Washington (CNN) -- Even as he charges into his re-election battle, President Barack Obama has a festering weakness on a flank that, by all accounts, ought to be rock solid: the one held by African-American Democrats. Their support for his programs, belief in his leadership and enthusiasm for another term is softening just as he needs it most.

In the past few weeks, the president has been chastised by the Congressional Black Caucus for avoiding troubled inner-city districts, peppered with tough questions on BET, and suffered plummeting poll numbers among black voters.

That last item is critical. During the 2008 election, their turnout was massive and their support almost unanimous. Now, however, a Washington Post/ABC News poll finds that black voters with a "strongly favorable" view of Obama dropped from 86% to 58% in just five months.

"Patience is running out," says Reginald Daniel, a professor of sociology at the University of California Santa Barbara. Daniel has written extensively about race and politics. "People are disappointed because I think their expectations were way too high to begin with."

Many political analysts sum up those "expectations run amok" this way: White voters heralded the election of a black president as a sign that long-standing racial gaps were closing, and they expected Obama to play a post-racial role; a president for everyone, who just happened to be black.

Meanwhile, many African-American voters just as clearly saw his election as a great leap forward and hoped the presence of a black president in the Oval Office would bring a new level of understanding, acknowledgment, and relief for their community's problems.

"Finding a middle ground is almost an impossibility," Daniels says. "It's just the worst position to be in."

The driving problem, however, is neither black nor white -- it is green. Joblessness, bad for everyone, is much worse in African-American communities, where unemployment is pushing 17%, the worst since the 1980s. That is what triggered the revolt in the CBC and those stinging questions during that TV interview.

The president is pushing back, pointing out that his initiatives, such as health care reform and the recent jobs bill, especially help lower-income families, many of whom are black. On BET, he quickly dismissed talk about a dearth of specific programs for minorities.

"What people are saying all across the country is we are hurting and we've been hurting for a long time," the president said. "The question is: How can we make sure the economy is working for every single person?"

He also insisted that even if black leaders are grousing, it's not really about him or his policies. "There's always going to be somebody who is critical of the president of the United States." And at a CBC fundraising dinner he raised eyebrows by telling members to quit complaining and start "marching" with him for change.

But if the reaction of Rep. Maxine Waters, D-California, is any gauge, he'll have to do a lot more selling. She summed up his comments in a word: "Curious."

To be sure, most African-Americans still support Obama. Political analysts do not expect a massive shift of their votes to the Republicans; and even the president's most adamant black critics often follow their barbs with a quick salve, saying African-American voters ultimately will not oppose him.

Still, the danger for the White House is not that black citizens will vote against Obama, but that they won't vote at all.

A lackluster turnout in just a few key states could tip the electoral balance against him. What's more, every moment he spends making sure black Democrats come to the polls increases his risk of alienating white voters, and is time lost winning over independents, whom he also must have.

Politically, it is hard for a candidate to tiptoe through such a black-and-white minefield. For a president, it is even tougher

Question: Who said "Finding a middle ground is almost an impossibility"?

Question: what does sociologist Reginald Daniel say?

Question: Who is losing support among blacks?

Question: what occupation does reginald daniel have?

Question: In recent weeks, whose support among blacks has been beset by troubles?

Question: who faces a balancing act in the 2012 campaign?

Question: What did Reginald Daniel say?

Question: He faces a balancing act in which campaign?

Answer: Daniels

Answer: "Patience is running out,"

Answer: President Barack Obama

Answer: professor of sociology

Answer: President Barack Obama

Answer: President Barack Obama

Answer: "Patience is running out,"

Answer: re-election

Summary:
In recent weeks, Obama's support among blacks has been beset by troubles .
Among them: CBC scolding, hardball questions on BET, black jobless numbers .
He faces a balancing act in the 2012 campaign in appealing to various blocs .
Sociologist Reginald Daniel: "Finding a middle ground is almost an impossibility"


Washington (CNN) -- Fearlessly demonstrating the majesty of U.S. justice or acquiescing to terrorists by giving them undeserved rights and a public platform? The decision to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, admitted mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks, and four other suspects to a New York courtroom, rather than a military tribunal, was described in stark contrasts Sunday by officials on opposing sides of the political spectrum. Democrats hailed Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to try the men in a civilian court as a demonstration of America's might and moral certainty, while Republicans called it a bad idea based on politics rather than pragmatism. "We have a judicial system that's the envy of the world," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, said on the CBS program "Face the Nation." "I don't think we should run and hide and cower. Let's use our system." But Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, speaking on the CNN program "State of the Union," questioned why foreigners who allegedly are terrorists at war with the United States should be given full judicial rights of U.S. citizens. "These people are evil people," Gregg said of the defendants. "They represent a cause which wants to destroy this nation. If they have the opportunity and were to get free, they would try to destroy this country. There's no reason we should have them in the criminal justice system." Former New York Major Rudy Giuliani, considered a possible GOP presidential candidate in 2012, called military tribunals created for terrorism suspects who have been held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a better option than a civilian court. Military tribunals are "a better choice for the government," Giuliani said on "Fox News Sunday." "This choice of New York is a better choice for the terrorists. Why would you seek to give the terrorists a better choice than you're giving the public?" In a separate interview on CNN's "State of the Union," Giuliani said a New York court trial would cause unnecessary stress and expense for the city's police force. "Anyone that tells you that this doesn't create additional security problems, of course, isn't telling you the truth," Giuliani said. "And the best indication of it is, just look at the additional security that's going to be employed when this happens. That also happens to cost millions and millions and millions of dollars." Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, warned that bringing the suspects to New York raised the risk of further attacks on the United States. "Why move them into the United States while we are still under the threat from radical jihadists?" Hoekstra asked on the CBS program. However, Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island said on "Fox News Sunday" that scores of terrorism suspects were successfully prosecuted in civilian courts under the Bush Administration. "What was a statesmanlike decision by the Bush administration can't be a political decision by this administration," Reed said. Holder announced the decision on the trial Friday. He said he expected all five suspects to be tried together and for prosecutors to seek the death penalty. The trial would be open to the public, although some portions that deal with classified information may be closed, Holder said.

Question:
What type of tribunals are they?
Who raises trheat of attacks?
What did Hoekstra say?

Answer: military

Answer: Peter Hoekstra of Michigan,

Answer: "Why move them into the United States while we are still under the threat from radical jihadists?"

Summary:
Democrats: Decision is a demonstration of America's might and moral certainty .
Military tribunals would have been better choice, says ex-N.Y. mayor Giuliani .
Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Michigan: Bringing suspects into U.S. raises threat of attacks .
Sen. Jack Reed, D-Rhode Island: Prosecuting terrorism suspects in civilian courts not new .


Washington (CNN) -- Fears that Haitian earthquake survivors would engage in a massive and deadly ocean migration to South Florida have thus far been unfounded, according to federal and local government officials, who say they continue to plan for such an exodus only as a precaution.

The U.S. Coast Guard said it has witnessed only normal maritime traffic around Haiti, and it has not intercepted any Haitians attempting illegal crossings into U.S. waters. Nor does it see people preparing for voyages .

Florida officials have asked for federal government funding to shelter 10,000 refugees, but said that was done only as a precaution.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Air Force continues daily flights of its EC-130J Commando Solo aircraft -- a radio station in the sky -- which is broadcasting warnings to would-be migrants, as well as information about where people can find food and aid.

List of missing, found people in Haiti

The plane is broadcasting a recorded message from Raymond Joseph, Haiti's ambassador to the United States, saying: "Listen, don't rush on boats to leave the country. Because I'll be honest with you: If you think you will reach the U.S. and all the doors will be wide open to you, that's not at all the case. And they will intercept you right on the water and send you back home where you came from."

State Department deputy spokesman Gordon Duguid said the message is "part of the U.S. effort to help keep Haitians safe."

"We don't want people to endanger their lives by taking risk to try to get to the U.S. at this time," he said.

The U.S. military will be distributing special radios to Haitians this week in an effort to get messages and news spread as far as possible.

Some 50,000 portable solar-powered and windup radios will be distributed by the U.S. military joint task force that is deploying troops in Haiti's capital, Port-au-Prince, and other severely stricken parts of the country.

Government officials say past migrations from Cuba and Haiti were the result of large geopolitical events, circumstances that differ significantly from those in Haiti now. Further, there is a large U.S. government presence in Haiti and offshore -- factors that will make any migration easier for the government to detect.

"At this point, we are not expecting a massive influx of Haitian individuals," said Mike Stone, spokesman for the Florida Emergency Operations Center. Immediately after the January 12 quake, the state "dusted off" a preparedness plan known as Operation Vigilant Sentry "just in case," he said.

The plan has been in place since 2003.

David Halstead, director of Florida's Division of Emergency Management, said the state's request for "safe housing" for 10,000 Haitian survivors was based on the plan. That is the maximum number Florida officials believe the state could support in any mass migration, and only for a limited period, he said. It is based on the expectation that people would first be housed at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba and federal immigration detention centers.

"I think right now, with everyone watching Haiti ... for any boat or ship to be able to get out of there illegally would be a miracle upon itself," Halstead said Tuesday.

The U.S. Coast Guard said it has seen "nothing out of the ordinary" off Haiti's coast in recent days. Ferry vessels have been crowded, "but they're not going anyplace we wouldn't expect them to," Lt. Cmdr. Christopher O'Neil said.

