk on Monday to be signed into law.

The House of Representatives passed the measure late Sunday, delivering a historic victory to Obama, who had made it his No. 1 domestic priority.

The bill passed in a 219-212 vote after more than a year of bitter partisan debate. All 178 Republicans opposed it, along with 34 Democrats.

The measure, which cleared the Senate in December, constitutes the biggest expansion of federal health care guarantees since Medicare and Medicaid were enacted more than four decades ago.

A separate compromise package of changes expanding the reach of the measure also passed the House over unanimous GOP opposition, and is now set to be taken up by the Senate.

The overall $940 billion plan is projected to extend insurance coverage to roughly 32 million additional Americans. It represents a significant step toward the goal of universal coverage sought by every Democratic president since Harry Truman.

Most Americans will now be required to have health insurance or pay a fine. Larger employers will be required to provide coverage or risk financial penalties. Total individual out-of-pocket expenses will be capped and insurers will be barred from denying coverage based on gender or pre-existing conditions.

The compromise package would add to the bill's total cost partly by expanding insurance subsidies for middle- and lower-income families. The measure would scale back the bill's taxes on expensive insurance plans.

Numerous House members insisted they would not vote for the Senate bill without a clear promise that senators would approve the changes.

"This is what change looks like," Obama said shortly after the votes. The passage of health care reform is "not a victory for any one party. ... It's a victory for the American people and it's a victory for common sense."

The president said successful reform proves Americans "are still a people capable of doing big things."

iReport: Share your views on health care reform

The rare Sunday votes occurred after a long weekend of intense negotiations among the White House, House leaders and individual Congress members. Obama traveled to Capitol Hill on Saturday to make a last minute plea to the House Democratic caucus. He spent much of the past week trying to personally persuade dozens of members.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, worked with administration officials to defuse a potential rebellion among socially conservative Democrats concerned that the bill wouldn't do enough to prevent taxpayer-funded abortions.

She also brokered a last-minute deal among several Democrats worried about disparities in Medicare funding for individual states.

Republicans failed to stop the Democratic health care initiative despite using virtually every weapon in their legislative arsenal. GOP leaders have repeatedly warned the plan will lead to a government takeover of America's private employer-based health care system.

They have also argued it will lead to higher premiums and taxes while imposing harsh Medicare cuts and doing little to control spiraling medical costs.

Pelosi and Boehner make final comments

Shortly before the House voted on the bill, Pelosi said health care reform was necessary to end insurance industry abuses and bring greater economic stability to most Americans.

Congress will be "making history, making progress and restoring the American dream" by passing reform, she said.

It's time to "complete the great unfinished business of our society." Health care "is a right and not a privilege."

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, argued that Democratic leaders had betrayed the trust of the public by pushing ahead with a bill that lacks broad public support.

"We have failed to listen to America and we have failed to reflect the will of our constituents," he said. "And when we fail to reflect that will, we fail ourselves and we fail our country."

He also slammed what he characterized as a legislative process marked by a lack of transparency and accountability.

"Look at how this bill was written," he said, his voice steadily rising. "Can you say it was done openly? With transparency and accountability? Without backroom deals? ... Hell no you can't!"

The $875 billion bill now headed to Obama's desk is projected to cut the federal deficit by $118 billion over the next 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

If the compromise plan clears the Senate, the bill's total cost will rise by $65 billion. Projected deficits, however, will be reduced by an additional $25 billion.

Key details of the bill

The plan, according to CBO projections, will cut budget deficits by more than $1 trillion in its second decade.

It will subsidize insurance for a family of four making up to about $88,000 annually, or 400 percent of the federal poverty level.

It also creates a series of health insurance exchanges designed to make it easier for small businesses, the self-employed and the unemployed to pool resources and purchase less expensive coverage.

Medicaid will be significantly expanded, ensuring coverage to those earning up to 133 percent of the poverty level, or just over $29,000 for a family of four.

The bill cuts projected Medicare spending by roughly $500 billion, in part through reductions in the Medicare Advantage program. Democratic leaders have promised the reductions will not affect service to Medicare recipients.

The bill hikes Medicare payroll taxes on families making more than $250,000.

Starting in 2013, it also imposes a 40 percent tax on insurance companies providing "Cadillac" health plans valued at more than $8,500 for individuals and $23,000 for families.

Proponents of the tax on high-end plans say it's one of the most effective ways to curb medical inflation. However, many Democrats oppose taxing such policies because it would hurt union members who traded higher salaries for more generous health benefits.

If the compromise bill becomes law, the threshold for imposing the Cadillac tax will be raised to health plans valued at more than $10,200 for individuals and $27,500 for families.

