Commuters welcome news of MRT line extension, new MRT lines

SINGAPORE: Many commuters welcomed news of two new lines and extension of three MRT lines.

On Thursday morning, Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew announced two new MRT lines will be built, while three existing lines will be extended.

The new lines are the Cross Island Line and Jurong Region Line.

Those heading to the west, such as to the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), find it most beneficial.

Victoria Lee, who is currently studying at NTU, said: "I live in Choa Chu Kang and I go to school to NTU so it takes about an hour journey."

Currently, students have to take a bus from the nearest MRT stations at either Pioneer or Boon Lay.

And on occasions such as the exam period, getting to school can be costly.

"It costs about $30 to go straight to school. It means a lot to a student. $30 is quite significant, said NTU student Marcus Tan who lives in Bishan.

He added: "The problem that we face is the rush hour - coming to school in the morning, leaving at 5pm when everyone is leaving work at the same time. Hopefully that will solve the problem."

The Cross Island Line is set to be ready in 2030, and the Jurong Region Line in 2025.

But the new lines may not come soon enough for some commuters.

"15 years later? I'm not even sure if I'll still be around! But it's good. It's a good thing," said Mr Tan, a commuter.

Ms Ash Maskell, who lives near NTU, said: "I find it a bit inconvenient. I don't have a direct train, you got to catch a bus and come down all the way to Jurong Point so hopefully they do it. They should have done it 10 years ago."

Ms Lee said: "I think it's still good because it's still happening and we will benefit in the future but for now at least, we can look forward to something like that."

Associate Professor Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim, who is Parliamentary Secretary for Transport, said Singapore has seen a change in the environment, the demographics, as well as the urban development over the years.

He said: "With this MRT, as well as the rail, it has been seen to be very good platform and also vehicle to transport people. It is only logical for us to extend and I'm happy that we're looking at areas where it matters for Singaproeans."

The transport ministry said meanwhile, plans are in place to solve near-term problems.

Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said: "I understand the occasional frustrations of commuters especially with the problems that they face here and now, and I want to assure you that we have plans in place both in buses, as well as injection of rail capacity, to solve some of the near-term problems."

The ministry is working out details of the extension and new MRT lines.

- CNA/fa

Read More..

Assets case: CBI court extends Jaganmohan Reddy's remand till Jan 31

HYDERABAD: A special CBI court here on Thursday extended till January 31 the judicial remand of YSR Congress President Y S Jaganmohan Reddy and other accused in connection with the alleged disproportionate assets case.

Jagan, along with other accused including former minister Mopidevi Venkata Ramana Rao, industrialist Nimmagadda Prasada and senior bureaucrat K V Brahmananda Reddy (all accused in Vanpic aspect of Jagan assets case), who are currently lodged in Chanchalguda Central Prison, were produced before the court through video-conferencing after which their judicial custody was extended by another 14 days.

Jaganmohan Reddy was arrested by CBI on corruption charges on May 27 last year.

The court also extended the judicial remand of former Karnataka minister Gali Janardhan Reddy, his brother-in-law B V Srinivas Reddy, and another accused Mehfuz Ali Khan in the illegal mining case involving Obulapuram Mining Company (OMC) till January 31 after they were produced before it through video link.

The mining baron, who is lodged in Chanchalguda jail, was supposed to be taken to Bellary today after a court there had summoned him on a prisoner transit warrant, in connection with a defamation suit filed by former MLA Diwakar Babu.

However, Chanchalguda jail authorities did not take Janardhan Reddy to Bellary, as the local police were unable to provide escort to present him before the Bellary court.

The Bellary court had directed that Janardhan Reddy should appear before it on January 18.

In a related development, the court also extended the judicial remand of Emaar scam accused Sunil Reddy till January 31.

Read More..

6 Ways Climate Change Will Affect You

Photograph by AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez

The planet keeps getting hotter, new data showed this week. Especially in America, where 2012 was the warmest year ever recorded, by far. Every few years, the U.S. federal government engages hundreds of experts to assess the impacts of climate change, now and in the future.

