Thursday, February 28, 2013

FOXNews.com: Obama urges court to overturn gay marriage ban

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Obama urges court to overturn gay marriage ban
Mar 1st 2013, 05:00

In a historic argument for gay rights, President Barack Obama on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to overturn California's same-sex marriage ban and turn a skeptical eye on similar prohibitions across the country.

The Obama administration's friend-of-the-court brief marked the first time a U.S. president has urged the high court to expand the right of gays and lesbians to wed. The filing unequivocally calls on the justices to strike down California's Proposition 8 ballot measure, although it stops short of the soaring rhetoric on marriage equality Obama expressed in his inaugural address in January.

California is one of eight states that give gay couples all the benefits of marriage through civil unions or domestic partnership, but don't allow them to wed. The brief argues that in granting same-sex couples those rights, California has already acknowledged that gay relationships bear the same hallmarks as straight ones.

"They establish homes and lives together, support each other financially, share the joys and burdens of raising children, and provide care through illness and comfort at the moment of death," the administration wrote.

The brief marks the president's most expansive view of gay marriage and signals that he is moving away from his previous assertion that states should determine their own marriage laws. Obama, a former constitutional law professor, signed off on the administration's legal argument last week following lengthy discussions with Attorney General Eric Holder and Solicitor General Donald Verrilli.

In a statement following the filing, Holder said "the government seeks to vindicate the defining constitutional ideal of equal treatment under the law."

Obama's position, if adopted by the court, would likely result in gay marriage becoming legal in the seven other states: Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon and Rhode Island.

In the longer term, the administration urges the justices to subject laws that discriminate on sexual orientation to more rigorous review than usual, as is the case for claims that laws discriminate on the basis of race, sex and other factors.

The Supreme Court has never given gay Americans the special protection it has afforded women and minorities. If it endorses such an approach in the gay marriage cases, same-sex marriage bans around the country could be imperiled.

Friend-of-the-court briefs are not legally binding. But the government's opinion in particular could carry some weight with the justices when they hear oral arguments in the case on March 26.

Despite the potentially wide-ranging implications of the administration's brief, it still falls short of what gay rights advocates and the attorneys who will argue against Proposition 8 had hoped for. Those parties had pressed the president to urge the Supreme Court to not only overturn California's ban, but also declare all gay marriage bans unconstitutional.

Still, marriage equality advocates publicly welcomed the president's legal positioning.

"President Obama and the solicitor general have taken another historic step forward consistent with the great civil rights battles of our nation's history," said Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign and co-founder of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which brought the legal challenge to Proposition 8.

The president raised expectations that he would back a broad brief during his inauguration address on Jan. 21. He said the nation's journey "is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law."

"For if we are truly created equal, than surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well," he added.

Obama has a complicated history on gay marriage. As a presidential candidate in 2008, he opposed the California ban but didn't endorse gay marriage. He later said his personal views on gay marriage were "evolving."

When he ran for re-election last year, Obama announced his personal support for same-sex marriage, but said marriage was an issue that states, not the federal government, should decide.

Public opinion has shifted in support of gay marriage in recent years.

In May 2008, Gallup found that 56 percent of Americans felt same-sex marriages should not be recognized by the law as valid. By last November, 53 percent felt they should be legally recognized.

Gay marriage supporters see the Supreme Court's hearing of Proposition 8, as well as a related case on the Defense of Marriage Act, as a potential watershed moment for same-sex unions.

In a well-coordinated effort, opponents of the California ban flooded the justices with friend-of-the-court briefs in recent days.

Among those filing briefs were 13 states, including four that do not now permit gay couples to wed, and more than 100 prominent Republicans, such as GOP presidential candidate Jon Huntsman and Florida Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

Two professional football players who have been outspoken gay rights advocates also filed a brief in the California case. Minnesota Vikings punter Chris Kluwe and Baltimore Ravens linebacker Brendon Ayanbadejo urged the court to rule in favor of same-sex marriage.

The Supreme Court has several options to decide the case that would be narrower than what the administration is asking. The justices also could uphold the California provision, as opponents of gay marriage are urging.

One group, the National Organization for Marriage, expects the Supreme Court to uphold the votes of over 7 million Californians to protect marriage, spokesman Thomas Peters said.

One day after the Supreme Court hears the California case, the justices will hear arguments on provisions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman for the purpose of deciding who can receive a range of federal benefits.

The administration abandoned its defense of the act in 2011, but the measure will continue to be federal law unless it is struck down or repealed.

In a brief filed last week, the government said Section 3 of the act "violates the fundamental constitutional guarantee of equal protection" because it denies legally married same-sex couples many federal benefits that are available only to legally married heterosexual couples.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Michigan governor may declare Detroit fiscal emergency Friday

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Michigan governor may declare Detroit fiscal emergency Friday
Mar 1st 2013, 05:51

DETROIT –  Gov. Rick Snyder plans to announce Friday whether he will appoint an emergency manager for Detroit but likely won't immediately name the person if he does, Mayor Dave Bing said.

Bing, who spoke with Snyder by phone earlier in the day, signaled the Republican governor had decided to take the extraordinary step of choosing an independent overseer to confront the city's $327 million budget deficit and $14 billion in long-term debt.

He stopped short of confirming the decision, saying the announcement was Snyder's to make.

"Everybody's got a pretty good idea of what the announcement will be," Bing said.

Speaking briefly to reporters Thursday afternoon from Lansing, Snyder only said that no specific individual would be announced during a forum he scheduled for mid-day Friday to discuss the city's financial situation. If he agrees that a financial emergency exists, which he is expected to do, there would be an appeals process, he said.

