Encounter with the Ancient Mariner

Last week our in-house astrophysicist Summer Ash got her geek on about NASA's MESSENGER spacecraft, which was just beginning to orbit around the planet Mercury after a nearly eight-year, circuitous journey. On Monday, MESSENGER took its first pictures of the surface of Mercury from its new vantage point in orbit, and today, msnbc.com science editor Alan Boyle shares the news of NASA's surprise discovery of decades-lost spacecraft Mariner 10, last heard from in 1975. Suspiciously absent from NASA's coverage of this chance passing is the presence at the time of celebrated tourist-photo mimicker (and TRMS intern), Henry Melcher. Henry was in space, gathering material for his Posing With Friends blog when MESSENGER captured its shot of Mariner 10 posing with Mercury. The truth revealed:

Release Date: April 1, 2011

Topics: WAC

Date acquired: April 1, 2011 Image Mission Elapsed Time (MET): 209890197 Image ID: 65110 Instrument: Wide Angle Camera (WAC) of the Mercury Dual Imaging System (MDIS) WAC filter: 7 (749 nanometers wavelength) Center Latitude: 3.1° Center Longitude: 352.3° E Resolution: 1.5 kilometers/pixel Scale: The radius of Mercury is 2440 km Of Interest: MESSENGER captured this image while taking one of its first pictures from orbit around the planet Mercury. The frame shown is one of several images obtained of the same view through the different color filters of the Mercury Dual Imaging system (MDIS) Wide Angle Camera (WAC). The first reaction of some on the MESSENGER team was that the feature to the left of Mercury’s limb must be an imaging artifact. “It’s the effect of solar neutrinos on the WAC’s CCD,” pronounced Project Scientist Mack Knott. The imaging team was skeptical of this explanation, however, and all Knott could add was “I could explain it to you, but you’d have to understand Feynman diagrams.” The imaging team brought the anomalous image to the attention of Mission Systems Engineer E. Finn Again, who immediately called an emergency gathering of the Collision Avoidance Review Board. Fortunately, the unusual object in the image did not appear to be in the immediate path of MESSENGER’s next few orbits, but the fact that earlier and subsequent images of the same scene did not include the object prevented a determination of its trajectory. One of MESSENGER’s Science Team members, Prof. S. T. Rom, recognized the object immediately as Mariner 10, the only spacecraft before MESSENGER to have visited Mercury. Launched in 1973, Mariner 10 flew by Mercury three times in 1974 and 1975 before communication with the probe was lost. Prof. Rom is the only member of the MESSENGER team to have served on the science team of Mariner 10 as well. The Science Operations Center was filled at the time with MESSENGER team members, and everyone proceeded at once to theorize on why Mariner 10 might appear in an MDIS image of Mercury. Professor Rom suggested that Mariner 10 may have remained in place as of the time of its last signal: “Day after day, day after day, We stuck, nor breath nor motion; As idle as a painted ship Upon a painted ocean.” The dead albatross hanging from Rom’s neck, however, reduced the effectiveness of his argument. Mission design lead Mick Adams quickly calculated that Mariner 10 should not be encountering Mercury on this date. “Mariner 10 and Mercury were in a resonant state that brought the spacecraft by the planet once every two Mercury years. By my calculation, this appearance is 23 days early.” Guidance and control lead E. C. Shaughn offered that the effect of solar radiation should have substantially altered Mariner 10’s orbit over the past 36 years as a result of solar sailing: “With throats unslaked, with black lips baked, We could nor laugh nor wail; Through utter drought all dumb we stood! I bit my arm, I sucked the blood, And cried, A sail! a sail!” Propulsion lead Brecht Engel added that some residual propellant after Mariner 10’s last propulsive maneuver may have outgassed, and that multiple outgassing events may also have contributed to trajectory changes: “A speck, a mist, a shape, I wist! And still it neared and neared: As if it dodged a water-sprite, It plunged and tacked and veered.” MESSENGER’s navigation team members, all of whom are named Williams, plugged these suggestions into their codes. Minutes later they were able to announce to all assembled that Mariner 10 appeared to be in a new resonant state, one synchronous with Earth’s period. The ancient spacecraft is locked into an orbit that swings it by Mercury once every Earth year, on April 1st. As MESSENGER passed into eclipse behind Mercury, Prof. Rom had the last word: “The sun's rim dips; the stars rush out: At one stride comes the dark; With far-heard whisper o'er the sea, Off shot the spectre-bark.”

Credit: NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory/Carnegie Institution of Washington  NASA/Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory/Carnegie Institution of Washington

The drones don't need you anymore

By Will Femia

 - 

Fri Apr 1, 2011 9:00 PM EDT

Hey, remember that time Rachel flew the iPhone camera drone?
Well check this out!




