House passes $9.7B Sandy relief bill

The House today passed a bill approving more than $9 billion in aid for regions impacted by superstorm Sandy, the first of two Sandy relief measures making their way through Congress between now and the end of the month.

The measure, which allows FEMA to temporarily increase the National Flood Insurance program's borrowing limit by $9.7 billion, needed two thirds support to pass through the House.

On January 15, the first full day of legislative business on Capitol Hill, House Speaker John Boehner is expected to bring up a vote for additional Sandy relief measures totaling the remaining $51 billion requested by President Obama.

The House was expected to vote on a Sandy relief package earlier this week, before the close of the 112th Congress. But after the House passed a Democrat-crafted deal to avert the so-called "fiscal cliff" -- a deal many Republicans disliked due to a lack of spending cuts and an increase in tax rates -- Boehner pulled the Sandy legislation at the last minute.

His decision was met with outrage on both sides of the aisle, and Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie lashed out at the speaker in a press conference the following day. Several House Republicans also threatened to vote against Boehner's bid to be re-elected Speaker of the House.

In light of the backlash, Boehner quickly scheduled the $9.7 billion flood insurance package for today and pledged to conduct a vote on the remaining funds on January 15.

The first portion of Sandy aid was expected to pass, though there were objections among conservative Republicans. The Club for Growth sent out a press release urging House members to vote "no" on the bill, arguing that "Congress should not allow the federal government to be involved in the flood insurance industry in the first place, let alone expand the national flood insurance program's authority."

Republican Jeb Hensarling, R-Tex., also expressed his opposition to the legislation, citing general objections to the national flood insurance program as well as a desire for the $9.7 billion to be offset by reductions elsewhere.

"There is no doubt that Hurricane Sandy rendered unspeakable damage to both lives and property on our East Coast," he said in remarks on the House floor. "The tragic reality [is] the national flood insurance program is broke. It is beyond broke... Members are faced with a tragic choice of not paying contractual claims to victims who pay premiums or adding $9.7 billion to an an insane national debt that threatens our national security, our economic well-being, and our children's future."

He continued: "Emergency bills like this should not come to the floor without offsets to pay for it or structural reforms to ensure that taxpayer bailouts are never needed again. Regrettably, less than 24 hours into a new congress, there is simply not time for this."

Democrats fiercely defended the legislation, and continued to blast Republicans for stalling on the original vote. They also expressed some concern that the bill could be held up by the Senate, which is expected to pass the package by voice vote this afternoon.

"I am concerned that whatever here passes in the United States Senate," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in a press conference today. "That's why I thought, really in the interest of confidence-building, comfort to those affected by loss of life, loss of home, loss of job, loss of community, character of their community, that it would have been important just to pass that bill."

"The victims of superstorm sandy can wait no longer. It's been 11 weeks," added Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., in remarks during debate over the bill. "Haven't they suffered and waited long enough?"

Read More..

Quadruple Amputee Gets Two New Hands on Life

It's the simplest thing, the grasp of one hand in another. But Lindsay Ess will never see it that way, because her hands once belonged to someone else.

Growing up in Texas and Virginia, Lindsay, 29, was always one of the pretty girls. She went to college, did some modeling and started building a career in fashion, with an eye on producing fashion shows.

Then she lost her hands and feet.

Watch the full show in a special edition of "Nightline," "To Hold Again," TONIGHT at 11:35 p.m. ET on ABC

When she was 24 years old, Lindsay had just graduated from Virginia Commonwealth University's well-regarded fashion program when she developed a blockage in her small intestine from Crohn's Disease. After having surgery to correct the problem, an infection took over and shut down her entire body. To save her life, doctors put her in a medically-induced coma. When she came out of the coma a month later, still in a haze, Lindsay said she knew something was wrong with her hands and feet.

"I would look down and I would see black, almost like a body that had decomposed," she said.

The infection had turned her extremities into dead tissue. Still sedated, Lindsay said she didn't realize what that meant at first.

"There was a period of time where they didn't tell me that they had to amputate, but somebody from the staff said, 'Oh honey, you know what they are going to do to your hands, right?' That's when I knew," she said.

