In 2 Minutes, Bangladesh Rejects 28-Year-Old Challenge to Islam’s Role

Abstract: DHAKA, Bangladesh — It took Bangladesh ’s High Court less than two minutes on Monday to dismiss a petition aiming to remove the designation of Islam as the country’s state religion, a challenge that had wended its way through the court system for 28 years. The effort had struck a nerve among Bangladeshis, whose tug of war over secularism and Islam dates to the 1971 war for independence from Pakistan. The country’s largest Islamic political party had declared a nationwide strike on Monday, and Sunni Muslim groups had staged protests demanding that the hearing be called off. They need not have worried. A swarm of lawyers had barely taken their seats when Justice Naima Haider ruled that the group of 15 petitioners, 10 of whom had died as the case navigated the court bureaucracy, had no standing to raise the issue with the court. Subrata Chowdhury, the lawyer who filed the original petition 28 years ago, looked lost as he listened to the judge. “Without a hearing, without giving any chance,” he said helplessly. Later, back at his office, he commiserated with a circle of stunned colleagues. “I’m very disappointed. This case was our baby,” he said. “I’ve never seen anything like this. At least a proper hearing should have taken place. We had prepared so much.” After winning independence from Pakistan in 1971, Bangladesh was declared a secular nation, but a military ruler amended the Constitution in 1988 to make Islam the state religion. The 1988 petition challenging this decision went nowhere until the governing Awami League, which positions itself as a secular party, took power in 2009. The court’s ruling on Monday came at an anxious time. Attacks on religious minorities have become more frequent over the last year, leading to fears that Islamic fundamentalism is on the rise. Kamal Hossain, the politician who drafted Bangladesh’s original Constitution, said he was uncertain why the case was being heard now after so many years, and at such a sensitive time. The decision to dismiss the case was greeted jubilantly by Muslim leaders, who linked arms and flashed victory signs for television cameras as they left the court. Mufti Masum Billah, the chairman of the Bangabandhu Ulema Foundation, a religious nonprofit, said there was no need to worry about Islam’s status as a state religion, since the Constitution protects freedom of religion. “Bangladesh has a state flower — it’s the water lily,” he said. “We have a state fruit — the jackfruit. Why shouldn’t Islam be our state religion?”

Bangladesh
Islam
Separation of church and state
Religion and Belief
Freedom of religion


All Blacks Have Tough Choice at Key Flyhalf Spot

Abstract: WELLINGTON, New Zealand — For years, New Zealand Coach Steve Hansen has been the envy of rugby coaches worldwide because of the All Blacks’ depth at the sport’s most crucial position, flyhalf. That depth at the No.10 spot was crucial once again for the All Blacks as they beat South Africa, 27-20, in the Rugby Championship in Johannesburg on Saturday. The four flyhalfs currently on the All Blacks — Daniel Carter, Beauden Barrett, Colin Slade and Lima Sopoaga — could be starters on nearly any other national team. In addition, Aaron Cruden is waiting to return once he recovers from a ruptured anterior cruciate ligament that will keep him out of the World Cup . Sopoaga’s strong play during his All Blacks’ debut on Saturday means that Hansen will face a difficult decision before Aug. 30. Only three of the four will make it onto the 31-man World Cup roster. Carter is a certainty, and Barrett looks like a definite choice because he can also play fullback. Hansen has just two more tests — both against Australia — to decide whether to pick Slade or Sopoaga to join them. Sopoaga did his chances no harm in the cauldron of Ellis Park. Despite the All Blacks being largely outplayed for most of the first half, the young No.10 kept his composure and set up the try for winger Ben Smith with a searing break and well-timed pass to end the half. The score allowed the All Blacks to go into the break surprisingly tied with the Springboks, 10-10. Sopoaga converted after a try by hooker Dane Coles early in the second half. Though he missed a couple of shots at the goal previously, he kept his composure with the game on the line and converted Richie McCaw's game-changing try from out wide with five minutes to go. The rookie flyhalf sealed the win with a penalty in the closing seconds. “He showed a lot of courage,” Hansen said in a television interview immediately after the game. “He missed a couple of kicks and then came back and kicked those two important ones. “We’re in a tough situation; we’ve got four very good five-eighths and another one injured. We’ll have to make some tough decisions.” Hansen was less impressed by his team’s overall performance in the matchup between the world’s two top-ranked teams. No.1 New Zealand struggled in the first half as the Springboks forwards won the breakdown battle and the young South African midfield pairing of Damian de Allende and Jesse Kriel got the better of their much-vaunted opposites, Ma’a Nonu and Conrad Smith. South Africa flyhalf Handré Pollard was also a constant threat playing on the advantage line, but the Springboks only managed to score one try in each half, by Willie le Roux and Kriel. They were denied another one by the video replay official in the second half, and they missed several other chances because of their own mistakes and New Zealand’s scrambling defense. That allowed the All Blacks to claw their way back into the match before McCaw delivered the decisive blow. “I’m really proud of the ticker the boys showed,” Hansen said. “Was I happy with the performance? Parts of it, no. But the second half I thought the mental fortitude got us over the line. So I’ve got to be very, very proud of that.” It was the second straight week that the Springboks let a lead slip away in the final 20 minutes. Just like a week before in Brisbane against Australia, South Africa’s bench players didn’t provide the same impact that the opposition substitutes did. Schalk Burger, in his first match as Springboks captain, said the defeat was hard to swallow, as the team had not capitalized on the numerous opportunities it had created. “It is not easy to beat the All Blacks, and they showed why tonight,” Burger said. “They used a limited number of chances well, and we did not.” South Africa’s injury problems showed no signs of abating, with four players — Jannie du Plessis (knee), Vincent Koch, Warren Whiteley (both suspected broken ribs) and Francois Louw (shoulder) — joining an ever-growing casualty list. Australia will play New Zealand for the Rugby Championship title in Sydney on Aug. 8 after it won a scrappy encounter in Argentina, 34-9. Australia led 8-6 at halftime in Mendoza after Wallabies winger Joe Tomane scored the only try in an uninspiring first half that saw the Wallabies scrum once again put under pressure. The Wallabies ran away with the match in the second spell when Dean Mumm, Tevita Kuridrani and Adam Ashley-Cooper all scored to ensure Australia a four-try bonus point. Argentina was not able to capitalize on a man advantage after Australia’s Quade Cooper was sent to the sin-bin for a high tackle in the second half. All of Argentina’s points came from flyhalf Nicolás Sánchez’s three penalty goals.

Tri-Nations Rugby
2015 World Cup Rugby
All Blacks
Lima Sopoaga
Colin Slade
Daniel Carter
Beauden Barrett
Springboks


Work Is Never Done, Obama Tells Class

Abstract: TEMPE, Ariz. — President Obama traveled Wednesday to the university that does not think he has done enough to merit an honorary degree and declared that he agreed. Mr. Obama delivered his first commencement address as president at Arizona State University , whose decision not to award him a ceremonial diploma touched off a national furor. He used the controversy to make the point that no one should be satisfied with “the outward markers of success,” either as individuals or as a country. “I come here not to dispute the suggestion that I haven’t achieved enough in my life,” Mr. Obama told tens of thousands of students and relatives packed into Sun Devil Stadium. “First of all, Michelle concurs with that assessment. She has a long list of things I have not yet done waiting for me when I get home. “But more than that,” he added, “I come to embrace the notion that I haven’t done enough in my life. I heartily concur. I come to confirm that one’s title, even a title like president of the United States, says very little about how well one’s life has been led — and that no matter how much you’ve done, or how successful you’ve been, there’s always more to do, always more to learn, and always more to achieve.” The decision not to award an honorary degree to Mr. Obama was taken by many as a snub, especially after university officials explained that “his body of work is yet to come.” Embarrassed university officials tried to contain the damage by renaming its most important financial aid program the President Barack Obama Scholars Program, which will benefit 1,600 freshmen this fall. The university’s president, Michael Crow, heaped praise on Mr. Obama in introducing him on Wednesday night. “You’ve lit a fire under all of us to move America forward,” Mr. Crow said. Mr. Obama thanked him and called the controversy “much ado about nothing.” But he still aimed a barb at the university’s leadership. “President Crow and the board of regents will soon learn about being audited by the I.R.S.,” he joked. Mr. Obama’s commencement season schedule this year has generated more attention than most presidents receive. His plan to speak at the graduation at Notre Dame on Sunday has drawn vociferous protests from anti-abortion leaders who consider it inappropriate for him to be invited to speak at the nation’s most prominent Catholic university. In his speech here to a stadium full of people who waited hours in temperatures hovering around 100 degrees, Mr. Obama said the degree controversy underscored that the nation needs “a fundamental change of perspective and attitude,” one that values substance over appearance, character over celebrity and wise investments over “get rich quick schemes.” The country, he suggested, has lost its way. “In recent years, in many ways, we’ve become enamored with our own success, lulled into complacency by our own achievements,” he said, citing the economic crisis. “We started taking shortcuts. We started living on credit, instead of building up savings. We saw businesses focus more on rebranding and repackaging than innovating and developing new ideas that improve our lives.” He cited Americans who ran the Underground Railroad, fought for worker rights, developed new technology and saved people caught in the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. “A whole bunch of them didn’t get honorary degrees,” he said in an ad lib not in the released text, “but they changed the course of history and so can you.” He added: “That’s what building a body of work is all about: it’s about the daily labor, the many individual acts, the choices large and small that add up over time, over a lifetime, to a lasting legacy.”

