By Michael Quint
Dec. 31 (Bloomberg) -- New York state ended 2009 with $883.7 million of available cash, after borrowing from its short-term investment pool to absorb a record $600 million deficit in its general fund, according to a report by Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli.
The state expects in January to repay the investment pool and provide $750 million of payments to schools and local governments delayed this month by Governor David Paterson, budget director Robert Megna said.
The investment pool, which holds cash and securities for various accounts such as lottery winnings and state university tuition payments, serves as a kind of line of credit, available when the main account, the general fund, runs out of cash. Borrowing from the investment fund must be repaid by the end of New York’s fiscal year on March 31, according to the state’s annual information statement.
“Had we not delayed payments, we would have run out of money,” Paterson said at a news conference in Albany today.
A cash report by DiNapoli showed the state’s cash balance at the start of business today was $506.4 million, after payments yesterday of about $3.79 billion. The opening balance was less than the $750 million of payments Paterson temporarily withheld.
Paterson said the state’s ending balance was $283 million after subtracting the $600 million general fund deficit from the ending cash balance. In fact, the general fund is a component of the investment pool, according to the comptroller’s office. The general fund deficit is included in the ending cash balance of $883.7 million, and shouldn’t be subtracted from it, said Matt Anderson, a Division of Budget spokesman.
Biggest Revenue Month
State revenue next month exceeds spending by $5.84 billion, according to Division of Budget projections in October. January is the biggest month of the year for tax collections, estimated at $8.88 billion. Wall Street bonus payments are harder to predict this year because many banks plan to pay employees in stock rather than cash, Paterson and Megna said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Michael Quint in Albany, New York, at mquint@bloomberg.net.
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Percy Sutton, trailblazing businessman, dies at 89
By Jamie Guzzardo,
December 27, 2009 8:34 p.m.
(CNN) -- Civil rights attorney Percy Sutton, who represented Malcolm X and became an influential New York politician and broadcaster, has died at age 89, associates said Sunday.
As a businessman, Sutton was credited with leading the revitalization of Harlem, including the restoration of the famous Apollo Theater. In a statement issued after Sutton's death Saturday night, New York Gov. David Paterson called the former Manhattan borough president "a friend and mentor."
"Percy was fiercely loyal, compassionate and a truly kind soul," Paterson said. "He will be missed, but his legacy lives on through the next generations of African-Americans he inspired to pursue and fulfill their own dreams and ambitions."
And in a statement issued by the White House, President Obama called Sutton a "true hero to African-Americans in New York City and around the country."
His career as an entrepreneur and public servant made the rise of countless young African-Americans possible.--President Obama
"His life-long dedication to the fight for civil rights and his career as an entrepreneur and public servant made the rise of countless young African-Americans possible," Obama said.
A native of Texas, Sutton served as an intelligence officer for the famed Tuskegee Airmen during World War II before becoming an attorney. He represented Malcolm X until the onetime Nation of Islam leader's 1965 assassination, and continued to represent his widow, Betty Shabazz, until her death in a 1997 fire. He then defended Shabazz's 12-year-old grandson, who admitted to starting the fatal blaze.
In the 1970s, Sutton was a member of the Harlem circle dubbed the "Gang of Four," which included U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel; Paterson's father Basil, who became New York's secretary of state; and future New York Mayor David Dinkins. He served as Manhattan borough president from 1966 to 1977, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg ordered flags at city offices to fly at half-staff on Monday.
"It's hard to capture in just a few words how important Percy's contributions were -- and just how unique an individual he was. He helped move African-Americans and all of New York forward," Bloomberg said in his declaration.
After public office, Sutton became an African-American broadcasting pioneer by purchasing radio stations WLIB and WBLS, launching the first radio chain aimed at black listeners, civil rights leader Al Sharpton said Sunday.
"He was at the forefront of everything you can think of in black America," Sharpton told CNN. "He was the quintessential black American. He pioneered black business, black media and black politics. He opened those doors and he kept them open."
Sutton also reopened the Apollo, the Harlem landmark credited with launching the careers of performers from Ella Fitzgerald to Michael Jackson, "when it was boarded up -- when the only ones here were the rats and the roaches," Sharpton told reporters Sunday.
"He was suave and eloquent and debonair," Sharpton said. "He had a coolness about him that I think that we will never see the likes of. There was a grace about Percy Sutton that was hard to describe."
And Rangel said Sutton "never stopped fighting for our rights and building community, especially in his beloved Harlem."
"Percy Sutton wrote his own story, and in doing so, he leaves behind a remarkable legacy of achievement and social justice that will serve as an example and inspiration for generations of leaders, now and forever," the veteran congressman said in a written statement.
--http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
December 27, 2009 8:34 p.m.
(CNN) -- Civil rights attorney Percy Sutton, who represented Malcolm X and became an influential New York politician and broadcaster, has died at age 89, associates said Sunday.
As a businessman, Sutton was credited with leading the revitalization of Harlem, including the restoration of the famous Apollo Theater. In a statement issued after Sutton's death Saturday night, New York Gov. David Paterson called the former Manhattan borough president "a friend and mentor."
"Percy was fiercely loyal, compassionate and a truly kind soul," Paterson said. "He will be missed, but his legacy lives on through the next generations of African-Americans he inspired to pursue and fulfill their own dreams and ambitions."
And in a statement issued by the White House, President Obama called Sutton a "true hero to African-Americans in New York City and around the country."
His career as an entrepreneur and public servant made the rise of countless young African-Americans possible.--President Obama
"His life-long dedication to the fight for civil rights and his career as an entrepreneur and public servant made the rise of countless young African-Americans possible," Obama said.
A native of Texas, Sutton served as an intelligence officer for the famed Tuskegee Airmen during World War II before becoming an attorney. He represented Malcolm X until the onetime Nation of Islam leader's 1965 assassination, and continued to represent his widow, Betty Shabazz, until her death in a 1997 fire. He then defended Shabazz's 12-year-old grandson, who admitted to starting the fatal blaze.
In the 1970s, Sutton was a member of the Harlem circle dubbed the "Gang of Four," which included U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel; Paterson's father Basil, who became New York's secretary of state; and future New York Mayor David Dinkins. He served as Manhattan borough president from 1966 to 1977, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg ordered flags at city offices to fly at half-staff on Monday.
