malagao: অক্টোবর 2013

বৃহস্পতিবার, ৩১ অক্টোবর, ২০১৩

Magnitude-6.6 quake strikes central Chile

SANTIAGO, Chile (AP) — A 6.6-magnitude earthquake rocked central Chile on Thursday, causing buildings to sway in the capital and nervous people to run out into the streets.

But Chile's emergency services office said no damages to infrastructure were immediately reported and discarded the possibility of a tsunami.

The U.S. Geological Survey said the quake's epicenter was located about 65 kilometers (40 miles) southwest of the city of Coquimbo. Its depth was 10 kilometers (6 miles).

Chile is one of the world's most earthquake-prone countries. A magnitude-8.8 quake and the tsunami it unleashed in 2010 killed more than 500 people, destroyed 220,000 homes, and washed away docks, riverfronts and seaside resorts.

Associated PressSource: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/cae69a7523db45408eeb2b3a98c0c9c5/Article_2013-10-31-Chile-Earthquake/id-c7cf304d886041abb6e9e5fb8aa622c8
Related Topics: david ortiz calvin johnson Cam McDaniel eagles nfl

Supreme Court's Obamacare decision established new limits on federal authority, IU paper says

PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:

31-Oct-2013

[

| E-mail

]

Contact: George Vlahakis
vlahakis@iu.edu
812-855-0846
Indiana University

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- A new paper by an Indiana University professor sheds new light on the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act, which many critics said threatens state sovereignty and individual liberties.

The paper comes at a time when problems with the act's implementation, particularly the creation of state health care exchanges, highlight the limits of federal capabilities and the importance of state cooperation in the success of domestic government programs.

In an article in Business Horizons, a journal published by IU's Kelley School of Business, Tim Lemper argues that the court's decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius actually established new limits on the power of the federal government.

"The court was heavily criticized for betraying the principles of federalism and limited government in the U.S. Constitution," Lemper said. "In reality, the court's decision placed groundbreaking limits on Congress' power to regulate commerce and use federal funds to pressure states into doing its bidding.

"These aspects of the court's decision received less attention in the popular media but may actually prove to have a more significant impact on the scope of federal power in the future," said Lemper, a clinical professor of business law at Kelley.

In his research, Lemper often takes a more critical approach to overlooked details in legislation and jurisprudence. Earlier research brought to light a drafting error in the federal trademark dilution statute, which led Congress to amend the law last fall.

In his paper, "The Supreme Struggle: 'Obamacare' and the New Limits on Federal Regulation," Lemper bases his arguments on two points raised in the court's opinion: new limits on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce and to coerce states with the threat of losing federal funding.

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that the limits on Congress' power in the Constitution, and the reservation of powers to the states, were intended to protect individual liberty.

Details overlooked in media reports about the decision include what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in dissent, called "a novel constraint" on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, a sweeping and seemingly unlimited power that has been used to uphold a broad range of federal regulations on activity far beyond traditional commercial transactions, Lemper said.

"Set in historical context, the court's decision is significant because it establishes a new limit on Congress' expansive power under the Commerce Clause," he wrote. "Five of the nine justices concluded that the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate existing commercial activity, but does not allow Congress to compel individuals to become active in commerce.

"In other words, Congress can regulate activity under the Commerce Clause, but it cannot regulate inactivity."

Applying this rationale to the Affordable Care Act, the majority on the court concluded that the individual mandate (requiring individuals to buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty) exceeded Congress' power to regulate commerce because it compelled people to engage in commerce by buying health insurance.

"That the court still upheld the individual mandate as a valid exercise of Congress' more limited power to lay and collect taxes does not diminish the significance of the limit that it placed on Congress' more expansive power to regulate interstate commerce," Lemper said. "Congress' power to lay and collect taxes is more limited and less coercive than its power to regulate interstate commerce, which -- before this decision -- increasingly appeared to have no limit."

"The court's decision precludes Congress from venturing into new regulatory territory under the guise of regulating commerce," he said. "At the very least, it forecloses future governmental regulation that uses a person's inaction as a basis to compel them to act."