After having her hands and feet amputated, Lindsay adapted. She learned how to drink from a cup, brush her teeth and even text on her cellphone with her arms, which were amputated just below the elbow.

"The most common questions I get are, 'How do you type,'" she said. "It's just like chicken-pecking."

PHOTOS: Lindsay Ess Gets New Hands

Despite her progress, Lindsay said she faced challenges being independent. Her mother, Judith Aronson, basically moved back into her daughter's life to provide basic care, including bathing, dressing and feeding. Having also lost her feet, Lindsay needed her mother to help put on her prosthetic legs.

"I've accepted the fact that my feet are gone, that's acceptable to me," Lindsay said. "My hands [are] not. It's still not. In my dreams I always have my hands."

Through her amputation recovery, Lindsay discovered a lot of things about herself, including that she felt better emotionally by not focusing on the life that was gone and how much she hated needing so much help but that she also truly depends on it.

"I'm such an independent person," she said. "But I'm also grateful that I have a mother like that, because what could I do?"

Lindsay said she found that her prosthetic arms were a struggle.

"These prosthetics are s---," she said. "I can't do anything with them. I can't do anything behind my head. They are heavy. They are made for men. They are claws, they are not feminine whatsoever."

For the next couple of years, Lindsay exercised diligently as part of the commitment she made to qualify for a hand transplant, which required her to be in shape. But the tough young woman now said she saw her body in a different way now.

Read More..

Why U.S. lives under the shadow of 'W'

Julian Zelizer says former President George W. Bush's key tax and homeland security policies survive in the age of Obama

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Julian Zelizer: For all the criticism Bush got, two key policies have survived


• He says fiscal cliff pact perpetuates nearly all of Bush's tax cuts


• Obama administration has largely followed Bush's homeland security policy, he says


• Zelizer: By squeezing revenues, Bush tax cuts will put pressure on spending

Editor's note: Julian Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. He is the author of "Jimmy Carter" and of "Governing America."

Princeton, New Jersey (CNN) -- Somewhere in Texas, former President George W. Bush is smiling.

Although some Democrats are pleased that taxes will now go up on the wealthiest Americans, the recent deal to avert the fiscal cliff entrenches, rather than dismantles, one of Bush's signature legacies -- income tax cuts. Ninety-nine percent of American households were protected from tax increases, aside from the expiration of the reduced rate for the payroll tax.

Julian Zelizer

In the final deal, Congress and President Barack Obama agreed to preserve most of the Bush tax cuts, including exemptions on the estate tax.

When Bush started his term in 2001, many of his critics dismissed him as a lightweight, the son of a former president who won office as result of his family's political fortune and a controversial decision by the Supreme Court on the 2000 election.

But what has become clear in hindsight, regardless of what one thinks of Bush and his politics, is that his administration left behind a record that has had a huge impact on American politics, a record that will not easily be dismantled by future presidents.

The twin pillars of Bush's record were counterterrorism policies and tax cuts. During his first term, it became clear that Obama would not dismantle most of the homeland security apparatus put into place by his predecessor. Despite a campaign in 2008 that focused on flaws with the nation's response to 9/11, Obama has kept most of the counterterrorism program intact.

Opinion: The real issue is runaway spending

In some cases, the administration continues to aggressively use tactics his supporters once decried, such as relying on renditions to detain terrorist suspects who are overseas, as The Washington Post reported this week. In other areas, the administration has expanded the war on terrorism, including the broader use of drone strikes to kill terrorists.

Now come taxes and spending.

With regard to the Bush tax cuts, Obama had promised to overturn a policy that he saw as regressive. Although he always said that he would protect the middle class from tax increases, Obama criticized Bush for pushing through Congress policies that bled the federal government of needed revenue and benefited the wealthy.

In 2010, Obama agreed to temporarily extend all the tax cuts. Though many Democrats were furious, Obama concluded that he had little political chance to overturn them and he seemed to agree with Republicans that reversing them would hurt an economy limping along after a terrible recession.

Opinion: Time to toot horn for George H.W. Bush

With the fiscal cliff deal, Obama could certainly claim more victories than in 2010. Taxes for the wealthiest Americans will go up. Congress also agreed to extend unemployment compensation and continue higher payments to Medicare providers.

