Tuesday, May 7, 2013

Kansas Bill Would Protect Doctors Who Mislead Women About Their Pregnancies

The Kansas Senate Judiciary Committee recommended a bill yesterday that would effectively allow doctors to lie or withhold information about debilitating genetic conditions or birth defects in order to influence women’s decisions about their pregnancies.

Kansas SB 142 provides blanket protection from “wrongful birth” lawsuits to doctors, with section 1(a) reading:

“No civil action may be commenced in any court for a claim of wrongful life or wrongful birth, and no damages may be recovered in any civil action for any physical condition of a minor that existed at the time of such minor’s birth if the damages sought arise out of a claim that a person’s action or omission contributed to such minor’s mother not obtaining an abortion.

The Arizona State Senate passed a similar law in 2012, but that proposal contained a provision absent from the Kansas bill allowing wrongful birth suits in the event of “an intentional or grossly negligent act or omission.”

The proposal was included as a provision in an omnibus anti-abortion bill last year, but was so controversial that it ending up being submitted as a standalone bill in this cycle, according to Kansas NOW lobbyist Elise Higgins. Despite Kansas’s dismal reproductive rights record, Kansas legislators have already introduced over 90 pages of anti-choice legislation in 2013.


View the original article here

Weather Extremes Provoked By Trapping Of Giant Waves In The Atmosphere, Likely Boosted By Global Warming

In October, a NOAA-led study found that “Warming-Driven Arctic Ice Loss Is Boosting Chance of Extreme U.S. Weather.” A new study offers another mechanism for warming to drive extreme weather — JR

Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research news release

The world has suffered from severe regional weather extremes in recent years, such as the heat wave in the United States in 2011 or the one in Russia 2010 coinciding with the unprecedented Pakistan flood. Behind these devastating individual events there is a common physical cause, propose scientists of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). The study will be published this week in the US Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and suggests that man-made climate change repeatedly disturbs the patterns of atmospheric flow around the globe’s Northern hemisphere through a subtle resonance mechanism.

“An important part of the global air motion in the mid-latitudes of the Earth normally takes the form of waves wandering around the planet, oscillating between the tropical and the Arctic regions. So when they swing up, these waves suck warm air from the tropics to Europe, Russia, or the US, and when they swing down, they do the same thing with cold air from the Arctic,” explains lead author Vladimir Petoukhov.

“What we found is that during several recent extreme weather events these planetary waves almost freeze in their tracks for weeks. So instead of bringing in cool air after having brought warm air in before, the heat just stays. In fact, we observe a strong amplification of the usually weak, slowly moving component of these waves,” says Petoukhov. Time is critical here: two or three days of 30 degrees Celsius are no problem, but twenty or more days lead to extreme heat stress. Since many ecosystems and cities are not adapted to this, prolonged hot periods can result in a high death toll, forest fires, and dramatic harvest losses.

Anomalous surface temperatures are disturbing the air flows

Climate change caused by greenhouse-gas emissions from fossil-fuel burning does not mean uniform global warming – in the Arctic, the relative increase of temperatures, amplified by the loss of snow and ice, is higher than on average. This in turn reduces the temperature difference between the Arctic and, for example, Europe, yet temperature differences are a main driver of air flow. Additionally, continents generally warm and cool more readily than the oceans. “These two factors are crucial for the mechanism we detected,” says Petoukhov. “They result in an unnatural pattern of the mid-latitude air flow, so that for extended periods the slow synoptic waves get trapped.”

The authors of the study developed equations that describe the wave motions in the extra-tropical atmosphere and show under what conditions those waves can grind to a halt and get amplified. They tested their assumptions using standard daily weather data from the US National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP). During recent periods in which several major weather extremes occurred, the trapping and strong amplification of particular waves – like “wave seven” (which has seven troughs and crests spanning the globe) – was indeed observed. The data show an increase in the occurrence of these specific atmospheric patterns, which is statistically significant at the 90 percent confidence level.

The probability of extremes increases – but other factors come in as well

“Our dynamical analysis helps to explain the increasing number of novel weather extremes. It complements previous research that already linked such phenomena to climate change, but did not yet identify a mechanism behind it,” says Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of PIK and co-author of the study. “This is quite a breakthrough, even though things are not at all simple – the suggested physical process increases the probability of weather extremes, but additional factors certainly play a role as well, including natural variability.” Also, the 32-year period studied in the project provides a good indication of the mechanism involved, yet is too short for definite conclusions.

Nevertheless, the study significantly advances the understanding of the relation between weather extremes and man-made climate change. Scientists were surprised by how far outside past experience some of the recent extremes have been. The new data show that the emergence of extraordinary weather is not just a linear response to the mean warming trend, and the proposed mechanism could explain that.

– Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research news release


View the original article here

Sequestration's impact on national defense

By Del. Madeleine Z. Bordallo (D-Guam) - 02/27/13 04:45 PM ET

Since the enactment of the Budget Control Act, there has been almost unanimous opposition to sequestration and its meat-ax approach to deficit reduction. These automatic cuts come on top of $1.5 trillion in cuts already enacted through the BCA, with a large percentage absorbed by the Department of Defense alone. It’s clear that further cuts through sequestration would harm our defense industrial base and local economies; however, partisan gridlock and an unwillingness to compromise has made it difficult for Congress to reach a long-term and balanced solution.

While spending more on defense doesn’t necessarily make us safer, tighter purse strings means we need to target spending in more strategic ways; however, sequestration does not allow for strategic cuts. Sequestration, as many have testified, would cripple DoD’s operations and maintenance accounts and weaken our country’s military readiness. Moreover, the second- and third-order effects on our sustainment industrial base will further impact the readiness of our military. In the long run, sequestration will cost our government more than what we find in immediate savings. Ultimately, the readiness of our military is critical to protecting our nation’s sea, air, land, and cyberspace security, including our ability to support our allies across the globe. And while it is possible to have a leaner, more flexible military, it is critical to prioritize funds that ensure our forces are postured effectively and well-resourced to carry out their missions.

