Obama Care: Jan 14, 2013

Monday, January 14, 2013

Statement by the President on the Status of the Administration’s Supplemental Request to Congress for Response, Recovery and Mitigation Related to Hurricane Sandy

Statement by the President on the Status of the Administration’s Supplemental Request to Congress for Response, Recovery and Mitigation Related to Hurricane Sandy | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email Updates Contact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Performances Live Streams Podcasts 2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2012 Annual Report to Congress 2011 Annual Report to Congress 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff A Commitment to Transparency

Browse White House visitor logs

Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense End of Iraq War Disabilities Economy Jobs Reform and Fiscal Responsibility Strengthening the Middle Class A Plan for Refinancing Support for Business Education Energy & Environment Ethics Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Taxes Tax Receipt The Buffett Rule Rural Urban Policy Veterans Joining Forces Technology Seniors & Social Security Service Snapshots Creating Jobs Health Care Small Business PreK-12 Education Women Americans Sharing Their Story

On what $2K means to them

President Obama's Tax Plan

Extend tax cuts for families making under $250,000 a year

The Administration We the People

Create and Sign Petitions Now

President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet 2010 Video Reports White House Staff Chief of Staff Jack Lew Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy-Ann DeParle Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House White House On the Go

Download our mobile apps

2012: A Year in Photos

A unique view of 2012

Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Statements & Releases The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release January 02, 2013 Statement by the President on the Status of the Administration’s Supplemental Request to Congress for Response, Recovery and Mitigation Related to Hurricane Sandy

It has only been two months since Hurricane Sandy devastated communities across New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut as well as other eastern states. Our citizens are still trying to put their lives back together. Our states are still trying to rebuild vital infrastructure. And so, last month, working closely with the Governors of the affected states, I sent Congress an urgent request to support their efforts to rebuild and recover. The Senate passed this request with bipartisan support. But the House of Representatives has refused to act, even as there are families and communities who still need our help to rebuild in the months and years ahead, and who also still need immediate support with the bulk of winter still in front of us.

When tragedy strikes, Americans come together to support those in need. I urge Republicans in the House of Representatives to do the same, bring this important request to a vote today, and pass it without delay for our fellow Americans.

Blog posts on this issue January 04, 2013 6:12 PM ESTJoin President Obama in a National Day of Service

The Presidential Inaugural Committee announces a National Day of Service on January 19, 2013

January 04, 2013 6:05 PM ESTJoin President Obama in a National Day of Service

The Presidential Inaugural Committee announces a National Day of Service on January 19, 2013

January 04, 2013 2:55 PM EST2012: A Year in Photos

Each January, Pete Souza, Chief Official White House Photographer and Director of the White House Photography Office selects his favorite images from the past twelve months, and now, we're sharing them with you.

En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Developers Apply for a Job

View the original article here

Since September, America Has Lost One Government Job For Every Five Private Sector Jobs Created

The public sector lost another 13,000 jobs in December, bringing the post-recession job loss total for federal, state, and local governments to more than 600,000. Those job losses — many of which have hit teachers, firefighters, police officers, and other public safety officials — have had a devastating impact on the economic recovery. If public sector job creation had kept its pre-recession pace, the unemployment rate would be a full point lower.

Government job losses began to slow earlier this year, but in the last three months, the public sector has shed another 89,000 jobs. And as Demos’ David Callahan noted in a blog post today, that means the public sector has lost one job for every five private sector jobs created in that time:

But here’s a statistic that jumped out at me: 89,000 public sector workers lost their jobs in October, November, and December—with most of those losses, 66,000, occurring in October.
Large-scale layoffs of government workers continue across the United States. Such layoffs undermine local economies and stymie the recovery. For every five workers who were hired in the past three months, one was laid off by government.

Government job losses have come as a result of crunched budgets at the state and local levels, where a vast majority of the losses have occurred. They’ve been exacerbated by spending cuts at the federal level. Efforts to alleviate those losses through stimulus measures like the American Jobs Act, which would have provided aid to states and localities to rehire teachers and public safety officials, were repeatedly blocked by the GOP.

That has terrible consequences for the overall economic recovery. Fewer government workers means fewer workers overall, which means that less money is being spent throughout the economy. A study from the Economic Policy Institute, in fact, found that the shrinking public sector has cost the overall economy at least 750,000 private sector jobs.

View the original article here

ObamaCare Math Doesn't Add Up to a Healthier U.S.