The tax won't kick in until 2018.

Buy insurance or pay a fine

Under the plan now headed to Obama, individuals are required to purchase health insurance coverage or face a fine of up to $750 or 2 percent of their income -- whichever is greater. It includes a hardship exemption for poorer Americans.

Companies with more than 50 employees that don't provide coverage are required to pay a fee of $750 per worker if any of its employees rely on government subsidies to purchase coverage.

The compromise package would drop the individual fine to $695 or 2.5 percent of income, whichever is greater. The fine on companies failing to provide coverage would jump to $2,000 per employee.

Federally funded abortion coverage for people purchasing insurance through the exchanges will be banned under the bill now passed by Congress. Exceptions will be made in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the life of the woman.

Individuals receiving federal assistance who want abortion coverage will have to purchase the coverage using private funds.

Illegal immigrants will be barred from buying insurance in the health insurance exchanges.

Parents, however, will be entitled to keep their children on their health care plans until age 26.

While passage of the Senate bill is a major win for Democrats on a major party priority, Pelosi had to take a number of steps in recent weeks to assuage House members unhappy with the measure.

A deeply unpopular special exemption for the state of Nebraska from all new Medicaid expenses -- known as the "Cornhusker kickback" -- would be eliminated under the compromise plan. The federal government will instead assist every state by picking up 100 percent of the costs of expanded Medicaid coverage between 2014 and 2016, and 90 percent starting in 2020.

The speaker also tried to sweeten the deal for some progressive members of her caucus partly by adding additional subsidies and a major student loan overhaul measure to the compromise plan.

The measure -- a priority for Obama -- would end the practice of having private banks offer student loans and would expand direct lending from the government.

Closing the "doughnut hole"

In addition, the compromise plan would close the Medicare prescription drug "doughnut hole" by 2020. Under current law, Medicare stops covering drug costs after a plan and beneficiary have spent more than $2,830 on prescription drugs. It starts paying again after an individual's out-of-pocket expenses exceed $4,550.

Senior citizens stuck in the doughnut hole this year would receive a $250 rebate.

Several fiscally conservative Democrats were assuaged by the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the bill's long-term effect on the federal deficit.

A key group of anti-abortion Democrats, meanwhile, was reassured by a last-minute promise of an executive order from Obama stating that the provisions in the health care bill comply with the 32-year-old Hyde Amendment, which sharply restricts federal funding for abortion.

Emotions exploded shortly after the vote, however, as one Republican shouted "baby killer" at Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, a leader of anti-abortion Democrats involved in negotiations over Obama's order.

The speaker also considered trying to help unhappy House Democrats by allowing them to avoid a direct vote on the Senate bill. Numerous Congress members had advocated passing a rule that would have deemed the Senate bill approved once the separate package of changes had passed.

GOP leaders objected furiously to the so-called deem and pass move. House leaders backed away from the idea on Saturday.

Republicans are still fuming over Democrats' decision to use a legislative procedure called reconciliation that will allow the compromise measures to clear the Senate with a simple majority of 51 votes.

Senate Democrats lost their filibuster-proof 60-seat supermajority in January with the election of GOP Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

Republicans say that reconciliation, which is limited to provisions pertaining to the budget, was not meant to pass a sweeping overhaul measure such as the health care bill. Democrats point out that reconciliation was used to pass several major bills in recent years, including George W. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

House Democrats have been continually reassured that the compromise package will be approved by the more conservative Senate.

Pelosi said Friday that "when our members go to vote, they will have all the assurances they need" that the Senate will approve the compromise plan.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, attended the Saturday meeting between Obama and House Democrats. He presented a letter indicating that the Senate would use reconciliation to pass the House's changes.

"We believe that health insurance reform cannot wait and must not be obstructed," the letter said. "We support an up-or-down majority vote and will vote to make these improvements."

The letter was not signed, though Reid told the House members that a majority of the Senate backs reconciliation.

Brown, however, decried the vote and said the nation can't afford the measure.

"Today's vote shows that leaders in Washington continue to ignore the will of the people," he said. "Americans have sent a message to Washington for the past year, including with my election, that they are opposed to this multitrillion-dollar health care bill that will raise taxes, increase premiums, cut Medicare and leave future generations with a mountain of debt."

Posted by jc at 4:58 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

Reforming America's Schools
March 19, 2010

In Houston, a controversial education reform measure allows teachers to be fired based on their students' test scores. Some parents back the policy, but teachers unions have reservations.

Imagine if a computer could identify the weakest-link teachers - the ones who should be told it's time to get out of the classroom.

