Showing posts with label Top Story. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Top Story. Show all posts

Energy minister will hold summit to calm rising fears over peak oil

A report last month warned of complacency over the huge dislocation from a terminal decline in global oil production.

Lord Hunt, the energy minister, is to meet industrialists in London tomorrow in a bid to calm mounting fears about the disruption that could follow a sudden shortage of oil supplies.

In a significant policy shift, the government has agreed to undertake more work on whether the UK needs to take action to avoid the massive dislocation that could be caused by the early onset of "peak oil" – the point that marks the start of terminal decline in global oil production.

Jeremy Leggett, the executive chairman of the renewable power company Solar Century and a leading figure in the UK industry taskforce on peak oil and energy security, said the meeting, to be held at the Energy Institute, showed a welcome new sense of urgency.

"Government has gone from the BP position – '40 years of supply left, the price mechanism works, no need to worry' – to 'crikey'," he said. "BP and others are telling us that, but you lot, Virgin, Scottish and Southern, and others are telling us something completely different. We do not know who to believe. Let's do a proper risk assessment with industry," he said.

The meeting is expected to include executives from the taskforce members including Virgin, Arup, Stagecoach, Scottish and Southern Energy, and Solar Century as well as other industrialists.

The decision to hold the talks came after the UK industry taskforce on peak oil and energy security last month issued a provocative report, The Oil Crunch: a Wake-up Call for the UK Economy, in which it warned of the dangers of complacency.

Sir Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group, whose rail, airline and travel companies are sensitive to energy prices, warned then that the coming crisis could surpass the credit crunch. "The next five years will see us face another crunch: the oil crunch. This time, we do have the chance to prepare. The challenge is to use that time well," he said.

The government had previously played down the risks arising from peak oil after the Wicks review in the summer in effect dismissed the idea that global demand for oil could soon outstrip supply.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change confirmed last night that Hunt and a range of energy-policy civil servants would be holding "private and behind-doors" talks at the Energy Institute. But she played down the significance of the session, saying the government had always taken supply issues seriously and met different parts of industry on a regular basis. "We do this all the time; it is just a normal stakeholder meeting," she insisted, adding that there was no "marked" change in ministerial policy.

The issue of peak oil arose last November when whistleblowers inside the International Energy Agency alleged the problem had been deliberately downplayed over a long period. BP and other oil companies insist that there is little danger of the world running out of oil because new areas such as Brazil, and more recently Uganda, are always opening up to development. BP chief executive, Tony Hayward, believes demand will fall as prices move up., pushing back any major peak-oil dislocation.

But booming demand in China, India and the Middle East has pushed up the price of crude to more than $80 a barrel and UK petrol prices are close to record levels.

Read more...

Six arrested over City insider dealing

Three senior City figures were among six men arrested in dawn raids yesterday as part of the biggest ever crackdown on insider dealing.

One employee of Deutsche Bank, another from BNP Paribas and a City professional at the hedge fund Moore Capital, were among those arrested in what is being described as an unprecedented attempt by the City regulator to close down a "sophisticated and long-running insider dealing ring".

As part of its battle to clean up the City, the Financial Services Authority swooped in London, the south-east and Oxfordshire in its first joint operation with the Serious Organised Crime Agency. Around 143 police officers and FSA staff were required to conduct the raids, which the authority described as its "largest-ever operation against insider dealing".

Those arrested were being held at police stations in London, Kent and Oxford and are suspected of passing inside information to traders – either directly or via middlemen – who traded based on this information and have made significant profits.

Insider dealing takes place when individuals trade on price-sensitive information not widely known in the market – such as a takeover bid – and often obtained illicitly. It is a criminal offence but has been notoriously difficult to prosecute despite the FSA's own calculations that there are "suspicious price movements" in 29% of takeovers.

Lawyers said that the FSA was now employing a new, tough approach in its attempt to end such abuses under which ordinary shareholders lose out because they are not able to make quick profits in the same way as the "insiders".

