Tagliabue overturns Goodell on Saints suspensions

NEW ORLEANS (AP) — In a sharp rebuke to his successor's handling of the NFL's bounty investigation, former Commissioner Paul Tagliabue overturned the suspensions of four current and former New Orleans Saints players in a case that has preoccupied the league for almost a year.

Tagliabue, who was appointed by Commissioner Roger Goodell to handle the appeals, still found that three of the players engaged in conduct detrimental to the league. He said they participated in a performance pool that rewarded key plays — including hard tackles — that could merit fines. But he stressed that the team's coaches were very much involved.

"My affirmation of Commissioner Goodell's findings could certainly justify the issuance of fines. However, this entire case has been contaminated by the coaches and others in the Saints' organization," the ruling said.

Tagliabue oversaw a second round of player appeals to the league in connection with the cash-for-hits program run by former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams from 2009-2011. The players initially opposed his appointment.

Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma had been given a full-season suspension, while defensive end Will Smith, Cleveland linebacker Scott Fujita and free agent defensive lineman Anthony Hargrove each received shorter suspensions.

Tagliabue cleared Fujita of conduct detrimental to the league.

Saints quarterback Drew Brees offered his thoughts on Twitter: "Congratulations to our players for having the suspensions vacated. Unfortunately, there are some things that can never be taken back."

None of the players sat out any games because of suspensions. They have been allowed to play while appeals are pending, though Fujita is on injured reserve and Hargrove is not with a team.

Shortly before the regular season, the initial suspensions were thrown out by an appeals panel created by the league's collective bargaining agreement. Goodell then reissued them, with some changes, and now those have been dismissed.

Now, with the player suspensions overturned, the end could be near for a nearly 10-month dispute over how the NFL handled an investigation that covered three seasons and gathered about 50,000 pages of documents.

"We respect Mr. Tagliabue's decision, which underscores the due process afforded players in NFL disciplinary matters," the NFL said in a statement.

"The decisions have made clear that the Saints operated a bounty program in violation of league rules for three years, that the program endangered player safety, and that the commissioner has the authority under the (NFL's collective bargaining agreement) to impose discipline for those actions as conduct detrimental to the league. Strong action was taken in this matter to protect player safety and ensure that bounties would be eliminated from football."

Meanwhile, the players have challenged the NFL's handling of the entire process in federal court, but U.S District Judge Ginger Berrigan had been waiting for the latest round of appeals to play out before deciding whether to get involved.

NFL investigators found that Vilma and Smith were ring leaders of a cash-for-hits program that rewarded injurious tackles labeled as "cart-offs" and "knockouts." The NFL also concluded that Hargrove lied to NFL investigators to help cover up the program.

Goodell also suspended Williams indefinitely, while banning Saints head coach Sean Payton for a full season.

Tagliabue's ruling comes after a new round of hearings that for the first time allowed Vilma's attorneys and the NFL Players Association, which represents the other three players, to cross-examine key NFL witnesses. Those witnesses included Williams and former Saints assistant Mike Cerullo, who was fired after the 2009 season and whose email to the league, accusing the Saints of being "a dirty organization," jump-started the probe.

"We believe that when a fair due process takes place, a fair outcome is the result," the players' union said in a statement. "We are pleased that Paul Tagliabue, as the appointed hearings officer, agreed with the NFL Players Association that previously issued discipline was inappropriate in the matter of the alleged New Orleans Saints bounty program.

"Vacating all discipline affirms the players' unwavering position that all allegations the League made about their alleged 'intent-to-injure' were utterly and completely false.

"We are happy for our members."

A statement released on Vilma's behalf said the linebacker is "relieved and gratified that Jonathan no longer needs to worry about facing an unjustified suspension.

"On the other hand, Commissioner Tagliabue's rationalization of Commissioner Goodell's actions does nothing to rectify the harm done by the baseless allegations lodged against Jonathan. Jonathan has a right and every intention to pursue proving what really occurred and we look forward to returning to a public forum where the true facts can see the light of day."

Read More..

Global Update: Hand-Held Device Locates Hot Spots of Lead Contamination

Using a hand-held scanner to map hot spots where the soil is full of lead could protect children in mining towns against brain damage, scientists at Columbia University concluded in a new study.

Touched to the ground, the device, an X-ray fluorescence scanner, can measure the soil’s lead content in less than a minute, said Alexander van Geen, a geochemist at Columbia’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory and an author of the study, which is in the current issue of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization. The “XRF guns,” which are often used by scrap-metal sorters, cost between $15,000 and $40,000.

