Philippines Enacts Strong Penalties for Abductions

MANILA — The Philippines has enacted a law aimed at stopping the military and police officers from abducting people suspected of antigovernment activity, one of the ugly legacies of the country’s years of dictatorship.

The law, which President Benigno S. Aquino III signed late Friday, makes the “arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty committed by agents of the state” punishable by life in prison. It also holds superior officers liable for abductions committed by those under their command. Congress passed the legislation in October.

Human Rights Watch hailed the law, which it called “the first of its kind in Asia and a major milestone in ending this horrific human rights violation.” It was the first major human rights legislation signed by Mr. Aquino, who campaigned on promises of a better human rights climate but whose record since his election in 2010 has been seen as mixed by many rights groups.

The kidnapping of political opponents by security forces in the Philippines is a legacy of martial law, which was imposed during the 1970s by the dictator Ferdinand Marcos. During that period, the military, police officers and their agents abducted, tortured and sometimes murdered political opponents with impunity.

Such “disappearances” have continued to the present day, though on a smaller scale, despite the restoration of democracy in 1986, according to rights advocates. A Manila-based organization, Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearance, says more than 2,200 people have disappeared since 1985 at the hands of security forces or others linked to the government.

“It is a way for the authorities to short-circuit our laws and Constitution,” said Carlos Isagani Zarate, a vice president of the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers, which represents people who say they have been abducted by the military. “If they suspect someone is part of an underground organization but they don’t think the case will prosper in court, they abduct them.”

“In a lot of the cases, the victims are innocent civilians who are suspected of having links to underground groups,” Mr. Zarate said.

Under President Aquino — the son of an opposition politician who was assassinated during Mr. Marcos’s rule, and of the late President Corazon Aquino, who led the popular uprising that drove Mr. Marcos from power — there have been 17 documented cases of forced disappearance, according to Mary Aileen D. Bacalso, secretary general of the Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances. That, however, is a steep decline from the more than 300 cases alleged during the administration of his predecessor, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

“The number of cases has decreased, but we cannot tolerate even one forced disappearance,” Ms. Bacalso said. “The cases continue despite the pronouncements of the administration in support of human rights.”

One notorious disappearance case that dates from the previous administration, but which Mr. Aquino’s Justice Department has yet to resolve, is that of Jovito Palparan, a retired major general.

General Palparan, who was given the nickname “The Butcher” during his more than two decades of military service, was indicted in December 2011 in connection with the abduction in 2006 of two young women who were university students and activists for leftist organizations. According to a statement filed in court by the prosecution, the women were kept chained in a barracks and were periodically tortured and sexually assaulted by soldiers under General Palparan’s command.

“The girls narrated the circumstances of their abduction to our witness,” said Edre Olalia, an attorney for the victims’ families. “He saw them being tortured in a restroom. It was a horrible account of physical and sexual abuse.”

Despite a nationwide manhunt, and the offering of a large reward for his capture, Mr. Palparan remains at large and has received testimonials of support from prominent politicians and members of the military.

“It is immensely difficult to prosecute these kinds of cases,” said Mr. Olalia. “I don’t think this new law alone will make prosecution any easier. There must be a strong demonstration to the security forces that they can no longer get away with this. So far, the administration has not done that.”

Read More..

Boehner Tax Plan in House Is Pulled, Lacking Votes

Brendan Hoffman for The New York Times

Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio leaving a meeting Thursday with fellow House Republicans on talks over the “fiscal cliff.”

WASHINGTON — Speaker John A. Boehner’s effort to pass fallback legislation to avert a fiscal crisis in less than two weeks collapsed Thursday night in an embarrassing defeat after conservative Republicans refused to support legislation that would allow taxes to rise on the most affluent households in the country.

House Republican leaders abruptly canceled a vote on the bill after they failed to rally enough votes for passage in an emergency meeting about 8 p.m. Within minutes, dejected Republicans filed out of the basement meeting room and declared there would be no votes to avert the “fiscal cliff” until after Christmas. With his “Plan B” all but dead, the speaker was left with the choice to find a new Republican way forward or to try to get a broad deficit reduction deal with President Obama that could win passage with Republican and Democratic votes.

What he could not do was blame Democrats for failing to take up legislation he could not even get through his own membership in the House.

“The House did not take up the tax measure today because it did not have sufficient support from our members to pass,” Mr. Boehner said in a statement that said responsibility for a solution now fell to the White House and Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, the majority leader. “Now it is up to the president to work with Senator Reid on legislation to avert the fiscal cliff.”

The stunning turn of events in the House left the status of negotiations to head off a combination of automatic tax increases and significant federal spending cuts in disarray with little time before the start of the new year.

At the White House, the press secretary, Jay Carney, said the defeat should press Mr. Boehner back into talks with Mr. Obama.

“The president will work with Congress to get this done, and we are hopeful that we will be able to find a bipartisan solution quickly that protects the middle class and our economy,” he said.

