Brain Benefits for the Holidays? Stuff the Stocking with Video Games

Title Post: Brain Benefits for the Holidays? Stuff the Stocking with Video Games
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Ashton Kutcher files for divorce from Demi Moore

LOS ANGELES (AP) — Ashton Kutcher filed court papers Friday to end his seven-year marriage to actress Demi Moore.

The actor's divorce petition cites irreconcilable differences and does not list a date that the couple separated. Moore announced last year that she was ending her marriage to the actor 15 years her junior, but she never filed a petition.

Kutcher's filing does not indicate that the couple has a prenuptial agreement. The filing states Kutcher signed the document Friday, hours before it was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court.

Kutcher and Moore married in September 2005 and until recently kept their relationship very public, communicating with each other and fans on the social networking site Twitter. After their breakup, Moore changed her name on the site from (at)mrskutcher to (at)justdemi.

Kutcher currently stars on CBS' "Two and a Half Men."

Messages sent to Kutcher's and Moore's publicists were not immediately returned Friday.

Moore, 50, and Kutcher, 34, created the DNA Foundation, also known as the Demi and Ashton Foundation, in 2010 to combat the organized sexual exploitation of girls around the globe. They later lent their support to the United Nations' efforts to fight human trafficking, a scourge the international organization estimates affects about 2.5 million people worldwide.

Moore was previously married to actor Bruce Willis for 13 years. They had three daughters together — Rumer, Scout and Tallulah Belle — before divorcing in 2000. Willis later married model-actress Emma Heming in an intimate 2009 ceremony at his home in Parrot Cay in the Turks and Caicos Islands that attended by their children, as well as Moore and Kutcher.

Kutcher has been dating former "That '70s Show" co-star Mila Kunis.

The divorce filing was first reported Friday by People magazine.

___

Anthony McCartney can be reached at http://twitter.com/mccartneyAP.

Read More..

Your Money: Walking the Tightrope on Mental Health Coverage

Insurance covers more mental health care than many people may realize, and more people will soon have the kind of health insurance that does so. But coverage goes only so far when there aren’t enough practitioners who accept it — or there aren’t any nearby, or they aren’t taking any new patients.

In the days after the Newtown, Conn., school shooting, parents and politicians took to the airwaves to make broad-based proclamations about the sorry state of mental health care in America. But a closer look reveals a more nuanced view, with a great deal of recent legislative progress as well as plenty of infuriating coverage gaps.

The stakes in any census of mental health insurance coverage are high given how many people are suffering. Twenty-six percent of adults experience a diagnosable mental disorder in any given year, and 6 percent of all adults experience a seriously debilitating mental illness, according to the National Institute of Mental Health. Twenty-one percent of teenagers experience a severe emotional disturbance between the ages of 13 and 18.

According to this year’s Society for Human Resource Management survey of 550 employers of all sizes, including nonprofits and government entities, 85 percent offer at least some mental health insurance coverage. A 2009 Mercer survey found that 84 percent of employers with more than 500 employees covered both in-network and out-of-network mental health and substance abuse treatments.

For now, some people who have no health insurance or who buy it on their own may avoid purchasing mental health coverage too, or may avoid seeking treatment for things like addiction or depression. This happens for many of the same reasons that there has historically been less mental health coverage than there has been for other illnesses. The earliest objections among insurance providers and employers had to do with whether mental disorders existed at all, according to Howard Goldman, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Maryland school of medicine. Then there were questions about whether treatment actually worked. Next, concerns arose over cost and how often people would avail themselves of costly mental health treatments.

But a subset of adults who have good insurance coverage still avoid treatment for mental illness to this day, according to Edward A. Kaplan, senior vice president and national practice leader for the Segal Company, a benefits consultant that works with many unions. “Culturally, a lot of people driving trucks don’t believe in it and suffer through,” he said. “And a lot of transport unions don’t trust employers and think they will look at it and use it to retaliate against the workers.”

For many of the people who do have mental health coverage, there is now a bit more of it at a lower cost than there might have been five years ago, even if mental health insurance over all remains much less generous than it was many years ago when employees did not pay as much out of pocket. That’s because a 2008 federal law requires employers with more than 50 employees that do offer mental health coverage to have no more restrictions than there are for physical injuries or surgery, and no higher costs.

