How Donald Trump hijacks U.S. media

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Howard Kurtz: Donald Trump said the GOP can go nuclear in budget showdown


• Kurtz: It's remarkable that Trump draw attention no what what he says


• He says it's so easy to hijack the media in the age of Twitter


• Kurtz: Journalists like sexy stories but shouldn't lose focus of what's important

Editor's note: Howard Kurtz is the host of CNN's "Reliable Sources" and is Newsweek's Washington bureau chief. He is also a contributor to the website Daily Download.

(CNN) -- After a year of national gridlock that ended on the precipice of a cliff, Donald Trump went nuclear.

The man who called Barack Obama's re-election a travesty said Republicans could gain control of the budget showdown because they "are sitting there with a nuclear weapon": the specter of voting against a rise in the debt ceiling in the coming weeks. In other words, the GOP could get its way by again threatening to push the country into default.

The remarkable thing here is not Trump's apocalyptic advice but that the man who still doesn't concede that the president was born in Hawaii draws attention no matter what he says. The colorful businessman has a knack for hijacking the media -- and he's hardly alone.

Watch: Hey Fox, Hillary Clinton was sick after all

Howard Kurtz

In fact, one of the most striking developments in recent years is how easy it is to carry out the hijacking. You don't need a weapon, nuclear or otherwise. You don't have to be a famous zillionaire to pull it off. In the Twitter age, almost anyone can capture the spotlight for 15 seconds.

We're so easy. If it's new, novel or naughty, we are there.

A critical mass of tweeters hijacked the presidential debates by turning Big Bird and "binders full of women" into trending topics. What, you thought what was most important was what the candidates said during those 90-minute face-offs? Nope, it's just as much about winning the post-game chatter. A single "oops" by Rick Perry enables the press to wipe out everything else that was said.

Watch: Are critics being too harsh on Chelsea Clinton?

Clint Eastwood, telling Obama (in the guise of an empty chair) to perform an anatomically impossible act? That hijacked Mitt Romney's convention.

Eric Fehrnstrom inadvertently hijacked his boss' campaign when he compared Romney's election strategy to an Etch A Sketch. Nothing like a kid's toy to seize the attention of grown-up journalists.

Any invocation of a celebrity has great hijacking potential, even if the story is a sprinkling of fairy dust.

The political press recently surrendered to the notion that Ben Affleck might run for John Kerry's Senate seat in Massachusetts. This was based on nothing more than local chatter, amplified by Politico. Affleck shrewdly kept the door ajar -- such speculation helps in the gravitas department --but on Christmas Eve, he gave the press a lump of coal by admitting he wasn't running.

Watch: Were the media swept away by fiscal cliff madness?

Next the media got excited by the idea that Ted Kennedy Jr. would run for office -- until he quickly popped that trial balloon.

Sometimes the hijacker wants no part of the limelight but is swept along for the ride.

Paula Broadwell was embedded in the nation's consciousness for weeks after her affair with David Petraeus prompted his resignation as CIA director. And her romantic rival, Jill Kelley, became a captive as well.

Racial tension can grab the media's attention like few other issues.

There are more than 15,000 murders annually in the United States, but only a few move beyond local headlines. The killing of Trayvon Martin, initially overlooked even in Florida, became a national sensation once activists persuaded the media that race played a role in the teenager's shooting (a perception deepened by NBC's misleading editing of George Zimmerman's 911 call). Week after week of routine murders in cities such as Chicago barely register on the radar.

Most journalists gravitate toward sensational and sexy stories (and I haven't been immune to the temptation) because we want the clicks and the ratings. And perhaps to alleviate our own boredom with the daily grunt work of reporting. The on-and-off negotiations over the fiscal cliff have been tedious and incremental. Along comes Trump and boom, you've got an easy headline.

The problem with all this media hijacking goes beyond the strange twists and turns along the way. It's that we cede control of what's important.

Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion

Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Howard Kurtz.

Read More..