"It's hard to capture in just a few words how important Percy's contributions were -- and just how unique an individual he was. He helped move African-Americans and all of New York forward," Bloomberg said in his declaration.
After public office, Sutton became an African-American broadcasting pioneer by purchasing radio stations WLIB and WBLS, launching the first radio chain aimed at black listeners, civil rights leader Al Sharpton said Sunday.
"He was at the forefront of everything you can think of in black America," Sharpton told CNN. "He was the quintessential black American. He pioneered black business, black media and black politics. He opened those doors and he kept them open."
Sutton also reopened the Apollo, the Harlem landmark credited with launching the careers of performers from Ella Fitzgerald to Michael Jackson, "when it was boarded up -- when the only ones here were the rats and the roaches," Sharpton told reporters Sunday.
"He was suave and eloquent and debonair," Sharpton said. "He had a coolness about him that I think that we will never see the likes of. There was a grace about Percy Sutton that was hard to describe."
And Rangel said Sutton "never stopped fighting for our rights and building community, especially in his beloved Harlem."
"Percy Sutton wrote his own story, and in doing so, he leaves behind a remarkable legacy of achievement and social justice that will serve as an example and inspiration for generations of leaders, now and forever," the veteran congressman said in a written statement.
--http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Senate Passes Health Care Overhaul Bill
By ROBERT PEAR
Published: December 24, 2009
WASHINGTON — The Senate voted Thursday to reinvent the nation’s health care system, passing a bill to guarantee access to health insurance for tens of millions of Americans and to rein in health costs as proposed by President Obama.
A History of Overhauling Health Care
Senate Roll Call: Health Care Bill
The 60-to-39 party-line vote, on the 25th straight day of debate on the legislation, brings Democrats a step closer to a goal they have pursued for decades. It clears the way for negotiations with the House, which passed a broadly similar bill last month by a vote of 220 to 215.
If the two chambers can strike a deal, as seems likely, the resulting product would vastly expand the role and responsibilities of the federal government. It would, as lawmakers said repeatedly in the debate, touch the lives of nearly all Americans.
The bill would require most Americans to have health insurance, would add 15 million people to the Medicaid rolls and would subsidize private coverage for low- and middle-income people, at a cost to the government of $871 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
President Obama said after the vote that the health care bill was “the most important piece of social legislation since the Social Security Act” was adopted and that it represented “the toughest measure ever taken to hold the insurance companies accountable.”
The budget office estimates that the bill would provide coverage to 31 million uninsured people, but still leave 23 million uninsured in 2019. One-third of those remaining uninsured would be illegal immigrants.
If the bill becomes law, it would be a milestone in social policy, comparable with the creation of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare in 1965. But unlike those programs, the new initiative lacks bipartisan support. Only one Republican voted for the House bill last month, and no Republicans voted for the Senate version.
Published: December 24, 2009
WASHINGTON — The Senate voted Thursday to reinvent the nation’s health care system, passing a bill to guarantee access to health insurance for tens of millions of Americans and to rein in health costs as proposed by President Obama.
A History of Overhauling Health Care
Senate Roll Call: Health Care Bill
The 60-to-39 party-line vote, on the 25th straight day of debate on the legislation, brings Democrats a step closer to a goal they have pursued for decades. It clears the way for negotiations with the House, which passed a broadly similar bill last month by a vote of 220 to 215.
If the two chambers can strike a deal, as seems likely, the resulting product would vastly expand the role and responsibilities of the federal government. It would, as lawmakers said repeatedly in the debate, touch the lives of nearly all Americans.
The bill would require most Americans to have health insurance, would add 15 million people to the Medicaid rolls and would subsidize private coverage for low- and middle-income people, at a cost to the government of $871 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
President Obama said after the vote that the health care bill was “the most important piece of social legislation since the Social Security Act” was adopted and that it represented “the toughest measure ever taken to hold the insurance companies accountable.”
The budget office estimates that the bill would provide coverage to 31 million uninsured people, but still leave 23 million uninsured in 2019. One-third of those remaining uninsured would be illegal immigrants.
If the bill becomes law, it would be a milestone in social policy, comparable with the creation of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare in 1965. But unlike those programs, the new initiative lacks bipartisan support. Only one Republican voted for the House bill last month, and no Republicans voted for the Senate version.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Power Troubles Snarl New York City Train Service
By JOHN KELL
DECEMBER 23, 2009, 12:21 P.M. ET
Rail service was suspended at New York City's Penn Station for nearly three hours Wednesday due to power problems, disrupting commuter and holiday travel for several New Jersey Transit, Long Island Railroad and Amtrak lines.
The outage was first reported at 8:45 a.m. EST and crews were working to resolve the power issue, according to Amtrak. The cause of the power disruption is under investigation. An Amtrak spokesman said trains were moving again as of 11:35 a.m. Additional delays were expected as normal service resumed, Amtrak said in a release.
A NJ Transit spokesman said average ridership into Penn Station on any given day was 81,000. He estimated the outage affected "tens of thousands" of customers.
Trains were unable to travel in and out of New York. Amtrak said those en route to New York at the time of the power outage had power onboard, including heat and lights.
Numerous Acela Express and Northeast regional trains between Boston, New York and Washington were affected by the outage. Amtrak's Empire Service running through New York, Albany and Niagara Falls was also affected.
For NJ Transit, service was temporarily suspended on the Northeast Corridor, North Jersey Coast and Midtown Direct lines, with all Midtown Direct trains being diverted to Hoboken, N.J. The other lines were operating through Newark Penn Station with significant delays.
NJ Transit said the lines were restored as of 12:07 p.m., though delays of up to one hour in both directions were expected.
Some alternative transportation was available via the Port Authority of New York an New Jersey, or PATH, trains. NJ Transit said it provided alternative travel options through the PATH, as well as the New York Port Authority Bus Terminal.---From wsj.com
DECEMBER 23, 2009, 12:21 P.M. ET
Rail service was suspended at New York City's Penn Station for nearly three hours Wednesday due to power problems, disrupting commuter and holiday travel for several New Jersey Transit, Long Island Railroad and Amtrak lines.
The outage was first reported at 8:45 a.m. EST and crews were working to resolve the power issue, according to Amtrak. The cause of the power disruption is under investigation. An Amtrak spokesman said trains were moving again as of 11:35 a.m. Additional delays were expected as normal service resumed, Amtrak said in a release.
