House Democrats Finally Have Their Dinner

WASHINGTON â€" House Democratic leaders had been feeling left out of President Obama’s second-term strategy of outreach to Congress, but on Wednesday night they got their turn, joining him for a longer-than-expected dinner at a hotel near the White House.

Mr. Obama had invited Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the minority leader, and nine members of her leadership team to dine at the Jefferson Hotel, where he had picked up the tab for a dozen Republican senators in early March. That was when he began his engagement with lawmakers, Republicans especially, in the hope of building the relationships necessary to enact at least some of his second-term agenda.

Since then, he has had separate dinners with a second group of a 12 Republican senators and with some Democratic senators; lunch with Representative Paul D. Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the Budget Committee; and, on Monday, a golf outing with two Republican senators and one Democratic senator.

House Democrats were chafing at being neglected, one said. That is not uncommon: with Republicans tightly controlling the House since the 2010 election, House Democrats typically have to watch as the White House deals almost exclusively with the Democrats who run the Senate.

But House Democrats have pointed out to the White House that if there is to be a grand bargain with Republicans on spending cuts and tax increases to reduce annual budget deficits, it will not pass in the House without their votes. Similarly, they say, if Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, allows votes this year on Mr. Obama’s two other priorities â€" immigration and gun-safety measures â€" he probably will do so with the understanding that many if not most Republicans would vote against the bills, making Democratic lawmakers’ support essential.

In a statement after the dinner, the White House said the group had discussed those issues and others, including continued federal assistance in the investigation of the Boston Marathon bombings on April 15. In the give-and-take on budget issues, according to the statement, Mr. Obama described his “ongoing efforts to find common ground with both sides to reduce our deficit in a balanced way.” That balance includes higher taxes on the wealthy, which Republicans oppose, and reductions from fast-growing benefit programs, chiefly Medicare and Medicaid, which many Democrats resist.

Some House Democrats, including members of the leadership, have objected to Mr. Obama’s proposal for a new cost-of-living formula that would reduce increases for Social Security beneficiaries â€" a proposal he included in his annual budget as a concession to Republicans in the hope of getting them to compromise on tax revenues. So far, Republicans have given no public indication of doing so, leaving some Democrats complaining that Mr. Obama’s move on Social Security left them vulnerable to campaign attacks from Republicans when he got nothing in return.

It was not clear whether all of the invited Democrats had made it for dinner, which lasted about two and a half hours. Besides Ms. Pelosi, those invited were Representatives Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, Xavier Becerra of California, Joseph Crowley of New York, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, Robert E. Andrews of New Jersey, Steve Israel of New York and Mike Thompson of California.

In Massachusetts Senate Race, Markey Has Strong Lead Over G.O.P. Challenger

In the special Senate election in Massachusetts, Representative Edward J. Markey, the Democratic nominee, starts with a strong lead over Gabriel Gomez, the Republican, according to a new poll from Suffolk University.

Taken Saturday through Tuesday, the poll of voters likely to vote in the June 25 special election showed Mr. Markey with 52 percent and Mr. Gomez with 35 percent, with 11 percent undecided. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus four percentage points.

“The numbers are pretty ominous” for Mr. Gomez, said David Paleologos, the director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center. “There aren’t a lot of weak spots for Markey.”

One of the most positive signs for Mr. Markey is that Massachusetts voters hold an overwhelmingly favorable view of President Obama, both personally and in how he is doing his job. And most voters there believe Mr. Markey will support the president, although he recently opposed a proposal by Mr. Obama that would lower Social Security benefits by changing the formula used to calculate cost-of-living adjustments.

Mr. Markey, who was first elected to Congress in 1976, is better known than Mr.Gomez, a private equity investor and former Navy SEAL who is a newcomer on the political scene. Fully one-third of the voters said they did not know enough about Mr. Gomez to express an opinion about him.

Mr. Paleologos said that Mr. Gomez had yet to win over independents, especially men, who voted for other candidates in last week’s Republican primary. “They probably will come to Gomez eventually, but we’re not picking up an instant warming of those voters to him now,” he said.

And yet, in a state where Scott Brown, a Republican, pulled off an upset victory for the Senate in 2010, no one is counting Mr. Gomez out. From the minute he was declared the winner of the primary, he has cast Mr. Markey as a relic and raised questions about campaign donations Mr. Markey accepted from industry groups that he regulates.

On the question of which candidate is more likely to change the way Congress works, Mr. Gomez beat Mr. Markey in the Suffolk poll by six percentage points. And on the question of which candidate can better help turn around the economy, far and away the most important issue to voters, Mr. Gomez trailed Mr. Markey by only six percentage points.

