Thursday, January 26, 2012

Teen saves school bus after driver dies

A teen with just two weeks of driving experience managed to steer her school bus to safety after her driver had a heart attack. WCAU-TV's Deanna Durante reports.

By NBCPhiladelphia.com

Graceann Rumer, 17, started driving only two weeks ago. But when her school bus driver collapsed from a heart attack Tuesday afternoon,?she didn't hesitate to use what she knew to?steer a bus full of children to safety.

"I just realized that there's no one driving this bus... I need?to do something,"?Rumer said.

The 17-year-old senior at Calvary Christian Academy in northeast Philadelphia had been driving herself to?school recently for practice,?but on Tuesday she opted for the?bus.


For more information, visit NBCPhiladelphia.com

Rumer and about three dozen other students were riding the bus home when 51-year-old driver Charles Duncan suddenly crumpled to the floor at about 3:30 p.m. Duncan died soon after.

With the driver obstructing the brake pedal, Rumer acted quickly?-- grabbing the wheel of the moving bus and making a U-turn to slow it down and change direction, as it was heading into oncoming traffic, witnesses say.

With still no access to the brake pedal, Rumer put the bus into park and successfully and safely stopped it, according to witnesses and bus company officials.

"I usually panic at like everything but I just reached over... grabbed the wheel and I pulled it over to the side and got off the road,"?Rumer said.?

None of the students were injured.

Parents of fellow students, friends and school officials all praised Rumer?s quick thinking and action.

"We had three of our children on the bus along with dozens of other kids and the outcome could have been much different," said Renee Lawsin, one of the parents. "She did something very heroic."

But Rumer dismisses being a hero, instead saying she was just the closest student to the front of the bus who had any driving experience.

"I don't think it was that heroic though. But it was a legit miracle," Rumer tweeted Thursday. "God really protected us."

More content from msnbc.com and NBC News

Source: http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/26/10242761-teen-drives-school-bus-to-safety

district 9 pandaria pandaria artie lange baby lisa irwin baby lisa irwin pearl jam 20

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Another Applied Hayek Moment (Powerlineblog)

Share With Friends: Share on FacebookTweet ThisPost to Google-BuzzSend on GmailPost to Linked-InSubscribe to This Feed | Rss To Twitter | Politics - Top Stories Stories, News Feeds and News via Feedzilla.

Source: http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stories/politics/top-stories/190499287?client_source=feed&format=rss

advent calendar adobe air 2005yu55 advanced search alexander the great personhood amendment haynesworth

Obama plans new team to get tough on China trade (Reuters)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) ? President Barack Obama on Tuesday said he was creating an enforcement unit to crack down on unfair trade practices in China and other countries and would beef up border inspections to block imports of counterfeit goods.

"I will go anywhere in the world to open new markets for American products. And I will not stand by when our competitors don't play by the rules," Obama said in his annual State of the Union speech.

The White House said the new enforcement team would bring together resources and investigators from across the federal government to go after unfair foreign trade practices.

Obama said his administration had already brought trade cases against China "at nearly twice the rate as the last administration ... But we need to do more. It's not right when another country lets our movies, music, and software be pirated. It's not fair when foreign manufacturers have a leg up on ours only because they're heavily subsidized."

Republicans vying to take on Obama in this year's presidential race have slammed his handling of China. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has promised a tougher approach, begin with labeling China a currency manipulator.

The U.S. trade deficit with China is expected to hit a new record high of about $300 billion in 2011 when figures are released next month.

The U.S. Trade Representative's office has filed five World Trade Organization cases against China since Obama took office in January 2009, compared to seven during the two terms of former President George W. Bush. China joined the WTO in December 2001.

In addition, the Commerce Department is currently investigating U.S. industry charges of unfair pricing practices by Chinese wind and solar energy equipment manufacturers.

Obama did not mention those cases, but urged Congress to pass tax credits to create more U.S. clean energy jobs.

"I will not cede the wind or solar or battery industry to China or Germany because we refuse to make the same commitment here," he said.

A business group representing U.S. companies that do business in China said it welcomed Obama's push to open China's markets to more U.S. exports.

"Direct negotiation with China is the best first approach to dealing with commercial problems American companies have with China. But we also can use other sound legal tools - such as anti-dumping investigations and WTO cases," said John Frisbie, president of the U.S.-China Business Council.

