Obama Sees 'Potential' for Averting the Fiscal Cliff

President Obama says he sees "potential" for averting the "fiscal cliff" in 28 days, but that no deal will get done unless Republicans consent to raise income-tax rates on the top 2 percent of U.S. earners.

"We're going to have to see the rates on the top 2 percent go up and we're not going to be able to get a deal without it," Obama told Bloomberg TV in his first televised interview since the Nov. 6 election.

Obama suggested that Republican opposition to any increase in tax rates has stifled progress in negotiations and at least partly explains why he has not met more regularly with House Speaker John Boehner.

"Speaker Boehner and I speak frequently," he said. "I don't think the issue right now has to do with sitting in a room.

"Unfortunately, the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance," he added, referring to the GOP plan unveiled Monday that would extend all income tax rates at current levels while imposing changes to Medicare and Social Security.

The GOP proposal would achieve $2.2 trillion in deficit reduction in the next decade, including $800 billion in higher taxes through elimination of loopholes and deductions, slower annual cost-of-living increases for Social Security benefits and a higher eligibility age for Medicare.

Jessica Kourkounis/Getty Images

Washington, D.C., Gridlocked as Fiscal Cliff Approaches Watch Video

What Exactly Did Obama Promise Voters on Tax Hikes Watch Video

'Fiscal Cliff' Negotiations: Ball Is in the GOP's Court Watch Video

The plan contrasts sharply with the White House proposal, which calls for $1.6 trillion in new tax revenue -- largely from higher rates on upper-income earners -- modest unspecified savings from Medicare and a new burst of economic stimulus spending.

Both sides have dismissed out of hand the opposing proposal, raising the prospect of continued gridlock as the economy hurdles toward the "cliff."

Income tax rates for the top 2 percent of Americans remain the immediate sticking point. Obama insists that rates must rise at the end of the year as part of any deal; Republicans oppose increasing rates on the wealthy.

Unless Obama and Republicans reach a compromise, a sweeping set of automatic, across-the-board tax hikes and deep spending cuts will take effect, potentially throwing the U.S. economy back into recession.

The "cliff" scenario results from a failure by Congress and the administration at previous intervals to take steps to reduce federal deficits and debt.

In the Bloomberg interview, Obama said he could be flexible on tax rates and entitlement overhaul, but only in broader discussions next year about revamping the tax code and social safety-net programs.

"Let's let [rates on higher-income earners] go up and then let's set up a process with a time certain at the end of 2013, or the fall of 2013, where we work on tax reform, we look at what loopholes and deductions both Democrats and Republicans are willing to close and it's possible that we may be able to lower rates by broadening the base at that point," he said.

The president also said he's "willing to look at anything" that might strengthen entitlements and extend their financial solvency, but did not specify further.

Republicans continued to rebuff the president's proposal Tuesday, claiming the $1.6 trillion package of tax increases could not pass either house of Congress, including the Democrat-controlled Senate.

"Only one person in the country can deliver the members of his party to support a deal that he makes, and that is the president," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

He praised House Republicans for "trying to move the process forward" with their proposal, but stopped short of endorsing it. Some conservative advocacy groups have been assailing GOP leaders this week for consenting to any tax revenue increases in a deal with Obama.

"With our latest offer we have demonstrated there is a middle ground solution that can cut spending and bring in revenue without hurting American small businesses," Boehner said in a statement today.

Read More..

Israel says will stick with settlement plan despite condemnation

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel rejected concerted criticism from the United States and Europe on Monday over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to expand settlement building after the United Nations' de facto recognition of Palestinian statehood.

Washington urged Israel to reconsider its plan to erect 3,000 more homes in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, saying the move hindered peace efforts with the Palestinians.

Britain, France, Spain, Sweden and Denmark summoned the Israeli ambassadors in their capitals to give similar messages.

An official in Netanyahu's office said Israel would not bend. "Israel will continue to stand by its vital interests, even in the face of international pressure, and there will be no change in the decision that was made," the official said.

Angered by the U.N. General Assembly's upgrading on Thursday of the Palestinians' status in the world body from "observer entity" to "non-member state", Israel said the next day it would build the new dwellings for settlers.

Such projects, on land Israel captured in a 1967 war, are considered illegal by most world powers and have routinely drawn condemnation from them. Approximately 500,000 Israelis and 2.5 million Palestinians live in the two areas.