A NJ Transit spokesman said average ridership into Penn Station on any given day was 81,000. He estimated the outage affected "tens of thousands" of customers.
Trains were unable to travel in and out of New York. Amtrak said those en route to New York at the time of the power outage had power onboard, including heat and lights.
Numerous Acela Express and Northeast regional trains between Boston, New York and Washington were affected by the outage. Amtrak's Empire Service running through New York, Albany and Niagara Falls was also affected.
For NJ Transit, service was temporarily suspended on the Northeast Corridor, North Jersey Coast and Midtown Direct lines, with all Midtown Direct trains being diverted to Hoboken, N.J. The other lines were operating through Newark Penn Station with significant delays.
NJ Transit said the lines were restored as of 12:07 p.m., though delays of up to one hour in both directions were expected.
Some alternative transportation was available via the Port Authority of New York an New Jersey, or PATH, trains. NJ Transit said it provided alternative travel options through the PATH, as well as the New York Port Authority Bus Terminal.---From wsj.com
Monday, December 21, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Health Bill Passes Key Test in the Senate With 60 Votes
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN and ROBERT PEAR
Published: December 21, 2009
WASHINGTON — After a long day of acid, partisan debate, Democrats held ranks early Monday in a dead-of-night procedural vote that proved they had locked in the decisive margin needed to pass a far-reaching overhaul of the nation’s health care system.
The roll was called shortly after 1 a.m., with Washington still snowbound after a weekend blizzard, and the Senate voted on party lines to cut off a Republican filibuster of a package of changes to the health care bill by the majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada.
The vote was 60 to 40 — a tally that is expected to be repeated four times as further procedural hurdles are cleared in the days ahead, and then once more in a dramatic, if predictable, finale tentatively scheduled for 7 p.m. on Christmas Eve.
Both parties hailed the vote as seismic. ------From nytimes.com---N.Y.T. U.S.
Published: December 21, 2009
WASHINGTON — After a long day of acid, partisan debate, Democrats held ranks early Monday in a dead-of-night procedural vote that proved they had locked in the decisive margin needed to pass a far-reaching overhaul of the nation’s health care system.
The roll was called shortly after 1 a.m., with Washington still snowbound after a weekend blizzard, and the Senate voted on party lines to cut off a Republican filibuster of a package of changes to the health care bill by the majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada.
The vote was 60 to 40 — a tally that is expected to be repeated four times as further procedural hurdles are cleared in the days ahead, and then once more in a dramatic, if predictable, finale tentatively scheduled for 7 p.m. on Christmas Eve.
Both parties hailed the vote as seismic. ------From nytimes.com---N.Y.T. U.S.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
With Nelson on board, health-care bill could pass by Christmas
By Shailagh Murray and Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 19, 2009; 1:30 PM
Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), the final Democratic holdout on health care, announced to his colleagues Saturday morning that he would support the Senate reform bill, clearing the way for final passage by Christmas of President Obama's top domestic policy priority.
Asked if he had secured the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) told reporters, "It seems that way."
The Senate is expected to work its way through a series of procedural motions over the next few days, with a vote on the legislation scheduled the evening of Dec. 24th. A conference with the House to produce a final bill would likely extend into January, Senate aides said.
Congressional budget analysts said the revised package, unveiled Saturday morning by Reid, would spend $871 billion over the next decade to extend coverage to more than 30 million Americans by dramatically expanding Medicaid and offering federal subsidies to those who lack affordable coverage through employers.
Those costs would be more than covered by nearly $400 billion over the next decade in new taxes and nearly $500 billion spending reductions, primarily cuts to Medicare, the federal health program for people over 65. The remainder, about $132 billion over 10 years, would go to lowering the federal deficit. --http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, December 19, 2009; 1:30 PM
Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), the final Democratic holdout on health care, announced to his colleagues Saturday morning that he would support the Senate reform bill, clearing the way for final passage by Christmas of President Obama's top domestic policy priority.
Asked if he had secured the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) told reporters, "It seems that way."
The Senate is expected to work its way through a series of procedural motions over the next few days, with a vote on the legislation scheduled the evening of Dec. 24th. A conference with the House to produce a final bill would likely extend into January, Senate aides said.
Congressional budget analysts said the revised package, unveiled Saturday morning by Reid, would spend $871 billion over the next decade to extend coverage to more than 30 million Americans by dramatically expanding Medicaid and offering federal subsidies to those who lack affordable coverage through employers.
Those costs would be more than covered by nearly $400 billion over the next decade in new taxes and nearly $500 billion spending reductions, primarily cuts to Medicare, the federal health program for people over 65. The remainder, about $132 billion over 10 years, would go to lowering the federal deficit. --http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Health bill held up by single Democrat and GOP tactics
By Janet Hook December 17, 2009
Reporting from Washington - New obstacles slowed Senate action on the healthcare bill today, as the hunt for supporters narrowed to a lone Democrat -- Ben Nelson of Nebraska -- and Republican delaying tactics brought debate to a temporary standstill.But Democratic leaders made progress toward bringing their party in line and remained hopeful that they would pass the bill through the Senate by Christmas -- just barely.The effort to win Nelson's support hinges largely on abortion policy, the same divisive issue that nearly derailed action on the healthcare bill at the last minute in the House, where antiabortion Democrats insisted on tight restrictions on the funding of abortion under the proposed new health programs.Nelson, seeking similar abortion restrictions, continued to withhold his support for the Senate bill despite major concessions made to him on other issues affecting the powerful insurance industry that is important to his home state.Efforts to address his abortion concerns advanced today as another antiabortion Democrat -- Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania -- floated a compromise designed to strengthen guarantees that federal funds would not be used for abortion.Democratic leaders were cautiously optimistic that if they can nail down Nelson's vote, they will have the 60 votes they need to break the filibusters expected to be mounted by Republicans.Senate aides calculate that if Republicans use every procedural roadblock available to them -- as they have promised --