It's not quite so simple, but a new policy in Houston allows teachers to be fired based on data that some experts say isolates a teacher's effect on his or her students' test-score gains.

Reform advocates say school districts should improve teacher quality in part by using such "value added" data. Dozens of districts, including Houston's, have already incorporated the concept into "pay for performance" systems. Education leaders in New York City and the District of Columbia are moving toward linking it to tenure or dismissals. But none has gone ahead as boldly as the Texas district.

"The worst teachers in a school really drag down achievement," says Eric Hanu�shek, a senior fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution in California. "The biggest tension is: How much do you rely upon objective statistical information from test scores, and how much do you rely on other measures of teacher performance?"

A number of parents backed the Houston decision at a packed February board meeting. But the local teachers union is planning a legal challenge, claiming, among other concerns, that the formula is not public and leaves teachers in the dark about how they're judged.

The district defends it as a tool to help principals ensure that each classroom has an effective teacher. No one has been let go yet under the new policy, but at the end of the school year, the data could be cited as one criterion for not renewing a teacher's contract.

The controversy highlights a broader debate over how to improve teacher evaluations - which are "largely broken," US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said recently before a House committee.

Secretary Duncan presented the blueprint of the No Child Left Behind overhaul to the House education committee Wednesday. The plan includes a number of provisions for improving teacher quality.

For all the potential flaws, linking teacher evaluations to student achievement data is a move in the right direction, says Kate Walsh, president of the National Council on Teacher Quality in Washington. Under the status quo, she says, teachers tend to be fired only if they are abusive or break the law. Studies in a sample of districts across the United States have found that less than 1 percent of teachers earn an unsatisfactory rating on their evaluations. "We do not fire teachers because they aren't good at teaching math [or other subjects]," she says.

Posted by jc at 4:27 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

Healthcare: Obama on Fox & Kucinich flips
March 18, 2010

Rep. Dennis Kucinich said Wednesday that he will continue to work toward a single-payer program, despite his decision to reverse course and support President Obama's health care plan.

"This was a detour," the Ohio Democrat told CNN's "Larry King Live."

"I'll work with the president in getting this bill passed and the president has committed to working with me to seeing further health care reforms after this bill is out of the way."

Kucinich has been a strong proponent of what he calls "Medicare for all," but said he was willing to settle for something short of that -- at least in the short term.

"I'm not a 'my-way-or-the-highway' kind of guy," he said. "This is a first step. By no means is this bill the bill that I wanted. I've been highly critical of it, and I don't take back anything I said."

He predicted that if the plan fails, the ramifications will reverberate for years.

"I doubt that this president or any president in the near future or any Congress in the near future will want to touch anything remotely related to health care."

Kucinich had previously characterized the bill, which cleared the Senate in December, as little more than a boondoggle for private insurers. He was publicly lobbied for his vote by Obama during the president's visit this week to Kucinich's congressional district in Ohio. He told reporters he's had four meetings with Obama to discuss the bill.

Kucinich's decision to change his vote is a good sign, Obama told reporters in the Oval Office. "I told him 'Thank you.' "

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said she thought Kucinich's switch would make a difference with a large number of liberal activists.

"He's been a supporter of health care for all Americans for a long time," she said. "He has a constituency, and many of those people still don't understand why there isn't a public [option]."

Kucinich predicted that the House vote, which could come this weekend, would be close.

The Democrats' plan is expected to extend insurance coverage to more than 30 million Americans. The Senate bill also would reduce federal deficits by about $118 billion over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Top Republicans contend the plan amounts to an ill-conceived government takeover of the country's health care system, an assertion Kucinich disputed, given that it maintains the private insurance system.

Republicans have also said the plan would do little to slow spiraling medical costs. They also argue it would lead to higher premiums and taxes for middle-class families while resulting in deep Medicare cuts.

Public opinion polls indicate a majority of Americans have turned against the administration's health plan, though individual elements of the proposal remain widely popular.

Posted by jc at 4:01 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

Making sense of the Census
March 18, 2010

There are only ten questions on the 2010 U.S. Census but some people are saying they're too impersonal and downright offensive.

If you've received your census form chances are you've read through it and answered the questions.

But some folks are hesitant in answering certain ones specifically when it's about their race.

There are questions ranging from what type of home you have to your telephone number.

But it's question number 9 that asks a person's race that is raising criticism from folks because of the addition of the word negro along with black and African American.

"I was shocked to see the word negro on there in the day and times that we're living in because America is such a multi-cultured country and the word negro really should be taken out," says Rachel Clark.

