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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (280583)3/17/2006 9:17:23 AM
From: Alighieri  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1579680
 
To add insult to injury, Cantwell's officed sent out emails indicating that drilling of the ANWR had been slipped into a budget bill. This could be the bill to which the drilling approval was attached.

Really? This is recent? I did a search and can't find anything...can you post a link or pointer?

Al



To: tejek who wrote (280583)3/17/2006 10:53:53 AM
From: Road Walker  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1579680
 
I wonder how much the Reps could get for Mt. Rushmore?
******************

Bush plan to sell off U.S. national forests under attack by former officials Thu Mar 16, 6:09 PM ET


WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. administration formalized its plan to sell more than 120,000 hectares of national forest to help pay for rural schools in 41 states, submitting legislation to Congress on Thursday to funnel $800 million to the schools over the next five years.

The schools would receive $320 million next year but the figure would drop sharply after that, to just $40 million in its final year, officials said. That would be a 90-per-cent decrease from current spending - a figure some legislators called unacceptable.

The legislation came as four former U.S. Forest Service chiefs blasted the land sale plan as contrary to more than a century of agency practice.

"Selling off public lands to fund other programs, no matter how worthwhile those programs, is a slippery slope," the retired chiefs said, calling the land sale "an unwise precedent."

The letter was signed by Max Peterson, Dale Robertson, Jack Ward Thomas and Michael Dombeck, who headed the Forest Service from 1979 to 2001. The men led the agency under four presidents from both parties.

U.S. agriculture undersecretary Mark Rey, who oversees the Forest Service, said he welcomes advice from the former chiefs but they must be "suffering from selective memory loss."

Contrary to their letter, the Forest Service has proposed - and Congress has enacted - dozens of land-conveyance bills, Rey said.

"It's not a precedent of any sort, one way or another," Rey said, noting the proposed sales total less than one-half of one per cent of the 78-million-hectare national forest system. Parcels to be sold are isolated, expensive to manage or no longer meet forest system needs, he said.

Legislators from both parties have challenged the land sale, saying short-term gains would be offset by the permanent loss of public lands. They also said profits would fall far short of what's needed to help rural governments pay for schools and other services.

Josh Kardon, chief of staff to U.S. Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said the land sale should not distract from the real harm of a severe funding cut for rural schools.

"I am beginning to suspect that the administration is working overtime to keep land sales the issue that everyone debates, so that the public never focuses on the massive loss of funding for rural counties," Kardon said.

The administration's plan would result in a 55-per-cent cut over five years, compared with current spending, which totalled nearly $400 million this year.

Republican senators were more open to the administration plan. Senator Larry Craig of Idaho, who had sharply opposed the land sale at a hearing last month, had moved toward a more neutral position by Thursday.

"At this point, he appreciates the administration's continued willingness to fund the program but doesn't have any specific comments on the proposal until he has more time to review it," said spokesman Dan Whiting.

A spokesman for Senator Pete Domenici, a New Mexico Republican and chairman of the Senate energy and natural resources committee, said Domenici was "keeping an open mind on the proposal and will do a full review."

Rey said the question for legislators is not whether they like the land sale plan but whether they have a better alternative in a tight budget year.

"Students don't go to school on promises. They go to school on resources," he said.



To: tejek who wrote (280583)3/18/2006 8:31:31 AM
From: Alighieri  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1579680
 
Senate Approves Budget, Breaking Spending Limits
Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

President Bush, far left, with Senators Rick Santorum, George Allen and John Kerry Thursday after a meeting in the White House.

WASHINGTON, March 16 — The Senate narrowly approved a $2.8 trillion election-year budget Thursday that broke spending limits only hours after it increased federal borrowing power to avert a government default.
Skip to next paragraph
Related Roll Call Vote: Debt Limit Increase

The budget decision at the end of a marathon day of voting followed a separate 52-to-48 Senate vote to increase the federal debt limit by $781 billion, bringing the debt ceiling to nearly $9 trillion. The move left Democrats attacking President Bush and Congressional Republicans for piling up record debt in their years in power.

Despite calls by Republican deficit hawks to hold the line, Senate Republicans joined with Democrats to approve more than $16 billion in added spending for social, military, job safety and home-heating programs, exceeding a ceiling established by President Bush.