Democrats may not be able to bring the bill to a vote before Christmas Eve.The power and variety of Republican delaying tactics became clear today, when GOP members brought debate to a halt by forcing the Senate clerk to read the entire text of a 767-page amendment by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent, to establish a government-run insurance plan that would entirely replace the private insurance system.The amendment was not expected to pass, and after the clerk had spent two hours and 43 minutes reading 139 pages of the bill -- to a chamber with only two or three senators present -- Sanders withdrew the amendment to allow debate to resume."We are going to do everything we can to make it hard to pass a bad bill," said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).For all the end-game maneuvering, however, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has yet to unveil the details of his final version of the bill, a far-reaching "manager's amendment" that will incorporate all elements of the bill he has had to revise to garner support from all of his party's caucus.The fundamental aims of the bill remain the same: to reduce the ranks of people without insurance, make coverage more stable, and slow the growth of healthcare costs.Reid has decided to drop the so-called "public option" -- a government-run health insurance plan included in the House bill -- because of opposition from Senate centrists like Nelson and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.Although liberals in the House have threatened to vote against the health bill if it comes back for final approval without a public option, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) signaled today more clearly than ever that she could accept a bill without the option -- if she were satisfied with other elements."It depends on what else is in the bill," she told reporters. "Our priority on the public option -- the emphasis was not on 'public.' The emphasis was on 'option.' "The head count of Democratic senators who have committed to vote with Reid to end the Republican filibuster has mounted slowly but steadily. In a White House meeting with President Obama and other Democrats on Tuesday, Lieberman indicated that he was prepared to support the bill after Democratic leaders agreed to drop plans to expand Medicare to people as young as 55.Nelson is the only Democrat that leaders are really worried they could lose. He welcomed the leadership's decision to drop the public option -- a provision bitterly opposed by insurance companies -- and Reid's assurance that the bill would not include a proposal to strip the insurance industry of its federal anti-trust exemption.But that was not enough to win Nelson's support. He still objected that the bill's provisions barring the use of federal funds for abortion did not go far enough to enforce the ban in the new insurance-buying exchange that would be set up for people who do not get insurance from their employers.The Senate rejected a Nelson amendment to insert the House's stronger language, which would bar insurance companies in the exchange from covering abortion in policies for people receiving federal premium subsidies.The Senate bill would allow those policies to cover abortion so long as they segregated the federal funds and guaranteed that only private premiums were used for the procedure.But even as he and Democratic leaders considered compromise abortion language, Nelson told reporters in a conference call that abortion was not the only troublesome issue.He said that he also was concerned about the bill's proposed new long-term care insurance program and cuts in Medicare payments to home healthcare providers."Until those things are corrected, it's not something I can vote for right now," he told reporters.--From L.A.Times U.S World
Reporting from Washington - New obstacles slowed Senate action on the healthcare bill today, as the hunt for supporters narrowed to a lone Democrat -- Ben Nelson of Nebraska -- and Republican delaying tactics brought debate to a temporary standstill.But Democratic leaders made progress toward bringing their party in line and remained hopeful that they would pass the bill through the Senate by Christmas -- just barely.The effort to win Nelson's support hinges largely on abortion policy, the same divisive issue that nearly derailed action on the healthcare bill at the last minute in the House, where antiabortion Democrats insisted on tight restrictions on the funding of abortion under the proposed new health programs.Nelson, seeking similar abortion restrictions, continued to withhold his support for the Senate bill despite major concessions made to him on other issues affecting the powerful insurance industry that is important to his home state.Efforts to address his abortion concerns advanced today as another antiabortion Democrat -- Sen. Bob Casey of Pennsylvania -- floated a compromise designed to strengthen guarantees that federal funds would not be used for abortion.Democratic leaders were cautiously optimistic that if they can nail down Nelson's vote, they will have the 60 votes they need to break the filibusters expected to be mounted by Republicans.Senate aides calculate that if Republicans use every procedural roadblock available to them -- as they have promised --
Democrats may not be able to bring the bill to a vote before Christmas Eve.The power and variety of Republican delaying tactics became clear today, when GOP members brought debate to a halt by forcing the Senate clerk to read the entire text of a 767-page amendment by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent, to establish a government-run insurance plan that would entirely replace the private insurance system.The amendment was not expected to pass, and after the clerk had spent two hours and 43 minutes reading 139 pages of the bill -- to a chamber with only two or three senators present -- Sanders withdrew the amendment to allow debate to resume."We are going to do everything we can to make it hard to pass a bad bill," said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).For all the end-game maneuvering, however, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has yet to unveil the details of his final version of the bill, a far-reaching "manager's amendment" that will incorporate all elements of the bill he has had to revise to garner support from all of his party's caucus.The fundamental aims of the bill remain the same: to reduce the ranks of people without insurance, make coverage more stable, and slow the growth of healthcare costs.Reid has decided to drop the so-called "public option" -- a government-run health insurance plan included in the House bill -- because of opposition from Senate centrists like Nelson and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut.Although liberals in the House have threatened to vote against the health bill if it comes back for final approval without a public option, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) signaled today more clearly than ever that she could accept a bill without the option -- if she were satisfied with other elements."It depends on what else is in the bill," she told reporters. "Our priority on the public option -- the emphasis was not on 'public.' The emphasis was on 'option.' "The head count of Democratic senators who have committed to vote with Reid to end the Republican filibuster has mounted slowly but steadily. In a White House meeting with President Obama and other Democrats on Tuesday, Lieberman indicated that he was prepared to support the bill after Democratic leaders agreed to drop plans to expand Medicare to people as young as 55.Nelson is the only Democrat that leaders are really worried they could lose. He welcomed the leadership's decision to drop the public option -- a provision bitterly opposed by insurance companies -- and Reid's assurance that the bill would not include a proposal to strip the insurance industry of its federal anti-trust exemption.But that was not enough to win Nelson's support. He still objected that the bill's provisions barring the use of federal funds for abortion did not go far enough to enforce the ban in the new insurance-buying exchange that would be set up for people who do not get insurance from their employers.The Senate rejected a Nelson amendment to insert the House's stronger language, which would bar insurance companies in the exchange from covering abortion in policies for people receiving federal premium subsidies.The Senate bill would allow those policies to cover abortion so long as they segregated the federal funds and guaranteed that only private premiums were used for the procedure.But even as he and Democratic leaders considered compromise abortion language, Nelson told reporters in a conference call that abortion was not the only troublesome issue.He said that he also was concerned about the bill's proposed new long-term care insurance program and cuts in Medicare payments to home healthcare providers."Until those things are corrected, it's not something I can vote for right now," he told reporters.--From L.A.Times U.S World
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Window closing for healthcare reform: Biden
Tue Dec 15, 10:08 am ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – If the U.S. Congress fails to agree on a healthcare bill soon, the opportunity for a sweeping overhaul of the $2.5 trillion system will be lost for a generation, Vice President Joe Biden warned on Tuesday.
