10.11.07

California in play!

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:20 pm by

I’d say sorry for setting you off like that, except that it’d be, you know, a lie and all.

Anyway, things are going to be a little bit different in California’s GOP primaries this year:

GOP hunts for delegates in California

By GLEN JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer 59 minutes ago
[snip]
California Republicans have instituted new rules for awarding delegates to their 2008 national nominating convention, prompting their party’s White House hopefuls to pursue a counterintuitive strategy of seeking GOP votes in Democratic strongholds like Waters’ district.
[snip]
The payoff three convention delegates per district is the same the candidates would receive if they prevail in heavily Republican districts, but the cost and energy needed to compete in the Democratic districts is much less than a more widespread media campaign.
[snip]
In the past, the California GOP awarded convention delegates on a winner-take-all basis. The candidate getting the most votes statewide got all the state’s delegates.

Read on.

This looks like - at least from an outsider’s point of view - something that could shake up Californian politics quite a bit. As noted above, the old system would assign delegates based on who won statewide; as a practical matter, this meant that in the very GOP-light districts it didn’t particularly matter who you and your neighbors voted for. If the delegate was for your guy, it was pretty much by accident.

Under this new system… well, while I don’t think that it’s going to affect the final delegate total all that much (the campaigns appear to be well aware of this change, and are shaping tactics to match) it will have some effect on the way the GOP treats California. Right now we treat CA as a potential spoiler state for Presidential elections: our opponents are not quite certain that they can simply ignore the GOP there, and losing CA’s electoral votes would be a disaster for them, so we can bleed Democratic coffers white every four years making them play defense.

All of this is fun, no question about it - but CA is a State that we could win*. Will reminding beleaguered Republicans in San Francisco and Los Angeles that the Party actually does care about their opinion on who should be President make that happen? Not a chance. Is it a good first step in a campaign to rebuild the Party in those districts? Yes, actually, it is.

Should be interesting to see: now if we can just get CA’s EVs apportioned by district winners, too. Tell you what, Democrats: I’ll endorse doing TX and FL if you stop logrolling CA. Any takers? No? Tsk, tsk, tsk…

Moe Lane

*No State is beyond the reach of either Party. The Democrats could take Texas or Georgia. The Republicans could win Massachusetts or Illinois. We’ve/they’ve done it in the past; we/they can do it again.

Originaly from Source

Rep. Bartlett to Democrats: I Won’t Switch on SCHIP

Posted in Uncategorized at 10:31 pm by

Pressure from congressional Democrats isn’t going to sway Rep. Roscoe Bartlett into voting for an expansion of government-run health care. The Maryland Republican, who was the only member of the state’s congressional delegation to side with President Bush in the debate over SCHIP, told Democrats that he’s not switching his vote. Bartlett is one of the Democrats’ targets in their quest to sway enough Republicans to override Bush’s veto.

Congressional Democrat leaders have delayed a vote to override the Presidents veto of their plan to expand the S-CHIP program. They have singled me out as a target by lobbyists of special interests group, such as labor unions.

Only Democrat Congressional leaders could demand that a family earning $82,000 a year could qualify for their expanded S-CHIP program and simultaneously call that same family rich enough to force them to pay the AMT, Alternative Minimum Tax. It just goes to show that what Democrats really want is to have the government control how to spend the money that American taxpayers earn.

I want to thank Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid for recognizing that I cast the only correct vote in the Maryland delegation against the Democrat version of S-CHIP. Im proud that I voted to create the bipartisan S-CHIP program in 1997. I support continuing S-CHIP health insurance for all children of the working poor, but that is not what this debate is about.

Democrats are demanding that S-CHIP be expanded because they want to force government-controlled, taxpayer-paid health coverage onto middle-class and upper-class families who already have private health care coverage that they themselves control. The Democrat S-CHIP bill is a crucial step toward achieving their ultimate goal of universal health care, that is government-controlled health care that Americans soundly reject.