Haitians have migrated to the United States by boat in relatively small numbers for at least the past 30 years, with several notable spikes. An estimated 25,000 Haitians were among the mass migration of more than 150,000 asylum seekers, primarily Cubans, during the Mariel boatlift in 1980. In the early 1990s, tens of thousands of Haitians migrated to the United States after the coup d'etat deposing President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

CNN Pentagon Producer Mike Mount contributed to this report.

Question: How many extra people has Florida asked for Federal funding to house

Question: Are Haitians trying to cross into the U.S.?

Question: What is the maritine traffic around Haiti like according to the USCG

Question: Where are Coast Guard?

Question: Has the coast guard intercepted Haitians trying to cross illegally into US waters?

Answer: 10,000 refugees,

Answer: attempting illegal crossings

Answer: normal maritime

Answer: Haiti,

Answer: not

Summary:
U.S. Coast Guard: Maritime traffic around Haiti normal .
Coast Guard says it hasn't intercepted Haitians trying illegal crossings into U.S. waters .
Florida has asked for federal funding to shelter 10,000 as a precaution .
U.S. Air Force plane broadcasts message: Don't try to reach U.S. on boats .


Washington (CNN) -- Federal Aviation Administrator Randy Babbitt resigned Tuesday, three days after he was arrested on a drunk driving charge near his suburban Washington home.

In a brief statement released to the media, Babbitt said he had submitted his resignation to his boss, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, and that LaHood had accepted it.

Babbitt, 65, a former airline pilot and president of a major pilots' union, said serving as FAA administrator had been "the highlight of my professional career," adding, "But I am unwilling to let anything cast a shadow on the outstanding work done 24 hours a day, 7 days a week by my colleagues at the FAA."

His statement made no mention of his arrest, although it was clearly the event that precipitated his action.

Earlier in the day, Secretary LaHood told reporters he was "very disappointed" that he had learned about Babbitt's Saturday night arrest only after the Fairfax City, Virginia, police department issued a news release about the incident.

In a statement released just minutes after Babbitt announced his resignation, LaHood called Babbitt a "dedicated public servant and outstanding leader."

"I'm proud to say that we have the safest aviation system in the world, and thanks to Randy's stewardship, it became safer and stronger," LaHood said. "He worked tirelessly to improve relations with the labor community and bolstered employee engagement among his 49,000 colleagues at the FAA."

Fairfax City police arrested Babbitt late Saturday night after they allegedly saw Babbitt driving on the wrong side of the road. The police put out a news release on Monday morning detailing the incident. Babbitt was alone in the car, and was cooperative, police said. He was released on personal recognizance, meaning no bail was required.

The police department said Babbitt failed a sobriety test, but they did not release the results of any blood-alcohol test.

On Monday, DOT officials appeared to be caught off-guard when the police department, in accordance with its policies, issued a news release saying Babbitt had been arrested. DOT officials Monday afternoon issued a statement saying that Babbitt had asked for a leave of absence, and it had been granted.

A court date for Babbitt has been set for February 2 in Virginia.

Deputy Administrator Michael Huerta is serving as acting administrator.

Question: When did FAA head Randy Babbitt resign?

Question: Who is the Transportation Secretary?

Question: Who saw Babbit driving

Question: police allegedly saw babbitt doing what?

Question: Who accepted the resignation

Question: Who resigned after this weekend?

Question: What was Randy Babbitt charged with?

Question: who accepts babbitt's resignation?

Question: what did FAA head resign for?

Answer: Tuesday,

Answer: Ray LaHood,

Answer: Fairfax City police

Answer: driving on the wrong side of the road.

Answer: LaHood

Answer: Randy Babbitt

Answer: drunk driving

Answer: Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood,

Answer: he was arrested on a drunk driving charge

Summary:
NEW: FAA head Randy Babbitt resigns after a weekend charge of drunk driving .
NEW: Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood accepts Babbitt's resignation .
Police allegedly saw Babbitt driving on the wrong side of the road .


Washington (CNN) -- Few issues divide the Supreme Court -- and the country at large -- more than church-state matters, and arguments before the Supreme Court on Wednesday involving a workplace discrimination lawsuit against a Lutheran church proved especially touchy.

At issue is whether the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to hiring and firing decisions involving "ministerial employees" like teachers who may have primarily secular job duties.

The justices appeared at odds over whether this is substantive discrimination or simple retaliation against a Michigan teacher, after she complained to government authorities over her treatment on the job.

"You're asking for an exemption (to lawsuits) so these issues can't even be tried" in a government hearing on the merits, said Justice Anthony Kennedy. "She was fired simply for asking for a hearing."

"It's none of the business of the government to decide what the substantial interest of the church is," countered Justice Antonin Scalia. "There, in black and white in the text of the Constitution, are special protections for religion."

Court records show Cheryl Perich went on medical leave for narcolepsy in 2004. When she tried to return several months later to the Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School, officials refused to accept her, saying a substitute had been hired to complete the school year. After weeks of often acrimonious discussions between her and the school, Perich was fired for insubordination and "regrettable" conduct toward church leaders.

She then complained to the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which sued the church on her behalf.

Federal courts have upheld an exception in the Americans with Disabilities Act blocking government intrusion in the employment decisions between religious institutions and ministerial workers. The church said Perich was just such an employee and therefore the institution could not be sued.

Perich had been hired five years earlier, and eventually became a "called" teacher, meaning she could not be fired without cause.

Assigned to third and fourth grades, she led instruction in math, language arts, social studies, gym and music, with much of the curriculum identical to that of the local public schools. Perich also taught a religion class four days a week, and engaged in daily prayers and devotionals with her students. The religion-based activities typically took up about 45 minutes of the seven-hour school day, according to court documents.

She also led chapel services with her class twice a year, on a rotation basis with other instructors.

The faculty has two types of teachers: "lay" employees, who are on one-year contracts, and called teachers like Perich, who have completed a formal colloquy, receiving a certificate of admission into the teaching ministry. Those parochial instructors are hired on an open-ended basis and cannot be summarily dismissed without proper justification. Perich began as a contract teacher, but fulfilled the requirements to be a called teacher, becoming a "commissioned minister" in the Lutheran Church.

Perich attended the one-hour oral arguments at the high court, saying afterward, "I can't fathom how the Constitution in any way can be interpreted to deny me my fundamental rights. I hope the court sees it that way."

The Redford, Michigan, school is affiliated with the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, but does not require its teachers to be called, or even Lutheran.

A federal appeals court in Cincinnati eventually ruled for Perich, saying her primary duties as a teacher were not religious in nature.

In the oral arguments at the high court, Douglas Laycock, representing the church, said, "Government does not set the criteria for selecting and removing officers of the church. That's a bedrock principle."

Justice Sonia Sotomayor jumped in. "Doesn't society have a right at some point to say certain conduct is unacceptable," and deserving of government intervention. "We know from the news recently that there was a church whose religious beliefs centered around sexually exploiting women and, I believe, children."

She added, "Once we say that's unacceptable, can and why shouldn't we protect (from

Question: who wants to sue the church school that dismissed her

Question: What denomination is the church that dismissed the former teacher?

Question: Whats the name of the justice?

Question: what did justice Sotomayor say about society right

Question: Whats the name of the school?

Question: Was the teacher dismissed?

Answer: Cheryl Perich

Answer: Lutheran

Answer: Anthony Kennedy.

Answer: "Doesn't

Answer: Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and

Answer: fired for insubordination and "regrettable" conduct toward church leaders.

Summary:
A former teacher wants to sue the church school that dismissed her .
The Evangelical Lutheran Church and School says it is immune from such suits .
Justice Sotomayor: "Doesn't society have a right" to censure "certain conduct?"
Chief Roberts: The EEOC is judging "how important a ... religious belief is to a church"


Washington (CNN) -- Finding al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and rolling back a resurgent Taliban are necessary steps toward winning the war in Afghanistan, the top U.S. commander there told a Senate committee Tuesday.

Bin Laden remains at large more than eight years after the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington that triggered the Afghan war, and is widely believed to be hiding along the rugged border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, said the world's most wanted terrorist is "an iconic figure" whose survival "emboldens al Qaeda as a franchising organization across the world."

"It would not defeat al Qaeda to have him captured or killed, but I don't think we can finally defeat al Qaeda until he is finally captured or killed," McChrystal told the Senate Armed Services Committee. But he said if bin Laden is hiding across the border, "It is outside of my mandate."

In addition, he said, pushing back the Taliban -- which allowed al Qaeda to operate from Afghanistan before 9/11 -- is a "prerequisite" for destroying the terrorist network.

"To pursue our core goal of defeating al Qaeda and preventing their return to Afghanistan, we must disrupt and degrade the Taliban's capacity, deny their access to the Afghan population, and strengthen the Afghan security forces," he said.

McChrystal's appearance before senators was his second round of testimony on Capitol Hill on Tuesday, following a session with the House Armed Services Committee earlier in the day. Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador in Kabul, joined him in both hearings.

Both men were called to testify about President Obama's new plan for the Afghan war, which involves the deployment of another 30,000 U.S. troops and a July 2011 date for the beginning of an American withdrawal. McChrystal said the next 18 months will be "critical" to the war effort and said U.S. forces must convince Afghans that "we are going to win."

The United States and its NATO allies must reverse the Taliban's actual and perceived momentum and establish "contiguous security" around the country rather than the pockets that currently exist, McChrystal said. One advantage U.S. troops have is that the Taliban -- which ruled most of Afghanistan before the 9/11 attacks -- remain largely unpopular among Afghans and draw support only through the threat of violence.

"I have never seen evidence that the Taliban have popular support like a political liberation movement," he said.

