13 attorneys general sue over health care overhaul

The lawsuit was filed in Pensacola after the Democratic president signed the bill the House passed Sunday night.

"The Constitution nowhere authorizes the United States to mandate, either directly or under threat of penalty, that all citizens and legal residents have qualifying health care coverage," the lawsuit says.

Legal experts say it has little chance of succeeding because, under the Constitution, federal laws trump state laws.

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum is taking the lead and is joined by attorneys general from South Carolina, Nebraska, Texas, Michigan, Utah, Pennsylvania, Alabama, South Dakota, Idaho, Washington, Colorado and Louisiana. All are Republicans except James "Buddy" Caldwell of Louisiana, who is a Democrat.

Some states are considering separate lawsuits - Virginia filed its own Tuesday - and still others may join the multistate suit. In Michigan, the Thomas More Law Center of Ann Arbor, a Christian legal advocacy group, sued on behalf of itself and four people it says don't have private health insurance and object to being told they have to purchase it.

McCollum, who is running for governor, has pushed the 13-state lawsuit for several weeks, asking other GOP attorneys general to join him. He says the federal government cannot constitutionally require people to get health coverage and argues the bill will cause "substantial harm and financial burden" to the states.

The lawsuit claims the bill violates the 10th Amendment, which says the federal government has no authority beyond the powers granted to it under the Constitution, by forcing the states to carry out its provisions but not reimbursing them for the costs.

It also says the states can't afford the new law. Using Florida as an example, the lawsuit says the overhaul will add almost 1.3 million people to the state's Medicaid rolls and cost the state an additional $150 million in 2014, growing to $1 billion a year by 2019.

South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster, who is also running for governor in his state, said Tuesday the lawsuit was necessary to protect his state's sovereignty.

"A legal challenge by the states appears to be the only hope of protecting the American people from this unprecedented attack on our system of government," he said.

But Lawrence Friedman, a professor who teaches constitutional law at the New England School of Law in Boston, said before the suit was filed that it has little chance of success. He said he can't imagine a scenario where a judge would stop implementation of the health care bill.

Some states are also looking at other ways to avoid participating in the overhaul. Virginia and Idaho have passed legislation aimed at blocking the bill's insurance requirement from taking effect, and the Republican-led Legislature in Florida is trying to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to ask voters to exempt the state from the federal law's requirements. At least 60 percent of voters would have to approve.

Under the bill, starting in six months, health insurance companies would be required to keep young adults as beneficiaries on their parents' plans until they turn 26, and companies would no longer be allowed to deny coverage to sick children.

Other changes would not kick in until 2014.

That's when most Americans will for the first time be required to carry health insurance - either through an employer or government program or by buying it themselves. Those who refuse will face tax penalties.

"This is the first time in American history where American citizens will be forced to buy a particular good or service," said Nebraska Attorney General Jon Bruning, explaining why his state joined the lawsuit.

Tax credits to help pay for premiums also will start flowing to middle-class working families with incomes up to $88,000 a year, and Medicaid will be expanded to cover more low-income people.

No Republicans in the U.S. House or Senate voted for the bill.

Associated Press Writer Meg Kinnard in Columbia, S.C., and Josh Funk in Omaha, Neb., contributed to this report.

http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_14739387

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

Actions count: Shame on pols who won't take the same pay cut they are asking of workers

SHAME on the politicians - from Sacramento to City Hall - who are asking employees to take pay cuts and residents to pay more for services, but are unwilling to share the pain themselves.

Indeed, many have extensive explanations for why they're protecting their six-figure salaries while asking for as much as 10 percent cuts from workers who earn a fraction of their wages.

The newest Los Angeles City Council member, Paul Krekorian, for example, justifies his reluctance to cut his wages by saying that he's reducing office expenses by 10 percent and will trim his office staff.

Similarly, City Attorney Carmen Trutanich's staff says he has cut deeply into his office's budget and has asked employees to take pay cuts. He hasn't done so himself, they say, because he would earn more if he were in private practice (which, it must be noted, he left when he ran for office).

Trutanich also would make more if he were a A-list movie star. But he's not. He's just another elected city office who thinks he should be protected from the recession that has drained the pockets of so many Angelenos.

It's disappointing to see such a lack of leadership from City Hall, where eight of the 18 elected officials are unwilling to lead by example. Shame on Krekorian and Trutanich, as well as Councilmen Bill Rosendahl, Richard Alarc n, Greig Smith, Herb Wesson and Bernard Parks (who also has his six-figure LAPD pension to help him scrape by).

They are talking the talk, but not walking the walk.

And no one can make them. The City Council's pay is tied to that of Superior Court judges and increases automatically each year. In order for them to take a pay cut, they must actively give the money back.

In addition, a 10 percent cut - which is what they're seeking from the vast majority of municipal workers - is significant amount when you're pulling down the $178,798-a-year salary of a council member or the $213,724 paid the city attorney.

And yes, a few thousand from each elected official is a tiny drop in the sea that is the city's general fund - merely a symbolic gesture. But often, symbolic gestures are the most powerful.

Even less leadership has been shown by state lawmakers, who command salaries from the high-90s to low three figures. (And that's after the independent commission that sets their pay levels decided to reduce salaries last year.) Rather than submit to the same cutbacks they asked of state employees, lawmakers fought their own pay reductions in court. Way to show some inspirational leadership.

