Assembly approves smoking ban at state parks and beaches

By Patrick McGreevy

11:09 PM PDT, March 22, 2010

Reporting from Sacramento

State lawmakers adopted one of the nation's most far-reaching regulations of tobacco use Monday, approving a bill to outlaw smoking at 278 state parks and beaches.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has not said publicly whether he will sign the measure, which would allow a fine of up to $100 for smoking at a state beach or in a designated section of a state park.

Smoking would still be allowed in many parking lots and campgrounds.

The state has previously banned smoking within 25 feet of a playground or sandbox area and in public buildings.

The addition of the state ban would make much of the Los Angeles beachfront off-limits to cigarettes.

The city of Los Angeles already bans smoking at parks, beaches and within 25 feet of playgrounds, sports fields and picnic areas.

Santa Monica and Malibu have similar bans, as does Long Beach.

Los Angeles County banned smoking on county-run beaches in 2004 and last year extended the ban to parks and public golf courses.

Sen. Jenny Oropeza (D-Long Beach), the author of the statewide bill, SB 4, said it built on such local restrictions.

More than 100 local governments statewide have imposed similar bans, she said, including Huntington Beach, Newport Beach and Seal Beach in Orange County.

Although smoking bans at restaurants and bars are widespread around the country, bans on smoking outdoors have been less common outside California.

Last year, Maine adopted a smoke-free law for beaches and parks, but no other state has outlawed cigarettes in its entire park system as California is proposing to do, according to the group Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, which tracks such measures.

The measure, which squeaked by with one vote to spare Monday, goes back to the Senate, which had approved it previously and is expected to concur in amendments.

Republicans opposed the bill, saying it was unwarranted meddling in legal behavior.

"It was a nanny-state bill then, and it is a nanny-state bill now," said Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries (R-Lake Elsinore), who also opposed the measure last week when it fell short of the votes needed.

The Democratic majority, however, argued that the ban was justified because of the health risks of second-hand smoke and the pollution caused by thousands of toxic cigarette butts littering beaches and picnic areas.

"This is a great vote for the environment, for fire protection and a darn good vote for those of us who don't like secondhand smoke," Oropeza said.

The senator said her primary reason for the bill was that cigarette butts represent a significant source of pollution and threaten marine animals, which have difficulty eating and digesting food once they have ingested cigarette debris.

In addition, Oropeza said the California Department of Forestry estimates that smoking is responsible for more than 100 wildfires in an average year, damaging more than 3,400 acres.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-smoke-ban23-2010mar23,0,1307449,print.story

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the Wall Street Journal

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

U.S. Aims to Bolster Overseas Fight Against Cybercrime

The alleged Chinese cyber attacks on Google have spurred proposals at the State Department and on Capitol Hill to establish an ambassador-level cybersecurity post and to tie foreign aid to a country's ability to police cybercrime.

"Google was a watershed moment," said James Lewis, a former State Department official and cybersecurity specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "It helped push the debate in the direction of better security."

Cybersecurity involves the protection of government and corporate computer systems from hackers. In the wake of the cyber attacks on Google, officials at the State Department circulated a proposal to create an ambassador-like post, according to officials briefed on the proposal. This person would take on such duties as negotiating cyber policy at the United Nations, and making sure the U.S. has a consistent position on cybersecurity when issues come up overseas.

The proposal, however, has run ran into internal resistance from the State Department's intelligence bureau, which currently oversees most cybersecurity matters at the department, said Mr. Lewis, who frequently advises the administration.

The turf wars inside the State Department became apparent several months ago, when Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg met with the more than one dozen bureaus with an interest in cybersecurity issues and discovered many thought they should run cybersecurity for the department, officials said.

A senior administration official confirmed that the State Department was weighing the creation of the post. "This person would coordinate a full range of related issues from cybersecurity to Internet freedom to economic issues," the official said, adding that, "the security dimension bleeds over into economic issues."

The emerging solution is to create a high-level cybersecurity position. The person in this job would either report to a top State official like the deputy secretary or to a panel of representatives from the major department bureaus involved in computer security policy, U.S. officials said.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is also drafting a proposal to create the post. It would be an ambassador-type position to be confirmed by the Senate, meaning the official could be called before Congress to testify. It is modeled after the department's counterterrorism coordinator, who also carries the rank of ambassador.

