Title Post: Sony confirms 10 devices will get Jelly Bean upgrade starting in February 2013
Rating:
100%
based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author:
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment
LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) – It’s always a challenge to tell a story where the audience knows the ending. The trick comes in offering a new perspective on familiar events or at least generating suspense in a way that makes us nervous that Apollo 13 might not land safely, even when history tells us otherwise.
“Argo” and “Lincoln” are two films that successfully tread these waters, and now comes “Zero Dark Thirty,” Kathryn Bigelow‘s eagerly awaited follow-up to “The Hurt Locker.”
She and screenwriter Mark Boal have consciously chosen to take a just-the-facts-ma’am approach to the manhunt and subsequent killing of Osama bin Laden, and while there’s no denying the skill with which they’ve gone about telling the tale, the results are simultaneously uninvolving and somewhat infuriating.
Uninvolving, to some extent, because the people in this movie are not so much characters as they are plot functionaries, chess pieces that move around strategically to capture their target. Jessica Chastain stars as Maya, a CIA agent who, with each passing year, grows more determined to nab the man behind the 9/11 attacks.
There’s nothing wrong with this style of storytelling — giving us some backstory about Maya’s taste in men or love of antique cars or whatever wouldn’t necessarily add anything to what Bigelow and Boal are trying to do here – but it’s a gamble that doesn’t quite pay off.
After spending its first half getting into the false leads and call-tracing and all the nitty-gritty of a manhunt, “Zero Dark Thirty” subjects its capable lead character to the requisite scene in which she snaps and barks at her bureaucrat boss (played by Kyle Chandler) that she’s so close, and not to take her off the case.
It’s a moment that feels like it might have come from any given episode of “Homeland” or any TNT show about a plucky female cop, and it capsizes a movie that, until that point, had been a fairly fascinating examination of the unglamorous sausage-making that goes into a worldwide search for a terrorist.
The somewhat infuriating facet comes early on, as we watch Maya observe seasoned interrogator Dan (Jason Clarke, giving a fascinating performance) torture terror suspects to find out what they know about September 11. The movie indirectly implies that waterboarding and electrodes to the genitals and all that other stuff that George W. Bush‘s consiglieri convinced him were kosher actually resulted in actionable intelligence, despite the reams of reportage that suggested otherwise.
I believe Bigelow and Boal’s after-the-fact denials that they intended to glorify torture in any way, but when you include material like this in a movie that takes such a coolly detached tone in telling its story, you can’t then be surprised later when some viewers interpret a filmmaker’s neutral tone as an implicit endorsement.
Still, even if the eventual raid on the bin Laden compound isn’t as exciting as the film’s first half (this is where some “Argo”-style suspense might have come in handy), there’s a lot to recommend about “Zero Dark Thirty,” which more often than not reflects Bigelow’s consummate abilities as an action filmmaker; her no-frills skills in mounting car chases, surveillance and the other tools of the CIA trade get a full workout.
The acting is also uniformly strong, although if you found the parade of famous faces popping up in “Lincoln” to be distracting, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Many recognizable performers turn up very briefly for their chance to be in the new Bigelow movie, to the occasional point of distraction. (I started counting lines from well-known actors; “Torchwood” star John Barrowman? Two.)
And even if “Zero Dark Thirty” packs something less of a punch than “The Hurt Locker,” it’s still a movie that’s going to part of the national discussion, both politically and artistically, and deservedly so. Whether you love it, hate it, or have mixed feelings, it’s not to be ignored.
Movies News Headlines – Yahoo! News
MANILA — After losing a battle to stop the passage of a contentious birth control law, Roman Catholic Church officials on Tuesday dug in and instructed their millions of followers to campaign against the measure in communities, schools and homes.
“Let us intensify the moral spiritual education of our youth and children so that they can stand strong against the threats to their moral fiber,” Archbishop Socrates Villegas said in a statement. “Let us use all the means within our reach to safeguard the health of expectant mothers in our communities.”
The Philippine Congress passed legislation on Monday to help the country’s poorest women gain access to birth control. Each chamber of the national legislature passed its own version of the measure, and minor differences between the two must be reconciled before the measure goes to President Benigno S. Aquino III for his signature.