Assembly Speaker John Perez immediately made it clear that his era will be no less entitled than that of his predecessor, Karen Bass, who gave out big raises to staffers the week she left. Upon his ascension to head the state body earlier this month, he gave his chief of staff a $65,000 raise. To the teacher who might be axed from his mid-50s salaried job next year because of the failure of state lawmakers to take evasive financial action years ago, that's not merely poor leadership, it's an insult. No wonder the public's approval of state legislators is in the teens.

Still, among the disappointments are some who still get the idea of leadership right. Kudos to those few elected officials who have voluntarily cut their pay, such as L.A. Councilman Dennis Zine, who represents the West Valley.

Zine has voluntarily rejected his pay raises for years. (Of course, it doesn't hurt that he also has a fat pension from his years on the LAPD.) Still he doesn't have to do so. Councilwoman Janice Hahn is likewise commended for her voluntary cut of 16 percent. Same to council members Paul Koretz, Tom LaBonge, Eric Garcetti, Ed Reyes, Jan Perry, Jose Huizar and Tony Cardenas, and to City Controller Wendy Greuel and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

They understand that, to those who they represent, actions count much more than words.

http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_14735634

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

From the Wall Street Journal

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

Sun Belt Loses Its Shine

Census Data Show Recession Has Altered Longtime Migration Pattern in U.S.

The recession has halted the dominant migration trend of recent decades, turning once-hot destinations such as Las Vegas and Orlando, Fla., into some of the country's losers.

Census data released Tuesday portray a sharp shift in migration during the depths of the recession, from July 2008 to July 2009. With home prices slammed and few jobs available in any state, people from Massachusetts to California decided to stay put or go back where they came from.

The Las Vegas metropolitan area lost about 1,300 residents to other areas. That compares with an annual inflow of 54,000 people during the height of the real-estate boom, and marks the first year of out-migration the city has seen in at least a century. The Orlando area swung to an outflow of about 4,300 from an inflow of 52,000 in 2004-2005.

The shifts represent a radical departure from the migration patterns that had made cities such as Las Vegas and Orlando some of the country's fastest-growing. For decades, people have been leaving colder Northeastern and Midwestern states, either to retire or to chase better weather and jobs in the South and West.

"It's unprecedented to see areas like Las Vegas and Orlando, just blue-chip destinations for anybody who wanted to move, to stop and stay stopped over a couple of years," said William Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

Meanwhile, some cities accustomed to losing people are showing net gains. The government's growing role in the economy has benefited the Washington, D.C., area, which drew 18,200 residents from other states, its first net gain since 2002.

In many cases, cities in the Midwest and Northeast are gaining because residents are locked in place. With depressed home prices and a dearth of out-of-state job offers preventing departures, even a modest number of people moving in can drive gains. The Boston area, for example, swung to an inflow of about 6,800 in 2008-2009 from an outflow of about 46,000 in 2004-2005. The Chicago area's outflow narrowed to about 40,400 from about 77,400.

Tim Jones, a 30-year-old satellite-television installer, has been on both ends of the migration. Late last year, he moved back to Plano, Ill., in the Chicago area after losing an installation job in the Phoenix area. He said he tried hard to find another job in Phoenix, applying everywhere from auto-repair shops to Wal-Mart, but to no avail.

Mr. Jones's former home county—Arizona's Maricopa County—is emblematic of the turnaround. A stream of new housing-related jobs attracted people to the area, but that halted once the real-estate market tanked. The county's domestic-migration gain dropped to just 4,600 in 2008-2009 from 69,400 in 2005-2006, according to an analysis of Census data by Kenneth M. Johnson, senior demographer at the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire.

Overall, migration within the U.S. has declined sharply—a phenomenon that could present yet another hurdle for an economy still limping to recovery. Past recessions have seen regional shifts where people left the hardest-hit areas in hopes of finding better prospects a few states away. In the 1980s recession, for instance, many people moved from depressed manufacturing hubs in the upper Midwest to Southern oil states, where the economy was booming. If depressed house prices prevent enough people from moving to seek work, that labor flexibility could be lost.

Perhaps the most profound shift has been in Las Vegas, the desert gambling Mecca that has become a national symbol of the housing boom and bust. Between December 2007 and the beginning of this year, the city has lost more than 130,000 jobs.

Dave Tina moved to Las Vegas 13 years ago after two decades as a New York City fireman, lured by warm weather and low tax rates on his pension. Now, in a second career selling real estate, Mr. Tina said he found himself brokering deals for people who wanted to sell their homes at a loss, leave Las Vegas and go back where they came from.

"For the last 12 years of my business, no one ever said they were leaving to go home," he said. "Now all of a sudden, they lost their job and a house they bought for $400,000 is $150,000. They're short-selling their house and going home."