But beneath all the sound and fury is the fact that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, for most Americans, are now a permanent part of the legislative landscape. (In addition, middle class Americans will breathe a sigh of relief that Congress has permanently fixed the Alternative Minimum Tax, which would have hit many of them with a provision once designed to make sure that the wealthy paid their fair share.)

As Michigan Republican Rep. Dave Camp remarked, "After more than a decade of criticizing these tax cuts, Democrats are finally joining Republicans in making them permanent." Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the new legislation will increase the deficit by $4 trillion over the next 10 years.

The tax cuts have significant consequences on all of American policy.

Opinion: Christie drops bomb on GOP leaders

Most important, the fact that a Democratic president has now legitimated the moves of a Republican administration gives a bipartisan imprimatur to the legitimacy of the current tax rates.

Although some Republicans signed on to raising taxes for the first time in two decades, the fact is that Democrats have agreed to tax rates which, compared to much of the 20th century, are extraordinarily low. Public perception of a new status quo makes it harder for presidents to ever raise taxes on most Americans to satisfy the revenue needs for the federal government.

At the same time, the continuation of reduced taxes keeps the federal government in a fiscal straitjacket. As a result, politicians are left to focus on finding the money to pay for existing programs or making cuts wherever possible.

New innovations in federal policy that require substantial revenue are just about impossible. To be sure, there have been significant exceptions, such as the Affordable Care Act. But overall, bold policy departures that require significant amounts of general revenue are harder to come by than in the 1930s or 1960s.

Republicans thus succeed with what some have called the "starve the beast" strategy of cutting government by taking away its resources. Since the long-term deficit only becomes worse, Republicans will continue to have ample opportunity to pressure Democrats into accepting spending cuts and keep them on the defense with regards to new government programs.

Politics: Are the days of Congress 'going big' over?

With his income tax cuts enshrined, Bush can rest comfortably that much of the policy world he designed will remain intact and continue to define American politics. Obama has struggled to work within the world that Bush created, and with this legislation, even with his victories, he has demonstrated that the possibilities for change have been much more limited than he imagined when he ran in 2008 or even in 2012.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Julian Zelizer.

Read More..

Football: AC Milan storm off pitch after racist chants

ROME: AC Milan striker Kevin-Prince Boateng stormed off the pitch on Thursday forcing the suspension of a friendly match against fourth-tier Pro Patria after racist chants from a group of fans for the opposing team.

"Pulling out was the right choice with something like this," Milan trainer Massimiliano Allegri said after the match was stopped in the 26th minute.

"We have to stop it with these uncouth acts. Italy as a country has to improve and become more civilised and intelligent," he told reporters.

Squad captain Massimo Ambrosini said: "That was intolerable, it was only a friendly! We couldn't have gone on like that, we had to give a signal."

Boateng picked up the ball, kicked it towards the Pro Patria stands and walked off the pitch of Pro Patria's home town of Busto Arsizio.

His teammates joined him despite Pro Patria players begging them to stay and whistles from many of the Pro Patria fans against the racists.

The 25-year-old Boateng, who has Ghanaian citizenship and played for Ghana at the 2010 World Cup, was previously at Tottenham, Borussia Dortmund and Portsmouth.

- AFP/jc

Read More..

For new Congress, bar couldn't be lower

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• The fiscal cliff was averted, but issues like the the sequester and debt ceiling await


• The new Congress will vote on $60 billion in aid to Superstorm Sandy victims


• House Speaker John Boehner canceled the vote on the aid in light of the fiscal cliff vote


• Democrats gain seats in both chambers, but Republicans keep control of the House

(CNN) -- A new Congress takes office Thursday, and many of the same difficult issues that snagged the last one will fall into its lap.

President Barack Obama has signed into law a bill to avert the fiscal cliff, a deal worked out after lengthy, grinding friction between Democrats and Republicans. The political theatrics kept Americans and people around the world on pins and needles over how the outcome would affect the shaky global economy.

But the sequester -- a set of automatic spending cuts of up to 10% to the budgets of most agencies and programs -- lies ahead. It has been pushed back to the end of February.

At about the same time, a decision on the debt ceiling that the last Congress postponed will be due.

