At least 61 crushed to death in Ivory Coast stampede

ABIDJAN (Reuters) - At least 61 people were crushed to death in a stampede after a New Year's Eve fireworks display at a stadium in Ivory Coast's main city Abidjan early on Tuesday, officials said.

Witnesses said police had tried to control crowds around the Felix Houphouet-Boigny Stadium following the celebrations, triggering a panic in which scores were trampled.

"The estimate we can give right now is 49 people hospitalized ... and 61 people dead," said the chief of staff of Abidjan's fire department Issa Sacko.

Crying women searched for missing family members outside the stadium on Tuesday morning. The area was covered in patches of dried blood and abandoned shoes.

"My two children came here yesterday. I told them not to come but they didn't listen. They came when I was sleeping. What will I do?" said Assetou Toure, a cleaner.

Sanata Zoure, a market vendor injured in the incident, said New Year's revelers going home after watching the fireworks had been stopped by police near the stadium.

"We were walking with our children and we came upon barricades, and people started falling into each other. We were trampled with our children," she said.

Another witness said police arrived to control the crowd after a mob began chasing a pickpocket.

President Alassane Ouattara called the deaths a national tragedy and said an investigation was under way to find out what happened.

"I hope that we can determine what caused this drama so that we can ensure it never happens again," he said after visiting the injured in hospital.

The country, once a stable economic hub for West Africa, is struggling to recover from a 2011 civil war in which more than 3,000 people were killed.

Ivory Coast's security forces once were among the best trained in the region, but a decade of political turmoil and the 2011 war has left them in disarray.

At least 18 people were killed in another stampede during a football match in an Abidjan stadium in 2009.

(Reporting by Loucoumane Coulibaly and Alain Amontchi; Writing by Richard Valdmanis; Editing by Michael Roddy)

Read More..

Cricket: Brett Lee misconduct charges dropped

SYDNEY: Misconduct charges against veteran Australian fast bowler Brett Lee for criticising administrators have been withdrawn and a compromise agreed, cricket officials said Wednesday.

Cricket New South Wales (NSW) reported Lee to Cricket Australia for alleged code of conduct breaches after he claimed that dumped NSW coach Anthony Stuart had been made the scapegoat for failings of the state's cricket hierarchy.

The former Test quick, who still plays in the domestic Big Bash League, said in an interview that NSW had "seriously dropped the ball" and Cricket NSW chief David Gilbert "should have been made to go" instead of Stuart.

Lee attended a disciplinary hearing of governing body Cricket Australia in Sydney over the comments on Wednesday, where charges of unbecoming behaviour and detrimental public comment were dropped and a compromise brokered.

Instead of being disciplined, Lee was invited to address a new committee established to address his concerns about the future of cricket in NSW.

"Both parties are very pleased to have found a way forward and at having arrived at a very positive mutual outcome," Cricket NSW said in a statement.

"Brett Lee looks forward very much to working constructively with Cricket New South Wales into the future."

Lee had been unapologetic about the comments despite the disciplinary threat, saying he stood by them as being "in the best interests of NSW cricket" and was looking forward to stating his case to officials.

After the three-hour hearing Lee said he was "really, really pleased with the outcome".

"I'm looking forward in the next seven to 12 days to meet(ing) with the subcommittee of the board to move forward and get this state back where it used to be," Lee told reporters.

"The last 10 years it's been going through some tough times. I'm actually looking forward to improving that and getting NSW back to where it was."

-AFP/ac

Read More..

NHAI slams GMR for termination notice for biggest highway project

NEW DELHI: National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) has hit back at infrastructure major GMR on its termination notice for the country's biggest highway project worth at least Rs 6,000 crore. The Authority in its reply to GMR has said that the company did not give 90-day cure period (to rectify and address the deficiencies), and how it is in violation of the norms laid down in the concession agreement.

NHAI was to respond to the GMR notice to exit from Kishangarh-Udaipur-Ahmedabad project by January 4. GMR has cited NHAI's failure to get environmental clearance for the 555-km highway project and to notify the revised toll rate on this stretch being widened from four to six lanes.

"The notice served on us had several deficiencies, and we have spelt them out clearly. The revised toll notification has been done and environment clearance will be obtained in the next few days," said a senior NHAI official.

Sources said that the toll notification was done after highways minister C P Joshi held a meeting at his residence on Monday evening and the environment and forest ministry (MoEF) has been approached to convene a special meeting of the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) to grant clearance.

The project has huge significance considering it being the country's first mega highway project. In addition, if the contract gets cancelled, NHAI would directly lose revenue of Rs 636 crore annually, which increases 5% every successive year. The Authority's own estimate shows the total revenue during the entire contract period would be at least Rs 9,000 crore at net present value.

