Hollywood writers were optimistic they could end a three-month strike that has crippled the entertainment industry after reviewing a proposed deal from studios that increases their payments for online use of TV shows and movies.

Leaders of the Writers Guild of America recommended the deal Saturday to thousands of members gathered on both coasts and warned that holding out for a better deal might be disastrous.

Union chief negotiator John Bowman told writers at the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles that "if they push any further, everyone would fall off the cliff," said Mike Rowe, a writer for the animated show "Futurama."

The WGA board planned to meet Sunday and decide whether to authorize a membership vote to lift the strike, according to a person familiar with the plan who requested anonymity because of a media blackout.

If guild members approve, they could be back at work on Wednesday, although formal approval of a contract would have to await ratification by members, which could take two weeks.

Giving writers a 48-hour window to vote on lifting the strike order would help alleviate concerns that the agreement was being pushed too rapidly by the guild's board.

Still, writers seemed confident that the walkout, which cost the Los Angeles area economy alone an estimated $1 billion or more, was coming to a close.

"It's a historic moment for labor in this country," said Oscar-nominated WGA member Michael Moore, who attended the New York meeting.

Carmen Culver, a film and TV writer, lauded the guild "for hanging tough."

"It's a great day for the labor movement. We have suffered a lot of privation in order to achieve what we've achieved," Culver said.

The WGA's first strike in 20 years began Nov. 5 and involved 10,000 members. It idled thousands of other entertainment industry workers, from caterers to security staff, disrupted both TV and movie production and derailed the Golden Globes awards, which was reduced to a news conference because actors wouldn't cross picket lines.

The Grammy Awards, set for Sunday night, were not affected because they received a waiver allowing writers to work on them. But an end to the strike could permit resumption of work for the Feb. 24 Academy Awards show.

A tentative three-year agreement was hammered out in recent talks between the WGA and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, with the actual contract language concluded by lawyers on Friday.

According to the guild's summary, the deal provides union jurisdiction over projects created for the Internet based on certain guidelines, sets compensation for streamed, ad-supported programs and increases residuals for downloaded movies and TV programs.

Once again defying a veto threat from President Bush, the House this afternoon passed a new bill to provide health insurance for 10 million children, but not by a margin large enough to override a promised veto. The vote was 265 to 142, or 7 votes short of the two-thirds needed to override a veto. Forty-three Republicans joined 222 Democrats in voting for the bill. Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California implored members to vote for the bill, declaring that it "has the support of the American people."

But the Republican minority leader, John A. Boehner of Ohio, said late revisions to the bill were "window-dressing rather than substantive changes."

Throughout hours of debate, several Republican opponents of the legislation said its supporters were trying to ram it through while much of the California delegation was back home because of the wildfires in their state. Ten of the 26 members who did not vote today are from California, and 8 of the 10 are Republicans.

A week ago, President Bush's veto of the original bill was sustained, as the 273-to-156 vote in support of the bill was 13 short of the toll needed to overturn the veto. Forty-four Republicans voted then to override the veto, and the suspense before today's vote was whether the bill's supporters would convert any Republicans. But only 43 Republicans voted for the bill today.

"It's unfortunate that even after a week of meetings and adjustments to the bill at the Republicans' request, they would still apparently prefer to play politics instead of reauthorizing a program the vast majority of the country supports," Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said after today's vote. "Once again, Republicans have chosen partisanship over pediatrics."

The Senate will probably approve the revised bill next week. There is a veto-proof majority in favor of the bill in the Senate, but today's vote in the House, as well as last week's, signal that it will sustain Mr. Bush's veto again.

If that happens, Democrats said, they may extend the existing insurance program for children through next summer. They would then schedule another vote on the issue in September or October, in the hope of inflicting maximum political damage on Republicans just before the 2008 elections.

Two prominent Republican senators who generally side with the White House, Orrin G. Hatch of Utah and Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, expressed disappointment after this afternoon's vote, underscoring how the children's insurance issue cuts across party politics.

"It's a shame that this legislation, which is even stronger than the compromise legislation passed earlier this month, did not secure a veto-proof majority of support from members of the House of Representatives," Mr. Grassley said.

Mr. Hatch called today's outcome "a lost opportunity for America's low-income, uninsured children" and said he was dismayed that the issue had become such a political battle. "As a result, low-income children will continue to be uninsured," he said. "That is a shame."

The new bill, like the one vetoed by Mr. Bush on Oct. 3, would cost $60 billion over five years, an increase of $35 billion over the current level of spending.

Supporters of the new bill said it addressed all the major concerns that prompted Republicans to oppose an earlier version. The new bill, they said, would end coverage of adults, ban coverage of illegal immigrants and generally prohibit states from covering children in families with incomes above three times the poverty level, or $61,950 for a family of four.

