Monday, November 30, 2009; Posted: 04:11 PM
by BWW NEWS DESK
The Broadway community will be included with participating venues across the city to commemorate World AIDS Day, December 1, 2009. The marquees of Broadway theaters in New York will be dimmed on Tuesday, December 1st, at exactly 8:00pm for one minute.
In addition to Broadway theaters, participating venues across the city include the Brooklyn Bridge, Lincoln Center, Madison Square Garden, the Chrysler Building, Radio City Music Hall, the Beacon Theatre and the Washington Square Park Memorial Arch.
A roster of notable guests, including United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and actress and UNAIDS Goodwill Ambassador Naomi Watts, will kick off the global Light for Rights campaign in New York City on World AIDS Day-Tuesday, December 1, 2009-as lights on numerous landmarks all over the city will be turned off to remember those lost to AIDS and turned back on to emphasize human rights for those living with HIV/AIDS around the world.
The global initiative, organized by UNAIDS (the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS); amfAR, The Foundation for AIDS Research; Broadway Cares/Equity Fights AIDS; and the World AIDS Campaign, will showcase the importance of fundamental human rights as citizens and organizations around the world fight AIDS.
The New York anchor event will begin at 6:00 p.m. in Washington Square Park in Greenwich Village, where the Secretary-General and Naomi Watts will be joined by Kenneth Cole, chairman, Kenneth Cole Productions and chairman of the board, amfAR; New York City Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn; and 13-year-old Honduran AIDS activist Keren Dunaway-Gonzalez, who is living with HIV.
During the event, at 6:15 p.m., the lights on the Washington Square Park Memorial Arch will be turned off and then re-illuminated as the speakers talk about the importance of human rights when confronting the AIDS pandemic.
--http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Monday, November 30, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Bloomberg Spent $102 Million to Win 3rd Term
By MICHAEL BARBARO
Published: November 27, 2009
To eke out an election victory over the city’s low-key comptroller, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg spent $102 million of his own fortune — or about $174 per vote — according to data released Friday, making his bid for a third term the most expensive campaign in the city’s history.
Mr. Bloomberg, the wealthiest man in New York City, shattered his own records: He poured $85 million into his campaign in 2005 (or $112 per vote) and $74 million into his first bid for office in 2001 ($99 per vote).
And the $102 million tab is likely to rise, because the mayor has not yet doled out postelection bonuses to campaign workers, which have routinely exceeded $100,000 a person in years past. That spending will not be reported until after his inauguration in January.
Mr. Bloomberg has now spent at least $261 million of his own money in the pursuit of public office, more than anyone else in the United States.
Government watchdog groups criticized the nine-digit price tag for his re-election, saying it undermined a widely admired campaign finance system that Mr. Bloomberg helped install in the city. Mr. Bloomberg did not participate in the system, which rewards candidates who raise small donations with large matching money from taxpayers.
The downside for the billionaire mayor: It caps spending at $6 million in the general election.
“He has done long-term damage to the system,” said Gene Russianoff staff attorney at the New York Public Interest Research Group.
Throughout the campaign, the mayor’s aides sought to project an air of inevitability, but data released on Friday revealed just how anxious they had become in the final weeks.
From Oct. 20 to Nov. 26, his campaign burned through $18.6 million, much of it on last-minute television and radio advertising.
As the mayor’s consultants and pollsters realized that a large bloc of undecided voters either favored Mr. Thompson or planned to stay home on Election Day, the campaign scrambled.
A few hours before the polls closed on Nov. 3, the campaign issued a flurry of recorded telephone calls to registered voters, in which Mr. Bloomberg requested that New Yorkers head to the polls and pull the lever for him.
At the start of the race, Mr. Bloomberg’s aides promised to run a political operation that mirrored the austere times. But that promise quickly evaporated.
The mayor’s campaign, which leased a 35,000-square-foot headquarters in Midtown Manhattan and paid a disc jockey $300 to perform as volunteers called voters, was widely expected to crush his Democratic opponent, William C. Thompson Jr., the city’s chief financial officer.
Mr. Thompson, who participated in the campaign finance system, was outspent by 14 to 1, and he struggled to attract experienced staff members and raise money.
His press releases misspelled his own name; his aides groused about their jobs on Facebook; and his media team was so short on cash that it resorted to running 15-second blink-and-you-miss-it TV commercials.
But Mr. Bloomberg’s unpopular drive to overturn the city’s term limits law, his lavish campaign and a sputtering economy soured thousands of New Yorkers on him, even though most admired his record in office.
On Election Day, their frustration erupted into public view: Mr. Bloomberg won by fewer than 5 percentage points, at a cost of about $20 million for each point.
