The Gotham City Cheerleaders Perform Outside MetLife Stadium as the Unofficial Squad of the Giants

Abstract: The Gotham City Cheerleaders have one mission: to become the official cheerleading team of the Giants. The team, started in 2011 by a former Washington Redskins cheerleader, Ana De Villegas, operates like any official N.F.L. cheerleading squad: It practices a few times a week, performs at events, has its own uniforms and even produces a swimsuit calendar. But you will not see these cheerleaders on the sidelines at Giants home games. Instead, they hit the pavement outside MetLife Stadium, performing at tailgate parties in the parking lot with the hope that word of mouth and a growing fan base will persuade the franchise to bring them inside. The Giants are one of six teams in the N.F.L. without an official cheerleading squad. John Mara, one of the Giants’ owners, has said, “It’s just not part of our philosophy.” Shortly after forming the cheerleading team, De Villegas reached out to the Giants, but she never got a response. So she decided to build her brand from the ground up. As the team makes its way around the parking lot, the reactions are mostly favorable. Fans cheer for the women and often join their dance circles. Teenage boys and young female cheerleaders line up for selfies and autographed calendars. The squad frequently, politely, declines invitations for beer and burgers from tailgaters. However, the women also often hear grumbling about “tradition,” and how the Giants need a new offensive line more than cheerleaders. They also regularly hear, “Wait, the Giants have cheerleaders?” To De Villegas, her squad and their fans, the Giants do — just not inside the stadium.

Football
Cheerleading
NFL
Super Bowl
Super Bowl 2015
MetLife Stadium NJ
Giants


Away From Battle, Appreciating a Soldier-Skeptic

Abstract: These days, Jonathan Gensler lives in Brooklyn and is in business developing solar energy projects. Exactly 10 years ago, he was getting ready to go to Iraq with the Fourth Infantry Division of the United States Army. He was 25, a lieutenant, not long out of West Point. Under him was a platoon of 30 men, all but two younger than he was. “I couldn’t afford skepticism then,” Mr. Gensler said on Thursday. “My mind was occupied with how I am going to achieve the mission, get my men home safely, and advance America’s interest. “But I certainly appreciated skepticism.” As Mr. Gensler was speaking, former Senator Chuck Hagel was parked at the front of a hearing room in Washington, where he faced demands that he repent of his doubts about the wisdom of the Iraq invasion in 2003, and his opposition to a troop surge ordered by President George W. Bush in 2007. Nominated by President Obama to be the secretary of defense, Mr. Hagel, a conservative Republican and Vietnam War veteran, reluctantly voted to approve the 2003 invasion, quickly came to see it as a blunder, and refused in 2007 to vote for the additional troops requested by President Bush. Senator John McCain, who supported the escalation, demanded that Mr. Hagel answer yes or no: Had he been right or wrong? Mr. Hagel said he could not answer without elaborating, and he defended his criticism of the war effort. “Our war in Iraq, I think, was the most fundamentally bad, dangerous decision since Vietnam,” Mr. Hagel said. For a few minutes, the Hagel hearings became a kind of proxy trial for the Iraq war; as badly as its early years had gone, with no weapons of mass destruction discovered and anarchy reigning, it was important to Senator McCain that Mr. Hagel concede that folly had been redeemed by the surge. He said he might not support Mr. Hagel’s nomination because of what he saw as waffling on that point. “I think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you’re on the wrong side of it,” Senator McCain said. Around New York, veterans of Iraq who were following the hearings saw Mr. Hagel’s skepticism about the war — and the surge — as vital qualities in a secretary of defense. “I was a senior in college in 2005, in R.O.T.C., and I remember Dick Cheney saying that the insurgency was in its last throes,” said Matt Gallagher, who was an Army captain with a unit north of Baghdad. “Hagel wasn’t having it.” In fact, the insurgency was entering a phase of scorching violence. Mr. Hagel said the administration was “disconnected from reality,” and challenged Mr. Cheney to explain why American casualties were climbing. Mr. Gallagher, now in New York for graduate studies in creative writing, was sent to Iraq in 2007, during the United States surge. He and other veterans said that it coincided with the emergence of Sunni forces that changed the balance of power. “By the time I got there, it was pretty well recognized that the invasion had been a mistake, but it was up to us do the best we could — to push the country back from the brink of civil war,” Mr. Gallagher said. “The surge’s role is still being debated. Senator McCain is getting ahead of himself.” Mr. Gensler, who was awarded a Bronze Star during his service, said Mr. Hagel’s “worries were very prescient.” “They weren’t appreciated by the administration at the time,” he said. “Being willing to go against his party shows the character that we want in a secretary of defense.” Walking down Eighth Avenue late Tuesday afternoon, Steve Maddox, 35, who went to Iraq in June 2007 with the Marines, said that Mr. Hagel’s experiences in Vietnam, where he was wounded twice, had made him aware of the costs of war and the need to support veterans. “I went to business school on the new G.I. bill,” said Mr. Maddox, now a strategist with Deloitte Consulting. “He said, ‘This is an investment, this is not a cost.’ ” That speaks volumes. “There are people down in Washington who see conflict as open-ended. They’re saying, when do we get to Syria? When do we get to fight Iran?” Mr. Maddox said. “But Hagel wants to know, how are you getting these kids home? We just do not send men and women into harm’s way on an open-ended conflict.” War teaches its lessons most directly to people who are in it. “Hagel has been there as an enlisted man,” Mr. Gallagher said. “Paraphrasing Douglas MacArthur, no one hates war like a soldier does. That’s the kind of sensibility Hagel would bring.”

Chuck Hagel
Iraq War
US Military
Iraq
Veteran


A Week Ends Almost Where It Started

Abstract: Oil prices cast a pall over Wall Street last week, leaving the major indexes with only modest gains despite good first-quarter reports by several notables. Crude settled at $118.52 a barrel, a record that sent gasoline prices to new highs, and a measure of consumer confidence showed a decline. But there were pockets of good news. Apple’s quarter was lifted by a 51 percent increase in Macintosh sales, offering evidence that the company is still resistant to the troubles of the broader economy. And Ford Motor posted a $100 million profit, a surprise that led to the biggest one-day gain in the company’s share price in five years. For the week, the Dow Jones industrial average rose 42.5 points, or 0.3 percent, to close at 12,891.86. The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index rose 7.51 points, or 0.5 percent, to close at 1,397.84. The Nasdaq composite index ended the week up 19.96 points, or 0.8 percent, closing at 2,422.93. The yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note rose to 3.87 percent from 3.74 percent the previous week.

Nasdaq Composite Index
Stocks and Bonds
Dow Jones Stock Average
Oil (Petroleum) and Gasoline
Ford Motor Co


A Korean Auto-Racing Debacle, but Hope Around the Bend

Abstract: YEONGAM, South Korea — Eight years ago, the South Korean province of South Jeolla, which includes this sleepy coastal county, cleared 1,000 acres of rice paddies and embarked on a $375 million experiment: building a Formula One track. In 2010, Yeongam hosted the first Korean Grand Prix. New hotels went up to accommodate what local officials hoped would be an unprecedented wave of foreign tourists. The screams of racing machines came to this flat, quiet land, which was more accustomed to the trundle of gigantic ship components on their way to the Hyundai shipyard. But only three more Grand Prix races followed, and today the quiet has returned. The biggest events now seen at the 3.5-mile Korea International Circuit, with its capacity for 120,000 spectators, are amateur races that draw modest crowds. “We started with a big dream of making lots of money,” said Park Bong-soon, a South Jeolla Province official whose title until recently was director of the Formula One support center, even though there is no longer a Formula One race to support. “Instead, we ended up with a spectacular flop.” Such failures are far from unheard-of in Formula One. The Turkish Grand Prix lasted from 2005 to 2011, and India’s third and last was in 2013. Low attendance in Turkey and a tax dispute in India were blamed for the early demises. But many in South Korea say the Yeongam circuit, which was funded mostly with public money, was ill-conceived from the start. As early as 2007, Parliament’s budget office and a government research institute warned that South Jeolla’s revenue forecasts for the project were exaggerated. In January, a civic group filed suit against former provincial officials over the track, asking prosecutors to bring criminal charges for breach of trust. “The Formula One race here was a nest of problems, a project that should never have been born,” said the group, whose English name is Good Society for Humans , accusing the officials of squandering tax revenue to pursue a “political showpiece.” The officials have denied such accusations. The Korean Grand Prix’s main problem, provincial officials like Mr. Park now say, was that most South Koreans were simply unfamiliar with Formula One — and, indeed, with auto racing in general. Some took “F1” to be a variant of K-1, a mixed-martial-arts competition. In Seoul, the capital, road racing is usually mentioned in association with so-called pokjujok, literally “tribes of violent speed” — fast-food delivery drivers on souped-up motorcycles who terrorize late-night drivers. South Jeolla officials had envisioned the Grand Prix as a multimillion-dollar advertising platform for Korean corporations like Samsung and Hyundai, but given the sport’s obscurity in the country, no major sponsors were interested. Image Since the Korea International Circuit's final Formula One race, the track has been used for domestic races that draw modest crowds. Credit Jean Chung for The New York Times And ticket sales were disappointing — which perhaps should have been no surprise, given the track’s location in the remote southwest. (Both the location and the dearth of South Korean racing fans were cited by Parliament in its early warnings about the project.) Organizers wound up cutting ticket prices substantially, and they were accused of exaggerating turnout and of letting people into the races at no charge. By 2013, South Jeolla was deep in debt and unable to come up with the annual fees required by Formula One. The fees were reduced by about 40 percent that year, to $27 million (after which a banner went up in Yeongam thanking Bernie Ecclestone, the Formula One chief). But no more discounts were forthcoming, and that year’s Grand Prix was the last. In the fall, South Korea was mysteriously included on Formula One’s calendar for 2015, with no site specified for the race, prompting speculation that it would move to the Seoul area. But it was dropped from the calendar in January, with no explanation given. South Korean officials say there is no realistic prospect that the Grand Prix will return soon. Still, some say that the Formula One venture should not be seen as a complete failure. It left behind a legacy, they say: the seeds of a South Korean racing scene. “You see the car-racing mind-set suddenly picked up in Korea in the past two years,” said Michel Puchercos, 57, a French businessman in Seoul who has been competing in local amateur races for three years. “You see the number of racing cars increasing.” Boosters maintain that Formula One will prove to have done for South Korean racing what Se Ri Pak did for golf and Kim Yu-na did for figure skating. After those women became the first South Koreans to win fame in their sports, parents here began taking their children to golf ranges and, after Ms. Kim’s Olympic gold in 2010, to ice rinks. Today, the top ranks of women’s golf are studded with Korean names, the “Se Ri kids” inspired by Ms. Pak, and interest in skating lessons has soared here. Formula One has no Korean driver to inspire the masses, but the sport’s small following in South Korea does seem to be growing. Since 2010, the number of drivers licensed to use the Korea International Circuit — mostly amateur racers wanting to use a Formula One-quality track — has risen by 30 percent annually, to 3,000. Hundreds of car clubs have formed online, most of them since 2012, when the country eased restrictions on the modifications that can be made to automobiles (previously, all an owner could legally do was change the seats or the stereo system). Two new racetracks have opened near Seoul since 2010, and another one farther south of the capital has expanded. Songdo, a “new city” built on reclaimed land west of Seoul, hosted races on its streets in July and plans to do it again this year. And Hyundai, which declined to sponsor Formula One, has begun supporting some domestic races, seeing it as a low-cost investment that could pay off if interest in the sport keeps growing. “Ten years ago, when I first took to car racing, there was no track, and people like me contented ourselves with speeding dangerously on twisted country roads,” said Shim Woo-won, 35, an amateur racer who works for an electronics company. “What we see here is the birth of a car-racing culture in South Korea.” In the meantime, the Korea International Circuit hosts domestic races — and, at times, motorcycle, bicycle and even roller-skating competitions. “Right now, we may suffer so much criticism for our F1 project,” said Mr. Park, the South Jeolla official. “But in 10 to 20 years, people will see this place as a national landmark, a mecca of South Korean auto racing.”

