This is why we ffed our pets Nature's Variety. Look them up at www.naturesvariety.com
By MARK JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
ALBANY, N.Y. - Rat poison was found in the pet food suspected of causing kidney failure that killed at least 16 cats and dogs, but scientists still don't know how it got there, state officials said Friday.
The toxin was identified as aminopterin, which is used to kill rats in some countries, state Agriculture Commissioner Patrick Hooker said.
Aminopterin is not registered for killing rodents in the United States, according to the
Environmental Protection Agency, though it is used as a cancer drug. State officials wouldn't speculate on how the toxin got into Menu Foods' now-recalled pet food but said no criminal investigations had been launched.
Scientists at the New York State Animal Health Diagnostic Center at Cornell and at the New York State Food Laboratory tested three cat food samples provided by Menu Foods and found Aminopterin in two of them. Hooker said they would test individual components of the pet food, as well. The early test results were released to give veterinarians a better idea of how to treat sick animals.
"Any amount of this product is too much in food," Hooker said.
Aminopterin, also used as a cancer drug, is highly toxic in high doses. It inhibits the growth of malignant cells and suppresses the immune system.
In dogs and cats, it can cause kidney failure, according to Donald Smith, dean of Cornell University's College of Veterinary Medicine.
The
Food and Drug Administration has said the investigation into the pet deaths was focusing on wheat gluten in the pet food. Wheat gluten itself would not cause kidney failure, but the common ingredient could have been contaminated, the FDA said.
Bob Rosenberg, senior vice president of government affairs for the National Pest Management Association, said he had never heard of the substance before Friday.
"It would make no sense to spray a crop itself with rodenticide," Rosenberg said, though he said grain shippers typically put bait stations around the perimeter of their storage facilities.
The pet deaths led to a recall of 60 million cans and pouches of pet food produced by Menu Foods and sold throughout North America under 95 brand names. There have been several reports of kidney failure in pets that ate the recalled brands, and the company has confirmed the deaths of 15 cats and one dog.
Menu Foods last week recalled "cuts and gravy" style dog and cat food. The recall sparked concern among pet owners across North America. It includes food sold under store brands carried by Wal-Mart, Kroger, Safeway and other large retailers, as well as private labels such as Iams, Nutro and Eukanuba.
The company, already facing lawsuits, planned a media teleconference for later Friday, a spokesman said. It is majority owned by Menu Foods Income Fund of Streetsville.
A complete list of the recalled products along with product codes, descriptions and production dates was posted online by Menu Foods and is available at http://tinyurl.com/2pn6mm. The company also designated two phone numbers that pet owners could call for information: (866) 463-6738 and (866) 895-2708.
A spokesman for New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said he was not aware of any criminal investigation involving the tainted food.
FBI spokesman Paul Holstein in Albany said Friday he was not aware of any FBI involvement in the case.
"I don't know where we'll go from here," he said.
___
Associated Press writer Andrew Bridges in Washington contributed to this report.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Missouri, Georgia May Limit Ticket Camera Profit
A Missouri legislator would like a portion of the revenue to go towards the government schools, frankly I amased that this solution took this long. I can see it know an AdCouncil commercial can say the following... Remeber every time you run a red light (insert number here) % goes towards educating the children. To those of you that think we don't give the schools enough money just go out and run some red lights think of the "good" you'll be doing
Legislation eliminating the profit incentive threatens red light camera programs in Georgia and Missouri.
Two states, Georgia and Missouri, are following the example of New Mexico by adopting legislation restricting the ability of cities to profit from photo enforcement programs. The Georgia state House of Representatives yesterday voted 110-60 to direct 75 percent of automated ticketing profit to a state trauma fund. Although the original version of the legislation would simply outlawed traffic cameras, lawmakers struck a compromise that would impose a number of less stringent restrictions on use of the devices.
If passed by the Senate and signed by the governor, the law would require jurisdictions to consider engineering alternatives to cameras and file a report describing the options for each intersection on an annual basis. Although the bill states that only sworn police officers would be allowed to issue tickets, in practice such provisions have proved meaningless in California cities where an officer conducts a "bulk approval" of a stack of citations without first examining them. The measure also forbids cities from shortening yellow signal times either before or during a photo enforcement program. Each city must file an annual report on its camera program by February 1 or the state will impound all revenue generated.
