WASHINGTON – The NFL Players Association is trying to set up a meeting with Cleveland Browns players this week to talk about coach Eric Mangini's practices, a person at the union told The Associated Press on Monday.
The person, who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity to protect the Browns players' confidentiality, said the union is looking into what has been going on in Cleveland this season because of concerns about health and safety.
Two Browns players have been injured during post-practice drills Mangini calls "opportunity periods." A member of Cleveland's practice squad, defensive end Keith Grennan, hurt his knee on one such drill last week. Rookie running back James Davis went on injured reserve last month with a season-ending shoulder injury.
The NFL examined what happened to Davis and determined the Browns did not violate any league policies. The league reviewed video of the practice session and interviewed Browns players, coaches and team staff.
Last week, veteran running back Jamal Lewis said he thought Mangini was tiring out his players by overworking the Browns, although Lewis then reversed field a day later and blamed the media for exaggerating his complaints.
In his first year with Cleveland after being fired by the New York Jets, Mangini ran a tough training camp, one with much more contact than any held by former Browns coach Romeo Crennel. The Browns also have practiced in full pads more under Mangini than in the past.
Cleveland was 1-7 heading into its game against the visiting Baltimore Ravens on Monday night.
November 2009
STOCKHOLM (Reuters) –
The European Union and Russia hope to lay the foundations of a new economic and political partnership at a summit on Wednesday despite differences over energy, trade, human rights and climate change.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and the EU's Swedish presidency will seek to rebuild trust shattered during Russia's war with Georgia last year but boosted by a deal this week on an "early warning" mechanism to shield Europe from supply cuts.
They are setting their sights low for now, especially as the EU fears gas supplies from Russia are threatened by a dispute between Moscow and Ukraine, but hope at least to avoid new quarrels and start a gradual improvement in ties.
"We need to work closely with Russia. There is a level of mutual dependence -- we depend on them for energy supplies and we are energy consumers for them," Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb said on Monday as the EU prepared for the talks.
The EU, which represents almost 500 million people, is Russia's biggest trading partner, accounting for about half its overall trade turnover in the first nine months of this year.
Russia, a country with vast natural resources and a population of about 142 million, hopes to win more foreign investment from the EU following the global economic crisis.
EU officials are encouraged by Medvedev's calls for reform and modernization of Russia's economy. Moscow sees positive signs from Sweden under Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, who hosts the one-day summit because Stockholm holds the EU's six-month presidency until the end of this year.
"We see signs of pragmatism ... in the Swedish leadership which we hope will lead to productive meetings," said Sergei Prikhodko, Medvedev's chief foreign policy adviser.
TALKS ON NEW PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
The EU and Russia are negotiating a new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement to provide the framework for their relationship, but it will not be completed on Wednesday.
Relations are improving only slowly after the Georgia war in August 2008, which prompted Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt to compare Russia's military intervention to Nazi leader Adolf Hitler's invasion of parts of central Europe.
"Certainly I'm looking forward to a constructive discussion rather than a heated exchange of criticism," Vladimir Chizhov, Russia's envoy to the EU, told reporters on Friday.
Hopes of ties improving were lifted by the signing on Monday of a memorandum requiring both sides to notify the other of any likely disruption to energy supplies and to work together to resolve the problem.
Russian gas supplies to Europe via Ukraine, a route that supplies a fifth of Europe's gas, were halted for more than two weeks in January because of a quarrel between Moscow and Kiev.
Fears are growing of a new dispute next January, when Ukraine holds a presidential election. But the EU hopes the summit will help build trust on energy issues, even though it is seeking to diversify its supply routes.
"The EU should reiterate that it sees Russia as its key energy partner. The summit will serve as an opportunity for the EU to underline the need to rebuild confidence and ensure predictability in EU-Russia energy relations," the EU said in a document setting out its position for the summit.
The EU hopes to persuade Moscow to do more in the fight against global warming and wants clarity from Russia over its plans to join the World Trade Organization after Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said it would join only as part of a customs union with Belarus and Kazakhstan.
Regional security and issues such as conflict in Afghanistan and Iran's nuclear program are also expected to be discussed.