Some people feel the census could still get the information they need without using this term.
"If they would put African American it would be more appropriate," says James Hart

According to the U.S. Census Bureau the term negro was added in this census based off of what people were using to identify themselves as in the 2000 census.

"Questions aren't just randomly added they go through years of research and there's a culturally diverse group who are stake holders involved that select the questions", says Deborah Muehleisen with the U.S. Census Bureau.

Muehleisen says based on what people select this year the term may be eliminated next census.

Muehleisen tells News First 5 the census provides a snapshot of the U.S. population and once the forms are counted they are destroyed.

Posted by jc at 3:59 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

Toyota Prius case may be hoax
March 17, 2010

At a press conference today, Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc. offered key preliminary findings of technical field examination and testing that were performed on March 10 and 11 regarding an alleged "runaway Prius" event dramatically covered by national news media.Toyota engineers completed an investigation of the 2008 Prius driven by Mr. James Sikes that was the subject of a 911 emergency call on Monday, March 8. The driver reported that the vehicle was traveling at a high rate of speed, the accelerator pedal was stuck, and that the vehicle was out of control and could not be stopped. The emergency operator repeatedly instructed the driver to shift the car into neutral and turn off the power button.

A California Highway Patrol officer intercepted the vehicle and instructed the driver to press firmly on the brakes, apply the emergency brake and turn off the car, at which time the Prius came to a safe stop.

While a final report is not yet complete, there are strong indications that the driver's account of the event is inconsistent with the findings of the preliminary analysis.

Toyota engineers employed data download/analysis, static and dynamic testing as well as thorough inspections of all relative components. In addition, they retraced the reported driving route taking into account driving time and accounts from the 911 recording.

The investigation revealed the following initial findings:

* The accelerator pedal was tested and found to be working normally with no mechanical binding or friction. It should be noted that the Prius is not subject to a recall for sticking accelerator pedals and the Prius component is made by a different supplier than the one recalled.

* The front brakes showed severe wear and damage from overheating. The rear brakes and parking brake were in good condition and functional.

* A Toyota carpeted floor mat of the correct type for the vehicle was installed but not secured to the retention hooks. It was not found to be interfering or even touching the accelerator pedal.

* The pushbutton power switch worked normally and shut the vehicle off when depressed for 3 seconds as the 911 operator advised Mr. Sikes to do.

* The shift lever also worked normally and neutral could be selected. The neutral position is clearly marked and can be easily engaged by moving the lever left to the "N" marking.* There were no diagnostic trouble codes found in the power management computer, nor was the dashboard malfunction indicator light activated. The hybrid self-diagnostic system did show evidence of numerous, rapidly repeated on-and- off applications of both the accelerator and the brake pedals.

* After examination of individual components, the front brakes were replaced and the vehicle was test driven, during which the vehicle was observed to be functioning normally.

* During testing, the brakes were purposely abused by continuous light application in order to overheat them. The vehicle could be safely stopped by means of the brake pedal, even when overheated.

The Prius braking system uses both conventional hydraulic friction brakes and a regenerative braking system which switches the electric drive motors into brakes to generate electricity.

The system features a sophisticated self- protection function which cuts engine power if moderate brake pedal pressure is applied and the accelerator pedal is depressed more than approximately 50 percent, in effect providing a form of "brake override.

"This function, which is intended to protect the system from overload and possible damage, was found to be functioning normally during the preliminary field examination.Toyota engineers believe that it would be extremely difficult for the Prius to be driven at a continuous high speed with more than light brake-pedal pressure, and that the assertion that the vehicle could not be stopped with the brakes is fundamentally inconsistent with basic vehicle design and the investigation observations.

These findings suggest that there should be further examination of Mr. Sikes account of the events of March 8.

NHTSA investigators were present during Toyota's examination, and are conducting their own investigation of the vehicle and its performance. Toyota's examination was also observed by a congressional staff member

Posted by jc at 4:34 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

Health bill: Will it pass without a vote?
March 17, 2010

An obscure parliamentary maneuver favored by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) suddenly ignited Tuesday as the latest tinder in the year-long partisan strife over reshaping the nation's health-care system, triggering debate over the strategy's legitimacy and political wisdom. Republicans condemned Pelosi's idea -- in which House members would make a final decision on broad health-care changes without voting directly on the Senate version of the bill -- as an abuse of the legislative process.

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) called it "the ultimate in Washington power grabs." Pelosi shot back: "I didn't hear any of that ferocity when the Republicans used this, perhaps, hundreds of times."