In a shift that raised the alarm among Palestinians and in world capitals, Netanyahu's pro-settler government also ordered "preliminary zoning and planning work" for thousands of housing units in areas including the "E1" zone east of Jerusalem.

Such construction in the barren hills of E1 has never been put into motion in the face of opposition from Israel's main ally, the United States. Building in the area could bisect the West Bank, cut off Palestinians from Jerusalem and further dim their hopes for a contiguous state.

Israeli television stations reported Jerusalem's district planning commission would soon approve plans for several thousand more housing units, including more than 1,000 Israel had shelved two years ago after angering Washington by publishing the plans before a visit by Vice President Joe Biden.

The settlement plan, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said, would deal "an almost fatal blow" to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

French President Francois Hollande said he was "extremely concerned" and Washington made clear it would not back such Israeli retaliation over the U.N. vote, sought by Palestinians after peace talks collapsed in 2010 over settlement building.

"We urge Israeli leaders to reconsider these unilateral decisions and exercise restraint as these actions are counterproductive and make it harder to resume direct negotiations to achieve a two state solution," White House spokesman Jay Carney told a briefing.

Ahead of a Netanyahu visit this week, Germany, considered Israel's closest ally in Europe, urged it to refrain from expanding settlements, and Russia said it viewed the Israeli moves with serious concern.

RETALIATION

Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz said Israel could not have remained indifferent to the Palestinians' unilateral move at the United Nations.

"I want to tell you that those same Europeans and Americans who are now telling us 'naughty, naughty' over our response, understand full-well that we have to respond, and they themselves warned the Palestinian Authority," he said.

Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat said building in E1 "destroys the two-state solution, (establishing) East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and practically ends the peace process and any opportunity to talk about negotiations in the future".

The United States, one of the eight countries to vote alongside Israel against the Palestinian resolution at the General Assembly, has said both were counterproductive to the resumption of direct peace talks.

In Europe, only the Czech Republic voted against the status upgrade while many countries, including France, backed it. Netanyahu plans to visit Prague this week to express his thanks.

In the Gaza Strip, Sami Abu Zuhri, spokesman for the governing Hamas Islamist movement, called the settlements "an insult to the international community, which should bear responsibility for Israeli violations and attacks on Palestinians".

Israeli police arrested three Jewish settlers on Monday whom they suspect of arson and other crimes against Palestinian property in the West Bank, including the torching of a car.

Attackers have often proclaimed they are exacting a "price tag" for steps taken against the settler movement by Palestinians, or by the Israeli government.

Alongside the settlement plans, Israel announced it would withhold about $100 million in Palestinian tax revenues from the Palestinian Authority, which exercises limited self-rule in the West Bank, saying Palestinians owed $200 million to Israeli firms.

"These are not steps towards peace, these are steps towards the extension of the conflict," Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo said.

Only three weeks ago, Netanyahu won strong European and U.S. support for a Gaza offensive that Israel said was aimed at curbing persistent cross-border rocket fire.

Favored by opinion polls to win a January 22 national election, he brushed off the condemnation and complaints at home that he is deepening Israel's diplomatic isolation.

Netanyahu told his cabinet on Sunday that his government "will carry on building in Jerusalem and in all the places on the map of Israel's strategic interests".

But while his housing minister has said the government would soon invite bids from contractors to build 1,000 homes for Israelis in East Jerusalem and more than 1,000 in West Bank settlement blocs, the E1 plan is still in its planning stages.

"No one will build until it is clear what will be done there," the minister, Ariel Attias, said on Sunday.

Israel froze much of its activities in E1 under pressure from former U.S. President George W. Bush, and the area has been under the scrutiny of his successor, Barack Obama.

Israel cites historical and Biblical links to the West Bank and Jerusalem and regards all of the holy city as its capital, a claim that is not recognized internationally.

(Additional reporting by Crispian Balmer, Dan Williams, Nidal al-Mughrabi in Gaza, Jihan Abdalla in Ramallah, Steve Gutterman in Moscow, Gareth Jones in Berlin, John Irish and Elizabeth Pineau in Paris and Tim Castle in London; writing by Jeffrey Heller; editing by Philippa Fletcher)

Read More..

Football: Lionel Lewis calls it a day

SINGAPORE: He was Singapore's safest pair of hands for almost a decade and, despite retiring from international football last year with 73 caps, Lionel Lewis was playing well enough to warrant consideration for a recall to the national squad for the current ASEAN Football Federation Championship.

But a persistent ankle injury put paid to the possibility of that happening, and now Lewis has decided to call it a day.

