Archive for the ‘Jon Kyl’ Category

Obama Week 3: Senate Poised to Defeat Stimulus?

February 1, 2009

“As it stands it would be very hard for me to vote for this package, because I don’t think it is fully targeted, timely and temporary,” Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) said. “I think there is widespread dissatisfaction with the package that came over from the House.”

Both Democratic Senator Kent Conrad and Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson seem ready to join with Senate Republicans against the House version of the stimulus….

“Too little is being done about housing, which is central to the crisis,” said Conrad.

***************

Republicans suggested overhauling the Senate’s stimulus proposal because they said it doesn’t pump enough into the private sector through tax cuts but allows Democrats to go on a spending spree unlikely to jolt the economy.

“When I say start from scratch, what I mean is that the basic approach of this bill, we believe, is wrong,” said Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the No. 2 Republican. He added that he was seeing an erosion of support for the bill.

By DOUGLASS K. DANIEL, Associated Press Writer

In this photo provided by CBS, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., ... 
In this photo provided by CBS, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., appears on CBS’s ‘Face the Nation’ in Washington, Sunday, Feb. 1, 2009.(AP Photo/CBS Face the Nation, Karin Cooper)

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said he doubted the Senate would pass the bill, contending that Democrats as well as Republicans were uneasy with it. He renewed a Republican complaint that Democrats had not been as bipartisan in writing the bill as Obama had said he wanted.

“I think it may be time … for the president to kind of get a hold of these Democrats in the Senate and the House, who have rather significant majorities, and shake them a little bit and say, ‘Look, let’s do this the right way,'” McConnell said. “I can’t believe that the president isn’t embarrassed about the products that have been produced so far.”

Democrats defended their almost $819 billion version of President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan, which is set for debate this week, and said they were open to considering changes by Republicans. But they said the unrelentingly bleak economic news demanded action.

“We cannot delay this,” said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Democrats’ No. 2 leader. “We can’t engage in the old political rhetoric of saying, ‘Well, maybe it could be a little bit better here and a little bit better there.’ We’ve got to pull together.”

A bank employee counts US dollar bank notes. The euro fell sharply ...

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., agreed that more could be done in the area of housing, though he said tapping money in the separate financial bailout fund would be a more likely way to pay for mortgage relief.

Under Obama’s plan, strained state budgets would receive a cash infusion, projects for roads and other infrastructure would be funded, and “green jobs” in the energy sector would be created. In its centerpiece tax cut, single workers would gain $500 and couples $1,000, even if they don’t earn enough to owe federal income taxes.

Among the major changes Kyl said would be needed to gain Republican support in the Senate was the tax rebate for individuals and couples, which he criticized as going to too many people who didn’t pay the tax to start with. He also criticized the bill for seeking to create nearly three dozen government programs and giving states far more money than they need.

Durbin argued that $1 out of every $3 in the bill goes to tax cuts and defended it as aimed at helping working families. While he contended that Democrats were “very open” to Republican proposals, he cited only what he said were calls for more money in job-creating public works projects, typically a Democratic priority.

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., characterized the proposal as “a spending plan. It’s not a stimulus plan. It’s temporary, and it’s wasteful.”

Read the rest:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/2009020
1/ap_on_go_co/congress_stimulus

Related:
Economic Stimulus About “Soul of America”
.
Forbes Pleads For Bank Bailout, “Banks Are the Heart of the Financial System”

Here’s What $800 Billion Stimulus Means to America as We Knew It

Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/200
9/02/01/stimulus-heavy-spending-say-growing-nu
mber-senators/

http://jmcpherson.wordpress.com/2009/02/01
/a-stimulating-limbaugh-lesson-and-battles-in-
afghanistan-and-tampa/

Advertisements

Iran: Nuclear? Rich With Oil? A Threat? Some Dubious Ideas Linger….

December 5, 2008

The incoming Barack Obama administration has already been inundated with reports, policy recommendations and position papers vying for the president-elect’s attention on the Iran nuclear issue. Although nicely wrapped in the semantics of a “fresh” or “game-changing” approach, the majority are familiar and lack novelty, and this should come as no surprise as many were penned by old US foreign policy hands like Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk.

As a result, even when they seem to be suggesting a reasonable “new thinking” in the US’s Iran policy, wedded to the idea of “engagement” and or “dialogue without preconditions”, these noble efforts are, however, undermined by their reliance on dubious assumptions. Not to mention their restrictive methodologies, which ultimately veer them back towards the same old plans for “coercive diplomacy”.

By Kaveh L Afrasiabi 
Asia Times 

There are also the limits to the “dialogue without preconditions” logic put forth by, among others, the president of Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, in a new collaborative report with Indyk published by the Brookings Institution. Although positive in many respects and apparently earning the disapproval of Israel, the Haass-Indyk call for engaging Iran in dialogue without preconditions falls short of what is really necessary and lacking in Washington today, that is, dialogue without false assumptions.

One such false assumption that has been adopted like an article of faith by nearly all the pundits and nuclear experts in the US today, is that Iran is fast approaching a “nuclear breakout capability” – in light of Iran’s double process of mastering the nuclear fuel cycle and advancing its missile technology. This has warranted the word “crisis”, to quote US Senator Jon Kyl. [1] Not to be outdone by politicians, a number of nuclear experts, such as David Albright, have echoed the sentiment.

Read the rest:
http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JL06Ak01
.html

********************

Ahmadinejad, Iran Worry Oil’s Price Shrinks Thier Importance

Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has for the first time admitted that the fall in world oil prices will affect the economic projects of his government, local media reported on Thursday.

“If we fix the oil price at 30 dollars a barrel in the budget, we will have to abandon much of our economic projects … We have to set it at 30 to 35 dollars as we don’t determine the oil price on international markets,” he said.

He acknowledged that “oil prices will be low for some time” because of the global recession.

Iran, which is OPEC’s second largest producer, has an official oil output of 4.2 million barrels a day, with half of the country’s budget dependent on its crude exports.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (left) Foreign Minister ... 
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (left) Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki in Tehran on December 1, 2008. Ahmadinejad has for the first time admitted that the fall in world oil prices will affect the economic projects of his government, local media reported.(AFP/File/Atta Kenare)

Ahmadinejad boasted only last month that his government could run the country “with a barrel of oil priced at between eight and five dollars.”

“Even if we reach the point where the enemies do not buy our oil any more, we can manage the country. Thanks God, fluctuations in oil prices will have no effect on the next budget,” he said.

From:  AFP

Read the rest:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20081204/wl_midea
st_afp/iranpoliticseconomy_081204163303