Obama Pledges Support For Social Innovators

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Tuesday promised that the White House will do its part to support grassroots organizations that are successful in their efforts to improve communities.

"Solutions to America's challenges are being developed every day at the grassroots. And government shouldn't be supplanting those efforts, it should be supporting those efforts," Obama told representatives of nonprofit programs during a White House gathering.

The president said he was asking Domestic Policy Council director Melody Barnes and the White House innovation team to travel across the country to discover and evaluate the best programs making strides in such areas as education, training and health care.

Obama noted that the community service act he signed into law contained a $50 million innovation fund that he wanted to use to provide aid to the most promising nonprofits in the country. "We'll invest in those with the best results, that are most likely to provide a good return on our taxpayer dollars," he said.

Obama also called on foundations, businesses and philanthropists to take an active role, saying they would require matching investments from the private sector. He added that the economic stimulus package also has a $650 million "what works fund" for the Education Department that will be invested in high-impact initiatives in schools and communities.

Among the nonprofits invited to the event were the Harlem Children's Zone, which helps children get an early start on a good education; Genesys Works, a Houston-based group that trains and helps low-income high school students get entry-level technical support jobs in major corporations; Bonnie CLAC, a New Hampshire organization that helps struggling people acquire fuel-efficient, affordable and reliable vehicles; and HopeLab, a California program using technology to help young people with chronic diseases.

Source: http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_12723576?source=email&nclick_check=1

Tags: Obama, Social programs, Domestic policy council, Education department, White House, Harlem’s children, genesys works, Bonnie CLAC, HopeLab, Global Best Practice, US government policy, High impact social programs, social innovation,

Posted via email from Global Business News

Healthcare Makes A Miraculous Recovery

Obama gets drug companies to cut senior drug bills by $80 billion. Suddenly, his plan is no longer dead

WASHINGTON -- Last week didn't bring much good news for the Obama administration's drive to overhaul healthcare. Congressional budget wonks announced the draft legislation the Senate was working on would cost more than anyone expected; the industry players the White House had worked hard to bring into the reform process started grumbling about the whole thing. By the weekend, conventional wisdom inside the Beltway had more or less already declared reform dead.

Which made Monday's announcement by President Obama that the lobbying arm for the nation's drug manufacturers had agreed to cut the costs of drugs for seniors by $80 billion over the next decade something of a confusing spectacle. If the chances for getting anything done on healthcare had dwindled away, what was the president doing bringing back his campaign slogans -- and, more confusingly still, smiling confidently?

"To those who, here in Washington, who've grown accustomed to 'sky is falling' prognoses and the certainties that we cannot get this done, I have to repeat -- revive an old saying we had from the campaign: Yes, we can," Obama said. "We are going to get this done."

So the deepest significance of the deal between the government and PhRMA, the drug lobby, may well have been what it meant politically. Yes, the announcement means Medicare patients will no longer have to deal with an odd "doughnut hole" in their drug coverage; before Monday, the government pays for seniors' prescriptions if their annual cost is under $2,700 or more than $6,100, but not if the price is in between.

But more important, the news gave the administration a public relations victory -- the president just saved the government, and seniors, $80 billion -- to kick off a week where Obama plans to play offense, not defense, on healthcare. On Tuesday, the president will hold a midday news conference, where he'll have a chance to pitch his plans, and on Wednesday, the White House will host ABC News all day, culminating in a live, prime-time town hall on health reform.

"There was this feeding frenzy last week," one administration official admitted. But White House aides -- who like to insist that they're not paying attention to day-by-day news cycle battles, even as they manage events carefully to fit them -- aren't close to panicking yet. "There will be lots of developments every day about little provisions, and ultimately [very little of it] matters until you get a final bill."

Obama certainly didn't seem ruffled on Monday. He repeated the administration's main theme about healthcare -- you may like the coverage you have, but if the current system isn't changed, you won't be able to afford it for much longer. "Our goal -- our imperative -- is to reduce the punishing inflation in healthcare costs while improving patient care," Obama said. "And to do that we're going to have to work together to root out waste and inefficiencies that may pad the bottom line of the insurance industry, but add nothing to the health of our nation."

Among healthcare policy experts, that's become common knowledge, but the administration isn't finding it as easy to sell to the rest of the country -- or even to Congress. Obama has taken to quoting liberally from a New Yorker article about healthcare cost disparities in two neighboring Texas cities; administration officials have realized the story lays out their case pretty well. What's tricky about pitching the reform plan is that surveys show most voters actually like the care they have. In the last two weeks, Democratic and Republican pollsters have both reported fairly broad satisfaction with existing healthcare options. Obama's challenge is to convince people the system will soon gobble up an unsustainable share of the budget -- both on the federal level and where their own paychecks are concerned -- unless it's changed.