Tuesday's Census release covered a range of data on metropolitan areas and counties, including immigration, births, deaths and state-to-state movements. While the recession appeared to have little impact on births and deaths, it did make the U.S. a less attractive destination for foreigners: Immigration fell to about 855,000 in 2009, from just over a million in 2006.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704211704575140132450524648.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_3#printMode

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

From the New York Times

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

In Health Care Bill, Obama Attacks Wealth Inequality

By DAVID LEONHARDT

For all the political and economic uncertainties about health reform, at least one thing seems clear: The bill that President Obama signed on Tuesday is the federal government's biggest attack on economic inequality since inequality began rising more than three decades ago.

Over most of that period, government policy and market forces have been moving in the same direction, both increasing inequality. The pretax incomes of the wealthy have soared since the late 1970s, while their tax rates have fallen more than rates for the middle class and poor.

Nearly every major aspect of the health bill pushes in the other direction. This fact helps explain why Mr. Obama was willing to spend so much political capital on the issue, even though it did not appear to be his top priority as a presidential candidate. Beyond the health reform's effect on the medical system, it is the centerpiece of his deliberate effort to end what historians have called the age of Reagan.

Speaking to an ebullient audience of Democratic legislators and White House aides at the bill-signing ceremony on Tuesday, Mr. Obama claimed that health reform would “mark a new season in America.” He added, “We have now just enshrined, as soon as I sign this bill, the core principle that everybody should have some basic security when it comes to their health care.”

The bill is the most sweeping piece of federal legislation since Medicare was passed in 1965. It aims to smooth out one of the roughest edges in American society — the inability of many people to afford medical care after they lose a job or get sick. And it would do so in large measure by taxing the rich.

A big chunk of the money to pay for the bill comes from lifting payroll taxes on households making more than $250,000. On average, the annual tax bill for households making more than $1 million a year will rise by $46,000 in 2013, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group. Another major piece of financing would cut Medicare subsidies for private insurers, ultimately affecting their executives and shareholders.

The benefits, meanwhile, flow mostly to households making less than four times the poverty level — $88,200 for a family of four people. Those without insurance in this group will become eligible to receive subsidies or to join Medicaid . (Many of the poor are already covered by Medicaid.) Insurance costs are also likely to drop for higher-income workers at small companies.

Finally, the bill will also reduce a different kind of inequality. In the broadest sense, insurance is meant to spread the costs of an individual's misfortune — illness, death, fire, flood — across society. Since the late 1970s, though, the share of Americans with health insurance has shrunk. As a result, the gap between the economic well-being of the sick and the healthy has been growing, at virtually every level of the income distribution.

The health reform bill will reverse that trend. By 2019, 95 percent of people are projected to be covered, up from 85 percent today (and about 90 percent in the late 1970s ). Even affluent families ineligible for subsidies will benefit if they lose their insurance, by being able to buy a plan that can no longer charge more for pre-existing conditions. In effect, healthy families will be picking up most of the bill — and their insurance will be somewhat more expensive than it otherwise would have been.

Much about health reform remains unknown. Maybe it will deliver Congress to the Republicans this fall, or maybe it will help the Democrats keep power. Maybe the bill's attempts to hold down the recent growth of medical costs will prove a big success, or maybe the results will be modest and inadequate. But the ways in which the bill attacks the inequality of the Reagan era — whether you love them or hate them — will probably be around for a long time.

“Legislative majorities come and go,” David Frum , a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush , lamented on Sunday. “This health care bill is forever.”

Since Mr. Obama began his presidential campaign in 2007, he has had a complicated relationship with the Reagan legacy. He has been more willing than many other Democrats to praise President Reagan . “Reagan's central insight — that the liberal welfare state had grown complacent and overly bureaucratic,” Mr. Obama wrote in his second book, “contained a good deal of truth.” Most notably, he praised Mr. Reagan as a president who “changed the trajectory of America.”

But Mr. Obama also argued that the Reagan administration had gone too far, and that if elected, he would try to put the country on a new trajectory. “The project of the next president,” he said in an interview during the campaign, “is figuring out how you create bottom-up economic growth, as opposed to the trickle-down economic growth.”

Since 1980, median real household income has risen less than 15 percent . The only period of strong middle-class income growth during this time came in the mid- and late 1990s, which by coincidence was also the one time when taxes on the affluent were rising.

For most of the last three decades, tax rates for the wealthy have been falling, while their pretax pay has been rising rapidly. Real incomes at the 99.99th percentile have jumped more than 300 percent since 1980. At the 99th percentile — about $300,000 today — real pay has roughly doubled.

The laissez-faire revolution that Mr. Reagan started did not cause these trends. But its policies — tax cuts, light regulation, a patchwork safety net — have contributed to them.

Health reform hardly solves all of the American economy's problems. Economic growth over the last decade was slower than in any decade since World War II. The tax cuts of the last 30 years, the two current wars, the Great Recession, the stimulus program and the looming retirement of the baby boomers have created huge deficits . Educational gains have slowed , and the planet is getting hotter .

Above all, the central question that both the Reagan and Obama administrations have tried to answer — what is the proper balance between the market and the government? — remains unresolved. But the bill signed on Tuesday certainly shifts our place on that spectrum.

Before he became Mr. Obama's top economic adviser, Lawrence Summers told me a story about helping his daughter study for her Advanced Placement exam in American history. While doing so, Mr. Summers realized that the federal government had not passed major social legislation in decades. There was the frenzy of the New Deal, followed by the G.I. Bill, the Interstate Highway System, civil rights and Medicare — and then nothing worth its own section in the history books.