Turnout was unusually low — 585,000 New Yorkers cast votes for him, compared with 753,089 in 2005 and 744,757 in 2001, records show.
“He didn’t seem to get very much for his money,” Mr. Russianoff said.
Howard Wolfson, a spokesman for the mayor’s campaign, said that a harsh political environment helped oust incumbents in Westchester County and New Jersey.
“The reason this anti-incumbent wave stopped at the Hudson’s edge,” Mr. Wolfson said, “is because the mayor ran an effective campaign based on eight years of success.
--nytimes
Published: November 27, 2009
To eke out an election victory over the city’s low-key comptroller, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg spent $102 million of his own fortune — or about $174 per vote — according to data released Friday, making his bid for a third term the most expensive campaign in the city’s history.
Mr. Bloomberg, the wealthiest man in New York City, shattered his own records: He poured $85 million into his campaign in 2005 (or $112 per vote) and $74 million into his first bid for office in 2001 ($99 per vote).
And the $102 million tab is likely to rise, because the mayor has not yet doled out postelection bonuses to campaign workers, which have routinely exceeded $100,000 a person in years past. That spending will not be reported until after his inauguration in January.
Mr. Bloomberg has now spent at least $261 million of his own money in the pursuit of public office, more than anyone else in the United States.
Government watchdog groups criticized the nine-digit price tag for his re-election, saying it undermined a widely admired campaign finance system that Mr. Bloomberg helped install in the city. Mr. Bloomberg did not participate in the system, which rewards candidates who raise small donations with large matching money from taxpayers.
The downside for the billionaire mayor: It caps spending at $6 million in the general election.
“He has done long-term damage to the system,” said Gene Russianoff staff attorney at the New York Public Interest Research Group.
Throughout the campaign, the mayor’s aides sought to project an air of inevitability, but data released on Friday revealed just how anxious they had become in the final weeks.
From Oct. 20 to Nov. 26, his campaign burned through $18.6 million, much of it on last-minute television and radio advertising.
As the mayor’s consultants and pollsters realized that a large bloc of undecided voters either favored Mr. Thompson or planned to stay home on Election Day, the campaign scrambled.
A few hours before the polls closed on Nov. 3, the campaign issued a flurry of recorded telephone calls to registered voters, in which Mr. Bloomberg requested that New Yorkers head to the polls and pull the lever for him.
At the start of the race, Mr. Bloomberg’s aides promised to run a political operation that mirrored the austere times. But that promise quickly evaporated.
The mayor’s campaign, which leased a 35,000-square-foot headquarters in Midtown Manhattan and paid a disc jockey $300 to perform as volunteers called voters, was widely expected to crush his Democratic opponent, William C. Thompson Jr., the city’s chief financial officer.
Mr. Thompson, who participated in the campaign finance system, was outspent by 14 to 1, and he struggled to attract experienced staff members and raise money.
His press releases misspelled his own name; his aides groused about their jobs on Facebook; and his media team was so short on cash that it resorted to running 15-second blink-and-you-miss-it TV commercials.
But Mr. Bloomberg’s unpopular drive to overturn the city’s term limits law, his lavish campaign and a sputtering economy soured thousands of New Yorkers on him, even though most admired his record in office.
On Election Day, their frustration erupted into public view: Mr. Bloomberg won by fewer than 5 percentage points, at a cost of about $20 million for each point.
Turnout was unusually low — 585,000 New Yorkers cast votes for him, compared with 753,089 in 2005 and 744,757 in 2001, records show.
“He didn’t seem to get very much for his money,” Mr. Russianoff said.
Howard Wolfson, a spokesman for the mayor’s campaign, said that a harsh political environment helped oust incumbents in Westchester County and New Jersey.
“The reason this anti-incumbent wave stopped at the Hudson’s edge,” Mr. Wolfson said, “is because the mayor ran an effective campaign based on eight years of success.
--nytimes
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
NY Gov. asks lawmakers to let him cut deficit
By MICHAEL GORMLEY (AP) 11-24-2009
ALBANY, N.Y. — New York Gov. David Paterson wants the Legislature to grant him emergency, one-time power to close a $3.2 billion deficit in the face of inaction by lawmakers.
In an Internet address Tuesday, he asked lawmakers to give him the power to make spending cuts and take other actions to provide enough cash for the state to pay its December bills.
It's unclear whether the special power would be granted by lawmakers who have so far balked at Paterson's proposed cuts. There was no immediate comment from the Senate and Assembly majorities
State Sen. Ruben Diaz, a Bronx Democrat, says he won't vote for Paterson's cuts or his proposed bill. Diaz says Paterson is trying to act like a "macho man" for New York voters.
