The New Old Age: Murray Span, 1922-2012

One consequence of our elders’ extended lifespans is that we half expect them to keep chugging along forever. My father, a busy yoga practitioner and blackjack player, celebrated his 90th birthday in September in reasonably good health.

So when I had the sad task of letting people know that Murray Span died on Dec. 8, after just a few days’ illness, the primary response was disbelief. “No! I just talked to him Tuesday! He was fine!”

And he was. We’d gone out for lunch on Saturday, our usual routine, and he demolished a whole stack of blueberry pancakes.

But on Wednesday, he called to say he had bad abdominal pain and had hardly slept. The nurses at his facility were on the case; his geriatrician prescribed a clear liquid diet.

Like many in his generation, my dad tended towards stoicism. When he said, the following morning, “the pain is terrible,” that meant agony. I drove over.

His doctor shared our preference for conservative treatment. For patients at advanced ages, hospitals and emergency rooms can become perilous places. My dad had come through a July heart attack in good shape, but he had also signed a do-not-resuscitate order. He saw evidence all around him that eventually the body fails and life can become a torturous series of health crises and hospitalizations from which one never truly rebounds.

So over the next two days we tried to relieve his pain at home. He had abdominal x-rays that showed some kind of obstruction. He tried laxatives and enemas and Tylenol, to no effect. He couldn’t sleep.

On Friday, we agreed to go to the emergency room for a CT scan. Maybe, I thought, there’s a simple fix, even for a 90-year-old with diabetes and heart disease. But I carried his advance directives in my bag, because you never know.

When it is someone else’s narrative, it’s easier to see where things go off the rails, where a loving family authorizes procedures whose risks outweigh their benefits.

But when it’s your father groaning on the gurney, the conveyor belt of contemporary medicine can sweep you along, one incremental decision at a time.

All I wanted was for him to stop hurting, so it seemed reasonable to permit an IV for hydration and pain relief and a thin oxygen tube tucked beneath his nose.

Then, after Dad drank the first of two big containers of contrast liquid needed for his scan, his breathing grew phlegmy and labored. His geriatrician arrived and urged the insertion of a nasogastric tube to suck out all the liquid Dad had just downed.

His blood oxygen levels dropped, so there were soon two doctors and two nurses suctioning his throat until he gagged and fastening an oxygen mask over his nose and mouth.

At one point, I looked at my poor father, still in pain despite all the apparatus, and thought, “This is what suffering looks like.” I despaired, convinced I had failed in my most basic responsibility.

“I’m just so tired,” Dad told me, more than once. “There are too many things going wrong.”

Let me abridge this long story. The scan showed evidence of a perforation of some sort, among other abnormalities. A chest X-ray indicated pneumonia in both lungs. I spoke with Dad’s doctor, with the E.R. doc, with a friend who is a prominent geriatrician.

These are always profound decisions, and I’m sure that, given the number of unknowns, other people might have made other choices. Fortunately, I didn’t have to decide; I could ask my still-lucid father.

I leaned close to his good ear, the one with the hearing aid, and told him about the pneumonia, about the second CT scan the radiologist wanted, about antibiotics. “Or, we can stop all this and go home and call hospice,” I said.

He had seen my daughter earlier that day (and asked her about the hockey strike), and my sister and her son were en route. The important hands had been clasped, or soon would be.

He knew what hospice meant; its nurses and aides helped us care for my mother as she died. “Call hospice,” he said. We tiffed a bit about whether to have hospice care in his apartment or mine. I told his doctors we wanted comfort care only.

As in a film run backwards, the tubes came out, the oxygen mask came off. Then we settled in for a night in a hospital room while I called hospices — and a handyman to move the furniture out of my dining room, so I could install his hospital bed there.

In between, I assured my father that I was there, that we were taking care of him, that he didn’t have to worry. For the first few hours after the morphine began, finally seeming to ease his pain, he could respond, “OK.” Then, he couldn’t.

The next morning, as I awaited the hospital case manager to arrange the hospice transfer, my father stopped breathing.

We held his funeral at the South Jersey synagogue where he’d had his belated bar mitzvah at age 88, and buried him next to my mother in a small Jewish cemetery in the countryside. I’d written a fair amount about him here, so I thought readers might want to know.

