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 : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MSI who wrote (10686)	2/7/2002 4:57:17 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93284

Update on campaign finance.... Hastert Pledges to Fight Campaign Finance Bill By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, February 7, 2002; Page A01 House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), who generally has stayed aloof from the contentious question of overhauling campaign finance laws, vowed yesterday to fight the measure aggressively, likening next week's showdown vote to Armageddon. In a closed meeting with GOP colleagues, Hastert said Republicans could lose their slim House majority if Congress approves the proposal. The bill would ban unlimited "soft-money" donations that corporations, unions and individuals give to political parties. An aide said the speaker will personally lobby wavering House Republicans, who typically are loath to defy their leader on a high-profile issue. The Senate has passed a campaign finance bill similar to the one scheduled for a House vote next week. President Bush campaigned against the measure in 2000, but Republican insiders say he is unlikely to veto it if it reaches his desk -- especially now that the Enron scandal is prompting new criticisms of money and political influence. Some Democrats oppose the bill, but most resistance has come from Republicans. Both parties reap many millions in soft-money donations every election year, but the GOP routinely collects more. Until now, the House's third-ranking Republican -- Majority Whip Tom DeLay (Tex.) -- has spearheaded opposition to the campaign finance legislation. He said last year that he would "try anything I can" to defeat it. Yesterday, Hastert spokesman John Feehery said the speaker was equally committed to fighting the bill. "He believes this is an important issue for parties," Feehery said. The legislation, he said, would transfer political power to "special-interest groups -- big labor, environmental groups and other Democratic groups -- that will be more engaged than our allies. That puts us at a great disadvantage." At yesterday's closed meeting, Hastert declared, "This is Armageddon," participants said. He called it "a life and death issue" for the GOP, they added. His remarks reflected a growing unease among Republicans that the bill would give their opponents a critical advantage in the closing months of this year's congressional elections. In addition to banning soft money, the measure would limit political ads that independent groups often run in a campaign's final weeks. If approved, the bill would take effect in 30 days, although lawmakers are considering delaying it until 2003. House supporters of the bill, sponsored by Reps. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) and Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.), last month collected 218 signatures -- a bare majority -- on a petition that forced Hastert to allow a vote. In an interview yesterday, House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said Hastert's fiery rhetoric underscored the high stakes involved in next week's vote. "We're going to try to win, and I think we have a chance to win," he said. "But it's going to be very close and very tough. . . . This is [about] the ability of interests to come in here with millions and millions of dollars." To kill the measure, Hastert and other opponents must win over some of the 43 Republicans who have supported soft-money bans before. Twenty Republicans signed the "discharge petition." DeLay told reporters yesterday that the Shays-Meehan bill is "probably going to pass," although he said leaders hope to alter it first. Amendments conceivably could force lengthy and potentially fruitless negotiations with senators. Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) sponsored the Senate version. Republicans spent several hours yesterday debating how to alter the Shays-Meehan bill. Some suggested politically problematic amendments, such as banning donations from lobbyists while Congress is in session. Others proposed more modest changes to make the bill more palatable to Republicans. Shays defended his bill in Hastert's closed-door session, urging colleagues to "vote your conscience." But several Republicans told personal accounts of how changing campaign finance laws could jeopardize their reelection chances. "Chris is making it very hard to vote your conscience when he's on every talk show with his friends saying if you're not corrupt, you'll vote for this," Rep. Anne M. Northup (R-Ky.) said after the meeting. Meanwhile, Democratic supporters continued to target several black colleagues who say the bill would hamper the party's voter mobilization efforts aimed at blacks. Gephardt and newly installed Minority Whip Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) appealed individually to several black Democrats yesterday. © 2002 The Washington Post Company washingtonpost.com

To: MSI who wrote (10686)	2/7/2002 5:26:28 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

I don't usually daytrade but will until this market shapes up You mean there's another way to trade? :-) In spite of appearances, I find that fairly fast (or just plain FAST) trading is safer. If you decide some buy is "long term" that means you have hang on through the dips. And if what you just bought happens to be Enron.... (Or any number of other companies, including the dot-cons.) If you're doing a short term long and it takes a dive, you get out with a small loss. And if it booms, you just ride it up until you see a dip you don't like and jump off with a profit.