The committee has been negotiating with the State Department over whether the position should be mandated by law or left to the department to establish internally, a Senate Democratic aide said. Both lawmakers and the administration agree a position should be established, the discussion is about how to do it, the aide said.

The proposal would be folded into the bill authorizing funding for the State Department. It isn't clear yet whether the Senate will take that bill up this year, given the limited left on the legislative calendar.

Another proposal gaining political momentum is a broader measure that would create a cyber post at the State Department and establish attachés for cybersecurity in U.S. embassies. It would also require the administration to identify the countries that are havens for cybercrime and which ones are doing little to combat it.

The findings, updated annually, would be used to prioritize foreign-aid programs to combat cybercrime.

Countries that fail to improve efforts to counter cybercrime could also face U.S. penalties. The president would have a menu of options for punishment—from limiting new foreign aid to restricting financing from the Overseas Private Investment Corp., a U.S. agency that helps U.S. businesses invest overseas.

The proposal is set to be unveiled Tuesday by Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D., N.Y.) and Orrin Hatch (R., Utah).

"One of the greatest threats we have to our national security is cybercrime, cyber espionage, cyber terror, and cyber attack," Ms. Gillibrand said.

It has received early backing by a variety of U.S. tech and financial companies, including Microsoft Corp., eBay Inc., and Visa Inc.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704841304575137994061837952.html?mod=WSJ_World_LEFTSecondNews#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thefts Plague Drug Makers

When authorities raided the Florida home of Servando Gomez last October, they found hundreds of stolen cigarettes, razor blades and lotions. They also found $10 million worth of prescription drugs, including treatments for heart and skin disorders, that had been stolen from a tractor-trailer truck in Tennessee.

The Florida case is one symptom of a growing menace to drug makers: Criminal gangs that used to steal laptops and fragrances are increasingly targeting high-value painkillers, drugs for erectile dysfunction, antidepressants and other medications, law-enforcement officials say.

Some of the stolen medicine is sold on the black market in the U.S. and abroad, and an undetermined amount makes its way to U.S. pharmacy and hospital shelves.

For patients, that can be dangerous because some sensitive drugs aren't stored by the thieves in proper conditions. Last year, several diabetes patients lost control of their blood-sugar levels after they unwittingly used stolen insulin, which must be refrigerated.

"Consumers shouldn't be concerned, but they should be alert and aware," said Ilisa Bernstein, director of pharmacy affairs at the Food and Drug Administration.

The past few years have seen a rise in thefts of consumer goods in general. But Medicines in particular have become a popular target for thieves, in part because small volumes can be worth more than bulkier consumer goods.

"It's a growth industry and is becoming highly professionalized," said Katherine Eban, author of "Dangerous Doses," a book about drug theft and counterfeiting in the U.S. "This isn't two-bit addicts leaping over pharmacy counters."

The trend was highlighted this month with the heist of $75 million worth of antidepressants and other pills from an Eli Lilly & Co. warehouse in Connecticut. Industry experts believe it was the biggest theft of its kind.

Bob Reilley, Lilly's chief security officer, said the company had taken steps to ensure the drugs stolen from Connecticut would be identified if they returned to the legitimate drug supply. The company "will learn from this" incident, he said.

The Lilly incident mirrored several other unsolved break-ins, including one at a warehouse owned by drug maker GlaxoSmithKline PLC in Richmond, Va., last year and another several years ago at a Marshfield, Mass., facility owned by drug wholesaler AmerisourceBergen, according to Charles Forsaith, director of supply-chain security for Purdue Pharma L.P. The companies declined to comment.

Last year $184 million worth of prescription drugs were stolen in the U.S., a 350% increase from 2007, according to the U.S. division of FreightWatch International, a supply-chain security consultant.

In Europe, gangs have focused on stealing human-growth hormone, which is sometimes used as a performance-enhancing drug and can be sold to body-builders and athletes on the black market. Drug maker Novo Nordisk A/S said tens of thousands of vials of the drug were taken from two of its Denmark facilities in 2008.

Current and former law-enforcement officials said several rings based in south Florida's Cuban-American community were responsible for most major U.S. heists. Some specialize in tractor-trailer thefts; others target warehouses. These largely nonviolent criminals have separate units devoted to penetrating a building, secreting away the drugs and fencing the items, they said. Ed Petow, a former Miami police officer who specialized in cargo theft, said about 50 to 60 south Floridians carry out most of the U.S. warehouse thefts of items such as electronics and pharmaceuticals.