Defense spending has been greatly reduced in recent years. This reduction in DoD’s overall budget reflects our struggling economy and the end of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As such, our national defense strategy has shifted with a renewed engagement in the Asia-Pacific theater. The realignments of U.S. Marines on Guam and throughout the Pacific is just one example of how our military is shifting to respond to emerging threats in an increasingly vital region. As such, it is incumbent on policymakers in Washington to look further down the line and do more than just a patch-and-repair job. It is important to protect funding for current operations and it is necessary to make critical investments to ensure our country’s long-term security. Asia-Pacific requirements, in particular, must be prioritized, and it will require difficult decisions in the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill.

These deep, indiscriminate cuts would affect more than immediate threats to our national security and defense. As the largest federal agency in United States and the world’s largest single employer, the Department of Defense plays a major role in sustaining our nation’s workforce and promoting economic growth. Moreover, further cuts to defense would affect businesses that depend on federal contracts and slow progress on military construction projects currently underway, potentially derailing others indefinitely. The impacts of sequestration may not be felt immediately, but it behooves leadership in Congress to prevent the sequester from crippling our country’s ability to address threats to our national security and defense. Congress did not create the last economic recession and it would be irresponsible to allow sequestration to move forward. These drastic, unnecessary cuts would inevitably lead to a recession, just like nations in Europe who have adopted draconian austerity measures.

Bordallo is the Guam delegate to the U.S. House of Representatives. She is the ranking member on the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness.

View Comments

View the original article here

Canadian Supreme Court Upholds Hate Speech Laws Against Anti-Gay Activist

William Whatcott

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that the nation’s laws against hate speech do, in fact, restrict anti-gay rhetoric, regardless of whether it reflects religious beliefs or not. The case dealt with William Whatcott of Saskatchewan, who regularly protests in public spaces with signs that say things like “Keep Homosexuality out of Saskatoon’s Public Schools!” and “Sodomites in our Public Schools.” According to the Court’s unanimous decision, Whatcott’s religious beliefs do not entitle him to spread messages that are harmful and marginalizing to a whole group of people:

Framing speech as arising in a moral context or within a public policy debate does not cleanse it of its harmful effect.  Finding that certain expression falls within political speech does not close off the enquiry into whether the expression constitutes hate speech.  Hate speech may often arise as a part of a larger public discourse but it is speech of a restrictive and exclusionary kind.  Political expression contributes to our democracy by encouraging the exchange of opposing views.  Hate speech is antithetical to this objective in that it shuts down dialogue by making it difficult or impossible for members of the vulnerable group to respond, thereby stifling discourse.  Speech that has the effect of shutting down public debate cannot dodge prohibition on the basis that it promotes debate.  Section 14 of the Code provides an appropriate means by which to protect almost the entirety of political discourse as a vital part of freedom of expression.  It extricates only an extreme and marginal type of expression which contributes little to the values underlying freedom of expression and whose restriction is therefore easier to justify.

A prohibition is not overbroad for capturing expression targeting sexual behaviour.  Courts have recognized a strong connection between sexual orientation and sexual conduct and where the conduct targeted by speech is a crucial aspect of the identity of a vulnerable group, attacks on this conduct stand as proxy for attacks on the group itself.  If expression targeting certain sexual behaviour is framed in such a way as to expose persons of an identifiable sexual orientation to what is objectively viewed as detestation and vilification, it cannot be said that such speech only targets the behaviour.  It quite clearly targets the vulnerable group.

Canada’s laws differ from the U.S.’s in terms of what limitations can be placed on free speech, so a similar law would not likely be upheld back in the States. But the Court’s ruling is notable for the sensible way it addresses sexual orientation, ensuring that attacking the behavior unique to a group of people is the same as attacking the people themselves.

Conservatives regularly try to discount the very existence of gay people by reducing their identities to merely their sexual behavior. This distinction is artificial and specifically designed to negate the full life experiences of LGBT people and their families.


View the original article here

Remarks by the President on the Impact of the Sequester - Newport News, VA

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Newport News Shipbuilding
Newport News, Virginia

1:23 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT:  Hello, Newport News!  (Applause.)  Well, it is good to see all of you here today. 

I want to thank your CEO, Mike Petters, for showing me around.  I usually don’t get a chance to hang out with nuclear submarines, especially submarines that my wife has sponsored.  (Applause.)  So right there, that was worth the trip. 

But most importantly, it’s a great chance to see the incredible men and women who, every single day, are helping to keep America safe and are just the bedrock of this country’s manufacturing base.  Thank you to all of you.  (Applause.)

I want to thank our outstanding Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus, who’s here.  (Applause.)  There he is right there -- the good-looking guy over at the end.  (Laughter.)  I want to thank your Mayor, McKinley Price, who served this nation bravely in the U.S. Army.  (Applause.)  I want to thank two outstanding Congressmen who care about this facility, care about Virginia and care about the country -- Congressman Bobby Scott is here -- (applause) -- and Congressman Scott Rigell is here as well.  (Applause.)

Now, the reason I came here today, in addition to seeing just some incredible stuff -- it’s true, every time I come to these places, I don't know how you all do it.  It is just amazing work.  But the main reason I'm here is to call attention to the important work that you’re doing on behalf of the nation’s defense, and to let the American people know that this work, along with hundreds of thousands of jobs, are currently in jeopardy because of politics in Washington. 

In a few days, Congress might allow a series of immediate, painful, arbitrary budget cuts to take place -- known in Washington as the sequester.  Now, that's a pretty bad name -- sequester.  But the effects are even worse than the name.  Instead of cutting out the government spending we don’t need -- wasteful programs that don't work, special interest tax loopholes and tax breaks -- what the sequester does is it uses a meat cleaver approach to gut critical investments in things like education and national security and lifesaving medical research. 

And the impact of this policy won’t be felt overnight, but it will be real.  The sequester will weaken America’s economic recovery.  It will weaken our military readiness.  And it will weaken the basic services that the American people depend on every single day. 