We weren’t ready, if anyone ever really is, but in our sorrow, my sister and I recite this mantra: 90 good years, four bad days. That’s a ratio any of us might choose.


Paula Span is the author of “When the Time Comes: Families With Aging Parents Share Their Struggles and Solutions.”

Read More..

Greece Tax Scandal Shifts Focus From Collection Problem





The tax scandal that reignited in Greece over the holidays had all the makings of a grade-B drama. A former finance minister, George Papaconstantinou, was accused of scrubbing his relatives’ names from a CD containing the identities of thousands of possible Greek tax dodgers. Within hours, his chief political rival tossed him from their party.







Thanassis Stavrakis/Associated Press

George Papaconstantinou, a former finance minister, was accused of scrubbing relatives’ names from a CD with the identities of possible tax dodgers.






Mr. Papaconstantinou, in turn, hinted darkly that he was the victim of a plot masking malfeasance at higher levels.


While the firestorm may have made for political theater of a sort, it has diverted attention from a much bigger problem: Greece, its foreign lenders say, has fallen woefully short of its tax collection targets and is still not moving hard enough to tackle widespread tax evasion — long tolerated, particularly among the country’s richest citizens.


Greek officials agreed to the targets as part of an international lending pact last year, but there is no penalty for missing them. In recent weeks, however, two reports by Greece’s foreign lenders have found that Athens pulled in less than half of the additional tax income that it expected last year and performed fewer than half of the expected audits.


One report said that Athens had brought in a little less than $1.3 billion in additional taxes of the $2.6 billion it had hoped to collect in 2012. Only 88 major taxpayers, including corporations, were the subject of full-scope audits, well below a target of 300, the report said, while just 467 audits of high-wealth individuals were completed, compared with a goal of 1,300.


The fragile, three-party coalition government of Prime Minister Antonis Samaras continues to vow it will crack down on corruption and tax evasion, but a blunt assessment last month by a task force of Greece’s foreign lenders said, “These changes have not yet been reflected in results in terms of improved tax inspection and collection.” Analysts say the failure to pursue tax evaders aggressively is deepening social tensions. “It’s a weak government with very difficult work to do, and this is very, very bad for the morale of the people,” said Nikos Xydakis, a political columnist for Kathimerini, a daily newspaper. “This year will be hell for the middle-class people. And the rich people are untouchable. This is very bad.”


In a separate report, the European Union and the International Monetary Fund said they were concerned that the “authorities are falling idle and that the drive to fight tax evasion by the very wealthy and the free professions is at risk of weakening.”


The report added that total unpaid taxes amounted to nearly $70 billion, about 25 percent of Greece’s gross domestic product. But only about 15 percent to 20 percent of the amount is actually collectible, either because the statute of limitations has run out or the scofflaws do not have the money.


It pressed Greece to focus on the cases most likely to produce real revenues, especially in vocations where tax evasion has become pernicious. “Doctors and lawyers are a good place to start,” it said.


Critics, especially the leftist party Syriza, which leads in opinion polls, say the government has not done enough to stop corruption because its members are tied to the country’s business elite and do not want to jeopardize their political careers.


“The problem is not simply tax evasion among the rich,” said Zoe Konstantopoulou, a member of Parliament from Syriza who serves on a panel investigating the so-called Lagarde list, a compilation of more than 2,000 Greeks with accounts in a Swiss branch of HSBC that had been sent to Mr. Papaconstantinou in 2010 by Christine Lagarde, then the finance minister of France. “The problem is tax evasion among the rich with the complicity and the aiding and abetting of those who govern.”


While Greece received a badly needed $45 billion in aid last month to help it avoid defaulting on its debts, critics say that unless Athens can more forcefully tap the billions it is owed in taxes, it will never pay off its debts, even if its moribund economy eventually starts to recover.


A dysfunctional bureaucracy weakened by budget cuts, two destabilizing rounds of elections last spring and an economy decimated by austerity have hampered tax collections further. But a thicket of regulations and a culture of resistance also fuel a shadow economy that includes an estimated 25 percent of economic activity.


Liz Alderman reported from Paris, and Rachel Donadio from Rome. Niki Kitsantonis contributed reporting from Athens.



Read More..

Afghan Soldier’s Journey From Friend to Killer of Americans


Video Image via Site Monitoring Service


Mahmood is shown being welcomed by the Taliban after he opened fire on American trainers in Kunar Province.