Delhi gang-rape suspects formally charged

NEW DELHI: Indian police on Thursday formally charged five men with murder, kidnapping and rape following the fatal gang-rape of a young woman that appalled the nation.

"We have filed the charge sheet against the five accused," an investigating police officer told a magistrate hearing the case in the Saket court complex in New Delhi.

The five men, who could face the death penalty if convicted, were not present when the media were allowed into the courtroom. Journalists were initially prevented from listening to proceedings, sparking chaotic scenes outside.

The men face at least seven charges, including murder, kidnapping, rape, robbery and attempting to destroy evidence. The next hearing in the case was set for January 5.

A police charge sheet under Indian law lays out the charges against the accused and details the key evidence against them.

The 23-year-old victim in the gang-rape case, who died at the weekend from her horrific injuries, gave a statement to police immediately after the attack.

Her boyfriend, who was with her at the time and was also attacked, has also given an account.

- AFP/xq

Read More..

Argentina presses claim to Falklands

Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner during the 30th anniversary of the Falklands war, in Ushuaia, Argentina on April 2, 2012.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Argentina says Britain stripped the Falkland Islands away 180 years ago


• The countries went to war over the islands in 1982, when Argentina put troops there


• Argentina, which calls the islands Las Malvinas, wants sovereignty negotiations


• British government says there won't be sovereignty talks unless islanders want them

London (CNN) -- Argentinian President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner is once again calling on the UK to hand back the Falkland Islands -- known in Argentina as Las Malvinas -- accusing Britain of blatant colonialism.

In an open letter to British Prime Minister David Cameron, which was published in the British press, she says that Britain stripped the islands away from Argentina 180 years ago on Thursday's date: January 3.

Read more: Falkland Islands will vote on political status

The two countries went to war over the territory in 1982, when the then-Argentinian military government landed troops on the islands.

Argentina put its death toll from the conflict at around 645. Britain's civil and military losses amounted to 255.

Falklands war wounds still fresh, 30 years later

In the letter, which was copied to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the Argentinian president writes: "The Argentines on the Islands were expelled by the Royal Navy and the United Kingdom subsequently began a population implantation process similar to that applied to other territories under colonial rule.

"Since then, Britain, the colonial power, has refused to return the territories to the Argentine Republic, thus preventing it from restoring its territorial integrity."

She quotes a 1965 U.N. resolution inviting the two countries to negotiate a solution to the sovereignty dispute and calls on the British to abide by the resolution.

Read more: Why tensions are rising over Falklands

Located in the South Atlantic Ocean, about 480 kilometers (298 miles) east of the tip of South America, the Falklands have long been coveted as a strategic shipping stopover and potential wellspring of natural resources.

The Falklands, which raise their own taxes but rely on the United Kingdom for defense and foreign policy, are one of 14 British overseas territories and have been under British rule since 1833.

Read more: Chavez, allies call for sanctions against Britain over Falklands

The British government swiftly rejected the idea of negotiations, saying the Falkland Islanders have chosen to be British.

In a statement, the British Foreign Office said the islanders remain free to choose their own futures and "have a right to self-determination as enshrined in the U.N. Charter. This is a fundamental right for all peoples."

The statement added: "There are three parties to this debate, not just two as Argentina likes to pretend. The islanders can't just be written out of history.

"As such, there can be no negotiations on the sovereignty of the Falklands Islands unless and until such time as the islanders so wish."

The islanders are due to hold a referendum on their political status this March but were also quick to dismiss the Argentinian position.

"We are not a colony," said Barry Elsby, a member of the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands. "Our relationship with the United Kingdom is by choice."

The exchange comes amid rising tension over the islands, which are home to about 3,000 people.

In February of last year, the Argentinian leader accused the British of militarizing the South Atlantic after the Royal Navy sent its warship HMS Dauntless to the region. Then, in June of 2012, Fernandez confronted Cameron at the G-20 meeting and tried to hand him a letter about the islands -- something he refused to accept.

