The Caucus: 2 More Republicans Back Deficit Plan

All three Senate Republicans on President Obama?s debt-reduction commission have announced their support for the bipartisan plan of the panel?s co-chairmen, exposing a party break over how to address the nation?s fiscal problems since the panel?s three House Republicans are expected to vote no when the commission votes on Friday.

Two of the Senate?s most conservative Republicans, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Michael D. Crapo of Idaho, said they would set aside their reservations about the package of long-term spending cuts and revenue increases and vote yes along with Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, who endorsed the plan on Wednesday.

The latest endorsements bring to nine the number of members whom the co-chairmen ? former Senator Alan K. Simpson, a Republican, and Erskine B. Bowles, a Democrat and former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton ? have won over in private lobbying this week.

That means their plan will receive support from at least half of the 18-member panel, which is more than most people expected. But it is short of the 14-vote supermajority needed to send it the plan to Congress for a vote under the terms of Mr. Obama?s February order that established the commission, which is made up of 12 members of Congress, six from each party, and six private citizens.

Even if the vote falls short of the threshold, the bipartisan support the plan has attracted so far has increased its potential appeal to some in the White House and in Congress as a model for future action.

Besides the three Republican senators, the other six supporters of the plan include five of the commission?s six nonelected members ? the two chairmen along with David Cote, a Republican and the chief executive of Honeywell International; Ann Fudge, a former business executive and a political independent; and Alice M. Rivlin, a Democrat who was a budget director to Congress and then to Mr. Clinton.

Of the six Democratic lawmakers on the commission, two have announced their positions ? Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, in support, and Representative Jan Schakowsky, a liberal from Illinois, opposed.

At Wednesday?s public meeting on the Bowles-Simpson plan, which would shave $4 trillion from projected deficits through the next decade, Mr. Coburn said he had ?heartaches with tons of it? and Mr. Crapo said he had ?a lot of heartburn.? But on Thursday, both men said the nation?s looming fiscal crisis demanded that both parties compromise.

In contrast, Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, one of the three House Republicans on the panel, reiterated his opposition in a breakfast meeting with reporters on Thursday. Mr. Ryan, who will become the House Budget Committee chairman in January, when Republicans take control of the House, cited in particular the proposed plan?s failure to seek repeal of the new health care law and to replace Medicare with a voucher system for future beneficiaries.

Instead, the Bowles-Simpson plan, like other centrist deficit-reduction plans, would build upon the cost-saving provisions of Mr. Obama?s health care law to force down health care providers? prices and ratchet up out-of-pocket costs for some beneficiaries of federal health care programs in coming years even as it expands coverage to more than 30 million uninsured Americans.

Also planning to vote against the plan are Mr. Ryan?s House colleagues, Representatives
Dave Camp of Michigan, who will become chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, and Jeb Hensarling of Texas, a member of the House Republican leadership.

The split between the House and Senate Republicans in part reflects the House lawmakers? new role in soon having control of the House; while Republicans won more seats in the Senate in the midterm elections, they will remain a minority there.

House Republicans, having campaigned as the conservative alternative to the Obama administration, say they are obligated to try to translate that ideological vision into policy rather than immediately compromise. And the outlines of the Bowles-Simpson plan ? in retaining the health care law, raising tax revenues and cutting spending less than House Republicans promised ? would conflict with their promised vision.

Yet the three Senate Republicans lauded the plan for its level of proposed spending cuts, in domestic and military programs; for making Social Security solvent for 75 years; and for proposing to slash income-tax rates for individuals and corporations by eliminating $1 trillion in annual tax breaks, including the mortgage interest deduction and industry incentives.

?Doing nothing will, sooner rather than later, guarantee that this nation becomes a second-rate power with less opportunity and less freedom,? Mr. Coburn and Mr. Crapo said in a joint statement. ?The plan developed by the debt commission, while flawed and incomplete, will help America avoid this fate and secure freedom for future generations.?