In August, the general had cautioned that a failure to reverse Taliban gains within 12 months could make defeating the insurgents impossible. But his testimony Tuesday lengthened that timeline.

"The sober fact is that there are no silver bullets," he told the House committee. "Ultimate success will be the cumulative effect of sustained pressure."

McChrystal said he "participated fully in the president's assessment and decision-making process" and fully supports Obama's decision. And Eikenberry, whose leaked cables to Washington indicated that he opposed sending large numbers of troops to the conflict, told the Senate he is "100 percent" behind the new strategy "with the refinement of the mission."

His initial questions, Eikenberry told the House, were about the number of troops, the timeline for those troops, and the context in which those troops would operate.

"The mission was refined, the ways forward were clarified, and the resources now have been committed to allow us to achieve the refined mission," said the ambassador, a retired general who held a senior post in Kabul before retiring from the Army. "With that, at this point in time ... I am unequivocally in support of this mission and I am exactly aligned with Gen. McChrystal in moving forward now to vigorously implement the assigned mission."

Both Eikenberry and McChrystal went out of their way to minimize the differences in their views after reports of an Eikenberry cable advising the president that McChrystal's plans to send more troops would be ill advised because of a lack of confidence in the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai. In their opening statements, both said they were honored

Question: who testified before the committees?

Question: Who testified before the armed services committee?

Question: what will be critical to success?

Question: Who do they need to capture to defeat al Qaeda?

Answer: Gen. Stanley McChrystal,

Answer: Gen. Stanley McChrystal,

Answer: the next 18 months

Answer: Osama bin Laden

Summary:
NEW: "I don't think we can finally defeat al Qaeda" without getting bin Laden, McChrystal says .
NEW: General, U.S. ambassador testify before House and Senate armed services committees .
McChrystal: Perceptions of Afghan people and insurgency will be critical to success .
McChrystal: "I don't view July 2011 as a deadline."


Washington (CNN) -- Flights transporting critically injured Haitians into the United States will resume within a few hours, the White House announced Sunday afternoon.

The flights were temporarily suspended because of logistical issues including space to care for the injured, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said Saturday.

"Having received assurances that additional capacity exists both here and among our international partners, we determined that we can resume these critical flights," he said in a statement Sunday.

Full coverage

The statement, released Sunday afternoon, said flights would resume "in the next 12 hours."

The evacuated patients are those whose medical needs could not be met by doctors working in Haiti. Nearly 23,000 people have been seen by U.S. personnel since the January 12 earthquake, Vietor said.

Some volunteer American doctors in Haiti expect the flights to resume at 11 a.m. Monday, according to Nery Ynclan, a spokeswoman for Dr. Barth Green, of the University of Miami, who is leading a team of volunteers in Port-au-Prince.

Airlifts stopped after there were "concerns about the strain on domestic health capacity," Vietor said. But officials have increased the ability to care for patients through a network of nonprofits and U.S. hospitals, he said.

But earlier reports also cited questions over who would pay for patients' care.

The missing, the found, the victims

The flights stopped Wednesday when some states refused to allow entry to Haitians needing care, according to Navy Capt. Kevin Aandahl, a spokesman for the U.S. Transportation Command. He would not say which states objected.

In a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius obtained by CNN, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist asked that the federal government activate the National Disaster Medical System to provide reimbursement to Florida and other states for taking in the patients, who have no insurance.

Florida's health facilities were already strained by winter tourism and seasonal residence migration, Crist said in the letter. But Florida officials said Saturday that the state was committed to assisting Haitian quake victims and had not asked the airlifts be halted.

Florida will play a role in caregiving once flights resume. The state has identified medical facilities that could take in victims, Vietor said in Sunday's statement.

CNN's Susan Candiotti and Rachel Streitfeld contributed to this report.

Question: Who are Evacuated patients?

Question: what did spokesman say?

Question: What flight had been temprarily suspened

Question: Had Flights been temporarily suspended?

Question: What has White House received?

Answer: those whose medical needs could not be met by doctors working in Haiti.

Answer: The flights were temporarily suspended because of logistical issues including space to care for the injured,

Answer: transporting critically injured Haitians into the United States

Answer: were

Answer: assurances

Summary:
White House spokesman: Flights had been temporarily suspended because of logistical issues .
Spokesman says there were "concerns about the strain on domestic health capacity"
Evacuated patients are those whose medical needs couldn't be met in Haiti after quake .
White House has "received assurances that additional capacity exists"


Washington (CNN) -- Flights transporting critically injured Haitians to the United States are set to resume Monday morning, according to a spokeswoman for a University of Miami team of volunteers in Port-au-Prince. The flights are scheduled to resume at 11 a.m. Monday, said Nery Ynclan, a spokeswoman for the university's R. Barth Green, who is leading the team. The flights were temporarily suspended because of logistical issues including space to care for the injured, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said Saturday. "Having received assurances that additional capacity exists both here and among our international partners, we determined that we can resume these critical flights," he said in a statement Sunday. The statement, released Sunday afternoon, said flights would resume "in the next 12 hours." The evacuated patients are those whose medical needs could not be met by doctors working in Haiti. Nearly 23,000 people have been seen by U.S. personnel since the January 12 earthquake, Vietor said. The missing, the found, the victims Airlifts stopped after there were "concerns about the strain on domestic health capacity," Vietor said. But officials have increased the ability to care for patients through a network of nonprofits and U.S. hospitals, he said. Earlier reports also cited questions over who would pay for patients' care. The flights stopped Wednesday when some states refused to allow entry to Haitians needing care, according to Navy Capt. Kevin Aandahl, a spokesman for the U.S. Transportation Command. He would not say which states objected. In a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius obtained by CNN, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist asked that the federal government activate the National Disaster Medical System to provide reimbursement to Florida and other states for taking in the patients, who have no insurance. Share your stories from Haiti Florida's health facilities were already strained by winter tourism and seasonal residence migration, Crist said in the letter. But Florida officials said Saturday that the state was committed to assisting Haitian quake victims and had not asked the airlifts be halted. Full coverage Florida will play a role in caregiving once flights resume. The state has identified medical facilities that could take in victims, Vietor said in Sunday's statement. CNN's Susan Candiotti and Rachel Streitfeld contributed to this report.

Question: What have questions been raised about?

Question: what Flights were temporarily halted Wednesday over?

Question: When will evacuation flights to U.S. resume?

Question: who are these support groups

Question: what to resume Monday morning, aid group says?

Question: When were flights temporarily halted?

Answer: who would pay for patients' care.

Answer: transporting critically injured Haitians to the United States

Answer: 11 a.m. Monday,

Answer: a network of nonprofits and U.S. hospitals,

Answer: Flights transporting critically injured Haitians

Answer: Wednesday

Summary:
Evacuation flights to U.S. to resume Monday morning, aid group says .
Flights were temporarily halted Wednesday over logistical issues, White House says .
Some hospitals lacked space to care for influx of Haitian patients .
Questions have also been raised about who will pay for their care .


Washington (CNN) -- Foreign nationals who are HIV-positive will find it easier starting Monday to visit the United States. The Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed HIV infection from the list of diseases that prevent non-U.S. citizens from entering the country. HIV is the human immunodeficiency virus -- the virus that causes AIDS. Advocates for HIV-positive people said the new policy was long overdue, calling it "a significant step forward for the United States." "The end of the HIV travel and immigration ban is the beginning of a new life for countless families and thousands who had been separated because of this policy," said Steve Ralls, spokesman for Immigration Equality, a national rights organization for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and HIV-positive individuals. "This is a new beginning for them." The final rule was approved in November and went into effect Monday. The new regulation takes HIV infection out of the category of "communicable diseases of public health significance," the CDC said. It also removes required testing for HIV infection from the U.S. immigration medical screening process and eliminates the need for a waiver for entry into the United States. U.S. laws and regulations enacted since 1952 have made persons "who were afflicted with any dangerous contagious disease" ineligible to receive a visa to enter the country. People infected with HIV have been restricted since 1987, when Congress directed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to add HIV to its list of diseases of public health significance. The United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008, which President Bush signed on July 30, 2008, removed the statutory requirement that mandated the inclusion of HIV on the list of diseases of public health significance that barred entry in the United States. The legislation did not, however, automatically change the existing regulations, administered by HHS, that continued to list HIV as a "communicable disease of public-health significance" and required the more cumbersome visa process. The United States was one of 13 countries that restricted entry of HIV-positive visitors, according to amfAR, an AIDS research foundation.

Question: When was the ban put in place?

Question: What ban was recently lifted?

Question: what does the HIV-infected visitors have to do?

Question: what does the advocates say?

Question: What was the ban on?

Answer: 1952

Answer: the HIV travel and immigration

Answer: required testing for HIV infection from the U.S. immigration medical screening process

Answer: the new policy was long overdue, calling it "a significant step forward for the United States."

Answer: HIV travel and immigration

Summary:
Travel and immigration ban on HIV-positive travelers lifted .
Advocates for HIV-positive people say the new policy was long overdue .
HIV-infected visitors previously had to get a special waiver to obtain a visa .