His team tested the scanners in Cerro de Pasco, Peru, a town in the high Andes with mines dating back 1,400 years. Samples as close as 100 yards apart showed widely variable lead levels, so it is possible to find and mark off the areas most dangerous to young children, who get fine lead dust on their hands while playing and then put their fingers in their mouths.

“People assume the contamination is everywhere, and it’s not,” Dr. van Geen said. “It could be in one backyard and not in another.” Or, he said, in an untested playground, schoolyard, or any place where children gather.

The technology could be useful anywhere families live close to mines or smelters, which is common in Latin America and Africa, he said. Lead is a byproduct not just of lead mines, but of mining for gold, silver, copper and other metals.

Read More..

Economic Scene: Behind Tax Loopholes, Some Worthy Goals

If there is one idea that everybody seems to agree on while peering over the fiscal cliff, it is that we should close the loopholes that riddle the tax code. It is offered as a painless way to raise money, like fixing a leak or ending some unfair privilege.

But there is a problem with this consensus. Many of the things the government promotes with loopholes are truly valuable to lots of Americans. Tax credits and deductions may be murky and convoluted, and perhaps are not the best way to achieve government objectives. But that doesn’t mean they serve no purpose at all.

Consider education. The federal government has helped Americans pay for college since World War II. Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty featured the Higher Education Act, which included grants and loans for low-income families. Jimmy Carter’s Middle Income Student Assistance Act vastly increased federal aid by granting access to the middle class.

Right after winning re-election to a second term, Bill Clinton set out to surpass these efforts and provide access to at least two years of higher education to all Americans. Rather than offering federal spending as the Democrats who preceded him did, President Clinton mainly offered tax breaks for higher education: $40 billion worth of them over five years, tucked into the 1997 Taxpayer Relief Act.

It was a strategy for the times. Three years earlier, Republicans had taken control of both chambers of Congress for the first time since the 1950s. “Republicans would vote for any tax reduction that came along without questioning it much,” said Michael Graetz, an expert on taxation at Columbia Law School who worked in the administration of George H. W. Bush. “Democrats found that the only way they could get the kind of spending they wanted was in the form of tax benefits.”

Through the hall of mirrors that is government budgeting, President Clinton’s tax breaks for higher education accomplished two conflicting goals. They amounted to the biggest expansion in federal money for higher education since the G.I. bill. At the same time, they made the government look smaller.

Today, the political tide has turned decidedly against tax breaks. Last week, House Speaker John A. Boehner may have put President Clinton’s higher-education benefits on the chopping block. In exchange for less spending on federal entitlements, he said Republicans could drop their vow of “no new revenues” and let the government raise $800 billion over 10 years by cutting or paring tax breaks.

Though the offer to raise money by closing loopholes has a bipartisan pedigree — based on a plan proposed last year by the Democrat Erskine Bowles and the Republican Alan Simpson, the chairmen of President Obama’s deficit commission — it relies on rhetorical sleight of hand. If tax breaks are equivalent to government spending, eliminating them is equivalent to spending cuts. Mr. Boehner’s offer to do away with tax breaks in exchange for cutting entitlements raises no new revenue. It amounts to cutting spending twice.

Loopholes make up a huge chunk of our government. Known as tax expenditures in the arcane lexicon of budget experts, they have grown a lot since the early 1990s — a consequence of our increasing demand for government programs coupled with our resistance to raising taxes. Last year they added up to more than 7 percent of the nation’s economic output, a sizable figure considering that all federal taxes took some 15 percent of the economy.

Many breaks do the same job as taxing and spending. One of them, for instance, allows employers to pay for employees’ health insurance tax-free. As an alternative, the government might collect the revenue and offer health plans to workers. Rather than offer a mortgage interest deduction, the government could offer grants to help Americans buy homes. A subsidy for the poor could replace the earned-income tax credit.

According to Eric Toder and Donald Marron of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, including all the spendinglike exclusions as regular items in the budget increases the size of the federal government by about 4 percent of our gross domestic product. That’s about $600 billion in “hidden” spending through the tax code last year alone.

We may want to trim or eliminate certain tax breaks for specific reasons — because they are poorly targeted or inefficient. The exclusion for employer-provided health insurance — which will cost the government $1 trillion over the next five years, according to the Tax Policy Center — is pretty inefficient as a tool to deliver health care.

