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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: FaultLine who wrote (18787)12/5/2003 2:36:09 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793905
 
I wonder if Chirac can bluff his way through this one. He has been dodging criminal charges for years.

UPDATE 3-Chirac role questioned in Executive Life affair
Fri December 05, 2003 10:51 AM ET

(Rewrites with questions over Chirac role)
By Emmanuel Jarry

PARIS, Dec 5 (Reuters) - French lawmakers demanded answers on Friday over President Jacques Chirac's role in the Executive Life dispute amid speculation he blocked a settlement that did not protect his billionaire friend Francois Pinault.

France this week rebuffed a U.S. offer to settle allegations that the then state-owned Credit Lyonnais illegally purchased assets of the failed California insurer in 1991, including a junk bond portfolio later acquired by Pinault.

Sources close to the matter say France rejected the deal because it did not cover Pinault and ex-Credit Lyonnais chief Jean Peyrelevade. Local French media have reported that Chirac prevented Finance Minister Francis Mer from signing the deal.

"The government must explain its strategy and why it took the decisions it has," said Eric Besson, a deputy for the main opposition Socialist Party.

"Is it true or not that the president gave Francis Mer the order not to sign so as to protect Monsieur Pinault?" he asked.

Besson told Reuters he would raise the matter in parliament next week after a motion to launch a full-blown parliamentary inquiry into the affair was scratched without explanation from the agenda of next Friday's meeting of its finance committee.

"This is going to turn into the Chirac-Pinault affair," said Alain Riou, a senior figure in the opposition Green party, who is also seeking clarification on Chirac's role.

Under U.S. law at the time, banks could not own insurers and state insurance law banned foreign governments from owning California insurers. California's insurance regulator is seeking damages of more than $3 billion on behalf of policyholders.

Chirac was on an official visit in Tunisia on Friday. In October he said France had rejected a preliminary deal signed the month before because it could not accept last-minute changes demanded by prosecutors in California.

DOMESTIC FALLOUT

Suggestions that Chirac may have intervened to help a man thought to be one of three richest in France come at a when his government is defending unpopular budget measures such as tax hikes on cigarettes and fuel.

The friendship between Pinault, 67, and Chirac, 71, dates back to 1981 when the businessman rescued a bankrupt sawmill in Chirac's constituency, saving 20 jobs. In 1995, Pinault hosted an election night dinner for Chirac to celebrate his victory.

Without a settlement, French taxpayers would face a costly court battle that could strain diplomatic ties already frayed over France's opposition to the U.S.-led war in Iraq and could cause Credit Lyonnais to lose its U.S. banking licence.

Industry minister Nicole Fontaine said on Friday France was still optimistic of reaching a settlement.

"We hope talks can continue and we hope talks can lead to a definitive settlement of this affair," Fontaine told Europe 1 radio. "I have high hopes we can reach a reasonable agreement."

Separately on Friday, financial daily La Tribune reported French mutually held insurer MAAF Assurances was close to signing a deal to settle its own involvement in the affair.

MAAF was part of the group of investors assembled in 1991 to buy Executive Life. The paper said the proposed settlement was for a $10 million payment and would not affect a possible deal with other parties.

MAFF declined comment on Friday except to say it hoped for an all-inclusive deal.

-- Additional reporting by Christopher Noble in Paris

reuters.com



To: FaultLine who wrote (18787)12/6/2003 12:21:52 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793905
 
Nice to read about some "Bureaucrats" that know how to break the mold, wasn't it? Some of the papers are making a big deal about the readiness level of our returning units. Here is a good explanation of what is going on. Big change from when I was in.

The troops coming back from Korea were wearing way to much rank so they were sent to "Reppo-Deppos" and treated badly. When they acted up they were broken in rank. I had a lot of ex NCO's as privates in my Ordnance Company in Germany.
"Military News" Blog.

December 5, 2003: The U.S. Army is allowing units returning from Iraq to fall to the lowest level of readiness (level C-4). The reason for this is practical, mainly because all those activities that would have take a soldier from the unit (special schools, leave, transfer, retirement and end of enlistment) were halted while in Iraq. Once back in the United States, many of the troops in these units will be gone, at least temporarily, and it will take several months before replacements can be brought in, and the training cycle restarted.