Lemper said the court's decision also broke new ground in restricting Congress' power under the Spending Clause. Seven of the justices -- "a majority of rare size for this court" -- held that the Affordable Care Act wrongly coerced states into accepting the Medicare expansion by threatening them with the loss of all Medicare funding (a significant portion of states' budgets) if they refused to do so.

"The court's decision is remarkable because it is the first time that the court has ever struck down a federal law under the Spending Clause on the ground that it runs counter to the system of federalism in the Constitution," he added. "For decades, the court has recognized the possibility that the federalism principles could limit Congress' power under the Spending Clause, but it had never actually done so until its decision on the Affordable Care Act.

"Its landmark holding gives real teeth to limits on Congress' power that had previously only existed in theory."

###

[

| E-mail

Share

]

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Supreme Court's Obamacare decision established new limits on federal authority, IU paper says

PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:

31-Oct-2013

[

| E-mail

]

Share
Contact: George Vlahakis
vlahakis@iu.edu
812-855-0846
Indiana University

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- A new paper by an Indiana University professor sheds new light on the U.S. Supreme Court's rejection of legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act, which many critics said threatens state sovereignty and individual liberties.

The paper comes at a time when problems with the act's implementation, particularly the creation of state health care exchanges, highlight the limits of federal capabilities and the importance of state cooperation in the success of domestic government programs.

In an article in Business Horizons, a journal published by IU's Kelley School of Business, Tim Lemper argues that the court's decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius actually established new limits on the power of the federal government.

"The court was heavily criticized for betraying the principles of federalism and limited government in the U.S. Constitution," Lemper said. "In reality, the court's decision placed groundbreaking limits on Congress' power to regulate commerce and use federal funds to pressure states into doing its bidding.

"These aspects of the court's decision received less attention in the popular media but may actually prove to have a more significant impact on the scope of federal power in the future," said Lemper, a clinical professor of business law at Kelley.

In his research, Lemper often takes a more critical approach to overlooked details in legislation and jurisprudence. Earlier research brought to light a drafting error in the federal trademark dilution statute, which led Congress to amend the law last fall.

In his paper, "The Supreme Struggle: 'Obamacare' and the New Limits on Federal Regulation," Lemper bases his arguments on two points raised in the court's opinion: new limits on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce and to coerce states with the threat of losing federal funding.

In his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that the limits on Congress' power in the Constitution, and the reservation of powers to the states, were intended to protect individual liberty.

Details overlooked in media reports about the decision include what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in dissent, called "a novel constraint" on Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce, a sweeping and seemingly unlimited power that has been used to uphold a broad range of federal regulations on activity far beyond traditional commercial transactions, Lemper said.

"Set in historical context, the court's decision is significant because it establishes a new limit on Congress' expansive power under the Commerce Clause," he wrote. "Five of the nine justices concluded that the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate existing commercial activity, but does not allow Congress to compel individuals to become active in commerce.

"In other words, Congress can regulate activity under the Commerce Clause, but it cannot regulate inactivity."

Applying this rationale to the Affordable Care Act, the majority on the court concluded that the individual mandate (requiring individuals to buy health insurance or pay a tax penalty) exceeded Congress' power to regulate commerce because it compelled people to engage in commerce by buying health insurance.

"That the court still upheld the individual mandate as a valid exercise of Congress' more limited power to lay and collect taxes does not diminish the significance of the limit that it placed on Congress' more expansive power to regulate interstate commerce," Lemper said. "Congress' power to lay and collect taxes is more limited and less coercive than its power to regulate interstate commerce, which -- before this decision -- increasingly appeared to have no limit."

"The court's decision precludes Congress from venturing into new regulatory territory under the guise of regulating commerce," he said. "At the very least, it forecloses future governmental regulation that uses a person's inaction as a basis to compel them to act."

Lemper said the court's decision also broke new ground in restricting Congress' power under the Spending Clause. Seven of the justices -- "a majority of rare size for this court" -- held that the Affordable Care Act wrongly coerced states into accepting the Medicare expansion by threatening them with the loss of all Medicare funding (a significant portion of states' budgets) if they refused to do so.