It leaves out not only the unemployed, but also 42 percent of working Americans, whose companies don’t provide coverage despite the subsidy. By encouraging unlimited spending on health by high earners, the tax break contributes to making the United States one of the most costly health care systems in the world.

Most federal tax breaks benefit primarily higher-income Americans, who face higher tax rates and therefore get a bigger break from deductions. Rather than strengthen middle-class homeownership, the deduction for mortgage interest mainly helps the affluent buy bigger homes than they otherwise would, leading to higher home prices. Critics argue that the tax break for charitable donations is often merely a subsidy for church donations and college football stadiums.

And some breaks aimed carefully to help low-income and middle-income Americans — like the earned-income tax credit — can pack some unhelpful incentives too. Even President Clinton’s tax breaks for higher education fell short of the goal. They eased the financial burden of college, for sure, but participation was much smaller than the administration had anticipated. A report by the Congressional Research Service found that the program did very little to increase enrollment.

Just because some tax breaks are inefficient and misdirected does not necessarily mean that the goals they serve are unworthy, however. It only means that there may be more effective ways to achieve government objectives.

For instance, President Obama’s fiscal stimulus made some of President Clinton’s higher-education tax credits refundable, so they could help lower-income Americans who owed no income tax and could not benefit from a tax credit.

Ending the tax break for health insurance provided by employers could make sense, for example, when subsidies are available for everybody to be insured. Tax breaks for individual retirement account contributions could be rolled back in exchange for more generous Social Security benefits for the poor.

It makes sense to have an open debate about the purpose, efficacy and cost of our many tax loopholes. But that is not the same thing as simply looking for loopholes to close. It is a debate about the purpose of government and how best to achieve its goals.

E-mail: eporter@nytimes.com;

Twitter: @portereduardo

Read More..

Changing of the Guard: Signals of a More Open Economy in China

Carlos Barria/Reuters

In November, Xi Jinping made his official debut as party chief at the 18th party congress, which military officers attended.

BEIJING — In a strong signal of support for greater market-oriented economic policies, Xi Jinping, the new head of the Communist Party, made a visit over the weekend to the special economic zone of Shenzhen in south China, which has stood as a symbol of the nation’s embrace of a state-led form of capitalism since its growth over the last three decades from a fishing enclave to an industrial metropolis.

The trip was Mr. Xi’s first outside Beijing since becoming party chief on Nov. 15. Mr. Xi visited a private Internet company on Friday and went to Lotus Hill Park on Saturday to lay a wreath at a bronze statue of Deng Xiaoping, the leader who opened the era of economic reforms in 1979, when Shenzhen was designated a special economic zone. Mr. Deng famously later visited the city in 1992 to encourage reviving those economic policies after they had stalled following the violent crackdown on pro-democracy protests in 1989.

“Reform and opening up is a guiding policy that the Communist Party must stick to,” Mr. Xi said, according to Phoenix Television, one of several Hong Kong news organizations that covered the trip. “We must keep to this correct path. We must stay unwavering on the road to a prosperous country and people, and there must be new pioneering.”

In the months before the transition, there were widespread calls, including from people close to Mr. Xi, to adopt more liberal economic policies and even to experiment with greater political openness as a way for the party to maintain its rule. Without much success so far, reformers have long been encouraging the leadership to move toward a more sustainable growth model for China, one that relies more on domestic consumption rather than infrastructure investment and exports, and where state enterprises play less of a role.

Mr. Xi, known as a skillful consensus builder, has kept his ideas carefully veiled throughout his career, but his trip to Shenzhen is the strongest sign yet that he may favor more open policies. In a speech in Beijing on Nov. 29, Mr. Xi spoke of the “Chinese dream” of realizing the nation’s “revival,” which, besides being a call for renewal, also signaled strong nationalist leanings.

Mr. Xi’s father, Xi Zhongxun, was a revered senior official handpicked by Mr. Deng to help shape the new economic policies and oversee the creation of the Shenzhen zone. Mr. Xi’s mother lives in Shenzhen, and he visited her on his trip, according to Hong Kong news reports.

“If he indeed went to Shenzhen, that means he intends to make reform a subject of priority,” said Li Weidong, a liberal political analyst. “That would really be a phenomenon.”

Mr. Li cautioned, though, that the so-called reform policies that followed Mr. Deng’s 1992 southern tour, in his view, “ended up being fake” because China’s boom resulted in widespread corruption and the expansion of state enterprises at the expense of private entrepreneurship.