Already, the uncertainty around these cuts is having an effect.  Companies are starting to prepare for layoff notices.  Families are preparing to cut back on expenses.  And the longer these cuts are in place, the greater the damage.

So here at Newport News Shipbuilding, you guys have made an enormous investment, because we've said in order to maintain the finest Navy that the world has ever known we've got to make sure that there is an orderly process whereby we are continually upgrading our ships, building new ships, maintaining our ships properly.  And these are some big ships.  So it’s expensive, and it’s complicated.  And you’ve got 5,000 suppliers all across the country, and you've got to have some certainty and some knowledge about how things are going to proceed over the long term for Mike and others to plan properly.
So you're rightly concerned.  Mike is properly concerned about the impact that these cuts will have on not just this company, but companies and small businesses from all 50 states that supply you with parts and equipment. 

Mike was telling me that you guys have already made a billion dollars’ worth of capital investment.  You've got half a billion dollars in training costs as you recruit and hire new people.  Well, those aren't commitments that you make lightly.  You've got to have the capacity to plan and have some certainty in terms of what it is that we're going to be doing.  And you know that if Congress can’t get together and plan our nation’s finances for the long term, that over time some of your jobs and businesses could be at risk. 

Over at the Norfolk Naval Station, the threat of these cuts has already forced the Navy to cancel the deployment, or delay the repair of certain aircraft carriers.  One that’s currently being built might not get finished.  Another carrier might not get started at all.  And that hurts your bottom line.  That hurts this community.
Because of these automatic cuts, about 90,000 Virginians who work for the Department of Defense would be forced to take unpaid leave from their jobs.  So that’s money out of their pockets, money out of their paychecks.  And then that means there’s going to be a ripple effect on thousands of other jobs and businesses and services throughout the Commonwealth, because if they don’t have money in their pockets or less money in their pockets, that means they're less able to afford to buy goods and services from other businesses.  So it's not just restricted to the defense industry.  

All told, the sequester could cost tens of thousands of jobs right here in Virginia.  But it doesn’t just stop there.  If the sequester goes into effect, more than 2,000 college students would lose their financial aid.  Early education like Head Start and Early Start would be eliminated for nearly 1,000 children, and around 18,000 fewer Virginians would get the skills and training they need to find a job.   

Across the country, these cuts will force federal prosecutors to close cases and potentially let criminals go.  Air traffic controllers and airport security will see cutbacks, and that could cause delays at airports across the country.  Tens of thousands of parents will have to scramble to find child care for their kids.  Hundreds of thousands of Americans will lose access to primary care and preventive care like flu vaccinations and cancer screenings, including more than 3,500 children right here in Virginia. 

So these cuts are wrong.  They’re not smart.  They’re not fair.  They’re a self-inflicted wound that doesn’t have to happen.

Now, the reason that we're even thinking about the sequester is because people are rightly concerned about the deficit and the debt.  But there is a sensible way of doing things and there is a dumb way of doing things.  I mean, think about your own family.  Let's say that suddenly you've got a little less money coming in. Are you going to say, well, we'll cut out college tuition for the kid, we'll stop feeding the little guy over here, we won't pay our car note even though that means we can't get to work -- that’s not what you do, right? 

You step back and you say, what is it that's important -- our child's education, making sure they're healthy, making sure we can get to the job, keeping our house repaired?  And then you say, here are the things that aren't so important and you cut those out.  You prioritize, and you make smart decisions.  Well, we should be doing the same thing.   

Now, I’ve laid out a plan that details how we can pay down our deficit in a way that’s balanced and responsible.  We have the plan right on a website, the White House website.  Everybody can go see it.  It details exactly how we can cut programs that don't work, how we can raise money by closing loopholes that are only serving a few, as opposed to the average American. 

We detailed $930 billion in sensible spending cuts that we’re willing to make and $580 billion in wasteful tax loopholes and deductions that we’re willing to eliminate through tax reform. 

And what I've said is if the Republicans in Congress don’t like every detail of my proposal, which I don't expect them to, I’ve told them my door is open.  I am more than willing to negotiate.  I want to compromise.  There's no reason why we can't come together and find a sensible way to reduce the deficit over the long term without affecting vital services, without hurting families, without impacting outstanding facilities like this one and our national defense.  There's a way of doing this. 

And the fact is there are leaders in both parties throughout this country who want to do the same.  I've got to give Scott Rigell credit.  He is one of your Republican congressmen who’s with us here today -- and that's not always healthy for a Republican, being with me.  But the reason he’s doing it is because he knows it's important to you.  And he’s asked his colleagues in the House to consider closing tax loopholes instead of letting these automatic cuts go through.  He’s concerned about the deficit, and he’s more than prepared to make some really tough cuts, but he wants to do it in a smart way. 

Bobby Scott -- same thing.  Some of the cuts we've proposed, Bobby might not think are perfect, but he knows that we've got to make some tough decisions.  He just wants to make sure that you aren't the ones who are adversely impacted and that we're sharing the sacrifice in bringing down our deficit; we're not just dumping it on a few people and we're not doing it in a dumb way.

Senators like John McCain have made similar statements to what Scott said.  Your Republican Governor along with other governors around the country have said they want Congress to stop the sequester, to stop these cuts.  

But I just have to be honest with you.  There are too many Republicans in Congress right now who refuse to compromise even an inch when it comes to closing tax loopholes and special interest tax breaks.  And that's what's holding things up right now. 

Keep in mind, nobody is asking them to raise income tax rates.  All we’re asking is to consider closing tax loopholes and deductions that the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, said he was willing to do just a few months ago.  He said there were a bunch of loopholes and deductions you could close.  He said you could raise $800 billion, a trillion dollars by closing loopholes. 

Well, we're not even asking for that much.  All we're asking is that they close loopholes for the well-off and the well-connected -- for hedge fund managers, or oil companies, or corporate jet owners who are all doing very well and don’t need these tax loopholes -- so we can avoid laying off workers, or kicking kids off Head Start, or reducing financial aid for college students. 