Argentinian leader denounces 'militarization' of the South Atlantic

The dispute flared again ahead of the London 2012 Olympics, when Argentina released a video boosting its Olympic team that was filmed on the islands. The advertisement showed Argentinian field hockey star Fernando Zylberberg training in the streets of Port Stanley in the Falklands. The video ends with the slogan: "To compete on English soil, we train on Argentine soil."

Read More..

Hillary Clinton discharged from hospital

WASHINGTONSecretary of State Hillary Clinton was discharged from a New York hospital Wednesday, after spending 72 hours under observation following the discovery of a blood clot in her head, the State Department said.

In a statement, spokesperson Philippe Reines said: "Her medical team advised her that she is making good progress on all fronts, and they are confident she will make a full recovery. She's eager to get back to the office."

Clinton and her family thanked her medical team "for the excellent care she received," Reines said.

Earlier Wednesday, Clinton had been seen in public for the first time in three weeks when she walked out of the Harkness Eye Institute in New York City and into a secure van along with a smiling Bill and Chelsea Clinton and accompanied by a security detail, reports CBS News correspondent Margaret Brennan.

The State Department had said Secretary Clinton was active in speaking with staff and reviewing paperwork while she continued to recover at New York Presbyterian Hospital.

Clinton was admitted to a New York hospital Sunday and was treated with blood thinners to dissolve a clot in the vein behind the right ear. Doctors found the clot during a follow-up exam stemming from a concussion she suffered in early December. She has been hospitalized for around 72 hours, which is a window of time during which it is possible to establish the proper blood thinner dosage that would be required prior to discharge according to doctors.

Clinton's doctors say there was no neurological damage.

Read More..

Senate Swears in a Historic 20 Female Senators

Today the Senate will make history, swearing in a record-breaking 20 female senators – 4 Republicans and 16 Democrats – in office.

As the 113th Congress is sworn in today on Capitol Hill, ABC "World News" anchor Diane Sawyer has an exclusive joint interview with the historic class of female Senators.

Diane Sawyer's complete interview will air on World News this evening.

"I can't tell you the joy that I feel in my heart to look at these 20 gifted and talented women from two different parties, different zip codes to fill this room," Sen. Barbara Mikulksi, D-Md., said while surrounded by the group of women senators. "In all of American history only 16 women had served. Now there are 20 of us."

Senator-elect Deb Fischer, R-Neb., becomes today the first women to be elected as a senator in Nebraska.

"It was an historic election," Fischer said, "But what was really fun about it were the number of mothers and fathers who brought their daughters up to me during the campaign and said, "Can we get a picture? Can we get a picture?' Because people realize it and -- things do change, things do change."

The women senators all agree that women will be getting things done in this new Congress, a sign of optimism felt for the new Congress, after the bruising battles of the 112th Congress.

"We're in force and we're in leadership positions, but it's not just the position that we hold. I can tell you this is a can-do crowd," Mikulski said of both Democrats and Republican senators in the room. "We are today ready to be a force in American politics."

And while the number of women in the Senate today makes historic, many of the women agreed that they want to keep fighting to boost those numbers. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said that women are still "underrepresented" in the Senate.

"I think that until we get to 50, we still have to fight because it's still a problem," Boxer said. "I think this class as you look around, Republicans and Democrats... I think that because of this new class and the caliber of the people coming and the quality of the people coming, I think that hopefully in my lifetime -- and I really do hope and pray this is the case -- we will see 50 percent. "

No Sorority Here, Even With the Will to Work Together

The cooperation does not make them a "sorority," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., says. There are real differences in ideology and personality and they don't want their gender to define them as senators.

But the women also admit that they believe having more women in the room would help in fierce negotiations, compromise, and legislating on Capitol Hill, traits they say do not come as naturally to their male colleagues in the Senate. That sentiment enjoys bipartisan support among the women of the Senate.

"What I find is with all due deference to our male colleagues, that women's styles tend to be more collaborative," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said by nature women are "less confrontational." Sen-elect Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, says that women are "problem solvers."