"This isn't quite a US-style dragging people off the trading floor but it's going that way," said Simon Morris of law firm CMS Cameron McKenna. "The FSA is striking to maintain the good name of the City. But the proof of the striking is in the gaoling, and we will have to wait several years before we know whether FSA has found a smoking gun or a damp squib."

In the past the FSA has relied on whistleblowers rather than use methods deployed in the US to tap phones and covert surveillance and wants firms to start recording employees' mobile phones, not just those made from their desk phones.

Hector Sants, the FSA chief executive, has warned the City to be "afraid" of the regulator and last week set out plans for a hiring spree to help bolster its investigations of insider dealing.

As he launched the FSA's business plan, Sants said this was the "key year" to demonstrate the FSA was serious on cracking down on such City crimes. There would be a "significant" increase in criminal cases and enforcement actions, he said, reiterating his view that the amount of insider dealing in the City was "unacceptable".

The FSA has been focusing on this area since 2008, with this the fifth set of arrests. Four people have been jailed – and another person received a suspended sentence – while three other insider-dealing cases are set for trial.

Read more...

British Airways 'trying to break Unite union' in cabin crew dispute

A group of leading academics has accused the BA chief executive, Willie Walsh, of trying to break the Unite union.


British Airways is attempting to "break" the Unite trade union in a battle with cabin crew that could erode workers' rights across the UK, according to a joint declaration by 95 leading industrial relations academics.

In a letter to the Guardian, professors from the London School of Economics and other universities accused BA of having a radical agenda in a dispute that is set to enter its second weekend of strikes.

Unite has pledged to suspend the strikes if the BA chief executive, Willie Walsh, reinstates a peace offer that was withdrawn a fortnight ago. His failure to put the document on the table was highlighted by the academics.

"It is clear to us that the actions of the chief executive of British Airways, notwithstanding his protestations to the contrary, are explicable only by the desire to break the union which represents the cabin crew," they wrote. "What other possible interpretation can there be for Willie Walsh rejecting Unite's acceptance of BA's previous offer or indeed of his marshalling of resources, including those of bitter industry rival Ryanair, to undermine the action of his staff?"

BA mustered an effective auxiliary schedule during a three-day strike last weekend, including 1,000 cabin crew and 22 chartered jets from carriers including Ryanair. This weekend, BA claims it will do even better by running seven out of 10 long-haul services from Heathrow.

A BA official said: "We have been in negotiations since February 2009. We had been talking in the TUC for three days solid before the strikes happened. Why would we do that if we wanted to break the unions? Willie Walsh is one of the few chief executives to have given out his mobile number to union officials so they can contact him day or night."

However, time is running out for both sides to reach a deal before tomorrow afternoon. According to sources close to the talks, BA would need to secure a compromise agreement by around 2pm tomorrow in order to have a chance of reinstating its normal flight schedule. The general secretary of the TUC, Brendan Barber, has been attempting to find common ground between both sides this week but so far there is no sign of a renewal of talks.

BA's confirmation this week that it will strip all striking cabin crew of discounted travel perks has caused further friction between the airline and Unite, which now wants the move reversed as part of any deal. The academics warned about wider consequences if BA faced down Unite.

The statement read: "The wider significance of a triumph of unilateral management prerogative would be a widening of the representation gap in UK employment relations, and a further erosion of worker rights and of that most precious of commodities – democracy."

Trade union sources have said the massive publicity afforded the strike, including the intervention of Gordon Brown, has obscured the fact that both sides were close to a peace deal over cuts to staffing levels on flights. BA has stated that the three-day walkout last weekend cost the airline at least £21m, and Walsh has already asked for Unite to find further savings among BA cabin crew to compensate for that loss.

Read more...

Osama bin Laden threatens US soldiers over Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial

Osama Bin Laden has issued a threat to US troops.
Osama bin Laden has threatened to kill American soldiers if the US executes Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the Pakistani alleged to have masterminded the 9/11 attacks.

An audio tape, purportedly by the al-Qaida leader, was broadcast on the al-Jazeera news channel today.

"The day America will take such decision [to execute Mohammed and any others] it would have taken a decision to execute whoever we capture," the speaker said.