I don’t think that’s too much to ask.  I do not think that is partisan.  (Applause.)  The majority of the American people agree with me.  The majority of Newport News agrees with me.  We need to get this done.  (Applause.)

But the choice is up to Congress.  Only Congress has the power to pass a law that stops these damaging cuts and replaces them with smart savings and tax reform.  And the second I get that bill on my desk, I will sign it into law.  But I've got to get Congress to pass it. 

None of us will get 100 percent of what we want.  Democrats, they've got to make some tough choices too. Democrats like me, we've said we're prepared to make some tough cuts and reforms, including to programs like Medicare.  But if we're willing to compromise, then Republicans in the House have to compromise as well.  That’s what democracy is about.  That’s what this country needs right now.  (Applause.)  

So let me just make one last point, by the way, for those of you who are following this.  Now, lately, some people have been saying, well, maybe we'll just give the President some flexibility.  He could make the cuts the way he wants and that way it won't be as damaging.  The problem is when you're cutting $85 billion in seven months, which represents over a 10-percent cut in the defense budget in seven months, there's no smart way to do that.  There's no smart way to do that.  You don't want to have to choose between, let's see, do I close funding for the disabled kid, or the poor kid?  Do I close this Navy shipyard or some other one?  When you're doing things in a way that's not smart, you can't gloss over the pain and the impact it's going to have on the economy.  

And the broader point is, Virginia, we can’t just cut our way to prosperity.  We can’t just cut our way to prosperity.  We can't ask seniors and working families like yours to shoulder the entire burden of deficit reduction while asking nothing more from the wealthiest and the most powerful.  We're not going to grow the middle class just by shifting the cost of health care or college onto families that are already struggling, or forcing communities to lay off more teachers or cops or firefighters or shipbuilders, and then folks who are doing really well don’t have to do anything more.  That’s not fair, and it's not good for the economy. 

And the other thing we've got to do is to stop having these crises manufactured every month.  It seems like -- I know you guys must get tired of it.  (Applause.)  Didn’t we just solve this thing?  Now we've got another thing coming up?  (Applause.) I mean, think about if Mike Petters ran his business this way -- once every month or two there would be some crisis, and you wouldn’t be sure whether or not you were working or not.  Even if it got solved eventually or ultimately, it would be pretty discouraging on people.  You would be less productive.  Ships wouldn’t get built as fast.  You would waste money because you don’t know exactly what to expect.  Folks aren't sure, am I showing up to work today, or not? 

If it's not a good way to run a business, it's sure not a good way to run a country.  (Applause.) 

Now, all of you, the American people, you’ve worked too hard for too long rebuilding and digging our way out of the financial crisis back in 2007 and 2008 just to see Congress cause another one.  The greatest nation on Earth can't keep on conducting its business drifting from one crisis to the next. 

We've got to have a plan.  We've got to invest in our common future.  Our true north is a growing economy that creates good middle-class jobs; a country that provides its people with the skills they need to get those jobs and make sure that you're getting paid a decent wage for working hard so you can support your families.  That’s what we should be focused on right now.  Not weakening the economy.  Not laying people off.  (Applause.)

That’s what we should be talking about in Washington.  And if you agree with me, I need you to make sure your voices are heard.  Let your leaders know what you expect of them.  Let them know what you believe.  Let them know that what this country was built on was a sense of obligation to not just each other but to future generations; that we've got to shoulder those obligations as one nation, and as one people. 

I was in a conversation with some of the governors from across the country yesterday and I told them, I said, I've run my last election.  Michelle is very happy about that.  (Laughter.)  I'm not interested in spin; I'm not interested in playing a blame game.  At this point, all I'm interested in is just solving problems.  (Applause.)  All I'm interested in is making sure that when you get up early in the morning, and get to this ship at 5:30 in the morning, that you know if you do a good job and if you work hard and if you're making sure that all the parts to this incredible ship that you're building are where they need to be -- if you're doing what you do, then you can go home feeling satisfied, I did my job, I did my part, I can support my family, I can take pride in what I've done for this country. 

That’s all I want.  I want us to be able to look back five years from now, 10 years from now, and say we took care of our business and we put an end to some of these games that maybe, I guess, are entertaining for some but are hurting too many people. 

But in order for us to make that happen I'm going to need you.  The one thing about being President is, after four years you get pretty humble.  (Laughter.)  You’d think maybe you wouldn't, but actually you become more humble.  You realize what you don't know.  You realize all the mistakes you’ve made.  But you also realize you can't do things by yourself.  That's not how our system works.  You’ve got to have the help and the goodwill of Congress, and what that means is you’ve got to make sure that constituents of members of Congress are putting some pressure on them, making sure they’re doing the right thing, putting an end to some of these political games.

So I need you, Virginia, to keep up the pressure.  I need you to keep up the effort.  I need you to keep up the fight.  (Applause.)  If you do, Congress will listen.  If you stand up and speak out, Congress will listen.  And together, we will unleash our true potential, and we'll remind the world just why it is the United States builds the greatest ships on Earth and is the greatest nation on Earth.  (Applause.)

Thank you.  God bless you.  God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

END
1:44 P.M. EST

Extending Middle Class Tax Cuts

Rosa Parks has a Permanent Place in the U.S. Capitol

President Obama is on hand for the unveiling of the new Rosa Parks statue in the U.S. Capitol

February 27, 2013 12:00 PM EST

To mark African American History Month, as well as the 150th anniversary of the year the Emancipation Proclamation, we talked with White House Curator Bill Allman about a painting called Watch Meeting--Dec. 31st 1862--Waiting for the Hour that hangs near the Oval Office in the West Wing.