Off Capitol Hill, parliamentary experts of both parties said the tactic has been used with increasing frequency in recent years by Democrats and Republicans alike, usually earlier in the legislative process. And political analysts wrangled over whether the use of the "self-executing rule," also known as a "deem and pass," would further antagonize an electorate whose enthusiasm for Democrats has dimmed in the past year.

Legal scholars disagreed about whether it would be a constitutional way to pass the legislation. Yet even critics said they doubt that the procedure would put the measure at risk of being struck down by the courts.

"I feel pretty confident it is unconstitutional," said Michael W. McConnell, director of Stanford Law School's Constitutional Law Center and a former appellate judge appointed by President George W. Bush. "What a court would do about it is a murkier problem."

The debate centers on a parliamentary technique that is a variant on the "rule" that the House adopts for every bill that comes to a floor vote. Rules define the ground rules for the vote, including amendments, length of the debate and other terms. Under a self-executing rule, the House essentially agrees that a vote on one measure is tantamount to, or "deemed" as, deciding on something related.

In this instance, the self-executing rule would say that the Senate's version of health-care legislation would be deemed approved if House members adopt a set of changes to that bill. The Senate then would have to approve the changes, but the original bill could go directly to President Obama to be signed into law.

Pelosi has said the process would make it easier to secure the votes needed to push health-care changes across the legislative finish line. At a time when relations within Congress are frayed, it would enable House Democrats not to be on record directly as supporting the Senate measure. House Republicans are unified against the bill.
Although the speaker has embraced the idea, a decision on whether to use a self-executing rule will not be made until the House Rules Committee convenes later this week, probably on Thursday.

Republicans sought to block Democrats' path. Rep. Parker Griffith (R-Ala.), who switched political parties in December, plans to introduce a resolution that would compel the Democrats to conduct a regular vote. Outside the Capitol, hundreds of conservative activists affiliated with the "tea party" movement gathered to protest the health-care legislation. They seized on the parliamentary method, with demonstrators shouting "treason."

At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs sidestepped the question of whether Obama supports the "deeming" approach. The president called on Congress last week to move forward with an "up-or-down vote" to redesign the health-care system. Gibbs told reporters Tuesday: "You're going to know where people are on health-care reform, and where they are on the president's proposal on health-care reform."

Close watchers of the debate were divided about whether the parliamentary strategy would influence public sentiment about the legislation -- or its Democratic supporters.

Robert L. Laszewski, a consultant who follows the politics of health care, predicted that the effect would be negligible, because Americans' views on the subject have solidified. Democrats "are pushing through Obamacare," he said. "You either like it or not. . . . There's not a lot of subtlety. Either people really want this to happen, or they think it's incredible arrogance. I don't think there's anybody in the middle on this."

On the other hand, Stuart Rothenberg, a nonpartisan political analyst, said the current stage of the debate is a rare instance in which the public is focused on the process of legislating. "Voters are aware it's been pulling teeth," he said, adding that some Americans think Congress's Democratic leaders had "to give away the store to get even Democrats to pass it" and, more recently, resorted to a "reconciliation" procedure that requires fewer Senate votes to pass.

"From there, we've leapt to a totally different planet with this deeming," Rothenberg said. "I feel like I've fallen through the rabbit hole: 'Oh, they are going to not pass the bill and just pretend they passed the bill.' "

Parliamentary specialists said there is ample precedent for self-executing rules. Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution said congressional leaders of both parties are using the procedure more frequently, with 36 instances under the last Republican-led House, in 2005-06, and 49 during the immediate past session, when Democrats were in control.

Donald Wolfensberger, a former Republican staff director of the House Rules Committee who now directs the Congress Project at the Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, said this use of such a rule would be unusual, though not unprecedented, because it would send part of what the House would be voting on -- the bill already approved by the Senate -- directly to the president.

Wolfensberger said self-executing rules often have been employed at an earlier stage, rather than for final passage of a bill. He said he knows of four instances when a measure that was deemed to have been passed went directly to the White House. The first, in 1933 during the Great Depression, involved Senate amendments to legislation pertaining to the United States' creditworthiness. The tactic was employed twice in the 1990s, by Democrats on a bill involving the Family Medical Leave Act, and by Republicans on a measure involving a line-item veto. Most recently, it was used a few weeks ago, when the House voted on both an increase in the debt ceiling and a pay-as-you-go budget provision.

Stanford's McConnell said that such a procedure would be unconstitutional in this case because, in passing both the Senate legislation and the changes in the reconciliation package in a single stroke, "no one bill will then have been passed by both the House and the Senate" because the Senate still would have to approve the changes added by the House.