"The court's decision is remarkable because it is the first time that the court has ever struck down a federal law under the Spending Clause on the ground that it runs counter to the system of federalism in the Constitution," he added. "For decades, the court has recognized the possibility that the federalism principles could limit Congress' power under the Spending Clause, but it had never actually done so until its decision on the Affordable Care Act.

"Its landmark holding gives real teeth to limits on Congress' power that had previously only existed in theory."

###

[

| E-mail

Share

]

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Source: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-10/iu-sco103113.php
Category: miami heat daylight savings michigan football Presidents Cup Streaker Anna Kendrick

Study tracks risk of VL exposure in Brazil's urban areas

PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:

31-Oct-2013

[

| E-mail

]

Contact: Mariangela Carneiro
mcarneir@icb.ufmg.br
Public Library of Science

Analysis could apply to tracking infection risks in other urban areas

Visceral Leishmaniasis (VL) is a severe chronic systemic disease caused by the protozoa (Leishmania infantum) in South America, the Mediterranean, southwest and central Asia. These parasites lodges in defense cells and compromises the spleen, liver and bone marrow, becoming fatal if left untreated. The parasites are transmitted to human and animal hosts by the bite of phlebotomine sand flies with dogs as the main urban reservoirs.

The official global burden totaled more than 58,000 human VL cases per year and more than 90% these occur in just six countries: India, Bangladesh, Sudan, South Sudan, Brazil and Ethiopia. In Brazil, during 2001 to 2011, were confirmed 39,780 VL cases.

The increasing occurrence of VL cases in Brazilian urban centers is a challenge for control programs. In this context, Belo Horizonte, with nearly 2.5 million inhabitants, is one of the largest Brazilian cities with active transmission of VL: 1,604 cases were recorded from 1994 to 2013. In spite of the availability of diagnosis (clinical and laboratory) and drugs for treatment, the city has one of the highest VL fatality rates in nation, with 21% of those who have the disease succumbing in 1994 and 24% in 2009.

The factors involved in VL transmission are poorly understood, especially in urban and densely populated counties. Assuming that the identification of risk factors for the disease can help VL control and contribute to the reduction of cases and deaths, the research group in Epidemiology, headed by Dr. Mariangela Carneiro (Federal University of Minas Gerais, Brazil), conducts studies on urbanization and expansion of VL in Belo Horizonte, capital of Minas Gerais State. One of the studies carried out by the group, publishing in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases aimed to identify the risk areas for VL and the risk factors involved in transmission in Belo Horizonte.

In the same geographical space human VL cases (n=412), canine infection, socioeconomic and environmental features were analyzed. A concentration of high-risk focal points of human VL cases was identified in the northern part of the city, marked by lower levels of education and income, and higher numbers of infected dogs per inhabitant. It is worth mentioning that the Brazilian Ministry of Health prohibits the treatment of dogs with drugs available for use in cases of human VL and instead recommends euthanasia of infected dogs. This measure has been questioned by the population, especially by animal protection groups.

The spatial analysis adopted for this study is useful for the identification of focal points with a greater risk of VL and displays operational applicability in the control program for an urban environment with an unequal spatial distribution of the disease. Thus, the frequent monitoring of risk of human VL according to focal points is important to direct and prioritize the actions of the control program in urban environment, especially in big cities.

###

[

| E-mail

Share

]

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Study tracks risk of VL exposure in Brazil's urban areas

PUBLIC RELEASE DATE:

31-Oct-2013

[

| E-mail

]

Contact: Mariangela Carneiro
mcarneir@icb.ufmg.br
Public Library of Science

Analysis could apply to tracking infection risks in other urban areas

###

[

| E-mail

Share

]

AAAS and EurekAlert! are not responsible for the accuracy of news releases posted to EurekAlert! by contributing institutions or for the use of any information through the EurekAlert! system.

Source: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-10/plos-str102913.php
Tags: lou reed Johnny Manziel Supernatural tina fey Xbox One Release Date

5 Creepy, Scary, Awesome Things You Never Knew About Blood

The internet has been beating us over the head with the fact it's Halloween today, and that means lots of fake blood. But the real stuff coursing through your veins can be scary all on its own. Here are some of the weirdest and wildest things going on in the world of blood.

