Washington (CNN) -- Minerals Management Service Director Elizabeth Birnbaum resigned Thursday as head of the Interior Department's scandal-plagued Minerals Management Service, the department's chief said. Two sources told CNN that Birnbaum had been fired.

The Minerals Management Service (MMS) is involved in federal oversight of offshore oil drilling. Birnbaum's resignation letter cast her decision to leave as a consequence of a decision to reorganize the agency following April's explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico. The explosion resulted in a massive oil spill that well owner BP and federal authorities are still trying to cap.

"As you move forward with the reorganization of Minerals Management Service, you will be requiring ... new leaders," Birnbaum wrote in a letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

President Barack Obama said Thursday that he didn't know whether Birnbaum had been fired or chose to resign on her own. Speaking before a House subcommittee, Salazar insisted Birnbaum had resigned "on her own terms and own volition."

She "is a strong and very effective person who ... helped us break through the very difficult things which we have a lot more work to do," Salazar said. "She helped us with addressing a very broken system. And all I can really [say] is that she is a good public servant."

Birnbaum, a former high level staffer on Capitol Hill, became head of the MMS in July 2009.

A recently released federal report highlighted what many observers have characterized as widespread corruption at the agency. Among other things, the report, issued by the Interior Department's inspector general, revealed that federal inspectors overseeing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico accepted meals and tickets to sporting events from companies they monitored.

In one case, an inspector in the MMS office in Lake Charles, Louisiana, conducted inspections of four offshore platforms while negotiating a job with the company, the report stated.

The Lake Charles investigation was launched shortly after another scandal emerged from within the MMS. A September 2008 inspector general's report found regulators in the agency's Colorado office received improper gifts from energy industry representatives and engaged in illegal drug use and inappropriate sexual relations with them.

Salazar recently called the allegations of MMS corruption "evidence of the cozy relationship between some elements of [the agency] and the oil and gas industry." He pledged to follow through with the Interior Department inspector general's recommendations, "including taking any and all appropriate personnel actions including termination, discipline and referrals of any wrongdoing for criminal prosecution."

MMS collected nearly $10 billion in royalties from the energy and mining industries in 2009. Salazar recently announced that he was splitting up the agency to separate its energy development, enforcement and revenue collection divisions, saying they have "conflicting missions" that needed to be separated.

The associate director for the agency's Offshore Minerals Management Program also is leaving at the end of May, a month earlier than planned, in the wake of the Gulf spill. That official, Chris Oynes, launched the investigation that resulted in former New Orleans, Louisiana, supervisor Donald Howard's firing in 2007. Howard later pleaded guilty after being accused of failing to report gifts valued at more than $6,600 from an offshore drilling contractor.

As part of the growing push to crack down on the MMS, Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Florida, introduced legislation Wednesday requiring federal oil industry regulators to wait at least two years after leaving government service before going to work for companies they helped regulate.

The bill also would bar regulators from accepting gifts from oil companies, would require regulators to divest themselves of any stock they may currently hold in oil companies, and would prohibit regulators from part-time employment in the industry.

Question: What did Obama say about Birnbaum?

Question: What is Birnbaum's first name?

Question: What did the Interior Department report cite?

Question: Which director resigned?

Question: What has been introduced in part to help crack down on the MMS?

Question: Legislation has been introduced in part to help crack down on what?

Question: What doesn't Obama know?

Question: What did the report claim?

Answer: he didn't know whether

Answer: Elizabeth

Answer: widespread corruption

Answer: Elizabeth Birnbaum

Answer: legislation

Answer: MMS,

Answer: whether Birnbaum had been fired or chose to resign on her own.

Answer: federal inspectors overseeing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico accepted meals and tickets to sporting events from companies they monitored.

Summary:
Obama says he doesn't know if Elizabeth Birnbaum was fired or resigned on her own .
Interior secretary says the MMS Service director resigned; sources say she was fired .
Interior Department report cited inappropriate relationship between inspectors, oil industry .
Legislation has been introduced in part to help crack down on the MMS .


Washington (CNN) -- More than 200 federal, state and local law enforcement personnel have been assigned to an operation intended to find who was responsible for Saturday's fatal shootings of three people linked to the U.S. consulate in Cuidad Juarez, Mexico, an official said.

Among the agencies involved in Operation Knock Down -- taking place in southern New Mexico and in the vicinity of El Paso, Texas -- are the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration, said DEA spokesman David Ausiello.

El Paso is across the Rio Grande from Ciudad Juarez.

A law enforcement official said investigators believe that there could be a connection between Barrio Azteca, a gang that operates in both cities, and the killings. The official said that mistaken identity has not been ruled out.

A relative of U.S. consulate worker Lesley Ann Enriquez said Wednesday that the 35-year-old woman was four months pregnant with a boy when she was shot dead. Enriquez's husband, 34-year-old Arthur Redelfs, was also killed. He was a 10-year veteran of the El Paso County Sheriff's Office.

The couple was fired on in their SUV as they left a birthday party at the U.S. consulate. Their 7-month-old daughter, Rebecca, who was in the back of the SUV, was unhurt.

A third victim, who had also left the party, was identified as Jorge Alberto Salcido Ceniceros, 37, a state police officer who was married to a Mexican employee of the U.S. consulate.

His wife was not traveling with him, but two of their children, ages 4 and 7, were in the car and were wounded, officials said.

"We have all come together to find Barrio Azteca members as part of a major intelligence effort," said Andrea Simmons, a public information officer for the FBI in El Paso.

In addition to the FBI and the DEA, other organizations involved are the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the El Paso Police Department, the El Paso County Sheriff's Office and the Texas Department of Public Safety.

"Part of this is being done to generate leads regarding the ongoing investigation in Juarez as well as an opportunity to gather information on the location of Eduardo Ravelo, one of the top 10 fugitives," she said.

The FBI is offering $100,000 for information leading to the arrest of Ravelo, who is accused of being a leader of Barrio Azteca.

This week, Mexican President Felipe Calderon made his third visit in slightly more than a month to Ciudad Juarez. Its more than 2,600 drug-related deaths last year made it the most violent city in Mexico.

No official numbers are available, but more than 400 killings have been reported in local media this year.

CNN's Arthur Brice contributed to this story.

Question: what is investigated

Question: how many people involved

Question: What is it that hundreds of law enforcement officers where assigned to

Question: where is the operation going down

Question: what is the operation

Question: To which gang are possible links being investigated

Question: how many law enforcement

Question: Three people where killed on Saturday in which city

Answer: Saturday's fatal shootings of three people linked to the U.S. consulate

Answer: More than 200

Answer: an operation intended to find who was responsible for Saturday's fatal shootings of three people linked to the U.S. consulate in Cuidad Juarez, Mexico,

Answer: southern New Mexico and in the vicinity of El Paso, Texas

Answer: to find who was responsible for Saturday's fatal shootings of three people

Answer: Barrio Azteca,

Answer: More than 200

Answer: Cuidad Juarez, Mexico,

Summary:
Hundreds of law enforcement officers assigned to Operation Knock Down .
Among possible links being investigated is Barrio Azteca gang .
Three people connected to U.S. Consulate in Ciudad Juarez killed Saturday .


Washington (CNN) -- Most of the world's 1.57 billion Muslims know that the Holy Quran states quite clearly that, "Anyone who kills a human being ... it shall be as though he has killed all of mankind. ... If anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he has saved the lives of all of mankind." Accordingly, it should come as little surprise to any reasonable observer that when Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan recently committed his shocking acts of mass murder at Fort Hood, Texas, America's Muslim community of over 7 million felt an added sense of horror and sadness at this senseless attack against the brave men and women of the U.S. armed forces. True to form, many conservative media pundits wasted little time in pointing to reports that Hasan had said "Allahu Akbar" (Arabic for "God is great") at the start of his murderous rampage. News coverage continuously showed the looping convenience store black-and-white videotape footage of Hasan wearing traditional white Islamic garb. First of all, someone simply saying "Allahu Akbar" while committing an act of mass murder no more makes their criminal act "Islamic" than a Christian uttering the "Hail Mary" while murdering an abortion medical provider, or someone chanting "Onward, Christian Soldiers" while bombing a gay nightclub, would make their act "Christian" in nature. Simply put; murder is murder and has no religion whatsoever. Professor Juan Cole of the University of Michigan once wrote that, "One most certainly does insult Muslims by tying their religion to movements such as terrorism or fascism. Muslims perceive a double standard in this regard: Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols would never be called 'Christian terrorists' even though they were in close contact with the Christian Identity Movement. No one would speak of Christo-fascism or Judeo-fascism as the Republican[s] ... speak of Islam-o-fascism. ... [Many people also] point out that [it was] persons of Christian heritage [who] invented fascism, not Muslims." According to Pentagon statistics, there were over 3,400 American Muslims serving in the active-duty military as of April 2008. The Wall Street Journal reported that many officials believe "the actual number of [American] Muslim soldiers may be at least 10,000 higher than the Pentagon statistics." Thus, with thousands of patriotic American Muslim women and men proudly serving in our United States Army in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, perhaps it would behoove our army leaders to consider sending a strong message of American unity by appointing an American Muslim to be a part of the prosecution team against Hasan. This would help show that the mass murders allegedly committed by Hasan have nothing to do with the teachings of our religion. The United States Army can send a resounding message to all Americans and the rest of the world that the social fabric of our country will never become unraveled by murderous (and irreligious) gun-wielding felons -- whether it is a Muslim in Fort Hood, Texas, or a non-Muslim on a shooting rampage in an Orlando, Florida, high-rise less than a day later. By appointing a multicultural (and multireligious) legal prosecution team made up of military lawyers of all races and religions, we can set a good example to show the rest of the world that our American legal justice system is truly equal for all people, regardless of their race, religion or socioeconomic status. The larger point is that Muslims in America completely disavow and wash our hands of any acts of murder (or terrorism) claimed to be performed in the name of our religion. Acts of mass murder, regardless of their time or place, are simply ungodly criminal acts that have no religion whatsoever. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Arsalan Iftikhar.

