Congress is planning to use your tax dollars
to pay the debts of corrupt African dictators?
You read that right.
Next week the U.S. House of Representatives will vote on HR 2634 -- the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt Cancellation -- which will unconditionally erase billions in debt run up by African dictators.
Despite existing foreign aid programs, like the Highly Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative, which establish strict eligibility conditions for American aid and debt relief, the Jubilee Act eliminates accountability standards and does nothing to prevent the rulers of corrupt developing nations from continuing to line their own pockets.
The Jubilee Act is designed to alleviate poverty and stimulate growth in numerous developing nations. While the Act may have honorable intentions, without strict requirements such as the establishment of property rights, commitment to rule of law, elimination of corruption and adoption of free and open markets, our government will be forced to continually use American dollars to repay the debts of corrupt governments abroad.
Simply put, without such accountability requirements, the Jubilee Act will only make it even easier for corrupt dictators to seize aid dollars supposedly reserved for their impoverished citizens.
Rather than adopt economic and political reforms that could end the accumulation of billions of dollars in debt, leaders of corrupt foreign governments are relying on America to bail them out. Unfortunately, some in the U.S. Congress seem all too willing to grant their wishes.
If the Jubilee Act passes, it will signal to corrupt leaders in developing nations that they can continue to rely on American tax dollars to build their mansions and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on their own lavish lifestyles while their people suffer.
Take a look at how one of these corrupt leaders is living as he demands debt relief for his impoverished people:
"Despite widespread poverty in the Republic of Congo, President Denis Sassou-Nguesso in 2005 racked up more than $300,000 in hotel bills, including $20,000 in room service charges alone at New Yorks Waldorf Astoria for such luxuries that included bottles of Cristal champagne.
According to news reports, the Republic of Congo exports at least 200,000 million barrels of oil per day. And in 2006 the country received $3 billion in debt relief. Yet, as President Sassou-Nguesso lives his posh lifestyle, the people of his nation continue to live a life of poverty.
What is his reward for such irresponsible behavior? Millions of dollars in debt relief if the Jubilee Act is passed by the U.S. Congress.
Take Action now! Urge Congress to OPPOSE the Jubilee Act!
The U.S. government must demand that leaders in developing nations pay their debts rather than reward them for their corruption.
Passage of the Jubilee Act is unacceptable. Unconditional debt relief puts American taxpayers on the hook for billions in future aid without holding the recipients accountable for the actions that lead to their debts in the first place.
The US Government must send a message to corrupt rulers. American tax dollars must not be used to pay the bills of corrupt rulers. HR 2634, the Jubilee Act would enable dictators to continue to seize aid dollars meant for their impoverished citizens.
Take Action now! Urge Congress to OPPOSE the Jubilee Act!
Sincerely,
Center for Individual Freedom
What's wrong with our government?? If you want to see the text of the bill, click here. Then feel free to follow the links above, or call your Senators (the Senate version is S.2166) and Rep to let them know what you think of these actions. In my opinion, we've got enough financial issues of our own that we don't need to be forgiving billions of dollars of debt, especially not from corrupt dictators who are sucking money from their own people while living in luxury.
There's my two cents.
1 comment:
Why is it that virtually every conservative viewpoint on governmental policy seems like the same position any average jerk would take? In other words, it seems like if you were to pick Policy X and then evaluate Policy X by the standard of "would a jerk support this policy?", 9 times out of 10, the jerk's view of the policy would line up with the conservative view of the policy.
Giving debt relief to poor African countries? Naaaaah, not until they meet our requirements.
The environment? I can drive whatever car I want, use whatever energy I want, and create as much trash as I want, the environment be damned.
Crime? Drug problems are no excuse, throw 'em in prison!
Death penalty? Who cares if virtually every other nation in the world doesn't execute juveniles or the mentally retarded, our country should be able to.
International law? Yeah, it's ok, unless it means I can't do something I want to do.
Diplomacy? Only for a little while, then we bomb the #$%! out of 'em.
Nuclear weapons? We gotta have a bunch of 'em...that'll teach other countries to mess with us.
Welfare? Get those lazy, good-for-nothings off the government payroll.
Lawsuits? Who cares if their kid was killed because some idiot ran a stop sign...cap 'em at $250,000.
Minimum wage? $5.15/hour is plenty.
Now, I know conservatives are pretty smart and can come up with some (disingenuous) other reasons (like gotta protect the free market, government regulation hurts everyone, government is inefficient, some foreign leaders are corrupt) to take the views they do, but the bottom line is, it seems like whenever there is an option to cut someone a break, or give someone something for nothing, or grant a little grace to some stupid decision they made, or listen to/consider an opponents/enemies gripes, etc., the conservative view always seems to oppose those opportunities (at least as far as it comes to policy).
I don't think there are many, but I'd love to hear examples of policy positions of conservatives that fall into the cut someone a break, give something for nothing, give grace mold.
Post a Comment