(Additional reporting by David Brunnstrom in Brussels and Oleg Shchedrov in Moscow; Editing by Louise Ireland)
GENEVA – Global wages fell in the United States and some other wealthy nations in the second quarter of the year, raising questions about whether workers are sharing in any economic recovery, the U.N. labor agency said Tuesday.
The International Labor Organization said inflation-adjusted wage growth fell sharply around the world last year to 1.4 percent, from 4.3 percent in 2007. It said wages are falling in a number of countries so far this year.
"The picture on wages is likely to get worse in 2009, despite the beginning of a possible economic recovery," the 15-page report said.
The ILO analyzed data from 35 countries including Brazil, Britain, Japan, South Africa and Ukraine. China and India, which provide large amounts of the world's workers, were excluded from the report.
Monthly wages have fallen almost 2 percent in the United States since January, said Patrick Belser, an ILO economist.
Manuela Tomei, ILO's employment chief, said wage declines were depriving national economies of much needed demand and were contributing to sapping consumer confidence.
"The continued deterioration of real wages worldwide raises serious questions about the true extent of an economic recovery, especially if government rescue packages are phased out too early," Tomei said.
The ILO noted some good efforts by governments to help workers, citing minimum wage increases above inflation in the United States, Brazil, Japan and Russia.
"In the U.S., there is a real policy toward strengthening the wage policies," Belser said, adding that Washington was trying to make it easier for workers to join unions.
"These measures can go a long way in addressing the imbalance that we found before the crisis, particularly with zero growth in the median wages in the U.S. for many years despite a booming economy," he said.
Nov. 3 (Bloomberg) -- During one of his first meetings
about overhauling U.S. financial regulations in February,
President Barack Obama had a question for his economic advisers,
who included Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and National
Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers.
“What about the families?” Obama asked, according to people
familiar with the discussions. He then asked them whether they’d
read the work of Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard Law School
professor and longtime advocate of a national consumer financial
protection agency. Michael Barr, a University of Michigan
professor who was a Summers aide at the time, jumped in to say
he knew Warren’s work.
“Well, what do you think about it?â€
“I think it’s a great idea,” Barr, 44, replied. The two
debated the merits of such an agency during several meetings
over the following three days. Then Obama offered Barr, whose
own work included research on the borrowing patterns of low-
income households, the job of assistant Treasury secretary for
financial institutions. He was confirmed by the Senate in May.
Thus an idea that the U.S. banking industry has learned to
hate moved a giant step closer to reality. The creation of a
consumer protection agency is part of the Obama administration’s
plans to enact the most wide-ranging financial regulations since
the Great Depression.
Following the 1999 decision to overturn the Glass-Steagall
Act that separated commercial banks from securities firms, bank
lobbyists have been able to shoot down virtually any proposed
rule they perceived as unfavorable to their industry, lobbyists
and politicians say.
Campaign Contributions
Banks and securities firms spent $193 million to fund
political campaigns for the 2008 elections and raise even more
money through events that their trade groups organize. They have
successfully fought the administration’s efforts to limit
executive pay and are battling against draft legislation
governing the $592 trillion market for derivatives.
When it comes to consumer banking, the industry’s lobbyists
are no longer all-powerful. Banks lost their bid to squelch new
credit card rules that Obama signed into law in May. They
lobbied for months before a bill that would have forced them to
renegotiate mortgages failed in the Senate.
Now the banks and their trade associations are lobbying
furiously to kill Obama’s plan to create the new financial
protection agency, which was approved by the House Financial
Services Committee in late October and is likely to face a full
House vote by the end of 2009.
Influence Lost
The different trade groups that represent the industry are
also divided over how they want the bill rewritten. They will
now shift their struggle to the Senate, which has yet to unveil
its version of proposals overhauling financial regulations.
“Banks have lost their influence on consumer issues,” says
Brian Gardner, an analyst monitoring Washington’s impact on
financial services for the brokerage firm Keefe Bruyette & Woods
Inc. Gardner says banks will retain their clout when it comes to
more complex financial issues such as derivatives. “Folks on
Capitol Hill still need to talk to the banks for the expertise
on highly technical areas,” Gardner says.
Members of Congress who have traditionally been supportive
of the banks’ positions are breaking ranks as popular opinion
shifts strongly against the institutions. Some 80 percent of the
public blames banks and other financial firms for the economic
crisis, according to an ABC News-Washington Post poll in March.