The measure had been stalled for more than a decade because of determined opposition from the church in this overwhelmingly Catholic country.
Birth control is legal and widely available in the Philippines for people who can afford it, particularly those living in cities. But condoms, birth control pills and other forms of contraception are sometimes kept out of community health centers and clinics by local government and Catholic Church officials.
The measure passed on Monday would stock government health centers, including those in remote areas, with free or subsidized birth control options for the poor. It would also require sex education in public schools and family-planning training for community health officers.
Archbishop Villegas, the vice president of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines, on Tuesday encouraged Catholics to resist the measure by disseminating information about natural family planning methods and warning people about “the hazardous effects of contraceptive pills on the health of women.”
“Let us conduct our own sex education of our children insuring that sex is always understood as a gift of God,” Archbishop Villegas stated. “Sex must never be taught separate from God and isolated from marriage.”
Bishop Gabriel V. Reyes, chairman of the conference’s Episcopal Commission on Family and Life, said after the vote Monday that “we need to explain to our fellow believers that they ought to refuse contraceptives even when they are being offered these.”
The Philippines has one of the highest birthrates in Asia, but backers of the legislation, including the Aquino administration, have said repeatedly that its purpose is not to limit population growth. Rather, they say, the bill is meant to offer poor families the same reproductive health options that wealthier people in the country enjoy.
Though lacking the numbers needed to defeat the legislation, lawmakers who opposed the measure sought to delay the vote. In one instance, an opposition senator proposed 35 amendments just before a vote was to take place.
Often the debate took bizarre turns, as when a congressman claimed that the birth control measure was a plot by the Philippine Communist Party to take over the government.
In another instance, a male senator requested removal of the phrase “satisfying sex” from a passage in the bill that referred to “safe and satisfying sex.” Several female senators opposed its removal, and the amendment was debated live on television while social media networks crackled with sarcastic commentary. “I am a Filipina,” Senator Miriam Santiago said in response to the amendment. “I am also a married woman, and I insist whoever is married to me should give me safe and satisfying sex, period.”
During a vote on the measure in the House of Representatives, the boxer and congressman Manny Pacquiao linked the birth control measure to his having been knocked unconscious on Dec. 8 by Juan Manuel Marquez during their W.B.O. world welterweight fight in Las Vegas.
“Some thought I was dead,” Mr. Pacquiao said in a speech explaining his vote against the measure. “What happened in Vegas strengthened my already firm belief in the sanctity of life.” He added: “Manny Pacquiao is pro-life. Manny Pacquiao votes no.”
UBS, the Swiss banking giant, announced a record settlement with global authorities on Wednesday, agreeing to a combined $1.5 billion in fines for its role in a multiyear scheme to manipulate interest rates.
In a sign that officials are increasingly taking a hard line against financial wrongdoing, the Justice Department also secured a guilty plea from the bank’s Japanese subsidiary, sending a warning shot to other big banks suspected of rate rigging. The UBS subsidiary, which agreed to plead to a single count of wire fraud, is the first unit of a big bank to agree to criminal charges in more than a decade.
The cash penalties represented the largest fines to date related to the rate-rigging inquiry. The fine is also one of the biggest sanctions that American and British authorities have ever levied against a financial institution, falling just short of the $1.9 billion payout that HSBC made last week over money laundering accusations.
The severity of the UBS penalties, authorities said, reflected the extent of the problems. The government complaints laid bare a scheme that spanned from 2005 to 2010, describing how the bank reported false rates to squeeze out extra profits and deflect concerns about its health during the financial crisis.
“The findings we have set out in our notice today do not make for pretty reading,” Tracey McDermott, the enforcement director for the Financial Services Authority of Britain, said in a statement. “The integrity of benchmarks,” she said, “are of fundamental importance to both U.K. and international financial markets. UBS traders and managers ignored this.”
The UBS case reflects a pattern of abuse that authorities have uncovered as part of a multi-year investigation into rate-rigging. The inquiry, which has ensnared more than a dozen big banks, is focused on key benchmarks like the London interbank offered rate, or Libor. Such rates are used to help determine the borrowing rates for trillions of dollars of financial products like corporate loans, mortgages and credit cards.
