Gérard Depardieu, Citizen of Russia

But since then, a public feud between Mr. Depardieu and French officials has continued to simmer over Mr. Depardieu’s complaint a few days earlier about France’s high tax rates on the wealthy. French politicians and commentators have lambasted him for renouncing his French citizenship and registering as a resident of Néchin in Belgium, which has lower taxes. And on Thursday, the Kremlin announced that Mr. Putin had kept his promise and had signed a decree making Mr. Depardieu a citizen of Russia.

A spokesman for Mr. Putin, Dmitri Peskov, said that Mr. Depardieu had recently applied for citizenship, and that it was granted in honor of his cultural achievements.

“The thing is that Depardieu has been a part of large film projects and has acted many parts, including the part of Rasputin,” Mr. Peskov told the Interfax news agency. Referring to a television movie about the mad monk, he added, “This film has not been shown here, but it is a very bold and innovative interpretation of the character.”

In a letter to Russia’s Channel One television station, Mr. Depardieu confirmed that he applied for Russian citizenship and said he was “happy” the request was granted.

“I adore your country, Russia, your people, your history and your writers,” he wrote, adding that his father was a Communist who listened to Moscow radio. He promised to study Russian and said he wanted to live in a village because Moscow was too big of a city.

He said he had informed the French president, François Hollande, of his decision and also said, “I love your president, Vladimir Putin, very much and it’s mutual.”

It seemed likely, however, that Mr. Putin also saw a poetic opportunity in the chance for Russia, long known for losing wealthy citizens to the West, to claim one in return — and not just anyone, but a macho actor instantly recognizable by a giant nose that seems made for sniffing Bordeaux by the barrel.

That Mr. Depardieu might find Russia an attractive place in which to settle down, or at least to declare as his official tax address, fits in well with a narrative that Mr. Putin has developed in recent months portraying Russia not just as a geopolitical equal of Western powers, but as superior in many respects, especially in terms of its performance during the economic downturn.

“On the whole, we made a recovery from the crisis even faster than other countries,” Mr. Putin said. “Just look at the recession in Europe. Russia has posted growth, albeit a modest one, but we still have a much better situation than in the once-prosperous euro zone, or even in the United States.”

If Mr. Depardieu chooses to take up Russian citizenship, he would potentially trade steep French income tax rates, which he said now claim 85 percent of his income, and even Belgian rates of 60 percent or higher, for Russia’s flat 13 percent income tax. The value-added tax, a sales tax on goods and services, is 18 percent in Russia compared with nearly 20 percent in France, while Russian social security taxes are 30 percent compared with 50 percent in France.

But aside from tax savings, Mr. Putin suggested that French officials were too brusque in their response to Mr. Depardieu’s complaints and that he might find that Russians simply understand him better as an artist. “Actors, musicians and artists are people with a special, delicate psychological makeup and, as we say in Russia, the artist is easily offended,” Mr. Putin said at the news conference on Dec. 20. “So I understand Mr. Depardieu’s feelings.”

Mr. Putin at the time went out of his way to say that he meant no ill will toward the French. “Among our foreign partners, France stands out,” he said, prefacing his response to a reporter who asked if he had offered Mr. Depardieu residency. “We have had close spiritual ties for centuries now, despite tragic events in our common history.”

Mr. Putin also said that he regarded Mr. Depardieu as thoroughly French as Mr. Putin, a former K.G.B. agent, is Russian. “I must say that even though he said — and I read his statement — that he considers himself a European, a citizen of the world, I know for a fact that he considers himself a Frenchman,” Mr. Putin said. “I know this since we have very friendly, personal relations, even though we have not met many times. He loves his country, its history, its culture; that’s his life.”

Mr. Depardieu, it turns out, is no stranger to Russia. In October, he visited Grozny, the capital of the Russian republic of Chechnya, where he attended a celebration of the capital’s 194th anniversary with the Chechen leader, Ramzan Kadyrov, who has invited Mr. Depardieu to live there.

