HOT NEWS

Thứ Bảy, 9 tháng 3, 2013

U.S. plan to resolve meat-origin label fight draws fire

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States on Friday sought to address a long-running trade dispute by proposing stricter rules for labeling meat, but its proposal quickly drew criticism from theCanadian government, which said the plan falls short and vowed to continue fighting it.

The meat labeling rules at the center of the dispute aim to help consumers identify the country that produced the beef, pork, chicken and lamb sold in U.S. grocery stores.

The United States has until May 23 to redesign its country-of-origin rules to satisfy a World Trade Organization ruling. Canada and Mexico successfully argued the 2008 labeling law discriminated against their livestock and meat exports.

In a statement late on Friday, Canadian Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said his government was "extremely disappointed" with the U.S. proposal.

"We do not believe that the proposed changes will bring the United States into compliance with its WTO obligations," Ritz said.

"The proposed changes will increase the discrimination against exports of cattle and hogs from Canada and increase damages to Canadian industry. Our government will consider all options, including retaliatory measures, should the U.S. not achieve compliance by May 23, 2013, as mandated by the WTO."

Country of origin labels, referred to as COOL, became mandatory in March 2009 after years of debate. Some U.S. farm and consumer groups said the labels would help shoppers make informed decisions, but meat packers and large livestock groups termed the labels a costly paperwork headache.

The Obama administration said it would comply with the trade ruling by requiring labels on muscle cuts, such as steaks and pork chops, to spell out where the animal was born, raised and slaughtered. All the meat in a package would have to come from the same source.

The American Meat Institute objected to that solution. Patrick Boyle, head of the trade group, said the proposal would generate additional costs.

"Only the government could take a costly, cumbersome rule like mandatory country-of-origin labeling and make it worse even as it claims to ‘fix it,'" he said.

The administration estimated the cost of compliance at $33 million a year for the 7,181 processors and retailers who would apply the new, more detailed labels.

"These changes will improve the overall operation of the program and also bring the current mandatory COOL requirements into compliance with U.S. international trade obligations," U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said in a statement.

Under the proposed rule, the mingling of muscle cuts from different sources in the same package would not be allowed. Commingling would be allowed for ground meats, however.

In a 41-page proposal, the government provided examples of how the new rule would work. Chicken breasts from birds grown and slaughtered in America would be labeled "Born, Raised and Slaughtered in the United States" instead of the current "Product of the U.S."

Roasts from feeder cattle born in Canada but raised and slaughtered in America would be labeled "Born in Canada, Raised and Slaughtered in the United States" rather than "Product of the United States and Canada."

The Agriculture Department said it would accept comment on the proposal until April 11.

(Reporting by Charles Abbott; Editing by David Gregorio and Dan Grebler)

Illinois home care program for elderly is almost out of money

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Illinois warned that it will run out of money next week to pay for a program that allows 80,000 elderly and disabled people to live at home, the latest illustration of the state's fiscal crisis.

The Illinois agency that oversees home healthcare providers said in a letter on Thursday that the money was "projected to be exhausted by March 15," 3-1/2 months before the fiscal year ends on June 30.

The shortfall will force some smaller nonprofit home healthcare agencies to close, trigger layoffs at others and leave thousands of elderly people scrambling for alternatives to in-home care, said Bob Thieman, executive director of the Illinois Association of Community Care Program Healthcare Providers.

"The state's going to pay for this one way or another. If these seniors cannot be picked up by other in-home providers, they're going to wind up in nursing homes, which will cost a lot more," he said.

Illinois is mired in a financial crisis caused by skyrocketing costs of public-sector pensions, whichGovernor Pat Quinn this week said are draining money from other social services.

The state legislature has failed to approve reforms to the pensions that will reduce the cost, which has prompted the state to delay paying its bills to balance the budget.

State officials say the situation is improving, but Thieman said it is getting worse for home healthcare providers.

They already wait as long as six months to get paid by the state. Illinois has advised them to continue submitting invoices but says they will not be compensated immediately.

The department blamed the action on overdue bills from last year, which it said ate up a quarter of the $687 million budgeted for the current year to help elderly people remain independent by paying for in-home care.

It would be the second time in two years that the money ran out before the end of the fiscal year, Thieman said. This year's warning came much earlier than last year and was caused by a much larger backlog of bills.

"This one is critical," Thieman said, predicting hardship for providers.

The program serves about 80,000 people each month, according to the Department on Aging. The 40 providers - ranging from nonprofits such as Catholic Charities to for-profit companies such as Addus HealthCare - employ about 25,000 home care assistants, according to Thieman.