Criminals can sell the goods to buyers in the black market, through Internet retailers or to drug brokers or wholesalers who can break up the loot and sell it in pieces, officials said.

"The loosely regulated secondary wholesale market presents an opportunity for unscrupulous" dealers to break the law, said Phillip Eugene Porter, a federal prosecutor who brought a major case in Kansas City in 2006 in which several Midwest-based drug brokers and wholesale distributors pleaded guilty. "It's a 'don't ask, don't tell' market," he said.

Some drug companies said they were beefing up security around their warehouses and outfitting supply trucks with monitoring devices. Others have put global positioning system devices in trucks or imprint drug containers with tracking devices or codes that can be checked at various points in the supply chain.

The insulin stolen last year was taken from a truck that a driver briefly left unattended at his trucking company's North Carolina office. John Sullivan, supply-chain director at Novo Nordisk, which made the insulin, said would-be robbers do a lot of surveillance of industrial parks where its product is stored.

He said the company had installed video cameras at warehouses and checked the background of everyone involved in storing, handling and shipping its products.

Lilly said wholesalers that sold its products must agree to purchase Lilly products directly from the Indianapolis drug maker. Pharmacy benefit managers such as Express Scripts have similar agreements with drug makers and wholesalers.

"It's very difficult for product to get back into the legitimate U.S. supply chain because of these business practices," said Peggy Staver, director of product integrity at Pfizer Inc., which in the U.S. attaches radio-frequency identification tags on bottles, cases and pallets of impotence drug Viagra and on cases and pallets of painkiller Celebrex.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704841304575138070024485734.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5#printMode

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the New York Times

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Justices to Weigh Law on Gaining Citizenship via Parents

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide if mothers and fathers may be treated differently in determining whether their children may claim American citizenship.

The case involves Ruben Flores-Villar, who was born in Tijuana, Mexico, but was raised by his father and grandmother, both American citizens, in San Diego. His mother was Mexican, and his parents were not married.

Mr. Flores-Villar tried to avoid deportation by claiming American citizenship. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, rejected that claim under a law that spelled out different requirements for mothers and fathers whose children were born abroad and out of wedlock to a partner who was not an American citizen.

The law, since amended, allowed fathers to transmit citizenship to their children only if the fathers had lived in the United States before the child was born for a total of 10 years, five of them after age 14. Mothers were required to have lived in the United States for a year before their child was born. (The amended law kept the general system but shortened the residency requirement for fathers.)

Mr. Flores-Villar's father was 16 when his son was born, making it impossible for him to fulfill the part of the law requiring five years of residency after age 14.

Mr. Flores-Villar argued that the differing treatments violated equal protection principles. The Supreme Court has said that sex-based classifications are permissible only if they serve important governmental goals and are substantially related to achieving those goals.

In 2001, the Supreme Court upheld a law that imposed differing requirements in a similar situation. In that case, Nguyen v. Immigration and Naturalization Service , a closely divided court said that American fathers of children born out of wedlock abroad had to get a court order establishing paternity or swear to it under oath for their children to obtain American citizenship. American mothers were not subject to that requirement.

Mr. Flores-Villar said that decision turned on biological factors concerning the establishment of paternity that are not present in his case, Flores-Villar v. United States, No. 09-5801.

Prosecutor Misconduct

The court also agreed to review a $14 million jury award in favor of a former death row inmate who was freed after prosecutorial misconduct came to light.

The former inmate, John Thompson, sued officials in the district attorney's office in New Orleans, saying they had not trained prosecutors to turn over exculpatory evidence. A prosecutor there failed to give Mr. Thompson's lawyers a report showing that blood at a crime scene was not his.

Mr. Thompson spent 18 years in prison, 14 in solitary confinement on death row. He once came within weeks of being executed.

The Supreme Court has generally been wary of efforts to hold prosecutors accountable for even demonstrated misconduct. Last year, in a unanimous ruling , it said that a California man who had served 24 years in prison for murder based on false testimony from a jailhouse informant could not sue the two senior prosecutors who ran the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office at the time of his trial.