But it remains to be seen whether Mr. Gomez can attract the kind of financial donations that Mr. Brown received; Mr. Markey is doing his best to try to limit that money by calling on Mr. Gomez to sign a pledge that would penalize a candidate if outside special interests ran television ads on his behalf. So far, Mr. Gomez has refused to sign it.

The special election is to fill the Senate seat vacated by John Kerry, the Democrat who stepped down to become secretary of state. The poll found that the third-party candidate, Richard Hoes, of the Twelve Visions Party, drew one percent of the vote.

Senate Panel Postpones Vote on Obama’s Labor Nominee

Senate Republicans on Wednesday forced Democrats to postpone a committee vote on the nomination of Thomas E. Perez to lead the Labor Department after the chamber’s top Republican raised doubts about Mr. Perez’s ethics.

With a Democratic majority, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions was set to approve Mr. Perez’s nomination at a meeting Wednesday afternoon after a two-week delay. But the committee chairman, Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa, postponed the meeting to next week after a Republican on the panel, whom Mr. Harkin did not name, invoked a procedural rule that forbids committees from meeting after the Senate has been in session for two hours.

“This pointless obstructionism is extremely disturbing,” Mr. Harkin said on the Senate floor. He accused Republicans of using “procedural tricks” to delay the vote further after receiving an additional two weeks to consider Mr. Perez’s nomination.

Mr. Harkin rescheduled the vote for Thursday, May 16, at 9:15 a.m.

Senator Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee, the ranking member on the panel, said in a statement that Republicans were still waiting for Mr. Perez and the White House to provide “all the information some senators are requesting â€" troubling information that is key to the Senate’s constitutional role of advice and consent.”

“Until those documents and answers to questions are received,” Mr. Alexander said, “it is appropriate to delay the committee’s vote on Mr. Perez.”

The postponement came shortly after the Senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, took to the Senate floor to criticize Mr. Perez, the assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department’s civil rights division. Pointing to his efforts at the Justice Department on housing discrimination and voting rights, and his work in Maryland as the state’s labor secretary and a member of the Montgomery County Council, Mr. McConnell said Mr. Perez was a “crusading ideologue” who would use the law to assert his own agenda.

“Taken together, all of this paints the picture, for me at least, not of a passionate liberal who sees himself as patiently operating within the system and through the democratic process to advance a particular set of strongly held beliefs, but a crusading ideologue whose conviction about his own rightness on the issues leads him to believe the law does not apply to him,” Mr. McConnell said. “Unbound by the rules that apply to everyone else, Mr. Perez seems to view himself as free to employ whatever means at his disposal, legal or otherwise, to achieve his ideological goal.”

Mr. Harkin said that characterization of Mr. Perez was “grossly unfair” and inconsistent with the endorsements offered by Republican lawmakers and businesses that worked with Mr. Perez in Maryland.

At a news conference on Wednesday, Hispanic lawmakers defended Mr. Perez, the son of Dominican immigrants, against what they said amounted to character assassination. They warned Republicans that blocking his nomination would set back the party’s efforts to improve relations with Hispanic voters.

But Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who is one of two Hispanic Republicans in the Senate, said he would still vote against Mr. Perez’s confirmation.

“Many Americans, especially those of us of Hispanic descent, celebrate his success and his personal story as yet another example of all that’s possible in America, no matter where you or your family came from,” Mr. Rubio said. “Unfortunately, intellect and work ethic are not sufficient qualifications for a cabinet secretary.”

He added, “Mr. Perez’s far-left views and troubling record at the Justice Department simply do not qualify him to lead the Labor Department, and I will strongly oppose his confirmation.”

The vote â€" which had been moved to 4 p.m. from 10 a.m. on Wednesday to accommodate the South Korean president’s speech to a joint session of Congress â€" was originally scheduled for April 25, but delayed until Wednesday after Republicans on the panel asked for more time to review Mr. Perez’s nomination. Republicans also said that Democrats were concerned about a whistle-blower testifying against Mr. Perez that day.

Jabra Revo Lets You Shape Your Sound

Jabra, best known for its Bluetooth phone accessories, is making its first foray into Bluetooth premium headphones with the $250 Revo Wireless.

While the Revo has the fashionably overstated bass sound, it also has an equalizer app so you can dial the bass down to a more realistic level â€" or up to a brain punishing thud.

Jabra has used its wireless expertise to good effect. I would have thought the Revo Wireless was connected by cable if I didn’t know better. Its sound is nearly indistinguishable from the $100 wired Revos. I didn’t experience the dropouts or watery sound that I have noticed in Bluetooth headphones I have tried in the past.