Indications abound that in case GMR still decides to opt out of the project, NHAI would forfeit the company's bank guarantee along with other harsh steps. "We don't want this to be a precedent for other concessionaires who would show delay in environment clearance to exit from the project and consequently forcing us to rebid them," said a senior ministry official.

NHAI also seems to use this case to draw MoEF's attention to fast track green clearance, highlighting the laxity on the green ministry's part to grant such nods. NHAI chairman R P Singh wrote to MoEF secretary V Raja Gopalan on December 24, "Any delay on our part in giving environment clearance can be construed as an indirect support to the contention of the concessionaire" while seeking his personal invention to convene a special meeting of the FAC.

According to NHAI, the project got environment clearance in early June, with a rider that stage-1 of forest clearance for the venture is obtained. This requires diversion of 37.62 hectares reserved forest and 40.39 hectares of protected forest that fall in Rajasthan. The state government has processed and sent its proposal in mid-November. Even after some of the queries of MoEF were cleared, the proposal was not placed before the FAC that met on December 21 and 22.

A part of the project also falls in Gujarat, and hence forest diversion is required for 173.39 hectares. NHAI officials said that the Gujarat government has given its nod after the poll code for the assembly election was lifted.

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..

House Approves 'Fiscal Cliff' Deal

The House of Representatives has approved a bipartisan Senate deal to avert the "fiscal cliff" and preserve Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans making less than $400,000 per year.

The compromise is now on its way to President Obama for his signature.

House Republicans agreed to the up-or-down vote Tuesday evening, despite earlier talk of trying to amend the Senate bill with more spending cuts before taking a vote. The bill delays for two months tough decisions about automatic spending cuts that were set to kick in Wednesday.

A majority of the Republicans in the GOP-majority House voted against the fiscal cliff deal. About twice as many Democrats voted in favor of the deal compared to Republicans. One hundred fifty-one Republicans joined 16 Democrats to vote against the deal, while 172 Democrats carried the vote along with 85 Republicans.

The Senate passed the same bill by an 89-8 vote in the wee hours of New Year's Day. If House Republicans had tweaked the legislation, there would have been no clear path for its return to the Senate before a new Congress is sworn in Thursday.

The vote split Republican leaders in the House. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, voted yes, and so did the GOP's 2012 vice presidential candidate, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis.

But House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., the No. 2 Republican in the House, voted no. It was his opposition that had made passage of the bill seem unlikely earlier in the day.

The deal does little to address the nation's long-term debt woes and does not entirely solve the problem of the "fiscal cliff."

Indeed, the last-minute compromise -- far short from a so-called grand bargain on deficit reduction -- sets up a new showdown on the same spending cuts in two months amplified by a brewing fight on how to raise the debt ceiling beyond $16.4 trillion. That new fiscal battle has the potential to eclipse the "fiscal cliff" in short order.

"Now the focus turns to spending," said Boehner in a statement after the vote. "The American people re-elected a Republican majority in the House, and we will use it in 2013 to hold the president accountable for the 'balanced' approach he promised, meaning significant spending cuts and reforms to the entitlement programs that are driving our country deeper and deeper into debt."

President Obama also seemed to be looking forward to the next debate.

Bill Clark/Roll Call/Getty Images

'Fiscal Cliff' Negotiations: Congress Reaches Agreement Watch Video

"This is one step in the broader effort to strengthen our economy for everybody," said Obama, who was joined by his top negotiator, Vice President Joe Biden, for late-night televised remarks after the House vote.

Obama lamented that earlier attempts at a much larger fiscal deal that would have cut spending and dealt with entitlement reforms failed. He said he hoped future debates would be done with "a little less drama, a little less brinksmanship, and not scare folks quite as much."

But Obama drew a line in the sand on the debt ceiling, which is set to be reached by March.

"While I will negotiate over many things, I will not have another debate with this Congress over whether they should pay the bills for what they've racked up," Obama said. "We can't not pay bills that we've already incurred."

Republicans hope that allowing the fiscal cliff compromise, which raised taxes without an equal amount of spending cuts, will settle the issue of tax rates for the coming debates on spending.

However, getting the deal done wasn't easy. Before deciding on the up-or-down vote in the House on the fiscal cliff deal, GOP leaders had emerged from a morning conference meeting disenchanted by the legislative package devised by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Mo., and Vice President Biden early this morning, with several insisting they could not vote on it as it stood.

"I do not support the bill," Cantor said as he left the meeting. "We're looking for the best path forward. No decisions have been made yet."