A US counterterrorism official dismissed the sentiments expressed in the 74-second tape as "the height of absurdity" this afternoon.

The country is understood to be seeking the death penalty against Mohammed and four other men accused of planning the 9/11 attacks. President Barack Obama announced in November last year that the five would be tried in a civilian court in New York.

The speaker in the tape criticised Obama for "following the footsteps of his predecessor".

"The politicians in the White House were practising injustice against us and still they are. Especially by supporting Israel in its continuous occupation of Palestine."

The recording continued: "They used to think that America across the oceans is protected from the rage of the oppressed until our reaction was loudly heard at your home on the 9/11, with God's help."

The official, who wished to remain anonymous, responded to al-Qaida's threat to execute detained Americans by drawing attention to the organisation's previous treatment of captives.

"It's the height of absurdity for anyone associated with al-Qaida to even suggest that now, at long last, they're going to start treating captives badly," the official told Reuters.

"They may have forgotten Danny Pearl and all the others they've slaughtered, but we haven't."

Pearl, a Wall Street Journal reporter, was kidnapped and held hostage in Pakistan in 2002. His kidnappers made demands for the release of al-Qaida prisoners before setting a deadline for his killing.

After Pearl had been held for a month, the US state department received a videotape showing the journalist being murdered.

The US president has already faced criticism over the treatment of Mohammed, although so far it has come from closer to home. His decision to put the alleged 9/11 organiser on trial in central New York has seen the president come under pressure, with Republicans saying al-Qaida will use the trial for propaganda.

Read more...

Kolkata fire claims six lives

Six persons were killed and 20 others injured in a devastating fire that swept through a 150-year-old multi-storeyed building housing offices and residences on upscale Park Street.
The fire broke out at 2:15 pm, but there was confusion on which floor of the six-storey building, Stephen Court, it broke out with panic gripping those trapped inside.
The toll could rise, Fire Services minister Pratim Chatterjee said.
The Stephen Court, located in the heart of the city, houses the iconic 100-year-old Flury’s confectionery house and a large music store called Music World and several other offices.
Of the six casualties, a man, identified as Sourav Barik leapt to his death, while a woman Richa Krishnan fell when she lost her grip while being evacuated by firemen with the help of a rope.

Three others - Pradip Chokhalia, Vivek Upadhyay and Bikash Agarwala - died of burns in hospital, Home Secretary Ardhendu Sen told reporters.

Read more...

Govt alerts Naxal-hit states on possible attack on rail network

The government has alerted Naxal affected states against possible Maoist attacks on railway networks in wake of the Left extremists targeting a Rajdhani express in Bihar by blasting the rail tracks.
The Home Ministry has issued the alert to West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa and Chhattisgarh apprehending attacks by Naxalites on trains and railway infrastructure as any sabotage on the network can result in large scale damages, official sources said.

The Home Ministry has also requested the Railway Ministry to deploy adequate manpower to provide security to rail operations and passengers and take necessary precautionary measures.

The alert has been issued after the latest attack near Gaya, when Maoists targeted a Rajdhani express blasting the rail tracks in which the passengers had a miraculous escape after ten coaches derailed. The attack came during the 48-hour 'bandh' call given by Naxals on Monday in the state along with six others.

Read more...

What does Pakistan want from U.S. talks

Top U.S. and Pakistani diplomats meet in Washington this week to discuss a range of issues from security, Pakistan's economy, water and energy to education, foreign policy communications and agriculture. Here are some questions and answers on what Pakistan, a front-line state in the U.S. struggle against al Qaeda and religious extremism, hopes to get out of the talks:
WHAT'S AT STAKE FOR PAKISTAN?