From agriculture (pictured) to infrastructure to how humans consume energy, the National Climate Assessment Development Advisory Committee spotlights how a warming world may bring widespread disruption.

Farmers will see declines in some crops, while others will reap increased yields.

Won't more atmospheric carbon mean longer growing seasons? Not quite. Over the next several decades, the yield of virtually every crop in California's fertile Central Valley, from corn to wheat to rice and cotton, will drop by up to 30 percent, researchers expect. (Read about "The Carbon Bathtub" in National Geographic magazine.)

Lackluster pollination, driven by declines in bees due partly to the changing climate, is one reason. Government scientists also expect the warmer climate to shorten the length of the frosting season necessary for many crops to grow in the spring.

Aside from yields, climate change will also affect food processing, storage, and transportation—industries that require an increasing amount of expensive water and energy as global demand rises—leading to higher food prices.

—Daniel Stone

Published January 16, 2013

Read More..

Notre Dame: Football Star Was 'Catfished' in Hoax

Notre Dame's athletic director and the star of its near-championship football team said the widely-reported death of the star's girlfriend from leukemia during the 2012 football season was apparently a hoax, and the player said he was duped by it as well.

Manti Te'o, who led the Fighting Irish to the BCS championship game this year and finished second for the Heisman Trophy, said in a statement today that he fell in love with a girl online last year who turned out not to be real.

The university's athletic director, Jack Swarbrick, said it has been investigating the "cruel hoax" since Te'o approached officials in late December to say he believed he had been tricked.

Private investigators hired by the university subsequently monitored online chatter by the alleged perpetrators, Swarbrick said, adding that he was shocked by the "casual cruelty" it revealed.

"They enjoyed the joke," Swarbrick said, comparing the ruse to the popular film "Catfish," in which filmmakers revealed a person at the other end of an online relationship was not who they said they were.

"While we still don't know all of the dimensions of this ... there are certain things that I feel confident we do know," Swarbrick said. "The first is that this was a very elaborate, very sophisticated hoax, perpetrated for reasons we don't understand."

Mike Ehrmann/Getty Images

Notre Dame's Athletic Director Discusses Manti Te'o Girlfriend Hoax Watch Video

Notre Dame Football Star Victim of 'Girlfriend Hoax' Watch Video

Eddie Lacy, Barrett Jones Discuss 'Bama Win Watch Video

Te'o said during the season that his girlfriend, Lennay Kekua, died of leukemia in September on the same day Te'o's grandmother died, triggering an outpouring of support for Te'o at Notre Dame and in the media.

"While my grandma passed away and you take, you know, the love of my life [Kekua]. The last thing she said to me was, 'I love you,'" Te'o said at the time, noting that he had talked to Kekua on the phone and by text message until her death.

Now, responding to a story first reported by the sports website Deadspin, Te'o has acknowledged that Kekua never existed. The website reported today that there were no records of a woman named Lennay Kekua anywhere.

Te'o denied that he was in on the hoax.

"This is incredibly embarrassing to talk about, but over an extended period of time, I developed an emotional relationship with a woman I met online," Te'o said in a statement released this afternoon. "We maintained what I thought to be an authentic relationship by communicating frequently online and on the phone, and I grew to care deeply about her."

Swarbrick said he expected Te'o to give his version of events at a public event soon, perhaps Thursday, and that he believed Te'o's representatives were planning to disclose the truth next week until today's story broke.

Deadspin reported that the image attached to Kekua's social media profiles, through which the pair interacted, was of another woman who has said she did not even know Te'o or know that her picture was being used. The website reported that it traced the profiles to a California man who is an acquaintance of Te'o and of the woman whose photo was stolen.

"To realize that I was the victim of what was apparently someone's sick joke and constant lies was, and is, painful and humiliating," Te'o said.

Read More..

A misguided Tea Party claim on the debt ceiling

A Tea Party rally in Chicago.
(Scott Olson/GETTY IMAGES)

“It is pure baloney to say we have to pay the bills for things Congress has already approved. We are drawing the line on future spending, not the debt or obligations to Social Security, Medicare and the military, which can all be met without an immediate rise in the debt ceiling.”