Question: What does  Arsalan Iftikhar say about the killings?

Question: Where did the killings take place?

Question: Does Islam forbid the taking of human life?

Answer: murder is murder and has no religion whatsoever.

Answer: Fort Hood, Texas,

Answer: it shall be as though he has killed all of mankind.

Summary:
The Fort Hood killings were not a religious act, says Arsalan Iftikhar .
He says reports shooter said "Allahu Akbar" don't make slayings an "Islamic" crime .
Iftikhar says Islam forbids the taking of human life .
Thousands of patriotic Muslims serve in the U.S. Armed Forces, he says .


Washington (CNN) -- NFL player Samuel Hurd has been arrested and charged with conspiring to distribute cocaine, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced Thursday.

Agents say Hurd, 26, a wide receiver for the Chicago Bears, was arrested Wednesday night after a five-month investigation that began in Dallas, where Hurd once played for the Cowboys. Authorities say he was trying to set up a drug distribution network in Chicago.

The complaint states that Hurd met with an ICE undercover agent at a restaurant in Chicago on Wednesday night when, law enforcement officials say, Hurd introduced himself as the person communicating with a confidential informant.

Hurd stated that he was interested in purchasing 5 to 10 kilograms of cocaine, at $25,000 per kilogram, and 1,000 pounds of marijuana at $450 per pound per week for distribution in the Chicago area, according to ICE.

Hurd said that "he and another co-conspirator currently distribute about four kilograms of cocaine per week in Chicago but that his supplier couldn't supply him with enough quantity," Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said.

After they finished negotiating, according to the complaint, the undercover agent presented Hurd with a kilogram of cocaine that Hurd accepted.

"Hurd stated that he plays for the Chicago Bears and that he gets out of practice at about 5:30 p.m., after which he would make arrangements to pay for the kilogram of cocaine," ICE officials said in a news release, "Hurd left the restaurant with the bag of cocaine and was arrested shortly thereafter in the parking lot of the restaurant."

If convicted, Hurd faces a maximum penalty of 40 years in prison and a $2 million fine for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine. CNN's efforts to contact Hurd's lawyers were unsuccessful Thursday afternoon.

Question: What is he said to have accepted?

Question: what accepted a kilo of cocaine from undercover agent?

Question: What was Hurd accused of?

Question: Which Chicago Bears player was arrested?

Question: what Officials accuse him of trying to set up?

Question: What is Hurd accused of?

Question: What is he alleged to have accepted from an undercover agent?

Question: Who has been arrested?

Answer: kilogram of cocaine

Answer: Samuel Hurd

Answer: conspiring to distribute

Answer: Samuel Hurd

Answer: a drug distribution network in Chicago.

Answer: conspiring to distribute

Answer: kilogram of cocaine

Answer: Samuel Hurd

Summary:
Chicago Bears wide receiver Samuel Hurd arrested .
Officials accuse him of trying to set up a drug distribution network .
He accepted a kilo of cocaine from undercover agent, they say .


Washington (CNN) -- Nearly 180 Department of Homeland Security weapons were lost -- some falling into the hands of criminals -- after officers left them in restrooms, vehicles and other public places, according to an inspector general report.

The officers, with Customs and Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, "did not always sufficiently safeguard their firearms and, as a result, lost a significant number of firearms" between fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2008, the report said.

In all, 243 firearms were lost in both agencies during that period, according to the January report from Inspector General Richard Skinner. Of those, 36 were lost because of circumstances beyond officers' control -- for instance, ICE lost a firearm during an assault on an officer. Another 28 were lost even though officers had stored them in lockboxes or safes.

But 74 percent, or 179 guns, were lost "because officers did not properly secure them," the report said.

Following a review of the draft report in December, Homeland Security took steps to implement its recommendations and overhaul its property management policy, according to a response in the report. A department spokeswoman did not immediately return a call from CNN Thursday seeking comment.

The report concluded the department did not have specific procedures and policies in place regarding firearms. "Instead, DHS relied on its components to augment its general property management policies and procedures with specific guidance for safeguarding and controlling firearms," it said. "Although some component policies and procedures for safeguarding firearms were sufficient, personnel did not always follow them."

The inspector general cited several examples of "inappropriate practices." A customs officer, for instance, left a firearm in an idling vehicle in the parking lot of a convenience store. The vehicle was stolen while the officer was inside. "A local law enforcement officer later recovered the firearm from a suspected gang member and drug smuggler," the report said.

In addition, an ICE officer left an M-4 rifle and a shotgun unsecured in a closet at his home. Both weapons were stolen in a burglary and later recovered from a felon, according to the report. Another officer left his firearm in the restroom of a fast-food restaurant, and it was gone when he returned.

"Other CBP and ICE officers left firearms in places such as a fast food restaurant parking lot, a bowling alley and a clothing store," the report said.

"Although our review focused on CBP and ICE, other components described similar incidents. For example, a TSA officer left a firearm in a lunch box on the front seat of an unlocked vehicle; the officer realized the firearm was stolen when he returned to the vehicle two days later," said the report. "Officers may have prevented many of these losses had they exercised reasonable care when storing their weapons."

Of the 179 lost because of laxity, 120 were reported stolen and 59 as lost, the report said. That resulted from the agencies' lack of guidance on a standard method for classifying and reporting lost firearms, as well as "a common perception among officers that reporting a stolen firearm was more acceptable than reporting a lost firearm.

"Although CBP and ICE reported 120 firearms as stolen, our analysis showed that these firearms were lost (stolen) because officers left the firearms unsecured," according to the report. "All 179 losses may have been prevented had the officers properly secured their firearms."

The department had about 188,500 weapons in its inventory as of last summer, the report said. The majority are assigned to Customs and Border Protection and ICE officers, but others are carried by agencies including the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Secret Service and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

Question: What didn't the officers sufficiently safeguard?

Question: Where were guns left?

Question: What did Homeland Security do to respond?

Question: What did ICE officers not safeguard?

Answer: their firearms

Answer: restrooms, vehicles and other public places,

Answer: took steps to implement its recommendations and overhaul its property management policy,

Answer: firearms

Summary:
Customs, ICE officers "did not always sufficiently safeguard their firearms," report says .
Of 243 guns, 179 were lost "because officers did not properly secure them"
Guns were left in unlocked cars, fast food restaurants, bowling alleys .
Homeland Security responds by overhauling property management policy .


Washington (CNN) -- Nearly all healthy pregnant women who receive a single dose of the H1N1 flu vaccine will be protected from that flu, according to just-released clinical trial data. In a news conference Monday at the headquarters of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, said out of about 100 pregnant women who participated in trial studies, over 90 percent showed a robust immune response to a single 15-microgram dose of the H1N1 vaccine. And at this point, there have been no reported side effects, Fauci said. Fauci stressed that these results should be reassuring for already-vaccinated pregnant women and this is "vital information for those who have not yet been vaccinated." He added that "pregnant women have tolerated the vaccine well, and no safety concerns have arisen." Pregnant women are considered to be among the highest at risk for serious complications of this new flu strain. Since H1N1, also known as swine flu, first emerged in April, 28 pregnant women reportedly have died from complications of this flu, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Despite health officials repeatedly saying the H1N1 vaccine is safe, questions about it persist. To reassure those who question the safety of the vaccine, Dr. Bruce Gellin, director of the National Vaccine Program Office, noted that a new independent panel has been formed to review data from all sources on the safety of the vaccine. The group will monitor all sources reporting problems with the vaccine. "The vast amount of adverse events have been minor," said Gellin. He said there has been one reported death linked to the vaccine, but further investigation showed that the person died from the actual H1N1 flu, not the vaccine. Gellin said the panel was designed to keep an eye on any possible negative consequences and report them immediately. According to Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the CDC, who also attended the news conference, 30 million doses of the vaccine are available for states to order. She explained that that does not mean 30 million shots are available to the public at this point. The vaccines need to be ordered by each state and distributed before they make it to doctor's offices and clinics. Schuchat reassured the public that more vaccines would be made available within the next few weeks, as demand for shots continues to rise. Fauci also noted further studies on children -- youngsters between the ages of 6 months to 35 months, and children from the age of 3 years to 9 years -- found they responded much better to two 15-microgram doses of the vaccine, than one single dose. For children 9 and older, a single 15-microgram dose gave young people a robust immune reaction that should protect them against the virus. When asked how this H1N1 virus differed from the seasonal flu, Schuchat said they were at opposite ends of the spectrum when it came to high-risk patients. "With seasonal flu," said Schuchat, "Ninety percent of the deaths every year are in people over the age of 65." She noted, "But with H1N1, 90 percent of the deaths, thus far, have been in people under the age of 65." And she added, "half of those are under the age of 25 years, in young people. So those are the people we want to get our message to. Children, pregnant women, young people should be getting vaccinated." Fauci agreed saying, "You need to look at the risk ... Right now, the risk of becoming seriously ill, even dying from this virus, outweighs the risk of something happening to you if you take the vaccine. It's really that simple." CNN's Miriam Falco contributed to this report.