South Korea
Car Racing
Formula One
South Jeolla


Your Digital Trail Follows You to the Border

Abstract: Information, money and jobs flow easily around the world, yet it’s getting tougher for travelers to cross some borders. As immigration policies tighten and the security and technology to enforce them increase, travelers can find themselves caught in a web of suspicion that prevents them from visiting some countries. A past arrest or conviction — even a public admission of illegal activity — can be grounds for inadmissibility. So can political activism or the impression that a traveler is visiting on business without obtaining a work visa. While governments have long aspired to be more vigilant about their borders, databases and the digital tracks people leave have made it easier for agents to investigate and deny entry to some travelers. A cellphone is partly what tripped up Jake Owen, a musician from Williamsburg, Brooklyn, when he flew to Canada to play at a cafe last year. Mr. Owen, who is a United States citizen, was stopped by a Canadian border officer at the Vancouver airport and detained for several hours while he was questioned about the purpose of his visit. “He asked, ‘Are you going to be working while you’re here?’ ” Mr. Owen recalled. “I said, ‘There’s a gig at a coffee shop, but it’s pro bono.’ He said, ‘You know you need a permit to work here,’ very threatening and menacing. He took my phone immediately — I didn’t know he had a right to do that.” Mr. Owen, who plays the guitar, said the officer found a message on his phone that suggested he was getting paid by the friend he was playing with — a Danish singer — not the coffee shop. But that was enough to get him put on a plane back to Newark. “I was in a big interrogation room with steel tables. It was really cold, and this guy is acting like he’d caught me red-handed, telling me he could have me barred from Canada forever if I didn’t come clean,” Mr. Owen said. “Apparently, I got sent back because I supposedly lied to a federal officer. But I don’t really understand what happened. We weren’t getting paid — there was no money being exchanged in Canada.” Nancy Caron, a spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada, said she couldn’t comment on a particular case but clarified that someone playing a small show for even a little money might need a work permit — unlike a famous musician at a large venue. “Normally, if you’re potentially taking a job away from a Canadian, you’d need a work permit,” Ms. Caron said. “If you’re a big international performer, then you’re not taking a job away from someone.” Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s website lists examples of visitors who don’t need a work permit, including reporters and public speakers. But musicians performing in a bar or a restaurant do typically need one. Aaron Caplan, a vice president at Perry International, which helps travelers obtain visas, said some countries were more carefully screening visitors for whether they may require work authorization. “For Brazil, if you’re going short-term but you’re doing hands-on work — even if it’s for a company in the U.S. — there’s a separate visa,” Mr. Caplan said. “And in China, we have heard they’re really scrutinizing what people are doing there, to make sure anyone who is actually working is getting a work visa.” Another issue that can present problems for travelers is a criminal record. Mr. Caplan says Canada is the main country that has surprised visitors deemed “criminally inadmissible” because of a past arrest or conviction. Image NO ENTRY The chef Nigella Lawson was kept from visiting the United States. Credit Luke MacGregor/Reuters “Technology has made it easier to check on that,” he said. The United States and Canada now share criminal history data, so Canadian border agents can view records from the F.B.I.’s database, and Canada shares its criminal records with the United States. Travelers may be denied entry to Canada if they have committed any one of a wide range of crimes, including theft, assault, dangerous driving, driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and possession of a controlled substance. Enforcement of these rules has led to confusion about whether an old shoplifting charge or a D.U.I. might prevent someone from traveling to Canada, but Ms. Caron said in an email that it is not always possible to find out in advance. “There is no specific mechanism in place that would allow a visitor to know ahead of time whether they would be let in or not,” she wrote. “The final decision on whether to allow someone to enter Canada is made by a Canadian Border Services Agency officer once the person arrives at a point of entry.” Travelers with criminal records can apply for a rehabilitation waiver or a temporary resident permit to visit Canada, but the application requires copies of court documents that can be costly and time-consuming to collect. For foreigners hoping to visit the United States, having a criminal record — or even publicly admitting illegal activity — can also be a barrier to entry. This spring, the British chef Nigella Lawson was prevented from visiting after she disclosed in a court case that she had used cocaine, and The Globe and Mail reported this week that Mayor Rob Ford of Toronto, who had said he would seek treatment for an alcohol problem, flew back to Canada without officially entering the United States in Chicago. Mr. Ford has also admitted using illegal drugs. Citizens of countries in the United States’ visa waiver program — like Britain — do not need a visa for short trips but must answer questions like “Do you have a communicable disease; physical or mental disorder; or are you a drug abuser or addict?” The questionnaire, part of the Electronic System for Travel Authorization, vets travelers and grants them permission to visit the United States. One of the questions asks potential visitors whether they have ever been arrested or convicted of a violation related to a controlled substance or an offense involving “moral turpitude” — a broad list including fraud, larceny and “the intent to harm persons or things.” Jenny Burke, a spokeswoman for Customs and Border Protection, said that having ESTA approval or a visa does not guarantee admission to the United States and that border officers make final admissibility decisions; they refuse entry to about 366 people a day. Besides being responsible for immigration and customs laws, she said, officers enforce more than 400 laws for other agencies — creating opportunities for mistakes, some lawyers say. “Border officers are not trained as lawyers,” said Robert Pauw, an immigration lawyer with Gibbs Houston Pauw in Seattle. “We’ve definitely seen cases where they misinterpret the law or don’t understand the law, and people suffer the consequences for that. What you need to be careful about is, if the officer does ask questions more specifically, you need to answer honestly.” Writers and political activists can also encounter travel problems because of their work, an issue that predates the Internet but is easier for governments to investigate even just using Facebook, Twitter and Google. Suzanne Nossel, executive director of the PEN American Center, an organization that defends writers’ freedom of expression, said human rights groups have had some success helping authors who have been denied travel visas to attend events or give speeches. After the Bulgarian-German writer Ilija Trojanow — a critic of surveillance by the National Security Agency — was prevented in September from boarding a plane to the United States for a conference, PEN sent a letter to the State and Homeland Security Departments asking for Mr. Troyanov’s case to be reviewed. He was allowed to travel to the United States in November. Citing the Privacy Act, Ms. Burke said she could not discuss any individual case. Although Ms. Nossel says these types of “ideological exclusions” have subsided since 9/11, it can be difficult for travelers to find out why a visa or ESTA permission has been denied or what information is used to make these decisions. “As more data is being amassed, it is being moved more quickly and easily between government agencies and immigration authorities,” she said, “so there can be more of a chance of something popping up.”

