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

To: calgal who wrote (511)	3/5/2003 11:56:07 AM
From: calgal	Respond to of 601

URL:http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/garner.htm

To: calgal who wrote (511)	3/5/2003 11:57:07 AM
From: calgal	Respond to of 601

France, Russia, Germany Vow to Block U.N. War Resolution Wednesday, March 05, 2003 URL:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80303,00.html PARIS — The French, German and Russian foreign ministers said Wednesday that their governments would "not allow" passage of a U.N. resolution authorizing war against Iraq. "We will not allow a resolution to pass that authorizes resorting to force," French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said at a press conference in Paris. "Russia and France, as permanent members of the Security Council, will assume their full responsibilities on this point." When asked whether France would use its veto, as Russia has suggested it might do, de Villepin said, "We will take all our responsibilities. We are in total agreement with the Russians." The three ministers had set up the hastily arranged meeting amid quickening U.S.-led preparations for war and a Friday Security Council meeting to hear progress reports from inspectors scouring Iraq for banned weapons. On Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, visiting British Prime Minister Tony Blair, suggested Russia could veto a new U.S.-backed resolution seen as paving the way to war in Iraq. Ivanov also said his country was unlikely to abstain in any Security Council vote on Iraq. Ivanov met with French President Jacques Chirac before the talks with his fellow foreign ministers. The Russian minister was greeted at the presidential Elysee palace by de Villepin and entered without talking to reporters. The palace said there were no plans for Chirac to meet German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer. Britain, the United States and Spain have proposed a draft resolution that says Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has missed his final opportunity to disarm. The United States and Britain claim Iraq has refused to destroy its chemical and biological weapons, as ordered by the United Nations, and military action will probably be necessary to disarm Saddam. Other Security Council members, led by France, say the U.N. inspections are working and want the inspectors to be given more time to hunt for banned chemical and biological arms. On Tuesday, Ivanov was quoted as saying by the British Broadcasting Corp. that "Russia will not support any decision that would directly or indirectly open the way to war with Iraq." The three ministers said that inspections were producing results and that weapons experts should be given more time to search for arms that Iraq is not supposed to have, as set out in U.N. resolution 1441. "We see there is progress," Fischer said. "I do not see personally how we can stop the process of resolution 1441 and resort to war." De Villepin said he believes the results of inspections "were more and more encouraging," citing the destruction of Iraqi missiles, information being received about biological and chemical agents and interviews with scientists. But de Villepin also said Iraq needs to cooperate "more actively" with inspections. "The inspections cannot go on forever," he said. The French foreign minister also set out a framework for giving inspectors more muscle, including detailed measures to gage whether inspections are making progress. In replying to journalists' questions, de Villepin said that war would increase tensions in the Middle East, create instability and boost the risk of terrorism." The Associated Press contributed to this report.

To: calgal who wrote (511)	3/5/2003 5:50:26 PM
From: calgal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 601

Republicans Strategize on Bush Tax Cuts Wednesday, March 05, 2003 URL:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80314,00.html WASHINGTON — Top congressional Republicans say they plan to make President Bush's proposed tax cuts filibuster-proof in the Senate, but won't do the same for his plan to make permanent the huge tax cut enacted in 2001. The strategy, described Tuesday by GOP lawmakers and aides, diminishes the prospects that the 2001 tax reductions will be made permanent this year. Those cuts in income tax rates, taxes paid by families with children and other reductions will otherwise expire after 2010. The decision underlines a concern by Republicans that they might lack the votes for Senate passage of Bush's entire tax cut package. His overall tax plan would cost $1.57 trillion over the coming decade, according to new calculations released by Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation, $100 billion more than the White House had estimated. Coming at a time of renewed federal deficits, the Bush tax package is opposed by nearly every Democrat and has gotten a lukewarm reception from moderate Republicans who question its size and some of its components. Since it was unveiled in January, administration officials have chiefly emphasized its economic growth portion, which would erase the corporate dividend tax and accelerate personal income tax rate reductions enacted in 2001 that have yet to take effect. Republicans intend to split up the tax plan and bring the economic growth proposals to the Senate floor under rules that prohibit a filibuster. Any other tax bills would be subject to delaying tactics. Republicans have a 51-48 majority in the Senate, with one independent. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles, R-Okla., said if Republicans tried protecting Bush's entire plan against filibusters, "it might be a little more difficult to get the votes." Asked why the economic plan would be protected, Nickles said, "That's the thing we're trying to do immediately to try to create jobs." Bush's economic growth plan would cost $726 billion, the new figures showed, $31 billion higher than previously calculated by the White House. Nickles and others said lawmakers have not decided how much Congress' version of the economic package would cost. At the House Ways and Means Committee's first hearing Tuesday on Bush's tax plans, Democrats challenged the administration's pursuit of tax cuts as a potentially costly war with Iraq may be about to begin. "I just don't see how we can talk about a dramatic cut in taxes when we haven't got a clue about the cost of a war," said Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y. But Treasury Secretary John Snow said both were affordable and argued that the sputtering economy needs the spark the tax cuts would provide. "Whether or not the president decides to authorize the use of force, it is vital that our country grow," Snow said. "One reason the deficit is rising, has risen, is the fact that governmental revenues are coming in at a slower pace and the reason they're coming in at a slower pace is that the economy is not growing fast enough," he argued Wednesday on ABC's "Good Morning America." "The economy can grow so much faster," he said. "The best way to deal with the deficit is to have rising government revenues from growth in the economy." The GOP decision to protect the economic package from filibuster means they would need only 51 votes in the 100-member Senate to prevail. The part of Bush's tax cuts not protected from filibuster would need 60 votes to overcome expected Democratic procedural delays. Most of that remaining portion of Bush's proposal would make permanent the huge 10-year tax cut enacted in 2001. Getting 60 votes would be a high hurdle for Senate Republicans. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, whose panel has jurisdiction over tax legislation, said the part of Bush's tax plan not exempted from filibuster "probably is not going to happen." With House and Senate committees planning to begin writing budgets next week covering the next 10 years, both panels are hoping to craft plans that would be balanced by the end of the period, officials said. Those goals reflect political pressures brought by Democrats and conservative Republicans, who have been critical of the revival of huge federal deficits after four years of annual surpluses. Democrats have blamed Bush and the $1.35 trillion, 10-year tax cut enacted in 2001, while Republicans have faulted the weak economy and costs of the fight against terrorism. It was unclear where the needed savings would come from for a balanced budget. Congressional Democrats said they, too, were working on budgets of their own that they hoped would be balanced or nearly so at the end of the decade. Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the Senate Budget Committee's top Democrat, said his goal was for "a more fiscally responsible budget" than Bush. The president's plan, which mapped the next five years, ended with annual deficits near $200 billion.