Arizona State University
Obama Barack
Colleges and Universities


Donald Trump Hosts Fund-Raiser to Help Chris Christie Pay Off Campaign Debt

Abstract: LAWRENCE TOWNSHIP, N.J. — Donald J. Trump spoke beneath nine chandeliers on Thursday, exulting in the company of “so many wiseguys.” Trump headwear topped visitors’ well-moussed hair. One admirer boasted of fashioning a lamp out of an empty bottle of Trump Vodka. Mr. Trump was in New Jersey. But Hillary Clinton was on his mind. “You talk about bad judgment. How bad a judgment is the email scandal?” he told hundreds of attendees inside an armory here, where Gov. Chris Christie, a top Trump supporter, helped convene a fund-raiser Thursday night to retire his own campaign debt. “It’s always the same with her and it’s always the same with them,” Mr. Trump said of the Clinton family. “For her to be able to continue to run is an absolute disgrace, in my opinion, to this country.” Mr. Trump’s escalation of hostilities with the Clintons has moved apace for weeks since he wrapped up the Republican nomination, zipping gleefully from Mrs. Clinton’s résumé to her husband’s sexual indiscretions and back again. Yet as the presumptive Republican nominee continued his offensive, Mrs. Clinton was left on Thursday to scrap on two fronts, sitting for an unusually forceful interview to address the boiling anger in her own party among supporters of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Despite recent primary wins by Mr. Sanders, his path to the party’s nomination appears mathematically impossible, a fact Mrs. Clinton sought to make clear in an interview with CNN . “I will be the nominee of our party,” she said. “There is no way I won’t be.” The Sanders campaign quickly seized on the remarks. “In the past three weeks voters in Indiana, West Virginia and Oregon respectfully disagreed with Secretary Clinton,” a Sanders spokesman, Michael Briggs, said in a statement. “We expect voters in the remaining eight contests also will disagree.” Mr. Briggs alluded to polls showing Mr. Sanders faring better than Mrs. Clinton against Mr. Trump, which he said made clear that “millions of Americans have growing doubts about the Clinton campaign.” In her interview, Mrs. Clinton also took aim at Mr. Trump, calling him unqualified for the presidency and “unmoored” on matters of foreign policy. She declined to respond to Mr. Trump’s attacks on her husband, Bill Clinton , including in an interview with Fox News this week in which Mr. Trump reminded viewers of a decades-old rape allegation against the former president. Are You Concerned About the Republican Party’s Future? There is deep concern among Republicans about political divisions and the future of the party, a new Times/CBS News poll shows. We want to hear from the party’s longtime members or those who have just registered as Republicans. “I think people can judge his campaign for what it is,” Mrs. Clinton said. “I’m going to run my campaign.” In his remarks Thursday night, Mr. Trump largely steered clear of Mr. Clinton, limiting his ribbing to the news media, President Obama, long-departed competitors Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio and — it seemed — the weight of Mr. Christie, to name a few targets. “I’m not eating Oreos anymore,” Mr. Trump said, repeating an oft-used attack against the cookie’s parent company over plans to move some production to Mexico. “Neither is Chris!” As supporters requested some greatest hits — “Build the wall!” they shouted at one point, before he came out — Mr. Trump returned to another familiar theme: antagonizing the Chinese government and existing trade policies. “Who the hell cares if there’s a trade war?” he asked, arguing that current arrangements had harmed the United States anyway. Cheers soon filled the space, where a model cannon in back was pointed at the stage as he spoke. The event, along with a fund-raiser for Long Island Republicans a week earlier, forced Mr. Trump to flex muscles he has used sparingly over the years, and never for himself. He has hosted fund-raisers for party committees and has written checks, but he has never been forced to entertain and dazzle donors whose support he badly needs. Regular admission to the armory event was $200, intended to help Mr. Christie retire hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign obligations. News media credentials did not bear familiar Trump campaign logos or slogans. “Paid for by Chris Christie for President,” they read instead. The gathering also came amid internal shuffling in Mr. Trump’s campaign organization. Earlier in the day, the campaign said that Paul Manafort, the veteran Republican operative he hired in March, would be the campaign chairman and chief strategist, lending a measure of clarity to the chain of command. Corey Lewandowski, who has been the campaign manager since Mr. Trump entered the race, will retain the title, according to Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump. She added that Mr. Manafort and Mr. Lewandowski would continue to work together on many aspects of the campaign. On Thursday night, Mr. Christie assumed the role of chief Trump deputy, earning a warm reception amid recent polls suggesting New Jerseyans have an ever-dimming view of him. “We’ve been friends with Donald Trump for 14 years. We know him well,” he said, recalling a conversation with his wife about whether to endorse. “And I said to Mary Pat, ‘We never, ever make a mistake by standing with your friend.’” Moments later, Mr. Trump took the stage with an announcement: Mr. Christie, he said, had paid off his entire campaign debt.

2016 Presidential Election
Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton
Bernard Sanders,Bernie Sanders
Chris Christie
Republicans


S.E.C. Tightens Rules on Managing Public Pension Funds

Abstract: WASHINGTON — The Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday tightened restrictions against “pay-to-play” practices in the municipal securities market. The measure was another attempt to close loopholes that agency officials say have allowed political influence to corrupt aspects of the $2.6 trillion public pension business. The five-member commission voted unanimously to bar investment managers who make political contributions to officials with influence over public pension funds from managing those funds for two years. The commission also barred investment managers from paying a third party to solicit pension business on their behalf unless the third party is registered with the S.E.C. or other regulators and so subject to similar pay-to-play bans. But the commission stepped back from its original proposal, which would have placed an outright ban on third-party solicitations of pension-management business. The commission’s staff recommended the partial ban after investment advisers and fund managers complained that they often lacked the resources to secure pension business on their own, causing them to rely on consultants and brokers to gain access. Mary L. Schapiro, the chairwoman of the S.E.C., called pay-to-play “an unspoken but entrenched and well-understood practice.” The commission has made several attempts in recent years to crack down on pay-to-play, which Ms. Schapiro said could “favor large advisers over smaller competitors, reward political connections rather than management skill, and — as a number of recent enforcement cases have shown — pave the way to outright fraud and corruption.” The rule banning political contributions applies to the financial management company as well as to certain of its executives and employees. To address what the commission said were free-speech concerns, one provision in the rule permits contributions of up to $350 an election if the contributor is entitled to vote for the candidate at issue, or up to $150 if not. The pay-to-play rule would also prohibit an investment manager from asking another person or a political action committee to make a contribution or payment to a candidate or political party the investment manager was seeking business with. A similar restriction, aimed at preventing investment managers from circumventing the rule, would apply to spouses, lawyers or companies affiliated with the investment adviser. In the mid-1990s, regulators tried to limit pay-to-play practices in the municipal securities market. They adopted rules that prohibited brokerage firms that made political contributions to a candidate or official from underwriting municipal securities offerings related to that official’s jurisdiction for two years. While those rules slowed pay-to-play activity in the municipal securities market, similar activity appeared to migrate to an area not covered by those rules: the management of public pension funds. In 1999, the S.E.C. tried to address pay-to-play in the public pension market, proposing a rule similar to the one approved Wednesday. But the measure was never adopted. Since then, the S.E.C. has brought enforcement actions against investment advisers in pay-to-play schemes involving public pension funds in states including California, Illinois, Ohio and Florida. Most recently, the commission filed a civil lawsuit asserting that illegal kickbacks had been paid in connection with investments by the New York State Common Retirement Fund. Luis A. Aguilar, an S.E.C. commissioner, said Wednesday that the agency had not done enough to follow through on its proposed 1999 rules, a failure that “resulted in real harm that had real costs.” “These schemes harmed investors by making their retirement assets the spoils in these quid pro quo arrangements,” Mr. Aguilar said. “Many people focus on the costs of regulation, but they do not consider the costs of a failure to take regulatory action.” The S.E.C. also said on Wednesday that it was seeking public comment on a proposal to more than double the number of stocks covered by circuit breakers that slow trading in individual stocks. The commission is proposing expanding the circuit breakers from stocks in the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index to those in the Russell 1000 index. In addition, the proposal would apply the circuit breakers to some exchange-traded funds , which are essentially mutual funds that trade like stocks. On Tuesday, trading in Citigroup shares was halted for five minutes when an erroneous trade caused the reported share price to plunge, the second time that the circuit-breaker rules have been used. The circuit breakers call for a five-minute trading halt if a stock’s price moves 10 percent or more in either direction in a five-minute period.

Securities and Exchange Commission
Pensions and Retirement Plans
Regulation and Deregulation of Industry
Campaign Finance


