The bipartisan immigration bill being pushed by the White House and Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican, is fracturing rather than "saving" the Republican Party nationally, according to angry party leaders and new poll findings.  

Arizona Republican Party officials have received "hundreds and hundreds of calls, e-mails and letters from Republicans angry about the bill," state party Chairman Randy Pullen told The Washington Times. 

"They were saying, 'I am going to register independent and not give you any more money' -- and that's the base of our party saying that," Mr. Pullen said.  

Republican officials also criticized Sen. Mel Martinez, Florida Republican, as being out of touch for his weekend remark on CNN that the immigration bill "could be the saving of the Republican Party." 

Chuck Laudner, the Iowa Republican Party executive director, told The Times that Mr. Martinez is "dead wrong because the bill doesn't save the Republican Party -- it drives a wedge right through it." 

"I don't think the immigration bill is going to save the Republican party," Cindy Costa, the Republican national committeewoman from South Carolina, told The Times. "If you undermine your base as this bill does, I don't hardly see how that can save the GOP."

Faced with an estimated 40 percent falloff in small-donor contributions and aging phone-bank equipment that the RNC said would cost too much to update, Anne Hathaway, the committee's chief of staff, summoned the solicitations staff and told them they were out of work, effective immediately, fired staff members told The Times. 

Several of the solicitors fired at the May 24 meeting reported declining contributions and a donor backlash against the immigration proposals now being pushed by Mr. Bush and Senate Republicans. 

"Every donor in 50 states we reached has been angry, especially in the last month and a half, and for 99 percent of them immigration is the No. 1 issue," said a fired phone bank employee who said the severance pay the RNC agreed to pay him was contingent on his not criticizing the national committee.

The Bush administration said Tuesday it will fight to keep meatpackers from testing all their animals for mad cow disease.  

The Agriculture Department tests fewer than 1 percent of slaughtered cows for the disease, which can be fatal to humans who eat tainted beef. A beef producer in the western state of Kansas, Creekstone Farms Premium Beef, wants to test all of its cows.  

Larger meat companies feared that move because, if Creekstone should test its meat and advertised it as safe, they might have to perform the expensive tests on their larger herds as well.  

The Agriculture Department regulates the test and argued that widespread testing could lead to a false positive that would harm the meat industry.  

A federal judge ruled in March that such tests must be allowed. U.S. District Judge James Robertson noted that Creekstone sought to use the same test the government relies on and said the government didn't have the authority to restrict it.  

A federal judge ruled in March that such tests must be allowed. The ruling was scheduled to take effect June 1, but the Agriculture Department said Tuesday it would appeal, effectively delaying the testing until the court challenge has played out.

Last fall Edward Lazear, the Bush administration’s top economist, explained that what’s good for corporations is good for America. “Profits,” he declared, “provide the incentive for physical capital investment, and physical capital growth contributes to productivity growth. Thus profits are important not only for investors but also for the workers who benefit from the growth in productivity.”  

In other words, ask not for whom the closing bell tolls; it tolls for thee.  

Unfortunately, these days none of what Mr. Lazear said seems to be true. In the Bush years high profits haven’t led to high investment, and rising productivity hasn’t led to rising wages.  . . .   

Since President Bush took office ... rising productivity and stagnant wages — workers are producing more, but they aren’t getting paid more — has led to ... corporate profits more than doubling since 2000. Last year, profits as a share of national income were at the highest level ever recorded.  

You might have expected this gusher of profits, which surely owes something to the Bush administration’s pro-corporate, anti-labor tilt, to produce a corresponding gusher of business investment. But the reality has been more of a trickle. . . .  

Instead of investing in physical capital, many companies are using profits to buy back their own stock. And cynics suggest that the purpose is to produce a temporary rise in stock prices that increases the value of executives’ stock options, even if it’s against the long-term interests of investors.

The president of the United States has made it clear that we are on a course that is a diplomatic course,” Ms. Rice said here. “That policy is supported by all of the members of the cabinet, and by the vice president of the United States.” 

Ms. Rice’s assurance came as senior officials at the State Department were expressing fury over reports that members of Vice President Dick Cheney’s staff have told others that Mr. Cheney believes the diplomatic track with Iran is pointless, and is looking for ways to persuade Mr. Bush to confront Iran militarily.

In a news conference on Friday, Ms. Rice maintained that Mr. Cheney supported her strategy of trying to deal with Iran’s nuclear ambitions through diplomacy. A senior Bush administration official separately denied that there was a deep divide between Ms. Rice and Mr. Cheney on Iran. 

But, the official said, “The vice president is not necessarily responsible for every single thing that comes out of the mouth of every single member of his staff.” The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about any divide within the administration. 

The reports about hawkish statements by members of Mr. Cheney’s staff first surfaced last week in The Washington Note, an influential blog put out by Steve Clemons of the left-leaning New America Foundation. The reports have alarmed European diplomats, some of whom fear that the struggle over Iran’s nuclear program may evolve into a decision by the Bush administration to resort to force against Iran.

The Pentagon warned Friday that cash-flush China was militarizing under an opaque budget and that Beijing's ballistic nuclear missiles could now strike the United States. . . .  

"Americas financial sugar daddy" is China, because it has capital "for a nation that abhors savings, worships spending and is addicted to other peoples money.". . .   

Reportedly, two-thirds of China's 1.2 trillion dollars in reserves are in dollar-denominated assets, including 420 billion in US Treasury bills. . . .  

Washington is . . . concerned China is spending its mountain of foreign reserves on its military. 

An annual Pentagon report on Friday said China could be "planning for pre-emptive military options in advance of regional crises." 

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the report "paints a picture of a country that is devoting substantial resources to the military and developing ... some very sophisticated capabilities."

conciliatory tone toward Beijing today, saying the United States and China have the opportunity to "build trust over time." 

During a speech delivered form the same podium where Donald Rumsfeld said in 2005 that China's growing arsenal of ships, missiles and submarines threatened Asia's security balance, Gates steered away from a direct challenge to China about its military modernization and said he was hopeful about future dealings between the two countries. 

"I believe there is reason to be optimistic about the U.S.-China relationship," Gates said, at a gathering here of defense ministers from the Pacific region.

Gates briefly raised concerns that China's actual defense spending appears to far outpace its publicly stated military budget. But the speech and comments by Pentagon officials make it clear that the Pentagon — which has long taken a hawkish view toward China's intentions — is hoping to lower the temperature in the relationship between the two powers. . . .  

Last week, the Pentagon unveiled its annual report on Chinese military power that documented the People's Liberation Army's efforts to modernize its arsenal, which the U.S. fears could be used to strike U.S. bases and ships in the Pacific.

But Pentagon officials traveling with Gates said they did not intend to focus on the report here. Instead, defense officials said they wanted to focus on countering a growing perception that the U.S., engaged in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, had neither the capability nor the desire to remain engaged in Asia.