Biden was speaking just hours before Democratic lawmakers were to meet at the White House with President Barack Obama, who is pressing them to reach agreement and pass a bill on his signature domestic policy issue.
Obama has invested much of his political capital in trying to get the Democratic-controlled Congress to pass a healthcare bill by the end of the year. The bill has been passed by the House of Representatives, but Democrats have struggled to win the 60 votes they need in the Senate.
The planned overhaul would spark the biggest changes in the U.S. healthcare system, which accounts for one sixth of the U.S. economy, since the creation of the Medicare government health program for the elderly in 1965.
It would extend coverage to 30 million uninsured Americans and halt industry practices like refusing coverage to people with preexisting medical conditions.
Biden said if the bill did not pass in this Congress "it is going to be kicked back for a generation."
He also said he expected independent Senator Joe Lieberman, who caucuses with Democrats and is a key vote on the healthcare overhaul, would vote in favor of the final bill.
Lieberman has threatened to join Republicans in opposing the bill, complicating Democratic efforts to gather the 60 votes needed to overcome Republican opposition.
"I think Joe's judgment is wrong in this," Biden said in an interview on MSNBC. "I'm confident Joe is going to see the light, I'm confident he is going to vote for a final bill, but there is an awful lot of gamesmanship going on right now."
Obama has invited all 60 members of the Senate Democratic caucus to the White House for a meeting at 1:40 p.m. (1840 GMT) to push them to reach agreement.
Senate Democrats said on Monday they would probably drop a compromise to expand Medicare after Lieberman said he could join Republicans in blocking any bill with the proposal.
Democrats have no margin for error. They control exactly 60 of the 100 votes and cannot afford to lose Lieberman.
(Reporting by Ross Colvin; Editing by David Storey)
-posted by-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – If the U.S. Congress fails to agree on a healthcare bill soon, the opportunity for a sweeping overhaul of the $2.5 trillion system will be lost for a generation, Vice President Joe Biden warned on Tuesday.
Biden was speaking just hours before Democratic lawmakers were to meet at the White House with President Barack Obama, who is pressing them to reach agreement and pass a bill on his signature domestic policy issue.
Obama has invested much of his political capital in trying to get the Democratic-controlled Congress to pass a healthcare bill by the end of the year. The bill has been passed by the House of Representatives, but Democrats have struggled to win the 60 votes they need in the Senate.
The planned overhaul would spark the biggest changes in the U.S. healthcare system, which accounts for one sixth of the U.S. economy, since the creation of the Medicare government health program for the elderly in 1965.
It would extend coverage to 30 million uninsured Americans and halt industry practices like refusing coverage to people with preexisting medical conditions.
Biden said if the bill did not pass in this Congress "it is going to be kicked back for a generation."
He also said he expected independent Senator Joe Lieberman, who caucuses with Democrats and is a key vote on the healthcare overhaul, would vote in favor of the final bill.
Lieberman has threatened to join Republicans in opposing the bill, complicating Democratic efforts to gather the 60 votes needed to overcome Republican opposition.
"I think Joe's judgment is wrong in this," Biden said in an interview on MSNBC. "I'm confident Joe is going to see the light, I'm confident he is going to vote for a final bill, but there is an awful lot of gamesmanship going on right now."
Obama has invited all 60 members of the Senate Democratic caucus to the White House for a meeting at 1:40 p.m. (1840 GMT) to push them to reach agreement.
Senate Democrats said on Monday they would probably drop a compromise to expand Medicare after Lieberman said he could join Republicans in blocking any bill with the proposal.
Democrats have no margin for error. They control exactly 60 of the 100 votes and cannot afford to lose Lieberman.
(Reporting by Ross Colvin; Editing by David Storey)
-posted by-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Sunday, December 13, 2009
White House Lashes Out at Bankers
By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON and DAMIAN PALETTA
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama and his economic team lashed out at Wall Street, with the president calling bankers "fat cats" who "don't get it," in a move that could escalate tensions with the nation's biggest bankers ahead of a meeting with industry representatives.
Mr. Obama, speaking on the eve of Monday's meeting with the heads of top banks at the White House, said he would try to persuade bankers to free up more credit to businesses, with the aim of helping boost job growth. But the president also expressed frustration with banks that the government has assisted.
"I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street," Mr. Obama said in an interview to be broadcast on CBS's "60 Minutes" program Sunday evening, according to excerpts made available ahead of the program.
Relations between the banking industry and the White House began frosty and have deteriorated in recent weeks, with large banks lobbying against legislation that would toughen financial-market regulations and administration officials frustrated by some banks' continued payment of high bonuses and their reluctance to lend.
Mr. Obama reiterated that frustration in the interview, noting that some banks have continued to award bonuses and restrict lending while many Americans struggle with unemployment. "Some people on Wall Street still don't get it," he said.
The national unemployment rate was 10% in November.
White House economic adviser Larry Summers also voiced aggravation with Wall Street on Sunday. "Here is what I think they don't get…It was their irresponsible risk-taking in many cases that brought the economy to collapse," Mr. Summers, who chairs the National Economic Council, said on CNN's "State of the Union."
"And they don't get in some cases that they wouldn't be where they are today, and they certainly would not be paying the bonuses they are paying today, if their government hadn't taken extraordinary actions."
Mr. Summers criticized big banks for opposing a bill in Congress that would tighten regulatory controls over the financial industry. Banks and their lobbyists have said that the measure -- a version of which was passed by the House on Friday -- would duplicate existing rules in some cases, were overly broad in others, and would be costly to enforce.
"For them to be complaining about serious regulation directed at making sure this never happens again is wrong. For $300 million to be spent on lobbyists trying to gut serious efforts at financial reform is not how this country should be operating," Mr. Summers said. "For firms that have benefited from taxpayer support to be complaining about the government burdening them is, frankly, a bit rich."
Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Christina Romer said Americans were "still paying the price for what went on on Wall Street."
"We know that some of the practices that happened on Wall
Street did set us up for what was a very severe financial crisis," she told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday.