"There's a 10-day appeals period," he said. "There's potentially a hearing. Then after that, I would need to reaffirm my decision or change my decision. Depending on if I reaffirm my decision then it could lead to an emergency manager announcement."

Emergency managers have the power under state law to develop financial plans, renegotiate labor contracts, revise and approve budgets to help control spending, sell off city assets not restricted by charter and suspend the salaries of elected officials.

A state-appointed review team made public on Feb. 19 its determination that Detroit is in a financial emergency and submitted its report to Snyder. The team found that "no satisfactory plan exists to resolve a serious financial problem" in the city, leaving Snyder to mull over whether to appoint a manager.

Bing said Thursday he has believed since taking office that some kind of outside help is needed to address the city's finances, though he doesn't support the appointment of an emergency manager.

"I'm more interested, instead of fighting Lansing, in working with them," the first-term mayor said.

The financial review team's report given to Snyder said the accumulated deficit as of June 30, 2012, would have topped $900 million if Detroit leaders in recent years had not issued bonds to pay some of its bills.

Long-term liabilities, including underfunded pensions, total more than $14 billion, and in recent months the city has relied on bond money from an escrow account to meet its dwindling cash flow needs and to pay city workers. The review team also said that because of its cash deficit, the city would have to either increase revenues or decrease expenditures, or both, by about $15 million per month between January and March to "remain financially viable."

"The case is all about the numbers," Bing said of Snyder's expected decision to name an emergency manager for Detroit. "Anybody who's been following the numbers in Detroit knows that the numbers aren't good and they're not going to change dramatically any time soon. There are things Lansing can do to help to get us out of this situation faster than we can do it by ourselves."

Snyder has described the fiscal predicament in the state's largest city as "quite dire" but "solvable," if the city works with the state and an emergency manager if one is appointed.

If a manager is appointed over Detroit's finances, that person will have to hit the ground running, said Patrick O'Keefe, president of O'Keefe and Associates, a turnaround consulting firm north of Detroit in Bloomfield Hills.

"Time is not your friend in these situations," O'Keefe said. "The emergency manager, he's an army of one. He's going to have to assemble a team to help him consult and deal with all the issues the city has. If they get the right person, things will happen fast. If you get somebody with understanding and expertise in restructuring, I think within 90 days they'll have a plan."

A Detroit emergency manager's race may be just as important as his or her resume, said Bill Brandt, chief executive of Development Specialists, Inc., a national turnaround firm.

"Snyder's been building political cover for two weeks to do this. Now it's going to happen," Brandt said Thursday. "If they don't appoint an African American to do this it will be a horribly wrong decision politically and probably do nothing but exasperate many old wounds in Detroit. It will be seen as a cavalier slap in the face for people in Detroit."

More than 80 percent of the just over 700,000 people living in Detroit are black. All nine members of the City Council are black. The last time Detroit had a white mayor was prior to 1973 when Coleman A. Young was elected the city's first black mayor.

The city and its mostly white suburbs have shared an often racially strained relationship. A 1967 race riot spurred a faster exodus of white residents and white businesses from the city to the suburbs.

A stricter consent agreement would be preferable to state oversight, Council President Pro Tem Gary Brown said Friday.

"I think the mayor should push very hard for a new consent agreement with some very strong milestones that every 30 days have to be achieved," Brown said. "And as long as the mayor and the council are making progress in meeting those milestones then we should be allowed to continue to make progress. And if we're not making progress you can always pull the trigger."

But the state complained that the city failed to meet some deadlines under a consent deal approved last spring. That led to a preliminary review of the city's finances in December that eventually found a serious financial problem existed in Detroit. The review team was appointed to take a deeper look at the city's books.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: White House to enact sequester cuts Friday, amid questions over impact

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
White House to enact sequester cuts Friday, amid questions over impact
Mar 1st 2013, 05:00

The sequester lawmakers have been warning about for months will soon be reality.

Congress effectively missed the deadline to avert the automatic spending cuts, originally passed into law in the summer of 2011. President Obama will officially enact the cuts by the end of the day Friday – but there will be cuts.

Still, if you're reading this, odds are you've survived.

As the White House has come to acknowledge, the impact of the cuts will – for the most part -- not be felt immediately.

The billions of dollars in budget cuts are most likely going to phase in over the next few months. Furloughs of government workers will begin several weeks from now. Administration officials say the impact of this and other cuts will build up over time; President Obama describes the effect on the economy as a "tumble downward."

But some fiscal hawks see a silver lining, in that the sequester will force the government to trim the waste in order to shield higher-priority items. Already, the White House budget office is recommending agencies take a skeptical eye toward costly conferences and training programs.

And there's still time for a deal, only now the debate over the sequester gets wrapped into the debate over an expiring budget provision.

On Friday, Obama is scheduled to meet with congressional leaders from both parties at 10 a.m. This comes after Republicans and Democrats each put forward a proposal Thursday to avert the sequester; each was defeated, paving the way for talks toward a possible compromise.    

Still, the two sides remain deadlocked over the issue of raising taxes. Republicans want to replace the current regime of cuts with different, more sensible, cuts. Democrats want to blend in a set of tax increases, closing loopholes for top earners and some corporations.

The effects of the 2013 sequestration will be rolled out over the next several months. It won't be a government shutdown but it will be a government slowdown.

"The impact of this policy won't be felt overnight but it will be real," Obama said. "The longer these cuts are in place, the greater the damage."

The predicted impact of the spending cuts could come in flight delays, limited hours at national parks, longer wait times at border crossings and furloughs of civilian Pentagon employees – and workers at several other agencies.

