Bloomberg News, sent from my Android phone
United Nations special envoy Kofi Annan is looking to overcome Russia's misgivings over a plan to end the bloodshed in Syria and to resolve the fate of President Bashar al-Assad.
The foreign ministers of the five permanent UN Security Council members -- China, France, Russia, the U.K. and the U.S. -- as well as Turkey, Qatar, Kuwait and Iraq are set to attend a conference in Geneva today to discuss Annan's plan. The meeting's success may hinge on whether Russia breaks with Assad after shielding him with Security Council vetoes.
Persuading Assad to step aside and not be part of a transitional government paving the way for elections is at the core of Annan's plan that seeks to end 16 months of violence that has left more than 10,000 people dead. About 4,000 Syrians have been killed since Annan took on the peacemaking mission in February, according to the Local Coordination Committees, an activist group.
Annan, who also represents the Arab League, yesterday said he's optimistic that the meeting will yield an "acceptable result" on how to proceed with a handover of power.
Russian Foreign Minster Sergei Lavrov, after meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton yesterday in St. Petersburg, said he wants changes in Annan's plan.
They agreed on "most of" the plan, Lavrov said, while telling reporters afterwards that he is seeking unspecified changes. Lavrov said Russia and the U.S. agree that Annan's proposals "aren't untouchable," and he predicted a compromise.
"We'll find a way out in Geneva, Lavrov said.
U.S.-Russia Gap
Clinton and Lavrov failed to resolve their differences during nearly an hour of one-on-one talks, said a State Department official who asked for anonymity because the discussions are private. They covered the situation in detail and Clinton pointed to the dangers of Syria leading to a wider conflict in the region, the official said.
Still, the two ministers agreed to go to Geneva out of respect for Annan, knowing there may or may not be an agreement there, the official said.
Annan's three-page paper sets out as ''key steps in any transition" the creation of a unity government that he defined in terms that would leave out Assad and some members of his inner circle.
The plan says the new government "could include members of the present government and the opposition and other groups, but would exclude from government those whose continued presence and participation would undermine the credibility of the transition and jeopardize stability and reconciliation."
The U.S. refuses to endorse any plan that enables Assad to remain in power at the top of a transitional government.
Fighting 'Terrorists'
The Syrian leader yesterday said his government rejects any external solutions to the conflict. Assad said it's the government's responsibility to wipe out the "terrorists," as Syrian authorities refer to rebels. He has said that any future government in Syria must hold free and fair elections for a multiparty government.
Tensions have also risen with neighboring Turkey, a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, after Syria shot down a Turkish warplane that it said violated its territory and Turkey said was in international airspace, on June 22.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said this week that Turkey had changed its military rules of engagement after the incident and that any military element approaching the Turkish border from Syria could be viewed as a threat and treated as a military target.
Iran's Exclusion
Iran, Syria's neighbor and ally, was excluded from the Geneva talks at the insistence of the U.S., which said the Tehran regime has provided Assad's forces with weapons, training and other support. Russia, which sought to have Iran included, then opposed inviting Saudi Arabia, which it said is helping arm the Syrian opposition.
Iran's exclusion is a mistake, Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations Mohammad Khazaee said yesterday in New York. He criticized Western nations "and particularly the United States" for failing to consider "the power and influence of Iran." Iran could be "a heavyweight champion in bringing peace to the region," he said
To contact the reporters on this story: Jennifer M. Freedman in Geneva at jfreedman@bloomberg.net; Scott Rose in Geneva at rrose10@bloomberg.net; Indira A.R. Lakshmanan in St. Petersburg at ilakshmanan@bloomberg.net
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Balazs Penz at bpenz@bloomberg.net; John Walcott at jwalcott9@bloomberg.net
Find out more about Bloomberg for Android: http://m.bloomberg.com/android
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
(BN) EU Banking Debate Shifts to Euro Area After Accord on Spain
Bloomberg News, sent from my Android phone
The European Union's push to unify bank oversight moved to the euro area after two days of talks in Brussels, putting the European Central Bank at the center of Spain's efforts to extract its government from its banking- industry rescue.
Euro-area leaders asked for proposals this year to unify banking supervision and soup up the ECB's powers. They referred to a clause in the EU treaty that allows them to give the ECB prudential oversight of banks and other non-insurance financial companies.