Large banks, from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. to Citigroup Inc., have lobbied against parts of the White House's proposed changes to financial- market rules, angering White House officials. The banks have argued that the bill would penalize them for being large, through tougher capital requirements and higher fees, and would give the government greater authority to either seize large companies or order them to decrease their size.
Meanwhile, many small businesses are complaining that they cannot get access to credit, and many government officials believe that banks' reluctance to lend is preventing the economy from rebounding more quickly. But the White House could be criticized for meddling too much in the private business of banks if they were to direct lenders to make specific loans, particularly at a time when regulators are requiring banks to write off certain delinquent loans.
These issues could come to a head on Monday morning, when Mr. Obama is scheduled to meet with some of the country's top bankers, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc.'s Lloyd Blankfein, JPMorgan Chase's Jamie Dimon, and Bank of America Corp.'s Ken Lewis. The meeting was expected to be cordial, but recent rhetoric out of the White House suggests that the administration could take a tough stance.
-From wall street journal
WASHINGTON—President Barack Obama and his economic team lashed out at Wall Street, with the president calling bankers "fat cats" who "don't get it," in a move that could escalate tensions with the nation's biggest bankers ahead of a meeting with industry representatives.
Mr. Obama, speaking on the eve of Monday's meeting with the heads of top banks at the White House, said he would try to persuade bankers to free up more credit to businesses, with the aim of helping boost job growth. But the president also expressed frustration with banks that the government has assisted.
"I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street," Mr. Obama said in an interview to be broadcast on CBS's "60 Minutes" program Sunday evening, according to excerpts made available ahead of the program.
Relations between the banking industry and the White House began frosty and have deteriorated in recent weeks, with large banks lobbying against legislation that would toughen financial-market regulations and administration officials frustrated by some banks' continued payment of high bonuses and their reluctance to lend.
Mr. Obama reiterated that frustration in the interview, noting that some banks have continued to award bonuses and restrict lending while many Americans struggle with unemployment. "Some people on Wall Street still don't get it," he said.
The national unemployment rate was 10% in November.
White House economic adviser Larry Summers also voiced aggravation with Wall Street on Sunday. "Here is what I think they don't get…It was their irresponsible risk-taking in many cases that brought the economy to collapse," Mr. Summers, who chairs the National Economic Council, said on CNN's "State of the Union."
"And they don't get in some cases that they wouldn't be where they are today, and they certainly would not be paying the bonuses they are paying today, if their government hadn't taken extraordinary actions."
Mr. Summers criticized big banks for opposing a bill in Congress that would tighten regulatory controls over the financial industry. Banks and their lobbyists have said that the measure -- a version of which was passed by the House on Friday -- would duplicate existing rules in some cases, were overly broad in others, and would be costly to enforce.
"For them to be complaining about serious regulation directed at making sure this never happens again is wrong. For $300 million to be spent on lobbyists trying to gut serious efforts at financial reform is not how this country should be operating," Mr. Summers said. "For firms that have benefited from taxpayer support to be complaining about the government burdening them is, frankly, a bit rich."
Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Christina Romer said Americans were "still paying the price for what went on on Wall Street."
"We know that some of the practices that happened on Wall
Street did set us up for what was a very severe financial crisis," she told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday.
Large banks, from J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. to Citigroup Inc., have lobbied against parts of the White House's proposed changes to financial- market rules, angering White House officials. The banks have argued that the bill would penalize them for being large, through tougher capital requirements and higher fees, and would give the government greater authority to either seize large companies or order them to decrease their size.
Meanwhile, many small businesses are complaining that they cannot get access to credit, and many government officials believe that banks' reluctance to lend is preventing the economy from rebounding more quickly. But the White House could be criticized for meddling too much in the private business of banks if they were to direct lenders to make specific loans, particularly at a time when regulators are requiring banks to write off certain delinquent loans.
These issues could come to a head on Monday morning, when Mr. Obama is scheduled to meet with some of the country's top bankers, including Goldman Sachs Group Inc.'s Lloyd Blankfein, JPMorgan Chase's Jamie Dimon, and Bank of America Corp.'s Ken Lewis. The meeting was expected to be cordial, but recent rhetoric out of the White House suggests that the administration could take a tough stance.
-From wall street journal
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Virgin Extends Government's Free Cell Phone Program
Sascha Segan - PC Magazine Sascha Segan - Pc Magazine – Wed Dec 9, 10:02 am ET
Free, government-funded cell phones may be the target of right-wing rage, but they're real, they're out there and they're getting more free minutes.
Virgin Mobile on Wednesday announced Assurance Wireless, a government-funded program to offer Kyocera Jax phones with 200 minutes per month to poor or disabled people in New York, Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee. That's a big bump up from their major competitor, TracFone's SafeLink Wireless, which only offers around 60 free minutes per month, varying state by state.
Free phones and service are available to low-income families or folks participating in a range of government "welfare" programs, including Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
The free phones aren't a new, Obama-era benefit; they're actually part of a program that started back in 1997 called LifeLine, which followed from the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The program was enhanced in 2005 during the Bush administration, and SafeLink started disbursing free phones in 2008. According to LifeLine's Web page, "similar programs have existed since at least 1985."
The program is funded by the Universal Service Fund, which you see as a surcharge on your phone bill. The USF used to subsidize landline service for low-income and disabled people. Now it's allowed to subsidize wireless service as well. That especially helps folks who move frequently, or are living in motels, bunking with family, or are homeless - in many cases, the most struggling folks in America.
Up until now, most cellular LifeLine service was provided through SafeLink, which operates in nineteen states. SafeLink's service provides fewer minutes than Virgin's, but their phones may have better coverage. Virgin, a subsidiary of Sprint, exclusively uses Sprint's network to make calls. Depending on where you live, TracFone may be able to use multiple networks to provide better coverage.
Other major cell phone companies all participate in LifeLine, but they provide discounted, not free service. Verizon Wireless, AT&T Sprint, Cricket and T-Mobile all offer discounted wireless service as part of the LifeLine program.
- Yahoo News
Free, government-funded cell phones may be the target of right-wing rage, but they're real, they're out there and they're getting more free minutes.
Virgin Mobile on Wednesday announced Assurance Wireless, a government-funded program to offer Kyocera Jax phones with 200 minutes per month to poor or disabled people in New York, Virginia, North Carolina and Tennessee. That's a big bump up from their major competitor, TracFone's SafeLink Wireless, which only offers around 60 free minutes per month, varying state by state.