“Many members of Congress who have been pro-banking and who
have done the banks’ bidding are walking more cautiously since
the financial meltdown,” says Representative Maxine Waters, a
California Democrat.
Frank’s Priority
Representative Barney Frank, chairman of the Financial
Services Committee, says he’s making it his priority to create
the new agency to protect consumers.
“The existing structure for consumer protection in the
financial area, particularly in the area of bank products, has
failed miserably,” the Massachusetts Democrat told a news
conference in July.
Frank has gotten $2.1 million in campaign contributions
from financial firms over the past three elections, according to
the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research
group.
The biggest U.S. banks have a lot at stake. They rely on
the relatively stable revenue from consumer lending to balance
out the volatility of their investment banking operations. Bank
of America Corp., the largest U.S. bank in terms of assets, and
No. 3 Citigroup Inc. got almost half of their revenue from
consumer lending, including credit cards, in the first nine
months of 2009.
Dimon in Washington
Harvard’s Warren says the consumer agency she proposes will
affect the larger banks disproportionately: “It may cost the
community banks some nickels, but the real impact will be on the
big banks’ profit model.”
JPMorgan Chase & Co., the second-biggest U.S. bank, got 48
percent of its revenue from consumer lending in the first nine
months of 2009. The bank, which was one of the least scathed by
the crisis, has stepped up its lobbying. Chief Executive Officer
Jamie Dimon now visits the capital twice a month, meeting with
administration officials and congressional leaders, up from
twice a year in 2006.
JPMorgan also added two lobbyists to its Washington staff,
which includes former Commerce Secretary William Daley. Jill
Blickstein, who was previously chief of staff at the Office of
Management and Budget in the Obama administration, was one of
the new hires.
‘Weakened Position’
Citigroup and Bank of America are both partially owned by
the government following the bailouts of 2008, and have cut
their lobbying budgets as a result. The two banks spent a
combined $6.6 million to lobby in the first nine months of 2009,
down 12 percent from a year earlier, according to congressional
disclosures they have filed.
“No question that the banks and the rest of the industry
are in a weakened position,” says Bruce Thompson, who lobbied
Capitol Hill for 22 years on Merrill Lynch & Co.’s behalf. “They
used to be able to say, ‘This will hurt us,’ and Congress
wouldn’t do it. Now, they laugh at you.”
Waters says she has introduced or sponsored dozens of
legislative proposals to rein in banking practices. For example,
she proposed a 2003 bill that aimed to prevent predatory lending
by increasing the amount of information that banks would have to
disclose when offering mortgages. All were blocked by bank
lobbying, she says.
“They manage protecting their interests quite well,” she
says.
‘Losing Some Battles’
Consumer advocates agree.
“We couldn’t get a vote on bills banks opposed,” says Ed
Mierzwinski, the consumer program director at the U.S. PIRG, a
federation of state public-advocacy groups that lobby for
consumer rights. “Now, they’re losing some battles, winning
others.”
One fight the banks lost in 2009 was against the creation
of a credit card consumer’s bill of rights. The failure came
even though financial industry lobbyists, led by the American
Bankers Association and the largest individual banks,
outnumbered consumer lobbyists by 10 to 1, according to
congressional staffers involved in the talks.
The credit card bill, which was first introduced in 2008 by
Representative Carolyn Maloney, a Democrat from New York, passed
the House and then died in the Senate amid opposition by banks
and credit card companies. Christopher Dodd, the Democrat from
Connecticut who is chairman of the Senate banking committee,
sided with the banks. Dodd has received more than $8.4 million
in election contributions from financial firms since 2005,
according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Banks Fought Bill
The financial crisis, and Obama’s election, improved the
bill’s prospects. Maloney reintroduced the measure in January,
revising it to incorporate elements from Obama’s campaign
platform, such as restricting how and when credit card issuers
can increase interest rates and late-payment penalties.
The ABA, along with Bank of America, Citigroup and
JPMorgan, argued that the bill would hurt the availability of
credit and jack up interest rates on cards. This time around,
Dodd didn’t try to convince fellow senators to support the
banks’ argument.