The move paves the way for the European Commission, the EU's regulatory arm, to augment its proposals on deposit insurance, capital requirements and how to handle failing banks. It also acknowledges concerns from the U.K. and Sweden that countries outside the currency area be free from mandates to join the ECB umbrella.
Once Europe establishes a single banking supervisor, leaders said they may allow cash-strapped lenders to be recapitalized directly instead of through their home governments. This could break the link between banks and sovereigns that has plagued the euro area throughout the crisis and become a particular flash point for Spain's bank rescue.
'Held Hostage'
"The Spanish sovereign is effectively being held hostage to what is likely to be a tortuous political process in putting the ECB in charge of euro-zone banks," said Nicholas Spiro, managing director of Spiro Sovereign Strategy in London. He said direct recapitalization of Spanish banks is the summit's most important achievement and hinges on creation of an independent supervisory authority.
French President Francois Hollande predicted that ECB supervision over euro-area banks wouldn't be in place before year end. British Prime Minister David Cameron said "the euro- zone countries are well on the way to making the euro-zone bank, the ECB, the regulators of their banks. That will be a good outcome."
ECB President Mario Draghi welcomed the summit's overall conclusions and acknowledged the Brussels-based commission's mandate to assess the ECB's role as allowed in the treaty. Speaking to reporters today, he did not elaborate on how the commission's proposals should take shape other than to say "all these things should be, to be credible, accompanied by strict conditionality."
National Supervisors
The Frankfurt-based ECB might end up serving as an umbrella over national supervisors, rather than building a separate organization, EU officials said in the run-up to this week's summit. EU members would need to decide how many banks to include and how the ECB would work with the European Banking Authority, which was created to help supervisors coordinate across the 27-nation bloc.
EU Financial Services Commissioner Michel Barnier called on all the bloc's nations to broker deals on draft financial regulations in the coming weeks as a "cornerstone" of the banking union that EU leaders seek to secure the long-term future of the euro, in an interview in Brussels yesterday. He said decisions on whether the ECB or the London-based EBA gain enhanced powers depends on how all 27 nations agree to further pool their bank-oversight powers.
The EBA, which began work last year, was set up as part of the EU's response to the crisis that followed the 2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. It coordinates the work of national regulators and has some power to resolve disputes between them.
Banking Union
Where to place enhanced supervisory power becomes a trickier decision if individual countries opt out of a banking union, Barnier said, in part because the ECB decides monetary policy for the 17 countries of the euro area, and in part because of other aspects of the EBA's mandate. Should all 27 EU countries sign up for the banking union plans, then the enhanced power for the EU to supervise lenders should "probably" be handed to the EBA, Barnier said.
"If you are fewer than 27 then there is an issue to resolve with the EBA, if you are more than 17 then there is an issue to resolve with the ECB," he said. "This is why there are a range of possible models, and why we need some weeks or months to work on this."
The adoption of proposals that the commissioner has made on bank capital requirements, coordination of deposit guarantee programs and the winding-down of failing banks is a "precondition" for the creation of a banking union, Barnier said yesterday in an interview with Bloomberg News in Brussels. The draft laws should be settled "in the weeks to come, or in the case of crisis resolution before the end of the year."
Depending on the outcome of the summit, the commission will present plans for extra EU supervision of banks, as well as for "the mutualization of deposit guarantee funds and resolution funds" by year end, Barnier said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Jim Brunsden in Brussels at jbrunsden@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Anthony Aarons at aaarons@bloomberg.net
Find out more about Bloomberg for Android: http://m.bloomberg.com/android
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
The European Union's push to unify bank oversight moved to the euro area after two days of talks in Brussels, putting the European Central Bank at the center of Spain's efforts to extract its government from its banking- industry rescue.
Euro-area leaders asked for proposals this year to unify banking supervision and soup up the ECB's powers. They referred to a clause in the EU treaty that allows them to give the ECB prudential oversight of banks and other non-insurance financial companies.
The move paves the way for the European Commission, the EU's regulatory arm, to augment its proposals on deposit insurance, capital requirements and how to handle failing banks. It also acknowledges concerns from the U.K. and Sweden that countries outside the currency area be free from mandates to join the ECB umbrella.
Once Europe establishes a single banking supervisor, leaders said they may allow cash-strapped lenders to be recapitalized directly instead of through their home governments. This could break the link between banks and sovereigns that has plagued the euro area throughout the crisis and become a particular flash point for Spain's bank rescue.