Free phones and service are available to low-income families or folks participating in a range of government "welfare" programs, including Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
The free phones aren't a new, Obama-era benefit; they're actually part of a program that started back in 1997 called LifeLine, which followed from the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The program was enhanced in 2005 during the Bush administration, and SafeLink started disbursing free phones in 2008. According to LifeLine's Web page, "similar programs have existed since at least 1985."
The program is funded by the Universal Service Fund, which you see as a surcharge on your phone bill. The USF used to subsidize landline service for low-income and disabled people. Now it's allowed to subsidize wireless service as well. That especially helps folks who move frequently, or are living in motels, bunking with family, or are homeless - in many cases, the most struggling folks in America.
Up until now, most cellular LifeLine service was provided through SafeLink, which operates in nineteen states. SafeLink's service provides fewer minutes than Virgin's, but their phones may have better coverage. Virgin, a subsidiary of Sprint, exclusively uses Sprint's network to make calls. Depending on where you live, TracFone may be able to use multiple networks to provide better coverage.
Other major cell phone companies all participate in LifeLine, but they provide discounted, not free service. Verizon Wireless, AT&T Sprint, Cricket and T-Mobile all offer discounted wireless service as part of the LifeLine program.
- Yahoo News
Wednesday, December 09, 2009
Recount in Atlanta mayor's race confirms winner
ATLANTA (Reuters) - A recount in the race for Atlanta mayor confirmed lawyer Kasim Reed as winner on Wednesday after an election that exposed a racial fault line in one of the leading cities in the U.S. Southeast.
City councilwoman Mary Norwood, who would have become the city's first white mayor since 1974, picked up just one vote in the recount she had requested.
She finished 714 votes behind Reed with some 84,000 votes cast, Fulton County's election office said.
Reed was declared the winner of the December 1 run-off and announced his priorities would include selecting a new police chief and shoring up city finances.
Voting mirrored Atlanta's demographics, with Reed running up big numbers in the south and west, which are majority black and include some of the city's poorest neighborhoods.
Norwood's support base was in mainly white northern council districts, which include some of the city's richest suburbs. Like many U.S. cities, Atlanta's metropolitan area spreads far beyond the city limits.
Both candidates avoided playing up race during the campaign, instead presenting themselves as outsiders best qualified to restore city finances and fight rising crime.
Major U.S. corporations such as Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines and UPS are based in Atlanta.
For decades, civic leaders have credited part of the city's prosperity on its ability to navigate potential racial divisions and its status as home of the civil rights movement and birthplace of Martin Luther King.
(Writing by Matthew Bigg; Editing by Jim Loney and Xavier Briand)
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
City councilwoman Mary Norwood, who would have become the city's first white mayor since 1974, picked up just one vote in the recount she had requested.
She finished 714 votes behind Reed with some 84,000 votes cast, Fulton County's election office said.
Reed was declared the winner of the December 1 run-off and announced his priorities would include selecting a new police chief and shoring up city finances.
Voting mirrored Atlanta's demographics, with Reed running up big numbers in the south and west, which are majority black and include some of the city's poorest neighborhoods.
Norwood's support base was in mainly white northern council districts, which include some of the city's richest suburbs. Like many U.S. cities, Atlanta's metropolitan area spreads far beyond the city limits.
Both candidates avoided playing up race during the campaign, instead presenting themselves as outsiders best qualified to restore city finances and fight rising crime.
Major U.S. corporations such as Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines and UPS are based in Atlanta.
For decades, civic leaders have credited part of the city's prosperity on its ability to navigate potential racial divisions and its status as home of the civil rights movement and birthplace of Martin Luther King.
(Writing by Matthew Bigg; Editing by Jim Loney and Xavier Briand)
-http://davidsradiotv2000.blogspot.com
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Gates Defends ‘Gradual’ U.S. Afghanistan War Exit
By Viola Gienger and Jonathan Salant
Dec. 3 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. forces will leave Afghanistan gradually based on security in local areas, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told lawmakers as he sought to deflect Republican criticism of a target July 2011 troop-drawdown date.
The start of any withdrawal will be based on a review to be conducted in December 2010, and probably will occur district by district or province by province, as Afghan forces are ready to take over, Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington yesterday.
“The end state in Afghanistan looks a lot like what we see in Iraq,” Gates said. “This gradual transfer of security responsibility with a continuing role on our part as a partner for that country in the long-term is what I would call success in Afghanistan.”
The setting of a target date for starting a pullout has divided members of Congress since President Barack Obama included the goal in a plan he announced Dec. 1 to increase the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan by 30,000, to almost 100,000. The first deployments will begin “in a couple of weeks,” Admiral Michael Mullen told another congressional hearing later in the day.
Many Republicans say the timeline wouldn’t give troops enough time to make decisive headway against the Taliban. Democrats who want to limit U.S. involvement in the war welcomed the schedule.
Pelosi’s View
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat who told reporters in September there wasn’t “a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan,” said yesterday she anticipates Obama’s plan would win the backing of many of her party colleagues.
“We will probably be OK” among House Democrats, Pelosi said in an interview. “Some people will never be for it, other people want to hear” the president’s rationale, she said.
Republicans including Senator John McCain, the senior member of his party on the Armed Services Committee, told Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that setting a withdrawal date was a mistake.
“Success is the real exit strategy,” not “some arbitrary date in July 2011, which our enemies can exploit to weaken and intimidate our friends,” McCain told the officials.
Obama Speech
Obama announced his decision to increase the number of troops next year and begin a pullout in 2011 in an address at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York. The aim is to reverse Taliban gains and ensure that Afghanistan doesn’t again harbor al-Qaeda as it did before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
Clinton pledged an accompanying surge in civilians working alongside the increased military force to help Afghans develop their economy, especially by improving agriculture.
“We will help by working with our Afghan partners to strengthen institutions at every level of Afghan society so that we don’t leave chaos behind when our combat troops begin to depart,” Clinton told the Armed Services Committee, on which she served when she represented New York in the Senate.
Obama’s national security team defended the timeframe for the surge as sufficient to determine whether the 43-nation NATO- led coalition in Afghanistan can succeed.
“We will know where we are by the summer of 2011,” Mullen told the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Iraq Pattern
The surge in Iraq lasted only 14 months, Gates said. In Afghanistan, as in Iraq, responsibility might be transferred to Afghan security forces in some districts and provinces even as other areas see “extraordinarily heavy combat,” he said.