Business travel
Visas
Immigration
Social Media
Security


Joseph Lieberman Won’t Seek Fifth Senate Term

Abstract: Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, the Democratic vice-presidential candidate in 2000 who later became deeply alienated from his party, will announce on Wednesday that he will not seek a fifth term, according to people he told of the decision. Mr. Lieberman, 68, whose term is up in January 2013, has chosen to retire rather than face a difficult campaign for re-election, according to aides and others who spoke to the senator on Tuesday. “He believes that if he were to run for re-election it’d be a tough fight,” said Marshall Wittmann, a member of Mr. Lieberman’s Senate staff. “He’s confident he could’ve won that fight. He’s had tough fights before. But he wants to have a new chapter in his life.” News of Mr. Lieberman’s plans surfaced on the same day that Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota, announced he would retire. Democrats say the decision by Mr. Lieberman, which his office declined to confirm, increases the likelihood that their party will capture his seat next year. Among other things, Democrats noted that President Obama, who won Connecticut overwhelmingly in 2008, would be on the ballot in 2012. Connecticut voters once embraced Mr. Lieberman, the son of a liquor store owner who entered politics as a reform-minded Democrat in 1970, for his folksy ways and his common-sense approach to issues. But he repeatedly broke with his party during the past decade, and the political climate in the state had grown increasingly unwelcoming to him. Referring to Mr. Lieberman’s plan to forgo re-election, Bill Curry, a prominent Democrat who served with Mr. Lieberman in the State Senate, said, “It’s the first thing he’s done in 10 years to make Connecticut Democrats completely happy.” As an independent, Mr. Lieberman needed to hold together a coalition of Democrats, independents and Republicans to win another term, but he appeared threatened from several directions. His support among Democratic voters, already eroded because of his outspoken advocacy for the war in Iraq, plummeted after he backed Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, for president against Mr. Obama. A year later, he threatened to join Republicans in blocking Mr. Obama’s health care plan, though he ultimately supported the bill. His approval rating among Democrats has remained below 40 percent since 2006. At the same time, his standing among Republicans has been undercut by his support for Obama administration initiatives like the repeal of the law barring gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the military. Moreover, Republicans are likely to nominate a credible candidate next year, making it virtually impossible for Mr. Lieberman to repeat his feat of 2006, when he captured 70 percent of the Republican vote as an independent. Mr. Lieberman hoped to go out on a high note, and his aides said he had been particularly proud of his leadership in the Senate of the successful effort to repeal the “ don’t ask, don’t tell ” policy. The victory on “don’t ask, don’t tell” came as a bookend of sorts. Even before Mr. Lieberman began his political career as a state legislator, he traveled to Mississippi in 1963 as a Yale student protesting in the civil rights movement. But Mr. Lieberman, as a senator, was best known for his centrist positions and outspokenness on issues of morality. In 1998, he publicly rebuked President Bill Clinton, calling his conduct in the Monica Lewinsky scandal “disgraceful,” drawing praise from members of both parties. As Al Gore’s running mate in 2000, Mr. Lieberman was the first Jewish candidate on a major party’s presidential ticket, and he was an early entrant into the primary field in his own right in 2004. But he quickly faded, in large part because of his steadfast support for the Iraq war. In 2006, the Democratic Party’s grass-roots activists rose up against Mr. Lieberman, handing him a defeat in the primary by choosing Ned Lamont, a Greenwich businessman and an opponent of the Iraq war. But he prevailed as an independent that November with the help of many Republican voters. Returning to the Senate, he largely sided with Democrats on votes but continued to antagonize Democratic leaders, who faced pressure to punish him after he supported Mr. McCain for president, but largely refrained, given their party’s tenuous hold on the Senate. Mr. Curry said the senator seemed personally hurt by voters’ rejection of him in the presidential campaign in 2004, and that may have contributed to his eventual rupture with the party. “There was a bitterness after that in all of his dealings with Democrats,” Mr. Curry said. Rivals were already signaling they believed Mr. Lieberman was vulnerable; even before the news emerged on Tuesday, the Democrat Susan Bysiewicz, a former secretary of state in Hartford, had said she would run for the seat. Other possible contenders include Representatives Christopher S. Murphy, a popular three-term Democrat whose district includes Danbury and Waterbury, and Joseph Courtney, whose district includes New London. On the Republican side, Linda E. McMahon, the former World Wrestling Entertainment executive who was defeated by Richard Blumenthal in the Senate race last year, has hinted at a run, and Rob Simmons, a former congressman whom she defeated in the primary, said he was now more likely to run as well. “I did not relish the idea of running against someone like Joe Lieberman, for whom I have profound respect,” he said. If Mr. Lieberman was estranged from his party, he still managed to be at the center of key issues in Washington. “Joe cast that role for himself and is very comfortable in it,” said Peter G. Kelly, a lawyer and Democratic elder statesman in Hartford. “He continues to be a swivel point on issues of major significance. He’s pretty much always in play.” David Gergen, a counselor to several presidents who has known Mr. Lieberman since their Yale days, said he was one of a “breed that is becoming increasingly extinct, and we are poorer for it.” “He loved the job,” Mr. Gergen said. “He relished being there. He loved the politics. I think he will miss it.”

Lieberman Joseph I
Senate
United States Politics and Government


My Daughter Brings Out My Inner Girly Girl

Abstract: I WAS a tomboy. I grew up climbing trees and playing baseball in a dirt lot in Jersey City. I cried on my First Communion Day when my mother told me I’d have to wear that white dress all day long. My first Halloween costume was an astronaut’s space suit, complete with a blinking red light on my helmet. I wore boys’ swim trunks until I was old enough to be teased by the real boys in my neighborhood. But somehow, some way, I have spawned a girly girl. My 5-year-old daughter, Paulina, has loved pink and purple since she was a year old, and it’s really not my fault. I dressed her in her big brother’s blue and red hand-me-downs until she was old enough to protest. Pink was always my least favorite color. Purple ran a close second. But to make my daughter happy, I actually paid someone to paint her room the color of Pepto-Bismol. I wince every time I go in there, though the pain and shock are starting to fade. When I was a girl, the only way my mother could get me to play with a doll was to give me some rope and let me tie it up and then pretend to rescue it, as if I were a superhero. My daughter brushes the hair of her doll lovingly, sleeps next to it and even talks to it. She refuses to wear pants, even on 17-degree days. She likes jewelry and ruffles and dress-up. And ribbons and bows. And princesses. My daughter is an alien life form to me. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not a complete stranger to girly girls; my big sister was one of them. She was a cheerleader and the prettiest girl for miles. She loved — and still loves — to shop. And it’s because of her, a backlash, I’m sure, that I became a tomboy, to set myself apart and forge my own identity. When Paulina was born, I named her after my sister, Paula. And there’s some part of me, the mystical, supernatural-loving part of me, that makes me wonder if naming her after Paula has made her just like Paula. If I hadn’t gone through several hours of labor, I would swear Paulina was Paula’s daughter and not my own. It’s actually a running joke in our family. “Are you sure she’s yours?” my niece recently asked. Every few months, I have to take Paulina shopping for dresses. I would much rather have a dental cleaning than go shopping. Clothes are an annoyance to me, a necessary inconvenience at best. But Paulina loves to shop and will walk a mile — and actually has, with me in tow, of course — for the perfect pair of boots. If I could send her to the mall by herself, I would. But Social Services would not allow it. Whenever I have a date with my husband, Paulina helps me pick my outfit. I’m hoping that when she’s older I can pay her to be my stylist. But she always chooses the fanciest cocktail dress in the closet — something I last wore to a wedding back in 1986 — and I sadly have to inform her that Daddy and I are just going to have a beer around the corner. But I compromise, and by the time I leave the house, I’m wearing a skirt. Sometimes a pink skirt. I found myself buying pink and purple clothing recently, not because I like it any more than I did 30 years ago, but because I know it will make Paulina smile. When she was 3 years old, Paulina dropped the biggest girly-girl bomb of all on me, one that I should have seen coming but didn’t. She told me that she wanted to take ballet lessons. All I knew about ballet was that it was something I never wanted to know anything about. I signed her up for classes at a local dance studio and watched, amazed, how Paulina instinctively knew what to do. While waiting for class to end, I started reading the reviews of the New York City Ballet. Within six months, I knew who Wendy Whelan was, I knew the difference between a plié and an arabesque, and how to get cheap seats at Lincoln Center. Paulina and I started going to the ballet, educating ourselves at what I thought was the same pace. But she was a quick study and learned, before I did, to tell the difference between the “Nutcracker” and “Swan Lake” scores. She swooned at the costumes and sets for “The Sleeping Beauty.” She didn’t blink during the entire two hours of “Coppélia.” But then neither did I. I surprised myself by actually enjoying the ballet, not only for the lithe, powerful bodies that leap and spin across that awesome stage, but also for the little girls like my own whom I watch as they watch. They are in love with those ballerinas and sit there entranced by the pink tutus and the sparkles and the chiffon and the tiaras and satin toe shoes and all the soft, lovely things I rejected for years and years. When I look at them, I sometimes feel as if I may cry. Because of Paulina, my tough-girl facade has begun to crack. Last year, I received an e-mail notice that “Romeo and Juliet” tickets were going on sale. The only seats still available were for the evening performance, much too late for Paulina to make it through the full two hours. I bought the tickets anyway and asked my husband to go with me. He looked at me as if I were wearing a fez and had informed him I had just joined the Shriners. “What?” he asked, incredulously. “You mean you want to go to the ballet?” “I think I might actually like it,” I admitted, shaking my head, my inner girly girl falling softly and helpless at both our feet. That night, Paulina helped me pick my jewelry and outfit. And this time, I went with the fancy dress.