This so-called parity bill now applies to a crucial provision of President Obama’s Affordable Care Act. Insurance plans in the exchanges that will offer health coverage to millions of uninsured individuals starting in 2014 must cover many items and services, including mental health disorders and substance abuse.

The combination of parity and expanded care is crucial, according to Anthony Wright, the executive director of Health Access, a consumer advocacy organization in California. After all, parity doesn’t do much good if the mental health coverage need only be equivalent to a meager health insurance plan that covers very little.

Then again, what good is parity in mental health insurance if you can’t get the treatment you need? Plenty of psychiatrists in private practice accept no insurance at all, though it is not clear how many; their professional organizations claim to have no recent or decent data on the percentage of people in private practice who take cash on the barrelhead, write people a receipt and send them off to their insurance company to request out-of-network reimbursement if they have any at all.

According to a 2008 American Psychological Association survey, 85 percent of the 2,200 respondents who said they worked at least part time in private practice received at least some third-party payments for their services. That doesn’t mean they take your insurance, though.

Nor does it guarantee that they or other mental health practitioners are anywhere near you or have any imminent openings for appointments. This can be a challenge for people who live far from major cities or big medical centers and need treatment for mental illnesses like severe depression or schizophrenia or disorders like autism.

But it is a particular problem for parents of autistic children who need specialized treatment that is relatively new or that not many people are trained to do. Amanda Griffiths, who lives in Carlisle, Pa., and is the mother of two autistic boys, called 17 providers within two hours of her home before finding one who was qualified to evaluate her younger son and was accepting new patients his age.

“No amount of insurance is going to magically make a provider appear,” she said.

And it remains a struggle to persuade insurance companies and employers to cover treatment that is new or expensive, even if it’s likely to be effective. Ira Burnim, legal director of the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, points to something called assertive community treatment, a team-based approach that has proved useful for adults with severe mental illness and holds promise for children, too. There, the challenge is to define what kinds of interaction with a patient outside of an office setting is billable and write rules for coverage.

Autistic children can benefit from an intensive treatment called applied behavior analysis, but many insurance companies haven’t wanted to cover what can be a $60,000 or $70,000 annual cost. They claim that the treatment, which can include intensive one-on-one interaction and assistance with both basic and more complex skills, is either too experimental or an educational service that schools should provide. This can be a tricky area for parents to navigate, because it isn’t always clear which part of an overall health insurance policy ought to cover various possible treatments.

A law school professor named Lorri Unumb faced a bill that big several years ago when her son Ryan was found to be autistic and she discovered that her insurance would not pay for treatment. After moving to South Carolina and meeting families there who had not been able to afford the therapy, she spent two years persuading state legislators to pass a law that forced insurance companies to pay for the treatment. “I did not really know how to write a bill,” she said. “I had watched ‘Schoolhouse Rock’ before, and that was kind of my inspiration and guidance.”

Autism Speaks, a national advocacy organization, saw what she accomplished and hired her to barnstorm the country in an effort to get similar laws passed. There are now 32 states that have them, though there’s a crucial catch: they don’t apply to the many large employers who pool their own resources in so-called self-funded insurance plans.

If you work in such a company, it may be up to you to lobby your human resources department to cover applied behavioral analysis or whatever mental health therapy you or your child may need. Sometimes a personal appeal will succeed; Mr. Kaplan, the benefits consultant, noted that when a parent called about a child, an employer might be particularly sensitive.

But a part of Ms. Unumb’s job these days is to assist parents with appeals where employers have said no or appear likely to. She has accompanied parents to meetings with their human resources departments all over the country to request that the employer expand coverage for everyone. She has a 115-page presentation that she draws on, pointing out that at its core, autism is a medical condition diagnosed by a doctor, the very thing health insurance is supposed to cover.

At $60,000 or more annually for children with particularly acute treatment needs, the coverage does not come cheaply. But Autism Speaks estimates that that expense, spread over thousands of employees, raises premium costs 31 cents a month.

Ms. Unumb notes that for many autistic children, intensive early intervention can allow them to function in mainstream classrooms and prevent a host of problems there and once they finish school. “You pay for it now or you pay for it later,” she said. “And you pay for it a lot more if you choose later, in more ways than just financial.”

Read More..

