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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: orkrious who wrote (46251)	2/10/2006 11:14:53 PM
From: shades	Respond to of 116555

DJ Minor Flaw In US Budget May Lead To Major Legal Challenge . WASHINGTON (AP)--Opponents of a major budget bill just signed by President George W. Bush are weighing a court challenge on the grounds that the measure is unconstitutional because it was amended after the House voted on it. At issue is a provision involving the period of time the government pays to rent some types of durable medical equipment before medical suppliers transfer it to Medicare patients. The Senate voted for 13 months, as intended by Senate and House negotiators, but a Senate clerk erroneously put down 36 months in sending the bill back to the House for a final vote, and that's what the House approved Feb. 1. By the time the bill was shipped to Bush, the number was back to 13 months as passed by the Senate but not the House. The issue is arcane and technical, but the broader constitutional question is very simple. As anyone who passed high school civics knows, a bill can only become a law if the House and Senate pass it in identical form. That didn't happen in this case. "That bill .. is actually not a properly enacted law," said Michael Gerhardt, a professor of constitutional law at the University of North Carolina School of Law. "It wouldn't surprise me if a court struck it down. That bill was not approved by the House." "I don't yet know exactly what happened and who is at fault, but it is clear that the legislation signed by the president on Wednesday is not what actually passed the House of Representatives on February 1," said Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee. Bush and his GOP allies on Capitol Hill consider the matter over. But opponents of the bill are actively considering trying to get it struck down by the courts. "There is a high probability that some legal action will be pursued," said Brad Woodhouse, spokesman for the Emergency Campaign for America's Priorities, a group of organizations opposing the budget bill, which contains $39 billion in cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, student loan subsidies and other programs. "Perhaps a temporary restraining order to stop the implementation and then broader legal action after that." Legal experts say any court challenge would be on firm legal ground. "Each house has to pass the whole law and the same law," said Alan Morrison, senior lecturer in law at Stanford University Law School. "This is a case where the Constitution is very clear." (END) Dow Jones Newswires

To: orkrious who wrote (46251)	2/10/2006 11:16:11 PM
From: shades	Respond to of 116555

DJ Patriot Act Compromise Includes Methamphetamine Provision . WASHINGTON (AP)--The USA Patriot Act compromise agreed to Friday included a provision to combat illegal methamphetamine by limiting sales of cold remedies used to make the highly addictive drug. A number of states have already moved to curb the sale of cold pills containing pseudoephedrine, the ingredient used to cook "meth" in makeshift labs around the country. The federal measure would impose restrictions nationwide. Stores would be required to keep medicines like Pfizer Inc.'s (PFE) Sudafed and Procter & Gamble Co.'s (PG) Nyquil behind the counter, and consumers would be limited to 3.6 grams, or about 120 pills, per day, and 9 grams, or about 300 pills, per month. Purchasers would need to show a photo identity card and sign a logbook. The limits target meth dealers who buy large quantities of the drugs to extract the pseudoephedrine. The measure is a compromise reached after months of haggling over the 30-day limit. Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Jim Talent, R-Mo., who pushed the legislation in the Senate, insisted the limit was needed. They had sought various ways to get their legislation through Congress, finally attaching it to the Patriot Act, only to find their efforts frustrated when the bill stalled in December over concerns that civil liberties protections were being shortchanged. On Friday, House Speaker Dennis Hastert agreed to a Patriot Act compromise reached between the White House and Senate Republicans, clearing the way for passage by both houses of Congress with the meth legislation included. "With this agreement on the Patriot Act, Congress is but a step away from passing the most significant anti-meth bill in a decade," Feinstein said. "The heart of this legislation is a strong standard for keeping pseudoephedrine products out of the hands of meth cooks." Many leading retailers - including Kmart (SHLD), Walgreen Co. (WAG), Target Corp. (TGT) and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) - already have adopted guidelines to limit customer access to cold products or to limit their sales. Some states that have passed their own laws, including Oklahoma and Oregon, have reported the number of meth labs plunging. Under the legislation, stores with pharmacies would have to keep the medicine behind the pharmacy counter. Stores without pharmacies could sell cold medicines from a locked case behind a store counter if they gain approval from the Drug Enforcement Administration. The measure would provide nearly $100 million a year for five years to train state and local law enforcement to nab meth offenders, would provide $40 million to help children affected by meth, and would enhance criminal penalties for meth production and trafficking. (END) Dow Jones Newswires

To: orkrious who wrote (46251)	2/10/2006 11:16:33 PM
From: shades	Respond to of 116555

DJ US Commerce Secy Warns Not To Overreact To Trade Deficit . RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C. (AP)--The U.S. can't make economic decisions based only on the record-high trade deficit reported Friday, U.S. Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez said during a visit to IBM Corp. (IBM). "We can't overreact and make tactical choices that will hurt our economy but will lower our trade deficit," Gutierrez said in an interview with The Associated Press on the day his department revealed that the deficit, fueled by record imports of oil, food, cars and other consumer goods, reached a record $725.8 billion in 2005. "It's certainly an important number, but I will say it's not the only important number," Gutierrez said. Four other key indicators show that the U.S. economy is in good shape, he said. The gross domestic product is growing, jobs are being created, inflation is controlled and productivity is increasing, he said. The Bush administration has a plan to gradually reduce the deficit by increasing foreign sales, one that includes lobbying for more markets for U.S. products and pushing for more enforcement of laws barring the theft of intellectual property, Gutierrez said. "If we wanted to fix it next week we could always just say we're not going to import more and erect barriers and increase tariffs, but that would be devastating for our economy," Gutierrez said. Labor groups charged that the deficit is a major force behind the loss of nearly 3 million U.S. manufacturing jobs in recent years, as companies send jobs to countries that pay workers lower wages. The gap between what the U.S. sells abroad and its imports was up by 17.5% from the previous record of $617.6 billion set in 2004, the Commerce Department reported. (END) Dow Jones Newswires February 10, 2006 18:08 ET (23:08 GMT) Copyright (c) 2006 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.- - 06 08 PM EST 02-10-06