Powered by WizardRSS | Best Membership Site Software

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=3ca0075f5c05ccf9087a3319eb4bc734

bryan cranston cyber monday deals 2010 blac chyna bowl projections

If there?s one video that will make you want a holiday. It?s this one. [TNW Shareables]

I need a holiday and so when I caught this ad at the cinema last weekend, it played repetitively in mind for the hours and days after; so much so in fact that I just had to share it with you.

There?s not a standout scene or anything particularly unique but there is something which grabs you after about 40 seconds or so and you end up engrossed with a smile on your face picturing yourself with the sand beneath your feet and the sun gleaming across your face.

Do your best to immerse yourself in the video, the same unavoidable way you would at a cinema.

The song is Summercat by Billie The Vision & The Dancer. Great track.

Powered by WizardRSS | Best Membership Site Software

Source: http://thenextweb.com/shareables/2010/12/03/if-theres-one-video-that-will-make-you-want-a-holiday-its-this-one/

cyber monday deals 2010 blac chyna bowl projections big 12 championship tickets

Blog - Poker n' Face

House Votes to Continue Some Bush-Era Tax Cuts

The vote for the so-called middle class tax package was 234 to 188, with just three Republicans joining 231 Democrats in favor; 20 Democrats and 168 Republicans were opposed.

Under current law the lower tax rates are due to expire at the end of the year. The bill approved by the House on Thursday would let that happen for income above $250,000 a year for families and $200,000 a year for individuals ? in keeping with Mr. Obama?s campaign pledge to end tax breaks for the wealthy ? but would make permanent the lower rates for income under those levels.

The bill has no chance of passage in the Senate, where even some Democrats say the lower rates should be extended for everyone, at least temporarily, given the continued weakness in the economy.

The House Republican leader and soon-to-be House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, derided the Democratic maneuver to force a vote on the bill in the House as ?chicken crap.?

Still, the measure held enormous symbolism for Democrats, including the outgoing speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, who used the debate to accuse Republicans of standing for the rich. Extending the tax breaks for the top two income levels would add about $700 billion more to the deficit than Mr. Obama?s original plan, which would add about $3 trillion to the deficit.

?Giving $700 billion to the wealthiest people in America does add $700 billion to the deficit, and the record and history shows it does not create jobs,? Ms. Pelosi said. She chastised Republicans for insisting on the tax breaks for high earners while threatening to block an extension of unemployment aid for millions of Americans whose benefits are starting to run out.

But even as lawmakers were debating the bill on the House floor, negotiators including the Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, were discussing a plan that would temporarily extend the lower tax rates at all income levels.

Those talks are expected to continue into next week, but Senate Democrats said that in the meantime, the majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, would bring the House-passed bill to the Senate floor as quickly as possible. Aides said that votes would be held either Friday or Saturday on both the House measure and an alternative proposal that would raise the income threshold at which the lower rates would expire to $1 million from $250,000.

Neither version is expected to win the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.

Some Republicans were feeling so emboldened by the strength of their negotiating position that they called on party leaders to reject any proposal for a temporary extension of the lower tax rates, and said they should insist on making all of the lower rates permanent, including a permanent elimination of the estate tax, which lapsed this year but is set to return in 2011.

Congressional Democrats expressed deepening frustration with the White House, which they said had made numerous missteps, giving Republicans the upper hand. And they expressed worries that the administration was ready to give in quickly to Republican demands, in a bid to preserve time on the Senate calendar for ratification of an arms control treaty with Russia known as New Start.

?I don?t know what?s worse, that Republicans held the Start treaty hostage to get lower tax rates, or that we let them do it,? one senior Democratic Senate aide said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the awkward tensions with the Democratic White House.

The lead negotiators for Congressional Democrats, Senator Max Baucus of Montana and Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, were said to be making a final push to extract further concessions from the Republicans in exchange for a temporary extension of the tax rates at all income levels, including a continuation of jobless benefits.

But Republicans seemed unwilling to give much if any ground, especially with the tight Congressional calendar on their side.