The 29-year-old Home United custodian will hang up his gloves to get a head start on his post-football career at Nanyang Polytechnic, his former school. He will be joining its Student Affairs Department.

"My friends and family know I have been thinking about my career after football," said Lewis, who had a training stint with Manchester City in 2007 and a week-long trial with Swiss side Grasshopper-Club Zurich.

"The job offer from Nanyang Polytechnic has been on the table for several months and after working out all the options, including the possibility of playing football on a part-time basis, I've decided to stop instead when my contract with Home runs out at the end of this month."

With a young family - his wife Jenny gave birth to their son Jonas only 10 weeks ago and his daughter Jennel is four - Lewis, who has a Sports Management degree from the University of Wolverhampton, felt it was necessary to not delay the start of his second career.

"I can play for another five to eight years, and if I were getting the kind of money that an English Premier League player earns, maybe it would be harder to walk away. But a footballer's pay here... you can't even smell their one-week wages," said Lewis, who did not say how much he earned at Home.

"I'm not putting down local football but that is the reality. Getting started now means that when I am 35, I can have a more assured career and hopefully be able to explore more options."

Former Singapore and Home United coach P N Sivaji thinks Lewis is making the right move.

"Yes, Lionel's one of our best goalkeepers ever, and yes, keepers do get better with age. But I think he's probably tired of the life of a footballer and its routines," he said.

Lewis' 12-year playing career has left him with a litany of injuries. He even had surgery three weeks ago to repair a tear to his anterior talofibula ligament. But he said he was not quitting because of his injuries.

"I've got to be satisfied with my 12 years, having won many trophies and travelled to most parts of the world," he said. "It has been an absolutely wonderful journey, and I am looking forward to this career change.

"I still plan to play football once a week and my friends will be happy because I can now join their social games."

- TODAY

Read More..

Zee editors denied bail for 2nd time in a week

NEW DELHI: For the second time in less than a week, a trial court on Monday dismissed the bail applications of the two Zee group editors arrested for allegedly trying to extort Rs 100 crore from Congress MP Naveen Jindal's firm.

Metropolitan magistrate Rajinder Singh on Monday dismissed the bail pleas, saying Zee News head Sudhir Chaudhary and Zee Business editor Samir Ahluwalia had not given any new grounds for their release on bail after their earlier plea was rejected on November 28. The two editors will now have to move a higher court for bail.

Move higher court for bail: Magistrate

Investigation is at a preliminary stage and there is no change of facts and circumstances since November 28...and no fresh ground has come up to release them on bail. Hence, in my considered opinion, the bail (plea) is dismissed," the court said while dismissing bail pleas of two Zee group editors. The metropolitan magistrate said the two editors would now have to move a higher court for bail.

During the hearing, special public prosecutor Rajiv Mohan argued that the two accused had no right to move a fresh bail plea as a similar application under section 437 of CrPC had been dismissed by a magistrate.

Mohan argued the two editors should not be given bail as they were involved in criminally extorting money from Jindal Steel and Power Limited and have also abused the freedom of speech and expression granted to the press under Article 19 of the Constitution. The two had been booked for non-bailable offences and hence can't be released on bail, Mohan added.

Read More..

Fossil fuel subsidies in focus at climate talks

DOHA, Qatar (AP) — Hassan al-Kubaisi considers it a gift from above that drivers in oil- and gas-rich Qatar only have to pay $1 per gallon at the pump.

"Thank God that our country is an oil producer and the price of gasoline is one of the lowest," al-Kubaisi said, filling up his Toyota Land Cruiser at a gas station in Doha. "God has given us a blessing."

To those looking for a global response to climate change, it's more like a curse.

Qatar — the host of U.N. climate talks that entered their final week Monday — is among dozens of countries that keep gas prices artificially low through subsidies that exceeded $500 billion globally last year. Renewable energy worldwide received six times less support — an imbalance that is just starting to earn attention in the divisive negotiations on curbing the carbon emissions blamed for heating the planet.

"We need to stop funding the problem, and start funding the solution," said Steve Kretzmann, of Oil Change International, an advocacy group for clean energy.

His group presented research Monday showing that in addition to the fuel subsidies in developing countries, rich nations in 2011 gave more than $58 billion in tax breaks and other production subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. The U.S. figure was $13 billion.

The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has calculated that removing fossil fuel subsidies could reduce carbon emissions by more than 10 percent by 2050.