The refusal of a band of House Republicans to allow income tax rates to rise on incomes over $1 million came after Mr. Obama scored a decisive re-election victory campaigning for higher taxes on incomes over $250,000. Since the November election, the president’s approval ratings have risen, and opinion polls have shown a strong majority not only favoring his tax position, but saying they will blame Republicans for a failure to reach a deficit deal.

With a series of votes on Thursday, the speaker, who faces election for his post in the new Congress next month, had hoped to assemble a Republican path away from the cliff. With a show of Republican unity, he also sought to strengthen his own hand in negotiations with Mr. Obama. The House did narrowly pass legislation to cancel automatic, across-the-board military cuts set to begin next month, and shift them to domestic programs.

But the main component of “Plan B,” a bill to extend expiring Bush-era tax cuts for everyone with incomes under $1 million, could not win enough Republican support to overcome united Democratic opposition. Democrats questioned Mr. Boehner’s ability to deliver any agreement.

“I think this demonstrates that Speaker Boehner has a real challenge,” said Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 House Democrat. “He hasn’t been able to cut any deal, make any agreement that’s balanced. Even if it’s his own compromise.”

Representative Rick Larsen of Washington accused Republicans of shirking their responsibility by leaving the capital. “The Republicans just picked up their toys and went home,” he said.

Futures contracts on indexes of United States stock listings and shares in Asia fell sharply after Mr. Boehner conceded that his bill lacked the votes to pass.

The point of the Boehner effort was to secure passage of a Republican plan, then demand that the president and the Senate to take up that measure and pass it, putting off the major fights until early next year when Republicans would conceivably have more leverage because of the need to increase the federal debt limit. It would also allow Republicans to claim it was Democrats who had caused taxes to rise after the first of the year had no agreement been reached.

That strategy lay in tatters after the Republican implosion.“Some people don’t know how to take yea for an answer,” said Representative Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, a Republican who supported the measure and was open about his disappointment with his colleagues.

Opponents said they were not about to bend their uncompromising principles on taxes just because Mr. Boehner asked.

“The speaker should be meeting with us to get our views on things rather than just presenting his,” said Representative Justin Amash of Michigan, who recently lost a committee post for routinely crossing the leadership.

Jeremy W. Peters contributed reporting.

Read More..

Stigma Fading, Marijuana Common in California

Jim Wilson/The New York Times

At a San Francisco concert in 2010, marijuana use was general while signatures were collected for a measure to decriminalize it.

LOS ANGELES — Let Colorado and Washington be the marijuana trailblazers. Let them struggle with the messy details of what it means to actually legalize the drug. Marijuana is, as a practical matter, already legal in much of California.

No matter that its recreational use remains technically against the law. Marijuana has, in many parts of this state, become the equivalent of a beer in a paper bag on the streets of Greenwich Village. It is losing whatever stigma it ever had and still has in many parts of the country, including New York City, where the kind of open marijuana use that is common here would attract the attention of any passing law officer.

“It’s shocking, from my perspective, the number of people that we all know who are recreational marijuana users,” said Gavin Newsom, the lieutenant governor. “These are incredibly upstanding citizens: Leaders in our community, and exceptional people. Increasingly, people are willing to share how they use it and not be ashamed of it.”

Marijuana can be smelled in suburban backyards in neighborhoods from Hollywood to Topanga Canyon as dusk falls — what in other places is known as the cocktail hour — often wafting in from three sides. In some homes in Beverly Hills and San Francisco, it is offered at the start of a dinner party with the customary ease of a host offering a chilled Bombay Sapphire martini.

Lighting up a cigarette (the tobacco kind) can get you booted from many venues in this rigorously antitobacco state. But no one seemed to mind as marijuana smoke filled the air at an outdoor concert at the Hollywood Bowl in September or even in the much more intimate, enclosed atmosphere of the Troubadour in West Hollywood during a Mountain Goats concert last week.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor, ticked off the acceptance of open marijuana smoking in a list of reasons he thought Venice was such a wonderful place for his morning bicycle rides. With so many people smoking in so many places, he said in an interview this year, there was no reason to light up one’s own joint.

“You just inhale, and you live off everyone else,” said Mr. Schwarzenegger, who as governor signed a law decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana.

Some Californians react disdainfully to anyone from out of state who still harbors illicit associations with the drug. Bill Maher, the television host, was speaking about the prevalence of marijuana smoking at dinner parties hosted by Sue Mengers, a retired Hollywood agent famous for her high-powered gatherings of actors and journalists, in an interview after her death last year. “I used to bring her pot,” he said. “And I wasn’t the only one.”

When a reporter sought to ascertain whether this was an on-the-record conversation, Mr. Maher responded tartly: “Where do you think you are? This is California in the year 2011.”

John Burton, the state Democratic chairman, said he recalled an era when the drug was stigmatized under tough antidrug laws. He called the changes in thinking toward marijuana one of the two most striking shifts in public attitude he had seen in 40 years here (the other was gay rights).

“I can remember when your second conviction of having a single marijuana cigarette would get you two to 20 in San Quentin,” he said.

In a Field Poll of California voters conducted in October 2010, 47 percent of respondents said they had smoked marijuana at least once, and 50 percent said it should be legalized. The poll was taken shortly before Californians voted down, by a narrow margin, an initiative to decriminalize marijuana.

