you talked about federalism, and given the willingness of the federal government to go to arizona with the emigration bill and the extensive web of red tape and financial dependence of states on federal government. what would you say is the first step an individual state could take to empower itself and a search federalism again? >> go to the supreme court. i speak with great support to the supreme court. i am a member of the federal judiciary. when four of nine justices of the supreme court agree with me case after case i don't feel totally out of harm's way. what we need to do is get people in congress, a majority who accept the premise that the federal government has gotten so unwieldy that it cannot effectively do very much constructively. it is distorting the whole system and threatening our freedoms. we have a huge amount of money from the federal government to the state's. if i were emperor for one session of congress, i would confer all existing grant and aid programs into block grants. one wrote and so on and phase them out over ten years. it will take that much time for state

of the federalism in which the federal government is excluded from intruding into telling the states how to run their own affairs. >> perhaps we could have a couple of questions from the audience. please. >> thanks, with senator scott brown's office. you talked about the power back to states and the federal government being too large. i think one of the areas republicans to but we differ with that approach is with regard to the a policy where the republican plan has been having to deal, having won drug policy for the nation and i was wondering how you settle those two things where you were on the states' different policy. >> - cubin .1 of the dangers. that is you are sitting here in the capitol of the united states. you've got all of this power and authority and i said something has got to be done and i know how to handle it. i'm going to do it and let's forget what the constitution requires. so even though i would agree, tend to agree this is such a national problem i think in terms of the overall health why should we deny the state of delaware or alaska the authority to decide on t

canada has no federal department of education. their kids do much better on international tests than do american kids. i don't think federal involvement in these local activities is the answer. >> brown: it's partly economics and partly politics here of course inescapably. when you get to the list that you've both been talking about, what happens politically? isn't that always somebody's sacred cow or somebody... some representative represents these. >> you're absolutely right. every single federal spending program has a special interest group that supports it. there is some heavy lifting involved in spending cuts. i wish the republicans would come out and give us more specifics. so far as we've seen republican leaders have been very shy about telling us exactly where they would want to cut. we don't know whether they'll be cutting across the board or cutting a specific program. certainly i think we need to get the federal government out of areas like k-12 education. the federal simply doesn't have the money anymore to fund these

then john gauge discusses how much federal employees are paid and the size of federal agencies. plus your e-mails and phone calls. "washington journal" is next. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] host: some of the latest of elements on this sunday morning, january 30. welcome to "washington journal". we will begin with the situation in egypt. and your phone calls. the area code -- 202 in washington, d.c. 202-737-0002 is our line for democrats. 202-737-0001 for republicans. if you are an independent, our number is 202-628-0205. the piece is called "inside the white house with," as the president begins to scrabble with the situation in egypt. the president has ben briefed. it has been going on for three straight days as the crisis gathered momentum. they are not all huddled in a big office, one of the administration's policy makers trying to calibrate the u.s. response. the story from newsweek.com. ethel joining us from new york city. caller: yes, i have been watching the situation there in egypt. and i

the only way that would happen is if this federal court reverses the federal circuit. >> so your view is the complete did not state their obligation to pay you? that required them to pay you? >> that is right, at that moment, they knew that. in fact they sent a bank letter saying please don't do that. then we entered into a deferment agreement. but we have an absolute right to that money right now, regardless. we don't need an affirmative decision forum this court to get that money. we're asking them to follow the high credit principle th --e hippocratic principle of doing no wrong or harm. >> if you are right, out with this follow with other contracts? >> that is right, it provides an offset. we don't actually have to seek the $1.35 billion dollars, we would just get that. >> you get the extra money without having to go to court. because they have to go to court to challenge the offset. >> and again, that is the contract which they signed. >> thank you. >> thank you, general. mr. phillips, you have three minutes. >> justice kennedy, i think this can be properly decided on federal com

reduce the federal work force by 16% and cut or eliminate more than 100 federal programs.guest: that's slash and burn. i do wish the president would really lay out what o economic situation is and how we got there. it wasn't discretionary spending that got us into this mess. president bush, with the faction cuts, and then the two wars, and the financial market, you know, president bush's plan and then prident obama's stimulus is what has led us to this federal deficit. it is not the employee salary. it is not the work of the agencies that constantly goes through this tightening effect. for people to say we are going to make up this deficit by slashing the 201, 2012 budget deficits, it is not serious. host:: it is 30% higher than a private sector employee, both salaries and benefits. and the second is irrespective of the economy, federal employees are less likely to be fired. guest: certainly in the heritage and "u.s.a. today" study they are comparing the federal salary to the private sector. that is wrong. we have 10 million or so people on minimum wage. when y consider th