Jobless rate falls below 10% in California

California's unemployment fell below 10% in November for the first time in almost four years, thanks in part to a holiday hiring surge by retailers.

The jobless rate fell to 9.8% from 10.1% in October, according to data in an overall jobs report released Friday by the state Employment Development Department.

The drop in the unemployment rate, based on a survey of households, came even as a separate payroll survey found that employers shed a net 3,800 jobs in California, according to the report.

"The state showed a very significant and encouraging drop in the unemployment rate. A fall below 10% is welcome news," said Lynn Reaser, chief economist at the Fermanian Business & Economic Institute at Point Loma Nazarene University.

For months, economic forecasts have said the unemployment rate would stay above 10% well into next year.

The state's labor force — those who are employed or looking for jobs — grew by 34,100 people in November. That typically indicates that job seekers feel encouraged to resume looking for work.

A growing number of people working as independent contractors and in sole proprietorships, a figure not caught in the payroll survey, helped to explain the seeming incongruity of a growing labor force, falling employment rate and net loss of jobs.

"The good news in California was that we saw more people looking for work and more people getting jobs," Reaser said. "But the bad news was that the nonfarm payroll survey, which is usually the more reliable source, showed a small drop in employment ... and comes as quite a disappointment."

The biggest drop in jobs — 11,000 — came in the educational and health services sector. The manufacturing sector lost 8,900 positions. The biggest gains came in retail, which added 15,900 jobs.

Some economists were skeptical of November's report, particularly losses reported in the healthcare and professional and business services sectors.

"Over the last year, [these sectors] have been very strong," said Christopher Thornberg, founding principal at Beacon Economics, a Los Angeles consulting firm. "Why should it turn on a dime?"

Thornberg pointed out that healthcare has been resilient, expanding even through the economic recession.

He said he expects that November's job report will be revised early next year and that the loss in payroll jobs probably will be reversed.

The report "is not as good as what the household survey says, but it's not as bad as the payroll survey," Thornberg said. "None of this should be a surprise to us. California's economy has clearly been gaining strength."

In recent months, retailers beefed up payrolls on expectations of an unusually strong holiday shopping season. The National Retail Federation predicted holiday retail sales of $586.1 billion this year, up 4.1% from last year — and the highest level in decades, according to retail experts.

The trade, transportation and utilities sector, which includes retail, notched the largest increase from October, adding 12,900 jobs. Leisure and hospitality added 3,300 jobs. Construction, aided by a housing recovery, gained 1,700 jobs last month.

Esmael Adibi, director of the A. Gary Anderson Center for Economic Research at Chapman University, called the report a "mixed bag."

"Overall, yes, unemployment went down," Adibi said. "Some people will see that as good news, but the question will be: Is this downtick going to be sustainable?"

Adibi said an increase of 78,000 in the civilian employment figures shows more Californians becoming self-employed, a sign that companies have been reluctant to hire. Household surveys take those people into account; payroll surveys don't.

"Firms are laying people off," Adibi said. "So in October and November, we've seen a surge of self-employment."

Read More..

GOP lawmakers challenge plan to correct diplomatic security flaws

WASHINGTON — Congressional Republicans on Thursday challenged the Obama administration's plan for correcting flaws exposed by the deadly attacks on the U.S. mission in Libya, pressing for an overhaul of its approach to security and probing to discover what Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other top officials knew before the attacks.

Three days after an independent investigative panel delivered a stinging report on the department's failures in Benghazi, Libya, GOP lawmakers in open hearings demanded to know why State Department officials had not done more to protect the mission when they were clearly aware that militant attacks on Western targets had been increasing all year.

Republican lawmakers didn't appear to open any unexplored areas for investigation, however. And with a number of GOP lawmakers not showing up for the hearings, it appeared that an issue that has been a major focus of conservatives' efforts since fall may be losing steam.

The Benghazi attacks Sept. 11 killed U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans and set in motion a broad reexamination of how the State Department protects its 275 posts around the world.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) asked Clinton's deputies, William J. Burns and Thomas R. Nides, why the secretary hadn't sought to shift money to better protect the Benghazi mission, given the stream of violent incidents in the city and warnings from lower-level U.S. officials.

"Why did [Clinton] never ask for … any change of resources to make sure Benghazi was secure? Why did that not happen?" Corker asked at a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "I cannot imagine that we had people out there with the lack of security.... What I saw in the report is a department that has sclerosis."