KABUL, Afghanistan — It was only after the young Afghan soldier’s hatred of Americans had grown murderous that he reached out to the Taliban.




The soldier, named simply Mahmood, 22, said that in May he told the insurgents of his plan to shoot Americans the next time they visited the outpost where he was based in northeastern Afghanistan. He asked the Taliban to take him in if he escaped.


The Taliban veterans he contacted were skeptical. Despite their public insistence that they employ vast ranks of infiltrators within the Afghan Army and the police, they acknowledged that many of the insider attacks they take credit for start as offers by angry young men like Mahmood. They had seen many fail, or lose their nerve before even starting, and they figured that Mahmood, too, would prove more talk than action or would die in the attempt.


“Even the Taliban didn’t think I would be able to do this,” Mr. Mahmood said in an interview.


He proved them wrong days later, on the morning of May 11, when he opened fire on American trainers who had gone to the outpost in the mountains of Kunar Province. One American was killed and two others were wounded. Mahmood escaped in the ensuing confusion, and he remains free in Kunar after the Taliban welcomed him into their ranks.


It was, he said, his “proudest day.”


Such insider attacks, by Afghan security forces on their Western allies, became “the signature violence of 2012,” in the words of one former American official. The surge in attacks has provided the clearest sign yet that Afghan resentment of foreigners is becoming unmanageable, and American officials have expressed worries about its disruptive effects on the training mission that is the core of the American withdrawal plan for 2014.


“It’s a game changer on all levels,” said First Sgt. Joseph Hissong, an American who helped fight off an insider attack by Afghan soldiers that left two men in his unit dead.


Cultural clashes have contributed to some of the insider attacks, with Afghan soldiers and police officers becoming enraged by what they see as rude and abusive behavior by Americans close to them. In some cases, the abusive or corrupt behavior of Afghan officers prompts the killer to go after Americans, who are seen as backing the local commanders. On rare occasions, like the killing of an American contractor by an Afghan policewoman late last month, there seems to be no logical explanation.


But behind it all, many senior coalition and Afghan officials are now concluding that after nearly 12 years of war, the view of foreigners held by many Afghans has come to mirror that of the Taliban. Hope has turned into hatred, and some will find a reason to act on those feelings.


“A great percentage of the insider attacks have the enemy narrative — the narrative that the infidels have to be driven out — somewhere inside of them, but they aren’t directed by the enemy,” said a senior coalition officer, who asked not to be identified because of Afghan and American sensitivities about the attacks.


The result is that, although the Taliban have successfully infiltrated the security forces before, they do not always have to. Soldiers and police officers will instead go to them, as was the case with Mr. Mahmood, who offered a glimpse of the thinking behind the violence in one of the few interviews conducted with Afghans who have committed insider attacks.


“I have intimate friends in the army who have the same opinion as I do,” Mr. Mahmood said. “We used to sit and share our hearts’ tales.”


But he said he did not tell any of his compatriots of his plan to shoot Americans, fearing that it could leak out and derail his attack. The interviews with Mr. Mahmood and his Taliban contacts were conducted in recent weeks by telephone and through written responses to questions. There are also two videos that show Mr. Mahmood with the Taliban: an insurgent-produced propaganda video available on jihadi Web sites, and an interview conducted by a local journalist in Kunar.


Though Mr. Mahmood at times contradicted himself, falling into stock Taliban commentary about how it had always been his ambition to kill foreigners, much of what he said mirrored the timelines and versions of events provided by Taliban fighters who know him, as well as Afghan officials familiar with his case.


Mr. Mahmood grew up in Tajikan, a small village in the southern province of Helmand. The area around his village remains dominated by the Taliban despite advances against the insurgents made in recent years by American and British troops. Even Afghans from other parts of Helmand are hesitant to travel to Tajikan for fear of the Taliban.


Sangar Rahimi and Jawad Sukhanyar contributed reporting from Kabul, and an employee of The New York Times from Asadabad.



Read More..

Europe Likely to Be Harder on Google Over Search







SAN FRANCISCO — By some accounts, the United States let Google off the hook by finding that the technology giant had not abused its dominance in the Internet search market.




Few expect the European antitrust watchdog to be as lenient.