Melancholy in the Bronx, but Not Because of Yankee Stadium

Abstract: I grew up in the South Bronx, but we were never Yankee fans in our home. My father was an ardent Giants loyalist who took it hard when his team moved to California. His allegiance to the National League was not without geographical basis — just not in New York City. As a Puerto Rican who came here as a teenager in the 1930s to work in factories, he stuck with the league that was home to his beloved countryman Roberto Clemente, the legendary Pittsburgh Pirates outfielder. Other men of his generation remembered how the Yankees, playing summer nights in a nearby corner of my borough, were late to integrate. And for those from the land of Clemente, there was the special disappointment that the Yankees as an organization had released Vic Power — born Victor Pellot in Puerto Rico — a man as outstanding as a player as he was outspoken about racism. He would go on to become an All-Star and Gold Glove winner playing for a handful of major-league teams, including the Athletics, in both Philadelphia and Kansas City, and the Cleveland Indians. My family’s National League loyalty, of course, was finally rewarded in 1962, when the Mets started playing baseball — or something that sometimes looked like it. The Yankees were sleek winners. The Mets were a motley bunch. But maybe there is something to be said for the appeal an underdog had to people like my father, a handyman who struggled to make his way in his adopted city. He worked in a basement. So did the Mets. But even our loyalty to the Mets could be bent. We might have rooted (or prayed and offered it up) for the Mets most days, but not when Pittsburgh was in town. My father and his brothers watched those games in awe, seemingly drawing strength from Clemente’s athleticism. Here was this proud man, a Caribbean Adonis with a cannon for an arm — and later we would learn, a heart just as formidable — who spoke the same language we did. He bowed to no one, except his parents. No doubt there are melancholy hearts in the South Bronx this weekend — the final weekend set for the stadium of legend. But the park that looms so large in the minds of the fans has been but a backdrop for me — imposing from afar, but up close about as real as a theatrical prop. This is not to deny that great moments occurred inside those walls. And even to this day, there are players like Derek Jeter or Robinson Canó who impress with their skills on the diamond and their bearing off the field. And like them or not, any team that has won that many championships has to be respected. It’s just that too often, no one much respected the neighborhood outside its walls, including Yankee executives. That’s what makes for my melancholy heart. Over the years there was griping about how the area was unsafe — this despite scores of police officers assigned to games and the presence of two pretty well-fortified courthouses and a transit police station a couple of blocks away. And there were arguments about whether the Yankees could develop a fan base in the Bronx — a borough that is home to legions of baseball-mad Dominicans and Puerto Ricans. On one level, you could dismiss it as just posturing, a bargaining ploy over the years meant to wrest something new from the city — tax breaks or a stadium. But for a track man at Cardinal Hayes High School who ran past the stadium every day, it could feel like an entire community’s recent history had been reduced to a negotiating tactic. Maybe an inherited love for the underdog and the outsider led me to become a runner when I entered Hayes in 1971. How else to explain the attraction of a sport that had us running up and down the Grand Concourse in shorts years before it became popular to do so? We wore clunky sneakers that mangled our knees. We kept tattered photos in our lockers of rebels like Tommy Smith and John Carlos, they of the clenched fist salute at the 1968 Olympics. For much of the year we worked out in the shadow of the stadium, at Macombs Dam Park. High school wise guys loved to say they were going to the “Dam Park,” just to test the patience of the priests at school. Then again, Father Thomas McCormack, the square-jawed dean of discipline who later became principal, exacted his revenge daily during school announcements, calling the track team the “runners to nowhere.” Our path to nowhere, such as it was, took us past the stadium. A small pack of us would cut through Franz Sigel Park (immortalized — or libeled — in Tom Wolfe’s “Bonfire of the Vanities” as too dangerous for armed court personnel to enter, even for lunch). Along Gerard Avenue we would go onto a parking lot that led to the stadium, past the mouth of the subway tunnel where the No. 4 train rumbled into view. A short jog later, and we were doing laps on the track at Macombs. The track was made of cinders. The symbolism of this — at a time when the borough was burning — escaped us. We were too busy dodging the ruts that threatened to swallow our ankles. We went in circles, breathing to the syncopated beat of the trains that thundered by on schedule. Two hours later, exhausted and drenched in sweat, we jogged past the stadium on our way back to school and the showers. The neighborhood was changing, though not everyone saw this as something bad. Roberto Vives, a standout sprinter at Hayes with a gravity-defying Afro, embraced the population shift when he started a track team called the Bronx Internationals. By the time they started practicing summers at Macombs, Yankee Stadium was closed for a two-year renovation. Whatever indifference I felt toward the stadium turned to something like active dislike in 1977. That was the year that Howard Cosell famously declared to a national audience, “The Bronx is burning,” while calling a game there. Those few words felt like a body blow. While no one would argue the South Bronx was a paradise, I never found the area by the stadium to be threatening, especially on game days. For a while in the early 1990s, my office was across the street from Macombs. I parked my car on the street and not once had it broken into. My biggest fear was being locked in the building by a security guard who liked to sneak off and smoke pot with his friends. Yet the slights continued. An executive called neighborhood kids “monkeys” in 1994. He was in charge of community relations. Judging by the reaction of local schools and youth groups at the time, community relations was close to an oxymoron. Whatever requests they made of the team — for money, tickets or speakers — went unanswered, they said. To love the Bronx is to love it when it is down, and yes, it was battered and staggering 20 years ago. But the beauty — yes, beauty — of that era was that people decided to stay and make it work. A generation of grass-roots leaders had stepped forward to spur the borough’s turnaround. One of them, Astin Jacobo, was a baseball maniac — he had been a scout for Houston in his native Dominican Republic. In the Bronx, he became a community leader in the Crotona neighborhood a few miles north of the stadium. Jacob (nobody called him Mr. Jacobo) used baseball to rally families and neighbors. When drug addicts and urban scavengers threatened to strip pipes from half-burned buildings, he got local youths from his teams to stand watch. When the streets were ruled by gun-crazy crack dealers, he talked politicians into putting lights on a neighborhood field, luring parents and friends back outside for night games. Leaders, he said, were out on the streets, not hidden in an office. “If we don’t see your face, how can we trust you?” Jacob said in a 1996 interview. “You don’t have to talk a lot to change a community. It’s the people who devote themselves to the job.” A dozen years later, Jacob is dead, buried back home in the Dominican Republic in a grave whose headstone reads “Community Leader.” The Yankees, whom he cheered out of friendship with the team’s growing roster of Latino players, are still in the Bronx. And they made it work. They won. And fans came. In record numbers. And without fear. Now they will have their new stadium, rising on what had been Macombs Dam Park. A lone sign taped to the window of a Jerome Avenue apartment building still demands that the Yankees leave the park alone. Although it took almost two years, local groups are getting grants from the community benefits agreement that was part of the stadium deal. More is promised. Local activists are waiting for the replacement parks they were promised, too. Along River Avenue, visitors from New Jersey and Connecticut stroll in and out of souvenir stores buying T-shirts whose backs declare “RODRIGUEZ 13.” Bars painted Yankee blue offer boxes of Cracker Jack where the real surprise is not the toy in the box but the price on it — $4. A gaggle of Japanese tourists take pictures of a mural of Yankee greats, which adorns a lot where valet parking costs $30. In the tangle of subway tunnels and overpasses, large Budweiser ads still dominate the walls, all remnants from July’s All-Star Game at the stadium. Spanish ads declare “The Smoothness Goes On and On” in big letters, dwarfing the smaller advice that “Responsibility Matters.” Up near the Concourse, skateboarding daredevils rule the narrow plaza that is dedicated to Lou Gehrig. They like coming here — despite the “No Skateboards” sign — on game nights, flipping and flying into the air, their bodies briefly frozen against the glow from the ballpark. The cheers, they imagine, are for them. Yet go just a few blocks east of the stadium, and it’s as if you were on any other street. Sure, banners on lampposts along Gerard Avenue declare “Baseball Capital of the World,” but the rest of the block shows almost no sign of Yankee fever. The buildings — six-story Art Deco or sturdy prewar structures mistakenly called tenements by those who would look only at their tenants — betray no allegiance to the local team. Along the Concourse side to Franz Sigel Park, farmers have set up small tents for their weekly market. The air is thick with the damp smell of soil and cilantro. Further down the street, the Most Precious Blood Pentecostal Mission shares a building with a halal slaughterhouse, which sits next door to a discount furniture store. The side streets are lined with modest red brick homes that have survived decades. Some of them have housed generations of the same family. Closer to 149th Street, dramas and tragedies occur daily inside the cultural gem that is the Pregones Theater, itself reborn inside an old factory. And Cardinal Hayes is still there, too, its renovated facade partly hidden behind thick, leafy trees. If there is greatness here, it is not only in a baseball dynasty. It is found in the stubborn refusal of residents to give up on their neighborhood. The Yankees’ neighborhood. The South Bronx.


Justices Hear Second Round of Arguments on Case Hinging on Phrase’s Meaning

Abstract: WASHINGTON — For the fifth time since 2007, the Supreme Court on Monday struggled to make sense of a phrase in a federal law that requires longer sentences for some gun crimes based on earlier convictions. “I can think of no other instance in which the court has endeavored so many times in so few years to answer precisely the same question,” said Katherine M. Menendez, a lawyer for a Minnesota man who was sentenced to 15 years in prison based in part on an earlier conviction for possessing a short-barreled shotgun. The case, Johnson v. United States, No. 13-7120, was before the court for a rare re-argument. When the court first heard arguments in the case in November, the question before it was whether merely possessing the shotgun could be considered a violent felony under the law. In January, the court asked the parties to come back for a second argument on the broader question of whether the key phrase in the law was unconstitutionally vague. Under the law, convicted felons caught with guns face a maximum sentence of 10 years. But those with three prior convictions for violent felonies are subject to a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence. Which crimes qualify as violent felonies has been the subject of much litigation. The law defines the relevant crimes to include burglary, arson, extortion, the use of explosives and ones that “otherwise involve conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.” On Monday, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. suggested that the law, if not the court’s interpretations of it, was clear enough. “Can a statute be vague simply because this court messes it up?” he asked, adding that the court had twice upheld the constitutionality of the law. The case concerned Samuel J. Johnson, a white supremacist from Minnesota who pleaded guilty to a gun charge. The trial judge ruled that he was subject to the mandatory minimum sentence because of earlier convictions for robbery, attempted robbery and possession of the shotgun. Mr. Johnson argued that the third offense should not count under the law’s definition of violent felonies. The trial judge disagreed, imposing the 15-year mandatory sentence. But he was not happy to do so. “For whatever it’s worth, and it’s probably worth nothing,” the judge said, “I think 180 months is too heavy of a sentence in this case. But I take an oath to follow the law as I see it, and I’ve made my decision in that regard.” At Monday’s argument, Michael R. Dreeben, a lawyer for the federal government, said the law was a straightforward attempt to reduce recidivism. Mr. Johnson, he said, “knew or should have known that he could not possess a gun,” referring to the latest conviction. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. responded by returning to a theme that has troubled him in earlier cases involving harsh punishments. “The problem is what the prosecutor threatens when he’s entered into plea bargain negotiations,” the chief justice said. “You are putting the defense counsel in a position where they have to interpret the vagueness in making the decision on whether they want to plead to five years or risk the mandatory minimum of 15.” In 2011, the court ruled in Sykes v. United States , a 6-to-3 decision, that fleeing from the police in a car is a violent felony that can subject a defendant to the 15-year minimum sentence. Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissent in the case foreshadowed Monday’s argument. He said that the law was a hopelessly vague congressional “drafting failure” and that the court’s “tutti-frutti opinion” had produced “a fourth ad hoc judgment that will sow further confusion.”

