The New Old Age Blog: Officials Say Checks Won't Be in the Mail

The jig is up.

Two years ago, the Treasury Department initiated its Go Direct campaign to persuade people still receiving paper checks for their Social Security, Veterans Affairs, S.S.I. and other federal benefits to switch to direct deposit.

“At that point, we were issuing approximately 11 million checks each month,” or about 15 percent of the total, Walt Henderson, director of the campaign, told me.

After putting notices in every monthly check envelope, circulating public service announcements and putting the word out through banks, senior centers, the Red Cross, AARP and other organizations, the Treasury Department has since shrunk that number to five million monthly checks.

That means 93 percent of those getting federal benefits are using direct deposit or, if they prefer or lack a bank account, a Direct Express debit card that gets refilled each month and can be used anywhere that accepts MasterCard.

“So people have been getting the word and making the switch,” Mr. Henderson said. Now, federal officials are pushing the last holdouts to convert to direct deposit by March 1.

Although officials say the change is not optional, the jig isn’t entirely up. If you or your older relative does not respond to their pleading, “we’re not going to interrupt their payments,” Mr. Henderson said. But the department will start sending letters urging people to switch.

The major motive is financial: shifting the last paper checks to direct deposit or a debit card (only 2 percent of recipients go that route) will save $1 billion over the next decade, the department estimates.

But safety enters the picture, too. One reason some beneficiaries resist direct deposit, Mr. Henderson said, is that they fear their electronic deposits can be hacked or diverted. Having grown up in a predigital age, perhaps they feel safer with a check in their hands.

But they probably aren’t. In 2011, the Treasury Department received 440,000 reports of lost or stolen benefits checks. With direct deposit, “there’s no check lingering unattended in a mailbox,” Mr. Henderson noted.

The greater reason for sticking with paper is probably simple inertia. “It’s human nature to procrastinate,” he said.

But unless you or your relatives want a series of letters from the Treasury Department, it is probably time for the last fence-sitters to get with the program.

They don’t need to use a computer. People can switch to direct deposit, or get the debit card, at their banks or the local Social Security office. More simply, they can call a toll-free number, (800) 333-1795, and have agents walk them through the change. Or they can sign up online at www.GoDirect.org.

They will need:

1. Their Social Security number.
2. The 12-digit federal benefit number found on their checks.
3. The amount of the most recent check.
4. And, for direct deposit, a bank or credit union routing number, usually found on the front of a check. They can have direct deposit to a savings account, too.

A caution for New Old Age readers: If you think your relative has not switched because he or she is cognitively impaired and can no longer handle his finances, you can be designated a representative payee and receive monthly Social Security or S.S.I. payments on your relative’s behalf. This generally requires a visit to your local Social Security office, documentation in hand.

---

Paula Span is the author of “When the Time Comes: Families With Aging Parents Share Their Struggles and Solutions.”

Read More..

U.S. finalizes rules for financial firms to avoid foreclosures

In a major effort to heal the $10-trillion U.S. mortgage market, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has finalized rules designed to ensure financial firms offer every available option to keep delinquent borrowers in their homes.

The regulations, to be announced Thursday, address widespread complaints that loan servicers — the companies that collect mortgage payments and repossess homes — were woefully unprepared to help borrowers during the tsunami of foreclosures after the housing bust.

They are designed to complement previous settlements by major banks over allegations of widespread servicing and foreclosure abuses. But unlike earlier settlements, they will apply to all large mortgage servicers, not just banks, in all states.

Still, the rules drew immediate criticism from a prominent consumer group, which said they don't do enough to force servicers to consider easing the terms of mortgages and expressed fears that the rules might preempt stronger existing provisions.

"While the establishment of industrywide standards is important, the failure to require meaningful loan modification protections is a retreat from current safeguards under the soon-to-expire [Obama administration] loan modification program," said Alys Cohen, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center.

The consumer bureau was created when Congress passed the sweeping Dodd-Frank financial reform act in reaction to the mortgage meltdown and the global economic crisis that ensued. The law also required lenders to ensure that they only make loans that borrowers can reasonably be expected to repay.

Last week, the bureau issued major regulations providing a "safe harbor" from lawsuits under that new requirement for lenders who make certain types of presumably sound home loans. A key requirement is that total debt payments for borrowers — including principal, interest, taxes and insurance on home loans — be no more than 43% of gross income.

