Obama Calls Wall Street Bonuses ‘Shameful’

January 30, 2009

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG and STEPHEN LABATON

WASHINGTON — President Obama branded Wall Street bankers “shameful” on Thursday for giving themselves nearly $20 billion in bonuses as the economy was deteriorating and the government was spending billions to bail out some of the nation’s most prominent financial institutions.

“There will be time for them to make profits, and there will be time for them to get bonuses,” Mr. Obama said during an appearance in the Oval Office with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner. “Now’s not that time. And that’s a message that I intend to send directly to them, I expect Secretary Geithner to send to them.”

It was a pointed — if calculated — flash of anger from the president, who frequently railed against excesses in executive compensation on the campaign trail. He struck his populist tone as he confronted the possibility of having to ask Congress for additional large sums of money, beyond the $700 billion already authorized, to prop up the financial system, even as he pushes Congress to move quickly on a separate economic stimulus package that could cost taxpayers as much as $900 billion.

This week alone, American companies reported as many as 65,000 job cuts, and public anger is rising over reports of profligate spending by banks and investment firms that are receiving help from the $700 billion bailout fund. About half of that money is still available, but the new administration has yet to announce how it will use it, and many analysts think it will take far more to stabilize the banking system.

Should Mr. Obama have to go to Congress to seek more money for the bailout fund to avert the failure of more banks, he would most likely encounter opposition within both parties and demands for tighter restrictions on pay for executives of institutions that receive government assistance.

Mr. Geithner has already signaled a willingness to impose stricter compensation limits as part of a revamped approach to dealing with the banking crisis, but with his strong words on Thursday, Mr. Obama seemed intent on reassuring Congress and the public that he would step up the pressure on bankers before granting them additional assistance.

Mr. Obama was reacting to a report by the New York State comptroller that found financial executives had received an estimated $18.4 billion in bonuses for 2008, less than for the previous several years but the same level of bonuses as they received in 2004, when times were flush.

“That is the height of irresponsibility,” Mr. Obama said. “It is shameful. And part of what we’re going to need is for the folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility.”

The Obama administration and lawmakers have begun to consider ways to control executive pay; the bailout fund, known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, would be the main vehicle for exerting such control. The administration of former President George W. Bush issued guidelines last October to try to control executive pay at companies receiving government help, but so far they have done little to curb large salaries.

During his confirmation hearings, Mr. Geithner said the administration is preparing rules that would require executives at companies receiving taxpayer money to agree that any compensation above a certain amount — he did not specify how much — be “paid in restricted stock or similar form” that could not be liquidated or sold until the government had been repaid.

Some lawmakers, meanwhile, have said they are considering so-called “clawback” provisions that could be invoked by the government to take back bonuses and executive pay from officials at companies that encountered problems.

In the meantime, public outrage is already forcing some companies to rein in their lavish spending. John A. Thain, the former Merrill Lynch executive who was forced out of Bank of America, said this week he would reimburse Bank of America for an expensive renovation of his office that included an $87,000 area rug and $35,000 commode.

But it took the urging of the Obama administration to force Citigroup, which received an infusion of taxpayer funds last year, to abandon plans to buy a $50 million corporate jet. On Thursday, Mr. Obama made reference to the jet, without singling out Citigroup by name; his remarks came one day after the president met at the White House with business leaders, including Richard D. Parsons, the new chairman of Citigroup.

On Capitol Hill, Senator Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, issued his own warning on Thursday, saying companies would be summoned to testify if taxpayer money was involved.

“Whether it was used directly or indirectly, this infuriates the American people and rightly so,” Mr. Dodd said. “So I say to anyone else who does it, if you do it, I’m going to bring you before the committee.”

There is also political pressure to rein in pay in industries beyond banks and investment firms. The pressure reflects the substantial disparities between pay increases for senior executives, the low rate of wage growth for workers and the frequent disconnect between compensation and the long-term strategic success or failure of corporations.

Mr. Obama’s message on Thursday was reinforced by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who pledged in an interview with CNBC and The New York Times that the government would spend the remaining $350 billion of the troubled assets money “wisely and prudently and transparently.”

Mr. Biden said that he, like the president, was outraged by reports of large bonuses going to Wall Street executives.

“I’d like to throw these guys in the brig,” he said. “They’re thinking the same old thing that got us here, greed. They’re thinking, ‘Take care of me.’ ”

John Harwood contributed reporting.



http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama slams Wall Street bonuses

Obama calls for bankers to act responsibly

President Barack Obama says that multi-billion dollar bonuses taken by Wall Street bankers are "shameful" while taxpayers bail out their industry.

The president said their actions "were the height of irresponsibility".

He said his administration would tell bankers they needed to show some discipline and restraint.

Mr Obama was responding to reports that employees at financial companies in New York collected an estimated $18.4bn (£12.9bn) in bonuses last year.

"It is shameful, and part of what we are going to need is for the folks on Wall Street who are asking for help to show some restraint and show some discipline and show some sense of responsibility," he added.

"The American people understand that we have got a big hole we have got to dig ourselves out of but they don't like the idea that people are digging a bigger hole."

Earlier this week, US bank Citigroup cancelled an order for a new corporate jet after President Obama questioned the wisdom of the purchase.

The White House asked whether buying the jet was the "best use of money at this point" for a bank that took $45bn (£31.6bn) of public money last autumn.




http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama to lobby for stimulus plan

President Obama and Timothy Geithner want to move quickly on the plan

US President Barack Obama is to hold talks with congressional Republicans to try to persuade them to accept his $825bn (£586bn) economic recovery plan.

Republican lawmakers are increasingly vocal in opposing the bill, complaining it is too expensive and unworkable.

President Obama is hoping to get their support, saying the slumping economic climate showed the need for "swift and extraordinary" action.

The president hopes his plan could clear Congress by mid-February.

'Unprecedented crisis'

The plan will be debated in the House of Representatives on Wednesday, with the Senate to follow later.

This will probably be the largest tax cut they will get to vote for over the next 24 months. They ought to grab it House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer Obama diary: The first 100 days Timeline: US government bail-outs

Republicans lack the votes to defeat the stimulus bill on their own, but could slow its progress, especially in the Senate.

Any decision will fall to the new Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who was sworn in on Monday, with the task of trying to get the US economy back in shape.

President Obama has said his administration will be held accountable for the success or failure of his stimulus plan.

He has described the US as being "in the midst of an unprecedented crisis" and has announced:

• More than 3,000 miles of new electricity transmission lines would be laid down to improve the US power network
• 75% of public sector buildings would be made more energy-efficient, saving taxpayers $2bn a year
• More than 2.5m homes would be "weatherized" (made more energy efficient)
• Funds would be made available to improve or renovate 10,000 schools

Other proposals include tax credits for firms that create jobs, tax cuts for 95% of American workers and extended unemployment benefits.

The president has pledged the plan "will save or create three to four million jobs over the next few years".