Likewise, Missouri's state Senate last week adopted an amendment directing red light camera profit to the public school system. A similar provision in the North Carolina state constitution caused several cities, including Charlotte, Greensboro, Greenville and High Point, to drop their photo enforcement programs after an appeals court ruling last May insisted on payment to the schools. The Missouri state House and governor must approve the measure before it becomes law.
Article Excerpt:
Georgia General Assembly
The House Committee on Motor Vehicles offers the following substitute to HB 77:
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT
To amend Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to motor vehicles and traffic, so as to require use of a certified peace officer to swear to a traffic light violation; to provide for an engineering study; to provide for changing timing; to provide for reports to the Department of Transportation; to provide for disposition of funds collected through use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices; to provide for related matters; to provide for an effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:
SECTION 1.
Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to motor vehicles and traffic, is revised in Code Section 40-6-20, relating to enforcement by traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
...
(B) The law enforcement agency for which such device is permitted shall send by first-class mail addressed to the owner of the motor vehicle postmarked not later than ten days after the date of the alleged violation:
(i) A citation for the alleged violation, which shall include the date and time of the violation, the location of the intersection, the amount of the civil monetary penalty imposed, and the date by which the civil monetary penalty shall be paid;
(ii) A copy of the recorded image;
(iii) A copy of a certificate sworn to or affirmed by a certified peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency for which such device is authorized and stating that, based upon inspection of recorded images, the owner´s motor vehicle was operated in disregard or disobedience of a CIRCULAR RED or RED ARROW signal in violation of subsection (a) of this Code section and that such disregard or disobedience was not otherwise authorized by law;
...
(C) Proof that a motor vehicle was operated in disregard or disobedience of a CIRCULAR RED or RED ARROW signal in violation of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be evidenced by recorded images produced by a traffic-control signal monitoring device authorized pursuant to Article 3 of Chapter 14 of this title. A copy of a certificate sworn to or affirmed by a certified peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency for which such device is authorized and stating that, based upon inspection of recorded images, a motor vehicle was operated in disregard or disobedience of a CIRCULAR RED or RED ARROW signal in violation of subsection (a) of this Code section and that such disregard or disobedience was not otherwise authorized by law shall be prima-facie evidence of the facts contained therein; and
...
(8) The provisions of this subsection shall limit law enforcement agencies to the use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices in enforcing subsection (a) of this Code section."
SECTION 2.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-21, relating to the use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
"40-14-21.
...
(b) No county or municipality shall operate a traffic-control signal monitoring device unless it has first conducted a traffic engineering study of the approach to an intersection to determine whether, in addition to or as an alternative to the traffic-control signal monitoring device, a design change to the approach, reducing the approach speed, or a change in the signalization of the intersection is likely to reduce the number of accidents or red light violations at that intersection. This report shall be submitted with the annual report required under these provisions.
(c) No county or municipal governing authority shall be authorized to use traffic-control signal monitoring devices where any arresting officer or official of the court having jurisdiction of traffic cases is paid on a fee system. This subsection shall not apply to any official receiving a recording fee.
(d) A county or municipality shall not impose a civil penalty under this Code section on the owner of a motor vehicle if the operator of the vehicle was arrested or issued a citation and notice to appear by a peace officer for the same violation that is recorded by a traffic- control signal monitoring device.
(c)(e) If a county or municipality elects to use traffic-control signal monitoring devices, no portion of any civil monetary penalty collected through the use of such devices may be paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the traffic-control signal monitoring devices. The compensation paid by the county or municipality for such devices shall be based on the value of such equipment and shall not be based on the number of citations issued or the revenue generated by such devices.
(d)(f)(1) A traffic-control signal monitoring device shall not be used by a law enforcement agency unless the law enforcement agency employs at least one full-time certified peace officer.
(2) Failure of a law enforcement agency to continue to meet the standards provided by this subsection shall cause such agency to be ineligible to use traffic-control signal monitoring devices.
(e)(g) A traffic-control signal monitoring device shall not be used to produce any photograph, microphotograph, electronic image, or videotape showing the identity of any person in a motor vehicle."
SECTION 3.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-22, relating to timing of traffic-control signals, as follows:
"40-14-22.
The timing of any traffic-control signal which is being monitored by a traffic-control signal monitoring device shall conform to regulations promulgated by the Department of Transportation pursuant to Code Section 32-6-50. The duration of the yellow or red light of any traffic-control device at which a traffic-control signal monitoring device is installed shall not be decreased prior to the installation of a device or during the time for which the device is operated. Each county or municipal law enforcement agency using a traffic-control signal monitoring device shall at its own expense test the device for accuracy at regular intervals and record and maintain the results of each test. Such test results shall be public records subject to inspection as provided by Article 4 of Chapter 18 of Title 50. Each such test shall be made in accordance with the manufacturer´s recommended procedure. Any such device not meeting the manufacturer´s minimum accuracy requirements shall be removed from service and thereafter shall not be used by the county or municipal law enforcement agency until it has been serviced and calibrated at the expense of the law enforcement agency by a qualified technician."
