CHILD ABUSE...
NEW YORK (AP) - Many states often fail to release adequate information about fatal and near-fatal child abuse cases, placing confidentiality above disclosure to a degree that thwarts needed reforms, two child advocacy groups say in a new report.

Their report, which gave 10 states a failing grade for their disclosure practices, urges Congress and state legislators to adopt stronger policies and laws regarding deadly and life-threatening child abuse cases. It was being released Tuesday by First Star, a national nonprofit which advocates for abused children, and by the University of San Diego School of Law's Children's Advocacy Institute.

``When abuse or neglect lead to a child's death or near death, a state's interest in confidentiality becomes secondary to the interests of taxpayers, advocates and other children, who would be better served by maximum transparency,'' said Amy Harfeld, First Star's executive director and a co-author of the report.

``Once we know what is broken, we can try to fix it,'' she said.

Several of the states receiving low grades defended their policies on grounds that families entangled in near-fatal abuse cases were entitled to confidentiality. Harfeld responded that the report is not pressing for disclosure of families' names, but rather for other details illuminating how state agencies handled the cases.

Every state accepts federal funds under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, which directs states to ``allow for public disclosure'' of information regarding fatal and near-fatal cases.

But the report says many states limit disclosure because the act provides too much leeway. For example, according to report, some state policies cover abuse deaths but not near-fatalities, while other states impede access by releasing information only if a petition is filed.

Robert Fellmeth, executive director of the Children's Advocacy Institute, noted that extensive details often emerge only when a child abuse death gets heavy media coverage.

``But the reality is that 90-plus percent of the time, nobody knows anything and the states actively conceal it,'' he said in a telephone interview. ``That's not right and that's what we're mad about.

``The system most of all wants to protect its most embarrassing gaffes,'' Fellmeth said.

About 1,500 American children die from abuse annually. The report contends that more standardized and thorough disclosures about these deaths, and near-fatal cases, might reduce the toll.

Changes resulting from a single high-profile tragedy ``are usually knee-jerk responses,'' the report said. ``Enhanced public disclosure of all child abuse and neglect deaths and near deaths enables the public, child advocates and policymakers to work together to understand comprehensive trends and craft more thoughtful, comprehensive reforms.''

The report issued grades for the disclosure policies of all 50 states and Washington, D.C.

Only six states - Nevada, New Hampshire, California, Indiana, Iowa and Oregon - received grades of A or A minus. Ten states received an F: Georgia, Maryland, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and Vermont.

In South Dakota, Virgena Wieseler of the Division of Child Protection Services said her agency will propose changes based on the laws in states that got high grades. Rob Johnson of Tennessee's Department of Children's Services said legislative efforts were under way ``on how to better release information.''

But several states contested their ranking.

Cathy Utz of Pennsylvania's Office of Children, Youth and Families said the report did not reflect a recent state initiative to provide summaries of fatal and near-fatal cases in its annual child abuse report. Elizabeth Sollis of Utah's Department of Human Services said the report was wrong in asserting there her state had no policy on disclosure.

Tara Muhlhauser of North Dakota's children and family services division said officials withhold only information that is deemed confidential under state or federal law.

``We are not failing in our efforts to protect children in North Dakota,'' she said, contending that the F grade reflected only a ``narrow category'' regarding public information.

Vermont's and Georgia's low grades were due partly to their policies of withholding information about near-fatalities.

``If a child survives a situation that serious, being on page one of the newspaper could be incredibly re-traumatizing,'' said Steve Dale, commissioner of Vermont's Department of Children and Families.

Romaine Serna of New Mexico's Children, Youth and Families Department said her state complies with federal law.

``It's a balancing act for us because we do believe in the public's right to know but we also believe in families and their right to confidentiality,'' she said.

Elyn Jones of Maryland's Department of Human Resources said the low grade was no surprise because the agency has long been criticized for restrictive disclosure policies. Maryland is one of a handful of states that doesn't release information about serious child abuse unless a criminal charge is filed.

However, Jones said the department is working on being more open with information than past administrations.

The report made three general recommendations:
 - Amend federal law to clarify and strengthen disclosure requirements, so states know how to comply with its intent.
 - Revise state policies and laws to make disclosure policies more enforceable.
 - Separate disclosures from criminal proceedings so information on fatal and near-fatal abuse is made available no matter whether a criminal charge is filed.

ALL-STAR...
The 2008 Major League Baseball All-Star Game will be held at Yankee Stadium. A number of local events are planned to coincide with it. Mayor Bloomberg will be among others including Hal Steinbrenner and Yogi Berra on hand to unveil the schedule of events this afternoon.