Another group that represents both labor and domestic manufacturers that compete with China also welcomed the initiative, but urged lawmakers to go further.

Congress should pass "a bipartisan bill to stop China's currency manipulation," said Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing.

Last month, a top U.S. trade official said China continued to fall short on many of its WTO promises including barriers to its agricultural markets, weak intellectual property rights protection, discriminatory industrial policies and barriers in services.

Obama, in his speech to Congress, promised to increase border inspections to stop counterfeit name-brand goods and other pirated or unsafe products from getting into the United States.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce complains the worldwide trade in fake goods, many of which come from China, costs the United States hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs.

Obama said the United States cannot afford to stand by when competitors like China offer cheap government financing to help their businesses win sales overseas.

He also appeared to make a subtle pitch for lawmakers to approve "permanent normal trade relations" with Russia in order to ensure that U.S. companies benefit from the market-opening benefits of Moscow's expected accession to the WTO.

"This Congress should make sure that no foreign company has an advantage over American manufacturing when it comes to accessing finance or new markets like Russia. Our workers are the most productive on Earth, and if the playing field is level, I promise you - America will always win," Obama said.

(Reporting By Doug Palmer; Editing by Eric Walsh)

Source: http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/rss/obama/*http%3A//news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20120125/ts_nm/us_usa_obama_speech_trade

santonio holmes raheem morris winter classic mt rainier stanford vs oklahoma state caucus occupy rose parade

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Steuben County To Get Emergency Communications Upgrade

Steuben County emergency system getting $1.5 million grant
Work taking place now to ensure continuity of Steuben emergency communications

By Mary Perham


Bath, N.Y. ?

Extensive plans are now under way to be sure emergency communications in Steuben County are not interrupted after the end of the year.

County Office of Emergency Services Director Michael Sprague said Motorola is on schedule with plans to set up a "narrow band" communications system in the county by Dec. 31, 2012.

The new system will be funded by a $1.5 million grant recently awarded by the state, Sprague told the county Legislature?s Public Safety and Corrections Committee recently. More...

Source: http://solomonswords.blogspot.com/2012/01/steuben-county-to-get-emergency.html

hunter s thompson berkman berkman new beavis and butthead game 7 anya ayoung chee peru earthquake

Legal Theory Blog: Legal Theory Lexicon: Transparency

Introduction

Sooner or later, most law students encounter the idea that "transparency" (as opposed to "opaqueness") is (all else being equal) a desirable characteristic in markets, procedures, and governance institutions (both private and public).?But what is "transparency" and why is it a good thing??This entry in the?Legal Theory Lexicon?provides a very brief introduction to the concept of transparency for law students (especially first-year law students) with an interest in legal theory. The basic idea of transparency is simple: things go better when processes are open. Markets function best when transactions are public and terms are disclosed. Judicial processes work best when they are visible to the participants and the public. Governments work best when both inputs to decisions and the meetings in which decisions are made are public. This post provides a brief introduction to the idea of transparency in a few important contexts.

Transparency and Democratic Process?

Why should the processes of democratic decisionmaking be transparent??There are so many different answers to this question that one hardly knows where to begin, but we might start by distinguishing between answers that rely on consequentialist reasoning and those that appeal to ideas about rights, fairness, or legitimacy. The consequentialist case for transparency in government usually rests on the idea that opaque processes are likely to facilitate corruption or capture. Corruption is more likely because secret decisionmaking facilitates rent-seeking (soliciting bribes) by public officials; transparency processes make bribery more difficult and increase the likelihood that it will be exposed. "Capture" is the term used to describe domination of a regulatory process by the interests who are supposed to be regulated. When lawmaking (or administrative rulemaking) is done in secret, there is a greater likelihood that the information flow will be one sided.

The process that led to the formation of the Bush Administration's energy policy provided a good example of debates over the pros and cons of transparency in government. The administration developed its energy policy through non-transparent procedures. Vice-President Cheney met in private with a variety of interest groups, and the records of the meetings were not made available to the public. Critics charged that this secrecy allowed oil and coal interests to dominate the decision-making process to the detriment of the public interest. The administration defended the process, arguing that public processes would have inhibited free and frank discussion of the issues by the various interest groups. Whether or not this argument was correct in this particular context, it illustrates an important point. Transparency in government comes at a price. Transparent processes may be inefficient--what can be done in private in minutes may take hours in public. Transparent processes may also distort decision-making, forcing political actors to pander to public opinion at the expense of good policy.? And transparency may inhibit rather than facilitate the free flow of information--unpopular truths may be discussed behind closed doors but avoided in the sunshine.