The rules to be released Thursday, which take effect in a year, bar lenders from pursuing foreclosure proceedings against borrowers while applications for loan modifications are pending — the much-criticized practice of "dual tracking."

The consumer bureau said banks also must provide "direct, easy, ongoing access" to employees who are required to alert borrowers to missing information, provide status reports on modification requests and ensure documents don't get lost.

Banks also are required to inform borrowers who miss two monthly payments about options to avoid foreclosure and to wait until loans go 120 days delinquent before beginning a foreclosure — a provision that would preempt a 90-day requirement under California law.

Richard Cordray, the consumer bureau's director, said distressed borrowers had not gotten the help and support they deserved, such as "timely and accurate information about their options for saving their homes."

"Servicers failed to answer phone calls, routinely lost paperwork and mishandled accounts," Cordray said in remarks to be delivered at an industry conference Thursday.

"Communication and coordination were poor, leading many to think they were on their way to a solution, only to find that their homes had been foreclosed on and sold," he said. "At times, people arrived home to find they had been unexpectedly locked out."

The new rules don't apply to most small banks and credit unions. Bureau officials said they have had few complaints about these small institutions, which are more likely to keep loans on their books, rather than sell them, and generally devote more attention to individual customers.

Servicers often are collecting payments on behalf of loan owners, who may be the banks themselves but more often are trusts created on behalf of mortgage investors. The investors have mandated a wide range of relief programs for troubled borrowers in addition to government-sponsored programs such as the Obama administration's Home Affordable Modification Program.

In the past, servicers would sometimes not inform troubled borrowers about all the options, instead steering them into foreclosure or programs that provided the servicers with greater financial rewards, bureau officials said.

The servicers are now supposed to clearly explain all alternatives to borrowers so they can pick the best one. The new rules also establish clearer opportunities for borrowers to appeal servicers' denials of loan modifications.

In addition to worries that the bureau has not cracked down hard enough on servicers, consumer advocates expressed concern that the new rules will not take effect for a year.

"While we understand that servicers need time to implement complex procedures, we're still in the middle of a foreclosure crisis," Cohen said. "Many people will unnecessarily lose their homes if we wait a year."

scott.reckard@latimes.com

Read More..

Confession could be bad for Lance Armstrong's bank account

Now that Lance Armstrong has finally admitted to using performance-enhancing drugs during his storied athletic career, the shamed cyclist could be pulled into courtrooms around the globe for legal battles with people seeking millions of dollars.

That's one of the many downsides to the confession of a once-adored athlete who for more than a decade not only denied doping but aggressively counterattacked his accusers.

But a significant question remains about whether there is an upside to his coming clean in an interview with Oprah Winfrey scheduled to air later this week.

The confession potentially represents a first step in trying to rebuild his tarnished public image. It might also help in persuading sports officials to reduce his lifetime ban so that the 41-year-old might someday compete in sanctioned triathlons and marathons.

Armstrong faces an uphill climb.

"For him to chart a course to redemption is really complicated and would take a lot of time," said Adam Hanft, a branding and crisis communications strategist. "It's not going to be reversed with a TV appearance."

In his 21/2-hour interview at a downtown Austin, Texas, hotel, Armstrong was forthcoming about the doping allegations that dogged him during a career that included seven Tour de France victories, Winfrey told "CBS This Morning" on Tuesday.

"I don't think 'emotional' begins to describe the intensity or the difficulty he experienced in talking about some of these things," she said, declining to provide further details.

Armstrong has come under increasing pressure in the months since the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency enforced the ban and issued a 1,000-plus-page report that accused him of leading "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen."

With 11 former teammates providing depositions, he was stripped of his Tour championships and lost several big-money sponsors, including Nike, that had made him one of the sporting world's richest endorsers.

Now, Armstrong stands to lose a large chunk of his personal wealth, reported at about $100 million.

His most pressing concern appears to be a federal whistle-blower lawsuit filed by former teammate Floyd Landis, who was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title for doping. The suit accuses Armstrong of defrauding the U.S. Postal Service, which sponsored his racing team for a number of years.

Armstrong's attorneys have met with government officials to discuss, among other things, how much the Postal Service was actually damaged by his misconduct, according to a person with knowledge of the situation who is not authorized to speak publicly.