Yet the argument is just recently gaining traction in climate negotiations, which in two decades have failed to halt the rising temperatures that are melting Arctic ice, raising sea levels and shifting weather patterns with impacts on droughts and floods.

In Doha, the talks have been slowed by wrangling over financial aid to help poor countries cope with global warming and how to divide carbon emissions rights until 2020 when a new planned climate treaty is supposed to enter force. Calls are now intensifying to include fossil fuel subsidies as a key part of the discussion.

"I think it is manifestly clear ... that this is a massive missing piece of the climate change jigsaw puzzle," said Tim Groser, New Zealand's minister for climate change.

He is spearheading an initiative backed by Scandinavian countries and some developing countries to put fuel subsidies on the agenda in various forums, citing the U.N. talks as a "natural home" for the debate.

The G-20 called for their elimination in 2009, and the issue also came up at the U.N. earth summit in Rio de Janeiro earlier this year. Frustrated that not much has happened since, European Union climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard said Monday she planned to raise the issue with environment ministers on the sidelines of the talks in Doha.

Many developing countries are positive toward phasing out fossil fuel subsidies, not just to protect the climate but to balance budgets. Subsidies introduced as a form of welfare benefit decades ago have become an increasing burden to many countries as oil prices soar.

"We are reviewing the subsidy periodically in the context of the total economy for Qatar," the tiny Persian gulf country's energy minister, Mohammed bin Saleh al-Sada, told reporters Monday.

Qatar's National Development Strategy 2011-2016 states it more bluntly, saying fuel subsides are "at odds with the aspirations" and sustainability objectives of the wealthy emirate.

The problem is that getting rid of them comes with a heavy political price.

When Jordan raised fuel prices last month, angry crowds poured into the streets, torching police cars, government offices and private banks in the most sustained protests to hit the country since the start of the Arab unrest. One person was killed and 75 others were injured in the violence.

Nigeria, Indonesia, India and Sudan have also seen violent protests this year as governments tried to bring fuel prices closer to market rates.

Iran has used a phased approach to lift fuel subsidies over the past several years, but its pump prices remain among the cheapest in the world.

"People perceive it as something that the government is taking away from them," said Kretzmann. "The trick is we need to do it in a way that doesn't harm the poor."

The International Energy Agency found in 2010 that fuel subsidies are not an effective measure against poverty because only 8 percent of such subsidies reached the bottom 20 percent of income earners.

The IEA, which only looked at consumption subsidies, this year said they "remain most prevalent in the Middle East and North Africa, where momentum toward their reform appears to have been lost."

In the U.S., environmental groups say fossil fuel subsidies include tax breaks, the foreign tax credit and the credit for production of nonconventional fuels.

Industry groups, like the Independent Petroleum Association of America, are against removing such support, saying that would harm smaller companies, rather than the big oil giants.

In Doha, Mohammed Adow, a climate activist with Christian Aid, called all fuel subsidies "reckless and dangerous," but described removing subsidies on the production side as "low-hanging fruit" for governments if they are serious about dealing with climate change.

"It's going to oil and coal companies that don't need it in the first place," he said.

___

Associated Press writers Abdullah Rebhy in Doha, Qatar, and Brian Murphy in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, contributed to this report

____

Karl Ritter can be reached at www.twitter.com/karl_ritter

Read More..

Boehner Makes Fiscal Cliff Counter-Offer

House Speaker John Boehner today sent President Obama a counter-proposal on how to cut the deficit that he called a “credible plan” to break the stalemate in negotiations to keep the country from going off the “fiscal cliff” but just hours later the White House quickly rejected the offer.

In the plan, Republicans offer a total of $2.2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next decade. That would give lawmakers “ample” savings to off-set $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts set to begin to take effect Jan. 2, 2013. Senior Republican aides said the proposal does not explicitly include an offer to address the standoff over whether the president or Congress should have power over debt limit increases.

White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer rejected the GOP’s counteroffer, complaining that it “does not meet the test of balance.”

“Their plan includes nothing new and provides no details on which deductions they would eliminate, which loopholes they will close or which Medicare savings they would achieve,”  Pfeiffer stated. “While the president is willing to compromise to get a significant, balanced deal and believes that compromise is readily available to Congress, he is not willing to compromise on the principles of fairness and balance that include asking the wealthiest to pay higher rates.”

Brendan Buck, a spokesman to the speaker, said that by rejecting the offer, “the White House has once again demonstrated how unreasonable it has become” and he said “it is now [Obama's] obligation to present a plan that can pass both chambers of Congress.”