When Mr. Xi’s predecessor, Hu Jintao, became party chief in 2002, he was seen by many as a potential reformer, but his tenure was marked by conservative policies. For his first trip outside Beijing as party chief, Mr. Hu went in December 2002 to Xibaipo, a hallowed site for the revolution, where he reiterated a speech given by Mao Zedong.

Over the weekend, video footage from Phoenix Television showed a line of minibuses and police cars winding its way through Shenzhen. Mr. Xi and other officials walked outdoors in dark suits. The party’s official news organizations did not immediately report on the trip, but some prominent mainland Chinese news Web sites cited the Hong Kong reports.

Mr. Xi’s early moves as party leader seem aimed at emphasizing national “revival,” a theme he highlighted when he appeared on Nov. 29 with the party’s new seven-man Politburo Standing Committee in a history museum at Tiananmen Square. According to People’s Daily, the party mouthpiece, Mr. Xi stood in front of an exhibition called “The Road to Rejuvenation” and said, “After the 170 or more years of constant struggle since the Opium Wars, the great revival of the Chinese nation enjoys glorious prospects.”

He added: “Now everyone is discussing the Chinese dream, and I believe that realizing the great revival of the Chinese nation is the greatest dream of the Chinese nation in modern times.”

The emphasis on a “Chinese dream” is particular to Mr. Xi, and could prove to be a recurring motif throughout his tenure. The notion of a grand revival — “fu xing” in Mandarin — has been popular with Chinese leaders for at least a century, but Mr. Xi appears to be tapping more deeply into that nationalist vein than his recent predecessors, perhaps recognizing that traditional Communist ideology no longer has popular appeal.

Patrick Zuo contributed research.

Read More..

Slumping Ravens fire offensive coordinator Cameron

OWINGS MILLS, Md. (AP) — Cam Cameron has been fired as offensive coordinator of the Baltimore Ravens, who have lost two straight and are still striving for consistency in the running and passing game.

Cameron ran the team's offense since the start of the 2008 season, when current coach Jim Harbaugh replaced Brian Billick. Since that time, the Ravens' attack has repeatedly taken a back seat to the team's defense.

The move came Monday.

Jim Caldwell, who was hired as quarterbacks coach before the season, will assume Cameron's duties. Caldwell was head coach of the Indianapolis Colts from 2009-11.

Baltimore (9-4) scored seven points after halftime Sunday in a 31-28 overtime loss to the Washington Redskins. Quarterback Joe Flacco passed for only 182 yards, lost a fumble and was intercepted in the third quarter.

Read More..

Mind: A Compromise on Defining and Diagnosing Mental Disorders

They plotted a revolution, fell to debating among themselves, and in the end overturned very little except their own expectations.

But the effort itself was a valuable guide for anyone who has received a psychiatric diagnosis, or anyone who might get one.

This month, the American Psychiatric Association announced that its board of trustees had approved the fifth edition of the association’s influential diagnostic manual — the so-called bible of mental disorders — ending more than five years of sometimes acrimonious, and often very public, controversy.

The committee of doctors appointed by the psychiatric association had attempted to execute a paradigm shift, changing how mental disorders are conceived and posting its proposals online for the public to comment. And comment it did: Patient advocacy groups sounded off, objecting to proposed changes in the definitions of depression and Asperger syndrome, among other diagnoses. Outside academic researchers did, too. A few committee members quit in protest.

The final text, which won’t be fully available until publication this spring, has already gotten predictably mixed reviews. “Given the challenges in a field where objective lines are hard to draw, they did a solid job,” said Dr. Michael First, a psychiatrist at Columbia who edited a previous version of the manual and was a consultant on this one.

Others disagreed. “This is the saddest moment in my 45-year career of practicing, studying and teaching psychiatry,” wrote Dr. Allen Frances, the chairman of a previous committee who has been one of the most vocal critics, in a blog post about the new manual, the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM5.

Yet many experts inside and outside the process said the final document was not radically different from the previous version, and its lessons more mundane than the rhetoric implied. The status quo is hard to budge, for one. And when changes do happen, they are not necessarily the ones that were intended.

The new manual does extend the reach of psychiatry in some areas, as many critics feared it might. Hoarding is now a mental disorder (previously it was considered a symptom of obsessive-compulsive behavior). “Premenstrual dysphoric disorder,” a severe form of premenstrual syndrome, is also new (it was previously in the appendix).