Read the rest of this entry »

Somebody(-bodies?) at MSNBC is a lying coward who thinks you are stupid

Posted in Uncategorized at 9:40 pm by

In the dining facility here in Kuwait, “Hardball” was on the TV (yes, at least 2 hours of MSNBC are played on Armed Forces Network-News channel, including Matthews and Olbermann).

For the entirety of a ten-minute segment on SCHIP (featuring Pat Buchanan and some Air America (fe?)male, the graphic on the page exclusively said, “Bush Vetoes Kids Healthcare.”

That’s it. That’s all. Pathetic.

Read the rest of this entry »

Mitt Romney and Rush Limbaugh

Posted in Uncategorized at 8:50 pm by

Mitt Romney has been criticized here on RedState and in other places for this statement, issued by Romney spokesman Kevin Madden to the Huffington Post, which criticizes Rush Limbaugh on the basis of what he did not say. As regular readers of this site will know, nobody is quicker to knock Mitt Romney than I am, but I was encouraged last night to contact the campaign and get their statement on the matter, in the interest of fairness. I was interested to see if perhaps the campaign was speaking from an incorrect understanding of the facts about what Rush actually said, and if they would stand behind the original statement if they were apprised of the true facts in this case.

The response I got from the campaign directed me to this YouTube link, which documents Governor Romney’s appearance on the Hugh Hewitt show last night, in which he discussed the Rush Limbaugh brouhaha. A transcript of the relevant portion of the interview is below the fold. I have been told by the campaign that these statements are the true feelings of Governor Romney on the matter, and should be interpreted as the campaign’s actual position. To the extent that Kevin Madden’s statement to the Huffington Post contradicts the Governor’s own words, of course the Governor’s own words should control.

Although the Romney campaign has not said this, I’m guessing that Madden was ambushed with a question that went something like, “Rush Limbaugh said that soldiers in Iraq who are criticizing the Iraq war are ‘phony soldiers.’ Does the Governor support such rhetoric?” My personal feeling is that if you get a question like that from the Huffington Post, the answer should be, “Let me get back to you,” so that I could check to make sure that the basis of the question was accurate, but this mistake - if that is indeed what happened - should not, in fairness be imputed to Romney. I think, in fairness, that what appears below the fold is probably what he would have said all along, if he knew the facts of the case.

More below the fold…

HUGH HEWITT: Morning glory and evening grace, America, its Hugh Hewitt, thanks for listening, what a strange, strange year its going to begin to be in politics. A week ago, on September 26, Rush Limbaugh, speaking on his program, denounced a phony soldier, a guy who is actually serving time in jail now for pretending to be a veteran and an anti-war veteran at that. He picked up on a story that had been on ABC News two days earlier and then this week, the lefties out there, beginning with Hillarys front group Media Matters, begin to attack him on it. And then the Harry Reids of the world take to the Senate floor to denounce Rush Limbaugh and Rush has been talking about it. I catch up now with former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney to talk about new media and this political climate. Governor, always a pleasure to talk to you.

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Thank you, Hugh, good to be with you.

HEWITT: Thanks for joining us. Have you been able to follow this story?

GOV. ROMNEY: Well, you know you sort of follow it from afar as youre going from place to place and I think anybody who looks at the story, hears what Rush Limbaugh has to say, which of course makes perfect sense; he was referring to this soldier who had doctored up his resume, was a phony solider and he was critical of that soldier and he had every right to be critical of that soldier. And its amazing to watch the Democrats turn that into something which clearly he had not intended to make it. And certainly for his explanation people should say, Oh, okay, I understand what you were saying what you mean I understand the context, and thats finethe truth of the matter is, Rush Limbaugh supports our troops and supports the rights for American to express their views. After all, he does that very thing day in and day out.

Originaly from Source

“How Many Children Will be Dead” — Are you kidding me?

Posted in Uncategorized at 8:01 pm by

Its predictable: when your ideology requires you to justify every tax-and-spend growth of government with the statement its for the children, it would only be natural for you to do what the Democrats and their amen chorus in the liberal media are doing about the Presidents veto of the SCHIP (State Childrens Health Insurance Program) renewal legislation. If you listen only to them, youd conclude that the President is against the welfare of poor American children and is using the money they need for healthcare to fund the War in Iraq.