Some officials say the administration has the leeway, or should be given the leeway, to spread around the budget pain.

"There is so much hype on this, it's ridiculous," David Walker, former U.S. comptroller general, told Fox News. "We spend as much money as the next 15 countries put together and some of the people who are hyping this big time are going to be really embarrassed."

How the public reacts to the cuts will have an effect on how Congress addresses the issue. If voters react with a shrug, the GOP may be less compelled to agree to the kinds of tax increases Obama wants. If there's a big backlash, the Obama administration may take it as vindication that the public won't stand for big cuts to federally funded programs. Still, Republicans point out that the sequester idea originated at the White House.

"The sky is not going to fall but things will get progressively worse," Maryland Democrat Rep. Chris Van Hollen said.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Friday's talks are designed to be a "constructive discussion" about how to keep the deep spending cuts from having harmful consequences.

The meeting, the first face-to-face since Obama was sworn in for his second term in January, will essentially look past the current $85 billion in cuts to the next looming fiscal crisis – a possible government shutdown.

On March 27, the fiscal 2013 continuing appropriations resolution expires, cutting off the ability of most agencies and programs to operate. A new spending bill will be needed to keep the government from shutting down.

Following March Madness – budget style – Congress will have two months to decide on the debt limit. Congress has suspended enforcement of the $16.4 trillion limit on federal borrowing until May 18. The short-term debt limit deal will then raise the borrowing limit the following day, on May 19, to the debt accumulated up through May 18. The short-term extension, approved in January, will allow what budget experts project will be $450 billion in additional borrowing before the debt limit is raised to a new, higher level.

And then, even if no increase in granted by May 19, the Treasury Department will be able to stave off a final day of reckoning until late July or early August by redeploying cash management measures which would allow it to claw back about $220 billion worth of borrowing capacity.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Napolitano says she regrets surprise announcement of illegal immigrant release

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Napolitano says she regrets surprise announcement of illegal immigrant release
Mar 1st 2013, 02:46

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano claimed Thursday that she had no part in her department's decision to release low-risk illegal immigrant detainees as a way to deal with looming cuts to the department's budget.

In an interview with ABC News, Napolitano claimed even she was surprised to learn about the release of the prisoners, which drew criticism from many Republican lawmakers. 

"Detainee populations and how that is managed back and forth is really handled by career officials in the field," she said.

Napolitano also conceded that the decision was poorly timed, saying she wishes people, herself included, weren't caught by surprise by the announcement. 

Click for more from ABC News. 

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Romney likens 2012 race to 'roller coaster,' in exclusive ‘Fox News Sunday’ interview

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Romney likens 2012 race to 'roller coaster,' in exclusive 'Fox News Sunday' interview
Feb 28th 2013, 22:39

Mitt Romney, in an exclusive interview with "Fox News Sunday," said the end of the 2012 presidential race was like getting off a roller coaster. 

"We were on a roller coaster, exciting and thrilling, ups and downs. But the ride ends," Romney said. "And then you get off. And it's not like, oh, can't we be on a roller coaster the rest of our life? It's like, no, the ride's over." 

The 2012 Republican presidential nominee and his wife Ann spoke extensively with "Fox News Sunday" in their first post-election interview.   

Watch the Romneys on "Fox News Sunday" at 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. ET on Fox News Channel -- check local listings for Sunday morning airtimes.  

Ann Romney described the "adjustment" she and her husband made -- going from being surrounding by crowds and Secret Service agents to, after Mitt Romney's loss in November, being by themselves again. She likened it to serving in different positions in their church. 

"In our church, we're used to serving and you know, you can be in a very high position, but you recognize you're serving. And now all of a sudden, you're released and you're nobody," she said. "And we're used to that. It's like we came and stepped forward to serve. And you know, the other part of it was an amazing thing, and it was really quite a lot of energy and a lot of passion and a lot of -- a lot of people around us and all of a sudden, it was nothing." 

She added: "But the good news is fortunately we like each other." 

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: US Embassy in Cairo closes for Kerry trip, prompting security questions

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
US Embassy in Cairo closes for Kerry trip, prompting security questions
Feb 28th 2013, 21:44

The United States Embassy in Cairo will be closed this Sunday as Secretary of State John Kerry arrives in Egypt for a series of high-level meetings as part of his first overseas tour. 

"We regret that the U.S. Embassy Consular Section will be closed to the general public on Sunday, March 3," the U.S. Embassy in Cairo said in a statement on its website. "Only emergency U.S. citizen services will be provided and U.S. citizens needing those services can contact the American Citizen Services Unit." 

The unusual closure has led some foreign policy observers to ask if the U.S. believes it is unsafe to keep the embassy open upon Kerry's arrival. Kerry's stop in Cairo is part of a nine-nation tour that includes visits to Turkey and Saudi Arabia. 

"The U.S. just gave Egypt four F-16 Fighting Falcons with Lockheed Martin Advanced Targeting Pods and Raytheon electronic jamming suites," said one D.C. foreign policy insider. 

"Later this year we're going to give them a couple hundred M1A1 Abrams. It speaks volumes that we don't even feel safe keeping our embassy open while our secretary of state is in town. Let's not pretend that this country is a stable ally." 

"Clearly, there is a credible security threat to the secretary's visit that prompted the regional security officer to recommend and the ambassador to approve closing the embassy," said one Senate aide familiar with State Department procedure. 