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer last week stressed that the package included $275bn (£195bn) in tax cuts and warned Republicans: "This will probably be the largest tax cut they will get to vote for over the next 24 months. They ought to grab it."

http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Melding Obama’s Web to a YouTube Presidency

January 26, 2009

By JIM RUTENBERG and ADAM NAGOURNEY

WASHINGTON — Lyle McIntosh gave everything he could to Barack Obama’s Iowa campaign. He helped oversee an army that knocked on doors, distributed fliers and held neighborhood meetings to rally support for Mr. Obama, all the while juggling the demands of his soybean and corn farm.

Asked last week if he and others like him were ready to go all-out again, this time to help President Obama push his White House agenda, Mr. McIntosh paused.

“It’s almost like a football season or a basketball season — you go as hard as you can and then you’ve got to take a breather between the seasons,” he said, noting he found it hard to go full-bore during the general election.

Mr. McIntosh’s uncertainty suggests just one of the many obstacles the White House faces as it tries to accomplish what aides say is one of their most important goals: transforming the YouTubing-Facebooking-texting-Twittering grass-roots organization that put Mr. Obama in the White House into an instrument of government. That is something that Mr. Obama, who began his career as a community organizer, told aides was a top priority, even before he was elected.

His aides — including his campaign manager — have created a group, Organizing for America, to redirect the campaign machinery in the service of broad changes in health care and environmental and fiscal policy. They envision an army of supporters talking, sending e-mail and texting to friends and neighbors as they try to mold public opinion.

The organization will be housed in the Democratic National Committee, rather than at the White House. But the idea behind it — that the traditional ways of communicating with and motivating voters are giving way to new channels built around social networking — is also very evident in the White House’s media strategy.

Like George W. Bush before him, Mr. Obama is trying to bypass the mainstream news media and take messages straight to the public.

The most prominent example of the new strategy is his weekly address to the nation — what under previous presidents was a speech recorded for and released to radio stations on Saturday mornings. Mr. Obama instead records a video, which on Saturday he posted on the White House Web site and on YouTube; in it, he explained what he wanted to accomplish with the $825 billion economic stimulus plan working its way through Congress. By late Sunday afternoon, it had been viewed more than 600,000 times on YouTube.

The White House also faces legal limitations in terms of what it can do. Perhaps most notably, it cannot use a 13-million-person e-mail list that Mr. Obama’s team developed because it was compiled for political purposes. That is an important reason Mr. Obama has decided to build a new organization within the Democratic Party, which does not have similar restrictions.

Still, after months of discussion, aides said the whole approach remained a work in progress, even after Friday, when the organizers e-mailed a link to a video to those 13 million people announcing the creation of Organizing for America. Mr. Obama’s aides know they have a huge resource to harness, but fundamental questions remain about how it will run and precisely what organizers are hoping to accomplish.

“This has obviously never been undertaken before,” David Plouffe, Mr. Obama’s campaign manager and one of the organizers of this effort, said in the video sent to supporters. “So it’s going to be a little trial and error.”

Even with that video, in addition to one sent earlier in the president’s name, the organization does not have a fully developed Web site, evidence, some of Mr. Obama’s advisers said, of just how murky the mission is.

Mr. Plouffe said the group had not settled on a budget or begun serious fund-raising. The goal is to have a relatively small staff, with representatives in most, if not every, state, and to make up any shortfall in personnel with the use of technology.

There is a clear interest in keeping the Internet-based political machinery that made Mr. Obama’s brand so iconic and that helped him raise record amounts. The new group’s initials, O.F.A., conveniently also apply to his Obama for America campaign. And the desire for the Obama organization to live on was voiced in a meeting of organizers in Chicago after Election Day, and echoed at 4,800 house meetings in December and in a survey completed by 500,000 Obama supporters.

Still, sensitive to ruffling feathers even among fellow Democrats wary of Mr. Obama’s huge political support, Mr. Obama’s aides emphasized that the effort was not created to lobby directly or pressure members of Congress to support Mr. Obama’s programs.

“This is not a political campaign,” Mr. Plouffe said. “This is not a ‘call or e-mail your member of Congress’ organization.”

Instead, Mr. Plouffe said the aim was to work through influential people in various communities as a way of building public opinion.

“So it’s: ‘Here’s the president’s speech today on the economy. Here are some talking points,’ ” he said. “This was a very under-appreciated part of our campaign. If someone who has never been involved in politics before — or is an independent or a Republican — makes this case with their circle of people, that has more impact.”

The operation is being run from borrowed desks on the third floor of the D.N.C. headquarters on Capitol Hill, led by organizers chosen, Mr. Plouffe said, because of skills they demonstrated during the campaign. The head of the group is Mitch Stewart, a low-key operative who helped run Mr. Obama’s effort in three critical states — Iowa and Indiana in the primary season and Virginia in the general election. Another important person in the operation is Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, the new executive director of the Democratic National Committee, who was the battleground states director for Mr. Obama in his campaign.

And there will be clear coordination between this independent operation at the Democratic National Committee and a communications arm being set up at the White House, under Macon Phillips, the “new media” director for Mr. Obama’s administration.

Mr. Phillips was an Internet strategist with Blue State Digital, a private firm closely tied to Mr. Obama’s campaign. His team signaled the new direction Mr. Obama is bringing with a redesigned White House Web site that was introduced shortly after Mr. Obama was sworn in and is modeled after his campaign site. It will be continually updated to add presidential orders and blog postings that make the case for administration policy, often echoed by talking points that Organizing for America is sending to supporters.

In an interview, Mr. Phillips, 30, said the site would give the White House another way to reach the public without having to rely on the mainstream news media.

“Historically the media has been able to draw out a lot of information and characterize it for people,” he said. “And there’s a growing appetite from people to do it themselves.”

The approach is causing some concern among news media advocates, who express discomfort with what effectively could become an informational network reaching 13 million people, or more, with an unchallenged, governmental point of view.

“They’re beginning to create their own journalism, their own description of events of the day, but it’s not an independent voice making that description,” said Bill Kovach, the chairman of the Committee of Concerned Journalists. “It’s troublesome until we know how it’s going to be used and the degree to which it can be used on behalf of the people, and not on behalf of only one point of view.”

The undertaking will require Mr. Obama’s aides to wedge technology that worked for them in the campaign into the infrastructure of the White House, with its relatively older technology and security restrictions. Where Mr. Obama’s campaign was free to use Facebook, instant messaging and Twitter, among other forms of communication, the White House faces more constraints. With every note part of the historical record, and new scrutiny on every communication, staff members are unable to access public instant messaging accounts and social networking sites from their desks.

The administration’s Web team has a YouTube channel, but it is already exhibiting the dangers for a White House in the Wild West of the Internet: a page showing Mr. Obama’s inauguration address is littered with offensive commentary from users.

In campaigns, candidates control multimillion-dollar advertising budgets and organizations in 50 states. When they take office, they have had to put their own stamp on existing party organizations, and to rely largely on the news media to communicate with the public. Though he comes to the task with the advantage of a team that proved innovative in using technology and communications advances to reshape electoral politics, Mr. Obama’s challenge is not totally different from the one that faced his predecessors.