During those talks, settlement figures were discussed, the person said.

A lengthy federal investigation into Armstrong and his team was dropped early last year without charges being brought. It remains to be seen whether the criminal statute of limitations has elapsed, but the Department of Justice could join in the civil suit.

The False Claims Act, the basis of whistle-blower suits, carries heavy penalties, including triple damages and fines, said Mike Morse, a Philadelphia-based lawyer who specializes in such cases.

"Violations of the federal False Claims Act can expose him to some really significant monetary damages," Morse said. "There could also be a whole host of private lawsuits."

Reacting to early allegations of Armstrong's doping, a Dallas-based promotional company declined to pay him a $5-million bonus for winning the 2004 Tour de France. He sued and received a $7.5-million settlement.

Now SCA Promotions plans to sue Armstrong to get its money back. "We do expect to file soon," said Jeffrey Dorough, the company's in-house counsel. "We don't know what impact the interview will have until we see it."

The government of South Australia state has said it will seek to recoup several million dollars in appearance fees paid to Armstrong for competing in the Tour Down Under from 2009 through 2011.

Read More..

“Banshee” head Greg Yaitanes: secrets galore, but hold the olives

NEW YORK (TheWrap.com) – Like many TV creators, Greg Yaitanes isn’t crazy about the alternate identities people adopt online – and the Emmy-winning former “House” executive producer gets to explore anonymity and becoming someone else in the new Cinemax series “Banshee.”

“I’ve been harassed by ‘House’ Twitter fans for years now. I’m always kind of surprised at people’s level of saying something that they would never say to my face – that they would never say to another human being’s face,” he said.

Not that Yaitanes has a problem with social media – he was an early investor in Twitter, and used a litany of apps and new technology to make his pulpy drama, executive produced by Alan Ball, as scrappy as a tech startup.

With “Banshee,” Yaitanes gets to explore “the best of the wish fulfillment that people have of reinventing themselves or being able to disappear. In a way, all the characters are reinventing themselves.”

Those characters include a thief who steals the identity of the sheriff in Banshee, Pa., his cat burglar ex-girlfriend, who has eked out a new life as a homemaker, and the villain, a man who becomes a criminal mastermind after he is ousted from his Amish community. Then there’s the identity thief – Job – who keeps changing which gender he appears to be.

We talked with Yaitanes about how he made his show look expensive, how to describe Job, and the importance of counting olives.

The Wrap: The show looks expensive – starting with a sequence in New York in which a bus falls over and skids through an intersection. Can you talk about how you kept costs down?

Yaitanes: It’s a way of thinking from working with startups. They’re often one, two, three man operations when they first operate. Twitter was an example of that. You have to look at what is the simplest, most effective way to do this, to deliver to the consumer. We had a very specific box that “Banshee” could be made in, in terms of our budget.

The first thing that came to mind was what I call the “one olive.” The one olive is a story that originates with American Airlines back in the ’80s, when American Airlines took one olive out of their inflight meal – and saved $ 40,000. It’s all about challenging and making everybody their own producer and their own CEO and asking, ‘What is that one thing I can take out that either saves money or makes us that more efficient over the course of 100 days?’

Maybe $ 1,000 isn’t particularly exciting, but when you do it across a season, that’s an official day of shooting. That’s seven more minutes of content that we can get done that day.

We just looked for all these small ways that I feel put nearly an episode’s worth of saving back into the show, so we could make our show more robust and make the action scenes that much bigger and get the actor that we really want.

These are things that the audience gets to enjoy.

What are some of the cost-saving measures?

We also tried to find our olives by using the apps and technology that’s right in front of us, like Skype and Facetime and iChat so we don’t have to fly everybody around? I think probably 75 percent of the crew including directors were hired through some form of video conferencing. You saw the pilot, with the bus crash. We scouted all of that via Google Streetview. We could find blocks and circle around and look up and down and did all the legwork until we absolutely had to go to New York. So we saved on those flights, those hotels, those per diems.

You’ve invested in so many social media sites. Is there something that want to say on the show about the changing nature of identity when we can all take on different personalities online? Your main character, Lucas Hood (Antony Starr) actually takes on another person’s life.