That's right, they're playing catch with each other. I had to triple check but I'm almost positive this is not an April Fool's trick with "quadrocopters" bouncing on strings. 1,220,936 views since March 28, 2011 is hard to fake for April Fool's.
In fact, it's apparently part of a Swiss program called The Flying Machine Arena (explanation video here), which is basically a safe place to play with your flying robot. Even though the video includes people holding remote controls, it seems there's a mix of pre-programming and manual control.
But that's not to say it needs any manual control at all. It can bounce a ball all by itself, not only without any human help, but without the benefit of "eyes."

GOP trying to use tax law to limit abortions

Republicans look to limit tax breaks for insurance policies that cover the procedure

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER

updated 3/31/2011 12:00:18 PM ET

WASHINGTON — House Republicans are trying to use the tax code to curb abortions by limiting tax breaks for insurance policies that cover the procedure.

The House Ways and Means Committee is scheduled to vote on a bill Thursday that would prevent taxpayers from deducting the cost of an abortion from their taxable income. It would also prevent small businesses and taxpayers from using tax credits in the new health care law to provide or pay for insurance policies that cover the procedure.
If women pay for an abortion using tax-free income that had been set aside in a heath savings account, the money would have to be reported as taxable income. There would be exceptions for cases of rape or incest, or if a physician certifies that a woman's life would be in danger if she doesn't terminate her pregnancy.
Current law bars federal money for abortion, with the same exceptions as those in the bill. The health overhaul creates state marketplaces for insurance and allows participating plans to cover abortions, as long as they collect a separate premium from policyholders and that money is kept apart from federal subsidies.
The abortion language in the new law resulted from a compromise among then-majority Democrats that didn't leave everyone happy. Republicans were united in opposing the overhaul. Now, with their efforts to repeal it stalled in the Democratic-controlled Senate, Republicans now running the House are attacking it piece by piece.
House GOP leaders support the effort to limit tax breaks that help pay for abortions, but the bill faces strong opposition in the Senate.
Supporters say the bill is necessary because current law doesn't go far enough in ensuring that no tax money is used to subsidize abortions.
"We're just trying to have a very clear line of demarcation on where our taxpayer funds may be used for abortion," said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. "It's really using the tax code and taxpayer dollars to assist with the procurement of abortion, and we're going to make sure that doesn't happen."
'I will not support this'
Opponents say the bill would make it difficult, if not impossible, for many women to obtain medical coverage that covers abortions — even if they pay for it with their own money.
"This is overkill plus, and the purpose of it escapes me," said Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., a member of the committee. "We're debating an issue that is so inconsequential to the lives of most Americans. I will not support this. I'm annoyed that we're even taking time on the Ways and Means Committee to do something that's obviously very ideological and has nothing to do with the health care bill, and nothing really to do with taxes or getting people back to work."
By law, taxpayers can deduct medical expenses that exceed 7.5 percent of their adjusted gross income, a threshold that increases to 10 percent in 2013. They can also set side tax-free money in health savings accounts, and spend it on approved medical expenses. The Internal Revenue Service currently lists the cost of an abortion as an approved medical expense.
Donna Crane, policy director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, said she is concerned the bill would cause insurance companies in state exchanges to drop abortion coverage, making it unavailable, even for women who pay their own premiums. She is also concerned the bill would put the IRS in the awkward position of determining whether women who get abortions were sexually assaulted, so it can decide whether the procedure is tax-deductible.
"It would be an alarming new responsibility for the IRS," Crane said.

The Spending Fight

• APRIL 1, 2011

Republicans should realize they are winning the debate.

House Republican leaders and the White House are nearing a deal to finally close the books on the 2011 budget—six months into the fiscal year. The White House says it will accept spending cuts of $33 billion, compared to the $62 billion the House passed earlier this year. If House Speaker John Boehner can bring that number closer to $40 billion, so much the better.
We share the desire of new Members in Congress who want deeper reductions. But Republicans don't hold the Senate or the White House, and even cuts of this magnitude are bigger than anyone could have expected last December. Republicans and tea partiers should pocket the victory and move on to the bigger fights over the 2012 budget and debt ceiling.
The fact that Congress is cutting any spending from the $3.6 trillion budget is a big cultural shift in Washington and an important course correction. In 2008, domestic discretionary spending rose by roughly 8%. The budget for federal agencies then expanded another 24% over 2009 and 2010, not including the $270 billion of stimulus funds for these programs. By contrast, the $10 billion in cuts that Republicans have already won for fiscal 2011 will reduce spending by roughly 1%, and 3% if a $33 billion compromise becomes law.
This has accomplished two valuable goals. First, Republicans have succeeded in preventing the stimulus funding in 2009 and 2010 for discretionary programs from becoming a permanent part of the federal baseline of spending, which was a major goal of unions and liberal Democrats.
Second, because this budget permanently reduces the spending baseline for all future agency expenditures, over the next decade $33 billion savings will grow to about $400 billion. Now we're talking real money.

European Pressphoto Agency

U.S. Speaker of the House John Boehner (C) delivers remarks to members of the media regarding spending, with U.S. House Republican leadership.