“The problem that you have is, you come off a campaign — where there is an infrastructure and a director in every state — and then you have nothing,” said Sara Taylor, a White House political director for Mr. Bush. “You have allied organizations, but they don’t report to you, so you’re relying on allies to be supportive when you don’t have control of those organizations.”

Mr. Obama’s aides acknowledged that after two long years there were also some concerns about “list fatigue.” Mr. Obama, the party and the inaugural committee have reached out to his supporters on the e-mail list so frequently — for money, for input, for help in persuading their neighbors to vote — that some want to give it a rest before cranking it up again.

Even some of Mr. Obama’s most enthusiastic foot soldiers understand the sentiment.

“It’s kind of like we’re spent right now,” said Dr. Robert Gitchell, who campaigned for Mr. Obama in Ames, Iowa. But, “once that fire is lit” in supporters, he said, “it’s easy to trigger them all again.”




http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama’s Order Is Likely to Tighten Auto Standards

January 26, 2009

By JOHN M. BRODER and PETER BAKER

WASHINGTON — President Obama will direct federal regulators on Monday to move swiftly on an application by California and 13 other states to set strict automobile emission and fuel efficiency standards, two administration officials said Sunday.

The directive makes good on an Obama campaign pledge and signifies a sharp reversal of Bush administration policy. Granting California and the other states the right to regulate tailpipe emissions would be one of the most emphatic actions Mr. Obama could take to quickly put his stamp on environmental policy.

Mr. Obama’s presidential memorandum will order the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider the Bush administration’s past rejection of the California application. While it stops short of flatly ordering the Bush decision reversed, the agency’s regulators are now widely expected to do so after completing a formal review process.

Once they act, automobile manufacturers will quickly have to retool to begin producing and selling cars and trucks that get higher mileage than the national standard, and on a faster phase-in schedule. The auto companies have lobbied hard against the regulations and challenged them in court.

Mr. Obama will use the announcement to bolster the impression of a sharp break from the Bush era on all fronts, following his decisions last week to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; tighten limits on interrogation tactics by Central Intelligence Agency officers; order plans to withdraw combat forces from Iraq; and reverse President George W. Bush’s financing restrictions on groups that promote or provide abortion overseas, administration officials said.

Beyond acting on the California emissions law, officials said, Mr. Obama will direct the Transportation Department to quickly finalize interim nationwide regulations requiring the automobile industry to increase fuel efficiency standards to comply with a 2007 law, rules that the Bush administration decided at the last minute not to issue.

To avoid losing another year, Mr. Obama will order temporary regulations to be completed by March so automakers have enough time to retool for vehicles sold in 2011. Final standards for later years will be determined by a separate process that under Mr. Obama’s order must take into consideration legal, scientific and technological factors.

He will also order federal departments and agencies to find new ways to save energy and be more environmentally friendly. And he will highlight the elements in his $825 billion economic stimulus plan intended to create jobs around renewable energy.

The announcements, to be made in the East Room, will begin a week of efforts to get the stimulus plan through Congress. The White House hopes the Senate will confirm Timothy F. Geithner as Treasury secretary on Monday, and Mr. Obama plans to travel to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to meet with both Senate and House Republican caucuses and lobby for his stimulus package. Mr. Obama’s aides expect the House to vote on its plan on Wednesday.

But the centerpiece of Monday’s anticipated announcement is Mr. Obama’s directive to the Environmental Protection Agency to begin work immediately on granting California a waiver, under the Clean Air Act, which allows the state, a longtime leader in air quality matters, to set standards for automobile emissions stricter than the national rules.

California has already won numerous waivers for controls on emissions that cause smog, as opposed to global warming.

The Bush administration denied the waiver in late 2007, saying that recently enacted federal mileage rules made the action unnecessary and that allowing California and the 13 other states the right to set their own pollution rules would result in an unenforceable patchwork of environmental law.

The auto companies had advocated a denial, saying a waiver would require them to produce two sets of vehicles, one to meet the strict California standard and another that could be sold in the remaining states.

The Bush administration’s environmental agency director, Stephen L. Johnson, echoed the automakers’ claims in denying California’s application, ignoring the near-unanimous advice of agency lawyers and scientists that the waiver be granted.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, a Republican, wrote to Mr. Obama last week asking him to swiftly reconsider Mr. Bush’s decision. The head of California’s Air Resources Board, Mary D. Nichols, also wrote to the new director of the environmental agency, Lisa P. Jackson, asking for a quick reversal of the Bush policy.

Ms. Nichols said Sunday night that she had not been formally notified that Mr. Obama intended to move toward granting the waiver. But she said, “Assuming that it is favorable to our request, we’re delighted that the president is acting so quickly to reverse one of the worst decisions by the Bush administration and to get the E.P.A. back on track.”

Ms. Jackson indicated in her confirmation hearing this month that she would “aggressively” review California’s application. The environmental agency has routinely granted California such waivers dozens of times over the past 40 years.

The California law, which was originally meant to take effect in the 2009 model year, requires automakers to cut emissions by nearly a third by 2016, four years ahead of the federal timetable. The result would be an increase in fuel efficiency in the American car and light truck fleet to roughly 35 miles per gallon from the current average of 27.

The emissions standards are part of an ambitious California plan to reduce emissions of the gases that are blamed for the heating of the atmosphere. Automotive emissions account for more than one-fifth of all such greenhouse gases.

California was joined in its plea by 13 other states, including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington. Three other states have indicated they plan to adopt the California standard. Together they account for about half of the American market for cars and light trucks.

Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said the car makers would prefer a single national standard and needed time to develop new fuel-sipping models. “Applying California standards to several different states would create a complex, confusing and very difficult situation for manufacturers,” he said last week in anticipation of the Obama administration’s announcement.

Mr. Obama wants to use the Monday event to promote the environmental and energy elements of his economic plan, aides said. According to a report released by the White House this weekend, the plan is intended to double renewable energy generating capacity over three years, which would be enough to power six million American homes.

It would also pay for 3,000 miles of new or modernized transmission lines as part of a new national electric grid as well as 40 million “smart meters,” which provide instant readouts of electricity uses, on American homes. The money would also help refurbish two million homes and 75 percent of federal building space to better guard against the weather and conserve enough energy to save low-income families $350 a year and the federal government $2 billion a year, according to the report.

The White House also said that Mr. Obama wanted to start a “clean energy finance initiative” to leverage $100 million in private sector investments over the next three years through loan guarantees and other financial support.

Environmentalists and California Democrats had pressed hard for the tougher automotive standards. Daniel J. Weiss, director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress in Washington, plans to attend Monday’s announcement and said he was pleased by the quick action.

“This is a complete reversal of President Bush’s policy of censoring or ignoring global warming science,” Mr. Weiss said. “With the fuel economy measures and clean energy investments in the recovery package, President Obama has done more in one week to reduce oil dependence and global warming than George Bush did in eight years.”

