Obamas Return Home to the White House

President Obama is back in the White House.

After a gut-wrenching (and expensive) campaign that had him on the road for the better part of the last two months, Mr. Obama escorted his wife, Michelle, and their two daughters, Malia and Sasha, back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue after Air Force One landed at Andrews Air Force Base at 6:20 p.m. Wednesday.

Because of the weather, the Obamas took a motorcade instead of Marine One back to the White House.

This arrival lacked the pomp and circumstance of Mr. Obama's arrival at the White House after the 2008 election, for obvious reasons. Besides a gaggle of reporters, photographers and Secret Service agents, there were no staff members lined up to greet the president, although he was trailed by weary-looking staff members who accompanied him in the motorcade.

And he did get a congratulatory sheet cake from the crew aboard Air Force One on the flight home. As he posed with the cre w on the plane, a question dawned on him. “There is somebody flying this plane, right?” he asked.

At 6:55 the S.U.V. carrying the Obamas pulled in front of the south portico of the White House. Mr. Obama got out, commented on the weather - “chilly,” he pronounced it - and ignored a shouted question from a reporter about whether he thought he had a mandate.

And then he and his family walked back into their home for the next four years.

Labor Unions Claim Credit for Obama\'s Victory

The nation's labor unions have not been shy about claiming substantial credit for President Obama's re-election.

In a news conference Wednesday, Richard Trumka, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.'s president, said that without the huge push by the nation's labor unions, Mr. Obama never would have won Ohio, Wisconsin and Nevada - and their combined 34 electoral votes.

“We did deliver those states,” Mr. Trumka said. “Without organized labor, none of those states would have been in the president's column.”

A.F.L.-C.I.O. officials said that during the last four days of the campaign, union members and their community partners contacted 800,000 voters in Ohio alone, as part of what they said were 10.7 million door knocks and phone calls made nationwide by the federation's 56 unions. Moreover, the Service Employees International Union said that its members alone knocked on 5 million doors, including 3.7 million in battleground states.

“We had 100,000 volunteers across the country in the final days,” said Mary Kay Henry, the S.E.I.U. president.

Sixty percent of union members in Ohio voted for Mr. Obama, higher than the 50 percent that Mr. Obama received over all from Ohio voters, according to exit polls that had not been completed. Union households accounted for 22 percent of Ohio's voters. In Wisconsin, union members made up 21 percent of the electorate, and they voted for Mr. Obama over Mr. Romney, 66 percent to 33 percent.

Fifty-eight percent of union members nationwide backed Mr. Obama and 40 percent supported Mr. Romney.

Michael Podhorzer, the labor federation's political director, said organized labor's newfound ability â€" made possible by the Citizens United decision - to knock on the doors of not just union members, but also those of nonunion workers, went far to explain why a significantly higher percentage of white working-class voters in the battleground states where labor was most active voted for Mr. Obama than white working-class voters in nonbattleground states.

Some political experts say, however, that white working-class voters in the battleground states leaned toward Mr. Obama out of gratitude for the auto industry bailout and because of the many Obama campaign advertisements attacking Mitt Romney for Bain Capital's closing plants and outsourcing jobs.

Lee Saunders, chairman of the A.F.L.-C.I.O.'s political committee and president of the American Federation of State, County and Municpal Employees, said, this was the “the smartest, biggest and broadest effort we've ever run” in a political campaign.

Union leaders also hailed the victories of some of labor's best friends on Capitol Hill, including Sherrod Brown, a Democratic Senator from Ohio.

In his news conference, Mr. Trumka stopped short of saying he expected any quid pro quo from Mr. Obama. But he made clear what organized labor hoped for, especi ally as the White House prepares to negotiate with Republicans on Capitol Hill on how to reduce the budget deficit.

“People don't want cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security,” Mr. Trumka said. “Even people who voted for Mitt Romney don't want that.”