The case for transparency in government need not rest on consequences. It might also be argued that transparent government is required by the rights of citizens to meaningfully participate in democratic self-government. If public officials conduct business in private, then it becomes more difficult for citizens to make meaningful decisions at the ballot box.? This deontological foundations of the values of transparency are likely to be rooted in theories of procedural justice and the role of democracy a conception of the political equality of citizens.

Transparency in the Market and the Boardroom

The case for transparent markets is simple. Efficiency requires information. Efficient pricing, for example, requires that buyers know what they are buyng and sellers know what they are selling. "Buying a pig in a poke" is simply a colorful way of expressing the idea that a nontransparent transaction has occurred. Transparency may be especially important in capital markets.? Securities regulation in the United States rests on the assumption that mandatory disclosure of accurate financial information will lead to investor confidence and facilitate efficient financial markets. Without transparency each investor would face either uncertainty or enormous information acquisition costs. Efficient capital markets produce enormous benefits, because they enable resources to be allocated to their highest and best use. Finally, transparency in corporate governance aims to prevent management from appropriating wealth owned by stockholders.

There are, however, situations in which transparency is inconsistent with efficient markets. Trade secret law, for example, aims at the opposite of transparency. The theory is that the ability to keep secrets creates an incentive to develop new ideas, inventions, and processes; disclosure would allow competitors to appropriate the new idea without compensation, and hence would reduce the incentives for the creation of new knowledge. Similarly, corporations are not required to disclose business strategies and tactics.

Transparent Judicial Procedures

Civil litigation and criminal trials provide a final context in which transparency is an important value. When we think about the transparency of judicial procedures, there are two different groups for whom the process may be transparent or opaque. The first group is comprised of litigants (plaintiffs/defendants in civil litigation and defendants in criminal litigation). The second group consists of the public at large. Most legal systems place a higher value on transparency to participants than on transparency to the public. While it is not unusual for a hearing to be closed to the public, it is very unusual for a judicial proceeding to exclude the parties themselves. But there are important exceptions to this rule. Deliberations by both judges and juries are usually opaque.

Thus, even the defendant in a criminal case is not allowed to observe the deliberations of the jury. A similar rule applies to judicial deliberations. For example, the conferences of an appellate court (e.g. the United States Supreme Court) are conducted in the strictest secrecy, as are the communications between among judges and between judges and their clerks. In these contexts, the thought is that open deliberations would actually distort the decision making process, leading to worse rather than better decisions.

Connections with Normative Legal Theory

As should be clear by now, debates about transparency in law connect with larger debates in normative legal theory. ?The case for transparency in a given context may rest on either utilitarian or deontological considerations. ?And the case against transparency, likewise, might be grounded in a right to privacy or on the basis of benefits of secrecy. ?As is frequently the case, some debates about transparency do not get very far, because the participants are operating on the basis inconsistent premises about the kinds of values that should guide legal choice. ?One way to move past this kind of impasse might involve appeal to public reasons--reasons that draw on values that are accepted in the public political and legal culture that do not directly invoke comprehensive moral conceptions (like Bentham's utilitarianism or Kant's deontology).

Conclusion

Concern with process is ubiquitous in legal theory, and processes can be transparent or opaque. As a law student, you might begin to ask yourself about the effect of legal rules on transparency. Does this rule make the process more transparent or more opaque. When you encounter rules that render processes opaque, always ask?why? There may be an answer to the question, but then again, there may not. ?One way to deal with this problem involves conceptual ascent--moving directly to address the underlying value conflict. ?Another solution may involve the attempt to refocus the discussion in a way that involves?public reasons--reasons that appeal to public values that do not directly depend on comprehensive moral or political theories.

Related Lexicon Entries

Bibliography

(This entry was last revised on January 22, 2012.)

Source: http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2012/01/legal-theory-lexicon-transparency.html

roddy white howard stern howard stern free shipping day free shipping day golden globe nominations 2012 war in iraq

AP IMPACT: Health overhaul lags in states

WASHINGTON (AP) ? Here's a reality check for President Barack Obama's health overhaul: Three out of four uninsured Americans live in states that have yet to figure out how to deliver on its promise of affordable medical care.