The state has faced a $3.2 billion deficit for months
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
ALBANY, N.Y. — New York Gov. David Paterson wants the Legislature to grant him emergency, one-time power to close a $3.2 billion deficit in the face of inaction by lawmakers.
In an Internet address Tuesday, he asked lawmakers to give him the power to make spending cuts and take other actions to provide enough cash for the state to pay its December bills.
It's unclear whether the special power would be granted by lawmakers who have so far balked at Paterson's proposed cuts. There was no immediate comment from the Senate and Assembly majorities
State Sen. Ruben Diaz, a Bronx Democrat, says he won't vote for Paterson's cuts or his proposed bill. Diaz says Paterson is trying to act like a "macho man" for New York voters.
The state has faced a $3.2 billion deficit for months
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Sunday, November 22, 2009
NYC mayor, government try different ways to trim workers
Fri Nov 20, 2009 6:10pm EST
By Joan Gralla
NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York City and the state both want to cut expenses by trimming public employees but so far they are using different strategies.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg is encouraging agencies to prune workers by giving them credit for saving money on health care and pension benefits, although those costs come out of the city's overall spending plan, Doug Turetsky, a spokesman for the Independent Budget Office, said by telephone on Friday.
In contrast, Governor David Paterson is trying to entice workers to quit in exchange for $20,000 severance payments.
Both the city and state must close multibillion dollar deficits over the next few years as they face fallout from problems on Wall Street.
Paterson, a Democrat, on Thursday extended the state's severance program until January 20 because agencies had only let 1,089 people opt in by the time it ended on November 11.
About 137,000 workers are eligible for the buyouts, but agencies have a compelling reason to find other ways to cut the $500 million the governor has demanded.
"Positions that are targeted for severances may not be refilled for at least five years in order to ensure that savings are achieved," a budget spokesman said by email.
Paterson on Friday warned the state might have to lay off workers due to a December cash crunch.
A spokesman for Bloomberg, who previously tried to push agencies to prune workers by offering incentives, was not available to comment on one of his new ways of slicing $1.75 billion over two years.
As with any big employer, health and pension costs make up a large portion of city workers' compensation.
When Bloomberg won his first term in 2001, the city had about 316,000 full- and part-time workers, said Turetsky, whose agency is a fiscal monitor. The mayor had trimmed the city payroll but it bounced back up to almost 318,000 positions as of March 2009, he said.
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
By Joan Gralla
NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York City and the state both want to cut expenses by trimming public employees but so far they are using different strategies.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg is encouraging agencies to prune workers by giving them credit for saving money on health care and pension benefits, although those costs come out of the city's overall spending plan, Doug Turetsky, a spokesman for the Independent Budget Office, said by telephone on Friday.
In contrast, Governor David Paterson is trying to entice workers to quit in exchange for $20,000 severance payments.
Both the city and state must close multibillion dollar deficits over the next few years as they face fallout from problems on Wall Street.
Paterson, a Democrat, on Thursday extended the state's severance program until January 20 because agencies had only let 1,089 people opt in by the time it ended on November 11.
About 137,000 workers are eligible for the buyouts, but agencies have a compelling reason to find other ways to cut the $500 million the governor has demanded.
"Positions that are targeted for severances may not be refilled for at least five years in order to ensure that savings are achieved," a budget spokesman said by email.
Paterson on Friday warned the state might have to lay off workers due to a December cash crunch.
A spokesman for Bloomberg, who previously tried to push agencies to prune workers by offering incentives, was not available to comment on one of his new ways of slicing $1.75 billion over two years.
As with any big employer, health and pension costs make up a large portion of city workers' compensation.
When Bloomberg won his first term in 2001, the city had about 316,000 full- and part-time workers, said Turetsky, whose agency is a fiscal monitor. The mayor had trimmed the city payroll but it bounced back up to almost 318,000 positions as of March 2009, he said.
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
'Critical moment' for Afghanistan
Afghanistan is at a "critical moment" as Hamid Karzai prepares to be sworn in for a second term, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said.
Speaking in Kabul, Mrs Clinton said there was a "window of opportunity" for President Karzai to demonstrate he was going to improve Afghans' lives.
Mr Karzai was declared the winner after an election tainted by allegations of widespread fraud.
He has come under growing pressure from Western officials to tackle corruption.
Mrs Clinton arrived in Kabul amid heavy security ahead of Thursday's inauguration ceremony.
Western officials are hoping that Mr Karzai will use his inauguration speech to make commitments to reform.
"We stand at a critical moment on the eve of the inauguration of President Karzai's second term," Mrs Clinton told staff at the US embassy.
Western leaders are backing the Afghan leader. They know they have little choice - and need to work closely with the Afghan government otherwise the situation will only get worse.