Democrats grouse that even this is too much to cut from discretionary accounts in one year, especially when the big money is in such entitlement accounts as Medicare and Medicaid. But this is a political bait and switch, since these same Democrats will oppose any entitlement reforms when House Republicans put those on the table next week. It's a shame that some conservatives also fall for the line that the only cuts that matter are in entitlements. When federal spending reaches 25% of GDP, taxpayers should take every cut they can get.
Republicans now need to insist that the cuts come from domestic agencies, rather than from defense or national security. Another danger is that the White House will use the accounting trick of cutting from the "unobligated balances" of programs that wouldn't have spent that money anyway. We hear that Speaker Boehner has told the White House that Republicans will submit their list of $62 billion in specific savings that have already passed the House, and Democrats can pick the cuts they want from that list. That sounds reasonable.
A deal like this would prevent a government shutdown—at least for now—which could jeopardize the GOP's ability to win future budget fights that are more consequential. Next week, House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan will release his fiscal 2012 budget, which we are told will contain more than $2 trillion in savings over the next decade. He'll propose much-needed reforms in Medicare and Medicaid, as well as reductions in funding to implement ObamaCare, which would add 30 million more Americans to the government health-care rolls.
Also looming is a vote to increase the debt ceiling. This is an opportunity for Republicans to explain to the public that it isn't enough merely to honor our national debts, as important as that is. It is also crucial to cut up Congress's credit card so we don't have to keep raising the debt limit again and again.
This ought to mean reforming the current budget process that Democrats rigged in 1974 to make it easier to raise spending and taxes. The "current services" baseline builds in inflated spending levels each year. The absence of a cap on entitlement spending puts double-digit increases on cruise control. Tax cuts to grow the economy are scored as budget busters. Republicans should insist on a rewrite of the budget process, including annual spending caps enforced by automatic cuts, in return for raising the debt limit.
We hope freshmen Republicans don't mistake this early budget compromise for Armageddon and refuse to vote for it. That could weaken the final deal by forcing GOP leaders to move left to get Democratic votes. Republicans are winning the spending debate because they have methodically kept their focus on spending issues rather than on extraneous policy riders. They shouldn't weaken themselves by splintering over an early skirmish, because they will need to be unified and determined for the bigger fights ahead.

Balanced Budget Amendment

March 31, 2011

Johanns Touts Balanced Budget Amendment As Strong Step Toward Sustainable Government

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) and Senate Republicans today introduced a consensus Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution that would mandate a balanced federal budget. The amendment would require both Congress and the President to commit to a budget limiting federal expenditures to 18 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP), and would require supermajorities in both houses of Congress to raise taxes or increase the debt limit.

"The Balanced Budget Amendment marks a strong step toward where we need to be as a country, and that's on a path of sustainability," Johanns said. "We can either start making the tough decisions now, or be forced into reactionary measures later when our debt problems inevitably lead to a debt crisis. The American people have been tightening their belts and this amendment would make Congress do the same. If we want to get our economy on track and kick job creation into high gear, then we’re going to have to get spending under control. Our job creators aren’t going to hire until they have confidence we’re on the right path.

The Balanced Budget Amendment would:

• Require the President to submit to Congress a balanced budget that limits outlays to 18 percent of GDP.

• Require Congress to pass a balanced budget and limit federal outlays to 18 percent of GDP.
  • Exceptions include:
    1. Both houses by a two-thirds vote can provide for a specific excess
    2. Both houses by a majority vote can provide for a specific excess during a declared war;
    3. Both houses by a three-fifths vote can provide for a specific excess for a fiscal year during a military conflict declared to be "an imminent and serious military threat to national security" and the excess be limited to "outlays…made necessary by the identified conflict."

• Require a two-thirds vote from both houses for any bill that raises taxes or otherwise "increases the statutory rate of any tax or the aggregate amount of revenue."

• Require three-fifths vote from both houses to increase the debt limit;
  • Only a simple majority would be required during a time of declared war against a specific nation state.  

• Become effective the fifth fiscal year after ratification.

March 31, 2011

Hatch, Senate Republicans Unveil Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution

Entire Senate Republican Conference Backs Constitutional Amendment to Require Balanced Budgets; Supermajorities for Deficit Spending, Tax Increases, Raising Debt Limit

Mark Eddington and Antonia Ferrier, (202) 224-5251

WASHINGTON – As part of his ongoing effort to restore the nation’s fiscal house, U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee, today unveiled S.J. Res. 10, a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution that will bring down the nation’s skyrocketing national debt by requiring the government to balance its budget, limiting the growth of government spending, and requiring supermajorities for tax increases.  

Hatch spearheaded negotiations for the proposed amendment which brings together major components of an amendment introduced earlier this year by Hatch and Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) and a proposal by Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). S.J. Res. 10 has garnered the support of the entire Senate Republican Conference, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Republican Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), Senate Republican Conference Chair Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, John Cornyn (R-Texas.), and Chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, John Thune (R-S.D.).