President Obama Calls for a Responsible Approach to Deficit Reduction

President Obama strongly believes we need to replace the arbitrary cuts known as the sequester with balanced deficit reduction, and today he was at a shipyard in Newport News, VA to talk about what failing to do so will mean for middle class families.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

Why We Still Need The Voting Rights Act: Perspectives From Supreme Court Spectators

The US Supreme Court heard a challenge to the 1965 Voting Rights Act today, attracting hoards of voting rights advocates, speakers, and a massive line of people vying for a spot in the courtroom. Today’s argument could lead to the elimination of Section 5, which protects minority voting rights in states with historically discriminatory election laws. Though Congress reauthorized the Voting Rights Act in 2006 by overwhelming margins of of 98-0 in the Senate and 390-33 in the House, many Republicans are now calling for the Supreme Court to strike it down, claiming the protections are obsolete in the post-Jim Crow era. In the last election cycle, however, the Justice Department used Section 5 to block new voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina, early voting restrictions in Florida, and racially gerrymandered redistricting maps in Texas. The courts agreed that these laws would suppress minority voting power.

ThinkProgress spoke to five individuals waiting in line outside the Supreme Court. While the attorneys made their case inside the court, these supporters gave their own oral arguments for why the Voting Rights Act is still needed:


“There are unfortunately some people who don’t want all Americans to have the right to vote for the person of their choice. And I believe that every American, no matter what you look like or what your background is, if you want to vote you should be allowed to vote for the person of your choice. It doesn’t matter what party you’re in. I think everyone should have that right. And I have grandchildren, and I want them to be able to have that same right wherever they live.” — Priscilla

“I think we need to keep moving forward. I think it’s fair the way it is. I was part of voter registration this year and some of the people I got registered, when I went down to vote, there was no record of them. It was very upsetting. They gave them a form to fill out and said they would get credit for voting, so I don’t know exactly how that turned out. But it was an effort to not let everyone vote. The Voting Rights Act is still very necessary. You can see some of the setbacks, even today.” — Emma


“I was in the Capitol yesterday. We have a record amount of women senators here, but when you look down at the floor, it’s basically an old men’s club with white hair. White men with white hair. To me, that’s just the proof right there that maybe voting rights aren’t as democratic as they should be in this country. I think it’s important. The voting restrictions today maybe aren’t as overtly racial, but there’s still many restrictions to voting.”


“I think the Voting Rights Act, as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, are timeless. They have to be protected. I’ve read both sides of the argument, but if there’s any, any evidence at all that this would disenfranchise someone, then Section 5 needs to keep being renewed. That’s my personal feeling. As long as we have racism and bigotry in our country, then we need to protect those who can’t speak out for themselves.”


“Sometimes I really feel like there’s been a change [in racism at the ballot box], but at the same time, when you try to manipulate things and not let the public be aware of it… We’re voters, too. We need to have knowledge to what is going on on the boundary lines. Our city council didn’t even have a clue that particular thing had be done, but they did it, and next thing we know they manipulated it to the point of bringing someone else in. And we didn’t have a clue! It’s very important. Even though it started in Shelby County, this is a nationwide kind of event. It could happen anywhere.”


“I consider myself a “super voter” because I vote all the time, every election, even for dog catcher. It’s important to understand that voting is a fundamental, bottom-line, foundational right of any citizen, and it shouldn’t be impugned or even exempted from anyone. Voting and voting rights, as an African-American of course, has a tremendously significant role, being a part of this American citizenry. What we see from those who are trying to strike down voting rights is that there’s a realization of how powerful the vote is. So if you can restrict it, then obviously you can say it has some power to it. So being under attack by those who want to change it and have used things now with this new gerrymandering that’s going on, this locking votes in, is very, very important to understand that it is under attack. So those that believe in it have to defend it. That’s why I’m here today.”


View the original article here

UPDATE 3-Tenet sees benefit in 2014 from health reform

* Expects to treat more patients with insurance under reform

* Says signed first contracts for insurance to be sold on exchanges

* Q4 profit 45 cts/shr vs loss 70 cts/shr year ago

* Reiterates 2013 EBITDA outlook; says budget cuts factored in

* Shares up less that 1 percent

Feb 26 (Reuters) - Tenet Healthcare Corp said on Tuesday it expects the U.S. healthcare reform law to have a positive impact on its earnings in 2014 as uninsured patients start to obtain coverage through the new health insurance exchanges.

Tenet, the No. 3 for-profit U.S. hospital chain, also reported a fourth-quarter profit versus a year-ago loss as outpatient visits to its hospitals increased.

The Dallas-based company said it has traditionally treated more uninsured patients than other publicly traded hospital chains due to the markets it is in, including Texas, where a quarter of the state's population is uninsured.

This burden is expected to diminish as those patients obtain insurance through the exchanges, beginning in 2014.

"Everything about health reform should help alleviate some of the pressures on us," Tenet Chief Executive Trevor Fetter said in a telephone interview.

Tenet anticipates a positive impact on its earnings even if states such as Texas do not participate in a planned expansion of the Medicaid program for the poor.

"We see a lot of upside in our markets," Fetter said on a conference call. The company expects to have more details on how health reform will affect its business in the next few months, he added.

An estimated 26 million people are expected to obtain coverage through the health insurance exchanges being set up under the U.S. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. But some Republican-led states have rejected both the exchanges and the Medicaid expansion.

Tenet recently signed its first contracts with three Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans for health insurance to be sold to individuals through the exchanges, covering about 30 percent of its hospitals, Fetter said. The plans have a structure similar to its commercial contracts, but with a modest pricing discount of less than 10 percent from current rates, he said.

"Where we have accepted any discount at all, it is for additional market share," Fetter said.

Tenet posted fourth-quarter earnings of $49 million, or 45 cents a share, compared with a loss of $76 million, or 70 cents a share, a year earlier, when the company took a large charge for the early retirement of debt.

Adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) increased 16.7 percent to $336 million. Net operating revenue rose 7.3 percent to $2.33 billion.

Tenet reiterated its outlook for 2013 EBITDA of $1.325 billion to $1.425 billion.

The outlook includes an expected reduction to Tenet's revenue and earnings of $45 million this year if automatic U.S. budget cuts, known as sequestration, go into effect.

"We have expected for a long time that it would happen and have planned for that," Fetter said.