Now there is.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/business/24leonhardt.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

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

California, in Financial Crisis, Opens Prison Doors

By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD

LANCASTER, Calif. — The California budget crisis has forced the state to address a problem that expert panels and judges have wrangled over for decades: how to reduce prison overcrowding.

The state has begun in recent weeks the most significant changes since the 1970s to reduce overcrowding — and chip away at an astonishing 70 percent recidivism rate, the highest in the country — as the prison population becomes a major drag on the state's crippled finances.

Many in the state still advocate a tough approach, with long sentences served in full, and some early problems with released inmates have given critics reason to complain. But fiscal reality, coupled with a court-ordered reduction in the prison population, is pouring cold water on old solutions like building more prisons.

About 11 percent of the state budget, or roughly $8 billion, goes to the penal system, putting it ahead of expenditures like higher education, an imbalance Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has vowed to fix.

The strains on the system are evident inside the state prison here, about 50 miles north of Los Angeles, where 4,600 inmates fill buildings intended for half as many. A stuffy, cacophonous gymnasium houses nearly 150 people in triple-bunked beds stretching wall to wall.

The new effort this year is intended to remove from prisons criminals who are considered less threatening and divide them into two categories: those who pose little or no risk outside the prison walls, and those who need regular supervision.

The goal is to reduce the number of inmates in the state's 33 prisons next year by 6,500 — more than the entire state prison population in 2009 of Nebraska, New Mexico, Utah or West Virginia. In all, there are 167,000 prisoners in California.

“People in the criminal justice world are looking at California with great interest,” said Jeremy Travis, president of John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. “Some very important reforms are under way.”

The effort, narrowly approved by the Democratic-controlled State Legislature and signed into law by Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, will be achieved through a range of steps long recommended by independent analysts and commissions.

To slow the return of former inmates to prison for technical violations of their parole, hundreds of low-level offenders will be released without close supervision from parole officers. Those officers will focus instead on tracking serious, violent offenders.

Some prisoners may also be released early for completing drug and education programs or have their sentences reduced under new formulas for calculating time served in county jails before and after sentencing.

The effort represents a “seismic shift,” said Joan Petersilia, a criminologist at Stanford Law School and a longtime scholar of the state's prisons.

Public safety concerns have other states rethinking their decisions to save prisons costs by releasing inmates early and expanding parole.

The same red flags are being raised here, but the overcrowding problem dwarfs that of any other state and the budget deficit — $20 billion and climbing — has left lawmakers with virtually no choice but to move ahead.

The Schwarzenegger administration has floated a number of other ideas to reduce costs, including building prisons in Mexico for illegal immigrant offenders, turning over prisons to private contractors and, last week, having the University of California handle inmate health care.

The release of prisoners in California has stirred a backlash. Several hundred inmates at county jails were released in the last couple of months because of confusion over time credits in the new law.

Attorney General Jerry Brown , a Democrat who is running for governor, issued a directive clarifying the law, but not before one inmate in Sacramento was arrested shortly after his release and charged with attempting to rape a woman. The man had been released on probation after serving time on an assault charge.

That case prompted several lawmakers to call for abandoning early releases. And crime victim and law enforcement groups have been sounding alarms about what they consider the dangers of not more aggressively tracking the low-level offenders.

“We are concerned about victims these felons will leave in their wake before being rearrested for committing new crimes,” said Paul M. Weber, the president of the Los Angeles police union.

Proponents, including Mr. Schwarzenegger's corrections secretary, Matthew Cate, have stood by the law, calling it overdue and necessary. The state spends, on average, $47,000 per year to house a prisoner. Early estimates suggest the new changes could save $100 million this year.

“This was an opportunity to do something impactful without imperiling public safety,” Mr. Cate said, adding that allowing parole officers to focus on more serious offenders will improve public safety.

Even with the new law, the system falls short of providing the kind of rehabilitation, drug treatment and education and job programs that academics and prisoner advocates have called for to help ensure prisoners and parolees do not commit new crimes.

The governor and the Legislature received a report on March 15 from a state oversight board warning that cuts to inmate rehabilitation programs would jeopardize the effort to reduce recidivism.

California is the only state that places all prisoners on parole at release, no matter the offense, Professor Petersilia said, and usually for one to three years. If a parolee is arrested or fails a drug test or misses an appointment with a parole officer, the offender lands back in prison.

Now, low-level offenders will not need to meet regularly with a parole officer and must be convicted of a new crime to be sent back.

Eric Susie, 24, recently had his parole terms readjusted under the new law. Mr. Susie had served 13 months in prison for possessing an M-80 firecracker wrapped with razors near a school (he argued, unsuccessfully, that it belonged to a friend).

Now, more than a year out of prison, he no longer reports to a parole officer or submits to monthly drug tests and can travel more freely, including out of state to visit family in Las Vegas.

“I feel like I am finally free,” Mr. Susie said. “I feel like I don't have that monkey on my back, like being a prisoner. I feel like I am a human being and can get my life together.”

Even the guards' union, which so heavily promoted and supported the tough sentencing of the past that fueled the prison building and expansion boom, now says it supports the idea of alternatives to prison and did not publicly object to the new law.