The Revos feel solidly constructed of plastic and aluminum with faux leather earpads. Volume and song advance are controlled by a touch-pad surface on the left earpiece, much like the Parrot Zik.

At a little over a half pound, they are not exactly lightweight, but they are comfortable, if you like an on-ear headset.

It has an NFC connection, so in theory you can tap it to an NFC phone and it should pair. I could not get it to connect with a new Samsung Galaxy S4, however.

The real charm here is in the Jabra Sound app, which is available for Android and Apple. The app has settings for Dolby processing, mobile surround and an equalizer.

The Dolby processing seems to exaggerate your sound settings. In the default mode, I thought the sound was dramatically overamped, as if bass, midrange and treble had been turned to 11.

The mobile surround makes the sound seem as if it is more spread out, giving it more dimension, but it also seemed to boost the fuzziness of the bass. I preferred it off.

The equalizer offers seven bands of frequency adjustment. I was able to dial down the bass, which made the headphones much more to my taste, although they never achieved a really natural sound.

Legal Memo Advised Postal Service Against Ending Saturday Delivery

An outside law firm hired by the Postal Service warned its nine-member board that they risked being removed from office if they proceeded with plans to end mail delivery on Saturdays, according to a memo the firm prepared for the agency’s legal department.

The memo also said the Postal Service faced a number of obstacles in implementing its plans, including legal challenges from the director of the Government Accountability Office and lawsuits from opponents of the plan around the country.

The legal document warned the agency that it, “should tread carefully in the highly controversial area of potential open disobedience of a federal statute.”

Dave Partenheimer, a spokesman for the Postal Service, said the legal memo played no role in the board’s decision to back away from the move to a five-day delivery schedule.

The Federal Times first reported on the memo, which was prepared by the firm King and Spalding in Washington.

The release of the memo sheds new light on legal efforts by the Postal Service to change its mail delivery schedule. The cash-strapped agency said it would save about $2 billion a year by stopping mail deliveries on Saturday. But the move was vigorously opposed by postal unions, some lawmakers, and business and residential customers.

The Postal Service’s Board of Governors allowed the agency to proceed with its plans to move to a five-day mail delivery schedule because the Postal Service said the spending measure, known as a continuing resolution, passed by Congress late last year, did not prohibit it. But last month, the agency abandoned its plan to stop Saturday mail deliveries after Congress passed spending measures that included language specifically prohibiting the agency from halting its six-day delivery schedule.

In a statement, the board expressed disappointment in Congress’s decision, but added that it would, “follow the law and has directed the Postal Service to delay implementation of its new delivery schedule until legislation is passed that provides the Postal Service with the authority to implement a financially appropriate and responsible delivery schedule.”

Several members of Congress, including Representative Darrell Issa, Republican of California, and Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, sided with the Postal Service and urged its board of governors to move forward with the plan to stop Saturday letter mail deliveries, but continue the delivery of packages. The lawmakers said the governors had the legal authority to proceed.

The agency’s legal advisers disagreed.

“Contrary to certain members of Congress, the governors’ fiduciary duty to the public does not permit them to violate the 6-day proviso in order to maintain fiscal solvency, and proceeding with such a plan would entail substantial risks,” they said in the memo.

Members of the Postal Service’s Board of Governors are appointed by the president and approved by the Senate. The board is comparable to a corporate board of directors. The members of the board also select the postmaster general, who runs the agency.

Mickey D. Barnett, a New Mexico attorney and a former state senator, is currently the chairman of the board.

Food Stamp Program Faces Deeper Cuts Under House Farm Bill

A new farm bill being crafted by the House Agriculture Committee includes deeper cuts to the food stamp program than those included in legislation that passed the Senate last year, setting up a potential fight with House and Senate Democrats who oppose additional cuts to the program.

The chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Frank D. Lucas, Republican of Oklahoma, is proposing to cut $20 billion from the food stamp program in the version of the farm bill that lawmakers will begin working on next Tuesday, up from the $16 billion in cuts that were in the House bill last year. The food stamp program, which is officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, provides nutritional assistance to low income families and individuals and makes up the bulk of the farm bill, accounting for nearly 70 percent of spending in the 2008 legislation, the last time it was signed into law.

The new House version of the farm bill is expected to save about $38 billion over 10 years, about $3 billion more than last year’s bill, which passed in committee but failed to come to the House floor for a full vote, derailed primarily because of fights over the food stamp program. Several conservative lawmakers wanted deeper cuts than those proposed by Mr. Lucas and Representative Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota, the ranking Democrat on the committee.

