Home > Politics, News & Issues > US Politics > Political Issues
Should Congress approve Obama's "end global poverty" bill with the $845 billion price tag?
Results so far:
| No | 39% | 101 votes | Total: 256 votes | |
| Yes | 61% | 155 votes |
No
by Bill Dover
Created on: February 21, 2008
Congress should not support Obama's bill to end global poverty. Bill S.2433 would place an $845 billion obligation upon us to be paid over the next 13 years. In order to fulfill this obligation American citizens would essentially be paying a global or world tax. Congress needs to resolve domestic issues and strengthen our economy before placing additional burdens upon American taxpayers.
Section 4 of the bill also lays out requirements upon the President such as working with the U.N. and other international organizations to implement programs and evaluate needs. These other parties are not groups that would be working with the best interests of the United States in mind. We would be working to meet the benchmarks of the U.N. Millennium goals. The bill suggests that government seek to make international business an agent of this assistance program and section 4, subsection (c) states that we should make available additional U.S. assistance as appropriate. We don't need the U.N. setting goals on what is appropriate. We need to strengthen our own economy before sending our aid to foreign countries.
We are fortunate to live in a country where we have such a high standard of living and we should help other less fortunate countries as we are able. However, our standard of living is a result of past choices and decisions we have made as a country as well as individuals. Our success as a nation does not indebt us to solve the problems of other nations that are in their current positions due to choices and decisions they have made as a people and as individuals. We should help our fellow humans because we are able, not because our success has come with guilt over the condition of others.
Congress should work to strengthen the U.S. economy that we might reduce national debt before they seek to spend more money on other countries. To continue spending when a recession is possible is unwise and irresponsible. A strong U.S. economy would allow us the ability to help foreign countries without jeopardizing the welfare of American citizens. Congress should first attend to the business of improving U.S. fiscal health before trying to heal the economic woes of other nations. The first responsibility of Senators and Representatives is to their constituents.
Learn more about this author, Bill Dover.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Yes
by Mona Gallagher
Created on: February 16, 2008 Last Updated: February 17, 2008
Historically, the United States has been the country with deep pockets when it comes to aid for other countries facing disaster. In addition to what our government coffers provide, other privately funded US groups give billions of dollars in relief, but we're behind in our efforts. Senator Obama is sponsoring a bill that will cut global poverty in half by the year 2015.
On the surface, this sounds like a great humanitarian effort and one that we subscribed to in the year 2000. Five countries are meeting the goal of paying .07 percent of their Gross National Income, but the United States is coming up short. Keep in mind this bill does not reflect the total global aid for disasters that we've provided since the year 2000 but applies only to the UN declaration.
The UN is charged with administration of the global poverty program, and the rumor from some reports is that they plan to "force" the countries, that are behind in the schedule, to pay up on their promises. The recent UN scandal involvement in the Oil for Food program (2003) left a bad taste in the mouth of many Americans and the word "force" doesn't cleanse our palates.
Some of us see the UN as not trust worthy, and we can't help but question the final destination of the funds, but there is more to the UN mandate than global poverty and while I cannot address it in this article, I invite you to read it.
S. 2433: Global Poverty Act of 2007
The background for the senate bill can be found in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000). http://www2.ohchr.or g/english/law/millen nium.htm
The estimated cost for this bill is $845 billion dollars based on the US Gross National Income (over and above what the US already gives in aid) The funds are requested to cover the next seven years in order to meet the UN mandate.
Some critics believe the bill could result in an imposition of a global tax on the US and place the US in a submissive position to the UN in terms of US foreign aid.
Most of us will agree that helping others is a humane act and the right thing to do. What we may also agree upon is that we have poverty and needs right here in the US that are not being addressed. However, since our country agreed to this global poverty program, there is little we can do about our own rising costs and added burden on the citizens of the United States, except to bring it to the attention of all concerned.
Although our commitment to reducing global poverty is a done-deal, with or without the senate bill, it might be wise to examine our own US citizens needs and thoughts in the United States that are largely ignored by our congressional lawmakers.
We have US citizens that live in poverty from generation to generation and crime-ridden areas where hope is nonexistent and help is sparse. Who among you would allow your child to go without food or clothing in order to fund a grand dream of eradicating poverty for others? Would you not feed and clothe your family first and then look outward to meet the needs of others?
Is the US government of the people, and for the people of the United States?
Will the $845 billion be spent wisely?
Does humanitarian aid reach the people who really need it? Is it a responsible act to turn humanitarian aid over to an organization whose past records show that their own members compromised humanitarian aid in taking kickbacks and oil vouchers from the people the program was designed to help?
If and when we become a passive and subservient tool to UN spending regarding foreign aid, it appears that we've given up a portion of our freedom as a sovereign nation. Is that the fork in the road for the US?
Final thoughts on the bill:
The senate bill is not in its final form and s 2433 is subject to riders that can be added in mark-ups to the bill. $845 billion dollars is said to be about 1.1 percent of the US Gross National Income over the next seven years that will allow the US to meet the original commitment. What else will be added to it?
Where the funds will come from is not specified, but I don't think Santa will be making special runs over the next seven years.
Sources:
http:/ /www2.ohchr.org/engl ish/law/millennium.h tm
http://www.aim.org /aim-column/obamas-g lobal-tax-proposal-u p-for-senate-vote/
Learn more about this author, Mona Gallagher.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page >>
Write and get published
Share with other writers
Polish your freelancing skills
Quality articles from proven freelancers
Exclusive rights, fast turnaround
Brand engagement, business blogging -- our writers do it all
INFORMATION
Copyright © 2002-2012 Helium, Inc. All rights reserved.
Helium.com: A Service of RR Donnelley