In the UBS matter, the wrongdoing occurred largely within the Japanese unit, where traders colluded with other banks and brokerage firms to tinker with Yen denominated Libor and bolster their returns. During the 2008 financial crisis, UBS managers also “inappropriately gave guidance to those employees charged with submitting interest rates, the purpose being to positively influence the perception of UBS’s creditworthiness,” according to authorities.
In a series of colorful e-mails and phone calls, traders tried to influence the rate-setting process. “I need you to keep it as low as possible,” one UBS trader said to an employee at another brokerage firm in September 2008, according to the complaint filed by the Financial Services Authority. “If you do that,” the trader promised to pay “whatever you want. I’m a man of my word.”
As the employees carried out the alleged manipulation, they also celebrated the efforts, with one trader referring to a partner in the scheme as “superman.” “Be a hero today,” he urged, according the complaint by regulators.
The British and Swiss authorities released their complaints on Wednesday before the bank’s shares began trading in Switzerland. American authorities are expected to release their own complaints later Wednesday in Washington.
In a statement, UBS highlighted its cooperation with the investigation. The firm previously stated that it made provisions of 897 million Swiss francs ($975 million) to cover potential legal and regulatory fines.
“We discovered behavior of certain employees that is unacceptable,” the chief executive of UBS, Sergio P. Ermotti, said in the statement. “We deeply regret this inappropriate and unethical behavior. No amount of profit is more important than the reputation of this firm, and we are committed to doing business with integrity.”
The UBS case provides a lens to view broader problems in the rate-setting process, which affects how consumers and companies borrow money around the world. In June, authorities scored their first Libor settlement, securing a $450 million payout from Barclays, the big British bank.
The UBS case — the product of cross-border collaboration among regulators and federal prosecutors – is more than triple the earlier fine.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Justice Department leveled about $1.2 billion in combined fines. The Financial Services Authority of Britain fined the bank $260 million. The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority, which does not have the power to fine, recovered $65 million in the bank’s supposed ill-gotten gains.
The Justice Department’s criminal division, which arranged the guilty plea with the Japanese subsidiary, also struck a non-prosecution agreement with the parent company. The exact total of the penalties was unclear, because the department has not yet released its settlement documents.
The Justice Department’s case is also expected to take aim at some of the bank’s traders, including 33-year-old Thomas Hayes. The Justice Department plans to announce charges against Mr. Hayes, the former UBS and Citigroup trader, who featured prominently in the investigation, according to people with knowledge of the matter. He was arrested in London last week and later released on bail. Other UBS employees have been suspended or fired following an internal investigation.
The fallout from the UBS case is expected to ratchet up the pressure on some of the world’s largest financial institutions and spur settlement talks across the banking industry.
The Royal Bank of Scotland has said it expects to pay fines before its next earnings statement in February, while Deutsche Bank has set aside an undisclosed amount to cover potential penalties. Some American institutions, including Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase, also remain in regulators’ crosshairs.
The UBS case has exposed the systemic problems with the rate-setting process. Over a 6-year period, UBS traders targeted the major currencies that form the Libor system, including the U.S. dollar denominated rate. The bank was also cited for attempting to manipulate other benchmarks like the Euro Interbank Offered Rate, or Euribor, and the Tokyo Interbank Offered Rate, or Tibor.
Much of the activity took place in the bank’s Japanese unit. Authorities said four UBS traders colluded to manipulate submissions to Yen Libor. The individuals made more than 1,900 requests to brokers and other banks to alter the rate, according to regulatory filings. As part of their efforts, UBS employees made quarterly payments of £15,000 ($24,000) to outside brokers involved in the rate-rigging for at least 18 months for their help, the complaint said.
To avoid arousing suspicion, UBS employees routinely made small changes to submissions, the complaint detailed. The individuals, who communicated with colleagues about the rate-setting through emails and instant messages, also altered rate submissions to benefit traders at other banks.
The Japanese unit’s guilty plea for wire fraud follows frantic last-minute negotiations last week between senior UBS officials and American authorities. The actions detailed in the complaint emboldened the Justice Department to seek the guilty plea from the Japanese unit. By forcing the plea from the firm’s Japanese subsidiary, federal authorities sent a clear message about the level of wrongdoing, but stopped far short of shutting UBS out of the American markets.