Many people in health care saw passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in 2010 as an historic achievement, a reshaping of how health care is practiced in the U.S.

In truth, the new law has remarkably limited objectives. Its single goal is insurance expansion. An additional 32 million Americans are to be covered by private insurance and Medicaid. Integrated medicine, best practices and promotion of primary care get only “pilot program” treatment. The ACA doesn’t mandate enough change to have risked the political opposition of industry interests.

Indeed, the law’s most obvious characteristic is its continuity with our existing system. Step away from the sound and fury of politics, and the 2010 health-care law is laid bare as a technocrats’ approach to saving our current system while expanding it to cover more people. At the end of the day, it is unlikely to change much at all.

Americans spend an enormous amount of money on health care -- two and a half times as much as was spent 20 years ago. Medicare and Medicaid represent 23 percent of federal spending, up from 15 percent in 1993. And employers pay an average insurance premium of $15,073 for a family of four, up from $4,404 two decades ago.

We also pay a physical toll for our system’s carelessness. In the past 20 years, medical errors have killed 1 million to 3 million people -- more than have died in all of America’s wars combined.

The fundamental flaws in our system are familiar: perverse incentives that encourage excess treatment, high prices, poor service (even dangerous sloppiness), incomprehensible complexity and a flawed safety net. But to all such problems the new health-care law has the same two answers: more insurance and Medicaid and more top-down cost control.

Supporters may believe that the ACA will be worth it even if it only expands our insurance system to cover many people who are not now covered. But if the law places more of the burden of health care on the poor and the middle class, diverts resources into waste and unnecessary treatments, reinforces an industry culture of dangerous sloppiness and crowds out all other social priorities, then it will have actively hurt the very people it was intended to help.

Nothing better illustrates the flaw at the heart of the ACA than its treatment of Medicaid. There may be no element of our current system more dysfunctional or plagued by runaway costs, quality issues, unimaginable complexity and outright corruption. But the ACA mandates a massive expansion of the program. Indeed, Medicaid’s growth is expected to account for roughly half of the 32 million newly covered.

Medicaid is already very expensive. In 2010, the states and the federal government spent a combined $405 billion on their Medicaid programs, up from $206 billion only a decade earlier. It doesn’t seem to make sense that a population that is getting richer, that has greater access to better food and cleaner water than it used to have, that works in less physically dangerous occupations, that doesn’t smoke or drink as much should need so much more health care. But Medicaid’s growth is an inevitable consequence of the undisciplined demand for care that pushes up prices.

Furthermore, Medicaid coverage is already no guarantee of actual care; because of low reimbursement rates, many physicians refuse to treat Medicaid patients. A Medicaid card may provide “access” to high-volume procedures, but not to the more time- intensive care, such as primary services. All health care is not equally valuable.

For proponents of the ACA, expanding our insurance system is a simple moral issue; they believe it will keep people alive. But the reality is far more complex; we cannot even be sure that when you consider all its effects, the uninsured are more helped than hurt by the ACA.

Keep in mind that the uninsured are not a monolithic group. The most recent estimate is that about 50 million people lack insurance at any one time. (This number is expected to shrink to 18 million under the new law.) But “at any one time” is not the same as permanently. Almost 20 percent of our population lacks insurance at some point during a given year, but 40 percent of these people are uninsured for less than a year.

In addition, people aged 18 to 30 make up about a third of the uninsured. They are less likely to have jobs with coverage and more likely to consider insurance an unnecessary expense. Remember that virtually no senior citizens are uninsured, because they receive Medicare, while most of the uninsured who suffer disabilities become eligible for Medicaid or Medicare. Strangely, then, the uninsured may be healthier than the general population; 90 percent of them describe their own health as good to excellent.

For the long-term uninsured, the story is likely to be quite different. Roughly half the uninsured at any one time -- 25 million people -- are estimated to be without coverage for three years or more. These people are disproportionately poor, suffering long periods of unemployment and often working in low- wage jobs without health benefits. Furthermore, low-income people are more likely to suffer from chronic health problems relating to lifestyle: hypertension, diabetes and heart disease.

If viewing the uninsured as a monolithic high-risk group clouds our understanding of the issue, viewing them as having no access to care is even more deceptive. A 2008 study estimated that those uninsured for a whole year averaged $1,686 in health- care spending, a little more than 43 percent of what was spent by those privately insured ($3,915). Lacking health insurance is not the same as lacking health care.

