Bush's Budget Projects $333 Billion Tax Increase

Editor's note: I am moving to post at the primary blog(also see new articles below).
---
Related
The Power Elite Uses the State To Rob the People
---
March 26, 2007

Joint Tax Committee Releases Description of Tax Provisions in President's Budget, Projects $333 Billion Tax Increase from Proposed Standard Deduction for Health Insurance

The Joint Committee on Taxation today released Description of Revenue Provisions Contained in the President's Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Proposal (JCS-2-07):

This document, prepared by the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, provides a description and analysis of the revenue provisions modifying the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”) that are contained in the President’s fiscal year 2008 budget proposal, as submitted to the Congress on February 5, 2007. The document generally follows the order of the proposals as included in the Department of the Treasury’s explanation of the President’s budget proposal. For each provision, there is a description of present law and the proposal (including effective date), a reference to relevant prior budget proposals or recent legislative action, and an analysis of policy issues related to the proposal.

On page 301, the Joint Committee projects that the President's proposed standard deduction for health insurance, coupled with repeal of the exclusion for employer-paid health insurance, self-employed health insurance deduction, and itemized medical deductions, would result in a $333 billion tax increase over 10 years.

March 26, 2007 in Congressional News | Permalink

China shifts to euros for Iran oil

By Chen Aizhu

BEIJING (Reuters) - China's state-run Zhuhai Zhenrong Corp, the biggest buyer of Iranian crude worldwide, began paying for its oil in euros late last year as Tehran moves to diversify its foreign reserves away from U.S. dollars.

The Chinese firm, which buys more than a tenth of exports from the world's fourth-largest crude producer, has changed the payment currency for the bulk of its roughly 240,000 barrels per day (bpd) contract, Beijing-based sources said.

Japanese refiners who buy about 500,000 bpd of Iranian crude, nearly a quarter of Iran's 2.2 million-bpd shipments, continue to pay in dollars but are willing to shift to yen if asked, industry sources and officials said separately.

Iranian officials have said for months that more than half the OPEC member's customers switched their payment currency away from the dollar as Tehran seeks to diversify its reserves, but news of the Zhenrong change is the first outside confirmation.

The price of the oil is still based on dollar quotes.

The shift, being watched closely by foreign exchange traders, comes amid an extended row between Tehran and Washington over Iran's nuclear programme.

China, which depends on Iran for about 12 percent of its imported crude oil, has at times used the threat of its United Nations veto to blunt Western measures.

The UN imposed new sanctions on Iran on Saturday as Tehran refused to halt its nuclear programme, targeting arms exports and 28 Iranian individuals and entities.

Iran's central banker told Reuters earlier on Tuesday that Tehran had cut its holding of U.S.-dollar assets to a minimum level of around a fifth of its foreign reserves in response to U.S. hostility, still enough to handle major shocks.

CHINA SWITCHES EARLY

"Most of China's purchases have shifted to euro. It's not difficult so long as our banks can handle that," said a Chinese state oil trader.

Hojjatollah Ghanimifard, head of international affairs at the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), told Reuters last week that around 60 percent of its oil income was in non-dollar currencies as almost all of Iran's European clients and some of its Asian customers had agreed to make non-dollar payments.

Iran is China's third-largest crude supplier with daily volume of 335,000 barrels last year. Sinopec Corp. <0386.hk>, Asia's top refiner but a minor lifter of Iranian oil, is still paying in U.S. dollars, said a Sinopec trader.

Japanese buyers, including top refiner Nippon Oil Corp. <5001.t>, said they had all received inquiries from Iran to pay on non-U.S. dollar terms, but were awaiting an official request.

"We are looking at it so that we can switch the currencies any time, but we have not gotten any official requests from them (NIOC). We are doing the transactions in dollars (now)," Nippon Oil chairman Fukuaki Watari told reporters last week.

Sources with other majors refiners concurred.