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., says that women have a camaraderie which helps in relationships that are key to negotiations on Capitol Hill, something she says comes natural to women more than men.

"I think there's just a lot of collaboration between the women senators and... advice and really standing up for each other that you don't always see with the men," she said.

Read More..

Time to rebrand in Lincoln's image?

Wade Henderson thinks the modern Republican Party should look to Abraham Lincoln for some inspiration.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Wade Henderson: January 1 is 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation


• He says GOP should look to Lincoln, a canny politician who led moral fight on civil rights


• He says GOP has history of civil rights support that it has largely abandoned in recent years


• Henderson: In 2012, election minority voters unimpressed; GOP should return to roots

Editor's note: Wade Henderson is the president and CEO of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and The Leadership Conference Education Fund.

(CNN) -- On January 1, the nation will commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation, which legally freed slaves in the secessionist Southern states. Meanwhile, thousands of theaters will still be presenting the film "Lincoln," portraying the soon-to-be-martyred president's efforts in January 1865 to persuade the House of Representatives to pass the 13th Amendment, outlawing slavery throughout the nation.

Coming at a time when many Republicans are seeking to rebrand their party, these commemorations of the first Republican president raise this question: Why not refashion the Grand Old Party in the image of the Great Emancipator?

Steven Spielberg's historical drama, as well as the biography upon which it is based, Doris Kearns Goodwin's "Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln," both remind today's Americans that Lincoln was not only a moral leader but also a practical politician. The political identity that Lincoln forged for the fledgling Republican Party -- uniting the nation while defending individual rights -- was a winning formula for half a century, with the GOP winning 11 of 13 presidential elections from 1860 through 1908.

Wade Henderson

Moreover, support for civil rights persisted in the party throughout the last century. Among the Republican presidents of the 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt famously hosted Booker T. Washington at the White House. Dwight Eisenhower ordered federal troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, to enforce school desegregation. Richard Nixon expanded affirmative action. And George H. W. Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act into law.

Brazile: A turning point for freedom in America, 150 years later

In the U.S. Senate, such prominent Republicans as Edward Brooke of Massachusetts (the first African-American senator since Reconstruction), Jacob Javits of New York and Everett Dirksen of Illinois were strong supporters of civil rights, as were governors such as Nelson Rockefeller in New York, George Romney in Massachusetts and William Scranton in Pennsylvania.

Former California Gov. Earl Warren served as chief justice when the Supreme Court issued its decision in Brown v. Board of Education, ordering the desegregation of the nation's schools. As recently as 1996, the Republican national ticket consisted of two strong civil rights advocates, former Kansas Sen. Bob Dole and former New York Rep. Jack Kemp.

Unfortunately, by 2012, the Republican Party had veered far from its heritage as the party of Lincoln. Prominent Republicans supported statewide voter suppression laws that hit hardest at vulnerable minorities or called for the "self-deportation" of immigrants and their families.

While some Republican senatorial nominees needlessly offended women, leading moderates such as Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe and Ohio Rep. Steven LaTourette opted for retirement. In what I hope was rock bottom, 38 Senate Republicans rebuffed their former presidential nominee Bob Dole -- a wheelchair-bound war hero -- to block an international civil and human rights treaty for people with disabilities.

Not surprisingly, the GOP in the presidential race lost the black vote by 87 points, the Asian-American vote by 47 points, the Latino vote by 44 points and the women's vote by 11 points, according to CNN exit polls. As Republicans reflect on their path forward with minority voters and persuadable whites, there are opportunities to advance civil rights.

While the GOP has increasingly promoted diverse candidates, it has not yet begun to reflect the values of our diverse nation. Fiscally conservative officeholders can fight for civil and human rights.

Just a few years ago, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions championed a reduction in the sentencing disparity between people charged with possession of crack and powder cocaine. These are two forms of the same drug, but crack cocaine is used more by minorities and carried much harsher punishments for possession. Working with Sessions, civil rights advocates pushed to reduce this disparity significantly -- among the greatest advances in criminal justice reform in decades.