Overall, the uninsured receive less care than the insured, especially preventive and chronic-condition care -- but certainly not so much less as to explain the cost of the ACA’s efforts to expand insurance. The government has estimated that the law will provide coverage for 32 million at a cost of $200 billion in government funds plus $100 billion of the newly insured’s own money. That’s $6,250 per newly insured person.

Now consider how the uninsured currently pay for their care. Their own money accounts for some of it -- the 2008 study estimated $583 per uninsured person a year (compared with $681 spent out-of-pocket by the insured). And the uninsured receive $56 billion worth of “uncompensated” care annually, the 2008 study found. Mostly, this is treatment provided by hospitals for free.

But this care is at least partially compensated under a variety of state and federal programs. A recent estimate is that hospitals provide $34 billion in uncompensated care and receive roughly $25 billion to help them deal with the burden.

The assumption has been that the hospital and pharmaceutical industries supported the ACA because it will bring them new customers. But a better explanation is that reform will turn their discount customers into full-price ones. A recent investment research report suggests that hospital profits will rise 43 percent with the implementation of the ACA.

Now, I don’t want to get carried away with this; there is no question that many uninsured face an impossible burden in managing certain ongoing conditions and that the ER safety net is not the most desirable option for many kinds of treatment. All other things being equal, I -- and probably everyone -- would rather have insurance.

But all other things aren’t equal. The most vulnerable uninsured are most vulnerable not just because of insurance issues but because of low incomes, financial insecurity and the lifestyle choices and stress associated with poverty.

You may ask, even if the ACA may do more for hospitals and drug companies than for the uninsured, doesn’t society have a moral responsibility to include everyone in our health-care system? So what that we may spend $200 billion more to get our neediest only $70 billion in additional real care -- isn’t it worth it?

As a liberal, I would have answered yes even a few years ago. Now, I suspect, the questions are out of date. Our system no longer neatly divides between the insured and the uninsured. Your odds of getting appropriate care -- rather than excessive and uncoordinated care -- depend more on the professional culture of your providers than on your insurance status. And your chances of avoiding a serious medical error are mainly a matter of luck.

The ACA is just the latest in a long line of laws that drive resources from all other goods into health care. The $100 billion a year in additional government spending could, for example, buy gym memberships for 42 million Americans and pay them $10 an hour to exercise three times a week, or put fresh vegetables on the table daily for every child in the U.S. This doesn’t even include the $100 billion now in Americans’ pockets that the ACA will make them spend on health insurance.

If health-care costs were a reasonable percentage of our economy, then the money-is-no-object argument might make sense. But with these costs making up 18 percent of our economy, the decision to shovel more money into health care will have a powerful impact on job creation, wage growth and disposable income. All of these issues are more important to the well-being of the long-term uninsured -- even to their health -- than more health care.

(David Goldhill is the president and chief executive officer of the cable TV network GSN. This is the second in a series of three excerpts from his new book, “Catastrophic Care: How American Health Care Killed My Father -- and How We Can Fix It,” to be published Jan. 8 by Alfred A. Knopf. The opinions expressed are his own. Read Part 1 and Part 3.)

To contact the writer of this article: David Goldhill at .

To contact the editor responsible for this article: Mary Duenwald at mduenwald@bloomberg.net

View the original article here

Merck resubmits cholesterol combo pill to FDA

TRENTON, N.J. -- Merck & Co. said Wednesday it has resubmitted its application for a new combination cholesterol drug to the Food and Drug Administration, which rejected the experimental medication in March.

The drugmaker is seeking approval for a pill that combines a generic version of Lipitor, the top-selling drug of all time, with Merck's cholesterol medicine Zetia. The company said in a statement that the FDA judged the drug application complete and ready for review. A decision is expected in the first half of 2013.

Merck's experimental drug, still known only as MK-0653C, contains medicines that fight high cholesterol in two different ways to reduce risk of heart attack and stroke.

Lipitor, known chemically as atorvastatin, is part of the widely used class of drugs called statins that reduce the amount of cholesterol naturally produced in the liver. Zetia, on the other hand, reduces the amount of cholesterol absorbed from the food the patient eats.

Merck shares rose 40 cents to close at $41.34 in trading Wednesday.