The GOP deal would create $800 billion in new revenue through tax reform, but Boehner insisted that tax rates should not go up on the top 2 percent of taxpayers. Instead, the GOP wants lower tax rates after closing loopholes, limiting tax credits and capping deductions.

“We believe through tax reform that you absolutely could lower rates below what they are for this year, and still hit the $800 billion target,” a senior GOP leadership aide said.  “How much you would be able to lower rates depends on what else you’re doing in tax reform, but it’s a number that’s mathematically consistent with not raising rates and doing comprehensive tax reform.”

The offer also proposes $600 billion in health savings, $300 billion in additional mandatory savings, $300 billion in discretionary spending cuts, and $200 billion by updating the formula by which the Consumer Price Index is calculated, which would affect all sorts of federal programs from Social Security to federal pensions.

“What we’re putting forth is a credible plan that deserves serious consideration by the White House, and I would hope that they would respond in a timely and responsible way,” Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters today when he dropped into a staff briefing on the pitch. “We could have responded in kind, but decided not to do that.”

A senior Republican aide also said health care savings is a mandatory element of a comprehensive deal.

“That has been in every one of these sets of conversations that we’ve had over the last 15 months, and I don’t think there’s any way to get to a comprehensive deal that solves this situation without it,” the aide said. “Means testing has been, likewise, a part of every single discussion.”

Boehner said the president’s offer last week was “basically the president’s budget from last February,” which he noted received no votes in the House and no votes in the Senate.

“Going over the cliff will hurt our economy and hurt job creation in our country. It’s one of the reasons why the day after the election, I offered a concession to try to speed this process up by putting revenue on the table,” Boehner said. “Unfortunately the White House responded with the La-la-land offer that couldn’t pass the House, couldn’t pass the Senate.”

Now, in a letter to the president, House Republicans say they devised an offer based on Erskine Bowles’ proposal to the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, the so-called supercommittee. But Bowles himself issued a statement that the counteroffer “does not represent” his proposal to the supercommittee, since his plan was created to demonstrate how a deal could be achieved last year as negotiations faltered.

“The Joint Select Committee failed to reach a deal, and circumstances have changed since then,” Bowles said this afternoon. “It is up to negotiators to figure out where the middle ground is today. ”

Last week, the president asked for about $1.6 trillion in new revenue, including about $800 billion from allowing tax cuts on income over $250,000 a year expire. Obama also asked for about $400 billion in new stimulus spending, but the plan was rejected by Republicans as a “step backward.”

The letter with the GOP’s proposal was sent to the president around 2 p.m. today. One senior Republican aide close to the negotiations admitted the counteroffer “is not something that a bunch of conservatives are going to be jumping up and down endorsing.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the proposal is “another assault on the middle class, seniors, and our future.”

“The American people made clear that they want us to work together on a balanced approach; yet, in the Republican plan, any alleged resemblance to an offer seeking balance and fairness is nonexistent.  It only makes matters worse,” Pelosi said. “Republicans are simply digging in their heels by refusing to ask the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share and actually calling for lower tax rates.”

The speaker said he did not intend to speak with the president personally about the offer, but he “might run into him” tonight at a holiday reception at the White House. Pelosi is also scheduled to attend the party.

Get more pure politics at ABC News.com/Politics and a lighter take on the news at OTUSNews.com

ABC News’ Mary Bruce contributed to this article

Read More..

Islamist protest shuts down Egypt's top court

CAIRO (Reuters) - Protests by Islamists allied to President Mohamed Mursi forced Egypt's highest court to adjourn its work indefinitely on Sunday, intensifying a conflict between some of the country's top judges and the head of state.

The Supreme Constitutional Court said it would not convene until its judges could operate without "psychological and material pressure", saying protesters had stopped the judges from reaching the building.

Several hundred Mursi supporters had protested outside the court through the night ahead of a session expected to examine the legality of parliament's upper house and the assembly that drafted a new constitution, both of them Islamist-controlled.

The cases have cast a legal shadow over Mursi's efforts to chart a way out of a crisis ignited by a November 22 decree that temporarily expanded his powers and led to nationwide protests.

The court's decision to suspend its activities appeared unlikely to have any immediate impact on Mursi's drive to get the new constitution passed in a national referendum on December 15.

Judges supervise voting in Egypt, and Mursi will need them to oversee the referendum.