Administration officials have accepted the conclusion of the investigative panel that security arrangements were deeply flawed, and they have sought to show they are taking the initiative on the issue, which has the potential to affect Clinton's legacy as she prepares to leave office.

State Department officials have embraced all 29 reform proposals recommended by the Accountability Review Board and have removed from their jobs — but not the department — four officials with some responsibility for diplomatic security in Libya. They are asking Congress for more money and reallocating funds to pay for additional Marine guards, civilian security personnel and physical security improvements.

Burns acknowledged that "we did not do a good enough job … in trying to connect the dots" amid signs of mounting danger.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said the board's report "places a lot of the blame on lower-level officials" and asked how aware Clinton and top aides were of the concerns about the militant threat in Libya.

Burns said there were memos circulating among Clinton and top aides discussing the "deteriorating security situation in Libya." But he said he was not aware of any paper flow to the top level that discussed lower-level officials' requests for greater security funding in Benghazi.

The Republicans rejected arguments by administration officials and their Democratic supporters that part of the problem was the tight budget for diplomatic security, which House Republicans reduced last year. They called instead for a shift of money from lower-priority items.

At an afternoon hearing, the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), said the problem was "misplaced priorities." She said the department was "lavishing" money on projects such as a "culinary diplomacy partnership" that sends American chefs around the world, and efforts to slow climate change.

The hearings probably would have drawn more lawmakers if Clinton had testified, as originally planned. But Clinton asked Saturday to be excused because she suffered a concussion in a fall last week. She plans to testify in mid-January, Ros-Lehtinen said.

The State Department said Wednesday night that three officials who had been criticized by the investigative board were giving up their jobs and that Eric Boswell, head of the Diplomatic Security bureau, agreed to resign. The three others were "relieved of their current duties" and have been "placed on administrative leave pending further action," a department statement said.

The statement didn't identify the three, but other officials said they include Charlene Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary in the Diplomatic Security bureau, and Raymond Maxwell, a deputy assistant secretary in the Near Eastern Affairs bureau.

paul.richter@latimes.com

Read More..

RIM loses BlackBerry subscribers for first time

TORONTO (AP) — Research In Motion‘s stock plunged in after-hours trading Thursday after the BlackBerry maker said it plans to change the way it charges fees.

RIM also announced that it lost subscribers for the first time in the latest quarter, as the global number of BlackBerry users dipped to 79 million.

In a rare positive sign, the Canadian company added to its cash position during the quarter as it prepared to launch new smartphones on Jan. 30. The new devices are deemed critical to the company’s survival.

RIM’s stock initially jumped more than 8 percent in after-hours trading on that news, but then fell $ 1.48, or 10.4 percent, to $ 12.65 after RIM said on a conference call that it won’t generate as much revenue from telecommunications carriers once it releases the new BlackBerry 10 platform.

RIM is changing the way it charges service fees, putting an important source of revenue at risk. RIM CEO Thorsten Heins said only subscribers who want enhanced security will pay fees under the new system.

“Other subscribers who do not utilize such services are expected to generate less or no service revenue,” Heins said. “The mix in level of service fees revenue will change going forward and will be under pressure over the next year during this transition.”

RIM’s stock had been on a three-month rally that has seen the stock more than double from its lowest level since 2003.

But Mike Walkley, an analyst with Canaccord Genuity, said BlackBerry 10 will change RIM’s services revenue model dramatically. He said that instead of getting about $ 6 per device each month from carriers and users RIM could get as little as zero.

“That’s what turned the stock from being up 10 percent to being down 10 percent,” Walkley said. “That’s been part of our worry. How do they come back with a new platform and get carriers to continue to share the higher revenue —which sounds like they are not going to— and then subsidize the phone to make it affordable for consumers and enterprises.”

“People are seeing that the services revenue has a lot of risk to it now with the BlackBerry 10 migration.”

Three months ago, RIM had 80 million subscribers. Analysts said the loss of 1 million subscribers was expected. Once coveted symbols of an always-connected lifestyle, BlackBerry phones have lost their luster to Apple’s iPhone and phones that run on Google’s Android software.

