Most Recent Posts

If you're a football fan, Sunday is kind of like Christmas.

Two conference championship games will determine the teams that advance to the Super Bowl, and the matchups couldn't be more exciting: Denver vs. New England (Peyton Manning vs. Tom Brady). And some would say the other game, pitting San Francisco against Seattle, might just feature the two best teams in the league.

America shows its love for the sport in many ways beyond breathless anticipation of big games. It also gives back to the National Football League with tax breaks and publicly funded stadiums.

But does the multibillion-dollar business really need the help, or is the NFL getting a free ride?

Not For Profit

If you walk into NFL headquarters on Park Avenue in Manhattan, "you think you're in the headquarters of Goldman Sachs," says Gregg Easterbrook, author of King of Sports: Football's Impact on America.

The NFL is registered as a not-for-profit, tax-exempt organization — even with a commissioner who makes nearly $30 million a year. From the tax code to big stadium deals, critics say the NFL is getting millions of public dollars that would be better spent elsewhere.

The NFL league office is organized as a 501(c)(6), a part of the tax code that exempts thing like business leagues, chambers of commerce and trade associations.

But that's just the league office, not the 32 individual franchises. "There is no tax break at the NFL for revenue earned from things like ticket sales or jersey sales or corporate sponsorships or television money," says Jeremy Spector, outside tax counsel for the NFL and a partner at Covington and Burling LLP.

Spector tells NPR's Arun Rath that the NFL, including its teams, brings in around $10 billion of annual taxable income.

"None of those revenues are escaping tax. It's the league office — that organizational or administrative arm — that's exempt," Spector says.

The administrative arm handles things like writing the rulebook, hiring referees, running the college draft and negotiating stadium deals.

Republican Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma says it's absurd to call the NFL a "trade association." He's proposed changing the tax code to end the exemption and start collecting taxes from pro sports organizations.

"In a time when we have a $640 billion deficit — and that's the best we've had in five years — shouldn't very wealthy ... sports leagues pay their share?" he asks.

Spector, lawyer for the NFL, says sports organizations are being unfairly singled out.

"I think it's very dangerous if Congress starts picking and choosing which industry or which industry trade associations are eligible for the tax exemption," he says.

If You Build It ...

Besides the tax exemption, the NFL can also get a break through big stadium deals. Take, for example, the Dallas Cowboys.

In the late 1990s, the Dallas Cowboys and the team's owner, Jerry Jones, began plans to expand their stadium or build a new one. Jones shopped in and around Dallas for years, asking for public assistance to fund the stadium.

He found an audience in Arlington, a city just outside of Dallas. The price tag for the public was $325 million. (Jones was responsible for the balance of the money for the $1.2 billion stadium. Dallas News says Jones' contribution "was paid with commercial loans, league funding and proceeds from a ticket and parking tax.")

Arlington Mayor Robert Cluck saw an opportunity for the city, and a tough sell to voters.

Tom Coburn will leave the Senate with a reputation as "Dr. No," but not necessarily as doctrinaire.

The Oklahoma Republican, who at age 65 is undergoing his fifth bout of cancer, announced that he will resign in December, two years before his second term expires.

"This decision isn't about my health, my prognosis or even my hopes and desires," Coburn, a physician, said in a statement. "As a citizen, I am now convinced that I can best serve my own children and grandchildren by shifting my focus elsewhere."

The departure of Coburn, a leading conservative who previously served three terms in the U.S. House, will divest Congress of one of its most ardent budget and debt hawks.

His zeal is reflected his annual, much pored over "Wastebook." It details examples of what he views as flagrant government spending excesses. Last year's compilation of 100 included $65 million for post-Hurricane Sandy tourism advertising, as well as $10,000 for a National Endowment for the Arts grant to produce a live "pole dancing" performance that featured power linemen, their bucket trucks and 20 utility poles.

"Tom Coburn was fighting runaway spending long before it was cool," wrote Jim Geraghty, columnist for the conservative National Review, under a Friday headline that read, "Depressing news this morning."

Kurt Hochenauer, an Oklahoma Democrat and author of the political blog Okie Funk, says that while Coburn's actions often felt like political theater, his war on wasteful spending resonated across the political spectrum.

"I disagree with Tom Coburn on many issues, but I have found common ground with him at times, especially his interest in wasteful government spending," says Hochenauer. "Sometimes his actions as so-called Dr. No have seemed like political stunts to me, but I admire his consistency and focus."

"I also admire that he stands up for his principles and views," Hochenauer says, "even when it means going against more extreme members of his political party."

Coburn's decision to step down early also returns to the sidelines a strict social conservative, but one who would occasionally buck his own party — and who unfailingly avoided vilifying his political opponents.

It was President Obama, in fact, who wrote about Coburn last year for Time when the senator was named to the magazine's annual list of its picks for the 100 most influential people in the world.

Obama and Coburn famously befriended each other at an orientation dinner in 2005 when they were both new senators. Their wives bonded, and so did they, the president wrote, "over family and faith."

The men collaborated, Obama said, on government transparency legislation, trimming earmarks, and efforts to "close tax loopholes that benefit only the well-off and well connected."

"After I took office, Tom received dozens of letters from Oklahomans complaining that we looked too close on TV," Obama wrote. "Tom's response was, 'How better to influence somebody than to love them?' "

Self-Examination

Coburn loves his party, too, but he was willing to give it hell.

He excoriated Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz's "defund Obamacare" mission that led to a partial government shutdown last year.

Here's what he said on MSNBC's Morning Joe program: "To create the impression that we can actually defund Obamacare, when the only thing we control, and barely, is the House of Representatives, is not intellectually honest."

Back in the spring of 2008, during the height of the chaotic battle for the GOP nomination for president, he accused Republicans of being in a state of "paralysis and denial." He lambasted fellow party members for hiding a "big-government liberal agenda" (read: spending) inside a GOP package.

Here's more of what he wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

"Regaining our brand is not about messaging. It's about action. It's about courage. It's about priorities. Most of all, it's about being willing to give up our political careers so our grandkids don't have to grow up in a debtor's prison, or a world in which other nations can tell a weakened and bankrupt America where we can and can't defend liberty, pursue terrorists, or show compassion."

After Obama won a second term in 2012, Coburn, who decided to become a doctor at age 30 after his first bout with cancer, urged Republicans to "never give up."