The overcrowding, union officials now say, poses a physical threat to its members, and the union has sided with plaintiffs battling in federal court to force even greater reductions of 40,000 inmates over the next two years.

But even with the progress in recent months, State Senator Mark Leno, a Democrat from San Francisco who helped push through changes in the prison system, suggested that further reductions would be a hard sell. Mr. Leno called the changes under way “a noble effort” and the best that could be achieved in the current political climate.

Many lawmakers, he said, still want to lengthen sentences and spend more on incarceration, both politically popular notions.

“We can't control ourselves,” Mr. Leno said. “Or some of my colleagues can't control themselves.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/us/24calprisons.html?ref=us&pagewanted=print

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

Tough Bill Advances in Arizona on Illegal Immigrants

By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD

LOS ANGELES — The Arizona Legislature gave preliminary approval Tuesday to a proposal that would allow the police to arrest illegal immigrants on trespassing charges simply for being in the state.

The provision, which opponents and proponents call a first in the nation, is part of a wide-ranging bill whose sponsors say they hope will make life tougher for illegal immigrants.

The House bill must be reconciled with a version passed by the Senate, something that may be done within the next week or two. Both include measures to outlaw the hiring of day laborers off the street; prohibit anyone from knowingly transporting an illegal immigrant, even a relative, anywhere in the state; and compel local police to check the status of people they reasonably suspect are in the country illegally.

Immigrant advocates call the bill some of the harshest legislation they have seen in a state where battles over immigration are particularly sharp edged.

Its sponsors said Gov. Jan Brewer, a Republican facing a primary competition from conservatives, has indicated her support, though her spokesman said she would not take a position until the final bill reaches her desk.

State Senator Russell Pearce, a Republican and the chief sponsor of the legislation, brushed aside concerns raised by civil libertarians that the law would open the door to racial profiling. The local office of the American Civil Liberties Union says the bill is unconstitutional.

Mr. Pearce said the bill gives the police another tool and compensates for lax enforcement of immigration law by the federal authorities. The police, he said, do not have to arrest every illegal immigrant on trespassing charges, but it gives them that discretion.

“American citizens have a constitutional right to expect their rights and laws to be enforced,” he said in an interview.

Several police chiefs and sheriffs have criticized the bill, calling it burdensome and impractical and a tactic that will scare immigrants out of cooperating with investigations and reporting crime.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/us/24immig.html?adxnnl=1&ref=us&adxnnlx=1269439241-j8R0riqCkFLh9T/JDjsbJA&pagewanted=print

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

From the White House

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

For Victims of Domestic Violence, Health Care is a Lifeline

Sunday night's historic vote on health care reform helps women across the board.

A greater percentage of women are more likely than men to be uninsured or underinsured and to struggle to make ends meet. In addition, those women who manage to get coverage are more likely to pay higher premiums than men. Women who suffer from preexisting conditions are often denied coverage altogether.

For all women, the advent of health care reform is a victory. For domestic violence victims, it is a lifeline.

Domestic violence causes 2 million injuries and more than 1,200 deaths every year . These women are not strangers - they are our daughters, our mothers, our sisters, our co-workers, and our neighbors. For victims of domestic violence, access to health care is critical. They need treatment for immediate injuries and ongoing care for related health problems. They need to be able to talk to their health care provider about the cause of their injuries without fear of losing their health insurance. Most importantly, they need our compassion and support.

Yet until last night, insurance companies in eight states and the District of Columbia could still discriminate against victims by declaring domestic violence a preexisting condition. Domestic violence victims in those states faced the real risk of being denied health care at the very time when they needed it the most. Because of last night's vote, domestic violence victims in those states will no longer face discrimination.

All across the country, this bill will help domestic violence victims get the health care they need.  They will not face gender discrimination or lifetime caps on benefits. They will not face the struggle of paying too much for health care while trying to rebuild their lives after suffering domestic violence.

Victims of domestic violence should not have to worry about access to health care. Because of last night, we can make sure that they won't.

Lynn Rosenthal is the White House Advisor on Violence Against Women

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/23/victims-domestic-violence-health-care-a-lifeline

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

What's in the Health Care Bill?

On the day that President Obama signed health insurance reform into law, a lot of Americans are researching the final legislation and how it affects them.  As the President helpfully pointed out in his speech earlier today:

Go to our Web site, WhiteHouse.gov; go to the Web sites of major news outlets out there; find out how reform will affect you.  And I'm confident that you will like what you see -- a common-sense approach that maintains the private insurance system but makes it work for everybody; makes it work not just for the insurance companies, but makes it work for you.

So we want to make sure you don't miss a bunch of health care reform resources on our website:

• Frequently asked questions
  
  
• A title-by-title health care reform bill summary
  
  
• A list of all recent blog posts about health care
  
  
• Links to full text of the health care bill: H.R. 4872 - Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010 and an area to submit your comment on the legislation
  

Today, White House Director of Health Reform Nancy-Ann DeParle sent an email update ( you can sign up for them here ) outlining key benefits of health reform for individual Americans that take place soon: 

FROM: Nancy-Ann DeParle, The White House
SUBJECT: What Happens Next

Good afternoon,

Since the House of Representatives voted to pass health reform legislation on Sunday night, the legislative process and its political impact have been the focus of all the newspapers and cable TV pundits.