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) has called the Dems accusations about the SCHIP veto “over the top, borderline ridiculous rhetoric” and hes absolutely right. Boehner’s office has put together some of the irresponsible and absurd things Democrats have said recently to distort the SCHIP debate.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) on the House floor asked how many children will be dead or will suffer with disease and disability until enough members of this Congress are willing to stand up to the President

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) cited a biblical reference saying that President Bush would bring new meaning to the phrase suffer little children upon veto of the bill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told reporters she telephoned President Bush on Friday to tell him she was praying for him” to sign the Dem SCHIP bill.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) after the veto said President Bush used his cruel veto pen to say I forbid 10 million children from getting the health benefits they deserve.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) said the veto is a stunning lack of compassion for some of the most vulnerable members of our society.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) called the President heartless for vetoing the bill and rhetorically wondered how he could sleep at night.

House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) accused Republicans of telling children to take a hike when it comes to healthcare

Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) stated today on the House floor that the Axis of Evil isnt just in the Middle East, its just down here on Pennsylvania Avenue.

Once again liberal Democrats petition on emotion avoiding facts in order to manipulate the public and push their agenda.

Read the rest of this entry »

Why Is FamiliesUSA Putting Politics Ahead of Kids?

Posted in Uncategorized at 12:00 am by

FamiliesUSA wants you to think President Bush hates kids in a new ad about yesterday’s SCHIP veto.

I’ve said all along that the right’s position on SCHIP would be portrayed that way. What disturbs me most about the FamiliesUSA ad is that the organization says it wants to “get something done,” but isn’t at all interested in a compromise. In reality, FamiliesUSA wants to impose government-run health care on America. Take, for instance, the language on its petition to Congress:

Unless you act to overturn President Bush’s veto, 10 million children will lose their health coverage. Our children count on us to protect them. We expect our elected leaders to remember that. I strongly urge you to override President Bush’s veto of health care for America’s children.

So let’s get this straight: FamiliesUSA’s idea of “get[ting] something done” on SCHIP includes just one option — overriding Bush’s veto. Where’s the good-faith effort to come to the table and talk about alternatives to the Democrats’ plan? And, if FamiliesUSA really cares about kids, why hasn’t the group engaged in the discussion of offering tax credits to families who fall between 200% and 300% of the federal poverty level?

Instead of shilling for congressional Democrats, FamiliesUSA should drop the spin and help find a solution.

Read the rest of this entry »

10.10.07

Justice Scalia on “24″

Posted in Uncategorized at 11:12 pm by

This video from Slate is hilarious.

H/T WSJ Law Blog.

Read the rest of this entry »

Republicans Talk a Good Game on SCHIP, but Will It Matter?

Posted in Uncategorized at 10:22 pm by

Senate Republican leaders Mitch McConnell and Trent Lott are planning unveil an SCHIP bill today that will look and sound familiar. That’s because it’s the one McConnell and Lott peddled earlier this year. It flopped then and it’s likely to flop now. So why waste the time?

In the aftermath of President Bush’s veto of the $35-billion expansion of SCHIP yesterday, congressional Republicans talked a good game, but now that it’s time to act, Senate GOP leaders appear hesitant to embrace an alternative that would have a realistic chance of bringing lawmakers to the table to negotiate.

For months, such a plan didn’t exist. The one offered by McConnell and Lott is basically an extension of SCHIP as it currently exists with a few other changes. It may have sailed through in a Republican-controlled Congress but stands no chance of passing today. By offering their bill again, McConnell and Lott have chosen to stick their heads in the sand and pretend SCHIP will just go away. At a time when Republicans should be looking for ways to bring their own into the fold — namely Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) — their leadership is showing no effort to do so.

What’s so sad is that after months without a viable alternative, Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) has legislation to fill that void. Martinez’s plan offers tax credits to families who fall between 200% and 300% of the federal poverty level. It’s a way to satisfy concerns from conservatives about government-run health care and it appeases liberals who want to make sure more families get help for health insurance.