But with a faltering mission in Afghanistan - and their troops dying in the field - those leaders are getting tough. They want President Karzai to tackle rampant corruption within his government - something he has promised to do.
And all of this comes as President Obama deliberates on whether to send more troops to the country where the security situation is worsening.
There are concerns within his administration that more troops may make little difference unless the Afghan government increases its authority across the country.
Corruption a political obstacle
"There is now a clear window of opportunity for President Karzai and his government to make a compact with the people of Afghanistan to demonstrate clearly that they're going to have accountability and tangible results that will improve the lives of the people," she said.
"We want to be a strong partner with the government and the people of Afghanistan - and I always say both. Because it's not either or, it has to be both."
The BBC's Kim Ghattas reports from Kabul that for Washington Mrs Clinton's presence there is a qualified endorsement of Mr Karzai.
Both US President Barack Obama and Mrs Clinton have made very public statements about the need to fight corruption, and Mrs Clinton has also warned civilian aid will not continue to flow to Afghanistan unless the issue is addressed.
She was expected to make those points when she had dinner with Mr Karzai on Wednesday evening, our correspondent says.
The Obama administration is currently debating sending more troops to Afghanistan, with Mr Obama saying he is "very close" to a decision.
Mr Karzai was declared president after a second round run-off was called off when his sole remaining challenger pulled out, saying the vote could not be free and fair.
Widespread fraud in the 20 August first round led to Mr Karzai being stripped of the outright win he appeared to have secured.
Meanwhile, a survey from British aid agency Oxfam has said poverty and unemployment are overwhelmingly seen as the main reasons behind conflict in Afghanistan.
Government weakness and corruption were the next most commonly cited reasons, ahead of Taliban violence. -BBC NEWS
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Speaking in Kabul, Mrs Clinton said there was a "window of opportunity" for President Karzai to demonstrate he was going to improve Afghans' lives.
Mr Karzai was declared the winner after an election tainted by allegations of widespread fraud.
He has come under growing pressure from Western officials to tackle corruption.
Mrs Clinton arrived in Kabul amid heavy security ahead of Thursday's inauguration ceremony.
Western officials are hoping that Mr Karzai will use his inauguration speech to make commitments to reform.
"We stand at a critical moment on the eve of the inauguration of President Karzai's second term," Mrs Clinton told staff at the US embassy.
Western leaders are backing the Afghan leader. They know they have little choice - and need to work closely with the Afghan government otherwise the situation will only get worse.
But with a faltering mission in Afghanistan - and their troops dying in the field - those leaders are getting tough. They want President Karzai to tackle rampant corruption within his government - something he has promised to do.
And all of this comes as President Obama deliberates on whether to send more troops to the country where the security situation is worsening.
There are concerns within his administration that more troops may make little difference unless the Afghan government increases its authority across the country.
Corruption a political obstacle
"There is now a clear window of opportunity for President Karzai and his government to make a compact with the people of Afghanistan to demonstrate clearly that they're going to have accountability and tangible results that will improve the lives of the people," she said.
"We want to be a strong partner with the government and the people of Afghanistan - and I always say both. Because it's not either or, it has to be both."
The BBC's Kim Ghattas reports from Kabul that for Washington Mrs Clinton's presence there is a qualified endorsement of Mr Karzai.
Both US President Barack Obama and Mrs Clinton have made very public statements about the need to fight corruption, and Mrs Clinton has also warned civilian aid will not continue to flow to Afghanistan unless the issue is addressed.
She was expected to make those points when she had dinner with Mr Karzai on Wednesday evening, our correspondent says.
The Obama administration is currently debating sending more troops to Afghanistan, with Mr Obama saying he is "very close" to a decision.
Mr Karzai was declared president after a second round run-off was called off when his sole remaining challenger pulled out, saying the vote could not be free and fair.
Widespread fraud in the 20 August first round led to Mr Karzai being stripped of the outright win he appeared to have secured.
Meanwhile, a survey from British aid agency Oxfam has said poverty and unemployment are overwhelmingly seen as the main reasons behind conflict in Afghanistan.
Government weakness and corruption were the next most commonly cited reasons, ahead of Taliban violence. -BBC NEWS
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Obama: Gunman in Fort Hood rampage to pay for crimes
Tue Nov 10, 2009 7:24pm EST
By Ross Colvin
FORT HOOD, Texas (Reuters) - President Barack Obama vowed on Tuesday to make sure the gunman who killed 13 people in a rampage at a U.S. Army base in Texas pays for his crimes.
Leading a memorial service for victims of an attack blamed on a Muslim Army psychiatrist, Obama reminded Americans they were enduring "trying times" while fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but said there was no justification for what he called an "incomprehensible" tragedy.