Washington (CNN) -- Former President Bill Clinton will travel to Haiti on Monday to meet with officials and deliver aid supplies to the quake-ravaged country, his foundation announced Sunday. Clinton, the U.N. special envoy to Haiti, will meet with Haitian President Rene Preval and other members of the local government as well as aid workers, to discuss how to proceed with recovery operations. The visit comes two days after President Barack Obama announced the formation of the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund, a major fundraising effort for victims of Tuesday's earthquake led by Clinton and former President George W. Bush. In a pre-recorded interview broadcast Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union," Bush and Clinton said the first goal of the fund is to get aid to Haiti right away to save lives. It also seeks to ensure that money keeps coming in after public attention begins to wan in the weeks and months ahead. "For me, success is helping save lives in the short term, and then we can worry about the long-term after the situation has been stabilized," Bush said. Clinton, who also is the U.N. special envoy to Haiti, defined success as "setting up a network quickly to get the food, water, medicine, security and information people need." The overall goal is to help Haiti resume "as quickly as possible" its efforts to build a "strong, modern society" after decades of political and social instability that made it the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere before the earthquake, Clinton said. Officials in Haiti fear more than 100,000 people killed in the disaster. Clinton noted that Haiti already was working to overcome its problems before the latest crisis. "They have an economic plan," Clinton said. "We're going to have to amend it now, and substantially, to take account of the damage done." Simply restoring Haiti to its impoverished state prior to the earthquake would amount to failure, Clinton said. The two predecessors to Obama as U.S. leader also said the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund (http://www.clintonbushhaitifund.org/) was intended to provide people with a safe place to continue donating money to help the Caribbean country. "Our job it to set up a fund to make sure the compassion is still existent once the crisis gets off TV and make sure the money is wisely spent," Bush said. That means getting the donated money quickly to organizations with experience working in Haiti, including faith-based groups and international aid groups, Bush and Clinton said. "During these crises, all kinds of fake charities spring up that take advantage of people's good will," Bush said. "We're safe haven. We will make sure the money is accounted for and there's transparency and properly spent." Both Bush and Clinton noted politics should play no role in responding to the crisis, with Clinton saying: "I hope that it will humanize us all in every aspect of our lives." However, Clinton couldn't resist a little politicking, praising the Obama administration's response so far and noting that the president had "extraordinary taste" in a secretary of state -- his wife, Hillary Clinton. Clinton also offered warm praise for CNN's coverage of the Haiti earthquake. "You made this come alive to the American people," Clinton said. "You put us in the skin of the Haitian people, and I'm personally very grateful." For Bush, his return to Washington is a welcome chance to aid a worthy cause, but nothing more. "I frankly don't miss the limelight," Bush said. "I'm glad to help out."

Question: What does Clinton say the relief funds will help do?

Question: Who will the Haitian president meet with on monday?

Question: What kind of relief are we sending to Haiti?

Question: Who will Clinton meet with on monday?

Answer: to get aid to Haiti right away to save lives.

Answer: Bill Clinton

Answer: food, water, medicine, security and information people need."

Answer: officials

Summary:
Clinton will meet with Haitian president on Monday .
Clinton working with former President George W. Bush on Haitian relief .
Clinton says relief fund will help Haiti recover after situation stabilizes .
Bush says fund is a place for people to make sure their donations are well-spent .


Washington (CNN) -- Frustrated Democrats went to the Senate floor Friday to seek Republican approval for a long list of administration nominees currently blocked by controversial secret holds placed by GOP senators.

But a Republican senator objected to each of them as they came up.

"Most of the people on the list, we don't know why they're sitting there. We don't even know who's making them sit there," complained Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, who is spearheading Democratic efforts to banish secret holds. "Enter stage left, the anonymous hold. Or as I like to call it, nobody can blame me cause they don't know who I am."

McCaskill said the delay in approving these nominees is particularly agonizing because most of them passed out of committee with little or no opposition.

"If there is a legitimate complaint or grievance against any nominee, I think any senator has a right to be heard and appeal to the body for a vote," Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the number two Democrat, said Thursday. "But secret holds, I think, have become a reprehensible part of the process here and need to end."

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, was the lone Republican on the floor Friday during the nearly two-hour debate on the issue. He objected to Democratic requests to approve the nominees not because he personally opposes them but "as courtesy to people on my side of the aisle who have problems with some of these nominees."

Coburn said Republicans have a right to a public debate on nominees they oppose and Democrats are trying to get around that by seeking unanimous consent to quickly confirm them.

In fact, Coburn won praise from McCaskill because she said he is the only Republican senator who has made his holds public.

Democrats are especially upset because they think most Republicans are getting around a Senate rule adopted three years ago that requires senators to make public their holds once they've had them in place for six legislative days.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, called the practice "hold-laundering," which is when senators rotate a secret hold off to one another before hitting the six-day trigger for making their names public and thereby keep a hold in place indefinitely.

Republicans don't deny using the method but argue it's allowed by Senate rules which could be changed if Democrats want.

"If they think the rule needs to be tightened up they can offer to change the rule," suggested a GOP leadership aide.

In fact, Democrats said an effort is under way to offer an amendment to the financial regulations bill currently on the floor to shorten the six-day window to two days.

Democrats complain the secret holds keep the Obama administration from being able to effectively govern and point to one nominee, Michael Huerta, to be the No. 2 official at the Federal Aviation Administration, as an example of a key appointee stalled by an anonymous senator.

At a news conference on Thursday, Durbin said that Republicans that day had finally lifted a hold and approved the nomination of a top National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration official only after feeling pressured because of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

"If they're going to move this appointee ... because of an oil spill, what does it take to move the deputy administrator of the FAA in charge of air safety," Durbin asked. "Fill in the blanks."

Asked about Democratic concerns over the issue earlier this week, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky acknowledged, "We've always had a challenging environment in the Senate with regard to the confirmation of executive branch appointments. This administration's been treated about the same as previous administrations in terms of the pace of confirmations."

Democrats disputed that notion and cited figures suggesting Obama's nominees are moving slower than George W. Bush's at this time in his presidency.

A top Republican senator accused Democrats also of using rotating holds.

"What I have run into in trying to get a bill or an amendment in the Senate in the past is the

Question: Who seek approval of nominees?

Question: What democrats say?

Question: What does the republicans refuse to deny?

Question: What do democrats say keeps Obama from effective governing?

Question: Who do democrats seek approval from?

Answer: Democrats

Answer: "Most of the people on the list, we don't know why they're sitting there. We don't even know who's making them sit there,"

Answer: using the method

Answer: the secret holds

Answer: Republican

Summary:
Senate Democrats seek approval of nominees they say GOP is blocking .
Republicans don't deny holding up process, argue it's allowed by Senate rules .
Democrats say secret holds keep Obama administration from being able to effectively govern .
Republicans say Democrats use the same tactic .


Washington (CNN) -- Full-body imaging machines that see through clothes have significantly improved security in airports where they are deployed, and have revealed more than 60 "artfully concealed" illegal or prohibited items in the past year, the Transportation Security Administration says.

To date, no explosives have been detected by the machines, but their ability to spot even small concealed objects demonstrates their effectiveness as a security tool, officials said.

"It is absolutely a tremendous improvement of what we can detect at the checkpoints," TSA Acting Administrator Gale Rossides said this week. "It is an excellent piece of technology that will significantly improve our detection capabilities."

As evidence of the machines' capabilities, the security agency released five photos of drugs or suspected drugs that airport screeners found after scans revealed anomalies on the ghost-like images of people's bodies. The agency said metal detectors would not have revealed the items.

Screeners using the technology also found a knife hidden in the small of a person's back at the Richmond, Virginia, airport, a concealed razor blade on a passenger in Phoenix, Arizona, and other concealed items such as large bottles of lotion, which are prohibited as carry-on items.

In addition, the machines have revealed numerous prohibited items that passengers evidently inadvertently left in pockets. Those items are confiscated but are not counted in the tally, a TSA spokesman said.

U.S. to implement new airport security measures

The agency field-tested the full-body imagers for more than a year before announcing last month the deployment of machines to 11 airports nationwide. Today, 46 machines are in place in 23 airports, and the agency is stepping up deployments and plans to have about 1,000 set up by the end of 2011.

Interest in the machines has heightened since the Christmas Day incident in which a man allegedly attempted to detonate an explosive concealed in his underwear. In an appearance before Congress last month, Rossides declined to say whether the machines could have detected the underwear bomb.

But to illustrate the machines' effectiveness, Rossides showed a packet of white powder smaller than a tea bag, saying it was identical to a concealed bag detected by an imager.

"The amazing thing is that our officers, as they get more and more familiar with this technology, are actually finding very, very small things that are being secreted on the body," she said.

But some passengers say the machine's capabilities are presenting new Fourth Amendment questions about the government's searches, saying the machines -- in detecting very small objects -- are subjecting passengers to scrutiny beyond what is needed to safeguard the plane.

"I can't imaging an explosive that is powerful enough in that [tea-bag size] quantity to endanger an aircraft," said John Perry Barlow, a former Grateful Dead lyricist who once took the TSA to court after a search of his checked luggage revealed a small amount of drugs.

"Every time technology makes another leap forward, we have to reclaim the Fourth Amendment, and often we have to reclaim the entire Bill of Rights, because technology gives us powers that were not envisioned by the Founding Fathers," Barlow said.

The security agency said that it searches only for prohibited items -- not illegal items such as drugs. When it finds illegal items during a search, it refers the item to local law enforcement officers, it says.

"What we're trying to resolve is the anomaly that we're seeing on the body," said Rossides. "If it's drugs, then we call in local law enforcement and they handle it from there."

Barlow predicted that the body scanner will lead to another court case to clarify the extent it can be used to search the body.

"Eventually they're going to bust somebody for something that was clearly and obviously not a threat to the aircraft, and any reasonable person would have known that [while looking at the] body scan. And at that point somebody is going to make it an issue," he said.