Although McConnell and Lott have decided to ignore it, House Republicans appear headed in the opposite direction. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), ranking member on the Energy & Commerce Committee, is working on the plan with Martinez. When I asked Minority Leader John Boehner about it yesterday, he was familiar with the details of the plan and suggested Republicans could move in that direction.

I’ve had a briefing on the Martinez bill, and clearly something like that is of interest to us. And as we get through the next several days of this fight, there may be further steps that we’ll take.

If Republicans stand any shot of prevailing in the fight over SCHIP, they need to have a viable alternative. The Martinez plan appears to be their best bet.

Read the rest of this entry »

Summary Estimates for Multinational Companies: Employment, Sales, and Capital Expenditures for 2005

Posted in Uncategorized at 9:31 pm by

FOR WIRE TRANSMISSION: 8:30 A.M. EDT, THURSDAY, APRIL 19, 2007

Ray Mataloni: 	(202) 606-9867				     BEA 07-15

Summary Estimates for Multinational Companies:
Employment, Sales, and Capital Expenditures for 2005

U.S. multinational companies (MNCs) employed 30.5 million workers
worldwide in 2005, of which 21.5 million were employed in the United
States by U.S. parent companies and 9.1 million were employed abroad
by their majority-owned foreign affiliates.  The employment in the
United States by U.S. parents accounted for almost one-fifth of total
U.S. employment in private industries.  Worldwide capital expenditures
by U.S. MNCs totaled $478.1 billion; capital expenditures in the United
States by U.S. parents accounted for $340.8 billion and capital
expenditures abroad by majority-owned foreign affiliates accounted
for $137.3 billion.  Sales by U.S. parent companies totaled $7,606.1
billion, and those by majority-owned foreign affiliates totaled
$3,761.9 billion.

Majority-owned U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs employed 5.1 million
workers in 2005, accounting for 4.5 percent of total U.S. employment
in private industries.  Capital expenditures by these affiliates
totaled $120.9 billion and their sales totaled $2,507.6 billion.

Worldwide employment by U.S. MNCs increased 1.8 percent in 2005,
following a 2.2-percent increase in 2004.  Employment in the United
States by U.S. parent companies increased 1.1 percent, following a
0.6-percent increase.  Employment abroad by the majority-owned
foreign affiliates of U.S. MNCs increased 3.6 percent, following a
6.1-percent increase.  Employment in the United States by
majority-owned U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs decreased 0.7 percent
in 2005, following a 2.0-percent decrease in 2004.

Worldwide capital expenditures of U.S. MNCs increased 15.2 percent in
2005, following a decrease of 2.4 percent in 2004.  The increase
reflected a 15.3-percent increase in capital spending in the United
States by U.S. parent companies, following a decrease of 6.3 percent;
capital spending abroad by majority-owned foreign affiliates increased
14.9 percent, following a 9.0-percent increase.  For majority-owned U.S.
affiliates of foreign MNCs, capital expenditures increased 7.1 percent
in 2005, following a 3.5-percent increase in 2004.

Sales by U.S. parent companies increased 8.7 percent, following a
6.9-percent increase in 2004, and sales by majority-owned foreign
affiliates increased 14.4 percent, following a 14.8-percent increase.
Sales by majority-owned U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs increased 8.8
percent, following an increase of 8.6 percent.

Employment in the United States by U.S. parent companies accounted for
70 percent of the worldwide employment of U.S. MNCs in 2005, down from
71 percent in 2004.  The U.S.-parent share of the worldwide capital
expenditures of U.S. MNCs in 2005 was 71 percent, the same share as
in 2004.