No other U.S. state has institutionalized late payment of bills like Illinois, according to the National Council of State Legislatures.

The state's backlog of unpaid bills stood at $8.7 billion at the end of fiscal 2012, or about a quarter of the state's annual revenues. Financial watchdogs say it could soar to nearly $22 billion in five years unless the state takes action to curb its public pension costs.

The state currently has $96.8 billion in unfunded pension liabilities and has the lowest credit rating among the states rated by Moody's and S&P.

In January Illinois Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka asked lawmakers to either approve spending more money or require state agencies with surplus funds to return them for others to use.

The legislature approved some additional funding but it did not include money for the elderly and people with disabilities, said Topinka's spokesman, Brad Hahn.

(Editing by Xavier Briand)

Colorado Senate advances gun control measures

DENVER (Reuters) - A sweeping package of gun control measures advanced in Colorado on Friday, with expanded background checks and other limits as states seek to curb gun violence after the massacre of 20 children in Connecticut.

The Democratic-controlled state Senate passed four measures by an informal voice vote, including requiring gun buyers to pay for their own background checks and banning firearms purchases by people who are convicted of domestic violence crimes.

Republican leaders in the state Senate said the bills were overreaching and a violation of the Constitution's Second Amendment, which guarantees the right to own guns.

President Barack Obama and several states have proposed new gun-control measures in the aftermath of the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, on December 14, when a gunman killed 20 children and six adults at an elementary school.

The Colorado state Senate also gave preliminary approval to a bill that expands background checks to private weapons sales, and a measure banning online certification of concealed-carry permits, requiring that they be done in person.

All the proposals still require a formal vote by the full Senate next week, and then will head toGovernor John Hickenlooper's desk for his signature or veto.

Lawmakers debated late into the night on three other proposed gun control measures. They include banning firearms on college campuses, limiting the sale of ammunition magazines over 15 rounds, and holding gun makers and owners liable for civil damages caused by their weapons.

One of the worst shootings in U.S. history occurred in Colorado when a gunman opened fire in July 2012 during a screening of "The Dark Knight Rises" Batman movie, killing 12 moviegoers and wounded 58 others.

In 1999, two students at Columbine High School in Littleton shot and killed a teacher and 12 students before committing suicide.

(Reporting by Keith Coffman; Editing by Dan Whitcomb and Lisa Shumaker)

Congress in a race with states to pass online gambling law

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - States racing to legalize online gambling may soon be overtaken by thefederal government, as efforts to pass a national bill begin to come together.

Legislation in the House is likely to be introduced this spring. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada), whose long-advocated federal legislation never got introduced last year, is working behind the scenes to form a coalition to support the measure.

"I think the states' passage gives some incentive to the federal government to act," saidRepresentative Joe Barton (R-Texas), who introduced an online poker bill in 2011 that failed. He plans to introduce a bill this spring.

"Whether you're for or against Internet gambling," said Barton, "you don't want 50 sets of state laws. You want uniformity."

Similar efforts by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and former Senator Jon Kyl (R-Arizona), backed by the casino industry, fizzled last year. The Reid-Kyl bill faced stiff opposition from Republicans and several states' governors and others who felt it unfairly favored Nevada by giving it too much regulatory clout and a cut of the regulatory fees.

Congressional efforts have picked up as more states move forward with their own bills. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie signed legislation on February 27 authorizing online gambling in an attempt to help the state's struggling casino industry and generate casino tax revenues.

New Jersey is the most populous state to approve online gaming, following Delaware and Nevada. Many others are considering it. An Illinois senate committee filed a bill earlier this week that could authorize online gambling there.

Several states are also trying to figure out how to band together to attract more gamblers.

Proponents of a federal law say it would create uniformity and impose safeguards against fraud, while opponents say it would usurp states' power and siphon off badly needed revenues.

Prior federal efforts have also drawn steadfast opposition from religious groups such as the National Association of Evangelicals and the Southern Baptist Convention, which blasted the draft legislation circulated last year.

That effort was sidetracked as both parties concentrated on the election, gambling executives and political officials said. Reid and Senator Dean Heller (R-Nevada) say they intend to try it again.

"We should have done it on a federal level ... we are going to try to figure out a way forward," said Reid at a recent press conference.

"Senator Heller believes federal legislation for online poker is crucial, and will continue to work with Senator Reid and like-minded colleagues to get a bill passed," said Chandler Smith, Heller's communications director.

To date, proposed federal legislation has sought only to regulate Internet poker and prohibit other forms of online gambling.