Question: Who is most vulnerable to the H1N1 flu?

Question: Who said the vaccine is safe and effective in pregnant woman?

Question: What is the vaccine against?

Question: How many percent of women show response?

Question: What is the name of the vaccine?

Question: What doctor said the vaccine is safe?

Question: What is the vaccine for?

Answer: Pregnant women

Answer: Dr. Anthony Fauci,

Answer: H1N1

Answer: 90

Answer: H1N1

Answer: Dr. Anthony Fauci,

Answer: H1N1 flu

Summary:
Over 90% of women in study showed robust response to one 15-microgram dose .
Dr. Anthony Fauci: Vaccine is safe and effective in pregnant women .
Young people and pregnant women have shown to be vulnerable to H1N1 flu .
Children 9 and younger have responded better to two doses of the vaccine .


Washington (CNN) -- Nearly two weeks after an explosion aboard an oil rig caused a leak from an undersea oil well off Louisiana, the impact is just beginning to unfold.

Though the widening pool of oil remained offshore Monday, it was already a presence for some coastal areas. John Kelly, administrator of Gulfport, Mississippi, said he had been able to smell it since Friday.

"I got $3 million worth of boats sitting here," said Capt. Louis Skrmetta, who ferries tourists from Gulfport to the state's pristine barrier islands. "What am I going to do with them?"

BP's ruptured undersea well continues to spew about 210,000 gallons -- or 5,000 barrels -- of crude per day into the Gulf of Mexico. Efforts to contain or curtail the spill have been unsuccessful.

The sheen extends up to 60 miles across and threatens the coasts of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, as well as the Florida Panhandle, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. That's an area nearly as large as the state of Delaware. The slick was nine miles off the Louisiana coast Monday, said Adm. Thad Allen, commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard and incident commander.

BP chief executive Tony Hayward vowed that the oil giant would "absolutely be paying for the cleanup operation" of the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico.

"Where legitimate claims are made, we will be good for them," he told NPR's "Morning Edition."

The U.S. government was leaving little to chance. Attorney General Eric Holder said Monday that Justice Department employees were in the Gulf region "to ensure that BP is held liable."

Allen said BP "is the responsible party" and "will bear all the costs" of the cleanup.

Still, the promises failed to quell the fears. "I hope we can weather the storm," said Keith Delcambre, owner of seafood market Bozo's in Pascagoula, Mississippi.

WLOX: Pass Christian Harbor in Mississippi prepares for oil

He said the nature of the current disaster could exact more of a toll on seafood than  Hurricane Katrina, which savaged the Gulf Coast in August 2005. "We weathered Katrina, but shrimp after Katrina was good," he said. "Seafood after Katrina was good. With all the oil out there, I don't know what to expect. This is brand new."

In Gulfport, officials worried that a drop in tourism from the slick would chill the city's post-Katrina rebound, which includes half a billion dollars in new construction, $30 million of which has been spent on the harbor.

"This could not have happened at a worse time in our history," Kelly, the city's administrator, said.

Katrina left equipment operator Daniel Schepens out of work for a month, but the oil slick could prove worse, he said. "The warehouses are empty. No trucks, no imports, no exports."

"If it threatens the commercial sea lanes, that's a concern, because if ships don't come in and ships aren't able to go out, that stops commerce," said Donald Allee, CEO of the Mississippi State Port Authority.

WWL: Fishermen try to help contain oil slick

For now, the harbor is being used as a loading point for hundreds of miles of booms that are intended to defend against the slick's arrival.

But the booms may not protect the coast any more than the levees protected New Orleans during Katrina: Rough seas have already broken apart some of the booms.

WDSU: Rush to save Lake Pontchartrain

Meanwhile, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist on Monday extended a state of emergency to 13 coastal counties in his state and said he might extend it to two more on Tuesday.

He had issued an emergency declaration last week for six counties on the western end of the Florida Panhandle; Monday's declaration added the rest of the Panhandle, and counties on the Gulf Coast of the main Florida peninsula as far south as Sarasota.

"In the event that the oil does come to our shores

Question: For how long has been oil slick?

Question: On how many counties Florida governor extend emergency declaration?

Question: Who extended the emergency declaration?

Question: Where did the spill occur?

Question: How far away from the coast was the oil slick?

Answer: two weeks

Answer: 13

Answer: Florida Gov. Charlie Crist

Answer: oil well off Louisiana,

Answer: 60 miles

Summary:
NEW: Administration officials meet with BP execs to discuss spill response .
Florida governor extends emergency declaration to 16 more coastal counties .
Oil slick was nine miles off coast Monday .
Feds ban fishing for at least the next 10 days in part of the northern Gulf of Mexico .


Washington (CNN) -- Nearly two years into the recession, opinion about which political party is responsible for the severe economic downturn is shifting, according to a new national poll. A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Friday morning indicates that 38 percent of the public blames Republicans for the country's current economic problems. In May, 53 percent blamed the GOP. According to the poll, 27 percent now blame the Democrats for the recession, up 6 points from May, and 27 percent now say both parties are responsible. "The bad news for the Democrats is that the number of Americans who hold the GOP exclusively responsible for the recession has been steadily falling by about two to three points per month," said Keating Holland, CNN polling director. "At that rate, only a handful of voters will blame the economy on the Republicans by the time next year's midterm elections roll around.." Thirty-six percent of people questioned said that President Obama's policies have improved economic conditions, with 28 percent feeling that the president's programs have made things worse, and 35 percent saying what he's done has had no effect on the economy. One reason for that, Holland said, may be the growing federal budget deficit: Two-thirds say that the government should balance the budget even in a time of war and recession. The survey indicates that only 18 percent said the economic conditions in the country today are good, down 3 points from August. Eighty-two percent said economic conditions are poor. "Some economic indicators may suggest that the economy has turned the corner -- but try telling that to the American people," Holland said. The number of Americans who said the economy is in good shape -- a number that grew steadily through the spring and summer -- has now stalled, with fewer than one in five expressing a positive view of current conditions. More than eight in 10 say that economic conditions are in poor shape, with 43 percent calling them very poor. The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll was conducted November 13-15, with 1,014 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points. CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.

Question: Blame them for what?

Question: What may partly explain shift?

Question: What were Republicans blamed for in May ?

Question: What percentage blame Democrats?

Question: What camp is the most blamed ?

Question: How many blamed Republicans for economic mess?

Question: How many people say economic conditions are good ?

Answer: country's current economic problems.

Answer: the growing federal budget deficit:

Answer: the country's current economic problems.

Answer: 27 percent

Answer: the GOP.

Answer: 38 percent of the public

Answer: 18 percent

Summary:
38 percent blame Republicans, 27 percent blame Democrats .
In May, 53 percent blamed Republicans for economic mess .
Rising federal deficit may partly explain shift, CNN polling director says .
Only 18 percent say economic conditions are good .


Washington (CNN) -- New Hampshire Republican political pros are not expecting a big surprise when the state's voters cast their ballots in Tuesday's GOP presidential primary, seeing an easy victory for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. But the race for second place is much less clear.

A CNN survey of 52 New Hampshire GOP insiders found that only one thought Romney would lose the primary, and that was to former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania. This group included Republican leaders in both chambers of the state Legislature, local elected and party officials, business and conservative interest group leaders, veterans of previous primary campaigns, GOP political consultants and other party activists. (Those surveyed were granted anonymity for their individual responses to encourage candor. The names of the insiders who participated in this survey appear at the end of this article.)

The political insiders also thought that while Romney's margin of victory would be substantial, he would not crack 40 percent. When their predictions for what percentage of the vote each candidate would receive were averaged, Romney came out with a victory of 19 percentage points over Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, followed closely by Santorum.

Percentage of primary vote expected

Mitt Romney -- 37%

Ron Paul -- 18%

Rick Santorum -- 16%

Newt Gingrich --12%

Jon Huntsman -- 12%

Rick Perry -- 4%

Others -- 1 %

The CNN insiders closely mirror the most recent statewide poll of likely GOP voters from WMUR and the University of New Hampshire, which indicates a strong lead for Romney, but the same list of other candidates vying for the No. 2 position. Second place could be key coming out of New Hampshire and going into the contentious South Carolina primary January 21.

"Other than Romney right now, feels like the junior varsity on the field," said one New Hampshire GOP insider. Another said, "I believe like so many (that) it's Romney's to lose."

Since finishing second in the GOP presidential primary here four years ago to Sen. John McCain of Arizona, Romney has continued to court New Hampshire Republican activists and maintained a home on Lake Winnipesaukee, about an hour north of Manchester.

So far, none of the other candidates has been able to knock down Romney in a state with a tradition of humbling front-runners. All the other contenders seem to have significant flaws, at least in the eyes of local party activists.

Paul: Too 'wacky'?

Paul, who commands a loyal following in the state, faces two of the same hurdles that he faced in Iowa: the view among many in the party -- fair or unfair -- that he can't defeat President Barack Obama in November, and his isolationist foreign policy views, which are anathema to many Republicans.

What do you think has been the biggest obstacle for Paul in New Hampshire?