And binge-eating disorder (also formerly in the appendix), a kind of severe, highly distressing gluttony, is now a full-blown diagnosis. This one by itself could tag millions of people considered healthy, if often overindulgent, with a psychiatric label, some experts said.

But the deeper story is one of compromise. It is most evident in how the committee handled three of the thorniest diagnoses in psychiatry: autism, depression and pediatric bipolar disorder.

The group working on depression declared early on that it wanted to eliminate the so-called bereavement exclusion, which stated that grieving the loss of a loved one should not be considered a clinical disorder, though it shares many of the same outward signs. Grief has always been a normal reaction to death, not a kind of depression.

Advocacy and support groups, such as those representing people who have lost a child, objected furiously to the idea that the bereaved might be given a diagnosis of depression.

“This was just astonishing, that they would eliminate the exclusion, and a distortion of the research on the subject,” said Jerome Wakefield, a professor of social work and psychiatry at New York University, who did not work on the manual.

In the end the committee cut a deal. It eliminated the grief exclusion but added a note in the text, reminding doctors that any significant loss — of a job, a relationship, a home — could cause depressive symptoms and should be carefully investigated.

“It’s like they took it all back,” Dr. Wakefield said. “I don’t like the way it was done — in a footnote — but it’s there.”

The debate over autism was even more furious, and it resulted in a similar rapprochement.

From the outset, the committee intended to tighten the definition of autism and simplify it, eliminating related labels like Asperger syndrome and “pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified,” or PDD-NOS. The rate of diagnosis of such conditions has exploded over the past decade, in part due to the vagueness of the definitions, and the committee wanted to draw clearer boundaries.

It proposed a single “autism spectrum disorder” category, with stricter requirements.

Some outside researchers raised concerns. In January one of them, Dr. Fred Volkmar of the Yale School of Medicine, who had quit the committee in protest, presented research suggesting that 45 percent or more of people who currently had an autism or related diagnosis would not have one under the proposed revision.

Autism groups reacted immediately, fearing that the change in the diagnosis would deny services to children and families who need them.

The committee countered with its own study, suggesting that the new definition would exclude about 10 percent of people currently with a diagnosis. And again, the experts took a half step back.

The new, streamlined definition was approved, but with language that took into account a person’s diagnostic history. “It’s explicit that anyone who’s had an Asperger’s or autism or PDD-NOS diagnosis before is now included,” said Catherine Lord, a committee member who worked on the new definition and who is director of the Center for Autism and the Developing Brain in New York. “Essentially everyone gets in.”

Pediatric bipolar disorder posed a different challenge.

In the 1990s and 2000s, psychiatrists began giving aggressive, explosive children a diagnosis of bipolar disorder in increasing numbers. The trend appalled many patient advocates and doctors.

Bipolar disorder, which is characterized by episodes of depression and mania, had previously been an adult problem; now the diagnosis is given to children as young as 2 — along with powerful psychiatric drugs and tranquilizers that also cause rapid weight gain. The committee wanted to stop the trend in its tracks, said experts who were involved.

Most of the children treated for bipolar disorder did not have it, recent research found. The committee settled on an alternative label: “disruptive mood dysregulation disorder,” or D.M.D.D., which describes extreme hostility and outbursts beyond normal tantrums.

“They essentially wanted to have some place for these kids, and D.M.D.D. was all they had in their kit,” said Dr. Gabrielle Carlson, a child psychiatrist at Stony Brook University Medical Center, who provided some outside consultation. “These are mostly kids who have A.D.H.D. or what we would call oppositional defiant disorder, but with this explosive feature. They need help; you can’t wait forever. The question was what to call it, without pretending we know enough to saddle them with a lifelong diagnosis” like bipolar disorder.

D.M.D.D. has its own problems, as many experts were quick to point out. It could be a symptom of an underlying condition, as Dr. Carlson argues. It could “medicalize” frequent temper tantrums. It’s brand new, and no one knows how it will play out in practice.

But it is now in the book — because it was the best solution available, experts inside and outside of the revision process said.

From beginning to end, many experts said, the process of defining psychiatric diagnoses is very much like finding the right one for an individual: it’s a process of negotiation, in many cases.

“That’s one of the take-aways from all this, and I think it’s a good one,” Dr. Carlson said. “A diagnosis is a hypothesis. It’s a start, and you have to start somewhere. But that’s all it is.”

One of the committee’s most ambitious proposals was perhaps the least noticed: a commitment to update the book continually, when there’s good reason to, rather than once every decade or so in a giant heave. That was approved without much fanfare.

