Welcome to the Twisted Age of the Twitter Death Threat












Never believe anyone who tells you that the Internet is all nice or all terrible. Just like real life, there are good people and bad ones here. The majority of people behave badly occasionally and decently most of the time. Yes, there are some truly horrible people lurking and behaving in ways consistent to their form, but the thing is, we’re complicated creatures, online and off. So I don’t buy into theories that the Internet is all nice anymore than I believe all commenters are trolls. Still, there is something worrisome going on online, and if you were the Chicken Little type (which none of us here are, obviously), you might be covering your head and hiding from the Twitterverse. It’s this matter of death threats online. 


RELATED: After His Vulgar Assault on Jenny Johnson, Chris Brown Quits Twitter












The most recent example of this, of course, is the recent Chris Brown/Jenny Johnson nastiness. Brown has his share of on- and offline haters, but he has plenty of adamant supporters, too. This became apparent when Johnson, a comedian who’d been on a Twitter crusade of sorts against Brown since his physical attack on Rihanna, after a stream of tweets intended to shame/provoke the singer, finally hit pay-dirt with a response (other than Brown blocking her at one point). Over the weekend, Chris Brown tweeted: “I look old as fuck! I’m only 23,” to which Johnson tweeted, “I know! Being a worthless piece of shit can really age a person.” (That tweet’s been retweeted by Johnson followers more than 7,000 times.)


RELATED: The Internet–Not All It’s Cracked Up to Be


You probably know what happened next, even if you don’t: After a pretty gross back-and-forth that doesn’t make either side look great, Brown deactivated his account. But his followers started to pile on, threatening Johnson with—what else?—death. There is no irony here about the followers of a guy who beat his girlfriend offering up a stream of brutish death threats; it is only sad. 


RELATED: Is Twitter for Girls?


Enter the age of the online death threat. It’s scary, yeah, because it’s a death threat. Humans rarely like being threatened with an end to their basic essence, no matter the delivery method for that announcement. And yet, on Twitter, this becomes such a weird, surreal concept: It’s deeply impersonal (these people don’t even know each other and probably never will; NONE of them know each other, likely), fueled by a false kind of rage spawned by the way the Internet works (one side gets self-righteously mad, another side self-righteously madder, and repeat). Fortunately, in most cases, the threat is also incredibly unlikely to be fulfilled. That doesn’t make it pleasant. One might be prone to try to laugh away the kind of death threats Johnson received, from people she doesn’t know (people who don’t know Chris Brown either), who might not recognize her on the street, who most likely live nowhere near where she does and probably also don’t plan to actually kill her. Yet a death threat is pretty much the ultimate “I hate you,” and it’s worth wondering, when “I hate you” doesn’t serve to deliver the message strongly enough and we start saying “I’m going to kill you”/”you deserve to die,” how far has humanity gone down some sick drain?


RELATED: Only Six Percent of Americans Use Twitter


As David Knowles writes for The Daily in a piece titled “Twitter Terror,” Johnson is hardly the first person to be threatened on Twitter. President Obama, Mitt Romney, Ellen Page, Tom Daley, and Taylor Swift can claim this dubious badge of fame, too. The list goes on. But before the little bird was the death-threat method of the year, death threats would arrive to famous people, politicians, and those in the public eye, particularly controversial figures, as a matter of course—on paper, perhaps by telephone, and in the movies, via the weird scrawlings or puzzle-piece letter constructions of madmen. Of course, there’s no handwriting to decipher on Twitter, there are only assumptions of power and education based on icons and followers, word choice and spelling, what the person says and has said, as well as their affiliations. But again, probably, the people threatening Jenny Johnson shouldn’t scare her (if you’re really going to try to kill someone and are dumb enough to publicize it on Twitter, that’s a clear benefit to your intended victim). If there’s anything to be afraid of, it’s this idea that death threats are this kind of new online norm. I think part of that fear, the fear that this is just a regular thing nowadays, is what subconsciously creates the need in us to assume a such a horrified shock-and-outraged position about such death threats. Knowles quotes digital media expert Jeanette Castillio as calling “the Twitterverse … a very uncivil place.” Is it any more uncivil than anywhere else, though? The Internet hardly created hate, or hate-speak, or bullying. Further, do we only increase the levels of that incivility by freaking out about what a bunch of random people are raging about behind the protection, and often anonymity, of Twitter?