The U.S.-parent share of MNC activity can change for a number of
reasons, and the changes do not uniformly correspond to either
additions to, or subtractions from, employment and capital expenditures
in the United States.  Examples of factors other than production
shifting that might be associated with a change in the parent and
affiliate shares of MNC activity include different rates of economic
growth in the United States and in specific markets where investment
is occurring abroad, or the creation of new market opportunities
abroad that cannot be served by exports from the United States.
Additional discussion of data and analytical considerations may be
found in A Note on Patterns of Production and Employment by U.S.
Multinational Companies, in the March 2004 issue of the Survey of
Current Business.

Revisions.--The MNC estimates for 2004 presented in this release
supercede preliminary estimates that were released in the
second half of 2006.  For U.S. parent companies, the estimates of
employment were revised down 0.6 percent, the estimates of capital
expenditures were revised down 4.3 percent, and the estimates of
sales were revised up 0.7 percent.  For majority-owned foreign
affiliates, the estimates of employment were revised up 1.5 percent,
the estimates of capital expenditures were revised down 2.9 percent,
and the estimates of sales were revised up 1.5 percent.  For
majority-owned U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs, the estimates of
employment were revised up 0.5 percent, the estimates of capital
expenditures were revised up 4.4 percent, and the estimates of sales
were revised up 0.1 percent.  The upward revision for capital
expenditures by majority-owned U.S. affiliates was largely due to late
reports for newly acquired affiliates, including companies in
automotive equipment rental and leasing (see definition of capital
expenditures in the technical note).

*   *   *

TECHNICAL NOTE

For the fourth consecutive year, the Bureau of Economic Analysis is
releasing advance summary estimates of employment, sales, and capital
expenditures by U.S. parent companies, by their foreign affiliates,
and by U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs.  Estimates based on more
complete source data, including country and industry detail, will be
released later this year.

The estimates presented in this release were constructed from data
collected by BEA in two distinct surveys of MNC operations: (1) a
survey of U.S. MNCs that covers the operations of both U.S. parent
companies and their foreign affiliates, and (2) a survey of the
operations of U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs.  Because a U.S. parent
company may itself be foreign-owned, there is some overlap between the
data on U.S. parent companies and on U.S. affiliates; thus, to avoid
duplication, data on U.S. parents and U.S. affiliates should not be
added together to produce U.S. totals.

The estimates presented here pertain to nonbank U.S. parent companies
and their majority-owned nonbank foreign affiliates, and to
majority-owned nonbank U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs.  Data on all
nonbank U.S. and foreign affiliates, including affiliates that are not
majority-owned, will be presented in the Survey of Current Business
later this year.  (In these data series, affiliates are defined as
businesses in which an investor of another country holds at least
10-percent ownership.)

The most recent data show that nonbank foreign affiliates that were not
majority-owned employed 1.4 million workers, and nonbank U.S.
affiliates that were not majority-owned employed 0.4 million workers,
in 2004.  Data on bank parents and affiliates are currently collected
only in benchmark surveys, which are conducted once every five years.
To close this gap in coverage, BEA is proposing to extend the coverage
of its annual surveys of MNC operations to include banks, with an
annual time series of data beginning for 2007.

Based on data from the 1999 Benchmark Survey of U.S. Direct Investment
Abroad (the 2004 benchmark covered banks, but the results released to
date have covered only nonbanks),  U.S. bank parents employed 1.0
million workers, and foreign affiliates of U.S. bank parents, plus bank
affiliates of U.S. nonbank parents, together employed 0.2 million
workers.  (Data for U.S. parents and foreign affiliates in banking will
be included in the presentation of final results from the 2004
benchmark survey.)  The most recent data on U.S. affiliates in banking
cover the benchmark-survey year 2002:  These data show that U.S.
affiliates that were banks employed 0.1 million workers in 2002.  For
both U.S. bank affiliates of foreign companies and foreign bank
affiliates of U.S. companies, almost all of the employment was by
majority-owned affiliates.

For both U.S. MNCs and U.S. affiliates of foreign MNCs, the estimates
of employment cover the total number of full-time and part-time
employees on the payroll at the end of the year.  The estimates of
sales cover gross sales minus returns, allowances and discounts, or
gross operating revenues.  The estimates of capital expenditures cover
total expenditures on property, plant, and equipment (that is,
expenditures for land and depreciable structures and equipment); they
are gross of any sales, retirements, or transfers of previously owned
tangible assets.  Capital expenditures include spending for equipment
that is leased or rented to others, which in some industriessuch as
automotive equipment rental and leasingcan be very large (the value
of sales, retirements, or transfers in these industries also can be
very large).