“Under the Obama Administration, federal spending has reached 25 percent of our nation’s economic output. We are spending at a level not seen since World War II and it is clear we cannot afford to sustain this White House’s big-spending, tax-hiking, debt-increasing agenda,” said Hatch.  “Hard-working families across the country have tightened their belts, balanced their budgets, and lived within their means, and the federal government ought to do the same. Regrettably, Washington has proven it won’t solve this crisis on its own. A Balanced Budget Amendment will be the shot in the arm Washington needs to effectively hold down spending.” 

Today, the national debt stands at more than $14 trillion. And, according to Congress’s non-partisan budget score-keeper, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the nation’s debt could reach an astonishing 90 percent of GDP in less than a decade with the government spending almost $1 trillion on interest payments alone.  A longtime champion of a Balanced Budget Amendment, Hatch has introduced similar proposals five times throughout his tenure in Congress and has supported or cosponsored proposals more than 20 times.  The Senate came within one vote of approving a similar amendment put forward by Hatch in 1997. 

In addition to 47 Republican cosponsors the Hatch Amendment has garnered the support of Americans for Tax Reform, Americans for Limited Government, Pass the Balanced Budget Amendment, 60 Plus Association, National Tax Limitation Committee, National Taxpayers Union, American Council for Health Reform, Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, Grassroot Voices, EndingSpending.com and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste. Clickhere to see their letters of support.

Specifically, S.J. Res. 10, the Balanced Budget Amendment:

• Mandates that total budgetary outlays for any fiscal year not exceed total revenues.
• Caps federal spending at 18 percent of GDP.
• Requires the President to submit a balanced budget to Congress every fiscal year.
• Requires a two-thirds supermajority for any new tax, any increase in tax rates, or any bill that is a net revenue raiser.   Requires a supermajority to raise the debt limit.
• Allows for waiver of limits if there is a formal declaration of war, if the U.S. is engaged in a military conflict constituting a threat to national security, or if two-thirds of both the House and Senate approve.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder Signs Unemployment Bill

Gov. Rick Snyder   (WJBK | myFOXDetroit.com)

Updated: Tuesday, 29 Mar 2011, 7:52 PM EDT
Published : Monday, 28 Mar 2011, 10:36 AM EDT

By myFOXDetroit.com Staff

(WJBK) - Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder has signed a bill that temporarily continues federal jobless benefits while cutting six weeks of state-level unemployment benefits for new filers starting in 2012.

The measure reduces state jobless benefits from 26 weeks to 20 weeks as of January.

It also allows up to 150,000 Michigan residents to continue receiving extended federal unemployment benefits they otherwise would lose by year's end.

Michigan's two Democratic U.S. senators and six Democratic congressmen sent a letter to the Republican governor Monday asking him to veto the bill because it permanently reduces Michigan's benefits below other states.

Snyder says in a statement he signed it Monday because he didn't want 35,000 jobless workers to abruptly lose their unemployment checks as they would have if the measure wasn't signed by Friday.

Statement from Sander Levin in response to the signing of the bill:

(Washington D.C.) – U.S. Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI) today criticized Gov. Rick Snyder’s signing of a bill that will permanently cut Michigan unemployment insurance from 26 weeks to 20 weeks, giving Michigan the dubious distinction of being the ONLY state in the country that provides fewer than 26 weeks of UI benefits. Snyder, in a news release this morning announcing that he signed HB 4408, failed to even mention the reckless change in the legislation. Instead, he focused on the technical change that could have easily been made without Republicans having to make a permanent cut to unemployment insurance.

“Gov. Snyder’s decision to sign this reckless measure cutting the lifeline for Michigan’s unemployed will reverberate for years in Michigan. In signing this bill, the governor has tried to distract Michiganders from the full story, seeking to portray legislation that includes a drastic and permanent cut as a ‘protection’ for the unemployed. Republicans hijacked a simple technical change to extend 100 percent federally funded benefits this year and gave Michigan the dubious distinction of becoming the only state in the union with 20 weeks of state unemployment insurance. This would affect hundreds and hundreds of thousands of Michiganders in the future.”

Collective bargaining changes pass NH House

By TOM FAHEY
State House Bureau Chief
Thursday, Mar. 31, 2011

CONCORD – The House approved a key piece of its budget package that would make deep cuts to social and health programs, and includes a controversial change to collective bargaining laws.
Republicans rejected a series of attempts by Democrats to lessen the dramatic changes in House Bill 2 (click to see bill text and roll call votes) and passed it, 222-119. The bill would make public workers at-will employees if their contracts end before a new one is in place. The change to collective bargaining, actively opposed by labor, was a late addition to the bill.
The budget, which the House has cut to a nearly $10.2 billion spending package, will be voted on today. The total spending level is $743 million less than the current two-year budget. HB 2 makes the changes in law needed to put the new budget in effect.
HB 2 would eliminate a $7 million program meant to help troubled children in need of services, cut services for the elderly and disabled, cut $115 million in funding to cover hospital charity care, limit the role of the Attorney General's Office, reinforce public pension system changes, freeze school building aid for two years, lock in education aid at this year's level, lock in reduced aid to local government, close the Department of Cultural Resources and require a managed-care system for Medicaid, among other things.
The full bill has 465 sections and covers 136 pages.
Ranks of state workers, firefighters and police listened for nearly an hour late Wednesday as the House debated the change in bargaining laws. The House defeated a move to kill the change, 201-155.