That task won't be easy, but advocates say it's certainly still possible. "People need to put aside the instant gratification bug and appreciate that it's going to take a while to get through the details," said Jackie Schechner, a spokeswoman for Healthcare for America Now, a union-backed group pushing for reform. Even the price tag doesn't have to scare voters off. "They say it's expensive to fix it, and then somebody gets their next insurance bill." Republicans, though, plan to focus their rhetoric on how much the reforms would cost -- more than $1.6 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office, though that number is likely to change once the legislation is finished.

Meanwhile, the aspect of the reform that Congress is most upset about doesn't seem to be particularly controversial with actual voters: including a government-funded insurance option to compete with private plans. A CBS News/New York Times poll found 72 percent of respondents liked the idea. "Free puppies and ice cream isn't as popular as that," the administration official joked.

Even Republicans had to acknowledge that the public seems less than terrified. "Indeed, 'government bureaucrats' are scarcely less appealing than 'insurance bureaucrats," a GOP polling memo by Whit Ayres and Ed Gillespie reported on Monday. By the end of this week, the pundits may start declaring healthcare reform is as good as done. Last week's panic was probably premature. This week's celebration will be, too.

Source: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/23/healthcare/index.html?source=rss&aim=/news/feature

Tags: Obama, Congressional Budget office, Phrma, Pharma lobby groups, Big Pharma, Healthcare for America now, GOP, New Yorker, Global Economic News, Pollsters, Senate, Beltway,

Posted via email from Global Business News

US Draws Line With China On Climate Technology

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Access to green technology is becoming a growing stumbling block in global efforts to fight climate change, with US lawmakers bristling at what they see as China's attempt to "steal" US know-how.

China and India have led calls for developed nations to share technology to help them battle global warming as the clock ticks to a December meeting in Copenhagen meant to seal a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. The US House of Representatives this month unanimously voted to make it US policy to prevent the Copenhagen treaty from "weakening" US intellectual property rights on a wind, solar and other eco-friendly technologies.

Congressman Rick Larsen, a member of President Barack Obama's Democratic Party who authored the measure, said the United States was caught between concern both over the climate and its soaring trade deficit with China. "The US can be part of China's solution for the problems that they admittedly have with energy efficiency and emissions. And I think legitimately we want to be part of that solution -- we're the two largest emitters of C02 in the world," Larsen said.

"But we need to couple being part of that solution with making it part of the solution on the trade deficit as well," he said ahead of the measure's approval. Representative Mark Kirk, a Republican who joined Larsen on a recent trip to China, said that climate change was the most contentious issue during talks with Chinese leaders.

Kirk said the Chinese essentially were seeking "the stealing of all intellectual property" related to energy efficiency and climate change. Kirk warned that China's position could change the political dynamics in Washington, where promoters of a bill to force emission cuts say the United States stands to create millions of jobs in a new green economy. "Right now a number of green industries like the climate change bill coming out. But if an international treaty sanctions the theft of their intellectual property, then there will be hardly any green jobs built in the United States," Kirk said.

The United States is the only major industrialized nation to reject the Kyoto Protocol, with former president George W. Bush saying it was unfair by making no demands of fast-growing developing nations such as China and India. Despite a recession, President Barack Obama has vowed to work to halt the planet's warming, which UN scientists warn will threaten severe weather and the extinction of plant and animal species later this century if unchecked.

More than 180 countries promised at a December 2007 meeting in Bali, Indonesia to take part in the next global treaty with a "common but differentiated responsibility" for developed and developing economies. But 12 days of talks this month in Bonn came up with no visible progress, with top Chinese negotiator Li Gao accusing rich nations of reneging on sharing technology and watering down commitments to cut emissions.

"There is an attempt to obliterate the principle of 'common but differentiated responsibility' and to split up the developing countries," Li told China's state Xinhua news agency.

Shyam Saran, India's envoy on climate change, also criticized rich nations, which he said bore the historic responsibility for climate change. India has proposed setting up global "innovation centers" to work on green technology.

A report last month by experts for the UN climate body called for a "balanced" approach, stressing the importance of intellectual property rights but saying all nations needed to accept the terms.

Technology transfer "is certainly a big and important question that might be a roadblock" in global negotiations, said Daniel Kessler of Greenpeace.