"No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts. No just and loving God looks upon them with favor," Obama told a crowd of 15,000, many of them soldiers in camouflage, on a parade ground outside Fort Hood's headquarters.
"And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice -- in this world, and the next."
The shootings marked the latest blow to a U.S. military under strain from its combat duties as Obama weighs sending thousands more troops to the increasingly unpopular war in Afghanistan even as he winds down America's role in Iraq.
The somber ceremony came amid questions about whether authorities missed warning signs about the alleged gunman, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who spent years counseling severely wounded soldiers and was soon to be deployed to Afghanistan.
Relatives have said Hasan, who is of Palestinian descent, wanted to leave the Army to avoid being sent to Afghanistan and was harassed by fellow soldiers because of his religion. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have stoked anti-U.S. sentiment among many Muslims worldwide.
Intelligence agencies learned Hasan had contacts with an Islamist sympathetic to al Qaeda and relayed that information to authorities before he allegedly went on the shooting spree, officials said on Monday.
No action was taken against Hasan by federal authorities, who determined the information gave no hint he was planning an attack or was taking orders from Anwar al-Awlaki, a fiery, anti-American cleric based in Yemen.
OBAMA PAYS TRIBUTE
Five days after the attack, the president and first lady Michelle Obama flew to Texas, where he honored the victims in public and met privately with their families and some of the 30 people wounded in the shootings.
"We are a nation of laws whose commitment to justice is so enduring that we would treat a gunman and give him due process, just as surely as we will see that he pays for his crimes," Obama said.
Obama invoked the September 11 attacks of 2001 as he tried to rally the spirits of the troops.
"These are trying times for our country. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, the same extremists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans continue to endanger America, our allies and innocent Afghans and Pakistanis," he said.
"As we face these challenges, the stories of those at Fort Hood reaffirm the core values that we are fighting for." Continued...
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
By Ross Colvin
FORT HOOD, Texas (Reuters) - President Barack Obama vowed on Tuesday to make sure the gunman who killed 13 people in a rampage at a U.S. Army base in Texas pays for his crimes.
Leading a memorial service for victims of an attack blamed on a Muslim Army psychiatrist, Obama reminded Americans they were enduring "trying times" while fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but said there was no justification for what he called an "incomprehensible" tragedy.
"No faith justifies these murderous and craven acts. No just and loving God looks upon them with favor," Obama told a crowd of 15,000, many of them soldiers in camouflage, on a parade ground outside Fort Hood's headquarters.
"And for what he has done, we know that the killer will be met with justice -- in this world, and the next."
The shootings marked the latest blow to a U.S. military under strain from its combat duties as Obama weighs sending thousands more troops to the increasingly unpopular war in Afghanistan even as he winds down America's role in Iraq.
The somber ceremony came amid questions about whether authorities missed warning signs about the alleged gunman, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who spent years counseling severely wounded soldiers and was soon to be deployed to Afghanistan.
Relatives have said Hasan, who is of Palestinian descent, wanted to leave the Army to avoid being sent to Afghanistan and was harassed by fellow soldiers because of his religion. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have stoked anti-U.S. sentiment among many Muslims worldwide.
Intelligence agencies learned Hasan had contacts with an Islamist sympathetic to al Qaeda and relayed that information to authorities before he allegedly went on the shooting spree, officials said on Monday.
No action was taken against Hasan by federal authorities, who determined the information gave no hint he was planning an attack or was taking orders from Anwar al-Awlaki, a fiery, anti-American cleric based in Yemen.
OBAMA PAYS TRIBUTE
Five days after the attack, the president and first lady Michelle Obama flew to Texas, where he honored the victims in public and met privately with their families and some of the 30 people wounded in the shootings.
"We are a nation of laws whose commitment to justice is so enduring that we would treat a gunman and give him due process, just as surely as we will see that he pays for his crimes," Obama said.
Obama invoked the September 11 attacks of 2001 as he tried to rally the spirits of the troops.
"These are trying times for our country. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, the same extremists who killed nearly 3,000 Americans continue to endanger America, our allies and innocent Afghans and Pakistanis," he said.
"As we face these challenges, the stories of those at Fort Hood reaffirm the core values that we are fighting for." Continued...
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Saturday, November 07, 2009
House Passes Sweeping Healthcare Overhaul
November 8, 2009
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives approved a sweeping healthcare reform bill on Saturday, backing the biggest health policy changes in four decades and handing President Barack Obama a crucial victory.
On a narrow 220-215 vote, including the support of one Republican, the House endorsed a bill that would expand coverage to nearly all Americans and bar insurance practices such as refusing to cover people with pre-existing conditions.