Boehner refused to comment on the meeting, but his spokesman said, "The lack of spending cuts in the Senate bill was a universal concern amongst members in today's meeting."

As lawmakers wrestled with the legislation, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that the bill's added spending combined with the cost of extending tax cuts for those making under $400,000 would actually add $3.9 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. The Joint Committee on Taxation reached a similar conclusion.

The impasse once again raised the specter of sweeping tax hikes on all Americans and deep spending cuts' taking effect later this week.

"This is all about time, and it's about time that we brought this to the floor," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said after emerging from a meeting with Democrats.

"It was a bill that was passed in the U.S. Senate 89-8. Tell me when you've had that on a measure as controversial as this?" she said of the overwhelming vote.

Pelosi could not say, however, whether the measure had the backing of most House Democrats.

"Our members are making their decisions now," she said.

Biden joined Democrats for a midday meeting on Capitol Hill seeking to shore up support for the plan.

While Congress technically missed the midnight Dec. 31 deadline to avert the so-called cliff, both sides expressed eagerness to enact a post-facto fix before Americans went back to work and the stock market opened Wednesday.

"This may take a little while but, honestly, I would argue we should vote on it today," said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., who sits on the Budget Committee, early Tuesday. "We know the essential details and I think putting this thing to bed before the markets is important.

"We ought to take this deal right now and we'll live to fight another day, and it is coming very soon on the spending front."

Read More..

North Korean leader, in rare address, seeks end to confrontation with South

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong-un called for an end to confrontation between the two Koreas, technically still at war in the absence of a peace treaty to end their 1950-53 conflict, in a surprise New Year speech broadcast on state media.

The address by Kim, who took over power in the reclusive state after his father, Kim Jong-il, died in 2011, appeared to take the place of the policy-setting New Year editorial published in leading state newspapers.

Impoverished North Korea raised tensions in the region by launching a long-range rocket in December that it said was aimed at putting a scientific satellite in orbit, drawing international condemnation.

North Korea, which considers North and South as one country, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, is banned from testing missile or nuclear technology under U.N. sanctions imposed after its 2006 and 2009 nuclear weapons tests.

"An important issue in putting an end to the division of the country and achieving its reunification is to remove confrontation between the north and the south," Kim said in the address that appeared to be pre-recorded and was made at an undisclosed location.

"The past records of inter-Korean relations show that confrontation between fellow countrymen leads to nothing but war."

The New Year address was the first in 19 years by a North Korean leader after the death of Kim Il-sung, Kim Jong-un's grandfather. Kim Jong-il rarely spoke in public and disclosed his national policy agenda in editorials in state newspapers.

The two Koreas have seen tensions rise to the highest level in decades after the North bombed a Southern island in 2010 killing two civilians and two soldiers.

The sinking of a South Korean navy ship earlier that year was blamed on the North but Pyongyang has denied it and accused Seoul of waging a smear campaign against its leadership.

Last month, South Korea elected as president Park Geun-hye, a conservative daughter of assassinated military ruler Park Chung-hee whom Kim Il-sung had tried to kill at the height of their Cold War confrontation.

Park has vowed to pursue engagement with the North and called for dialogue to build confidence but has demanded that Pyongyang abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions, something it is unlikely to do.

Conspicuously absent from Kim's speech was any mention of the nuclear arms program.

(Reporting by Jack Kim; Editing by Nick Macfie)

Read More..

N.Korea leader vows "radical" economic shift

SEOUL: North Korea's young leader Kim Jong-Un called for a "radical turnabout" in the impoverished country's economy in a rare New Year's address Tuesday that also urged improved relations with the South.

While the heart of his lengthy speech was devoted to turning the North into an "economic giant" and raising living standards, Kim stressed that military power remained a national priority.

"The military might of a country represents its national strength. Only when it builds up its military might in every way can it develop into a thriving country," he said in a voiced message broadcast on state television.

The address will be closely parsed for meaning in South Korea which just elected its first woman president, the conservative Park Geun-Hye, who has signalled a willingness for greater engagement with Pyongyang.

The voiced message was the first of its kind since Kim's grandfather, the North's founding president Kim Il-Sung, delivered one in 1994, the year of his death.

Kim's comments on the economy are likely to fuel speculation that he might be set to implement economic reforms that observers have been predicting since he came to power a year ago after the death of his father Kim Jong-Il.

The year 2013 will be a year of "great creations and changes in which a radical turnabout will be effected," Kim said, adding that "the building of an economic giant is the most important task" facing the country.

Praising the success of the North's space scientists in launching a long-range rocket last month, Kim said a similar national effort was required on the economic front.