RIM is banking its future on its much-delayed BlackBerry 10 platform, which is meant to offer the multimedia, Internet browsing and apps experience that customers now demand.

“We believe the company has stabilized and will turn the corner in the next year,” Heins said. He noted that the company’s cash holdings grew by $ 600 million in the quarter to $ 2.9 billion, even after the funding of all its restructuring costs. RIM previously announced 5,000 layoffs this year.

Heins said subscribers in North America showed the largest decline, but said there is growth overseas.

Colin Gillis, an analyst with BGC Financial, said before the conference call that the company bought itself more time.

“It doesn’t mean (BlackBerry) 10 will gain traction. A lot of people said 10 would be DOA, but I don’t think that’s going to be the case,” he said.

Jefferies analyst Peter Misek also earlier called the results better than expected, noting that RIM added a significant amount of cash. RIM will need the money to advertise the new BlackBerrys and operating system.

Misek also called it a positive development that RIM said there would not be another delay to BlackBerry 10.

“The success or failure of this company will be on BlackBerry 10,” Misek said.

RIM posted net income of $ 14 million, or 3 cents per share for its fiscal third quarter, which ended Dec. 1. That compares with a profit of $ 265 million, or 51 cents per share, in the same quarter a year ago.

The latest figure includes a favorable tax settlement. Excluding that adjustment, RIM lost 22 cents per share. Analysts polled by FactSet were expecting a wider loss of 27 cents.

RIM reported revenue of $ 2.7 billion, down 47 percent from a year ago.

Wireless News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: RIM loses BlackBerry subscribers for first time
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Twitter post offers clue to The Civil Wars' future

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — While there still remain questions about the future of The Civil Wars, there's new music on the way.

Joy Williams, one half of the Grammy Award-winning duo with John Paul White, said Thursday during a Twitter chat that she was in the studio listening to new Civil Wars songs.

It's a tantalizing clue to the future of the group, which appeared in doubt when a European tour unraveled last month due to "irreconcilable differences."

At the time, the duo said it hoped to release an album in 2013. It's not clear if Williams was referring Thursday to music for a new album or for a documentary score they have composed with T Bone Burnett. They're also set to release an "Unplugged" session on iTunes on Jan. 15.

Nate Yetton, the group's manager and Williams' husband, had no comment — though he has supplied a few hints of his own by posting pictures of recording sessions on his Instagram account recently. The duo announced last summer it would be working with Charlie Peacock, who produced its gold-selling debut "Barton Hollow." The photos do not show Williams or White, but one includes violin player Odessa Rose.

Rose says in an Instagram post: "Playing on the new Civil Wars record... Beautiful sounds."

Even with its future in doubt, the duo continues to gather accolades. Williams and White are up for a Golden Globe on Jan. 13, and two Grammy Awards on Feb. 10, for their "The Hunger Games" soundtrack collaboration "Safe & Sound" with Taylor Swift.

Williams' comments came during an installment of an artist interview series with Alison Sudol of A Fine Frenzy sponsored by The Recording Academy.

___

Online:

http://thecivilwars.com

___

Follow AP Music Writer Chris Talbott: http://twitter.com/Chris_Talbott.

Read More..

Bernard Madoff's brother is sentenced to 10 years in prison

NEW YORK — The brother of imprisoned financier Bernard Madoff was sentenced to 10 years in prison for crimes committed in the shadow of his notorious sibling by a judge who said she disbelieved his claims that he did not know about the epic fraud.

Peter Madoff, 67, agreed to serve the maximum sentence allowable to the charges of conspiracy and falsifying the books and records of an investment advisor that he pleaded guilty to in June.

U.S. District Judge Laura Taylor Swain urged him to tell the truth even after he reports to prison Feb. 6 about what he knows about the multi-decade fraud that cost thousands of investors their original $20 billion investment.

The judge said Peter Madoff was "frankly not believable" when he said at his plea that he learned about the fraud only when his brother revealed it to him just before he surrendered to authorities.

Peter Madoff spoke only briefly Thursday before he was sentenced, saying: "I am deeply ashamed of my conduct and have tried to atone by pleading guilty and have agreed to forfeit all of my present and future assets."

He added: "I am profoundly sorry that my failures let many people down, including my loved ones."

Two investors spoke during the proceeding, which ended in less than an hour.

Investor Michael T. De Vita, 62, also demanded that the truth be forced out.