Outside of DC, however, many Americans are trying to cut through the chatter and get to the substance of reform with a simple question: "What does health insurance reform actually mean for me?" To help, we've put together a list of some key benefits every American should know.

Let's start with how health insurance reform will expand and strengthen coverage:

• This year, children with pre-existing conditions can no longer be denied health insurance coverage. Once the new health insurance exchanges begin in the coming years, pre-existing condition discrimination will become a thing of the past for everyone.
  
  
• This year, health care plans will allow young people to remain on their parents' insurance policy up until their 26th birthday.
  
  
• This year, insurance companies will be banned from dropping people from coverage when they get sick, and they will be banned from implementing lifetime caps on coverage. This year, restrictive annual limits on coverage will be banned for certain plans. Under health insurance reform, Americans will be ensured access to the care they need.
  
  
• This year, adults who are uninsured because of pre-existing conditions will have access to affordable insurance through a temporary subsidized high-risk pool.
  
  
• In the next fiscal year, the bill increases funding for community health centers, so they can treat nearly double the number of patients over the next five years.
  
  
• This year, we'll also establish an independent commission to advise on how best to build the health care workforce and increase the number of nurses, doctors and other professionals to meet our country's needs.  Going forward, we will provide $1.5 billion in funding to support the next generation of doctors, nurses and other primary care practitioners -- on top of a $500 million investment from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
  

Health insurance reform will also curb some of the worst insurance industry practices and strengthen consumer protections:

• This year, this bill creates a new, independent appeals process that ensures consumers in new private plans have access to an effective process to appeal decisions made by their insurer.
  
  
• This year, discrimination based on salary will be outlawed. New group health plans will be prohibited from establishing any eligibility rules for health care coverage that discriminate in favor of higher-wage employees.
  
  
• Beginning this fiscal year, this bill provides funding to states to help establish offices of health insurance consumer assistance in order to help individuals in the process of filing complaints or appeals against insurance companies.
  
  
• Starting January 1, 2011, insurers in the individual and small group market will be required to spend 80 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Insurers in the large group market will be required to spend 85 percent of their premium dollars on medical services. Any insurers who don't meet those thresholds will be required to provide rebates to their policyholders.
  
  
• Starting in 2011, this bill helps states require insurance companies to submit justification for requested premium increases. Any company with excessive or unjustified premium increases may not be able to participate in the new health insurance exchanges.
  

Reform immediately begins to lower health care costs for American families and small businesses:

• This year, small businesses that choose to offer coverage will begin to receive tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums to help make employee coverage more affordable.
  
  
• This year, new private plans will be required to provide free preventive care: no co-payments and no deductibles for preventive services. And beginning January 1, 2011, Medicare will do the same.
  
  
• This year, this bill will provide help for early retirees by creating a temporary re-insurance program to help offset the costs of expensive premiums for employers and retirees age 55-64.
  
  
• This year, this bill starts to close the Medicare Part D 'donut hole' by providing a $250 rebate to Medicare beneficiaries who hit the gap in prescription drug coverage. And beginning in 2011, the bill institutes a 50% discount on prescription drugs in the 'donut hole.'
  

Thank you,

Nancy-Ann DeParle
Director, White House Office of Health Reform

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/03/23/whats-health-care-bill

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

From the Department of Homeland Security

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

Secretary Napolitano and Mexican Counterparts Sign Arrangements to Bolster Bilateral Border and Aviation Security

Release Date: March 23, 2010

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
Contact: 202-282-8010

MEXICO CITY—U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano today joined with Mexican Interior Secretary Fernando Francisco Gómez-Mont to sign two arrangements to bolster aviation and border security between the United States and Mexico at the Mérida U.S.—Mexico High Level Consultative Group meeting—further expanding ongoing cooperative efforts to crack down on violent drug cartels and combat terrorism while facilitating the secure and efficient flow of legitimate travel and trade.

"Our close relationship with the Mexican government continues to grow stronger as we work together to find new ways to crack down on violent drug cartels and combat terrorism," said Secretary Napolitano. "The arrangements signed today further increase the capabilities of the United States and Mexico to protect both sides of the border from transnational criminals and terrorists that threaten the safety of both of our nations."

The first arrangement formally establishes the Joint Security Program for Travelers (JSP), which enhances information sharing and best practices between the United States and Mexico regarding the identification of potential terrorists or other dangerous criminals traveling by air through Mexico City International Airport and builds a foundation for future JSP expansion to additional Mexican airports—bolstering both nations' abilities to thwart acts of terrorism and protect against travel document fraud.

The second arrangement, signed with both Secretary Gómez-Mont and Secretary of Public Safety Genaro García Luna, will enable DHS to electronically share some criminal history information with Mexican law enforcement about Mexican nationals who are being repatriated from the United States and who have been convicted of certain felonies in the United States—providing the seamless transmission of vital security information in order to ensure the safety and security of citizens of both countries.

The agreements signed today build on numerous bilateral agreements and declarations of cooperation between Secretary Napolitano and her Mexican counterparts over the past year:

• In June 2009, Secretary Napolitano and former Mexican Secretary of Finance Agustín Carstens signed a Letter of Intent to provide further cooperation in the areas of enforcement, planning, and trade facilitation along the Southwest border.
  