In a word, relevance. Pakistan has a narrow window of opportunity to cement its position and capitalise on its usefulness to the United States regarding Afghanistan, India and the region as a whole.
While for years Afghanistan was dependent on Pakistan for its links to the outside world, it now is increasingly reliant on India, China and Central Asia for trade, which in turn reduces its formerly strong ties to Pakistan.
Indeed Kabul, post-Taliban rule, views Pakistan with great suspicion.
The Pakistani establishment knows the United States needs its help to create conditions favourable for the beginning of a U.S. pullout from Afghanistan next year. Pakistan still has influence with the Afghan Taliban on the one hand, and could crack down on the insurgents' use of Pakistan territory for sanctuary on the other.
But the Pakistanis fear once the United States is out of Afghanistan -- and Pakistan's utility is reduced -- the United States will cozy up to India, greenlight Afghanistan's alternate links to the outside world and leave Pakistan isolated and encircled by hostile powers.
Pakistan's challenge, then, is to leverage its current usefulness to the United States to attain long-term benefits that will last.

Read more...

Women's bill won't let a male be elected to Lok Sabha: Mulayam

Samajwadi Party on Tuesday said not a single male would be elected to the Lok Sabha ten years after the Women's Reservation Bill came into force and advocated quota for the fair sex within political parties.
"Once the bill comes into force, not a single male would be elected to the Lok Sabha after ten years as elected women would not leave their seats, nor the political parties would be in a position to replace them," Samajwadi Party President Mulayam Singh Yadav said addressing a function to mark Ram Manohar Lohia's birth centenary here.

Advocating reservation for women within political parties instead, Yadav said it should be made mandatory for them to give 15 per cent tickets to women.
"If this limit is increased by few more per cent we have no objection over it," he said and termed the legislation passed in the Rajya Sabha as "an international conspiracy to ensure that not a single male member enters the Lok Sabha."
Also dubbing the bill as a conspiracy against Muslims, the SP leader said his party was not against reservation to women, but it was not ready to accept the bill in its present form.
He also alleged that the UPA "forcibly" presented the bill in Parliament to divert people's attention from the price rise issue.

"The country's situation is turning worse, but the central government is not ready to change its policies. The Women Reservation Bill was presented forcibly in the Rajya Sabha only to distract people's attention from price rise issue," he said.

Read more...

Bomb in Kingfisher plane: Blame game begins

A debate regarding the security breach at the Bangalore International Airport due to which someone managed to plant a crude bomb on a Kingfisher Airlines [ Images ] aircraft from Bangalore to Thiruvananthapuram is on with the authorities blaming each other for the incident.

The Central Industrial Security Force, which is in charge of the airport's security, has blamed the airline officials for the incident while the airlines authorities blamed the CISF.

Senior CISF officials said it is the responsibility of the airlines to screen the baggage that gets into the cargo, while the CISF ensures that they screen the hand baggage manually at the departure lounge before the passengers board the aircraft.

On the other hand the cargo baggage undergoes an x-ray screening before it is loaded to the aircraft, an official told rediff.com.

Both CISF and BIA who conducted a review meeting on the incident have blamed the airline for the security breach stating that the security norms at the airport is in compliance with the regulations laid down by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security.

Anti-sabotage checks are supposed to be conducted twice before an aircraft embarks. The anti-sabotage check is usually conducted in the mornings and in case of an early morning flight, its done the previous night and only after the check is conducted clearance is given to take-off.

"If such a check had been conducted properly, the explosive material could have been detected," said a CISF official.

Responding to the charges against them, the airline has said that flight IT 4731 being an ATR-72 aircraft does not have a cargo hold and the cargo compartment in the aircraft is located between its cockpit and the passenger cabin, and hence it is the responsibility of the airport operators to conduct any check.

"Shortly after Kingfisher Airlines flight IT 4731 landed in Thiruvananthapuram and after all the 27 guests on board had de planed, a routine security check was being carried out. During this security check, an unclaimed package was found. The matter was immediately reported to the authorities who removed the package from the aircraft, and as precautionary measure, the aircraft is being checked by the security agencies," a statement from the Kingfisher stated.

Airport officials said that there was no lapse on its side and that it is impossible to smuggle explosives into the aircraft and to then load it on to an aircraft.

Meanwhile, investigators are also looking into the aspect whether explosives wrapped in a Malayalam newspaper could have been sneaked into the aircraft after the aircraft landed in Thiruvananthapuram, considering that the checks had already been carried at the BIA.