Still, the steep sanctions come as a surprise, given the bank’s cooperation with investigators.
Since first announcing that it was the subject of Libor investigations, the Swiss bank has eagerly worked with authorities in a bid for leniency. UBS, for example, had received conditional immunity from the Justice Department’s antitrust unit, a deal that did not apply to the Justice Department’s criminal division.
The case presents the latest setback for UBS.
The Swiss bank already agreed to a $780 million fine in 2009 with American authorities to settle charges that it helped American clients avoid tax. The firm also announced a $2.3 billion loss last year related to illegal trading activity by a former employee, Kweku M. Adoboli. Mr. Adoboli subsequently was sentenced to seven years, and British authorities fined UBS $47.5 million over the scandal.
UBS said it expected to report a net loss of up to $2.7 billion in the fourth quarter of the year because of the costs related to Libor and other legal matters. The figure includes around $2.3 billion of provisions of legal and regulatory costs, as well as $548 million in restructuring charges.
In the wake of the Libor scandal, UBS has been forced to beef up its compliance and rate-setting procedures, according to the Swiss regulator. The bank has also fired individuals connected to the rate-rigging.
“We are pleased that the authorities gave us credit for the important and positive changes we have already made,” the chairman of UBS, Axel Weber, said in a statement. “I have zero tolerance for inappropriate and unethical behavior of any of our staff.”
This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: December 19, 2012
An earlier version of this post misstated a loss announced by UBS related to illegal trading activity by a former employee, Kweku M. Adoboli. It was $2.3 billion, not $2.3 million.
Marcy Cook embraces the holiday season. The tell? Start with the teddy bears dressed as Santa. More than 1,500 stand sentry around and inside her Newport Beach waterfronthome. Garland and strings of lights threaten to strangle the place like kudzu.
"We decorate a little bit, if you haven't noticed," said Cook, 69. "It's the highlight of the year for us."
Each Christmas, Newport Harbor is ablaze in lights as homeowners go to extraordinary lengths to complement the city's annual Christmas Boat Parade — an indelible tradition that renews itself Wednesday night and continues through Sunday.
But this has been a stressful season here along the tranquil waterfront lined with multimillion-dollar homes.
An increase in city rental fees for residential docks that protrude over public tidelands created a furor when it was approved last week by the City Council.
It also prompted a call to boycott the boat parade and festival of lights by a group calling itself "Stop the Dock Tax."
"It costs us thousands of dollars to voluntarily decorate our homes and boats to bring holiday smiles to nearly 1 million people," organization Chairman Bob McCaffrey wrote to the city. "This year, we are turning off our lights and withdrawing our boats in protest of the massive new dock tax we expect the City Council to levy."
Pete Pallette, a fellow boycott proponent and harbor homeowner, told city leaders the group would call off the boycott only if the council delayed voting on the rent hike. "Otherwise," he vowed, "game on."
In a place where homes come with names and mega-yachts bob in the harbor, it might appear the wealthy are wielding a weapon most often reserved for the masses. A holiday blackout, proponents say, will underscore their displeasure.
Newport's dock fee, which has stood at $100 a year for the last two decades, will now be based on a dock's size. The city says rents will increase to about $250 for a small slip to $3,200 annually for a large dock shared by two homeowners.
"People have been paying $8 a month all these years to access what is public waters," said Newport Beach City Manager Dave Kiff. "That's a pretty good deal. The City Council didn't think the increase it approved was too extreme."
Many did.
They packed council meetings when the hike was discussed, accusing the city of an excessive money grab.
They brushed aside the city's rationale: Statelawmandates cities charge fair market rents for the private use of public lands, and Newport Beach was only now catching up.
And they were unmoved by arguments that the extra revenue will go exclusively to badly needed repairs to a harbor that, despite outward appearances, needs a lot of work.
The city's five-year plan for the harbor calls for $29 million in long-overdue maintenance. Its silt-filled channels haven't been fully dredged since the Great Depression. Ancient, leaky sea walls protecting neighborhoods need to be repaired or replaced.