Kensington police Chief Wayne Sheehan, left, was among the municipal employees who were at the State House in protest of anti-union provisions in the House's budget proposal. (THOMAS ROY)

The Senate must approve the provision for it to become law.
Gov. John Lynch opposes the measure. His press secretary, Colin Manning, said it "completely eliminates collective bargaining for public employees, and that's why he opposes it."

More than 400 union members showed up last week when the at-will provision went into the budget. A State House rally today is expected to draw thousands of union members, social service clients, church members and others protesting the budget .
Republicans differed on why the provision was introduced. House Deputy Whip Rep. Shawn Jasper, R-Hudson, said it is needed to make it easier for local government to reach deals with workers. He denied labor's claims that the bill will mean the end of collective bargaining.
Rep. Neal Kurk, R-Weare, who sponsored the change, said it was to make the state budget balance, because the state needs to save $50 million in health benefits for state workers.
"We need to put pressure on state employees' unions for concessions," he said.
Rep. Ben Baroody, D-Manchester, said Republicans short-circuited the legislative process by including a major change to state law in the budget bill at the last minute.
"This is a policy change that shouldn't come in after hours during the budget process when nobody is around. This is wrong. It's not the way we do business," Baroody said.
Union officials said they'll fight the change when it gets to the Senate.
"It's a sad day for workers. It's a sad day for the public sector, but we're certainly not done by any stretch of the imagination," AFL-CIO President Mark MacKenzie said.
David Lang, president of the Professional Firefighters of New Hampshire, said Republicans who spoke on the bill misled listeners on the impact the bill would have on every public worker.
"They should be ashamed of themselves," he said. "This bill will end collective bargaining, and it destroys the public sector."
Democrats tried unsuccessfully to restore $115 million the budget takes from hospitals to provide charity care; to restore the CHINS program for children in need of services; and to protect funding for the 10-year highway plan. The GOP majority rejected them all.
The House easily passed an $89 million capital budget that pays for repairs and upgrades to state buildings and properties, including community colleges and courthouses.
The total is 9 percent below what Gov. Lynch requested, and will leverage up to $78 million in federal funds.
Capital spending will include money that will pay for the E-Court initiative, which would bring electronic filing and access to court documents. It also includes $2 million to purchase 34 or more homes flooded and still threatened by the Suncook River.

Boehner signals compromise in budget talks

'Our goal is to cut spending, not shut down the government'

J. Scott Applewhite  /  AP

Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, and other GOP leaders comment on the Senate Democratic leadership and the problems in passing a long-term spending bill, on Capitol Hill in Washington on Tuesday.

By ANDREW TAYLOR

updated 3/31/2011 4:56:17 PM ET

WASHINGTON — Despite fresh pressure from tea party conservatives, House Speaker John Boehner said Thursday that Republicans "can't impose our will" on the White House and Senate Democrats on legislation to cut tens of billions of dollars in federal spending.

At a news conference, Boehner, R-Ohio, denied Democratic suggestions that he has already agreed to jettison nearly half of the $61 billion in cuts passed by the House a month ago.
But as was the case with Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., earlier in the week, he did not say the demand was non-negotiable. "Our goal is to cut spending, not shut down the government," he said.
Story: Where's the spending squabble heading?

1. Other political news of note
   1. Uncertainty might be biggest shutdown cost
      A federal government shutdown next week would be more complicated than in the one in 1996 because so many more federal functions are performed by contractors.
   2. NJ: Census data favors Obama in key states
   3. Tea Party ralliers: 'Shut it down!'
   4. NYT: Fannie, Freddie executives earned millions
   5. Wis. judge halts governor's union law plans