In the fourth quarter, Tenet said adjusted patient admissions, which include both inpatient and outpatient volumes, rose 2.9 percent, with outpatient visits up 7.3 percent and outpatient surgeries climbing 13.9 percent. Total admissions were flat, while emergency room visits increased 8.6 percent.

"All things considered, it was a decent quarter," said Jefferies & Co analyst Brian Tanquilut.

Uninsured and charity admissions rose 1.1 percent. Bad debt expenses as a percentage of revenue was 7.9 percent, up from 7.7 percent from a year ago, as more uninsured patients sought treatment, Tenet said.

Tenet, which last week announced plans to acquire Emanuel Medical Center in Turlock, California, is gaining a greater appetite for hospital acquisitions, after focusing on acquiring physician practices and outpatient centers in recent years, company executives said on a conference call with industry analysts.

Tenet shares were up 0.5 percent to $37.82 in Tuesday afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange.


View the original article here

Remarks by the President and Vice President at Meeting of the National Governors Association

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

State Dining Room

11:18 A.M. EST

THE VICE PRESIDENT:  Thank you all.  I tell you what, I didn't know Jack was as good as he is until I heard that rhyme last night.  (Laughter.)  Jack, if you had done that, I’d be introducing you here.  (Laughter.)

Thank you all very, very much.  I’m sorry -- you guys are much more disciplined than the place I lived for 36 years, up on the Hill, and you’re running ahead of schedule.  And so the President is with me, and I want to thank you all for being here.  
We have a lot to work on.  There’s a lot from fixing a broken immigration system to rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure, and this new word everybody in America is learning about -- “sequester.”

This town, unlike many of your capitals, is I hope temporarily frozen in -- not indifference but in sort of an intense partisanship, the likes of which in my career I’ve only see the last couple years.  But you know the American people have moved to a different place.  By the way, thanks for being so nice to my wife last night.  I like you a hell of better.  (Laughter.) We disagreed on some things.  

But all kidding aside, I think the American people have moved -- Democrats, Republicans, independents.  They know that the possibilities for this country are immense.  They're no longer traumatized by what was a traumatizing event, the great collapse in 2008.  They're no longer worried, I think, about our economy being overwhelmed either by Europe writ large, the EU, or China somehow swallowing up every bit of innovation that exists in the world.  They're no longer, I think, worried about our economy being overwhelmed beyond our shores.  

And I don't think they're any more -- there’s no -- there’s very little doubt in any circles out there about America’s ability to be in position to lead the world in the 21st century, not only in terms of our foreign policy, our incredible defense establishment, but economically.  I think the American people are ready to get up.  As a civil rights leader, when I was coming up as a kid, said, they're just -- the American people are tired of being tired.  I think they're ready to get up and move.  And you guys know that because it’s happening in your states.  You probably feel it in your fingertips more than most of us do here in Washington.

And as I said, I think they know we’re better positioned than any nation in the world to lead the world.  And that's why I think they're so frustrated by what they see and don't see happening here in Washington.  And I think their frustration is turning into a little bit of anger.

I found an interesting dynamic -- without ruining any of your reputations and picking out any one of you -- but whether it was a Democrat or Republican governor I had been talking to last night and over this past weekend, I heard from several of you, both parties, how do you deal with this going on up here?  How do you deal with the Congress?  No distinction, Democrat or Republican, depending who I was talking to, no distinction about who you’re dealing with -- but how do you deal with this?  Because you guys deal and women deal with legislatures that are split.  Some of you represent a minority party as a governor, yet you get on very well with -- you accomplish things in your home state.  And as I said, I’ve been here long enough -- that's the way it used to work, and I think we can make it work that way again.

But there’s a number of things we have to do immediately, and we may disagree on how to address them, but I don't think anybody disagrees on the need for them to be addressed -- from implementing the Affordable Care Act.  It’s the law.  You all are grappling with that.  Each of you are making different decisions, but you’re grappling with it.  You’re moving and you’re making your own judgments.  

We also have to -- I don't think there’s much disagreement there’s a need for immigration reform.  I’ve not met a governor from the time of implementing the Recovery Act to now who doesn't think that we have do something about our crumbling infrastructure in order to impact on our productivity here in this country -- continue to attract, keep and bring back American business from abroad.  

And there’s very little disagreement on the need to build an education system that has such immense possibilities for our people.

But on most of these issues we’re united by more than what divides us.  All these issues intersect at a place -- the ones I just mentioned and others -- they intersect at a place where both the state and federal governments engage.  So we’re going to have to work together.  They overlap in many cases.  

We’ll have our differences, but we all should agree that the United States has to once again have the highest percentage of college graduates of any nation in the world.  I don't think there’s any disagreement.  Everybody agrees and some of you governors have led the way on early education and the consequences for the prospects of success for our children not only of graduating, but avoiding the criminal justice system.  You’ve all led in knowing that we have to have reform of our high school system so that we -- and not only finding a pathway for people who are going to four-year college and community college but go into the trades.  

So there’s so much agreement that I think we ought to be able to get a fair amount done.  And we should all agree that to grow our economy we have to invest in manufacturing, clean energy, infrastructure, education.  The question is who invests and how much and how -- we’re going to debate that.  But there’s not much disagreement about the need to invest.  

And I think we’re all -- I’ve never met a Democrat or Republican who’s been a governor who doesn't think that the American people should have the sense that hard work is going to be rewarded, that there’s a chance that if you work hard, you got an opportunity.  I don't know of any group of men or women who are a better living example of that than all of you sitting in front of me in your own experiences.  

So the question is -- we all use the phrase “move forward in a balanced way” -- when one man’s balance is another man’s imbalance, but that's what we got to talk about.  That's what’s at stake.  But the one thing that I don't think any of you lack is a vision about how great this country can be now that we’re coming back, that we ought to be able to reassert ourselves in a way that we own the 21st century.  And I know the guy I’m about to introduce believes that as strongly as all of you do.

Ladies and gentlemen, let me introduce you to the President -- who’s back with the pastry chef and I’m wondering what he’s doing back there.  (Laughter.)  The President of the United States, my friend, Barack Obama.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, everybody.  (Applause.)   Thank you.  Thank you, guys.  Please have a seat.  Well, welcome, everybody.  Thanks for being here.  