"Many want to blame our setbacks in the Senate, in particular, on the Tea Party," he said. "I agree we need to do a much, much better job of candidate recruitment. The problem in Republican politics isn't the challengers: It's the incumbents — career politicians who say they are for limited government and lower taxes but make decisions that give us bigger government and higher taxes."

The Dysfunction Factor

Less than a month ago, Coburn decried Washington dysfunction in a Wall Street Journal commentary headlined, "The Year Washington Fled Reality."

His disillusionment was palpable, including with Obama for having "conformed to, rather than challenged, the political culture that as presidential candidate he vowed to reform."

Coburn, who opposed the president's health care legislation, criticized the disastrous rollout of the law — though in a Senate floor speech in December, he said its health insurance exchanges will ultimately "work, and work well."

But his real ire was reserved for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat who deemed that a simple majority of senators could override filibusters on presidential nominees, except those to the Supreme Court.

Reid's "narrative about Republican obstruction of appointees is a diversion for his own war against minority rights," said Coburn, who last year offered more amendments than any other senator.

Coburn's seat is expected to remain in Republicans hands when a successor is picked in November, and his party is within sight of winning Senate control.

But Coburn, in an interview with The Oklahoman newspaper, said he's ready to move on.

"I've had a lot of changes in my life," he told the newspaper. "This is another one."

Subpoenas are hitting his closest aides and allies. His approval rating in New Jersey has taken a modest hit. And suddenly, politicians long afraid of him are speaking out about his revenge-style of governing.

But headed into a three-day weekend, there's some good news for Christie. The conservative base of the Republican Party, long skeptical of the New Jersey governor because of his bro-hug with President Obama after Sandy, is beginning to rally to his side. Here's some evidence:

1) Christie's political advisers tell NJPR that national donors who have long coveted a Christie presidential candidacy are calling to express support, not skepticism. According to Bill Palatucci, the governor's confidante and link to the national donor base, interest in Christie fundraisers spiked after the scandal broke. Christie is headlining events this weekend in Florida for Republican Gov. Rick Scott and the Republican Governors Association, and Palatucci said in recent days he has gotten about two dozen calls for people looking to buy tickets at the last minute.

2) Other potential presidential candidates have taken a wait-and-see approach to the scandal. He has not been publicly attacked by other Republican governors or potential Republican presidential rivals, indicating that Christie's stature within the party is not yet weakened.

3) The all-important conservative media is actually coming to Christie's defense. It's as if he earned some street cred by getting dragged through the media gauntlet. FOX News' Sean Hannity used the opportunity to slam "liberal media" for not pushing harder on the Benghazi situation: "You can rest-assured that if Christie does go on to run for President, this issue will be mentioned by the liberal media in virtually every conversation or analysis. If Hillary Clinton runs for president, will Benghazi or the host of other scandals similarly coincide with their analysis? Highly doubtful." Hannity said that compared to the evasive Clinton, Christie handled his scandal with "moral courage." And Rush Limbaugh, who once went so far as to call Christie a "Democrat," also rushed to the governor's defense this week after liberal rocker Bruce Springsteen and late-night host Jimmy Fallon made fun of Christie in a "Born To Run" parody.

4) Polls don't indicate that Christie's standing as the Republican presidential front-runner has diminished. A New Hampshire poll from Public Policy Polling taken after the release of the Bridgegate documents indicate Christie has a larger lead among Republicans than he did in September. And get this: 14 percent of GOP voters said it made them like him more.

But about those subpoenas. As Christie takes off for warmer climes, the Assembly committee investigating the Bridgegate scandal has made public some of the subpoenas they've issued, including one to the custodian of records at the Governor's office. Others being ordered to turn over correspondence related to the bridge include:

- Bill Baroni, former Port Authority Deputy Executive Director

- Maria Comella, Christie Deputy Chief of Staff, Communications

- Michael Drewniak, Christie Press Secretary

- Regina Egea, Christie Chief of Staff

- Christina Genovese, Christie Director of Departmental Relations

- Charles McKenna, Christie Chief Counsel

- Evan Ridley, Christie aide

- Colin Reed, Christie Deputy Communications Director

- Kevin O'Dowd, former Christie Chief of Staff/Attorney General nominee

- David Wildstein, former Port Authority Director of Interstate Capital Projects

- Bill Stepien, Christie Campaign Manager/Former Deputy Chief of Staff

- David Samson, Port Authority Chairman

Listen to the report here.

Matt Katz covers Gov. Chris Christie for WNYC and New Jersey Public Radio.

Tom Coburn will leave the Senate with a reputation as "Dr. No," but not necessarily as doctrinaire.

The Oklahoma Republican, who at age 65 is undergoing his fifth bout of cancer, announced that he will resign in December, two years before his second term expires.

"This decision isn't about my health, my prognosis or even my hopes and desires," Coburn, a physician, said in a statement. "As a citizen, I am now convinced that I can best serve my own children and grandchildren by shifting my focus elsewhere."

The departure of Coburn, a leading conservative who previously served three terms in the U.S. House, will divest Congress of one of its most ardent budget and debt hawks.

His zeal is reflected his annual, much pored-over "Wastebook." It details examples of what he views as flagrant government spending excesses. Last year's compilation of 100 included $65 million for post-Hurricane Sandy tourism advertising, as well as $10,000 for a National Endowment for the Arts grant to produce a live "pole dancing" performance that featured power linemen, their bucket trucks and 20 utility poles.

"Tom Coburn was fighting runaway spending long before it was cool," wrote Jim Geraghty, columnist for the conservative National Review, under a Friday headline that read, "Depressing news this morning."

Kurt Hochenauer, an Oklahoma Democrat and author of the political blog "Okie Funk," says that while Coburn's actions often felt like political theater, his war on wasteful spending resonated across the political spectrum.

"I disagree with Tom Coburn on many issues, but I have found common ground with him at times, especially his interest in wasteful government spending," says Hochenauer. "Sometimes his actions as so-called Dr. No have seemed like political stunts to me, but I admire his consistency and focus."

"I also admire that he stands up for his principles and views," Hochenauer says, "even when it means going against more extreme members of his political party."