View the original article here

Rep. Gutierrez moves from Financial Services Committee to Judiciary for immigration reform

Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) is taking a leave of absence from the House Financial Services Committee to serve on the House Judiciary Committee to help pass new immigration reform legislation.

Gutierrez, the chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Immigration Task Force, recently met with a number of Republican lawmakers who are likely to play a prominent role in upcoming immigration reform negotiations. He discussed immigration reform with both Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) in December.

Gutierrez, who was the third-ranking Democrat on the Financial Service Committee, will likely be the 13th ranking Democrat on the Judiciary committee. The move was announced Friday.

President Obama has vowed to make immigration reform a top priority of his second term and already a number of legislators have begun initial talks on immigration reform legislation.

"All of the road signs are pointed in the right direction, and I felt I must be on the Judiciary Committee during this Congress to help the others on the Committee get immigration reform to the finish line," Gutierrez said in a statement. "We are poised for serious action to fix our broken immigration system, a top priority for Democrats, for the Democratic leadership, and for the president, and I have spoken to numerous Republicans in the House and Senate who want to get it done."

Gutierrez thanked the Democratic leadership for approving the move.

"I look forward to working with the chairman and the subcommittee chairmen and the Ranking Member, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), and the Immigration Subcommittee Ranking Leader, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), in crafting bipartisan immigration reform that fixes our broken immigration system," Gutierrez also said in the statement.

View Comments

View the original article here

Innovation to fund global health

Millions of lives are saved today in developing countries because of bold, innovative financing arrangements over last 10 years. These financing mechanisms are good examples of private sector partnership with public sector for common good.

These financing initiatives have pooled large public sector funding with private sector resources, thus allowing tax payers funds to have much larger impact than would otherwise be possible. Some of the examples are given below.

In 2000, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) was set up by major donors to provide support for immunization programs. GAVI has immunized 296 millions children in 74 countries and committed $7.2 billions to immunize an additional 245 million children by 2016. By increasing demand, pooling global requirements, and making additional resources available, GAVI has helped reduce prices of vaccines and brought in more producers in the market place.

In 2002, The Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria was set up. Over last 11 years, it has put 4.2 million HIV patients on treatment, treated over 9.5 million TB cases, and saved millions of lives from Malaria. Predictable large scale financing helped major reduction in prices of health products especially HIV treatment drugs ARV.

In 2006, the International Finance Facility for Immunization (IFFIm) was established by France and UK. The Fund ensures flow of funds from developing countries to support immunization programs in developing countries. The IFFIm is a legally binding commitment of donors for up to 23 years and nine countries proposed donation of $6billion for immunization programs.

In 2006, France in partnership with Brazil, Chile, Norway, and UK has set up UNITAID, an airline levy solidarity initiative. Today it is backed by Gates Foundation and several other countries. Over last six years, it has provided $2.5billion to support medicine and diagnostics procurement for poor people in 94 countries for HIV/AIDS, TB, and Malaria. Its market dynamics initiative has resulted in price reduction of 10% to 40% for medicines and diagnostics.

The Clinton Foundation hosts many initiatives that raise funds for fighting poverty and diseases everywhere. Over the last seven years, President Clinton has organized global forums for world leaders that have raised more than US$73 billion that will go towards saving 400 million lives around the world. Clinton Health Initiative is a major partner of UNITAID to provide treatment for HIV positive children. 7 out of 10 HIV positive children receive treatment under UNITAID funding.

Two other innovations that complement the work of the innovative financing mechanisms. These are patent pools. They are supposed to address the barriers posed by Intellectual Property (IP) system so that drugs can be made available through generic producers to poorer countries in exchange for a small fee to the patent holders. The two patent pools are: Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) and Pool for Open Innovation. MPP was established by UNITAID for HIV/AIDS drugs and is now an independent entity. The Pool for Open Innovation was conceived and created by GlaxoSmithKline(GSK) for neglected tropical diseases and is now led by several pharmaceutical companies, the World Intellectual Property Organization(WIPO), and BIO Ventures for Global Health.
Universal access to health care requires major financing from international donors which is not available from bilateral donors alone, thus requiring innovative financing initiatives with the private sector.

Medicines and diagnostics are a major part of developing country health budgets. Many new medicines are expensive and low income countries cannot afford them.

Financing initiatives that can reduce prices of medicines and diagnostics as well as allow use of technology to reduce delivery costs facilitates sustainable health financing by low income countries.