Speaker Pelosi said the restrictions on adults, immigrants and high-income families were clear in the first bill, and "they are even clearer in the second bill."

For the cost of just 41 days of the Iraq war, Democrats said, the government could finance a full year of health care for 10 million children.

But President Bush said his concerns had not been addressed "in a meaningful way," and many Republican lawmakers said the changes were illusory.

"The bill puts lipstick on a sow," said Representative Thomas M. Reynolds, Republican of New York. "Today is raw politics — trotting out a vote just for the sake of a vote."

Representative Ginny Brown-Waite, Republican of Florida, said the State Children's Health Insurance Program would still be a "magnet for illegal aliens." Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Michigan, said that rich children could still qualify for benefits because states, in determining eligibility, could ignore or disregard part of a family's income.

Representative Tom Price, Republican of Georgia, said the bill still called for a "a massive tax increase" The federal excise tax on cigarettes would be increased to $1 a pack, up 61 cents from the current level.

And Representative Pete Sessions, Republican of Texas, said that under the new bill, as under the original, two million people would lose private health insurance coverage and enroll in the expanded government program.

Negotiators with the United Auto Workers union and Chrysler LLC remained at the bargaining table Saturday evening as efforts to reach a tentative contract agreement intensified, a person briefed on the talks said. The person, who requested anonymity because the talks are private, said they are expected to run through the weekend. Ford spokeswoman Marcey Evans and UAW spokesman Roger Kerson did not return calls seeking comment Saturday. Chrysler spokeswoman Michele Tinson confirmed that the parties were negotiating Saturday but would not comment further.

The UAW reached a tentative agreement with General Motors Corp. on Sept. 26 but the agreement must be ratified by a majority of GM's UAW members to take effect. Members began voting last week and are expected to wrap up votes by Wednesday.

A person briefed on the talks said late Friday that the UAW selected Chrysler as its next bargaining target and would turn to Ford Motor Co. last. The person requested anonymity because the talks are private.

A message was left with Ford spokeswoman Marcey Evans seeking comment.

Local union leaders on Friday endorsed a tentative agreement between General Motors Corp. and the United Auto Workers that requires GM to pay out at least $35 billion for retiree health care, establishes lower wages for thousands of new employees and offers an unprecedented number of promises for future work at U.S. plants, according to a summary of the agreement provided by the UAW. The agreement still is subject to a vote of GM's 74,000 UAW members, which should be completed by Oct. 10. UAW President Ron Gettelfinger said he's confident members will support the agreement and that Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC will match many of its terms.

"We're happy with this stuff," he said.

GM spokesman Dan Flores said both UAW workers and the company benefit from the agreement. GM didn't release any specifics of the contract Friday; the company typically waits until the contract is ratified to make detailed comments.

"Not only does this new agreement enhance the security for employees and retirees, it enables GM to close competitive gaps in our business, and the projected competitive improvements will allow us to maintain a strong manufacturing presence in the U.S. with significant future investments," Flores said.

Gettelfinger said he hadn't yet decided whether the union would negotiate with Ford or Chrysler next, but he expects to make that call next week. Both automakers have extended their contracts with the union indefinitely.

The linchpin of the deal is a trust fund for retiree health care, known as a Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association, or VEBA. GM, which has around 340,000 retirees and spouses, wanted to form the VEBA in order to get $51 billion in retiree health care debt off its books. The VEBA will be run by an independent board overseen by the UAW.

GM will put $24.1 billion into the VEBA in January 2008 and will pay an additional $5.4 billion to cover retirees' health care costs until the VEBA takes over in January 2010. GM also will make up to 20 additional $165 million payments -- to a maximum of $1.6 billion -- to the VEBA anytime the fund's level is insufficient to provide benefits for at least 25 years.

GM also will be required to pay cash interest on a $4.37 billion convertible note for the benefit of the VEBA. The fund's trustees will be able to convert that note to GM stock, which could be a windfall for the fund if GM's share price goes up. GM's active workers also will be required to contribute a small amount of their cost-of-living increases to the VEBA.

In a two-page letter to retirees sent Friday, the UAW sought to calm retirees' fears about the VEBA, saying the union supports the fund because it protects retirees' benefits in the event of a downturn or bankruptcy. Retirees don't get to vote on the contract.

The UAW was seeking to protect jobs and slow its falling membership in this contract, and Gettelfinger said GM responded with "unprecedented product guarantees." GM committed to building current or existing products at 16 of its 18 U.S. assembly plants, according to the UAW's summary. GM already has announced the closure of a plant in Doraville, Ga., in 2008. A midsize sport utility vehicle plant in Moraine, Ohio, wasn't listed because its workers are represented by the International Electronics Workers-Communications Workers of America.