Perception that he can't win in the general election -- 50%

His stance on foreign policy -- 48%

Paul is too extreme for New Hampshire (volunteered) -- 2%

"He has a ceiling to grow entirely because of his foreign policy views," one New Hampshire GOP insider said. "He has his bloc; they are passionate and not going anywhere."

Others said they feel that Paul's foreign policy stance feeds into a broader impression of 76-year-old congressman and his campaign. "He's often wacky," another GOP insider said. "And his supporters turn off regular voters with their messianic zeal."

Santorum: Not enough time

Hoping to build on his near-victory in the Iowa caucuses, Santorum has held town-hall meetings throughout the state taking questions from all comers. Doing so earns him points from locals who believe they have a duty to cross-examine White House hopefuls, but it also has led to a number of hard questions about Santorum's strenuous opposition to same-sex marriage, which at times put him on the defensive. Indeed, a slight majority of the New Hampshire GOP insiders said they felt Santorum's stance on social issues was a major handicap for him in the state

Question: Who was the only one who did not feel as "junior varsity"?

Question: Who is a clear favourite?

Question: What insiders said about the all story?

Question: Who has been a clear favorite politician at New Hampshire?

Question: Who is the favorite?

Question: Is the race close?

Question: What is the name of politicians in New Hampshire who having a very close race for the second place?

Answer: Romney

Answer: Gov. Mitt Romney.

Answer: "I believe like so many (that) it's Romney's to lose."

Answer: Mitt Romney.

Answer: Mitt Romney.

Answer: race for second place is much less clear.

Answer: Ron Paul

Summary:
Mitt Romney is a clear favorite among New Hampshire political pros, insider survey finds .
Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman in close race for second place .
Insiders say besides Romney, the rest of field feels like "junior varsity"


Washington (CNN) -- No decision has been made on whether to change the current plan to hold the September 11 terrorist attack trial in a civilian court in lower Manhattan, White House officials said Sunday.

Last week, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other politicians expressed concern over the costs and disruption of holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four accomplices at a New York City courthouse.

David Axelrod, the senior adviser to President Obama, and White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Sunday that Obama believes the trial should take place in a criminal court instead of before a military commission, as permitted for some terrorism suspects.

However, Axelrod and Gibbs acknowledged that Obama and the Justice Department were considering moving the trial from New York City.

"We've made no decisions on that yet," Axelrod said on the NBC program "Meet the Press." Gibbs, speaking on CNN's "State of the Union," also said the location of the trial was under discussion, but he expressed certainty that Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the September 11, 2001, attacks, "is going to meet justice and he's going to meet his maker."

Gibbs and Axelrod criticized Republican opposition to the plan to hold the trial in a criminal court, saying no one complained when the previous administration of Republican President George W. Bush put terrorism suspects such as "shoe bomber" Richard Reid on trial in U.S. criminal courts.

"Now we have a Democratic president and suddenly we hear these protests," Axelrod said. "What has changed between now and then that would cause people to reverse positions?"

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, told the CNN program that the Bush administration was wrong to hold terrorism trials on U.S. soil. Instead, trials for dangerous terrorism suspects should be held by military commissions at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility where they currently are held, McConnell said.

Obama intends to shut down the Guantanamo facility by transferring the roughly 200 suspects to the United States to stand trial or face indefinite detention, or to third countries. McConnell said Sunday he would fight that plan by trying to withhold federal spending for it.

"'I think that will be done on a bipartisan basis," McConnell said of congressional opposition, adding that "whatever domestic support they had for this is totally collapsing."

White House officials say the decision about any possible alternate sites to try Mohammed and the others will come from the Justice Department.

New York police estimated that the cost to the city would be more than $200 million per year in what could be a multi-year trial and that more than 2,000 checkpoints would need to be installed around Lower Manhattan. Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said additional protection would have to be deployed for the city, not just "the core area of Manhattan."

Bloomberg initially supported the move, saying "it is fitting that 9/11 suspects face justice near the World Trade Center site where so many New Yorkers were murdered."

However, Bloomberg used different rhetoric last week when asked about a community agency's proposals to relocate the trial, saying he would prefer the trial be held elsewhere, perhaps at a military base where it would be easier and cheaper to provide security.

"It's going to cost an awful lot of money and disturb a lot of people," Bloomberg said.

On Thursday, several New York Democratic politicians urged the Obama administration to thoroughly re-examine locating the trial in downtown Manhattan.

Julie Menin, chairwoman of a city community advisory agency, proposed four alternative locations for the trial within the Southern District of New York: Governors Island, Stewart Air National Guard Base in Newburgh, the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, and the Bureau of Prisons jail complex at FCI Otisville. The latter three are in Orange County, New York, less than an hour from New York City, county executive Edward Diana told CNN.

Diana thinks the trials should not be held anywhere in New York, and definitely not in Orange County, which lost 44 residents in the terror attacks, he said.

Question: How much would the cost be?

Question: Cost to the city would be more than how much?

Question: What worries the mayor of New York?

Question: Where is Orange County?

Question: The Justice Department is considering moving the 9/11 trial from where?

Question: Who is concerned about cost

Answer: $200 million per year

Answer: $200 million per year

Answer: the costs and disruption of holding the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four accomplices at a

Answer: New York,

Answer: a civilian court in lower Manhattan,

Answer: Michael Bloomberg and other politicians

Summary:
NEW: Orange County, New York, leader: Don't move trial here .
Officials: President, Justice Department considering moving 9/11 trial from New York City .
New York mayor concerned about costs and disruption of holding the trial in city .
New York police: Cost to the city would be more than $200 million per year .


Washington (CNN) -- One-time Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin may have sent a clear message to the political world, analysts say, by signing a deal to become a TV commentator.

That message: She's unlikely to run in the 2012 presidential race.

"I do think maybe it suggests, sadly for Democrats, that she might not be running," said Democratic strategist and CNN contributor Paul Begala. "Democrats ... are pretty confident they can defeat Sarah Palin. She's not going to beat Barack Obama."

The former Alaska governor has signed a deal with Fox News to appear as a contributor on the network, a source with knowledge of the agreement confirms to CNN.

There are no plans for Palin to anchor her own program, the source said.

"Let's first hope for [Fox News President] Roger Ailes' sake that she doesn't quit that job the way she quit her job as governor of Alaska," Begala joked.

Nancy Pfotenhauer, a former McCain presidential campaign spokesperson, also indicated that Palin's new job is a possible sign of things to come.

"There's a slight indication she may not run," she said. "I assume this is a business decision on the part of both Fox News and on Gov. Palin's part."

Begala, though, did give Palin praise for her TV gig.

"It's indoor work. It's interesting and lucrative. I'm all for it," he said. "Congratulations for the former governor of Alaska."

Palin is hardly alone in top Republicans-turned-TV talking heads.

After the 2008 GOP presidential primaries, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee joined Fox News as the host of his own show. Karl Rove, a former top aide to President George W. Bush, also joined Fox News as a commentator.

Michael Steele, the current chairman of the Republican National Committee, was once a Fox News contributor as well.

Mary Matalin, a former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, is now a CNN contributor alongside her husband James Carville and Begala -- top Democratic aides to then President Clinton.

One of Begala and Carville's colleagues -- George Stephanopolous -- has been a long-time political analyst at ABC News, who later hosted his own Sunday TV show "This Week." Most recently, he was named as the host of ABC's "Good Morning America."

On MSNBC, former Florida GOP Rep. Joe Scarborough now hosts his own TV show called "Morning Joe."

Pat Buchanan, a leading conservative voice and former presidential candidate, also graces MSNBC's airwaves giving his take on politics.

Since leaving office, Palin has become a vocal critic of the Obama administration's policies. She recently released her autobiography "Going Rogue" and toured the country promoting her book.

Question: On what news network will Palin appear?

Question: Sarah Palin is the former governor of what state?

Question: What will Palin's appear as on the program?

Question: Who will not anchor her own program?

Question: Who joins ranks of many other politicians who have become analysts?

Answer: Fox

Answer: Alaska

Answer: TV commentator.

Answer: Palin

Answer: Sarah Palin

Summary:
Sarah Palin will appear as a contributor on Fox News, source tells CNN .
Source: Former Alaska governor will not anchor her own program .
Palin joins ranks of many other politicians who have become analysts, co-contributors .


Washington (CNN) -- Only one-quarter of Americans think the federal stimulus plan has helped the middle class, while a majority say it has helped bankers and investors, according to a new national poll.

A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released Wednesday morning indicates that 25 percent of the public thinks the stimulus has benefited the middle class.

One-third of the people questioned think the stimulus has helped low-income Americans, with just over four in 10 saying the plan has benefited business executives. A majority, 54 percent, think the stimulus has helped bankers and investors.

"Opinions on the economic stimulus bill are colored by the perception that it has helped fat cats, but not ordinary Americans," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "It's possible that the belief that the stimulus bill helped bankers and CEOs is due to the public confusing the stimulus bill with the various bailout bills that were passed at roughly the same time last year."

The survey also indicates that one-quarter think the stimulus has helped people in their own community, with three in 10 saying it has hurt people in their community and 45 percent saying the plan has had no effect.

According to a CNN poll released Sunday, 56 percent of the public opposes the stimulus, with 42 percent supportive of the plan. Last March, just weeks after President Obama signed the stimulus bill into law, a CNN survey indicated that 54 percent supported the program, with 44 percent opposed.

The program, formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, attempts to stimulate the country's economy by increasing federal spending and cutting taxes, at a total cost to the government of $862 billion.