Read More..

Fear of Fighting Haunts Once-Tranquil Damascus

Muzaffar Salman/Reuters

A portrait of President Bashar al-Assad outside the venue of a charity concert by the Syrian National Symphony Orchestra in Damascus on Nov. 21.

DAMASCUS, Syria — Business has been terrible for Abu Tareq, a taxi driver, so last week, without telling his wife, he agreed to drive a man to the Damascus airport for 10 times the usual rate. But, he said later, he will not be doing that again.

On the airport road, he could hear the crash of artillery and the whiz of sniper fire. Dead rebels and soldiers lay on the roadsides. Abu Tareq saw a dog eating the body of a soldier.

“I will never forget this sight,” said Abu Tareq, 50, who gave only a nickname for safety reasons. “It is the road of the dead.”

Damascus, Syria’s capital, is one of the world’s oldest continuously inhabited cities, a touchstone of history and culture for the entire region. Through decades of political repression, the city preserved, at least on the surface, an atmosphere of tranquillity, from its wide downtown avenues to the spacious, smooth-stoned courtyard of the Umayyad Mosque and the vine-draped alleys of the Old City, where restaurants and bars tucked between the storehouses of medieval merchants hummed with quiet conversation.

Now, though, the rumble of distant artillery echoes through the city, and its residents are afraid to leave their neighborhoods. Cocooned behind rows of concrete blocks that close off routes to the center, they huddle in fear of a prolonged battle that could bring destruction and division to a place where secular and religious Syrians from many sects — Sunni, Shiite, Alawite, Christian and others — have long lived peacefully.

For more than a week, Syrian rebels and government forces have fought for the airport road, as the military tries to seal off the capital city, the core of President Bashar al-Assad’s power, from a semicircle of rebellious suburbs. Rebels have now kept the pressure on the government for as long as they did during their previous big push toward Damascus last summer. This time, improved supply lines and tactics, some rebels and observers say, may provide a more secure foothold.

But the security forces wield overwhelming firepower, and while it has been unable to subdue the suburbs, some rebel fighters say they lack the intelligence information, arms and communication to advance. That raises the specter of a destructive standoff like the one that has devastated the commercial hub of Aleppo.

“Damascus was the city of jasmine,” Mahmoud, 40, a public-school teacher, said in an interview in the capital. “It is not the city I knew just a few weeks ago.”

Car bombs have ripped through neighborhoods, their targets and perpetrators only guessed at. Checkpoints choke traffic, turning 20-minute jaunts into three-hour ordeals. Wealthy residents find it quicker and safer to drive to Beirut, Lebanon, for a weekend trip than to the Old City.

Shells have been fired from Mount Qasioun overlooking Damascus, a favorite destination from which to admire the city’s sparkling lights. West of downtown, where the palace stands on a plateau, things are relatively quiet. But from the mountain, puffs of smoke can now be seen over suburbs in an arc from northeast to southwest.

Mahmoud, unable to find heating oil and medicine for his sick wife, said his grocer has lectured him daily on shortages and soaring prices. The once-ubiquitous government, he said, now appears to have no role beyond flooding streets with soldiers and security officers, “who are sometimes good and sometimes rude.”

People with roots in other towns have left, he said, “but what about me, who is a Damascene, and has no other city?”

The sense of claustrophobia has grown as rebels have declared the airport a legitimate target and the government has blocked Baghdad Street, a main avenue out of the city. On Sunday, it blocked the highway south to Dara’a.

In some outlying neighborhoods and nearby suburbs, the front lines seem to be hardening.

On the route into Qaboun, a neighborhood less than two miles from the center of Damascus, the last government checkpoint in recent days was near the municipal building. Less than a quarter-mile on, rebels controlled the area around the Grand Mosque.

An employee of The New York Times reported from Damascus, Syria, and Anne Barnard from Beirut, Lebanon. Neil MacFarquhar contributed reporting from Beirut.

Read More..

U.S. judge names lead plaintiffs in Facebook litigation

NEW YORK (Reuters) – A group of investors including state pension funds in North Carolina and Arkansas will be the lead plaintiffs in securities lawsuits arising out of Facebook Inc’s $ 16 billion initial public offering, a U.S. judge ruled on Thursday.

The investors, in a proposed class-action case, have accused Facebook of misrepresenting its financial condition in the run-up to the May stock offering. They are represented by law firms Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann and Labaton Sucharow.