Android 4.4 KitKat is official, launching on the Nexus 5

Streamlined performance, new smarter phone app, pedometer support, new "immersive mode" in new version of Android

Along with the LG Nexus 5, Android 4.4 KitKat is finally official — and there's a whole bunch of new features to get to grips with, besides the obvious UI changes we've seen in all the renders. For starters, among the many changes to the stock launcher, it's now possible to say "OK Google" from the home screen to start a voice search or use other voice-activated features.

More after the break.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/androidcentral/~3/MQBZOqgfiaE/story01.htm
Similar Articles: vince young Seamus Heaney

HTC: Android 4.4 KitKat coming to the One within 90 days, Google Play edition within 15 days

Now that we know which of Google's Nexus devices will be eligible for an update to Android 4.4 KitKat, other manufacturers are starting to speak up about their rollout plans as well. Jason Mackenzie, president of HTC America, confirmed to us in an interview that the company is going to aggressively ...

Source: http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~3/xQAbOuYBarU/
Tags: Daylight Savings Time 2013 lunar eclipse lamar odom justin timberlake Lee Thompson Young

Texas club auctions right to hunt endangered rhino

HOUSTON (AP) — Plans to auction a rare permit that will allow a hunter to take down an endangered black rhino are drawing criticism from some conservationists, but the organizer says the fundraiser could bring in more than $1 million that would go toward protecting the species.

John J. Jackson III belongs to the Dallas Safari Club, which earlier this month announced it would auction the permit — one of only five offered annually by Namibia in southwestern Africa. The permit is also the first to be made available for purchase outside of that country.

"This is advanced, state-of-the-art wildlife conservation and management techniques," Jackson, a Metairie, La.-based international wildlife attorney, said Wednesday. "It's not something the layman understands, but they should.

"This is the most sophisticated management strategy devised," he said. "The conservation hunt is a hero in the hunting community."

Some animal preservation groups are bashing the idea.

"More than ridiculous," Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States, said Wednesday.

"At a time when the global community is rallying to protect the elephant and rhino from the onslaught of people with high-powered weapons, this action sends exactly the wrong signal. It's absurd. You're going to help an endangered animal by killing an endangered member of that population?"

An estimated 4,000 black rhinos remain in the wild, down from 70,000 in the 1960s. Nearly 1,800 are in Namibia, according to the safari club.

Poachers long have targeted all species of rhino, primarily for its horn, which is valuable on the international black market. Made of the protein keratin, the chief component in fingernails and hooves, the horn has been used in carvings and for medicinal purposes, mostly in Asia. The near extinction of the species also has been attributed to habitat loss.

The auction is scheduled for the Dallas Safari Club's annual convention in January.

According to Jackson, who said he's been working on the auction project with federal wildlife officials, the hunt will involve one of five black rhinos selected by a committee and approved by the Namibian government. The five are to be older males, incapable of reproducing and likely "troublemakers ... bad guys that are killing other rhinos," he said.

"You end up eliminating that rhino and you actually increase the reproduction of the population."

Jackson said 100 percent of the auction proceeds would go to a trust fund, be held there until the permit is approved and then forwarded to the government of Namibia for the limited purpose of rhino conservation.

"It's going to generate a sum of money large enough to be enormously meaningful in Namibia's fight to ensure the future of its black rhino populations," Ben Carter, the club's executive director, said in a statement.

Jeffrey Flocken, North American regional director of the Massachusetts-based International Fund for Animal Welfare, disagreed, describing the club's argument as "perverse, to say the least."

"And drumming up a bidding frenzy to get to the opportunity to shoot one of the last of a species is just irresponsible," Flocken said. "This is just an attempt to manipulate a horrific situation where rhino poaching is out of control, and fuel excitement around being able to kill an animal whose future existence is already hanging in the balance."

Rick Barongi, director of the Houston Zoo and vice president of the International Rhino Foundation, said the hunt was not illegal but remained a complex idea that "sends a mixed message."

On Tuesday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced it was providing "guidance" to the safari club on whether it would agree to a permit, required under federal law, to allow the winning bidder to bring the trophy rhino to the United States.