He made clear that to help cut the deficit, Mr. Obama should push forward with his plan to raise taxes on the highest-earning 2 percent of Americans.

The nation's labor unions are planning rallies in roughly 100 cities on Thursday to protest against cuts in Medicare, Social Security or other social insurance programs.

Mr. Trumka said he also wanted Mr. Obama to push more aggressively to create jobs â€" for instance, to invest more in rebuilding the nation's infrastructure and to push Congress to pass the stalled American Jobs Act.

Ms. Henry of the service employees union and Mr. Trumka also made clear that they were eager for the president to push forward on immigration reform, s aying that their organizations would strongly back him in such an effort. They join with many Hispanic groups in calling for a path to legalization for millions of unauthorized immigrants.

On Wednesday, labor leaders were celebrating a major victory in California: the defeat of Proposition 32, a ballot initiative backed by several wealthy conservatives, that would have gone far to cripple labor's political efforts by largely banning unions from using their dues money for politics. That initiative was voted down by 56 percent to 44 percent.

Several conservatives had said that if they won that battle in California, they would push for similar ballot initiatives in other states.

But organized labor suffered a major loss in Michigan on Tuesday. There the United Auto Workers and several public employees unions had vigorously backed a ballot initiative that would have enshrined collective bargaining in the state constitution. Such a move would have prohibited the state's Republican-dominated legislature from enacting a “right to work” law or passing legislation that, like the law in Wisconsin, curbed the ability of government workers to bargain collectively. Business leaders warned that this pro-labor measure would injure the state's business climate and push up costs for cities and school districts.

Labor and business interests each spent more than $20 million in the fight, and the proposal was defeated 58 percent to 42 percent.

Several union leaders said that if they had won that battle in Michigan, they would have pushed for similar labor-friendly initiatives in other states.

In Ryan\'s Hometown, the Calm That Follows Defeat

JANESVILLE, Wis. - The motorcades and Secret Service agents are gone now, and the overcast sky here on Wednesday seemed to channel the town's collective gray mood. Its native son, Representative Paul D. Ryan, had fallen short of the prize.

The blinds were drawn at the Mitt Romney “victory center” here, where volunteers cleaned up soda cans, leftover lawn signs and a life-size cardboard cut-out of the would-be vice-president. Main Street, bustling just 24 hours ago with television trucks and campaign vans when Mr. Ryan blew into town to vote, was nearly silent.

With Election Day come and gone, Joni Bozart, who owns a consignment shop here, said she would miss the excitement. “You didn't know what was going on day to day here,” she said. “It's certainly nothing I could be tired of.”

At that, a worker from Mr. Ryan's campaign office walked in to drop off a box of leftover tea bags. The office would no longer be needing them, he explained: “We g ot to be out of there by Thursday.”

For fans, there was a consolation prize: Mr. Ryan easily won re-election to the House of Representatives, where he will continue to serve this blue-collar city of 60,000. Amid all the pomp of a vice-presidential run, it may have been easy to forget that Mr. Ryan was still pursuing a lower office: a handwritten sign in his campaign office reminded voters, “Yes, Paul is running for Congress.”

But even after Republicans' defeat on Tuesday, residents here said their representative would remain the same hardline fiscal conservative he has always been. Val Yachik, 68, an artist, even urged Mr. Ryan to double down.

“The Republicans are going to have to strengthen their backbone on the fiscal side, because Obama might take it too far to the left in terms of an entitlement society,” said Mr. Yachik, who described Mr. Ryan as “a Jack Kemp conservative.”

“He'll be back sticking needles into Obama, like he should be doing,” Mr. Yachik added, approvingly.

Kitty Cole, an athletic trainer who has lived in Janesville for a decade, said she was struck by the Romney-Ryan ticket's failure to win support from independents and minority groups. “Whether Ryan changes his view on some social issues that really impacted the Republicans in this election, I don't know,” she said, across the street from Mr. Ryan's campaign office.