But in a blow to the president, the Judges' Club, an influential society representing the nation's judges, decided on Sunday not to oversee the vote, the state news agency reported. The club's decisions are not binding on members, however.

Vice President Mahmoud Mekky said on Sunday he was confident the judges would perform that role, despite calls by Mursi's critics in the judiciary for a boycott.

Three people have been killed and hundreds wounded in protests and counter-demonstrations over Mursi's decree.

At least 200,000 of Mursi's supporters attended a rally at Cairo University on Saturday. His opponents are staging an open-ended sit-in in Cairo's Tahrir Square, the cradle of the uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak in February 2011.

Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood, which propelled him to power in a June election, hope to end the crisis by pushing through the new constitution hastily adopted by the drafting assembly on Friday. The next day the assembly handed the text to Mursi, who called the referendum and urged Egyptians to vote.

"The Muslim Brotherhood is determined to go ahead with its own plans regardless of everybody else. There is no compromise on the horizon," said Hassan Nafaa, a professor of political science at Cairo University.

Outside the Supreme Constitutional Court, Muslim Brotherhood supporters rallied behind the referendum date. "Yes to the constitution", declared a banner held aloft by one protester. Chants demanded the "purging of the judiciary".

The interior minister told the head of the court that the building was accessible and the protests were peaceful, according a statement from the ministry.

The protest reflected the deep suspicion harbored by Egypt's Islamists towards a court they see as a vestige of the Mubarak era. The same court ruled in June to dissolve the Muslim Brotherhood-led lower house of parliament.

Since then, several legal cases have challenged the legitimacy of the upper house of parliament and the 100-member constituent assembly that wrote the constitution.

Those against the upper house have focused on the legality of the law by which it was elected, while the constitutional assembly has faced a raft of court cases alleging that the way it was picked was illegal.

STOCK MARKET RALLIES

Mursi believes that securing approval for the new constitution in a popular referendum will bury all arguments on the legality of the constituent assembly, as well as controversy over the text it worked through the night to finish on Friday.

It will also override the November 22 decree that drew concern from Western governments and a rebellion by sections of the judiciary. The decree shielded Mursi from judicial oversight.

While the Islamists' critics, including representatives of the Christian minority, have accused the Brotherhood of trying to hijack the constitution, investors appear to have seen Mursi's moves as a harbinger of stability. They were also relieved that Saturday's mass Islamist protest went off calmly.

The main stock market index, which lost a tenth of its value in response to Mursi's November 22 decree, rallied more than 2 percent when the market opened on Sunday.

"The events that took place through the weekend, from the approval of the final draft of the constitution and the president calling a referendum, gave some confidence to investors that political stability is on track," said Mohamed Radwan of Pharos Securities, an Egyptian brokerage.

But the political opposition, made up of leftist, liberal and socialist parties, have been infuriated by what they see as the Brotherhood's attempt to ram through a constitution that does not enjoy national consensus.

Mursi's opponents warn of deeper polarization ahead.

"LET EVERYONE HAVE THEIR SAY"

Leading opposition figure Mohamed ElBaradei said on Twitter that the "struggle will continue" over a draft constitution that "undermines basic freedoms".

Liberal figures, including former Arab League chief Amr Moussa, pulled out of the constituent assembly last month, as did Christian representatives.

The draft constitution contains Islamist-flavored language which opponents say could be used to whittle away human rights and stifle criticism. It forbids blasphemy and "insults to any person", does not explicitly uphold women's rights and demands respect for "religion, traditions and family values".

The New York-based Human Rights Watch said it protected some rights while undermining others.

The text limits presidents to two four-year terms, requires parliamentary approval for their choice of prime minister, and introduces some civilian oversight of the military - although not enough for critics. Mubarak ruled for three decades.

Mursi described it as a constitution that fulfilled the goals of the revolution that ended Mubarak's rule. "Let everyone -- those who agree and those who disagree -- go to the referendum to have their say," he said.

The Islamists are gambling that they will be able to secure a "yes" vote by mobilizing their core support base.

Nafaa of Cairo University said the constitution would likely be approved by a slim majority. "But in this case, how can you run a country with a disputed constitution - a constitution not adopted by consensus?" he asked.

(Writing by Tom Perry; Editing by Alistair Lyon and Roger Atwood)

Read More..

French minister says 'no confidence' in steel tycoon Mittal

PARIS: A French minister cast doubt Sunday on whether the world's top steelmaker ArcelorMittal would keep its end of the bargain after a compromise deal on a key plant that Paris had threatened to nationalise.