Coburn's decision to step down early also returns to the sidelines a strict social conservative, but one who would occasionally buck his own party — and who unfailingly avoided vilifying his political opponents.

It was President Obama, in fact, who wrote about Coburn last year for TIME when the senator was named to the magazine's annual list of its picks for the 100 most influential people in the world.

Obama and Coburn famously befriended each other at an orientation dinner in 2005 when they were both new senators. Their wives bonded, and so did they, the president wrote, "over family and faith."

The men collaborated, Obama said, on government transparency legislation, trimming earmarks, and efforts to "close tax loopholes that benefit only the well-off and well connected."

"After I took office, Tom received dozens of letters from Oklahomans complaining that we looked too close on TV," Obama wrote. "Tom's response was, 'how better to influence somebody than to love them?'"

Self Examination

Coburn loved his party, too, but he was willing to give it hell.

He excoriated Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz's "defund Obamacare" mission that led to a partial government shutdown last year.

Here's what he said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program: "To create the impression that we can actually defund Obamacare, when the only thing we control, and barely, is the House of Representatives, is not intellectually honest."

Back in the spring of 2008, during the height of the chaotic battle for the GOP nomination for president, he accused Republicans of being in a state of "paralysis and denial." He lambasted fellow party members for hiding a "big-government liberal agenda" (read: spending) inside a GOP package.

Here's more of what he wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

"Regaining our brand is not about messaging. It's about action. It's about courage. It's about priorities. Most of all, it's about being willing to give up our political careers so our grandkids don't have to grow up in a debtor's prison, or a world in which other nations can tell a weakened and bankrupt America where we can and can't defend liberty, pursue terrorists, or show compassion."

After Obama won a second term in 2012, Coburn, who decided to become a doctor at age 30 after his first bout with cancer, urged Republicans to "never give up."

"Many want to blame our setbacks in the Senate, in particular, on the Tea Party," he said. "I agree we need to do a much, much better job of candidate recruitment. The problem in Republican politics isn't the challengers: it's the incumbents — career politicians who say they are for limited government and lower taxes but make decisions that give us bigger government and higher taxes."

The Dysfunction Factor

Less than a month ago, Coburn decried Washington dysfunction in a Wall Street Journal commentary headlined, "The Year Washington Fled Reality."

His disillusionment was palpable, including with Obama for having "conformed to, rather than challenged, the political culture that as presidential candidate he vowed to reform."

Coburn, who opposed the president's health care legislation, criticized the disastrous rollout of the law – though in a Senate floor speech in December, he said its health insurance exchanges will ultimately "work, and work well."

But his real ire was reserved for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat who deemed that a simple majority of senators could override filibusters on presidential nominees, except those to the Supreme Court.

Reid's "narrative about Republican obstruction of appointees is a diversion for his own war against minority rights," said Coburn, who last year offered more amendments than any other senator.

Coburn's seat in is expected to remain in Republicans hands when a successor is picked in November, and his party is within sight of winning Senate control.

But Coburn, in an interview with The Oklahoman newspaper, said he's ready to move on.

"I've had a lot of changes in my life," he told the newspaper. "This is another one."

The holiday season data breach at Target that hit more than 70 million consumers was part of a wide and highly skilled international hacking campaign that's "almost certainly" based in Russia. That's according to a report prepared for federal and private investigators by Dallas-based cybersecurity firm iSight Partners.

And the fraudsters are so skilled that sources say at least a handful of other retailers have been compromised.

"The intrusion operators displayed innovation and a high degree of skill," the iSight report says.

The report doesn't say specifically how Target's network was breached but says that a virus was injected into the retail giant's credit card swiping machines, and that malware allowed hackers to collect data from the magnetic stripes on payment cards. The problem for the security companies hired to protect retailers is, according to iSight, the malware the bad guys are using can't be detected by anti-virus software.

Who are these guys? Well, it's all part of an underground market that's been running for years — Planet Money featured this dark credit card underworld in 2011 — and the hackers writing data-stealing code are getting more sophisticated than ever.

"There's already a lot of breaches related to the Target breach that aren't being disclosed," says Avivah Litan, a retail industry analyst for Gartner. "The chances that we'll see another big breach like this are probably 80 percent."

All Tech Considered

Security Experts Say Data Thieves Are Getting Harder To Fight

Ruling that "voting laws are designed to assure a free and fair election" and that Pennsylvania's "Voter ID Law does not further this goal," a state judge on Friday struck down that controversial statute.

Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court Judge Bernard McGinley's ruling is posted here.

The Associated Press writes that:

"McGinley said the requirement that was the centerpiece of Pennsylvania's embattled 2012 voter identification law places an unreasonable burden on the fundamental right to vote.

"The decision paves the way for an expected appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Republicans approved the law over the protests of Democrats.

"During a 12-day trial this summer, plaintiffs said hundreds of thousands of voters lacked acceptable IDs and the inconvenience of getting a photo ID might discourage some from voting. State officials insisted there were ample opportunities for voters to get a valid ID if they had none.

"The court has barred enforcement of the law since [shortly before] the 2012 general election."

When a federal ban on slaughtering horses to produce horse meat was lifted several years back, ranchers including Rick De Los Santos, a New Mexico rancher and owner of Valley Meat Co, stepped up to start operations with an aim to export the meat.

But, as we've reported, his plans for a horse meat slaughterhouse have hit major road blocks. There have been lawsuits to stop him and others trying to get into the business. And plenty of stories about the ick factor evoked by the image of butchering a beautiful thoroughbred.

Now, given a bit of language written into the omnibus spending bill that was approved by the Senate Thursday night, it's seeming more certain that there will be no horse slaughtering on U.S. soil in the foreseeable future. The House already approved the spending measure, which now heads to President Obama for his signature.

The provision bans the funding of U.S. Department of Agriculture inspections at horse slaughter plants. And without inspections, slaughterhouses can't be in business. Game over.

"Americans do not want to see scarce tax dollars used to oversee an inhumane, disreputable horse slaughter industry," argues Wayne Pacelle of the Humane Society in this release. He has been lobbying for a ban on funding for horse slaughter inspections.

"We don't have dog and cat slaughter plants in the U.S. catering to small markets overseas, and we shouldn't have horse slaughter operations for that purpose, either," Pacelle writes.

For retiring Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA), it's a win he helped usher through.