Most Republicans criticized its $1 trillion price tag, new taxes on the wealthy and what they said was excessive government interference in the private health sector.
Democrats cheered and hugged when the 218th vote was recorded, and again when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pounded the gavel and announced the results.
The battle over Obama's top domestic priority now moves to the Senate, where work on its own version has stalled for weeks as Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid searches for an approach that can win the 60 votes he needs.
Any differences between the Senate and House bills ultimately will have to be reconciled, and a final bill passed again by both before going to Obama for his signature.
"Thanks to the hard work of the House, we are just two steps away from achieving health insurance reform in America. Now the United States Senate must follow suit and pass its version of the legislation," Obama said in a statement after the vote.
"I am absolutely confident it will, and I look forward to signing comprehensive health insurance reform into law by the end of the year," he said.
The overhaul would spark the biggest changes in the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system, which accounts for one sixth of the U.S. economy, since the creation of the Medicare government health program for the elderly in 1965.
ABORTION DEAL
The vote followed days of heavy lobbying of undecided Democrats by Obama, his top aides and House leaders. The narrow victory was clinched early on Saturday by a deal designed to mollify about 40 Democratic opponents of abortion rights.
Democrats had a cushion of 40 of their 258 House members they could lose and still pass the bill. In the end, 39 Democrats sided with Republicans against it.
The lone Republican to vote in favor of it was first-term Representative Anh Cao of Louisiana. "It was a bipartisan vote," Democratic leader Steny Hoyer said to laughter among fellow Democrats afterward.
The landmark vote was a huge step for Obama, who has staked much of his political capital on the healthcare battle. A loss in the House would have ended the fight, impaired the rest of his legislative agenda and left Democrats vulnerable to big losses in next year's congressional elections.
Obama traveled to Capitol Hill on Saturday morning to meet with House Democrats and emphasize the vital need for the healthcare reform bill.
Republicans and Democrats battled in sometimes testy debate through the day and into the night on Saturday over the bill, which would require individuals to have insurance and all but the smallest employers to offer health coverage to workers.
It would set up exchanges where people could choose to purchase private plans or a government-run insurance option bitterly opposed by the insurance industry, and it would offer subsidies to help low-income Americans buy insurance.
Congressional budget analysts say the bill would extend coverage to 36 million uninsured people living in the United States, covering about 96 percent of the population, and would reduce the budget deficit by about $100 billion over 10 years.
"We can't afford this bill," said Republican Representative Roy Blunt. "It's a 2,000-page road map to a government takeover of healthcare."
REPUBLICAN PLAN REJECTED
Democrats rejected on a 258-176 vote the much smaller Republican healthcare plan, which focused on cost controls and curbing medical malpractice lawsuits but did not include many of the insurance reforms of the Democratic plan.
The House also approved on a 240-194 vote an amendment that would impose tighter restrictions on using federal funds to pay for abortions.
House Democratic leaders agreed to allow a vote on the amendment to mollify about 40 moderate House Democrats who threatened to oppose the overhaul without changes to ensure federal subsidies in the bill for insurance purchases were not used on abortion.
The move enraged Democratic abortions rights supporters, but they largely voted in favor of the bill in hopes they can remove the language later in the legislative process.
(Editing by Arshad Mohammed and Todd Eastham)
--http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives approved a sweeping healthcare reform bill on Saturday, backing the biggest health policy changes in four decades and handing President Barack Obama a crucial victory.
On a narrow 220-215 vote, including the support of one Republican, the House endorsed a bill that would expand coverage to nearly all Americans and bar insurance practices such as refusing to cover people with pre-existing conditions.
Most Republicans criticized its $1 trillion price tag, new taxes on the wealthy and what they said was excessive government interference in the private health sector.
Democrats cheered and hugged when the 218th vote was recorded, and again when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pounded the gavel and announced the results.
The battle over Obama's top domestic priority now moves to the Senate, where work on its own version has stalled for weeks as Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid searches for an approach that can win the 60 votes he needs.
Any differences between the Senate and House bills ultimately will have to be reconciled, and a final bill passed again by both before going to Obama for his signature.
"Thanks to the hard work of the House, we are just two steps away from achieving health insurance reform in America. Now the United States Senate must follow suit and pass its version of the legislation," Obama said in a statement after the vote.
"I am absolutely confident it will, and I look forward to signing comprehensive health insurance reform into law by the end of the year," he said.
The overhaul would spark the biggest changes in the $2.5 trillion U.S. healthcare system, which accounts for one sixth of the U.S. economy, since the creation of the Medicare government health program for the elderly in 1965.
ABORTION DEAL
The vote followed days of heavy lobbying of undecided Democrats by Obama, his top aides and House leaders. The narrow victory was clinched early on Saturday by a deal designed to mollify about 40 Democratic opponents of abortion rights.