Click for more from The Washington Free Beacon.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Fox News Poll: Voters say sequester needed because Congress can't make cuts

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Fox News Poll: Voters say sequester needed because Congress can't make cuts
Feb 28th 2013, 20:36

American voters think the impending across-the-board budget cuts, known as the sequester, are what it will take to get the federal deficit under control -- because there's no other way Congress will do it.  In addition, less than half think the cuts will have a negative effect on the country.  

A new Fox News national poll shows 57 percent of voters think the "only way" to control the deficit is through actions like the automatic cuts because lawmakers are unable to do it on their own.  Some 29 percent have confidence that Congress has the know-how and power to make it happen.  

Click here for full poll results.

The $85 billion in mandatory cuts are set to take effect Friday.

While 45 percent of voters think the consequences of the cuts would be negative, slightly more say they would either have a positive effect (27 percent) or not make much of a difference (22 percent).  

Even voters who think the cuts would have a negative effect are more likely to say sequester-style tactics are necessary to control the deficit.  

In January, President Obama and Congress reached a budget agreement that raised tax rates on wealthy Americans and postponed making spending cuts.  Since then, Republicans and Democrats alike have insisted there must be a smarter way to reduce the deficit.  How would voters like to see this done?  Just over half think a new debt deal should focus only (33 percent) or mostly on budget cuts (19 percent).  Thirty-six percent say it should include an equal mix of spending cuts and tax increases, while hardly any -- 7 percent -- think the new deal should focus only on tax increases.  

Meanwhile, people are feeling worse about the economy.  Over half -- 55 percent -- say it feels like things are getting worse for their family.  That's not only up from 45 percent who felt that way in October, but also nearly matches the high of 56 percent in 2006.  Thirty-one percent say it feels like things are getting better.

Views on the economy are closely tied to party identification:  52 percent of Democrats say things are getting better for their family, while just 8 percent of Republicans say the same.  Fully 77 percent of Republicans say things are getting worse, up from 71 percent in October.  

The president's ratings are down a bit, with 46 percent approving of the job Obama's doing and 47 percent disapproving.  Earlier this month 49 percent of voters approved and 45 percent disapproved (February 4-6, 2013).  

Despite his mixed ratings, the president continues to trounce Congress:  77 percent disapprove of lawmakers on Capitol Hill, almost five times as many as the 16 percent who approve.

In addition, more than twice as many voters have a favorable opinion of Obama (51 percent) as feel that way about his main Republican sparring partner on the budget negotiations, House Speaker John Boehner (23 percent favorable).  

On a series of issues the poll asks voters if they feel "fed up" or if it doesn't bother them that much.  Most voters are fed up with the growing deficit (81 percent), too much government spending (79 percent) and gridlock in Washington (78 percent).  The only thing to top the aggravation with what's going on in Washington: 84 percent are fed up with gas prices.   

After the State of the Union address this month, President Obama took his message on the road with campaign-style events in North Carolina, Georgia, Illinois and Virginia.  Voters disagree with this as a method for getting things done.  Nearly 6 in 10 say the best way for the president to solve the nation's problems would be to "lock himself in a room with Republicans" and work out solutions, while 32 percent think he should travel and "make his case directly to voters."  

The new poll, released Thursday, shows voters see the president in a better negotiating position than in the past.  A 54-percent majority says Obama is a "strong and decisive leader," up from 45 percent (August 2011).  

More voters think Obama is a strong leader than approve of the job he's doing.  That's because some 17 percent think Obama is a strong leader even though they disapprove of his job performance.  

Republicans are about two and a half times as likely to say Obama is a strong leader (24 percent) as they are to give him positive marks for his job performance (10 percent approve).  

Recently former Wyoming Sen. Alan Simpson, who co-chaired Obama's deficit-reduction commission, said that Obama will have a quote "failed presidency" unless he deals with entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security because those must be dealt with to get the economy on a sustainable path.  By a margin of 51-42 percent, voters agree with Simpson -- including 38 percent of Democrats, 49 percent of independents and 66 percent of Republicans.  Those most likely to agree are Tea Partiers (70 percent) and "very" conservatives (68 percent).

Former President George W. Bush stopped golfing after the start of the Iraq war.  Views are divided over whether the condition of the economy merits the same from President Obama:  43 percent think he should stop golfing until the unemployment rate improves and the economy is doing better, while 45 percent disagree.  

Republicans (57 percent) are more likely to say Obama should stop golfing, while over half of Democrats (55 percent) and independents (51 percent) come down on the other side.  

The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,010 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from February 25 to February 27.  The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Fox News Poll: Voters disagree with Obama on transparency

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Fox News Poll: Voters disagree with Obama on transparency
Feb 28th 2013, 20:40

Earlier this month President Barack Obama praised his administration as "the most transparent administration in history."  

American voters disagree.

A new Fox News poll finds that 37 percent of voters think the Obama administration is less open and transparent than previous administrations, and another 35 percent say it is about as transparent as others.

Click here for full poll results.

Twenty-six percent agree President Obama has met a 2008 presidential campaign commitment to openness and that his administration is more transparent than others.  

The issue rose to the surface again last week when the White House press corps was shut out from watching President Obama play golf with Tiger Woods.  Prior to that reporters had been questioning the openness of the administration on weightier issues, such as the Benghazi attack on U.S. diplomats.

The differing views of the administration's transparency have a strong partisan bias.  

By a 38 percentage-point margin, Democrats say Obama has been more transparent than previous presidents, while Republicans say it has been less open by a 58-point margin.  Among independents, 14 percent say Obama has been more open, 40 percent say less open and 45 percent say it's been about the same as others.

By contrast, by a 62-29 percent margin, voters say media coverage of Washington and the White House is focusing more on silly issues of little importance for the country than serious issues of great importance.  