The California rules would not take effect immediately, but would require several months of legal review and public comment. The auto companies could challenge them in court, but they have been unsuccessful in previous lawsuits.

The Clean Air Act allows California to seek a waiver from federal rules if it can demonstrate that its own regulations are more stringent, and needed to address its air pollution problems. California’s trend-setting air resources board has done this successfully more than 50 times. Other states can adhere to either the California or the federal standard.

Felicity Barringer contributed reporting from Palo Alto, Calif.



http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama Voices Hope for Mideast Peace in Talk With Al-Arabiya TV

By Michael D. Shear and Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, January 27, 2009; A03

President Obama expressed optimism yesterday about the prospect of peace between Israel and the Palestinians, but he said a peace accord will take time and require new thinking about the problems of the Middle East as a whole.

Obama's comments came during his first formal television interview as president, with a correspondent from al-Arabiya, the Dubai-based satellite network that is one of the largest English-language TV outlets aimed at Arab audiences.

The president sat for the interview, at the White House, moments after officially dispatching George J. Mitchell, his special envoy for Middle East peace, to the region last evening.

"All too often the United States starts by dictating -- in the past on some of these issues -- and we don't always know all the factors that are involved," Obama told al-Arabiya. "So let's listen. He's going to be speaking to all the major parties involved. And he will then report back to me. From there we will formulate a specific response."

Mitchell will be on the road until Feb. 3, according to the State Department. He will travel to Israel, the West Bank, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, France and England. He also hopes to go to Istanbul, the site of talks between Israel and Syria.

"The administration will actively and aggressively seek a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as Israel and its neighbors," said State Department spokesman Robert Wood.

In the television interview, Obama reiterated U.S. support for Israel, calling it "a strong ally of the United States" and saying he will "continue to believe that Israel's security is paramount."

But in tone, his comments were a stark departure from those of former president George W. Bush, who often described the Middle East conflict in terms that drew criticism from Palestinians.

By contrast, Obama went out of his way to say that if America is "ready to initiate a new partnership [with the Muslim world] based on mutual respect and mutual interest, then I think that we can make significant progress."

The president declined to reveal where he plans to give his first major speech in a foreign country. In the past he had said he would speak in a Muslim capital sometime within the first 100 days of his administration.

And he reiterated a point from his inaugural address: He plans to reach out to Muslims around the world who are willing to "unclench your fist" but will go after terrorists who continue to be bent on destruction.

"Now, my job is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect. I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries," Obama said in the interview.

He said that the United States must be "willing to talk to Iran" and that he would lay out a "framework" for those discussions over the next several months.

Wood said Mitchell will not have contact with Hamas, the militant group that controls the Gaza Strip, but he did not rule out the possibility that Mitchell would also visit Syria or travel to Gaza.

Mitchell's quick start -- just four days after he was named -- appears designed to showcase the administration's determination that it will engage more vigorously on Middle East peace than did the Bush administration.

"The cause of peace in the Middle East is important to the United States and our national interests. It's important to me personally," Obama told reporters while meeting with Mitchell and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton at the White House before Mitchell's departure.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama Issues Orders Toward More Fuel-Efficient Cars

By Steven Mufson and Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, January 27, 2009; A04

President Obama issued two orders yesterday that could ultimately toughen fuel efficiency requirements for new cars and light trucks in what could prove stiff medicine for a U.S. auto industry already hobbled by financial troubles.

With General Motors and Chrysler leaning heavily on billions of dollars of federal loans, Obama is in a strong position to remake the industry with an eye toward cutting U.S. petroleum consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.

"Our goal is not to further burden an already struggling industry," Obama said, but to help American automakers "prepare for the future" and "thrive by building the cars of tomorrow."

The president raised hopes on all sides for a resolution of years of divisive debate over fuel efficiency requirements. Environmentalists and many state officials said they hope that Obama would endorse tough tailpipe emissions standards proposed by California. Automakers, meanwhile, want the administration to establish uniform nationwide mileage standards while moving to ease the cost by providing assistance and incentives for car buyers.

"If you're a stakeholder, you hope the stake goes in ground and not in your back or chest," said David McCurdy, president of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, who watched Obama sign the orders yesterday at the White House.

Flanked by Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Obama directed the EPA to reconsider granting California and other states waivers to set their own strict regulations over tailpipe emissions. California would require a 30 percent cut in those emissions, a mandate more stringent than the federal mileage standards. The new review process could take several months.

Obama also instructed the Transportation Department to draw up new interim targets for mileage standards starting in 2012 that ensure new vehicles reach the 35 mile-a-gallon level set by Congress for 2020. He left intact Bush administration guidelines for 2011 models already being designed.

"The days of Washington dragging its heels are over," Obama said. Saying the nation has arrived at a crossroads, he said: "It will be the policy of my administration to reverse our dependence on foreign oil while building a new energy economy that will create millions of jobs."

Separately, the State Department named Todd Stern the new U.S. envoy on climate change. Stern, a partner in the Washington law firm of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress think tank, served as the top White House negotiator on the Kyoto talks on global warming from 1999 to 2001.

Obama's announcement on fuel efficiency standards encouraged state officials who want to institute their own greenhouse gas curbs but faced opposition from the Bush administration. Ian Bowles, Massachusetts secretary of energy and environmental affairs, said his state had encountered "a strong headwind from the federal government" over the past two years. But "to my mind, today's announcement represents a shift in direction that will lead to a significant federal tailwind."

Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) also applauded Obama's announcement. In 2007, the Maryland General Assembly passed a so-called clean cars law that would set stricter emissions standards for vehicle models hitting the road in 2010. The law would eventually raise average fuel efficiency of cars told in Maryland to 43 miles per gallon.

"In the long run, it's best for American automakers as well," O'Malley said.

Automakers in the past have not seen it that way and have filed at least three lawsuits in different jurisdictions to stop states from setting their own emission standards. "The suits are still there," said Gloria Bergquist, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. But, she added, "We're the first to say we would like to find a better way forward."

Environmental groups argue that controlling tailpipe emissions from vehicles will do much to address climate change. According to the advocacy group Environment America, applying the California standards to the 14 states that have already adopted them will reduce global warming pollution by more than 450 million metric tons by 2020, an amount equal to eliminating all of the pollution from 84.7 million of today's cars for a year.

Staff writer Lisa Rein contributed to this report.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama’s Order Is Likely to Tighten Auto Standards

January 26, 2009

By JOHN M. BRODER and PETER BAKER

WASHINGTON — President Obama will direct federal regulators on Monday to move swiftly on an application by California and 13 other states to set strict automobile emission and fuel efficiency standards, two administration officials said Sunday.

The directive makes good on an Obama campaign pledge and signifies a sharp reversal of Bush administration policy. Granting California and the other states the right to regulate tailpipe emissions would be one of the most emphatic actions Mr. Obama could take to quickly put his stamp on environmental policy.