The banking committee chairman was humiliated in March when
it was disclosed that a bill he sponsored curtailing pay for
executives of firms bailed out by the government made an
exception for insurance company American International Group
Inc. The company’s derivatives arm is based in Connecticut,
Dodd’s home state, and the senator is the largest recipient of
campaign contributions from AIG. Dodd said the exemption had
slipped in during negotiations without his knowledge.
Bill Sails Through
In the spring of 2009, Maloney’s bill sailed through
Congress, getting 357 votes in the House and 90 in the Senate.
Banks also had to fight hard before they succeeded in
blocking the so-called cram-down provision proposed by six
senators led by Dick Durbin of Illinois and Chuck Schumer of New
York this past spring. The proposal, which would have given
judges the right to restructure mortgages during a personal
bankruptcy trial, was being considered by some of its sponsors
as early as 2007.
After the government bailed out several of the largest U.S.
financial institutions in the fall of 2008, interest in the
measure grew. Citigroup, which got the biggest U.S. bailout --
$346 billion -- decided to back the cram-down provision,
reversing its previous stance. In January 2009, Durbin and
Schumer held a news conference together with Dodd to announce
the bank’s support for the provision.
Obama’s Role
It was the new political circumstances with Obama in power
that made the bank change course, former and current Citigroup
lobbyists say. Citigroup’s consumer-friendly position gave the
bank some positive publicity, too, these people say.
The House passed a version of the cram-down bill in March.
In the Senate, Durbin and Schumer needed at least a handful of
Republicans to muster 60 votes to avoid a filibuster. Without
the banks’ support, that majority wouldn’t materialize. So the
two senators started negotiating with the ABA, JPMorgan and two
trade groups that represent credit unions. The Independent
Community Bankers of America, which represents small banks,
later joined the talks along with Wells Fargo & Co. and Bank of
America.
After a few meetings, the ABA pulled out and lobbied
quietly against the cram-down bill, while the ICBA publicly
opposed it. The Financial Services Roundtable, which consists of
the CEOs of the top 100 U.S. financial firms, coordinated the
different groups’ efforts and meetings with members of Congress
from both parties, says Scott Talbott, the Roundtable’s chief
lobbyist. The provision died in the Senate in April.
Cramdown Is Back
The lobbyists’ success may be short-lived: In September,
Durbin and his allies introduced a new version of the cram-down
bill.
The next big test for the banks is whether they can
influence plans to create the new regulatory agency to protect
consumer rights.
“The administration’s proposal would hurt banks that never
made a subprime loan, and yet you’re going to pile a whole new
set of regulations and a new regulator on them,” says ABA
President Edward Yingling.
The ABA has organized its members to write 140,000 letters
to congressmen, provided Op-Ed templates for community bank
executives who want to write editorials in local newspapers and
set up hundreds of meetings between its members and their
congresspeople.
Lobbying Tips
In September, some 80 bankers from 28 states mingled at an
ABA reception at the Madison hotel in downtown Washington,
gearing up for meetings with congressmen representing their
districts. Floyd Stoner, the ABA’s chief lobbyist, circulated
among the crowd, stopping to chat with bankers and dispensing
lobbying tips.
The pressure from the community banks has had some impact:
In October, Frank’s committee revised the original proposal so
that small banks can stick with their existing regulators, which
will enforce the consumer agency’s rules.
The banks face opposition from consumer groups, which have
banded together in a 200-strong coalition to push for the
agency. Obama, who himself started in politics as a community
organizer, has been sympathetic to their concerns.
“In a financial system that has never been more
complicated, it has never been more important to have a watchdog
function like the one we have proposed,” Obama said in October.
The Treasury’s Barr has even appointed a former consumer
advocate at the Center for Responsible Lending, Eric Stein, as
his deputy in charge of consumer protection.
Leveling the Playing Field
While Barr asked the banks for their opinion of the
consumer agency during meetings in March and April, their
objections weren’t heeded, according to people familiar with the
discussions. He also asked consumer groups and community
organizations to weigh in, an unprecedented move when the
government considers financial regulation, according to
lobbyists.
“The status quo has fundamentally failed consumers and
helped to bring us to the brink of financial disaster,” Barr
says. “We need to level the playing field.”
While banks’ lobbying efforts may have been weakened, their
deep pockets still give them willing listeners on Capitol Hill
and in the White House, says Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the 2001
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics.
“It comes down to the influence of money on our political
process,” the Columbia University economics professor says.