Charles Tiefer, a University of Baltimore law professor who is a former Democratic House counsel and has written extensively about House procedure, disagreed, saying: "This is so familiar a House procedure. . . . I don't know anything in the Constitution that prevents the House from holding one vote for two bills. . . . Why would it make a difference?"

Posted by jc at 4:33 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

Mexico drug killings out of control
March 16, 2010

Three people connected to the U.S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, were killed in two drive-by shootings, a senior White House official told CNN Sunday.

Two of the victims were an American employee at the consulate and her U.S. citizen husband. Their 1-year-old child, who was in a vehicle with the couple at the time of the shooting, survived the incident, according to the El Paso County Sheriff's Office.

The American couple were found dead inside a white Toyota RAV4 with Texas license plates, according to the Chihuahua state attorney general's office.

The woman was shot in the neck and left arm, while the man had a bullet wound near his right eye, officials said.

"We know that the U.S. citizens were targeted," Juarez Mayor Jose Reyes Ferriz told CNN, saying a police officer witnessed a car shooting at the Americans' car. "We know they were chasing them. We know they wanted to kill them."

The Americans were identified as Arthur Redelfs, 34, and Lesley Enriquez by the El Paso County Sheriff's Office, where Redelfs worked as a detention officer.

Redelfs was a 10-year veteran of the department, according to Jesse Tovar, a spokesman for the sheriff's office.

"On behalf of the men and women of the Sheriff's Office, I would like to extend our deepest sympathy and condolences to the family during this difficult time," said Sheriff Richard Wiles. "Our thoughts and prayers are with them."

Authorities retrieved only one shell casing, from a 9 mm weapon. About 10 minutes before authorities received the call, they were alerted to a body inside a 2003 Honda Pilot. Inside was the husband of the Mexican employee, identified as Jorge Alberto Salcido Ceniceros, 37. Reyes said the victim was a state police officer who was married to a Mexican employee at the U.S. consulate.

Two children, 4 and 7, were injured in that shooting and transported to the hospital, the attorney general's office said.

Police recovered two shells at that scene from an assault rifle, authorities said.

"The president is deeply saddened and outraged by the news of the brutal murders of three people associated with the United States Consulate General in Ciudad Juarez," National Security Council Spokesman Mike Hammer said in the statement Sunday. "He extends his condolences to the families and condemns these attacks on consular and diplomatic personnel serving at our foreign missions. In concert with Mexican authorities, we will work tirelessly to bring their killers to justice."

In response, the U.S. State Department authorized the temporary relocation of employees' families working in border-area consulates.

"These appalling assaults on members of our own State Department family are, sadly, part of a growing tragedy besetting many communities in Mexico," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a statement Sunday night. "They underscore the imperative of our continued commitment to work closely with the Government of (Mexican) President (Felipe) Calder�n to cripple the influence of trafficking organizations at work in Mexico."

The families of employees at U.S. consulates in Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juarez, Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey and Matamoros, are allowed to leave for a period of 30 days "in response to an increase in violence along the Mexican side of its border with the U.S.," State Department spokesman Fred Lash told CNN.

After 30 days, the authorization can be renewed, depending on a review, Lash said, adding that this was not a mandatory evacuation.

The announcement was part of a warning to American citizens regarding travel to Mexico.

The warning urges U.S. citizens to delay nonessential travel to parts of the states of Durango, Coahuila and Chihuahua, where Juarez is located, because of recent violent attacks. U.S. government employees are restricted from traveling to all or parts of these three states.

The attacks include the kidnapping and killing of two resident U.S. citizens in Chihuahua, the warning states.

"Some recent confrontations between Mexican authorities and drug cartel members have resembled small-unit combat, with cartels employing automatic weapons and grenades," the warning says. "During some of these incidents, U.S. citizens have been trapped and temporarily prevented from leaving the area."

The mayor said the shootings highlight a problem shared by both countries along their border.

"It is not just a Mexican problem -- it's is a U.S.-Mexico problem," Reyes said. "I'm very glad that the U.S. has taken that position."

He said he supported the State Department's authorization to consular families and that "it is important they feel safe."

Mexico on Sunday said that its government was committed to protecting all people, citizens and visitors alike, diplomats or not.

"The Mexican government deeply laments the killings of three people linked to the U.S. Consulate in Ciudad Juarez," Mexico's foreign ministry said in a statement. "The Mexican authorities are working with determination to clear up the facts surrounding the crime scene and put those responsible before the law."

Juarez is one of the front lines in Mexico's war against the drug cartels that operate in its territory. More than 2,600 people were killed in Juarez in 2009.