After California Chrome Wins the Preakness, His Team Steals the Show

Abstract: In the Kentucky Derby and the Preakness, California Chrome dazzled on the racetrack. Afterward, though, his team stole the show. The fairy-tale run of his working-class owners, Steve and Carolyn Coburn and Perry and Denise Martin, has captured even the most casual fan’s attention. At 77, the trainer Art Sherman finally made it to the sport’s biggest stage. His 41-year-old jockey, Victor Espinoza, battled back from a slump to partake in his second Triple Crown run. Most important, they are all having fun. Following are excerpts from their post-Preakness news conference, where they were cracking jokes as if they were part of an improv show. Q. This is the sixth straight win for California Chrome. What has been the No. 1 ingredient for that winning streak right now? VICTOR ESPINOZA I think the way I ride him. ART SHERMAN I’ll drink to that. MODERATOR We can probably end that right there. (Laughing.) Great answer, though. Q. When will you be at the barn tomorrow so the media can talk to you tomorrow morning, and when are you thinking about taking the horse out of here? A.S. I think he’ll probably have a couple of days here to unwind and just be a horse. You know what I mean? Even though it’s not that far a van drive, he needs to just, he’s going to be tired in the morning. I’m going to be there early like I always am. V.E. Me, too. A.S. Give him a little kiss for myself. I tell you, he’s my superstar, I can tell you that. Q. How is it dealing with all the outside distractions pulling at you both before the race and now after the race? A.S. Well, I’m kind of getting used to it. After I won the Kentucky Derby, I said, Wow, all of a sudden I feel like Willie Nelson the old rock star coming through the airport. So I’m getting kind of used to it. Sometimes I need to take my little siesta for about an hour. I call it just charging my battery a little bit, and then I’m O.K. Q. You’ve always had a great feeling about this horse. You keep predicting wins, and he keeps winning for you. What’s next? STEVE COBURN The Triple Crown. This is a nice horse. He loves people. He loves what he does, and that’s why he’s America’s horse, because in my opinion, this horse, what he’s doing for two guys that work their butts off every day just to put beans and bacon on the table, this horse has given everybody else out there the incentive to say, You know what? We can do it, too. It may not be a racehorse. It may be the idea that they have in their head or a new product or whatever the case may be, but we just hope that this horse is letting America know that the little guy can win. The little guy can do it, because this is the little guy here (Sherman). Have you ever seen him? He’s only about that tall (laughing). Q. Can you imagine the kind of reception you’re going to get when you get to New York? A.S. All I know is my wife already bugged me she wanted to go see a play downtown, so I know I’m in trouble right away. S.C. So your wife’s been talking to my wife, right? A.S. That’s right. Q. Steve, how about you? S.C. I’ve never been to Kentucky. It was always on our bucket list to go there. Not necessarily for the Kentucky Derby, but just to go to Churchill Downs. We went to Kentucky as the favorite to win the Kentucky Derby, and we did. We came to Maryland with the favorite to win the Preakness, and we did. I think I’m going incognito to New York. I’m going to go buy me some dreadlocks, and some Billy Bob teeth, and I’m sliding in the back door (laughing). Image Steve Coburn, part owner of California Chrome, kissed the horse in the winner’s circle of the 139th Preakness Stakes. 1 / 15 Q. Can you get some dreadlocks for Art? S.C. They’re on the way. Q. Can you take us through your emotions watching the race? S.C. Well, honestly, when he broke good, and he held his line, I had so many cameras in my face, I didn’t even get to see the race. Carolyn says he’s in the lead. I said, where is he? She said he’s in the lead. He’s going to win the race, and then I saw him, I said he’s winning the damn race (laughing). I had so many cameras in my face that I actually couldn’t see the race. But you know what? Ladies and gentlemen of this wonderful, wonderful state, I cannot tell you how much I appreciate what you’ve done for us. We’re just everyday people. I looked in the mirror this morning, and I thought I had me like a royal birthmark on my butt. Q. As crazy as it sounds, can you look back now and think that turning down the $6 million [offer to buy the horse] was a good decision? A.S. Actually, he knew more than I did, and now the horse is worth $30 million. S.C. That’s my boy. Q. So the answer is an emphatic yes? A.S. A big yes. Q. In retrospect now, the deal you turned down for $6 million was it the best business deal you didn’t make? S.C. Not only yes, but hell yes. No, honestly, we were here yesterday, and the man I said “not only no, but hell no” to was also. And he shook my hand and said I respect what you did. So that tells me this man actually believed in us because we knew we had a good horse. This horse wouldn’t be who he is today without the trainer, Art Sherman. The exercise rider, Willie, and Raul, because Raul sleeps with this horse more than he sleeps with his wife. So, Raul, thank you. I love you. You’re doing a great job. Art, you have a lot of competition in front of you. So when you see Raul, you tell him I said thank you from the bottom of my heart. Q. Why is Mr. Martin not here? S.C. Well, all I can say is my partner, Perry Martin, is a very private person. And Perry, I hope you’re listening to this because, you know what? We love you, and we really wanted you to be here. But I can understand why he’s not here. The hospitality we received at Churchill Downs wasn’t very good, and Perry Martin, he decided that he and his family were going to watch the race some place within the world — I can’t tell you where it’s at because I don’t even know where in the hell it’s at — and then go have a good supper. So, Perry, I hope I did you proud, because you saw me crying on camera. Q. There is a question in regards to the Churchill Downs comment you made to NBC? You said Churchill Downs could take a lesson from the Maryland Jockey Club. S.C. Yes, and I’m serious about this. I’m serious as a heart attack. Because you know what? We got to Churchill, and not only did I complain, but there were other trainers and owners and even the jockeys were complaining about the way they were treated. I’ve said this once, I’ve said it 50 times, Churchill Downs needs to call Maryland to get a lesson in hospitality. Because these people right here, they’ve treated us like we’re royalty, and I can’t say thank you enough. We’ve got a gentleman out here, his name’s John. That’s our driver. John, say hi to the folks. There is John. He’s saying hi to the folks. But you know what? We’re not royalty. We don’t expect to be treated like royalty, but the hospitality that these folks in Maryland have shown us is top shelf. I’m talking above top-shelf liquor. Hopefully we’ll be back next year for the Black-eyed Susan because California Chrome has a foal sis. Q. Do you think Perry Martin will be able to make the Belmont? S.C. Well, you know what? I know a lot of people that can throw a good loop, and we’ll drag his butt to Belmont if he doesn’t want to show up on his own. Because he needs to be. He’s missing out on a lot of fun. He really, really is. I know how him and Denise are, and I’ll talk to him. I can’t guarantee nothing, but I’ll talk to him. Q. Did you talk to Perry right after the race? If so, what did he say? S.C. I have not talked to Perry yet. My phone’s turned off, but I’m sure that when I turn it back on, there are going to be a lot of buzzes coming on that thing. Perry and I, we talk a lot. It’s back and forth. It’s like, Hey, partner, how you doing? Fine. How you doing? It’s very casual. I don’t know what else to tell you. But Perry, we need to go to New York, New York, New York. Q. How much does this sport need a Triple Crown winner? S.C. I believe that there are a lot of good horses running out there, and 19 of them started in the Kentucky Derby. I honestly believe that they need to change this sport to where those 20 horses that start in the Kentucky Derby are the only 20 eligible to run in all three races. If you bow out in the Preakness, you don’t come back for the Belmont. I honestly believe that if the Triple Crown is not won this year by California Chrome, I will never see it in my lifetime because there are people out there trying to upset the apple cart. They don’t want a Triple Crown winner. They want a paycheck. So that’s my honest opinion. If they don’t like it, I don’t care. But that’s my opinion. Thank you, folks.

Horse racing
California Chrome
Preakness Stakes
Steve Coburn
Art Sherman
Victor Espinoza
Perry Martin


New Front: Protecting America's Investors

Abstract: IN the tiny room where I am writing this missive, there are four little display cases and a framed diploma, among many other mementos. The diploma is for my father-in-law, Dale Denman Jr. of Arkansas, and it is from the United States Military Academy, dated June 6, 1944 -- a day when quite a lot was happening of military significance in France. Next to that is a display case with two little stars. One is a Silver Star that my father-in-law won in Europe several months after he graduated. It is for running along a road under heavy German machine-gun fire to call in artillery to save the company for which he was a forward artillery observer. Next to it is a Bronze Star that my father-in-law, then a colonel, won in Vietnam in 1966 for holding his unit together when it was ambushed by a Vietcong force and would have been cut to pieces without him. I have been thinking a lot lately about these heirlooms that Colonel Denman left to my wife and me. That's because of some mail I have been getting about my recent articles in this space about the way high executives have been treating their employees and stockholders. What I said two weeks ago about UAL, the parent company of United Airlines, prompted hundreds of e-mail messages. (I have still not even remotely caught up with all of them because I read them myself -- no secretary here.) Several people sent clippings describing how UAL provided Glenn F. Tilton, who was living in San Francisco when it hired him as chairman and chief executive, with a suite in a luxury hotel when he spent time at its headquarters in Chicago. UAL was paying for the suite -- which cost $18,000 a month, according to The San Francisco Chronicle -- while it was reorganizing its finances under bankruptcy court protection and telling tens of thousands of workers that their jobs had been eliminated, their pay cut, their pensions terminated or all of the above because the company was broke. Some of the letter writers recalled how UAL spent an average of $10 million a month on lawyers, accountants and investment bankers for 37 months while UAL was in bankruptcy, and yet was unable to pay its employees their pensions. Now UAL has emerged from bankruptcy with a mighty flourish, and an allowance of hundreds of millions of dollars for its top executives. Some letters pointed out that one of UAL's board members is none other than our old friend Robert S. Miller, chief executive of Delphi, the auto parts maker. Delphi also recently entered bankruptcy -- but proposed to the bankruptcy court a payment of well over $100 million to its top executives to keep them happy while it was in bankruptcy. Mr. Miller, who goes by Steve, a version of his middle name (not the one who sings "Fly Like an Eagle," but an artist of sorts nonetheless), has told Delphi's workers that they will have to take pay cuts of roughly two-thirds in order to save the business. But my favorite communication, the one that made me stay up nights, was from a United States Army sergeant who has done two combat tours in Iraq and two more in Afghanistan, and is now home in Georgia training others to serve in those wars. I have been pals with this man for a couple of years now, and we talk on the phone. He has been following my articles online, and he simply asked, "Was this what I was fighting for in Iraq?" The question haunts me, not only because of UAL and Delphi, but also because there is something deeply broken about the corporate system in America. Long ago, my pop was pals with Harlow H. Curtice, the president of General Motors in its glory days in the 1950's. Mr. Curtice presided over a spectacularly powerful and profitable G.M. For that, in his peak year as I recall from my youth, he was paid about $400,000 plus a special superbonus of $400,000, which made him one of the highest-paid executives in America. At that time, a line worker with overtime might have made $10,000 a year. In those days, that differential was considered very large -- very roughly 40 times the assembly line worker's pay, without bonus; very roughly 80 times with bonus. A differential of more like 10 to 20 times was more the norm. Now C.E.O.'s routinely take home hundreds of times what the average worker is paid, whether or not the company is doing well. The graph for the pay of C.E.O.'s is a vertical line in the last five years. The graph for workers' pay is a flat line -- in every sense. Now, my fellow free-market fans may well say: "Hey, stop your whining. This is the free market at work." Only it isn't the free market at work. It's a kleptocracy at work. (I am indebted to another of my correspondents for the word.) What's happening here is that the governance system for many -- by no means all -- corporations has simply stopped working. For centuries, the idea has held that the stockholders own the company. They are the trustors. The trustors select directors who in turn hire a chief executive and other top officers and then keep an eye on them for the stockholders. They -- the chief executive, other top officers and the directors -- are all agents for the stockholders, many of whom are often the employees, as is the case at UAL. But what has happened is that -- as in a corrupt, failed third-world state -- the trustees in too many cases are captives of the C.E.O. and his colleagues; they owe both their places on the board and their emoluments to the chief executive, and they exercise no meaningful restraint at all on managers. The directors are instead a sort of praetorian guard, protecting management from its real bosses, the stockholders, as management sucks the blood out of the company. I am by no means saying this is the standard or the usual way business is done in this country. Most managements are still honest and hard-working, I believe. But far too many are simply in the catbird seat to take what is not decently theirs from people who cannot afford to be taken. Government, meanwhile, does nothing, or next to nothing. Courts, especially bankruptcy courts, do nothing. And the employees and stockholders and the whole society are looted. Maybe it's not looting in the legal sense, but something basic is removed from the society. In the capitalist society, the most basic foundation is trust. But in today's world, trust is abused, mocked, drained of meaning. Again, I am not talking everywhere, by any means. I work with many, many businessmen and businesswomen, and a huge majority are honest and amazingly hard-working. I am sure that this is true nationally. But enough are not so honest and hard-working that it takes a toll on the rest of us. Don't get me wrong. I am not a newborn. I know that looting is not new. Man is highly flawed when money is on the table and not guarded well. I saw it and wrote about it in great detail when Michael R. Milken and Drexel Burnham Lambert were ascendant, and in many other cases. It was terrible and dreadful, at least in my view, back then in the 1980's. It has always been terrible. But there is something new and unlovely that my pal in the Army brought up. Now, we are engaged in a war. More than 100,000 Americans are fighting far from home. Many don't come back. Many come home crippled. They are fighting for a vision of a just and decent society back home in glorious, shining, blessed America. And back home, meanwhile, the looters are running wild, taking the meaning out of that vision of America, taking some -- by no means all -- of the beauty out of America as a land of justice and fairness. ONE of my correspondents wrote that she, a flight attendant at United Airlines,had played by the rules, believed what her bosses told her, trusted that the laws would protect her, believed that fairness would triumph in the end because it's America. "I guess that makes me a fool in today's world," she said, because now she is broke, with no job, barely any pension and no faith. While the soldiers are fighting to protect us from the terrorists with bombs, too few are at home protecting us from the terrorists with briefcases. There aren't a lot of such terrorists, but they do a lot of damage. Surely this is not what Colonel Denman won his medals for. Surely this is not the America that our best are fighting and dying for in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is something desperately wrong here, and if President Bush is searching for an issue, I might suggest this: common decency for the workers and the savers and investors of this country, and an end to the hideous breaches of trust that build great mansions in the Hamptons and wreck a free soci-ety. EVERYBODY'S BUSINESS Ben Stein is a lawyer, writer, actor and economist. E-mail: ebiz@nytimes.com.