During a committee vote last year, Mr. Lucas sided with Democrats and a few Republicans in defeating amendments to cut food stamps even more deeply, including one by Representative Tim Huelskamp, Republican of Kansas, that would have doubled the cuts in the program to $33 billion.

The deeper cuts to food stamps are expected to run into resistance from lawmakers on the Senate Agriculture Committee, particularly Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat of New York. The Senate bill would also cut food stamps, shaving the program by $4.1 billion over ten years, slightly less than the $4.5 billion proposed last year.

Ms. Gillibrand fought against cuts in the food stamp program in the Senate bill last year and proposed instead cutting the federal crop insurance program, which pays farmers for drops in crop yields or revenue.

The government pays about 62 percent of the insurance premiums for farmers. The policies are sold by 15 private insurance companies that receive about $1.3 billion annually from the government. The government also backs the companies against losses.

The Senate, which passed it version of the farm bill, voted down Ms. Gillibrand’s proposal 66 to 33.

Ms. Gillibrand said she will oppose the cuts to food stamps again this year.

“So I don’t know under what world our colleagues think these cuts are acceptable, but tightening our belts around the waists of children and veterans and active duty service members is not how we should be balancing our debt and deficit,” she said during a conference call with reporters on Tuesday.

Twitter Adds Tweets You Can Hear

Now you can hear the Twittering.

With a new app, Twitter Music, referenced in print as #music, Twitter has promised to “change the way people find music.” I’m not so sure about that, but it will certainly change the way bands market music.

Basically the Twitter Music app lets you see what songs people are sharing and lets you listen too.

You need to know a few things to get started.

First, Twitter Music is distinct from Twitter, so you will have to download a separate app. What happens on Twitter does affect Twitter Music, but I’ll get to that.

The music app, right now only for Apple products, lets you see a list of 140 songs in each of four categories. The “Popular” list has the songs by major artists that are most often mentioned and shared. It will also show the 140 top “Emerging” songs, which are by lesser-known artists. A third list makes recommendations based on the musicians you follow, and a fourth shows you what the people you are linked to on Twitter are sharing. You can also go to an artist’s Twitter Music page, see which musicians they follow and listen to clips of those songs.

The app plays 30-second samples of songs. You can hear full-length songs on Twitter Music if you have a subscription with either the Rdio or Spotify streaming services. Twitter Music asks if you want to sign in with Rdio or Spotify when you first set it up.

Keep in mind you have to use the $10 a month versions of these streaming services to use Twitter Music on a mobile device. Once you are signed in, that’s it - full songs will play.

While you are listening a small turntable icon appears, which you can use to change volume, pause, move to the next song or tweet the song yourself.

I don’t know that Twitter Music changes the way people find music because you still have to dig through hit-and-miss recommendations to find what you like.

But it certainly helps artists sell themselves. Who is to say if one musician follows another because they like them or because it’s good business for their label? I suppose it could be both.

The service is still quite new, so don’t count on finding all of your obscure hipster favorites on Twitter Music. Right now the artists are pretty mainstream. I was unable to call up any of the lesser-known power pop bands I searched for.

But here is a tip. What happens on Twitter influences the results on Twitter Music. So if enough people tweet about a particular song, it may appear in the Popular or Emerging list. I’m starting my campaign for Paul Collins, Webb Wilder and Kurt Baker.

Twitter Adds Tweets You Can Hear

Now you can hear the Twittering.

With a new app, Twitter Music, referenced in print as #music, Twitter has promised to “change the way people find music.” I’m not so sure about that, but it will certainly change the way bands market music.

Basically the Twitter Music app lets you see what songs people are sharing and lets you listen too.

You need to know a few things to get started.

First, Twitter Music is distinct from Twitter, so you will have to download a separate app. What happens on Twitter does affect Twitter Music, but I’ll get to that.

The music app, right now only for Apple products, lets you see a list of 140 songs in each of four categories. The “Popular” list has the songs by major artists that are most often mentioned and shared. It will also show the 140 top “Emerging” songs, which are by lesser-known artists. A third list makes recommendations based on the musicians you follow, and a fourth shows you what the people you are linked to on Twitter are sharing. You can also go to an artist’s Twitter Music page, see which musicians they follow and listen to clips of those songs.

The app plays 30-second samples of songs. You can hear full-length songs on Twitter Music if you have a subscription with either the Rdio or Spotify streaming services. Twitter Music asks if you want to sign in with Rdio or Spotify when you first set it up.

Keep in mind you have to use the $10 a month versions of these streaming services to use Twitter Music on a mobile device. Once you are signed in, that’s it - full songs will play.