federal spending. a balanced budget amendment would be the perfect tool for that, and it would protect future generations for, from this new administration to run rampant. like my fellow voters, like my fellow conservatives in this room i don't see storm clouds and sadness on the horizon. i happen to see some of our greatest days ahead of us. i see a bright, bright future, the future is contingent upon a return to our essential constitutional value and individual freedom. restoring a constitutional limited government will take a massive effort, but our people are more than equal to the task. surely, the people who were willing to die on foreign battlefields in the defense of freedom for others and sheltered complete stranger in the afterhath of storms like katrina that and ike have the heart and the compassion to tackle this with the continued influence of conservative groups like the heritage foundation and bold leaders from our elected class everywhere. we can surely recapture what is great about ame

these don't come from federal standards for federal regulation. they come from a partnership that would be led by the department of homeland security to build off of standards put in place by ines. it would add granularity to those standards by building best practicees by ensuring the private sector has the information it needs to make good decisions and as this relates to those most critical components of our critical infrastructure, if disrupted could cost thousands of lives, billions of dollars in damages, set of mechanisms for the federal government to interact as relates to those systems. our legislation worked primarily by building in performance requirements for those crucial components. we're not talking about the entire company's, entire systems. we're talking about particularly critical nodes in allowing the department working in conjunction with the private sector and other regulators to create risk based performance requirements that would allow those operators to shoes the systems within the framework established in partnership with t

the shooting of the federal employees. nbc's justice correspondent pete williams has more. pete, good evening. >> lester, tonight, federal officials say they found evidence in jared loughner's own handwriting indicating he intended congresswoman giffords to be the target of his shooting rampage. some of his former college classmates said they feared he would one day do something violent. when federal agents searched the tucson house where jared loughner lived, court documents say they found a safe with an envelope inside. written on it the fbi says were these words, quote, i planned ahead. my assassination and the name giffords along with what appears to be loughner's signature. linda sorenson of tucson says she's not surprised he's the suspect. six months ago when she was a classmate of his at pima college in tucson, she described him this way in an e-mail to a friend. she's one of those whose picture you see on the news after he has come into class with an automatic weapon. >> he alarmed me. his behavior was bizarre. i t

in 2009 alone federal agencies finalized 3500 federal regulations. the growth of regulation giving costs of american consumers and businesses. according to estimates, < mentioned several times to look cost of federal regulation exceeds a trillion and approaches $2 trillion a year. this is more than americans pay in individual income tax. in so far as substantial costs they operate like a hidden tax. regulations may be necessary. they may address public bills and public benefits, but these benefits may be worthwhile to have these regulations but that doesn't mean they are free. the fact the regulations like taxes can impose substantial costs and generate substantial benefits makes it that much more important that there be political accountability for federal regulatory decisions. increasing the scope of federal regulation was facilitated by the legislative practice of delegating substantial regulatory authority and policy discretion to the administrative agencies. all agency authorities to issue regulations comes from congress. such delegation may be

employees but of the federal regulations. guest: that's a fair question. i just didn't think the president should, you know, reinforce these ideas that the federal government is totally incompetent and can't make common-seps decisions. i don't think that's true. nor do i think the president putting freezes or freezing federal benefits -- it kind of enforces this idea that federal employees are over-paid, and i don't agree with that either. so i would like our president to come out more forcefully and address the arguments that we can get along better without government programs and that federal employees have to take not just federal but state, county employees, public employees across the board, have to take huge cuts. that this is somehow in the interest of our country and going to cure the deficit. host: john cage is the president of the federation of government employees. thank you for being with us. guest: thank you for being with -- thank you for having me. . >> congrressmen patrick mchenry, a republican. >> there is a