Iran ranks as Japan's third-largest crude supplier so far this year with daily rate of just under 500,000 bpd.

Tokyo has cautioned world powers against including oil in sanctions they may impose on Iran for its refusal to suspend atomic work, which the U.S. says is aimed at developing a nuclear weapon, but Tehran insists is for generating electricity.

Iran's major European customers include Royal Dutch Shell , France's Total and Spain's Repsol . The United States has banned imports of Iranian crude since 1995.

(Additional reporting by Ikuko Kao in Tokyo)

(c) Reuters 2007. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by caching, framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.

Supreme Court Rules Against Whistle-Blower

Court Rules Against Whistle-Blower

Tuesday March 27, 2007 4:46 PM

By MARK SHERMAN

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court made it harder Tuesday for whistle-blowers to share in the proceeds from fraud lawsuits against government contractors.

The court ruled 6-2 that James Stone, an 81-year-old retired engineer, may not collect a penny for his role in exposing fraud at the now-closed Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant northwest of Denver.

Writing for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia said Stone was not an original source of the information that resulted in Rockwell International, now part of aerospace giant Boeing Co., being ordered to pay the government nearly $4.2 million for fraud connected with environmental cleanup at the Rocky Flats plant.

Rockwell must pay the entire penalty anyway. The only question before the court was whether Stone would get his cut.

The company, backed by defense, energy and pharmaceutical interests, wanted the justices to restrict when an individual can collect for suing on the government's behalf.

The Bush administration sided with Stone, arguing that it was in the government's interest to encourage whistle-blowers, even though the government keeps more money now that Stone has lost.

The False Claims Act allows individuals, acting on the government's behalf, to file fraud suits against companies that do business with the government. If they prevail, they receive a portion of what the contractor must pay the government. Lower federal courts ruled in Stone's favor.

The case turned on whether Stone provided information that a jury eventually used to find fraudulent claims.

Once allegations are disclosed publicly, often by the media, individuals face a higher hurdle in bringing fraud suits on the government's behalf. Otherwise, people could read a newspaper account or an indictment and then rush to the courthouse to file suit.

The major exception to this rule is if an individual is an original source of the information, which Stone said he was.

The company said his claim was implausible, since Stone was laid off the year before Rockwell began submitting false claims saying it was meeting goals of treating low-level radioactive wastes at the former atomic weapons plant.

Scalia agreed. ``Stone did not have direct and independent knowledge of the information upon which his allegations were based,'' he said.

Justice John Paul Stevens, in a dissent joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said whistle-blowers should have to show only that their information led the government to the fraud, not that the claims ultimately proved to a jury must also have come from them. Justice Stephen Breyer did not take part in the case.

The lower courts said Stone demonstrated that he provided information on which the allegations of fraud were based.

Rocky Flats is designated by the Environmental Protection Agency as a Superfund cleanup site. It is an Energy Department-owned cleanup and closure site.

In nearly four decades, some 70,000 plutonium triggers for nuclear bombs were made at Rocky Flats. Production was halted in 1989 because of chronic safety problems, prompting a raid by FBI agents. The Cold War ended before production could resume. In 1993, the Energy Department announced that the facility's mission was over.

State and federal regulators signed an agreement in 1996 on the cleanup, including demolition of what was termed ``the most dangerous building in America'' because of leaks, spills and a fire that drove radiation levels off the charts.

The case is Rockwell International v. U.S., ex rel Stone, 05-1272.

Israeli embargo impoverishes Palestinians

Web posted at: 3/24/2007 3:6:29
REUTERS

jerusalem • Conditions for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip would worsen further unless Israel lifts an economic embargo and lets people and goods move more freely, a senior UN official said yesterday.

Karen Koning AbuZayd, head of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), said donors had poured in more money last year than ever before “but that’s because we’ve made everybody aid-dependant”.