SECTION 4.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-23, relating to signs to notify motorists of use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
"40-14-23.
Each county or municipality using traffic-control signal monitoring devices shall erect signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the jurisdictional limits of the county or municipality. A sign shall be erected also by such entity on each public road on the approach to the next traffic-control signal for such road when a traffic-control signal monitoring device is monitoring such next signal for such road. Such signs shall be of a design specified by the Department of Transportation and shall be a nationally recognized regulatory sign as designated by the Federal Highway Administration´s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices."
SECTION 5.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-24, relating to reports regarding use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
"40-14-24.
(a) Each county or municipality using any traffic-control signal monitoring device shall submit not later than February 1 of each year a report on such use during the preceding calendar year to the Department of Transportation. Such report shall include, without limitation:
(1) A description of the locations where traffic-control signal monitoring devices were used;
(2) The number of violations recorded at each location and in the aggregate on a monthly basis;
(3) The total number of citations issued;
(4) The number of civil monetary penalties and total amount of such penalties paid after citation without contest;
(5) The number of violations adjudicated and results of such adjudications, including a breakdown of dispositions made;
(6) The total amount of civil monetary penalties paid; and
(7) The quality of the adjudication process and its results.
(b) If any county or municipality fails to provide the report provided for in subsection (a) of this Code section, all revenues generated from the operation of any traffic-control signal monitoring device in that county or municipality shall be forwarded to the general fund of the state. The county or municipality shall not be entitled to retain any revenue until the annual report is filed and accepted by the Department of Transportation.
(c) The Department of Transportation shall forward copies of all reports to the offices of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and the Speaker of the House by March 1 of each year. The department shall also forward to the offices of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and the Speaker of the House a complete list of all traffic-control signal monitoring devices currently in use."
SECTION 6.
Said title is further amended by adding a new Code section to read as follows:
"40-14-25.
The amount of civil monetary penalties collected under the provisions of this article, less any costs incurred for acquisition, installation, maintenance, and operation of the traffic-control signal monitoring devices, and less 25 percent of the remaining money to be retained by the county or municipality, shall be deposited in the general fund of this state with the intent that these moneys be used to fund a trauma care system in Georgia. The Office of Treasury and Fiscal Services shall separately account for all of the moneys received under the provisions of this Code section."
SECTION 7.
This Act shall become effective upon its approval by the Governor or upon its becoming law without such approval.
SECTION 8.
All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.
Legislation eliminating the profit incentive threatens red light camera programs in Georgia and Missouri.
Two states, Georgia and Missouri, are following the example of New Mexico by adopting legislation restricting the ability of cities to profit from photo enforcement programs. The Georgia state House of Representatives yesterday voted 110-60 to direct 75 percent of automated ticketing profit to a state trauma fund. Although the original version of the legislation would simply outlawed traffic cameras, lawmakers struck a compromise that would impose a number of less stringent restrictions on use of the devices.
If passed by the Senate and signed by the governor, the law would require jurisdictions to consider engineering alternatives to cameras and file a report describing the options for each intersection on an annual basis. Although the bill states that only sworn police officers would be allowed to issue tickets, in practice such provisions have proved meaningless in California cities where an officer conducts a "bulk approval" of a stack of citations without first examining them. The measure also forbids cities from shortening yellow signal times either before or during a photo enforcement program. Each city must file an annual report on its camera program by February 1 or the state will impound all revenue generated.
Likewise, Missouri's state Senate last week adopted an amendment directing red light camera profit to the public school system. A similar provision in the North Carolina state constitution caused several cities, including Charlotte, Greensboro, Greenville and High Point, to drop their photo enforcement programs after an appeals court ruling last May insisted on payment to the schools. The Missouri state House and governor must approve the measure before it becomes law.
Article Excerpt:
Georgia General Assembly
The House Committee on Motor Vehicles offers the following substitute to HB 77:
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT
To amend Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to motor vehicles and traffic, so as to require use of a certified peace officer to swear to a traffic light violation; to provide for an engineering study; to provide for changing timing; to provide for reports to the Department of Transportation; to provide for disposition of funds collected through use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices; to provide for related matters; to provide for an effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:
SECTION 1.