No Republicans in the House of Representatives and only three in the Senate voted for the bill.

The stimulus was initially thought to have a price tag of $787 billion, but the Congressional Budget Office on Tuesday increased its forecast for how much the stimulus will add to the nation's deficit, raising its estimate by $75 billion.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll was conducted January 8-10, with 1,021 adult Americans questioned by telephone. The survey's sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.

Question: What percentage of the public thinks stimulus has benefited the middle class?

Question: How many percent of the public thinks stimulus has benefited the middle class?

Question: What does 54% of the public think?

Question: How much more than expected will the stimulus cost?

Question: What has the stimulus helped, according to 54 percent?

Question: What do 25% of the public think?

Question: How much doe the Congressional Budget Office say the stimulus will cost?

Question: How many believe the stimulus has helped bankers, investors?

Answer: one-quarter

Answer: 25

Answer: the stimulus has helped bankers and investors.

Answer: $75 billion.

Answer: bankers and investors.

Answer: the stimulus has benefited the middle class.

Answer: $862 billion.

Answer: one-quarter

Summary:
Poll: 25 percent of the public thinks stimulus has benefited the middle class .
Poll: 54 percent say stimulus has helped bankers, investors .
Congressional Budget Office: Stimulus will cost $75 billion more than expected .


Washington (CNN) -- Pakistan's military insists that the NATO strike last month that killed more than two dozen Pakistani soldiers near the Afghan border was deliberate.

In an effort to pre-empt the results of NATO's official investigation, due out next week, the Pakistani Embassy in Washington invited reporters for a detailed briefing on the incident.

Pakistani military officials at the briefing contended that NATO forces knew they were firing at Pakistani troops throughout the attack and even apologized as they kept firing, evidence they say supports their assertions the attack was deliberate.

U.S. officials have said it was a regrettable case of mistaken identity and miscommunication when NATO attacked the area in support of a nearby U.S.-Afghan joint patrol that believed it was under fire from the Taliban.

"I have a story to tell and this is the story of those brave people who left us in the middle of a cold, November night on a barren mountain top," a senior Pakistani defense official began.

Using maps, photos and PowerPoint charts, he offered a painstaking recreation of the incident from the Pakistani military's point of view, based on interviews with surviving troops and residents where the attack took place.

He and embassy officials at the briefing spoke on the condition of anonymity, preferring for their military and civilian leadership in Islamabad to speak on the record.

At issue is whether Pakistani troops were the target of the attacks.

The Pakistani officials at the briefing argued that well-established operating procedures and an intricate system for operational information sharing were deliberately ignored, which led to the tragic incident that killed 24 Pakistani "martyrs."

American officials told CNN that U.S. forces checked first with their Pakistani counterparts before launching the strike. Before calling in airstrikes, the U.S. forces checked with a Pakistani liaison team. They were not seeking permission -- because the airstrikes were described as a matter of self-defense -- but were making sure Pakistani troops weren't in what was called a poorly marked border area, the officials said.

After that consultation, the U.S. believed there were no Pakistani forces nearby, which turned out not to be true.

U.S. military officials would not comment on the Pakistani assertions, citing the ongoing investigation. But in the past few weeks, U.S. officials have denied vehemently the charge by Pakistan's military that this was a deliberate attack.

"What I can say, absolutely, and I can't imagine anyone in this room wouldn't believe me -- we did not attack a border post, a Pakistan military border post, intentionally," Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in a speech in Washington last week. "If you think we did, I'd have to ask you in return what in the world would we hope to gain by doing that? So I can say that categorically.

Dempsey said, "They believe we did this intentionally in some way to either discredit them or goad them into further action."

Pentagon spokesman George Little said, "We know enough at this point to say with certainty this was not an intentional attack on Pakistani forces. The Pakistanis are our partners; it defies reason that we would attack them."

But Pakistani officials at the embassy briefing said that not only were the coordinates incorrect, covering an area nine miles north of the attack, but Pakistan's chain of command was in the process of reviewing them when NATO helicopters began the striking Pakistani outpost "Volcano" shortly after midnight. Pakistan only returned fire after its first post was fired upon, which prompted NATO to strike against the second post, "Boulder," the officials said, adding that the commanding officer who ran up the hill to the area with a rescue team was killed.

A NATO officer at the joint coordination outpost in the area even apologized to his Pakistani liaison in the middle of the attack for relaying the wrong location of the area NATO planes were about to fire on, preventing Pakistan from warning this was a friendly post, according to the Pakistani officials. Even after NATO officer acknowledged at about 1:15 a.m. that it was firing on the outposts and confirmed it was pulling back its

Question: What was the number of killed Pakistani soldiers?

Question: Which military is talking about NATO?

Question: where did  say NATO forces knew they were firing at Pakistani troops?

Question: where did this happen

Answer: 24

Answer: Pakistan's

Answer: near the Afghan border

Answer: near the Afghan border

Summary:
Pakistani military officials say NATO forces knew they were firing at Pakistani troops .
U.S. has said last month's attack was a case of mistaken identity, miscommunication .
More than two dozen Pakistani soldiers killed in NATO strike near the Afghan border .
Strike has exacerbated already fractious relationship between U.S. and Pakistan .


Washington (CNN) -- Politically sensitive issues such as immigration, border security, drug trafficking and trade took center stage in Washington on Wednesday as President Obama welcomed his Mexican counterpart, Felipe Calderon, to the White House.

Both leaders used the occasion -- the fourth time they have met for bilateral talks -- to take sharp aim at Arizona's new law meant to crack down on illegal immigrants. Calderon characterized the measure as discriminatory; Obama called it a "misdirected expression of frustration."

The leaders criticized the law while meeting with reporters shortly after Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rolled out the red carpet for Calderon in a formal White House arrival ceremony.

U.S. first lady Michelle Obama and Mexican first lady Margarita Zavala joined their husbands for the occasion, which was to be followed by a state dinner Wednesday night. Calderon is to address a joint session of Congress on Thursday.

"Our progress today marks another step forward in a new era of cooperation and partnership between our countries, a partnership based on mutual interests, mutual respect and mutual responsibility," Obama said.

Calderon said the United States and Mexico now face a series of common challenges, including climate change and organized crime, which is a rising threat to border stability.

But what ultimately "turns us into good neighbors" is a common belief in "freedom, justice and democracy," he said.

Obama ticked through a list of items he said the two leaders had agreed upon during their meeting. On the economy, he said, they had agreed to streamline regulations while strengthening protection of intellectual property. To facilitate trade, they had reaffirmed a "commitment to a 21st-century border that is modern, secure and efficient."

He also pledged to expand joint initiatives promoting renewable energy and "smart grid" technology.

Turning to illegal drug and weapons trafficking, Obama noted that his administration is now screening 100 percent of south-bound rail cargo. Moving in the other direction, Mexican authorities in recent years have seized 45,000 weapons that could be traced to the United States.

Obama also cited new initiatives to cut U.S. demand for illegal drugs.

"As your partner, we'll give you the support you need to prevail ... against the drug cartels that have unleashed horrific violence in so many communities," Obama told Calderon.

Drug violence claimed 6,500 lives in Mexico last year. But Calderon said 90 percent of the casualties from the war on drugs are criminals fighting each other, adding that the cartels "are not winning."

"The Mexican gangs are passing through a very unstable process ... and fighting each other and that explains most of those casualties," Calderon said on CNN's "The Situation Room."

He acknowledged, however, that innocent people have also been killed.

Obama also noted Mexico's current seat on the U.N. Security Council, highlighting the two countries' agreement on possible sanctions against Iran to stop Tehran's current nuclear program.

The issue of Arizona's new immigration law, however, consumed most of the leaders' time during their meeting with reporters. The measure, which will allow law enforcement officers to ask for proof of legal residency of anyone who is being investigated for a crime or possible legal infraction, has drawn widespread criticism in Mexico.

Critics contend, among other things, that the law will lead to racial profiling against Hispanic residents.

Later Wednesday, Calderon acknowledged that immigration is the biggest challenge Mexico is facing with the United States.

"It is provoking a lot of tensions between our people," Calderon said. "This is a phenomenon that we need to solve. ... And the best way to solve that is creating new jobs in Mexico and that is exactly what we are trying to do."

Calderon said Mexico is working to change its own immigration policies to address criticisms from officials in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico who claim they're only trying to do in their states what Mexico is doing in the southern part of its country.

Calderon said that illegal immigration has not been a crime in Mexico since last year.

Question:
What did Obama criticize?
What do Obama and Calderon criticize?
What state law was criticized?
who is Felipe Calderon?

Answer: Arizona's new law

Answer: Arizona's new law meant to crack down on illegal immigrants.

Answer: Arizona's new

Answer: Mexican counterpart,

Summary:
NEW: Felipe Calderon says immigration is biggest challenge Mexico faces with U.S.
Obama and Calderon criticize Arizona law .
Drug violence, trade, renewable energy also among topics .
Immigration overshadows Wednesday's state dinner, which will honor Calderon .


Washington (CNN) -- Prescription drug overdose is now the fastest-growing drug problem in the country, surpassing the number of people who overdosed during both the crack cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and the black tar heroin epidemic of the 1970s combined, the Obama administration says.

The problem is so severe, the administration is releasing a plan to combat what it calls a crisis of epidemic proportions.

"The toll our nation's prescription drug abuse epidemic has taken in communities nationwide is devastating," said Gil Kerlikowske, White House director of national drug control policy. "We share a responsibility to protect our communities from the damage done by prescription drug abuse."