The government is running on the second of two short-term spending bills, and at the insistence of Republicans, a total of $10 billion has been cut so far.
Without action by Congress, the money will run out on April 9. Lawmakers are seeking a compromise that will extend to the Sept. 30 end of the spending year.
House plans symbolic budget vote as pressure on Senate mounts Senior House and Senate aides, experts in the intricacies of spending legislation, met during the day to explore a possible compromise.
Yet officials in both parties said Democrats had not yet provided Republicans with a detailed list of their proposed cuts, an indication that negotiations were not far along.
Tea Party ralliers: 'Shut it down!' Democratic officials added that some of their proposed reductions would cut $3 billion or so from the Pentagon budget. The House-passed legislation calls for an increase in defense spending, and reserves spending cuts for domestic programs.
Boehner spoke as tea party activists demonstrated within shouting distance of the Capitol and a pair of potential GOP presidential contenders injected themselves into the first big test for the GOP majority elected last fall.
Congressional pay during a shutdown? Still looks likely A few hundred protesters bore signs demanding that the Republican majority they helped vote into office remain true to campaign pledges.
"Remember your promises — WE DO," read one. "Extreme spending requires extreme cuts," was another.
They drew encouragement from several Republican lawmakers.
"Stay courageous and I know you will. Don't back down and I know you won't," Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, a potential presidential contender, exhorted on a cold, drizzly day.
"We will stand for cutting the size of government we won't change our principle," she said.
Separately, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, another White House hopeful, met behind closed doors with first-term Republicans.
Story: House, Senate No. 2s battle over federal budget As speaker, Gingrich led the party into twin shutdowns more than a decade ago that wound up damaging the party politically. He has recently written that the confrontation during the Clinton administration paved the way for a balanced budget agreement a few years later. But he leaves out that, as part of the deal, conservative Republicans were forced to create a new government benefit program — health care for millions of lower-income children — that President Bill Clinton demanded.
Boehner was a junior member of the leadership when Gingrich was party leader in the House. Now the leader of a rambunctious majority, his comments marked a public hint of flexibility two days after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid offered one of his own.
On Tuesday, the Nevada Democrat said his side in the talks was willing to consider limitations on government regulators as well as other non-spending items the House seeks. In exchange, Democrats would expect Republicans to scale back on their demands for spending cuts.
He did not identify any, but other officials have said curbs on the Environmental Protection Agency and other government regulators were likely candidates. Another is a proposed ban on the use of government funds to pay for abortions for poor women living in the District of Columbia.
Additionally, Boehner has made a personal priority of a measure the House passed earlier this week to reinstate school vouchers for District of Columbia students. The program is the only one in the country that uses federal tax dollars to subsidize private-school tuition.
While the showdown over spending has dominated Congress in recent days, it is only the first in a series of collisions expected in the coming months as the Republicans push to rein in the size and scope of government.
Story: Poll: Americans souring more on economy House Republicans are expected to unveil a budget for the next fiscal year next week that includes deep spending cuts in domestic programs as well as steps to remake Medicare and Medicaid. Officials have said that in private conversations, Republicans have set an informal target of reducing budget deficits to $1 trillion over 10 years, down from about $1.5 trillion for the current year.
Details unseen, Democrats are already eager to attack it as too harsh. But conservatives in the Republican Study Conference are expected to outline an alternative with even tighter deficit cuts.
The Treasury also has put lawmakers on notice that an increase in the government's borrowing authority will be needed later this spring. Some conservatives have already announced they will oppose any such measure, while others have laid down conditions that appear unlikely to be met.
Boehner and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky have said the GOP will demand changes to rein in future spending before the increase can pass.

Video: Budget fight intensifies on Capitol Hill

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

President Obama's Green Fleet Initiative A Bold Step Forward In US Energy Use

I am one who agrees with the idea of getting off imported oil. But to get our oil production even to where that would help is a good ten years down the line.  And it was said that our domestic oil production is exported, why when we could use it here.  Obama wants clean energy, that is solar, wind, nuclear, but the Republicans in their haste to cut cut cut the budget have cut the programs that would enable us to go forward with those options.  I am not a budget person, I am not a fiscal hawk, I am an everyday citizen who pays taxes and does not understand all this talk. I would love for someone, anyone who could come to the podium and give me straight talk about what the budget is where it needs to go and what we as Americans need to do to help......I am utterly confused. 

Posted by Secretary Ray LaHood on April 01, 2011 at 11:41 AM EDT

Ed. Note: Updated with video and photo.

Read the Transcript  |  Download Video: mp4 (181MB) | mp3 (17MB)

This afternoon, President Obama unveils his green fleet initiative which ensures that by 2015, all new vehicles purchased for Americas's federal agencies will be electric, gas-electric hybrid, or alternatively fueled.

I will stand alongside the President when he makes that announcement because the Department of Transportation will do whatever we can to support this bold new goal.

The transportation sector accounts for two-thirds of the United States’ oil use and contributes one-third of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions.  After housing, transportation is the second biggest monthly expense for most American families.  Reducing the gas consumed by our federal fleet will help relieve some of the upward pressure on gas prices.

As the President said earlier this week, “In an economy that relies so heavily on oil, rising prices at the pump affect everybody.”

We have the opportunity, and the obligation, to take action.  We can change both the types and the amounts of energy that our transportation systems use while also creating good, high-paying jobs and easing everyone’s burden at the pump.

The Administration is already leading by example on this one. Since taking office, President Obama has doubled the number of hybrids in the government’s fleet of 600,000 vehicles.

President Obama is also right when he says that electric vehicles offer one solution.  They’re on the market, more are coming, and people are excited to buy them.  DOT has already awarded grants to help develop charging stations for these vehicles, and communities across America--from Baltimore to Houston to Seattle are beginning to have more and more of these stations available.

Through historic fuel economy standards, we’ve also made sure the gasoline-powered vehicles purchased by the federal government prior to President Obama's 2015 deadline will also run more efficiently and use less gas.