RELATED: Friday’s Top Tweets


As Knowles writes, also, Twitter does have a rule against this sort of thing; people aren’t supposed to “publish or post direct, specific threats of violence against others.” Still, like everything online, there is too much information, and not enough time for comprehensive monitoring. Knowles adds, “A small percentage of violent tweets are investigated by police, but even then Twitter is reluctant to betray what it believes is a sacred duty to protect a user’s privacy.” 


That’s the other thing about online threats: They manage to be so incredibly cowardly, and an utterly ineffectual form of communication—until, suddenly, the media is paying attention to said threats and in some ways legitimizing them. I’m honestly not sure what the media’s role should be in acknowledging tweets of the sort that Brown and Johnson and Brown’s followers and Johnson exchanged. Sometimes it seems like that old “ignoring” tactic your mom taught you could work out to everyone’s benefit—and yet these things are bound to go viral; badly behaving celebrities are something TMZ taught us people want to know about. These things are also, when discussed calmly and rationally, fodder for good conversations about how we live now.


Like a rude comment, a Twitter death threat is a way of hiding in your comfy-safe basement in your comfy-safe boxers and saying really gross things to someone in the hopes that they will get upset. These people are bullying, or hope to bully. Which means we shouldn’t take the bait, a thing far more difficult to do than say. Turning the other cheek was hard in real life, too, and you never know, better safe than sorry. But more important than preventing “actual Twitter murders” (which I dare say and hope will not become the norm), it’s worth paying attention to this ratcheting up of the hate ante as a new kind of communication norm. A cynical person would say we no longer need to touch people, instead, we reach out to them online. We no longer need to talk on the phone, we simply tweet or email or text. We certainly don’t write letters, and we hardly write on paper. Instead we blog and Tumbl and Instagram and Facebook. And so, when we get angry, irrationally or otherwise, we take to those methods of communication to speak out, retaliate, vow revenge. The most worrisome thing about the Twitter death threat, I think, that if it’s just something people do now. I don’t want to be in the Age of the Twitter Death Threat. It makes me pretty nostalgic for the good old days of the handwritten love letter, actually. 


Social Media News Headlines – Yahoo! News


Read More..

Protesters Gather Again in Cairo Streets to Denounce Morsi





CAIRO — Thousands of people flowed into the streets of Cairo, the Egyptian capital, Tuesday afternoon for a day of protest against President Mohamed Morsi’s attempt to assert broad new powers for the duration of the country’s political transition, dismissing his efforts just the night before to reaffirm his deference to Egyptian law and courts.




By early Tuesday afternoon in Cairo, a dense crowd of hundreds had gathered outside the headquarters of a trade group for lawyers, and thousands more had filed in around a small tent city in Tahrir Square. In an echo of the chants against Hosni Mubarak, Egyptian’s ousted president, almost two years ago, they shouted, “Leave, leave!” and “Bring down the regime!” They also denounced the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist group allied with Mr. Morsi.


A few blocks away, in a square near the American Embassy and the Interior Ministry headquarters, groups of young men resumed a running battle that began nine days ago, throwing rocks and tear gas canisters at riot police officers. Although those clashes grew out of anger over the deaths of dozens of protesters in similar clashes one year ago, many of the combatants have happily adopted the banner of protest against Mr. Morsi as well.


Egyptian television had captured the growing polarization of the country on Monday in split-screen coverage of two simultaneous funerals, each for a teenage boy killed in clashes set off by disputes over the new president’s powers. Thousands of supporters of Mr. Morsi and his allies in the Muslim Brotherhood marched through the streets of the Nile Delta city of Damanhour to bury a 15-year-old killed outside a Brotherhood office during an attack by protesters. And in Tahrir Square here in Cairo, thousands gathered to bury a 16-year-old killed in clashes with riot police officers and to chant slogans blaming Mr. Morsi for his death. “Morsi killed him,” the boy’s father said in a video statement circulated over the Internet.