While you are listening a small turntable icon appears, which you can use to change volume, pause, move to the next song or tweet the song yourself.

I don’t know that Twitter Music changes the way people find music because you still have to dig through hit-and-miss recommendations to find what you like.

But it certainly helps artists sell themselves. Who is to say if one musician follows another because they like them or because it’s good business for their label? I suppose it could be both.

The service is still quite new, so don’t count on finding all of your obscure hipster favorites on Twitter Music. Right now the artists are pretty mainstream. I was unable to call up any of the lesser-known power pop bands I searched for.

But here is a tip. What happens on Twitter influences the results on Twitter Music. So if enough people tweet about a particular song, it may appear in the Popular or Emerging list. I’m starting my campaign for Paul Collins, Webb Wilder and Kurt Baker.

Twitter Adds Tweets You Can Hear

Now you can hear the Twittering.

With a new app, Twitter Music, referenced in print as #music, Twitter has promised to “change the way people find music.” I’m not so sure about that, but it will certainly change the way bands market music.

Basically the Twitter Music app lets you see what songs people are sharing and lets you listen too.

You need to know a few things to get started.

First, Twitter Music is distinct from Twitter, so you will have to download a separate app. What happens on Twitter does affect Twitter Music, but I’ll get to that.

The music app, right now only for Apple products, lets you see a list of 140 songs in each of four categories. The “Popular” list has the songs by major artists that are most often mentioned and shared. It will also show the 140 top “Emerging” songs, which are by lesser-known artists. A third list makes recommendations based on the musicians you follow, and a fourth shows you what the people you are linked to on Twitter are sharing. You can also go to an artist’s Twitter Music page, see which musicians they follow and listen to clips of those songs.

The app plays 30-second samples of songs. You can hear full-length songs on Twitter Music if you have a subscription with either the Rdio or Spotify streaming services. Twitter Music asks if you want to sign in with Rdio or Spotify when you first set it up.

Keep in mind you have to use the $10 a month versions of these streaming services to use Twitter Music on a mobile device. Once you are signed in, that’s it - full songs will play.

While you are listening a small turntable icon appears, which you can use to change volume, pause, move to the next song or tweet the song yourself.

I don’t know that Twitter Music changes the way people find music because you still have to dig through hit-and-miss recommendations to find what you like.

But it certainly helps artists sell themselves. Who is to say if one musician follows another because they like them or because it’s good business for their label? I suppose it could be both.

The service is still quite new, so don’t count on finding all of your obscure hipster favorites on Twitter Music. Right now the artists are pretty mainstream. I was unable to call up any of the lesser-known power pop bands I searched for.

But here is a tip. What happens on Twitter influences the results on Twitter Music. So if enough people tweet about a particular song, it may appear in the Popular or Emerging list. I’m starting my campaign for Paul Collins, Webb Wilder and Kurt Baker.

Critic of Immigration Proposal Cited Lower I.Q. of Immigrants in Dissertation

A co-author of a new Heritage Foundation study highly critical of the Senate’s bipartisan immigration proposal also wrote a doctoral dissertation in which he argued that immigrants generally had an I.Q. that was “substantially lower than that of the white native population.”

Jason Richwine, who joined the Heritage Foundation in 2012 as a senior policy analyst after receiving his doctorate in public policy from Harvard University in 2009, focused his dissertation, “I.Q. and Immigration Policy,” on his view that the lower intelligence of immigrants should be considered when drafting immigration policy.

A summary of Mr. Richwine’s dissertation, first reported by The Washington Post, says:

“The statistical construct known as IQ can reliably estimate general mental ability, or intelligence. The average IQ of immigrants in the United States is substantially lower than that of the white native population, and the difference is likely to persist over several generations. The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market. Selecting high-IQ immigrants would ameliorate these problems in the U.S., while at the same time benefiting smart potential immigrants who lack educational access in their home countries.”

In a section titled “The Immigrant I.Q. Deficit,” Mr. Richwine writes, “Immigrants living in the U.S. today do not have the same level of cognitive ability as natives.”

He concludes that section with the belief that Hispanics are not likely to catch up to their non-Hispanic counterparts.

“No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach I.Q. parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-I.Q. children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against,” he writes. “From the perspective of Americans alive today, the low average I.Q. of Hispanics is effectively permanent.”

He argues that I.Q. should be used as a “selection factor” in admitting immigrants into the country, and he says that he is unsure whether “the deficit” is a factor of genes, environment, or both.

“Today’s immigrants are not as intelligent on average as white natives,” he writes in his concluding section. “The I.Q. difference between the two groups is large enough to have substantial negative effects on the economy and on American society.”