The 16 factories either will continue building their current products or, in most cases, the next generation of those products. A plant in the Detroit area is scheduled to begin producing the electric Chevrolet Volt, one of GM's most anticipated products, in 2010, while a plant in Lordstown, Ohio, is set to get a new subcompact.

"The whole thing looks fantastic," said Dave Green, president of one of two local unions in Lordstown. The agreement, he said, preserves wages and health care for active workers "and we've done creative stuff that's going to make the company profitable in North America."

But the future of some plants may be in jeopardy.

GM's Orion Township plant, which will make the Pontiac G6 mid-sized car until 2013, and the Wilmington, Del. plant, which makes the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky roadsters until 2012, do not have new vehicles listed on the UAW's summary.

Eldon Renaud, head of United Auto Workers Local 2164 in Bowling Green, Ky., said production of the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky will move from Wilmington to his plant, leaving Wilmington's future in doubt.

The union said assembly line workers will get economic gains totaling $13,056 over the life of the four-year contract. They will get bonuses in each year of the contract, including a $3,000 bonus when the contract is ratified, as well as cost-of-living increases.

General Motors workers return to work today after the auto maker agreed to a new labor contract with the United Auto Workers union. The deal ends a two-day strike but questions remain just how much the deal will save GM.

Shares of GM rose $2.76, or 8.0%, to $37.18, after the company agreed to a tentative contract with the UAW. The UAW represents approximately 74,000 GM employees. The contract ends a national strike that began Monday and crippled GM's production.

The deal sets up a health care trust to pay for retiree healthcare benefits. GM will front the money for the trust while the UAW will run it. GM hopes the trust will help it close a $25-per-hour labor gap with foreign auto makers.

"This agreement helps us close the fundamental competitive gaps that exist in our business," said GM Chief Executive Rick Wagoner. "The projected competitive improvements in this agreement will allow us to maintain a strong manufacturing presence in the United States along with significant future investments."

But former Forbes senior editor Jerry Flint says that the health care trust won't reduce any costs. He explains the health care bill remains the same whether the UAW or GM is in charge. "A health care trust, if it happens, may look good today, but one day it will come back to haunt GM," says Flint.

The deal must now be approved by the rank-and-file union membership. The Securities and Exchange Commission must also review the contract.

Bargainers for the United Automobile Workers union and General Motors worked through the night in an effort to reach a settlement in contentious contract talks, facing an 11 a.m. Eastern time strike deadline on Monday. G.M.'s 73,000 workers began returning to factories around the United States this morning as scheduled, but were prepared to walk off the job when told to leave by their union. Picket signs, which had been printed 10 days ago when the U.A.W. and G.M. faced an original deadline of midnight Sept. 14, were brought out of storage at local union halls around the country. In many locations, assignments and schedules for picket duty have already been announced, only to be put on hold as negotiations went on.

One local in Flint, Mich., told workers on its Web site, "U.A.W. leaders set 11:00 a.m. as strike deadline. If a strike should occur, members are asked to refer to the letter handed out earlier," the notice, from Local 599, read.

Negotiations continued after the unexpected move by the union late Sunday night. Until then, the U.A.W. had extended its contract on an hour-by-hour basis, and the union's president, Ron Gettelfinger, told workers in a memo last week that the U.A.W. hoped to avoid a strike against G.M.

The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously upheld a Washington state law that restricts how labor unions can use fees collected from nonmembers for political purposes.
The high court ruled the restrictions covering labor unions for public employees do not violate the union's constitutional free-speech rights to engage in political advocacy.
Washington voters in 1992 adopted a campaign finance law that required unions to get the consent of each worker before spending fees on political activity, such as campaigning for or against various measures.

The law also required the unions to refund the fee to nonmembers who oppose the political activity proposed by the union.

The case involved the Washington Education Association, the state's largest teachers union. About 4,000 of the more than 70,000 people it represents choose not to be members, according to the union, which said Washington is the only state in the nation with such a law.

Lawyers for the state and the Bush administration urged the Supreme Court to uphold the law because it was designed to regulate campaign financing in state elections. The high court agreed in an opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia.

"The purpose of the voters of Washington was undoubtedly the general one of protecting the integrity of elections by limiting electoral spending in certain ways," Scalia said.

"Quite obviously, no suppression of ideas is afoot, since the union remains as free as any other entity to participate in the electoral process with all available funds other than" those fees by nonmembers who refuse to give their approval, Scalia said.