In separate action, the House advanced $92 billion in war spending and hurricane recovery money.

Even with the added money, the Senate approved the $2.8 trillion budget by only 51 to 49 with five Republicans defecting. Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana was the sole Democrat to back the budget after winning agreement for a new $10 billion effort for levee rebuilding and coastal protection to be paid for out of oil royalties and other sources. Her vote saved Vice President Dick Cheney from having to break a tie.

The White House and Senate Republican leaders sought to put the best face on the budget outcome, with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget, crediting Republicans for "navigating difficult waters" in winning approval. Mr. Bolten said the administration would work to eliminate the added spending and restore the benefit cuts sought by the White House.

The successful push for additional spending alarmed and frustrated conservative Republicans who have been trying to steer the party back to a course of more fiscal restraint.

"It is very disturbing, and it gives me a whole lot of heartburn," said Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, who attributed the additional spending to political anxiety. "They want to go and say they are helping people, but we are not helping people when we are selling out their future."

In the House, lawmakers easily approved almost $92 billion in emergency spending, with about $68 billion going for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and $19 billion for hurricane recovery, slightly less than the White House sought.

The House and the Senate then left for a weeklong break.

The Senate budget bill would clear the way to opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, but the outlook for that provision is uncertain given strong resistance by Republican moderates in the House and a long legislative route before final approval.

The budget fight and the focus on the rising national debt proved uncomfortable for some Republicans, who instead of tightening the federal belt found themselves caught in a Senate rush to add spending after raising the federal debt ceiling for the fourth time in five years.

"This budget could be the final nail in our coffin, if we don't watch it," said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, who said the Republican spending pattern was demoralizing party voters. "I don't think we properly understand the keys to our electoral success."

But Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who led the push for $7 billion in extra money for health and education programs, said those areas had been starved for money in recent years and could not afford to be overlooked again.

"Health and education are the two major capital assets of this country," said Mr. Specter, whose proposal passed easily, 73 to 27.

The provision, like many of the other spending increases, was ostensibly paid for, but Mr. Specter readily acknowledged that the plan to pay the new money out of the succeeding year's allocation was a gimmick.

In another spending increase, the Senate unanimously approved $184 million for mine safety. The provision by Senators Robert C. Byrd and John D. Rockefeller IV, both West Virginia Democrats, would be used to hire mine safety inspectors and put in place better mine rescue technologies over five years. It came after a string of mining accidents that left 24 miners dead this year.

The increases in spending took the budget further away from President Bush's original plan. Senate budget writers had stripped some Medicare cuts sought by the president and added other spending before even bringing it to the floor.

Senator Tom Harkin, the Iowa Democrat who joined with Mr. Specter in seeking the increase for health and education, said the vote showed that his Republican colleagues were "recognizing the American people want something different than the president's budget."

The changes also mean that reaching a final budget deal with the House will be difficult, given conservative resistance there to new spending. In a subtle swipe at the Senate, House Republicans circulated a memorandum on Thursday showing how they had been willing to resist efforts to add money for social and domestic security programs to the emergency spending bill.

The administration told Congress that the increase in the statutory debt limit to nearly $9 trillion was needed to avoid a default and keep the government operating.

The increase in the debt limit brought the total increase during the Bush administration to $3 trillion. Democrats said the rising debt was the consequence of what they described as a reckless Republican fiscal policy centered on tax cuts for the affluent.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, said Thursday that given Mr. Bush's record, "I really do believe this man will go down as the worst president this country has ever had."

Few Republicans took the floor to defend the debt limit request, and three — Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Conrad Burns of Montana and John Ensign of Nevada — joined all Democrats in opposing the increase.

But Senator Charles E. Grassley, the Iowa Republican who is chairman of the Finance Committee, attributed most of the growth in the debt to increased domestic security and the costs of natural disasters.

Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota, the senior Democrat on the Budget Committee, said it was fitting the Senate would agree to raise the debt limit on the same day it adopted a budget that he said would add substantially to the nation's accumulating red ink over the next five years.

"This thing is larded with debt," Mr. Conrad said.

Ian Urbina contributed reporting for this article.