--Amy Kremer, chairman of the Tea Party Express, in a statement, January 14, 2013

Kremer issued that statement after President Obama, in a news conference on Monday, argued that if Congress did not raise the debt limit, the United States would not be able to pay for services rendered in the past: “If congressional Republicans refuse to pay America’s bills on time, Social Security checks and veterans’ benefits will be delayed,” Obama said. “We might not be able to pay our troops, or honor our contracts with small business owners.” 

This is an interesting question, which we explored before the last debt limit showdown in 2011. Then, we examined whether Social Security benefits could still be paid even if the debt ceiling was breached; the answer was a bit inconclusive. But after that last crisis, the Treasury Department’s inspector general provided Congress with a detailed look at the options the administration had considered for such a crisis.

 Moreover, Kremer has upped the ante by saying the government could pay not only Social Security benefits but also Medicare and the military — three of the biggest parts of the budget — as well as interest payments on the debt. Let’s examine whether her claim is credible.

The Facts

This year’s debt ceiling showdown is exacerbated by the fact that February is just about the worst month in terms of government finances because relatively little money is collected while lots of bills must be paid, including income-tax refunds. Both the Treasury Department and the Congressional Research Service say that there is tremendous legal uncertainty about whether some payments could be honored while others ignored if the nation goes about the borrowing limit.

The Treasury believes that Congress has never given direction about which payments should receive priority; others (such as the Government Accountability office in 1985) have concluded there is no requirement that Treasury must pay bills in the order in which they are received.

This is a bit of an academic dispute. The sheer volume of transactions — as many as 5 million a day — would make it difficult to pick and choose. Moreover, Treasury says its systems are designed to make payments in the order in which they are due.

 After the 2011 showdown, Treasury concluded that “the least harmful option available to the country at the time, of these very bad options,” was a delayed payment regime. In other words, Treasury would only pay all of the bills for a particular day once it had collected enough cash for every outstanding claim due that day.

 So, in theory, Monday’s payments would be held until, say, Wednesday. Then, Tuesday’s payments would be held until enough money was collected for that day’s payments, which could be Thursday or Friday. So the government could start the following week already three days behind in payments — and continue to fall ever farther back.

 Taylor Budowich, a spokesman for the Tea Party Express, defended Kremer’s statement, pointing us to a recent report by the Bipartisan Policy Center, which he said included “some options” for spending priorities.

“It is unadvisable to get into a situation where we must prioritize spending, but it is irresponsible and absolutely unacceptable to continue down a path of increased debt, increased spending, and increased taxes,” Budowich said.

 We looked at the Bipartisan Policy Center report and actually found that it completely undercut Kremer’s statement. We also double-checked with Steve Bell, a co-author of the report and a former staff director of the Senate Budget Committee under Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.). He agreed that Kremer’s statement was incorrect.

 “You don’t have to be an MIT mathematician to figure this out,” Bell said. “As a matter of math, the Tea Party person is wrong.” On a given day, he said, payments for Social Security, Medicare, active-duty soldiers and interest on the debt would add up to $53 billion — while the government would have only collected $20 billion.

Bell also agreed that as a practical matter it was all but impossible for Treasury to pay a defense contractor ahead of a Social Security recipient, or vice versa.

 Here’s an example of cash-flow problem as illustrated by the Bipartisan Policy Center:

 

 The Pinocchio Test

 Kremer used pretty strong language — “baloney”— to condemn Obama’s statement, but the evidence provided by the Tea Party Express actually supports the president’s point. By available evidence, it appears all but impossible for the Treasury Department to pick and choose among payments — or to keep up that balancing act up for very long.

Four Pinocchios

 

(About our rating scale)

Check out our candidate Pinocchio Tracker

Follow The Fact Checker on Twitter and friend us on Facebook
.

Read More..