Democrats had a cushion of 40 of their 258 House members they could lose and still pass the bill. In the end, 39 Democrats sided with Republicans against it.
The lone Republican to vote in favor of it was first-term Representative Anh Cao of Louisiana. "It was a bipartisan vote," Democratic leader Steny Hoyer said to laughter among fellow Democrats afterward.
The landmark vote was a huge step for Obama, who has staked much of his political capital on the healthcare battle. A loss in the House would have ended the fight, impaired the rest of his legislative agenda and left Democrats vulnerable to big losses in next year's congressional elections.
Obama traveled to Capitol Hill on Saturday morning to meet with House Democrats and emphasize the vital need for the healthcare reform bill.
Republicans and Democrats battled in sometimes testy debate through the day and into the night on Saturday over the bill, which would require individuals to have insurance and all but the smallest employers to offer health coverage to workers.
It would set up exchanges where people could choose to purchase private plans or a government-run insurance option bitterly opposed by the insurance industry, and it would offer subsidies to help low-income Americans buy insurance.
Congressional budget analysts say the bill would extend coverage to 36 million uninsured people living in the United States, covering about 96 percent of the population, and would reduce the budget deficit by about $100 billion over 10 years.
"We can't afford this bill," said Republican Representative Roy Blunt. "It's a 2,000-page road map to a government takeover of healthcare."
REPUBLICAN PLAN REJECTED
Democrats rejected on a 258-176 vote the much smaller Republican healthcare plan, which focused on cost controls and curbing medical malpractice lawsuits but did not include many of the insurance reforms of the Democratic plan.
The House also approved on a 240-194 vote an amendment that would impose tighter restrictions on using federal funds to pay for abortions.
House Democratic leaders agreed to allow a vote on the amendment to mollify about 40 moderate House Democrats who threatened to oppose the overhaul without changes to ensure federal subsidies in the bill for insurance purchases were not used on abortion.
The move enraged Democratic abortions rights supporters, but they largely voted in favor of the bill in hopes they can remove the language later in the legislative process.
(Editing by Arshad Mohammed and Todd Eastham)
--http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Kerik pleads guilty to giving false info to Bush officials
November 5, 2009 12:43 p.m. EST
White Plains, New York (CNN) -- Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik has pleaded guilty to giving false information to Bush administration officials who vetted his unsuccessful 2004 nomination to be homeland security secretary.
Kerik, 54, also indicated that he would admit to tax violations as part of a plea agreement in exchange for a recommended sentence of less than three years in prison.
Kerik had been scheduled to go to trial next week on a variety of corruption charges, including allegations that he received and concealed benefits of about $255,000 in renovations to his Riverdale, New York, apartment from a company seeking to do business with the city of New York.
In December 2008, prosecutors charged him with making several false statements to White House officials and other federal officials when he applied for positions in the Bush administration, including his nomination to be secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
In 2006, he pleaded guilty to accepting tens of thousands of dollars in gifts while he worked as city corrections commissioner, but under his plea agreement he paid $221,000 in fines and avoided jail time.
His admission dogged the 2008 presidential campaign of his longtime patron, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who admitted his endorsement of Kerik had been "a mistake."
--http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
White Plains, New York (CNN) -- Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik has pleaded guilty to giving false information to Bush administration officials who vetted his unsuccessful 2004 nomination to be homeland security secretary.
Kerik, 54, also indicated that he would admit to tax violations as part of a plea agreement in exchange for a recommended sentence of less than three years in prison.
Kerik had been scheduled to go to trial next week on a variety of corruption charges, including allegations that he received and concealed benefits of about $255,000 in renovations to his Riverdale, New York, apartment from a company seeking to do business with the city of New York.
In December 2008, prosecutors charged him with making several false statements to White House officials and other federal officials when he applied for positions in the Bush administration, including his nomination to be secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
In 2006, he pleaded guilty to accepting tens of thousands of dollars in gifts while he worked as city corrections commissioner, but under his plea agreement he paid $221,000 in fines and avoided jail time.
His admission dogged the 2008 presidential campaign of his longtime patron, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who admitted his endorsement of Kerik had been "a mistake."
--http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Bloomberg elected to a third term
By CLEMENTE LISI
Posted: 9:43 PM, November 3, 2009
Call him Mike "Three Times" Bloomberg.
Mayor Bloomberg, who engineered a change in the city's term limits law so he could run again, won a squeaker last night when he was narrowly re-elected to a third term as he defeated while vastly outspending Comptroller Bill Thompson.
With 99 percent of the precincts reporting, Bloomberg had a 51 to 46 percent edge -- a much smaller gap than the double-digit win polls had projected on the eve of the election.
