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: Hope Praytochange who wrote (762314)	5/17/2007 3:02:31 PM
From: pompsander	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 769670

Bush hails deal on immigration reform By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS, Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON - Key senators in both parties and the White House announced agreement Thursday on an immigration overhaul that would grant quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S. and fortify the border. The plan would create a temporary worker program to bring new arrivals to the U.S and a separate program to cover agricultural workers. Skills and education-level would for the first time be weighted over family connections in deciding whether future immigrants should get permanent legal status. New high-tech employment verification measures also would be instituted to ensure that workers are here legally. The compromise came after weeks of painstaking closed-door negotiations that brought the most liberal Democrats and the most conservative Republicans together with President Bush's Cabinet officers to produce a highly complex measure that carries heavy political consequences. Bush called it "a much-needed solution to the problem of illegal immigration in this country" and said, if approved, the proposal "delivers an immigration system that is secure, productive, orderly and fair." "With this bipartisan agreement, I am confident leaders in Washington can have a serious, civil and conclusive debate so I can sign comprehensive reform into law this year," he said in a written statement. Bush planned to make remarks about the bill later Thursday at the White House. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, his party's lead negotiator on the deal, hailed it as "the best possible chance we will have in years to secure our borders and bring millions of people out of the shadows and into the sunshine of America." Anticipating criticism from conservatives, Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., said, "It is not amnesty. This will restore the rule of law." The accord sets the stage for what promises to be a bruising battle next week in the Senate on one of Bush's top non-war priorities. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., called the proposal a "starting point" for that debate, but added that it needs improvement. "I have serious concerns about some aspects of this proposal, including the structure of the temporary worker program and undue limitations on family immigration," Reid said in a statement. The key breakthrough came when negotiators struck a bargain on a so-called "point system" that prioritizes immigrants' education and skill level over family connections in deciding how to award green cards. The immigration issue also divides both parties in the House, which isn't expected to act unless the Senate passes a bill first. The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and — after paying fees and a $5,000 fine — ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of household would have to return to their home countries first. They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed. A new temporary guest worker program would also have to wait until those so-called "triggers" had been activated. Those workers would have to return home after work stints of two years, with little opportunity to gain permanent legal status or ever become U.S. citizens. They could renew their guest worker visas twice, but would be required to leave for a year in between each time. Democrats had pressed instead for guest workers to be permitted to stay and work indefinitely in the U.S. In perhaps the most hotly debated change, the proposed plan would shift from an immigration system primarily weighted toward family ties toward one with preferences for people with advanced degrees and sophisticated skills. Republicans have long sought such revisions, which they say are needed to end "chain migration" that harms the economy, while some Democrats and liberal groups say it's an unfair system that rips families apart. Family connections alone would no longer be enough to qualify for a green card — except for spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens. New limits would apply to U.S. citizens seeking to bring foreign-born parents into the country.

To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (762314)	5/17/2007 3:19:08 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769670

Message 23550237 Message 23550554 Message 23550632 Message 23550262 Message 23550402 Message 23550524 Message 23550658

To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (762314)	5/17/2007 4:41:43 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

OUR EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT: "But just how effective is the government? According to the Office of Management and Budget, just 17 percent of federal programs are 'effective' while 25 percent are deemed 'not performing.' The federal government wastes billions (trillions?) of dollars each year thanks to mismanagement, fraud, and abuse. As Chris Edwards notes in 'Downsizing the Federal Government,' 'erroneous and fraudulent payments to Medicare cost $20 billion annually,' 'overpayments in federal rental housing subsidies cost $2 billion a year,' and a single inside deal at the Pentagon 'would have wasted up to $2.5 billion of taxpayer money.'" -- "Happy Bureaucrat Week," Brandon Arnold, director of government affairs at the Cato Institute: cato.org

To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (762314)	5/17/2007 4:46:32 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