New Jersey's legislation allows for a broad array of games, including online slots, blackjack and other table games. The state plans to take 15 percent of the amount won by online casinos from players within its borders. Nevada intends to keep 6.7 percent.

Nevada is expected to be the first state to go live with online gaming, likely by summer, according to regulatory and industry experts. The state will only allow poker.

Draft federal legislation over the past few years would divide tax revenue between the federal government and states where the bettors reside and the state where the legal website is located. Some proposals allow the federal government to take 5 percent to 10 percent of the tax revenue.

According to the American Gaming Association, about 85 countries have legalized online gambling and an estimated $35 billion is being bet worldwide online each year, including by millions of people in the United States.

AGA projects the U.S. market to reach $10 billion a year by 2017 from about $4 billion in unauthorized gambling in 2011.

Caesars and other large casino operators like MGM Resorts International Ltd have long promoted federal legislation, as it would offer a larger, more uniform and liquid market.

"We will be prepared with our offerings for Nevada and hopefully New Jersey," said Seth Palansky, a spokesperson for Caesars Interactive Entertainment. "But there is still time for Congress to step in and provide a federal solution."

(Reporting by Susan Zeidler; editing by Prudence Crowther)

Thứ Sáu, 8 tháng 3, 2013

Wisconsin Assembly approves bill that clears way for controversial mine

(Reuters) - Wisconsin's Republican-controlled state Assembly approved a bill on Thursday that would clear the way for a possible $1.5 billion iron ore mine in the northwest corner of the state.

The Assembly voted 58-39 along party lines to approve the bill that would set a 420-day limit for the state Department of Natural Resources to approve or deny a permit for iron ore mining.

The legislation, which was narrowly passed by the Senate in February, heads to Republican Governor Scott Walker, who supports the bill.

"On behalf of the unemployed skilled workers in our state who will benefit from the thousands of mining-related jobs over the next few years, I say thank you for passing a way to streamline the process for safe and environmentally sound mining in Wisconsin," Walker said in a statement.

Supporters say the project will create jobs and help the economy, while opponents argue the mine will pollute the air, lakes, streams and groundwater.

"I do find it disappointing and perplexing that some lawmakers, whom Wisconsin's citizens entrust to promote their welfare and protect the environment, are the very same people who would push for this reckless legislation," Democratic Representative Leon Young said after the vote.

Mining company Gogebic Taconite wants to develop a $1.5 billion mine in portions of Iron and Ashland counties in northwestern Wisconsin.

The company has said the project could create 700 mining jobs, more than 3,000 construction jobs, and $604 million of total economic benefits annually.

During its first phase, the Gogebic mining site is expected to be about 5 miles long with a 1,500-acre open pit up to 1,000 feet deep, according to the state's Legislative Fiscal Bureau. It could reach 20 miles long in later phases, the agency said.

The mine, intended to extract the 2.2 billion tons of iron ore available in the area, would be one of the largest in North America, said Thomas Evans, assistant director of the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.

Gogebic Taconite's parent company is the privately held Cline Resource and Development Group, which is owned by billionaire Christopher Cline.

The measure would reduce a mining company's environmental liability by removing irrevocable trust requirements, which require mining companies to set aside money to pay for future environmental issues that may arise such as contamination.

But it would retain requirements that a company carry 40 years of long-term care insurance and a bond to pay for reclamation of the mine site.

The bill also loosens restrictions on using nearby wetlands, lakes smaller than two acres and some streams for mining waste disposal.

Anne Sayers, program director of the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters, has said the mining would pose a public health threat by emitting arsenic, lead and mercury, and would damage the groundwater supply, a source of drinking water for almost 70 percent of Wisconsin citizens.

Senators approved the bill with a 17-16 vote on February 27. The bill failed last year when a Republican lawmaker refused to support the measure.

(Reporting by Brendan O'Brien; Editing by David Bailey, Cynthia Johnston and Stacey Joyce)

In Arkansas, challenges expected for nation's strictest abortion law

LITTLE ROCK, Ark (Reuters) - Abortion rights groups say they plan to challenge a new Arkansas law adopted on Wednesday that will prohibit most abortions after about 12 weeks of pregnancy and is the most restrictive abortion law in the United States.

The measure, which lawmakers approved over Democratic Governor Mike Beebe's veto, prohibits abortions once a fetal heartbeat can be detected by a standard ultrasound.

Legal scholars say the law violates the U.S. Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that legalizedabortion until a fetus could viably survive outside the womb. A fetus is generally considered viable at 22 to 24 weeks.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, the national ACLU and the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights plan to sue Arkansas in federal court over the 12-week ban before it becomes law this summer.