"These incredible companion animals don't deserve to be callously slaughtered for human consumption," his office wrote in an email to The Salt. "We fought hard for the past three years to reinstate this ban to prevent slaughter facilities from reopening on American soil."

The flip side of the argument is that horse slaughter is a practical way to handle the problem of abandoned horses. Horses can be very expensive to maintain, and when owners can't afford them, it's not unheard of for them to be sent to factories in Mexico and Canada.

That's the argument put forth by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), who tried but failed to strike the ban on funding inspections from the spending bill.

"Without these facilities, aging horses are often neglected or forced to endure cruel conditions as they are transported to processing facilities across the border," Inhofe wrote in a release. "This provision is counterproductive to what animal rights activists are hoping to achieve."

And Inhofe is not giving up yet.

Before last night's Senate vote, Inhofe said he and Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) plan to introduce separate legislation that would lift the ban on funding for horse slaughterhouse inspections.

Big Bad Wolves

Director: Aharon Keshales and Navot Papushado

Genre: Thriller, Black Comedy

Running Time: 110 minutes

Not rated; contains violence, torture, and frank talk about pedophilia

With Lior Ashkenazi, Rotem Keinan

When relocating to a new country, it's important to establish routines and traditions. My ritual here in London is spending an hour on the phone with the bank every day.

It's a strange thing about 2014 — we've got one collective foot planted squarely in the 21st century, while the other is stuck in back in the 19-something-or-others.

My email, Facebook, and Twitter accounts don't care whether I'm in Dublin or Dubai. I can jog along the Seine in Paris to the same music on Spotify that I listen to when I'm running along the Willamette River in Portland.

On WhatsApp, I send text messages to my friends every day at no cost, no matter where in the world I am. Skype is a snap. But banking is something else altogether. (Phone calls go in the same category as banking, but that's for another blog post.)

This is a universal experience, from what I can gather. Anyone living abroad wrestles with the arcane formulas and fees that go into converting an American salary to a British (or Brazilian, or Burmese) bank account.

Two weeks in London, and I've already found that American expats trade banking horror stories like crusty sailors comparing sharkbite scars.

My story, briefly, is this: In order to avoid a $35 Bank of America fee every time I move my paycheck to the United Kingdom, I devised a hopscotch as follows: Dollars leave Bank of America to an international transfer company. That company hands off the money to a Lloyds Bank International account. Lloyds International plops it into an account with UK Lloyds. Hardly simple, but at least the plan comes with no fees. Guaranteed.

The first transfer took three days longer than planned, and arrived with $600 less than the amount that left the U.S.

Related NPR Stories

Parallels

Some Brits Not Ready To Say 'Ta-Ra' To Iconic Telephone Box

Former California official Maria Contreras-Sweet is President Obama's pick to lead the Small Business Administration. She was introduced and her official nomination announced at a White House event Thursday.

Born in Mexico, Contreras-Sweet became the first Latina to serve as a cabinet secretary in California when she led its Business, Transportation and Housing Agency from 1999-2003.

That post led Obama to tell this anecdote:

"Maria, on the way in, told me a wonderful story about how her grandmother, back in Mexico who was a migrant worker, said to her that if she worked hard, studied, stayed in school, that someday she'd be able to work in an office as a secretary and really make her proud. And she ended up being the Secretary of Business Development and Transportation in California. And now she's going to be helping the folks who are following behind her achieve their dreams. That's what America is all about.

"So Maria is fulfilling the vision of her grandma in ways that maybe are not entirely expected," he said.

After leaving her job in the California cabinet, Contreras-Sweet went on to found community lender ProAmerica Bank, and to work in a private equity firm that helps fund small businesses, according to The Los Angeles Times.

If confirmed to the post, Contreras-Sweet would take over from Jeanne Hulit, who has served as the SBA's acting administrator since Karen Mills left the post last year. The job of SBA chief is the last remaining opening in Obama's cabinet – and as the AP reports, she "would become the second Hispanic in Obama's second-term Cabinet. The other is Labor Secretary Thomas Perez. She would also become the eighth woman in Obama's current Cabinet."

At Thursday's event, Obama highlighted the stories of a few small business owners who were in attendance: craft brewers Deb and Dan Carey of Wisconsin's famed New Glarus Brewing Company, which has more than 80 full-time employees, and Casey Patten and Dave Mazza, founders of the D.C.-area sandwich chain Taylor Gourmet. As the president pointed out, there's one close to the White House.

Obama also said that his administration has supported small businesses by lending "more than $130 billion to more than 225,000 small businesses during the course of five years," and by making it easier for small businesses to work with the government's federal contracting system.

Former California official Maria Contreras-Sweet is President Obama's pick to lead the Small Business Administration. She was introduced and her official nomination announced at a White House event Thursday.

Born in Mexico, Contreras-Sweet became the first Latina to serve as a cabinet secretary in California when she led its Business, Transportation and Housing Agency from 1999-2003.

That post led Obama to tell this anecdote:

"Maria, on the way in, told me a wonderful story about how her grandmother, back in Mexico who was a migrant worker, said to her that if she worked hard, studied, stayed in school, that someday she'd be able to work in an office as a secretary and really make her proud. And she ended up being the Secretary of Business Development and Transportation in California. And now she's going to be helping the folks who are following behind her achieve their dreams. That's what America is all about.

"So Maria is fulfilling the vision of her grandma in ways that maybe are not entirely expected," he said.

After leaving her job in the California cabinet, Contreras-Sweet went on to found community lender ProAmerica Bank, and to work in a private equity firm that helps fund small businesses, according to The Los Angeles Times.

If confirmed to the post, Contreras-Sweet would take over from Jeanne Hulit, who has served as the SBA's acting administrator since Karen Mills left the post last year. The job of SBA chief is the last remaining opening in Obama's cabinet – and as the AP reports, she "would become the second Hispanic in Obama's second-term Cabinet. The other is Labor Secretary Thomas Perez. She would also become the eighth woman in Obama's current Cabinet."

At Thursday's event, Obama highlighted the stories of a few small business owners who were in attendance: craft brewers Deb and Dan Carey of Wisconsin's famed New Glarus Brewing Company, which has more than 80 full-time employees, and Casey Patten and Dave Mazza, founders of the D.C.-area sandwich chain Taylor Gourmet. As the president pointed out, there's one close to the White House.

