|
May 5, 2002
Jeffrey St. Clair
High and Dry in the Mojave
May 4, 2002
Robert
Fisk
Sharon
the Merciless
and Arafat the Corrupt
Sam Bahour
New United States of Israel
Alexander
Cockburn
Extreme
Solutions:
Priests and Palestinians
May 3, 2002
Arundhati Roy
Democracy and
Religious Fascism
Wayne
Madsen
Dispatch
from Paris:
Le Pen's Strange Coalition
Yigal Bronner
A Journey to Beit Jalla
CounterPunch
Wire
Otto
Reich Named to Board of School of the Americas
John Troyer
Hatemongers Try to Cleanse History:
Gays and 9/11
John Stauber
Big
Food/Tobacco/Booze
Attacks "Mad Cow" Authors
Kathleen Christison
Before There Was Terrorism
May 2, 2002
CounterPunch
Wire
Rep.
Dick Armey Calls for Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians
Rami Kaplan
Israeli Soldiers Resisting
the Occupation:
Why We Refuse to Fight
Carol
Norris
Subterranean
Mini-Nuke Blues
Bernard Weiner
A Peek Inside Colin Powell's Personal
Diary
May 1, 2002
Badiou,
Michel, Lazarus
French
Elections:
What is to be Done?
Baruch Kimmerling
The Battle of Jenin as
an Inter-Ethnic War
Edward
Hammond
Hiding
History:
NAS Suppresses Chem/Bio War Documents
Kristen Schurr
Inside Gaza
Sam Bahour
Corporate
America and
the Israeli Occupation
Jacques Ranciere
Prisoners of the Infinite
April 30, 2002
Mike Leon
Chomsky,
Letters to the Writer and the Peace Movement
Dave Marsh
The FBI and the Music
Industry: Paying the Cost to Feed the Boss
Steen
Sohn
Something
Rotten in Denmark:
New Danish Government's Alliance with Far Right
Desmond Tutu
Apartheid in the Holy Land
Christopher
Reilly
Kissinger:
the Wanted Man
April 29, 2002
Larry Hales
At the Church of the Nativity
Michael
Colby
The
Times Does Brockovich:
Ralph Nader with Cleavage?
CounterPunch Wire
Bank Robs Publisher,
Vows to Repeat
Gavin
Keeney
So
Long, Frank O. Gehry?
April 28, 2002
Michael Neumann
The Jewish Left and Palestine
April 27, 2002
Dr. Susan
Block
Adelphia
Going Down:
Cover Ups, Censorship
and Naughty Accounting
Jordy Cummings
Stuck Inside the Journalism School
Pyramid
Jeffrey
St. Clair
Set
This Flag on Fire!
April 26, 2002
Tom Turnipseed
Act
Now to Stop the Killing
of an Innocent Man
Mokhiber
/ Weissman
Anti-Bribery
Law Takes a Hit
Tariq Ali
Letter to a Young Muslim
April 25, 2002
Francis
A. Boyle
Home
Brew? Biowarfare,
Terror Weapons and the US
Adam Federman
"And the Earth Wept"
Bush at Saranac Lake
Stanton
and Madsen
US
Media Interests:
Champions of Profit, Propaganda and Puffery
Aaron Hawley
Cop a Buzz Day in Vermont:
Education v. Incarceration
David
Vest
Code
Red: Politics and Wordplay at the Vatican
Bernard Weiner
Time Out! A Pause for Longer-Range
Thinking
Rep. Dennis
Kucinich
Standing
with the Peace Movement
April 24, 2002
David Vest
State of Politics in France:
Code Bleu
Jean Fallow
A20
in Seattle:
Cops Get Rough, Again
Kevin Alexander Gray
Help Save the Life of an Innocent Man:
Ask for Clemency for Ricky Johnson
Tanya
Reinhart
Jenin,
the Propaganda Battle
Todd May
Drowning Children, Palestinians and American
Responsibility
Alexander
Cockburn
The
Loneliest Road
Nir Rosen
The Broken Home:
Revisiting Israel
Mokhiber
/ Weissman
A
Big Blow to Big Tobacco
April 23, 2002
Brian Wood
Where Is the Aid for the Victims in
Jenin?