According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy, in 2007 about 28,000 people died from drug overdoses. Most were accidental and were related to prescription drugs.

"Today, we are making an unprecedented commitment to combat the growing problem of prescription drug abuse," said Vice President Joe Biden as he announced the administration's plan Tuesday morning. "The government, as well as parents, patients, health care providers, and manufacturers all play a role in preventing abuse. This plan will save lives, and it will substantially lessen the burden this epidemic takes on our families, communities, and workforce."

The effort, called "Epidemic: Responding to America's Prescription Drug Abuse Crisis," is primarily aimed at cracking down on abuse of opioids, some of the most powerful pain relievers on the market. Opioids are a class of drugs used to treat chronic pain and include products like OxyContin, Vicodin, Darvon, Dilaudid and Demerol. When abused they can be highly addictive.

Prescriptions for these painkillers have increased dramatically over the past 10 years. In 2000 pharmacies filed 174 million opioid prescriptions. By 2009 that number was 257 million. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, over the past five years, hospital emergency room visits linked to prescription drug abuse or misuse have doubled.

"Unintentional drug overdose is a growing epidemic in the U.S. and is now the leading cause of injury death in 17 states," said Dr. Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "There are effective and emerging strategies out there to address this problem. Support for this action plan will help us implement those strategies which will go a long way to save lives and reduce the tremendous burden this problem has on our health care system and our society."

The plan seeks to reduce abuse and drug diversion, educate both parents and health care providers, find better ways to dispose of unused pills, and beef up enforcement efforts by clamping down on pill mills and doctor shopping.

The Food and Drug Administration will provide support by requiring an opioids Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy to determine that a drug's benefits outweigh its risks. Under this process, drug manufacturers must make educational materials on proper prescribing and disposal available to anyone writing prescriptions for long-acting and extended-release painkillers. The agency must approve all materials before they are released.

"Long-acting and extended-release opioid drugs have benefit when used properly and are a necessary component of pain management for certain patients, but we know that they pose serious risks when used improperly, with serious negative consequences for individuals, families and communities," said FDA Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg. "The prescriber education component of this opioid (risk evaluation and mitigation strategy) balances the need for continued access to these medications with stronger measures to reduce their risks."

Thirty-five states already have prescription drug monitoring programs in place that help track how prescriptions are prescribed and distributed by authorized healthcare providers and pharmacies.

The program's main goal is to prevent abuse and diversion at the retail level. Under the new plan, agencies will work to establish prescription drug monitoring programs in every state.

The Drug Enforcement Agency will be heavily involved in enforcement, recovering prescription drugs, and focusing on doctors who illegally prescribe and dispense these drugs. They will also target "doctor shoppers" -- people who visit multiple doctors to secure multiple prescriptions and pill mills.

"When abused, prescription drugs

Question:
What is being launched?
What is reaching epidemic proportions?
What does Biden say?

Answer: "Epidemic: Responding to America's Prescription Drug Abuse Crisis,"

Answer: Prescription drug overdose

Answer: "Today, we are making an unprecedented commitment to combat the growing problem of prescription drug abuse,"

Summary:
Abuse of prescription drugs is reaching epidemic proportions, the administration says .
A new effort to combat the problem is being launched .
Biden: The plan will "lessen the burden this epidemic takes on our families"


Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama announced Friday that states will be allowed to opt out of certain requirements imposed by the controversial No Child Left Behind law, the landmark education reform initiative passed with broad bipartisan support a decade ago.

The administration will immediately begin reviewing state applications to waive various demands imposed by the law in return for credible commitments to close lingering achievement gaps.

"Higher standards are the right goal. Accountability is the right goal. Closing the achievement gap is the right goal," Obama said at the White House. "But experience has taught us that in its implementation, No Child Left Behind has some serious flaws."

Among other things, the law, which passed 2001, requires public schools to meet targets aimed at making all students proficient in reading and math by 2014 or face stiff penalties. The Department of Education has predicted that, without waivers, up to 82% of the nation's schools could miss that target and end up facing penalties including the loss of federal education dollars.

Obama blasted Congress for failing to change the law, a failure that forced the administration to act on its own, the president said.

"We can't afford to wait for an education system that isn't doing everything it should for our kids," Obama said. "We've got to act now and harness all the good ideas coming out of our states (and) coming out of our schools."

A senior administration official speaking to reporters on a conference call Thursday said the law "is hurting children by denying the children most at risk the resources they really need."

Under Obama's reforms, states will be encouraged to enact accountability standards that don't treat all schools the same.

Specifically, schools will have to implement new teacher and principal accountability standards. Local districts will have to set basic guidelines to evaluate a teacher's performance based on a number of factors, not simply student performance.

"The purpose is not to give states and districts a reprieve from accountability, but rather to unleash energy to improve our schools at the local level," Obama said in a separate statement released by the White House.

One of the major criticisms of the current No Child Left Behind guidelines is that it encouraged schools to lower standards rather than improve. The new guidelines "should reduce the pressure to teach the test and the narrowing of the curriculum," one administration official said.

Six months ago, the administration sent Congress its plan to revamp No Child Left Behind. That legislation, however, has stalled.

The administration insists it hasn't enacted the new changes alone. Instead, it has reached out and received input from 45 states that helped develop the new guidelines for opting out of No Child Left Behind standards. In addition, senior administration officials told reporters that 44 states and the District of Columbia are working to adopt a common set of state-developed college and career-ready standards.

Some critics fear the new guidelines will ultimately give the federal government an even larger role in states' education decisions. Administration officials deny the accusation, instead maintaining that the new guidelines will actually give states more flexibility, including how to spend 20% of their Title I money, which funds low-income education and can account for as much as a billion dollars nationwide.

Currently, No Child Left Behind requires states spend that portion of federal education dollars on tutoring.

The administration says many states and school districts are already moving toward the new guidelines. States can file a request for a waiver from the requirements by mid-November and the waivers could be granted in early 2012.

CNN's Lesa Jansen and Alan Silverleib contributed to this report

Question: When was No Child Left Behind signed into law?

Question: what will Obama grant

Question: When will states be granted exemptions

Question: what was signed into law

Question: what will states be granted

Question: What will President Obama grant?

Answer: 2001,

Answer: waiver from the requirements

Answer: early 2012.

Answer: No Child Left Behind

Answer: waivers

Answer: be allowed to opt out of

Summary:
President Obama says he will grant waivers from No Child Left Behind requirements .
States will be granted exemptions in exchange for certain commitments .
No Child Left Behind was signed into law by President George W. Bush a decade ago .


Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama released his long-awaited debt reduction plan Monday, outlining a roughly $3 trillion savings blueprint that was immediately criticized by top congressional and other Republicans.

The president's plan includes $1.5 trillion in new revenue generated largely by higher taxes on the wealthiest Americans, a proposal strongly opposed by GOP leaders who insist that any tax increase will undermine an already shaky economy.

The measure -- which would add to nearly $1 trillion in savings signed into law under the debt-ceiling deal enacted in August -- does not include changes to Social Security. It would increase Medicare premiums for individuals with higher incomes starting in 2017 -- the year Obama leaves office if he wins a second term.

"We are not going to have a one-sided deal that hurts the folks that are most vulnerable," Obama said at the White House, offering a defense of tax hikes on the highest earners.

Spending cuts alone "will not solve our fiscal problems. We can't just cut our way out of this hole," he added. "It's going to take a balanced approach. If we're going to make spending cuts -- many of which we wouldn't make if we weren't facing such large budget deficits -- then it's only right that we ask everyone to pay their fair share."

Obama explicitly promised to veto any debt-reduction legislation that cuts benefits while failing to include higher taxes on the wealthy.

iReport: What do you think about Obama's plan?

"I will not support any plan that puts all the burden on ordinary Americans," he insisted.

Republicans responded by dismissing the plan as little more than a cheap political gimmick.

It's "a thinly veiled attempt to score political points," said Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus. "By raising taxes on job creators, Obama may win back some support from disgruntled liberal voters, but America will lose even more sorely needed jobs."

"Veto threats, a massive tax hike, phantom savings and punting on entitlement reform is not a recipe for economic or job growth â€” or even meaningful deficit reduction," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky.

"Pitting one group of Americans against another is not leadership," added House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Key congressional Democrats quickly rallied to Obama's defense, calling the blueprint a serious attempt to take on one of the most contentious issues in Washington.

The "proposal is clearly moving in the right direction," said North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. "It represents a significant and balanced plan for bringing our deficits and debt under control."

On Monday night, Obama referred to the Republican response as predictable and said the issue shows the fundamental difference between the parties on how the nation should deal with mounting federal deficits and national debt.

"What has been clear over the last two and a half years is that we have not had a willing partner," Obama told a New York fundraising event.

"Now, we've been able to get some stuff done despite that, and despite a filibuster in the Senate. But at least over the last nine months what we've seen is some irreconcilable differences, let's put it that way."

The release of Obama's blueprint is likely to set the stage for a fall dominated by harsh partisan debates over taxes and spending, as well as a 2012 presidential campaign focused on growing economic fears.

Under Obama's plan, $800 billion in revenue would be generated by allowing some of the Bush-era tax cuts for high-income households to expire, as the president has repeatedly called for. An additional $400 billion would result from capping the value of itemized deductions and other exemptions for high-income households.

Read the White House plan (PDF)

The remaining $300 billion would come from closing various tax loopholes, according to a senior administration official.