Video of the October event shows Mr. Depardieu exhorting an appreciative crowd in a mixture of Russian and French: “Glory to Grozny! Glory to Chechnya! Chechnya is strong! Glory to Kadyrov!”

Mr. Depardieu has also agreed to star in a movie written by Gulnara Karimova, the eldest daughter of President Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan, the former Soviet Republic.

A spokeswoman for the French government, Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, said Thursday that the decision to grant Mr. Depardieu a passport was “an exclusive prerogative of the head of the Russian state,” and declined to comment further, Europe 1 radio reported.

Read More..

Can the Government Really Ban Twitter Parody Accounts?

Arizona is entertaining a law that will make it a felony to use another person’s real name to make an  Internet profile intended to “harm, defraud, intimidate or threaten,” which to some sounds like a law against parody Twitter accounts. The legislation, if passed, would make Arizona one of a few states, including New York, California, Washington and Texas, to enact anti-online-impersonation laws. If these regulations seek to put a stop to fake representations online, that does sound like the end of fake celebrity baby accounts and Twitter death hoaxes. Then again, these laws have existed in these other places for years, and that hasn’t stopped the faux accounts from coming in. So what then does this mean?

RELATED: The Army’s Social Media Industrial Complex

What kind of stuff is the law intended to prosecute?

RELATED: Why French Broadcasters Can’t Say ‘Twitter’ and ‘Facebook’ Anymore

The law does not say that all uses of another person’s real name can be charged as a felony, but only profiles made for the more nefarious purposes fall into that territory. The legislation is  targeted at more serious forms of impersonation, like cyber bullying. Two Texas teens were arrested and charged under this law for creating a fake Facebook page to ruin a peer’s reputation, for example. Or, the case of Robert Dale Esparza Jr. who created a fake profile of his son’s vice principal on a porn site might fall under this law, suggests The Arizona Republic‘s Alia Beard Rau. Or, in one of the cases brought to court under the Texas version of this law, an Adam Limle created websites that portrayed a woman he used to date as a prostitute. (The case was eventually dropped because of a geographical loophole. Limle lived in Ohio, not Texas.) 

RELATED: Prius Drivers Will Get Their Own Social Network

Okay, the harm and threat in those situation is pretty clear. How can it at all apply to something relatively harmless, like a Twitter parody account? 

RELATED: How the Deported American Teen Spent Her Time in Colombia

The term “harm” is pretty vague, as this Texas Law blog explains, referring to that state’s version of this legislation, on which Arizona based its own law. “‘Harm’ can be very broadly construed–one person’s joke is another person’s harm,” writes Houston lawyer Stephanie Stradley. 

RELATED: Netanyahu’s Son Demonstrates Another Political Risk of Social Media

So, that could extend to parody accounts then? 

Well, possibly. Stradley suggests that politicians who had parody accounts created to mock them might have a case. Some of the impersonation of Texas lawmakers has gone beyond just the jokey fake Twitter handle. Jeffwentworth.com is not the official site for Texas state senator, but rather redirects to the web site of the anti-tax advocate group Empower Texans which considers the San Antonio politician the “the most liberal Republican senator in Austin.” Wentworth told The New York Times this domain squatting amounted to “identity theft,” and could be the basis for the law’s usage. 

The law could also possibly effect sillier parody accounts, suggest privacy advocates. “The problem with this, and other online impersonation bills, is the potential that they could be used to go after parody or social commentary activities,” senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation Kurt Opsahl told The Arizona Republic’s Alia Beard Rau. ”While this bill is written to limit ‘intent to harm,’ if that is construed broadly, there could be First Amendment problems.”

Ok, but what about precedent? Has the law ever applied to a faux Twitter handle? 

Twitter has its own parody policy that mitigates a lot of the possible damage that could ever lead to a court case. Saint Louis Cardinals manager Anthony La Russa sued Twitter in 2009 because of a made-up account, but the account was removed before the case went anywhere (And that was before these laws went into effect.) 