importantly the federal reserve's ability to pay interest on reserve balances held in federal reserve banks will allow it to put upward pressure on short-term market interest rates and dust tight monetary policy we needed can't even if bank reserves remain high. moreover, the fed has invested effort into developing methods to drain or immobilize bank reserves as needed to facilitate the schools -- when conditions warrant. if necessary the committee could also tightened policy by redeeming or selling securities on the open market. as i met him before the budget committee is worth emphasizing defense purchases of longer-term security are not comparable to ordinary government spending. in executing these transactions the federal reserve requires financial assets, not goods and services. ultimately at the appropriate time the federal reserve will normalize a balance sheet by selling these assets back into the market, or by allowing them to mature. in the interim the interest of the federal reserve earns from the securities holdings as to the feds assistance to the treasury. in 2009, 2010,

i think the kindest thing the federal government can do for the states is to deny a single penny of federalmoney to bail out state minister both governments. i should also note incidentally that the five states and the greatest fiscal trouble today are among the 12 wealthy wealthiest states in the nation. any dollar they get back from washington is a fraction of the amount of money that is sent to washington. they should be able to have some of their own and be forced to do so. >> as we said, you have had this unique opportunity and i was trying to do some research as to just how unique are you? are you familiar? how many other americans that have this opportunity to serve in all three branches? perhaps that is a research project. >> i started that research project wants and as far as i know i'm the only one alive. [laughter] >> and very much so. >> i had a book of existing topographies of existing federal judges and then i got as far as by, secretary of state supreme court justice and senator. >> perhaps we have a latter-day james burns here. >> is too late. the supreme court. >> maybe not

the federal government's ability to raise $70 billion to t.a.r.p. along with the additional 2.5 trillion financial systems by april of 2009 is indicative

importantly the federal reserve's ability to pay interest on reserve balances held in federal reserve banks will allow it to put upward pressure on short-term market interest rates and dust tight monetary policy we needed can't even if bank reserves remain high. moreover, the fed has invested effort into developing methods to drain or immobilize bank reserves as needed to facilitate the schools -- when conditions warrant. if necessary the committee could also tightened policy by redeeming or selling securities on the open market. as i met him before the budget committee is worth emphasizing defense purchases of longer-term security are not comparable to ordinary government spending. in executing these transactions the federal reserve requires financial assets, not goods and services. ultimately at the appropriate time the federal reserve will normalize a balance sheet by selling these assets back into the market, or by allowing them to mature. in the interim the interest of the federal reserve earns from the securities holdings as to the feds assistance to the treasury. in 2009, 2010,

importantly the federal reserve's ability to pay interest on reserve balances held in federal reserveks will allow it to put upward pressure on short-term market interest rates and dust tight monetary policy we needed can't even if bank reserves remain high. moreover, the fed has invested effort into developing methods to drain or immobilize bank reserves as needed to facilitate the schools -- when conditions warrant. if necessary the committee could also tightened policy by redeeming or selling securities on the open market. as i met him before the budget committee is worth emphasizing defense purchases of longer-term security are not comparable to ordinary government spending. in executing these transactions the federal reserve requires financial assets, not goods and services. ultimately at the appropriate time the federal reserve will normalize a balance sheet by selling these assets back into the market, or by allowing them to mature. in the interim the interest of the federal reserve earns from the securities holdings as to the feds assistance to the treasury. in 2009, 2010, tho

when i went to federal prison, i did time in eight different states in nine different federal prisons, including four penitentiaries -- that is a maximum security. including the united states penitentiary at marion, the first super federal max. that is on a marijuana convention. -- conviction. i spent most of my time in solitary confinement. you do not know this, but if you plead not duty and you get a jury trial and then you have an appellate case, you go directly to solitary confinement. were you do not have access to the law library. you do not have access to your attorneys. i spent most of my time in federal prison in solitary confinement because i had an appellate case. if you do not know this. when i came out of federal prison, i went to graduate school, directly into graduate school. my first semester in grad school as a master student, i remember the chair of the department asked me if i could teach criminology. i said, "sure." [laughter] the first day i taught class at the university of wisconsin, i had 500 students and an entire front row were milwaukee police officers. i to

talk a little about the whole federal work force, not just about federal employees. let's talk about contractor employees and throw the grantees into the mix. if we are going to talk about downsizing, we have to include the hidden workforce. i think if we did a job-to-job comparison between federal employees and contractors, we would find the contractors are spending a lot more on labor than the federal government. that is not to dismiss your concern in omaha about the difference between how much federal employees are making, and i think federal employees have to make a sacrifice right now. president obama made that point. you just cannot be raising salaries every year and allowing automatic pay increases due to time on the job during this period. federal employees have to sacrifice. contractors have to sacrifice. so do grantees. let's put it all on the table and impose a real hard freeze on federal salary increases, but let's include the whole work force, not just the one we can say. host: are the postal service considered federal employees? guest: they are quasis.