“Everybody is just in bad shape now with the whole economy going down so badly. They just don’t have any opportunities,” she said at her office in Jerusalem, citing high unemployment and shortfalls in wage payments over the past year.

“We’re handing out food to most of the refugees in Gaza and a good proportion of those in the West Bank, and the (UN) World Food Programme is feeding the non-refugees.”

Israel says its curbs, which include withholding most Palestinian tax revenue since Hamas Islamists came to power after 2006 elections, are a response to attacks on Israelis.

Some foreign donors who halted direct aid to the Hamas-led government over its refusal to recognise Israel, renounce violence and accept existing agreements have eased a diplomatic boycott since Hamas formed a unity cabinet with President Mahmoud Abbas’s more moderate Fatah faction on March 17.

“Israel is still saying no to paying the tax bill and giving the Palestinians the money that’s theirs,” AbuZayd said.

She noted some recent improvement in allowing businessmen in and out of the Gaza Strip but said “things really won’t work” unless Israel relaxed restrictions on the Karni and Erez crossings into Gaza and on the Rafah border terminal with Egypt.

Despite the direct aid embargo, the United Nations says about $1.2 billion in foreign aid reached the Palestinians last year, up from $1 billion in 2005. Nonetheless, the Palestinian economy contracted nearly 10 percent and poverty rates rose.

AbuZayd said she hoped next week’s Arab summit would produce an agreed peace proposal which the international community could use to encourage renewed Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

“One of our messages .. is to encourage people from each side to see the other as a partner and to get active at the negotiating table,” she said. “We say that from a humanitarian point of view because we just see things getting worse.”

UNRWA’s 27,000 staff provide education, health care, social services and emergency aid to over 4.3 million refugees in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.

AbuZayd, a US national, said discussions were under way on the sensitive matter of how UNRWA could sustain the expanding refugee population with no political solution in sight.

“It’s an issue and it’s something we are now having to talk seriously about with our donors, because it is 58 years and every year there are more refugees, which means we need more money, more schools, more teachers and so on,” she said.

Like refugees elsewhere in the world, Palestinian refugees and their descendants retain their status “until they can go home, go somewhere else or settle where they are”, she said.

West Point prof says torture encourages enemy to fight to the death rather than surrender

West Point: Canada way off-base on Afghan PoWs

Harpers disturbingly shallow grasp of the strategy and tactics (condoning torture) is counterproductive.

The Prime Minister may believe that talking like a cowboy about the Taliban and human rights make the government appear tough. But in reality, it only makes it dangerous, both to the mission, and our soldier's lives.

It would rob our soldiers of possibly their single most important tactical and strategic tool – moral integrity.

RE: U.S. Lt-col. and professor at West Point, David Grossman book On Killing:

Adhering to the Geneva Conventions and treating PoWs humanely is of supreme strategic and tactical importance to any organized army.

In short, enemy forces are much more willing to surrender when secure in the knowledge that in doing so they will be treated fairly and humanely. Otherwise they will fight to the death and inflict greater casualities - even in a losing effort.

In Iraq: “America's moral integrity was the single most important weapon my platoon had on the streets. It saved innumerable lives ..."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PM off base over Afghan PoWs

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's comments regarding the Liberal's "passion" for the Taliban reveals the government's disturbingly shallow grasp of the strategy and tactics necessary to win in Afghanistan.

In his landmark book, On Killing, a U.S. Army lieutenant-colonel and professor at West Point, David Grossman, describes the psychological implications of killing, both legally and illegally, in battle.

Of specific interest is the psychological argument and historical evidence that explain why adhering to the Geneva Conventions and treating PoWs humanely is of supreme strategic and tactical importance to any organized army.

In short, enemy forces are much more willing to surrender when secure in the knowledge that in doing so they will be treated fairly and humanely. Enemies that believe otherwise are likely to fight to the death and inflict greater casualities even in a losing effort.