AZIZ...
BAGHDAD (AP) - He was the international face of Saddam Hussein's regime - defending Iraq and taunting the West for more than a decade. Now, Tariq Aziz awaits an Iraqi court as the latest member of the Saddam's inner circle to face trial.

Aziz, 72, the only Christian among Saddam's mostly Sunni Muslim coterie, and five other defendants face charges in the 1992 execution of dozens of merchants accused of profiteering.

The trial, scheduled to begin Tuesday, could represent the last high-profile Saddam era figure to face prosecution for alleged atrocities.

But defenders of Aziz - who used his fluent English in countless interviews and news conferences as foreign minister and then deputy prime minister - accused the Shiite-led government of seeking revenge for Aziz's refusal to testify against the late dictator.

``The Iraqi government also wants to avoid the public criticism for keeping an ailing man in prison for five years without presenting any charges against him,'' Aziz's son, Ziad, said in a telephone interview from Amman, Jordan.

Aziz was No. 25 on the U.S. most-wanted list after the invasion and surrendered to American forces on April 25, 2003, about two weeks after the fall of Baghdad.

Among his co-defendants are Saddam's half brother Watban Ibrahim al-Hassan and the dictator's cousin known as ``Chemical Ali,'' who faces a pending death sentence in another case, according to an attorney.

The trial deals with the execution of 42 merchants accused by Saddam's government of being behind a sharp increase in food prices when the country was under strict U.N. sanctions.

A judge with the Iraqi High Tribunal, which is prosecuting offenses of the former regime, said the charges against the defendants would include war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. If convicted, the men could face a sentence of death by hanging.

The judge - who declined to be identified because he wasn't authorized to discuss the information - said Aziz was being prosecuted because he signed the execution orders against the merchants as a member of Saddam's Revolutionary Command Council, a rubber stamp group that approved the dictator's decisions.

The merchants were rounded up over two days in July 1992 from Baghdad's wholesale markets and charged with manipulating food supplies to drive up prices at a time when many Iraqis were suffering economically. All 42 were executed hours later after a quick trial.

Abdul Amir al-Saedi, 54, said his father, who owned a grocery store, and his brother were among those killed, along with several workers who were caught up in the raids.

``We had nothing to do with politics. We were businessmen and patriots,'' he said, adding the traders were executed at Abu Ghraib prison and the Interior Ministry compound.

``When they arrested my father, they told him that they were taking him to a meeting at the trade ministry, but it turned out there was no such meeting and they were taken to the interior ministry instead,'' al-Saedi said.

Al-Saedi, who planned to testify in the trial, said witnesses told him Watban had personally accused the merchants of being spies, but he did not know what role Aziz had in the case.

``I think he had nothing to do with the traders execution,'' he said Monday during an interview.

Aziz, a member of Iraq's Chaldean Catholic minority, became internationally known as Saddam's defender and fierce American critic after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and the subsequent 1991 Gulf War.

He was later promoted to deputy prime minister and often represented Iraq at the United Nations and other international forums. Just weeks before the U.S.-led invasion, Aziz met with the late Pope John Paul II at the Vatican in a bid to head off the conflict.

In late 2002, he called Washington's allegations that Iraq still held weapons of mass destruction a ``hoax'' and a pretext to wage war.

Defense attorney Badee Izzat Aref insisted Aziz was not responsible for the execution of the merchants.

``He was outside Iraq at that time and he was in general detached from things related to criminal charges against Iraqis,'' Aref said. ``He was a pure diplomat and politician.''

Aref said Ali Hassan al-Majid, known as ``Chemical Ali'' for ordering chemical weapons attacks on ethnic Kurds, was one of the defendants but would not attend Tuesday's session because he was ill.

The U.S. military said al-Majid remained under medical care after suffering a heart attack during a hunger strike earlier this month but he remains in an American detention facility.

Presiding over the trial will be judge Raouf Abdul-Rahman, who sentenced Saddam to death in May 2006 for his role in the killing of Shiite Muslims in the town of Dujail after an assassination attempt in 1982. Saddam was hanged the following December.

Saddam was executed while on trial in a second case, stemming from the brutal crackdown on ethnic Kurds in the late 1980s.

A third trial is under way for officials accused of crushing a Shiite uprising that followed the 1991 Gulf War.

Chemical Ali, who also is on trial for the Shiite uprising trial, was sentenced to hang along with two others for their roles in a brutal crackdown against ethnic Kurds in the late 1980s but the executions have been stalled due to disputes over details.

WHITE HOUSE-EPA...
WASHINGTON (AP) - A Senate committee is looking into a report that says the Bush administration is hampering the ability of Environmental Protection Agency scientists to assess the health dangers of toxic chemicals.