Rossides said the body imagers are especially useful because they can expose contraband

Question: What was discovered in the past year?

Question: what No explosives have been detected by?

Question: Have explosives been detected?

Question: what Found items include drugs, knife, bottle of lotion?

Question: who found them

Question: What are some of the found items?

Answer: more than 60 "artfully concealed" illegal or prohibited items

Answer: the machines,

Answer: no

Answer: Full-body imaging machines

Answer: airport screeners

Answer: drugs or suspected drugs

Summary:
60 "artfully concealed" illegal or prohibited items discovered in past year, TSA says .
No explosives have been detected by the machines .
Found items include drugs, knife, bottle of lotion bigger than allowed .


Washington (CNN) -- GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain faced a new claim of sexually inappropriate behavior Monday as a Chicago woman told reporters the former head of the National Restaurant Association groped her after a dinner together in 1997.

Sharon Bialek, who worked at the restaurant group's education foundation until shortly before the alleged groping incident, said Cain unexpectedly put his hand on her leg beneath her skirt "toward my genitals." She also said he pushed her head toward his crotch.

Cain stopped when she protested, Bialek told a news conference.

Looking into the television cameras, Bialek said: "I want you, Mr. Cain, to come clean. Just admit what you did."

Gloria Allred a girl's best friend

The accusation follows the disclosure last week that the restaurant association provided payments to two women who left the group after alleging sexual harassment by Cain, also in the late 1990s.

Cain has denied all accusations of sexual harassment, and his campaign put out a fresh denial after Bialek made her accusations on Monday.

"All allegations of harassment against Mr. Cain are completely false," a campaign statement said. "Mr. Cain has never harassed anyone."

Earlier accuser's attorney talks to CNN

Since becoming public on October 30 in a report by Politico, the sexual harassment accusations have overwhelmed the bid by the former pizza company executive to win the Republican presidential nomination.

Cain, a favorite of tea party conservatives, has risen to the top of the polls following strong performances in several debates and the release of his "9-9-9" tax plan that sets flat 9% rates for corporate and income taxes and also creates a 9% national sales tax.

However, Bialek's accusation raises fresh questions about whether Cain has been candid about the allegations that he sexually harassed women at the restaurant association when he headed the group from 1996-99.

Bialek said she started to work at the group's foundation in 1996 but was laid off in 1997. The association confirmed Bialek's employment dates as December 30, 1996, to June 20, 1997.

Shortly after getting let go, Bialek said, she contacted Cain -- whom she had met at the group's Chicago convention -- to seek help in finding a job.

She traveled to Washington, where Cain worked, and found he had upgraded her hotel room to a luxury suite without telling her. They had dinner at an Italian restaurant, she said, and then Cain asked if she had been to the association offices in the capital.

Cain made his advances on the way, according to Bialek.

"He said, 'You want a job, right?' " she told reporters at the news conference organized by celebrity attorney Gloria Allred.

Bialek took no questions from reporters, but Allred said Bialek had told two people at the time about what happened. Bialek filed no complaint with the restaurant association because she no longer worked there, Allred said.

Asked why Bialek was coming forward now, Allred said it was in solidarity with Cain's other accusers and harassed women everywhere.

Cain has previously complained the sexual harassment allegations amount to a baseless media onslaught against his campaign. Polls have yet to indicate any significant effect on his support -- in fact, the campaign reported a spike in donations Monday.

Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon told CNN the campaign raked in $2 million during the past week. By comparison, Cain raised $2.8 million between June and October.

On Sunday, one of Cain's rivals called for keeping the issue alive, saying the necessary scrutiny of presidential candidates requires Cain to answer all questions about what happened.

On Saturday, Cain scolded reporters who asked about the issue following a debate with fellow conservative Newt Gingrich in Texas.

"Don't even go there," Cain told one questioner who'd asked about the allegations. Asked again later, he responded: "What I'm saying is this -- we are getting back on message, end of story. Back on message. Read all of the other accounts, where everything has been answered -- end of story.

Question: What did Sharon Bialek say?

Question: What did a Chicago woman accuse Cain of?

Question: What does Cain's campagin say about the harassment?

Question: What does the Cain camp report?

Question: what says sharon bialek

Question: When did Cain make an unwanted sexual advance?

Question: What did Sharon Bialek challenge Cain to do?

Answer: Cain unexpectedly put his hand on her leg beneath her skirt "toward my genitals." She also said he pushed her head toward his crotch.

Answer: sexually inappropriate

Answer: "Mr.

Answer: spike in donations

Answer: "I want you, Mr. Cain, to come clean. Just admit

Answer: 1997.

Answer: to come clean. Just admit

Summary:
NEW: Cain camp reports $2 million haul since allegations broke .
Chicago woman says Cain made an unwanted sexual advance in 1997 .
"Just admit what you did," Sharon Bialek says of Cain .
Cain's campaign denies any sexual harassment on his part .


Washington (CNN) -- Gregg Keesling chooses his words carefully when he talks about the death of his son, Spc. Chancellor Keesling. As far as he's concerned, the soldier didn't "take his own life" or "commit suicide." His son "died by suicide," Keesling insists -- and he has his reasons why. When 25-year old Chancellor Keesling shot himself in Iraq on June 19, his family received much support from the military and local officials. Gregg Keesling's son was given the honor afforded to a fallen service member. The Keesling family went to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to watch as his body was flown back to Indiana six days later. At his burial, seven rifles fired three times each, in true military tradition. Later, the soldier's aunt created a memorial wall in the family's Indianapolis living room. On the wall hangs Spc. Keesling's uniform, the U.S. flag that was handed to his mother, Jannett, after the service and the Indianapolis flag that flew over the state Capitol in his honor. Yet there's an empty spot on the wall for an honor that never arrived: a letter from the president. Gregg Keesling wanted to know why, especially after hearing President Obama talk about how he struggled to write letters to the families of each and every soldier killed in the war. After pressing for an answer, the family found out the truth: There would be no condolence letter. It's a matter of policy dating to the Clinton era, according to the White House. The commander in chief sends such letters to the families of troops who have died in combat, but not if they committed suicide, Gregg was told. The policy felt wrong to Gregg and Jannett Keesling. Their son was a hero, and his country should be proud of him, they said. So Gregg Keesling wrote to Obama and Army Chief of Staff Gen. George W. Casey Jr., imploring them to rethink the policy. "The recognition of the president could have profound impact on the family of the suicide victim," Keesling wrote in August. Read the letters to President Obama "The lack of acknowledgment and condolences from the President, who our family admires greatly, leaves us with an emotional vacuum and a feeling that we his family have somehow [made] less of a sacrifice," he wrote in another letter to Casey. A White House spokesman said the administration is reviewing the "inherited" policy. "The President's thoughts and prayers are with every military family who has lost a loved one in service to our country. As Commander-in-Chief, he has worked with Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen to address the mental health needs of our service members," spokesman Tommy Vietor wrote in an e-mail. Spc. Keesling completed two tours of duty in Iraq. When he enlisted in 2003, the family struggled with his decision. But the young soldier was convinced that he made the right decision, telling his family, "We must have a military, and somebody's got to be in it." Before he deployed 2005, he was anxious but excited, his mother remembered. However, toward the end of his deployment, the stress of a failing marriage and the shock of war "began to wear on him terribly," Gregg Keesling said. In anger, he threw his wedding ring into the Tigris River, his parents said. He was put under suicide watch, and his ammunition was taken away for several days. At home, though, he was "back to his old self," his father said, adding that his son found a job at FedEx and a new girlfriend. He was treated at the Veterans Affairs clinic for a shoulder injury and burn he suffered during his deployment. His parents assumed he was being treated for everything he needed. In 2009, he received new deployment orders . His family suggested that he move to his mother's native Jamaica to avoid service, but the soldier insisted that it was his obligation to see it through

Question: What is the family asking for?

Question: Who wants a condolence letter from President Obama?

Question: Who wants a condolence letter from Obama?

Question: What does the policy state?

Question: Who hopes Obama would want to thank them for their sacrifice?

Answer: a letter from the president.

Answer: Gregg Keesling

Answer: Gregg Keesling

Answer: The commander in chief sends such letters to the families of troops who have died in combat, but not if they committed suicide,

Answer: Gregg Keesling

Summary:
Family of Spc. Chancellor Keesling, 25, wants condolence letter from President Obama .
Parents believe suicide brought on by stress of war, distance from loved ones .
White House: "Inherited" policy lets president write only families of fallen soldiers .
Family hopes Obama would want to thank them for their sacrifice .


Washington (CNN) -- Health care reform advocates inched closer to victory Wednesday as a high-profile liberal Democrat switched his position and announced his intention to vote for a sweeping $875 billion plan under consideration in the House of Representatives.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, said he believes "health care is a civil right." He had previously characterized the bill, which cleared the Senate in December, as little more than a boondoggle for private insurers.

Kucinich was publicly lobbied for his vote by President Barack Obama during the president's visit this week to Kucinich's congressional district in Ohio. He told reporters he's had four meetings with Obama to discuss the bill.

"The president's visit to my district ... underscored the urgency of this vote," Kucinich said. "I have doubts about the bill ... [but] I've decided to cast a vote in favor of the legislation."

He said he ultimately had "to make a decision on the bill as it is, not on the bill as I'd like to see it." Kucinich is a backer of a single-payer health care system under which the government would fund all costs billed by doctors and hospitals.