During WW-II, the Allies' adherence to the Geneva Convention resulted in German soldiers surrendering to U.S. forces in large numbers. This was in sharp contrast to the experience of the Soviets, who cared little for PoWs.

IRAQ: Lieutenant Paul Rieckhoff, who fought in Iraq and then founded and became executive director of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, makes a similar argument regarding today's conflicts.

Prior to the Abu Ghraib debacle, he noted how "(O)n the streets of Baghdad, I saw countless insurgents surrender when faced with the prospect of a hot meal, a pack of cigarettes and air-conditioning. America's moral integrity was the single most important weapon my platoon had on the streets. It saved innumerable lives ..."

When MPs and ordinary Canadians ask questions about the treatment of Afghan prisoners they don't do so out of contempt, but out of a deep respect and concern for Canadian soldiers. Canadians know we can ill afford to treat enemy combatants inhumanely. They know this because it is in opposition to our values and our very purpose in Afghanistan.

However, they also know there is a compelling military reason: It would rob our soldiers of possibly their single most important tactical and strategic tool – moral integrity. Without this, who knows how many Canadian lives will be needlessly lost in battles where an insurgent, believing that surrender is tantamount to execution, instead opts to fight to the death.

The Prime Minister may believe that talking like a cowboy about the Taliban and human rights make the government appear tough. But in reality, it only makes it dangerous, both to the mission, and our soldier's lives.

Iran Conflict Rocks Oil Market

Evelyn M. Rusli, 03.26.07, 3:45 PM ET

Escalating hostility between Iran and the international community pushed crude oil prices toward $63 a barrel on Monday morning, touching a high for the year.

Amid concerns that increased tensions in the Middle East could interfere with future oil deliveries, crude oil prices spiked on Friday after Iran, the fourth-largest oil provider in the world, seized 15 British naval officers in the Persian Gulf.

New York Mercantile Exchange crude futures rose to $62.98 during early Morning trading, up 1.1% from Friday's $62.28 close. Oil is up 24.8% from a January low of $49.90 a barrel.

Over the weekend, Iran and other countries continued to lock horns over the British seizure issue and the country's uranium-enrichment program. Iran continued to detain the British personnel despite claims from the United Kingdom that its sailors and marines were not trespassing in Iranian waters. Prime Minister Tony Blair called the seizure "unjustified and wrong." On Saturday, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted to impose new finance and arms sanctions against Iran. The body ordered Iran to suspend its uranium program in 60 days.

In reaction, Iran stiffened its posture on Sunday by affirming its commitment to its uranium-enrichment program and declaring that it will limit cooperation with United Nations officials. Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the Security Council's ultimatum will not disrupt Iran's nuclear program "even for a second."

Because of Iran's location, increased conflict could jeopardize oil shipments. More than 20% of the world's oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow water passage bordered by Iran's coast.

John Flemy, chief economist for the American Petroleum Institute, said the knee-jerk spike was triggered by uncertainty surrounding Iran's nuclear program and strong statements issued by its politicians. But he dismissed the concern that Iran would use oil as a weapon against international aggression. "There's a whole host of mischevious things Iran could do, but Iran won't use their oil supply as a weapon, because oil sales are too important for their economy," he said in an interview on Monday.

Oil stocks were higher during Monday afternoon trading in New York. Royal Dutch Shell (nyse: RDSA - news - people ) gained 0.5%, or 34 cents, to $66.40, and Exxon Mobil (nyse: XOM - news - people ) edged up 0.1%, or 7 cents, to $75.09. Meanwhile, the iPath Goldman Sachs Crude Oil Tracking Index (nyse: OIL - news - people ), an exchange-traded fund, was up 0.87%, or 32 cents, to $37.24.

--The Associated Press contributed to this article.

Senator Clinton's Lawyers Seek to Halt Fraud Suit

By Fred Lucas
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
March 27, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - Attorneys for Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) are trying to keep her out of a lawsuit that may ultimately force her to testify under oath about an alleged violation of campaign finance laws.