"An import permit will be issued if, and only if, we determine that the sport-hunted trophy is taken as part of a well-managed conservation program that enhances the long-term survival of the species," the agency said.

Earlier this year, the service granted such a permit for a sport-hunted black rhino taken in Namibia in 2009.

Pacelle said the Humane Society would work to oppose the permit.

An administrator at the Namibian Embassy in Washington referred questions about the hunt and auction to the government's tourism office in Windhoek, the nation's capital. There was no response Wednesday to an email from The Associated Press.

"The two hot issues here are the fact it's an endangered species, and the second thing is it's a trophy," Barongi, the zoo director, said. "It's one individual that can save hundreds of individuals, and if that's the case, and it's the best option you have ... then you go with your best option.

"Because the alternative is you can lose them all," he said.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/texas-club-auctions-hunt-endangered-rhino-113113990.html
Related Topics: nfl scores

NYC moves closer to tobacco-buying age of 21

NEW YORK (AP) — Young New Yorkers who want to light up will soon have to wait for their 21st birthdays before they can buy a pack of smokes after lawmakers in the nation's most populous city voted overwhelmingly to raise the tobacco-purchasing age from 18 to 21.

The City Council's vote Wednesday makes New York the biggest city to bar cigarette sales to 19- and 20-year-olds, and one of only a few places throughout the United States that have tried to stymie smoking among young people by raising the purchasing age. The council also approved a bill that sets a minimum $10.50-a-pack price for tobacco cigarettes and steps up law enforcement on illegal tobacco sales.

"We know that tobacco dependence can begin very soon after a young person first tries smoking so it's critical that we stop young people from smoking before they ever start," Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a statement after the council's vote.

Bloomberg, a strong supporter of tough smoking restrictions, has 30 days to sign the bills into law. The minimum age bill will take effect 180 days after enactment.

The city's current age limit is 18, a federal minimum that's standard in many places. Smoking in city parks and beaches already is prohibited as it is in restaurants.

Advocates say higher age limits help prevent, or at least delay, young people from taking up a habit that remains the leading cause of preventable deaths nationwide.

But cigarette manufacturers have suggested young adult smokers may just turn to black-market merchants. And some smokers say it's unfair and patronizing to tell people considered mature enough to vote and serve in the military that they're not old enough to decide whether to smoke.

"New York City already has the highest cigarette tax rate and the highest cigarette smuggling rate in the country," said Bryan D. Hatchell , a spokesman for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, which makes Camel and other brands. "Those go hand in hand and this new law will only make the problem worse."

Another anti-smoking initiative pushed by the Bloomberg administration was previously shelved ahead of Wednesday's vote: forcing stores to keep cigarettes out of public view until a customer asks for them.

Newsstand clerk Ali Hassen, who sells cigarettes daily to a steady stream of customers from nearby office buildings, said he didn't know if the new age restrictions would do any good.

While he wouldn't stop vigilantly checking identification to verify customers' age, Hassen doubted the new rules would thwart determined smokers.

"If somebody wants to smoke, they're going to smoke," he said.

Similar legislation to raise the purchasing age is expected to come to a vote in Hawaii this December. The tobacco-buying age is 21 in Needham, Mass., and is poised to rise to 21 in January in nearby Canton, Mass. The state of New Jersey also is considering a similar proposal.

"It just makes it harder for young people to smoke," said Stephen McGorry, 25, who started smoking at 19. He added that had the age been 21 when he took up the habit, "I guarantee I wouldn't be smoking today."

Associated PressSource: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/bbd825583c8542898e6fa7d440b9febc/Article_2013-10-31-Smoking-Minimum%20Age/id-625b4242b79f4612b4e88ba0db82c1fd
Related Topics: hocus pocus thursday night football how i met your mother djokovic Amber Riley

Texas club auctions right to hunt endangered rhino

In this Jan. 5, 2003, photo released by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shows a black rhino male and calf in Mkuze, South Africa. The organizer of a Texas hunting club’s planned auction of a permit that will allow a hunter to bag an endangered black rhino in Africa is hoping it raises up to $1 million for rhino preservation. (AP Photo/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Karl Stromayer)