Mr. Obama’s presidential memorandum will order the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider the Bush administration’s past rejection of the California application. While it stops short of flatly ordering the Bush decision reversed, the agency’s regulators are now widely expected to do so after completing a formal review process.

Once they act, automobile manufacturers will quickly have to retool to begin producing and selling cars and trucks that get higher mileage than the national standard, and on a faster phase-in schedule. The auto companies have lobbied hard against the regulations and challenged them in court.

Mr. Obama will use the announcement to bolster the impression of a sharp break from the Bush era on all fronts, following his decisions last week to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; tighten limits on interrogation tactics by Central Intelligence Agency officers; order plans to withdraw combat forces from Iraq; and reverse President George W. Bush’s financing restrictions on groups that promote or provide abortion overseas, administration officials said.

Beyond acting on the California emissions law, officials said, Mr. Obama will direct the Transportation Department to quickly finalize interim nationwide regulations requiring the automobile industry to increase fuel efficiency standards to comply with a 2007 law, rules that the Bush administration decided at the last minute not to issue.

To avoid losing another year, Mr. Obama will order temporary regulations to be completed by March so automakers have enough time to retool for vehicles sold in 2011. Final standards for later years will be determined by a separate process that under Mr. Obama’s order must take into consideration legal, scientific and technological factors.

He will also order federal departments and agencies to find new ways to save energy and be more environmentally friendly. And he will highlight the elements in his $825 billion economic stimulus plan intended to create jobs around renewable energy.

The announcements, to be made in the East Room, will begin a week of efforts to get the stimulus plan through Congress. The White House hopes the Senate will confirm Timothy F. Geithner as Treasury secretary on Monday, and Mr. Obama plans to travel to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to meet with both Senate and House Republican caucuses and lobby for his stimulus package. Mr. Obama’s aides expect the House to vote on its plan on Wednesday.

But the centerpiece of Monday’s anticipated announcement is Mr. Obama’s directive to the Environmental Protection Agency to begin work immediately on granting California a waiver, under the Clean Air Act, which allows the state, a longtime leader in air quality matters, to set standards for automobile emissions stricter than the national rules.

California has already won numerous waivers for controls on emissions that cause smog, as opposed to global warming.

The Bush administration denied the waiver in late 2007, saying that recently enacted federal mileage rules made the action unnecessary and that allowing California and the 13 other states the right to set their own pollution rules would result in an unenforceable patchwork of environmental law.

The auto companies had advocated a denial, saying a waiver would require them to produce two sets of vehicles, one to meet the strict California standard and another that could be sold in the remaining states.

The Bush administration’s environmental agency director, Stephen L. Johnson, echoed the automakers’ claims in denying California’s application, ignoring the near-unanimous advice of agency lawyers and scientists that the waiver be granted.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California, a Republican, wrote to Mr. Obama last week asking him to swiftly reconsider Mr. Bush’s decision. The head of California’s Air Resources Board, Mary D. Nichols, also wrote to the new director of the environmental agency, Lisa P. Jackson, asking for a quick reversal of the Bush policy.

Ms. Nichols said Sunday night that she had not been formally notified that Mr. Obama intended to move toward granting the waiver. But she said, “Assuming that it is favorable to our request, we’re delighted that the president is acting so quickly to reverse one of the worst decisions by the Bush administration and to get the E.P.A. back on track.”

Ms. Jackson indicated in her confirmation hearing this month that she would “aggressively” review California’s application. The environmental agency has routinely granted California such waivers dozens of times over the past 40 years.

The California law, which was originally meant to take effect in the 2009 model year, requires automakers to cut emissions by nearly a third by 2016, four years ahead of the federal timetable. The result would be an increase in fuel efficiency in the American car and light truck fleet to roughly 35 miles per gallon from the current average of 27.

The emissions standards are part of an ambitious California plan to reduce emissions of the gases that are blamed for the heating of the atmosphere. Automotive emissions account for more than one-fifth of all such greenhouse gases.

California was joined in its plea by 13 other states, including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Oregon and Washington. Three other states have indicated they plan to adopt the California standard. Together they account for about half of the American market for cars and light trucks.

Charles Territo, a spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said the car makers would prefer a single national standard and needed time to develop new fuel-sipping models. “Applying California standards to several different states would create a complex, confusing and very difficult situation for manufacturers,” he said last week in anticipation of the Obama administration’s announcement.

Mr. Obama wants to use the Monday event to promote the environmental and energy elements of his economic plan, aides said. According to a report released by the White House this weekend, the plan is intended to double renewable energy generating capacity over three years, which would be enough to power six million American homes.

It would also pay for 3,000 miles of new or modernized transmission lines as part of a new national electric grid as well as 40 million “smart meters,” which provide instant readouts of electricity uses, on American homes. The money would also help refurbish two million homes and 75 percent of federal building space to better guard against the weather and conserve enough energy to save low-income families $350 a year and the federal government $2 billion a year, according to the report.

The White House also said that Mr. Obama wanted to start a “clean energy finance initiative” to leverage $100 million in private sector investments over the next three years through loan guarantees and other financial support.

Environmentalists and California Democrats had pressed hard for the tougher automotive standards. Daniel J. Weiss, director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress in Washington, plans to attend Monday’s announcement and said he was pleased by the quick action.

“This is a complete reversal of President Bush’s policy of censoring or ignoring global warming science,” Mr. Weiss said. “With the fuel economy measures and clean energy investments in the recovery package, President Obama has done more in one week to reduce oil dependence and global warming than George Bush did in eight years.”

The California rules would not take effect immediately, but would require several months of legal review and public comment. The auto companies could challenge them in court, but they have been unsuccessful in previous lawsuits.

The Clean Air Act allows California to seek a waiver from federal rules if it can demonstrate that its own regulations are more stringent, and needed to address its air pollution problems. California’s trend-setting air resources board has done this successfully more than 50 times. Other states can adhere to either the California or the federal standard.

Felicity Barringer contributed reporting from Palo Alto, Calif.



http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

LES MEDIAS FRANÇAIS SONT-ILS LES COMPLICES D’ISRAEL ????

En d’autres temps, c’est à dire avant les massacres de « Tsahal » à Gaza, personne n’aurait ouvertement posé cette question là. Rien que le fait de le suggérer aurait provoqué un tsunami d’indignations et une série de « procès en antisémitisme ». Les censeurs, les penseurs et les « intellectuels communautaires » auraient poussé des cris d’orfraie, parlé d’une « nouvelle judéophobie », théorisé sur le « dieudonnisme rampant » dans la société française.
Il faut croire que les temps ont bien changé et qu’ils ne pourront que très difficilement se servir de leur traditionnel écran de fumée, celui qui a asphyxié les Benoît Guigue, Richard Labevière, Pascal Boniface et d’autres, pour éviter que l’on pointe le rôle néfaste des « médias marchands » pendant la barbarie israélienne à gaza. Alors, les médias Français ont-ils trahi leur déontologie pour couvrir ce que Israël a appelé « opération plomb durci » contre les « terroristes du Hamas » ? La réponse coule de source, c’est bien une évidence irréfutable. Quelques faits qui démontrent, au mieux, la complaisance, au pire, la complicité des médias français dans ce que les médecins sur le terrain, les témoignages édifiants des victimes et bénévoles des ONG, les rapports des observateurs de l’ONU, qualifient de Crimes contre l’Humanité et Crimes de guerre commis par l’armée israélienne sur les populations civiles palestiniennes.