IRAQ
AFGHANISTAN
UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY
TILTON GLENN F
BUSH GEORGE W
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
EXECUTIVES AND MANAGEMENT
ETHICS
STOCKS AND BONDS
UNITED STATES ARMAMENT AND DEFENSE


The Costs of Stinginess in Medicaid

Abstract: How much money does Arkansas save by offering stingier Medicaid than Vermont? It looks like a straightforward calculation. Arkansas makes it tougher for children to qualify for Medicaid than Vermont does, and it spends much less on each beneficiary. Even though Arkansas’s poverty rate is double Vermont’s, Medicaid’s costs in Arkansas in 2012, the most recent year for which figures are available, were $600 less per resident than in Vermont. But there is a price to pay for such parsimony. Children in Arkansas get fewer regular checkups at the doctor and dentist. More adults forgo care because of the expense. More Arkansans are overweight and have diabetes . More are disabled. They die younger. This is not to pick specifically on Arkansas or to extol the virtues of Vermont. The contrast between these two disparate states frames a broader debate about the purpose of the American government. With a new Republican majority in Congress looking to further the cause of low taxes and less spending, it is easy to forget that tightfisted government imposes very real costs. That we can’t easily measure them doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Over the last couple of years, voters have been spared the bitter partisan brawl over taxes and spending that scarred President Obama’s first term in office. Having gained hefty spending cuts — notably through the process known as sequestration — Republicans concentrated on other goals, like sinking the Affordable Care Act. Content to have raised some taxes on the wealthiest Americans, the president, too, turned his attention elsewhere. But the fundamental partisan conflict never went away. When the new session of Congress opened last week, Republicans put the fight squarely back on the table. First they got rid of Douglas Elmendorf — a well-respected economist who, though a Democratic appointee, was widely considered a nonideological shooter — as the head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Next they proposed changing the rules governing how the budget office conducts its economic analysis of legislation in a fashion that many experts believe could ease the way for Republicans’ ambitious tax-cutting agenda. Republicans’ underlying assumption is that tax cuts amount to a tonic for economic growth, encouraging investment and toil. Many analyses by the budget office, they argue, misjudge the effect of tax cuts on the budget by underestimating their role as economic stimulus. They are not entirely wrong. Most economists agree that cutting taxes is likely to deliver some increase to growth. But it is substantially weaker than what Republicans often claim. At the same time, the implicit proposition underlying the Republican case is that public spending amounts at best to money down the drain and, more often, to an albatross around the economy’s neck, discouraging work among beneficiaries of government largess. The evidence for that is even weaker. Under such assumptions, the return to Vermont’s additional Medicaid spending would shrivel to nothing. That is, pretty much, how the budget office scores Medicaid spending today. That truly misjudges the role of government in the long-term health of the American economy. “Of course there are positive returns to spending on health, education, nutrition,” said William Gale, a tax expert at the Brookings Institution. “They are saving a lot of money and generating revenues. The macro effects are big relative to the expenditures.” A study published this week about the long-term impact of changes in Medicaid eligibility, by Amanda Kowalski of Yale University, and David Brown and Ithai Z. Lurie from the Treasury Department’s Office of Tax Analysis, underscores just how costly scrimping on Medicaid can be. Using national data, the researchers estimated that for children born in 1981, Vermont’s more generous eligibility standards would have cost the federal and state governments $4,796 more a child than in Arkansas, measured in 2011 dollars. They also found, however, that easier access to Medicaid translated into more payroll and income taxes when the children grew up. By the time Vermont’s children are 60, Professor Kowalski and her colleagues estimated, they will have repaid 56 cents of each additional Medicaid dollar spent on them when young. There’s more. Healthier children are more likely to become more productive adults who need less government assistance. Children with behavioral problems who receive counseling are less likely to end up in prison — a big expense line on state budgets. In his recent book “We Are Better Than This,” Edward D. Kleinbard, former chief of staff of Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation, now at the University of Southern California, put it cleanly: “Healthy and adequately nourished citizens are more productive, and will contribute more to the prosperity of society, than will sick and emaciated ones.” Not least, they will probably lead healthier, more satisfying lives. “One reason for the increased tax payments is that the children survived to pay them,” Professor Kowalski told me. Government spending is not always written off as a waste. In recent years, some of the Congressional Budget Office’s analyses have assumed a positive rate of return to the government’s civilian investment. That investment totaled $318 billion in 2012, or roughly 9 percent of total government spending. The estimate, however, is not quite hard science. The government invests in all sorts of things — bridges to nowhere, college education and vital research. Systematically evaluating the long-term return of these endeavors is daunting. Few economists have even tried. So the budget office uses a sort of rule of thumb: It assumes the rate of return to public investment will generally range from zero to the rate of return to private investment, averaging half the private return. This still often undervalues the productivity of what the government does. Some economists argue that public investment is often more productive than private investment . Even the International Monetary Fund, long an exponent of fiscal rectitude, argues that public infrastructure investment largely pays for itself , especially in periods of repressed economic activity and low interest rates like today. Consider early childhood education. James Heckman of the University of Chicago has estimated that early investment in poor children’s development yields an enormous a rate of return for society at large from things like higher productivity and less crime. Most glaringly, government spending not classified as investment — like Medicaid or food stamps — is assumed to deliver no economic return at all. Republicans’ attempts to recast budget rules might be portrayed as a political tactic of little consequence — an assertion of power with no economic or budgetary substance. The stakes are high, though. Under current laws, the C.B.O. has projected that civilian government investment will shrink to roughly 1.3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product by 2020. That is the smallest share since the government started keeping track in 1962. Federal income support programs like food stamps and the earned-income tax credit are also projected to shrink over the coming decade. And Republicans are unlikely to abandon their long-held plans to cut Medicaid and gut the Affordable Care Act. It’s one thing to shrink a government that is believed to do no good. It would be more difficult if voters understood how much bang they get for the government’s buck.