But it’s not clear that parody would ever be considered harmful enough for the law. When California’s version went into effect, a first amendment lawyer suggested to SF Weekly‘s Joe Eskenazi that jokes could go pretty far without prosecution. “You’re going to have to have room for satire,” he said. The account would have to look fool people, he argued. “A key question is, ‘is it credibile?’” asks Simitian. “Do people who read it think it’s him?” Because of our increasing skepticism of things on Twitter, unless the site has verified checkmark, it’s unlikely that most people believe in a fake account for long. So, unless the imitation tweeter does something extremely harmful to someone’s character, it doesn’t sound like anyone would have a strong case. Alas, parody Twitter accounts, for better or worse (worse, right?) are here to stay. 

Social Media News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Can the Government Really Ban Twitter Parody Accounts?
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/can-the-government-really-ban-twitter-parody-accounts/
Link To Post : Can the Government Really Ban Twitter Parody Accounts?
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

12 Over-the-Top Baby Gifts for Kimye

From a solid-gold rocking horse to a diamond-encrusted pacifier, see what we hope will be on the couple's baby registry

Updated: Thursday Jan 03, 2013 | 06:00 AM EST
By: Shanelle Rein-Olowokere

Subscribe Now

Read More..

Brain image study: Fructose may spur overeating

This is your brain on sugar — for real. Scientists have used imaging tests to show for the first time that fructose, a sugar that saturates the American diet, can trigger brain changes that may lead to overeating.

After drinking a fructose beverage, the brain doesn't register the feeling of being full as it does when simple glucose is consumed, researchers found.

It's a small study and does not prove that fructose or its relative, high-fructose corn syrup, can cause obesity, but experts say it adds evidence they may play a role. These sugars often are added to processed foods and beverages, and consumption has risen dramatically since the 1970s along with obesity. A third of U.S. children and teens and more than two-thirds of adults are obese or overweight.

All sugars are not equal — even though they contain the same amount of calories — because they are metabolized differently in the body. Table sugar is sucrose, which is half fructose, half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup is 55 percent fructose and 45 percent glucose. Some nutrition experts say this sweetener may pose special risks, but others and the industry reject that claim. And doctors say we eat too much sugar in all forms.

For the study, scientists used magnetic resonance imaging, or MRI, scans to track blood flow in the brain in 20 young, normal-weight people before and after they had drinks containing glucose or fructose in two sessions several weeks apart.

Scans showed that drinking glucose "turns off or suppresses the activity of areas of the brain that are critical for reward and desire for food," said one study leader, Yale University endocrinologist Dr. Robert Sherwin. With fructose, "we don't see those changes," he said. "As a result, the desire to eat continues — it isn't turned off."

What's convincing, said Dr. Jonathan Purnell, an endocrinologist at Oregon Health & Science University, is that the imaging results mirrored how hungry the people said they felt, as well as what earlier studies found in animals.

"It implies that fructose, at least with regards to promoting food intake and weight gain, is a bad actor compared to glucose," said Purnell. He wrote a commentary that appears with the federally funded study in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association.

Researchers now are testing obese people to see if they react the same way to fructose and glucose as the normal-weight people in this study did.

What to do? Cook more at home and limit processed foods containing fructose and high-fructose corn syrup, Purnell suggested. "Try to avoid the sugar-sweetened beverages. It doesn't mean you can't ever have them," but control their size and how often they are consumed, he said.

A second study in the journal suggests that only severe obesity carries a high death risk — and that a few extra pounds might even provide a survival advantage. However, independent experts say the methods are too flawed to make those claims.

The study comes from a federal researcher who drew controversy in 2005 with a report that found thin and normal-weight people had a slightly higher risk of death than those who were overweight. Many experts criticized that work, saying the researcher — Katherine Flegal of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — painted a misleading picture by including smokers and people with health problems ranging from cancer to heart disease. Those people tend to weigh less and therefore make pudgy people look healthy by comparison.

Flegal's new analysis bolsters her original one, by assessing nearly 100 other studies covering almost 2.9 million people around the world. She again concludes that very obese people had the highest risk of death but that overweight people had a 6 percent lower mortality rate than thinner people. She also concludes that mildly obese people had a death risk similar to that of normal-weight people.