Stephanie Toti, senior staff attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said that groups will take "swift action" on challenging the law.

"The Supreme Court has said that a state cannot ban abortion before viability and this bill clearly, clearly violates that," Toti said.

The sponsor of the bill, Republican state Senator Jason Rapert, said the law would challenge current legal precedent but he believes the nation needs to rethink its stance on when life begins.

"We will defend this law vigorously and I want other states to pick it up and file it as quickly as possible," Rapert said, referring to other states passing laws banning abortions after 12 weeks. "If we are a civilized nation, we should be doing better than this."

On Thursday, Rapert filed a bill that would defund Planned Parenthood, which provides low-cost health care services, including abortions.

In Arkansas, lawmakers can override an executive veto with a simple majority vote.

The abortion measure includes exemptions for rape, incest, danger to the life of the mother and major fetal conditions. Doctors who violate the prohibition would have their licenses revoked by the state medical board.

It was one of a series of proposed abortion restrictions filed by Arkansas Republicans emboldened since they won control of both chambers of the state legislature for the first time since the Reconstruction era following the Civil War.

"With a bipartisan majority, we were able to override Governor Beebe's veto of a bill that protects the most basic of all human rights - the right to life," said David Ray, a spokesman for the Republican Party of Arkansas.

Battles over abortion are playing out in a number of other states. This year, for example, the Indiana Senate passed a bill that would make the state the ninth to require an ultrasound prior to an abortion.

Passage of the 12-week ban in Arkansas came on the same day that a federal judge struck down a 2011 Idaho law that banned most abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, in a decision believed to mark the first time a court has ruled that such a measure was unconstitutional.

Idaho is one of at least eight states that have enacted late-term abortion prohibitions in recent years based on controversial medical research suggesting that a fetus feels pain starting at 20 weeks of gestation.

A similar law took effect in Arkansas in February after lawmakers again succeeded in over-riding the governor's veto.

In February, Beebe signed legislation to ban insurers who are participating in an exchange created under the federal health care law from covering abortions.

Challenges to the laws could cost the state hundreds of thousands of dollars, said Kelly Browe Olson, a law professor at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law.

Olson said she believes the measures clearly violate Roe v. Wade.

(Editing by Corrie MacLaggan, Edith Honan and Lisa Shumaker)

NYC man charged in hit-and-run crash that killed family

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York City man who fled a hit-and-run car crash that killed a youngOrthodox Jewish family appeared before a Brooklyn judge on Thursday night to hear the charges that could put him in prison for life.

Julio Acevedo, 44, of Brooklyn, faces three counts of criminally negligent homicide and one count of leaving the scene of an accident, according to prosecutors. He is also being accused of reckless driving, assault and speeding.

If convicted, Acevedo faces 25 years to life in prison because of his prior convictions, which include murder and robbery, said the prosecutor, Gayle Dampf. He is being held without bail.

The victims, Raizy and Nachman Glauber, 21, were members of an Orthodox Jewish enclave inWilliamsburg, Brooklyn. They were expecting their first child.

They were on the way to the hospital when their taxi was hit broadside by a gray BMW sedan, police said. The BMW driver fled the scene on foot.

The Glauber baby was delivered on Sunday by Cesarean section at Bellevue Hospital, where the mother had been pronounced dead on arrival, police said. The boy died early on Monday.

Family friends said the child's birth had been a ray of hope that was extinguished when the baby died of his injuries. They said Raizy Glauber was about six months pregnant and wanted to go to the hospital because she was not feeling well.

Police launched a manhunt for Acevedo, whom a witness picked out of a photo lineup. Acevedo, who has a lengthy criminal record, surrendered on Wednesday to New York City detectives in the parking lot of a convenience store in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

The meeting between the suspect and police had been arranged with the help of one of Acevedo's friends, New York City Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne said.

"It's a sweet, bitter pill to swallow," family friend and community leader Isaac Abraham said earlier this week. "Sweet because it's at least the best news we have heard in the last 72 hours, but it's bitter because it doesn't bring any of three people that were murdered back.

"I hope they throw the book at him," he added.

Witnesses to the Sunday morning crash said the BMW had been speeding, police said. The taxi was at a stop sign when the accident occurred, police said.

Before his surrender, Acevedo spoke by telephone to the New York Daily News. An article published on Tuesday said Acevedo had claimed he was fleeing gunshots when the accident occurred and that he fled the scene of the accident because he was afraid of being shot.

(Reporting by Edith Honan; Editing by Cynthia Johnston, Stacey Joyce and Lisa Shumaker)