In addition to presenting data collected directly in its surveys of MNC
operations, BEA uses data collected on costs incurred and profits
earned in production to estimate the value added of U.S. parent
companies, of majority-owned foreign affiliates, and of majority-owned
U.S. affiliates of foreign companies.  Value added estimates indicate
the contribution of parents or affiliates to gross domestic product
in the United States or in foreign host countries.  The latest
estimates of the value added of U.S. parent companies and
majority-owned foreign affiliates, which cover the year 2004, are
presented in "Operations of U.S. Multinational Companies: Preliminary
Results from the 2004 Benchmark Survey," in the November 2006 issue of
the Survey of Current Business.  The latest estimates of the value
added of majority-owned U.S. affiliates of foreign companies, which
also cover 2004, are presented in "U.S. Affiliates of Foreign Companies:
Operations in 2004," in the August 2006 issue of the Survey.

*   *   *

Summary BEA estimates are available on recorded messages at the
time of public release at the following telephone numbers

(202) 606-5306    Gross domestic product
(202) 606-5303    Personal income and outlays

BEA's national, regional, international, and industry estimates,
the Survey of Current Business, and BEA news releases are available
on BEA's Web site at www.bea.gov.  By visiting the site, you can also
subscribe to receive free e-mail summaries of BEA releases and
announcements.

*   *   *

Table 1. Employment, Capital Expenditures, and Sales by Nonbank U.S. Multinational Companies, 1988-2005
                     Thousands of employees              Millions of dollars
                         U.S.        U.S.     Majority-  Capital expenditures/1/               Sales/2/
                     multinationa  parents      owned        U.S.        U.S.     Majority-      U.S.     Majority-
                      companies                foreign   multinationa  parents      owned      parents      owned
                                              affiliates  companies                foreign                 foreign
                                                                                  affiliates              affiliates
1988 ................    22,498.1    17,737.6     4,760.5     223,814     177,203      46,611   2,828,209     927,886
1989 ................    23,879.4    18,765.4     5,114.0     260,488     201,808      58,680   3,136,837   1,019,966
1990 ................    23,785.7    18,429.7     5,356.0     274,614     213,079      61,535   3,243,721   1,208,349
1991 ................    23,345.4    17,958.9     5,386.5     269,221     206,290      62,931   3,252,534   1,242,635
1992 ................    22,812.0    17,529.6     5,282.4     272,049     208,834      63,215   3,330,886   1,291,649
1993 ................    22,760.2    17,536.9     5,223.3     271,661     207,437      64,224   3,480,778   1,275,775
1994 ................    24,272.5    18,565.4     5,707.1     303,364     231,917      71,447   3,990,013   1,435,901
1995 ................    24,499.7    18,576.2     5,923.5     323,616     248,017      75,599   4,235,578   1,693,836
1996 ................    24,867.0    18,790.0     6,077.0     340,510     260,048      80,462   4,478,970   1,868,588
1997 ................    26,358.0    19,878.0     6,480.0     398,037     309,247      88,790   4,886,330   1,972,515
1998 ................    26,592.9    19,819.8     6,773.1     411,155     317,184      93,971   4,970,138   1,971,909
1999/3/ .............    30,772.6    23,006.8     7,765.8     483,032     369,728     113,304   5,975,478   2,218,945
2000 ................    32,056.6    23,885.2     8,171.4     506,950     396,313     110,637   6,695,166   2,507,433
2001 ................    30,929.2    22,735.1     8,194.1     524,215     413,457     110,758   6,800,777   2,524,459
2002 ................    30,373.2    22,117.6     8,255.6     443,388     333,113     110,275   6,337,779   2,515,641
2003 ................    29,347.0    21,104.8     8,242.2     425,068     315,480     109,588   6,543,937   2,865,226
2004/4/ .............    29,987.8    21,241.0     8,746.8     415,038     295,565     119,473   6,998,298   3,288,364
2005/5/ .............    30,536.7    21,479.0     9,057.7     478,077     340,761     137,316   7,606,129   3,761,864