In asking the Supreme Court to hear the new case, Connick v. Thompson, 09-571, Leon A. Cannizzaro Jr., the Orleans Parish district attorney, said Mr. Thompson had not shown a pattern of misconduct or a direct link between the asserted training failures and what went on his case.

Religious Music

Over a spirited dissent from Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. , the court turned down an appeal from a high school student in Everett, Wash., who said her free speech rights had been violated when school officials refused to allow the school wind ensemble to play an instrumental version of Franz Biebl's “Ave Maria.” The officials said only secular music was permissible, a determination upheld by the Ninth Circuit.

In his dissent in the case, Nurre v. Whitehead, No. 09-671, Justice Alito said the appeals court's ruling, which he said applied to 10 million public school students, was “not easy to square with our free speech jurisprudence.” He added that the appeals court's reasoning may apply to “almost all public school artistic performances” and may authorize “school administrators to ban any controversial student expression at any school event.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/us/23scotus.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Acorn to Shut All Its Offices by April 1

The community organizing group Acorn announced Monday that it would close all its remaining state affiliates and field offices by April 1.

The organization is “developing a plan to resolve all outstanding debts, obligations and other issues,” said a statement released by the group.

Acorn has been battered by criticism from the right and has lost federal money and private donations since a video sting was publicized last fall. Acorn employees were shown in the videos advising two young conservative activists — posing as a pimp and a prostitute — how to conceal their criminal activities.

In reaction to the videos, the Census Bureau ended its partnership with the organization for this year's census, the Internal Revenue Service dropped the group from its Voluntary Income Tax Assistance program, and Congress voted to cut off all grants to the organization.

In recent years, the group has also been dogged by mismanagement and criticism — mostly from conservatives — for its handling of voter registration drives.

Last month, the Brooklyn district attorney's office completed an investigation of the Acorn employees there who appeared in the video and concluded that they had not taken part in any criminality.

“For Acorn as a national organization, our vindication on the facts doesn't necessarily pay the bills,” Bertha Lewis, the chief executive of Acorn, said in a statement.

While the videos gave the impression that one of the two activists, James E. O'Keefe III , was dressed as a pimp when he entered the offices, later inspection seemed to indicate that he had manipulated that part of the footage and showed no evidence that he wore the costume when talking to Acorn workers.

The transcript of several stings, however, indicate that Mr. O'Keefe clearly presented himself as a pimp and that Acorn workers in some offices told him how to hide prostitution activities from the authorities.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/us/23acorn.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the White House

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tax Returns Are Up 10% - Find Out If You Qualify for Recovery Act Tax Credits

Thanks in large part to tax benefits in the Recovery Act , taxpayers are seeing larger refunds from their 2009 tax returns this season -- according to the IRS, average tax returns are up by almost 10 percent this year . 

While these tax return averages are interesting ... the question you're probably asking is "Do I qualify for any of those benefits?"  To help you get answers, we've launched an interactive Tax Savings Tool to help you understand which Recovery Act tax benefits you should include in your filing.

Check it out: http://www.whitehouse.gov/recovery/tax-saving-tool

This morning, the Vice President talked about the benefits for taxpayers on the Today Show (video):

The big guys know all the credits and deductions to claim during tax season, but we want middle class families to know just how much is out there for them this year thanks to the Recovery Act – and how to take advantage of it. From help with college expenses to credits for cost-saving, energy-efficiency home improvements, these Recovery Act tax credits not only provide some needed relief for working Americans, but also help them invest in their families' futures.

Here is a quick run-down of some key tax benefits available thanks to the Recovery Act:

• Making Work Pay: 95 percent of working families are receiving the Work Pay tax credit of $400 for an individual or $800 for married couples filing jointly in their paychecks in 2009.
  
  
• College Expenses: Families and students are eligible for up to $2500 in tax savings under the American Opportunity Credit .
  
  
• Purchase of First Home: Homebuyers can get a credit of up to $8000 for first homes purchased by April 30, 2010 under the First Time homebuyer tax credit .
  
  
• Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Incentives: Taxpayers are eligible for up to $1500 in tax credits for making some energy-efficiency improvements to their homes.
  
  
• New Vehicle Purchases: Taxpayers can deduct state and local sales taxes or fees for vehicle purchases under the vehicle sales tax deduction .
  