Minnesota
Guns
Mandatory sentencing
Supreme Court,SCOTUS
Criminal Sentence
Gun Control
Samuel J. Johnson


Cashman Visits Restaurant, and Clemens Is on Menu

Abstract: Brian Cashman maneuvered through the cramped, chaotic El Nuevo Caridad in Washington Heights like a local baseball coach selling raffle tickets. He let patrons try on his World Series ring, he spoke to one youngster about becoming a batboy and he helped distribute free gloves and baseballs. As Cashman, the general manager of the Yankees, glided around the Upper Manhattan restaurant filled mostly with Dominicans, he did not realize that he was the guest of honor. Cashman thought he was coming for the seafood salad, but he soon found out that Miguel Montas, the owner of the restaurant, had a secret agenda. In addition to presenting Cashman with a community service award, Montas gave him a menu and pointed to the newest dish. The Brian Cashman, which is chicken breast and yellow rice, costs $11.75 and joins the Albert Pujols and the David Ortiz on a menu filled with meals named after baseball players. For one afternoon, Cashman was as visible in the Latin American community as Omar Minaya, the Dominican-born general manager of the Mets. Minaya has used his heritage to help the Mets attract Hispanic players and fans. Cashman dismissed the idea that he was invading Minaya's turf, especially since the menu already has an Omar Minaya (fried fish with plantains and an avocado salad, for $21). "Omar doesn't need to get an award," Cashman said. "He has done plenty." With pitchers and catchers scheduled to report next Thursday, Cashman spoke optimistically about the Yankees and winning a World Series for the first time since 2000. The Yankees signed center fielder Johnny Damon, re-signed Hideki Matsui and added relievers Kyle Farnsworth and Octavio Dotel. Seemingly, Cashman is finished molding the roster. Or is he? Roger Clemens has still not decided if he will pitch in the major leagues this season, so the Yankees are ready to pounce if he elects to return. Clemens plans to pitch for the United States in the World Baseball Classic next month, gauge how he feels and then make a decision. While it seems likely that Clemens will retire or pitch for the Houston Astros, Cashman knows how much George Steinbrenner, the Yankees' principal owner, likes Clemens. So he is monitoring the situation in case Clemens can be coaxed back to the Yankees. "At this point, he hasn't put himself into the area as a player looking to play in 2006," Cashman said. "If he does that, we'll have to take a look at it." Since the Astros did not offer Clemens salary arbitration in December, they cannot re-sign him until May 1. But the extra month off may be a positive for Clemens, who turns 44 in August, since it might enable him to remain fresher later into the season. In October, Clemens left his final World Series start with an injured hamstring. If Clemens left Houston, he would be leaving a cozy situation. The Astros have allowed him to skip some trips and games to spend time with his family, and the Yankees have said they will not allow a player such an unusual arrangement. For someone who does not have a contract with the Astros for 2006, Clemens is closely connected with them. Koby Clemens, Roger's son, is a minor leaguer in the Astros' system, and Clemens has a personal services contract with the team that begins after he retires. But Cashman reiterated the Yankees' interest in Clemens. Cashman has had discussions with Randy and Alan Hendricks, Clemens's agents. The Hendricks brothers have said that Clemens would be amenable to speaking with the Yankees. "Have I talked to the Hendrickses? Yes," Cashman said. "Is there anything active? No. I'll just leave it at that." Between bites of seafood salad, Cashman would not bite on predicting if Clemens would come back and if it would be with the Yankees. Cashman called Clemens "a great Yankee" who had a major impact on the team and could continue having an influence. "He was a great part of our history," Cashman said. "That doesn't mean history can't be rewritten. If he decides to play, they'll let us know. That's all I can say."

NEW YORK CITY
NEW YORK YANKEES
EL NUEVO CARIDAD
CLEMENS ROGER
CASHMAN BRIAN
BASEBALL


Democrats Feel Pressure From Gun Lobby on Contempt Vote

Abstract: WASHINGTON — The National Rifle Association has joined a Republican push to make Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. the first sitting cabinet member to be held in contempt of Congress, turning a once obscure fight over a gun-smuggling investigation into a proxy war over gun control. Both the N.R.A. and the smaller but more strident Gun Owners of America have made Thursday’s House contempt vote crucial to their ratings of House lawmakers. The N.R.A. is pressing to win Democratic votes, said Wayne LaPierre, the group’s chief executive, and White House officials and House Democratic leaders concede that a handful of Democrats are likely to vote for the contempt resolution. That may be more a testament to the enduring power of the gun lobby than to the bipartisan belief that Mr. Holder and the Obama administration have stonewalled Congress over the gun-smuggling investigation known as Operation Fast and Furious. “Some members will consider the recommendations of the N.R.A.,” said Representative Steny H. Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland, the House minority whip. Representative Jim Matheson of Utah, who is running for re-election in the most Republican district held by a Democrat, announced Tuesday that he would vote for contempt. “Sadly, it seems that it will take holding the attorney general in contempt to communicate that evasiveness is unacceptable,” Mr. Matheson said in a statement. “It is a vote I will support.” The vote will come as Congress tries to beat a Sunday deadline to reach deals on a major transportation bill and to extend subsidies for some student loans . On Tuesday, lawmakers gave final approval to bipartisan legislation overhauling user fees for the Food and Drug Administration. But glimmers of cooperation are not likely to be seen in the acrimonious debate over the contempt vote. The political posturing and rhetoric leading to Thursday’s showdown mirror imbroglios past, especially the vote of a Democratic House in 2008 to hold Joshua B. Bolten, chief of staff in the Bush White House, and Harriet E. Miers, then White House counsel, in contempt over their refusal to turn over documents related to the firing of United States attorneys . As in that case, the speaker of the House is talking about the need for the House to perform its oversight role against a stonewalling White House, and a minority leader is bristling over vital Congressional work being shunted aside for a partisan witch hunt. The players have swapped roles, however. Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, was the minority leader then, and Representative Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, now the minority leader, was the speaker. But sub rosa conspiracy theories about gun control have turned the contempt vote into something more than a power struggle between government branches. Publicly, the House is deciding whether the attorney general has overstepped his authority by withholding documents about the Justice Department’s response once details about Fast and Furious were revealed. Privately, lawmakers must consider how the vote will be seen by the N.R.A., gun enthusiasts and hunters in their districts. “There is a belief among a lot of people — and I believe it, too — that Fast and Furious was a political attack on the Second Amendment and that the Justice Department facilitated a crime to further their gun control political agenda,” Mr. LaPierre said. “This whole executive privilege assertion is the last gasp of a cover-up.” Gun Owners of America, a gun lobby considered more uncompromising than the N.R.A., released a letter to Representative Joe Donnelly, a Democrat running for the Senate in Indiana, demanding his contempt vote. “This is an issue of utmost importance to Second Amendment supporters in Indiana and throughout the country,” the group wrote. To White House officials, such assertions are bewildering. Fast and Furious was started by the Phoenix office of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to track guns as they moved into Mexico from United States gun dealerships. Seeking to build a bigger case against high-ranking gunrunners, agents did not move quickly against weapons obtained by low-level smugglers, and they lost track of 2,000 guns, most of which probably reached Mexican drug cartels. Two were found near the scene of a shootout in which a United States Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry, was killed. N.R.A. leaders are convinced that the operation was started to prove the Justice Department’s contention that 90 percent of the weapons fueling the Mexican drug wars come from the United States and that tighter gun laws are needed. Representative Darrell Issa , Republican of California, reflected that view on national television on Sunday. “We have e-mail from people involved in this that are talking about using what they’re finding here to support the — basically assault weapons ban or greater reporting,” Mr. Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said on ABC’s “This Week.” The committee has yet to produce those e-mails. Among the thousands of pages of internal e-mails and documents Congressional investigators have gathered about the operation, they found a few showing that A.T.F. officials considered using some examples of documented gun flows to build a case for requiring greater reporting of multiple “long gun,” or rifle, sales by federally licensed gun shops. They singled out AK-47 assault-style rifles and their variants. But the gun lobby is convinced that the documents being withheld would prove a far-reaching conspiracy to build support for a gun control agenda in a second Obama administration. A vast majority of Democrats are not buying it. “The idea that they spread a whole lot of guns around to foment gun crimes and then call for more gun control is a very peculiar line of reasoning,” said Representative Brad Miller, Democrat of North Carolina, who says he will vote no on the contempt measure. But, he conceded, he is not running for re-election.