Obama also said that his administration has supported small businesses by lending "more than $130 billion to more than 225,000 small businesses during the course of five years," and by making it easier for small businesses to work with the government's federal contracting system.

Despite a $7 billion effort to eradicating opium production in Afghanistan, poppy cultivation there is at its highest level since the U.S. invasion more than a decade ago, sparking corruption, criminal gangs and providing the insurgency with hard cash, says John Sopko, the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction.

In testimony before the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, he warns Wednesday that Afghanistan could degenerate into a narco-criminal state.

"The situation in Afghanistan is dire with little prospect for improvement in 2014 or beyond," Sopko says. "Afghan farmer are growing more opium poppies today than at any time in their modern history."

His assessment largely mirrors a United Nations report released in November that about 209,000 hectares (515,000 acres) of land was being used to cultivate poppies last year – with the highest concentration in southern Helmand province. That compares with just 8,000 hectares in 2001 and 74,000 in 2002, when U.S.-led international forces toppled the Taliban.

As NPR's Sean Carberry reported from Helmand late last year, many Afghan farmers in the province, who say they have few other options, see poppy cultivation as the lifeblood of an otherwise arid region.

"The narcotics trade is poisoning the Afghan financial sector and fueling a growing illicit economy," Sopko says. "This, in turn, is undermining the Afghan state's legitimacy by stoking corruption, nourishing criminal networks, and providing significant financial support to the Taliban and other insurgent groups."

The value of the heroin produced is worth $3 billion annually, or roughly 15 percent of Afghanistan's gross domestic product. As much as 90 percent of the world's heroin is produced there, and some of it is now reaching the United States and Canada, Sopko says.

"It is widely thought that every drug organization supports or works with insurgents in Afghanistan," he says. "I have been told that these same groups are closely linked with corrupt government officials."

The special inspector-general complains that counter-narcotics has been a low priority for both the U.S. and Afghan governments and that robust law enforcement is needed.

He says that many U.S. and international donor officials and experts have advised him that "one of the greatest risks facing Afghanistan is that the narcotics traffickers and other criminal networks will expand their influence, filling a power vacuum in the areas where the Afghan government is weak."

It's just me now, I thought this morning. All alone. I could almost hear the desert wind. I could almost see the tumbleweeds.

I once had a whole posse of sometimes bashful American Idol-viewing friends. We followed along, we had favorites, we lamented terrible decisions. I had a special touch for powerfully disliking from their first on-screen appearances everyone who would eventually finish second. My best friend and I bonded powerfully over wanting to punch Constantine Maroulis' voice in the mouth. (And now he's a Broadway star, which I consider a cosmic joke of some sort.) I once lost an American Idol pool and actually resented it. (Only briefly.)

But my pals are mostly gone now. Somewhere along the line, as Steven Tyler prattled on and Mariah Carey was too cool for the room and Randy Jackson had the staying power of your last rattling cough of winter and it seemed like 26 identical dudes in a row emerged victorious, they all gave up. The last one only told me so this week. So now, with the new season starting, I knew that if I persevered, I'd be like the guy in that episode of Cheers who wants his old war buddies to show up and winds up singing "hinky dinky parlez-vous" with the barflies.

This morning, I sat down with a screener of the 13th season, having extraordinarily low expectations, despite the fact that they changed judges again. After all, that's what they always do when the show is boring, and it never works, and it's usually worse than when they started. Even people who seem like decent ideas often aren't (Ellen DeGeneres, a lovely person and amiable TV presence, didn't have the right temperament at all, given that she couldn't deliver anything except compliments without cringing.) This time around, they've brought back Jennifer Lopez, kept Keith Urban, thrown out Carey and Nicki Minaj and Randy Jackson (finally!), and introduced Harry Connick, Jr., who's been a hoot when appearing on the show as a guest.

Perhaps, I thought, I can go too. I will leave the tumbleweeds behind, I will abandon this franchise in the dust, and I will go to figurative saloon after figurative saloon until I find the one to which my friends have decamped.

But something terrible has happened. There are new producers on board, and they have a few dangerous ideas.

They seem to believe that it's depressing to bring attention-starved, socially awkward people in front of wealthy celebrities to have their dreams brutally mocked. They seem to believe that people who are obviously auditioning as a prank are boring — that people who are not trying are less interesting than people who are trying. They seem to believe we want to hear about musicianship from the judges, just because they're musicians. They seem to believe humor should be participatory, a conspiracy between judges and willing, preferably talented contestants, rather than a slushie in the face from a bully.

They seem to believe it's okay for the judges to have different opinions about things, and for Connick to (non-jokingly) call out J.Lo and Urban for being overly infatuated with what Randy Jackson rapturously spoke of as runs, or as Connick more skeptically calls them, "licks." They seem to believe it's cool to have Harry Connick, Jr., a jazz musician, explain what he thinks sounds good using scales. Musical scales. Freaking music theory.

There's not a single person who auditions in a hilarious costume, unless you count a Patriots cheerleader who auditions wearing her Patriots cheerleader uniform. Almost everyone who doesn't make it walks in the door sincerely believing, not without cause, that he or she was a good singer.

The advice is solid, and sometimes surprising. Connick looks at people who have probably been told by everyone they know — not just blinder-wearing parents — that they have great voices, and he tells them, "I don't think you're a good enough singer." He points out to a 16-year-old that it's hard for her to convincingly deliver overtly dirty lyrics like "If I was a blade I'd shave you smooth" without crossing some sort of age-appropriateness threshold that he thinks is probably a bad idea. Not shameful, just weird. Others on the panel don't agree.

This has gone, in one episode, from a show where people walked in the door and could be instantly tagged as Joke Auditions or Successful Auditions to a show where a lot of people either barely get through or barely don't.

Hey, show. Nobody asked you to become fun again.

Stupid show.

Several donor nations have each pledged tens of millions of dollars for civilians affected by Syria's civil war.

The pledges, including $500 million from Kuwait and $380 million from the U.S., came Wednesday at the start of a conference in Kuwait City to raise money for the humanitarian suffering caused by the more than two years of fighting. The U.N. wants $6.5 billion for the effort to assist Syrian refugees. It's the largest-ever appeal for a single crisis.

Other donors include Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Britain, Norway, Luxembourg and Iraq.