they're tied by federal and state regulation. some schools, the teachers cannot teach their kids and their multiplication the old- fashioned way. host: unfortunately we have to leave it there. we are running out of time. guest: it is a problem. we have got to unfreeze this system. some of the regulations are too tight and not allow the teachers to bring out their passion and creativity. you put your finger on something very important. the statistics we have been looking out are far worse across our minority population and in our women. only 1.6% of u.s. women graduating from universities are engineers. this is a field we really have to work on. we have to give the teachers more flexibility in how they approach their subjects. host: charles vest, president of national academy of engineering. thank you so much. the website is on your screen. thank you for being with us. that does it for today's "washington journal." we want to bring you to the senate budget committee, where they will be hearing testimony from the cbo director, doug

the federal government that is the fbi and the federal prosecutors basically brought judge lackie again and insist that he get into the case. the judge goes through a series of like the only character lies not in the book but here as balducci sometimes doesn't even return his calls. finally come into timber, six months after the first approached by balducci, judge lackie says i am in a blind eye have created a hunt for myself. if i do a favor for scruggs to you think he would help me? and balducci sort of britain's because balducci is trying to ingratiate himself with scruggs. he and patterson have formed this new firm and they are desperate to latch onto his thoughts. so balducci commits and says i'm sure that he would. the judge makes another call and this is the fbi and federal government basically tell them what to say. you've got to ask for money and insure scruggs's name is there. the judge does that in a series of phone calls, asks for $40,000. balducci produces the case, brings it down to the judge finally in late september, six months after the first, and at that point clearly

talk a little about the whole federal work force, not just about federal employees. let's talk about contractor employees and throw the grantees into the mix. if we are going to talk about downsizing, we have to include the hidden workforce. i think if we did a job-to-job comparison between federal employees and contractors, we would find the contractors are spending a lot more on labor than the federal government. that is not to dismiss your concern in omaha about the difference between how much federal employees are making, and i think federal employees have to make a sacrifice right now. president obama made that point. you just cannot be raising salaries every year and allowing automatic pay increases due to time on the job during this period. federal employees have to sacrifice. contractors have to sacrifice. so do grantees. let's put it all on the table and impose a real hard freeze on federal salary increases, but let's include the whole work force, not just the one we can say. host: are the postal service considered federal employees? guest: they are quasis.

the only way that would happen is if this federal court reverses the federal circuit. >> so your view is the complete did not state their obligation to pay you? that required them to pay you? >> that is right, at that moment, they knew that. in fact they sent a bank letter saying please don't do that. then we entered into a deferment agreement. but we have an absolute right to that money right now, regardless. we don't need an affirmative decision forum this court to get that money. we're asking them to follow the high credit principle th --e hippocratic principle of doing no wrong or harm. >> if you are right, out with this follow with other contracts? >> that is right, it provides an offset. we don't actually have to seek the $1.35 billion dollars, we would just get that. >> you get the extra money without having to go to court. because they have to go to court to challenge the offset. >> and again, that is the contract which they signed. >> thank you. >> thank you, general. mr. phillips, you have three minutes. >> justice kennedy, i think this can be properly decided on federal com

but this is -- the spending for the elderly is the major part of the federal budget. the three programs i mentioned earlier are twice the size of the defense budget, for example. so if you do not attack that problem, you are ignoring the basic mismatch that exists in our federal accounts, and in the role of government as people conceived it. right now there is tremendous public support for cutting the deficit. there's also a large majorities that oppose doing the things that would over the long term really begin to reduce the deficit. i looked at a recent poll, and roughly 60% of the public opposes both increase in the eligibility age is for social security and increasing medicare premium for wealthier retirees. if you are against those things, you're basically against doing very much about the federal budget. >> i have your book that you wrote in 2008, the new version in paperback, called "the great inflation and its aftermath." the reason i hold up is to ask you -- we keep hearing that we are going to get inflation back. that is the way that possibly we get out of s