"We have the makings of a perfect storm like they did on the East Coast" during Superstorm Sandy, said Chris Miller, the city's harbor resources manager. "The sea walls are nearing the end of their useful life."
Even with the rent increases, Newport's dock owners will contribute a tiny fraction of that cost — the rest coming from the federal government and the city's general operating fund.
As dock owners fumed over having to pay more, others recoiled at the proposed boycott of the boat parade, which dates to 1908 when a single gondola led eight canoes illuminated by Japanese lanterns around the harbor. It has now swelled to a decent-sized armada of dozens of boats — some carrying paying customers — that circle past the decorated harbor-front homes.
"The boycott is ridiculous," said Shirley Pepys, whose frontyard on Balboa Island has been taken over by a family of penguins dressed for a Hawaiian luau.
LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) – Freestyle Releasing and Freestyle Digital Media have acquired the theatrical, DVD and VOD rights to “The Playroom,” a drama directed by Julia Dyer (“Late Bloomers”), which stars John Hawkes (“Winter’s Bone,” “The Sessions”) and Molly Parker (“Dexter,” “The Firm”).
The film is slated for a day-and-date theatrical release and on DVD/VOD on February 8, 2013.
“The Playroom” premiered in the gala/spotlight section of this year’s Tribeca Film Festival. It was produced by Stephen Dyer (“Hysteria”) and Angie Meyer (“Wuss”).
Set in the suburbs during the1970s, the family drama tells the story of Maggie (Olivia Harris), a vulnerable teenager who acts as a big sister to her three younger siblings. Upstairs in the attic, she tells them stories to mask what is happening downstairs with their hard-drinking parents.
“Julia Dyer has created a beautiful time machine back to the ’70s,” said Susan Jackson, president of Freestyle. “The film is a bird’s eye view of a tumultuous period told from the perspective of children.”
Freestyle Digital Media‘s slate of releases includes “Samsara,” from Ron Fricke and Mark Magidson, as well as the recently released “You May Not Kiss the Bride,” starring Katharine McPhee and Rob Schneider.
TV News Headlines – Yahoo! News
The gunman, Adam Lanza, 20, has been described as a loner who was intelligent and socially awkward. And while no official diagnosis has been made public, armchair diagnosticians have been quick to assert that keeping guns from getting into the hands of people with mental illness would help solve the problem of gun homicides.
Arguing against stricter gun-control measures, Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan and a former F.B.I. agent, said, “What the more realistic discussion is, ‘How do we target people with mental illness who use firearms?’ ”
Robert A. Levy, chairman of the Cato Institute, told The New York Times: “To reduce the risk of multivictim violence, we would be better advised to focus on early detection and treatment of mental illness.”
But there is overwhelming epidemiological evidence that the vast majority of people with psychiatric disorders do not commit violent acts. Only about 4 percent of violence in the United States can be attributed to people with mental illness.
This does not mean that mental illness is not a risk factor for violence. It is, but the risk is actually small. Only certain serious psychiatric illnesses are linked to an increased risk of violence.
One of the largest studies, the National Institute of Mental Health’s Epidemiologic Catchment Area study, which followed nearly 18,000 subjects, found that the lifetime prevalence of violence among people with serious mental illness — like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder — was 16 percent, compared with 7 percent among people without any mental disorder. Anxiety disorders, in contrast, do not seem to increase the risk at all.
Alcohol and drug abuse are far more likely to result in violent behavior than mental illness by itself. In the National Institute of Mental Health’s E.C.A. study, for example, people with no mental disorder who abused alcohol or drugs were nearly seven times as likely as those without substance abuse to commit violent acts.
It’s possible that preventing people with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and other serious mental illnesses from getting guns might decrease the risk of mass killings. Even the Supreme Court, which in 2008 strongly affirmed a broad right to bear arms, at the same time endorsed prohibitions on gun ownership “by felons and the mentally ill.”
But mass killings are very rare events, and because people with mentally illness contribute so little to overall violence, these measures would have little impact on everyday firearm-related killings. Consider that between 2001 and 2010, there were nearly 120,000 gun-related homicides, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Few were perpetrated by people with mental illness.