Juarez, across from El Paso, Texas, has become a focal point of Mexican President Felipe Calderon's anti-drug efforts after the January 31 killings of 15 people, most of whom were students with no ties to organized crime. The incident sparked outrage across Mexico.

In the western state of Guerrero, at least 25 people were killed in a series of violent acts on Saturday, state officials said.

The bodies of 14 people, including nine civilians and five police officers, were found in various parts of the resort city of Acapulco, the official Notimex news agency reported, citing Guerrero Public Security Secretary Juan Heriberto Salinas.

In the small city of Ajuchitlan del Progreso, 10 civilians and one soldier were killed in two shootouts that started when federal officials tried to carry out search warrants on two locations, Salinas said.

Police in the state were on a heightened security alert, he said.

The government has not released official figures, but national media say 7,600 Mexicans lost their lives in the war on drugs in 2009. Calderon said last year that 6,500 Mexicans died in drug violence in 2008.

Posted by jc at 4:57 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

The new face of terrorism
March 15, 2010

A Colorado woman was detained in Ireland in connection with an alleged plot to assassinate a Swedish cartoonist whose sketch offended many Muslims, a U.S. official said Saturday.

Jamie Paulin-Ramirez, 31, was among seven people arrested in Ireland this week as authorities investigate an alleged plot to kill cartoonist Lars Vilks over a 2007 sketch depicting the head of the Prophet Muhammad on a dog's body. Three people have since been released, and it was unclear whether Paulin-Ramirez was among those still in custody.

The U.S. official was not authorized to discuss the investigation and spoke on condition of anonymity.

After the arrests, U.S. authorities unsealed terror charges against Colleen LaRose, 46, of Pennsylvania. She allegedly went by the name "Jihad Jane" to recruit others online to kill the cartoonist.

Paulin-Ramirez's mother, Christina Mott of Leadville, Colo., told The Associated Press that she learned of her daughter's arrest in the case from the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies.

Denver FBI officials said Friday they couldn't confirm that the FBI had contacted Mott about the case. Dean Boyd, a Justice Department spokesman, said the agency was aware of the arrests in Ireland but had no comment on the identities of those taken into custody. "Our investigation continues," he said.

Mott said Paulin-Ramirez told her family after she left in September that she went to Ireland with her 6-year-old son and married an Algerian whom she met online. Before abruptly leaving Colorado, Paulin-Ramirez had been a straight-A nursing student, her mother said.

Earlier this week, Irish authorities announced the arrest of seven Muslims in the alleged plot, only identifying them as three Algerians, a Libyan, a Palestinian, a Croatian and an American woman married to one of the Algerians. They were arrested Tuesday, hours before U.S. authorities unveiled a terror indictment against LaRose.

On Saturday, Irish police said that three of those arrested had been released without charges, while three other men and an American woman remain in custody. Irish police refused to confirm whether Paulin-Ramirez is the woman in custody, and have declined to release the identities of any of those arrested.

The Wall Street Journal, quoting anonymous sources familiar with the case, first reported on its Web site that Paulin-Ramirez was being held in the alleged plot.

Christine Mott said she's concerned for the welfare of her grandson, who has been placed in the custody of Ireland's foster care system. "This is about my baby," she said. "We need some help to get this baby back. I'm concerned about my daughter but I'm concerned about our baby boy because he shouldn't be caught in the middle of this."

The Motts said Paulin-Ramirez announced to her family last spring that she was converting to Islam and began wearing headscarves, and later a hijab.

"It came out of left field," Christine Mott said. "I knew she was talking to these people online... What caused her to turn her back on her country, on her family and become this person? I don't know how or why. All I know is she was in contact with this Jihad Jane.

"The only thing I could think of is that they brainwashed her."

Irish police say LaRose visited Ireland in September and spent about two weeks with the Algerian-American couple and other suspects. Investigators believe she began communicating last year with the Irish-based suspects in member-only Internet chat rooms.

Her stepfather, George Mott, said the FBI seized a desktop computer in late September but did not tell the family what they found.

Christine Mott said her daughter was getting 4.0 grades as she studied to become a nurse practitioner and was working a $30,000 job at Eagle Valley Medical Clinic in nearby Edwards.

The Motts said Paulin-Ramirez began to withdraw and argue with her parents about her religion in the months after announcing her conversion.

Posted by jc at 10:35 PM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

High school says no to gay prom date
March 15, 2010

As most people have already heard, a Mississippi school has canceled its Senior Prom in response to a lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf Constance McMillen, a young girl who was barred from attending the school dance because her choice of date is also female. The chain of events are pretty simple.

