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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (756874)	1/5/2007 9:58:10 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769670

Lawmakers to Debate 'Pay As You Go' Rule By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS January 5, 2007 Filed at 7:46 a.m. ET nytimes.com WASHINGTON (AP) -- Legislation aimed at stifling the budget deficit could bedevil its Democratic proponents enjoying their new majority status in the House as well as Republican opponents. A proposed law known as the ''pay as you go'' rule is being pushed to the top of the agenda of the Democratic-controlled House with little support from Republicans. If strictly enforced, the PAYGO rule to be debated Friday would make it difficult for Democrats to pass increases in federal benefit programs such as Medicare. It would also threaten efforts to extend President Bush's tax cuts, most of which expire at the end of 2010. House lawmakers also will consider a new rule requiring them to attach their names to any homestate projects they obtain in spending bills in hopes that such disclosure would prevent scandals in which members of Congress trade such ''earmarks'' for bribes, campaign cash or other favors. The PAYGO and earmark proposals come a day after Democrats seized control of Congress for the first time in 12 years, with a jubilant Nancy Pelosi becoming the first woman ever to rise to speaker of the House. ''This is an historic moment -- for the Congress, and for the women of this country,'' Pelosi said Thursday when she took the House gavel. ''It is a moment for which we have waited more than 200 years.'' Pelosi, D-Calif., will exert vast influence over the congressional agenda and stands second in the line of succession to the presidency. In her first step as speaker, she orchestrated bipartisan 430-1 passage of a measure banning lawmakers from accepting gifts and free trips from lobbyists and discounted trips on private planes. Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., cast the sole ''nay'' vote. The vote, said Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., amounted to ''sweeping ethics reforms that begin to address some of the most egregious transgressions of the recent past.'' Republicans were expected to support Democrats' efforts to require greater disclosure of lawmakers' earmarks. The Democratic effort largely mirrored a GOP plan passed last year in the wake of the Randy ''Duke'' Cunningham scandal, in which the former California GOP congressman pleaded guilty to corruption charges for channeling earmarks to defense contractors in exchange for $2.4 million in bribes. Lesser scandals have hit other lawmakers. ''I give them kudos,'' said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a fierce but sometimes quixotic foe of Congress' earmarking ways. However, most Republicans were likely to resist the Democrats' move to reimpose the PAYGO rule requiring tax cuts or spending increases in entitlement programs such as Medicare or farm subsidies to be ''paid for'' with tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere in the budget. ''The PAYGO stuff wreaks havoc on tax cuts,'' Flake said. Democratic budget hawks, especially the moderate-to-conservative ''Blue Dogs,'' say that restoring the rule is crucial to curbing the budget deficit. Various forms of PAYGO were in place from 1990-2002, however, and Congress often found ways around it. The version up for a vote Friday can easily be waived. Still, the incoming chairman of the Budget Committee, John Spratt Jr., D-S.C., touted it as better than the status quo. ''You've got to offset those tax cuts,'' Spratt said. ''And if you want to enhance an entitlement, you've got to pay for it.'' Democrats left in place -- for now -- a GOP rule limiting committee chairmen to three two-year terms. Copyright 2007 The Associated Press

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (756874)	1/5/2007 9:59:15 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Senate Feels Heat as House Cranks Up Ethics Overhaul January 5, 2007 By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK nytimes.com WASHINGTON, Jan. 4 — Unexpectedly broad ethics rule changes that the House passed Thursday are putting new pressure on the Senate. The House rules leave what lobbyists say are ample loopholes for those seeking to buy access to lawmakers, mainly through campaign fund-raising. But leaders of the new Democratic majority in the Senate said Thursday that they were reintroducing a much less extensive package of changes passed last year as the starting place for an intraparty debate next week over how much further the Senate should go. Saying they were responding to voter backlash against Congressional corruption that helped them take control, House Democrats went beyond some of the ethics proposals on which they had campaigned. The new House rules bar members from taking gifts, meals or trips paid for by lobbyists, or the organizations that employ them. The rules also ban lawmakers from using corporate jets and reimbursing the owners. A further proposal would also eliminate major loopholes from earlier drafts, in requirements for lawmakers to disclose sponsorship of pet spending projects, or earmarks, and tax breaks they hide in complex legislation. The House Democrats said that in March they would take up the creation of an independent ethics watchdog to police their own conduct, something lawmakers in both chambers had steadfastly resisted. In contrast, the initial Senate ethics bill would ban only gifts or meals and not trips paid for by lobbyists or their employers. It would not restrict the use of corporate jets. It would require disclosure of the sponsors of only a small fraction of spending earmarks, excluding those added to supplementary material, called Congressional reports, that explain legislative intent or that are directed through federal agencies like the Defense Department. Nor does the Senate bill propose any independent enforcement. Some senior Democratic aides said the House rules had upped the ante for the Senate. “They will be embarrassed” if they do not do more, said James A. Thurber, a professor of government at American University in Washington and an expert on Congressional ethics rules who has acted as a consultant to several lawmakers. “When we look at the election, it is a hot issue, so there will be a lot of focus on it in people’s minds, and the heat will be on in the Senate.” Announcing his intention to reintroduce the Senate bill that passed last year, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, promissed to “improve that legislation and make additional reforms.” Senior aides in both parties said Mr. Reid was negotiating with Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, to try to work out a bipartisan package of changes. Jim Manley, a spokesman for Mr. Reid, said the House actions had no bearing on what the Senate would do. An overhaul is likely to face strong opposition from veteran senators who resent ethics rules as unnecessary, and helped bring back other changes. But aides to the Senate Rules Committee said they were preparing to match the House ban on meals, gifts and trips paid for by lobbyists or any organization that employs them. Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who is chairwoman of the Rules Committee, has said she intends to close some of the loopholes in the current bill’s earmark disclosure requirements. And despite personal doubts, she has also agreed to hold hearings on creating an independent enforcement watchdog. Other Democrats, including Senators Barack Obama of Illinois and Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, planned to push for a far more drastic overhaul. The Feingold-Obama plan would make lawmakers reimburse corporations for use of their jets at the cost of a charter flight instead of the price of a first-class ticket — a step that stops short of the House rules. The bill would also create an independent watchdog as the House Democrats have discussed. And it would prohibit lobbyists or the organizations that employ them from holding lavish events for lawmakers at party conventions. The Feingold-Obama bill would also require lobbyists to disclose any earmarks they are seeking for their clients, and require lobbyists to disclose any collecting and passing on of campaign contributions — a practice known as “bundling” that currently makes K Street the heart of campaign fund-raising for most lawmakers. Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, said she and many other newly elected Democrats were working with Mr. Obama, Mr. Feingold and Mr. Reid to pushing for stronger changes, in part because they felt the resonance of the issue on the campaign trail. “The House bill raises the bar,” Ms. Klobuchar said, “but a number of senators have already been talking about their own efforts to strengthen the Senate bill.” Lobbyists, meanwhile, groused that the rules passed in the House would have the unintended consequence of encouraging them to do more fund-raising for House members. The new rules bar lobbyists from treating lawmakers to meals or trips. But the lobbyists can still raise money for lawmakers’ campaigns and also join lawmakers at fund-raising events or on overnight trips paid for with those campaign funds. Lobbyists said people seeking access to lawmakers may now have even more incentive to attend fund-raisers because they can no longer simply buy dinner or lunch. Lawrence W. Noble, a Washington lawyer specializing in political rules, said lobbyists could well feel obliged to attend more fund-raisers. “We still have a system of private financing of campaigns,” Mr. Noble said. Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company