SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: calgal who wrote (3317)7/13/2003 11:07:35 AM
From: calgal  Respond to of 10965
 
Gephardt Blasts Kerry, Dean Over Trade Policies







Saturday, July 12, 2003

URL:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,91760,00.html

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa — Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt (search) ripped into two of his Democratic presidential rivals Saturday, accusing them of backing trade policies that have yielded "a race to the bottom" and shipped jobs overseas.





"Just understand that when I'm president I will work against and I will never sign a trade treaty of any kind that will send our jobs and our money and our welfare off to the highest bidder around this world," said Gephardt.

Using a union hall speech as a backdrop, Gephardt criticized Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry (search) and former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean (search) for supporting the North American Free Trade Agreement, which he said has drained thousands of jobs from the U.S.

"Both Sen. Kerry and Howard Dean voted for and supported NAFTA," said Gephardt, who said he led the fight against the treaty, even though it was being pushed by a president of his party.

Gephardt said he favors trade deals, but only those where environmental and labor rights are protected.

"We are constructing a world economy today because of the trade policies we're following, and in some cases people have voted for, that is causing a race to the bottom," said Gephardt.

Gephardt's assault underscores a deep division among Democrats and one of their key constituencies. Former President Clinton pushed NAFTA through Congress, over the opposition of organized labor. Union leaders argued the measure would shift American jobs to low-paying countries like Mexico and China. Gephardt as made the same argument to the activists Saturday.

Backers of the trade deals argue that the U.S. is part of a world economy, and free trade must be a part of that equation.

Gephardt's assault is also a sign that he's feeling pressure in key early states like Iowa, where precinct caucuses next January launch the presidential nominating season.

Gephardt has a long history in the state, winning the caucuses in 1988 and maintaining close ties since. Most consider him the favorite in the leadoff tests, but some polls have shown both Kerry and Dean making a strong showing. Dean in particular has built a solid organization in the state.

Kerry spokesman Chris Lehane said Gephardt's attack Saturday was sparked by his fading campaign fortunes.

"We're going to turn the cheek on this one because we respect Congressman Gephardt and are sympathetic to his campaign's frustrations and growing sense of desperation," said Lehane.

For his part, Kerry distributed a flier pointing to the trade agreements Gephardt has supported, including the creation of the World Trade Organization and expanding trade rules with China.

Dean spokeswoman Sarah Leonard said Gephardt's attack was directed at Dean because "we're doing well in Iowa. We're tied here and we're tied nationally."

———

North Carolina Sen. John Edwards called for a $5,000 "American Dream" tax credit for first-time home buyers, along with new tax breaks for businesses which keep their operations in this country.

Edwards opened a nine-city tour of Iowa on Saturday, pushing a series of economic proposals he's offered, largely focusing on revitalizing rural and small town economies.

"It's an effort to talk about the group of ideas I've been promoting," said Edwards, in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. "It's an important values issue for me and I think it's where most of America is coming from."

Stressing his small-town roots, Edwards said he can connect to rural voters who play a key role in important early campaign tests like Iowa's leadoff precinct caucuses.

"Growing up in Robbins, N.C., I learned the same values that Iowans have on Main Streets across this state — hard work, opportunity and community," said Edwards.

Many of the proposals Edwards was pushing have already been unveiled, but he said he was going to package them together to draw a contrast with economic proposals pushed by President Bush. It's a logical time to draw that contrast, Edwards said, because voters are beginning to pay attention to the caucuses just six months away.

Proposals Edwards was pushing during his latest swing include:

— The tax credit for first time home buyers, along with a 10 percent tax cut for companies which resist the temptation to relocate their operations overseas.

— A $50 billion package of assistance to cash-strapped states that are struggling to cover budget shortfalls.

— Spending $1 billion for a rural development effort that is coupled with creating rural revitalization zones offering incentives for development.

— Creating matching tax credits for middle-income taxpayers who are saving for retirement.



To: calgal who wrote (3317)7/13/2003 11:16:15 AM
From: calgal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10965
 
The ABCs of tax cuts

After the federal income tax withholding schedules were adjusted July 1 to account for part of President Bush's $350 billion tax-relief stimulus package, it took all of a week for Peter Jennings and his ABC News comrade Dean Reynolds to tell viewers just how miserly the tax cuts supposedly would be for the middle class. It was an exercise in agitprop that would have made Soviet apparatchiks proud.
ABC News went to Austin, Texas, where Mr. Bush served as governor for six years. As readers of this page may remember, Austin was the same setting chosen by the New York Times on Jan. 7, the day the president unveiled his package, to "report" on the Moorheads, a married couple with three children who earned $88,000 a year. The Moorheads believed the president's package was "not impressive," according to the Times reporter, who clearly had not outlined the real tax savings the Moorheads would have received. As our calculations demonstrated, however, the president's plan would have reduced the Moorheads' federal taxes by $2,976, or more than 30 percent.
In Austin last Tuesday, ABC News found the Linnborns, a married couple who apparently lived by themselves. "The Linnborns, who make about $90,000 a year," Mr. Reynolds reported, "are now getting $15 more take-home pay every week." That's comes to $780 a year. Michelle Linnborn said she wanted to use the money to "take my husband to lunch." Mr. Linnborn would have preferred to use the tax cut to "restore that '57 Chevy in his garage. And at about $15 a week," propagandist Reynolds snidely observed, "he figures the job will be done in about 20 years."
In fact, the Linnborns would receive a tax cut of at least $1,996 this year, or nearly $40 per week.
They would save $100 in taxes by virtue of the $2,000 increase in the 10 percent bracket.
They would save another $1,522 through the elimination of the marriage penalty. This $1,522 in savings arises from two changes. First, the standard deduction for married couples will be increased to double that of a single person, yielding a savings of $418. Second, the upper limit for the 15 percent tax bracket for married couples will be expanded to double the upper limit for single filers, yielding the Linnborns a savings of $1,104. Until President Bush eliminated the marriage penalty, the Linnborns' federal income tax liability was more than $1,500 higher than it would have been if they were merely living together.
Finally, the Linnborns will be saving an additional $374 because the president's 2003 tax-relief plan reduced their top marginal tax rate from 27 percent to 25 percent. Altogether, the Linnborns will be saving at least $1,996 this year. If any of their income comes from dividends, whose top marginal tax rate in their case was reduced from 27 percent to 15 percent, they would be saving even more. Now, that surefire $1,996 may not mean much money to the high-salaried Peter Jennings and the liberal propagandists at ABC, but $2,500 per year no doubt means a lot to the Linnborns.