The dispute over the closure of blast furnaces at the Florange plant risked damaging France's image among investors, after a virulent attack by a minister on the company owned by Indian-born steel tycoon Lakshmi Mittal.

"There has been an agreement but there is no confidence," French Ecology Minister Delphine Batho told the iTele network.

"Mittal has never kept his promises in the past," she said. "We are absolutely mobilised and the arm-wrestling with Mittal will continue to ensure that the pledges are respected."

Unions also echoed her fears, while Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault defended the compromise deal.

"Our negotiations with Mittal had been bitter and difficult because we refused vague statements and wanted unconditional and specific commitments," Ayrault told the regional daily Le Republicain Lorrain.

The head of the French employers federation Medef, Laurence Parisot, also hailed the accord, saying it was "very clear: there is no job loss".

She added, however, that the doubts regarding Mittal's good faith were "dramatic", as union representatives voiced their concerns.

"The government's decision has created a lot of disappointment and left a bitter taste," said Jean-Claude Mailly, secretary general of Force Ouvriere, one of France's top three unions.

Mailly told the weekly Journal du Dimanche that he was "very sceptical" about Mittal's promises.

"He had (earlier) promised 320 million for Florange but we never saw the cash," he said.

"We have the feeling we have once again been betrayed," said Edouard Martin, a spokesman for the CFDT union at the Florange plant. "We don't trust Mittal at all."

The unions are due to meet Ayrault on Wednesday.

Ayrault announced a deal Friday in which he said ArcelorMittal had committed to invest at least 180 million euros ($234 million) over five years at the Florange site in northeastern France.

The government and the steelmaker had been waging high-stakes brinkmanship for weeks over the fate of two blast furnaces at the plant.

ArcelorMittal wanted to shut them for good because of a slump in demand for low-end steel products.

It had given the government until December 1 to find a buyer for the blast furnaces after which it would begin laying off around 630 employees.

The government responded by threatening to nationalise the entire site, which contains facilities to produce higher-end products that ArcelorMittal wanted to keep. Paris said it could not find a buyer for just the furnaces.

Under Friday's deal, the two blast furnaces ArcelorMittal had closed would be left intact until EU financing was confirmed for an existing carbon-capture project, while ArcelorMittal agreed not to proceed with forced job cuts.

A decision on funding the project will be taken on December 20, a week after it is examined by the member states, a top European source told AFP in Brussels.

The dispute had left President Francois Hollande's government caught between a pledge to protect jobs and the need to improve industrial competitiveness in the face of rising unemployment and stagnant growth.

It also came at a difficult time for ArcelorMittal. The company is saddled with a debt mountain that is expected to rise to $22 billion by the end of the year, with Moody's recently downgrading its credit rating to junk status.

- AFP/fa

Read More..

FDI in retail to safeguard international market mafias' interest: BJP

ANI Dec 1, 2012, 03.28PM IST

NEW DELHI: India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) today said retail reform is a step taken by the Congress led-federal government to safeguard the interests of the international market mafias at the cost of national interest.

BJP vice president Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi said on Saturday that voting inside the parliament would decide as to who is in favour of national interest and who is working for international interests.

"The government feels that their responsibility is to safeguard the interest of international market mafias instead of national interest and for saving the interest of international market mafias, the government is ready to compromise with national interests. Now, the parliament will decide as to who is in support of international market mafias and who are supporting national interests," said Naqvi.

The government's decision to allow foreign supermarket chains such as Wal-Mart had triggered protest not only from opposition parties but also from some of its allies.

BJP had sought debate on the issue of allowing Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the retail sector, under the rule that entails voting after discussions.

Meanwhile, Minister in the Prime Minister Office (PMO), V Narayanaswamy said the government would answer all the queries raised by the opposition parties in the parliament and will explain the benefits of allowing FDI in retail sector.

The lower house of parliament has set December 04 and 05 as the date to vote and debate on FDI. The dates for the upper house are yet to be decided.

Narayanaswamy said the government is confident of becoming victorious in the debate.

Read More..

Asperger's dropped from revised diagnosis manual

CHICAGO (AP) — The now familiar term "Asperger's disorder" is being dropped. And abnormally bad and frequent temper tantrums will be given a scientific-sounding diagnosis called DMDD. But "dyslexia" and other learning disorders remain.

The revisions come in the first major rewrite in nearly 20 years of the diagnostic guide used by the nation's psychiatrists. Changes were approved Saturday.