Even if Barr levels the playing field and the new agency is
created, banks bearing cash still may win the game.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Yalman Onaran in New York at
yonaran@bloomberg.net .
KABUL (AFP) –
Afghan President Hamid Karzai vowed Tuesday that his new government would eradicate corruption and offered an olive branch to Taliban insurgents, launching his programme for another five years in office.
Under pressure from US President Barack Obama to wipe out corruption and world leaders to unify the war-torn nation, Karzai used his first appearance since electoral authorities declared him president to pledge a cleaner rule.
"Afghanistan's image has been tainted by corruption. Our government's image has been tainted by corruption," Karzai told a press conference flanked by his controversial vice president Mohammad Qasim Fahim, who is widely accused of rights abuses.
"We will strive, by any means possible, to eradicate this stain."
Karzai was declared president for another five years after the cancellation of a run-off ballot by the country's election commission, which followed the withdrawal at the weekend of his only challenger, Abdullah Abdullah. Related article: US urges Kharzai on corruption
The president said it would have been better for Afghanistan, which is rife with ethnic rivalry, to have voted in a second round following a fraud-tainted first election on August 20, and bemoaned Abdullah's withdrawal.
Karzai has been urged by a number of world leaders to ensure his next government can command the support of all the Afghan people.
"The future government will be a government that reflects all the people of Afghanistan ... We hope that no-one feels themselves isolated from this future government," he said.
The 51-year-old president, whose warm relations with the West have cooled over corruption and spiralling insecurity, also urged his Taliban "brothers" "to come home and embrace their land".
The Taliban insurgency is now at its deadliest, contributing to record US fatalities eight years since the militia was driven out of Kabul by a US-led invasion, paving the way for Karzai to take power.
The Islamists ridiculed Karzai as a "puppet" president, however, and said his re-election without a second round showed the West was dictating events.
"What is astonishing is two weeks ago they were arguing that the puppet president Hamid Karzai was involved in electoral fraud... but now he is elected as president based on those same fraudulent votes, Washington and London immediately send their congratulations," said a Taliban statement.
Obama and UN chief Ban Ki-moon led world powers in congratulating Karzai, but the US president called for "a much more serious effort to eradicate corruption" and a "new chapter" in cooperation between the two countries. Related article: Karzai faces array of challenges.
"This has to be (the) point in time in which we begin to write a new chapter based on improved governance," Obama said he had told Karzai in a phone call.
Karzai "assured me that he understood the importance of this moment but... the truth is not going to be in words, it's going to be in deeds", added Obama who is to decide whether to deploy thousands more troops in the coming weeks.
The New York Times reported the Obama administration was pressing Karzai to set up an anti-corruption commission, which would establish "strict accountability" for national and provincial government officials.
US and European officials are also seeking the arrests of what one US envoy termed "the more blatantly corrupt" people in government, the paper added.
Abdullah quit the contest on Sunday, saying there were no safeguards against a repeat of widespread fraud that resulted in the rejection of nearly a quarter of votes cast in August.
Karzai's anointment by the Independent Election Commission sought to draw a line under two months of political chaos in the conflict-ridden nation where 100,000 NATO and US troops are battling the Taliban. Related article: Cash-strapped US media struggles to cover war
Ban met Karzai and Abdullah amid a concerted diplomatic push to bring a quick end to the paralysis, which has undermined Western efforts to cultivate democracy in Afghanistan.
IEC chief Azizullah Ludin, a Karzai appointee who oversaw the fraud-riddled first round, said the decision had been made in line with the provisions of Afghan law and was "consistent with the high interest of the Afghan people".
There had been widespread unease about staging the November 7 run-off poll.
First-round turnout was as low as five percent in areas and Taliban had threatened fresh attacks.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) –
Federal Reserve officials meeting this week must weigh improving economic data against the risk, reinforced by a persistently weak job market, that a burgeoning recovery remains on shaky ground.
A 3.5 percent annualized jump in third quarter gross domestic product revived debate between analysts who believe a sustainable turnaround is under way, and those who think growth will falter once a heavy dose of stimulus fades.
The uncertainty is evident within the Fed itself, with many policymakers emphasizing the hazards in their outlook, even as they vow to vigorously fight any early signs of inflation.