Title 40 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to motor vehicles and traffic, is revised in Code Section 40-6-20, relating to enforcement by traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
...
(B) The law enforcement agency for which such device is permitted shall send by first-class mail addressed to the owner of the motor vehicle postmarked not later than ten days after the date of the alleged violation:
(i) A citation for the alleged violation, which shall include the date and time of the violation, the location of the intersection, the amount of the civil monetary penalty imposed, and the date by which the civil monetary penalty shall be paid;
(ii) A copy of the recorded image;
(iii) A copy of a certificate sworn to or affirmed by a certified peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency for which such device is authorized and stating that, based upon inspection of recorded images, the owner´s motor vehicle was operated in disregard or disobedience of a CIRCULAR RED or RED ARROW signal in violation of subsection (a) of this Code section and that such disregard or disobedience was not otherwise authorized by law;
...
(C) Proof that a motor vehicle was operated in disregard or disobedience of a CIRCULAR RED or RED ARROW signal in violation of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be evidenced by recorded images produced by a traffic-control signal monitoring device authorized pursuant to Article 3 of Chapter 14 of this title. A copy of a certificate sworn to or affirmed by a certified peace officer employed by a law enforcement agency for which such device is authorized and stating that, based upon inspection of recorded images, a motor vehicle was operated in disregard or disobedience of a CIRCULAR RED or RED ARROW signal in violation of subsection (a) of this Code section and that such disregard or disobedience was not otherwise authorized by law shall be prima-facie evidence of the facts contained therein; and
...
(8) The provisions of this subsection shall limit law enforcement agencies to the use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices in enforcing subsection (a) of this Code section."
SECTION 2.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-21, relating to the use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
"40-14-21.
...
(b) No county or municipality shall operate a traffic-control signal monitoring device unless it has first conducted a traffic engineering study of the approach to an intersection to determine whether, in addition to or as an alternative to the traffic-control signal monitoring device, a design change to the approach, reducing the approach speed, or a change in the signalization of the intersection is likely to reduce the number of accidents or red light violations at that intersection. This report shall be submitted with the annual report required under these provisions.
(c) No county or municipal governing authority shall be authorized to use traffic-control signal monitoring devices where any arresting officer or official of the court having jurisdiction of traffic cases is paid on a fee system. This subsection shall not apply to any official receiving a recording fee.
(d) A county or municipality shall not impose a civil penalty under this Code section on the owner of a motor vehicle if the operator of the vehicle was arrested or issued a citation and notice to appear by a peace officer for the same violation that is recorded by a traffic- control signal monitoring device.
(c)(e) If a county or municipality elects to use traffic-control signal monitoring devices, no portion of any civil monetary penalty collected through the use of such devices may be paid to the manufacturer or vendor of the traffic-control signal monitoring devices. The compensation paid by the county or municipality for such devices shall be based on the value of such equipment and shall not be based on the number of citations issued or the revenue generated by such devices.
(d)(f)(1) A traffic-control signal monitoring device shall not be used by a law enforcement agency unless the law enforcement agency employs at least one full-time certified peace officer.
(2) Failure of a law enforcement agency to continue to meet the standards provided by this subsection shall cause such agency to be ineligible to use traffic-control signal monitoring devices.
(e)(g) A traffic-control signal monitoring device shall not be used to produce any photograph, microphotograph, electronic image, or videotape showing the identity of any person in a motor vehicle."
SECTION 3.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-22, relating to timing of traffic-control signals, as follows:
"40-14-22.
The timing of any traffic-control signal which is being monitored by a traffic-control signal monitoring device shall conform to regulations promulgated by the Department of Transportation pursuant to Code Section 32-6-50. The duration of the yellow or red light of any traffic-control device at which a traffic-control signal monitoring device is installed shall not be decreased prior to the installation of a device or during the time for which the device is operated. Each county or municipal law enforcement agency using a traffic-control signal monitoring device shall at its own expense test the device for accuracy at regular intervals and record and maintain the results of each test. Such test results shall be public records subject to inspection as provided by Article 4 of Chapter 18 of Title 50. Each such test shall be made in accordance with the manufacturer´s recommended procedure. Any such device not meeting the manufacturer´s minimum accuracy requirements shall be removed from service and thereafter shall not be used by the county or municipal law enforcement agency until it has been serviced and calibrated at the expense of the law enforcement agency by a qualified technician."