On Wednesday, Senate Republicans said they would halt virtually all business on the Senate floor until the tax debate was resolved and Congress had approved a temporary spending measure to finance the government at least through the early part of next year.

That effectively put Democrats in a vice, leaving them with little choice but to accede to the Republicans? demands or face the prospect of accomplishing almost nothing between now and the end of the year, when they lose their majority in the House and six seats in the Senate.

In a floor speech on Thursday, the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, essentially mocked his Democratic colleagues for complaining about the blockade, noting that they had created their own logjam of issues by delaying the tax debate until the last possible moment.

?Yesterday, we watched a number of Democrat senators come to the floor and express their exasperation at not being able to do what they want to do around here,? Mr. McConnell said. ?Astonishing. Let?s face it: most Americans aren?t particularly interested in the things Democrat leaders have put at the top of their to-do list.?

He chided Democrats for wanting to pass legislation authorizing repeal of the military?s ?don?t ask, don?t tell? policy banning gay soldiers from serving openly, and to bring up an immigration measure that would create a path to citizenship for some illegal immigrants brought to the United States as young children.

?At the end of the month, every taxpayer suffers a pay cut, unless we stop it,? Mr. McConnell said, referring to the imminent expiration of the lowered tax rates. He added, in reference to Senate Democrats, ?They still don?t get it, and that?s why Republicans are insisting we put these things aside and finish the most important and urgent legislation, before time runs out.?

Powered by WizardRSS | Best Membership Site Software

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=12e511e9b1da272221e7f6c7d0b5f1c8

bcs projections uncle buck oklahoma state football fanny brice

Join us every week for TechSpot's Friday Night Fragfest!

McCain Questions Pentagon on Repeal of Gay Ban

Citing the results of a Pentagon survey of 115,000 active duty and reserve service members, Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, said that 58 percent of Marines in combat units and 48 percent of Army combat troops thought repealing the 17-year-old law would have either a negative or a very negative impact on the ability of their units to work together.

?I remain concerned, as I have in the past, and as demonstrated in this study, that the closer we get to service members in combat, the more we encounter concerns about whether ?don?t ask, don?t tell? should be repealed,? Mr. McCain said at a Senate hearing. ?These views should not be considered lightly, especially considering how much combat our forces face.?

Mr. McCain?s views were in striking contrast to those expressed by an array of the nation?s top defense and military officials, who appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee to urge repeal of the law, which requires gay men and women in the military to keep their sexual orientation secret or face discharge. The officials also pressed on the committee the larger conclusions of the survey, which found that 70 percent of all service members responded that allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the military ?would be positive, mixed or of no consequence at all.?.

At one point, Mr. McCain sharply asked Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, whose testimony led off the Pentagon?s position, if he was not concerned that so many combat forces were concerned about repeal of the law. Mr. Gates replied that many of those in combat are in their early 20s, have also never served with women and have a focused, limited experience in the military.

?With time and adequate preparation, we can mitigate their concerns,? Mr. Gates said.

?I couldn?t disagree more,? Mr. McCain shot back. ?We send these young people into combat, we think they?re mature enough to fight and die. I think they?re mature enough to make a judgment on who they want to serve with and the impact on their battle effectiveness.? Mr. McCain, a naval aviator in the Vietnam War who was shot down and imprisoned in Hanoi, then added: ?Mr. Secretary, I speak from personal experience.?

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, appeared alongside Mr. Gates and made a personal appeal to the panel. ?I?ve been serving with gays and lesbians my whole career,? he said. ?I went to war with them aboard a destroyer off the coast of Vietnam. I knew they were there. They knew I knew it. We never missed a mission, never failed to deliver ordnance on target.?

Admiral Mullen added: ?Should repeal occur, some soldiers and Marines may want separate shower facilities. Some may ask for different berthing. Some may even quit the service. We?ll deal with that.?

Repeal faces uncertain prospects in the Senate. It is unclear if there are enough Republicans willing to vote for it, and also if there is enough time in the lame-duck Senate before the end of the year.