Percent change at
annual rates:

1988-2002 ...........         2.2         1.6         4.0         5.0         4.6         6.3         5.9         7.4
2002-2003 ...........        -3.4        -4.6        -0.2        -4.1        -5.3        -0.6         3.3        13.9
2003-2004 ...........         2.2         0.6         6.1        -2.4        -6.3         9.0         6.9        14.8
2004-2005 ...........         1.8         1.1         3.6        15.2        15.3        14.9         8.7        14.4

  1. Total expenditures for property, plant, and equipment.
  2. An MNC-wide total for sales is not provided because transactions among and within MNCs would be duplicated.
  3. Break-in-series.  (See the technical note on page 121 of the December 2002 issue of the Survey of Current Business for details.)
  4. These estimates update those published in the November 2006 issue of the Survey of Current Business.  (Those estimates, in turn,
updated the advance summary estimates released on April 20, 2006.)  Revised estimates based on more complete source data
will be released later this year.
  5. Advance estimates.  Preliminary estimates based on more complete source data will be released later this year.

  NOTE: The data presented in this table cover nonbank U.S. MNCs only.  Bank parents and affiliates are not required
to report in BEA's annual surveys of the operations of U.S. MNCs.  Some limited data on the operations of
bank parents and affiliates (including employment and sales) are reported in benchmark surveys of U.S. direct investment
abroad conducted by BEA every five years.  (See the Technical Note.)

*   *   *

Table 2. U.S.-Parent Share of Selected Measures of the Operations
of Nonbank U.S. Multinational Companies

    [Percent]

                 Employment  Capital
                            expenditures
1988 ............       78.8       79.2
1989 ............       78.6       77.5
1990 ............       77.5       77.6
1991 ............       76.9       76.6
1992 ............       76.8       76.8
1993 ............       77.1       76.4
1994 ............       76.5       76.4
1995 ............       75.8       76.6
1996 ............       75.6       76.4
1997 ............       75.4       77.7
1998 ............       74.5       77.1
1999 ............       74.8       76.5
2000 ............       74.5       78.2
2001 ............       73.5       78.9
2002 ............       72.8       75.1
2003 ............       71.9       74.2
2004/1/ .........       70.8       71.2
2005/2/ .........       70.3       71.3
  1. These estimates update those published in the
November 2006 issue of the Survey of Current Business.
 (Those estimates, in turn, updated the advance summary estimates
released on April 20, 2006.)  Revised estimates
based on more complete source data will be
released later this year.
 2. Advance estimates.  Preliminary estimates based
on more complete source data will be released
later this year.
NOTE: A U.S.-parent share for sales is not provided because an
MNC-wide total for sales would contain duplication resulting from
transactions among and within MNCs.

*   *   *

Table 3. Employment, Capital Expenditures, and Sales by Majority-Owned
      Nonbank U.S. Affiliates of Foreign Companies, 1988-2005

                              Thousands   Millions of dollars
                                  of          Capital        Sales
                              employees   Expenditures/1/

1988 .......................       3,119.0          42,355     739,128
1989 .......................       3,573.4          51,490     863,538
1990 .......................       3,841.7          61,812     995,013
1991 .......................       3,991.3          60,097   1,008,388
1992 .......................       3,903.9          52,787   1,049,942
1993 .......................       3,851.7          53,371   1,112,693
1994 .......................       3,954.0          60,317   1,210,837
1995 .......................       4,022.6          64,778   1,311,210
1996 .......................       4,155.6          77,890   1,423,715
1997 .......................       4,269.1          88,313   1,478,221
1998 .......................       4,669.5         109,365   1,622,946
1999 .......................       5,064.3         114,767   1,792,520
2000 .......................       5,656.5         112,986   2,051,878
2001 .......................       5,594.3         121,665   2,070,234
2002 ......................       5,425.4         111,373   2,030,962
2003 .......................       5,244.4         109,126   2,122,683
2004 /2/  ..................       5,141.5         112,915   2,304,949
2005 /3/ ...................       5,103.2         120,883   2,507,588