The environmental group has called for public and private funds on climate change to be pooled into an independent global body, funded to the tune of at least 140 billion dollars a year. But such funding may prove hard to come by. The European Union, champion of the Kyoto Protocol, has come under fire from environmentalists for declining to put a figure on climate aid, saying it is waiting to see other nations' proposals.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090623/bs_afp/uschinaclimatewarmingtechnology_20090623022226

Tags: China, USA, Obama, Kyoto Protocol, EU, Greenpeace, Xinhua, Li Gao, Daniel Kessler, Shyam Saran, Global Development News, US House of Representatives, Copenhagen, Bali, Mark Kirk, Rick Larsen, Intellectual Property, Global Best Practice,

Posted via email from Global Business News

Obama to Offer Benefits to Gay Partners of Federal Employees

The decision comes as many in the gay community have voiced disappointment with the president, especially after the administration filed a legal brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act.

(Reporting from San Francisco and Los Angeles) - Faced with growing anger among gay and lesbian supporters, President Obama is expected tonight to extend healthcare and other benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees.

His action is a significant advance for gay rights and comes days after the Obama administration sparked outrage by filing a legal brief defending the law forbidding federal recognition of same-sex marriage. Obama opposed the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act during his presidential campaign.

It was not immediately clear whether Obama's latest decision would mollify his critics. Some offered only grudging support Tuesday night after learning of the president's intentions. "This is a good thing for the small percentage of . . . people that work for the federal government, but it leaves out the vast majority of people who are in same-sex relationships," said Geoff Kors, head of Equality California, one of the state's largest gay rights groups.

As a candidate for president, Obama was a staunch supporter of gay and lesbian rights. He called for repealing the federal Defense of Marriage Act and also the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which forbids openly gay men and women from serving in the armed forces. He promised to help lead the fight.

Since taking office, however, Obama has disappointed many gay activists by not just keeping silent but, lately, by defending some of the policies he criticized. After months of grumbling, the anger exploded in public denunciations this week after the administration filed its legal brief in Orange County federal court.

"Anyway you cut it, it is a sickening document," David Mixner, a longtime gay rights advocate, wrote in a blog posting that echoed the sentiments expressed by many in the gay community. "What in the hell were they thinking?" In a statement the day of the filing, administration attorneys said Obama considered the marriage ban discriminatory and wanted it rescinded but was legally obligated to defend the law as long as it remained in force.

Mixner, one of several gay activists who withdrew support from a big Democratic fundraising bash next week, offered a measured response to Obama's planned announcement. "I am thrilled for the federal employees," he said. "I also will be especially thrilled when [the Defense of Marriage Act] is repealed."

Although there is some sympathy for the president's position -- "he has enormous stuff on his plate that requires a lot of political capital," said Steve Elmendorf, a gay Democratic strategist -- many think the concerns of gays and lesbians are once again being shunted to second- and third-tier status.

Ken Sherrill, a Hunter College political scientist and gay activist, recalled how the Clinton administration started with great hope but ended in disappointment when the president, for tactical reasons, retreated on gay rights. President Clinton approved both the marriage bill and the policy preventing gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

"There's a fear that Obama will prove to be a heartbreaker as well," Sherrill said. A White House spokesman said Tuesday that the president was not retreating from his campaign promises. "The president remains fully committed to the . . . proposals he made," Adam Abrams said. "We have already begun work on many of these issues."

Tonight's Oval Office ceremony casts an especially bright light on the president's action and seemed intended to tamp down anger within the gay community. The extent of the benefits coverage and the cost to the government were not immediately available.

Obama has reached out in other ways. He named openly gay men to head the Export-Import Bank and the Office of Personnel Management. The State Department promised to give partners of gay and lesbian diplomats benefits such as diplomatic passports and language training. In April, gay parents were invited for the first time to bring their children to the annual White House Easter Egg Roll.

But critics say those gestures are meager beside the stack of grievances that started accumulating even before Obama took office. Many were angered when he picked pastor Rick Warren, a prominent opponent of same-sex marriage, to deliver the invocation at his inauguration. Then came the decision to discharge Army linguist Dan Choi after he declared in a cable television interview that he was gay.

The administration also intervened with the Supreme Court and opposed efforts to overturn the law forbidding gays from serving openly in the military. The justices sided with the president, declining to hear a constitutional challenge. White House officials say they want Congress to repeal the policy outright instead of having to intervene on a case-by-case basis.

Nothing, however, matches the outrage provoked by last week's court filing in Santa Ana supporting the Defense of Marriage Act. The fact that the brief was filed during Gay Pride Month, which Obama saluted with a formal proclamation, only compounded the sense of insult.

"You have some appointments that have been good and a proclamation," said Sherrill, who has written extensively on the history of the gay rights movement. "And then two tangible areas where the administration has done something wrongheaded and offensive. Doing nothing at all would have been a helluva lot better."