ANI adds:

The Kerala government has constituted a high-level committee headed by Deputy Commissioner of Police Jolly Cherian to probe the incident.

The state government has asked the security agencies to conduct a thorough investigation and find out how the lapse took place at the airport.

Kerala Law Minister M Vijaykumar said, "It is a serious security lapse. We have directed the security agencies to look into this."

Read more...

US had informed India of Headley's plea bargain

The US administration had informed the Indian government before it finalized a deal with David Coleman Headley to change his plea to guilty, sources said.

Headley, born Daood Gilani, an American citizen of Pakistani origin told a Chicago court on Friday that he played a "key" role in the planning and execution of the horrific 26/11 Mumbai [ Images ] terror attack. What the changed plea does is save Headley from a near certain death sentence and any possibility of extradition to India [ Images ], where he committed his worst crimes.

However, according to sources in the government, what the plea of 'guilty' on all 12 counts for which Headley is charged by the US Justice Department also does is to ensure that India gets access to him and his testimony.

Headley also pleaded guilty to planning an attack on a Danish newspaper that published cartoons poking fun at Prophet Mohammad. While several security analysts disagree, informed sources in the Indian government said the plea bargain would ensure Headley's cooperation, and help India get details of the serving Pakistan army [ Images ] handlers of the 26/11 attackers.

India will be allowed to interrogate Headley, who is key to a "huge amount of information" that will help fill the missing pieces in India's case and unravel other aspects of the conspiracy. There is no sense of disappointment in the Indian government, the sources said, because Headley will now have to depose and India will, as part of the plea bargain, get access to the man.

"Access will give us an opportunity to get more information," Home Minister P Chidambaram [ Images ] said today, denying that the plea bargain was a "setback".

"Headley has agreed to testify and there is a good chance he will testify in proceedings when Indian authorities get to examine him either in court or through video-conferencing or through a Letter Rogatory (a formal communication to request testimony of a witness living in a foreign land). We have not given up our plea for extradition," Chidambaram clarified, although chances for such an eventuality are bleak, particularly given that India has not even formally charged Headley yet.
"Headley has agreed to fully and truthfully testify in any foreign judicial proceedings held in the US. We will continue to press for access to Headley in that he will testify in a court or subject himself to interrogation," Chidambaram said.

Chidambaram was briefed about the changed plea and its implications when Dennis Blair, Director of the US National Investigation Agency, visited him on Thursday. Timothy Roemer, US Ambassador to India, accompanied Blair.

What the changed plea also does is definitively nail Pakistan's involvement in the 26/11 carnage in which over 170 people, including six Americans, died. According to sources, the plea bargain is a warning to Pakistan, because India will gain access to hitherto unrevealed details, as well as a gesture to them, indicating to Islamabad [ Images ] that Washington is "on board" with their concerns.

Read more...

US Companies Feel Increasingly Unwelcome in China


A growing number of American businesspeople feel unwelcome in China because of what they see as discriminatory government policies and inconsistent legal treatment. The findings come in a survey released Monday by the American Chamber of Commerce in China.

Amcham-China president Michael Barbalas says a survey of 203 members of his organization shows growing pessimism among American businesses operating in China.

"A question that we had asked before is, 'Are companies increasingly unwelcome to participate and compete in the Chinese market?' which we had in this survey, we had 38 percent saying yes. In 2008, when we asked a similar question, only 23 percent [had that response], so we're up 15 percent in just a little over a year and we thought that was pretty significant," he noted.

He attributes the business community's change in attitude to Chinese government regulations requiring something known as "indigenous innovation." The policy discourages companies - both Chinese and foreign - from using or purchasing foreign technology and instead encourages them to use domestically developed technology.

The Chinese government introduced the policy in 2006, and in December, announced a detailed process for applying for indigenous innovation status.

Read more...

Democrats hail landmark US healthcare bill

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) (C) delivers remarks during a press conference with (L-R) House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Rep. George Miller (D-CA), Majority Whip Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) and Rep. John Larson (D-CT) (R)
Democrats hope that once the voters see the law taking effect they will like it

Democrats have hailed the approval of legislation extending healthcare to an additional 32 million Americans as a historic advance in social justice.

The speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi said it was comparable to the establishment of Medicare and Social Security.

The bill was passed in the House on Sunday evening by just seven votes.

Republicans have vowed to continue to challenge it, saying it is too expensive and promotes big government.

Senator John McCain, the defeated presidential candidate, warned that outside the capital "the American people are very angry".

"They don't like it, and we're going to repeal this," he told ABC News.

President Barack Obama is expected to sign the bill as early as Tuesday, after which it will go to the Senate where Democrats hope it will be passed by a simple majority under budget reconciliation.

'New day in America'

The BBC's Adam Brookes in Washington says Mr Obama's long, stubborn effort to reform healthcare came to fruition after a dramatic late night in Congress.

We have failed to listen to America... This body moves forward against their will. Shame on us
Rep John Boehner
House Republican leader

The House approved the bill passed by the Senate on Christmas Eve by 219 votes to 212, with 34 Democrats joining Republicans in voting against it.

Victory was assured only hours before voting started, when the president agreed to a deal with conservative Democrats to reiterate in an executive order that money provided by the bill could not be used for abortions.

Democrats were jubilant after the vote, with House Majority Whip Representative James Clyburn describing it as "Civil Rights Act of the 21st Century".

Rep Marcy Kaptur of Ohio said the bill heralded "a new day in America", while Rep Doris Matsui of California said it would "improve the quality of life for millions of American families."

President Barack Obama: 'It's a victory for the American people'

The president said that after nearly 100 years of debate and frustration, Americans finally had the assurance of universal health cover.

"We pushed back on the undue influence of special interests," he said in a statement. "We didn't give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. Instead, we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things."

"This legislation will not fix everything that ails our healthcare system, but it moves us decisively in the right direction," he added.

Under the plans, health insurance will be extended to nearly all Americans, new taxes will be imposed on the wealthy, and restrictive insurance practices such as refusing to cover people with pre-existing medical conditions will be outlawed.

ANALYSIS
Mark Mardell
Mark Mardell, BBC News, Washington

While many Americans seem to genuinely yearn for the cross-party accord they call bipartisanship, and politicians at least play it pious lip service, this lengthy debate has revealed a gaping ideological chasm.

President Obama identified overhauling the healthcare system as his priority and he's got what he wanted, a victory that eluded Teddy Roosevelt, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton. But when he threw down the gauntlet the conservatives eagerly picked it up. Healthcare didn't create the tea party movement but it gave it a focus and a cause.

There are dangers to his left as well as his right. He's harmed his reputation with his own power base, for many liberals feel there have been so many compromises the bill is hardly worth it.

The House Republican leader, Rep John Boehner, said lawmakers had defied the wishes of their constituents.

"We have failed to listen to America," he added. "This body moves forward against their will. Shame on us."

Our correspondent says many Americans do seem bemused by the size and complexity of the bill and have been angered by the long, bitter process of its passage.

The New York Times, which has supported the reforms, called the vote an accomplishment of historic proportions, but the Wall Street Journal said the bill would mean much higher taxes, slower economic growth and worse medical care.

Democrats hope that once the voters see the new law taking effect they will learn to like it before they go to the polls in mid-term elections in November, our correspondent adds.

'Fixes'

The bill's final approval represented a stunning turnaround from January, when it was considered dead after Democrats lost their 60-seat majority in the Senate, which is required to defeat a filibuster, a method used to delay or block the passage of legislation.

KEY HEALTHCARE REFORMS
Cost: $940bn over 10 years; would reduce deficit by $143bn
Coverage: Expanded to 32m currently uninsured Americans
Medicare: Prescription drug coverage gap closed; affected over-65s receive rebate and discount on brand name drugs
Medicaid: Expanded to include families under 65 with gross income of up to 133% of federal poverty level and childless adults
Insurance reforms: Insurers can no longer deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions
Insurance exchanges:Uninsured and self-employed able to purchase insurance through state-based exchanges
Subsidies: Low-income individuals and families wanting to purchase own health insurance eligible for subsidies
Individual Mandate: Those not covered by Medicaid or Medicare must be insured or face fine
High-cost insurance: Employers offering workers pricier plans subject to tax on excess premium

To avoid a second Senate vote, the House also approved on Sunday evening a package of reconciliation "fixes" - agreed beforehand between House and Senate Democrats and the White House - amending the bill that senators adopted in December.