We all have a lot on our plate, everything from our immigration system to our education system.  As Joe talked about, our goal is to make sure that we can be an effective partner with you.

I want to thank the members of my Cabinet who are here, and members of the administration.  I want to thank Jack and Mary for their leadership of the NGA.  And everybody else, I just want to say thanks to you for being on your best behavior last night.  (Laughter.)  I’m told nothing was broken.  No silverware is missing.  (Laughter.)  I didn’t get any calls from the neighbors about the noise -- although I can’t speak for Joe’s after-party at the Observatory.  I hear that was wild.  (Laughter.)  

Now, I always enjoy this weekend when I have a chance to see the governors.  As leaders, we share responsibility to do whatever we can to help grow our economy and create good middle-class jobs, and open up new doors of opportunity for all of our people.  That’s our true north, our highest priority.  And it’s got to guide every decision that we make at every level.

As I’ve said, we should be asking ourselves three questions every single day:  How do we make America a magnet for good jobs? How do we equip our people with the skills and the training to get those jobs?  And how do we make sure if they get those jobs that their hard work actually pays off?  

As governors, you’re the ones who are on the ground, seeing firsthand every single day what works, what doesn’t work, and that's what makes you so indispensable.  Whatever your party, you ran for office to do everything that you could to make our folks’ lives better.  And one thing I know unites all of us, and all of you -- Democrats and Republicans -- and that is the last thing you want to see is Washington get in the way of progress.  

Unfortunately, in just four days, Congress is poised to allow a series of arbitrary, automatic budget cuts to kick in that will slow our economy, eliminate good jobs, and leave a lot of folks who are already pretty thinly stretched scrambling to figure out what to do.  

This morning, you received a report outlining exactly how these cuts will harm middle-class families in your states.  Thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off.  Tens of thousands of parents will have to deal with finding child care for their children.  Hundreds of thousands of Americans will lose access to primary care and preventive care like flu vaccinations and cancer screenings.  Tomorrow, for example, I’ll be in the Tidewater region of Virginia, where workers will sit idle when they should be repairing ships, and a carrier sits idle when it should be deploying to the Persian Gulf.  

Now, these impacts will not all be felt on day one.  But rest assured the uncertainty is already having an effect.  Companies are preparing layoff notices.  Families are preparing to cut back on expenses.  And the longer these cuts are in place, the bigger the impact will become.

So while you are in town, I hope that you speak with your congressional delegation and remind them in no uncertain terms exactly what is at stake and exactly who is at risk.  Because here’s the thing -- these cuts do not have to happen.  Congress can turn them off any time with just a little bit of compromise. To do so, Democrats like me need to acknowledge that we’re going to have to make modest reforms in Medicare if we want the program there for future generations and if we hope to maintain our ability to invest in critical things like education, research and infrastructure.

I’ve made that commitment.  It’s reflected in proposals I made last year and the year before that, and will be reflected in my budget, and I stand by those commitments to make the reforms for smart spending cuts.  

But we also need Republicans to adopt the same approach to tax reform that Speaker Boehner championed just two months ago.  Under our concept of tax reform, nobody’s rates would go up, but we’d be able to reduce the deficit by making some tough, smart spending cuts and getting rid of wasteful tax loopholes that benefit the well-off and the well-connected.  

I know that sometimes folks in Congress think that compromise is a bad word.  They figure they’ll pay a higher price at the polls for working with the other side than they will for standing pat or engaging in obstructionism.  But, as governors, some of you with legislators controlled by the other party, you know that compromise is essential to getting things done.  And so is prioritizing, making smart choices.  

That’s how Governor O’Malley in Maryland put his state on track to all but eliminate his deficit while keeping tuition down and making Maryland’s public schools among the best in America five years running.  That’s how Governor Haslam balanced his budget last year in Tennessee while still investing in key areas like education for Tennessee’s kids.  Like the rest of us, they know we can’t just cut our way to prosperity.  Cutting alone is not an economic policy.  We’ve got to make the tough, smart choices to cut what we don’t need so that we can invest in the things that we do need.  

Let me highlight two examples of what we do need.  The first is infrastructure.  This didn’t used to be a partisan issue. I don’t know when exactly that happened.  It should be a no-brainer.  Businesses are not going to set up shop in places where roads and bridges and ports and schools are falling apart.  They’re going to open their doors wherever they can connect the best transportation and communications networks to their businesses and to their customers.  

And that’s why I proposed what we’re calling “fix-it-first” -- I talked about this in my State of the Union address -- to put people to work right now on urgent repairs like the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country.  And to make sure taxpayers don’t shoulder the entire burden, I also proposed a partnership to rebuild America that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most -- modern ports to move our goods, modern pipelines to withstand a storm, modern schools that are worthy of our children.

I know that some people in Congress reflexively oppose any idea that I put forward, even if it’s an idea that they once supported, but rebuilding infrastructure is not my idea.  It’s everybody’s idea.  It’s what built this country.  Governor Kitzhaber, a Democrat in Oregon, has made clean-energy infrastructure a top priority.  Governor Brownback of Kansas, a Republican, has been fighting to upgrade water infrastructure there.  

And folks who think spending really is our biggest problem should be more concerned than anybody about improving our infrastructure right now.  We're talking about deferred maintenance here.  We know we're going to have to spend the money.  And the longer we wait, the more it’s going to cost.  That is a fact.  I think Matt Mead, a Republican, put it pretty well in Wyoming’s state address.  He said failing to maintain our roads “is not a plan for being fiscally conservative.”  Well, what's true in Wyoming is true all across the United States.  

And we could be putting folks back to work right now.  We know contractors are begging for work.  They’ll come in on time, under budget, which never happens.   And we could make a whole lot of progress right now on things that we know we're going to have to do at some point.  This is like fixing the roof or repairing a boiler that's broken.  It will save us money in the long term.   