Primo, au début de la campagne « plomb durci », les médias parlent unanimement de « l’offensive d’Israël contre le Hamas ». A l’évidence, ils omettent de rappeler aux français qu’il s’agit d’une agression contre les populations civiles, d’autant plus que l’agresseur se sert de toute sa puissance de feu pour écraser des « lanceurs de roquettes ». Cherchez l’erreur !

Deuxio, à mesure que les médias Arabes diffusaient les images des réalités à Gaza, contrariant tous les plans de communication des « stratèges israéliens », en France, les « spécialistes de l’info » se chargent de renvoyer dos à dos les bourreaux et leurs milliers de victimes, derrière lesquelles se cacheraient les « terroristes du Hamas ». Comprenez par là que s’il y a eu au moins 2000 morts et plus de 5000 blessés en 22 jours de folie destructrice, c’est avant tout la faute au Hamas ! Incroyable mais vrai !

Tertio, face au tollé général et aux milliers de manifestants qui défilent à travers le monde entier pour condamner les massacres de gazaouis, les médias,eux, préfèrent parler de « l’islamisation » des cortèges dans les rues, des « barbus en djellabas », et des « jeunes des banlieues ». Mieux encore, les « éditorialistes » mettaient en garde contre les « appels antisémites » ; sous entendu les banderoles associant Israël à un état terroriste. Une seule chose importe les médias aux ordres, Il n’est pas question de dénoncer la barbarie que les millions de téléspectateurs voient via les médias étrangers ; Internet et autres. Il ne faut surtout pas évoquer l’importance des manifestations qui réunissent les « Blancs, les Blacks et les Beurs » en France, comme lors de la coupe du monde 1998.

Quarto, pour tenter d’expliquer l’insupportable, ces images de corps déchiquetés, d’enfants dépecés par les bombes au phosphore blanc, les télévisions françaises diffusent les reportages filmés par l’état major israélien, où l’on voit des civils, des enfants apeurés et des femmes en larmes, se précipitant dans des abris pour éviter les roquettes artisanales du Hamas. Voyez vous, Israël a le droit de se défendre, y compris d’exterminer les palestiniens. Qui rappelle qu’en 8 ans, les roquettes du Hamas ont tué 10 civils israéliens alors qu’au moins 5000 palestiniens sont tombés sous les balles de leurs bourreaux ?

Enfin, après le « cessez le feu unilatéral » décrété par l’état hébreu, conscient qu’il avait perdu la bataille morale et médiatique, les médias décident de mettre l’accent sur la compassion des bourreaux à l’égard de leurs milliers de victimes civiles. Israël n’a t-il pas laissé passer les convois humanitaires ? Et que dire des bombardements des hôpitaux et des missions humanitaires par les chars, missiles, navires, avions et drones israéliens ? Silence, c’est la faute aux Hamas !

Aujourd’hui, alors que l’on découvre l’ampleur des massacres perpétrés par l’entreprise d’humiliation collective et de meurtres massifs à Gaza, l’on peut difficilement passer sous silence la complicité active des médias français, alors que leurs collègues étrangers faisaient consciencieusement leur travail. Si Israël a tombé le masque en commettant des Crimes contre l’Humanité rappelant ceux organisés par les Nazis dans les villages qui leur résistait, c’est aussi parce qu’il pouvait compter sur les médias aux ordres, à l’instar de ceux qui désinforment massivement les Français au quotidien. Il est temps de faire le procès de ces relais de la propagande néoconservatrice en France. On peut difficilement appeler à juger l’état hébreu pour Crimes contre l’Humanité tout en épargnant ses complices médiatiques.

A2N

GAZA : Enquete sur les bombardements au phosphore

Gaza : bombardement des bâtiments de l'ONU, témoignage

Pour Gaza : pas vu à la télé

Obama Presses for Quick Jolt to the Economy

January 24, 2009

By JACKIE CALMES and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Friday stepped squarely into the fractious effort in Congress to assemble an $825 billion economic recovery package, seeking to quell criticism from both parties and to retain leadership on an initiative that could define his term.

Through his budget director, Peter R. Orszag, Mr. Obama committed to seeing that three-quarters of the combined spending and tax cuts would be used within 18 months, to provide the fiscal jolt that economists say is needed to jump-start the economy.

Mr. Orszag’s letter of assurance to Congress sought to rebut some Republicans’ accusations that little of the spending in the House version of the package would get into the economy quickly enough to be effective.

For the first time as president, Mr. Obama also met with the leaders of both parties in Congress, in keeping with his campaign promise of bipartisanship.

Yet in a polite but pointed exchange with the No. 2 House Republican, Eric Cantor of Virginia, Mr. Obama took note of the parties’ fundamental differences on tax policy toward low-wage workers, and insisted that his view would prevail.

At issue is Mr. Obama’s proposal that his tax breaks for low- and middle-income workers, including his centerpiece “Making Work Pay” tax credit, be refundable — that is, that the benefits also go to workers who earn too little to pay income taxes but who pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. Republicans generally oppose giving such refunds to people who pay no income taxes.

“We just have a difference here, and I’m president,” Mr. Obama said to Mr. Cantor, according to Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, who was at the meeting.

Mr. Emanuel said that Mr. Obama was being lighthearted and that lawmakers of both parties had laughed.

Mr. Cantor, in an interview later, had a similar recollection. He said the president had told him, “You’re correct, there’s a philosophical difference, but I won, so we’re going to prevail on that.”

“He was very straightforward,” Mr. Cantor added. “There was no disrespect, but it was very matter-of-fact.”

In a day focused on the economy, Mr. Obama also attended what is now a daily economic briefing at the White House, met with his staff about his first budget, due next month, and conferred privately with Timothy F. Geithner, his Treasury secretary nominee, who is likely to be confirmed by the Senate on Monday.

As for the stimulus package, the president told reporters, “It appears that we are on target” toward adopting the recovery plan before Congress recesses for Presidents’ Day on Feb. 13.

As he opened their meeting, Mr. Obama told the lawmakers that “there are still some differences around the table and between the administration and the members of Congress about particular details on the plan.”

“But what I think unifies this group,” he said, “is recognition that we are experiencing an unprecedented, perhaps, economic crisis that has to be dealt with and dealt with rapidly.”

Having invited lawmakers to present their ideas for doing that, Mr. Obama is getting an earful. The process is shaping up as a first major test of his presidential leadership, with many of his campaign promises, as well as the livelihoods of millions of Americans, at stake.

Mr. Obama did not lay down a comprehensive plan but made clear his policy preferences, reflecting campaign promises on energy, education and health care, along with traditional stimulus proposals for aid to states and expanded unemployment compensation and food stamp benefits.