Federal Budget
Tax
US Politics
Medicaid
US
Budget
Arkansas
US Economy
Vermont


High-Def Video, Made Small

Abstract: MODERN electronics are great and all. But as our appreciation of technology blossoms, so, unfortunately, does our cynicism. We've learned the hard way that those "five mile" walkie-talkies don't even cover the backyard, that no version of Windows "just works," and that when you call for tech support, your call is not important to them. Thousands of people have also learned that those pocket-size camera-camcorders are generally rip-offs. Instead of tapes, they record onto expensive memory cards that hold only about 20 minutes of video. Zoom power and battery life are terrible. As for the photo and video quality, only camera phones do worse. You're forgiven for being skeptical, therefore, to learn of a new pocketcorder -- the Sanyo Xacti HD1, arriving in March -- that purports to record high-definition video. HDTV? From a camera the size of a bar of Ivory soap? In a world that's slowly but surely moving toward a high-def future, that would indeed be something. It would make the HD1 the world's smallest HDTV camera. And at its $800 price tag, it would be the least expensive by far. (Until now, the smallest, least expensive HDTV camcorder was Sony's spectacular HC1, which sells for about $1,340 online.) Could the Xacti HD1 be as good as it sounds? The answer is no. But it comes much closer than you might expect. First, though, it's worth understanding the pros and cons of a memory-based camcorder. The fact that it takes SD cards instead of tapes confers several benefits; for example, you can't record over something by mistake. You can jump from shot to shot without waiting to rewind or fast-forward. And you never have to buy tapes; you just reuse these memory cards, offloading your pictures and movies onto your computer when they get full. The downside is having to buy those memory cards; the HD1 doesn't come with one. A two-gigabyte SD card, the biggest available at the moment (about $100 online), can hold 28 minutes of best-quality HDTV video. If you buy the camcorder and two such cards, you'll still have spent less than $1,000. In any case, once the memory card fills up, you put the HD1 into its charging cradle and hook up the included U.S.B. cord. Then you drag the HD1's photo-and-video folder to your computer's hard drive -- a much faster process than playing a tape in real time. ON the Mac, iMovie and Final Cut slurp up the HD1's MPEG-4 video files without batting an eye; among Windows video editing programs, MPEG-4 compatibility varies. Sanyo also includes a basic editing program for both Mac and Windows. The HD1's 2.2-inch rotating screen is another breakthrough feature. People practically splurt their coffee when they see it, because it's probably the first time they've ever seen an organic light-emitting diode display on a camcorder. OLED is a new screen technology that offers brighter, more colorful images with much greater contrast than traditional L.C.D. screens. In fact, video and photos look better on the HD1's screen than on your computer or TV, which isn't necessarily a good thing. In theory, OLED is also supposed to require much less power than L.C.D. screens. But it doesn't seem to help the HD1 much; its battery lasts only an hour. The screen doesn't do well in bright sunlight, either. Opening the screen turns on the camcorder. On paper, that's a sweet, natural feature that cuts down on the preparing-to-shoot checklist. In practice, though, it means that the screen must be open to record anything, which eats up battery power and looks silly when you're just recording audio. (The HD1 makes a superb, high-capacity tapeless tape recorder. Not only is the built-in mike crisp and clear, but someone at Sanyo had the good sense to include a jack for an external microphone.) When you're gripping the HD1 in shooting position -- which is slightly uncomfortable, thanks to the camera's sharp metal edges -- two big buttons face you. One takes a picture. The other starts or stops video recording. (You can even snap a photo while recording, if you don't mind a crude gap in the video.) The five-megapixel stills are surprisingly good (samples are at nytimes.com/circuits). The top-mounted flash really works, and there's a full array of manual controls: exposure, ISO (light sensitivity), shutter and aperture, and white balance. Adjusting the exposure doesn't involve burrowing into a menu; you just tap the main joystick left or right. This is not to say that Kodak, Canon and Nikon have anything to fear. Still shots of moving subjects often come out blurry, and in low light, the photos exhibit more grain than a Kansas silo. But photos, schmotos. What the world really wants to know is, how does the high-definition video look? As a Sanyo rep puts it, "Amazing quality can be seen from the HD1, especially in controlled lighting and when the camera is stabilized." He should have said "only," not "especially." Those two factors -- lighting and stabilization -- turn out to be towering issues with this camcorder. Yes, it's true: park it on a tripod on a sunny day at the beach, and your home movies will be the talk of the family. You'll come home, plug it into your HDTV set (component and S-video cables are included), hit Play on the remote, and blow people away with the clarity and beauty of the wide-screen, 1,280-by-720-pixel picture, what the geeks call 720p high-def video. (The HD1 also records standard-definition video with the press of one button.) The video can't touch the quality of commercial HDTV, or even the results from that $1,340 Sony HC1. Even so, the HD1 can look miles better than any other pocketcorder's video. At its best, it humbles even most tape camcorders. Without good light and a tripod, though, the HD1 is an iffier prospect. Indoor shots and low-light scenes are marred by dancing pixels and compression "artifacts" (blotchy pixel clusters). Then there's the image-stability issue, where the HD1 represents a perfect storm of problems. First, you have to hold this camcorder vertically, with one hand -- a recipe for jiggles. Second, because it lacks an eyepiece viewfinder, you have to hold the HD1 at arm's length, further reducing stability. Finally, the wide-screen, horizontal orientation of high-definition video tends to exaggerate hand-held jitters. The HD1 does have an image stabilizer, but it doesn't do much. Meanwhile, it has a nasty side effect: it sacrifices the outer margins of the video frame. This camera is already weak in the wide-angle department -- to fit a six-foot adult in the frame, you have to back up about 15 feet. Finally, it's worth noting that the HD1's autofocus is excruciatingly slow. Any camcorder must adjust its focus every time you change zoom, you record a target at a different distance, or something passes momentarily between you and your subject. In some situations, the HD1 takes as long as two blurry seconds to recover. The autofocus can't even keep up with the camera's own 10X optical zoom. So no, the HD1 is not likely to become the independent filmmaker's camera of choice. But the fact that you can carry this gadget in a pants pocket is surely worth something. The fact that it's turned on and ready to record in two seconds is valuable, too. Even when there's a "real" camcorder sitting on the same shelf, a typical family videographer may often be tempted to grab the HD1 when something adorable is going on in the living room; the HD1's simplicity and immediacy earn it big points for trust and convenience. In other words, maybe the question shouldn't be, "How is the HD1 as a high-definition camcorder?" Maybe the proper question is, "How does it doconsidering its price and tiny size?" And the answer is that when the light is good, the camera's stable and the expectations aren't sky-high, the HD1 may just restore some luster to the tarnished reputation of the class of memory-card pocketcorders. CIRCUITS E-mail: Pogue@nytimes.com

RECORDING EQUIPMENT
ELECTRONICS
CAMCORDERS


Some Hybrids Could Be Used as Cabs Under Proposed Rule

Abstract: Faced with a lawsuit aimed at blocking New York’s so-called Taxi of Tomorrow because it is not a hybrid, the Bloomberg administration has proposed a compromise: Some owners can buy hybrids, as long as they are big enough. The city’s Taxi and Limousine Commission said on Friday that the proposed rule, which will be discussed at a public hearing in May before coming to a vote, should quell any concerns from environmentalists and medallion owners who want to use hybrids. But the group that brought the lawsuit, the Greater New York Taxi Association, said that the proposal was too strict, requiring every hybrid to have a large interior, at least 138 cubic feet, similar to that of a van or sport utility vehicle. The size is the same as that of the Taxi of Tomorrow, the Nissan NV200, the carmaker says. “These rules look like they have been created to short-circuit the litigation,” the group said in a statement. “We do not consider this to be a serious proposal.” The group, whose members operate many fuel-efficient cabs, noted that popular hybrids like the Prius and Camry from Toyota have interior volumes far smaller than 138 cubic feet. The proposal came months after the group’s lawsuit raised doubts about whether the Taxi of Tomorrow would ever reach the road in its current form. According to the suit, the city’s Administrative Code requires the commission to allow hybrid cars as an option for taxi operators. The Taxi of Tomorrow, not currently available as a hybrid, is to be the sole car permitted for nearly all operators, and is scheduled to be phased in beginning this year. David S. Yassky, the city’s taxi commissioner, said the Taxi of Tomorrow would eventually be available as a hybrid as well. The proposal, he said, ensures that “any hybrid taxi is spacious enough to comfortably accommodate passengers and luggage.” As the winner of the city’s Taxi of Tomorrow competition two years ago, Nissan secured a 10-year contract to manufacture virtually all of the city’s 13,000 cabs. The city has hailed the NV200’s distinctive features, including transparent roof panels and “lower-annoyance” horns, but the choice of the vehicle has drawn criticism from proponents of hybrids and advocates of wheelchair-accessibility. The car is not wheelchair-accessible, though it can be retrofitted to become so. Last year, John C. Liu, the city comptroller, rejected the agreement with Nissan, though it was not clear what practical effect the move had.

Electric Cars and Hybrids
Taxis
Lawsuit
NYC
Taxi and Limousine Commission
Greater New York Taxi Assn


States Spent Over $1 Billion on Winter Cleanup Operations

Abstract: The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials said 23 states reported combined spending of more than $1 billion on winter maintenance operations and eight million work hours plowing or treating state roads from October to March. The states that responded to Monday’s survey went through six million tons of salt and large quantities of brine and liquid de-icing chemicals. A single-season snowfall record was broken in Boston, with virtually all the 110 inches coming in a six-week stretch to early March. Massachusetts used 600,000 tons of salt and 1.6 million gallons of liquid de-icer. Crews removed 17.5 billion cubic feet of snow from state roadways, equivalent to 40 times the volume of dirt excavated during the giant Boston highway project known as the Big Dig, state officials noted.