The Federal Trade Commission ruled Thursday that Google had not broken antitrust laws, after a 19-month inquiry into how it operates its search engine. But the European Commission, which is pursuing assertions that the company rigs results to favor its own businesses, operates according to a different standard.


The agreement with the American authorities, analysts and competition lawyers say, is unlikely to alter the demands of European regulators, led by the E.U. competition commissioner, Joaquín Almunia.


“We have taken note of the F.T.C. decision, but we don’t see that it has any direct implications for our investigation, for our discussions with Google, which are ongoing,” said Michael Jennings, a spokesman for the European Commission in Brussels.


Faced with nearly $4 billion in possible penalties and restrictions on its business in Europe, Google in July submitted proposals to remedy the concerns of the European Commission, which covered four areas. In its deal with the F.T.C., Google made concessions in two of those areas but was not required to do so in the rest.


A Google spokesman, Al Verney, declined to comment on the content of the company's proposals to Mr. Almunia but said it would “continue to work cooperatively with the European Commission.”


The Google case underscores a basic difference between the European and U.S. approaches to monopoly power. American antitrust regulators tend to focus on whether a company’s dominance is harmful to consumers; the European system seeks to maintain competitors in the market. Mr. Almunia has vowed to restore competition to the Internet search business in Europe.


“History shows that competition law is applied to monopoly power more stringently in the E.U. than in the U.S.,” said Jacques Lafitte, head of the competition practice at Avisa Partners, a consultancy in Brussels, who brought one of the original complaints against Google. “Whether the E.U. is right or not is a different question.”


Mr. Lafitte has some expertise in the matter. He is the former head of corporate affairs at Microsoft Europe and watched as that company did battle with regulators over its dominant computer operating system. Microsoft won a lenient settlement with the U.S. Justice Department in October 2001, he noted, only to be slapped with nearly €1.6 billion, or $2.1 billion, in E.U. fines and penalties from 2004 to 2008.


Google learned from Microsoft’s mistakes, engaging in discussions with both the U.S. and European authorities to reach a deal rather than fighting a desperate legal action. That approach appears to have paid off: Last month, after a meeting with Eric E. Schmidt, Google’s executive chairman, Mr. Almunia said that the sides had “substantially reduced our differences.”


In its deal with the F.T.C., Google agreed to make concessions in two areas that concern European regulators. In one, it will allow rivals to opt out of allowing Google to “scrape,” or copy, text from their sites. It is probable that Google will offer the same concession to European authorities.


But in a second area of European concern — whether Google deliberately favors its own content in search results — the F.T.C. did not require changes.


Mr. Almunia has also demanded that Google put fewer restrictions on advertising distribution deals, an area that his U.S. counterparts did not explore.


The company will make a detailed set of proposed remedies in January, after which the European Commission will allow the complainants to review them in a period of what is known as “market testing.” Antitrust lawyers say a final denouement could arrive by spring, depending on how hostile Google’s rivals are to the proposed remedies.


FairSearch, an alliance of Google rivals, accused the U.S. trade commission of rushing its decision. It said in a statement that closing the F.T.C. investigation “with only voluntary commitments from Google is disappointing and premature.”


Read More..

Well: Vegan Recipes for Health

If one of your goals for 2013 is more healthful eating, the Recipes for Health columnist Martha Rose Shulman can get you started. She has proposed five delicious vegan meals for the New Year that may also save you some money. She writes:

Here is a New Year’s project for you. Take an inventory of your pantry, freezer and refrigerator and cook for a week without buying anything except items that you and your children may consume on a daily basis (for me that means bananas). That is what I’m doing this week, and I have decided that I will also make my meals vegan.

Here are some of the items ending the year in my pantry, freezer and produce bins: quinoa (regular, red and rainbow); a bag of mixed dried sprouted lentils packaged by Tru Roots (“Sprouted Lentil Medley”); a bag of yellow lentils (toor dal) from the Indian grocery store across the street (how handy that Mark Bittman had inspired me to explore the world of dals with his New York Times Magazine article in early December); rice in various colors – brown, Alter Eco’s purple jasmine; red Bhutanese; wild, Arborio and basmati; a bag of black beans; rice noodles; farro. I have had a big acorn squash lying around for over a month now, and in my refrigerator there are a few carrots, half of a purple cabbage, tofu, celery, beets and beet greens and a red pepper. There are various frozen stocks in my freezer, including a vegan pho broth from my recipe tests of a few months ago.