Both Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen made the argument to the committee that the Senate should vote in the next few weeks because delaying would result in a wave of lawsuits and the potential for repeal to be ordered by what Mr. Gates called "judicial fiat? -- meaning, he said, that the military would have no time to prepare for the change. "Those that choose not to act legislatively are rolling the dice that this policy will not be abruptly overturned by the courts,? Mr. Gates said.

Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen also spoke against the argument of "not now," voiced by many of the surveyed combat troops, that a time of two wars was not the right moment to impose social change on the force. Admiral Mullen told the committee that he had no expectation that "challenges to our national security are going to diminish in the near future, such that a more convenient time will appear.?

Mr. Gates said: "If not now, when? When we?re out of Afghanistan? But who?s to say, as I look ahead in the world, I don?t see the world getting to be a safer, easier place to live in, where our troops are necessarily under less stress.?

The two appeared to be heading off the arguments that are also expected to be advanced in testimony before the panel on Friday by the chiefs of the Army, Air Force and Navy, and the commandant of the Marine Corps. All have expressed reluctance about repeal.

Mr. Gates and Mr. Mullen appeared with the co-authors of a just-released Pentagon report on the effects of repeal on the military: Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon?s general counsel, and Gen. Carter Ham, the commander of the U.S. Army in Europe.

The defense and military officials were frequently pressed by Republicans whether it was a good idea to push for repeal when the survey revealed so much resistance among the surveyed combat forces. Mr. Gates at one point bristled at those questions and said that although the military?s opinions were important, it did not get a vote.

"I can?t think of a single precedent in American history of doing a referendum of the American armed forces on a policy issue,? Mr. Gates told the panel. "Are you going to ask them if they want 15-month tours? Are you going to ask them if they want to be part of the surge in Iraq? That?s not the way our civilian-led military has ever worked in our entire history. The ?should? question is to be decided by the Congress.?

When Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi, kept pushing the issue, Mr. Gates responded, "I think that in effect doing a referendum of the armed forces on a policy matter is a very dangerous path.?

Powered by WizardRSS | Best Membership Site Software

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=ef3c4c62d547b18338229c9b4f0b1faa

blac chyna bowl projections big 12 championship tickets notre dame football

Blog - Poker n' Face

City Room: Live Blog: The Rangel Censure Hearing

Representative Charles B. Rangel?s moment of final parliamentary judgment has arrived: His House colleagues voted against a lesser punishment than censure for a host of ethics violations Mr. Rangel was found to have committed.

The defeated measure would have reduced the proposed punishment from censure to reprimand. But the House has yet to vote on the censure measure itself.

Last month, the House ethics committee found that Mr. Rangel, 80, a 21-term Democrat from Harlem, brought dishonor upon the House by failing to report or pay taxes on rental income from a Dominican villa, improperly soliciting charitable donations and running a campaign office out of a rent-controlled apartment meant for residential use.

If the House accepts the committee?s recommendation to censure Mr. Rangel, he will be summoned to stand in the well of the House and formally rebuked by the speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. Mr. Rangel has lobbied colleagues for the lesser penalty of reprimand.

Powered by WizardRSS | Best Membership Site Software

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=ed3d201ba5847601c378208a6bc5957c

bryan cranston cyber monday deals 2010 blac chyna bowl projections

McCain Questions Pentagon on Repeal of Gay Ban

Citing the results of a Pentagon survey of 115,000 active duty and reserve service members, Mr. McCain, Republican of Arizona, said that 58 percent of Marines in combat units and 48 percent of Army combat troops thought repealing the 17-year-old law would have either a negative or a very negative impact on the ability of their units to work together.

?I remain concerned, as I have in the past, and as demonstrated in this study, that the closer we get to service members in combat, the more we encounter concerns about whether ?don?t ask, don?t tell? should be repealed,? Mr. McCain said at a Senate hearing. ?These views should not be considered lightly, especially considering how much combat our forces face.?