Ken Pomeroy Becomes Go-To Guy in N.C.A.A. Tournament

Abstract: NEW ORLEANS — Well past midnight in the team hotel after Butler defeated Michigan State for a spot in the national title game last year, the Bulldogs’ Brad Stevens embarked on the biggest challenge of his coaching career. With less than 48 hours to prepare for Duke, Stevens flipped open his laptop. He logged onto the basketball statistics Web site of Ken Pomeroy, a meteorologist based in Utah whom he has never met or spoken with. There, he found advanced data about Duke’s tendencies that helped him come within a missed shot of the championship. Stevens is hardly alone. As the N.C.A.A. tournament enters its Round of 16, coaches are scurrying for the slightest edge. And it is becoming increasingly common for coaches to rely on Pomeroy’s statistics for scouting. While they have not been universally embraced — programs like Connecticut and Richmond do not use them — advanced analytics have emerged as valuable preparation tools. Stevens uses Pomeroy’s numbers to seek trends in losses and to identify teams’ strengths and weaknesses. It is all part of trying to crack the code of the opposition. “That’s one of the most fun things for me, personally,” Stevens said. “Trying to see if you can solve a puzzle.” Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski is enough of an admirer that he has had Pomeroy on his radio show. Kevin Kuwik, a video coordinator at Ohio State, called the statistics at KenPom.com “the bible” and the “first thing I look at every time I go into a scout.” The statistics resonated enough at Arizona that the assistant coach Archie Miller said jokingly he would get the Ohio State assistant Brandon Miller a framed copy of KenPom’s offensive rankings after the Buckeyes finished No. 1 in Pomeroy’s regular-season offensive statistics. “In most offices the water cooler gossip is about last night’s television shows,” Danny Peters, a graduate manager at Arizona, said. “We talk about KenPom.” Pomeroy, who has a civil engineering degree from Virginia Tech and a graduate degree from Wyoming in atmospheric science, started researching statistics a few years ago when he heard television announcers lauding Air Force for its defense. He hypothesized that the low scoring of Air Force’s opponents was more related to the Falcons’ patient offense, which limited possessions, than a suffocating defense. Then he devised a formula, and it proved that he was right. Pomeroy’s statistics are often referred to as tempo stats because they take into account the pace of a game. So, instead of using traditional numbers like points per game to gauge an offense or a defense, his statistics are predicated on offensive and defensive efficiency, which are essentially points per possession. For example, Virginia Military Institute was the top-scoring team in the country thanks to its run-and-gun style, but it is 65th in Pomeroy’s ratings . Rebounding numbers can be misleading as well. A team may outrebound its opponent but lose by a large margin. Why? If the opposition is making a high percentage of its shots, there are fewer defensive rebounds to grab. That is why Pomeroy calculates rebounding percentage as a more accurate gauge of a team’s rebounding ability. Arizona Coach Sean Miller values offensive rebounding percentage so much that he uses the statistic during timeouts and at halftime. There are other helpful figures, like effective field-goal percentage, turnover percentage and the percentage of points teams score and yield from the free-throw line. “I’m not a math geek,” said the George Mason assistant coach Chris Caputo, who does his team’s scouting reports. “But it gives me a quick statistical synopsis of who they are before we watch tape and personnel. What do they do well? What are their strengths and weaknesses? Where do their points come from? It’s a snapshot of relevant statistics.” Caputo is one of the few coaches who regularly talk with Pomeroy, and many coaches said they would pay for the information on his site. But Pomeroy gives it away, joking that he is waiting for a wealthy program to pay him a large amount of money to shut down the site and hoard the information. Pomeroy said he makes a few dollars from advertisements on his site and has a small consulting deal with Baylor. But it is far from a windfall. Pomeroy, 37, said he spent about 20 to 30 hours a week on the site and watched college basketball another 10 to 12 hours a week. His full-time job is at the National Weather Service; he is not sure what the future is for his site. “It’s something that I always ask myself, exactly where do I want this to go,” he said. “There’s a lot of conflicting thoughts about that. I don’t really have any basketball background.” Pomeroy said he does a few write-ups each week for Baylor, crunching information not available on his site. He said he tailored the information to what Baylor was looking for, like studying opponents’ fast-break percentages, which can determine how many players Baylor sends to the offensive glass. He said one of the frustrating parts for him is how to better communicate the information. “I wish I knew how I could tailor this information better to help coaches,” Pomeroy said. “I can’t communicate information the way that I read it, because it will overwhelm them and make their eyes bleed. I feel like I need to whittle it down to two or three highlights.” Programs like Virginia Commonwealth, Ohio State, Marquette and Butler use KenPom’s statistics as a complement to Synergy Sports Technology, a video scouting system that has become popular in the past five years. (The full Synergy package costs $5,000 to $7,500 each year.) Synergy is so advanced that the Butler assistant coaches Matthew Graves and Micah Shrewsberry said they could take a player like Old Dominion guard Kent Bazemore, whom they faced in their first game of the N.C.A.A. tournament, and find out that he drives to the right 75 percent of the time (despite being left-handed). The Synergy statistics back up what is shown in the clips. With a few clicks, Butler coaches can watch clips of every post move on the right block that Wisconsin forward Jon Leuer made this season and how many times he turned over his left and right shoulder. “It reassures us what we saw,” said Darnell Archey, Butler’s coordinator of basketball operations. When George Mason’s Mike Morrison missed his first field-goal attempt against Ohio State in the Round of 32, Ohio State forward Jared Sullinger pointed to Kuwik, the video coordinator, on the bench. He had used the go-to move that Kuwik showed Sullinger in film that week. Stevens said one challenge was not to overwhelm players with too much detail. Butler’s coaches focus more on showcasing clips of personnel and tendencies, which guard Ronald Nored said helped tremendously. “There are two things that go into game planning,” Stevens said. “The players need to know things, and I need to know things. They don’t always need to be equal.” Marquette Coach Buzz Williams, a self-proclaimed “freak for numbers,” studies the KenPom rankings. But Williams said when Marquette does scouting breakdowns he gives the team three tendencies and two numbers on every player. “I give them the highlights of what I know they have to know,” Williams said. These days, there is plenty of information and film available. But for all the sophistication, there is a good chance that some of the teams who advance this weekend to reach the Final Four are relying on a meteorologist’s free Web site to form their game plan.

Pomeroy Ken
Statistics
Basketball
College Athletics
NCAA Basketball Tournament (Men)
Basketball (College)
NCAA Basketball Championships (Men)


Playoff-Savvy Packers Spot Redskins an Early Lead, Then Romp

Abstract: LANDOVER, Md. — Sacked for a safety on Green Bay’s second possession of the game and trailing the Washington Redskins by 11 points early in the second quarter, Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers quickly grasped the hole his team had dug for itself. Rodgers had also heard before Sunday’s wild-card playoff game that his Packers, losers in their final two regular-season games, were cast as the struggling underdogs against the surprising Redskins, who were riding a four-game winning streak. And then there were the pregame comparisons between Rodgers and Washington quarterback Kirk Cousins, perceived as a sudden star — he is five years younger. But Rodgers was buoyed by other numbers that mattered more to him, and they involved playoff experience. The Redskins entered the game with one postseason victory since the 1999 season. The Packers had won nine playoff games in the same span. So when things appeared darkest in the early moments Sunday, Rodgers insisted that the Packers would win. Asked how he had known the Packers could rally, Rodgers said: “Because we’ve been there, done that. It helps to have done it and know how to do it.” Image Davante Adams catching a pass for a Green Bay touchdown just before halftime. The Packers recovered from early stumbles and turned the game into a rout. Credit Michael Reynolds/European Pressphoto Agency With calm and resourceful efficiency, the 32-year-old Rodgers helped the Packers storm back not once but twice on Sunday in a convincing 35-18 rout of the Redskins. Green Bay scored 17 unanswered points in the second quarter to overtake Washington, and when the Redskins regained the lead early in the second half, the Packers scored the next 18 points to win going away. “For us offensively, it’s about rhythm,” Rodgers said. “And once we get that, we become like a snowball going downhill. We’re tough to stop once that happens.” Wide receiver James Jones insisted there had been no panic on the Green Bay sideline. “We were down, 11-0, but offensively, we were only out there a few plays,” Jones said. “We knew if we could get a few first downs, our tempo would wear down the defense. We would be clicking, and they would be tired.” He added: “We play fast all the time in practice. We’re used to it. Other teams aren’t.” As much as the Packers, who will advance to the divisional playoff round at Arizona next weekend, seemed poised after the game, they had appeared unsettled early in the second quarter. The home crowd was in full voice cheering on the Redskins, who had won six of eight home games in the regular season. Image Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers, left, under pressure in the first quarter. Rodgers led the Packers to 17 unanswered points in the second quarter. Credit Patrick Smith/Getty Images But piece by piece — at first with a few consecutive first downs, as Jones said — the Packers gathered themselves and slowly began to carve out smooth and efficient drives. Their offensive line dominated the line of scrimmage. And Rodgers, despite his humbling start, evaded the pass rush with little sidesteps, gaining just enough time to throw two touchdown passes and set up four other scores while completing 21 of 36 passes for 210 yards. “It’s a patient, resilient group,” Green Bay Coach Mike McCarthy said. “It was still early in the game.” While the Packers stormed back to take a 6-point lead at halftime, Washington did not go out meekly. On their first possession of the third quarter, Cousins, who completed 29 of 46 passes for 329 yards with one touchdown, quickly led the Redskins to the Packers’ 3-yard line. Cousins, showing some versatility, faked a dropback pass and then sprinted through the middle of the Green Bay defense on a quarterback draw. Running untouched into the end zone, Cousins gave Washington an 18-17 lead. But Rodgers was unfazed. He completed his first pass of the second half to wide receiver Davante Adams, and Green Bay advanced smoothly down the field. A balanced 11-play, 80-yard drive ended with running back James Starks dashing untouched 4 yards on an end-around and in for the score. So much for the Washington comeback. The Packers had swiftly regained the lead, 24-18. By the start of the fourth quarter, the Packers were imposing their will on the Redskins’ defense again. The Packers called plays and moved at a pace that had the Redskins desperate to keep up. Green Bay was unpredictable, too, with Randall Cobb both catching passes and taking handoffs in the backfield. With the Packers deep in Washington territory, Starks took a handoff for an off-tackle play and then broke it outside, running for 22 yards until he was pushed out of the bounds at the Washington 2-yard line. Eddie Lacy bulled in for a touchdown from there. When wide receiver Jared Abbrederis caught a pass for a 2-point conversion, the Packers led, 32-18, and the rout was on. The early moments of the game, and the Packers’ sluggish play, seemed a long way off. The worst of it for Green Bay was on its second possession, when Rodgers was forced to try to pass out of his own end zone on a third-and-13. No Packers receiver was open, and with the Redskins’ pass rush closing in, Rodgers tried to escape the pocket to his left. Instead, he ran into a blitzing linebacker, Preston Smith, who knocked Rodgers to the ground for a safety. A field goal and a touchdown by Washington followed before Green Bay started its rally. Afterward, it was almost as if the Packers preferred the come-from-behind nature of their victory. “A game like this is huge for us,” Rodgers said. “We needed a game like this to get our mojo going.”