Reducing the amount of gas consumed by our federal fleet and by America's private vehicles will lower overall fuel demand, helping to keep gas prices lower than they would otherwise be, and save all of us from spending a fortune to fill up. This comprehensive national program is also projected to save 500 million barrels of oil over the lives of the vehicles produced within the first five years of these new standards.

DOT’s Research and Innovative Technology Administration explores the full range of alternative fuels needed to meet our energy sustainability goals.  Their researchers are investigating hydrogen fuel-cell and biofuel transportation technologies that could someday greatly reduce or eliminate our dependence on foreign oil sources.  Already hydrogen refueling stations are popping up to serve the growing number of fuel-cell vehicles on our roadways.

Now, we can’t just wave a magic wand and end our reliance on oil overnight. But under President Obama’s leadership, we are progressing down the path toward sustainability, a cleaner environment, and more livable communities.

President Barack Obama delivers remarks following a tour of the United Parcel Service (UPS) facility in Landover, Md., April 1, 2011. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson)

Tea Party rallies to keep GOP cutting spending

Budget talks are a test of credibility, clout for the loosely affiliated political group

 

By LAURIE KELLMAN

updated 3/31/2011 10:32:42 AM ET

WASHINGTON — The Tea Partiers who helped drive GOP gains in the last election are rallying in the city they love to hate Thursday, urging Republican House leaders — Speaker John Boehner above all — to resist the drive toward compromise in the protracted fight over the federal budget.

Even, they say, if that means Congress fails to do its most important job — paying for the government.
And if Boehner opts instead to agree to a deal with President Barack Obama?
"You're going to see massive amounts of (GOP) primaries" in next year's election, said Mark Meckler of the Tea Party Patriots.
House plans symbolic budget vote as pressure on Senate mounts If the Ohio Republican strikes a budget deal that doesn't cut spending enough, Meckler said Wednesday, "he is going to face a primary challenge."
Story: Boehner signals compromise in budget talks It's tough talk from a member of the loosely affiliated political force that helped drive Boehner's Republican troops into the House majority last year on a platform of smaller, more austere government. And during three months in power, Boehner's been listening.
The House passed a Tea Party-friendly budget that would cut hundreds of programs and eliminate others, including a costly defense project. It also would repeal the Democrats' year-old health care law and assorted regulations on industry — all unlikely to pass the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Test for Tea Party The intensifying talks are as much a test of credibility and clout for the Tea Party as they are a measure of Boehner's ability to lead. There's evidence that some of the 87 members of the freshman class have been educated by their real bosses — their constituents — on the fact that compromise is sometimes the only path to governing. And governing is what lawmakers get paid for.
Story: Poll: Americans souring more on economy "Compromise on the subject of spending is a tough sell. It doesn't mean it's an impossible sell," said freshman Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., a member of the Appropriations Committee who won his seat with 72 percent of the vote. Though he acknowledges the voters' mandate to cut spending, "I also live in a realistic world."
Another freshman suggested the no-compromise crowd save their powder. The current, slow-motion showdown is only over a budget to fund the rest of this fiscal year.
Just wait, said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, for the fireworks over next year's budget, as well as a must-pass bill to allow the government to borrow more money to meet its commitments. Republicans hope to use that measure to force further spending cuts on the president.
"What I tell folks is: This is like Fort Sumter in the Civil War," the Illinois Republican said Wednesday. "This is the first fight. The big battle is still ahead of us."
Video: Budget fight intensifies on Capitol Hill (on this page) Such rhetoric reflects a reality that budget negotiators have assumed for weeks: That with time, those new to Capitol Hill would learn that the only way a budget passes is with spending cuts that all sides agree on. And that means reductions somewhat less than the $61 billion Republicans approved in the budget the House passed last month.
$33 billion in cuts Wednesday night, talks centered on $33 billion in cuts, and there was evidence that members of the broader Republican caucus weren't balking.
"I don't believe that shutting down government is a solution to the problem. Republicans and Democrats need to work out a compromise," said Rep. Charles Bass, R-N.H. "Let's get this over with and get on to the budget."
The tea party rally Thursday promised political muscle and headline-grabbing rhetoric aimed at reminding lawmakers of the populist budget-cutting furor that propelled them to power.
Headlining the event was to be the movement's star and possible presidential contender Michele Bachmann, who also happens to be the top Republican fundraiser in the House.
House Republican leaders weren't expected to attend the event. But Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell is expected to defend the tea party movement on the Senate floor against Democrats who have suggested it has lost popularity.
A new AP-GFK poll of 1,001 adults conducted March 24-28 showed that support for the movement hasn't budged since the election. About 30 percent of respondents said they were tea party supporters, the same percentage reported in surveys since October.
'We're still here' "If you ask me, the goals of the Tea Party sound pretty reasonable," McConnell said in remarks prepared for a Senate floor speech Thursday.
"These folks recognize the gravity of the problems we face as a nation, and they're doing something about it for the sake of our future," McConnell said. "They're making their voices heard. And they've succeeded in changing the debate here in Washington from how to grow government to how to shrink it."
The senator learned about Tea Party power in his own backyard last year when the movement's candidate, now-Sen. Rand Paul, won the GOP nomination over one that McConnell had endorsed. Then, in deference to the Tea Party's demand for a ban on so-called earmarks, McConnell reversed years of unapologetic resistance to such a policy and lined up with its supporters.
Lest lawmakers forget the lessons of 2010 as they face an April 8 deadline for the current budget, the rally Thursday is aimed at reminding them.
"We're still here," Meckler said.