Candidates to campaign hard for Punggol East seat

SINGAPORE: The four candidates vying for the Punggol East parliamentary seat will be campaigning hard over the next nine days to capture votes from some 31,600 residents.

The four candidates are: Dr Koh Poh Koon from the People's Action Party (PAP), Mr Kenneth Andrew Jeyaretnam from the Reform Party (RP), Mr Desmond Lim Bak Chuan from the Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) and Ms Lee Li Lian from the Workers' Party (WP).

On January 26, Punggol East residents will go to the polls to pick one of the four candidates to represent them in Parliament.

The seat was vacated last month by former Member of Parliament Michael Palmer.

It will be Singapore's second by-election since the 2011 General Election and it has the longest list of contenders for a parliamentary seat since 1997.

Candidate Dr Koh, a colorectal surgeon, is a fresh face. The 40-year-old, who has dubbed himself "the son of Punggol", has already outlined areas of concern he plans to focus on -- namely ensuring renovations to Rivervale Plaza stay on track and improving childcare amenities for the constituency.

Despite being flanked by party leaders at the nomination centre, Dr Koh said he is his own man and will run his own campaign.

"My supporters, voters of Punggol East, let us work together to make a better Punggol East," he said.

Many believe Dr Koh's biggest opponent will be the Workers' Party's Lee Li Lian.

She is no stranger to residents in Punggol East having contested there in the 2011 General Election.

She was then Mr Palmer's closest contender and garnered 41 per cent of valid votes.

Ms Lee said: "I will serve you whole-heartedly and I will continue and constantly stand up for your rights. On 26th of January, vote for the Workers' Party and send me into Parliament."

Also back to make another bid for the Punggol East seat is SDA's Secretary-General Desmond Lim.

He too had contested in the constituency at the 2011 General Election but lost his election deposit when he garnered just 4.5 per cent of the valid votes.

Undeterred, Mr Lim said he is determined to serve the residents, having been active in the area since 2005.

He said: "Dearest residents of Punggol East, Desmond Lim is back -- dedicated and more determined to serve you and your family in Punggol East."

Rounding up the four candidates is Reform Party chief Kenneth Jeyaretnam.

This is the second electoral fight for the son of former Workers' Party chief JB Jeyaretnam. He contested as part of a team in West Coast GRC in 2011.

Mr Jeyaretnam said: "This election, we are determined to bring a real choice to the voters of Punggol East. This is your chance to decide how you want to be represented."

Earlier, retired acupuncturist Zeng Guoyuan and private tutor Ooi Boon Ewe turned up at the nomination centre. However, both left without filing their nomination papers.

- CNA/al

Read More..

Showrooming is a growing trend in India: Study

BANGALORE: A new IBM study of 26,000 global consumers released today at the 2013 National Retail Federation convention found they are diversifying the way they shop for and acquire goods, becoming increasingly open to buying both online and in-store depending on their needs at time of purchase. While more than 80% of shoppers chose the store to make their last non-grocery purchase, only half are committed to returning there next time they buy.

IBM's research finds that consumers are in a transitional state. According to the study, 35%t of the respondents are unsure whether they would next shop at a store or online. Nine percent are ready to commit to making future purchases online. Of all eight product categories tracked in the survey, the two most popular categories chosen by consumers for an online shift are consumer electronics and luxury items, including jewelry and designer apparel.

"Today's consumer is sophisticated and opportunistic, navigating between store and online environments interchangeably to meet their shopping needs of the moment," said Jill Puleri, global retail leader, IBM Global Business Services.

"To satisfy clients, retailers must deliver a consistent, convenient shopping experience across each consumer touch point, extending from the store to online and back again. The key is using data and analytics to better understand the behavior and preferences of shoppers to close the sale,'' he said.

The IBM study also found that nearly half of online purchases in studied categories resulted from "showrooming," a burgeoning trend in which consumers browse goods at a store, but ultimately buy them online. Significantly, nearly a quarter of these online shoppers intended to buy their item in the store, but ultimately purchased online - primarily due to price and convenience.