Lucas does the most obvious adoption. A lot of people’s secrets and new identities and new lives are happening before the series starts, which is why we’ve shot an entire online series with our cast.

One of those characters, Job, is constantly in flux – even in terms of whether he appears male or female. Is he transgendered?

He’s straddling this line of androgyny. We specifically don’t want to answer questions about Job’s sexuality… he is a chameleon. He has something that he can tap into depending on his situation. By the time you get to the finale you won’t believe where Job goes.

Internet News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: “Banshee” head Greg Yaitanes: secrets galore, but hold the olives
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/banshee-head-greg-yaitanes-secrets-galore-but-hold-the-olives/
Link To Post : “Banshee” head Greg Yaitanes: secrets galore, but hold the olives
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Chicago rapper facing jail for parole violation

CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago rapper Chief Keef has been taken into custody after a juvenile court judge decided a video of him firing a semiautomatic rifle at a New York gun range was a violation of probation.

The artist, real name Keith Cozart, was sentenced last year to 18 months' probation after his conviction on aggravated unlawful use of a weapon charges for pointing a gun at police officers.

The Chicago Sun-Times reports (http://bit.ly/VJ1YUt) Judge Carl Anthony Walker said the video showed a disregard for the court's authority. Walker scheduled a Thursday sentencing hearing for the 17-year-old Cozart.

Defense attorney Dennis Berkson told Walker his client never took the gun outside of the range and the target practice was supervised.

Chief Keef's first album, "Finally Rich," was released last year to mixed reviews.

___

Information from: Chicago Sun-Times, http://www.suntimes.com/index

Read More..

The New Old Age Blog: In Flu Season,Use a Mask. But Which One?

Do face masks help prevent people from getting the flu? And if so, how much protection do they give?

You might think the answer to this question would be well established. It’s not.

In fact, there is considerable uncertainty over how well face masks guard against influenza when people use them outside of hospitals and other health care settings. This has been a topic of discussion and debate in infectious disease circles since the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic, also known as swine flu.

As the government noted in a document that provides guidance on the issue, “Very little information is available about the effectiveness of facemasks and respirators in controlling the spread of pandemic influenza in community settings.” This is also true of seasonal influenza — the kind that strikes every winter and that we are experiencing now, experts said.

Let’s jump to the bottom line for older people and caregivers before getting into the details. If someone is ill with the flu, coughing and sneezing and living with others, say an older spouse who is a bit frail, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends the use of a face mask “if available and tolerable” or a tissue to cover the nose and mouth.

If you are healthy and serving as a caregiver for someone who has the flu — say, an older person who is ill and at home — the C.D.C. recommends using a face mask or a respirator. (I’ll explain the difference between those items in just a bit.) But if you are a household member who is not in close contact with the sick person, keep at a distance and there is no need to use a face mask or respirator, the C.D.C. advises.

The recommendations are included in another document related to pandemic influenza — a flu caused by a new virus that circulates widely and ends up going global because people lack immunity. That is not a threat this year, but the H3N2 virus that is circulating widely is hitting many older adults especially hard. So the precautions are a good idea, even outside a pandemic situation, said Dr. Ed Septimus, a spokesman for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

The key idea here is exposure, Dr. Septimus said. If you are a caregiver and intimately exposed to someone who is coughing, sneezing and has the flu, wearing a mask probably makes sense — as it does if you are the person with the flu doing the coughing and sneezing and a caregiver is nearby.

But the scientific evidence about how influenza is transmitted is not as strong as experts would like, said Dr. Carolyn Bridges, associate director of adult immunization at the C.D.C. It is generally accepted that the flu virus is transmitted through direct contact — when someone who is ill touches his or her nose and then a glass that he or she hands to someone else, for instance — and through large droplets that go flying through the air when a person coughs or sneezes. What is not known is the extent to which tiny aerosol particles are implicated in transmission.

Evidence suggests that these tiny particles may play a more important part than previously suspected. For example, a November 2010 study in the journal PLoS One found that 81 percent of flu patients sent viral material through air expelled by coughs, and 65 percent of the virus consisted of small particles that can be inhaled and lodge deeper in the lungs than large droplets.

That is a relevant finding when it comes to masks, which cover much of the face below the eyes but not tightly, letting air in through gaps around the nose and mouth. As the C.D.C.’s advisory noted, “Facemasks help stop droplets from being spread by the person wearing them. They also keep splashes or sprays from reaching the mouth and nose of the person wearing them. They are not designed to protect against breathing in the very small particle aerosols that may contain viruses.”