  
• In September 2009, the United States and Mexico signed a bilateral agreement initiating a new cross-border communications network for public safety and law enforcement organizations to improve security along the U.S.-Mexico border by allowing participating federal, state, local and tribal public safety organizations to coordinate incident response.
  
  
• In November 2009, DHS officials met with their counterparts from the Mexican Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP) to outline joint initiatives to combat transnational crime, increase law enforcement collaboration and increase the secure flow of travel and trade along the U.S.-Mexico border. During the meeting, U.S. and Mexican officials agreed to formalize the Bi-national Port Security Committee to improve open and regular communication along the Southwest border—a significant step toward deterring violence at and near land ports of entry. These committees will address cross-border operational, safety and security issues.
  
  
• In December 2009, Secretary Napolitano and former Minister Carstens signed an updated and enhanced Declaration of Principles to create a joint U.S.—Mexico framework to improve security along the Southwest border and facilitate the flow of legitimate travel and trade.
  
  
• In February 2010, Secretary Napolitano and Mexican Secretary of Public Safety (SSP) Genaro García Luna signed a Declaration of Principles of Cooperation on joint efforts to secure the U.S.-Mexico border and share information about transnational threats while streamlining legitimate travel and trade. This declaration will allow the United States and Mexico to build on past and current efforts by promoting law enforcement information and intelligence sharing; the development of common priorities; the production of joint strategic plans; and joint operations—while respecting each nation's sovereignty, jurisdictions and authorities.
  
  
• In February 2010, Secretary Napolitano and Secretary Gómez-Mont signed a letter of intent to coordinate closely on a number of mutual aviation security initiatives—including deploying enhanced airport screening technologies, strengthening passenger information sharing, and ensuring passengers have proper travel documents. They also signed a communications protocol that outlined procedures for sharing and coordinating the release of public information in crisis events.
  

In addition, Secretary Napolitano traveled to Mexico City in February at Secretary Gómez-Mont's invitation to meet with officials from Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Panama and the International Civil Aviation Organization to discuss ways to bolster global aviation security measures and standards. The meeting resulted in a joint declaration on a way forward to strengthen the international civil aviation system through enhanced information collection and sharing, cooperation on technological development, and modernized aviation security standards.

Secretary Napolitano was in Mexico City as part of the U.S. delegation to the Mérida U.S.—Mexico High Level Consultative Group meeting today.

For more information, visit www.dhs.gov .

http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1269400206038.shtm

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

From ICE

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

Fresno County to benefit from ICE strategy to enhance the identification, removal of criminal aliens

Now the criminal and immigration records of all local arrestees to be checked

FRESNO, Calif. - On Tuesday, law enforcement agencies in Fresno County began employing a new information-sharing capability that modernizes the process used to accurately identify criminal aliens in the community.

Developed by the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Homeland Security (DHS), the information-sharing capability is the cornerstone of Secure Communities, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) initiative to enhance efforts to identify and remove criminal aliens from the United States.

Previously, local arrestees' fingerprints were taken and checked for criminal history information against the DOJ biometric system maintained by the FBI. With this new information-sharing capability, that fingerprint information will now be simultaneously checked against both FBI criminal history records and the biometrics-based immigration records maintained by DHS.

If any fingerprints match those of someone in DHS's biometric system, the new automated process notifies ICE, enabling the agency to take appropriate action to ensure criminal aliens are not released back into communities. Top priority is given to individuals who pose a threat to public safety, such as those with prior convictions for major drug offenses, murder, rape, robbery and kidnapping.

"Secure Communities provides local law enforcement with an effective tool to identify criminal aliens," said Secure Communities Executive Director David Venturella. "Enhancing public safety is at the core of ICE's mission. Our goal with Secure Communities is to use biometric information sharing to prevent criminal aliens from being released back into the community, with little or no additional burden on our law enforcement partners."

With the expansion of the information-sharing capability to Fresno County, there are now 13 California jurisdictions using this tool, including Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, San Diego, Imperial, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Sacramento, Sonoma, Solano, San Joaquin and Stanislaus counties. Across the country, 121 jurisdictions in 16 states have this capability. By 2013, ICE expects to make Secure Communities available nationwide.

"The Fresno County Sheriff's Office has always worked closely with ICE in an effort to identify criminal aliens booked into our jail," said Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims. "This new technology will allow us to identify criminal aliens in a more timely fashion without extra staffing or funding. It will strengthen our partnership with ICE and bolster our commitment to keeping the citizens of Fresno County safe."

Since its inception in October 2008, Secure Communities has identified more than 18,800 aliens charged with or convicted of Level 1 crimes, such as murder, rape and kidnapping - more than 4,000 of those individuals have already been removed from the United States. Most of the criminal aliens who have been identified but not yet removed are completing their sentences. Additionally, ICE has removed more than 24,700 aliens charged with or convicted of Level 2 and 3 crimes, including burglary and serious property crimes, which account for 90 percent of the crimes committed by aliens.

Secure Communities is part of DHS's comprehensive plan to distribute technology that links local law enforcement agencies to both FBI and DHS biometric systems. DHS's US VISIT Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) holds biometrics-based immigration records, while the FBI's Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) contains biometrics-based criminal records.