Tea Party ralliers: 'Shut it down!'

These are not Democrats, no matter what you think.

msnbc.com's Carrie Dann

msnbc.com's Carrie Dann

Tea Party activists gather in the shadow of the Capitol to urge budget cuts.

From msnbc.com's Carrie Dann
As budget negotiations continued inside the halls of Congress Thursday, a gathering of Tea Party activists huddled at a cold outdoor rally on Capitol Hill to send a message to the deal-makers inside:
They're ready to pick a fight.
A few hundred people -- far fewer than the massive rallies seen before last year's midterm elections -- who braved the dreary weather urged lawmakers to push deep cuts to the federal budget even if it results in a temporary shuttering of the government, chanting "Cut it or shut it!" and punctuating cheers with calls to "shut it down!"
"If Harry Reid wants a fight, let's give it to him!" said Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN), one of a parade of conservative lawmakers who made remarks at the event sponsored by the Tea Party Patriots.
Many of the rally's speakers were careful to note that Democrats are "rooting" for a shutdown and that GOP budget-cutters hope to avoid a funding lapse that would turn off the government's lights.
Democratic leaders "want to turn you into their scapegoats and blame the Tea Party for shutting the government down," said Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN).
Rep. Allen West (R-FL) declared, "We are not here to talk about shutting the government down... But if you want to talk about shutting down the government, go over there and talk to Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid and the folks at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue!"
Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) told reporters after his brief remarks to the crowd that a federal closure is undesirable but would not be catastrophic.
"No Republican wants to shut the government down. I don't think anybody here really wants a shutdown," DeMint said, "but we shouldn't be so afraid of a shutdown that we can't make the right decisions right now." He added, "We can't be cowed by this threat."
The preemptive finger-pointing over a potential shutdown likely stems from the scars of the budget fights of the mid-1990s, when the public soured on GOP leaders in the wake of a series of federal closings.
A full federal closure "is not going to be very popular with the American people," warned Clinton-adviser-turned-conservative-commentator Dick Morris, who instead suggested a "targeted shutdown" of agencies -- like the EPA and the National Labor Relations Board -- that are loathed by Tea Party activists.
"We don't have to close down the government. We're going to close down the parts of the government we can't stand!" Morris said.
That sentiment was met with cheers -- as well as a smattering of shouts to "shut it down!"
*** UPDATE *** Here's a dispatch from NBC's Catherine Chomiak:
As the continuing resolution currently funding the government inches closer to its expiration date of April 8, Tea Party activists rallied today for a budget battle. Reps. Steve King (R-IA), Mike Pence (R-IN), Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) fired up the crowd on a dreary day in Washington, D.C., with calls for a fight and threats of a government shutdown.

Congressman Pence, citing the current deficit, debt, and “defiant liberal majority in the Senate” said the time was right “to pick a fight."
“The debt stops here,” he said. “If liberals in the Senate would rather play political games and shut down the government instead of making a small down payment on fiscal discipline and reform, I say, 'Shut it down.'”
Representative and potential Republican presidential candidate Bachmann hit Democrats saying they are hoping for a government shut down. “That’s their plan," Bachmann said. "They want to shut the government down, and they want to turn you into their scapegoat and say, 'It’s the Tea Party’s fault for shutting the government down.'"
Paul urged the Tea Party members to keep up their political involvement. “The fight is just beginning,” he vowed. “Keep their feet to the fire, call them, email them, let them know that you are prepared for America to move forward, but only by balancing the budget and making government smaller.”
In addition to a fight on the budget, King showed support for his fellow House Republican saying, “We need to fight on Mike Pence’s proposal on unfunding (sic) Planned Parenthood… And we need to fight on cutting off the funding that implements Obamacare.”
Bachmann also got loud cheers from the crowd when she proposed sending “a change of address form to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.”
This is something Bachmann has said before and will probably be said again, as she continues to consider a 2012 presidential bid.

Inside the Ohio Capitol

By Julia Nutter

 - 

Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:11 AM EDT

Before Ohio Senate started the final vote on Senate Bill 5 to limit collective bargaining yesterday, opponents gathered inside the chamber and made their (singing) voices heard. The tally went 17-16, the same as on the original version.
The bill had passed the House by 53-44. The Ohio Capitol Blog posts video of opponents in the gallery erupting in anger (around :30), chanting "Shame on you! Shame on you!" among other things. You can hear House Speaker William G. Batchelder allowing members of the House to announce the time and location of tomorrow's committee meetings, their announcements are drowned out by the protesters above.