Looking toward to the 113th Congress, several civil rights initiatives would fit conservative values. They need congressional champions. Conservative lobbyist Grover Norquist and conservative strategist Richard Viguerie have called for criminal justice reforms that would reduce the number of prisoners in U.S. prisons.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has joined the civil rights coalition's call for federal initiatives to narrow the educational achievement gap between minority and white students. And more Republicans are joining Jeb Bush's support for comprehensive immigration reform that provides a pathway to citizenship for long-term, law-abiding residents.

Most importantly, the GOP must embrace one of Lincoln's most enduring legacies, the 15th Amendment, which guaranteed the right to vote regardless of race. The GOP must stop trying to suppress voters and begin to champion electoral reform that shortens lines and helps more people to vote.

I don't expect another Abraham Lincoln or Frederick Douglass from the modern Republican Party -- I'll settle for a few more Jeff Sessions. When Republicans consider the consequences for their party's narrow appeal, they'll try to return to their roots.

I'm happy to help.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Wade Henderson.

Read More..

Tennis: Impressive Azarenka reaches Brisbane International quarter-finals

BRISBANE, Australia: World number one Victoria Azarenka moved into the quarter-finals of the Brisbane International with a hard-fought 6-3, 6-3 win over German Sabine Lisicki on Wednesday.

Azarenka was made to work hard for her win by the hard-hitting Lisicki, who traded punishing ground strokes with the top seed but was let down by a high error rate -- 36 unforced errors compared with only nine from her opponent.

In a match much closer than the score suggests, Lisicki had her chances but was unable to take them.

She had eight break points on Azarenka's serve but was only able to convert three, whereas Azarenka -- who won her maiden WTA title in Brisbane in 2009 -- broke Lisicki six times to seize the advantage.

The German also served poorly, landing only 52 per cent of her first serves and sending down five double faults. But she stayed in the match thanks to the quality of her hitting from the baseline.

"I knew what kind of player she is and I felt like she did improve from maybe the last time we played," Azarenka said.

"I just knew that there is something that I have to deal with. So I was prepared to take some bullets today.

"But I just tried to stay focused on executing my game. I knew she was going to make some, she was going to miss some, so I just had to stay with her and look for my chance."

Azarenka now plays Kazakhstan qualifier Ksenia Pervak in the quarter-finals.

Earlier, Germany's Angelique Kerber, the only player to defeat Serena Williams since the French Open in May, came from behind to beat unheralded Puerto Rican Monica Puig in three sets.

The 24-year-old fourth-seed looked in huge trouble as she trailed 1-4 in the third set but fought back to force a tiebreak.

Puig then led 4-0 in the tiebreak only for Kerber to fight back again and take the match 3-6, 6-4, 7-6 (9/7) in two and a half hours.

She will next take on Russia's Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova in the quarter-finals.

"I was just thinking point by point (when she was down in the third set)," Kerber said.

"I was not thinking 'What's happening?' I was just really on court and just trying to hit the ball, move very well, and just fight for every point.

"It was a surprise how she played. I didn't know her before, but I'm sure that she'll be in the top 50 soon."

Sloane Stephens set up a quarter-final against fellow American Serena Williams when she beat Sweden's Sofia Arvidsson 6-3, 6-4. Ukraine's Lesia Tsurenko, who only came into the tournament when Maria Sharapova pulled out, downed Australia's Jarmila Gajdosova 1-6, 6-1, 6-4.

- AFP/fa

Read More..

Crises averted, but more fights loom

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• NEW: Reid accused Boehner of "dictatorship" Friday; Boehner responded with profanity


• The vote prevents tax increases for more than 98% of Americans


• It also wards off $110 billion in automatic cuts to domestic and military spending


• Most Americans will still see a payroll tax increase after a 2011 cut expires

Washington (CNN) -- After exhaustive negotiations that strained the country's patience, the House approved a bill to avert the dreaded fiscal cliff, staving off widespread tax increases and deep spending cuts.