"I believe it to be physically impossible for a single person to carry out such a gargantuan task all by himself," he said.

De Vita said investors "have waited four years for others to accept responsibility for this massive crime. We are still waiting for that today."

"All of this was preventable if only one person was willing to do the right thing and stop this in its tracks years ago. Peter Madoff could have been that person," he said.

The sentencing comes four years and a week after Bernard Madoff first revealed the fraud, which occurred over several decades as the former Nasdaq chairman built a reputation for delivering unparalleled investment results, even in bad times. The revelation came only days after the business sent out statements that made investors think their investments had grown to a total of more than $65 billion.

Peter Madoff said at his plea that he had no idea his brother was running a massive Ponzi scheme, paying off longtime investors at times with money from newer investors.

"My family was torn apart as a result of my brother's atrocious conduct," he said. "I was reviled by strangers as well as friends who assumed that I knew about the Ponzi scheme."

But he conceded that he followed his brother's instructions and helped him decide which favored friends, clients and family members would receive the $300 million that remained in the company's accounts. The checks were never sent.

Peter Madoff, who joined his brother's firm after graduating from Fordham Law School in 1970, has been free on $5-million bail after he agreed to surrender all his assets.

Before the sentencing, his lawyer, John Wing, said in a memorandum that Peter Madoff will "almost certainly live out his remaining days as a jobless pariah, in or out of prison." He called him a victim of his loyalty to his brother, saying he had been mistreated by the sibling who was eight years older and was viewed as "the prince" by his mother.

As part of a forfeiture agreement, Madoff's wife, Marion, and daughter Shana must forfeit nearly all of their assets. The government said those assets and assets that will be forfeited by other family members include several homes, a Ferrari and more than $10 million in cash and securities. It said his wife will be left with $771,733. Besides the Madoff brothers, no other family members have been arrested.

Read More..

Robert H. Bork, pivotal figure in Supreme Court history, dies at 85

Robert H. Bork, the conservative legal champion whose bitter defeat for a Supreme Court seat in 1987 politicized the confirmation process and changed the court's direction for decades, died Wednesday. He was 85.

The former Yale law professor and judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit died at Virginia Hospital Center in Arlington, Va., from complications of heart disease, said his son Robert H. Bork Jr.

A revered figure on the right, Bork inspired a generation of conservatives with his critiques of the liberal-dominated high court in the 1960s and '70s. In speeches, law reviews and op-ed articles, Bork argued that the liberal justices were abusing their power and remaking American life by ending prayers in public schools, extending new rights to criminals, ordering cross-town busing for desegregation and striking down laws on birth control, abortion and the death penalty. Bork said the Constitution, as originally written, left these matters to the wishes of the majority.

Bork was more than a legal theorist. He was also a highly regarded constitutional lawyer. When he served as U.S. solicitor general under Presidents Nixon and Ford, the Supreme Court justices praised Bork as one of the finest advocates they had ever seen.

As solicitor general, he served as a footnote to the Watergate scandal that brought down Nixon. In what became known as "the Saturday Night Massacre," the embattled chief executive ordered the firing of special prosecutor Archibald Cox because he had demanded Nixon's secret White House tapes. The attorney general and then the deputy attorney general resigned rather than carry out the order. Bork, who was then in the No. 3 post as solicitor general, carried out the order and fired Cox.

When Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980, Bork's name rose to the top of the list of potential court nominees. Reagan aspired to transform the Supreme Court, and Bork, then teaching law at Yale, was offered a seat on the Court of Appeals in Washington. It was seen as a stepping stone to the high court.

But it turned into a long wait for Bork.

Reagan chose Sandra Day O'Connor in 1981, fulfilling a campaign promise to appoint the first woman to the Supreme Court. A fateful moment came in 1986 when a second seat became vacant. Reagan and his advisors passed over Bork for his younger colleague, then-Judge Antonin Scalia, who won a unanimous confirmation in a Senate still under Republican control.

Bork's time finally came in the summer of 1987 when Justice Lewis Powell, the swing vote on the closely divided court, announced his retirement. By then, however, the Democrats had taken control of the Senate, and Reagan had been weakened by the Iran-Contra scandal.