This is a healthy, hearty and inexpensive way to begin the New Year and we have been eating extremely well. In fact there is enough on hand that I might extend this to a two-week exercise.

Here are five vegan meals from the pantry to get you started on a year of healthful eating.

Quinoa With Spiced Lentil Dal: A dal that is spiced up by a little bit of cayenne.


Warm Lentil Salad With Balsamic Roast Squash: A lentil salad with a cumin-scented vinaigrette.


Vegan Pho With Carrots, Noodles and Edamame: A pho without some traditional ingredients is still very much pho.


Rice Bowl With Sweet and Sour Purple Cabbage, Red Peppers and Baked Marinated Tofu: A colorful dish that uses up any sticky rice left in your pantry.


Enfrijoladas: A simple delicious dish that will use up corn tortillas in your freezer and black beans from the pantry.


Read More..

Well: Vegan Recipes for Health

If one of your goals for 2013 is more healthful eating, the Recipes for Health columnist Martha Rose Shulman can get you started. She has proposed five delicious vegan meals for the New Year that may also save you some money. She writes:

Here is a New Year’s project for you. Take an inventory of your pantry, freezer and refrigerator and cook for a week without buying anything except items that you and your children may consume on a daily basis (for me that means bananas). That is what I’m doing this week, and I have decided that I will also make my meals vegan.

Here are some of the items ending the year in my pantry, freezer and produce bins: quinoa (regular, red and rainbow); a bag of mixed dried sprouted lentils packaged by Tru Roots (“Sprouted Lentil Medley”); a bag of yellow lentils (toor dal) from the Indian grocery store across the street (how handy that Mark Bittman had inspired me to explore the world of dals with his New York Times Magazine article in early December); rice in various colors – brown, Alter Eco’s purple jasmine; red Bhutanese; wild, Arborio and basmati; a bag of black beans; rice noodles; farro. I have had a big acorn squash lying around for over a month now, and in my refrigerator there are a few carrots, half of a purple cabbage, tofu, celery, beets and beet greens and a red pepper. There are various frozen stocks in my freezer, including a vegan pho broth from my recipe tests of a few months ago.

This is a healthy, hearty and inexpensive way to begin the New Year and we have been eating extremely well. In fact there is enough on hand that I might extend this to a two-week exercise.

Here are five vegan meals from the pantry to get you started on a year of healthful eating.

Quinoa With Spiced Lentil Dal: A dal that is spiced up by a little bit of cayenne.


Warm Lentil Salad With Balsamic Roast Squash: A lentil salad with a cumin-scented vinaigrette.


Vegan Pho With Carrots, Noodles and Edamame: A pho without some traditional ingredients is still very much pho.


Rice Bowl With Sweet and Sour Purple Cabbage, Red Peppers and Baked Marinated Tofu: A colorful dish that uses up any sticky rice left in your pantry.


Enfrijoladas: A simple delicious dish that will use up corn tortillas in your freezer and black beans from the pantry.


Read More..

Europe Likely to Be Harder on Google Over Search








SAN FRANCISCO — By some accounts, the United States let Google off the hook by finding that the technology giant had not abused its dominance in the Internet search market.




Few expect the European antitrust watchdog to be as lenient.


The Federal Trade Commission ruled Thursday that Google had not broken antitrust laws, after a 19-month inquiry into how it operates its search engine. But the European Commission, which is pursuing assertions that the company rigs results to favor its own businesses, operates according to a different standard.


The agreement with the American authorities, analysts and competition lawyers say, is unlikely to alter the demands of European regulators, led by the E.U. competition commissioner, Joaquín Almunia.


“We have taken note of the F.T.C. decision, but we don’t see that it has any direct implications for our investigation, for our discussions with Google, which are ongoing,” said Michael Jennings, a spokesman for the European Commission in Brussels.


Faced with nearly $4 billion in possible penalties and restrictions on its business in Europe, Google in July submitted proposals to remedy the concerns of the European Commission, which covered four areas. In its deal with the F.T.C., Google made concessions in two of those areas but was not required to do so in the rest.


A Google spokesman, Al Verney, declined to comment on the content of the company's proposals to Mr. Almunia but said it would “continue to work cooperatively with the European Commission.”