'Held Hostage'
"The Spanish sovereign is effectively being held hostage to what is likely to be a tortuous political process in putting the ECB in charge of euro-zone banks," said Nicholas Spiro, managing director of Spiro Sovereign Strategy in London. He said direct recapitalization of Spanish banks is the summit's most important achievement and hinges on creation of an independent supervisory authority.
French President Francois Hollande predicted that ECB supervision over euro-area banks wouldn't be in place before year end. British Prime Minister David Cameron said "the euro- zone countries are well on the way to making the euro-zone bank, the ECB, the regulators of their banks. That will be a good outcome."
ECB President Mario Draghi welcomed the summit's overall conclusions and acknowledged the Brussels-based commission's mandate to assess the ECB's role as allowed in the treaty. Speaking to reporters today, he did not elaborate on how the commission's proposals should take shape other than to say "all these things should be, to be credible, accompanied by strict conditionality."
National Supervisors
The Frankfurt-based ECB might end up serving as an umbrella over national supervisors, rather than building a separate organization, EU officials said in the run-up to this week's summit. EU members would need to decide how many banks to include and how the ECB would work with the European Banking Authority, which was created to help supervisors coordinate across the 27-nation bloc.
EU Financial Services Commissioner Michel Barnier called on all the bloc's nations to broker deals on draft financial regulations in the coming weeks as a "cornerstone" of the banking union that EU leaders seek to secure the long-term future of the euro, in an interview in Brussels yesterday. He said decisions on whether the ECB or the London-based EBA gain enhanced powers depends on how all 27 nations agree to further pool their bank-oversight powers.
The EBA, which began work last year, was set up as part of the EU's response to the crisis that followed the 2008 collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. It coordinates the work of national regulators and has some power to resolve disputes between them.
Banking Union
Where to place enhanced supervisory power becomes a trickier decision if individual countries opt out of a banking union, Barnier said, in part because the ECB decides monetary policy for the 17 countries of the euro area, and in part because of other aspects of the EBA's mandate. Should all 27 EU countries sign up for the banking union plans, then the enhanced power for the EU to supervise lenders should "probably" be handed to the EBA, Barnier said.
"If you are fewer than 27 then there is an issue to resolve with the EBA, if you are more than 17 then there is an issue to resolve with the ECB," he said. "This is why there are a range of possible models, and why we need some weeks or months to work on this."
The adoption of proposals that the commissioner has made on bank capital requirements, coordination of deposit guarantee programs and the winding-down of failing banks is a "precondition" for the creation of a banking union, Barnier said yesterday in an interview with Bloomberg News in Brussels. The draft laws should be settled "in the weeks to come, or in the case of crisis resolution before the end of the year."
Depending on the outcome of the summit, the commission will present plans for extra EU supervision of banks, as well as for "the mutualization of deposit guarantee funds and resolution funds" by year end, Barnier said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Jim Brunsden in Brussels at jbrunsden@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Anthony Aarons at aaarons@bloomberg.net
Find out more about Bloomberg for Android: http://m.bloomberg.com/android
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Mexican media scandal: Televisa condemns Guardian reports
Mexican media scandal: Televisa condemns Guardian reports
http://gu.com/p/38je9
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
http://gu.com/p/38je9
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
(BN) Obama’s Legacy at Risk After Winning 100-Year Health-Care Fight
Bloomberg News, sent from my Android phone
The outcome of a 100-year fight for U.S. national health care rests on the verdict tomorrow of nine justices, who will emerge from behind a red velvet curtain.
Just four months before the presidential election, the Supreme Court is poised to rule on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's biggest legislative achievement, which would extend coverage to at least 30 million uninsured Americans in the biggest overhaul of the nation's health-care system since Medicare and Medicaid were enacted in 1965.
"When we talk about Obama 20 or 30 years from now, this is likely to be the bill we talk about," said Julian Zelizer, a presidential historian at Princeton University. "If the Supreme Court takes away from Obama his biggest accomplishment, this is exactly what a president really fears. In some ways, it's worse than not getting re-elected."
The last time the court invalidated legislation so central to the presidency was when it struck down parts of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal program in 1935 and 1936, said Zelizer. Even those decisions only addressed pieces of a larger package of economic and social initiatives that Roosevelt adopted in response to the Great Depression, he said.
