Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (9526)	1/25/2001 3:30:07 PM
From: calgal	Respond to of 10042

Greenspan Signals New Rate Cuts, Backs Bush Tax Reduction Plan Thursday, January 25, 2001 By Martin Crutsinger WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan told Congress Thursday that rising estimates of budget surpluses make room for a tax cut. He said the U.S. economy has slowed dramatically, signaling that further Federal Reserve interest rate reductions are on the way. Dennis Cook/AP Thursday: Greenspan testifies before the Senate Budget Committee on Capitol Hill. Greenspan's endorsement of tax cuts provided a significant boost for President Bush's effort to reduce taxes. However, Greenspan would not be drawn into a discussion of whether the 10-year, $1.6 trillion package being put forward by Bush is an appropriate size. Discussing the current economy, Greenspan said, "As far as we can judge, we have had a very dramatic slowing down. We are probably very close to zero at this particular moment." Wall Street took Greenspan's statements in stride. Two hours into his testimony, the Dow Jones industrials were up about 80 points — just where the index stood when he began speaking. Nasdaq was down 50 points at midday. Greenspan's comments on economic conditions were the first he has made since the Federal Reserve announced a surprise one-half-point cut in interest rates Jan. 3. The remarks revealed the seriousness with which the central bank views the economy's weakening, which began in the last two months of 2000. Greenspan said "inflation pressures are well contained." While he refused to answer a direct question over whether the Fed will cut rates again at its meeting next week, his comments about the sharp slowdown and the absence of inflation pressures sent a strong signal that further rate cuts will be forthcoming. Greenspan, who previously had expressed a preference for using the projected surpluses to pay down the national debt, said he still believes debt reduction is the best use for the added revenue. But he said government estimates project more than enough surplus funds to pay off the debt and still cut taxes. "The sequence of upward revisions to the budget surplus projections for several years now has reshaped the choices and opportunities before us," Greenspan said. "The most recent data significantly raise the probability that sufficient resources will be available to undertake both debt reduction and surplus-lowering policy initiatives," Greenspan said. "Accordingly, the trade-off (between paying down the debt and other possibilities) faced earlier appears no longer an issue." Greenspan refused in the question period to be drawn into endorsing a specific size for the tax cuts, saying that judgment was best left to Congress and the administration through the political process. Bush is recommending a $1.6 trillion cut over 10 years, a level that Democrats in Congress contend is too large. Nevertheless, Greenspan's endorsement of the economic soundness of cutting taxes represented a significant victory for the new administration. Bush and his advisers have said that because of the steep slowdown in economic growth he may accelerate his tax program in an effort to provide insurance that the country does not slip into a recession. Greenspan endorsed accelerating the tax cuts, saying that would be needed in any event to smooth out the economic impact of the government's goal of eliminating this decade the more than $3 trillion in national debt held by the public. "And should current economic weakness spread beyond what appears likely, having a tax cut in place may, in fact, do noticeable good," Greenspan said. Greenspan, however, noted the hurdles supporters face in such an approach, given the time it will take Congress to approve any tax reductions. "Such tax initiatives, however, historically have proved difficult to implement in the time frame in which recessions have developed and ended," Greenspan said, referring to an effort made by then-President Ford in 1975 to lower individual taxpayer withholding rates. He said even this "easiest of tax changes" was not implemented until four months after Ford proposed it in May 1975, "when the recession was officially over and the recovery was gathering force." Greenspan was chairman of Ford's Council of Economic Advisers and a number of officials in Bush's administration, including Vice President Dick Cheney and Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, held tops posts in the Ford administration. Greenspan repeated his warnings that Congress should be cautious in devoting the budget surpluses to increased government spending because of the difficulty in trimming established programs if the current budget forecasts turn out to be too optimistic. He also suggested that Congress should consider some type of trigger that would trim government spending or tax cuts if the budget surpluses aren't as large as currently estimated. He also suggested any tax cuts or spending increases be phased in. "The reason for caution, of course, rests on the tentativeness of our projections," Greenspan said, noting that the drop in the stock market over the past year highlighted the fact that economic conditions can change quickly. He noted the Clinton administration's final budget outlook, just last week, projected the total surplus over the next 10 years at $5 trillion. Members of Congress said the Congressional Budget Office is likely to project an even higher $5.7 trillion in its new estimate due out next week. That total includes $2.5 trillion in surpluses in the Social Security program, which both Democrats and Republicans have promised to reserve for bolstering that program to prepare for the retirement of the baby boom generation. foxnews.com

To: Bill who wrote (9526)	1/26/2001 6:28:45 AM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Yet, Clinton left office with 60 or 61% approval rating from American public. Mr. Clinton is no longer President. I'd focus on Mr. Bush's problems.

To: Bill who wrote (9526)	1/26/2001 6:33:54 AM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Post: Jobseeker Says Ashcroft Asked About Sexuality WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A health care expert seeking a top Cabinet post in Missouri's government contends then-Gov. John Ashcroft questioned him about his sexual orientation during a job interview, the Washington Post reported Thursday. Ashcroft is expected to win Senate confirmation as President Bush's attorney general, but Democrats have raised questions about Ashcroft's record on civil rights and his opposition to the nomination of a gay man as ambassador to Luxembourg, on the basis of his sexual orientation. Ashcroft assured Senate Democrats during his confirmation hearings last week that he would not consider sexual orientation in the hiring and firing of employees if approved as attorney general. The Post quoted Paul Offner, a Democrat and health care policy expert who applied in 1985 to be head of Missouri's Department of Social Services, as saying Ashcroft asked him directly about his sexual orientation, leading him to believe it was a condition for getting the job. Ashcroft spokeswoman Mindy Tucker told the Post the former Missouri senator and governor could not remember the meeting. ``The senator does not recall this meeting and cannot imagine starting a meeting with this question,'' the Post quoted Tucker as saying. ``He made it clear to the committee ... that sexual orientation has never been something that he has used in hiring in any of the offices he has held, and it will not be a consideration at the Department of Justice,'' she said. ``SAME SEXUAL PREFERENCE AS MOST MEN?'' Offner, who was single at the time of the interview, told the Post he was stunned by Ashcroft's query, which he said came with no introduction. ``Mr. Offner, do you have the same sexual preference as most men?'' Offner quoted Ashcroft as asking at the start of the interview, according to the Post article. ``Yes,'' Offner said he replied. ``Have you ever used an illegal controlled substance?'' Ashcroft asked next. ``I have not,'' Offner said. ``If his position is that this has never been an issue with him, then why did he say it?' Offner asked in an interview with the Post. ``It is hard to believe it wasn't a job qualification.'' Offner, 58, who is now married, said Ashcroft crossed the line with his direct question about sexual orientation. He Ashcroft later told him he could not give him the job because ''his people would not understand.'' The Post noted that a question about sexual orientation would not violate Missouri law, which does not prohibit discrimination in hiring on the basis of sexual orientation. But it would appear to contradict Ashcroft's testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, in which he said ``sexual orientation has never been something that I've used in hiring in any of the jobs, in any of the offices, I've held. It will not be a consideration in hiring at the Department of Justice.'' The Post quoted Rich McClure, Ashcroft's chief of staff from late 1985 until late 1992, as saying he had never heard Ashcroft or any of his staff or legal counsel ask ``that kind of question'' during job interviews. Offner did not get the job. He went on to serve as senior health care adviser to the Senate Finance Committee and then tried to help the District of Columbia reform its health care reimbursement system before joining the faculty at Georgetown University, according to the Post. dailynews.yahoo.com