Obama Looks to Limit Impact of Tactic Bush Used to Sidestep New Laws

Abstract: WASHINGTON — Calling into question the legitimacy of all the signing statements that former President George W. Bush used to challenge new laws, President Obama ordered executive officials on Monday to consult with Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. before relying on any of them to bypass a statute. But Mr. Obama also signaled that he intended to use signing statements himself if Congress sent him legislation with provisions he decided were unconstitutional. He promised to take a modest approach when using the statements, legal documents issued by a president the day he signs bills into law that instruct executive officials how to put the statutes into effect. But Mr. Obama said there was a role for the practice if used appropriately. “In exercising my responsibility to determine whether a provision of an enrolled bill is unconstitutional, I will act with caution and restraint, based only on interpretations of the Constitution that are well-founded,” Mr. Obama wrote in a memorandum to the heads of all departments and agencies in the executive branch. Mr. Obama’s directions were the latest step in his administration’s effort to deal with a series of legal and policy disputes it inherited from the Bush administration. They came the same day Mr. Obama lifted restrictions Mr. Bush placed on federal financing for research that uses embryonic stem cells . Mr. Bush’s use of signing statements led to fierce controversy. He frequently used them to declare that provisions in the bills he was signing were unconstitutional constraints on executive power, and that the laws did not need to be enforced or obeyed as written. The laws he challenged included a ban on torture and requirements that Congress be given detailed reports about how the Justice Department was using the counterterrorism powers in the USA Patriot Act . Since the 19th century, presidents have occasionally signed a bill while declaring that one or more provisions were unconstitutional. The practice became more frequent with the Reagan administration, but it initially drew little attention. That changed under Mr. Bush, who broke all records, using signing statements to challenge about 1,200 sections of bills over his eight years in office, about twice the number challenged by all previous presidents combined, according to data compiled by Christopher Kelley, a political science professor at Miami University in Ohio . Many of Mr. Bush’s challenges were based on an expansive view of the president’s power, as commander in chief, to take actions he believes necessary, regardless of what Congress says in legislation. The American Bar Association declared that such signing statements were “contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers,” and called on Mr. Bush and future presidents to stop using them and to return to a system of either signing a bill and then enforcing all of it, or vetoing the bill and giving Congress a chance to override that veto. The Bush administration defended its use of signing statements as lawful and appropriate. And other legal scholars, while critical of Mr. Bush’s use of the device, said the bar association’s view was too extreme, because Congress sometimes passed important legislation that had minor constitutional flaws. They said it would be impractical to expect a president to veto the entire bill in such instances. Mr. Obama’s approach may be geared to that kind of legislation. He issued the instructions as Congress was finishing up a huge omnibus spending bill filled with provisions that could affect presidential power, like requirements to get the approval of a committee before taking certain actions. In his memorandum, Mr. Obama wrote, “Particularly since omnibus bills have become prevalent, signing statements have often been used to ensure that concerns about the constitutionality of discrete statutory provisions do not require a veto of the entire legislation.” The Obama administration portrayed its approach as a major departure from that of Mr. Bush. But Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania , the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, disagreed, saying Mr. Obama was “wrong” to embrace the view that signing statements can be constitutionally legitimate. “I think the Constitution is explicit as to how you handle these situations, and if the president thinks something is unconstitutional, then he ought to veto it,” said Mr. Specter, an outspoken critic of Mr. Bush’s signing statements. He called the practice a “dodge” and “a disregard for the separation of powers and co-equal branches of government.” “It’s just insulting,” Mr. Specter said, “and there is no reason why we can’t follow the Constitution even if it takes a few days more.” But Robert S. Turner, a Reagan administration lawyer who has testified before Congress in support of signing statements, said he was pleased Mr. Obama was willing to use the device if he decided that signing a bill was in the national interest but that obeying part of it would be unconstitutional — including provisions that might amount to an “usurpation of presidential power.” Some bills, Mr. Turner argued, “are unvetoable,” because parts are urgently needed. Mr. Obama’s directive was consistent with what he said in the 2008 presidential campaign, when he criticized Mr. Bush’s use of signing statements as an abuse. He said he would use them in a more restrained manner. By contrast, the Republican presidential nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona , pledged never to issue a signing statement. In his directive, Mr. Obama said any signing statement issued before his presidency should be viewed with doubt, placing an asterisk beside all of those issued by Mr. Bush and other former presidents. “To ensure that all signing statements previously issued are followed only when consistent with these principles,” he wrote, “executive branch departments and agencies are directed to seek the advice of the attorney general before relying on signing statements issued prior to the date of this memorandum as the basis for disregarding, or otherwise refusing to comply with, any provision of a statute.”

George W Bush
Barack Obama
Legislation
US Politics
President of the United States


Frozen Four — Ferris State Hopes to Keep Making History on Ice

Abstract: TAMPA, Fla. — It seems only fitting that a team from Big Rapids, Mich., would dream big. Never mind that Ferris State’s men’s hockey team had qualified for the N.C.A.A. postseason only once before, in 2003, and bowed out quickly. Or that the Bulldogs were picked to finish ninth in their league last September. This season’s club believed it could make history. “We got tired of the preseason polls having us low and we were sick of seeing that,” said Taylor Nelson, Ferris State’s goalie. “It’s bulletin board stuff that fuels the fire.” Ferris State stoked that flame throughout a season to remember, reaching No. 1 in all three major Division I hockey polls on Feb. 14, capturing its second Central Collegiate Hockey Association regular-season championship, and upending Denver and Cornell in the N.C.A.A. tournament to advance to its first Frozen Four. “The fact we were able to make it here for the first time ever in school history is huge,” Nelson said. “We have three busloads coming down to Tampa to watch us play, which is awesome. I hope they get here safely, because we want them to help blow the roof off this place.” The Bulldogs (25-11-5) will square off with fellow upstart Union College (26-7-7), the pride of Schenectady, N.Y., at 4:30 p.m. Thursday, in the first semifinal at the Tampa Bay Times Forum, while the college hockey powerhouses Boston College (31-10-1) and Minnesota (28-13-1) are scheduled to play at 8 p.m. The final will be played Saturday night. Ferris State, with an enrollment of 14,560 students tucked into the west-central corner of Michigan, competes at the N.C.A.A. Division II level in all intercollegiate sports except hockey. Boston College and Minnesota had a combined 43 appearances in the Frozen Four, causing some to call Ferris State’s meeting with Union, also in the Frozen Four for the first time, the “junior varsity game.” “That’s silly,” Nelson said. “We’re in the Frozen Four last time I checked, and it’s a pretty big accomplishment for both teams. Both teams deserve to be here.” The backbone of the Ferris State program is Coach Bob Daniels, a 20-year veteran who has won 333 games in his tenure with the Bulldogs. Daniels, the recipient of the Spencer Penrose Award given annually to N.C.A.A. Division I men’s hockey coach of the year, was the steadying influence on a team with no N.H.L. draft picks, similar to Union. By contrast, Minnesota boasts 18 N.H.L. draft picks on its roster, while Boston College has 9. “I spoke with a past professor at Ferris State earlier in the week and he had an interesting take on small school versus big school,” Daniels said. “He said, ‘Say you end up running into Minnesota in the finals, and they have a school of 40,000, the nice thing is you’re only playing 20 of their student-athletes, you don’t have to play all 40,000.’ Regardless of the size of the school, everyone has earned their way here.” Minnesota’s enrollment is actually closer to 50,000, but Daniels’s easygoing demeanor belies a team built on a blue-collar approach and toothy defense. The Bulldogs are fifth in the country in team defense, allowing 2.17 goals per game. Nelson, a senior who lost his starting job last season, comes into the national semifinals with a 20-6-3 record, including three shutouts, a 2.10 goals-against average and a .923 save percentage, putting him in the top 10 nationally. “Their defensive zone coverage is something we haven’t seen before,” Union Coach Rick Bennett said. “They swarm you.” Without any poaching from the N.H.L., the Bulldogs feature a veteran roster, with 12 of the top 20 players either juniors or seniors. As a result, Daniels had little concern when a 15-game unbeaten streak resulted in the program’s initial No. 1 ranking and intensified the team’s national profile. “The No. 1 ranking really caught us off guard from the standpoint of the fan reaction and the media reaction,” said Daniels, who received a recent congratulatory call from the former Bulldog and two-time Stanley Cup champion Chris Kunitz of the Pittsburgh Penguins. “The phones started ringing off the hook, and the onslaught of coverage we got, I think, has really helped prepare our team. I’m not worried because our team is so mature and so focused.” That steely focus has been challenged not only by the enormity of the moment for Ferris State, but also the added distractions provided by the fun and sun in the nontraditional hockey environment of Tampa. Now that the nearly two-week buildup to the Frozen Four is about to conclude, the Bulldogs are eager to seize their rare opportunity. “Obviously this is a great event, but when you sit back and think about it, we’re coming here to play hockey,” defenseman Chad Billins said. “It’s great to see all the hoopla and excitement around this event, but we still have to prepare the same way we have all year.”

Hockey Ice
Ferris State University
NCAA Ice Hockey Championships
Union College (Schenectady NY)
Daniels Bob
College Athletics