The political stakes for Obama are high: The presumptive Republican presidential challenger, Mitt Romney, moved yesterday to frame a loss in the Supreme Court as a blow to his presidency. A ruling that invalidates the statute would make Obama's term in office "a waste," he said.
High Price
The court, which heard arguments in the case in March, meets at 10 a.m. Washington time and may keep the candidates and everyone else in suspense for a few more minutes.
Rulings on two other cases will probably come first. One is on a challenge to a law that makes it a crime to falsely claim to have been awarded a military medal. The other is a dispute over homebuyers' lawsuits against title insurers.
Obama has paid a high political price for passage of the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the culmination of efforts on behalf of a national health plan that stretch back to President Theodore Roosevelt's 1912 "Bull Moose" third- party candidacy. The cause has frustrated Democratic and Republican presidents, including Harry Truman, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, all of whom failed to win enactment of such legislation.
The perception of political weakness that enveloped Clinton after his universal health-care plan failed in Congress, costing Democrats' subsequent loss of control of the House and Senate, stalled efforts to pass a similar bill until Obama was elected.
It's the Economy
Obama rejected advice from aides, including then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, to settle for a more modest version of the health care overhaul to reduce the political risk. He confronted Republicans and even some Democratic critics as he prevailed in a yearlong legislative battle.
The push for the bill detracted from his capacity to make a public case for his economic agenda -- at a time the recession was voters' highest priority, said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist.
The controversy also helped fuel the Tea Party movement and "was a factor, without a doubt" in Democrats' loss of the House in the 2010 midterm congressional elections, said Devine, who worked on the Al Gore and John Kerry presidential campaigns.
"Much, if not most, of the advertising Republicans did in 2010 focused on health care," he said. "People were frustrated by anything they saw that led them to believe the president and other leaders were not focusing almost exclusively on the economy."
Pre-Existing Conditions
The health law bars insurers from denying coverage to people or discriminating in price based on pre-existing medical conditions. To maintain the insurance system's financial viability, people must obtain coverage beginning in 2014 or face a fine, a provision that's at the center of the constitutional challenge by 26 Republican-controlled states.
An individual insurance mandate was proposed more than 20 years ago by the Republican-aligned Heritage Foundation, and before Obama embraced it as part of his health-care legislation the provision had the support of many Republicans.
Provisions that already have taken effect allow young adults under 26 to remain on their parents' insurance plans, ban lifetime payment limits on policies and require insurers to cover children under 19 regardless of pre-existing conditions.
Rebate Payments
Insurers also will have to make rebate payments beginning this year by Aug. 1 to policyholders for plans that didn't spend a minimum portion of premiums the previous year on patient care. The Department of Health and Human Services said on June 21 that insurers will pay $1.1 billion in rebates to 12.8 million policyholders this year.
Low- and moderate-income families will receive assistance obtaining insurance through subsidies and an expansion of eligibility for the Medicaid program for the poor, financed in part by an excise tax on medical device makers and higher taxes on individuals earning more than $200,000.
The Supreme Court has several options for dealing with the law.
The court may uphold the entire statute. It could strike down part of the law, including the insurance mandate and the related provisions, which require insurers to cover people with pre-existing conditions and charge them the same rates as other policyholders. The justices also might invalidate the expansion of the Medicaid program, which is intended to provide coverage to about 16 million uninsured. Or they could strike down the law.
Based on the arguments in March, the pivotal votes belong to Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, two of the five Republican appointees on the nine-member court.
During the arguments on the insurance mandate, both aimed the bulk of their questions at the lawyer representing the Obama administration. At the same time, they left their likely votes in doubt by similarly directing questions toward the challengers to the law.
To contact the reporter on this story: Mike Dorning in Washington D.C. at mdorning@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Steven Komarow at skomarow1@bloomberg.net.
Find out more about Bloomberg for Android: http://m.bloomberg.com/android
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
The outcome of a 100-year fight for U.S. national health care rests on the verdict tomorrow of nine justices, who will emerge from behind a red velvet curtain.
Just four months before the presidential election, the Supreme Court is poised to rule on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's biggest legislative achievement, which would extend coverage to at least 30 million uninsured Americans in the biggest overhaul of the nation's health-care system since Medicare and Medicaid were enacted in 1965.