“Now blood has been spilled by political factions, so this is not going to go away,” said Rabab el-Mahdi, a professor at the American University in Cairo and a left-leaning activist, adding that these were the first deaths rival factions had blamed on each other and not on the security forces of the Mubarak government since the uprising began last year. Still larger crowds were expected in the evening, as marchers from around the city headed for the square. Many schools and other businesses had closed in anticipation of bedlam, and on Monday, the Brotherhood called off a rival demonstration in support of the president, saying it wanted to avoid violence.


Egypt’s Supreme Judicial Council met again on Tuesday to consider its response to the president, and the leader of Al Azhar, a center of Sunni Muslim learning that is regarded as the pre-eminent moral authority here, met with groups of political leaders in an effort to resolve the battle over the president’s decree and the deadlock in the constitutional assembly, which is trying to draw up a new constitution.


But even as Mr. Morsi met with top judges Monday night in an effort to resolve the crisis, a coalition of opposition leaders held a news conference to declare that preserving the role of the courts was only the first step in a broader campaign against what Abdel Haleem Qandeil, a liberal intellectual, called “the miserable failure of the rule of the Muslim Brothers.” Mr. Morsi “unilaterally broke the contract with the people,” he declared. “We have to be ready to stand up to this group, protest to protest, square to square, and to confront the bullying.”


Mr. Morsi’s effort to remove the last check on his power over the political transition had brought the country’s fractious opposition groups together for the first time in a united front against the Brotherhood. But the show of unity papered over deep divisions between groups and even within them, said Ms. Mahdi of the American University.


“This is not a united front, and I am inside it,” she said. “Every single political group in the country is now divided over this — is this decree revolutionary justice or building a new dictatorship? Should we align ourselves with folool” — the colloquial term for the remnants of the old political elite — “or should we be revolutionary purists? Is it a conflict between the Muslim Brotherhood and the pro-Mubarak judiciary, or is this the beginning of a fascist regime in the making?”


Mayy El Sheikh contributed reporting.



Read More..

Phils' Ruiz suspended 25 games after positive test

NEW YORK (AP) — Philadelphia Phillies catcher Carlos Ruiz was suspended Tuesday for the first 25 games of next season following a positive test for an amphetamine.

The 33-year-old was an All-Star for the first time this year when he hit .325 with 16 homers and 68 RBIs.

"I am sincerely regretful for my mistake in taking a prohibited stimulant," Ruiz said in a statement issued by the Major League Baseball Players Association. "I apologize to my teammates, the Phillies organization and the Philadelphia fans. I will serve the imposed 25-game suspension to begin the season and I look forward to returning to the field and working toward bringing a championship back to Philadelphia in 2013."

Ruiz will be eligible to participate in spring training, including exhibition games.

"The Phillies fully support Major League Baseball's drug program," the team said. "We are disappointed by the news of this violation of the program. We will support Carlos in an appropriate manner and move forward to achieve our goal to play championship-caliber baseball in 2013."

Ruiz became the eighth player suspended this year under the major league testing program, the second for amphetamines following Baltimore shortstop Ryan Adams. The eight suspensions are the most since 2007.

There have been 102 suspensions under the minor league testing program.

Read More..

Global Update: Investing in Eyeglasses for Poor Would Boost International Economy


BSIP/UIG Via Getty Images







Eliminating the worldwide shortage of eyeglasses could cost up to $28 billion, but would add more than $200 billion to the global economy, according to a study published last month in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization.


The $28 billion would cover the cost of training 65,000 optometrists and equipping clinics where they could prescribe eyeglasses, which can now be mass-produced for as little as $2 a pair. The study was done by scientists from Australia and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.


The authors assumed that 703 million people worldwide have uncorrected nearsightedness or farsightedness severe enough to impair their work, and that 80 percent of them could be helped with off-the-rack glasses, which would need to be replaced every five years.


The biggest productivity savings from better vision would not be in very poor regions like Africa but in moderately poor countries where more people have factory jobs or trades like driving or running a sewing machine.