“But I think from a fiscal, conservative standpoint, his message will remain consistent,” Ms. Cole added. “It hasn't really changed since he's been a congressman all these years.”

Despite this year's distinct anticlimax, neighbors and friends of Mr. Ryan predicted this would not be the final time the nation's attention turned to this southeastern corner of Wisconsin.

Word around town, Ms. Bozart said, is that Mr. Ryan “would be on the top of the ticket next time around.”

She gave a conspi ratorial smile: “This was a practice run.”

Boehner Strikes Conciliatory Tone on \'Fiscal Cliff\'

The House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, striking a conciliatory tone a day after the Republican Party's electoral drubbing, said on Wednesday that he was ready to accept a budget deal that raises federal revenue as long as it is linked to an overhaul of entitlements and a reform of the tax code that closes loopholes, curtails or eliminates deductions and lowers income tax rates.

Mr. Boehner's gesture was the most explicit offer he has made to avert the “fiscal cliff” in January, when billions of dollars in tax increases and automatic spending cuts go into force. And it came hours after Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, offered his own olive branch, saying “it's better to dance than to fight.”

“Mr. President, this is your moment,” Mr. Boehner told reporters in the Capitol. “We're ready to lead, not as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans.”

The offer may be enough to bring the parties to the table in the wake of an election that kept President Obama in power, strengthened the Democrats' grip on the Senate and chipped away at the still-large Republican majority in the House.

But Democrats and Republicans are still far apart. Mr. Boehner made it clear that his vision for additional revenue includes a tax code that lowers even the top income tax rate from where it is now, 35 percent, not where it would be in January when the Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire - 39.6 percent. At least some of that additional revenue would come from economic growth that he said would be fueled by a simpler tax code.

Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York, the third-ranking Democrat, has said those constructs are unacceptable. Democratic leaders say tax reform that lowers tax rates across the board would either hurt the middle class by trimming vital tax benefits like the home mortgage deduction or would not raise enough taxes to meaningfully reduce the deficit. M r. Reid underscored Mr. Obama's contention that tax rates on the rich must rise, saying “the vast majority of Americans” support that, “including rich people.”

But in language and timing, the leaders of Congress's two chambers left the unmistakable impression that they want a deal at least large enough to avert the worst economic impacts of a sudden rise in income, payroll, capital gains, dividend, interest and estate tax rates that would affect virtually every American family, working or not. Mr. Boehner has said for months that a deal to reform taxes and entitlements and substantially lower the deficit is not appropriate for a lame-duck Congress.

But facing a Congress next year that will be less Republican than the current one, he suggested on Wednesday that he would favor a deal that would serve at least as “a down payment on - and a catalyst for - major solutions, enacted in 2013.”

He said he had spoken to the president on Wednesday before m aking his statement to reporters.

“I'm not suggesting we compromise on our principles,” he said, “but I am suggesting we commit ourselves to creating an atmosphere where we can see common ground when it exists and seize it.”

Follow Jonathan Weisman on Twitter at @jonathanweisman.

Before Breaking a Lease, Check Your Renter\'s Policy

An article in Wednesday's paper detailed the woes of New York City renters whose apartments are uninhabitable because of Hurricane Sandy. Some renters, the article said, were wondering if they should break their leases and find another place to live.

But tenants who have bought renter's insurance may have other options if they want to stay in their current location.

Loretta Worters of the Insurance Information Institute says the “additional living expense” provision of renter's insurance, also known as “loss of use” coverage, may come into play if you're unable to live in your apartment due to a covered event like a hurricane.

In that case, she said, most policies will reimburse additional living expenses, but they may set limits on the amount they will pay. Covered expenses include hotel bills, temporary rentals, restaurant meals and other costs you have to pay while the apartment is being repaired or rebuilt.

“Typically, if you live in a certain size and type of apartment, you will get something” for a comparable dwelling, she wrote.