The president could sign the House-approved Senate bill as early as Tuesday, after which it will be officially enacted into law. However, the bill will contain some very unpopular measures that Democratic senators have agreed to amend.

The Senate will be able to make the required changes in a separate bill using a procedure known as reconciliation, which allows budget provisions to be approved with 51 votes - rather than the 60 needed to overcome blocking tactics.

The Republicans say they will seek to repeal the measure, challenge its constitutionality and co-ordinate efforts in state legislatures to block its implementation.

The White House plans to launch a campaign this week to persuade sceptical Americans that the reforms offer immediate benefits to them and represent the most significant effort to reduce the federal deficit since the 1990s.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the healthcare bill will cost about $940bn (£626bn over 10 years, and will cut the federal deficit by $143bn (£92bn) over the same period.

US HEALTHCARE AND WORLD COMPARISONS

Map showing highest snowfall and lowest temperature
Healthcare reform is a priority for Barack Obama. The US spends about $2.2tn a year on its system - which includes private, federal or employer schemes.
BACK1 of 3NEXT


Are you in the US? What is your reaction to the vote? How will the healthcare reforms affect you? Send us your comments.Please remember to include your phone number.

Read more...

The House passed the overhaul — now what?

21 out of 22 times, reconciliation legislation has been sent back to House

Video
Changing 'the fixes' in the health bill
March 22: NBC’s Ken Strickland discusses which Senators will play key roles in revising some of the fixes in the bill the House passed Sunday night.

The Daily Rundown

INTERACTIVE
Dose of reality
Dose of reality
Do health care reform headlines leave you saying “huh?” Visit msnbc.com's guide to health reform and send us claims you'd like fact-checked.
So, now what?

Relieved Democrats may still be celebrating the passage of landmark health care overhaul legislation, but Republicans in the Senate still have an opportunity to try to derail the bill.

And if history is any guide, they are likely to force the House to vote on health care again before Easter. "Anybody that thinks that this is only going to be a one-time deal today in the House, I think, is grossly mistaken," said Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch on CNN's "State of the Union."

Late Sunday, the House passed the Senate's version of the comprehensive bill, and because most members didn't like it, they also passed a smaller bill of so-called "fixes."

Passing of those subsequent fixes was a critical component to passage of the Senate bill for House Democrats.

Without them, House Democrats would have been supporting a bill with elements deemed largely undesirable. A promise by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that the Senate would work to approve the package of fixes coaxed "yes" votes from many Democratic lawmakers who had previously indicated they might oppose the Senate bill.

On Tuesday, the Senate is expected to formally start its work on the fixes bill using a little-understood procedure known as reconciliation.

For Democrats, reconciliation is the perfect antidote to what they feel is Republican obstructionism in the upper chamber. The process is filibuster-proof, requiring only 51 votes for final passage rather than the usual 60 to overcome a blockade by the minority party.

For Republicans, reconciliation is their best chance to kill the smaller bill or make changes to it. Because the House and Senate must pass the same bills — word for word — even a minor tweak would send it back to the House for another vote.

Republicans hope to force major changes to the reconciliation bill, some that could set up a political nightmare scenario for Democrats. If certain unpopular provisions of the Senate’s version of the bill — like special carve-out deals for individual states — are not corrected, Democrats risk being branded as supporters of back-room deals. And if Republicans manage to scuttle reconciliation language that would delay the implementation of new taxes on high-value insurance plans, union groups who were counting on the fix will be incensed.

In the 22 times reconciliation that has been used, only once has the Senate bill not been changed and sent back to the House.

Reconciliation's basic rules
Reconciliation is a fast-track legislative process specifically designed to reduce deficits. Debate is limited to 20 hours, but an unlimited amount of amendments can be offered and voted upon.