Some 6-12 months later, the unit will be back to the readiness level it was at when it went to Iraq. This phenomenon was first seen in the 1990s as brigades were sent to the Balkans for peacekeeping duty. It's almost impossible to prevent a unit, returning from overseas duty, from being reduced in effectiveness. The troops expect to get some time off, and when they were overseas, they were not training. The training has to be made up. However, it was discovered that, even in the Balkan peacekeeping duty (which has resulted in no American combat deaths so far, although there have been some wounded) troops working under the pressures of peacekeeping acquired valuable experience. Not only did they gain practical experience in dealing with peacekeeping situations, but they also spent a lot of time using their combat skills.

This included a lot of patrolling, in situations where there often hostile people with guns in the neighborhood. The troops also gained valuable experience in defending their bases. While there were few attacks (usually a few bullets or a grenade), there were many more attempts by thieves to sneak in. The troops learned to deal with these unwelcome visitors. In combat, the people trying to get in are carrying guns, not looking to carry something away. It turned out that the Balkans experience provided troops, NCOs and officers with valuable experience that has paid off big time in Iraq. There's little doubt that the Iraq experience will be equally valuable in creating more capable soldiers.

strategypage.com



To: FaultLine who wrote (18787)12/10/2003 2:40:35 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793905
 
The LA Times being who they are, they have slanted this to make it Arnolds fault. But Arnold is playing it right. Put the heat on the Legislature.

Schwarzenegger Retreats on Key Campaign Vows
The governor backs off promises to spare education funds and to cover local governments' loss of car-tax revenue. He says legislators deserve the blame.
By Peter Nicholas, Evan Halper and Joe Mathews
Times Staff Writers

December 10, 2003

SACRAMENTO — Retreating from two central campaign promises that helped make him governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday dropped his personal "guarantee" that cities and counties would be compensated for billions in lost car-tax revenue and reversed his pledge to safeguard spending for public schools.

In a wide-ranging interview with CNN, Schwarzenegger offered no commitment that his administration would restore to local governments the money they lost when he repealed a vehicle registration fee increase on his first day in office. Rather, he said that mayors and county supervisors who are worried that some $4 billion in lost revenue won't be replaced should look to the Legislature, which is considering a bill to make that happen.

And he suggested that if local government coffers are not replenished, it is not his fault.

"They [local officials] should put pressure on their state legislators because they've spent their money," Schwarzenegger said on the network's "Inside Politics" show. "It's not me taking anything away from them, it's they've spent their money."

Schwarzenegger also broached the prospect of suspending an education spending formula mandated by the state Constitution. During the campaign he had said that schools would be cut "over my dead body."

"We are working with the education community to see how we can work together with them to help us with this budget crisis," the governor said.

Local officials and educators were startled by the statements, made on the same day a major Wall Street rating agency downgraded California's credit status, and as he and state lawmakers continued haggling over a proposed spending cap and $15-billion bond measure aimed at shoring up the state's finances.

As a candidate, Schwarzenegger shared few details of how he would close the state's yawning budget gap. Now in office, his policies are being revealed in the day-to-day press of running a government.

Before he was sworn in, Schwarzenegger offered personal guarantees that local governments would not be deprived of money from a rollback of the car-tax increase. Across the state, cities and counties use up to 75% of that revenue to pay for public safety, according to the California State Assn. of Counties.

"They should have enough funds and I will make sure of that," Schwarzenegger told reporters in October. He also said on the subject, "I can guarantee you that we will not take money away from them. They need the money."

During the campaign, when Schwarzenegger was pressed on the loss of local revenues wrought by wiping out the increase, he said he would make up the difference the same day he cut the car tax.

Communities that rely on the tax fear that state government, facing a whopping shortfall of its own, will leave them shortchanged. The state's monthly transfer of car-tax revenue to local governments — set for today — will be $254 million less than what would have been the case under the higher fees.

"Everything local government does is being put on the line by this drastic, drastic reduction," said Chris McKenzie, executive director of the League of California Cities.

Los Angeles Mayor James K. Hahn and various City Council members held a news conference Tuesday to warn that the up to $19 million that the city will lose each month because of state cuts pays for the equivalent of 190 police officers or firefighters.

"We are extremely apprehensive that the nearly $4 billion in local revenues that cities in California are owed are at risk," Hahn said. "Most of that funding pays for police and fire services. In an emergency, this funding could mean the difference between life and death."

Schwarzenegger's evolving position reflects the difficulty of both fulfilling campaign promises and balancing the budget.