A new tax surcharge could also be imposed on millionaires: the "Buffett Rule,"

Question: The plan calls for $1.5 trillion in what?

Question: how many savings would be realized by ending wars in Iraq, Afghanistan?

Answer: new revenue

Answer: $3 trillion

Summary:
NEW: Obama cites "irreconcilable differences" with Republicans .
The plan calls for $1.5 trillion in new taxes, including a tax surcharge on millionaires .
Over $1 trillion in savings would be realized by ending wars in Iraq, Afghanistan .
GOP leaders call the new taxes a form of class warfare .


Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama took the push for his stalled $447 billion jobs plan to North Carolina on Monday, telling two audiences that alternative proposals put forward by his Republican critics amount to little more than sops to the rich that will gut critical regulations and fail to restore economic growth.

My "bill will help put people back to work and give our economy a boost right away," Obama told a morning crowd at Asheville Regional Airport. "But apparently, none of this matters" to GOP leaders.

"I've gone out of my way to find areas of cooperation" with congressional Republicans, the president declared. "We're going to give members of Congress another chance to step up to the plate and do the right thing."

But "if they vote against these proposals again ... then they're not going to have to answer to me. They're going to have to answer to you," he said.

Later Monday, Obama told students at West Wilkes High School in Millers Creek that Republican opposition to his plan "makes no sense," and he criticized the GOP alternative proposal as an attempt to satisfy the party's conservative wing.

"It's way overdue for us to stop trying to satisfy some branch of the party and take some common-sense steps to help" the economy and the nation, he said to a cheering crowd.

Since Obama's plan was rejected in the Senate -- due to unanimous GOP opposition -- Democratic leaders have decided to try to move it through Congress by breaking it up into a series of smaller legislative proposals.

But his appearance, analysts note, was as much about campaign politics as the bill. The president will spend the next three days on a bus tour through politically pivotal North Carolina and Virginia -- two states carried by Obama in 2008 but considered up for grabs next year.

Veteran Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, whom Obama defeated in the 2008 election, criticized the president Monday for using the taxpayer-funded trip for what McCain called political campaigning.

"On the taxpayer-paid dime, the president is now traveling, attacking the Republican plan," McCain said on the Senate floor. While noting Obama's right to level such criticism in a political venue, McCain added: "Is that appropriate on the taxpayer's dime, since it is clearly campaigning?"

In Asheville, the crowd repeatedly chanted "four more years" before and during Obama's remarks.

"I appreciate the 'four more years,' but right now, I'm thinking about the next 13 months," the president said. "We don't have time to wait. We've got a choice right now."

Obama's senior strategist, David Axelrod, vowed Sunday that every part of the bill will eventually have a vote.

"The American people support every single plank of that bill, and we're going to vote on every single one of them," Axelrod said on ABC's "This Week."

He would not say which part of the plan would come first.

Republicans will "get a vote on whether they believe we should protect tax breaks for small business owners and middle-class Americans, or whether we should protect tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires," Obama said in a written statement last Tuesday.

Meanwhile, demonstrators in Southern California said they'd gather Monday to protest the GOP's stance on the president's jobs bill. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and California Reps. Dana Rohrabacher and Ed Royce will be together in the area for a fundraising event.

"Members of the Courage Campaign, teachers and health care workers will deliver a petition to Speaker Boehner signed by 25,000 Courage Campaign members ... demanding that he hold a vote on President Obama's American Jobs Act," a statement from the demonstrators said.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Virginia, said over the weekend that there could be agreement on some elements.

"Let's work together. Let's find some of the things in his plan that we agree with

Question: How many days is the visit to North Carolina and Virginia?

Question: who visits North Carolina and Virginia?

Question: Who says Obama is campaigning on a taxpayer-funded trip?

Question: who criticized Obama?

Answer: three

Answer: President Barack Obama

Answer: John McCain,

Answer: Sen. John McCain,

Summary:
NEW: Sen. McCain criticizes Obama, says he's campaigning on a taxpayer-funded trip .
President launches a three-day visit to North Carolina and Virginia .
The two states are key battlegrounds in the presidential race .
The White House has called on Congress to pass the jobs bill incrementally .


Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama, speaking to a gathering of gay and lesbian activists, said Saturday that he is committed to equality, citing the repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy as an example.

Obama said his accomplishments on gay rights issues have been substantial since he last headlined the annual National Dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, in 2009.

He acknowledged "we have more work to do," including on the issue of bullying.

The president currently supports same-sex civil unions, and has said his views on gay marriage are "evolving." He recently announced his support of the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, a 1996 law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

Organizations working actively to legalize same-sex marriage say they hope Obama eventually changes his stance.

While Obama spoke Saturday about equality, he did not speak on the marriage issue.

The president chided participants in a Republican presidential debate last month for not rebuking members of the audience who booed a gay soldier who asked about the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

"We don't believe in standing silent when that happens," Obama said of the debate incident. "You want to be commander-in-chief, you can start by standing up for the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States even when it is not politically convenient."

After the debate, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum said he hadn't heard the booing when the question was asked. Santorum was being asked the question when the incident occurred.

Obama spoke of growing tolerance measured, he said, by ordinary Americans:

"A father realizes he doesn't just love his daughter but also her wife."

Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said after the speech that Obama reaffirmed commitment to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans. "It was a remarkable experience to see openly gay and lesbian uniformed service members in the audience be able to salute their commander in chief" about the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Obama's remarks were delivered to a key constituency that hasn't always been receptive to the president's policies and style of leadership.

"I'd like to see the president bring his message of support for the freedom to marry to a broader audience, perhaps in a conversational setting, so that all Americans can hear him talk about why marriage matters to loving gay and lesbian couples and their families," said Evan Wolfson, the founder and president of Freedom to Marry. "It is important that the president lay out the case for Americans opening their hearts to the values of fairness and treating others as they would want to be treated."

Wolfson, along with other organizations advocating for legal same-sex marriages, said the Obama administration had made significant progress on some issues, but that support for marriage equality was still an important goal.

"We applaud the administration's progress, while we also encourage him to 'evolve faster' on supporting full marriage equality," Stuart Gaffney, media director for Marriage Equality USA, said Saturday. He said he wasn't aware of any opposition within his organization to the HRC's selection of Obama as their keynote speaker.

"We look forward to the day soon when our president stands with that pro-equality majority," Gaffney added.

The Log Cabin Republicans, an organization that represents gay and lesbian conservatives, said Obama's appearance Saturday night was more about politics than substantive policy change.

"President Obama's appearance at the Human Rights Campaign Dinner this evening is more emblematic of their role as an ostensibly partisan organization than a representation of the gay and lesbian community," said Christian Berle, the group's deputy executive director.

Berle said Obama's stance on gay marriage didn't match that of most Americans.

"As all Americans are becoming open to marriage equality, the president is taking a retreat," Berle said. "

Question: Many gay rights activists applaud Obama's what?

Question: what did the president do

Question: what will obama do

Question: who do the gay rights activists applaud

Question: Who says he will continue to advocate for equality?

Question: who will continue to advocate for equality

Answer: on supporting full marriage equality,"

Answer: He acknowledged "we have more work to do," including on the issue of bullying.

Answer: "we have more work to do,"

Answer: the administration's progress,

Answer: President Barack Obama,

Answer: President Barack Obama,

Summary:
NEW: President tweaks GOP hopefuls over debate incident .
Obama says he will continue to advocate for equality .
Many gay rights activists applaud Obama's track record .
But some critics say he has done too little to advance same-sex marriage .


Washington (CNN) -- President Barack Obama, who has enjoyed Apple's products along with millions of other Americans, Wednesday night hailed Steve Jobs as one of America's greatest innovators, a man "brave enough to think differently, bold enough to believe he could change the world, and talented enough to do it."

"The world has lost a visionary. And there may be no greater tribute to Steve's success than the fact that much of the world learned of his passing on a device he invented," the president said in a statement.

Praising Jobs' breadth and the impact of his work from personal computers to iPhones to movie production, the president added, "Steve was fond of saying that he lived every day like it was his last. Because he did, he transformed our lives, redefined entire industries, and achieved one of the rarest feats in human history: He changed the way each of us sees the world."

This week, Obama, known for his affection for the BlackBerry, revealed he actually was a recipient of an advanced copy of the iPad 2 directly from Jobs.

"Steve Jobs actually gave it to me, a little bit early," he told ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "Yeah, it was cool. I got it directly from him."

In March, CNN photographed the president holding an iPad.

The president and Jobs met several times, including at a dinner in San Francisco in February with Silicon Valley executives and last year when they discussed issues revolving around technology and the economy.

Many politicians also praised Jobs as the truest example of the American dream, an icon.

House Speaker Rep. John Boehner, who also uses an iPad, tweeted: "Steve Jobs changed the world for the better w/his innovations and genius."

House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Virginia, tweeted, "There is not a day that goes by, and often not an hour, that a Steve Jobs invention does not better my family's life. Thank you Steve."

Fellow Californian Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, called Jobs "a visionary who changed the way we live, an innovator whose products brought joy to millions, a risk-taker who wasn't afraid to challenge the status quo," and also said in a statement, "His sage advice was respected by policymakers on both sides of the aisle. His courageous fight against cancer brought strength to many."

CNN Congressional Producer Deirdre Walsh contributed to this story.

Question: What did Obama say about Steve Jobs?