Before Election Day, various polls had Bloomberg winning by as little as 12 points to as many as 16.
With his victory, Bloomberg ensures himself a place in New York political lore by becoming the first mayor to win a third term since Ed Koch in 1985.
The victory also marks the fifth consecutive mayoral election where a Democrat has not won office after Rudy Giuliani, a Republican, won two straight terms, and Bloomberg matched that feat four years ago.
The City Council rolled back term limits last year, which allowed Bloomberg to run again.
The 67-year-old billionaire mayor, an independent who ran on the Republican and Independence lines, blanketed the city and airwaves with ads, spending more than $100 million of his own money to bankroll his campaign.
The amount represents the most expensive self-financed campaign in American history. Bloomberg spent $85 million to win re-election against Fernando Ferrer in 2005.
Bloomberg is described by Forbes magazine as the richest man in New York with a $16 billion fortune.
"This is the hardest and best run campaign I've ever seen," said Koch, who endorsed Bloomberg.
Eight years after he came out of nowhere following the Sept. 11 attacks to defeat Mark Green, Bloomberg won after he repeatedly touted his record that features the lowest crime levels in decades and the highest school test scores in a generation.
"He is building on the record of Rudy Giuliani," said Ed Cox, chairman of the state Republican Party.
New Yorkers who voted against Bloomberg overwhelmingly mentioned his changed position on term limits and exorbitant spending.
"I didn't like the idea that King Mike thinks he can buy anything he wants, including my vote," said Democrat Kevin Anterline, 56, who voted for Thompson.
Marjorie Shea, a retired high school teacher, said the spending was "overkill" -- but voted for Bloomberg anyway, saying his wealth and businessman's mind makes him an independent thinker.
"The team he has in place is doing very well. And he's not beholden to anyone," said Shea, a Democrat who voted on Manhattan's Upper West side.
Helen Newman, 32, voted for Green Party candidate Billy Talen, but said she wasn't bothered by the mayor's deep pockets.
"I didn't really see anyone show up who had a chance against him," said Newman. "But then I guess no one showed up who had a chance against him because he has so much money." nypost.com/
Posted: 9:43 PM, November 3, 2009
Call him Mike "Three Times" Bloomberg.
Mayor Bloomberg, who engineered a change in the city's term limits law so he could run again, won a squeaker last night when he was narrowly re-elected to a third term as he defeated while vastly outspending Comptroller Bill Thompson.
With 99 percent of the precincts reporting, Bloomberg had a 51 to 46 percent edge -- a much smaller gap than the double-digit win polls had projected on the eve of the election.
Before Election Day, various polls had Bloomberg winning by as little as 12 points to as many as 16.
With his victory, Bloomberg ensures himself a place in New York political lore by becoming the first mayor to win a third term since Ed Koch in 1985.
The victory also marks the fifth consecutive mayoral election where a Democrat has not won office after Rudy Giuliani, a Republican, won two straight terms, and Bloomberg matched that feat four years ago.
The City Council rolled back term limits last year, which allowed Bloomberg to run again.
The 67-year-old billionaire mayor, an independent who ran on the Republican and Independence lines, blanketed the city and airwaves with ads, spending more than $100 million of his own money to bankroll his campaign.
The amount represents the most expensive self-financed campaign in American history. Bloomberg spent $85 million to win re-election against Fernando Ferrer in 2005.
Bloomberg is described by Forbes magazine as the richest man in New York with a $16 billion fortune.
"This is the hardest and best run campaign I've ever seen," said Koch, who endorsed Bloomberg.
Eight years after he came out of nowhere following the Sept. 11 attacks to defeat Mark Green, Bloomberg won after he repeatedly touted his record that features the lowest crime levels in decades and the highest school test scores in a generation.
"He is building on the record of Rudy Giuliani," said Ed Cox, chairman of the state Republican Party.
New Yorkers who voted against Bloomberg overwhelmingly mentioned his changed position on term limits and exorbitant spending.
"I didn't like the idea that King Mike thinks he can buy anything he wants, including my vote," said Democrat Kevin Anterline, 56, who voted for Thompson.
Marjorie Shea, a retired high school teacher, said the spending was "overkill" -- but voted for Bloomberg anyway, saying his wealth and businessman's mind makes him an independent thinker.
"The team he has in place is doing very well. And he's not beholden to anyone," said Shea, a Democrat who voted on Manhattan's Upper West side.
Helen Newman, 32, voted for Green Party candidate Billy Talen, but said she wasn't bothered by the mayor's deep pockets.
"I didn't really see anyone show up who had a chance against him," said Newman. "But then I guess no one showed up who had a chance against him because he has so much money." nypost.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)