A similar conference organized last year raised $1.5 billion.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who is attending the conference, said the world needs to find a political solution to the Syrian conflict.

"We are not looking for a policy of simply increased assistance to refugees," he said. "We're looking for a policy that saves Syria and provides them an ability to go home and rebuild their lives."

With Wednesday's contribution, the U.S. has given $1.7 billion in humanitarian aid to victims of the Syria's civil war.

NPR's Michele Kelemen is traveling with Kerry, and she spoke to Frederic Hof, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council who as a diplomat worked on Syria for the Obama administration. Hof calls the effects of the Syrian civil war "the most catastrophic humanitarian disaster of the 21st century."

"You are seeing genocidal effects being produced on the ground. This terrible daily bombing, strafing, shelling by the Assad regime of populated areas — densely populated areas — in the hope that they might catch a few rebel fighters. This is what is driving this humanitarian catastrophe and the international community just hasn't come up with an answer yet."

This story begins with a lemon. It appeared not long ago on a houseboat-cum-food lab docked outside Scandinavia's temple of local food, the restaurant noma, in Copenhagen.

"Isn't that, like, the forbidden fruit?," I ask. "Are you allowed to have a lemon here?"

"I don't know why that's sitting there," says Ben Reade, the lab's head of culinary research and development, looking perplexed.

An anthropologist, Mark Emil Tholstrup Hermansen, pipes in, "We have an Italian on the boat."

Reade concurs: "He needs a lemon every so often for staff food."

Hermansen remembers the lemon had actually been requested by the boat's resident flavor chemist for an experiment.

The Salt

Nordic Cuisine: Moving Beyond The Meatballs And Pickled Fish

In a $16 billion deal this week, Japanese beverage giant Suntory announced it plans to purchase Beam Inc., the maker of Jim Beam bourbon and the owner of other popular bourbon brands like Maker's Mark.

Those and most other bourbons are made in Kentucky, and the deal has some hoping the drink's growth in the global market won't come at the expense of its uniquely Kentucky heritage.

For more than a century, Suntory has been in the beer and spirits industry in Japan, but what many Americans think of when they hear the name is the scene from the 2003 film Lost in Translation, in which Bill Murray plays an actor who goes to Tokyo to shoot a whiskey commercial.

"For relaxing times, make it Suntory time," Murray's character says coolly into the camera.

If the deal is approved by shareholders as expected, the name Suntory is likely to become more familiar in the U.S. in the months ahead.

The popularity of bourbon has exploded in recent years, especially in Japan and other Asian markets. The Kentucky Distillers Association calls the Suntory purchase of Beam exciting news, and evidence that the bourbon renaissance is strong. Carla Carlton agrees, and believes any qualms about the new owners will be put to rest.

"I know some people were talking about how, 'this is terrible, we're being taken over by a Japanese company,'" Carlton says. "I guess I see it as an investment in Kentucky."

Carlton is a contributing writer for The Bourbon Review and blogs under the name The Bourbon Babe. She predicts Suntory will embrace bourbon's colorful history and its appeal to tourists who flock to Kentucky's distilleries.

"Bourbon is very much an American product and it must be by law, so it will still be made here in Kentucky," she says. "I don't see them making huge changes. I think they're buying the product for what it is now and will try to maintain that as much as possible."

Suntory officials say they don't plan any management changes at Beam's American headquarters in Illinois.

In Kentucky, the bourbon celebration continues.

Coincidentally, on the day of the sale announcement, industry and government leaders gathered in Louisville to announce the Kentucky Bourbon Affair this spring.

It's a fantasy camp of sorts for bourbon connoisseurs to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Congress declaring bourbon "America's only native spirit."

Eight distilleries, including Jim Beam and Maker's Mark, are participating in bourbon-making demonstrations, behind-the-scenes tours, and of course, tastings.

Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer says an important element of bourbon's success has been the willingness of its producers to work together on events such as this.

"They're smart competitors," Fischer says. "They realize by working together we can make the whole industry a lot bigger and you can see that in the numbers right now."

Fischer predicts more heady times are ahead for the bourbon industry, and says if this were a football game, "we're in the first quarter."

Reports of white smoke from a battery compartment have temporarily grounded a Boeing 787 Dreamliner in Japan, nearly a year after all the new airliners were grounded due to a problem with batteries overheating. Today's incident happened on an airliner at Tokyo's Narita Airport that had no passengers aboard.

It was during a preflight checkout that a mechanic saw smoke emerging from the underside of a Japan Airlines Dreamliner, according to Japan's NHK TV News

From the broadcaster:

"The smoke quickly stopped. Airline officials found that an electrolytic solution had leaked from an open safety valve of one of the 8 cells in a battery box at the front.

"The carrier says the battery may have overheated for an unknown reason. It says the safety valve was activated and smoke was generated when the solution evaporated."

The recent disclosure that large troves of customer information has been stolen from Target, and now Neiman Marcus, points to growing vulnerabilities in cybersecurity. And experts say the problem is becoming more difficult to combat.

Avivah Litan, a security analyst at Gartner, says she's hearing from sources at retailers that the data breaches last holiday season were not limited to the 70 million-plus Target customers and untold number of Neiman Marcus shoppers.

"It's clear that there is a new bout of attacks," Litan says. She says data thieves struck several years ago at TJ Maxx, JC Penney and Target and that they could be back, though it might be a different gang of thieves.

Litan blames, in large part, the magnetic payment strip system, which she says is more vulnerable than systems used by other countries around the world, which have smart chips embedded in credit cards.

David Burg, leader of cybersecurity at PricewaterhouseCoopers, adds that part of the problem is rapid innovation.

"As we use more and more technologies to collaborate among businesses, or to connect with consumers using mobile devices and other kinds of applications that allow consumers to interface with various corporations, what you have is an attack surface that keeps increasing in size and complexity, making it very hard to secure," Burg says.

Burg says while there is a lot of pressure on retailers to alert consumers, regulatory and law enforcement authorities quickly, often there are delays because criminals work hard to cover their tracks.

"It's very hard to figure out what happened, how it happened and what the impact was," he says.

Tom Kellermann, a managing director at Alvarez & Marsal, a professional services firm, says the latest round of attacks indicate that even companies that invest heavily in sophisticated security systems are seeing new vulnerabilities from new sources; namely, rogue hackers who are buying readily available software tools on the black market.