In the 257-167 vote late Tuesday, 172 Democrats and 85 Republicans favored the bill; 16 Democrats and 151 Republicans opposed it.

The plan approved Tuesday maintains tax cuts for individuals earning less than $400,000 per year and couples earning less than $450,000. It will raise tax rates for those who make more, marking the first time in two decades the rates jump for the wealthiest Americans.

Just hours before the bill passed, House Speaker John Boehner pitched to fellow Republicans the idea of amending the Senate-approved bill to add a package of spending cuts. He cautioned about the risk in such a strategy, saying there was no guarantee the Senate would act on it.

By the end of the night, he was among the Republicans who voted for the bill as written.

President Barack Obama said he would sign the bill into law, but he did not say when. After the vote, he flew to Hawaii to rejoin his wife and daughters on their winter vacation.

Had the House not acted, and the Bush-era tax cuts that were set last decade expired fully, broad tax increases would have kicked in. In addition, $110 billion in automatic cuts to domestic and military spending would have taken place.

The combined effect could have dampened economic growth by 0.5%, possibly tipping the U.S. economy back into a recession and driving unemployment from its current 7.7% back over 9%, according to economists' estimates.

While the package provides some short-term certainty, it leaves a range of big issues unaddressed.

It doesn't mention the $16.4 trillion debt ceiling that the United States reached Monday.

It also delays for two months the so-called sequester, a series of automatic cuts in federal spending that would have taken effect Wednesday and reduced the budgets of most agencies and programs by 8% to 10%.

Come late February, Congress will have to tackle both those thorny issues.

Obama warned Congress that he will not tolerate another act of prolonged brinksmanship.

"While I will negotiate over many things, I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether or not they should pay the bills that they've already racked up through the laws that they've passed," he said after the Tuesday night vote.

"We can't not pay bills that we've already incurred. If Congress refuses to give the United States government the ability to pay these bills in time, the consequences for the entire global economy would be catastrophic -- far worse than the impact of the fiscal cliff."

How they voted: House | Senate

A partial victory

While the deal gives Obama bragging rights for raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans, it also leaves him breaking a promise.

Obama had vowed to raise tax rates for the top-earning 2% of Americans, including those with household income above $250,000 and individuals earning more than $200,000.

Raising the threshold for higher tax rates shrinks the number of Americans affected.

While nearly 2% of filers have adjusted gross incomes over $250,000, only 0.6% have incomes above $500,000, according to the Tax Policy Center.

Some House Republicans weren't exactly overjoyed in voting for the plan.

"I'm a very reluctant yes," said Rep. Nan Hayworth, an outgoing Republican representative from New York.

"This is the best we can do, given the Senate and the White House sentiment at this point in time, and it is at least a partial victory for the American people," she said. "I'll take that at this point."

Conservative lobbyist Grover Norquist, whose Americans for Tax Reform pushes candidates to sign a pledge never to raise taxes, said the plan preserves most of the Bush tax cuts and won't violate his group's beliefs.

"The Bush tax cuts lapsed at midnight last night," Norquist tweeted Tuesday. "Every (Republican) voting for Senate bill is cutting taxes and keeping his/her pledge."

The timing of the vote was crucial, as a new Congress is set to be sworn in Thursday. And without a breakthrough, the entire process would have had to start over.

Specifics of the plan

The legislation will raise roughly $600 billion in new revenues over 10 years, according to various estimates.

According to the deal:

-- The tax rate for individuals making more than $400,000 and couples making more than $450,000 will rise from the current 35% to the Clinton-era rate of 39.6%.

-- Itemized deductions will be capped for individuals making $250,000 and for married couples making $300,000.

-- Taxes on inherited estates will go up to 40% from 35%.

-- Unemployment insurance will be extended for a year for 2 million people.

-- The alternative minimum tax, a perennial issue, will be permanently adjusted for inflation.

-- Child care, tuition and research and development tax credits will be renewed.