Without the equivalent of reading glasses, “lots of skilled crafts become very difficult after age 40 or 45,” said Kevin Frick, a Johns Hopkins health policy economist and study co-author. “You don’t want to be swinging a hammer if you can’t see the nail.”


If millions of schoolchildren who need glasses got them, the return on investment could be even greater, he said, but that would be in the future and was not calculated in this study.


Read More..

Dark Warnings About Future of Internet Access








PARIS — Every time an Internet user watches “Gangnam Style” on YouTube, packets of digital data course through the global telecommunications system, converging on an iPhone, a tablet or a laptop.




Having missed out on most of the lucrative revenue that the explosion of digital content has generated for Internet companies, telecommunications providers in Europe, Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere now want to charge them for carrying this traffic.


No way, the content providers say.


This commercial and ideological clash is set for a showdown next week, when representatives of more than 190 governments, along with telecommunications companies and Internet groups, gather in Dubai for a once-in-a-generation meeting.


The ostensible purpose of the World Conference on International Telecommunications is to update a global treaty on technical standards needed to, say, connect a telephone call from Tokyo to Timbuktu. The previous conference took place in 1988, when the Internet was in its infancy and telecommunications remained a highly regulated, mostly analog business.


Critics of the International Telecommunication Union, the United Nations’ agency that is organizing the meeting, see a darker agenda. The blogosphere has been raging over supposed plans led by Russia to snatch away control of the Internet and hand it to the U.N. agency.


That seems unlikely. Any such move would require an international consensus, and opposition is widespread. Terry Kramer, the U.S. ambassador to the conference, has vowed to veto any change in how the Internet is overseen.


Hamadoun Touré, secretary general of the telecommunications union, has repeatedly said that it has no desire to take over the Internet or to stifle its growth. On the contrary, he says, one of the main objectives of the conference is to spread Internet access to more of the four and a half billion people around the world who still do not use it.


And yet, groups as diverse as Google, the Internet Society, the International Trade Union Confederation and Greenpeace warn that the discussions could set a bad precedent, encouraging governments to step up censorship or take other actions that would threaten the integrity of the Internet.


“This is a very important moment in the history of the Internet, because this conference may introduce practices that are inimical to its continued growth and openness,” Vinton G. Cerf, vice president and chief Internet evangelist at Google, said during a conference call.


Google set up a Web site last week, “Take Action,” encouraging visitors to sign a petition for a “free and open Internet.” The campaign is modeled on the successful drive last winter to defeat legislative proposals to crack down on Internet piracy in the United States.


Analysts say the outcry over censorship and Internet governance is a red herring; the real business of the conference is business.


“The far bigger issue — largely obscured by this discussion — are proposals that are more likely to succeed that envision changing the way we pay for Internet services,” Michael Geist, an Internet law professor at the University of Ottawa, said by e-mail.


In one submission to the conference, the European Telecommunications Network Operators’ Association, a lobbying group based in Brussels that represents companies like France Télécom, Deutsche Telekom and Telecom Italia, proposed that network operators be permitted to assess charges for content providers like Internet video companies that use a lot of bandwidth.


Analysts say the proposal is an acknowledgment by telecommunications companies that they cannot compete in the provision of digital content.


“The telecoms realize that they have lost the battle,” said Paul Budde, an independent telecommunications analyst in Australia. “They are saying, ‘We can’t beat the Googles and the Facebooks, so let’s try to charge them.”’


The European lobbying group says that without the new fees, there will be no money to invest in the network upgrades needed to deal with a surge in traffic. Regulators have required European telecommunications operators to open their networks to rivals, and the market for broadband is fiercely competitive, with rock-bottom prices.


In the United States, by contrast, most telecommunications companies have been permitted to maintain local monopolies — or duopolies, with cable companies — in broadband, keeping prices higher. And U.S. regulators have ordered broadband providers to give equal priority to all Internet traffic. Such “network neutrality” is incompatible with charging content providers for carriage.


Analysts say this may explain why U.S. telecommunications companies have not joined the European call for a new business model.


Read More..

ChannelAdvisor says eBay sales up 57 percent early on Cyber Monday












(Reuters) – ChannelAdvisor said client sales on eBay Inc‘s online marketplace jumped 57 percent from a year before early on Cyber Monday.