Large scale predictable financing and facilitation by patent pools promote generic drug production of expensive medicines by local pharmaceutical companies. The local production allows large scale availability of cheaper medicines to meet local demands.

Our efforts must be to support and expand these innovative financing mechanisms and promote innovation for efficient pricing arrangements. At the same time, we must ensure that these financing mechanisms remain lean, efficient, and transparent.

Rahman is an international health specialist with over 25 years experience in the health sector of several countries.

View Comments

View the original article here

Gohmert: 'Any weapon' is an assault weapon

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Friday that he would not support efforts for a renewed assault weapons ban, because "any weapon" — including hammers and machetes — could qualify as an "assault weapon."

"I refuse to play the game of 'assault weapon,' " Gohmert said on the "Dennis Miller Show," as first reported by ThinkProgress. "That’s any weapon. It’s a hammer. It’s the machetes. In Rwanda that killed 800,000 people, an article that came out this week, the massive number that are killed with hammers."

The term "assault weapon" was defined in the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban as certain firearms, the majority of which were semi-automatic and possessed cosmetic features mirroring those on military or fully automatic weapons. Opponents of the ban have argued that features like pistol grips, threaded barrels, or telescoping stocks do not actually increase the lethality of a weapon.

At a press conference last month, White House press secretary Jay Carney said the president will "actively support" efforts by Democrats to reinstate the federal assault weapons ban, which sunset during the Bush administration. Obama pledged to address gun violence in his second term after the Connecticut elementary school shooting that left 26 dead. "He wants to move in the coming weeks, which is a fairly short period of time," Carney said. "And while he supports, and strongly, renewal of the assault weapons ban, and strongly other measures, he wants to expand the conversation beyond those specific areas of legislation to look at other ways we can address this problem.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has pledged to introduce an updated version of the bill sometime this month.

That bill would outlaw 100 specifically named firearms, along with any weapon that can accept detachable magazines and handguns with fixed magazines that can accept more than 10 rounds.

Gohmert has previously suggested that he believes school officials should be armed to prevent future violence, and suggested that had the slain principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had a gun, the shooter may have been stopped.

"I wish to God she had had an M-4 in her office, locked up so when she heard gunfire, she pulls it out and she didn't have to lunge heroically with nothing in her hands. But she takes him out, takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids," Gohmert told Fox News.

View Comments

View the original article here

Poll: 50 percent disapprove of Boehner on 'fiscal cliff' negotiations

By Alicia M. Cohn - 01/04/13 05:12 PM ET

Americans are evenly split in their opinion of the “fiscal cliff” deal signed into law this week, but more people disapprove of the way congressional leaders handled negotiations than President Obama or Vice President Biden, according to a new poll released Friday.

The Gallup poll found that 43 percent approve of the tax bill, while 45 percent disapprove and 12 percent have no opinion.

The poll has a margin of error of 4 percentage points, making the split a statistical tie.

The national poll mostly proves true multiple polls from last year predicting that the public would blame Republicans more than Democrats if the country went over the “fiscal cliff,” but Democrats in Congress did not fare much better.

When asked about generic Democratic leaders and Republican leaders, Americans disapproved more than approved of both groups. Republicans leaders earned a 67 percent disapproval rating over the fiscal-cliff negotiations, with 25 percent approval, while Democratic leaders earned 55 to 34 percent ratings.

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) apparently took the most blame, with half of those polled disapproving of the way he handled negotiations, at 50 percent disapproval to 31 percent approval. The numbers for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) are close, with 48 percent disapproval to 27 percent approval for Reid and 46 percent to 28 for McConnell, although about 25 percent of those asked had no opinion for either man.

Obama and Biden fared better in Americans’ opinion of those involved in negotiations, with statistically tied approval-disapproval numbers. Obama earned 48 percent disapproval to 46 percent approval, and Biden 42 to 40 percent.

Technically, Congress missed the deadlines at the end of the year that allowed the George W. Bush-era tax rates to expire and the automatic spending cuts triggered by sequestration to kick in. Biden and McConnell ultimately brokered a deal that the Senate passed on New Year's Day followed by the House that night.

The legislation indefinitely extends the expiring Bush-era tax rates on annual family incomes up to $450,000, and for individuals up to a $400,000 cut-off. It also lifts the top capital gains and dividends rates to 20 percent, extends unemployment benefits for a year and delays for two months the automatic spending cuts triggered by the sequestering process.