  
• Expanded Family Credits: Moderate income families with children may be eligible for an increase under the Earned Income Tax Credit and the additional Child Tax Credit .
  
  
• Unemployment Benefits Tax Free in 2009: the Recovery Act made the first $2400 of unemployment benefits received in 2009 tax free.
  

The Recovery Act's tax benefits of nearly $300 billion are not only providing some relief for middle class families, but also helping to jumpstart the economy and create more clean-energy, manufacturing, and construction jobs. To learn more, visit Recovery.gov

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/22/helping-taxpayers-take-advantage-recovery-act-tax-credits

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Reform Begins

After more than a year of extensive debate, the House voted last night to pass the most significant health reform legislation this country has seen in decades.  It was a historic victory for the American people.  And now, millions of Americans – workers, families, seniors, small business owners – stand to benefit from lower health care costs, expanded coverage and tough consumer protections.

This year, thousands of uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions will have the opportunity to purchase quality, affordable health insurance. Beginning in 2010, small business owners will no longer be forced to choose between offering health care and hiring new employees because they'll be offered tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help insure their employees. Medicare beneficiaries will no longer wonder how they'll afford their prescription drug bills because they'll be given a rebate of $250 if they hit the prescription drug donut hole in 2010. And early retirees will be provided help through the creation of a temporary re-insurance program to help offset the costs of expensive premiums.

This year, you will now have the security of knowing that insurers cannot deny coverage to your child because of a pre-existing condition. You won't have to live every day in fear of having your insurance taken away from you if you get sick. And for new plans, there won't be lifetime or restrictive annual limits on the amount of care you receive from your insurance companies.

Because we didn't settle for the status quo, Americans who have insurance will now have the security and stability of knowing their coverage will be there when they need it most, and the millions of Americans who don't have insurance will be provided with quality, affordable options.  The legislation passed last night brings down health care costs for American families and small businesses, expands coverage to millions of Americans and ends the worst practices of insurance companies. And it begins to do so this year.

Dan Pfeiffer is White House Communications Director

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/21/reform-begins-now

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is What Change Looks Like

After a historic vote in the House to send health reform to the President, he speaks to all Americans on the change they will finally see as they are given back control over their own health care:

Tonight, at a time when the pundits said it was no longer possible, we rose above the weight of our politics. We pushed back on the undue influence of special interests. We didn't give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. Instead, we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things and tackling our biggest challenges. We proved that this government -- a government of the people and by the people -- still works for the people.

I want to thank every member of Congress who stood up tonight with courage and conviction to make health care reform a reality. And I know this wasn't an easy vote for a lot of people. But it was the right vote. I want to thank Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her extraordinary leadership, and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn for their commitment to getting the job done. I want to thank my outstanding Vice President, Joe Biden, and my wonderful Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, for their fantastic work on this issue. I want to thank the many staffers in Congress, and my own incredible staff in the White House, who have worked tirelessly over the past year with Americans of all walks of life to forge a reform package finally worthy of the people we were sent here to serve.

Today's vote answers the dreams of so many who have fought for this reform. To every unsung American who took the time to sit down and write a letter or type out an e-mail hoping your voice would be heard -- it has been heard tonight. To the untold numbers who knocked on doors and made phone calls, who organized and mobilized out of a firm conviction that change in this country comes not from the top down, but from the bottom up -- let me reaffirm that conviction: This moment is possible because of you.

Most importantly, today's vote answers the prayers of every American who has hoped deeply for something to be done about a health care system that works for insurance companies, but not for ordinary people. For most Americans, this debate has never been about abstractions, the fight between right and left, Republican and Democrat -- it's always been about something far more personal. It's about every American who knows the shock of opening an envelope to see that their premiums just shot up again when times are already tough enough. It's about every parent who knows the desperation of trying to cover a child with a chronic illness only to be told “no” again and again and again. It's about every small business owner forced to choose between insuring employees and staying open for business. They are why we committed ourselves to this cause.

Tonight's vote is not a victory for any one party -- it's a victory for them. It's a victory for the American people. And it's a victory for common sense.