With inflationary warning signals largely absent, an immediate shift in the central bank's ultra-easy policy stance, including any tinkering with its pledge to keep interest rates low for an "extended period," appears unlikely.
"The Federal Reserve is unlikely to change its assessment significantly," said Marc Chandler, global currency strategist at Brown Brothers Harriman.
The Federal Open Market Committee, the central bank's policy setting group, meets on November 3 and November 4.
RECOVERY'S ARRIVAL
The third quarter GDP report on Friday signaled the end of the worst U.S. recession since the Great Depression, but government stimulus, including the "cash for clunkers" incentive for auto purchases and a $8,000 tax credit for first time homebuyers, helped prop the economy up.
The Institute for Supply Management's manufacturing index, a widely watched barometer of industrial strength, suggested activity remained robust in October. The measure jumped to 55.7 last month, its highest level since April 2006. It has held above the 50 line that separates expansion from contraction for three straight months.
Even the ISM employment index, long in contraction territory, turned positive, indicating the first inklings of a willingness to hire.
"Given the fairly good performance of this indicator in predicting the performance of the U.S. economy more generally, it is pointing to further upward momentum in U.S. economic activity," said Millan Mulraine, economics strategist at TD Securities.
THE UNEMPLOYMENT PROBLEM
Despite signs factory activity is picking up, the U.S. consumers who normally account for around 70 percent of the economy's growth, are facing major challenges.
Chief among them is a jobless rate currently hovering at a 26-year high just below 10 percent, which is expected to continue climbing into next year.
Coupled with three years of declines in home values, the unfavorable labor market has dampened consumers' appetite to spend. Even for those who have managed to hold onto their jobs, incomes largely remain stagnant or have lost ground.
The grim employment outlook raises doubts about whether growth can be sustained when the effects of the government's stimulus program fade.
FINANCIAL STABILITY
The banking sector, which has regained some of its swagger but remains relatively fragile, is another important consideration for Fed officials.
Some banks, like JPMorgan and Goldmans Sachs, have returned solidly to profitability and have, controversially, set aside vast sums for bonus payouts.
But much of this largess, say analysts, is the product of the government's implicit -- and sometimes explicit -- backing. The perception, cemented after Lehman Brothers' disastrous bankruptcy, that the public sector will not allow a major financial institution to fail, has lowered the cost of borrowing for banks.
Losses in the commercial real estate sector, which have been flagged loudly by Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo and a host of regional central bank presidents, suggest the perils of the credit crunch are not yet over for banks.
This should make the Fed leery of any sudden policy movements that might unhinge gains made thus far.
KABUL (AFP) –
The 10 weeks of chaos that dogged Afghanistan's tumultuous election were accompanied by a string of diplomatic blunders that ended with the scrapping of a run-off imposed on President Hamid Karzai.
The decision to announce that November 7's run-off would not take place came after UN chief Ban Ki-moon flew to Kabul to persuade the country's nominally independent election commission not to stage a one-horse race.
Yet less than two weeks earlier, the United Nations was at the forefront of international arm-twisting designed to force Karzai into a second round despite his protestations that he won fair and square the first time.
"It's been the biggest mistake by the international community in the last eight years," said Nasrullah Stanikzai, an analyst at Kabul University.
"There's been no coordination between the United States and the Europeans... And they don't have good coordination with the Afghan government."
Karzai was catapulted to power in late 2001 after US-led coalition forces toppled the Taliban.
But warm relations between Washington and Kabul have steadily declined, with Karzai humiliated when he was reluctantly forced to announce his participation in the run-off, flanked by US Senator John Kerry and UN envoy Kai Eide.
But while diplomats managed to persuade Karzai to stand in a run-off, praising his "statesmanship", they failed to nail down the participation of Abdullah Abdullah, runner-up in the first round who quit the contest on Sunday.
There had been expectations that US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would fly to Afghanistan over the weekend after a trip to neighbouring Pakistan.
But Clinton never made it to Kabul and was in Abu Dhabi by the time Abdullah's camp was making it clear that their man would not take part.
Asked whether the outcome of a run-off with only one candidate would result in a legitimate government, Clinton appeared unfazed by such as prospect, saying such situations were "not unprecedented" and occur in the United States.