The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,010 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from February 25 to February 27.  The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Brennan nomination for CIA runs into delays over drone controversy

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Brennan nomination for CIA runs into delays over drone controversy
Feb 28th 2013, 22:08

John Brennan's confirmation to run the CIA has run into delays over questions about the administration's lethal drone program, and a leading civil liberties group is voicing doubt on whether the Senate Intelligence Committee will vote as planned next Tuesday.

"We will see if that actually happens or not," Chris Anders, senior legislative counsel for the ACLU told Fox News, referring to the Tuesday committee vote. "If it doesn't, that's a pretty big signal this nomination is in trouble largely over this (drone) issue."

Anders points to the fact that the Brennan confirmation has already been pushed back two weeks over a handful of issues ranging from the Benghazi terrorist attack to drones, including the growing bipartisan push on Capitol Hill for the Obama White House to release all the legal memos justifying the targeted killing of American citizens overseas. During a rare hearing devoted to the drone issue Wednesday, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said the Obama administration must do more explaining.

"The American people deserve to know and understand the legal basis under which the Obama administration believes it can kill U.S. citizens, and under what circumstances," Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said.

The pointed questions for the administration also came from the committee's ranking member, Democrat John Conyers: "It is not clear that Congress intended to sanction lethal force against a loosely defined enemy in an indefinite conflict with no borders or discernible end date."

The House does not get to vote on Brennan's nomination. But over in the Senate, a spokeswoman for Democrat Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the powerful Senate Intelligence Committee, told Fox News there are a total of 11 drone memos, and seven are outstanding. 

The senator is urging the administration to provide the remaining memos before Tuesday's scheduled vote. Fox News was told only four memos have been provided for a limited review.   

Feinstein told Fox News she "is assured the second set (of documents) is forthcoming" and that they can be made available and reviewed before Tuesday's scheduled vote. Asked whether Brennan will have the votes to advance, Feinstein said "I believe he'll come out of committee."

Democratic Sen. Mark Udall -- one of at least two potential "swing votes" on the committee -- told Fox News in a statement that he too is urging the administration to provide all memos before the scheduled vote. Sen. Ron Wyden -- who also pressed Brennan on the drone issue during the confirmation hearing Feb. 7 -- did not immediately respond to questions from Fox News.

National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor, asked whether the remaining documents will be provided, said the administration is "having conversations" with Congress. He would not say whether the administration had agreed to turn over the documents. 

Vietor said holding up nominees for "unrelated reasons" was unacceptable for lawmakers who complain the administration is frustrating their fundamental oversight function.  

"The confirmation process should be about the nominees and their ability to do the jobs they're nominated for," Vietor said. "As the confirmation hearings clearly showed, John Brennan is extraordinarily qualified to head the CIA, and the President needs him in place now. We face enormous national security and intelligence challenges across the globe, and to hold up these nominees for unrelated reasons is not in our national security interests."

Next week, Attorney General Eric Holder is on the Hill before the Senate Judiciary Committee where it is expected members of both parties will push him hard on the drone issue.

Fox News' Chad Pergram contributed to this report.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Fewer conferences, less travel? Sequester prompts cutbacks some have sought for years

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Fewer conferences, less travel? Sequester prompts cutbacks some have sought for years
Feb 28th 2013, 20:23

Amid the doom and gloom over looming budget cuts, some are starting to see a silver lining. 

The government might finally be forced to cut the waste, fiscal hawks say, and officials are already beginning to do away with some of the costly trappings of their office. On Thursday, the White House even suggested agency heads cut back on conference spending, a target of congressional ridicule for years. 

"Hopefully, we can begin moving in the direction of getting our economy moving by getting control of government overspending and debt," Tim Phillips, president of the conservative Americans for Prosperity, told FoxNews.com Thursday. "This is at least a modest step in that direction." 

Barring any shock developments, the sequester will go into effect Friday. The Senate held votes Thursday afternoon on dueling bills to avert the cuts, but both failed. The Republican bill died, garnering just 38 votes; the Democratic proposal garnered 51 votes, but not the 60 necessary to advance. President Obama next will convene a meeting with the top four congressional leaders Friday in Washington, to discuss the way forward -- as the sequester battle now merges with the looming debate over an expiring budget bill. 

Few are actually rejoicing over these specific cuts, though Democrats have tried to give that impression about their Republican colleagues. 

"There are Republicans dancing in the streets, happy with the thought that sequestration will happen," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., claimed Thursday. 

But the fact that Washington has stopped kicking the can on the cuts -- which were enacted in 2011 as part of the debt-ceiling debate and amount to $1 trillion over the next decade -- is seen by many Republicans as a win. Republicans aides claim to have the upper hand going into budget talks since they want the spending reductions. 

Neither side wants these specific reductions, which indiscriminately shave budgets across the board and hit the military particularly hard. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Thursday he will "do anything" to scratch the defense portion of the sequester. But Republicans say the cuts don't have to be as bad as the administration is making them sound, especially if Congress grants the administration more flexibility. The pressure of the deadline being passed could compel both sides to reach an amicable agreement in the coming weeks that still shaves the deficit. 

Already, Washington is starting to show signs of more fiscal discipline. 

House Speaker John Boehner announced Wednesday that he is suspending the use of military aircraft for official travel by House lawmakers. 

And Vice President Biden said the sequester made him rethink the military flights he takes to his home state of Delaware. He said Wednesday that he's going to go back to taking the train. 

Biden, known for his fondness of Amtrak, was upbeat about that particular part of sequester. 