Holder Eric H Jr
National Rifle Assn
Gun Owners of America
Gun Control
United States Politics and Government
Smuggling
Obama Barack
Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms


Tensions Escalating on Borneo as Malaysia Doubles Military Forces

Abstract: MANILA — Seven people were reported killed, and four hostages taken, as fighting continued Sunday in the Malaysian state of Sabah over a historic claim to the area by a religious group from the southern Philippines. The Malaysian government said the police and military presence in the area was being doubled, while the religious group said an undetermined number of supporters from the southern Philippines had entered the area to reinforce those supporting the claim. The Malaysian and Philippine navies have stepped up patrols in the waters between Sabah and the southern Philippines, which can be traversed in a speedboat in a little more than an hour. Five Malaysian police officers and two of their attackers were killed in an ambush Saturday, officials said Sunday. The Malaysian state news agency Bernama reported Sunday that villagers near the ambush had beaten to death a man suspected of being one of the attackers. That brought the death toll from fighting in the area to at least 21. On Friday, 12 members of the Filipino religious group and 2 Malaysian commandos were killed during a failed attempt to capture the group that had been holding a small village on the eastern coast of Borneo island since Feb. 12. A spokesman for the group, whose members claim to be heirs to the sultanate of Sulu, which ruled parts of northern Borneo for centuries, said Sunday that its forces on Sabah had taken hostage a Malaysian police officer, two soldiers and a government official. “We advised the people on the ground to take care of them, to feed them, so that in case there shall be international agencies to investigate the matter we can present those four captured government officials of Malaysia as witnesses to the atrocities committed by the government of Malaysia,” the group’s spokesman, Abraham Idjirani, said Sunday. Bernama quoted Prime Minister Najib Razak on Sunday as saying the violence had been limited to three areas of Sabah: Lahad Datu, where the group originally arrived, and the nearby areas of Semporna and Kunak. “The people of Sabah should not be fearful of their safety,” the prime minister was quoted as saying. He added that Malaysian forces were operating in the areas affected by the violence. “Let’s give them the opportunity and time to carry out their operations and overpower the group and rescue those in need,” he said. On Sunday, Malaysian officials urged Sabah residents to remain calm and said resorts and other tourist facilities in the area remained open. “More fatalities may be expected, and as a nation we must come together to rally behind our forces,” said Liew Vui Keong, a member of the Malaysian Parliament, according to Bernama. Jacel Kiram, the daughter of Jamalul Kiram, who claims to be the sultan of Sulu, told a television station in Manila that the Malaysian authorities were rounding up Filipinos in the areas affected by the violence. Thousands of Filipinos live and work in Sabah. “Yesterday, Malaysian police were indiscriminately capturing Filipinos,” she said. The Philippines has repeatedly asked the group to leave and has tried to calm tensions with its close ally. A Philippine diplomatic mission, headed by Jose Brillantes, a foreign affairs under secretary and former Philippine ambassador to Malaysia, has been sent to Kuala Lumpur to smooth relations. Several descendants of the sultanate of Sulu claim to be the current sultan, and some disagree with the actions taken by the group fighting in Sabah.


Crackdown on African Immigrants Tugs at Israel’s Soul

Abstract: TEL AVIV — One by one, immigration inspectors escorted the migrants out of a dilapidated building into an alley teeming with African-run stores and hair salons. Then, they were led onto a waiting bus, in the first steps on the way to deportation to their native South Sudan. One woman grasped a leopard-print purse. A man left with a book in his hand. Some wore brightly colored shirts and held their heads high. One shouted “Juba! Juba!” — the name of South Sudan’s capital — and raised his hands in a victory sign. “It must be done,” said Mor Sheffer, an Israeli bystander, “or tomorrow we will have no country and we will have to look for another one.” Many residents here in the Neve Shaanan area of south Tel Aviv complain of rampant crime by migrants and say that it has become “Soweto,” a reference to the site of a 1976 uprising in South Africa. At a recent protest fanned by right-wing politicians, one lawmaker described the Africans, known here as “infiltrators,” as “a cancer in our body.” Later, Africans’ stores and apartments were attacked. But the government clampdown is also ripping at Israel ’s soul. For some, the connotations of roundups and the prospect of mass detentions cut too close to the bone. “I feel I am in a movie in Germany, circa 1933 or 1936,” said Orly Feldheim, 46, a daughter of Holocaust survivors, as she doled out food last week to a long line of immigrants in the neighborhood’s Levinsky Park. Since 2005, about 60,000 sub-Saharan Africans have surreptitiously crossed the porous border from Egypt into Israel after traversing the rugged desert of the Sinai Peninsula. The rising tensions caused by their presence have prompted the government to announce a tough new policy to stem the influx of African immigrants and asylum seekers. The interior minister, Eli Yishai, has vowed to clear the country of all illegal immigrants within three years. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu contends that most of them are economic immigrants and that they threaten the Jewish character of Israel. On Sunday, he said that all new arrivals would immediately be placed in detention. Mr. Netanyahu told his cabinet that Israel was “building holding facilities to house tens of thousands of infiltrators until they can be sent out of the country.” For now, most of the immigrants and asylum seekers — about 50,000 — cannot be deported, in line with international conventions. They come from Sudan and Eritrea, countries considered too dangerous for their repatriation, and so they are afforded temporary collective protection in Israel. That protection was recently lifted for immigrants from South Sudan. On June 7, a Jerusalem court ruled that it was safe enough to repatriate them to South Sudan, a newly independent nation that has diplomatic ties with Israel. There are 1,500 South Sudanese here, according to Israeli officials; South Sudanese activists put the number at 700. In recent days, about 300 South Sudanese have been detained for hearings pending deportation. Hundreds more have agreed to leave voluntarily to avoid arrest and to qualify for a departure grant of $1,300. The first planeload was to depart late Sunday. Some immigrants tell harrowing tales of cruelty by Bedouin smugglers in Sinai. They recounted how, after dashing across the border, at risk of being shot by Egyptian officers, they sought out the Israeli border patrols. The soldiers who picked them up, they said, told them they were safe and welcomed them to Israel. The immigrants were then taken to Saharonim, a prison near the border, and registered. Israel carried out no background checks to sort the genuine asylum seekers from opportunists or fugitives. Most, mainly Eritreans and Sudanese, were released after a few days under the collective protection provision. They were put on buses and dropped off at Levinsky Park or other locations, ending up in a kind of limbo. Their visas state that they are not permitted to work. The new government measures include hefty fines for employers of illegal immigrants. Most immigrants end up doing odd jobs for low wages. Under the recently amended infiltrators law, even those entitled to collective protection can be detained for up to three years. Along with a fence that Israel is constructing on the border with Egypt, these measures are meant to deter more immigrants from coming. People can apply for refugee status, but priority is given to those not covered by collective protection, said Sabine Haddad, a spokeswoman for the Interior Ministry’s Population, Immigration and Border Authority. The approval rate is negligible. Since 2009, out of 7,000 applications, 16 people were granted refugee status or asylum. Critics say that Israel, a nation largely founded by refugees, lacks a proper immigration policy. “We say: ‘Be fair, we are Jews. Decide who is or isn’t a refugee,’ ” said Iftah Cohen, a lawyer working for We Are Refugees, an Israeli organization that provides free legal aid to asylum seekers threatened with deportation. One of them is Mary Eze, a widow who has a 4-year-old boy, Valentine. Ms. Eze left Nigeria in 2007 with her husband after his family disapproved of their marriage. They went to Cairo, where Valentine was born. But even after her husband died in a car accident, his family tracked her down in Egypt. “They came to take Valentine,” she said. Ms. Eze and Valentine escaped to Sinai, where, she said, over 15 months they were beaten and abused by Bedouin smugglers. Eventually, one tribesman took pity and sent them to Israel. After five months in Saharonim Prison, she and Valentine were taken to the airport to be sent back to Nigeria where, she believes, they would be killed. Then, We Are Refugees lawyers intervened. Ms. Eze’s case is now in court. “We came with nothing,” she said. “We have nowhere in the world.” Another case taken on by We Are Refugees is that of Takleb Melake Abtew and his wife, Lamlam. Of Eritrean origin, they met and married in a refugee camp in Sudan. In 2009, they crossed into Israel with their son, Ermias, then 3. In Israel, they were detained and separated for two years. Denied collective protection after their release, because, their lawyers said, the authorities decided they “looked Ethiopian,” they are threatened with deportation. For now, they live in a tiny apartment in Or Yehuda, a town south of Tel Aviv. Ms. Abtew, who is pregnant, rarely leaves home, afraid of being rearrested. Mr. Abtew said that in Eritrea he would be considered an army deserter for avoiding conscription, though he was 10 when he left. “I’d prefer to be here in prison,” he said. “Whatever the Israelis say, we will do.” Some Israelis invoke the biblical injunction to “love the stranger for we were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Others say they now feel like strangers in their own country. In Levinsky Park, an Israeli veteran who refuses to be identified helps immigrants find jobs. “My head tells me that it is not good that they are here,” he said, “but I follow my heart. I am split half and half.”

Israel
Immigration and Emigration
Deportation
Illegal Immigrants
Immigration Detention
Refugees and Displaced Persons
Prisons and Prisoners
Foreign Workers
Africa


Making the Most of the United States Open With an App

Abstract: APP: US Open PLATFORMS: iPhone , Android PRICE: Free The United States Open , which runs through Sept. 11, is the kind of sporting event that all but requires a guide. There is a lot of ground to cover at the tennis tournament, where several matches take place simultaneously across a sprawling complex in Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, Queens. For fans visiting the Open or following from elsewhere, the official smartphone app is worth downloading. This is the third year the app has been available, but there are several new features, including the ability to shop from the stands, then pick up the merchandise on the way out. There is also an Android version for the first time. The neatest feature is not new, though, and is available only for the iPhone. Called Around Me, it uses a technology known as augmented reality to provide a guide to the grounds. When Around Me is opened, the phone’s screen looks as though it is ready to take a photo — that is, you see whatever you are pointing the phone at. But the app overlays additional information about your location. If you point the phone toward Arthur Ashe Stadium, you see who is playing and what the score is. If you click the restroom icon, the app shows the location of the nearest one. The performance is slightly inconsistent, but even this seems like a minor miracle. The main problem with relying on the app at the Open is the connection quality there. Bad cellular service has been a perennial problem at the tournament. The Open does offer free WiFi networks, but on the night I was there, they were often nonfunctional. For those who are not at the Open, the app serves primarily as a way to get the latest scores and recaps; users can set the app to send updates even when it is not open. One new aspect of the app is its ability to show live video. But only games that are broadcast on CBS are available, a reminder that the main barrier to mobile video is not the lack of capable technology but the lack of the proper licenses. Fans trying to sneak in a set or two from the office can also watch on the Open’s Web site. Another option is the WatchESPN app, which shows all the matches that the sports network carries. The setup is slightly onerous, because users have to prove they have an account with a cooperating cable company, but once they have jumped through the hoops, the quality is good. JOSHUA BRUSTEIN Have a favorite New York City app? Send tips via e-mail to appcity@nytimes.com or via Twitter to @joshuabrustein.