Retailers must better connect their store and online presence to capture the sale to showroomers. Today, online-only retailers account for one-third of showroomer purchases. Younger, male and affluent shoppers are most likely to showroom. Although a global phenomenon, there is a higher incidence of showrooming in China (26%) and India (13% than the U.S. (7%), for example.

The IBM study reveals that consumers are seeking a truly integrated shopping experience. Retailers must better connect their online and physical stores, blending benefits into both at various points in the shopping cycle -- from research to purchase -- to build brand loyalty and repeat sales. In the store, retailers must infuse digital experiences, enable store associates with the technology to save the sale and embrace consumer-owned technology. Online, retailers most optimize their websites for various devices. The IBM Digital Analytics benchmach found that 70 percent more consumers used a mobile device to visit a retailer's site on Cyber Monday in 2012 than 2011. However, today's study found that only 3 percent of shoppers are using retailers' mobile apps.

IBM Retail Analytics solutions can provide the fact-based insight retailers need to treat each consumer as an individual, meeting their growing expectation for personalization.Analytics can also be used to identify why showroomers are shifting purchases online so retailers can act and adjust accordingly.

Read More..

Mars Rover Finds Intriguing New Evidence of Water

The first drill sample ever collected on Mars will come from a rockbed shot through with unexpected veins of what appears to be the mineral gypsum.

Delighted members of the Curiosity science team announced Tuesday that the rover was now in a virtual "candy store" of scientific targets—the lowest point of Gale crater, called Yellowknife Bay, is filled with many different materials that could have been created only in the presence of water. (Related: "Mars Has 'Oceans' of Water Inside?")

Project scientist John Grotzinger, of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, said during a press conference that the drill area has turned out "to be jackpot unit. Every place we drive exposes fractures and vein fills."

Mission scientists initially decided to visit the depression, a third of a mile from Curiosity's landing site, on a brief detour before heading to the large mountain at the middle of Gale Crater. But because of the richness of their recent finds, Grotzinger said it may be some months before they begin their trek to Mount Sharp.

The drilling, expected to start this month, will dig five holes about two inches (five centimeters) into bedrock the size of a throw rug and then feed the powder created to the rover's two chemistry labs for analysis.

The drill is the most complex device on the rover and is the last instrument to be used. Project Manager Richard Cook, of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, said that operating it posed the biggest mechanical challenge since Curiosity's high-drama landing. (Watch video of Curiosity's "Seven Minutes of Terror.")

A Watery Past?

That now-desiccated Mars once had a significant amount of surface water is now generally accepted, but every new discovery of when and where water was present is considered highly significant. The presence of surface water in its many possible forms—as a running stream, as a still lake, as ground water soaked into the Martian soil—all add to an increased possibility that the planet was once habitable. (Watch a video about searching for life on Mars.)

And each piece of evidence supporting the presence of water brings the Curiosity mission closer to its formal goal—which is to determine whether Mars was once capable of supporting life.

Curiosity scientists have already concluded that a briskly moving river or stream once flowed near the Gale landing site.

The discovery of the mineral-filled veins within Yellowknife Bay rock fractures adds to the picture because those minerals can be deposited only in watery, underground conditions.

The Curiosity team has also examined Yellowknife Bay for sedimentary rocks with the rover's Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI).  Scientists have found sandstone with grains up to about the size of a peppercorn, including one shaped like a flower bud that appears to gleam. Other nearby rocks are siltstone, with grains finer than powdered sugar. These are quite different from the pebbles and conglomerate rocks found in the landing area, but all these rocks are evidence of a watery past. (Related: "A 2020 Rover Return to Mars?")

One of the primary reasons Curiosity scientists selected Gale crater as a landing site was because satellite images indicated that water-formed minerals were present near the base of Mount Sharp. Grotzinger said that the minerals' presence so close to the landing site, and some five miles from the mountain, is both a surprise and an opportunity.

The current site in Yellowknife Bay is so promising, Grotzinger said, that he would have been "thrilled" to find similar formations at the mission's prime destination at the base of Mount Sharp.  Now the mission can look forward to the surprises to come at the mountain base while already having struck gold.