"I was able to say, 'Look guys, I've got to take the train now -- it's cheaper than flying.' So I get to take the train again," Biden said. 

And the White House budget office on Thursday told agency heads they should scrutinize new spending like "hiring new personnel" and issuing "monetary awards to employees." Addressing a pet peeve of fiscally conservative lawmakers, the office also urged against spending money on "new training, conferences and travel." The government spent hundreds of millions of dollars on conferences in fiscal 2012. 

For sure, the negative effects from the sequester will eventually be felt. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney warned Thursday of "dramatic effects." 

This includes some steps that have already gotten underway, including the release of low-priority illegal immigrants from Arizona jails and the docking of an aircraft carrier that was supposed to go to the Persian Gulf. 

Tens of thousands of federal workers are expected to be furloughed. Unemployment checks could be reduced. FAA cuts are, according to the Transportation Department, expected to result in longer delays for travelers. The Food and Drug Administration warned Thursday that the cuts will result in fewer food safety inspections. 

Phillips claimed Democrats are trying to make the sequester "as painful as possible," and that it will be up to conservatives to "fight" to prove that it doesn't have to be a catastrophe. 

"We've just got to keep reminding the American people this is 2 cents on the dollar, for a government that is spending a trillion more than it takes in," he said. 

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the same argument Thursday. "Instead of directing his Cabinet secretaries to trim waste in their departments, he's going after first responders and teachers and almost any other sympathetic constituency you can think of," he said, calling this attitude "nonsense." 

Republicans want to make sure that if any package replaces the automatic spending cuts, it is replaced by spending cuts alone -- their unsuccessful bill Thursday would have given Obama more flexibility to spread the cuts around. Democrats, by contrast, want the package to be replaced with a mix of spending cuts and tax increases. 

"Republicans should give Congress true flexibility," Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said Thursday. "Flexibility to cut wasteful subsidies, flexibility to close unnecessary tax loopholes, and flexibility to ask the richest of the rich to contribute a little bit more. Instead they've completely become inflexible."

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Jacob Lew becomes nation's 76th Treasury secretary

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Jacob Lew becomes nation's 76th Treasury secretary
Feb 28th 2013, 19:58

Published February 28, 2013

Associated Press

WASHINGTON –  Jacob Lew was sworn in Thursday as the nation's 76th Treasury secretary, one day before across-the-board government spending cuts kick in that could hold back the U.S. economy.

Vice President Biden swore Lew in during a brief ceremony at the Oval Office, with Lew's wife and family and President Obama looking on.

After the ceremony, Lew walked to the Treasury Department and was greeted by employees who lined the steps of the building.

Lew, 57, was White House budget director in both the Obama and Clinton administrations. He is expected to play a leading role in negotiating with Congress over ways to resolve the impasse over spending and tax issues.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Border towns brace for sequester's budget squeeze

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Border towns brace for sequester's budget squeeze
Feb 28th 2013, 16:37

In the tiny border town of Nogales, Ariz., it's the small shop owners, restaurant workers and independent businessmen and women who are bracing for the sting of sequester. They know the government spending cuts will start Friday. And they know their livelihoods will be affected.

Located along Arizona's southern edge, Nogales is the state's largest international border town and a major gateway along the U.S.-Mexico line. It's the economic capital of the region and can see up to 80,000 visitors in a single day. People come there to see friends and family -- and to spend money. The border businesses sell everything from Aspirin to tamales and are the financial engine of the local economy.

Nogales Mayor Arturo Garino told FoxNews.com he's worried what the cuts could mean for his town.

"There are a lot of places to go shopping but people might get bored waiting for entry at the border and decide it's not worth it and go home," he said.

Lawmakers are deeply divided over whether the spending cuts will be as bad as administration officials say. On Monday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano warned her agency would be forced to furlough 5,000 Border Patrol agents and cut 2,750 customs officers. U.S. Customs and Border Protection is looking at more than $500 million in cuts, scaling back overtime and imposing furloughs up to 14 days this year.

Napolitano said cuts at the nation's 329 ports of entry would result in longer wait times within the next few weeks.

"I'm not afraid of security at our border being compromised," Garino said. "I'm afraid of what the cuts could mean for our economy."

Republicans argue that the Obama administration is using scare tactics as leverage and says the cuts won't be so bad.

But across the country, the anxiety surrounding them has already put hundreds of independent business owners in military and border towns on edge.

Earlier this week, Arizona Sen. John McCain told constituents that the automatic spending cuts would cost his state 49,000 jobs and nearly $5 billion in economic output.

According to Stephen Fuller, director of the Center for Regional Analysis at George Mason University, the smaller and more specialized a store is, the more vulnerable it is to sequestration. Fuller testified before Congress in September about the effects of spending cuts on small businesses. He predicts 1.4 million lost private-sector jobs.

"However you allocate the consumer budget across the economy, there's a large number of small businesses," he said, adding that they would suffer from the reduced federal and private sector payroll because of the important role they play in the consumer economy.

Just outside Las Cruces, N.M., RTD Hardware owner Richard Trujillo tells FoxNews.com he's hoping for a last-minute D.C. deal to stop the cuts. Most of his customers work at the White Sands Missile Range.

The base, which contributes about $2.3 million a day to the regional economy, has been gearing up for the fiscal slowdown for weeks. And by default, that means Trujillo has been too.

"We're definitely feeling it," Trujillo, who sells hardware, plumbing and repair supplies for indoor and outdoor projects, said. "This is going to be a tough one."

Trujillo, who relies on business from the government -- both directly and indirectly -- says he's not sure how long it will take for his business to bounce back and says he's already scaled back on staffing.