His assertions quickly drew attention in the closely watched immigration fight on Wednesday, and the Heritage Foundation immediately sought to distance itself from the academic paper.

“This is not a work product of the Heritage Foundation,” Mike Gonzalez, vice president of communications for the organization, said in an e-mail statement. “Its findings in no way reflect the positions of the Heritage Foundation. Nor do the findings affect the conclusions of our study on the cost of amnesty to the U.S. taxpayer.”

The Heritage Foundation study is at the center of a split among conservatives about how to proceed on immigration. A similar study helped kill earlier efforts at an immigration overhaul. The study concluded that the plan will cost taxpayers $6.3 trillion by calculating that immigrants would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services, while paying only $3.1 trillion in taxes. It has already come under significant scrutiny and criticism, including from prominent conservatives such as Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and an author of the immigration legislation.

Mr. Richwine is no stranger to controversy. In a 2012 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, in response to a fight over collective bargaining in Wisconsin, Mr. Richwine argued that public workers are overpaid.

“When the public pay debate began to simmer two years ago, we were among the few analysts to show that many public employeesâ€"federal, state and local, including public school teachersâ€"are paid more than what their skills would merit in the private economy,” he wrote. “Our core insight was that public-sector pensions are several times more generous than typical private-sector plans, but this generosity is obscured by accounting assumptions that allow governments to contribute far less to pension plans than private employers must.”

He also written previously about how he believes I.Q. and immigration are intertwined. In a 2009 piece in Forbes, Mr. Richwine held up Indian-Americans as “the model minority.”

Critic of Immigration Proposal Cited Lower I.Q. of Immigrants in Dissertation

A co-author of a new Heritage Foundation study highly critical of the Senate’s bipartisan immigration proposal also wrote a doctoral dissertation in which he argued that immigrants generally had an I.Q. that was “substantially lower than that of the white native population.”

Jason Richwine, who joined the Heritage Foundation in 2012 as a senior policy analyst after receiving his doctorate in public policy from Harvard University in 2009, focused his dissertation, “I.Q. and Immigration Policy,” on his view that the lower intelligence of immigrants should be considered when drafting immigration policy.

A summary of Mr. Richwine’s dissertation, first reported by The Washington Post, says:

“The statistical construct known as IQ can reliably estimate general mental ability, or intelligence. The average IQ of immigrants in the United States is substantially lower than that of the white native population, and the difference is likely to persist over several generations. The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market. Selecting high-IQ immigrants would ameliorate these problems in the U.S., while at the same time benefiting smart potential immigrants who lack educational access in their home countries.”

In a section titled “The Immigrant I.Q. Deficit,” Mr. Richwine writes, “Immigrants living in the U.S. today do not have the same level of cognitive ability as natives.”

He concludes that section with the belief that Hispanics are not likely to catch up to their non-Hispanic counterparts.

“No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach I.Q. parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-I.Q. children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against,” he writes. “From the perspective of Americans alive today, the low average I.Q. of Hispanics is effectively permanent.”

He argues that I.Q. should be used as a “selection factor” in admitting immigrants into the country, and he says that he is unsure whether “the deficit” is a factor of genes, environment, or both.

“Today’s immigrants are not as intelligent on average as white natives,” he writes in his concluding section. “The I.Q. difference between the two groups is large enough to have substantial negative effects on the economy and on American society.”

His assertions quickly drew attention in the closely watched immigration fight on Wednesday, and the Heritage Foundation immediately sought to distance itself from the academic paper.

“This is not a work product of the Heritage Foundation,” Mike Gonzalez, vice president of communications for the organization, said in an e-mail statement. “Its findings in no way reflect the positions of the Heritage Foundation. Nor do the findings affect the conclusions of our study on the cost of amnesty to the U.S. taxpayer.”

The Heritage Foundation study is at the center of a split among conservatives about how to proceed on immigration. A similar study helped kill earlier efforts at an immigration overhaul. The study concluded that the plan will cost taxpayers $6.3 trillion by calculating that immigrants would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services, while paying only $3.1 trillion in taxes. It has already come under significant scrutiny and criticism, including from prominent conservatives such as Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and an author of the immigration legislation.

Mr. Richwine is no stranger to controversy. In a 2012 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, in response to a fight over collective bargaining in Wisconsin, Mr. Richwine argued that public workers are overpaid.

“When the public pay debate began to simmer two years ago, we were among the few analysts to show that many public employeesâ€"federal, state and local, including public school teachersâ€"are paid more than what their skills would merit in the private economy,” he wrote. “Our core insight was that public-sector pensions are several times more generous than typical private-sector plans, but this generosity is obscured by accounting assumptions that allow governments to contribute far less to pension plans than private employers must.”