I know that one of the biggest hurdles that you face when it comes to fixing infrastructure is red tape.  And oftentimes, that comes out of Washington with regulations.  In my first term, we started to take some steps to address that.  And we’ve shaved months -- in some cases, even years -- off the timeline of infrastructure projects across America.

So today, I’m accelerating that effort.  We’re setting up regional teams that will focus on some of the unique needs each of you have in various parts of the country.  We’re going to help the Pacific Northwest move faster on renewable energy projects.  We’re going to help the Northeast Corridor move faster on high-speed rail service.  We’re going to help the Midwest and other states, like Colorado, move faster on projects that help farmers deal with worsening drought.  We’re going to help states like North Dakota and South Dakota and Montana move faster on oil and gas production.  All of these projects will get more Americans back to work faster.  And we can do even more if we can get Congress to act.    

The second priority that I want to talk about is education  -- and in particular, education that starts at the earliest age. I want to partner with each of you to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America.  

Now, this is an area where we've already seen great bipartisan work at the state level.  I was just in Governor Deal’s state to highlight this issue because Georgia has made it a priority to educate our youngest kids.  And in the school district where I visited in Decatur, Georgia, you're already seeing closing of the achievement gap.  Kids who are poor are leveling up.  And everybody is seeing real improvement, because it's high-quality, early childhood education.

Study after study shows that the sooner children begin to learn in these high-quality settings, the better he or she does down the road, and we all end up saving money.  Unfortunately, today fewer than three in 10 four-year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program.  Most middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week in additional income for these kinds of preschool programs.  And poor kids, who need it most, lack access.  And that lack of access can shadow them for the rest of their lives.  We all pay a price for that.  

Every dollar we invest in early childhood education can save more than seven dollars later on -- boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing incidents of violent crime.  

And again, I'm not the first person to focus on this. Governor Bentley has made this a priority in Alabama.  Governor Snyder is making it a priority in Michigan.  Governor Tomblin has made this a priority in West Virginia.  Even in a time of tight budgets, Republicans and Democrats are focused on high-quality early childhood education.  We want to make sure that we can be an effective partner in that process.

We should be able to do that for every child, everywhere -- Democrat, Republican, blue state, red state -- it shouldn't matter.  All of us want our kids to grow up more likely to read and write and do math at grade level, to graduate high school, hold a job, and form more stable families of their own.  That will be better for every state.  That will be better for this country.  That's what high-quality early childhood education can deliver.  And I hope that you're willing to partner with us to make that happen.

Let me just close with this.  There are always going to be areas where we have some genuine disagreement, here in Washington and in your respective states.  But there are more areas where we can do a lot more cooperating than I think we've seen over the last several years.  To do that, though, this town has to get past its obsession with focusing on the next election instead of the next generation.

All of us are elected officials.  All of us are concerned about our politics, both in our own party’s as well as the other party’s.  But at some point, we've got to do some governing.  And certainly what we can't do is keep careening from manufactured crisis to manufactured crisis.  As I said in the State of the Union, the American people have worked hard and long to dig themselves out of one crisis; they don't need us creating another one.  And unfortunately, that's what we've been seeing too much out there.

The American people are out there every single day, meeting their responsibilities, giving it their all to provide for their families and their communities.  A lot of you are doing the same things in your respective states.  Well, we need that same kind of attitude here in Washington.  At the very least, the American people have a right to expect that from their representatives.  

And so I look forward to working with all of you not just to strengthen our economy for the short term, but also to reignite what has always been the central premise of America’s economic engine, and that is that we build a strong, growing, thriving middle class where if you work hard in this country, no matter who you are, what you look like, you can make it; you can succeed.  That's our goal, and I know that's the goal of all of you as well.  
So I look forward to our partnering.  And with that, what I want to do is clear out the press so we can take some questions. (Applause.)

END
11:40 A.M. EST

Extending Middle Class Tax Cuts

Rosa Parks has a Permanent Place in the U.S. Capitol

President Obama is on hand for the unveiling of the new Rosa Parks statue in the U.S. Capitol

February 27, 2013 12:00 PM EST

To mark African American History Month, as well as the 150th anniversary of the year the Emancipation Proclamation, we talked with White House Curator Bill Allman about a painting called Watch Meeting--Dec. 31st 1862--Waiting for the Hour that hangs near the Oval Office in the West Wing.

President Obama Calls for a Responsible Approach to Deficit Reduction

President Obama strongly believes we need to replace the arbitrary cuts known as the sequester with balanced deficit reduction, and today he was at a shipyard in Newport News, VA to talk about what failing to do so will mean for middle class families.

view all related blog posts

View the original article here

FDA approves Shionogi's drug for painful sex in women

WASHINGTON, Feb 26 (Reuters) - U.S. health regulators said on Tuesday they have approved a drug made by Japan's Shionogi & Co to treat women experiencing pain during sexual intercourse.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the drug, Osphena, for a type of pain known as dyspareunia, which is a symptom of vulvar and vaginal atrophy due to menopause.

Dyspareunia is associated with declining levels of estrogen hormones during menopause. Osphena, known chemically as ospemifene, is a pill that acts like estrogen on vaginal tissues to make them thicker and less fragile, resulting in a reduction in pain associated with intercourse.

The drug's label includes a boxed warning, the most severe available, alerting patients to an increased risk of strokes and deep vein thrombosis. Common side effects include hot flashes, vaginal discharge, muscle spasms and excessive sweating.

(Reporting By Toni Clarke; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick)

((toni.clarke@thomsonreuters.com)(617-856-4340)(Reuters

Messaging: toni.clarke.reuters.com@reuters.net))

Keywords: SHIONOGI DRUGAPPROVAL/


View the original article here

Tenet Healthcare Releases Q4 Profit

 Highlight transcript below to create clipTranscript:  Print  |  Email Go  Click text to jump within videoTue 26 Feb 13 | 08:17 AM ET Trevor Fetter, President & CEO of Tenet Healthcare, breaks down the company's quarterly numbers and weighs in on spending cuts in Washington and the outlook for the health care industry.

View the original article here