Kucinich's decision to change his vote is "a good sign," Obama told reporters in the Oval Office. "I told him thank you."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said she thought Kucinich's switch would make a difference with a large number of liberal activists.

"He's been a supporter of health care for all Americans for a long time," she said. "He has a constituency, and many of those people still don't understand why there isn't a public [option]."

Pelosi has repeatedly expressed confidence that she will have enough support to pass the bill when it comes to the floor for a final vote.

Read more about how votes are lining up

Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer, the No. 2 House Democrat, indicated Wednesday the vote could come at some point this weekend. He said the leadership is still waiting for final cost estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office on a package of changes to the measure.

Asked if the release of the CBO numbers was imminent, Pelosi said, "I would have said ... half an hour ago, hopefully any minute. I think it's going to take a little more time."

She said she had no explanation for the delay.

"I don't know the calculation," she said. "I don't know how they do it. Whatever it is, they're the gospel and we have to live by it."

Later, Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said that the CBO estimates would not be released Wednesday night. Since the Democrats have said the bill will be available for reading for 72 hours before a vote, the vote can take place no sooner than Sunday, provided the CBO numbers are posted Thursday.

Pelosi needs 216 votes from her 253-member caucus to pass the Senate bill. No Republicans are expected to back it.

A number of House Democrats have refused to state their voting intentions publicly. Twenty-seven House Democrats, however, have indicated they will join Republicans in opposing the Senate plan. That puts opponents of reform 11 votes shy of the 216 needed to prevent Obama from scoring a major victory on his top domestic priority.

Meanwhile, GOP leaders continued to pound away at the legislation on Wednesday, slamming House Democratic leaders for considering the use of a controversial legislative maneuver to pass the Senate bill.

Pelosi may try to help House Democrats unhappy with the Senate bill by allowing them to avoid a direct vote on the measure. She is considering pushing for a vote on a rule that would simply "deem" the Senate bill to be passed.

The House then would proceed to a separate vote on the more popular package of changes to the Senate plan.

"I've never seen anything like the plan that House Democrats hatched this week to jam their health care bill through Congress," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky

Question: Who intends to vote for the health care bill?

Question: What state is Kucinich from?

Question: Who is Dennis Kucinich?

Question: Who said he'll vote for health care bill?

Question: What did Dennis Kucinich say about the bill?

Answer: Rep. Dennis Kucinich,

Answer: D-Ohio,

Answer: Rep.

Answer: Rep. Dennis Kucinich,

Answer: "health care is a civil right."

Summary:
Democratic leaders say timing of vote will depend on CBO figures, which are delayed .
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, on Wednesday said he intends to vote for health care bill .
Kucinich previously had characterized the bill as a boondoggle for private insurers .
The apparent defection improves chances for the bill's passage .


Washington (CNN) -- Health care reform backers won a key victory Saturday night as the Senate voted to move ahead with a floor debate on a sweeping $848 billion bill. The 60-39 vote to prevent a Republican filibuster against the start of debate on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's legislation broke down along strict party lines. All 58 Senate Democrats -- along with independent Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont -- supported bringing the measure to the floor. Thirty-nine of the 40 Senate Republicans opposed the motion. Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, didn't vote. "Tonight's historic vote brings us one step closer to ending insurance company abuses, reining in spiraling health care costs, providing stability and security to those with health insurance and extending quality health coverage to those who lack it," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement. The polarized vote set the table for a holiday season now virtually certain to be marked by acrimonious deliberations on President Obama's top domestic priority. Top Senate Democrats, who are trying to pass a bill before the end of the year, spent much of the day tarring their Republican colleagues as defenders of a broken status quo benefitting rich insurance companies at the expense of ordinary American families. Republicans, in turn, slammed Democrats for pushing a bill that conservatives insist will force millions of Americans to drop insurance plans they like while boosting premiums, raising taxes and leading to government rationing of care. Read the health care bill (PDF) "Today we [decide] whether to even discuss one of the greatest issues of our generation," Reid, a Nevada Democrat, said shortly before the vote. "Whether this nation will finally guarantee its people the right to live free from fear of illness and death, which can be prevented by decent health care for all." The Republicans "are frightening people," said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. "Now is not the time to go wobbly in the knees. Now is the time to stand strong ... and move this country forward." "This bill... is a massive monument to bureaucracy and spending," replied Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky. It "imposes punishing taxes on almost everyone. ... A vote in favor of proceeding to this bill is a vote in favor of adding to the tax burden of the American people in the midst of double digit unemployment." The bill "does worse than nothing," said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. It "threatens the economic recovery. ... Changes to the health care system must be responsible and not break the backs of the taxpayers." The procedural vote represented another milestone in what has become an epic battle over the future of America's health care system. The House of Representatives narrowly passed a more than $1 trillion bill this month. If the Senate also manages to pass a bill, a congressional conference committee will then need to merge the House and Senate proposals into a consensus version requiring final approval from each chamber before moving to Obama's desk to be signed into law. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has projected that Reid's 2,074-page bill would extend health insurance coverage to 31 million additional Americans. The agency estimates that the proposal would reduce the federal deficit by $130 billion over the next 10 years, through 2019. Any effect on the deficit in the following decade would be "subject to substantial uncertainty," but probably would result in "small reductions in federal budget deficits," according to budget office analysts. A minimum of 60 votes is required to break a filibuster in the 100-member Senate. The outcome of the Senate vote was unclear before Saturday afternoon, when Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Arkansas, announced her intention to back a floor debate on the measure. Lincoln, a key moderate probably facing a tough re-election campaign in 2010, said the issue deserved further debate and consideration. She made clear, however, that she opposes several aspects of Reid's bill, including a controversial government-run public option.

Question:
How many democrats voted for this?
How many independents voted for this?

Answer: 58

Answer: All 58 Senate Democrats

Summary:
"Tonight's historic vote brings us one step closer," White House press secretary says .
All 58 Democrats, two independents clinch vote .
Democrats rip into Republicans as defenders of status quo .
GOP decries "massive monument to bureaucracy and spending"


Washington (CNN) -- Homegrown terrorism will be part of the United States' National Security Strategy for the first time, according to President Barack Obama's chief counterterrorism adviser, who called it a new phase of the terrorist threat.

When the Obama administration unveils its National Security Strategy on Thursday, it will be the first time any president "explicitly recognizes the threat to the United States posed by individuals radicalized here at home," National Security Adviser John Brennan said Wednesday.

The strategy acts as a blueprint for how a White House administration intends to protect Americans. In the past, it has focused mostly on international threats. But a spate of terror-related plots in the United States recently prompted the Obama administration to include homegrown terrorism in the document, Brennan said.

Earlier this month, Pakistani-American Faisal Shahzad was charged with trying to detonate a car bomb in New York's bustling district of Times Square.

U.S. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan is suspected of fatally shooting 13 people at Fort Hood in November.

Colorado resident Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan national, pleaded guilty in February for conspiring to detonate explosives in the New York subway system.

And David Headley, an American citizen from Chicago, Illinois, is accused of providing surveillance in the Mumbai, India, terrorist attacks that killed 160 people.

"We've seen an increasing number of individuals here in the United States become captivated by extremist ideology or causes," Brennan said. "We have seen individuals, including U.S. citizens armed with their U.S. passports, travel easily to extremist safe havens, return to America, their deadly plans disrupted by coordinated intelligence and law enforcement."

Brennan, who made his comments at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that as the United States has strengthened its defenses against massive attacks like 9/11, al Qaeda has shown itself to be a "resilient, resourceful and determined enemy."

Brennan said al Qaeda is recruiting individuals with little training, attempting relatively unsophisticated attacks and seeking people living in the United States to launch such attacks.

"They are seeking foot soldiers who might slip through our defense," Brennan said.  "As our enemy adapts and evolves their tactics, so must we constantly adapt and evolve ours."

Brennan did not provide any specific details about the president's strategy for combating al Qaeda and its affiliates, but said it "will require a broad, sustained and integrated campaign that harnesses every tool of American power, military and civilian, kinetic and diplomatic."

Question: What caused inclusion of homegrown terrorism?

Question: What acts as blueprint?

Question: Who is John Brennan?

Question: What words are use to describe the strategy?

Question: What will the strategy require?

Question: What is the blueprint for how the White House plans to protect Americans?

Question: What kind of plots are occurring?

Question: What is acting as the blueprint for how the White House plans to protect Americans?

Answer: a spate of terror-related plots in the United States recently

Answer: The strategy

Answer: National Security Adviser

Answer: it "will require a broad, sustained and integrated campaign that harnesses every tool of American power, military and civilian, kinetic and diplomatic."

Answer: a broad, sustained and integrated campaign that harnesses every tool of American power, military and civilian, kinetic and diplomatic."

Answer: National Security Strategy

Answer: terror-related

Answer: National Security Strategy

Summary:
National Security Strategy acts as blueprint for how White House plans to protect Americans .
Inclusion of homegrown terrorism comes after a spate of terror-related plots in the U.S.
National Security Adviser John Brennan calls al Qaeda a "resilient, resourceful and determined enemy .
Strategy will require a "broad" and "sustained" campaign against terrorist groups .


Washington (CNN) -- House Republican leaders will unveil a 21-page "Pledge to America" on Thursday that presents a "governing agenda" for what Republicans would do if they win control of Congress in November.

CNN obtained a copy of the document (PDF) Wednesday.

The plan focuses primarily on jobs and the economy, with a short reference in the "preamble" to the party's position on social issues.

According to the document, House Republicans want to permanently extend all the tax cuts due to expire at the end of this year, give small businesses a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income and require Congress to review any new federal regulations that add to the deficit.