“In a Republican year, the legalization came within two points,” said Chris Lehane, a Democratic consultant who worked on the campaign in favor of the initiative. He said that was evidence of the “fact that the public has evolved on the issue and is ahead of the pols.”

A study by the California Office of Traffic Safety last month found that motorists were more likely to be driving under the influence of marijuana than under the influence of alcohol.

Read More..

Stigma Fading, Marijuana Common in California

Jim Wilson/The New York Times

At a San Francisco concert in 2010, marijuana use was general while signatures were collected for a measure to decriminalize it.

LOS ANGELES — Let Colorado and Washington be the marijuana trailblazers. Let them struggle with the messy details of what it means to actually legalize the drug. Marijuana is, as a practical matter, already legal in much of California.

No matter that its recreational use remains technically against the law. Marijuana has, in many parts of this state, become the equivalent of a beer in a paper bag on the streets of Greenwich Village. It is losing whatever stigma it ever had and still has in many parts of the country, including New York City, where the kind of open marijuana use that is common here would attract the attention of any passing law officer.

“It’s shocking, from my perspective, the number of people that we all know who are recreational marijuana users,” said Gavin Newsom, the lieutenant governor. “These are incredibly upstanding citizens: Leaders in our community, and exceptional people. Increasingly, people are willing to share how they use it and not be ashamed of it.”

Marijuana can be smelled in suburban backyards in neighborhoods from Hollywood to Topanga Canyon as dusk falls — what in other places is known as the cocktail hour — often wafting in from three sides. In some homes in Beverly Hills and San Francisco, it is offered at the start of a dinner party with the customary ease of a host offering a chilled Bombay Sapphire martini.

Lighting up a cigarette (the tobacco kind) can get you booted from many venues in this rigorously antitobacco state. But no one seemed to mind as marijuana smoke filled the air at an outdoor concert at the Hollywood Bowl in September or even in the much more intimate, enclosed atmosphere of the Troubadour in West Hollywood during a Mountain Goats concert last week.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor, ticked off the acceptance of open marijuana smoking in a list of reasons he thought Venice was such a wonderful place for his morning bicycle rides. With so many people smoking in so many places, he said in an interview this year, there was no reason to light up one’s own joint.

“You just inhale, and you live off everyone else,” said Mr. Schwarzenegger, who as governor signed a law decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana.

Some Californians react disdainfully to anyone from out of state who still harbors illicit associations with the drug. Bill Maher, the television host, was speaking about the prevalence of marijuana smoking at dinner parties hosted by Sue Mengers, a retired Hollywood agent famous for her high-powered gatherings of actors and journalists, in an interview after her death last year. “I used to bring her pot,” he said. “And I wasn’t the only one.”

When a reporter sought to ascertain whether this was an on-the-record conversation, Mr. Maher responded tartly: “Where do you think you are? This is California in the year 2011.”

John Burton, the state Democratic chairman, said he recalled an era when the drug was stigmatized under tough antidrug laws. He called the changes in thinking toward marijuana one of the two most striking shifts in public attitude he had seen in 40 years here (the other was gay rights).

“I can remember when your second conviction of having a single marijuana cigarette would get you two to 20 in San Quentin,” he said.

In a Field Poll of California voters conducted in October 2010, 47 percent of respondents said they had smoked marijuana at least once, and 50 percent said it should be legalized. The poll was taken shortly before Californians voted down, by a narrow margin, an initiative to decriminalize marijuana.

“In a Republican year, the legalization came within two points,” said Chris Lehane, a Democratic consultant who worked on the campaign in favor of the initiative. He said that was evidence of the “fact that the public has evolved on the issue and is ahead of the pols.”

A study by the California Office of Traffic Safety last month found that motorists were more likely to be driving under the influence of marijuana than under the influence of alcohol.

Read More..

U.S. Makes Arrest in Olympus Accounting Scandal

Federal agents arrested a former bank executive in Los Angeles on Thursday in connection with the accounting scandal that erupted last year at Olympus, the Japanese camera and medical equipment maker.

Prosecutors in New York said that the executive, Chan Ming Fon, received more than $10 million from Olympus for assisting in its accounting fraud.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation said Mr. Chan, 50, was a citizen of Taiwan living in Singapore. He was charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, with a maximum potential penalty of 20 years in prison. His lawyer was not disclosed.

“As alleged, Chan Ming Fon was handsomely paid to play an international shell game with hundreds of millions of dollars of assets in order to allow Olympus to keep a massive accounting fraud going for years,” said Preet Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan, in a news release.

The authorities did not identify the financial institutions with which Mr. Chan was affiliated.

In February, the Japanese authorities arrested seven people in connection with the accounting missteps at Olympus, including Tsuyoshi Kikukawa, the company’s former chairman. Mr. Chan was not among those seven.

The company has admitted that executives set up a scheme to cover up $1.7 billion in losses. The illicit maneuvers came to light after Olympus fired Michael C. Woodford, its British chief executive, in October 2011. Soon after, Mr. Woodford made allegations of accounting misdeeds at Olympus.