CONCORD COALITION APPLAUDS PAYGO IN BUDGET RESOLUTION BUT WARNS THAT PROJECTED SURPLUS REQUIRES HARD CHOICES WASHINGTON --The Concord Coalition said today that the Congressional Budget Resolution to be voted on in the House and Senate this week would help restore fiscal discipline by applying a deficit neutral "pay-as-you-go" (paygo) standard to all entitlement expansion and tax cut legislation and by creating a "trigger" in the House to protect projected surpluses. Concord expressed concern, however, that the revenue numbers in the budget plan assume a waiver of paygo for certain tax cut extensions. This presumed waiver, along with the absence of cost cutting entitlement reform and an assumed slowing of discretionary spending growth in the outyears, makes the goal of a $41 billion surplus in 2012 seem optimistic. "Budget rules are only as strong as the political will to apply them. A close look at the pent-up spending and tax cut demands in the budget resolution's 23 reserve funds shows how important strict adherence to paygo will be for the desired surplus to result. In this budget, paygo acts as a fiscal levee against a flood of red ink. If that levee breaks, there is little chance of reducing the deficit, let alone of producing a surplus," said Concord Coalition executive director Robert L. Bixby. Under the budget resolution, revenues and outlays would balance at about 19 percent of GDP in 2012. That is a slightly lower number than this year's projected level of outlays (20.2) although the budget resolution does not require any major cost cutting initiatives. Revenues by 2012 would be slightly higher than projected revenues this year (18.6) although the budget resolution does not instruct the House Ways and Means or Senate Finance Committees to raise taxes. The revenue increase in the budget resolution is the result of current law "sunsets" that were included when these tax cuts were originally enacted. Concord noted the following positive aspects of the budget resolution: * It establishes a balanced budget goal. * There are no expansions of mandatory spending programs. All such initiatives are constrained by deficit neutral reverse funds that require offsets to pay for them. It is a particularly positive sign that the budget resolution applies this restriction to a number of high priority items for the Democratic leadership -- such as expansion of the SCHIP program and reauthorization of the farm program. * Despite the presumed waiver of paygo for certain tax cut extensions, the budget resolution does not exempt any tax cut legislation from the rule. * Discretionary spending would fall as a percentage of the economy, provided that Congress sticks with its targeted spending levels. There are other aspects of the plan that Concord finds disappointing. Specifically, it: * Does not budget for likely war costs. Like the President's budget, the budget resolution assumes just $50 billion for the cost of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2009 and nothing in 2010 through 2012. * Does not provide a meaningful spending reconciliation bill to achieve savings in entitlement programs. The explosion in health care and retirement benefits that looms on the horizon is the single biggest threat to our nation's fiscal health. Including entitlement savings as a regular part of the annual budget process is an important step in addressing our long-term challenges. Even if paygo is strictly applied to expansions of mandatory programs, this would still leave spending growth under current law on an unsustainable path. However, the reconciliation instruction included in this budget appears to be aimed at smoothing the way for controversial policy initiatives, not at deficit reduction. * Does not provide for discretionary spending caps beyond fiscal year 2008. In projecting a balanced budget in 2012, the budget resolution assumes much lower increases in non-defense discretionary spending after 2008, including increases lower than inflation from 2010-2012. Overall, the budget projects a decline in non-defense discretionary spending as a percent of GDP in every year after 2008. Without caps, the spending restraint assumed in the outyears of the budget resolution will be much harder to achieve. * Does not assume revenue numbers that are consistent with strict application of paygo. Under current law, the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 are scheduled to expire on December 31, 2010. Moreover, current law does not assume further relief from the Alternative Minimum Tax. Thus, under paygo, the revenue that comes from these provisions would be assumed in the budget resolution. However, the budget resolution assumes a revenue number that is $175 billion below what would be collected if paygo applied. This number, in effect, assumes a waiver of paygo to provide for extending certain tax cuts. Revenue and Outlays as a Percentage of GDP In the FY08 Budget Conference Report 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Discretionary Outlays 7.78% 8.01% 7.73% 7.07% 6.68% 6.38% Mandatory Outlays 10.65% 10.74% 10.82% 10.89% 11.12% 10.87% Interest on the Debt 1.73% 1.79% 1.78% 1.78% 1.74% 1.68% Total Outlays 20.17% 20.54% 20.33% 19.73% 19.54% 18.92% Total Revenue 18.60% 18.78% 18.76% 18.47% 18.97% 19.16% Total Surplus -1.57% -1.76% -1.57% -1.26% -0.58% 0.24%