"US VISIT is proud to support ICE, helping provide decision makers with comprehensive, reliable information when and where they need it," said US VISIT Director Robert Mocny. "By enhancing the interoperability of DHS's and the FBI's biometric systems, we are able to give federal, state and local decision makers information that helps them better protect our communities and our nation."

"Under this plan, ICE will be utilizing FBI system enhancements that allow improved information sharing at the state and local law enforcement level based on positive identification of incarcerated criminal aliens," said Daniel D. Roberts, assistant director of the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services Division. "Additionally, ICE and the FBI are working together to take advantage of the strong relationships already forged between the FBI and state and local law enforcement necessary to assist ICE in achieving its goals."

For more information, visit www.ice.gov .

http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/1003/100323fresno.htm

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

From the FBI

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

CAUGHT ON CAMERA

Best Practices for CCTV Systems

03/23/10

The TV news anchor soberly announced the day's top story: another city transit bus had been bombed, and a domestic terror group was claiming responsibility. The report went on to say that witnesses saw a man get off the bus just before it blew up, and that the FBI was investigating.

The scene described above—realistic as it may sound—is part of a fictional new video. But Caught on Camera is not a product of Hollywood. While it does have high production values, special effects, and narration by Annie Wersching, co-star of the TV show 24 , the video was created by our Operational Technology Division to show business owners how their security cameras can aid law enforcement investigations and maybe even help solve a terrorist attack.

Using the transit bus bombing as its story line, the 20-minute instructional video (view it here or at YouTube ) shows how closed circuit television (CCTV) systems can be installed and maintained for maximum effect—not only for the business owner but for the needs of law enforcement as well. “Convenience stores, banks, mom and pop operations, gas stations—potentially tens of thousands of businesses could enhance their security systems with the simple tips provided by this video,” said Katrina Gossman, unit chief for the Forensic Audio, Video, and Image Analysis Unit. Buying expensive new equipment isn't necessary, Gossman added. In most cases, a few changes to existing systems can make a significant difference.

“Often the surveillance images we receive from these types of security cameras are of poor quality, and they don't need to be,” she said, explaining that such images can be critical in identifying and apprehending a terrorist or fugitive.

Caught on Camera shows how to avoid common problems such as installing cameras in the wrong places, ignoring lighting and line-of-sight issues, and having administrators who don't understand how the systems operate. “Many business owners think their systems are fine until something happens,” Gossman said. The video uses real actors as well as FBI personnel, including members of our Hostage Rescue Team . “We wanted to make a training video that wasn't boring,” said Melody Buba, a forensic video examiner who worked on the year-long project. “It needed to be entertaining enough for business owners to watch it, but instructional.” In the video, the terrorist shops for bomb-making material in a local home improvement store and buys backpacks at a pharmacy to transport the explosives. Many of the stores' surveillance images are flawed, but one home improvement store camera reveals that the bomber has a distinguishing tattoo on his neck, which proves crucial to the investigation.

There are many ways for CCTV systems to fail, one of the actors explained. “But when the system works, it can make all the difference.” If you are going to install a CCTV system, the video points out, “Do it right—for yourself, for law enforcement, and for your community.”

In the case of Caught on Camera , the system did indeed work. And the outcome is fun to watch.

Caught on Camera is also available free of charge in DVD format to members of the law enforcement community, business owners, CCTV vendors, suppliers, contractors, and educators. To request a copy, send an e-mail to cctvdvd@leo.gov . Please include your name, position, agency, street address (no post office boxes), and telephone number.

http://www.fbi.gov/page2/mar10/cctv_032310.html

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

FBI Laboratory Seeks to Enhance the Efficiency of the National DNA Index System

In order to enhance the efficiency of the nation's DNA database, also known as the National DNA Index System (NDIS), the FBI has established an ongoing dialogue with various groups to gain a broader perspective and better understand the needs of the entire law enforcement community. Those groups include the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors (ASCLD), the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (SWGDAM), CODIS State Administrators, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), and various federal, state, local, and tribal agencies. The FBI is committed to seeking common ground in the interest of protecting the public, reducing backlogs, ensuring privacy, and maintaining the integrity of the National DNA database.

Many public law enforcement agencies collaborate with private laboratories for analysis of their DNA samples. The FBI Laboratory is currently re-evaluating existing policies, standards, and protocols, including requirements for outsourcing DNA analysis to private laboratories and review of their results by public law enforcement laboratories. Private laboratories continue to be an integral part of the process and share in the success of NDIS. The current policy assessment will focus on these contributions and will engage both public and private laboratories.

The administration and operation of the National DNA database is an inherently governmental function that supports criminal investigations conducted by our federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement partners. Therefore, the FBI's assessment does not include re-evaluating access to NDIS. Necessary improvements can be gained by enhancing the efficiency of NDIS procedures.

DNA analysis and, by extension, DNA databases, have proven to be invaluable to the law enforcement community and to victims of violent crimes and their families. Since more violent crimes are solved as more records are placed into the database, enhancing the operational procedures for optimal efficiency of NDIS is imperative.

http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel10/ndis032310.htm

.