But after the election commission decided to scrap the poll, the US embassy in Kabul said it welcomed the cancellation.
A European diplomat said the pressure on Karzai to compete in the second round was prompted by a desire to make him acknowledge the large-scale fraud that dogged the first round.
"What was important was to make Karzai admit he had not won in the first round," said the diplomat.
However, Karzai was then able to keep the electoral institutions, which oversaw the rigging in August, intact for the second round -- prompting Abdullah to conclude the contest would again be tilted against him.
Peter Galbraith, Eide's deputy until a major fallout after the first round, says it was clear that fraud would have played "as large a part in the presidential runoff voting as it did in the original August balloting".
"Eide is the victim of his past passivity," he wrote in the LA Times.
Haroun Mir, head of Afghanistan's Centre for Research and Policy Studies, said the UN made a series of mistakes and was guilty of "a lack of management and incompetence", with Eide failing to tackle concerns about vote-rigging.
"Eide wanted to cover up to show the process was successful," he told AFP.
The sight of Karzai announcing the run-off alongside Kerry and Eide also reinforced the perception in Afghanistan that the president was taking his orders from foreign powers.
Faheem Dashty, editor of The Kabul Weekly, said such an overt display of influence was unfortunate.
"For a young democracy such as ours, there is a need sometimes for pressure," he told AFP.
"But when the pressure is so public and open, this gives a very negative impression to the people of Afghanistan that we are not independent," he said.
Mir said, however, that the United States knew exactly what they were doing by putting Karzai in his place as it wanted him weakened.
"Now I think Karzai is very weak and he is not able to fight back when there is pressure on him," said Mir. "I think this is what the US wanted from the beginning."
LONDON (AFP) –
The leading stock exchange climbed higher on Monday, after much better-than-expected US data helped ease concerns the economic recovery could falter and threaten recent sustained gains.
London's FTSE 100 index of leading shares was up 1.19 percent to 5,104.50 points.
The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) was the most traded stock, seeing 247 million units change hands, followed by telecom giant Vodafone, which saw 118 million shares switch owners.
Gold miner Randgold Resources was top of the leader board, gaining 236 pence -- or 5.96 percent -- to close at 4196.
It was followed by miner Eurasian Natural Resources, up 45.50 pence -- or 5.46 percent -- to close at 879.
On the downside, RBS was the day's biggest loser, dropping 3.27 pence -- or 7.80 percent -- to close at 38.65.
It was followed by property firm Hammerson, which lost 14 pence -- or 3.45 percent -- to close at 392.20.
PHILADELPHIA – Cole Hamels isn't ready to call it a season.
Hamels wants to pitch again if the Philadelphia Phillies need him against the New York Yankees in the World Series. It would be the struggling left-hander's turn to take the mound in Game 7 on Thursday.
Hamels angered fans and created a stir on talk radio with his comments after his latest poor outing Saturday night. He clarified those remarks after the Phillies avoided elimination with an 8-6 victory in Game 5 on Monday night.
"Sometimes I might not say the best things or the smartest things, but I've learned and am learning," Hamels said. "I wasn't able to sleep the past couple of nights because of it."
Hamels allowed five runs over 4 1-3 innings in an 8-5 loss in Game 3. Last year's World Series and NLCS MVP, he's 1-2 with a 7.58 ERA in four starts this postseason after going 10-11 in the regular season.
"I can't wait for it to end," Hamels said after the game. "It's been mentally draining. At year's end, you just can't wait for a fresh start."
Many took that comment and ran with it. But Hamels talked for about 30 minutes to groups of reporters and also said he looked forward to the possibility of redeeming his season in Game 7.
Hamels reached out to manager Charlie Manuel to make sure they were on the same page.
"I went to Charlie just to talk to him because that's who I am, and I think he understands that," Hamels said. "I just wanted to tell him my true thoughts — that I'll never ever quit. I want to play this game until somebody takes it away from me.
"I think Charlie knows me. He has managed me for quite a few years. I think the only doubt it left in people's minds were the fans, and you know, it hurts. I love the city of Philadelphia, I play as hard as I possibly can. I might not necessarily have the results that they hope (for), but I know that if I go out there, and do everything I possibly can, and in the end they see (that), then I think they can respect that."