Perhaps more significant, we are not very good at predicting who is likely to be dangerous in the future. According to Dr. Michael Stone, professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia and an expert on mass murderers, “Most of these killers are young men who are not floridly psychotic. They tend to be paranoid loners who hold a grudge and are full of rage.”
Even though we know from large-scale epidemiologic studies like the E.C.A. study that a young psychotic male who is intoxicated with alcohol and has a history of involuntary commitment is at a high risk of violence, most individuals who fit this profile are harmless.
Jeffery Swanson, a professor of psychiatry at Duke University and a leading expert in the epidemiology of violence, said in an e-mail, “Can we reliably predict violence? ‘No’ is the short answer. Psychiatrists, using clinical judgment, are not much better than chance at predicting which individual patients will do something violent and which will not.”
It would be even harder to predict a mass shooting, Dr. Swanson said, “You can profile the perpetrators after the fact and you’ll get a description of troubled young men, which also matches the description of thousands of other troubled young men who would never do something like this.”
Even if clinicians could predict violence perfectly, keeping guns from people with mental illness is easier said than done. Nearly five years after Congress enacted the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, only about half of the states have submitted more than a tiny proportion of their mental health records.
How effective are laws that prohibit people with mental illness from obtaining guns? According to Dr. Swanson’s recent research, these measures may prevent some violent crime. But, he added, “there are a lot of people who are undeterred by these laws.”
Adam Lanza was prohibited from purchasing a gun, because he was too young. Yet he managed to get his hands on guns — his mother’s — anyway. If we really want to stop young men like him from becoming mass murderers, and prevent the small amount of violence attributable to mental illness, we should invest our resources in better screening for, and treatment of, psychiatric illness in young people.
All the focus on the small number of people with mental illness who are violent serves to make us feel safer by displacing and limiting the threat of violence to a small, well-defined group. But the sad and frightening truth is that the vast majority of homicides are carried out by outwardly normal people in the grip of all too ordinary human aggression to whom we provide nearly unfettered access to deadly force.
As 15 million people in the United States head to airports this holiday season — slightly fewer than last year — some travelers will find welcome changes to security screening procedures.
The Transportation Security Administration has expanded its PreCheck trusted traveler program to 35 airports, allowing members who have been deemed low risk to keep shoes, jackets and belts on. Children 12 and under and passengers 75 and older also receive expedited screening at any checkpoint; pilots, flight attendants, members of the military and people with top secret security clearances qualify at some airports.
John S. Pistole, administrator of the T.S.A., said in an interview that the agency’s priority this year had been to move toward a risk-based approach to screening, recognizing that a large majority of travelers are not potential terrorists.
“When the agency was set up, it was focused almost exclusively on the security mission and not as much on the passenger experience,” Mr. Pistole said. “It became an adversarial relationship, so what we’re trying to do through all these initiatives is change that paradigm and make this a partnership.”
Even with these changes, the agency is under pressure to refine its strategy further in 2013. Its operations have been scrutinized by independent researchers, travel industry committees and government officials charged with oversight, and their ideas for reform are coalescing around a consistent theme.
“I use this acronym SEE,” said Stephen M. Lord, director of homeland security and justice issues for the Government Accountability Office, which has issued many lengthy reports about the T.S.A. “They need to make the process more selective, more effective and more efficient.”
More selective means “shrinking the haystack and really focusing on the dangerous people,” Mr. Lord said. While PreCheck and other expedited screening options are a step in that direction, only 7 percent of passengers qualify for these programs, a number Mr. Pistole said the agency was working to expand.
One option being tested is to use dogs that sniff for explosives in tandem with behavior detection officers to divert more people to PreCheck lanes. That process was used at Indianapolis International Airport the day before Thanksgiving, allowing nearly a third of passengers to have expedited screening.
Regarding effectiveness, Mr. Lord said, the T.S.A. needs to improve the technology it relies on — primarily expensive body scanners that may not detect explosives reliably. Although the test results are classified, lawmakers briefed on them have called them disappointing. The agency has acknowledged problems with the slow pace of its X-ray body scanners, removing many of the machines from larger airports in favor of millimeter wave scanners. These now number 655 units in use, in contrast to 170 X-ray machines.