"The entire Party, the whole country and all the people should wage an all-out struggle this year to effect a turnaround in building an economic giant and improving the people's standard of living," he said.

When Kim Jong-Il died, he left a country in dire economic straits -- the result of a "military first" policy that fed an ambitious missile and nuclear programme at the expense of a malnourished population.

Despite a rise in staple food output, daily life for millions of Koreans is an ongoing struggle with under-nutrition and a lack of vital protein and fat, according to a recent World Food Programme report.

Some observers had seen a glimmer of reformist hope in the handover of power to the Swiss-educated Kim Jong-Un, only in his late 20s.

Instead, Kim focused on consolidating his power base with a series of high-profile personnel changes, notably within the military elite, while at the same time pursuing Kim Jong-Il's missile programme.

Tuesday's address called for a "radical" increase in output across the board, from light and heavy industry to agriculture, as well as an improved transport infrastructure.

But it offered no specific policy directives for how this might be achieved by the isolated state which relies on its sole major ally China for 70 per cent of its foreign trade.

Kim's address came as the UN Security Council is still considering how to punish Pyongyang for its recent rocket launch, which most of the world saw as a disguised ballistic missile test.

The speech lauded the launch as a historic national achievement and stressed the need to develop more "sophisticated military hardware" in order to bring about a "fundamental change" in combat preparedness.

On South Korea, Kim sounded a conciliatory note and urged a scaling down of tensions on the Korean peninsula.

"An important issue in putting an end to the division of the country and achieving its reunification is to remove confrontation between the North and the South," Kim said.

"The past records of inter-Korean relations show that confrontation between fellow countrymen leads to nothing but war," he said.

South Korean president-elect Park Geun-Hye has distanced herself from outgoing President Lee Myung-Bak's hardline policy towards Pyongyang and spoken of the need for greater engagement with the North.

But in her first post-election victory policy statement, Park made it clear she still viewed Pyongyang as a serious threat and would put the South's national security before any trust-building programme.

-AFP/ac

Read More..

Global rights bodies slam India for 'weak' rape laws

NEW DELHI: The Indian government has come under attack from global human rights bodies for its inadequate laws against sexual violence or treatment of survivors.

Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said, "The government needs to act now to prevent sexual assault, aggressively investigate and prosecute perpetrators, and ensure the dignified treatment of survivors."
The US embassy, in a statement, also mourned the death of the victim — ""We are deeply saddened to learn that the victim of a horrific assault in New Delhi Dec 16 has died," an embassy statement said. "As we honour the memory of this brave young woman, we also recommit ourselves to changing attitudes and ending all forms of gender-based violence which plagues every country in the world."

Meanwhile, UNICEF drew attention to the fact that an alarmingly large number of victims of sexual violence in India are children. "It is alarming that too many of these cases are children. One in three of the rape victims is a child. More than 7,200 children , including infants are raped every year. Given the stigma attached to rapes, especially when it comes to children, this most likely is only the tip of the ice berg," said Mr. Louis-Georges Arsenault, UNICEF Representative to India.

Read More..

Clinton's blood clot an uncommon complication

The kind of blood clot in the skull that doctors say Hillary Rodham Clinton has is relatively uncommon but can occur after an injury like the fall and concussion the secretary of state was diagnosed with earlier this month.

Doctors said Monday that an MRI scan revealed a clot in a vein in the space between the brain and the skull behind Clinton's right ear.

The clot did not lead to a stroke or neurological damage and is being treated with blood thinners, and she will be released once the proper dose is worked out, her doctors said in a statement.

Clinton has been at New York-Presbyterian Hospital since Sunday, when the clot was diagnosed during what the doctors called a routine follow-up exam. At the time, her spokesman would not say where the clot was located, leading to speculation it was another leg clot like the one she suffered behind her right knee in 1998.

Clinton had been diagnosed with a concussion Dec. 13 after a fall in her home that was blamed on a stomach virus that left her weak and dehydrated.

The type of clot she developed, a sinus venous thrombosis, "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 neurologist Dr. Larry Goldstein. He is director of Duke University's stroke center and has no role in Clinton's care or personal knowledge of it.

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 explained.

It should have no long-term consequences if her doctors are saying she has suffered no neurological damage from it, he said.

Dr. Joseph Broderick, chairman of neurology at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, also called Clinton's problem "relatively uncommon" after a concussion.

He and Goldstein said the problem often is overdiagnosed. They said scans often show these large "draining pipes" on either side of the head are different sizes, which can mean blood has pooled or can be merely an anatomical difference.

"I'm sure she's got the best doctors in the world looking at her," and if they are saying she has no neurological damage, "I would think it would be a pretty optimistic long-term outcome," Broderick said.