Critics again have focused on her methods. This time, she included people too thin to fit what some consider to be normal weight, which could have taken in people emaciated by cancer or other diseases, as well as smokers with elevated risks of heart disease and cancer.

"Some portion of those thin people are actually sick, and sick people tend to die sooner," said Donald Berry, a biostatistician at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

The problems created by the study's inclusion of smokers and people with pre-existing illness "cannot be ignored," said Susan Gapstur, vice president of epidemiology for the American Cancer Society.

A third critic, Dr. Walter Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health, was blunter: "This is an even greater pile of rubbish" than the 2005 study, he said. Willett and others have done research since the 2005 study that found higher death risks from being overweight or obese.

Flegal defended her work. She noted that she used standard categories for weight classes. She said statistical adjustments were made for smokers, who were included to give a more real-world sample. She also said study participants were not in hospitals or hospices, making it unlikely that large numbers of sick people skewed the results.

"We still have to learn about obesity, including how best to measure it," Flegal's boss, CDC Director Dr. Thomas Frieden, said in a written statement. "However, it's clear that being obese is not healthy - it increases the risk of diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and many other health problems. Small, sustainable increases in physical activity and improvements in nutrition can lead to significant health improvements."

___

Online:

Obesity info: http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html

___

Marilynn Marchione can be followed at http://twitter.com/MMarchioneAP

Mike Stobbe can be followed at http://twitter.com/MikeStobbe

Read More..

Wall Street extends gains on "cliff" deal

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. stocks jumped on the year's first day of trading, after Washington lawmakers cut a last-minute deal to avert automatic tax hikes that threatened to stunt economic growth.

With the gains, the S&P 500 was on target for its highest close since October 19.

The rally was broad-based, with nine stocks rising for every one falling on the New York Stock Exchange. All 10 S&P 500 industry sector indexes rose at least 1 percent, led by the S&P financial index <.gspf>, up 2.2 percent.

The S&P Information Technology index <.gspt> gained 2.1 percent. Among the strongest names in the sector was Hewlett-Packard , which climbed nearly 5 percent to $14.95. HP's gain followed a miserable 2012, when the stock fell nearly 45 percent.

On New Year's Day, while the U.S. stock market was closed, Congress passed a bill to raise taxes on wealthy individuals and families, and preserve certain benefits, while avoiding immediate austerity measures. The combination of mandatory tax hikes and reduced federal spending, which had been set to go into effect on January 1, had been known as the "fiscal cliff.

"We had three choices: We were going to be off the cliff, we were going to be on the cliff, or we were going to avoid the cliff, and we avoided it," said Brian Battle, director of trading at Performance Trust Capital Partners in Chicago.

"There's a relief rally, some progress because we raised revenue, but I think it's going to be short-lived because the relief rally today was created by politics, and the next cliff is going to be created by politics."

The vote avoided income-tax hikes for all U.S. households, but failed to resolve other political budget showdowns. Spending cuts of $109 billion in military and domestic programs were delayed for just two months, as another fight over the U.S. debt limit also looms then.

The market's surge was due to "the concrete news as opposed to a lack of specific news" that was common during the negotiations, said Stephen Carl, head of U.S. equity trading at The Williams Capital Group in New York.

U.S. stocks ended 2012 with the S&P 500 up 13.4 percent for the year, as investors largely shrugged off worries about the fiscal cliff. For the year, the Dow gained 7.3 percent and the Nasdaq jumped 15.9 percent.

The Dow Jones industrial average <.dji> gained 223.60 points, or 1.71 percent, to 13,327.74. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index <.spx> advanced 24.61 points, or 1.73 percent, to 1,450.80. The Nasdaq Composite Index <.ixic> climbed 66.87 points, or 2.21 percent, at 3,086.38.

Bank shares rose following news that U.S. regulators are close to securing another multibillion-dollar settlement with the largest banks to resolve allegations that they unlawfully cut corners when foreclosing on delinquent borrowers.