In other words, you will get some protection, but it is not clear how much. In most circumstances, “if you’re caring for a family member with influenza, I think a surgical mask is perfectly adequate,” said Dr. Carol McLay, an infection control consultant based in Lexington, Ky.

By contrast, respirators fit tightly over someone’s face and are made of materials that filter out small particles that carry the influenza virus. They are recommended for health care workers who are in intimate contact with patients and who have to perform activities like suctioning their lungs. So-called N95 respirators block at least 95 percent of small particles in tests, if properly fitted.

Training in how to use respirators is mandated in hospitals, but no such requirement applies outside, and consumers frequently put them on improperly. One study of respirator use in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, when mold was a problem, found that only 24 percent of users put them on the right way. Also, it can be hard to breathe when respirators are used, and this can affect people’s willingness to use them as recommended.

Unfortunately, research about the relative effectiveness of masks and respirators is not robust, and there is no guidance backed by scientific evidence available for consumers, Dr. Bridges said. Nor is there any clear way of assessing the relative merits of various products being sold to the public, which differ in design and materials used.

“Honestly, some of the ones I’ve seen are almost like a paper towel with straps,” Dr. McLay said. Her advice: go with name-brand items used by your local hospital.

Meanwhile, it is worth repeating: The single most important thing that older people and caregivers can do to prevent the flu is to be vaccinated, Dr. Bridges said. “It’s the best tool we have,” she said, noting that preventing flu also involves vigilant hand washing, using tissues or arms to block sneezing, and staying home when ill so people do not transmit the virus. And it is by no means too late to get a shot, whose cost Medicare will cover for older adults.

Read More..

All Boeing 787 Dreamliner jets in Japan grounded

All 24 of Japan's Boeing 787 Dreamliner passenger jets were grounded for safety checks after one of the planes operated by All Nippon Airways made an emergency landing in western Japan.

Details of the problem were still being checked, ANA spokesman Takuya Taniguchi said Wednesday after the flight to Tokyo from Ube landed at the Takamatsu airport, where NTV television reported passengers had used emergency slides to exit the jet. The airport was temporarily closed.

The plane landed after a cockpit message showed battery problems. It was the latest of a series of problems including a battery fire and a fuel leak on ANA Dreamliners parked at Logan International Airport in Boston last week. No one has been seriously injured in any of the incidents.

Japan's Transport Ministry said the airlines that operate Dreamliners had grounded the planes voluntarily. ANA operates 17 of the jets and Japan Airlines has seven. The Japanese planes represent almost half of the 50 Dreamliners being flown commercially worldwide.

After the Boston incidents, the Federal Aviation Administration launched an unusual "comprehensive safety review of Boeing 787 critical systems," including a sweeping evaluation of the way that Boeing designs, manufactures and assembles the aircraft.

Boeing said it would participate in the review with the FAA and believed the process would bolster the public's confidence in the reliability of the aircraft.

The move came despite an "unprecedented" certification process for the 787 in which FAA technical experts logged 200,000 hours of work over nearly two years and flew on numerous test flights, FAA Administrator Michael Huerta said. There were more than a dozen new special conditions developed during the certification because of the Dreamliner's innovative design.

Certification of the Dreamliner was completed Aug. 25, 2011, and the first plane was delivered to All Nippon Airways a month later. It was more than three years late because of design problems and supplier issues.

The Dreamliner, a twin-aisle aircraft that can seat 210 to 290 passengers, is the first large commercial jet with more than half its structure made of composite materials (carbon fibers meshed together with epoxy) rather than aluminum sheets. Another innovative application is the change from hydraulically actuated systems typically found on passenger jets to electrically powered systems involving lithium ion batteries.

Times staff writers W.J. Hennigan in Los Angeles and David Pierson in Shanghai contributed to this report.

Read More..

SoCal Edison destroyed downed poles before inspection

A state probe into the widespread power outages caused by a furious 2011 windstorm was unable to determine whether toppled utility poles met safety standards because Southern California Edison destroyed most of them before they could be inspected.