The Olympus scandal rocked the Japanese corporate sector. The case is being watched closely to gauge how serious the Japanese authorities will be in their pursuit of white-collar crime. The men arrested in February could each serve up to 10 years if found guilty.

The allegations against Mr. Chan could shed more light on Olympus’s elaborate accounting ruses. The company hid losses sustained in the 1990s, later masking them with inflated acquisitions and payments through shadowy overseas funds.

Mr. Chan was a principal at a fund that received large payments from Olympus, according to the F.B.I. The bureau contends that Mr. Chan told Olympus’s auditors in 2009 that the fund held hundreds of millions of dollars on behalf of Olympus, in the form of conservative investments like Japanese government bonds. The complaint says, however, that the money had been passed on to an entity controlled by Olympus to pay off a loan.

In the complaint, the F.B.I. said that Mr. Chan “acknowledged that it was wrong to assist Olympus in deceiving its auditor.”

Read More..

Afghan Factions Hold Informal Talks Near Paris

PARIS — A year that began with hopes that the Taliban were ready to start talking peace is ending with a final initiative — informal talks outside Paris among Afghanistan’s competing factions, including militants — that, if anything, exemplifies how little progress has been made in 2012 toward opening negotiations to end the war.

The talks, which began Thursday and are to last two days, have been trumpeted as the first time the Taliban have sat down with their former enemies in Afghanistan’s old Northern Alliance, a collection of militias that fought Taliban rule in the 1990s and eventually helped the United States oust the Islamist movement. Afghan government peace negotiators are also attending, as are representatives of Hezb-e-Islami, an insurgent faction independent of the Taliban.

But going into the meetings, both the Taliban and many old Northern Alliance leaders were clear about their lack of expectations. Abdullah Abdullah, an opposition politician and former presidential candidate who draws much of his support from Afghanistan’s north, said the meetings were “not by any chance a breakthrough.”

The talks, which are closed to the news media, are meant to offer participants an informal occasion to “project themselves toward the horizon of 2020,” said Camille Grand, the director of the Foundation for Strategic Research, the Paris-based research group that organized the meetings. The Afghans in attendance have come on a personal basis, Mr. Grand said.

A handful of French defense and foreign affairs officials are participating as well, he said, though the French, who recently pulled their combat forces from Afghanistan, say the meetings do not represent an effort to open formal talks. Philippe Lalliot, the Foreign Ministry spokesman, described them as an “academic seminar.”

Mr. Abdullah, the opposition politician, opted to remain in Kabul and send lesser-known members of his party, the National Coalition of Afghanistan, to attend instead. A rival opposition group, the National Front of Afghanistan, which is also made up largely of old Northern Alliance leaders, was sending two of its top leaders to Paris.

Mr. Abdullah and others among the old Northern Alliance nonetheless held out the possibility that the talks could lead to more. The Taliban “will come there, and they will make their own decisions clear,” Mr. Abdullah said in an interview in Kabul. “I don’t want to be pessimistic, but I don’t want to raise expectations out of the meeting.”

The small Taliban delegation in Paris was being led by Shahabuddin Delawar, who is expected to be one of the insurgents’ negotiators should peace talks ever begin in earnest. But neither Mr. Delawar nor any other Taliban representatives who had gone to Paris were there to discuss the stalled peace process, said Zabiullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the insurgents.

Rather, Mr. Delawar’s sole task was “to shed light on our stances and explain our official position and policies to the international community,” Mr. Mujahid said. “We want to explain it directly through our own official representatives to the international community, while in the past our position has been presented by the enemies, who were trying to display a wrong image.”

He did not elaborate on what those positions might be. The Taliban have repeatedly said they would not negotiate directly with the government of President Hamid Karzai, whom they deride as a puppet of the United States.

The Taliban suspended its preliminary talks with the United States in March after the Obama administration failed to push through a proposed prisoner swap, which was to be the first in a series of confidence-building measures. In the exchange, five insurgent leaders imprisoned at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, would have been traded for the sole American soldier known to be held by the Taliban, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.

The Taliban prisoners were to be sent to Qatar, where the insurgents were to then open a negotiating office.

American officials have said in recent months that they planned to revive the prisoner swap, and the Taliban have repeatedly emphasized that would be the first step necessary to restart the talks. But there have been no apparent moves to release the Taliban prisoners.

The Afghan government has tried to open a variety of other channels to the Taliban. Each has ended in failure, but recent overtures to Pakistan by Mr. Karzai’s High Peace Council have shown some progress.

The council, along with American officials, has been trying to gain support for peace talks from Pakistan, which has aided and sheltered the Taliban over the past dozen years, though it keeps a close watch on the group’s leading figures. Last month, Pakistan agreed to release some Taliban leaders imprisoned there, and nine have been freed, the Taliban and council members said.

What effect, if any, the releases will have on the Paris meetings is unclear. Two similar meetings have been held here since November 2011, but Taliban representatives did not attend.