California faces a $14-billion budget gap. For the governor to both repeal the car-tax hike and make local governments whole he would need to make steep cuts elsewhere in the budget, something he is reluctant to do.

Throughout the recall campaign and after his victory, Schwarzenegger pledged to leave intact money for kindergarten-through-12th-grade education. The children, he often said, would have first call on the treasury in his administration.

But in the CNN interview he indicated that K-12 might not be spared, suggesting that suspending a constitutionally mandated spending formula for education — known as Proposition 98 — might be needed to solve the state's budget problems. The proposition, passed by voters in 1988, requires that public schools — kindergarten through 12th grade and community colleges — receive about 40% of the state's revenues.

When asked about the funding guaranteed by Proposition 98, Schwarzenegger said, "Maybe have a suspension; some relief there so you can pull out of this next two years and then pay it back, maybe."

That comment seems at variance with an interview Schwarzenegger gave The Times in September. Asked if he would consider delaying Proposition 98 funds in the short term to balance the budget, he said: "The important thing to know is that there are certain fundamental things, I would just say, not over my dead body. To me, children are extremely important."

Asked if the governor is considering suspending Proposition 98, Schwarzenegger's communications director, Rob Stutzman said that "given the uncertainty facing the state, just about anything is on the table."

Stutzman denied that the governor reversed himself, claiming that a suspension of Proposition 98 could slow the growth of education spending, not necessarily cut it.

"If there is going to be some type of suspension of Proposition 98, that does not necessarily mean there is not more money for education," Stutzman said. "We have to be clear what Proposition 98 is and is not."

To suspend the education funding guaranteed by the proposition, Schwarzenegger would have to get the support of two-thirds of the Legislature.

Educators argue that Proposition 98 guarantees that funding for students keeps pace with population growth.

If cutting lower education is the governor's plan, it is out of the question, they said, pointing to promises made during the campaign.

"When I heard that comment I said, 'No, no that's not right,' " said Barbara Kerr, president of the California Teachers Assn. "When he was campaigning the governor said personally to me that he would not cut education, and the teachers of California intend to hold him to that promise."

Kevin Gordon, executive director of California Assn. of School Business Officials, said educators were "dubious" even of a suspension tied to promises that schools will be repaid down the road. He noted that other temporary solutions lawmakers have embraced in the past to bypass Proposition 98 wound up costing schools far more than education leaders had agreed to when they pledged not to challenge the moves.

In a tough financial climate, Schwarzenegger's campaign promises may be colliding, budget analysts said. Imposing a tough spending cap, as Schwarzenegger hopes to do, may be impossible without cutting education funding, they said.

"The problem is Proposition 98 is the elephant in the room," said Kim Reuben, a budget analyst with the Public Policy Institute of California. "Education is really popular, and it is also where most of our spending goes."

The state's credit standing, meanwhile, suffered anew when Moody's Investors Service lowered California's bond rating, citing the car-tax reduction.

"The [car-tax] action is expected to significantly increase what is already projected to be a very substantial fiscal deficit over the next 18 months," according to a statement announcing the rating move.

Moody's said the car-tax cut, coupled with "the deep political disagreement over a way out of the state's fiscal dilemma, are not encouraging."

The move lowered California's general obligation bond rating to Baa1 from A3. Moody's still rates California one notch above Standard and Poor's rating of BBB.

Tim Blake, a senior analyst at Moody's, said only four other states have been rated this low by the agency since the 1970s. Each of those states was facing significant economic downturns. In California, he said, the reason is poor fiscal management.

Only Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia are currently rated as low.

Lower credit ratings could cost taxpayers millions of dollars in higher interest rates on the billions of dollars the state probably will have to borrow in the next few months.

Meantime, Schwarzenegger, legislative leaders and aides continued negotiating the details of a permanent state spending limit and a plan to borrow up to $15 billion to balance this year's budget.

The Republican governor asked the Legislature to put those two measures on the March 2 ballot. But Democratic leaders have resisted, saying his spending cap would devastate public schools and programs that help the poor and disabled.

The two sides say they will keep talking until they get an agreement or until a noon deadline today passes. Schwarzenegger met separately for 45 minutes each with Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson (D-Culver City) and Senate President Pro Tem John Burton (D-San Francisco).

"Meetings don't really accomplish something; what we're hoping to do is just go up and work on a proposal that may lead to solving the problem," Burton said after his meeting with the governor.

Asked if they were close on a deal, Burton said, "Not really."

latimes.com