"I would have probably hired two more people to help out but haven't been able to," he said.

Trujillo says his establishment will be hit twice by the looming set of spending cuts. His family-run business is divided into two parts -- a commercial side that serves the missile needs of the government and a private sector side for "walk-in" customers. The problem is that 90 percent of his walk-in customers are employees of the White Sands Missile Range.

"We are so heavily dependent on business from the government and people who work for the government, it's hard not to feel the effects," he said.

At 100 miles long and 40 miles wide, White Sands Missile Range is the largest testing range in the country.  Close to 9,000 people work there and of that, about 80 percent of the salaries go to civilian workers or contractors like RTD Hardware.

Trujillo's daughter, Theresa Gonzalez, runs the business with him.

She says White Sands is saddled with cutbacks and worries it's only going to get worse.

The facility, which tests weapons soldiers use in combat overseas, is already under a hiring freeze, has stopped some travel and training and may not renew its contracts with outside businesses.

There's also the possibility furloughs could take place -- up to 22 days this year.

Trujillo says the uncertainty is hitting younger workers the hardest.

"The older ones don't seem to be as nervous," he said. "The younger ones are afraid they are going to get laid off so they won't come in to buy anything."

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Will Washington Stand Up for Woodward?

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Will Washington Stand Up for Woodward?
Feb 28th 2013, 15:56

"Color me a little baffled. I don't understand this White House. Do you?"

-- Bob Woodward of the Washington Post talking to Politico about an effort by the Obama White House to discredit his reporting on the president's budget negotiations.

There was something very quaint about Bob Woodward's concern about the attacks he's been receiving from the Obama White House.

Here's what Woodward told Politico:

"I think if Obama himself saw the way they're dealing with some of this, he would say, 'Whoa, we don't tell any reporter 'you're going to regret challenging us.' "

Woodward assumes that if only President Obama knew about the nastygrams and threats and attacks from his team the president would step in and rein in his over-eager staffers.

If only Obama knew!

Woodward, once celebrated by Democrats for yanking down Richard Nixon's imperial presidency, now seems puzzled by the doings of the current and even more imperial Obama presidency.

Team Obama is currently in the business of trashing Woodward for his reporting on the 2011 budget battle that resulted in the automatic decreases to automatic increases to federal spending set to begin tomorrow.

It is remarkable to the denizens of pre-Obama Washington that a top White House official would publicly taunt an eminence like Woodward, as David Plouffe did Wednesday, comparing the reporter to an aging baseball star unable to hit today's pitchers. It's nasty, mean and disrespectful. Woodward and his set recoil from that conduct.

If only Obama knew!

Washington is a Democratic place. Big time. And its official religion is a sort of old-fashioned, practical, patrician liberalism. John and Jackie Kennedy made Washington feel special for the first time, and the city's elite have been trying to get back to Camelot ever since.

This means Democratic presidents get a lot more slack than Republicans, especially if, as they all do, Democrats claim to be seeking a restoration of Camelot. But even Washington has its limits.

When the White House put a hit out on FOX News in a deliberate effort to silence the largest cable news outlet, eyebrows were raised but, well, it was just FOX News. People in Washington don't watch much FOX News, unless of course, they are appearing on it. FOX News is for the rest of the country, so an orchestrated campaign to muzzle the network was tut-tutted but nobody in Washington got their knickers in a twist.

When the victims were local reporters from other cities, well, sorry, that's life in the big leagues, kids. When the subjects of bullying, wrath and scorn were Washington reporters they weren't from the Post or the New York Times or broadcast television, it was bad but not dire. If the victim was Julie Mason at The Washington Examiner, people could commiserate at brunch, but no one was going to cancel their squash game.

Putting the hit out on Woodward, though, is something else. Robert Redford played him in the movie! He is the dean of the Washington press corps! He is at all of the parties!

Imagine the alarm rippling through Northwest D.C. today when the response came back from Team Obama: Whatever. He's going down anyway.

The thesis of Woodward's book "The Price of Politics" was that Obama really wanted to strike a grand bargain with Republicans during the 2011 showdown over the debt limit, but that the pending election kept both sides from being able to do a deal.

Obama has been more bullying, less engaged with the press, more aggressive and less inclined to deal with his adversaries than he even was before.

This is the same thinking that allowed Washington to excuse so much bad behavior from Team Obama in the past. He had an election to win, so a bit of bullying or running a campaign based on character assassination or stiff-arming even sympathetic reporters was quickly forgiven.

After all, Mitt Romney would have been the farthest thing from Camelot. He doesn't even drink. So Obama was given wide latitude in his first term.

But all of the right people assured Washington that a re-elected Obama would be the kind of upper-crust liberal that they adore. Colin Powell said so.

And yet it hasn't been that way at all.

Obama has been more bullying, less engaged with the press, more aggressive and less inclined to deal with his adversaries than he even was before. He's being, well, positively uncool.

What Washington and Woodward seem to have missed is that Obama doesn't much care for their brand. Obama means to raise an army in the cities of the nation beyond the Potomac Basin. With tweets and Google hangouts and rallies and a continuous campaign lavishly funded by his corporate partners, Obama means to bring down the status quo that Washington so adores.

The fight over the so-called "sequester" may be the moment when Washington realizes the state of things.

Woodward wonders why Obama is campaigning instead of holding the kind of negotiations that all of his predecessors eventually had to submit to.  Woodward wonders why the president would scorch hopes for bipartisan accord by adding a call for tax increases to the pre-arranged spending cuts.