"There's a massive consulting and software-based industry that supports the shadow economy that makes it far easier for people who are not sophisticated to leverage these types of attacks," Kellermann says.

Kellermann says organized crime syndicates — especially in Eastern Europe — not only make money selling the malware, they also then use the hackers' channels to their own ends. They prod at a company's network, often hanging out for months undetected, and then plan their attack.

"From someone who has investigated major breaches in the past, I am suggesting that this campaign in particular definitely went on for months," he says.

The loss to the consumer is often time, getting reimbursement from their credit card company. But for the retailer, Kellermann says it is "incalculable."

It costs about $200 per lost record to cover legal expenses and fines. In addition, as Target recently saw, a retailer's reputation takes a hit, and its stock can fall.

Doug Johnson oversees risk management policy for the American Bankers Association, and he says banks sustain losses as well. He says forensic investigations — as the FBI and Secret Service is conducting now on the Target and Neiman Marcus breaches — take a lot of time. At the end of it, it's often difficult to prove where the data leaked, and so banks often end up holding the bag.

"[Because] it's the financial institution that reimburses the customer for that fraud," Johnson says.

Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel apologized to customers on CNBC on Monday, saying Target would pay for credit monitoring and vowed to make things right for the consumers.

A new class of restrictive abortion laws, passed in recent years in a swath of states, hinges on the argument that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks of gestation.

But the fetal pain assertion, viewed skeptically by many scientists, hit a bump Monday when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a lower court ruling striking down an Arizona law that criminalized abortions at 20 weeks.

The state's ban asserted that "unborn children feel pain during an abortion at that gestational age." Federal courts last year also blocked similar "fetal pain" laws in Idaho and Georgia.

Abortion rights advocates hailed the Supreme Court's move as a signal that justices aren't inclined to take on the 40-year precedent of Roe v. Wade, which established viability at around 24 weeks (the point when a fetus is considered "viable" outside the mother's womb) and as the cutoff for most legal abortions.

"It would appear that the court is not ready or willing to deal with moving the viability line at this time," says John Robertson, chairman of the Ethics Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Rights.

"The science is weak, and it would be a major change," Robertson, a University of Texas law professor, said.

But anti-abortion activists assert that while the court's decision, offered without comment, is not the one they'd hoped for, they expect it to fuel efforts to limit abortion based on the fetal pain argument — including a federal bill passed last year by the U.S. House.

"This is a disappointment, but not a major setback," says Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List, which works to elect female candidates who oppose abortion.

She compared efforts to pass fetal pain restrictions to the "crooked path" it took to get the 2003 ban on late-term abortions.

"Every single time there was a rejection, it actually built momentum toward the final goal of passage," she said.

The question of how soon fetuses can feel pain has been debated for more than three decades. Scientists, with some exceptions, have consistently argued that fetuses are not developed enough to experience pain until around the third trimester.

A 2005 analysis of numerous studies that appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that for a fetus to feel pain its neural connections into the cortex have to be developed — and that doesn't occur until sometime after the 26th week of gestation.

Robertson, the Texas bioethicist, says that the science has not changed in the past decade and there is "overwhelming consensus" around the fetal pain issue.

But Dannenfelser and other anti-abortion activists argue that support for such laws is proved by the fact that challenges have not emerged in most of the states that in recent years have criminalized abortion at 20 weeks — from Alabama and Indiana to Louisiana and Oklahoma.

At the Center for Reproductive Rights, however, Director Nancy Northup has another explanation: "Some places where they've passed [fetal pain laws] there aren't even any providers in those states that do abortions after 20 weeks, so there's no way to challenge them."

You can't challenge a law, she notes, when there's no one with legal standing to mount the effort.

"It's a whole strategy to keep moving the timeline backwards," Northup says.

The fetal pain strategy has changed conversations that doctors are having with their patients, says Dr. Anne Davis, consulting medical director for Physicians for Reproductive Health and an associate professor for obstetrics and gynecology at Columbia University.

"Ten years ago, patients never asked about this," says Davis, an abortion provider. "Now we have questions from some very distraught people — it's a very emotional subject, and most people aren't experts on pain physiology."

Her explanation to patients is that the science of fetal development has not changed. "The brain and the rest of the nervous system where the pain is coming from are not connected until the third trimester," she says.

But, as Davis attests, the fetal pain argument has taken root.

And Northup, at the Center for Reproductive Rights, says that there are dozens of abortion-related cases in legal pipeline, including those involving the fetal pain argument.

"The Supreme Court," she says, "is going to have the opportunity again and again and again this year and next year to see if they want to take a look again at their jurisprudence on abortion rights."

Some analysts say that Nintendo's days are numbered. Holiday sales of its new console, the Wii U, have been lackluster compared to Microsoft's Xbox One and Sony's PlayStation 4.

But since Nintendo still offers some of the most popular game franchises, the love of Zelda and Mario may keep the company going for a long time.

In preparation for this story, I put out a call to talk to die-hard Nintendo fans. I was inundated with responses. Among them, Brian White, 30, grew up playing the Zelda games.

Now he's got a daughter. "We named her Zelda," he says.

White says as a dad he's happy Nintendo games aren't filled with violence.

"It's something I can play and have my daughter sit in front of the TV and not be ashamed of and wonder how corrupt she's gonna be," he says.

Zelda is a series of fantasy adventure games where the main character, Link, has to save Princess Zelda and the world. The soundtrack is so beloved that it's been performed as a four movement symphony.

Manny Contreras, 25, has seen the symphony performed twice. He says the music reminds him of great experiences he's had playing Zelda. "It's great music just in general. Even if you're not a fan, if you listen to it, you're probably surprised by just how good it is."

Love of these long-time franchises is the main reason that game analyst P.J. McNealy thinks that predictions of Nintendo's demise are overblown.

“ If you look at video game sales over the last 20 to 25 even 30 years and look at the top 10 games that have sold, Nintendo's probably owned five, six, seven, eight of those games on those lists.

For the first time in history, more than half the members of Congress are millionaires, according to a new analysis of financial disclosure reports conducted by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Of the 534 current members of the House and Senate, 268 had an average net worth of $1 million or more in 2012 – up from 257 members in 2011. The median net worth for members of the House and Senate was $1,008,767.