As an early order of business, the new Congress will address the massive aid package for Superstorm Sandy victims. House Speaker John Boehner scrapped a vote to approve the $60 billion measure late Tuesday in the wake of the vote on the fiscal cliff bill, triggering irate reactions from politicians in both parties from New York and New Jersey.

Republican Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey attacked his own party members in Washington, blasting "the toxic internal politics of the House majority."

A vote on $9 billion for immediate aid is now set for Friday, with the balance of $51 billion due for consideration January 15.

Stocks start 2013 with broad gains

There have been subtle changes in the makeup of the lawmaking bodies.

Although Republicans retained control of the House after the 2012 elections, Democrats gained seats in that chamber. They also expanded their control of the Senate.

Republicans will fill 234 seats in the new House, down from 242. Democrats will take 201, up from 193.

In the Senate, voters handed two former GOP seats to Democrats for a new balance of 55-45. The 55 Democratic seats include two independents who caucus with the party.

The small shift in numbers could make a difference in votes across party lines.

How much more you'll pay under fiscal cliff deal

The House will vote on its speaker position, and their are questions about whether Boehner will receive the gavel again in light of recent tensions.

The House vote on a deal approved by the Senate also split the parties, but enough Republicans crossed party lines for the bill to pass handily with a 257-167 vote. On Tuesday night, 172 Democrats and 85 Republicans favored the bill; 16 Democrats and 151 Republicans opposed it.

Congress also passed a bill approving defense expenditures, which the president signed into law.

A number of moderates on both sides lost their seats in the House, which is likely to make the lawmaking body even more polarized.

Partisan banter and stern words form the president preceded the convening of the 113th Congress on 1/3/13.

Before leaving Washington for Hawaii on Tuesday night, Obama warned Congress that he will not tolerate another act of prolonged brinksmanship.

"While I will negotiate over many things, I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they've already racked up through the laws that they've passed," he said.

Hours later Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell swiped back at the president in an op-ed piece he wrote for Yahoo News.

"I have news for him," McConnell wrote. "The moment that he and virtually every elected Democrat in Washington signed off on the terms of the current arrangement, it was the last word on taxes. That debate is over."

But to get through the debt ceiling, the self-imposed limit on how much the U.S. government may borrow, there will have to be debate over spending, he insisted.

The ceiling of $16.394 trillion has already been reached.

CNN's Josh Levs, Tom Watkins, Holly Yan, Robert Yoon and Ashley Killough contributed to this report

Read More..

Will GOP unite before next fiscal fight?

Anyone who thought Republicans were too focused on spending cuts in the "fiscal cliff" negotiations should brace themselves for what's next.

Tuesday's votes on the "fiscal cliff" deal divided the GOP: More than half of House Republicans voted against it, primarily complaining about its lack of spending cuts. Yet on the Senate side, all but three Republicans supported the measure.

A couple of the Senate's most conservative Republicans say they understand why their House counterparts opposed the bill -- it's littered with special-interest giveaways, was secretly drafted in the dead of night and extends spending on programs like unemployment insurance without paying for them. At the same time, those senators say, those House Republicans may have been too concerned about their outsider, tea party reputations to accept the overwhelming upside of the bill -- making the Bush-era tax rates permanent for nearly all Americans.

"This is not meant to reduce the deficit," Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., told CBSNews.com about the "fiscal cliff" deal. "This was meant to reduce taxes. The deficit is a different issue."

The nation's spending habit, however, is exactly the issue that will be on the table in a matter of weeks from now, when Congress will have to raise the debt limit, as well as reconsider the "sequester" spending cuts that were only put on hold for two months in the "fiscal cliff" bill.

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., another conservative who voted for the "fiscal cliff" deal, said voters can expect to see "a strongly united Republican party coming out of this."

"I think what the American public is going to see is President Obama's campaign pledge," he said. "He made the rich pay their fair share -- he got that. Now it's very legitimate for Republicans to demand and see what is the other part of his 'balanced approach'... His tax increase, at most, will close 5 percent of the deficit. What's the other 95 percent? What's his plan to save Social Security? To save Medicare?"

A few weeks ago, many hoped the "fiscal cliff" negotiations would result in a balanced, comprehensive approach to the nation's fiscal issues. Everything seemed to be on the table: entitlement reform, the debt limit, strategic spending cuts with which to replace the sequester, and new tax revenue.