they just want to add to the federal debt and the federal debt is going up very fast already and they't add to that. so it is going to be a different kind of thinking about how you find the infrastructure at the federal level. the other thing is i think, the reason there is ben resistance, is it is very hard to define what is investment in the federal budget, because the federal government doesn't actually do a lot of infrastructure itself. it is grants and if you think the of long-lasting stuff as physical investment most of it is military in the federal budget. so it is very different from looking at the state budget. >> could i just make one other point? i want to follow-up follow up on something ron said. seems like we have a gambit of the point of view represented but if ron is correct and the debt ceiling is not the precipitating event to a lease to begin to make a down down payment on addressing the fiscal problem than the next stop along the road will be either a substantial depreciation and are currently not in an orderly way that some sort of precipitous way or a spike in in

the federal circuit's view is -- we do not care. in that situation, where we have made that kind of showing, the default rule -- >> that showing was based on the review ofthe court's privileged information. made this judgment on the basis of a great deal of information. it could not conclude that you were right as a matter of law. is that correct? >> it recognizes it terminated the discovery early. terminated -- it terminated discovery very early. we do not know about the other programs. there's nothing in this on any of that, your honor. >> thank you, mr. phillips. >> general? >> thank you. two basic things decide this case. the government is not affirmatively invoking the power of the federal court. only the plaintiffs are. 20 years ago, the asked the court to set aside the decision of the contract in officer and to reward them over $1 billion in contrast. the government asked to dismiss the lawsuit. reynolds makes clear that the state secrets privilege could be used to bar a claim at most, only when the party that is relying on s

federer is undone by george evasion straight sets in the men's semifinal. banned for a year tour de france again contador is punished the day. but first it has been a day of upsets that the australian open russia's second seeded is of a new yorker losing her semifinal to kim clijsters in the belgium will face now late in the final after she beat world number one caroline wozniacki as one of the over was hoping for avenge against kleist is who beat her in the final of last year's u.s. open however the russian was outclassed early on as the number three c. took control of the set after gaining a crucial break before serving out to move one up the world number two had breakpoint opportunities in the second set as she tried to get back on level terms but she couldn't find a way past crises and sealed a six three six three victory in just under an hour and fifteen minutes. today i was able to just stay very aggressive throughout it all and keep my own unforced errors down put a lot of pressure on her. you know so i mean it was good on one for happy with this . a

congress has charged the federal reserve with two objectives as is our dual mandate. achievement of maximum employment and price stability. as i noted earlier the financial crisis in severe recession left the economy far below levels of resource utilization consistent with maximum sustained employment. the wide margins of economic slack that have persisted have moved inflation below the level of 2% less which is the rate that most fomc participants see as consistent with our dual mandate. in light of these results monetary policy continues to be focused on ensuring the economic recovery is sufficiently strong to sustainable progress toward our mandated objectives. i would like to take a few minutes to offer perspective on how monetary policy has been meeting this challenge. the federal reserve responded forcefully to the financial crisis by employing a range of measures and programs to provide badly needed liquidity to financial institutions and markets. at the same time the fomc used standard and less conventional forms of monetary policy to promote economic recovery

the federal reserve target for the federal funds rate has been close to a zero byte -- since 2008 leaving no scope for further reductions. for the past two years, we have been using alternative tools to provide additional monetary accommodations. between december, 2008 and march, 2010,the fmoc purchased $1.70 trillion in securities in the open market. the proceeds of these purchases ultimately find their way into the banking system with the result that the depository institutions hold a high level of balances with the federal reserve. longer-term securities purchases are a different tool, the goals and transmission mechanisms of the two approaches are similar. conventional monetary policy works by changing market expectations for the future of short-term interest rates which employs as the current level of longer-term interest-rate and other financial conditions. these changes in financial conditions affect household spending. securities purchases by the tories are put downward pressure directly on longer-term interest rates by reducing the stock of securities held by private investors. t

importantly the federal reserve's ability to pay interest on reserve balances held in federal reservew it to put upward pressure on short-term market interest rates and dust tight monetary policy we needed can't even if bank reserves remain high. moreover, the fed has invested effort into developing methods to drain or immobilize bank reserves as needed to facilitate the schools -- when conditions warrant. if necessary the committee could also tightened policy by redeeming or selling securities on the open market. as i met him before the budget committee is worth emphasizing defense purchases of longer-term security are not comparable to ordinary government spending. in executing these transactions the federal reserve requires financial assets, not goods and services. ultimately at the appropriate time the federal reserve will normalize a balance sheet by selling these assets back into the market, or by allowing them to mature. in the interim the interest of the federal reserve earns from the securities holdings as to the feds assistance to the treasury. in 2009, 2010, those remittanc