The sales growth rate was five times higher than during the same period last year, said ChannelAdvisor, which helps merchants sell more on websites including Amazon.com Inc and eBay.com.












Client sales on Amazon.com were up 52 percent during the first part of Cyber Monday, ChannelAdvisor also reported.


(Reporting By Alistair Barr; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick)


Internet News Headlines – Yahoo! News


Read More..

Egypt’s President Said to Limit Scope of Judicial Decree





CAIRO — President Mohamed Morsi agreed on Monday to limit the scope of a sweeping decree he had issued last week that raised his edicts above any judicial review, according to a report by a television network allied with his party. The agreement, reached with top judicial authorities, would leave most of Mr. Morsi’s actions subject to review by the courts, but it appears to preserve a crucial power: protecting the country’s constitutional council from being dissolved by the courts before it finishes its work.







Ahmed Jadallah/Reuters

Protesters ran for cover during clashes with riot police at Tahrir square in Cairo on Monday.









Tara Todras-Whitehill for The New York Times

Egyptians mourned Mohammed Gaber Salah, an activist who died Sunday from injuries sustained during protests, before his funeral on Monday in Cairo.






The agreement was announced by a spokesman for the president; as of Monday night it had not yet been confirmed by the judges.


The Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist group that sponsored Mr. Morsi and his party, announced that it was canceling a major demonstration in support of the president that had been planned for Tuesday.


Mr. Morsi’s deal with the judges follows four days of rising tensions and flashes of violence across the country set off by his decree, which removed the last check on his power to rule Egypt.


Mr. Morsi said he was forced to issue the decree in order to protect the constitutional assembly from the courts, which had shuttered Egypt’s first freely elected parliament and disbanded an earlier constituent assembly, both dominated by Mr. Morsi’s Islamist allies. But the scope of the new powers claimed by the president galvanized his political opposition. Vandals attacked more than a dozen offices of his political party, and thousands of people demonstrated in the streets to vent their fears of a new autocracy in a country that had just shaken one off.


The agreement announced on Monday could be a watershed moment for Egypt’s new order: a triumph of respect for the rule of law and the independence of the courts, and a demonstration that Egypt’s new leaders are capable of the kind of compromise in the national interest that often eludes the party leaders in even the most practiced democracies.


But opponents appeared set to hold out for a further withdrawal of presidential authority, as well as the immediate dissolution of the constitutional assembly. Speaking at a press conference while Mr. Morsi was meeting with the judges, the opposition activist and intellectual Abdel Haleem Qandeil called for “a long-term battle,” declaring that the limiting of the decree should only be the first step toward the opposition’s goal of “the withdrawal of the legitimacy of Morsi’s presence in the presidential palace.”


Mr. Morsi’s advisers emphasized on Monday that they had not altered the decree’s language, and they portrayed the agreement with the judges as merely an explanation of the president’s original intent, rather than any pullback.


But the statement Mr. Morsi issued last Thursday to claim his broader powers had explicitly exempted all his future edicts from judicial oversight until a new constitution is ratified, and in recent days Mr. Morsi’s justice minister, Ahmed Mekki, publicly criticized the wording of the decree as over-broad; he argued that the president should add a phrase restricting its application only to presidential edicts related to the constitutional assembly and certain other matters.


Some of the ramifications of the deal remain unclear. Mr. Morsi and the judges of the Supreme Judicial Council agreed to limit the scope of the president’s immunity from judicial review to matters known in Egypt as acts of sovereignty. That is an established formulation in Egyptian law, so interpreting the decree that way meant he would not be claiming new immunity.


By accepting that interpretation, Mr. Morsi in effect pulled back from the aspects of his decree that aroused alarm about a power grab.


Still, the deal appeared to give Mr. Morsi the power he said he had deemed most essential: to protect the constitutional assembly so that it can stay in business long enough to finish a charter and end Egypt’s tortured transition after the overthrow of its former strongman, Hosni Mubarak.