The goal is to demonstrate resolve while also stepping up pressure on the Afghan government to perform well enough to take over, Gates said.
House Republicans need more information before providing “full support,” their leader, John Boehner of Ohio, told reporters after a party caucus yesterday. Republicans want to know what “we hope to accomplish over the next 18 months” and how the benchmark of “conditions on the ground” would determine when to remove troops.
U.S. Army General Stanley McChrystal, the commander in Afghanistan, told U.S. troops and Afghan officials yesterday in Kandahar that the surge he requested would show results in less than a year.
“I believe that, by next summer, the uplift of new forces will make a difference” that’s “significant,” McChrystal said in a briefing broadcast by CNN.
The general told his staff at coalition headquarters in Afghanistan that they have a new “clarity” in their mission: to give the Afghans “time, space and capability to defend their sovereignty.”
Possible Al-Qaeda Boost
A U.S. military expansion in Afghanistan is needed to prevent a Taliban takeover of the country that could hand al- Qaeda a global propaganda victory, Gates told the congressional panels.
“The Taliban and al-Qaeda have become symbiotic, each benefiting from the success and mythology of the other,” Gates said. “Rolling back the Taliban is now necessary, even if not sufficient, to the ultimate defeat of al-Qaeda.”
In expanding the war, the U.S. is also seeking 5,000 to 7,000 extra troops from NATO members and other allies in the 43- nation coalition in Afghanistan, Gates said.
In Brussels, a North Atlantic Treaty Organization spokesman said allies have already pledged to send more than 5,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.
“We can confidently say that we will surpass that now -- we are beyond the 5,000 figure,” NATO spokesman James Appathurai told reporters before a meeting of allied foreign ministers today.
More than 20 countries are sending more forces, he said.
To contact the reporters on this story: Viola Gienger in Washington at vgienger@bloomberg.net;
Dec. 3 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. forces will leave Afghanistan gradually based on security in local areas, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told lawmakers as he sought to deflect Republican criticism of a target July 2011 troop-drawdown date.
The start of any withdrawal will be based on a review to be conducted in December 2010, and probably will occur district by district or province by province, as Afghan forces are ready to take over, Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee in Washington yesterday.
“The end state in Afghanistan looks a lot like what we see in Iraq,” Gates said. “This gradual transfer of security responsibility with a continuing role on our part as a partner for that country in the long-term is what I would call success in Afghanistan.”
The setting of a target date for starting a pullout has divided members of Congress since President Barack Obama included the goal in a plan he announced Dec. 1 to increase the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan by 30,000, to almost 100,000. The first deployments will begin “in a couple of weeks,” Admiral Michael Mullen told another congressional hearing later in the day.
Many Republicans say the timeline wouldn’t give troops enough time to make decisive headway against the Taliban. Democrats who want to limit U.S. involvement in the war welcomed the schedule.
Pelosi’s View
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , a California Democrat who told reporters in September there wasn’t “a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan,” said yesterday she anticipates Obama’s plan would win the backing of many of her party colleagues.
“We will probably be OK” among House Democrats, Pelosi said in an interview. “Some people will never be for it, other people want to hear” the president’s rationale, she said.
Republicans including Senator John McCain, the senior member of his party on the Armed Services Committee, told Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that setting a withdrawal date was a mistake.
“Success is the real exit strategy,” not “some arbitrary date in July 2011, which our enemies can exploit to weaken and intimidate our friends,” McCain told the officials.
Obama Speech
Obama announced his decision to increase the number of troops next year and begin a pullout in 2011 in an address at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, New York. The aim is to reverse Taliban gains and ensure that Afghanistan doesn’t again harbor al-Qaeda as it did before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
Clinton pledged an accompanying surge in civilians working alongside the increased military force to help Afghans develop their economy, especially by improving agriculture.
“We will help by working with our Afghan partners to strengthen institutions at every level of Afghan society so that we don’t leave chaos behind when our combat troops begin to depart,” Clinton told the Armed Services Committee, on which she served when she represented New York in the Senate.
Obama’s national security team defended the timeframe for the surge as sufficient to determine whether the 43-nation NATO- led coalition in Afghanistan can succeed.
“We will know where we are by the summer of 2011,” Mullen told the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Iraq Pattern
The surge in Iraq lasted only 14 months, Gates said. In Afghanistan, as in Iraq, responsibility might be transferred to Afghan security forces in some districts and provinces even as other areas see “extraordinarily heavy combat,” he said.
The goal is to demonstrate resolve while also stepping up pressure on the Afghan government to perform well enough to take over, Gates said.
House Republicans need more information before providing “full support,” their leader, John Boehner of Ohio, told reporters after a party caucus yesterday. Republicans want to know what “we hope to accomplish over the next 18 months” and how the benchmark of “conditions on the ground” would determine when to remove troops.
U.S. Army General Stanley McChrystal, the commander in Afghanistan, told U.S. troops and Afghan officials yesterday in Kandahar that the surge he requested would show results in less than a year.
“I believe that, by next summer, the uplift of new forces will make a difference” that’s “significant,” McChrystal said in a briefing broadcast by CNN.
The general told his staff at coalition headquarters in Afghanistan that they have a new “clarity” in their mission: to give the Afghans “time, space and capability to defend their sovereignty.”
Possible Al-Qaeda Boost
A U.S. military expansion in Afghanistan is needed to prevent a Taliban takeover of the country that could hand al- Qaeda a global propaganda victory, Gates told the congressional panels.
“The Taliban and al-Qaeda have become symbiotic, each benefiting from the success and mythology of the other,” Gates said. “Rolling back the Taliban is now necessary, even if not sufficient, to the ultimate defeat of al-Qaeda.”
In expanding the war, the U.S. is also seeking 5,000 to 7,000 extra troops from NATO members and other allies in the 43- nation coalition in Afghanistan, Gates said.
In Brussels, a North Atlantic Treaty Organization spokesman said allies have already pledged to send more than 5,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.
“We can confidently say that we will surpass that now -- we are beyond the 5,000 figure,” NATO spokesman James Appathurai told reporters before a meeting of allied foreign ministers today.
More than 20 countries are sending more forces, he said.
To contact the reporters on this story: Viola Gienger in Washington at vgienger@bloomberg.net;
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)