The Google case underscores a basic difference between the European and U.S. approaches to monopoly power. American antitrust regulators tend to focus on whether a company’s dominance is harmful to consumers; the European system seeks to maintain competitors in the market. Mr. Almunia has vowed to restore competition to the Internet search business in Europe.


“History shows that competition law is applied to monopoly power more stringently in the E.U. than in the U.S.,” said Jacques Lafitte, head of the competition practice at Avisa Partners, a consultancy in Brussels, who brought one of the original complaints against Google. “Whether the E.U. is right or not is a different question.”


Mr. Lafitte has some expertise in the matter. He is the former head of corporate affairs at Microsoft Europe and watched as that company did battle with regulators over its dominant computer operating system. Microsoft won a lenient settlement with the U.S. Justice Department in October 2001, he noted, only to be slapped with nearly €1.6 billion, or $2.1 billion, in E.U. fines and penalties from 2004 to 2008.


Google learned from Microsoft’s mistakes, engaging in discussions with both the U.S. and European authorities to reach a deal rather than fighting a desperate legal action. That approach appears to have paid off: Last month, after a meeting with Eric E. Schmidt, Google’s executive chairman, Mr. Almunia said that the sides had “substantially reduced our differences.”


In its deal with the F.T.C., Google agreed to make concessions in two areas that concern European regulators. In one, it will allow rivals to opt out of allowing Google to “scrape,” or copy, text from their sites. It is probable that Google will offer the same concession to European authorities.


But in a second area of European concern — whether Google deliberately favors its own content in search results — the F.T.C. did not require changes.


Mr. Almunia has also demanded that Google put fewer restrictions on advertising distribution deals, an area that his U.S. counterparts did not explore.


The company will make a detailed set of proposed remedies in January, after which the European Commission will allow the complainants to review them in a period of what is known as “market testing.” Antitrust lawyers say a final denouement could arrive by spring, depending on how hostile Google’s rivals are to the proposed remedies.


FairSearch, an alliance of Google rivals, accused the U.S. trade commission of rushing its decision. It said in a statement that closing the F.T.C. investigation “with only voluntary commitments from Google is disappointing and premature.”


Read More..

Obama Signs Defense Bill, With Conditions





WASHINGTON — President Obama set aside his veto threat and late Wednesday signed a defense bill that imposes restrictions on transferring detainees out of military prisons in Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. But Mr. Obama attached a signing statement claiming that he has the constitutional power to override the limits in the law.




His move awakened a dormant issue from Mr. Obama’s first term: his broken promise to close the Guantánamo prison. Lawmakers intervened by imposing statutory restrictions on transfers of prisoners to other countries or into the United States, either for continued detention or for prosecution.


Now, as Mr. Obama prepares to begin his second term, Congress has tried to further restrict his ability to wind down the detention of terrorists worldwide, adding new limits in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013, which lawmakers approved in late December.


The bill extended and strengthened limits on transfers out of Guantánamo to troubled nations like Yemen, where the bulk of the remaining low-level detainees who have been cleared for repatriation are from. It also, for the first time, limited the Pentagon’s ability to transfer the roughly 50 non-Afghan citizens being held at the Parwan prison at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan at a time when the future of American detention operations there is murky.


Despite his objections, Mr. Obama signed the bill, saying its other provisions on military programs were too important to jeopardize. Early Thursday, shortly after midnight, the White House released the signing statement in which the president challenged several of its provisions.


For example, in addressing the new limits on the Parwan detainees, Mr. Obama wrote that the provision “could interfere with my ability as Commander in Chief to make time-sensitive determinations about the appropriate disposition of detainees in an active area of hostilities.”


He added that if he decided that the statute was operating “in a manner that violates constitutional separation of powers principles, my administration will implement it to avoid the constitutional conflict” – legalistic language that means interpreting the statute as containing an unwritten exception a president may invoke at his discretion.


Saying that he continued to believe that closing the Guantánamo prison was in the country’s fiscal and national security interests, Mr. Obama made a similar challenge to three sections that limit his ability to transfer detainees from Guantánamo, either into the United States for prosecution before a civilian court or for continued detention at another prison, or to the custody of another nation.