Read More..

NRA Ad Calls Obama 'Elitist Hypocrite'

Jan 16, 2013 12:04am

Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP Photo

As the White House prepares to unveil a sweeping plan aimed at curbing gun violence, the National Rifle Association has launched a preemptive, personal attack on President Obama, calling him an “elitist hypocrite” who, the group claims, is putting American children at risk.

In 35-second video posted online Tuesday night, the NRA criticizes Obama for accepting armed Secret Service protection for his daughters, Sasha and Malia, at their private Washington, D.C., school while questioning the placement of similar security at other schools.

“Are the president’s kids more important than yours? Then why is he skeptical about putting armed security in our schools, when his kids are protected by armed guards at their school?” the narrator says.

“Mr. Obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, but he’s just another elitist hypocrite when it comes to a fair share of security,” it continues. “Protection for their kids and gun-free zones for ours.”

The immediate family members of U.S. presidents – generally considered potential targets – have long received Secret Service protection.

The ad appeared on a new website for a NRA advocacy campaign – “NRA Stand and Fight” — that the gun-rights group appears poised to launch in response to Obama’s package of gun control proposals that will be announced today.

It’s unclear whether the video will air on TV or only on the web. The NRA did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment.  The domain for the website is registered to Ackerman McQueen, the NRA’s long-standing public relations firm.

The White House had no comment on the NRA ad.

In the wake of last month’s mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, the Obama administration has met with a cross-section of advocacy groups on all sides of the gun debate to formulate new policy proposals.

The NRA, which met with Vice President Joe Biden last week, has opposed any new legislative gun restrictions, including expanded background checks and limits on the sale of assault-style weapons, instead calling for armed guards at all American schools.

Obama publicly questioned that approach in an interview with “Meet the Press” earlier this month, saying, “I am skeptical that the only answer is putting more guns in schools. And I think the vast majority of the American people are skeptical that that somehow is going to solve our problem.”

Still, the White House has been considering a call for increased funding for police officers at public schools and the proposal could be part of a broader Obama gun policy package.

Fifty-five percent of Americans in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll say they support adding armed guards at schools across the country.

“The issue is, are there some sensible steps that we can take to make sure that somebody like the individual in Newtown can’t walk into a school and gun down a bunch of children in a shockingly rapid fashion.  And surely, we can do something about that,” Obama said at a news conference on Monday.

“Responsible gun owners, people who have a gun for protection, for hunting, for sportsmanship, they don’t have anything to worry about,” he said.

ABC News’ Mary Bruce and Jay Shaylor contributed reporting. 

SHOWS: Good Morning America World News

Read More..

Annotating Obama’s 2006 speech against boosting the debt limit

(Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)

“I think if you look at the history, getting votes for the debt ceiling is always difficult, and budgets in this town are always difficult.”

— President Obama, news conference, Jan. 14, 2013

 “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

— Then-Sen. Barack Obama, floor speech in the Senate, March 16, 2006

As the saying goes, “where you stand depends on where you sit.” This is certainly true of the votes to boost the national debt limit, where almost by tradition, the party not holding the presidency refused to support an increase in the debt limit. (One big exception, as we have noted, is in 1953 during the Eisenhower presidency.)

 The president has acknowledged that his previous vote against the debt limit was “a political vote.” On Monday, at a news conference, he urged lawmakers to boost the debt limit without conditions: “We’re going to have to make sure that people are looking at this in a responsible way, rather than just through the lens of politics.”  (In other words, don’t do what I did back when I was a lawmaker.)

 In making his case, Obama noted: “The debt ceiling is not a question of authorizing more spending. Raising the debt ceiling does not authorize more spending. It simply allows the country to pay for spending that Congress has already committed to.”  He added that he was willing to have a “conversation” about reducing the deficit, but the debt limit was not the right vehicle.

 With that in mind, we were curious to look back at Obama’s 2006 speech and examine the case he made at the time for not supporting a boost in the debt limit. Below is the entire speech. At key points, we will offer commentary or further explanation.