-- The "Doc Fix" -- reimbursements for doctors who take Medicare patients -- will continue, but it won't be paid for out of the Obama administration's signature health care law.

The Democratic-led Senate overwhelmingly approved the bill early Tuesday before passing it to the House.

As news about the fiscal cliff's deflection spread across the world, several markets reacted positively Wednesday.

Australia's ASX All Ordinaries index added 1.2%. South Korea's KOSPI gained 1.5%, and the Hang Seng in Hong Kong advanced 1.9%. Tokyo's Nikkei and the Shanghai Composite remain closed for holiday celebrations but will reopen later in the week.

More fiscal cliffs loom

Payroll taxes still set to go up

Despite the last-minute fiscal cliff agreements, Americans are still likely to see their paychecks shrink somewhat because of a separate battle over payroll taxes.

The government temporarily lowered the payroll tax rate in 2011 from 6.2% to 4.2% to put more money in the pockets of Americans. That adjustment, which has cost about $120 billion each year, expired Monday.

Now, Americans earning $30,000 a year will take home $50 less per month. Those earning $113,700 will lose $189.50 a month.

With the latest battle round over, lawmakers will next set their sights on the other items on their docket of congressional squabbles over money: the debt ceiling and resolving the sequester.

Obama said he hopes leaders in Washington this year will focus on "seeing if we can put a package like this together with a little bit less drama, a little less brinksmanship (and) not scare the heck out of folks quite as much."

He thanked bipartisan House and Senate leaders for finally reaching a resolution Tuesday, but said Congress' work this year is just beginning.

"I hope that everybody now gets at least a day off I guess, or a few days off, so that people can refresh themselves, because we're going to have a lot of work to do in 2013."

Read more: 5 things to know about the fiscal cliff

Angry rhetoric flew

In the tense days leading up to the deal, heated words flew between some Democrats and Republicans.

On Friday, after Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid accused Boehner of holding a "dictatorship" in his chamber, the House speaker responded with a profanity.

"Go f— yourself," Boehner said to Reid, according to a source with knowledge of the exchange in a White House lobby.

Dana Bash reported from Washington, and Holly Yan reported from Atlanta. CNN's Rich Barbieri, Charles Riley, Josh Levs, Dana Ford, Matt Smith, Jessica Yellin, Deirdre Walsh and Ted Barrett contributed to this report.

Read More..

House GOP blasted for scrapping Sandy aid vote

WASHINGTON New York area-lawmakers in both parties erupted in anger late Tuesday night after learning the House Republican leadership decided to allow the current term of Congress to end without holding a vote on aid for victims of Superstorm Sandy.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said he was told by the office of Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia that Speaker John Boehner of Ohio had decided to abandon a vote this session.

Cantor, who sets the House schedule, did not immediately comment. House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland told reporters that just before Tuesday evening's vote on "fiscal cliff" legislation, Cantor told him that he was "99.9 percent confident that this bill would be on the floor, and that's what he wanted."

A spokesman for Boehner, Michael Steel said, "The speaker is committed to getting this bill passed this month."

A House Republican aide confirmed to CBS News producer Jill Jackson that the House would not take up the bill during this session.

In remarks on the House floor, King called the decision "absolutely inexcusable, absolutely indefensible. We cannot just walk away from our responsibilities."

The Senate approved a $60.4 billion measure Friday to help with recovery from the October storm that devastated parts of New York, New Jersey and nearby states. The House Appropriations Committee has drafted a smaller, $27 billion measure, and a vote had been expected before Congress' term ends Thursday at noon.

29 Photos

Cleaning up after Sandy

29 Photos

Superstorm Sandy: State-by-state snapshots

More than $2 billion in federal funds has been spent so far on relief efforts for 11 states and the District of Columbia struck by the storm, one of the worst ever to hit the Northeast. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund still has about $4.3 billion, enough to pay for recovery efforts into early spring, according to officials. The unspent FEMA money can only be used for emergency services, said Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J.