Now, it probably goes without saying that tonight's vote will give rise to a frenzy of instant analysis. There will be tallies of Washington winners and losers, predictions about what it means for Democrats and Republicans, for my poll numbers, for my administration. But long after the debate fades away and the prognostication fades away and the dust settles, what will remain standing is not the government-run system some feared, or the status quo that serves the interests of the insurance industry, but a health care system that incorporates ideas from both parties -- a system that works better for the American people.

If you have health insurance, this reform just gave you more control by reining in the worst excesses and abuses of the insurance industry with some of the toughest consumer protections this country has ever known -- so that you are actually getting what you pay for.

If you don't have insurance, this reform gives you a chance to be a part of a big purchasing pool that will give you choice and competition and cheaper prices for insurance. And it includes the largest health care tax cut for working families and small businesses in history -- so that if you lose your job and you change jobs, start that new business, you'll finally be able to purchase quality, affordable care and the security and peace of mind that comes with it.

This reform is the right thing to do for our seniors. It makes Medicare stronger and more solvent, extending its life by almost a decade. And it's the right thing to do for our future. It will reduce our deficit by more than $100 billion over the next decade, and more than $1 trillion in the decade after that.

So this isn't radical reform. But it is major reform. This legislation will not fix everything that ails our health care system. But it moves us decisively in the right direction. This is what change looks like.

Now as momentous as this day is, it's not the end of this journey. On Tuesday, the Senate will take up revisions to this legislation that the House has embraced, and these are revisions that have strengthened this law and removed provisions that had no place in it. Some have predicted another siege of parliamentary maneuvering in order to delay adoption of these improvements. I hope that's not the case. It's time to bring this debate to a close and begin the hard work of implementing this reform properly on behalf of the American people. This year, and in years to come, we have a solemn responsibility to do it right.

Nor does this day represent the end of the work that faces our country. The work of revitalizing our economy goes on. The work of promoting private sector job creation goes on. The work of putting American families' dreams back within reach goes on. And we march on, with renewed confidence, energized by this victory on their behalf.

In the end, what this day represents is another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream. Tonight, we answered the call of history as so many generations of Americans have before us. When faced with crisis, we did not shrink from our challenge -- we overcame it. We did not avoid our responsibility -- we embraced it. We did not fear our future -- we shaped it.

Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/22/what-change-looks

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the FBI

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FBI Releases 2009 Bank Crime Statistics

Today the FBI released bank crime statistics for calendar year 2009. Between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2009, there were 5,943 robberies, 100 burglaries, 19 larcenies, and three extortions of financial institutions 1 reported to law enforcement. The total 6,065 reported violations represents a decrease from 2008, during which 6,857 2 violations of the Federal Bank Robbery and Incidental Crimes Statute were reported.

Highlights of the report include:

• Of the 6,062 total reported bank robberies, burglaries, and larcenies, loot was taken in 5,514 incidents (91 percent). No loot was taken during the three reported bank extortions.
  
  
• The total amount taken was valued at more than $45.9 million. More than $8 million was recovered and returned to financial institutions.
  
  
• During the reported bank robberies, burglaries, and larcenies, the following modus operandi were the most common: oral demand (3,368 incidents), demand note (3,269 incidents), firearm used (1,619 incidents), use of a weapon threatened (2,553 incidents). Of the three reported extortions, perpetrators used or threatened the use of explosive devices during one incident and made threats by telephone during two incidents.
  
  
• Acts of violence were committed during 269 (4 percent) of the reported robberies, burglaries, and larcenies. These acts included 75 instances involving the discharge of firearms, 158 instances involving assaults, one instance involving an explosive device, and 47 instances of hostage situations. 4 No acts of violence occurred during the three reported bank extortions.
  
  
• Acts of violence resulted in 140 injuries, 21 deaths, and 94 persons being taken hostage. Of the 21 reported deaths, all were perpetrators. While nine officers were injured during the reported incidents, no law enforcement officers were killed responding to bank crimes in 2009. No injuries, deaths, or hostage takings occurred during the reported bank extortions.
  
  
• Most violations occurred on Friday. Regardless of the day of the week, violations between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. were the most common.
  
  
• Most violations occurred in the Southern region of the U.S., with 2,048 reported incidents.
  

These statistics were recorded as of February 22, 2010. Note that not all bank crimes are reported to the FBI, and therefore the report is not a complete statistical compilation of all bank crimes that occurred in the United States.

View the detailed report and learn more about the FBI at www.fbi.gov .

.