This is the year that will make or break the health care law. States were supposed to be partners in carrying out the biggest safety net expansion since Medicare and Medicaid, and the White House claims they're making steady progress.

But an analysis by The Associated Press shows that states are moving in fits and starts. Combined with new insurance coverage estimates from the nonpartisan Urban Institute, it reveals a patchwork nation.

Such uneven progress could have real consequences.

If it continues, it will mean disparities and delays from state to state in carrying out an immense expansion of health insurance scheduled in the law for 2014. That could happen even if the Supreme Court upholds Obama's law, called the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

"There will be something there, but if it doesn't mesh with the state's culture and if the state is not really supporting it, that certainly won't help it succeed," said Urban Institute senior researcher Matthew Buettgens.

The 13 states that have adopted a plan are home to only 1 in 4 of the uninsured. An additional 17 states are making headway, but it's not clear all will succeed. The 20 states lagging behind account for the biggest share of the uninsured, 42 percent.

Among the lagging states are four with arguably the most to gain. Texas, Florida, Georgia and Ohio together would add more than 7 million people to the insurance rolls, according to Urban Institute estimates, reducing the annual burden of charity care by $10.7 billion.

"It's not that we want something for free, but we want something we can afford," said Vicki McCuistion of Driftwood, Texas, who works two part-time jobs and is uninsured. With the nation's highest uninsured rate, her state has made little progress.

The Obama administration says McCuistion and others in the same predicament have nothing to fear. "The fact of states moving at different rates does not create disparities for a particular state's uninsured population," said Steve Larsen, director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the federal Department of Health and Human Services.

That's because the law says that if a state isn't ready, the federal government will step in. Larsen insists the government will be ready, but it's not as easy as handing out insurance cards.

Someone has to set up health insurance exchanges, new one-stop supermarkets with online and landline capabilities for those who buy coverage individually.

A secure infrastructure must be created to verify income, legal residency and other personal information, and smooth enrollment in private insurance plans or Medicaid. Many middle-class households will be eligible for tax credits to help pay premiums for private coverage. Separate exchanges must be created for small businesses.

"It's a very heavy lift," said California's health secretary, Diana Dooley, whose state was one of the first to approve a plan. "Coverage is certainly important, but it's not the only part. It is very complex."

California has nearly 7.5 million residents without coverage, more than half of the 12.7 million uninsured in the states with a plan. An estimated 2.9 million Californians would gain coverage, according to the Urban Institute's research, funded by the nonpartisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

Democrats who wrote the overhaul law had hoped that most states would be willing partners, putting aside partisan differences to build the exchanges and help cover more than 30 million uninsured nationally. It's not turning out that way.

Some states, mainly those led by Democrats, are far along. Others, usually led by Republicans, have done little. Separately, about half the states are suing to overturn the law.

Time is running out for states, which must have their plans ready for a federal approval deadline of Jan. 1, 2013. Those not ready risk triggering the default requirement that Washington run their exchange.

Yet in states where Republican repudiation of the health care law has blocked exchanges, there's little incentive to advance before the Supreme Court rules. A decision is expected this summer, and many state legislatures aren't scheduled to meet past late spring.

The result if the law is upheld could be greater federal sway over health care in the states, the very outcome conservatives say they want to prevent.

"If you give states the opportunity to decide their own destiny, and some choose to ignore it for partisan reasons, they almost make the case against themselves for more federal intervention," said Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb.

A conservative, Nelson was on the winning side of a heated argument among Democrats over who should run exchanges, the feds or the states. Liberals lost their demand for a federal exchange, insulated from state politics.

"It's pretty hard to take care of the states when they don't take care of themselves," said Nelson, who regrets that the concession he fought for has been dismissed by so many states.

The AP's analysis divided states into four broad groups: those that have adopted a plan for exchanges, those that made substantial progress, those where the outlook is unclear, and those with no significant progress. AP statehouse reporters were consulted in cases of conflicting information.

Thirteen states, plus the District of Columbia, have adopted a plan.

By contrast, in 20 states either the outlook is unclear or there has been no significant progress. Those states include more than 21 million of the 50 million uninsured Americans.

Four have made no significant progress. They are Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana and New Hampshire. The last three returned planning money to the federal government. In Arkansas, Democratic Gov. Mike Beebe ran into immovable GOP opposition in the Legislature. Beebe acknowledges that the federal government will have to run the exchange, but is exploring a fallback option.