But Obama already told him and everyone else. The president finds the political system--as constituted--unworthy and is going to smash it into smithereens. The Republican Party. The press. Even Washington. Smash. Smash. Smash.

Why menace the public? Why sabotage your own deals? Why trash reporters? To win, sillies.

Many in Washington will probably sell out their old heartthrob Woodward, quietly nodding when Team Obama demands that he be exiled for challenging the president's line. Certainly, the new liberal media will join the public pantsing of Woodward. And since the old Washington of Katherine Graham, Camelot revivals and Colin Powell is a mere shadow of its former self, lots of folks will take the chance to denounce their onetime idol.

The question is for those in the space between the Huffington Post and the Washington Post. For the Jake Tappers and the George Stephanopouli. Will they let Woodward get swallowed whole, tut-tutting as Team Obama eats him alive or will they dig in their heels and decide that no matter how horrible Republicans may be, Team Obama is on a dangerous power trip?

Woodward is under attack because he believed, as Washington believed, that Obama was a secret moderate who would do a deal once the liberal base out in those other cities had delivered re-election. His cardinal sin was expressing bewilderment that Obama was not doing as promised.

Woodward helped unseat the last president who despised Washington and its conventions the way Obama does, so he might have seen this coming.

But the next generation certainly knows better. They know Obama, he of the unlimited donations, permanent campaign and pitiful press access. And they know that if the president will treat Woodward this way, they'd be totally toast if Plouffe and Co. decided that any of their more moderate musings were deemed dangerous to Obama's prime directives.

It's up to them to decide whether to start biting back or to keep hoping the alligator eats them last.

And Now, A Word From Charles

"I think it could redound against the administration if people imagine, as in this case, that they could be acting in bad faith and deliberately making things really bad."

-- Charles Krauthammer on "Special Report with Bret Baier"


Chris Stirewalt is digital politics editor for Fox News, and his POWER PLAY column appears Monday-Friday on FoxNews.com. Catch Chris Live online daily at 11:30amET  at  http:live.foxnews.com.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Senate committee postpones work on gun bills

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Senate committee postpones work on gun bills
Feb 28th 2013, 16:29

Published February 28, 2013

Associated Press

The Senate Judiciary Committee has postponed its work on writing bills curbing guns, probably until next week.

The delay had long been expected. The panel often grants such delays to give senators more time to work on legislation.

The committee is considering bills that would ban assault weapons, strengthen federal laws against illegal gun trafficking, provide money for school safety improvements and expand the requirement for background checks for gun purchasers.

Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont has assured fellow Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California that she would get a vote on her bill banning assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. That measure, in particular, has drawn strong Republican opposition. And some moderate Democrats have also expressed concerns about the measure as well.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

FOXNews.com: Arkansas Senate overrides veto of abortion bill

FOXNews.com
FOX News Network - We Report. You Decide. // via fulltextrssfeed.com
Arkansas Senate overrides veto of abortion bill
Feb 28th 2013, 16:32

The Arkansas Senate voted Thursday to override a veto of a near-ban of abortions starting in the 20th week of pregnancy and backed a separate measure that would outlaw the procedures in most cases beginning in the 12th week.

The Republican-led Senate voted 19-14 along party lines to override Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe's veto of the 20-week bill, a day after the GOP-led state House voted to override it. A simple majority was required in each chamber.

That law, which took effect immediately, is based on the contested claim that fetuses can feel pain by that point.

Senate President Michael Lamoureux, R-Russellville, supported an override but told reporters afterward he was unsure whether the ban would survive a constitutional challenge.

"If it was an easy answer, then people wouldn't be raising that subject," he said after the vote.

Minutes after overriding Beebe's veto, the Senate's voted 26-8 in support of a bill that would outlaw most abortions starting in the 12th week of pregnancy, sending it to Beebe for consideration. He must decide by next week whether to sign or veto it.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas has already said it would challenge either the 20-week or 12-week bills if they became law, and opponents of the legislation were expected to seek an injunction barring enforcement of the new restrictions pending the outcome of the expected legal challenge.

Beebe said he thinks the new law contradicts the U.S. Supreme Court's 1976 Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion until a fetus can viably survive outside of the womb, which is typically at 22 to 24 weeks. He said the state will waste money trying to defend it.

Sen. Bruce Maloch, D-Magnolia, previously voted for the 20-week ban but said he voted against the override out of deference to Beebe and the concerns the governor raised over the measure's constitutionality.

"These bills are a real dilemma for people who are pro-life, but still there are constitutional concerns. It does really tear at you," Maloch said.

The near ban of abortions starting in the 20th week of pregnancy is based on the disputed claim that a fetus can feel pain by then and therefore deserves protection from abortion. Seven states have enacted similar 20-week restrictions based on the fetal pain argument, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks laws affecting women's health. A similar law in Arizona has been blocked while a federal appeals court reviews a lawsuit challenging it.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says it knows of no legitimate scientific information supporting the idea that a fetus experiences pain.

The 12-week bill is based on the argument that a fetus should be protected from abortion once its heartbeat can be detected during an abdominal ultrasound. The governor has not said whether he'll veto the bill but said earlier that he has constitutional concerns with the measure.

Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway, the sponsor of the 12-week ban, said Beebe should let the measure go into law without his signature.

"I respect his opinions and what he has to do as an individual, but I believe he should honor the vote of the Legislature," Rapert told reporters after the vote.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to this feed at blogtrottr.com.

If you no longer wish to receive these emails, you can unsubscribe from this feed, or manage all your subscriptions
Read more »

 
Great HTML Templates from easytemplates.com.