Mobile Applications
Smartphones
United States Open (Tennis)
Wireless Communications


Jubilant Libyan Militias Declare Victory Over ISIS in Surt

Abstract: LONDON — Libyan fighters declared victory over the Islamic State at its coastal stronghold of Surt on Tuesday, ending the extremist group’s ambitions for a caliphate on the southern shores of the Mediterranean. “The battle is finally over,” said Reda Eissa, a spokesman for the coalition of militias from nearby Misurata that led the assault. “Our fighters are ecstatic. We still have to comb through the city and make sure we got them all, but we are so, so happy.” The Libyan fighters’ apparent success was another defeat for the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, as its plans for a militant empire buckle on multiple fronts across the Middle East. In Surt, the Misuratan militias finally ousted the remaining Islamic State fighters from a cluster of houses after a grueling six-month assault that pitted suicide bombers and snipers against Libyan forces backed by American warplanes. After moving into Surt in 2014, the Islamic State seized a 150-mile stretch of coastline and instituted a brutal reign that included public killings and the imprisonment of migrants as sex slaves. The city became a transit hub for fighters traveling to Tunisia, as well as a supply stop and medical treatment center for Islamists fighting in eastern Libya. The Misuratan brigades began their drive toward Islamic State positions in Surt in May. American warplanes joined the effort in August, carrying out at least 490 sorties over the city while house-to-house fighting raged in the streets below. Even as the Misuratan brigades celebrated on Tuesday, analysts warned that the Islamic State could still regroup in other parts of Libya by exploiting the economic ruin and political vacuum that has dogged the country since the ouster of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi in 2011. “I’m concerned about the pockets of marginalization, and in some areas pre-existing jihadist presence, that they could use to reconfigure,” said Frederic Wehrey, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, citing the presence of Islamic State forces in Tripoli, Benghazi and the desert town of Sabha. Islamic State fighters could carry out bombings in an attempt to destabilize the fragile United Nations-backed government in Tripoli, the capital, Mr. Wehrey said. But it is unlikely that the Islamic State will be able to capture such a significant town again, he added. During the battle for Surt, both sides faced accusations of human rights abuses. Many of the sex slaves held by the Islamic State in Surt were African migrants captured as they crossed the Libyan Desert in hopes of reaching the coast so they could make the perilous sea journey to Europe. At least 100 women and children who escaped Surt during the fighting, many from Eritrea, are being held at a prison in Misurata where they have given accounts of being abused and gang-raped. The Libyan fighters from Misurata have faced accusations of torture and summary killings. A video recently emerged showing Misuratan militiamen interrogating and threatening to kill an Islamic State fighter named Mletan. Photographs that later circulated online showed the mutilated body of what appeared to be the same man being dragged along a street. Hanan Salah, a Libya researcher at Human Rights Watch, said on Tuesday that she had received reports from Libya that some public hospitals in Misurata had refused to treat civilians fleeing Surt on suspicion that they were members of the Islamic State. “The authorities are required to provide medical care to all those fleeing the fighting and who are in need of it, without distinction,” Ms. Salah said. The fall of Surt coincides with a concerted drive against the Islamic State in the Iraqi city of Mosul and a rapidly shifting fight in Syria. On Tuesday, Iraqi forces started shelling part of western Mosul as they prepared to open a new front in a battle now in its eighth week. The Misurata militias now in control of Surt nominally fight under the banner of the United Nations-backed government in Tripoli, led by Prime Minister Fayez Serraj — one of three rival administrations vying for control of Libya. The United States also supports the unity government. But the government is weak, having failed to extend its authority even over Tripoli since it started work in March. And many leaders of the Misurata militias are more concerned about Gen. Khalifa Hifter, a strongman who dominates Benghazi and the east of the country, than about the Islamic State. During a tour of the Surt battlefield in June, Misuratan commanders said they believed the Islamic State fighters were being controlled secretly by General Hifter as part of his wider ambition to seize control of Libya. There is little evidence to back that assertion — General Hifter is fighting against Islamic State militants, although opportunistic alliances are common on all sides of the conflict — but the heated talk illustrates the difficulty of bringing the country to a political settlement. Last week in Tripoli, the most violent clashes in two years erupted between competing factions, and one group blocked a major highway with shipping containers. Mr. Serraj’s administration was left to watch helplessly. The United Nations envoy to Libya, Martin Kobler, said he was “extremely alarmed” by the clashes, and Mark C. Toner, a State Department spokesman, said on Monday that the warring factions should rally behind the faltering unity government. Another uncertainty in Libya concerns the policy of the new administration of President-elect Donald J. Trump in the United States. On the campaign trail, Mr. Trump vowed to defeat the Islamic State but said he was averse to becoming involved in foreign countries. Mr. Trump’s expressed willingness to work with Russia and Egypt could lead to an alignment of United States efforts with those two countries’ policies in Libya. Egypt is a strong supporter of General Hifter, but the Obama administration has kept its distance from the general, who once worked for the C.I.A.

Surt Libya
Libya
ISIS,ISIL,Islamic State
Khalifa Hifter
Fayez Serraj
International relations
Terrorism


Two Wounded in National Zoo Shooting

Abstract: Two people were wounded in a shooting Monday evening that shut down the National Zoo on an unusually busy day. At least one suspect — initial reports said there were two — was being sought in the shooting, which occurred at the zoo’s entrance just before 6 p.m., the Washington police said. The police said the victims’ injuries were not life-threatening, but both were taken to a hospital for treatment. Police officials said they did not know what led to the shooting.

Washington DC
Smithsonian National Zoological Park
Murders


Gazprom Reduces Deliveries of Gas Through Ukraine

Abstract: MOSCOW — Gazprom , the Russian gas monopoly, on Monday reduced deliveries of gas for transit through Ukraine to Western European customers, saying that it was seeking to make up for gas stolen by Ukraine. Gazprom, which had already cut off all fuel supplies to Ukraine in a dispute over pricing, said any countries that suffered shortages as a result should blame Ukraine for not paying a fair price for Russia ’s natural gas. The Russian announcement was, in essence, a partial Russian fuel embargo of Europe, something policy makers in Western capitals have feared for some time as relations with Moscow bottomed out last summer following the war in Georgia. The announcement took the form of a conversation between Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin and the chief executive of Gazprom, Aleksei B. Miller, during an evening newscast on Russian state television. As they have in the past, the men accused Ukraine of diverting gas from pipelines that send it through Ukraine to Europe, something the Ukrainian government has denied doing. Mr. Putin asked Mr. Miller how much Ukraine had diverted. About 65.3 million cubic meters of natural gas since Jan. 1, the executive said. “What are you going to do?” Mr. Putin then asked. Mr. Miller responded that he was considering ordering Gazprom to immediately cut exports bound for Western Europe through Ukrainian pipes by this same amount, which is more than the 43 million cubic meters of gas used in Poland every day. He said Gazprom would seek to mitigate shortages by shipping more gas through Belarus and Turkey, and by withdrawing gas from storage. But he suggested that European nations should blame Ukraine for likely deficits of heating fuel. Mr. Putin asked, “How about the supplies to our Western European consumers under long-term contracts?” Mr. Miller said that Europe would only lack what “Ukraine had stolen.” Mr. Putin then said: “Good, I agree, cut it from today.” In the days ahead, Mr. Miller added, Gazprom would each day reduce the volume of gas supplied at Ukraine’s border and intended for re-export to Europe by the amount it suspects Ukraine of diverting from the pipelines. Russia and Ukraine’s pro-Western government have been haggling over gas prices for years, in disputes that often carry political overtones. In the current fracas, Ukraine resisted an increase in Russian gas to $250 per 1,000 cubic meters from the current $179.50. Russia then raised the price to $418 for the same volume and, most recently, to $450. With negotiations stalled, Russia diminished the flow of gas to Ukraine on Jan. 1 by about 100 million cubic meters per day. Since then, Russia has accused Ukraine of withdrawing gas from the export pipelines. Ukraine countered that it was diverting only enough fuel, about 21 million cubic meters, to power compressors. Authorities in Kiev said they were meeting internal demand from reserves and domestic production. While ostensibly intended to force higher payments on Ukraine, the latest cuts directly affect gas bound for Western markets, something that energy experts said was seemingly designed to drag the European Union into the dispute, forcing it to assume a mediating role, assist Ukraine with payments or face shortages in its member nations’ markets. In 2006, a similar dispute prompted the European Union to side with Kiev. This time the bloc has urged a swift end to the crisis, but it has so far refused to get involved. “It has to be resolved by the two parties,” said Ferran Tarradellas Espuny, an energy spokesman for the European Commission in Brussels. The global recession has reduced demand for energy and allowed many countries to salt away stockpiles in national reserves, making any embargo easier to weather than in 2006.