There are caveats, of course. “Each case is different, each policy is different,” she said.

If there's flooding, for instance, you probably won't be reimbursed because most standard renter's policies don't cover flooding. There are exceptions, she said, but “most don't.” You can buy flood insurance from the federal National Flood Insurance Program, but that program doesn't cover additional living expense, she said.

If you have no heat, or no electricity, you may be covered for your additional expenses, but it depends on the specific language in your policy. Sometimes, she said, the policy will provide coverage if you have only structural damage, but it depends on the situation.

Further, the amount of coverage provided for additional living expenses depends on the specific policy language, she said.  There are often dollar limits - in some cases, 20 percent or more of your policy's liability limit. A standard liability limit on a rental policy is $100,000, so that would mean benefits of at least $20,000. Some people buy much higher liability limits, so the coverage for additional living expenses would be higher.

Insurers may also place time limits on coverage for living expenses, usually, one to two years.

She advises checking with your insurance company about the alternative arrangements you plan to make, to make sure they're reasonable and will be covered.

What if your landlord is waiving your rent while the apartment is unlivable? Ms. Worters said any arrangement with your landlord probably wouldn't affect your coverage for additional living expenses because the insurance company wouldn't know that your rent was waived. “The honesty factor comes into play here,” she said.

Are you seeking additional living expenses under a renter's policy? Do you expect yo ur claim to be covered?

Before Breaking a Lease, Check Your Renter\'s Policy

An article in Wednesday's paper detailed the woes of New York City renters whose apartments are uninhabitable because of Hurricane Sandy. Some renters, the article said, were wondering if they should break their leases and find another place to live.

But tenants who have bought renter's insurance may have other options if they want to stay in their current location.

Loretta Worters of the Insurance Information Institute says the “additional living expense” provision of renter's insurance, also known as “loss of use” coverage, may come into play if you're unable to live in your apartment due to a covered event like a hurricane.

In that case, she said, most policies will reimburse additional living expenses, but they may set limits on the amount they will pay. Covered expenses include hotel bills, temporary rentals, restaurant meals and other costs you have to pay while the apartment is being repaired or rebuilt.

“Typically, if you live in a certain size and type of apartment, you will get something” for a comparable dwelling, she wrote.

There are caveats, of course. “Each case is different, each policy is different,” she said.

If there's flooding, for instance, you probably won't be reimbursed because most standard renter's policies don't cover flooding. There are exceptions, she said, but “most don't.” You can buy flood insurance from the federal National Flood Insurance Program, but that program doesn't cover additional living expense, she said.

If you have no heat, or no electricity, you may be covered for your additional expenses, but it depends on the specific language in your policy. Sometimes, she said, the policy will provide coverage if you have only structural damage, but it depends on the situation.

Further, the amount of coverage provided for additional living expenses depends on the specific policy language, she said.  There are often dollar limits - in some cases, 20 percent or more of your policy's liability limit. A standard liability limit on a rental policy is $100,000, so that would mean benefits of at least $20,000. Some people buy much higher liability limits, so the coverage for additional living expenses would be higher.

Insurers may also place time limits on coverage for living expenses, usually, one to two years.

She advises checking with your insurance company about the alternative arrangements you plan to make, to make sure they're reasonable and will be covered.

What if your landlord is waiving your rent while the apartment is unlivable? Ms. Worters said any arrangement with your landlord probably wouldn't affect your coverage for additional living expenses because the insurance company wouldn't know that your rent was waived. “The honesty factor comes into play here,” she said.

Are you seeking additional living expenses under a renter's policy? Do you expect yo ur claim to be covered?

TimesCast Politics: Attention Shifts to Washington

Associated Press

• 0:25  Electoral Paths

  Adam Nagourney looks at the electoral paths forward for the Republican party.

• 4:54  Possible Changes in the White House

  Peter Baker looks at the possible changes to President Obama's cabinet.