the only way that will happen 's if this federal court reverses the federal circuit -- >> so your viewis that the complaint did not stay their obligation to pay you? that provision required them to pay you? >> that's correct.uire >> the unliquidated -- >> that is right. at that moment they had to pay. they knew that, and they, in fact, sent a bank letter and so on, this is joint appendix 329, saying, please, don't do that. and then we entered into a deferment agreement. but we have an absolute right th that money right now regardless -- we don't need an affirmative decision from thisre court in order to get that money. we're asking the court to simpl stay its hand and follow the hippocratic principle of doingwe no harm' in a world in which thh court can't decide who's right and who's wrong. >> if you're wright -- right about that, it's the government's absolute right. because you withhold it from other contracts of these contractors?f yo >> that's absolutely right. the federal rules and contractit disputes act provide us an offset so that we could -- wean don't have to actually seek th

the richest 5% already pay about 45% of federal taxes. they may pay more, but not enough to balance the budget. defense spending constitutes a fifth of federal spending, projected deficits over the next decade are similar. we will show the pentagon. the major spending programs, social security and medicare, are widely popular with the 50 million beneficiaries. >> the problem is that our local leaders tell their bases -- political leaders to tell their bases what they want to hear. i have come to the sad conclusion that what is one to make as wake-up is a crisis that will force action. that is opposed to political leaders doing what they should do, which is leading us out of in dealing with problems for which there are solutions. there are a lot of social problems that are not want to have obvious solutions. -- not going to have obvious solutions. schools are an issue where there are obvious things you can do. you can't cut benefits to raise taxes. >> i have to ask you again, your not related to paul samuelson. how many times have you been

some federal programs, some federal programs, mr. speaker, are wasteful, and deserve to be cut. there will be others that have merit that which we simply cannot afford at the current levels. we have to be honest about that. we have to engage in a responsible debate about what our priorities must be. what we cannot do is allow this debate to degenerate into false accusations about the other side's intentions and let me repeat that, mr. speaker. we cannot let the kind of free-flowing rigorous debate we need to have to generate into these accusations that we so often seem to hear around here. there is no one in this body who wants to gut -- there is no one in this body that wants to gut funding for key essential programs, like veterans' programs or like education, child nutrition. no one wants to gut these programs. so i think it's important for us to state that. and there is no evidence that any proposal out there would undermine things like support for our nation's veterans. we are all entering into this debate with good faith, good intentions and a commitment to response by addr

a federal responsibility and only a federal responsibility, not a state responsibility. the federal indian programs that we fight hardest to find were created to fulfill the trust responsibility between its nation and its first people. authority to fund those programs derived from three distinct provisions of the constitution, the indian commerce club, the treaty cause and the property clause. this is not nice to have spending. this is must have spending, to fulfill the trust responsibility that is founded within the constitution. [applause] so my suggestion to you, as you visit the offices of my colleagues this year, i invite to come to keep your handy dandy copy of the constitution with you, bookmark the provisions that i've discussed. i think that would be helpful as you point out, that obligation there. i'd like to mention a few personal priorities for the 112 congress. just as we came together several years ago to fight the high rates of diabetes that plague our native communities, we must come together now to attack the high rate of suicide that plagues american in

. >>> the federal reserve says the u.s. economy is continuing to show gradual improvement, though the housing market remains sluggish. on wednesday the fed released a report known as the beige book. that's a survey of economic conditions in the country's 12 federal reserve districts. the report says all districts saw lingering sluggishness in the housing market, which is the key to a full-fledged economic recovery. it says manufacturing and consumer spending improved moderately. some districts reported stronger than expected retail sales during the year-end shopping season. the report says the unemployment situation is somewhat improved in nearly all parts of the country. but it also says employers remain cautious about wage hikes and new hiring. the fed additionally notes that many companies are concerned about the increasing cost of crude oil and oil-related products. >>> u.s. treasury secretary timothy geithner has urged china to allow its currency to rise faster. geithner made the comment in a speech in washington on we