More Republicans and Independents disapprove than approve of the deal itself, while more Democrats approve than disapprove, the poll found. The legislation passed with more Democratic than Republican support — it received 85 Republican votes in the House, but all except five Republican senators voted for it.

View Comments

View the original article here

Three December Facts That Prove ‘Uncertainty’ Isn’t Plaguing The Economy

In recent months, as the United States approached the so-called “fiscal cliff,” lawmakers and business executives argued that the supposed uncertainty brought on by the cliff’s combined automatic spending cuts and tax increases was depressing America’s economic growth. It has made a convenient narrative for chief executives who want to cut government spending and corporate taxes and institute policies more favorable to their companies.

Even in the wake of the deal to avert the fiscal cliff, which adds certainty to tax rates if not to spending cuts, CEOs are making the same argument. There is only one problem: it doesn’t appear to be true. Three indicators from December — job growth, holiday sales, and housing — prove that the uncertainty argument doesn’t hold water:

JOBS REPORT: The economy added 155,000 jobs in December, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ monthly report released this morning. That was in line with projections and equal to the monthly average over the last year. Hourly earnings also rose, and the unemployment rate remained constant from November. In all, it offered no indication that the supposed uncertainty surrounding the end-of-year fiscal cliff drove down hiring over the month.
HOLIDAY SALES: Holiday sales over Thanksgiving weekend rose 13 percent in stores and online, not far from the 16 percent rise over the same weekend in 2011. And despite forecasts in mid-December that holiday sales were slumping, retailers reported a 4.5 percent jump that actually beat earlier projections. Auto manufacturers, meanwhile, had their strongest sales month since 2007.
HOUSING: Housing prices continued to rise in October (the latest data available) according to recent reports. The S&P/Case Shiller index showed that prices rose 0.7 percent, beating the 0.5 percent increase projected by economists. In the 20 cities the index follows, prices rose 4.3 percent from October 2011. The December jobs report also showed that 30,000 construction jobs were created last month, another indication that the housing market has rebounded. “The housing turnaround continues,” the Washington Post’s Jim Tankersley tweeted. “It’s driving job growth now.”

Of course, “uncertainty” is really just the CEOs’ way of asking Congress for corporate tax cuts and massive spending cuts. But their preferred budget policies have done plenty to slow down the economy. The public sector shed another 13,000 jobs in December, and it has lost more than 600,000 jobs since the end of the recession. Nonpartisan agencies from the Congressional Budget Office to the International Monetary Fund, meanwhile, have warned Congress about the perils of further spending cuts.

View the original article here

POLL: Israelis Support Palestinian State But Split On Settlements

(Photo: Haaretz)

A new poll by an Israeli newspaper has found that the majority of those surveyed support the creation of a Palestinian state but remain unconvinced that one is likely to come into existence.

Conducted by Israel Hayom, the poll asked 800 Israeli citizens whether they “support or oppose the idea of two states for two peoples, i.e. the creation of a Palestinian state independent from Israel.” Fifty-four percent of respondents were in favor of a Palestinian state, with only 38 percent opposed. The result in favor is down slightly from a survey published in December by Smith Research, which found that 62 percent of Israelis supported a two-state solution at the time.

Likewise, the new poll shows both concerns about the likelihood of a Palestinian state ever coming about and ambivalence towards the ever-expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank. In the case of the former, 54 percent of those polled believe that a peace deal with the Palestinians is impossible. Support for settlements were almost exactly split in half, with 43 percent opposed and 43 percent in favor.

The split in the poll results may reflect the changing tone of Israeli politics. With a general election for the Knesset scheduled to take place in just a few weeks, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Beitenu party remains set to take the plurality of seats in the new session. Right-wing parties are also due to hold the majority of seats over center and left-wing groups like the Labor and Liberal parties.

However, due to the coalition-making that is an ingrained part of Israeli political culture, Netanyahu may find himself pushed even further to the right on the issue of the West Bank. According to pre-election polling, pro-settlement party Jewish Home alone is poised to increase their allotment of the 120 seats in the Knesset from 3 to 14. Netanyahu’s Cabinet has already signed off on several controversial expansions of West Bank settlements, including the E1 section of the territory that may make a contiguous territory within the West Bank impossible for Palestine.