Mr. Karzai, when asked about the meetings in Paris at a news conference this week, offered only a subdued endorsement, saying the government supports all meetings that could further the goal of reaching a peaceful settlement.

But Mr. Karzai, who late last year nearly scuttled American efforts to open talks with the Taliban in Qatar after complaining he had not been kept abreast of developments, also suggested there could be other motives for the Paris meetings, though he did not elaborate.

Mr. Karzai has bristled in the past when former Northern Alliance members, including some who are at the Paris talks, have held high-profile meetings outside Afghanistan. After a meeting in January in Berlin between former Northern Alliance leaders and United States Congress members, for instance, he accused Washington of plotting to dismember Afghanistan.

“Unless it is proven to us that a meeting has other purposes rather than peace, we are supporting all the peace meetings,” he said at the news conference this week. “But when it has been proven to us or we suspect that these meetings are following other goals, and the goal is not to bring peace in our country — that the meeting has other purposes — then we could talk about that.”

Scott Sayare reported from Paris, and Matthew Rosenberg from Kabul, Afghanistan. Sangar Rahimi contributed reporting from Kabul.

Read More..

Obama and Boehner Split on Fiscal Plan

Brendan Hoffman for The New York Times

Speaker John A. Boehner delivered a cutting response to President Obama on Wednesday.

WASHINGTON — Hopes for a broad deficit-reduction agreement faded on Wednesday as President Obama insisted he had offered Republicans “a fair deal” while Speaker John A. Boehner moved for a House vote as early as Thursday on a scaled-down plan to limit tax increases to yearly incomes of $1 million and up, despite Senate opposition and Mr. Obama’s veto threat.

The impasse was clear as Mr. Obama and Mr. Boehner separately spoke to the television cameras instead of each other, after a weekend of private negotiations amid grieving over the shootings in Newtown, Conn., had narrowed their differences enough to raise optimism about a far-reaching deal to stabilize the nation’s debt.

First Mr. Obama and then Mr. Boehner faulted the other side for the impasse, and ultimately the failure, if a year-end deal could not be reached to stop automatic tax increases and the indiscriminate spending cuts in military and domestic programs known as the “sequester.” The president, saying he had gone “at least halfway” toward Republicans’ demands, evoked Hurricane Sandy and the Newtown school massacre to prod lawmakers to compromise for the nation’s benefit.

“When you think about what we’ve gone through over the last couple months — a devastating hurricane, and now one of the worst tragedies in our memory — the country deserves us to be willing to compromise on behalf of the greater good,” he said during an appearance at the White House to discuss gun control.

“Frankly, up until a couple days ago if you looked at it, the Republicans in the House and Speaker Boehner were in a position to say, ‘We’ve gotten a fair deal,’ ” the president said.

About two hours later at the Capitol, Mr. Boehner delivered a surprisingly brief but sharp retort to Mr. Obama, after which he took no questions from reporters. He started by saying that on Thursday, the House would pass the fallback bill that he has called his Plan B, which would extend the Bush-era tax cuts, which would otherwise expire on Dec. 31, for all incomes up to $1 million — although later his leadership team was scrambling for votes.

“Then the president will have a decision to make,” he said. “He can call upon Senate Democrats to pass that bill, or he can be responsible for the largest tax increase in American history.”

The Boehner bill does hold tax benefits for those with a yearly income above $1 million. It would repeal two Clinton-era tax provisions that limit the personal exemptions and deductions that wealthy taxpayers can claim; extend the lower tax rates on inherited estates rather than allow them to revert to the pre-Bush administration level; and set a 20 percent tax rate for the dividends and capital gains of households earning at least $1 million a year.

The speaker’s package would raise about $300 billion in additional revenue over 10 years, compared with extending the Bush tax rates for all income, as Republicans long espoused. That is about $500 billion less than Mr. Boehner’s original offer for $800 billion. It is about $700 billion less than would be collected under Mr. Obama’s proposal to extend the Bush rates only for incomes below a $250,000 threshold for couples, and $200,000 for individuals. In the talks with Mr. Boehner, he moved that line to $400,000.

Mr. Boehner’s statement suggested confidence that Republican leaders would have the votes to pass his plan. But lawmakers who were counting votes for the leadership said the tally was short, and House leaders were adding provisions to the speaker’s bill to mollify dissidents.

Some Republicans, for example, objected that the plan would do nothing to prevent the automatic military cuts, about $50 billion, from taking effect in January. To satisfy Republican hawks, leaders will hold a separate vote on legislation, nearly identical to a bill passed earlier this year, that would cancel those cuts and instead shift them to domestic programs, a decision likely to amplify Democratic opposition.

Even if the House Republican majority passes the speaker’s measure, it probably faces doom in the Democratic-controlled Senate, making Mr. Obama’s threatened veto moot. Mr. Boehner’s office has countered that Congressional Democratic leaders in 2011 had supported a $1 million threshold for higher tax rates. Democrats said those proposals were largely intended to show that Republicans would not raise taxes even for millionaires.