He also written previously about how he believes I.Q. and immigration are intertwined. In a 2009 piece in Forbes, Mr. Richwine held up Indian-Americans as “the model minority.”

Critic of Immigration Proposal Cited Lower I.Q. of Immigrants in Dissertation

A co-author of a new Heritage Foundation study highly critical of the Senate’s bipartisan immigration proposal also wrote a doctoral dissertation in which he argued that immigrants generally had an I.Q. that was “substantially lower than that of the white native population.”

Jason Richwine, who joined the Heritage Foundation in 2012 as a senior policy analyst after receiving his doctorate in public policy from Harvard University in 2009, focused his dissertation, “I.Q. and Immigration Policy,” on his view that the lower intelligence of immigrants should be considered when drafting immigration policy.

A summary of Mr. Richwine’s dissertation, first reported by The Washington Post, says:

“The statistical construct known as IQ can reliably estimate general mental ability, or intelligence. The average IQ of immigrants in the United States is substantially lower than that of the white native population, and the difference is likely to persist over several generations. The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market. Selecting high-IQ immigrants would ameliorate these problems in the U.S., while at the same time benefiting smart potential immigrants who lack educational access in their home countries.”

In a section titled “The Immigrant I.Q. Deficit,” Mr. Richwine writes, “Immigrants living in the U.S. today do not have the same level of cognitive ability as natives.”

He concludes that section with the belief that Hispanics are not likely to catch up to their non-Hispanic counterparts.

“No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach I.Q. parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-I.Q. children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against,” he writes. “From the perspective of Americans alive today, the low average I.Q. of Hispanics is effectively permanent.”

He argues that I.Q. should be used as a “selection factor” in admitting immigrants into the country, and he says that he is unsure whether “the deficit” is a factor of genes, environment, or both.

“Today’s immigrants are not as intelligent on average as white natives,” he writes in his concluding section. “The I.Q. difference between the two groups is large enough to have substantial negative effects on the economy and on American society.”

His assertions quickly drew attention in the closely watched immigration fight on Wednesday, and the Heritage Foundation immediately sought to distance itself from the academic paper.

“This is not a work product of the Heritage Foundation,” Mike Gonzalez, vice president of communications for the organization, said in an e-mail statement. “Its findings in no way reflect the positions of the Heritage Foundation. Nor do the findings affect the conclusions of our study on the cost of amnesty to the U.S. taxpayer.”

The Heritage Foundation study is at the center of a split among conservatives about how to proceed on immigration. A similar study helped kill earlier efforts at an immigration overhaul. The study concluded that the plan will cost taxpayers $6.3 trillion by calculating that immigrants would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services, while paying only $3.1 trillion in taxes. It has already come under significant scrutiny and criticism, including from prominent conservatives such as Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and an author of the immigration legislation.

Mr. Richwine is no stranger to controversy. In a 2012 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, in response to a fight over collective bargaining in Wisconsin, Mr. Richwine argued that public workers are overpaid.

“When the public pay debate began to simmer two years ago, we were among the few analysts to show that many public employeesâ€"federal, state and local, including public school teachersâ€"are paid more than what their skills would merit in the private economy,” he wrote. “Our core insight was that public-sector pensions are several times more generous than typical private-sector plans, but this generosity is obscured by accounting assumptions that allow governments to contribute far less to pension plans than private employers must.”

He also written previously about how he believes I.Q. and immigration are intertwined. In a 2009 piece in Forbes, Mr. Richwine held up Indian-Americans as “the model minority.”

Backup Power in the Palm of Your Hand

An array of BoostBloc 6600 portable chargers from Etón.

Demand for electronic devices seems to be growing faster than the number of outlets available to charge them. Hoping to provide power to those in need, Etón has introduced a series of portable backup batteries called BoostBloc.

The BoostBloc batteries come in three options, each offering greater power than the last, with internal lithium ion batteries that provide an electrical charge measured in ampere-hours. For instance, Eton’s most powerful block, the BoostBloc 6600, provides 6,600 milliampere-hours, enough to fully charge a smartphone three times.

The charging blocks in the BoostBloc series range in price from $40 to $100 and come in three colors: red, black and white. Each one includes a micro USB cable, which is used to charge the block, and at least one USB port for power output (the BoostBloc 6600 has two USB ports to charge two devices at once).

With a simple, sleek design, the lightweight blocks do not have any buttons, not that they need any. A quick shake activates LED indicators on the bottom of the blocks that reveal how much charge remains.