The ruling helps set a structure for the Facebook IPO litigation, a headache for the social media company and a nagging reminder of the technical glitches in the highly anticipated stock market debut.

U.S. District Judge Robert Sweet in Manhattan also named lead plaintiffs for lawsuits against NASDAQ OMX Group Inc stemming from the IPO. NASDAQ was sued over allegations that orders to buy and sell Facebook were not properly executed on the first day of trading.

Facebook, which has defended its pre-IPO disclosures, declined to comment on Thursday. A spokesman for NASDAQ declined to comment on the litigation.

Facebook shares made their debut at $ 38 per share, and later fell as much as 50 percent. On Thursday, they closed at $ 26.90, down 2.6 percent.

Sweet consolidated the cases and picked lead plaintiffs to head up most of the 42 lawsuits before him arising out of the IPO.

Under a federal law governing securities lawsuits, courts routinely select a lead plaintiff in class actions. The lead plaintiff typically is the shareholder with the biggest losses, though judges have discretion to pick a different investor.

The plaintiff group picked to lead 31 cases alleging securities violations against Facebook includes the North Carolina Retirement Systems, Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, the Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association and Banyan Capital Master Fund Ltd.

The group has collectively claimed a combined $ 7.1 million in losses.

“Its members are large, institutional investors with experience representing shareholder classes in similar litigation with the resources to pursue the action,” Sweet said.

In the securities lawsuits against NASDAQ, the judge said First New York Securities LLC, T3 Trading Group LLC, and Avatar Securities LLC would act as co-lead plaintiffs. The group traded a combined $ 316 million in Facebook shares the day of the IPO, the decision said.

The case is In re Facebook, Inc, IPO Securities and Derivative Litigation, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, MDL No. 12-2389.

(Reporting by Nate Raymond; Editing by Martha Graybow)

Internet News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

Cowboys owner Jerry Jones says team is grieving

CINCINNATI (AP) — Dallas Cowboys players bowed their heads and some of them placed their hands over their hearts during a moment of silence Sunday for a teammate killed in a car accident a day earlier in Texas.

Owner Jerry Jones described his team as grieving before the kickoff of a game against the Bengals at Paul Brown Stadium that had playoff implications for both teams. The Cowboys learned on their flight to Cincinnati on Saturday that linebacker Jerry Brown had died in an accident overnight.

Defensive lineman Josh Brent was charged with intoxication manslaughter in Irving, Texas, for the early morning accident.

"First of all, I think that our team is grieving and they know that," Jones told Fox for its pregame broadcast. "They also know that they can handle that better if they will go out and do their work and do it to the top of their abilities.

"So it is a way for them to respond and to some degree, I am sure that many of them are proud that they have this to do this afternoon."

It was the second week in a row that an NFL team played a game one day after a team member died. Kansas City linebacker Jovan Belcher fatally shot his girlfriend, then killed himself at the Chiefs' practice complex in front of his coach and general manager.

Coach Jason Garrett told the Cowboys (6-6) on Saturday night that it was important to play well against the Bengals (7-5). Both teams needed a win to stay in the thick of playoff contention.

"First of all we all know, but we remind ourselves that there is something more important than football, and this is life and certainly the lost life of Jerry," Jones said. "On the other hand, they know the best way they can honor Jerry, because he was such a hard worker, so conscientious and enthusiastic about his career."

The teams observed a moment of silence for Brown before the national anthem. Quarterback Tony Romo put his hand over his heart, as did other Cowboys. Most lowered their heads.

Players around the league were touched by the Cowboys' tragedy.

San Francisco 49ers defensive lineman and special teams standout Demarcus Dobbs thought about it before a home game Sunday against Miami. Dobbs was arrested early Nov. 30 — his 25th birthday — on suspicion of driving under the influence and possession of marijuana. He missed last week's game at St. Louis but was active for Sunday's game with the Dolphins.

Authorities said Dobbs was alone and involved in a single-car accident in which he hit a chain-link fence and a bush but didn't sustain any injuries.

"It was a wake-up call to me what happened to me," Dobbs said on the field before the game. "The thing that happened in Dallas, it makes me grateful that God was looking out for me. It could have been a lot worse in my situation.

"What happened in Dallas is unfortunate. It just goes to show what could have been. I'm grateful that I'm here and able to be on the team and go on and continue my life. That saddened me to hear that, but it made me count my blessings even more."

___

AP Sports Writer Janie McCauley in San Francisco contributed to this report.