Finally, becoming more efficient means addressing the time passengers spend waiting to get through security — a factor that the T.S.A. does not measure consistently or make public, but one of growing concern to the travel industry as passenger volume has stagnated.
“You can’t focus exclusively on security,” Mr. Lord said. “You’ve got to be mindful of customer service.”
It is difficult to assess how travelers truly feel about airport security. Still, a G.A.O. report released in November found that the T.S.A. did a poor job of tracking and handling customer complaints, a process Mr. Lord described as allowing officials to “essentially investigate themselves.” A separate G.A.O. study called for better performance assessments, particularly as a way to gauge whether airports that use private companies to handle screening, under federal supervision, score higher than airports that use T.S.A. employees.
Mr. Pistole said the agency was working to improve its relationship with passengers. It is training officers and supervisors to defuse escalating situations at checkpoints, appointing customer service staff at some airports and creating a way to send complaints that are not resolved locally to an ombudsman.
SACRAMENTO — Now that California faces a dramatically smaller deficit, advocacy groups and other interests are queuing up with wish lists totaling hundreds of millions of dollars in case the spending spigot opens even slightly.
Children's advocates want day-care centers inspected more often. Dentists want their poor patients' coverage restored. Universities want funds to prevent further tuition increases, replace old computers and perform maintenance. Cities say the state should let them keep more of the money left over from defunct redevelopment agencies.
But California still has financial problems, even after years of steep service cuts, and Gov. Jerry Brown has vowed to keep a tight rein on the budget. State finances could take a turn for the worse if the federal budget standoff sends the country into a new recession or tax revenue doesn't keep pace with spending.
Labor unions that took compensation cuts this year and then put their political muscle behind Brown's successful tax-hike campaign may also look for more money. Almost every contract involving state workers — covering about 172,000 employees from 10 unions — is set to expire this summer.
Brown has not said publicly how he would cover next year's budget gap, which the nonpartisan legislative analyst projected at $1.9 billion. The governor is expected to unveil his spending blueprint in January.
Still, many groups "feel they should be at the head of the line and get their money back next year," said Mike Herald, a lobbyist at the Western Center on Law and Poverty. "Being shy just means you'll be at the back of the line."
Herald has his own wish list, including raising monthly welfare grants and increasing aid for the disabled.
Kim Kruckel, executive director at the Child Care Law Center in San Francisco, said she's been huddling with fellow advocates to decide what to request from Brown and lawmakers. She noted that spending on subsidized child care has been cut $1 billion in four years.
"Could we start to work our way back up? Ten or 20% per year?" Kruckel said. "That sounds reasonable."
Environmental advocates hope for more resources to control hazardous waste and other dangers through the Department of Toxic Substance Control.
"It hasn't been the most effective agency," said Kathryn Phillips, director of Sierra Club California. "If we want to make it work, they're going to have to substantially increase their funding."
Advocates for dental care for the poor already have a powerful supporter in their corner, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento). He frequently recalls his August visit to a temporary dental clinic in Sacramento, where hundreds camped overnight to get free care and volunteer dentists yanked 2,700 rotted teeth.
In a September conversation with The Times' editorial board, Steinberg said he regretted the cuts the government had made in dental coverage for the poor.
"I thought to myself, 'God, how could I have ever done that,'" he said.
More than 3 million adults lost their coverage in 2009. That saved the state $55 million annually and sacrificed an equal amount of federal money.
Anthony Wright, executive director of the advocacy group Health Access, said Sacramento should restore the money, ensuring that all adults are covered when Medi-Cal expands in 2014 to an estimated 2 million more people under President Obama's healthcare law.
Reviving dental care "could bring hundreds of millions of dollars into our healthcare system, into our economy, and help people have better health," Wright said.
The California Medical Assn. also wants more funding as the state prepares to enlarge healthcare coverage. David Ford, the group's associate director of medical and regulatory policy, said administrators will need more staff to process an influx of newly covered Californians.
"We have to be ramping up," he said.
Advocates worry that the new healthcare law will be undermined in California because the state's Medi-Cal cuts could make it harder for the poor to get care. A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that the state can reduce payments to doctors and others who care for Medi-Cal patients; provider groups say they will appeal.
Copyright © News Faithfulness. All rights reserved.
Design And Business Directories