It was not clear, however, whether Mr. Obama intended to follow through, or whether he was just saber-rattling as a matter of principle. Mr. Obama had made a similar challenge a year ago to the Guantánamo transfer restrictions in the 2012 version of the National Defense Authorization Act, but – against the backdrop of the presidential election campaign – he did not invoke the authority he had claimed.


Andrea Prasow, senior counterterrorism counsel and advocate at Human Rights Watch, which advocates closing Guantánamo, criticized Mr. Obama for not vetoing the legislation despite his threat to do so.


“The administration blames Congress for making it harder to close Guantánamo, yet for a second year President Obama has signed damaging congressional restrictions into law,” she said. “The burden is on Obama to show he is serious about closing the prison.”


Signing statements are official documents issued by a president when he signs bills into law that instruct subordinates in the executive branch about how to implement the new statutes. In recent decades, starting with the Reagan administration, presidents have used the device with far greater frequency than in earlier eras to claim a constitutional right to bypass or override new laws.


The practice peaked under President George W. Bush, who used signing statements to advance sweeping theories of presidential power and challenged nearly 1,200 provisions over eight years – more than twice as many as all previous presidents combined.


The American Bar Association has called upon presidents to stop using signing statements, calling the practice “contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional system of separation of powers.” A year ago, the group sent a letter to Mr. Obama restating its objection to the practice and urging him to instead veto bills if he thinks sections are unconstitutional.


As a presidential candidate, then-Senator Obama sharply criticized Mr. Bush’s use of the device as an overreach. Once in office, however, he said that he would use them only to invoke mainstream and widely accepted theories of the constitutional power of the president.


In his latest signing statement, Mr. Obama also objected to five provisions in which Congress required consultations and set out criteria over matters involving diplomatic negotiations about such matters as a security agreement with Afghanistan, saying that he would interpret the provisions so as not to inhibit “my constitutional authority to conduct the foreign relations of the United States.”


Mr. Obama raised concerns about several whistle-blower provisions that protected people who provide certain executive branch information to Congress from reprisals — including employees of contractors who uncover waste or fraud, and officials raising concerns about the safety and reliability of nuclear stockpiles.


He also took particular objection to a provision that directs the commander of the military’s nuclear weapons to submit a report to Congress “without change” detailing whether any reduction in nuclear weapons proposed by Mr. Obama would “create a strategic imbalance or degrade deterrence” relative to Russian stockpiles.


The provision, Mr. Obama said, “would require a subordinate to submit materials directly to Congress without change, and thereby obstructs the traditional chain of command.”


Read More..

In Victory for Google, U.S. Ends Antitrust Investigation


Mladen Antonov/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images


Jon Leibowitz, the F.T.C. chairman, said Google's search engine actions were "not undertaken without legitimate justification."







WASHINGTON — The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday found that Google had not violated antitrust or anticompetition statutes in the way it structures its Web search application — handing a big victory to the search giant in its ongoing dispute with regulators.




But the commission found that Google had misused its broad patents on cellphone technology, and ordered Google to make that technology available to rivals.


Google’s competitors, including Microsoft, have pressed vigorously for federal officials to bring an antitrust case involving its search business. Last year, an F.T.C. staff report recommended that the commission bring such a case.


The F.T.C. found that although Google sometimes favors its own products when producing search results with its ubiquitous search engine, its actions were “not undertaken without legitimate justification,” said Jon Leibowitz, the F.T.C. chairman.


Google agreed, however, to take certain actions to address what Mr. Leibowitz called “the most problematic business practices relating to its search and  search advertising business.”


The trade commission’s inquiry has been going on for at least a year and a half. Google disclosed in June 2011 that it had received formal notification from the commission that it was looking into Google’s business practices.


Google has long defended its search business, saying that it offers results that are most relevant to consumers and that the “competition is just a click away.” It contends that users who believe a Google search is not meeting their needs can easily move to another search engine, like Microsoft’s Bing.


Google has also said that the barriers to entry into the search business are so low that it cannot abuse its market power, even though it has more than a 70 percent share of the search business in the United States.


Companies that rely on Google to drive traffic to their sites have complained that Google adjusts its search algorithm to favor its own growing number of commerce sites — including shopping, local listings and travel.


But the trade commission faced an uphill battle in proving malicious intent — that Google changes its search algorithm to purposely harm competitors and favor itself. Antitrust lawyers say anticompetitive behavior cannot be proved simply by showing that a change in the algorithm affects other Web sites and causes sites to show up lower in results, even though studies have shown that users rarely look beyond the first page of search results.