Mr. McCain?s views were in striking contrast to those expressed by an array of the nation?s top defense and military officials, who appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee to urge repeal of the law, which requires gay men and women in the military to keep their sexual orientation secret or face discharge. The officials also pressed on the committee the larger conclusions of the survey, which found that 70 percent of all service members responded that allowing gay men and women to serve openly in the military ?would be positive, mixed or of no consequence at all.?.

At one point, Mr. McCain sharply asked Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, whose testimony led off the Pentagon?s position, if he was not concerned that so many combat forces were concerned about repeal of the law. Mr. Gates replied that many of those in combat are in their early 20s, have also never served with women and have a focused, limited experience in the military.

?With time and adequate preparation, we can mitigate their concerns,? Mr. Gates said.

?I couldn?t disagree more,? Mr. McCain shot back. ?We send these young people into combat, we think they?re mature enough to fight and die. I think they?re mature enough to make a judgment on who they want to serve with and the impact on their battle effectiveness.? Mr. McCain, a naval aviator in the Vietnam War who was shot down and imprisoned in Hanoi, then added: ?Mr. Secretary, I speak from personal experience.?

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, appeared alongside Mr. Gates and made a personal appeal to the panel. ?I?ve been serving with gays and lesbians my whole career,? he said. ?I went to war with them aboard a destroyer off the coast of Vietnam. I knew they were there. They knew I knew it. We never missed a mission, never failed to deliver ordnance on target.?

Admiral Mullen added: ?Should repeal occur, some soldiers and Marines may want separate shower facilities. Some may ask for different berthing. Some may even quit the service. We?ll deal with that.?

Repeal faces uncertain prospects in the Senate. It is unclear if there are enough Republicans willing to vote for it, and also if there is enough time in the lame-duck Senate before the end of the year.

Both Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen made the argument to the committee that the Senate should vote in the next few weeks because delaying would result in a wave of lawsuits and the potential for repeal to be ordered by what Mr. Gates called "judicial fiat? -- meaning, he said, that the military would have no time to prepare for the change. "Those that choose not to act legislatively are rolling the dice that this policy will not be abruptly overturned by the courts,? Mr. Gates said.

Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen also spoke against the argument of "not now," voiced by many of the surveyed combat troops, that a time of two wars was not the right moment to impose social change on the force. Admiral Mullen told the committee that he had no expectation that "challenges to our national security are going to diminish in the near future, such that a more convenient time will appear.?

Mr. Gates said: "If not now, when? When we?re out of Afghanistan? But who?s to say, as I look ahead in the world, I don?t see the world getting to be a safer, easier place to live in, where our troops are necessarily under less stress.?

The two appeared to be heading off the arguments that are also expected to be advanced in testimony before the panel on Friday by the chiefs of the Army, Air Force and Navy, and the commandant of the Marine Corps. All have expressed reluctance about repeal.

Mr. Gates and Mr. Mullen appeared with the co-authors of a just-released Pentagon report on the effects of repeal on the military: Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon?s general counsel, and Gen. Carter Ham, the commander of the U.S. Army in Europe.

The defense and military officials were frequently pressed by Republicans whether it was a good idea to push for repeal when the survey revealed so much resistance among the surveyed combat forces. Mr. Gates at one point bristled at those questions and said that although the military?s opinions were important, it did not get a vote.

"I can?t think of a single precedent in American history of doing a referendum of the American armed forces on a policy issue,? Mr. Gates told the panel. "Are you going to ask them if they want 15-month tours? Are you going to ask them if they want to be part of the surge in Iraq? That?s not the way our civilian-led military has ever worked in our entire history. The ?should? question is to be decided by the Congress.?

When Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi, kept pushing the issue, Mr. Gates responded, "I think that in effect doing a referendum of the armed forces on a policy matter is a very dangerous path.?

Powered by WizardRSS | Best Membership Site Software

Source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=ef3c4c62d547b18338229c9b4f0b1faa

oklahoma state football fanny brice randy shannon walmart cyber monday