Furthering that trend would position Netanyahu and his future Cabinet for further scorn and condemnation from his allies around the world. The settlements also remain illegal in the eyes of international law and an obstacle in the path to a lasting peace deal, rendering the uncertainty of those surveyed valid.

View the original article here

Health Care Law May Mean Less Hiring In 2013

President Obama leaves Air Force One upon arrival Nov. 30 at Andrews Air Force Base. He signed the Affordable Care Act on March 23, 2010. (Photo: Jose Luis Magana, AP)

Some businesses plan to trim employee hoursOthers may add more part-time workersRetail and hospitality industries affected

Many businesses plan to bring on more part-time workers next year, trim the hours of full-time employees or curtail hiring because of the new health care law, human resource firms say.

Their actions could further dampen job growth, which already is threatened by possible federal budget cutbacks resulting from the tax increases and spending cuts known as the fiscal cliff.

"It will have a negative impact on job creation" in 2013, says Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Analytics.

Under the Affordable Care Act, businesses that employ at least 50 full-time workers — or the equivalent, including part-time workers — must offer health insurance to staffers who work at least 30 hours a week. Employers that don't provide coverage must pay a $2,000-per-worker penalty, excluding the first 30 employees.

The so-called employer mandate to offer health coverage doesn't take effect until Jan. 1, 2014. But to determine whether employees work enough hours on average to receive benefits, employers must track their schedules for three to 12 months prior to 2014 — meaning many are restructuring payrolls now or will do so early next year.

About a quarter of businesses surveyed by consulting firm Mercer don't offer health coverage to employees who work at least 30 hours a week. Half of them plan to make changes so fewer employees work that many hours.

The health care law will particularly affect companies with 40 to 45 workers that plan to expand and hire. Many are holding off so they don't cross the 50-employee threshold, says Christine Ippolito, principal at Compass Workforce Solutions, a human resource consulting firm in Melville, N.Y.

Ernie Canadeo, president of EGC Group, a Melville-based advertising and marketing agency with 45 employees, planned to add 10 next year but now says he may add fewer so he's not subject to the mandate. Still, he says, he'll eventually have to hire more workers to grow. "If business demands that I hire, then I have to hire," he says.

Others already over the 50-employee threshold plan to add more part-time workers or cut the hours of full-timers, says Rob Wilson, head of Employco, a human resource outsourcing firm. Many, he says, will hire more temporary workers, whom they won't have to cover.

Nearly half of retailers, restaurants and hotels will be affected by the law, according to Mercer. They employ large numbers of part-time and seasonal employees, including many who work about 30 hours a week.

Since such low-wage workers are widely available, it often hasn't been cost-effective or necessary for employers to offer them coverage. Providing them benefits could be costly because employees must pay no more than 9.5% of their wages in insurance premiums, forcing employers to contribute significantly more than they do for higher-wage workers.

"I think you may see employees with fewer hours as a consequence," says Neil Trautwein, vice president of the National Retail Federation.

Thirty-one percent of franchisees surveyed recently by the International Franchise Association said they plan to pare staff to get under the 50-employee threshold.

{ "assetid": "1785641", "aws": "money/business", "aws_id": "money_business", "blogname": "", "contenttype": "story pages ", "seotitle": "Health-care-law-jobs", "seotitletag": "Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013", "ssts": "money/business", "taxonomykeywords":"Mark Zandi,Jobs Report,National Organization for Women,National Retail Federation,National Restaurant Association", "templatename": "stories/default", "topic":"jobs-report", "videoincluded":"no", "basePageType":"story" }

View the original article here

Obama Care

Donations Are Always Welcome and Appreciated

Translate

Monday, January 14, 2013

Statement by the President on the Status of the Administration’s Supplemental Request to Congress for Response, Recovery and Mitigation Related to Hurricane Sandy

Since September, America Has Lost One Government Job For Every Five Private Sector Jobs Created

ObamaCare Math Doesn't Add Up to a Healthier U.S.

Merck resubmits cholesterol combo pill to FDA

Rep. Gutierrez moves from Financial Services Committee to Judiciary for immigration reform

Innovation to fund global health

Gohmert: 'Any weapon' is an assault weapon

Poll: 50 percent disapprove of Boehner on 'fiscal cliff' negotiations

Three December Facts That Prove ‘Uncertainty’ Isn’t Plaguing The Economy

POLL: Israelis Support Palestinian State But Split On Settlements

Health Care Law May Mean Less Hiring In 2013

About Me

Blog Archive