"When we talk about Obama 20 or 30 years from now, this is likely to be the bill we talk about," said Julian Zelizer, a presidential historian at Princeton University. "If the Supreme Court takes away from Obama his biggest accomplishment, this is exactly what a president really fears. In some ways, it's worse than not getting re-elected."
The last time the court invalidated legislation so central to the presidency was when it struck down parts of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal program in 1935 and 1936, said Zelizer. Even those decisions only addressed pieces of a larger package of economic and social initiatives that Roosevelt adopted in response to the Great Depression, he said.
The political stakes for Obama are high: The presumptive Republican presidential challenger, Mitt Romney, moved yesterday to frame a loss in the Supreme Court as a blow to his presidency. A ruling that invalidates the statute would make Obama's term in office "a waste," he said.
High Price
The court, which heard arguments in the case in March, meets at 10 a.m. Washington time and may keep the candidates and everyone else in suspense for a few more minutes.
Rulings on two other cases will probably come first. One is on a challenge to a law that makes it a crime to falsely claim to have been awarded a military medal. The other is a dispute over homebuyers' lawsuits against title insurers.
Obama has paid a high political price for passage of the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the culmination of efforts on behalf of a national health plan that stretch back to President Theodore Roosevelt's 1912 "Bull Moose" third- party candidacy. The cause has frustrated Democratic and Republican presidents, including Harry Truman, Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, all of whom failed to win enactment of such legislation.
The perception of political weakness that enveloped Clinton after his universal health-care plan failed in Congress, costing Democrats' subsequent loss of control of the House and Senate, stalled efforts to pass a similar bill until Obama was elected.
It's the Economy
Obama rejected advice from aides, including then-chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, to settle for a more modest version of the health care overhaul to reduce the political risk. He confronted Republicans and even some Democratic critics as he prevailed in a yearlong legislative battle.
The push for the bill detracted from his capacity to make a public case for his economic agenda -- at a time the recession was voters' highest priority, said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist.
The controversy also helped fuel the Tea Party movement and "was a factor, without a doubt" in Democrats' loss of the House in the 2010 midterm congressional elections, said Devine, who worked on the Al Gore and John Kerry presidential campaigns.
"Much, if not most, of the advertising Republicans did in 2010 focused on health care," he said. "People were frustrated by anything they saw that led them to believe the president and other leaders were not focusing almost exclusively on the economy."
Pre-Existing Conditions
The health law bars insurers from denying coverage to people or discriminating in price based on pre-existing medical conditions. To maintain the insurance system's financial viability, people must obtain coverage beginning in 2014 or face a fine, a provision that's at the center of the constitutional challenge by 26 Republican-controlled states.
An individual insurance mandate was proposed more than 20 years ago by the Republican-aligned Heritage Foundation, and before Obama embraced it as part of his health-care legislation the provision had the support of many Republicans.
Provisions that already have taken effect allow young adults under 26 to remain on their parents' insurance plans, ban lifetime payment limits on policies and require insurers to cover children under 19 regardless of pre-existing conditions.
Rebate Payments
Insurers also will have to make rebate payments beginning this year by Aug. 1 to policyholders for plans that didn't spend a minimum portion of premiums the previous year on patient care. The Department of Health and Human Services said on June 21 that insurers will pay $1.1 billion in rebates to 12.8 million policyholders this year.
Low- and moderate-income families will receive assistance obtaining insurance through subsidies and an expansion of eligibility for the Medicaid program for the poor, financed in part by an excise tax on medical device makers and higher taxes on individuals earning more than $200,000.
The Supreme Court has several options for dealing with the law.
The court may uphold the entire statute. It could strike down part of the law, including the insurance mandate and the related provisions, which require insurers to cover people with pre-existing conditions and charge them the same rates as other policyholders. The justices also might invalidate the expansion of the Medicaid program, which is intended to provide coverage to about 16 million uninsured. Or they could strike down the law.
Based on the arguments in March, the pivotal votes belong to Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, two of the five Republican appointees on the nine-member court.
During the arguments on the insurance mandate, both aimed the bulk of their questions at the lawyer representing the Obama administration. At the same time, they left their likely votes in doubt by similarly directing questions toward the challengers to the law.
To contact the reporter on this story: Mike Dorning in Washington D.C. at mdorning@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Steven Komarow at skomarow1@bloomberg.net.
Find out more about Bloomberg for Android: http://m.bloomberg.com/android
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)