The document lacks, however, a pledge against unrelated pet projects that members of Congress insert in spending bills to bring funding to their home districts -- known as earmarks. Banning earmarks is typically a staple of Republican policy.

Some provisions matched positions of the conservative Tea Party movement that has helped defeat mainstream Republican candidates in several primary elections this year. For example, the document calls for a federal hiring freeze on nonsecurity employees and requiring all legislation to include a clause showing that it is authorized under the Constitution.

Other items would cancel unspent funding authorized by the economic stimulus bill, roll back spending to levels before the stimulus bill and earlier federal bailout legislation and repeal the health care reform bill passed in March.

The document also calls for permanently prohibiting taxpayer funding for abortion.

Several Republican sources said there was no intention to directly address social issues because the electorate is so heavily focused on jobs and spending.

Republican leaders settled on a line that states: "We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values."

This language was a late addition, according to a GOP source, after conservative Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana argued that social issues should be included in the document representing the agenda of House Republicans.

House Democratic leaders said the document showed that Republicans want to return to what they called failed policies of the past. A statement from House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer's office mocked the GOP positions, saying they showed that Republicans pledged allegiance to hedge fund managers on Wall Street, insurance companies, the "wealthiest of the wealthy," oil companies and big corporations that outsource jobs, "with a recession and huge deficits for all."

The GOP document represents an updated version of the 1994 "Contract with America." That much shorter, 10-item document, with specific bills attached to each item that would be passed with a Republican victory, was rolled out on the steps of the U.S. Capitol and signed by GOP members of Congress and candidates.

The 2010 version has more than 20 items, including changes to how Congress works and broad policy goals such as tougher sanctions against Iran. While it does contain legislative proposals, it does not include specific bills that would be introduced and passed if Republicans gain control of the House.

Introduced at roughly the same time as the previous contract, several weeks before midterm congressional elections, the "Pledge to America" will be unveiled at a hardware store in Sterling, Virginia, outside Washington.

A GOP lawmaker involved in putting together the document said House Republicans realize that voters are angry with both Democrats and Republicans. The agenda contained in the "Pledge to America" is intended to convince such voters that their concerns are taken seriously by Republicans, who will act differently if returned to power than they did when controlling Congress during parts of the Bush administration, the legislator said.

CNN's Tom Cohen contributed to this story.

Question: What have Democrats called this?

Question: What supports has been blocked?

Question: What do Democrats call the GOP positions?

Answer: failed policies of the past.

Answer: cancel unspent funding authorized by the economic stimulus bill,

Answer: they showed that Republicans pledged allegiance to hedge fund managers on Wall Street, insurance companies, the "wealthiest of the wealthy," oil companies and big corporations that outsource jobs,

Summary:
NEW: Unlike 1994 "Contract with America," "Pledge" has no specific legislation .
NEW: No pledge to ban earmarks .
Ban on federal funding for abortion, support for "traditional marriage" included .
Democrats call the GOP positions a pledge to special interests .


Washington (CNN) -- Human error and system lapses, rather than deliberate concealing of information, allowed a terror suspect with explosives to board a U.S.-bound airplane on Christmas Day, President Obama's terrorism czar said Sunday. John Brennan, the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, said on CNN's "State of the Union" that the security breakdown in the failed bombing of the Northwest Airlines flight was different from the September 11, 2001, terror attacks. "It's not like 9/11," Brennan said, adding that the "system didn't work as it should have" due to "lapses" and "human error." "There wasn't an effort to try to conceal information," he said, referring to the well-chronicled competition and turf wars among security agencies prior to the 2001 attacks, which was later blamed for the failure to prevent them. "There is no smoking gun piece of intelligence out there," Brennan said of the failed Christmas bombing, allegedly planned by a Nigerian man who boarded the flight from Amsterdam, Netherlands, to Detroit, Michigan, with explosives in his underwear. Meanwhile, the Transportation Security Administration announced Sunday new security measures to be implemented by domestic and international air carriers on flights bound for the United States, effective Monday. The suspect's father, a leading banker in Nigeria, warned U.S. authorities before the attack that his son might be involved with Islamic extremists. Brennan said the father's information was part of "bits and pieces" of information that were never connected by intelligence officials to properly target the suspect. "That was certainly an alert that came to our attention," Brennan said of the father's warnings. "He said, 'He's consorting with extremists in Yemen.'" However, Brennan rejected another potential warning sign -- that the suspect purchased the airline ticket with cash in Ghana before traveling to Nigeria for the first leg of his journey. "A lot of people buy their tickets in Africa with cash. That is the way, in fact, things are done, because there's so much fraud there. So that wasn't a necessary [warning] bell," Brennan said. "People in the Amsterdam airport didn't even know that he had bought the ticket for cash. He did bring on carry-on luggage. So there were a lot of things that were out there." At the same time, Brennan conceded "there was information that was in the system that should have allowed us to stop it." "A number of pieces were out there that weren't brought together," Brennan said. On the same program, however, the Republican chairman of the 9/11 commission said Brennan was "wrong when he says this wasn't like 9/11." Thomas Kean, a former governor of New Jersey, said both events occurred because the U.S. intelligence community failed to piece together various bits of information it already possessed in the weeks and months prior to the attacks. If the information had been properly shared and analyzed, "then this guy would've never have gotten on a plane" on Christmas Day, Kean said. In announcing the new security measures Sunday, the TSA stressed in a statement that "effective aviation security must begin beyond our borders." As a result, any individual flying into the United States who is "traveling from or through nations that are state sponsors of terrorism or other countries of interest will be required to go through enhanced screening," the statement said. "The directive also increases the use of enhanced screening technologies and mandates threat-based and random screening for passengers on U.S. bound international flights."

Question: Who paid cash for airfare?

Question: Who says the system didn't work due to lapses and human error?

Question: Who says Breenan is wrong?

Question: What did Thomas Kean say?

Question: What wasn't a necessary warning bell?

Question: What caused the system to fail?

Answer: the suspect

Answer: John Brennan,

Answer: Republican chairman of the 9/11 commission

Answer: both events occurred because the U.S. intelligence community failed to piece together various bits of information it already possessed in the weeks and months prior to the attacks.

Answer: that the suspect purchased the airline ticket with cash in Ghana

Answer: Human error and

Summary:
John Brennan: "System didn't work as it should have" due to "lapses" and "human error"
Suspect's cash payment for airfare "wasn't a necessary [warning] bell," says Brennan .
Thomas Kean of 9/11 panel says Brennan "wrong when he says this wasn't like 9/11"
CNN iReport: Tell us about your airport security experiences .


Washington (CNN) -- Ibrahim Hooper knows the drill. When news first broke Thursday that a shooting at Fort Hood, Texas, killed and injured U.S. soldiers, the national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations wrote a statement of condemnation. He only sent it out later, when reports emerged that the alleged shooter's name was Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. "As soon as we saw what appeared to be a Muslim name, we issued our statement," Hooper said. "Until that time, we were praying that no Muslim would be involved." That's the reality of crisis management for the Muslim-American community, said Hooper, who handles communications for the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy group. Even without confirmation that the alleged gunman was Muslim -- there was no immediate determination of any religious affiliation for Hasan -- the mere reporting of a possible Muslim name required an immediate comment, he said. "That's unfortunately the world we live in nowadays," Hooper said. "So often, Muslims are accused of not condemning these kind of acts." The CAIR statement said: "No political or religious ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence. The attack was particularly heinous in that it targeted the all-volunteer Army that protects our nation. American Muslims stand with our fellow citizens in offering both prayers for the victims and sincere condolences to the families of those killed or injured." In a separate statement, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, based in Los Angeles, California, condemned what it called the "heinous incident." "We are in contact with law enforcement and U.S. federal government officials to gain more facts from this tragic incident and work together in dealing with its aftermath," the group said. Its statement called on "all members of American Muslim communities to be in contact with local law enforcement for the safety and security of their communities and their institutions." The Islamic Information Center also issued a statement "in conjunction with all the major Muslim organizations nationwide" that condemned the attack. "While several news reports have cited one of the gunmen to be Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, IIC strongly emphasizes that this attack and its perpetrator are in no way representative of the Muslim people or the peace-loving religion of Islam," the statement said. "The individuals who perpetrated this attack blatantly acted against the teachings of Islam and humanity," it added. After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States, Muslim-Americans reported increased attacks and threats by revenge-minded non-Muslims. "We've seen this before," Hooper said of a possible backlash. "Whenever there's an incident of this type, there's always the possibility this will happen." Even non-Muslims could be targeted, he said, noting that Sikhs who wear turbans or Hispanic-Americans can be mistaken as being of Middle Eastern descent. On Thursday night, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad told a news conference the alleged Fort Hood attacker's motive remained unknown. "We urge all Americans to remain calm in reaction to this tragic event and to demonstrate once again what is best about America -- our nation's ability to remain unified even in times of crisis," Awad said. "We urge national political and religious leaders and media professionals to set a tone of calm and unity. "Unfortunately, based on past experience, we also urge American Muslims, and those who may be perceived to be Muslim, to take appropriate precautions to protect themselves, their families and their religious institutions from possible backlash."

Question: What is Malik accused of?

Question: Who was involved in Fort Hood shootings?

Question: Who is accused in Fort Hood shootings?

Question: What is the fear of backlash against?

Question: Who condemned his actions?

Question: What was Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan accused of?

Question: Some fear backlash against what people?

Answer: killed and injured U.S. soldiers,

Answer: Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.