     Percent change at
       annual rates:

1988-2002 ..................           4.0             7.1         7.5
2002-2003 ..................          -3.3            -2.0         4.5
2003-2004 ..................          -2.0             3.5         8.6
2004-2005 ..................          -0.7             7.1         8.8

  1. Total expenditures for property, plant, and equipment.
  2. These estimates update those published in the August 2006 issue of the Survey of Current Business.  (Those estimates, in
turn, updated the advance summary estimates released on April 20, 2006.)  Revised estimates will be released later
this year.
  3. Advance estimates.  Preliminary estimates based on more complete source data will be released later this year.

  NOTES: The data presented in this table cover nonbank affiliates only.  Bank affiliates are not required to report in BEA's annual
surveys of the operations of U.S. affiliates of foreign companies.  (See the Technical Note.)  Some limited data on the operations of
bank affiliates (including employment and sales) are reported in benchmark surveys conducted by BEA every five years.  The latest
benchmark survey results cover the year 2002.
  In contrast to the presentation in Table 1 for U.S. multinational companies (which includes data for U.S. parent companies), this
table does not include data on foreign parent companies or totals for foreign multinational companies, because they are not covered
in BEA's surveys.

Chart 1. U.S.-Parent Share of Employment by Nonbank U.S. Multinational Companies, 1988-2005

Chart 2. U.S.-Parent Share of Capital Expenditures by Nonbank U.S. Multinational Companies, 1988-2005
Read the rest of this entry »

U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Annual Revision for 2006

Posted in Uncategorized at 8:40 pm by

                       U.S. Census Bureau
                U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
                             NEWS
      U.S. Department of Commerce  Washington, D.C. 20230

                      FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
                 8:30 A.M. EDT FRIDAY, JUNE 8, 2007

CB07-82
BEA07-26
FT-900 (07-04)

For information on goods contact:
U.S. Census Bureau:
Nick Orsini    (301) 763-6959
Vanessa Ware   (301) 763-2311

For information on services contact:
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis:
Technical: Christopher Bach   (202) 606-9545
Media:      Ralph Stewart     (202) 606-2649

           U.S. INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN GOODS AND SERVICES
                       Annual Revision for 2006

                               NOTICE

In this release and the accompanying "U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services:
April 2007," the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
are jointly publishing revised data on U.S. trade in goods for 1997-2006 and the
first three months of 2007 and revised data on services for 2003-2006 and the first
three months of 2007.

Goods

The 2006 not seasonally adjusted Census-basis goods data were revised to redistribute
monthly data that arrived too late for inclusion in the month of transaction but that
were included, initially, in the month in which the data were received.  In addition,
corrections were made to previously published data.  Once the redistributions of data
to the proper month of transaction and corrections were completed, factors for seasonal
adjustments and trading day adjustments were recomputed and the seasonally adjusted
current-dollar series were revised for 2004-2006 and the first three months of 2007.
Similar changes were made to the chain-weighted dollar series.  Also, the balance of
payments adjustment to the Census-basis data for re-valuing some goods imports of
computer software from media to full value has been updated for 1997-2006 and the
first three months of 2007.

Services

The services estimates were revised for 2003-2006 and the first three months of 2007.
Most of the revisions resulted from the incorporation of results from BEA's quarterly
surveys.  Revisions from these sources have an impact mostly on receipts and payments
for 2005-2006.  The revisions to services receipts are larger than the revisions to
services payments.  Most of the revisions to services receipts are to "other private
services."  The revisions reflect results from recent BEA initiatives to better capture
movements of large and volatile categories of transactions, as well as to improve the
coverage of transactions.

Originaly from Source

« Previous entries · Next entries »