Every line in a reconciliation bill must adhere to strict rules to ensure a budgetary impact or else risk being eliminated by the non-partisan Senate parliamentarian. Here lies the biggest opportunity for the GOP.

Cutting up the bill
To ensure that all provisions of the bill have a budgetary impact, the rules of reconciliation allow Republicans to raise 19 different types of objections.

Video
Image: US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (R) laughs with other Democratic representatives
House OKs bill
March 22: NBC Chief White House Correspondent Chuck Todd reports on whether a divided Congress can repair the damage done by this long-fought battle.

Today show

The most commonly used objection (also called a "point of order) is known as the “Byrd Rule,” named after its author, West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd.

This can be raised against any part of the reconciliation bill that does not address budgetary matters. The extraneous matter would be removed from the bill if the parliamentarian, Alan Frumin, upholds that point of order.

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's reconciliation fixes could easily be blown to pieces in the Senate," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said on the Senate floor last week.

Reid can ask for a vote to overrule the parliamentarian, but it would take 60 "yes" votes in most cases. With the election of Massachusetts Republican Scott Brown in January, Democrats only have 59 votes in their caucus.

There are also other rarely-used points of order which could be used to effectively kill the entire bill.

Amendments to the bill
Adding new elements to the bill would also send it back to the House for another vote.

Under reconciliation, an unlimited number of amendments can be offered by Democrats or Republicans. Republicans haven't tipped their hand on strategy, but have made it clear they will offer dozens.

Republicans say the rules will allow them to offer a broad array of amendments. The topics could include anything within the jurisdiction on the two Senate committees that produced the health care bill: finance and health (which also includes education, labor, and pension issues).

New Hampshire Republican Judd Gregg has encouraged his GOP colleagues to submit amendments that are "serious and relevant," according to an aide. "I can't say there will be no crazy immigration stuff because we never can tell what certain people will do," the aide said.

Video
Image:  Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has a laugh during a news conference after the House passed health care reform legislation
Change for Obama, Dems?
March 22: NBC’s David Gregory discusses how the Democrats' health care win will change the future of the Democratic party and the Obama administration.

Today show

Such a wide open field could require Democrats to make some tough votes on hot button issues like taxes, Medicare cuts, Medicaid, immigration, and labor. This could prove especially problematic for those Democrats facing re-election.

Democrats say they'll ask the parliamentarian to rule that Republicans are being "dilatory" or delaying the process by offering too many amendments. Multiple Republican sources have suggested they're more interested in quality than quantity.

"You can be serious and relevant for a long time," the GOP aide said. "I think there's plenty of issues that can be covered without treading into that dilatory area."

Votes of the amendments would likely come at the end of the debate in what is called the "vote-o-rama."

The parliamentarian
It's clear the process puts a lot of power in the hands of the parliamentarian.

He alone rules whether something should be eliminated from the bill or if or if Republicans are employing stalling tactics. (The Democratic senator presiding over the Senate at the time, which could be Vice President Joe Biden, can chose to ignore Frumin's advice, but aides say Senate leaders will respect the parliamentarian's rulings.)

Many of the tough decisions have already been vetted in advance. On Monday afternoon, members of both parties were meeting behind closed doors with the parliamentarian to discuss the process.

"Nobody wants to surprise anybody if we can avoid it," Gregg said. "The parliamentarian deserves to have a reasonable amount of information so that he can make a thoughtful decision and is not having to take action in a situation where he hasn't had time to analyze the issue."

While the parliamentarian doesn't issue final verdicts, both sides are likely to get an early sense of which way the procedural winds are blowing.

This may reduce the risk of some "gotcha" moments on the floor, but not eliminate them completely. Republicans say they'll comb through the bill until the last moment looking for holes.

"As we come across provisions in the bill — be it before we get on the floor or on the floor — at anytime we can go down to the parliamentarian to make our case," said a Republican aide well versed in reconciliation strategy.

Democrats sheepishly admit that changes to the bill are possible. But they believe those changes would be minor and not have a significant impact on the substance or cost of the bill.

Read more...

copyright Oxkoon Inc.