SECTION 4.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-23, relating to signs to notify motorists of use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
"40-14-23.
Each county or municipality using traffic-control signal monitoring devices shall erect signs on every highway which comprises a part of the state highway system at that point on the highway which intersects the jurisdictional limits of the county or municipality. A sign shall be erected also by such entity on each public road on the approach to the next traffic-control signal for such road when a traffic-control signal monitoring device is monitoring such next signal for such road. Such signs shall be of a design specified by the Department of Transportation and shall be a nationally recognized regulatory sign as designated by the Federal Highway Administration´s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices."
SECTION 5.
Said title is further amended by revising Code Section 40-14-24, relating to reports regarding use of traffic-control signal monitoring devices, as follows:
"40-14-24.
(a) Each county or municipality using any traffic-control signal monitoring device shall submit not later than February 1 of each year a report on such use during the preceding calendar year to the Department of Transportation. Such report shall include, without limitation:
(1) A description of the locations where traffic-control signal monitoring devices were used;
(2) The number of violations recorded at each location and in the aggregate on a monthly basis;
(3) The total number of citations issued;
(4) The number of civil monetary penalties and total amount of such penalties paid after citation without contest;
(5) The number of violations adjudicated and results of such adjudications, including a breakdown of dispositions made;
(6) The total amount of civil monetary penalties paid; and
(7) The quality of the adjudication process and its results.
(b) If any county or municipality fails to provide the report provided for in subsection (a) of this Code section, all revenues generated from the operation of any traffic-control signal monitoring device in that county or municipality shall be forwarded to the general fund of the state. The county or municipality shall not be entitled to retain any revenue until the annual report is filed and accepted by the Department of Transportation.
(c) The Department of Transportation shall forward copies of all reports to the offices of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and the Speaker of the House by March 1 of each year. The department shall also forward to the offices of the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and the Speaker of the House a complete list of all traffic-control signal monitoring devices currently in use."
SECTION 6.
Said title is further amended by adding a new Code section to read as follows:
"40-14-25.
The amount of civil monetary penalties collected under the provisions of this article, less any costs incurred for acquisition, installation, maintenance, and operation of the traffic-control signal monitoring devices, and less 25 percent of the remaining money to be retained by the county or municipality, shall be deposited in the general fund of this state with the intent that these moneys be used to fund a trauma care system in Georgia. The Office of Treasury and Fiscal Services shall separately account for all of the moneys received under the provisions of this Code section."
SECTION 7.
This Act shall become effective upon its approval by the Governor or upon its becoming law without such approval.
SECTION 8.
All laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Funding more than war
Still voting for republicans and democrats, you must be stuck on stupid
By S.A. Miller
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 20, 2007
An Iraqi boy salutes a US soldier with the 1st Cavalry Regiment 2nd Brigade in Baghdad's Sheikh Ali neighbourhood yesterday. An Iraqi boy salutes a US soldier with the 1st Cavalry Regiment 2nd Brigade in Baghdad's Sheikh Ali neighbourhood yesterday. (AFP/Getty Images)
Nearly half of the $21 billion that House Democrats added to President Bush's request for emergency war funding would go to nonmilitary spending and to pork projects.
The supplemental spending bill includes more than $3.7 billion in farm subsidies, $2.9 billion in additional Gulf Coast hurricane relief and $2.4 billion for social programs such as money for rural Northwest school districts, health insurance for poor children, energy assistance for poor families and others.
Mr. Bush yesterday called on Congress to pass legislation that funds the troops without extraneous spending provisions or requirements for an early withdrawal from Iraq.
"They have a responsibility to pass a clean bill that does not use funding for our troops as leverage to get special-interest spending for their districts," said Mr. Bush, whose initial request funded the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as about $3.4 billion in hurricane relief.
"They have a responsibility to get this bill to my desk without strings and without delay."
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, said nonmilitary items in the emergency spending bill address vital needs that the previous Republican-led Congress neglected and that can't go unfunded until the next fiscal year begins Oct. 1.
"We are responding to needs that last Republican majority ignored, such as funding for children's health care that was requested by Republican and Democratic governors," Hoyer spokeswoman Stacey Bernards said.
Emergency spending bills historically are a magnet for pork projects, but critics of the war supplemental say the new Democratic majority has broken their vow to restore fiscal restraint to Washington.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, chairman of the Republican Study Committee, said Democratic leaders were trying to "wrap pork in Old Glory."