Obama’s 2006 speech on the debt limit

 “Mr. President, I rise today to talk about America’s debt problem. The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills.”

Here, Obama is sounding a bit Tea Partyish.

 

“It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our government’s reckless fiscal policies. Over the past five years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is  ‘‘trillion’’ with a ‘‘T.’’ That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers.”

Obama’s language is remarkably similar to charges made by the Mitt Romney campaign against Obama during the 2012 election, though Romney mostly focused on the debt held by China. (Japan was ignored.) When Obama took office in the midst of the Great Recession, the total national debt was $10.6 trillion; it is now $16.4 trillion.

“And over the next five years, between now and 2011, the president’s budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.”

 

It actually increased $5 trillion by the start of fiscal 2011.

“Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the federal government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we’ll spend on Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

“That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America. And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the federal budget.”

Despite the increase in the debt the past seven years, interest costs actually have dropped, to about $200 billion a year, because interest rates have fallen so much during the economic slowdown. But if interest rates go up again, interest expense will soar.

“This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and states of critical investments in infrastructure like bridges, ports and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health-care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on.

“Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America’s priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans — a debt tax that Washington doesn’t want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies.”

“But we are not doing that. Despite repeated efforts by Senators Conrad and Feingold, the Senate continues to reject a return to the commonsense pay-go rules that used to apply. Previously, pay-go rules applied both to increases in mandatory spending and to tax cuts. The Senate had to abide by the commonsense budgeting principle of balancing expenses and revenues.

“Unfortunately, the principle was abandoned, and now the demands of budget discipline apply only to spending. As a result, tax breaks have not been paid for by reductions in Federal spending, and thus the only way to pay for them has been to increase our deficit to historically high levels and borrow more and more money. Now we have to pay for those tax breaks plus the cost of borrowing for them. Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next five years. That is why I will once again co-sponsor the pay-go amendment and continue to hope that my colleagues will return to a smart rule that has worked in the past and can work again.”

 

The rules were restored in 2010.

“Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to remind us that it took 42 presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign-held debt. This administration did more than that in just five years.”

This is also similar to another line used by Romney against Obama during the 2012 campaign.

“Now, there is nothing wrong with borrowing from foreign countries. But we must remember that the more we depend on foreign nations to lend us money, the more our economic security is tied to the whims of foreign leaders whose interests might not be aligned with ours.

“Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

Reading the speech seven years later, Obama is correct that it was a political vote. He never really explains what he would do differently or how he would provide leadership on reducing the deficit. He just decries the rising debt, though he hints at possibly supporting tax increases, since he complains that tax cuts have been deficit-financed.

 After Obama finished speaking, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) rose to rebut his comments.

 “Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of final passage. Raising the debt limit is necessary to preserve the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

“We cannot as a Congress pass spending bills and tax bills and then refuse to pay our bills. Refusing to raise the debt limit is like refusing to pay your credit card bill — after you’ve used your credit card.

“The time to control the deficits and debt is when we are voting on the spending bills and the tax bills that create it. Raising the debt limit is about meeting the obligations we have already incurred. We must meet our obligations. Vote for this bill.”

Here, Grassley has found his inner President Obama. The increase in the debt limit passed on a vote of 52 to 48, with a handful of Republicans joining all Democrats (including then-Senators Joe Biden and Hillary Rodham Clinton) in opposition.

The Pinocchio Test

This is why many Americans hate politics.

The young senator from Illinois presumably did not want to buck the rest of his party establishment in voting for increasing the debt limit — not when there were just enough Republicans willing to support a president from their own party. But Obama would be on much more solid ground today if he had given a speech back in 2006 that sounded more like his news conference in 2013.

 For making an argument that the president now decries as politics, he earns the upside-down Pinocchio, signifying a major-league flip-flop. (We have rarely given this ruling, but are eager for other examples from readers.)

(About our rating scale)

Check out our candidate Pinocchio Tracker

Follow The Fact Checker on Twitter and friend us on Facebook
.

Read More..