The winds that roared through the San Gabriel Valley knocked down hundreds of utility poles, snapped cables and uprooted scores of trees, leaving nearly a quarter of a million Edison customers without power, some for a full week.

In a report released Monday, the California Public Utilities Commission found that at least 21 poles were unstable because of termite destruction, dry rot or other damage before tumbling over in wind gusts of up to 120 mph on Nov. 30 and Dec. 1, 2011.

But more than 75% of the 248 Edison poles that were knocked down in the storm were destroyed by the utility before they could be inspected, a violation of commission rules.

"At the onset of [power] restoration efforts, preservation of failed poles was not made a priority by Southern California Edison," the report says.

Of the 248 poles that failed, partial segments of only about 60 poles were collected and delivered for analysis by commission engineers — the remaining poles were "discarded by SCE staff," according to the report.

Efforts to reconstruct downed poles, many of them sliced into segments smaller than 10 inches, "were immensely hindered by the nature of SCE's collection and cataloging methodology," investigators reported.

Edison workers scattered small pole segments in various collection bins, "making it nearly impossible to determine which failed pole they belonged to," according to investigators.

A spokesman for the utility declined to comment on the report, saying the utility was in the process of formulating a statement.

Commission investigators also found that at least 17 wire pole support systems did not meet safety standards.

The report calls on Edison to update its emergency response procedures and test them on a yearly basis.

Officials will consider formal enforcement actions, including financial penalties, if Edison does not comply.

In a statement Monday, U.S. Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) — who represents Pasadena, South Pasadena, San Marino and other San Gabriel Valley cities — called for "immediate action" to ensure the issues raised in the report would not recur.

"This report confirms that by following such regulations and by asking for mutual assistance, power could have been restored more quickly," Chu said.

Former Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, who until recently represented part of the affected area, said the report "confirms what everyone who lived through the windstorm knew from personal experience, that Edison was not prepared and public safety and consumers suffered as a result."

State Sen. Carol Liu (D-La Cañada Flintridge) said the report raises fears that Edison equipment might sustain similar damage in future disasters.

"I am concerned that service and safety doesn't seem to be their priority," said Liu, who is married to California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Peevey.

The report comes less than a year after an Edison-commission study determined the utility had inadequate plans in place for emergencies and communicating with the public. The study, by Maryland-based Davies Consulting, also said the utility could have shortened power restoration time by one day or more by doing a better job of tracking and preparing for bad weather.

At the same time, the consultant commended Edison for having adequate staffing and managing a response that left no workers or customers injured.

joe.piasecki@latimes.com

Read More..

Verizon may be prepping a new mid-range Samsung smartphone with a 720p display

Read More..

AP source: Lance Armstrong tells Winfrey he doped

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Lance Armstrong has finally come clean.

After years of bitter and forceful denials, he offered a simple "I'm sorry" to friends and colleagues and then admitted he used performance-enhancing drugs during an extraordinary cycling career that included seven Tour de France victories.

Armstrong confessed to doping during an interview with Oprah Winfrey taped Monday, just a couple of hours after an emotional apology to the staff at the Livestrong charity he founded and was later forced to surrender, a person familiar with the situation told The Associated Press. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the interview is to be broadcast Thursday on Winfrey's network.

The confession was a stunning reversal for the proud athlete and celebrity who sought lavish praise in the court of public opinion and used courtrooms to punish his critics.

For more than a decade, Armstrong dared anybody who challenged his version of events to prove it. Finally, he told the tale himself after promising over the weekend to answer Winfrey's questions "directly, honestly and candidly."

Winfrey was scheduled to appear on "CBS This Morning" on Tuesday morning to discuss the interview. She tweeted shortly after the interview: "Just wrapped with (at)lancearmstrong More than 2 1/2 hours. He came READY!"

The cyclist was stripped of his Tour de France titles, lost most of his endorsements and was forced to leave Livestrong last year after the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency issued a damning, 1,000-page report that accused him of masterminding a long-running doping scheme.

Armstrong started the day with a visit to the headquarters of the Livestrong charity he founded in 1997 and turned into a global force on the strength of his athletic dominance and personal story of surviving testicular cancer that had spread to his lungs and brain.

About 100 Livestrong staff members gathered in a conference room as Armstrong told them "I'm sorry." He choked up during a 20-minute talk, expressing regret for the long-running controversy tied to performance-enhancers had caused, but stopped short of admitting he used them.

