There’s nothing wrong with Republicans helping Barack Obama, in the abstract. If he’s got a good idea, then by all means let’s pass it. Unfortunately, in the case of a bill moving largely under the radar, it appears he doesn’t:
Obama’s costly, dangerous and altogether bad bill (S. 2433), which could come up in the Senate any day, is called the Global Poverty Act. It would commit U.S. taxpayers to spend 0.7% of our gross domestic product on foreign handouts, which is at least $30 billion over and above the exorbitant and wasted sums we already give away overseas.
There’s nothing wrong with helping the world’s poor, either, if it’s done right. Unfortunately, in far too many instances it isn’t done right, and the aid ends up padding the Swiss bank accounts of rapacious despots instead of helping their victims:
London’s Financial Times estimated that Mobutu stole some $4 billion from foreign aid, much of it from the International Monetary Fund. This amounts to almost half of all the foreign aid received by Zaire between 1970 and 1994. Amazingly, the IMF was well aware of the expropriation of its funds, yet continued to lend Zaire money.
Reader Comments:
We have no choice in the matter Bob. The world is what it is. You have to take off the idealist eyeglasses and put on reality colored glasses.
American interests are important. Try getting to work on your bicycle. (don’t tell me please you already do that) No oil. No gas. No work. No play.
Then there is the issue mentioned offhand in the NYT article. Very important. Infectious diseases that start out in the tropics impact us just as much if we can’t control them. We have a big vested interest in global disease.
I could go on but the bottom line we have a vested interest in what the rest of the world is up to, pure and simple.
The problem is we try to intervene too much. Reform too much. That sounds like isolationism. It isn’t precisely, because what I just said was that the U.S. has a need to engage the rest of the world. Many countries are a threat. We need to engage with the “axis of evil” too.
I’m only saying we need to engage them in a non-idealist manner and be more pragmatic and chauvanistic and calculating and cautious like the rest of the world.
Both present day conservative and liberal ideology is infested with a noxious component of smug dogma that insists we have the answer to everything when clearly we barely have a handle on our own country. A little humility would go a long way.
So what else is new. The US doles out foreign aid to a dictator who is our buddy. With a wink and a nod, the US government says, enrich yourself. Dictator goes too far or falls out of favor. Then the US exposes him as what he is minus our kiss of friendship. Want examples : Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden (well he did not run a country just a war in Afghanistan against the Soviets),
Manuel Noriega, Batista in Cuba.
As long as he serves US intrests, we will back the corrupt.
Larry,
Agree but this project to save the world is not uniquely Obama alone.
It isn’t entirely bipartisan—there are a couple of Republican authors attached to the bill. You don’t hear their names because they aren’t running for president.
It isn’t as dire and excessive as IBD paints it, so it isn’t “saving the world”, but still agree BAD legislation.
By the way, lots of folks “do” want us to save the world, many right here in this country. Both liberal and conservative.
Oh, I almost forgot..National health care too.
Oh, he’s gonna end poverty here too. Here’s the list from M. Scarboroughs column. For some reason the link ain’t workin.
“Obama will make college affordable for all Americans.”
» “Obama will quadruple Early Head Start and increase Head Start funding. Obama will also provide affordable and high-quality child care to ease the burden on working families.
» “Obama will double funding for after-school programs.
» “Obama will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society.
» “Obama will create a fund to help people refinance their mortgages and provide comprehensive supports to innocent homeowners.
» “Obama will create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund to develop affordable housing in mixed-income neighborhoods.
» “Obama will create 20 Promise Neighborhoods in areas that have high levels of poverty and crime and low levels of student academic achievement … which provide a full network of services, including early childhood education, youth violence prevention efforts and after-school activities, to an entire neighborhood from birth to college.
» “He will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries, and ensure that Iraqis inside their own country can find a safe haven.
» “Obama will double our foreign assistance to $50 billion
The only thing that’s missing is how he intends to pay for it. Social Security will simply fix itself.
I don’t think superfluous philosophical spews are needed for an opinion on this. We need to focus on helping our own first & foremost. Oh, and before I forget...the man hasn’t even gotten into the U.S. Presidency yet and already he feels empowered to save the entire world.
On the one hand, it seems that if we pay for our own extravagant projects with borrowed money, i.e. the deficits, then we really do not have any money left over. That is analgous to running up a big credit card debt while giving generously to charity with the bank’s money, which incidentally is what a lot of Americans do. Eventually, you go bust.
On the other hand, the fear mongering IBD link makes it sounds as if we are breaking the piggy bank for people we hate. The fact of the matter as the NYT link below states, is that foreign aid is at historically low levels and sometimes is effective.
Just because the U.N. and the Millenium Project were named does not imply the money must go through U.N. aid channels. It only means this will help realize a goal of the U.N. In fact, the entire aid process is complicated by the fact that not all aid is direct grants. We are spending money for nation building in Iraq, but that probably comes out of the military budget.
We are also fighting a war the rest of the world is somewhat indifferent to, which means we must shoulder an unequal burden (or else).
The U.S. has a tendency to get involved in foreign entanglements that don’t seem in the best long term interests of us or anyone else. We need involvements that pay dividends that are appreciated and understood by the general public, not endless opportunities to fritter away the future of America in fruitless foreign involvements.
The bill appears to be dubious legislation.
Post Your Comments:
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.