The head of the EPA's pesticide and toxic chemical office was to testify Tuesday before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, along with an official of the Government Accounting Office that has just concluded an investigation of the EPA's chemical risk assessment program.

The GAO report, obtained by The Associated Press, said the EPA's ability to conduct timely, science-based risks assessments was being undermined by allowing greater involvement in the process by nonscientists, often in secret.

The administration's decision to give the Defense Department and other agencies an early role in the process adds to years of delay in acting on harmful chemicals and jeopardizes the program's credibility, the GAO concluded.

At issue is the EPA's screening of chemicals used in everything from household products to rocket fuel to determine whether they pose serious risk of cancer or other illnesses.

A review process begun by the White House in 2004 and imposed formally by the EPA earlier this month is adding more speed bumps for EPA scientists, the GAO said in its report.

GAO investigators said extensive involvement by EPA managers, White House budget officials and other agencies has eroded the independence of EPA scientists charged with determining the health risks posed by chemicals.

Many of the deliberations over risks posed by specific chemicals ``occur in what amounts to a black box'' of secrecy because the White House claims they are private executive branch deliberations, the report said.

The Pentagon, the Energy Department, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and other agencies - all of which could be severely affected by EPA risk findings - are being allowed to participate ``at almost every step in the assessment process,'' the GAO said.

Those agencies, their private contractors and manufacturers of the chemicals could face new restrictions on using the chemicals and be saddled with major cleanup requirements, depending on the EPA's scientific determinations. The risks data is widely used by EPA and states to determine levels of regulation and cleanup standards.

``By law the EPA must protect our families from dangerous chemicals,'' said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., the Senate committee's chairwoman. ``Instead, they're protecting the chemical companies.''

The EPA's risk assessment process ``never was perfect,'' Boxer said in an interview Monday. ``But at least it put the scientists up front. Now the scientists are being shunted aside.''

The White House said the GAO is wrong in suggesting that the EPA has lost control in assessing the health risks posed by toxic chemicals.

``Only EPA has the authority to finalize an EPA assessment,'' Kevin F. Neyland, deputy administrator of the White House budget office's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, wrote in response to the GAO. He called the interagency process ``a dialogue that helps to ensure the quality'' of the reviews.

RESERVE TEACHERS...
NEW YORK (AP) - New York City is paying $81 million over two years in salaries and benefits for teachers who have been laid off by school closings and have yet to be hired by another school.

The teachers are part of the so-called reserve pool, which is an outgrowth of the city's contract with the teachers' union.

The reserve pool was a trade off in contract talks to end seniority rights as well as the automatic transfer of teachers who had been cut because of shrinking enrollment.

At the time, Chancellor Joel Klein said he would rather absorb the cost of the teachers in the reserve pool than saddle principals with teachers they did not want.

Under the contract, teachers whose positions have been eliminated and cannot find another job, are assigned as substitute teachers or temporary replacements. They collect full teacher salary and benefits.

Since 2006 contract, more than 600 teachers have been placed in the reserve after failing to find new positions, according to the New Teacher Project, which recruits and trains teachers for school systems.

Union President Randi Weingarten says the Teachers Project is an excuse to blame teachers who have lost their jobs.

DEMOCRATS...
WASHINGTON (AP) - Loyal Democrat Richard Somer says if Hillary Rodham Clinton gets his party's presidential nomination, he just may sit it out this Election Day.

A Barack Obama supporter, Somer says he has been repulsed by her use of ``slimy insinuations'' in the campaign. He especially disliked her attacking the Illinois senator for his relationship with William Ayers, a former Weather Underground radical with provocative views.

``She's better than that,'' said Somer, 72, a retired professor from Clinton, N.Y. He said he expects the Democrats to carry New York anyway, so he might not vote ``as a protest to Mrs. Clinton.''

Somer is not the only Democrat whose views of his party's rival candidate have soured.

Party members increasingly dislike the contender they are not supporting in the bruising nomination fight, an Associated Press-Yahoo News survey and exit polls of voters show. That is raising questions about how faithful some will be by the November general election.

In the AP-Yahoo poll - which has tracked the same 2,000 people since November - Obama supporters with negative views of the New York senator have grown from 35 percent in November to 44 percent this month, including one-quarter with very unfavorable feelings.

Those Obama backers who don't like Clinton say they would vote for Republican candidate John McCain over her by a two-to-one margin, with many undecided.

As for Clinton supporters, those with unfavorable views of Obama have grown from 26 percent to 42 percent during this same period - including a doubling to 20 percent of those with very negative opinions.

The Clinton backers with unfavorable views of Obama say they would vote for McCain over him by nearly three-to-one, though many haven't made up their minds.