Mr. Obama left it to the Democratic-controlled Congress to fill in the details. His differences with his own party in the House are mostly minor, and the House Democrats’ package is expected to be passed next week. But a new Senate plan diverges in several ways from what House Democrats and Mr. Obama favor.

The Senate bill would restrict states from using their federal relief to expand Medicaid to cover more people. And while the House version would provide a single extra payment to Social Security disability beneficiaries, the Senate version would give $300 to all Social Security recipients and to disabled veterans.

Democrats are eager to help Mr. Obama succeed, knowing that their success rides on his. Still, they are refusing to cede their status as leaders of a co-equal branch of government, as they say Republicans did under President George W. Bush.

Republicans, for their part, do not want to be seen as obstructionists of a popular new president in a time of national distress. Yet especially in the House, where most Republicans hail from ideologically conservative districts, the opposition members view the stimulus debate as an opportunity to rededicate their divided, demoralized party around the one idea that unites it: big tax cuts, even if that means opposing Mr. Obama.

But House Republicans do not have enough votes to prevail. And events on Friday made clear they do not pose a united front with Senate Republicans.

In a speech, the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, countered criticism from party conservatives, like many in the House, who oppose compromise with Mr. Obama.

“Anyone who belittles cooperation resigns him or herself to a state of permanent legislative gridlock,” Mr. McConnell said. “And that is simply no longer acceptable to the American people.”

Senate Republicans have not signed on to the House Republican plan that Mr. Cantor and the House minority leader, John A. Boehner of Ohio, presented to Mr. Obama. It omits the Making Work Pay tax credit, which Obama aides have called “nonnegotiable,” in favor of reducing the two lowest income-tax brackets, to 10 percent from 15 percent, and to 5 percent from 10 percent, a move that would benefit even the richest taxpayers.

Those “are not the right kinds of cuts,” said Bob Williams of the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan research group. “You want to put money in the hands of people who will spend it.” And the poorest Americans are “the only people we know will spend the money.”

The House Democrats’ plan calls for roughly $550 billion in spending and $275 billion in tax breaks. Republicans have said they are alarmed at the size of that package, but they have not specified what dollar amount or ratio of tax cuts to spending they prefer.

Mr. Obama is likely to have to show some deference to Republican proposals, and there already are some under discussion that could gain traction. Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the senior Republican on the Finance Committee, said Friday that he would fight to include a provision to spare at least 24 million middle-class families in 2009 from having to pay the alternative minimum tax, which applies when tax filers do not pay enough taxes to meet minimum thresholds under the traditional income tax system.

Peter Baker, Michael Falcone and Sheryl Gay Stolberg contributed reporting.




http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama issues US recovery pledge

Advertisement

Obama calls for action on economy

US President Barack Obama has said his administration will be held accountable for the success or failure of his economic stimulus plan.

President Obama said all decisions about where to invest some $825bn (£607bn) would be made public and published on a new website.

Mr Obama made the pledge in his first weekly radio and internet address since taking office on Tuesday.

Mr Obama has said his recovery plan could clear Congress by mid-February.

'Lose a generation'

President Obama said the United States had found itself "in the midst of an unprecedented crisis that calls for unprecedented action".

He said: "Just this week, we saw more people file for unemployment than at any time in the last 26 years, and experts agree that if nothing is done, the unemployment rate could reach double digits.

"Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. And we could lose a generation of potential, as more young Americans are forced to forgo college dreams or the chance to train for the jobs of the future."

The US unemployment rate is 7.2%, after 524,000 jobs were lost in December.

The number of job losses last year was 2.6m, the largest since World War II.

Mr Obama said the economic recovery plan "will save or create three to four million jobs over the next few years".

"This recovery plan must and will include unprecedented measures that will allow the American people to hold my administration accountable for these results," he said.

Mr Obama announced:

• More than 3,000 miles of new electricity transmission lines would be laid down to improve the US power network
• 75% of public sector buildings would be made more energy-efficient, saving taxpayers $2bn a year
• More than 2.5m homes would be "weatherized" (made more energy efficient),
• Funds would be made available to improve or renovate 10,000 schools

President Obama said: "Instead of politicians doling out money behind a veil of secrecy, decisions about where we invest will be made public, and informed by independent experts whenever possible.

"We'll launch an unprecedented effort to root out waste, inefficiency, and unnecessary spending in our government, and every American will be able to see how and where we spend taxpayer dollars by going to a new website called recovery.gov."

The recovery plan suggests more than 40% of the new jobs should go to women and 90% of them should be in the private sector.



http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

Obama reverses Bush abortion-funds policy

By LIZ SIDOTI and MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writers Liz Sidoti And Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writers 16 mins ago

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday struck down the Bush administration's ban on giving federal money to international groups that perform abortions or provide abortion information — an inflammatory policy that has bounced in and out of law for the past quarter-century. Obama's executive order, the latest in an aggressive first week reversing contentious Bush policies, was warmly welcomed by liberal groups and denounced by abortion rights foes.

The ban has been a political football between Democratic and Republican administrations since GOP President Ronald Reagan first adopted it 1984. Democrat Bill Clinton ended the ban in 1993, but Republican George W. Bush re-instituted it in 2001 as one of his first acts in office.

A White House spokesman, Bill Burton, said Obama signed the executive order, without coverage by the media, late on Friday afternoon. The abortion measure is a highly emotional one for many people, and the quiet signing was in contrast to the televised coverage of Obama's Wednesday announcement on ethics rules and Thursday signing of orders on closing the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and banning torture in the questioning of terror suspects.

His action came one day after the 36th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.

The Bush policy had banned U.S. taxpayer money, usually in the form of Agency for International Development funds, from going to international family planning groups that either offer abortions or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion as a family planning method.

Critics have long held that the rule unfairly discriminates against the world's poor by denying U.S. aid to groups that may be involved in abortion but also work on other aspects of reproductive health care and HIV/AIDS, leading to the closure of free and low-cost rural clinics.

Supporters of the ban say that the United States still provides millions of dollars in family planning assistance around the world and that the rule prevents anti-abortion taxpayers from backing something they believe is morally wrong.

The ban has been known as the "Mexico City policy" for the city a U.S. delegation first announced it at a U.N. International Conference on Population.

Both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who will oversee foreign aid, had promised to do away with the rule during the presidential campaign. Clinton visited the U.S. Agency for International Development earlier Friday but made no mention of the step, which had not yet been announced.

In a move related to the lifting of the abortion rule, Obama is also expected to restore funding to the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA), probably in the next federal budget. Both he and Clinton had pledged to reverse a Bush administration determination that assistance to the organization violated U.S. law known as the Kemp-Kasten amendment.

The Bush administration had barred U.S. money from the fund, to contending that its work in China supported a Chinese family planning policy of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization. UNFPA has vehemently denied that it does.

Congress had appropriated $40 million to the UNFPA in the past budget year but the administration had withheld the money as it had done every year since 2002.