The wealthiest member of Congress? That's Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, who had a net worth between $330 and $598 million.

The reports found that there wasn't much distinction between the two parties – congressional Democrats had a median net worth of $1.04 million as compared to about $1 million for Republicans. In both cases, the averages are up from last year, when the numbers were $990,000 and $907,000, respectively.

The release of this analysis comes at a time when officials in both parties are making an effort to address income inequality in the United States.

The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Monday in a big constitutional fight over the balance of power between the president and the Senate.

At issue is whether the president's power to make temporary appointments during the Senate recess can be curtailed by the use of pro forma Senate sessions during which no business is conducted.

During the holidays from mid-December 2011 to Jan. 20, 2012, the Senate did not meet as it usually does. Failing to get the Republican House to grant permission to recess, the Senate formally convened and adjourned multiple times. Indeed, each time the Senate adjourned, it stipulated that no business would be conducted when it reconvened three days later.

A typical pro forma session on Jan. 6, 2012, opened with a Senate clerk reading aloud a letter from the Senate's senior member appointing another senator, James Webb from nearby Virginia, to chair the day's business. Webb then immediately adjourned the Senate session.

That session lasted all of 30 inconsequential seconds. Pretty much the norm for that period. But the legality of those brief sessions is the heart of the dispute before the Supreme Court now.

The president contends that these sessions were, in essence, fakes — a legal pretense — when in fact the Senate was really in recess.

It was during one of these pro forma sessions that President Obama nominated three people to fill long-vacant seats on the National Labor Relations Board. The nominees would serve until the end of the following year or longer if confirmed.

Part of the reason Obama used the recess appointment mechanism was that Senate Republicans had dragged their feet on so many appointments that the board, charged with enforcing labor laws, did not have a quorum to do its job, and the Supreme Court in 2010 had said the board could not act without a quorum.

Once the recess appointees began their work hearing labor cases, a soda pop bottling company named Noel Canning challenged an adverse ruling, contending that the board's members were unconstitutionally appointed.

Noel Canning won in the U.S. Court of Appeals based in Washington, D.C. Now the company, backed by 44 Republican senators, is asking the Supreme Court to affirm its lower court win. The company will argue that the Senate makes its own rules, the Senate was not in recess at the time of the appointments, and that, therefore, the president had no power to make the recess appointments.

Article II of the Constitution states: "The President shall have the power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate," and that the appointment shall automatically expire at the end of the next year if the nominee is not confirmed.

Texas A&M professor George Edwards points out that, at the time the Constitution was written, the only transportation available was by horse and carriage, not planes, trains or automobiles.

"There would be substantial periods when the Senate was not there to advise and consent on a presidential nomination," Edwards says. "The Founding Fathers didn't want there to be gaps in the administration of policy, so they provided for recess appointments."

Today, in contrast, senators can get to Washington quickly. The nature of government, however, is also dramatically different.

Edwards notes that the founders could not have conceived of government of the scale that we have today. "The government is much larger now. There are many more people in appointed positions and so many more vacancies that occur," he says.

Edwards says that since the mid-1800s, there have been more than 600 recess appointments to civilian jobs, and hundreds, perhaps thousands more in the military. Even some Supreme Court justices were first recess-appointed. Chief Justice Earl Warren was recess-appointed after the sitting chief justice died in September 1953. Warren served in that capacity for six months before he was confirmed by the Senate in March 1954.

In modern times, three appeals courts have upheld the president's power to make midsession recess appointments. In this case, however, the Court of Appeals reached a contrary conclusion, siding with the Noel Canning company.

Noel Francisco, the company's lawyer, contends that the importance of these appointments proves his point: "That's precisely why the recess appointments power was meant to be a narrow emergency power."

White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler disagrees. In an interview with NPR, she said that the way Senate Republicans managed to keep the Senate in session without actually handling any formal business proves her point — that the Senate sessions were nothing more than a "legal fiction."

"[The Senate] was not conducting any business and did not intend to conduct any business during these pro forma sessions," Ruemmler said. "It was solely employed, and members of the Senate have been quite clear about that, for the purpose of preventing the president from making recess appointments.

"It is not a bypass of the Senate confirmation process," she added. "It is a way for the president ... by express authority in the Constitution, to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed." That is something that she maintains cannot be done if many top federal agency positions are allowed to remain unfilled.

Ruemmler contends that if Senate Republicans prevail here, the recess appointment power will likely be dead for all practical purposes. The Senate, after all, could eat up every recess with pro forma sessions to prevent presidential appointments.

Noel Francisco readily concedes this point. "The fact of the matter is that in today's day and age, the Senate is virtually never incapable of providing advice and consent given modern transportation and communications," he says. "So, yes, the Senate can render itself perpetually available to provide advice and consent, and if it does so, the president is not empowered to make a recess appointment."

Related NPR Stories

Law

Supreme Court Bolsters Prosecutors' Use Of Psychiatric Exam

As Israelis paid their respects Monday to former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon with a memorial service and funeral, one of his contemporaries on the world stage offered this view of the general and statesman who an iconic and controversial figures:

"The idea that he changed from man of war to a man of peace," is mistaken, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said during a memorial service at the Knesset, Israel's legislature.

Shut out all night at the Golden Globes, the historical drama 12 Years a Slave eked out the night's top honor, best film drama, while the con-artist caper American Hustle landed a leading three awards, including best film comedy.

David O. Russell's American Hustle had the better night overall, winning acting awards for Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence. Best picture was the only award for 12 Years a Slave, which came in with seven nominations, tied for the most with American Hustle.

Awards were otherwise spread around.

Matthew McConaughey took best actor in a drama for his performance in the Texas HIV drama Dallas Buyers Club. Leonardo DiCaprio, a nine-time Golden Globe nominee, won his second Globe for best actor in a comedy for his work in The Wolf of Wall Street.

Alfonso Cuaron won best director for the space odyssey Gravity, a worldwide hit and critical favorite.

The night's biggest winners may have been hosts Tina Fey and Amy Poehler, whose second time hosting the Hollywood Foreign Press Association's Beverly Hills, Calif., ceremony was just as successful as last year's show. Fey concluded the night by toasting the awards as "the beautiful mess we hoped it would be."