To: calgal who wrote (3317)7/13/2003 11:17:08 AM
From: calgal  Respond to of 10965
 
White House welcomes Tenet mea culpa on Iraq allegations
URL:http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-07-12-us-iraq_x.htm

ABUJA, Nigeria (AP) — President Bush said Saturday he still has faith in his intelligence chief after CIA Director George Tenet accepted blame for Bush's erroneous claim about Iraqi weapons. (Text of Tenet's statement)

File photo of CIA Director George Tenet.
AP photo

Asked in Nigeria whether he continued to trust Tenet, Bush said, "Yes, I do. Absolutely."

"I've got confidence in George Tenet," he added.

Fueled by members of Congress and Democratic presidential hopefuls, the 16-word miscue in Bush's Jan. 28 State of the Union speech has turned into a firestorm of skepticism challenging the credibility of one of the president's primary justifications for the war — that Iraq was trying to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program.

The issue dogged Bush throughout his five-day trip to Africa, leading the White House to execute a well-scripted, two-day mea culpa seeking to quell the political uproar.

First up was Secretary of State Colin Powell, who said on Thursday that the president's claim that Iraq had sought nuclear materials from Africa, based on a British intelligence report, was never meant to mislead or deceive the American public. Powell said the intelligence did not stand "the test of time," and that he chose not to repeat the president's allegation during his own speech just days later to the U.N. Security Council.

On Friday, both Bush and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice pointed the finger at the CIA.

After calling Tenet to give him a heads-up, Rice spent nearly an hour aboard Air Force One telling reporters that if Tenet had concerns about the information in Bush's speech, he should have conveyed them to the president. A couple hours later, on the ground in Uganda, Bush said: "I gave a speech to the nation that was cleared by the intelligence services."

Heaping more criticism on the CIA, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., the chairman of the Senate intelligence committee issued a statement Friday afternoon accusing the agency of being "sloppy."

Roberts charged that unnamed intelligence officials were telling the press that the CIA warned the White House that the information about Iraq trying to obtain uranium from Africa was unfounded. But as late as 10 days before the State of the Union speech, Roberts said the CIA was still saying that Iraq was trying to get uranium from Africa.

"If the CIA had changed its position, it was incumbent on the Director of Central Intelligence to correct the record and bring it to the immediate attention of the president," Roberts said. "It appears that he did not."

Later Friday evening, Tenet himself shouldered the blame.

"First, CIA approved the president's State of the Union address before it was delivered," Tenet said in a statement. "Second, I am responsible for the approval process in my agency. And third, the president had every reason to believe that the text presented to him was sound."

While the Bush administration worked to quiet the controversy, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw defended Britain's publication of the disputed charge, saying the CIA expressed doubts about the allegation but did not say why.

In a letter to a House of Commons committee that was released Saturday, Straw said the charge was based in part on intelligence information it did not share with the U.S.

Administration officials said they did not expect Tenet to resign over the matter. He is the lone holdover from the Clinton administration and, while distrusted by some conservatives, has enjoyed Bush's confidence.

"I've heard no discussion along those lines," CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield said Friday night.

Asked Saturday in Nigeria whether he considered the matter closed, Bush replied: "I do."

Not so fast, says Howard Dean, a former Vermont governor running for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Tenet is simply the White House's scapegoat, he told NBC's Today Weekend Edition show on Saturday.

"I think the hasty taking of blame by George Tenet is an attempt, really, on the part of a loyal person to the president, to try to deflect the problem," Dean said.

"We've got a lot more information that needs to be disclosed by this administration about why we went to war in Iraq," he said. "... The question is what other information did they (White House officials) then use that was not true to send us to war."

Missouri Rep. Richard Gephardt, one of Dean's rivals for the Democratic nomination, criticized Bush for allowing Tenet to take the blame for the unsubstantiated statement.

"The president is responsible for what's in the State of the Union speech," Gephardt said. "It also points out the need for a joint bipartisan open inquiry."

Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, another Democratic candidate, said: "The president and the White House staff are ultimately responsible for what the president says. The White House needs to provide a full accounting of how that misleading information found its way into the president's State of the Union Address and who was aware of it."

Still another Democratic presidential candidate, Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, said he thought the president himself should take responsibility for any and all misleading statements made in the run-up to the war. "It is also time for Congress to step forward and hold full and public hearings on these matters," said Kucinich, ranking member of the Government Reform Committee's panel on national security. "The American public deserves no less."