Answer: Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan.

Answer: Muslim-Americans

Answer: the Muslim Public Affairs Council,

Answer: at Fort Hood, Texas,

Answer: American Muslims, and those who may be perceived to be Muslim,

Summary:
Slain Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan accused in Fort Hood shootings .
His religion, if any, isn't known, but American Muslims condemn his actions .
"American Muslims stand with our fellow citizens," one group says .
Some fear backlash against Muslims and people who are thought to be Muslim .


Washington (CNN) -- If criminal suspects fail to invoke their right to remain silent, they have waived that right, a divided Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.

The high court upheld the murder conviction of a man who did not verbally assert his right to remain silent during his police interrogation. In a 5-4 ruling, the court said a suspect must explicitly tell officers he or she is asserting that right, known as Miranda rights.

The famous constitutional "right to remain silent" and the "right to talk to a lawyer before answering any questions" are among the well-known warnings all criminal suspects must be given upon arrest. The conservative court has generally been supportive in recent years, when police challenges to Miranda rights have been raised.

"A suspect who has received and understood the Miranda warnings, and has not invoked his Miranda rights, waives the right to remain silent by making an uncoerced statement to police," said Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court.

Van Chester Thompkins was convicted of a January 10, 2000, murder outside a shopping mall in Southfield, Michigan. He fled the scene, but was as arrested about a year later in Ohio.

Local police began what turned out to be a three-hour interrogation, with Thompkins at first forced to read aloud part of a copy of "constitutional rights" derived from the original Miranda case that went before the Supreme Court in 1966. The five rights included the warning "anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law," and "the right to decide at any time before or during questioning to use your right to remain silent."

Thompkins refused to sign the form and there was strong disagreement over whether he verbally confirmed he understood them. He remained mostly silent during questioning, but later implicated himself in the shooting. He was later convicted of first-degree murder and other offenses.

The court majority sided with the police's version of the events.

"Thompkins did not say that he wanted to remain silent or that he did not want to talk to police," Kennedy concluded. "Had he made either of these simple, unambiguous statements, he would have invoked his 'right to cut off questioning.' Here he did neither, so he did not invoke his right to remain silent."

Kennedy's views were supported by Chief Justice John Roberts, along with Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

A federal appeals court in Cincinnati agreed with Thompkins his confession should be thrown out, but the high court reversed that decision.

In a sharp dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor called the court's ruling a "major retreat" from protections against self-incrimination guaranteed by the original Miranda ruling.

"Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent -- which counterintuitively requires them to speak," she said. "At the same time, suspects will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so. Those results, in my view, find no basis in Miranda or our subsequent cases and are inconsistent with the fair-trial principles on which those precedents are grounded."

Sotomayor said the Thompkins ruling "turns Miranda upside down." Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer backed her conclusions.

Thompkins had implicated himself after police asked if he believed in God. After replying yes, officers then asked, "Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?" asking about victim Samuel Morris. The court transcript said Thompkins replied "Yes," and turned away, but later refused to make a written confession.

The case is Berghuis v. Thompkins (08-1470).

Question: what does the court say?

Answer: that right,

Summary:
Court: Suspects who don't explicitly invoke right to remain silent have waived it .
Upholds murder conviction in Michigan case .
In sharp dissent, Sotomayor says ruling is a 'major retreat' from self-incrimination protections .


Washington (CNN) -- If the government does not take drastic steps, another deepwater oil spill like the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico could devastate the coastal areas of the United States, an oversight commission warned Tuesday in a long-awaited report to the president.

More research, funding and oversight are needed to help prevent another disaster, concluded the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling.

"As drilling pushes into ever deeper and riskier waters where more of America's oil lies, only systemic reforms of both government and industry will prevent a similar, future disaster," said William K. Reilly, the commission co-chairman.

Halliburton criticized the report's conclusions, saying the commission selectively omitted information it submitted.

The disaster "was almost the inevitable result of years of industry and government complacency and lack of attention to safety," Reilly said. The disaster led to the worst maritime oil spill in U.S. history.

That was "indisputably the case" with BP; Transocean, which owned the Deepwater Horizon oil rig; and Halliburton, which installed a cement casing for drill operations, he said. It also was the case with the government agency charged with regulating offshore drilling, Reilly said.

The report, "Deep Water: The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore Drilling," proposed "comprehensive" government and industry actions "to overhaul the U.S. approach to drilling safety and greatly reduce the chances of a similar, large-scale disaster in the future."

Over the past 20 years "we became lulled into a sense of inevitable success," which masked the heightened risk in deepwater drilling, said the commission's co-chair, former Sen. Bob Graham.

Advances in science, both in drilling offshore safely and in containing a spill, are vastly inadequate and must be improved, Graham said.

The commission faulted the government for passivity, saying regulators were outmatched, underfunded and had conflicting responsibilities that kept them from effective oversight.

They called for a new regulatory office headed by a scientist with a fixed term that would be created under the Interior Department. The position would be designed to remain more immune to industry pressures than current oversight agencies.

Since the spill, there have already been reforms and new rules requiring companies to strengthen safety practices and modernize equipment, said Kendra Barkoff, deputy communications director for the Interior Department.

"Over the last eight months, the Department of Interior has undertaken an aggressive overhaul of the regulatory agency responsible for overseeing offshore oil and gas operations, increasing safety and ensuring oil and gas development is conducted responsibly," she said.

The commission, convened by the president this summer, cited a systemic failure in the oil industry, blaming all three companies -- BP, Transocean and Halliburton -- involved in constructing the Deepwater Horizon rig.

"The industry needs to pick up its own game," said Reilly, who said the industry was already considering the commission's charge that it form a self-policing "safety institute."

Halliburton spokeswoman Cathy Mann criticized the report's conclusions, saying the commission "selectively omitted information provided to it by Halliburton in response to its numerous inquiries."

Mann specifically noted what she described as a mischaracterization of the February and April foam stability tests related to the cement pumped at the deepwater well, according to a company statement Tuesday.

Transocean spokesperson Samantha Cohen blamed BP for the incident, lauding the Transocean crew who "took appropriate actions to gain control of the well."

She added that "it would be premature to draw final conclusions at this juncture," according to a written statement.

In contrast, Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune said his organization commends "the oil spill commission for its thorough and thoughtful examination of the worst environmental disaster in our nation's history."

"This report is very timely, following a severe Alaskan pipeline leak this past week that reinforced the need for us to take a hard look at safety standards and our nation's addiction to oil," he said in a written statement.

To help fund some recommendations, the commission

Question: What were government regulators?

Question: What did Halliburton said?

Question: What happened to the governement regulators?

Question: What does Halliburton say?

Question: What is cited?

Answer: outmatched,

Answer: the commission selectively omitted information it submitted.

Answer: outmatched, underfunded and had conflicting responsibilities

Answer: criticized the report's conclusions, saying the commission selectively omitted information it submitted.

Answer: a systemic failure in the oil industry,

Summary:
NEW: Halliburton says the report unfairly criticizes them .
Government regulators were outmatched and underfunded, report says .
Years of industry and government complacency is cited .


Washington (CNN) -- If you're on your way to some of the nation's airports this holiday season and have a feeling there are fewer people schlepping their suitcases and looking for long-term parking spaces, it's not your imagination. The estimate for the upcoming winter holiday travel period predicts there will be fewer fliers than a year ago.

A projected 43.3 million air travelers will fly on U.S. carriers for both domestic and international routes during a 21-day period, according to Airlines for America (A4A), the industry trade organization for the leading U.S. airlines. That's a 1% drop from the same period last year which translates to about 20,000 fewer travelers on average per day.

However, travelers will not find that translates into more leg room once they board planes. On the busiest days, flights will be filled to at least 85% capacity, according to the forecast.

"Passengers still should expect to see full flights as many airlines have reduced capacity to match the decline in travel and increased cost of operations. Capacity reduction is one of the steps the industry is taking to preserve profitability," said A4A Chief Economist John Heimlich.

Lingering economic concerns, higher energy prices and less disposable income have all contributed to the slight decrease this winter, officials said.

The large weather system currently blasting parts of the West and Midwest is making driving through the southern Rockies dangerous but forecasters say to this point, it has not had a major impact on large airline hubs. However, forecasters are watching it closely.

"All hands are on deck and ready to go," said Tom Hendricks, A4A senior vice president for Safety, Security and Operations.

In the event winter weather causes problems, the FAA may open up Defense Department airspace not regularly available to commercial flights on an as-needed basis to help ease congestion.

Daily passenger volumes are expected to range from 1.6 million to 2.3 million during the holiday.

The busiest days are expected to be between December 21 through December 23, December 26 through December 30 and then January 2 and 3 as travelers fly home.

The airline organization recommends passengers check airline websites before they leave for the airport, pack gifts unwrapped to lessen security delays and review carry-on rules for liquids, gels and aerosols.

Question: On the busiest days, flights will be filled to at least what capacity?

Question: What percentage of a drop is that from the same period last year?

Question: How many air travellers will fly on U.S. carriers?

Question: To what capacity are the flights filled on busy days?

Question: What percentage reduction is there in U.S carrier air travellers?

Question: A projected 43.3 million air travelers will fly on what?

Answer: 85%

Answer: 1%

Answer: 43.3 million

Answer: 85%

Answer: 1%

Answer: U.S. carriers

Summary:
A projected 43.3 million air travelers will fly on U.S. carriers .
That's a 1% drop from the same period last year .
On the busiest days, flights will be filled to at least 85% capacity .