Bank of America Corp rose 3.4 percent to $11.99 and Wells Fargo shares added 2 percent to $34.87. JPMorgan Chase & Co shares rose 1.5 percent to $44.34.

Shares of Zipcar Inc jumped 48.4 percent to $12.23 after Avis Budget Group Inc said it would buy Zipcar for about $500 million in cash to compete with larger rivals Hertz and Enterprise Holdings Inc. Avis rose 4.5 percent to $20.72.

Shares of Apple rose 2.4 percent to $545, boosting technology stocks, following a report that the most valuable tech company has started testing a new iPhone and a new version of its iOS software. Apple stocks struggled in the final weeks of 2012 before a rally to end the year.

U.S. manufacturing expanded slightly in December after an unexpected November contraction, an Institute for Supply Management report showed on Wednesday.

A Commerce Department report showed U.S. construction spending fell in November for the first time in eight months, as an extended bout of weakness in the business sector outweighed modest growth in outlays on residential projects.

The stock market's reaction to both reports was muted.

(Editing by Jan Paschal)

Read More..

World Briefing | Middle East: Comedian Accused of Insulting Egyptian President to Be Investigated

Prosecutors in Cairo opened a criminal investigation on Tuesday into allegations that a popular television comedian, Bassem Youssef, who has taken special aim at ultraconservative Islamists on his program, had insulted Egypt’s president, Mohamed Morsi, during his satirical monologues.  

The accusations against Mr. Youssef come amid growing fears among Egypt’s media professionals that the country’s newly ratified Constitution offers scant protections for freedom of expression.

Since Mr. Morsi was elected in June, the authorities have opened investigations into several media figures accused of insulting him or the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist group he once led.

An Islamist lawyer who filed the complaint against Mr. Youssef, Ramadan al-Aqsuri, said a skit in which the comedian printed a picture of Mr. Morsi’s face on a red pillow amounted to a “sharp attack on the person of the president.” Separately, a Muslim Brotherhood lawyer filed a lawsuit asking the state to pull Mr. Youssef’s show off the air and to close down the channel that carries it, citing “sarcasm against the president.”  

Read More..

Apple reportedly considering Waze acquisition to help fix iOS Maps app

Title Post: Apple reportedly considering Waze acquisition to help fix iOS Maps app
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/apple-reportedly-considering-waze-acquisition-to-help-fix-ios-maps-app/
Link To Post : Apple reportedly considering Waze acquisition to help fix iOS Maps app
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Prince Charles Beats Prince William on Best Dressed List

By Simon Perry

01/02/2013 at 02:15 PM EST

Princes Charles, William and Harry

Getty (2), REX USA

Move over, Prince William and Prince Harry. Prince Charles is first in line for the throne, and can unofficially be crowned the "King of good tailoring."

The 64-year-old soon-to-be grandfather reigns at No. 8 on GQ 's annual best dressed list – well ahead of dashing William, who came in at 37.

Natalie Massenet of Net-a-Porter and head of the British Fashion Council calls Charles always "on trend." His method being simple: "This is a man who knows what he likes, knows how to wear it, and sticks with it whatever the prevailing fashions," she says in the February issue of the magazine out Thursday in the U.K. and next week in the U.S.

Since marrying Kate, 30-year-old William is noted to have improved sartorially, donning suits by Richard James and Spencer Hart.

And despite coming in far down the list, the debonair prince still get some raves and is said by the men's magazine to epitomize "true British style." 

Meanwhile, guess who topped the list of 50: Downton Abbey's Dan Stevens beat Robert Pattinson, Homeland's Damian Lewis and Idris Alba for the No. 1 spot. He is "always a class act," the magazine says.

Read More..

Clinton receiving blood thinners to dissolve clot

WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton continues to recover in a New York hospital where she's being treated for a blood clot in her head.

Her doctors say blood thinners are being used to dissolve the clot and they are confident she will make a full recovery. Clinton didn't suffer a stroke or neurological damage from the clot that formed after she suffered a concussion during a fainting spell at her home in early December, doctors said in a statement Monday.