The commission was pressing to wrap up its case before Monday, when a new commissioner will be sworn in, a development that could have affected the result of the Google investigation. Joshua D. Wright, a professor at George Mason University, was confirmed by the Senate this week to take one of the two Republican spots on the five-member commission. Mr. Wright had previously said he would recuse himself from any Google matters for two years, because he has done work for or about the company including co-authoring a paper arguing that Google has not violated any antitrust statutes.


Mr. Wright will replace J. Thomas Rosch, a commissioner since 2006. If the Google case were not settled by Monday, the commission faced the prospect that a vote on whether to charge Google would deadlock at 2-2.


The commission voted 4-1 to settle the patent charges, and voted 5-0 to close its antitrust and competition investigation.


“The F.T.C.’s credibility is eroded when confidential details of internal discussions are revealed to the media, as has continually been the case in the investigation of Google,” Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, said in a Nov. 26 letter to Mr. Leibowitz, the commission chairman. Mr. Wyden also said there was plenty of evidence that adequate competition exists in the search business. He cited the recent introduction of competitors like DuckDuckGo, which has a no-tracking privacy policy inspired by some consumers’ complaints about the tracking of consumer behavior that Google and other search engines perform.


“Compared to almost any other market in the history of antitrust regulation, online search has effectively zero barriers to entry,” Mr. Wyden said.


Read More..

Question Mark: Why Am I Getting Shorter With Age?


Sal DiMarco Jr. for The New York Times


The upward trajectory of youth starts falling for most people after 40. In a file photo, a Macungie, Pa., middle school nurse, Linda Duffy, measures a student.







Relax. You’ve been through this before.




Back when you were a baby baby boomer, your doctor probably laid you down every few months and measured your height.


Then came the big day: you toddled into the doctor’s office on your own two feet and instead of lying down to be measured, you stood up. And the odds are that when the doctor jotted down your height, it seemed to suggest that you had shrunk since the last visit.


The truth, of course, was that you weren’t really shrinking. When you were measured standing up, gravity compressed your spine. In follow-up visits, you quickly made up for lost ground, your height milestones rising on the doctor’s chart much as they may have in pencil markings on a kitchen wall.


Decades later, pretty much the same thing is probably happening to you right now, with two minor differences: you actually are shrinking. And you are not likely to get that height back.


Starting at about age 40, people tend to lose about four-tenths of an inch of height every decade, said Dr. David B. Reuben, chief of geriatrics at the David Geffen School of Medicine at U.C.L.A. Some of the height loss occurs as part of the normal aging process, and some because of disease. Our old friend gravity, bane of the first vertical height measurement, also plays a role. “It’s a Newton thing,” said Dr. Reuben, a past president of the American Geriatrics Society.


As we age, the disks between the vertebrae of the spine, sometimes described as gel-like cushions, dry out and become thinner, with the result that the spine becomes compressed. The bone loss known as osteoporosis can also contribute. People who have the condition may sustain small compression fractures in the spine, often without their knowledge. “The best way to think about those is if you step on a soda can and the soda can just kind of crumples,” Dr. Reuben said.


The fractures can lead to excessive curving of the spine, which can be seen in many people as they age. When it is very pronounced, it is considered hyperkyphosis, sometimes known as dowager’s hump. Hyperkyphosis, however, can occur even in the absence of fractures, often as a result of a loss of muscle tone, especially in core muscles like the abdominals. Even the flattening of the arches of the feet that comes with time can contribute to a loss of height.


There is not much to be done about many of these changes, but people who exercise, strengthening their core, may retain or gain height through better posture. And some research, while not definitive, has offered promising evidence that yoga may even help reverse the curving of the spine. If the yoga is begun at an earlier age, it may be possible to prevent the condition altogether, though more research would need to be done to establish this.


Making sure to get enough calcium and vitamin D can help, Dr. Reuben said, and there are medications used to prevent the fractures caused by osteoporosis.


Of course, if sit-ups or downward dogs are not your style, there are two simple tricks to being taller. Check your height in the morning, when it is at its maximum. Or ask your doctor to measure you lying down.


Questions about aging? E-mail boomerwhy@nytimes.com


Read More..