``I'd be hard pressed'' to vote for Obama, said April Glenn, 66, a Clinton supporter from Philadelphia, who said his handling of the controversy over the anti-American preachings of his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, made her doubt his leadership skills. ``I don't think he's capable.''

Clinton backers who have taken a dislike to Obama have a sharply lower regard for his honesty and ethics than they did last fall, the poll shows. Obama supporters whose view of Clinton has dimmed see her as far less compassionate and refreshing than they did then.

The feelings seem especially widespread among the candidates' strongest supporters.
 - About half of Obama's white backers with college degrees have negative views of Clinton. Fewer black Obama supporters dislike Clinton but their numbers have grown faster, more than doubling during the period to 33 percent.
 - Among Clinton's supporters, Obama is disliked by nearly half the whites who have not gone beyond high school, a near doubling since November. Four in 10 white women backing her have unfavorable views of Obama.

Intensified passions during contentious intraparty fights are nothing new, and voters often return to the fold by the time the general election rolls around and people focus on partisan and issue differences.

``These are snapshots of today,'' said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., a member of his party's congressional leadership who has not committed to Clinton or Obama. By autumn, he said, ``the party will come together.''

Yet with the battle between the two contenders threatening to stretch into June or beyond, some Democrats are wondering whether the party will have time to regain the loyalty of those whose candidate failed to win the party's nomination.

``If we can bring this to a conclusion by mid-June or something, I think that healing can take place,'' Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen, who has been pressing party leaders to settle on a nominee quickly, said in an interview. ``If it goes till late August, then it's a real problem.''

Others express concern but argue that the divisions are not nearly as intense as when the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago was split over the Vietnam War; when Ronald Reagan unsuccessfully fought President Ford for the Republican nomination in 1976; or when Sen. Edward Kennedy lost a bitter duel with President Carter to be the 1980 Democratic nominee. In each case, those parties' nominees lost the general election.

``It is not the same kind of rancor or bitterness'' as those years, said Democratic pollster Peter Hart.

If by July 4 the Obama and Clinton campaigns are still maneuvering for advantage at the party's August convention, it will be harder to unify party voters and ``Democrats will have done grievous harm to themselves,'' he said.

Obama and Clinton campaign officials express little concern their fight will leave Democratic voters disaffected come November.

``When the family squabble is over, the family will come back together,'' said Obama pollster Cornell Belcher.

Current Democratic divisions are ``par for the course'' at this stage of a campaign,'' said Clinton strategist Geoffrey Garin.

``I know a lot of party leaders are concerned about this. But the Democratic rank and file doesn't seem to be,'' Garin said, citing polls showing people want the nomination race to continue.

Exit polls of voters in this year's Democratic primaries tell a similar tale of hard feelings.
 - In Pennsylvania's primary last week, which Clinton won, 68 percent of Obama voters said they would back Clinton against McCain. Just 54 percent of her supporters would vote for Obama against the Republican - including less than half of her white voters who have not finished college.
 - In the 16 states that held primaries on Super Tuesday Feb. 5, a combined 47 percent of Clinton voters said they would be satisfied only if she won the nomination. That figure has grown to 53 percent in the nine states with primaries since then - including 58 percent who said so in Pennsylvania.
 - In Pennsylvania, while Clinton voters overall would vote heavily for Obama over McCain, her supporters who expressed displeasure should Obama win the nomination were evenly split in a contest between Obama and the Arizona Republican senator.
 - Obama voters have also grown more surly, though more modestly. On Super Tuesday, 44 percent of his supporters said they would only settle for him as nominee _ a number that has risen to 49 percent in states voting since that day.

Exit polls also show key voting blocs' negative feelings about their candidate's rival have grown, though it is less intense on Obama's side.

On Super Tuesday, about half of Clinton's white supporters with less than college degrees said they would be satisfied only if she won the nomination. In voting since then, six in 10 have said so - including 68 percent in Pennsylvania last week.

On the other hand, 46 percent of Obama's black supporters on Super Tuesday said he was the only candidate they wanted to win. That number has edged up to 49 percent since that Feb. 5 voting - including 55 percent in Pennsylvania.

The findings from the AP-Yahoo News poll are from telephone interviews with 863 Democrats on a panel of adults questioned in November, December, January and April. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.

The poll was conducted over the Internet by Knowledge Networks, which initially contacted people using traditional telephone polling methods and followed with online interviews. People chosen for the study who had no Internet access were given it free.

The exit poll is based on in-person interviews with more than 36,000 voters in 28 states that have held primaries this year in which both candidates actively competed. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 1 percentage point, larger for some subgroups.