Clinton, 65, was admitted to New York-Presbyterian Hospital on Sunday when the clot turned up on a follow-up exam on the concussion, Clinton spokesman Phillipe Reines said. The clot is located in the vein in the space between the brain and the skull behind the right ear. She will be released once the medication dose for the blood thinners has been established, the doctors said.

In their statement, Dr. Lisa Bardack of the Mount Kisco Medical Group and Dr. Gigi El-Bayoumi of George Washington University said Clinton was making excellent progress and was in good spirits.

Clinton's complication "certainly isn't the most common thing to happen after a concussion" and is one of the few types of blood clots in the skull or head that are treated with blood thinners, said Dr. Larry Goldstein, a neurologist who is director of Duke University's stroke center. He is not involved in Clinton's care.

The area where Clinton's clot developed is "a drainage channel, the equivalent of a big vein inside the skull. It's how the blood gets back to the heart," Goldstein said.

Blood thinners usually are enough to treat the clot and it should have no long-term consequences if her doctors are saying she has suffered no neurological damage from it, Goldstein said.

Clinton returned to the U.S. from a trip to Europe, then fell ill with a stomach virus in early December that left her severely dehydrated and forced her to cancel a trip to North Africa and the Middle East. Until then, she had canceled only two scheduled overseas trips, one to Europe after breaking her elbow in June 2009 and one to Asia after the February 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

Her condition worsened when she fainted, fell and suffered a concussion while at home alone in mid-December as she recovered from the virus.

This isn't the first time Clinton has suffered a blood clot. In 1998, midway through her husband's second term as president, Clinton was in New York fundraising for the midterm elections when a swollen right foot led her doctor to diagnose a clot in her knee requiring immediate treatment.

Clinton had planned to step down as secretary of state at the beginning of President Barack Obama's second term. Whether she will return to work before she resigns remains a question.

Democrats are privately if not publicly speculating: How might her illness affect a decision about running for president in 2016?

After decades in politics, Clinton says she plans to spend the next year resting. She has long insisted she had no intention of mounting a second campaign for the White House four years from now. But the door is not entirely closed, and she would almost certainly emerge as the Democrat to beat if she decided to give in to calls by Democratic fans and run again.

Her age — and thereby health — would probably be a factor under consideration, given that Clinton would be 69 when sworn in, if she were elected in 2016. That might become even more of an issue in the early jockeying for 2016 if what started as a bad stomach bug becomes a prolonged, public bout with more serious infirmity.

Not that Democrats are willing to talk openly about the political implications of a long illness, choosing to keep any discussions about her condition behind closed doors. Publicly, Democrats reject the notion that a blood clot could hinder her political prospects.

"Some of those concerns could be borderline sexist," said Basil Smikle, a Democratic strategist who worked for Clinton when she was a senator. "Dick Cheney had significant heart problems when he was vice president, and people joked about it. He took the time he needed to get better, and it wasn't a problem."

It isn't uncommon for presidential candidates' health — and age — to be an issue. Both in 2000 and 2008, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., had to rebut concerns he was too old to be commander in chief or that his skin cancer could resurface.

Beyond talk of future politics, Clinton's three-week absence from the State Department has raised eyebrows among some conservative commentators who questioned the seriousness of her ailment after she canceled planned Dec. 20 testimony before Congress on the deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya.

Clinton had been due to discuss with lawmakers a scathing report she had commissioned on the attack. It found serious failures of leadership and management in two State Department bureaus were to blame for insufficient security at the facility. Clinton took responsibility for the incident before the report was released, but she was not blamed. Four officials cited in the report have either resigned or been reassigned.

Read More..

"Fiscal cliff" moves to House, timing and outcome uncertain

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Washington's last-minute scramble to step back from a recession-inducing "fiscal cliff" shifted to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives on Tuesday after the Senate approved a bipartisan deal to avoid steep tax hikes and spending cuts.