While Mr. Boehner scrambled to unify his party, Mr. Obama faced unrest as well from liberals who said he had broken a campaign pledge to keep Social Security out of the deficit-reduction talks. Mr. Obama had given tentative support to Republicans’ demand that the government adopt a new inflation formula for calculating cost-of-living adjustments for federal benefits. The new formula would slightly reduce the growth in Social Security benefits from what it would be under the current inflation index.

Recalling his campaign, Mr. Obama countered, “What I said was that the ultimate package would involve a balance of spending cuts and tax increases. That’s exactly what I have put forward. What I have said is, in order to arrive at a compromise, I am prepared to do some very tough things, some things that some Democrats don’t want to see, and probably there are a few Republicans who don’t want to see them either.”

The president said he would continue to have discussions with Mr. Boehner and others. But on Wednesday, even the chief staff negotiators for the two leaders were not speaking.

In trying to line up votes, Republican leaders circulated word that the longtime antitax advocate Grover Norquist had blessed Mr. Boehner’s plan as compliant with his “Taxpayer Protection Pledge.” Because most Republican candidates sign the pledge not to approve any tax increase, Mr. Norquist effectively has long locked in their votes.

But Mr. Norquist seemed to bend his principles to issue the endorsement, perhaps to maintain his relevance in tax debates. Even senior Republicans lately have denounced Mr. Norquist as a deterrent to resolving the nation’s fiscal problems, given increasing bipartisan agreement that higher tax revenues are required to control debt growth.

Even so, the Club for Growth, a conservative group, said on Wednesday that it considered even Mr. Boehner’s scaled-back plan a tax increase bill and that it might work to defeat Republican lawmakers who voted for it.

Read More..

The New Old Age Blog: After Storm, 'Friends' Rescue a Caregiver

Tales of Hurricane Sandy survival will likely emerge for years — particularly about the sick and elderly who were trapped in their homes or forced to evacuate under harrowing circumstances. Many of those stories have happy endings, like this one of social media and neighborliness I recently heard.

It is about two ailing 90-year-olds who, because of social media, formal and informal, and the ingenuity of one of their daughters, were located amid the rubble of Long Beach, N.Y., after the storm’s initial fury, and in short order gained admission to one of the few elder care facilities in the region that could meet their divergent needs.

“The pluses of social networking really come into play in a situation like this,’’ said Alice, 66, the couple’s daughter, a social worker for senior services in the office of a New York State senator who found herself almost as flummoxed as a nonprofessional when she needed help for her own parents. “More people are willing to help others than we think, but nobody is going to help if we don’t ask.’’

Alice’s social media search, first to locate her parents and then to find them a new home, began on a Facebook page for missing persons, one of many that sprang up after the storm. Long Beach, one of the hardest-hit areas, had no phones or power and was, for the most part, inaccessible. A Facebook page, Long Beach NY Hurricane Information, was meant to help residents find free hot food, a mobile medical van, somewhere to do laundry, revised school bus routes, lists of open stores, suggestions for good contractors, warning of price-gougers and, increasingly, share tales of recovery.

“I put up a post and sure enough some wonderful man from Brooklyn got back to me,’’ Alice said (we tell Alice’s story using only her first name to protect her parents’ privacy). The man had braved the miles of dark back roads to get to his own mother, who happened to live in the same co-op building as Alice’s parents.

He volunteered to check on the old couple and their home health aide on the third floor. Alice’s father, who has dementia, is incontinent and cannot walk because of a neurological condition, and her mother, who is deaf, suffers from depression, but by comparison is the “well spouse.’’

Their personal belongings were not destroyed, although her mother’s medical records were lost when her doctor’s office was damaged. But the old building would be uninhabitable for an indeterminate time, surely too long for a pair of 90-year-olds to ever return. Still, the information that they were O.K., coming from a total stranger, “provided a night of sleep I otherwise never would have had,’’ Alice said.

The next morning, she and her younger sister, Sharon, were able to get to Long Beach and tell their mother that the evacuation would be permanent. They brought the couple to Alice’s home in Queens for a few days, then to a nearby hotel and finally to a borrowed apartment in a neighboring building.

“It is so painful for them to be uprooted all of a sudden, at this age,’’ Alice said. “But in a way this may be one of those blessings in disguise. The way they were living, it was only after we actually had them with us that we realized my mother’s description of how things were going were not exactly accurate.’’

This is the case with many elderly parents, getting by in their own apartment and putting the best face on it lest their children tell them it is time to leave. So in the short window before she and her husband left for Chicago, and Thanksgiving with their own children and grandchildren, Alice had to set in motion the next step.

Her sister and brother-in-law on Long Island would keep an eye on the old couple in the short term. But the long-term solution, Alice said, with the clear-eyes that came from seeing others in this situation day-after-day, was a senior community where her father could live in the skilled nursing section and her mother in the less restrictive assisted living area. They would see each other as often as they wished, but each would get the correct level of care.

So before leaving for Chicago, using a more informal kind of social media, Alice e-mailed 40 friends — from her synagogue, her social work circle, her Rolodex of elder care lawyers and Medicare advocates. The e-blast was a plea for help.