Back in December Constance inquired about the possibility of bringing her girlfriend to the upcoming event and was told it was against school policy. According to her the rule is meant to prevent non-coupled students from purchasing tickets at a discount price; guest tickets are only $10.

As a compromise she offered to arrive separately from her date who would meet her inside but was told that her choice of attire, a tuxedo, might be disruptive to the other students and if anyone complained of their dancing, they would be told to leave. After explaining to her principal that the policy was discriminatory against homosexual students and still being refused, she took her complaint to the ACLU and the Mississippi Safe Schools Coalition.

Here is where things get awesome.

In the memo announcing the dissolution of this years Prom the Itawamaba County school board expressed its "hope that private citizens will organize an event for the juniors and seniors." In response to this heartfelt wish, American Humanist Association members Todd and Diana Stiefel have made a $20,000 grant available in order to throw the Itawamba Agricultural High School their own, privately funded Senior Prom, open to all who wish to attend. As a fan of debate, this sort of tactical rebuttal is a thing of beauty. You want to enact a discriminatory policy against your students, then wash your hands of the whole thing? You want to leave it up to the invisible hand of the free-market to provide your students with a the most important dance of their young lives? That's fine. We do precisely that, tuxedo lesbians and all.

This is precisely the sort of activity Humanism should be involved in and it is wonderful to see it in action. What remains to be seen how open to this the Itawamba community is to the proposal but I suspect those students will have one hell of a kick-ass senior prom. Constance may have been told by a few students that she has "ruined highschool" but with any luck she'll be the Beau of the Ball.

Posted by jc at 4:59 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print

Last push for health bill
March 15, 2010

Democratic leaders scrambled Sunday to pull together enough support in the House for a make-or-break decision on health-care reform later this week, expressing optimism that a package will soon be signed into law by President Obama despite a lack of firm votes for passage.

The rosy predictions of success, combined with the difficult realities of mustering votes, underscore the gamble that the White House and congressional Democrats are poised to make in an attempt to push Obama's health-care plans across the finish line. The urgency of the effort illustrates growing agreement among Democratic leaders that passing the legislation is key to limiting damage to the party during this year's perilous midterm elections.

But House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) pledged to do "everything we can to make it difficult for them, if not impossible, to pass the bill." He also joined other Republicans Sunday in warning that Democrats would pay for the legislation by losing even more seats than expected in November.

The most optimistic talk on Sunday came from the White House. Obama senior adviser David Axelrod predicted that Democrats "will have the votes to pass this," and press secretary Robert Gibbs declared that "this is the climactic week for health-care reform."

But Rep. James E. Clyburn (S.C.), the Democrats' chief head-counter in the House, cautioned that the party has not yet found the 216 votes needed to win approval of the health-care bill passed by the Senate in December.

"We don't have them as of this morning, but we've been working this thing all weekend," Clyburn said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I'm also very confident that we'll get this done."
Democratic leaders are struggling to assemble support amid opposition to the Senate legislation from conservative Democrats, who object to abortion-related language in the bill, and from liberals, who are disappointed about the lack of a public insurance option and other measures. Obama has postponed a trip to Indonesia and Australia to help whip up support for the package.

Republicans pressed ahead Sunday with a battery of arguments against the Democratic plans, saying that polls show firm public opposition to the legislation and that Senate leaders are using parliamentary gimmicks in an attempt to win final passage. Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who has signaled a willingness to work with the administration on immigration and detention issues, said Obama's "arrogant" push for health-care reform has divided the country and threatens bipartisan cooperation.

"When it comes to health care, he's been tone-deaf, he's been arrogant and they're pushing a legislative proposal and a way to that legislative proposal that's going to destroy the ability of this country to work together for a very long time," Graham said on ABC's "This Week."

The Democrats' strategy calls for the House to pass the Senate version of reform, followed by consideration of a package of fixes to that legislation known as a reconciliation bill. The fixes must meet specific budget requirements allowing it to be approved in the Senate with a simple majority vote. The approach avoids having to muster 60 votes to overcome a threatened GOP filibuster; Democrats control 59 seats.

House Democrats expect to receive a final cost estimate by Monday afternoon, when the House Budget Committee is scheduled to vote on the reconciliation package. It would then go to the House Rules Committee, where Chairman Louise M. Slaughter (D-N.Y.) could package it with the $875 billion measure the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. The package is also expected to include Obama's proposed overhaul of the student-loan system.

The full House is expected to vote on both measures by week's end, with the climactic moment coming as soon as Thursday but, more likely, Friday or Saturday, aides said.

Posted by jc at 4:58 AM - Link to this entry  |  Share this entry  |  Print