"To call some of the stuff in this bill an emergency must have Webster spinning in his grave," Mr. Hensarling said. "The real emergency Democrats must have is the emergency of selling votes to get this thing passed."
Debate is set to begin this week on the $124 billion emergency spending bill, which also would require all U.S. troops to pull out of Iraq by fall 2008 or sooner if benchmarks for progress are not met. A vote on the bill is scheduled for Thursday.
The more than $9.9 billion of nonmilitary spending in the House bill includes $1 billion to buy vaccines against a major bird-flu epidemic, $750 million for State Children's Health Insurance Program, $500 million for wildfire suppression, $400 million for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, and $100 million in food aid to Africa.
Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, said the bill is "a blatant betrayal of the Democrats' campaign promise to restore fiscal accountability to Congress."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi questioned the validity of the criticism.
"Are they talking about the money that we have in the bill for health care for the poorest children in America -- legislation that has been asked for by both Democratic and Republican governors?" Mrs. Pelosi said to reporters last week.
"Are they talking about disaster assistance, which they have refused to give to America's farmers, which is long overdue?" she said. "I don't know, but I am very proud of the product that we are putting forth. It makes our country stronger by improving our military readiness. It holds the Iraqi government accountable by putting forth the president's own benchmarks."
The bill's $3.7 billion in agriculture assistance to U.S. farmers includes $1.4 billion to compensate ranchers who lost livestock in disasters, $283 million in milk subsidies, $74 million in peanut subsidies and $25 million in spinach subsidies. The legislation also adds $400 million to continue funding for rural Northwest school districts facing cuts in federal compensation because of declines in timber and salmon harvests.
It boosts the president's request for Gulf Coast hurricane relief by about $2.9 billion, adding $1.3 billion for Army Corps of Engineers' flood control projects, $30 million for colleges, $30 million for schools and $25.1 million for the Small Business Administration's disaster loan program.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has not indicated whether he will take up the House bill or introduce his own emergency spending legislation. Senate Republicans are expected to fight any funding that goes beyond the war effort or any measure to require a troop withdrawal.
Last week, the Senate in a near party-line vote rejected a Democratic plan to force all U.S. troops to pull out from Iraq by March 2008.
By S.A. Miller
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
March 20, 2007
An Iraqi boy salutes a US soldier with the 1st Cavalry Regiment 2nd Brigade in Baghdad's Sheikh Ali neighbourhood yesterday. An Iraqi boy salutes a US soldier with the 1st Cavalry Regiment 2nd Brigade in Baghdad's Sheikh Ali neighbourhood yesterday. (AFP/Getty Images)
Nearly half of the $21 billion that House Democrats added to President Bush's request for emergency war funding would go to nonmilitary spending and to pork projects.
The supplemental spending bill includes more than $3.7 billion in farm subsidies, $2.9 billion in additional Gulf Coast hurricane relief and $2.4 billion for social programs such as money for rural Northwest school districts, health insurance for poor children, energy assistance for poor families and others.
Mr. Bush yesterday called on Congress to pass legislation that funds the troops without extraneous spending provisions or requirements for an early withdrawal from Iraq.
"They have a responsibility to pass a clean bill that does not use funding for our troops as leverage to get special-interest spending for their districts," said Mr. Bush, whose initial request funded the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as about $3.4 billion in hurricane relief.
"They have a responsibility to get this bill to my desk without strings and without delay."
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, said nonmilitary items in the emergency spending bill address vital needs that the previous Republican-led Congress neglected and that can't go unfunded until the next fiscal year begins Oct. 1.
"We are responding to needs that last Republican majority ignored, such as funding for children's health care that was requested by Republican and Democratic governors," Hoyer spokeswoman Stacey Bernards said.
Emergency spending bills historically are a magnet for pork projects, but critics of the war supplemental say the new Democratic majority has broken their vow to restore fiscal restraint to Washington.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, chairman of the Republican Study Committee, said Democratic leaders were trying to "wrap pork in Old Glory."
"To call some of the stuff in this bill an emergency must have Webster spinning in his grave," Mr. Hensarling said. "The real emergency Democrats must have is the emergency of selling votes to get this thing passed."
Debate is set to begin this week on the $124 billion emergency spending bill, which also would require all U.S. troops to pull out of Iraq by fall 2008 or sooner if benchmarks for progress are not met. A vote on the bill is scheduled for Thursday.
The more than $9.9 billion of nonmilitary spending in the House bill includes $1 billion to buy vaccines against a major bird-flu epidemic, $750 million for State Children's Health Insurance Program, $500 million for wildfire suppression, $400 million for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, and $100 million in food aid to Africa.
Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, said the bill is "a blatant betrayal of the Democrats' campaign promise to restore fiscal accountability to Congress."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi questioned the validity of the criticism.
"Are they talking about the money that we have in the bill for health care for the poorest children in America -- legislation that has been asked for by both Democratic and Republican governors?" Mrs. Pelosi said to reporters last week.
"Are they talking about disaster assistance, which they have refused to give to America's farmers, which is long overdue?" she said. "I don't know, but I am very proud of the product that we are putting forth. It makes our country stronger by improving our military readiness. It holds the Iraqi government accountable by putting forth the president's own benchmarks."
The bill's $3.7 billion in agriculture assistance to U.S. farmers includes $1.4 billion to compensate ranchers who lost livestock in disasters, $283 million in milk subsidies, $74 million in peanut subsidies and $25 million in spinach subsidies. The legislation also adds $400 million to continue funding for rural Northwest school districts facing cuts in federal compensation because of declines in timber and salmon harvests.
It boosts the president's request for Gulf Coast hurricane relief by about $2.9 billion, adding $1.3 billion for Army Corps of Engineers' flood control projects, $30 million for colleges, $30 million for schools and $25.1 million for the Small Business Administration's disaster loan program.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has not indicated whether he will take up the House bill or introduce his own emergency spending legislation. Senate Republicans are expected to fight any funding that goes beyond the war effort or any measure to require a troop withdrawal.
Last week, the Senate in a near party-line vote rejected a Democratic plan to force all U.S. troops to pull out from Iraq by March 2008.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
remember when
the newly annoited President Clinton(actually it was Janet Reno) FIRED 93 district attorneys. I didn't think you did. The main crux is this the President can FIRE anyone for anything because JOB SECURITY isn't a RIGHT in this nation yet!!!
washingtonpost.com
The Reno Precedent
THE LATEST they-do-it-too excuse for the undeniably botched and increasingly suspicious firings of U.S. attorneys involves the 1993 episode in which President Clinton's new attorney general, Janet Reno, unceremoniously dismissed the first Bush administration's holdover U.S. attorneys. By comparison with the Reno massacre, we are told, the Bush administration's canning of eight U.S. attorneys was positively restrained; if you suspect political motives in the current controversy, so the argument goes, consider that when he was ousted by Reno, the U.S. attorney in the District, Jay Stephens, was just weeks away from deciding whether to indict House Ways and Means Chairman Daniel Rostenkowski (D-Ill.). Inconveniently for these conspiracy theorists, Mr. Rostenkowski was in fact indicted and convicted -- and, yes, he ultimately was pardoned by President Clinton....
To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/14/AR2007031402194.html?referrer=emailarticle
washingtonpost.com
The Reno Precedent
THE LATEST they-do-it-too excuse for the undeniably botched and increasingly suspicious firings of U.S. attorneys involves the 1993 episode in which President Clinton's new attorney general, Janet Reno, unceremoniously dismissed the first Bush administration's holdover U.S. attorneys. By comparison with the Reno massacre, we are told, the Bush administration's canning of eight U.S. attorneys was positively restrained; if you suspect political motives in the current controversy, so the argument goes, consider that when he was ousted by Reno, the U.S. attorney in the District, Jay Stephens, was just weeks away from deciding whether to indict House Ways and Means Chairman Daniel Rostenkowski (D-Ill.). Inconveniently for these conspiracy theorists, Mr. Rostenkowski was in fact indicted and convicted -- and, yes, he ultimately was pardoned by President Clinton....
To view the entire article, go to http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/14/AR2007031402194.html?referrer=emailarticle
Ozark aldermen OK redevelopment plan for downtown area
you owned some property and allowed it to get in a state of disrepair. Along with some busy bodies serving on city government and local inhabitants they form a committee to SEIZE your property via EMINENT DOMAIN. The voters approved of the city taking this parcel of land to rid the area of an eyesore, now these very same people may have their own houses yanked out from underneath them. I for one say HOORAY as the good book says an eye for an eye. Just remember your property can be deemed an eyesore just as easy as that mobile home park.
Common Sense from a common sense individual.
Some residents remain concerned city will seize property in blighted area.
Chad Hunter
News-Leader
Ozark — City leaders on Monday approved special financing plans for downtown redevelopment, paving the way for more than $50 million worth of homes and new businesses.