Organizations and lawmakers that had pressed Obama to rescind the Mexico City policy were jubilant.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the move "will help save lives and empower the poorest women and families to improve their quality of life and their future."

"Today's announcement is a very powerful signal to our neighbors around the world that the United States is once again back in the business of good public policy and ideology no longer blunts our ability to save lives around the globe," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Population Action International, an advocacy group, said that the policy had "severely impacted" women's health and that the step "will help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, abortions and women dying from high-risk pregnancies because they don't have access to family planning."

Anti-abortion groups and lawmakers condemned Obama's decision.

"I have long supported the Mexico City Policy and believe this administration's decision to be counter to our nation's interests," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

"Coming just one day after the 36th anniversary of the tragic Roe v. Wade decision, this presidential directive forces taxpayers to subsidize abortions overseas — something no American should be required by government to do," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., called it "morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans to promote abortion around the world."

"President Obama not long ago told the American people that he would support policies to reduce abortions, but today he is effectively guaranteeing more abortions by funding groups that promote abortion as a method of population control," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee.

___

AP White House Correspondent Jennifer Loven contributed to this report.

ocia

http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc

POURQUOI ISRAEL N'A PAS SA PLACE AU PROCHE-ORIENT !!!!

"Cessez le feu unilatéral" accompagné d'une réoccupation de Gaza!

Telle est la sanction finale infligée par Israël, état terroriste, à l'humanité, en particulier aux palestiniens et à la "communauté internationale". "Les objectifs militaires ont été atteints, même plus ", affirme le Premier ministre israélien, Ehud Olmert."Israël reprendra ses bombardements si nécessaire", affirme le ministre de la défense, Ehud Barak. "Nous allons garder le doigt sur la gâchette si les islamistes relèvent la tête, nous agirons avec force", surenchérit Tsipi Livni, ministre des Affaires Etrangères. Quelle indécence !

On ne pouvait pas faire mieux comme bras d'honneur adressé aux milliers de morts des massacres de Gaza. Les propos guerriers des responsables d'Israël démontrent, s'il le fallait encore, que cet état est HORS LA LOI.A preuve, Ehud Olmert ajoute:" Nous ne voulons aucune pression dans le temps et aucune pression internationale qui puissent nous empêcher d'atteindre nos objectifs. Nous ne sommes pas pressés". Faut-il rappeler qu'en 21 jours de barbarie inqualifiable l'armée israélienne a fait plus de 1200 morts, au moins 5000 blesses, et détruit toutes les infrastructures vitales palestiniennes?

Manifestement, la "communauté internationale" entend poursuivre sa complaisance criminelle à l'égard d'Israël, à commencer par Nicolas Sarkozy, qui a déclaré devant les médias israéliens:"La décision du gouvernement israélien, unanime, d'arrêter le feu est une décision que nous soutenons. C'est une décision digne d'un Etat démocratique".Or, on ne peut plus faire l'économie de la vérité après les dernières atrocités de Gaza qui doivent interpeller toutes les consciences de l'humanité, au-delà des appartenances ethniques, cultuelles, religieuses, philosophiques.....

Alors que les "nations civilisées" tentent de faire oublier que l'Etat hébreu vient une fois encore, après sa guerre au Liban en 2006, de commettre des atrocités et crimes contre l'humanité à Gaza, il est temps de dire une vérité qui dérange: Israël est la plus grande menace pour la paix mondiale.La seule vérité qui s'impose après la barbarie furieuse à Gaza, c'est que le "cessez le feu unilatéral" décrété par les responsables israéliens n'empêchera pas de dénoncer leurs crimes, comme l'ont rappelé les milliers de manifestations "pro-palestiniennes" et la réprobation générale de l'opinion publique mondiale.

Il est temps de se poser LA QUESTION de l'existence d'Israël sur les terres arabes. Si l'idée de la création d'un état pouvant accueillir les rescapés de la Shoah était louable et légitime après la victoire sur Hitler et les fascistes, force est de constater qu’elle s’est révélée tragique pour les peuples arabes, principalement les Palestiniens. La communauté internationale s'est trompée dans son choix d’implanter un état juif en Palestine, c’est peu dire qu’elle doit en tirer toutes les conséquences. Dire que l’état hébreu n’a pas sa place au Proche-Orient est aussi visible qu’un nez au milieu d’un visage.

Premièrement, parce que depuis sa création en 1948, Israël n'a jamais applique les résolutions, l'enjoignant à respecter les Palestiniens et ses voisins de la région.

Deuxièmement, parce que Israël est devenu un vecteur d'instabilité et d'insécurité pour ses voisins, qu'il n'a eu cesse de déstabiliser directement ou indirectement pour imposer son hégémonie dans la région

Troisièmement, parce que Israël a élevé l'instrumentalisation de la Shoah au rang de doctrine politique et géostratégique, ce qui lui confère une impunité totale et de sérieuses capacités de nuisance vis a vis de tous ceux qui s'opposent à ses projets expansionnistes.

Quatrièmement, parce que avec son chantage permanent à l'antisémitisme, Israël est parvenu à entraîner le monde occidental dans une culpabilisation éternelle. Cela explique grandement pourquoi les "nations civilisées" se taisent devant les crimes contre l’humanité commis sur les populations civiles palestiniennes.

Cinquièmement, parce que Israël n'entend pas faire la paix et vivre en harmonie au milieu de ses voisins arabes et musulmans. Et pour cause, ses responsables politiques n'ont aucune considération pour le monde "arabo-musulman",d'où les propos racistes ouvertement tenus à l’encontre des dirigeants et leaders arabes qui ne seraient pas assez "civilises" pour comprendre la supériorité des valeurs dites "judéo-chrétiennes".

Aujourd'hui, il ne s'agit plus d’organiser des conférences pour proposer des plans de paix qui n'ont aucune valeur aux yeux des responsables israéliens depuis 60 ans. Il est encore moins question, sauf à espérer un "choc de civilisations", de passer par pertes et profits le carnage de Gaza.
Il est temps, à la faveur de la prise de fonction de Barack Obama, nouveau Président états-unien, de mettre un terme à l'arrogance israélienne et à son impunité totale qui pourront définitivement précipiter la planète dans un chaos civilisationnel. S'il y a une grande conférence internationale pour la paix cette année, elle devrait surtout être l'occasion de faire le bilan sur l’existence chaotique d’Israël.A défaut, cet état entraînera le monde dans une troisième guerre mondiale, celle opposant l'occident judéo-chrétien au monde arabo-musulman. Si on peut redouter une telle confrontation apocalyptique qui plongerait la planète dans un obscurantisme moyenâgeux, il faut croire que les néoconservateurs et les faucons de Tel Aviv, eux, en rêvent.

A2N

Gaza: maintenant Israel tire sur des hôpitaux....

des rabbins brulent leurs passports israeliens...

Holocauste à Gaza

http://my.barackobama.com/page/dashboard/public/gGWdjc