Before he was done, several members were in tears when he urged them to continue the charity's mission, helping cancer patients and their families.

"Heartfelt and sincere," is how Livestrong spokeswoman Katherine McLane described his speech.

Armstrong later huddled with almost a dozen people before stepping into a room set up at a downtown Austin hotel for the interview with Winfrey. The group included close friends and lawyers. They exchanged handshakes and smiles, but declined comment and no further details about the interview were released because of confidentiality agreements signed by both camps.

Winfrey has promoted her interview, one of the biggest for OWN since she launched the network in 2011, as a "no-holds barred" session, and after the voluminous USADA report — which included testimony from 11 former teammates — she had plenty of material for questions. USADA chief executive Travis Tygart, a longtime critic of Armstrong's, called the drug regimen practiced while Armstrong led the U.S. Postal Service team "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen."

USADA did not respond to requests for comment about Armstrong's confession.

Hein Verbruggen, the former president of the International Cycling Union, said Tuesday he wasn't ready to speak about the confession.

"I haven't seen the interview. It's all guessing," Verbruggen told the AP. "After that, we have an independent commission which I am very confident will find out the truth of these things."

For years, Armstrong went after his critics ruthlessly during his reign as cycling champion. He scolded some in public and didn't hesitate to punish outspoken riders during the race itself. He waged legal battles against still others in court.

At least one of his opponents, the London-based Sunday Times, has already filed a lawsuit to recover about $500,000 it paid him to settle a libel case, and Dallas-based SCA Promotions, which tried to deny Armstrong a promised bonus for a Tour de France win, has threatened to bring another lawsuit seeking to recover more than $7.5 million awarded by an arbitration panel.

In Australia, the government of South Australia state said Tuesday it will seek the repayment of several million dollars in appearance fees paid to Armstrong for competing in the Tour Down Under in 2009, 2010 and 2011.

"We'd be more than happy for Mr. Armstrong to make any repayment of monies to us," South Australia Premier Jay Weatherill said.

Betsy Andreu, the wife of former Armstrong teammate Frankie Andreu, was one of the first to publicly accuse Armstrong of using performance-enhancing drugs. She called news of Armstrong's confession "very emotional and very sad," and choked up when asked to comment.

"He used to be one of my husband's best friends and because he wouldn't go along with the doping, he got kicked to the side," she said. "Lance could have a positive impact if he tells the truth on everything. He's got to be completely honest."

Betsy Andreu testified in SCA's arbitration case challenging the bonus in 2005, saying Armstrong admitted in an Indiana hospital room in 1996 that he had taken many performance-enhancing drugs, a claim Armstrong vehemently denied.

"It would be nice if he would come out and say the hospital room happened," Andreu said. "That's where it all started."

Former teammate Floyd Landis, who was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title for doping, has filed a federal whistle-blower lawsuit that accused Armstrong of defrauding the U.S. Postal Service. An attorney familiar with Armstrong's legal problems told the AP that the Justice Department is highly likely to join the lawsuit. The False Claims Act lawsuit could result in Armstrong paying a substantial amount of money to the U.S. government. The deadline for the department to join the case is Thursday, though the department could seek an extension if necessary.

According to the attorney, who works outside the government, the lawsuit alleges that Armstrong defrauded the U.S. government based on his years of denying use of performance-enhancing drugs. The attorney spoke on condition of anonymity because the source was not authorized to speak on the record about the matter.

The lawsuit most likely to be influenced by a confession might be the Sunday Times case. Potential perjury charges stemming from Armstrong's sworn testimony in the 2005 arbitration fight would not apply because of the statute of limitations. Armstrong was not deposed during the federal investigation that was closed last year.

Armstrong is said to be worth around $100 million. But most sponsors dropped him after USADA's scathing report — at the cost of tens of millions of dollars — and soon after, he left the board of Livestrong.

After the USADA findings, he was also barred from competing in the elite triathlon or running events he participated in after his cycling career. World Anti-Doping Code rules state his lifetime ban cannot be reduced to less than eight years. WADA and U.S. Anti-Doping officials could agree to reduce the ban further depending on what information Armstrong provides and his level of cooperation.

___

Litke reported from Chicago. Pete Yost in Washington also contributed to this report.

Read More..