Aldermen voted 4-1 to accept a recommendation made by a separate tax commission. It allows the developer to use future real estate property taxes and half the sales taxes generated in that area to help pay for infrastructure upgrade costs now.
The developer, Hagerman New Urbanism of Springfield, plans to add about 37,000 feet of retail space, lofts, more than 40 homes and 234 apartments to a portion of the 47-acre Finley River Redevelopment District, declared blighted by the city in 2004.
Several years from now, New Urbanism plans to create a "lifestyle center" with about 70,000 feet of retail space and 50 lofts.
But despite the city's promise not to force existing homeowners in the blighted area to sell, some residents Monday echoed concerns they've had about eminent domain.
"They exempted the homeowners — we still don't think that it's binding — but they won't exempt businesses," homeowner Dennis Sparrow said.
Also during the meeting, allegations again surfaced that Ozark misled voters who approved the blighting of the area. Some claim they thought they were only targeting a 2-acre, rundown mobile home park that the city eventually purchased and dismantled.
"We're not going to sit here and declare eminent domain on everything to take away people's property," said Alderman Mark Spinabella.
Politics reared its head at the packed meeting as alderman candidate Rick Amos asked the city to table the issue until after the April election because "there may be new blood up here."
"I feel that I have been misled," Amos said. "I am a citizen of this community and I voted. You didn't do what you said you would do. People I have been out talking to feel the same way."
Mayor Donna McQuay replied: "We have been going to meetings for three years and I have never seen you there. We have really tried to educate the public as to where we're headed with this and it's now become a reality."
Under the 23-year tax increment financing plan, taxing districts including the Ozark School District will lose real estate property taxes and half of sales taxes generated within the TIF district.
City Administrator Collin Quigley said that in the long run, everybody will benefit.
"We're trying to build a sales tax base, build the residential base and put the investment back into the heart of Ozark," he said. "So at some time, yes, the school and every taxing entity will be getting the full benefit of that tax benefit."
Someone from the audience retorted that it would be years before that would happen.
"Where will we be in 23 years without this?" Quigley answered. "This is one of the few examples where (a TIF) needs to be used to revitalize downtown."
Common Sense from a common sense individual.
Some residents remain concerned city will seize property in blighted area.
Chad Hunter
News-Leader
Ozark — City leaders on Monday approved special financing plans for downtown redevelopment, paving the way for more than $50 million worth of homes and new businesses.
Aldermen voted 4-1 to accept a recommendation made by a separate tax commission. It allows the developer to use future real estate property taxes and half the sales taxes generated in that area to help pay for infrastructure upgrade costs now.
The developer, Hagerman New Urbanism of Springfield, plans to add about 37,000 feet of retail space, lofts, more than 40 homes and 234 apartments to a portion of the 47-acre Finley River Redevelopment District, declared blighted by the city in 2004.
Several years from now, New Urbanism plans to create a "lifestyle center" with about 70,000 feet of retail space and 50 lofts.
But despite the city's promise not to force existing homeowners in the blighted area to sell, some residents Monday echoed concerns they've had about eminent domain.
"They exempted the homeowners — we still don't think that it's binding — but they won't exempt businesses," homeowner Dennis Sparrow said.
Also during the meeting, allegations again surfaced that Ozark misled voters who approved the blighting of the area. Some claim they thought they were only targeting a 2-acre, rundown mobile home park that the city eventually purchased and dismantled.
"We're not going to sit here and declare eminent domain on everything to take away people's property," said Alderman Mark Spinabella.
Politics reared its head at the packed meeting as alderman candidate Rick Amos asked the city to table the issue until after the April election because "there may be new blood up here."
"I feel that I have been misled," Amos said. "I am a citizen of this community and I voted. You didn't do what you said you would do. People I have been out talking to feel the same way."
Mayor Donna McQuay replied: "We have been going to meetings for three years and I have never seen you there. We have really tried to educate the public as to where we're headed with this and it's now become a reality."
Under the 23-year tax increment financing plan, taxing districts including the Ozark School District will lose real estate property taxes and half of sales taxes generated within the TIF district.
City Administrator Collin Quigley said that in the long run, everybody will benefit.
"We're trying to build a sales tax base, build the residential base and put the investment back into the heart of Ozark," he said. "So at some time, yes, the school and every taxing entity will be getting the full benefit of that tax benefit."
Someone from the audience retorted that it would be years before that would happen.
"Where will we be in 23 years without this?" Quigley answered. "This is one of the few examples where (a TIF) needs to be used to revitalize downtown."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)