New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, District of Columbia, West Virginia, Virginia, Maryland, New Hampshire, Delaware, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts are receiving federal aid.

Sandy was blamed for at least 120 deaths and battered coastline areas from North Carolina to Maine. New York, New Jersey and Connecticut were the hardest hit states and suffered high winds, flooding and storm surges. The storm damaged or destroyed more than 72,000 homes and businesses in New Jersey. In New York, 305,000 housing units were damaged or destroyed and more than 265,000 businesses were affected.

"This is an absolute disgrace and the speaker should hang his head in shame," said Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y.

"I'm here tonight saying to myself for the first time that I'm not proud of the decision my team has made," said Rep. Michael Grimm, R-N.Y. "It is the wrong decision, and I' m going to be respectful and ask that the speaker reconsider his decision. Because it's not about politics, it's about human lives."

"I truly feel betrayed this evening," said Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y.

"We need to be there for all those in need now after Hurricane Sandy," said Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y.

The House Democratic leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, said she didn't know whether a decision has been made and added, "We cannot leave here doing nothing. That would be a disgrace."

Read More..

Obama Hails 'Cliff' Deal, Warns of Next Fiscal Fight

Minutes after the House of Representatives approved a bipartisan Senate deal to avert the "fiscal cliff" and preserve Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans making less than $400,000 per year, President Obama praised party leaders and wasted little time turning to the next fiscal fight.

"This is one step in the broader effort to strengthen our economy for everybody," Obama said.

Obama lamented that earlier attempts at a much larger fiscal deal that would have cut spending and dealt with entitlement reforms failed. He said he hoped future debates would be done with "a little less drama, a little less brinksmanship, and not scare folks quite as much."

But Obama drew a line in the sand on the debt ceiling, which is set to be reached by March.

"While I will negotiate over many things, I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether they should pay the bills for what they've racked up," Obama said. "We can't not pay bills that we've already incurred."

An hour after his remarks, Obama boarded Air Force One to rejoin his family in Hawaii, where they have been since before Christmas.

AP Photo/Charles Dharapak

'Fiscal Cliff' Negotiations: Congress Reaches Agreement Watch Video

House Republicans agreed to the up-or-down vote Tuesday evening, despite earlier talk of trying to amend the Senate bill with more spending cuts before taking a vote. The bill delays for two months tough decisions about automatic spending cuts that were set to kick in Wednesday.

A majority of the Republicans in the GOP-majority House voted against the fiscal cliff deal. About twice as many Democrats voted in favor of the deal compared to Republicans. One hundred fifty-one Republicans joined 16 Democrats to vote against the deal, while 172 Democrats carried the vote along with 85 Republicans.

The Senate passed the same bill by an 89-8 vote in the wee hours of New Year's Day. If House Republicans had tweaked the legislation, there would have been no clear path for its return to the Senate before a new Congress is sworn in Thursday.

The vote split Republican leaders in the House. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, voted yes, and so did the GOP's 2012 vice presidential candidate, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis.

But House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., the No. 2 Republican in the House, voted no. It was his opposition that had made passage of the bill seem unlikely earlier in the day.

The deal does little to address the nation's long-term debt woes and does not entirely solve the problem of the "fiscal cliff."

Indeed, the last-minute compromise -- far short from a so-called grand bargain on deficit reduction -- sets up a new showdown on the same spending cuts in two months amplified by a brewing fight on how to raise the debt ceiling beyond $16.4 trillion. That new fiscal battle has the potential to eclipse the "fiscal cliff" in short order.

"Now the focus turns to spending," said Boehner in a statement after the vote. "The American people re-elected a Republican majority in the House, and we will use it in 2013 to hold the president accountable for the 'balanced' approach he promised, meaning significant spending cuts and reforms to the entitlement programs that are driving our country deeper and deeper into debt."

Republicans hope that allowing the fiscal cliff compromise, which raised taxes without an equal amount of spending cuts, will settle the issue of tax rates for the coming debates on spending.

Read More..