Cracks appeared in Mr. Morsi’s government on Sunday over the decree. At least three other senior advisers resigned over the measure, and the move had also prompted widening street protests and cries from opponents that Mr. Morsi, who already governs without a legislature, was moving toward a new autocracy in Egypt, less than two years after the ouster of the strongman Hosni Mubarak.


With a threatened strike by the nation’s judges, a plunge in the country’s stock market and more street protests looming, Mr. Morsi’s administration initially sent mixed messages on Sunday over whether it was willing to consider a compromise: a spokesman for the president’s party insisted that there would be no change in his edict, but a statement from the party indicated for the first time a willingness to give political opponents “guarantees against monopolizing the fateful decisions of the homeland in the absence of the Parliament.”


Mayy El Sheikh and Mai Ayyad contributed reporting.



Read More..

US federal mediators to join NHL labor talks

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal mediators are entering the stalled NHL labor talks, with the season's first 2½ months already lost because of the lockout.

George Cohen, director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, said Monday the parties had agreed to use the agency. He assigned three mediators to assist in negotiations — deputy director Scot Beckenbaugh, director of mediation services John Sweeney and Commissioner Guy Serota.

"While we have no particular level of expectation going into this process, we welcome a new approach in trying to reach a resolution of the ongoing labor dispute at the earliest possible date," NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said.

Cohen has worked with the players' associations for Major League Baseball, helping end the 1994-95 strike as an outside counsel, and the NBA. He was an adviser to the NHL players' union before joining the FMCS three years ago.

Cohen mediated during the 2010 negotiations in Major League Soccer and 2011 talks in the NFL and NBA, along with this year's dispute between the NFL and its on-field officials.

Hockey players and management have not negotiated since last Wednesday. The NHL has canceled more than one-third of its regular season, including all games through Dec. 14, the New Year's Day outdoor Winter Classic and the All-Star weekend scheduled for Jan. 26-27 at Columbus, Ohio.

"I have had separate, informal discussions with the key representatives of the National Hockey League and the National Hockey League Players' Association during the course of their negotiations for a successor collective bargaining agreement," Cohen said in a statement.

"Due to the extreme sensitivity of these negotiations and consistent with the FMCS's longstanding practice, the agency will refrain from any public comment concerning the future schedule and/or the status of the negotiations until further notice."

Read More..

Amid Hurricane Sandy, a Race to Get a Liver Transplant





It was the best possible news, at the worst possible time.




The phone call from the hospital brought the message that Dolores and Vin Dreeland had long hoped for, ever since their daughter Natalia, 4, had been put on the waiting list for a liver transplant. The time had come.


They bundled her into the car for the 50-mile trip from their home in Long Valley, N.J., to NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital in Manhattan. But it soon seemed that this chance to save Natalia’s life might be just out of reach.


The date was Sunday, Oct. 28, and Hurricane Sandy, the worst storm to hit the East Coast in decades, was bearing down on New York. Airports and bridges would soon close, but the donated organ was in Nevada, five hours away. The time window in which a plane carrying the liver would be able to land in the region was rapidly closing.


In a hospital room, Natalia watched cartoons. Her parents watched the clock, and the weather. “Our anxiety was through the roof,” Mrs. Dreeland said. “It just made your stomach into knots.”


The Dreelands, who are in their 60s, became Natalia’s foster parents in 2008 when she was 7 months old, and adopted her just before she turned 2. They have another adopted daughter, Dorothy Jane, who is 17.


Natalia is a “smart little cookie” who loves school and dressing up Alice, her favorite doll, her mother said. At age 3, Natalia used the word “discombobulated” correctly, Mr. Dreeland said.


Natalia’s health problems date back several years. Her gallbladder was taken out in 2010, and about half her liver was removed in 2011. The underlying problem was a rare disease, Langerhans cell histiocytosis. It causes a tremendous overgrowth of a type of cell in the immune system and can damage organs. Drugs can sometimes keep it in check, but they did not work for Natalia.


In her case, the disease struck the bile ducts, which led to progressive liver damage. “She would have eventually gone into liver failure,” said Dr. Nadia Ovchinsky, a pediatric liver transplant specialist at NewYork-Presbyterian. “And she demonstrated some signs of early liver failure.”