• 9:11  The Fiscal Cliff

  Jackie Calmes looks ahead at one of the immediate challenges facing President Obama.

Judge Rules for Employees in 401(k) Fee Case

About a year ago, Ron Lieber wrote a Your Money column that described a closely watched case in which employees of a large manufacturing company, ABB Inc., had sued their employer and Fidelity, the manager of its retirement plan, for charging excessive fees.

This spring, a judge for the federal District Court for the Western District of Missouri ruled in the case, finding that ABB had breached its fiduciary duty - meaning that it failed to act in the best interests of the retirement plan and Fidelity's employees - in several ways, including a failure to properly track record-keeping fees paid to Fidelity. The court also found that Fidelity breached its fiduciary duty to ABB's retirement plan by failing to properly allocate interest earned from the overnight investment of plan funds.

The judge, Nanette Laughrey, ordered ABB to pay $35.2 million in damages and Fidelity to pay $1.7 million.

Last week, the judge further ordered ABB and Fidelity to pay $13.4 m illion in attorney fees and costs. In ordering the payment, Judge Laughrey wrote that “ABB breached its fiduciary duties of both loyalty and prudence to the retirement plans, as a result of which it benefited significantly while plan beneficiaries were deprived of millions of dollars. Fidelity, while less culpable, also took plan assets in violation of its fiduciary duty.”

She said the results of the case “may help benefit other plan beneficiaries, in the event of similar litigation, by further clarifying the duty of loyalty and prudence owed by record keepers and employers.”

In an e-mail, Fidelity said it believed the initial ruling in the case “was in error, and it is being appealed.”

Fidelity also said it disagreed with the court's finding that Fidelity and ABB should pay attorney's fees and said it intended to appeal that finding as well, “since the vast majority of the claims against Fidelity were dismissed by the court, as they have been in prior cases.”

Fidelity also said that it provides “valuable services to 401(k) clients for whom Fidelity serves as a record keeper and trustee,” adding, “We believe the fees charged and the compensation collected by Fidelity for those services are reasonable.”

Do you understand the fees your company pays to your retirement plan?

App Snapshot: \'What Do We Do Now?\'

“What do we do now?” Robert Redford's character famously asked after winning his election in “The Candidate.” For President Obama and Congress, the answer to that is long and complicated. In the Election 2012 app, we've curated a list of forward-looking articles about the challenges ahead, both philosophical and practical:

GOVERNING
Question for the Victor: How Far Do You Push?
The next battle for President Obama is to decide what he wants to accomplish in a second term and how to go about it. (The New York Times)

• Winning a Second Term, Obama Will Confront Familiar Headwinds
  The generational shift President Obama embodied is under way, but it will not change Washington as quickly as voters once hoped. (The New York Times)
• Now That He's Won, the 6 Splitting Headaches W aiting for Obama
  Mr. Obama faces a second term that presents both immediate and longer-term challenges, some with deadlines that must be confronted in the seven weeks before New Year's Eve.
  (NBC Politics)
• Abroad, Obama's Victory Brings Demands for Attention
  World leaders are vying for favor as President Obama embarks on a second term with many major issues unresolved from the first. (The New York Times)

LAME DUCK SESSION
Though some lawmakers are on the way out, little happened during the election to change the dynamic as Congress confronts the so-called fiscal cliff.

• Fresh From Re-election, President Finds Himself on Edge of ‘Fiscal Cliff'
  President Obama returns from the campaign trail to face an epic year-end battle over taxes and spending. (The Washington Post)

Moving on to the lame duck… Speaker John Boehner will make a statement today at 3:30 on the fiscal cliff.