“Each of you on this email know me personally,’’ she wrote. “As you all know, many years of my professional life have been dedicated to helping seniors . . . . Now I find myself in the position of needing help for my mom and dad.’’ She told them the story of her parents evacuation and how “exhausted and completely stressed’’ she and her sister and both of their husbands were. Now her “biggest hurdle was to find a place that can accommodate each of their needs.’’

She essentially asked this group to put on their thinking caps, and they did. Alice and her husband left for the holiday on a Monday. That Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, she got a phone call from an admissions person from exactly the kind of facility she needed, who had been contacted by her friends. Alice was told what kind of records she would need for their application. A plan was made to reconvene by telephone the Monday after Thanksgiving.

On Friday, Nov. 30, Alice and her sister toured the place. In that same blur of a week, the sisters took turns going to Long Beach to deal with their parents’ possessions. Alice’s mother slowly moved from reconciled to relieved. When it was time to tell Alice’s father “he went from sad and crying to angry at my sister and I for not being able to take them to live with either of us.’’

Through it all, Alice kept her e-mail committee up to date. She had crowd-sourced one of the hardest problems she would ever face. She had tapped the viral nature of hastily created Facebook pages, where strangers literally “friend’’ each other, and sent e-mail blasts to the kind of friends who take no offense at receiving the same message as a bunch of people they may or may not know.

In the “new old age,” this is one of many ways of doing what nobody really knows how to do. And in all likelihood, with the paperwork almost complete, Alice’s parents will have a new home for Christmas.

---

Read More..

The New Old Age Blog: After Storm, 'Friends' Rescue a Caregiver

Tales of Hurricane Sandy survival will likely emerge for years — particularly about the sick and elderly who were trapped in their homes or forced to evacuate under harrowing circumstances. Many of those stories have happy endings, like this one of social media and neighborliness I recently heard.

It is about two ailing 90-year-olds who, because of social media, formal and informal, and the ingenuity of one of their daughters, were located amid the rubble of Long Beach, N.Y., after the storm’s initial fury, and in short order gained admission to one of the few elder care facilities in the region that could meet their divergent needs.

“The pluses of social networking really come into play in a situation like this,’’ said Alice, 66, the couple’s daughter, a social worker for senior services in the office of a New York State senator who found herself almost as flummoxed as a nonprofessional when she needed help for her own parents. “More people are willing to help others than we think, but nobody is going to help if we don’t ask.’’

Alice’s social media search, first to locate her parents and then to find them a new home, began on a Facebook page for missing persons, one of many that sprang up after the storm. Long Beach, one of the hardest-hit areas, had no phones or power and was, for the most part, inaccessible. A Facebook page, Long Beach NY Hurricane Information, was meant to help residents find free hot food, a mobile medical van, somewhere to do laundry, revised school bus routes, lists of open stores, suggestions for good contractors, warning of price-gougers and, increasingly, share tales of recovery.

“I put up a post and sure enough some wonderful man from Brooklyn got back to me,’’ Alice said (we tell Alice’s story using only her first name to protect her parents’ privacy). The man had braved the miles of dark back roads to get to his own mother, who happened to live in the same co-op building as Alice’s parents.

He volunteered to check on the old couple and their home health aide on the third floor. Alice’s father, who has dementia, is incontinent and cannot walk because of a neurological condition, and her mother, who is deaf, suffers from depression, but by comparison is the “well spouse.’’

Their personal belongings were not destroyed, although her mother’s medical records were lost when her doctor’s office was damaged. But the old building would be uninhabitable for an indeterminate time, surely too long for a pair of 90-year-olds to ever return. Still, the information that they were O.K., coming from a total stranger, “provided a night of sleep I otherwise never would have had,’’ Alice said.

The next morning, she and her younger sister, Sharon, were able to get to Long Beach and tell their mother that the evacuation would be permanent. They brought the couple to Alice’s home in Queens for a few days, then to a nearby hotel and finally to a borrowed apartment in a neighboring building.

“It is so painful for them to be uprooted all of a sudden, at this age,’’ Alice said. “But in a way this may be one of those blessings in disguise. The way they were living, it was only after we actually had them with us that we realized my mother’s description of how things were going were not exactly accurate.’’

This is the case with many elderly parents, getting by in their own apartment and putting the best face on it lest their children tell them it is time to leave. So in the short window before she and her husband left for Chicago, and Thanksgiving with their own children and grandchildren, Alice had to set in motion the next step.

Her sister and brother-in-law on Long Island would keep an eye on the old couple in the short term. But the long-term solution, Alice said, with the clear-eyes that came from seeing others in this situation day-after-day, was a senior community where her father could live in the skilled nursing section and her mother in the less restrictive assisted living area. They would see each other as often as they wished, but each would get the correct level of care.

So before leaving for Chicago, using a more informal kind of social media, Alice e-mailed 40 friends — from her synagogue, her social work circle, her Rolodex of elder care lawyers and Medicare advocates. The e-blast was a plea for help.