In the other 16 states, the outlook is unclear because of failure to advance legislation or paralyzing political disputes that often pit Republicans fervently trying to stop what they deride as "Obamacare" against fellow Republicans who are more pragmatic.

In Kansas, for example, Insurance Commissioner Sandy Praeger is pushing hard for a state exchange, but Gov. Sam Brownback returned a $31 million federal grant, saying the state would not act before the Supreme Court rules. Both officials are Republicans.

"It's just presidential politics," said Praeger, discussing the situation nationally. "It's less about whether exchanges make sense and more about trying to repeal the whole law." As a result, outlook is unclear for a state with 361,000 uninsured residents.

There is a bright spot for Obama and backers of the law.

An additional 17 states have made substantial progress, although that's no guarantee of success. Last week in Wisconsin, GOP Gov. Scott Walker abruptly halted planning and announced he will return $38 million in federal money.

AP defined states making substantial progress as ones where governors or legislatures have made a significant commitment to set up exchanges. Another important factor was state acceptance of a federal exchange establishment grant.

That group accounts for just under one-third of the uninsured, about 16 million people.

It includes populous states such as New York, Illinois, North Carolina and New Jersey, which combined would add more than 3 million people to the insurance rolls.

Several are led by Republican governors, including Virginia and Indiana, which have declared their intent to establish insurance exchanges under certain conditions. Other states that have advanced under Republican governors include Arizona and New Mexico.

For uninsured people living in states that have done little, the situation is demoralizing.

Gov. Rick Perry's opposition to the law scuttled plans to advance an exchange bill in the Texas Legislature last year, when Perry was contemplating his presidential run. The Legislature doesn't meet this year, so the situation is unclear.

McCuistion and her husband, Dan, are among the nearly 6.7 million Texans who lack coverage. Dan is self-employed as the owner of a specialty tree service. Vicki works part time for two nonprofit organizations. The McCuistions have been uninsured throughout their 17-year marriage, although their three daughters now have coverage through the Children's Health Insurance Program. Dan McCuistion has been nursing a bad back for years, and it only seems to get worse.

"For me it almost feels like a ticking time bomb," his wife said.

Dan McCuistion says he doesn't believe Americans have a constitutional right to health care, but he would take advantage of affordable coverage if it was offered to him. He's exasperated with Perry and other Texas politicians. "They give a lot of rhetoric toward families, but their actions don't meet up with what they are saying," he said.

Perry's office says it's principle, not lack of compassion.

"Gov. Perry believes 'Obamacare' is unconstitutional, misguided and unsustainable, and Texas, along with other states, is taking legal action to end this massive government overreach," said spokeswoman Lucy Nashed. "There are no plans to implement an exchange."

___

Online:

AP interactive: http://hosted.ap.org/interactives/2011/healthcare

Urban Institute estimates: http://tinyurl.com/86py8nd

Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight: http://cciio.cms.gov

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/386c25518f464186bf7a2ac026580ce7/Article_2012-01-22-US-Health-Overhaul-States/id-d24137291c1e4d1995924669a9499539

lisfranc injury ronan ronan diane sawyer clay matthews kenny chesney matt kemp

Monday, January 23, 2012

Steelers QB settles lawsuit alleging '08 rape

(AP) ? Lawyers for Ben Roethlisberger and a woman who accused him of raping her at a Lake Tahoe hotel-casino in 2008 have reached a settlement that ends her civil lawsuit against the Steelers quarterback.

Cal Dunlap, the Reno lawyer representing the woman, told The Associated Press on Friday "the matter has been resolved." He said he had no further comment.

The Reno Gazette-Journal first reported the settlement. It also dismisses claims against Harrah's employees whom the woman had accused of covering up the alleged sexual assault in Roethlisberger's penthouse suite.

Dunlap said in papers filed in Washoe District Court that his client wanted to have the case dismissed because all the parties had reached a resolution of all claims and counterclaims.

The Pittsburgh quarterback's lawyer has had no comment.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/347875155d53465d95cec892aeb06419/Article_2012-01-20-Roethlisberger%20Lawsuit-Settled/id-620f54df290944cfa3be85953871cf9b

walmart black friday 2011 packers vikings bob costas jerry sandusky chelsea clinton kat von d tiki barber minnesota vikings