The only hope was a transplant.


Dr. Tomoaki Kato, Natalia’s surgeon, knew that the liver in Nevada was a perfect match for Natalia in the two criteria that matter most: blood type and size. The deceased donor was 2 years old, and though Natalia is nearly 5, she is small for her age. Scar tissue from her previous operations would have made it very difficult to fit a larger organ into her abdomen.


Though Dr. Kato had considered transplanting part of an adult liver into Natalia, a complete organ from a child would be far better for her. But healthy organs from small children do not often become available, Dr. Kato said. This was a rare opportunity, and he was determined to seize it.


But as the day wore on, the odds for Natalia grew slimmer. The operation in Nevada to remove the liver was delayed several times.


At many hospitals, surgery to remove donor organs is done at the end of the day, after all regularly scheduled operations. The Nevada hospital had a busy surgical schedule that day, made worse by a trauma case that took priority.


At the hospital in New York, Tod Brown, an organ procurement coordinator, had alerted a charter air carrier that a flight from Nevada might be needed. That company in turn contacted West Coast carriers to pick up the donated liver and fly it to New York.


Initially, two carriers agreed, but then backed out. Several other charter companies also declined.


Mr. Brown told Dr. Kato that they might have to decline the organ. Dr. Kato, soft-spoken but relentless, said, “Find somebody who can fly.”


Dr. Kato used to work in Miami, where pilots found ways to bypass hurricanes to deliver organs. Even during Hurricane Katrina, his hospital performed transplants.


“I asked the transplant coordinators to just keep pushing,” he said.


Mr. Brown said, “Dr. Kato knew he was going to get that organ, one way or another.”


As the trajectory of the storm became clearer, one of the West Coast charter companies agreed to attempt the flight. The plan was to land at the airport in Teterboro, N.J. The backup was Newark airport, and the second backup was Albany, from where an ambulance would finish the trip.


The timing was critical: organs deteriorate outside the body, and ideally a liver should be transplanted within 12 hours of being removed.


Early Monday, as the storm whirled offshore, the plane landed at Teterboro. Soon a nurse rushed to tell the Dreelands that she had just seen an ambulance with lights and sirens screech up to the hospital. Someone had jumped out carrying a container.


At about 5 a.m., the couple kissed Natalia and saw her wheeled off to the operating room.


Three weeks later, she is back home, on the mend. The complicated regimen of drugs that transplant patients need is tough on a child, but she is getting through it, her father said.


Recently, Mr. Dreeland said, he found himself weeping uncontrollably during a church service for the family of the child who had died. “Their child gave my child life,” he said.


Though only time will tell, because the histiocytosis appeared limited to Natalia’s bile ducts and had not affected other organs, her doctors say there is a good chance that the transplant has cured her.


Read More..

DealBook: Mortgage Interest Deduction Is Now Seen as Vulnerable

A tax break that has long been untouchable could soon be in for some serious manhandling.

Many home buyers deduct their mortgage interest when assessing their tax bill, a perk that has helped bolster the income of millions of families — and the broader housing market.

But as President Obama and Congress try to hash out a deal to reduce the budget deficit, the mortgage interest deduction looks vulnerable. Limits on a broad array of deductions could emerge in any budget deal. It is likely that any caps would be structured to aim at high-income households, and would diminish or end the mortgage tax break for many of those taxpayers.

“This is definitely a chance worth jumping for,” said Amir Sufi, a professor at the Booth School of Business at the University of Chicago. “For a fixed amount of revenue, it’s better to remove deductions than increase marginal tax rates.”

Such a move would be fiercely opposed by the real estate industry. The industry has played a crucial role in defending the tax break, even as other countries with high homeownership have phased it out.

Housing market players who oppose any whittling down of the mortgage deduction still have time to press their case. If President Obama and Congress manage to reach an agreement to avoid the looming tax raises and spending cuts, their deal will be broad in nature. Then, over the following months, Congress will hash out details, like any caps on deductions.