In a rare late-night show of unity, the Senate voted 89 to 8 to raise some taxes on the wealthy while keeping income taxes low on more moderate earners.

The bill's prospects were less certain in the House, where a vote had not yet been scheduled.

Republicans, unhappy that the bill contained over $600 billion in tax increases but only around $12 billion in spending cuts, said they may change it more to their liking and send it back to the Senate. Party leaders planned to take the temperature of rank-and-file lawmakers over the afternoon before deciding on a course of action.

"My recommendation would be not to take a package put together by a bunch of sleep-deprived octogenarians on New Year's Eve," said Representative Steve LaTourette, a moderate Republican from Ohio who is a close ally of House Speaker John Boehner.

Republicans could face a backlash if they scuttle the deal. Income tax rates technically rose back to 1990s levels for all Americans at midnight, and public opinion polls show Republicans would shoulder the blame if Congress fails to act.

Many conservative Republicans have rejected tax increases on any Americans, no matter how wealthy. Some liberal Democrats were also upset with the complex deal, which they thought gave away too much.

Lingering uncertainty over U.S. tax and spending policy has unnerved investors and depressed business activity for months, and lawmakers had hoped to reach a deal before Tuesday, when a broad range of automatic tax increases and spending cuts would begin to punch a $600 billion hole in the economy.

Financial markets have avoided a steep plunge on the assumption that Washington would ultimately avoid pushing the country off the fiscal cliff into a recession.

With financial markets closed for the New Year's Day holiday, lawmakers have one more day to close the deal.

"My district cannot afford to wait a few days and have the stock market go down 300 points tomorrow if we don't get together and do something," Representative Steve Cohen, a Democrat from Tennessee, said on the House floor.

LATE-NIGHT DRAMA

The bill passed by the Senate at around 2 a.m. would raise income taxes on families earning more than $450,000 per year and limit the amount of deductions they can take to lower their tax bill.

Low temporary rates that have been in place for less affluent taxpayers for the past decade would be made permanent, along with a range of targeted tax breaks put in place by President Barack Obama in the depths of the 2009 recession.

However, workers would see up to $2,000 more taken out of their paychecks annually as a temporary payroll tax cut was set to expire.

The bill would also delay an across-the-board spending cut in domestic and military programs for two months, and extend jobless benefits for 2 million long-term unemployed people who otherwise would see them run out.

The bill would raise taxes on less than 1 percent of the population, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

However, that may be too much for conservative Republicans in the House, who last month scuttled an effort by Boehner to limit tax increases to those who earn more than $1 million. He has faced insurrections from his conservative wing in other budget showdowns over the past two years.

Republicans had hoped to include significant spending cuts in the deal to narrow trillion-dollar budget deficits. Conservatives were already looking forward to the next battle over the debt ceiling, in late February, to extract deficit reduction measures from the Democratic president.

The White House has floated $600 billion worth of spending cuts in earlier negotiations, and Obama said he would be willing to tackle deficit reduction over the coming months.

"There's more work to do to reduce our deficits, and I'm willing to do it," he said in a statement urging the House to pass the current bill.

Vice President Joe Biden, who was instrumental in pushing through the Senate measure, addressed a closed-door meeting of House Democrats seeking their support to pass the bill.

The conservative Club for Growth urged a "no" vote on the Senate measure, and warned that Republicans who support it could face a primary challenge when they run for re-election in two years.

Liberal groups also have urged Democrats to reject the deal.

Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO labor union, wrote on Twitter that the deal does not raise taxes enough on the wealthy and "sets the stage for more hostage taking" by Republicans in future budget confrontations.

Obama had originally sought to raise taxes on households making more than $250,000. Even with the higher threshold, the White House said is getting 85 percent of the revenue it wanted.

Republican Representative Tom Cole said his House colleagues should pass the Senate bill rather than try to change it.

"We ought to take this deal right now, and we'll live to fight another day," Cole said on MSNBC.

(Additional reporting by Jeff Mason and Mark Felsenthal, Writing by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Alistair Bell)

Read More..