Play Video

Repairing the Republican party

The ultimate deal, brokered by Vice President Joe Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was much more limited. Still, some conservatives saw plenty to be pleased with.

Inhofe said he was "in shock" Congress managed to pass an extension of the farm bill, a permanent fix to the alternative minimum tax, the "doc fix" for Medicare reimbursement rates and an extension of the child tax credit, among other things. He also hailed the limited increases in the estate tax and the capital gains tax, which could have gone much higher. "The only bad thing in this thing from a conservative standpoint: they've expanded unemployment insurance too far," he said.

That didn't stop right-wing commentators from berating Republicans for giving up on spending cuts. "The Republican Establishment in Washington, DC should be burned to the ground and salt spread on the remains," RedState.com blogger Erick Erickson wrote. Columnist Charles Krauthammer called the bill "a complete surrender on everything."

Inhofe chalked up the angry punditry to "demagoguing," noting that he and others who supported the measure are regularly named some of the Senate's most conservative members.

On the House side, Inhofe said, "Most of the ones that would be categorized as tea partiers are those who got in [to office] being critical of the establishment and sincerely wanting less government, less taxes, less spending. We all feel that way, but they were a little afraid they'd be portrayed as insiders, thinking, 'The electorate back home elected me to do something the establishment is not doing.'"

1/2

Read More..

Senate Swears in Historic 20th Female Senator

Today the Senate will make history, swearing in a record-breaking 20 female senators -- four Republicans and 16 Democrats -- in office.

As the 113th Congress is sworn in today on Capitol Hill, ABC "World News" anchor Diane Sawyer has an exclusive joint interview with the historic class of female senators.

Diane Sawyer's complete interview will air on "World News" and "Nightline" tonight.

"I can't tell you the joy that I feel in my heart to look at these 20 gifted and talented women from two different parties, different zip codes to fill this room," Sen. Barbara Mikulksi, D-Md., said while surrounded by the group of women senators. "In all of American history only 16 women had served. Now there are 20 of us."

Senator-elect Deb Fischer, R-Neb., today becomes the first women to be elected as a senator in Nebraska.

"It was an historic election," Fischer said, "But what was really fun about it were the number of mothers and fathers who brought their daughters up to me during the campaign and said, "Can we get a picture? Can we get a picture?' Because people realize it and -- things do change, things do change."

Tammy Baldwin Becomes First Openly Gay Senator Watch Video

Elizabeth Warren Wins Massachusetts Senate Race Watch Video

The women senators all agree that women will be getting things done in this new Congress, a sign of optimism felt for the new Congress, after the bruising battles of the 112th Congress.

"We're in force and we're in leadership positions, but it's not just the position that we hold. I can tell you this is a can-do crowd," Mikulski said of both Democrats and Republican senators in the room. "We are today ready to be a force in American politics."

And while the number of women in the Senate today makes history, many of the women agreed that they want to keep fighting to boost those numbers.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said that women are still "underrepresented" in the Senate.

"I think that until we get to 50, we still have to fight because it's still a problem," Boxer said. "I think this class as you look around, Republicans and Democrats. ... I think that because of this new class and the caliber of the people coming and the quality of the people coming, I think that hopefully in my lifetime -- and I really do hope and pray this is the case -- we will see 50 percent. "

No Sorority Here, Even With the Will to Work Together

The cooperation does not make them a "sorority," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., says. There are real differences in ideology and personality and they don't want their gender to define them as senators.

But the women also admit that they believe having more women in the room would help in fierce negotiations, compromise and legislating on Capitol Hill, traits they say do not come as naturally to their male colleagues in the Senate. That sentiment enjoys bipartisan support among the women of the Senate.

"What I find is with all due deference to our male colleagues, that women's styles tend to be more collaborative," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said by nature women are "less confrontational." Sen-elect Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, says that women are "problem solvers."

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., says that women have a camaraderie which helps in relationships that are key to negotiations on Capitol Hill, something she says comes natural to women more than men.

"I think there's just a lot of collaboration between the women senators and... advice and really standing up for each other that you don't always see with the men," she said.

Read More..