Obama's approach to gay issues seems guided by the unhappy experience of Clinton, who started his administration with an unsuccessful fight to open the military to gay and lesbian service members. Clinton lost the battle -- the result was "don't ask, don't tell," which allows gays to serve so long as they keep their sexual orientation a secret. The outcome angered many on both sides of the issue. Worse, Clinton squandered much of the goodwill that followed his election.

Now, however, many feel Obama may have learned the lesson too well. "Things have changed in the country," said Paul Begala, a top advisor during Clinton's early White House years. "I think some of the people in the White House are slow to apprehend that."

He cited gays in the military as a good example. When Clinton was pushing his overhaul policy, only 43% of Americans backed the change. Today, nearly 70% of Americans favor military service by openly gay men and women. Others noted that there are no openly gay men or women among Obama's top advisors, and suggested that may result in a certain political tone-deafness. In many ways, some said, it appears as though Washington is lagging the rest of the country in the debate over gay rights.

"They're talking about hate-crimes legislation and 'don't ask, don't tell' while people are getting married in Iowa," said Elmendorf, who spent years as a top aide on Capitol Hill. "It seems on this subject the politicians are a little bit behind where the American people are."

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-na-obamagays17-2009jun17,0,1003868.story?track=rss

Tags: Obama, Gay Pride Month, Bill Clinton, Defense of Marriage act, Same-Sex partners, Employee Benefits, Military, Gays in the military, Don’t ask don’t tell policy, Capitol Hill, HR, Human Capital,

Posted via email from Global Business News

US Asks Twitter to Stay Online Because of Iran Vote

NEW YORK (AFP) – The US government took the unusual step of asking Twitter to delay a planned maintenance outage because of its use as a communications tool by Iranians following their disputed election, according to a senior official.

The request highlighted the Obama administration's Web-savvy and the power of social networks such as Twitter and Facebook in organizing protests over the election results in the face of a ban by Iranian authorities on other media. But it also seemed to run counter to President Barack Obama's public efforts not to appear to be meddling in Iran's internal affairs.

Twitter delayed Monday's scheduled tuneup, which would have taken place during daylight hours in Iran, and rescheduled it for Tuesday but said the decision was made with its network provider, not the State Department. The micro-blogging site went down around 5:00 pm (2100 GMT) on Tuesday and was back online about an hour later.

A State Department official in Washington said Twitter had been asked to delay Monday's shutdown because it was being used as "an important means of communications" in Iran. The official told reporters on condition of anonymity that Twitter was all the more important because the Iranian government had shut down other websites, cell phones, and newspapers.

"One of the areas where people are able to get out the word is through Twitter," the official said. "They announced they were going to shut down their system for maintenance and we asked them not to." Twitter co-founder Biz Stone, in a blog post, noted the State Department request but said the decision to delay the outage was made with Twitter's network provider, NTT America.

"When we worked with our network provider yesterday to reschedule this planned maintenance, we did so because events in Iran were tied directly to the growing significance of Twitter as an important communication and information network," Stone said.

"We decided together to move the date. It made sense for Twitter and for NTT America to keep services active during this highly visible global event," he said. Stone said "it's humbling to think that our two-year old company could be playing such a globally meaningful role that State officials find their way toward highlighting our significance.

"However, it's important to note that the State Department does not have access to our decision making process," he said. "Nevertheless, we can both agree that the open exchange of information is a positive force in the world." Stone also said the maintenance was a success and Twitter's network capacity had been "significantly increased."

State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said meanwhile that the United States does not intend to meddle in Iranian politics. "We don't want to be seen as interfering," he said. Obama himself issued the same message Tuesday, saying: "It is not productive, given the history of US-Iranian relations to be seen as ... meddling in Iranian elections."

Kelly went on to say that new media provided a good source of information for the US government, which has had no diplomatic relations with Iran for three decades. "We're of course monitoring the situation through a number of different media, including social media networks like Facebook and Twitter," he said.

Another Twitter co-founder, Jack Dorsey, speaking at a two-day conference in New York on Tuesday about the micro-blogging service, described the usage of Twitter by Iranians as "amazing." "Just think about what's occurring over there and the accessibility that we all have to see this unfold in real time," he said. "It's amazing. It's huge."

"Suddenly everything that's happening over there feels extremely close," he said. "It feels approachable. And that's really important and that is really the greatest success of what Twitter is."

"If ever there was a time that Twitter mattered it was this past weekend in Iran," added Jeff Pulver, organizer of the 140 Character Conference.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090617/ts_alt_afp/iranuspoliticsunrestinternettwitter_20090617014955

Tags: US State Department, Obama, Biz Stone, Twitter, NTT America, Jack Dorsey, 140 Character Conference, Jeff Pulver, Iran, Iranians, Facebook, Election, Election Protests, Global Development News,

Posted via email from Global Business News