“Until Congress introduces specific legislation, there’s nothing to say about any proposed changes to the mortgage interest deduction,” Gary Thomas, president of the National Association of Realtors, said in an e-mailed statement. “However, it has always been the N.A.R.’s position that the mortgage interest deduction is vital to the stability of the American housing market and economy, and we will remain vigilant in opposing any future plan that modifies or excludes the deductibility of mortgage interest.”

One of the reasons the mortgage tax break is so vulnerable is that both Democrats and Republicans have recently favored capping deductions, including both President Obama and the recent Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney.

What is more, deductions could be used to grease a compromise in the budget negotiations. High earners would be hit most by deduction limits, something that might make Republicans recoil. But the party may tolerate such a policy in return for a deal that limits how much actual tax rates go up for high-income households.

Tax numbers suggest it may not be hard to structure deduction limits in a way that leaves most middle-income households untouched.

With the mortgage interest deduction, households realized tax savings of $83 billion in 2010, according to figures from the Reason Foundation. Nearly $65 billion, or 78 percent of those savings, went to households earning $100,000 or more.

There are a range of ways to increase tax revenue by aiming at higher earners, some less comprehensive than others. For instance, the interest deduction relating to second homes could be ended. Also, the cap on mortgage debt eligible for the interest rate deduction — currently $1 million — could be reduced.

There are broader approaches, too. In its proposed budget, the Obama administration plans to focus on top earners. The administration suggests capping deductions at 28 percent for high-income households, those earning more than $250,000.

Under the current rules, a high-earning household deducting $20,000 in interest payments would probably apply a 35 percent rate to that amount and receive $7,000 in tax savings. The Obama budget aims to limit that tax saving by capping that rate at 28 percent. If that rate were applied to $20,000 of interest payments, the saving would fall to $5,800.

The United States would capture the difference. Over the next 10 years, that 28 percent cap could increase tax revenue by $584 billion, according to the Treasury Department.

Separately, the Obama administration also wants to limit high earners’ deductions by letting certain Bush-era exemptions expire. Altogether, the Treasury Department thinks it could raise $749 billion over 10 years by limiting deductions for higher earners. That’s substantially more than the $684 billion it thinks it could raise from increasing their tax rates.

Still, there are situations where certain middle-income earners do get hit by deduction limits.

Consider a policy that uses a dollar limit, and caps all deductions at $35,000. That amount would be plenty to cover most middle-income households’ mortgage interest, state and local taxes and charitable giving.

But people earnings more than $100,000 may start to reach the limit, according to Sidney B. Rosenberg, associate professor emeritus at the University of North Florida. He assumes a household earns $110,000 and has a $300,000 mortgage on which it pays $17,500 a year. It also pays property taxes and state taxes at estimated nationally average rates. Such a family would have nearly $35,000 of deductible expenses, Dr. Rosenberg calculates.

One argument against curtailing the mortgage deduction is that it could reduce demand for housing, depressing home prices when the housing market is still somewhat weak. The National Association of Realtors believes a removal of the deduction could reduce property values by 15 percent, according to a presentation last year from its chief economist, Lawrence Yun.

Other analysts say they believe the housing industry overstates the potential impact. With several forms of government subsidy also supporting housing, it’s hard to single out the effect of the mortgage deduction. At the most, the Reason Foundation estimates, the deduction may bolster house prices by 3 percent.

Since any deduction cap is likely to aim at higher earners, expensive houses would be most affected. But big-ticket homes appear much more resilient to shocks than lower-cost dwellings.

CoreLogic, a housing data company, tracks data that effectively divides the market into higher- and lower-cost houses, grouping them based on the size of the mortgages. The prices of the higher-cost houses are up 5.9 percent since the start of 2005, before the housing crash. In contrast, the houses at the lower end have fallen 13.5 percent in price since the beginning of 2005.

Given the apparent sturdiness of the higher end of the housing market, politicians may decide there are few risks in effectively capping mortgage deductions for high earners. Limiting tax breaks in a way that could reduce mortgage relief would be a change for Washington, which has done so much to support housing.

Nick Kasprak, an analyst at the Tax Foundation, said that up until recently he didn’t expect to see a cap on deductions. “But now,” he said, “it seems both parties are open to pursuing this strategy.”

Read More..