Washington lawyers David Kendall and Carolyn Utrecht and Los Angeles attorney Jan B. Norman -- all representing the apparent frontrunner for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination -- filed legal briefs Friday in the California Court of Appeals focusing heavily on the criminal background of plaintiff Peter Paul, the Hollywood businessman who is suing both Bill and Hillary Clinton and others.

Paul alleges that fraudulent actions by the Clintons and others cost him his multi-million dollar Internet venture. Paul claims to have been the largest contributor to Sen. Clinton's U.S. Senate campaign, spending $1.9 million to hold a 2000 fundraising gala attended by Hollywood celebrities including Whoopi Goldberg, John Travolta and Brad Pitt.

In return, Paul claims, then-President Bill Clinton promised to promote the firm. However, the president allegedly reneged on the commitment after his wife was elected in November of that year and used his influence to discourage others from investing in the firm.

In an effort to stay out of the suit, Sen. Clinton used a California statute intended to protect a political candidate's First Amendment rights from frivolous lawsuits. A California Superior Court judge dismissed her from the lawsuit on those grounds last fall, but Paul appealed in January, contending the California statute does not protect Sen. Clinton from alleged illegal activity.

The Friday brief was a response to the appeal.

"Plaintiff's alleged 'donations'...were extremely unusual," the Clinton team's response said. "Unlike typical campaign contributions, these donations supposedly had strings attached; [the] plaintiffs claim that he financed the tribute in exchange for one year of former President Clinton's services after he left public office in January 2001."

Oral arguments will likely be made to the three-judge panel this summer on whether to release Sen. Clinton from the lawsuit, with a decision expected soon after. But the entire case could go on for much longer.

The motion goes on to describe how Paul's venture (Stan Lee Media, which he entered with comic book mogul Stan Lee) "imploded," and "in the midst of the company's financial collapse, [the] plaintiff fled the United States for Brazil."

"Not surprisingly," the brief said, "no working relationship between the plaintiff and the president ever materialized." It then details how Paul was indicted for and pleaded guilty to manipulating the company's stock price. He had two previous felony convictions, pleading guilty to fraud in the 1970s and to a drug charge in the 1980s.

Paul's past is irrelevant at this stage in the case, said his attorney, D. Colette Wilson of the United States Justice Foundation in Ramona, Calif.

The argument before the court in determining if Sen. Clinton is protected by the anti-lawsuit statutes is based on the seriousness of the charges, she said. Paul's credibility is a matter that is subject for discussion in the course of a civil trial.

"They're saying, 'Do not believe anything Peter said because he is a felon,'" Wilson told Cybercast News Service Monday.

She said the allegations he is making are more than viable, adding that part of his contention was already backed up by results of his 2001 complaint to the Federal Elections Commission.

After investigating the matter, the FEC ruled that Sen. Clinton's 2000 campaign committee underreported cash it received at the fundraising event Paul sponsored and slapped the campaign committee with a $35,000 fine. The Clinton campaign committee also amended financial reports to show Paul's share of the production costs were understated by $721,000. The legal limit for an individual to contribute was $2,000 at the time.

The fallout from the Paul's Hollywood fundraising event also led to the federal indictment of David Rosen, Sen. Clinton's finance director, who was acquitted on charges of lying to the FEC.

The three attorneys who filed the brief could not be reached for comment Friday or Monday.

In a written declaration for the court filed on April 7, 2006, Sen. Clinton said, "I have no recollection whatsoever of discussing any arrangement with him whereby he would support my campaign for the United States Senate in exchange for anything from me or then-President Clinton. I do not believe I would make such a statement because I believe I would remember such a discussion if it had occurred."

Wilson called it a classic "non-denial denial."

"She really doesn't want to go on the stand," Wilson said, adding the senator's delay tactics could drag the case right into the 2008 election cycle. "The timing could end up particularly disastrous for Hillary."