WASHINGTON – The health care bill headed for a vote in the House this week costs $1.2 trillion or more over a decade, according to numerous Democratic officials and figures contained in an analysis by congressional budget experts, far higher than the $900 billion cited by President Barack Obama as a price tag for his reform plan.
While the Congressional Budget Office has put the cost of expanding coverage in the legislation at roughly $1 trillion, Democrats added billions more on higher spending for public health, a reinsurance program to hold down retiree health costs, payments for preventive services and more.
Many of the additions are designed to improve benefits or ease access to coverage in government programs. The officials who provided overall cost estimates did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not authorized to discuss them.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has referred repeatedly to the bill's net cost of $894 billion over a decade for coverage.
Asked about the higher estimate, Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said the measure not only insures 36 million more Americans, it provides critical health insurance reform in a way that is fiscally sound.
"It will not add one dime to the deficit. In fact, the CBO said last week that it will reduce the deficit both in the first 10 years and in the second 10 years," Daly said.
Democrats have been intent on passing legislation this year to implement Obama's call for expanded coverage for millions, curbs on industry abuses and provisions to slow the rate of growth of health care costs nationally.
"Now, add it all up, and the plan I'm proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years," the president said in a nationally televised speech in early September.
Whatever the final cost of legislation, the calendar is working increasingly against the White House and Democrats. While a House vote is possible late this week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., may not be able to begin debate on the issue until the week before Thanksgiving. Additionally, the Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, has hinted at efforts to extend the debate for weeks if not months, a timetable that could extend into 2010.
One casualty of the time crunch and threatened Republican delaying tactics may be formal House-Senate negotiations on a final compromise. An alternative is a less formal hurry-up final negotiation involving the White House and senior Democrats.
Pelosi and her lieutenants worked on last-minute changes in the measure to ease concerns among opponents of abortion and a contentious provision relating to illegal immigrants. Conservative Democrats have expressed concern about the cost of the bill, and an evening closed-door meeting gave the leadership its first chance to hear their response.
The bill includes an option for a government-run health plan.
The leadership can afford more than two dozen defections and still be assured of the votes to prevail on the bill, one of the most sweeping measures in recent years.
Republicans put the cost of the bill at nearly $1.3 trillion.
"Our goal is to make it as difficult as possible for" Democrats to pass it, House Republican leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said at a news conference. "We believe it is the wrong prescription."
One day after announcing Republicans would have an alternative measure, Boehner offered few details. He said it would omit one of the central provisions in Democratic bills — a ban on the insurance industry's practice of denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions. Instead, he said the Republicans would encourage creation of insurance pools for high-risk individuals and take other steps to ease their access to coverage.
Boehner also said Republicans would propose limits on medical malpractice lawsuits in what he said was an attempt to reduce the cost of coverage.
Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., the third-ranking leader, said that Democrats looked at their bill as a way to advance universal coverage. In contrast, he said, Republicans "believe the real issue back home is cost" of insurance, and said their alternative would be designed to tackle it.
Democrats have made elimination of the industry's practice a linchpin of their drive to overhaul the health care system. The industry has said it would not fight the change, and an accompanying restriction on its ability to charge higher premiums for certain groups, as the legislation includes a requirement for individuals to purchase insurance. Lacking that, the industry says millions of relatively healthy individuals would refuse to pay for coverage until they became sick, and the cost of premiums would rise sharply for everyone else.
Republicans oppose any government requirements for individuals to purchase insurance or for businesses to provide coverage.
The Congressional Budget Office is seen by lawmakers as the arbiter of claims about the costs and effects of proposed legislation, and the agency has been under intense pressure in recent weeks to compete assessments on several bills circulating in House and Senate.
In a letter last week, the agency's director, Dr. Douglas Elmendorf, said the net cost of expanding coverage in the House measure was estimated at $894 billion over 10 years, a figure reflecting a gross total of $1 trillion in federal subsidies as well as other spending.
The letter contained no similar assessment for the balance of the legislation and it was not clear when or whether one would be forthcoming.
In a letter last week to Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., on the general subject of health care, Elmendorf cautioned that some provisions in legislation have elements that raise costs and elements that lower costs.
"Tabulating all of the aspects of the proposal that would, in isolation, increase federal outlays would be complicated and would require somewhat arbitrary judgments" about calculating overall costs, Elmendorf said.