Question: What did obama reveal

Question: what does obama reveal

Question: What did jobs change

Question: What did Obama reveal this week?

Question: what did Boehner tweet on

Question: What did John Boehner tweet on his iPad?

Question: who give an ipad 2 to obama

Answer: a man "brave enough to think differently, bold enough to believe he could change the world, and talented enough to do it."

Answer: "The world has lost a visionary. And there may be no greater tribute to Steve's success than the fact that much of the world learned of his passing on a device he invented,"

Answer: he actually was a

Answer: the world,

Answer: recipient of an advanced copy of the iPad 2 directly from Jobs.

Answer: "Steve Jobs

Answer: "Steve Jobs changed the world for the better w/his innovations and genius."

Answer: Jobs.

Summary:
Obama on Jobs: "He changed the way each of us sees the world"
This week, Obama revealed he received an iPad 2 directly from Jobs .
Boehner tweets on his iPad: "Steve Jobs changed the world for the better"


Washington (CNN) -- President Obama and Republican and Democratic leaders engaged in a spirited but civil debate at a health care summit Thursday, finding agreement on some issues but appearing to find little common ground on how to move forward in a bipartisan way.

"I don't know, frankly, whether we can close that gap," said President Obama as the day-long meeting closed. If agreement is not reached, he said, there will be "a lot of arguments about procedures in Congress about moving forward," an apparent reference to using a parliamentary shortcut under which a health care bill could be passed with a simple majority instead of the 60-vote supermajority the body requires to overcome the filibuster which Republicans have threatened to use.

"My hope had been there might be enough areas of overlap to realistically think about moving forward without a situation in which everyone just goes to their respective corners and this ends up being a political fight," he said.

"Frankly, I was discourage by the outcome," Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, told reporters after the meeting. He urged the Democrats to "start over and go step by step and target the areas of possible agreement that we discussed in the meeting today."

Sen. John Boehner, R-Ohio, sounded equally unenthusiastic. "I think the American people want us to work together on common steps to make our current system work better," he said. "We can't do it within the framework of a 2,700-page bill."

Live updates from the health care summit

"The president let everybody talk and talk and talk," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who called Obama "the most patient man in the world."

Though there were areas of agreement, he said, "every Republican used the same talking points." He, too, appeared to raise the specter of attempting to move forward through the parliamentary shortcut, known as reconciliation.

"It's time we do something and we're going to do it," the Nevada Democrat said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she was "not overly optimistic" that the Democrats would be able to attract Republican votes for the health care bill.

Obama said in opening remarks that "it is absolutely critical to begin now moving on what is one of the biggest drags on the economy."

The situation affects not just people without health insurance, but also those who have it, he said.

"The problem is not getting better," he said. "It is getting worse."

Share your reaction to the summit

Obama called on Republican and Democratic leaders at the much-publicized summit to "not focus on where we differ, but focus on where we agree."

The differences were evident, though, in what each side believes should happen next.

Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander, who made the opening remarks for his party, said Democrats should scrap existing bills passed by the House and Senate and start over on new legislation.  Watch what areas Democrats and Republicans can agree on

That's not going to happen, Democrats answered, saying Americans cannot wait.

"For them, they don't have time for us to start over," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said.

Jon Kyl, the Senate Republican Whip, pointed out that a major philosophical difference between the two sides is who should be in charge of the health care system -- the government or private industry.

"There's so much in the bills you have supported that puts so much control in Washington," Kyl said to Obama.

House Republican Whip Eric Cantor also highlighted that concern, pointing out that Republicans are nearly unanimous in their opposition to the bills.

"There is a reason we voted no," Cantor said to Obama. "It does have to do with the philosophical differences you pointed out. It also has to do with our fear that Washington can define what are essential health benefits."

Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin made an impassioned plea for passage of health care reform, saying the current system discriminates against

Question: Who urged Democrats to scrap the health care bill?

Question: Who said the health care system discriminates?

Answer: Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander,

Answer: Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin

Summary:
Sen. Jay Rockefeller: "This is a rapacious industry that does what it wants"
Sen. Tom Harkin says health care system discriminates, segregates people .
President Obama tells Sen. John McCain: "We're not campaigning. The election is over"
GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander urges Democrats to scrap bills, start over on health care .


Washington (CNN) -- President Obama and the rest of the first family teamed up with an extremely oversized rabbit Monday to the host the annual White House Easter Egg Roll, much to the delight of visiting children from across the country.

The theme of this year's festivities was "Ready, Set, Go!" -- a reference to first lady Michelle Obama's "Let's Move" initiative, which is designed to address the problem of childhood obesity.

The first family kicked off the event, which dates to 1878, shortly before 11 a.m., appearing with the Easter Bunny on the White House's South Portico, a balcony overlooking the residence's sprawling South Lawn.

"Is this not the most perfect day for the Easter Egg Roll?" Michelle Obama asked the enthusiastic crowd. Washington is currently in the middle of a warm spell under a clear sky.

"Our hope today is that in addition to having fun and doing some of the traditional activities like the egg roll ... you can learn about beginning to live a more healthy life," she said.

As well as participating in the traditional egg roll, families were invited to visit the White House garden and play football, basketball and tennis, among other things. Several celebrities attended the event, including players from the Washington Redskins and athletes Apolo Ohno and Billie Jean King.

The president also read the Dr. Seuss book "Green Eggs and Ham" to the visiting children.

"When your parents tell you to eat your broccoli, you don't know whether you're going to like them or not," he told the kids, emphasizing the point of the classic story. "You've got to try it. ... [And] when your parents tell you to eat your peas, eat your peas."

The first White House Easter Egg Roll was hosted by President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878.

Question: What did read Obama?

Question: Who read Dr. Suess books?

Question: what read Obama?

Question: What are the families being invited to the White House to do?

Question: What dates all the way back to 1878?

Question: Who were invited to visit White House?

Answer: Seuss book "Green Eggs and Ham"

Answer: The president

Answer: Dr. Seuss book "Green Eggs and Ham"

Answer: play football, basketball and tennis, among other things.

Answer: the annual White House Easter Egg Roll,

Answer: families

Summary:
White House Easter Egg Roll dates back to 1878 .
Families invited to visit White House garden and play football, basketball and tennis .
Obama read Dr. Seuss book "Green Eggs and Ham" to kids .


Washington (CNN) -- President Obama announced Thursday that the federal government will spend $8 billion developing a nationwide high-speed train system -- an investment the White House says is needed to help spur long-term economic growth.

The investment, to be made through a series of state grants, will be funded through the government's $862 billion economic stimulus package.

Overall, projects and planning involving the rail corridors will take place in 31 states, according to a White House statement.

The program "will help accelerate job growth in an economy that is already beginning to grow," Obama said at a town hall at the University of Tampa in Florida.

"There is no reason why other countries can build high-speed rail lines and we can't," Obama said.

More than 30 rail manufacturers have agreed to establish or expand U.S. operations if they are hired to work on the high-speed rail network, the administration said.

The president first mentioned the program in his State of the Union speech Wednesday night. The administration initially released an outline for a national high-speed rail network last April.

Each of the corridors identified by the administration last year are between 100 and 600 miles long.

The program is "a long-term venture in which states will need to plan projects, purchase and lay track, build and assemble equipment, and construct or upgrade train stations, tunnels and bridges," the statement said.

In addition to the $8 billion mentioned by Obama, the plan also includes $1 billion a year for five years in the federal budget "as a down payment to jump-start the program," the White House said.

Train corridors in the program include:

-- San Diego-Los Angeles-San Luis Obispo in California

-- Oakland-Sacramento in California

-- Portland-Eugene in Oregon

-- Seattle-Portland in Washington and Oregon

-- Chicago-St. Louis in Illinois and Missouri

-- St. Louis-Kansas City in Missouri

-- Minneapolis/St. Paul-Madison in Minnesota and Wisconsin

-- Madison-Milwaukee in Wisconsin

-- Milwaukee-Chicago in Wisconsin and Illinois

-- Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati in Ohio

-- Detroit/Pontiac-Chicago in Michigan, Indiana and Illinois

-- Tampa-Orlando in Florida

-- Raleigh-Charlotte in North Carolina

-- Washington-Richmond in the District of Columbia and Virginia

-- Raleigh-Richmond in North Carolina and Virginia

-- New York City-Albany-Buffalo in New York

-- New York City-Montreal in New York and Quebec, Canada.

-- Boston-New York-Washington in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and the District of Columbia

-- Brunswick-Portland in Maine

-- Philadelphia-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania

-- Springfield-East Northfield in Massachusetts

-- New Haven-Springfield in Connecticut and Massachusetts

Question: How many states will the projects and planning take place in?

Question: how much is the stimulus package?

Question: How many rail manufacturers agreed to establish or expand U.S. operations if hired?

Question: What is taking place in 31 states?

Question: What does the projects and planning involve?

Question: how many rail manufacturers agree to establish or expand U.S. operations if hired?

Question: What will be made through state grants?

Question: Who agreed to establish or expand US operations?

Answer: 31

Answer: $862 billion

Answer: More than 30

Answer: projects and planning involving the rail corridors

Answer: the rail corridors

Answer: More than 30

Answer: The investment,

Answer: More than 30 rail manufacturers

Summary:
Projects and planning involving rail corridors will take place in 31 states, White House says .
Investment will be made through state grants funded by $862 billion stimulus package .
More than 30 rail manufacturers agree to establish or expand U.S. operations if hired .