A review article in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2005 describes the condition, which more often occurs in newborns or young people but can occur after a head injury. With modern treatment, more than 80 percent have a good neurologic outcome, the report says.

In the statement, Clinton's doctors said she "is making excellent progress and we are confident she will make a full recovery. She is in good spirits, engaging with her doctors, her family, and her staff."

___

Online:

Medical journal: http://dura.stanford.edu/Articles/Stam_NEJM05.pdf

Read More..

Fiscal Cliff Deal Vote Likely in Senate

The so-called "fiscal cliff" came tonight -- but now there is a specific deal on the table to try to soften it after the fact, according to congressional sources.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the deal -- brokered by Vice President Joe Biden and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell -- would get a vote in the Senate tonight. The House would not vote before Tuesday, having adjourned for the evening before word of the agreement spread.

"I feel really very, very good about this vote," Biden told reporters leaving the meeting with Senate Democrats, "but having been in the Senate for as long as I have there's two things you shouldn't do: You shouldn't predict how the Senate is going to vote before they vote....[and] you surely shouldn't predict about how the House is going to vote."

The proposal would extend Bush-era tax cuts permanently for people making less than $400,000 per year and households making less than $450,000, the sources said.

The steep "sequester" budget cuts scheduled to go into effect with the New Year would be postponed two months, said sources. They said half the money would come from cuts elsewhere, and the other half from new revenue.

The deal also would affect taxes on investment income and estates, and extend unemployment benefits for a year, the congressional sources added.

"The end is in sight," said a Democratic aide with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office. "If everyone cooperates, it's possible things can move pretty quickly."

After the Biden meeting, Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said there was "strong" support for the plan among Senate Democrats.

"There is a feeling that it's not that this proposal is regarded as great or as loved in any way, but it's a lot better than going off the cliff," he said.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., called the compromise the "best" that could be done.

Even with progress in the Senate tonight, the "cliff" deadline will pass without action by the House, where Republican leaders said they would "consider" the deal starting tomorrow.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

'Fiscal Cliff': Lawmakers Scramble for Last-Minute Deal Watch Video

"Decisions about whether the House will seek to accept or promptly amend the measure will not be made until House members -- and the American people -- have been able to review the legislation," said House Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, and Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers in a statement.

The failure of a deal to pass Congress by Jan. 1 technically triggers an income tax hike on all Americans and automatic spending cuts, though lawmakers could still prevent a tax hike by making retroactive any legislation that passes in the weeks ahead, experts said.

The deal at hand will not entirely solve the problem of the "fiscal cliff," however. In fact, it could set up a new showdown over the same spending cuts in just two months that would be amplified by a brewing fight over how to raise the debt ceiling beyond $16.4 trillion. That new fiscal battle has the potential to eclipse the "fiscal cliff" in short order.

Earlier, during a midday news conference, Obama said he was optimistic about compromise in the short-term.

"It appears that an agreement to prevent this New Year's tax hike is within sight, but it's not done," he said. "There are still issues left to resolve, but we're hopeful that Congress can get it done."

In addition to extending current tax rates for households making $450,000 or less, the latest plan would raise the estate tax from 35 to 40 percent for estates larger than $5 million; and prevent the alternative minimum tax from hammering millions of middle-class workers, according to sources familiar with the talks.

Capital gains taxes would rise to 20 percent from 15, according to a senior White House official.

The deal would also extend for one year unemployment insurance benefits set to expire Tuesday, and avert a steep cut to Medicare payments for doctors, congressional sources said.

"I can report that we've reached an agreement on the all the tax issues," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in an afternoon speech on the Senate floor.

At the time, McConnell said that federal spending cuts remained a sticking point. That hurdle later appeared to be cleared by postponing the debate two more months, though it is unclear whether House Republicans will go along.

"In order to get the sequester moved, you're going to have to have real, concrete spending cuts," said Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich. Without that, he said, "I don't know how it passes the House."

Some Republicans also said Obama unduly complicated progress toward an agreement by seeming to take a victory lap on taxes at his campaign-style event at the White House.

"Keep in mind that just last month Republicans in Congress said they would never agree to raise tax rates on the wealthiest Americans," Obama said, raising the ire of several Republicans. "Obviously, the agreement that's currently discussed would raise those rates, and raise them permanently."

Those words drew a sharp retort from Republican Sen. John McCain.

Rather than staging a "cheerleading rally," McCain said, the president should have been negotiating the finishing touches of the deal.

"He comes out and calls people together and has a group standing behind him, laughs and jokes and ridicules Republicans. Why?" said McCain.

Several Democrats also voiced disappointment with the president and the emerging deal.

Read More..