Full details of all the revisions will come next May when the American Psychiatric Association's new diagnostic manual is published, but the impact will be huge, affecting millions of children and adults worldwide. The manual also is important for the insurance industry in deciding what treatment to pay for, and it helps schools decide how to allot special education.

This diagnostic guide "defines what constellations of symptoms" doctors recognize as mental disorders, said Dr. Mark Olfson, a Columbia University psychiatry professor. More important, he said, it "shapes who will receive what treatment. Even seemingly subtle changes to the criteria can have substantial effects on patterns of care."

Olfson was not involved in the revision process. The changes were approved Saturday in suburban Washington, D.C., by the psychiatric association's board of trustees.

The aim is not to expand the number of people diagnosed with mental illness, but to ensure that affected children and adults are more accurately diagnosed so they can get the most appropriate treatment, said Dr. David Kupfer. He chaired the task force in charge of revising the manual and is a psychiatry professor at the University of Pittsburgh.

One of the most hotly argued changes was how to define the various ranges of autism. Some advocates opposed the idea of dropping the specific diagnosis for Asperger's disorder. People with that disorder often have high intelligence and vast knowledge on narrow subjects but lack social skills. Some who have the condition embrace their quirkiness and vow to continue to use the label.

And some Asperger's families opposed any change, fearing their kids would lose a diagnosis and no longer be eligible for special services.

But the revision will not affect their education services, experts say.

The new manual adds the term "autism spectrum disorder," which already is used by many experts in the field. Asperger's disorder will be dropped and incorporated under that umbrella diagnosis. The new category will include kids with severe autism, who often don't talk or interact, as well as those with milder forms.

Kelli Gibson of Battle Creek, Mich., who has four sons with various forms of autism, said Saturday she welcomes the change. Her boys all had different labels in the old diagnostic manual, including a 14-year-old with Asperger's.

"To give it separate names never made sense to me," Gibson said. "To me, my children all had autism."

Three of her boys receive special education services in public school; the fourth is enrolled in a school for disabled children. The new autism diagnosis won't affect those services, Gibson said. She also has a 3-year-old daughter without autism.

People with dyslexia also were closely watching for the new updated doctors' guide. Many with the reading disorder did not want their diagnosis to be dropped. And it won't be. Instead, the new manual will have a broader learning disorder category to cover several conditions including dyslexia, which causes difficulty understanding letters and recognizing written words.

The trustees on Saturday made the final decision on what proposals made the cut; recommendations came from experts in several work groups assigned to evaluate different mental illnesses.

The revised guidebook "represents a significant step forward for the field. It will improve our ability to accurately diagnose psychiatric disorders," Dr. David Fassler, the group's treasurer and a University of Vermont psychiatry professor, said after the vote.

The shorthand name for the new edition, the organization's fifth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, is DSM-5. Group leaders said specifics won't be disclosed until the manual is published but they confirmed some changes. A 2000 edition of the manual made minor changes but the last major edition was published in 1994.

Olfson said the manual "seeks to capture the current state of knowledge of psychiatric disorders. Since 2000 ... there have been important advances in our understanding of the nature of psychiatric disorders."

Catherine Lord, an autism expert at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York who was on the psychiatric group's autism task force, said anyone who met criteria for Asperger's in the old manual would be included in the new diagnosis.

One reason for the change is that some states and school systems don't provide services for children and adults with Asperger's, or provide fewer services than those given an autism diagnosis, she said.

Autism researcher Geraldine Dawson, chief science officer for the advocacy group Autism Speaks, said small studies have suggested the new criteria will be effective. But she said it will be crucial to monitor so that children don't lose services.

Other changes include:

—A new diagnosis for severe recurrent temper tantrums — disruptive mood dysregulation disorder. Critics say it will medicalize kids' who have normal tantrums. Supporters say it will address concerns about too many kids being misdiagnosed with bipolar disorder and treated with powerful psychiatric drugs. Bipolar disorder involves sharp mood swings and affected children are sometimes very irritable or have explosive tantrums.

—Eliminating the term "gender identity disorder." It has been used for children or adults who strongly believe that they were born the wrong gender. But many activists believe the condition isn't a disorder and say calling it one is stigmatizing. The term would be replaced with "gender dysphoria," which means emotional distress over one's gender. Supporters equated the change with removing homosexuality as a mental illness in the diagnostic manual, which happened decades ago.

___

AP Medical Writer Lindsey Tanner can be reached at http://www.twitter.com/LindseyTanner .

Read More..