Gazprom
Ukraine
Natural Gas
Politics and Government
Putin Vladimir V
Russia
Europe


In Tax Overhaul Debate, It’s Large vs. Small Companies

Abstract: In America’s contentious tax reform debate, it is seen as C-Suite versus Main Street. Some of the biggest and most powerful companies in the United States are fighting for a cut in the official corporate tax rate, arguing that it is necessary to allow them to compete more effectively in the global market. But the nation’s millions of small businesses fear they will be the ones paying for it. “We are in favor of comprehensive tax reform that includes both corporate and personal tax, but we are not happy with anything that raises the rate for us,” said Chris Whitcomb, the tax counsel for the National Federation of Independent Business, the leading small business lobbying and advocacy group, representing about 350,000 members. The conflict, which in some ways is even larger than the controversial issue of how to properly tax multinational corporations on their global profits, arises because the vast majority of American businesses, including some large, well-known companies and prominent Wall Street firms, actually do not pay corporate taxes at all. Beginning in earnest in the 1980s, millions of businesses shed their traditional corporate status to become what are known as pass-through companies. That led to a boon for business, but was a drain on the Treasury. But what began as a typical Washington dispute between big and small business has been transformed into a fierce lobbying battle that pits some of the richest firms in the country against one another. Some big pass-throughs “are trying to conflate themselves with smaller pass-throughs,” said one official working on tax reform in Washington — so much so that they could be accused of “small business identity theft.” Business executives have long complained that a traditional corporation’s profits are taxed twice, first at the corporate level, and then again on the dividends received by shareholders. Pass-throughs, by contrast, are allowed to distribute their profits directly to their owners and investors, who then pay federal taxes on their personal income tax schedule. This arrangement, previously used almost exclusively by partnerships, very small businesses and the self-employed, proved especially attractive after the major 1986 tax overhaul, which cut personal rates below corporate ones. That spurred a vast migration to pass-through status, a shift that has continued up to the present day. Of the 34 million business tax returns filed in 2009, the most recent data available, 32 million were pass-throughs, representing about 70 percent of net business income, compared with about one-quarter in 1980. “Most businesses are pass-throughs,” said Eric Toder, institute fellow at the Urban Institute in Washington. “They dominate the business landscape.” Companies that switched said the simpler, generally lower single-tax rules gave them a leg up and helped them grow. McGregor Metalworking Companies, a family-owned business in Ohio and South Carolina, had 80 employees when it converted in 1986 and now has a work force of 370. “It has been a real force for reinvestment,” said Dan McGregor, 69, chairman of the company, which has seven shareholders. Even though the top personal income tax rate of 39.6 percent once again exceeds the maximum corporate rate of 35 percent, the pass-through arrangement remains attractive to companies like McGregor Metalworking, analysts say, by avoiding double taxation. And it is even more appealing to firms that are able to treat some of their income as long-term capital gains, which are taxed at no more than 20 percent. Image Dan McGregor of McGregor Metalworking said simpler, lower single-tax rules gave the company a leg up and helped it grow. Credit Andrew Spear for The New York Times In the 1990s, the introduction of “check the box” tax return procedures sped the growth of pass-through businesses. Other rule changes, allowing companies with more shareholders to qualify and affording investors increased protection against personal liability for their business’s debts, made pass-throughs even more popular — and not only among smaller companies. “The rules were originally written with small businesses in mind like restaurants, laundromats and small real estate developers,” said Victor Fleischer, a professor at the University of Colorado Law School. “But the same rules are being used by some of the largest companies.” A recent study by the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the switch by corporations to pass-through status cost the federal government about $76 billion in tax revenue in 2007 alone. “Crossing the line has been way too easy,” said Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in Washington. “More and more these are very large companies, and they should be paying corporate taxes.” In 2007, there were almost as many pass-throughs — 15,360 — with revenue exceeding $50 million annually as there were traditional corporations earning that amount. Among the big names escaping corporate taxes and paying taxes as pass-throughs is Bechtel, the global construction and engineering giant. A spokeswoman for Bechtel said it was a private company and would not comment on its tax status. Companies typically surrender their pass-through status when they go public, but some energy firms won an exemption. Kinder Morgan has organized its units as publicly traded partnerships, and investors pay taxes at individual rates, as do investors at Enbridge Energy Partners. Some financial giants were also able to opt out when they became publicly traded partnerships. The Fortress Investment Group, the first hedge fund and private equity company to go public in the United States; Blackstone; the Carlyle Group; Apollo Global Management; and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts all pay as pass-throughs. A spokesman for Blackstone said it supported “comprehensive tax reform that puts everything on the table including a possible tax increase” as part of a broader tax package that manages, in its view, to simplify and improve the overall business tax landscape. The Private Equity Growth Capital Council, a lobbying group, said the spread of pass-through companies had created jobs and helped the economy, arguing that adding another layer of tax by treating them as corporations would run counter to bipartisan efforts to streamline the tax code. To pay for a cut in corporate tax rates, some large corporations and the Obama administration propose eliminating some of the billions of dollars in tax deductions and credits that both corporations and pass-through businesses enjoy. The White House has also broached taxing some of the largest pass-through companies as corporations. “Large companies are increasingly avoiding tax by organizing themselves as pass-through businesses” an administration issue paper noted, putting traditional corporations at a disadvantage. In 2011, Timothy F. Geithner, who was the Treasury secretary, told the Senate Finance Committee: “Congress has to revisit this basic question about whether it makes sense for us as a country to allow certain businesses to choose whether they are treated as corporations for tax purposes or not. It is not a fundamentally sustainable balance now.” The pass-throughs are fighting back. “We just want a level playing field,” said Ron Travis, vice president for tax and legal affairs at O’Neal Industries, one of the largest metals distribution and manufacturing companies in the United States, with headquarters in Birmingham, Ala. O’Neal switched to pass-through status in 1987. It has a work force of 3,800, in the United States and abroad. “If you do a corporate-only tax reform, we don’t get a rate benefit,” Mr. Travis said. The bigger pass-throughs have plenty of allies among the vast ranks of small businesses that lawmakers are particularly attuned to. “We would lose critical deductions and benefits and gain nothing back by a lower corporate tax rate,” said Forrest McConnell, whose father started his family-owned car dealership business in Montgomery, Ala., in 1919. And that alliance between the larger and smaller pass-throughs helps explain why any plan to cut corporate tax rates faces such tough sledding. “This is one of the reasons why it is going to be difficult,” said Howard Gleckman, a fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington. “As long as it is seen as raising taxes on America’s yeomen business sector in order to cut taxes for Exxon, that is a really hard political sell.”

Tax Credits Tax Deductions Tax Exemptions


In Rockaways, Infusion of Sand Will Soon Raise Beaches Hit by a Hurricane

Abstract: Finally, the sand is coming back. This month, a contractor will start to dredge and spread 2.9 million cubic yards of sand on the Hurricane Sandy-depleted beaches of the Rockaways, in Queens, significantly expanding and raising six miles of beach. That’s a lot of sand castles or, put another way, enough sand to fill more than two Empire State Buildings. For area residents, the infusion of sand cannot come soon enough. The project will elevate the stretch between Beach 19th and Beach 149th Streets by as much as 10 to 14 feet above sea level, restoring the strand to the generous dimensions of the 1970s, when the Army Corps of Engineers first undertook sand replenishment there. And the New York City parks department will pay for an additional two feet of sand that will go along the boardwalk for an added buffer. Local officials say that even before the hurricane, which struck in October 2012, the community had watched its beach slowly disappear and residents had begged for more sand for years. “It’s unfortunate that it took a natural disaster for people to realize what residents of the Rockaways have known for 20 years — that the beach was eroding and no longer offered proper protection,” State Assemblyman Phillip Goldfeder, a Rockaway native, said. “Sandy secured the money to do it the right way.” While the addition of more than a half-million cubic yards of sand last summer by the same contractor came from the nearby East Rockaway Inlet, the rest of the sand will be dredged from the ocean bottom offshore. It will then be sprayed on the beaches via a large pipe, work that will continue through the summer. The Army Corps signed the second contract with the company, Weeks Marine of Cranford, N.J., in August. (The two contracts together total $36.4 million.) Work was supposed to begin in early winter. But the dredge — the large piece of equipment that sucks up sand offshore — is finishing another job in Wilmington Harbor in Delaware. “There are only so many dredges of this size available, and the terrible weather hasn’t helped,” Christopher Gardner, a spokesman for the Army Corps, said. “The one that’s going to work in the Rockaways is on its way.” Some residents remained bitter about the delay, however. And they say that without the addition of more rock jetties, known as groins, the new sand would also be washed away. John Cori, a founder of the Friends of Rockaway Beach , an advocacy group, said the hurricane showed the effectiveness of such groins. “If we had a minor storm now we would be worse off than we were pre-Sandy,” he said. But the hurricane has also led to the revival of a 2003 federal study of additional storm protections for the Rockaways, including structures like groins. The study was never completed for lack of money. “The Sandy Relief bill funds the completion of the study,” Mr. Gardner said, adding that the scope of the study was expanded to include neighborhoods next to Jamaica Bay as well as the ocean beaches. Working on a parallel track, the parks department has completed plans to replace the beach boardwalk, more than half of which was destroyed or damaged by the storm. The $274 million boardwalk project, divided into five phases, will begin sometime this spring; completion is expected in 2017. Parks officials said the boardwalk construction and sand replenishment will happen concurrently. The damaged boardwalk was a mix of wood and concrete, with the concrete sections faring better. But even the intact concrete boardwalk will be ripped out as part of the reconstruction. Instead of wood, the new 40-foot wide boardwalk will be topped entirely with sand-colored concrete. Unlike the old boardwalk, it will feature designated bicycle and jogging lanes. In the meantime, fans of the wooden boardwalk are getting one last hurrah. The 2.5-mile section of boardwalk between Beach Ninth and Beach 60th Streets was largely spared by the hurricane, except for the stretch between Beach 35th and 39th Streets. Bicyclists and joggers had complained that their exercise routine was disrupted by the gap. Parks officials decided to fill in the gap with 1,000 linear feet of treated pine planks, using the department’s own carpenters. Long horizontal beams that were salvaged from the damaged boardwalk were being used to support the temporary structure. “We think this is a really good investment,” Liam Kavanagh, first deputy commissioner for the parks department, said. “We’re looking to get two summers out of it.”

Sand and Gravel
Hurricane Sandy
Rockaway Beach Queens