On July 1, 1987, Reagan introduced the burly, bearded Judge Bork as his nominee, but within an hour the president's words were drowned out by a fierce attack from Capitol Hill led by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.).

"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, [and] rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids," Kennedy said. No one could remember such a harsh assault on a president's court nominee, and it set the tone for a campaign-style attack that lasted into the fall.

Bork gave the Democrats plenty of ammunition, however.

As a Yale professor in 1963, he had condemned the pending civil rights bill that would have given blacks an equal right to be served in hotels, restaurants and other public places across the nation. He called this a threat to individual freedom, and he advised Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, the Republican presidential nominee, to cast a "no" vote against what became the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Bork wrote critically of the Voting Rights Act and various school desegregation measures. He also denounced the court's "right to privacy" rulings that led to the Roe vs. Wade decision guaranteeing a woman's right to have an abortion.

When Bork made his case before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he faced a hostile majority of Democrats, including its new chairman, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware. Because of his long "paper trail," Bork had no choice but to try to explain his views. He did so, at length, but he did not win over many converts. And viewers watching on television told pollsters they saw the stiff, scowling judge as an intimidating figure. Bork helped his opponents paint a portrait of him as a nominee who was more attuned to legal theory than to doing justice. When asked why he wanted to serve on the nation's highest court, Bork told one senator the job would be "an intellectual feast."

When the hearings ended, the Reagan White House knew Bork could not be confirmed. But the judge refused to withdraw, and the Senate rejected his nomination on a 58-42 vote.

Conservatives were furious, insisting that partisan attacks had maligned the reputation of one of the most accomplished jurists to come before the Senate. The phrase "to bork" became shorthand for inflicting a harsh, unfair public attack. Liberals and Democrats countered that Bork went down to defeat because most Americans did not share his views.

But no one disputed that the Bork battle changed how presidents choose nominees and how the Senate debates them. In the wake of Bork's defeat, presidential legal advisors looked for judicial nominees who had said or written little on the major legal controversies. In 1990, for example, President George H.W. Bush chose a little-known New Hampshire judge for the Supreme Court because his views were unknown. Justice David H. Souter easily won confirmation, but then surprised his Republican backers when he became a reliable liberal on the court.

Court nominees after Bork refused to follow his tack of seeking to explain his views in answer to questions from senators, instead choosing to duck them. Bork's defeat also had a profound and lasting impact on the Supreme Court itself. Had Bork won confirmation, the court's conservative bloc, led by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, would have had a majority to overturn Roe vs. Wade as well as the strict ban on school-sponsored prayers and invocations. Instead, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, the Reagan nominee who eventually filled Powell's seat, cast a deciding vote in 1992 to preserve the right to abortion and the ban on school prayers. Kennedy has also been a strong foe of laws that discriminate against gays and lesbians, and he is seen as holding the decisive vote in the upcoming cases involving same-sex marriage.

Bork's influence on conservative legal thought was also lasting. In the 1970s, he was among the first to argue for interpreting the Constitution based on its "original intent," an idea that was later championed by Scalia and Justice Clarence Thomas.

As a scholar of antitrust law, Bork helped fundamentally change the thinking behind the law. He criticized those who targeted "big" businesses as monopolies and said antitrust law should focus instead on the welfare of consumers. At Yale, students joked that Bork taught "pro-trust," not antitrust. But his views are now widely accepted.

Bork stepped down from the bench a year after his Senate defeat, and he wrote several books renewing his criticism of liberalism. In the last year, he served as a chairman of Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney's advisory committee on the judiciary and the courts.

Scalia praised Bork as "one of the most influential legal scholars of the past 50 years. His impact on legal thinking in the fields of antitrust and constitutional law was profound and lasting. More important for the final accounting, he was a good man and a loyal citizen."

Bork was born in Pittsburgh on March 1, 1927, and served in the Marines. He graduated from the University of Chicago and its law school and worked as a lawyer in New York and Chicago before joining the Yale faculty in 1962.

His first wife, Claire Davidson, died in 1980. He married Mary Ellen Bork, a former nun, in 1982. She survives him, along with three children from his first marriage, sons Robert and Charles Bork and daughter Ellen Bork, and two grandchildren.

david.savage@latimes.com

Read More..

Apple is dominating the small and medium business market in Q4

Title Post: Apple is dominating the small and medium business market in Q4
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..