Economists Call Delaying Aid for Spain Risky for Europe

Abstract: MADRID — It has become Spain’s version of Godot: waiting for Rajoy. For various reasons, Mariano Rajoy, the country’s prime minister, has deferred seeking help from a financial assistance program that Europe has tailored to Spain’s needs. Many economists, analysts and business executives here are increasingly worried about the costs of further delay. They warn that waiting to seek aid, and the uncertainty the delay engenders, threaten to push the economy deeper into recession. And that, they say, could increase the ultimate cost to Spain and Europe if the aid eventually needs to be granted under crisis conditions. As long as Spain’s borrowing costs remain below 6 percent, as they have since the European Central Bank said it would buy the country’s bonds if asked, the Rajoy government might seem to have no reason to rush. But the downgrade of Spanish debt to near junk status last week by Standard & Poor’s underscored the fragility of the country’s finances. And the seeming political paralysis in Madrid may be reinforcing a wider economic stasis. “The economy has stopped,” said Ángel Berges, the chief executive of AFI, an economic consulting firm based in Madrid. The indicators are grim: Cement production has reached its lowest level since the 1960s. Car sales are down 37 percent from last year. And on weekdays the public squares of Madrid are filled with the unemployed — young and old — whiling away the hours. Even the wealthy are feeling the strain. In the boat slips of Barcelona, “For Sale” signs hang on nearly every moored yacht. The bond-buying program that the central bank announced in early September is meant to help keep a lid on the borrowing costs of besieged countries like Spain, if they ask for the help. Under the plan, the big new European bailout fund , whose financial firepower is to eventually reach 500 billion euros, or $648 billion, would buy newly issued Spanish bonds directly in the government’s auctions, while the central bank would stand ready to buy existing bonds in the secondary market. Analysts said there was more at stake than the yield on Spain’s government bonds. They pointed out that those lower interest rates would lead to reduced borrowing rates across the board, providing a cheaper source of financing for Spanish banks and corporations that could stimulate investment. And yet Mr. Rajoy’s reluctance to seek help has its own logic. To begin with, German officials have urged him to wait, as they have no desire to present yet another euro zone rescue package to their fed-up voters. But Mr. Rajoy, a stolid, cautious man, has plenty of domestic reasons, too. Since coming to power in late 2011, his popularity has plummeted in the wake of a series of wrenching austerity programs. Now, with regional elections on Sunday in his home state of Galicia that could test the strength of his center-right Popular Party, Mr. Rajoy has every incentive to wait a bit longer to request help from Europe, which would bring with it further outside oversight of the Spanish budget. “There is no pressure on us — we will take the decision when we know everything we need to know,” said a senior government spokeswoman in Madrid, who declined to be identified by name as a matter of policy. But analysts said that by waiting several more months, as many here predict will happen, Mr. Rajoy was playing a dangerous game. Not only will the economy continue to suffer from uncertainty, but Mr. Rajoy also runs the risk of being forced to seek help under the duress of a market panic, if bond investors once again begin to bet against Spain. Europe’s intervention under that circumstance could lead it to demand even harsher policy measures — like the socially disruptive cuts in Spanish pensions that so far Mr. Rajoy has avoided. “If you wait too long, you will be forced into a program that will have much tougher conditions — so better to ask for it now,” said José Manuel Campa, who was secretary of state for the economy during the previous government and is now a professor at the IESE Business School at the University of Navarra in Madrid. In terms of national debt, Spain is nowhere near as bad off as nearly bankrupt Greece, whose debt burden is nearly 200 percent of the size of its economy. In Spain’s case, the number is 90 percent — the same as France’s. The main worry is not the size of the debt, though, but how quickly it has been amassed. By next year, when it is expected to rise to 96 percent, Spain’s debt burden will have grown by nearly one-third since 2011, according to the International Monetary Fund. That rate of debt expansion outpaces every other country in the world and is the result of a plummeting economy, high interest rates and the burden of rescuing Spain’s collapsing banks. One of the concerns S.& P. raised in its downgrade last week was that the austerity measures already adopted by Spain were choking off economic growth. Consider the auto industry. Hard hit by the recession, it now sells about the same number of cars — projected to be about 700,000 this year — that it did in the 1990s. At the industry’s peak volume, in 2006, Spaniards purchased 1.6 million vehicles. Further curbing demand is the recent increase in Spain’s value-added tax , essentially a sales tax. It is now 21 percent, up from 18 percent, and it helped send Spanish car sales plunging by 38 percent in September, the first month of the higher tax. “We are worried about the market because sales are so dependent on the economy,” Juan Antonio Sánchez Torres, the president of Ganvam, the Spanish car retailers’ association. “The recent VAT tax increase raised the cost of a car by 650 euros on average. That has an important psychological impact that can stop consumption.” Downward pressure on wages in both the public and private sector has helped the economy by making Spanish exports, like machinery parts and chemicals, more competitive. But the Spanish economy is largely driven by domestic demand, and there are few signs that will pick up any time soon. Bank loans have virtually dried up. Compared with 2006 and 2007, when bank lending grew at about 25 percent each year, the evaporation of credit has had a devastating effect on consumers and corporations alike. Analysts at AFI, the Spanish financial consultancy, said they did not expect the country’s banks — many of them still trying to dig themselves out from a mountain of bad real estate loans — to resume lending in a measurable way until 2014 at the earliest. All the more reason, they said, for Spain to seek help quickly. Adding to the potential costs of delay, it seems nearly certain that the government will miss the deficit-cutting targets for this year and next that are part of its euro zone obligations. That raises the prospect that Madrid will be forced to submit to even tougher budgetary strictures if it waits until later to qualify for the bond-buying support. “The government will have to take additional measures to reach the 6.3 percent of G.D.P. target,” its goal for 2012, said Federico Steinberg, an economist at the Real Instituto Elcano, a research group. “They will need to freeze pensions or even reduce them.” Pensions take up about 100 billion euros of Spain’s 350 billion euros in annual spending, Mr. Steinberg said. But they have been one area that has been spared budget cuts; in fact, they recently were increased by 1 percent. Because many pensioners are now the sole bread winners of their families, any cutbacks in retirement payments would carry a devastating social cost. Mr. Rajoy’s critics said it would be better to not risk such an outcome by waiting to ask for aid. In Madrid, it is jokingly said that if you meet a Galician on the stairs, you won’t know if he is going up or down. Mr. Rajoy’s ambivalence about seeking Europe’s help might be partly explained by his Galician roots, say those who tell the joke. But as they wonder whether Spain is heading back up, or farther down, few are laughing.

Spain
European Stability Mechanism
European Sovereign Debt Crisis (2010- )
Rajoy Mariano
European Central Bank


M.T.A. Bans Hoverboards on Transit System

Abstract: First it targeted manspreading. Now hoverboards. In a new ad campaign, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority will remind subway and bus riders to leave their hoverboards at home. The popular two-wheeled motorized devices are banned across the system, officials announced on Wednesday. That means not only no zooming along subway platforms on hoverboards, but also no bringing them into stations or onto trains and buses, either. “There have been reports of exploding batteries, and certainly you don’t want anything like that in a crowded subway car or a train,” Fernando Ferrer, the vice chairman of the authority’s board, told reporters after a board meeting on Wednesday. The proliferation of hoverboards has raised safety concerns over injuries among riders and reports of batteries catching fire. More than a few celebrities have embraced them , even as federal officials have warned consumers about the risks and some airlines have banned them . The devices are already banned in New York City, according to the police. But some local officials have pushed to legalize them , saying they could require riders to wear helmets or to use them only in parks. The authority’s ad campaign, starting in the next two months, will feature the same colorful “bubble people” from the manspreading posters , which ignited a debate over proper seat etiquette. Hoverboards are banned on all subway trains and stations, Long Island Rail Road, Metro-North Railroad and Staten Island Railway, along with buses and Access-A-Ride, officials said. The authority noted that riders were already prohibited from riding scooters and skateboards and from carrying flammable materials. Mr. Ferrer said he had no personal experience with hoverboards — and no intention of taking one for a spin. “I’ve never been on one,” said Mr. Ferrer, the former Bronx borough president, “and I’m not intending to try.”

Public Transit
Hoverboards
MTA
NYC
New York
Accidents and Safety
Railroads
Transit Terminals
Bus
Subway


European Leaders Voice Frustration With Greece in Debt Crisis

Abstract: GARMISCH-PARTENKIRCHEN, Germany — World leaders on Sunday increased the pressure on Europe to resolve the crisis over Greek debt, hours after one of the chief European negotiators expressed exasperation with the way the Greek leader was handling the talks. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, host of the Group of 7 summit meeting in the Bavarian Alps, told the public broadcaster ZDF that she and the French president, François Hollande, had spoken to Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras of Greece by telephone late Saturday and had briefed other leaders attending the gathering on the conversation. “We can’t say yet that the problem is solved,” Ms. Merkel told ZDF. “We are working flat out,” she added, but said that any deal requires Europeans to bind together to help each other, as well as individual efforts from member states. President Obama also intensified pressure for a resolution, with the White House warning that a failure by Europe to reach a deal could spark broader financial instability around the globe. In a private meeting between Mr. Obama and Ms. Merkel on the sidelines of the summit, the two agreed “that it was important for Greece and their partners to chart a way forward that builds on crucial structural reforms and returns Greece to sustainable long-term growth,” Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said on Sunday. “There obviously is a deadline that’s looming,” Mr. Earnest added, saying the president was hopeful that Greece would pursue such changes “without causing undue volatility in the global financial markets.” Earlier Sunday, Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission , the executive arm of the European Union , accused Mr. Tsipras of failing to disclose important details of the proposal made by Greece’s creditors when he addressed Parliament on Friday. Mr. Juncker said he wanted Greece to remain in the euro currency zone but could not “pull a rabbit out of the hat.” Greece has until the end of the month to work out a deal with the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund , or it could default on its debt. The three entities lent Greece $240 billion in 2010 and 2012. On Friday, Greece delayed a deadline for a debt repayment to the I.M.F., buying Athens more time to renegotiate its deal. Speaking before the start of the G-7 meeting, Mr. Juncker said testily that he was still waiting for Greek proposals to counter an offer rejected by Mr. Tsipras last week. That proposal was pulled together on June 1 in Berlin by Ms. Merkel, Mr. Hollande, Mr. Juncker and the leaders of the central bank and I.M.F. After Mr. Juncker’s tart remarks and a reminder from Martin Schulz, the German who heads the European Parliament, that an agreement was needed, Greek officials reiterated that there was still no acceptable solution on the table. Mr. Juncker said he had discussed the latest proposal with Mr. Tsipras in Brussels on Wednesday. The Greek leader, according to Mr. Juncker, said he would counter with his own suggestions, but then went before Parliament in Athens on Friday and dismissed the latest European offer as “absurd,” in part because it reportedly required additional cuts in what he considered already meager pensions. In fact, Mr. Juncker said, he had stressed that a cut in pensions could be negotiable if Greece offered alternative savings. Not relaying that to Parliament had strained trust, Mr. Juncker suggested. He said that Mr. Tsipras remained “a friend,” but that friendship requires observing “some minimal rules.” Mr. Juncker added that he was now expecting to meet Mr. Tsipras in Brussels on Wednesday and that he expected to receive new Greek proposals by then. A Greek government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Athens was still awaiting a reaction to its proposal of last week, which included debt restructuring as a condition for any new agreement. The German government must have any new arrangement approved by the German Parliament and has insisted there will be no debt restructuring. Other governments that have gone through austerity programs — like Ireland, Portugal and Spain — argue that their voters would rebel against Greece’s being treated differently. The Greek opposition did not back the government proposal last Friday, although certain parties have indicated that they would support a deal to keep Greece in the eurozone. A recent poll showed that six in 10 Greeks who were questioned backed the government in its negotiating conduct, down from around seven in 10 in February. The same poll showed 47 percent wanted the government to accept the proposal the creditors made last Monday, while 35 percent wanted to reject it. Meanwhile, eight in 10 Greeks surveyed said they wanted to stay in the euro, according to the poll, carried out by Metron Analysis for the newspaper Parapolitika on June 3-4. The sample size was 1,003. Donald Tusk, the former prime minister of Poland, who heads the European Council, which directs European Union policy, also indicated that Brussels was losing patience with Greece’s continued wavering on a deal. “I think the debate on Greece is very simple,” Mr. Tusk said, speaking alongside Mr. Juncker at a news conference. “Greeks need money; creditors need guarantees,” Mr. Tusk said. If somebody insists on that, he continued, “that person is not a ruthless robber.”

G8,G7,G-7,Group of Seven
Alexis Tsipras
Jean-Claude Juncker
EU
Greece
European Commission
IMF
Euro Crisis