___

Online: http://pro32.ap.org/poll and http://twitter.com/AP_NFL

Read More..

New Taxes to Take Effect to Fund Health Care Law

WASHINGTON — For more than a year, politicians have been fighting over whether to raise taxes on high-income people. They rarely mention that affluent Americans will soon be hit with new taxes adopted as part of the 2010 health care law.

The new levies, which take effect in January, include an increase in the payroll tax on wages and a tax on investment income, including interest, dividends and capital gains. The Obama administration proposed rules to enforce both last week.

Affluent people are much more likely than low-income people to have health insurance, and now they will, in effect, help pay for coverage for many lower-income families. Among the most affluent fifth of households, those affected will see tax increases averaging $6,000 next year, economists estimate.

To help finance Medicare, employees and employers each now pay a hospital insurance tax equal to 1.45 percent on all wages. Starting in January, the health care law will require workers to pay an additional tax equal to 0.9 percent of any wages over $200,000 for single taxpayers and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.

The new taxes on wages and investment income are expected to raise $318 billion over 10 years, or about half of all the new revenue collected under the health care law.

Ruth M. Wimer, a tax lawyer at McDermott Will & Emery, said the taxes came with “a shockingly inequitable marriage penalty.” If a single man and a single woman each earn $200,000, she said, neither would owe any additional Medicare payroll tax. But, she said, if they are married, they would owe $1,350. The extra tax is 0.9 percent of their earnings over the $250,000 threshold.

Since the creation of Social Security in the 1930s, payroll taxes have been levied on the wages of each worker as an individual. The new Medicare payroll is different. It will be imposed on the combined earnings of a married couple.

Employers are required to withhold Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes from wages paid to employees. But employers do not necessarily know how much a worker’s spouse earns and may not withhold enough to cover a couple’s Medicare tax liability. Indeed, the new rules say employers may disregard a spouse’s earnings in calculating how much to withhold.

Workers may thus owe more than the amounts withheld by their employers and may have to make up the difference when they file tax returns in April 2014. If they expect to owe additional tax, the government says, they should make estimated tax payments, starting in April 2013, or ask their employers to increase the amount withheld from each paycheck.

In the Affordable Care Act, the new tax on investment income is called an “unearned income Medicare contribution.” However, the law does not provide for the money to be deposited in a specific trust fund. It is added to the government’s general tax revenues and can be used for education, law enforcement, farm subsidies or other purposes.

Donald B. Marron Jr., the director of the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, said the burden of this tax would be borne by the most affluent taxpayers, with about 85 percent of the revenue coming from 1 percent of taxpayers. By contrast, the biggest potential beneficiaries of the law include people with modest incomes who will receive Medicaid coverage or federal subsidies to buy private insurance.

Wealthy people and their tax advisers are already looking for ways to minimize the impact of the investment tax — for example, by selling stocks and bonds this year to avoid the higher tax rates in 2013.

The new 3.8 percent tax applies to the net investment income of certain high-income taxpayers, those with modified adjusted gross incomes above $200,000 for single taxpayers and $250,000 for couples filing jointly.

David J. Kautter, the director of the Kogod Tax Center at American University, offered this example. In 2013, John earns $160,000, and his wife, Jane, earns $200,000. They have some investments, earn $5,000 in dividends and sell some long-held stock for a gain of $40,000, so their investment income is $45,000. They owe 3.8 percent of that amount, or $1,710, in the new investment tax. And they owe $990 in additional payroll tax.

The new tax on unearned income would come on top of other tax increases that might occur automatically next year if President Obama and Congress cannot reach an agreement in talks on the federal deficit and debt. If Congress does nothing, the tax rate on long-term capital gains, now 15 percent, will rise to 20 percent in January. Dividends will be treated as ordinary income and taxed at a maximum rate of 39.6 percent, up from the current 15 percent rate for most dividends.

Under another provision of the health care law, consumers may find it more difficult to obtain a tax break for medical expenses.

Taxpayers now can take an itemized deduction for unreimbursed medical expenses, to the extent that they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The health care law will increase the threshold for most taxpayers to 10 percent next year. The increase is delayed to 2017 for people 65 and older.

In addition, workers face a new $2,500 limit on the amount they can contribute to flexible spending accounts used to pay medical expenses. Such accounts can benefit workers by allowing them to pay out-of-pocket expenses with pretax money.

Taken together, this provision and the change in the medical expense deduction are expected to raise more than $40 billion of revenue over 10 years.

Read More..