I decided over the weekend to tackle the annual spring cleaning of my storage unit, a job I knew would take all afternoon. Music always makes the task go faster, so I brought a BoostBloc as a backup in case my cellphone died. I chose the BoostBloc 2000 because it fit easily in my pants pocket. When the phone drained to 11 percent of its power, I connected it to the BoostBloc 2000, which allowed me to continue playing my music for a couple of more hours while still charging the phone back up to 92 percent.

With few bells and whistles, the BoostBloc backup batteries get the job done efficiently, providing power and peace of mind in situations where outlets are lacking.

For outdoor enthusiasts, Etón also offers the BoostTurbine 2000, a power charger with a hand-turbine generator, which provides juice with a few turns of the wrist. And a solar-powered charger is available.

Q.& A.: Scanning Checks at the ATM

Q.

How do automated teller machines know the amount of a deposited check without me entering the numbers on the keypad?

A.

Most bank ATMs automatically scan a high-resolution image of the check when you insert it into the deposit slot. This check image is processed with optical character recognition (O.C.R.) software, which reads the amount of money printed on the check. The ATM also reads account and routing numbers encoded in the magnetic ink on the check. This is why checks printed with standard home inkjet printers are usually rejected.

Mistakes can still happen due to smudged originals and other issues. If the check’s amount does not match the amount on your receipt, contact the bank’s customer-service department.

The Tarot Sees a Full Battery in Your Future

The Powerocks Tarot auxiliary battery is the size of a stack of credit cards.

Backup batteries usually trumpet their capacity, but capacity results in size: they are sometimes as large as a paperback book. The Powerocks Tarot, though, trumpets its size, because it’s just about the same as a stack of credit cards.

Its capacity isn’t bad either. At 1500 milliamp hours (mAh), it should be enough to top up an empty iPhone.

In a test, the Tarot filled a completely drained iPhone to 65 percent capacity in nearly an hour. It filled the high-capacity battery of a discharged Motorola RAZR Maxx HD to 39 percent. That’s impressive, considering that Motorola’s big auxiliary battery, the 4000 mAh P4000, filled the same phone to 89 percent.

Although Powerocks claims the Tarot is small enough to fit in a wallet, it had better be a big wallet. While the perimeter measurements are about the same as a credit card, it’s about as thick as a stack of 10 credit cards.

There is nothing fancy about the case, although it is available in black, silver or pink. It has four L.E.D. lights that show battery level. A red L.E.D. turns blue to let you know when the Tarot is done charging.

The battery comes with a cable that has a standard size USB on one end and a Micro USB connector on the other. It doesn’t come with a charger, but you can plug it into a computer or, in all probability, the one that comes with your phone.

The Tarot is available from Powerocks online for $35.

The Early Word: Spiraling Up

Today’s Times

• The Pentagon released a survey on Tuesday estimating that 26,000 people in the armed forces were sexually assaulted last year, up from 19,000 in 2010, prompting an angry President Obama and Congress to demand action, Jennifer Steinhauer reports. Just two days after the officer in charge of sexual assault prevention programs for the Air Force was arrested and charged with sexual battery, Mr. Obama expressed visible exasperation with the Pentagon’s attempts to bring sexual assault under control.

• The Obama administration is on the verge of backing the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s plan for a sweeping overhaul of surveillance laws that would make it easier to wiretap people who communicate using the Internet, Charlie Savage reports. It is most likely to set off a debate over the future of Internet privacy and freedom.

• The Heritage Foundation released a report on Monday estimating that immigration legislation would produce a “lifetime fiscal deficit” of at least $6.3 trillion, Ashley Parker reports. Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida and a chief author of the legislation, aggressively pushed back against the report, saying, “Everybody else who has analyzed immigration understands that if you do it, and we do it right, it will be a net positive for our economy.”

• Congressional Republicans say the testimony that a State Department official is expected to give Wednesday will be a damning indictment of the administration’s handling of the September attacks on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Jeremy W. Peters and Eric Schmitt report. But much of what the witness is expected to say raises questions that have already been addressed in previous hearings and in a critical report by the State Department, the writers report.

 Happenings in Washington

• President Obama will meet with electric utility chief executives to discuss lessons learned from Hurricane Sandy as another hurricane season approaches.

• He will then link up with a group of Asian-American and Pacific Islander leaders for a meeting in the Roosevelt Room of the White House.

• In the evening, Mr. Obama will have dinner at the Jefferson Hotel with members of the House Democratic leadership.

• Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. will attend the address given to a joint session of Congress by President Park Geun-hye of South Korea.