“Each of you on this email know me personally,’’ she wrote. “As you all know, many years of my professional life have been dedicated to helping seniors . . . . Now I find myself in the position of needing help for my mom and dad.’’ She told them the story of her parents evacuation and how “exhausted and completely stressed’’ she and her sister and both of their husbands were. Now her “biggest hurdle was to find a place that can accommodate each of their needs.’’

She essentially asked this group to put on their thinking caps, and they did. Alice and her husband left for the holiday on a Monday. That Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving, she got a phone call from an admissions person from exactly the kind of facility she needed, who had been contacted by her friends. Alice was told what kind of records she would need for their application. A plan was made to reconvene by telephone the Monday after Thanksgiving.

On Friday, Nov. 30, Alice and her sister toured the place. In that same blur of a week, the sisters took turns going to Long Beach to deal with their parents’ possessions. Alice’s mother slowly moved from reconciled to relieved. When it was time to tell Alice’s father “he went from sad and crying to angry at my sister and I for not being able to take them to live with either of us.’’

Through it all, Alice kept her e-mail committee up to date. She had crowd-sourced one of the hardest problems she would ever face. She had tapped the viral nature of hastily created Facebook pages, where strangers literally “friend’’ each other, and sent e-mail blasts to the kind of friends who take no offense at receiving the same message as a bunch of people they may or may not know.

In the “new old age,” this is one of many ways of doing what nobody really knows how to do. And in all likelihood, with the paperwork almost complete, Alice’s parents will have a new home for Christmas.

---

Read More..

Lebanon’s Shiites and Sunnis Fight in Syria, but Not at Home

Natalie Naccache for The New York Times

A Lebanese man who had been in Homs, Syria, fighting President Bashar al-Assad’s forces.

ARSAL, Lebanon — The patchwork of Sunni Muslim and Shiite villages arrayed along the northern border with Syria are heavily embroiled in the protracted struggle there, but with a distinctive twist.

Fighters from Hezbollah, the militant Lebanese Shiite movement, cross the frontier to fight for Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, who is Alawite and whose sect dominates the government. Sunni Muslims sneak over to join the opposition. Once back home in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, however, both sides observe an uneasy truce.

“Inside they are slaughtering us, but as soon as we cross into Lebanon there is nothing between us,” said Abdullah, 22, a stocky Sunni farmer who now toils as both a fighter and a smuggler, using only one name to protect his identity. “I would say it is something normal to fight on the other side, given that we are against the regime while they are with it.”

Yet the confrontation over controlling the strategic border throws off sparks that could ignite a bigger conflagration given that it is part of the Sunni-Shiite contest to dominate the Middle East. “There is already a kind of chaos along the border which neither Lebanon nor Syria fully controls, so there is a fear that it will spread into Lebanon,” said Talal Atrissi, a Lebanese academic and expert on Arab-Iranian relations.

Recently nearly two dozen Lebanese Sunni jihadists were ambushed by the Syrian Army soon after they crossed the border, but details of the number killed, wounded or captured are still unconfirmed.

With the battle for Damascus heating up, more and more Syrian soldiers are leaving the border area to deploy in the capital, opening up new opportunities for the Lebanese fighters along the frontier.

Accusations that Hezbollah deployed several thousand fighters across Syria started soon after the uprising erupted in March 2011, not least because its Iranian-supplied arsenal and years of fighting Israel had forged it into one of the most able armed forces in the region.

But interviews with more than a dozen government officials, members of Parliament, fighters and analysts suggested a far more limited, but concentrated, engagement.

Hezbollah fighters have been sent to Syria to protect areas important to Shiite Muslims, ranging from a couple of Shiite villages near Aleppo to the tomb of Sayida Zeinab in Damascus, a holy pilgrimage site for the sect, analysts said. Hezbollah has also advised the Syrian Army on strategy and tactics for urban warfare, as well as training, they said.

The fighters’ main focus, however, has been dominating the Lebanese-Syrian border, an essential link in the supply chain for Iranian weapons coming to Hezbollah through Syria. The Syrian government also wants to limit the fighters and weapons coming to the Free Syrian Army, and Hezbollah wants to protect fellow Shiites and Alawites.

For similar reasons, Sunni fighters, particularly jihadists, have also deployed to Syria, seeking to bolster the insurgents and smuggle what weapons they can. The main difference is that Hezbollah deployed as an organization, while the Sunni effort seems more freelance, analysts said.

The number of fighters involved is difficult to assess, but it seems to be small, analysts said, based on circumstantial details like the several dozen funerals for fighters from both sects combined.

Hezbollah strongly denies that it is fighting in Syria, and it is not alone in that — Lebanese of all stripes say that Syria does not need more fighters. Hezbollah’s media relations department rejected requests for an interview for this article, but one senior official commented briefly.

“We are not involved in the fighting inside Syria,” he said, speaking anonymously because he was not given permission to comment publicly. “But since there were attacks on the villages of Shiites, Christians and other sects by the Syrian rebels, resulting in massacres, we have been involved in some activities on the logistics level.”

He declined to elaborate. In his many speeches, Hassan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, generally avoids the topic of Syria.

Hwaida Saad and Hania Mourtada contributed reporting from Lebanon.

Read More..