- Roll Call Politics (@rollcallpols) 7 Nov 12

• Fiscal Impasse Leads to Caution After Election
  Business leaders and investors warned that the focus would quickly shift from electoral politics to the looming fiscal uncertainty in Washington. (The New York Times)
• Reid Extends Olive Branch (Sort Of) to Boehner and McConnell Ahead of Lame Duck
  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told a crowd of cheering Democrats that Republicans should learn from the political fallout caused by making their “No. 1 goal” to defeat the president “and not work to get legislation passed.” (The Hill)
• Boehner: G.O.P. House Majority Means ‘No Mandate' for Tax Hikes
  In a warning to Mr. Obama, House Speaker John A. Boehner said Tuesday night that the re-election of the House Republican majority means that there is “no mandate for raising tax rates” on the American people. (The Hill)

Wednesday Reading: One Low, Low Price for Sun and Sand

A variety of consumer-focused articles appears daily in The New York Times and on our blogs. Each weekday morning, we gather them together here so you can quickly scan the news that could hit you in your wallet.

• Suzuki's small cars weren't a fit in the United States. (Business)
• F.D.A. clears a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. (Business)
• Stuffing, set free from turkey. (Dining)
• Your new best friend: the sommelier. (Dining)
• Companies resist stronger online privacy rules for children. (Bits)
• Britax recalls 55,500 child restraints. (Wheels)
• Fuel economy in the United States is at a high. (Wheels)
• Loading photos from camera to iPad. (Gadgetwise)
• Can exercise protect the brain from fatty foods? (Well)
• The vagina (and penis) dialogues. (Motherlode)
• November college checklist for juniors. (The Choice)
• Moving back home after college can be a good thing. (Booming)
• On e low, low price for sun and sand. (Frugal Traveler)

At Watch Parties, Congressional Leaders Take In Election Results

With the White House and the Senate up for grabs on election night, Congressional leaders from both parties staked out corners of Capitol Hill to take in the results.

At the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, near the White House, Republicans were met with disappointment when the results began to show that they would not win 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and the Senate from Democrats as they had hoped.

Guests mingled to country music and ate sliders, falafel and chicken-on-a-stick while the results came in on a large screen tuned in to Fox News. But they began leaving as the Senate moved further out of reach. By the time cable news networks began calling the presidential election for President Obama, only a few hundred guests remained.

Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, was expected to speak but did not. Earlier, Mr. Priebus had celebrated having “a party that's functional and operational again” and promi sed to reappear minutes later.

“All I can say is, Wow,” said Collin Raye, a country singer, who performed after the presidential race was called.

The mood had shifted dramatically from earlier in the evening, when Republicans won the House. Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio, his leadership job presumably secure for the next Congress, practically galloped on stage to claim the victory. “Heeeeey, Republicans!” he bellowed.

Speaking under a billowing American flag, Mr. Boehner said that over the past two years, House Republicans had defended Americans against a government that spent, taxed and borrowed too much. Going forward, Mr. Boehner said Republicans were willing to work with whoever won the White House to address pressing issues like the “staggering” national debt, and to devise laws that support small businesses, create jobs and grow the economy, just as long as the solutions don't involve raising taxes.

“ With this vote, the American people have also made clear that there is no mandate for raising tax rates,” he said.

He ended by saying that Republicans were “humbled” to keep their majority and made a promise to voters that “we will never let you down.”

Nearby at the Liaison Capitol Hill, a hotel, Democrats gathered in a humbler setting - a conference room. Some people sat on the floor with their legs crossed and coats draped over their laps. Cheers rippled through the crowd as the party picked up Senate seats in Indiana, Massachusetts and Missouri - tightening its hold on the chamber - and again when the networks called the presidential race for President Obama.

“People this is what happens when your No. 1 goal is to defeat the president and not work to get legislation passed,” the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, said minutes after the networks began projecting Mr. Obama's re-election. He could barely get through his speech without spontan eous eruptions from the crowd.

Eyes and ears were on Representative Nancy Pelosi though, who did not mention her role as House minority leader after the party failed once again to clinch the 25 seats needed to control that chamber. But little could dampen the crowd's spirits: House or no House, they went on to chant “four more years.”