John Chuckman
I,
George:
Gomer as Claudius
Norman Madarasz
French Presidential Elections
Absenteeism and Le Pen
Dr. Susan
Block
Bernard
Parks, Goodbye:
A Farewell to My Chief
Joan Smith
Who Will Rid Us of
These Pedophile Priests?
April 22, 2002
CounterPunch
Wire
EPA
Ombudsman Resigns
in Protest
Dave Marsh
DeskScan: What's Playing
at My House This Week
Ron Jacobs
A20
in DC: Taking the
Message to the Beast's Belly
Kathy Kelly
An Open Letter to
Israeli Soldiers
Irit Katriel
Word
Games and Body Bags
Rep. Cynthia McKinney
We Come for Peace
Daniel
Bar-Tal
Is
There a Way Out?
Occupation, Terror
and Understanding
David Wilson
A Week of Coups, But Now
The Freedom Train Hits Town
Shaik
Ubaid
Today
I Was a Palestinian
April 21, 2002
Michelle Campos
Suckered Again in Israel
Mike Leon
200,000
in DC Protest Say:
"We Are All Palestinians Today"
C.G. Estabrook
Sex and Power in Catholicism
Kathy
Kelly
Gimme
Some Truth Now
A Walk Through Jenin
Resources:
100s of Links
About 9/11
CounterPunch:
Complete
Coverage of 9/11 and Its Aftermath
Five
Days That
Shook The World:
Seattle and Beyond
By Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
Photos by Allan Sekula
(Click Here to Order from CounterPunch
Online at 20% Off Amazon.com's price!)
INSIDE
EXCLUSIVE
TO
COUNTERPUNCH
SUBSCRIBERS
Published March 15, 2002
Read Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
The New Crusade:
America's War on Terrorism
By Rahul Mahajan
The Memphis Blues Again:
Six Decades of Memphis Music Photographs
Photos by Ernest Withers
Text by Daniel Wolff
The New Intifada:
Resisting Israel's Apartheid
Edited by Roane Carey
A Pocket Guide to
Environmental Bad Guys
by James Ridgeway
and Jeffrey St. Clair
The
Phoenix Program
by Douglas Valentine
Al Gore:
A User's Manual
by Cockburn
and St. Clair
Buy
This Explosive
New Book at an
Amazing Discount!
Reviews of Gore:
a User's Manual
|
May
6, 2002
No Corporate Welfare
by Congressman Ron Paul,
MD
[Editors' note:
the following is Rep. Paul's statement before the House Banking
Committee on reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank.]
Mr. Chairman, we are here today to reauthorize
the Export-Import Bank, but it has nothing to do with a bank,
do not mislead anybody. This has to do with an agency of the
government that allocates credit to special interests and to
the benefit of foreign entities. So it is not a bank in that
sense. To me it is immoral in the fact that it takes from some
who cannot defend themselves to give to the rich who get the
benefits. And I just do not see that as being a very good function
and a very good program for the U.S. Congress. Besides, I would
like to see where somebody gives me the constitutional authority
for doing what we do here and we have been doing, of course,
for a long time.
But I do not want to talk about the immorality
of this so-called bank or the unconstitutionality of it. I want
to talk just a second or two about the economics of it. It is
really bad economics. It is pointed out that it helps a company
here or there, but what is never talked about what you do not
see. This is credit allocation.
In order to take billions of dollars
and give it to one single company, it is taken out of the pool
of funds available. And nobody talks about that. There is an
expense. Why would not a bank loan when it is guaranteed by the
government? Because it is guaranteed. So if you are a smaller
investor or a marginal investor, there is no way that you are
going to get the loan. For that investor to get the loan, the
interest rates have to be higher. So it is a form of credit allocation,
and it is also a form of protectionism. We do a lot of talk around
here about free trade. Of course, there is a lot of tariff activity
going on as well, but this is a form of protectionism. Because
some argue, well, this company has to compete and another government
subsidizes their company so, therefore, we have to compete. So
it is competitive subsidization of special interest corporations
in order to do this.
Now, it seems strange that we here in
the Congress are willing to give the beneficiary China the most
number of dollars. They qualify for nearly $6 billion worth of
credits. And that just does not seem like the reasonable thing
for us to do. So I strongly urge a no vote on this bill.
Mr. Chairman, Congress should reject
H.R. 2871, the Export-Import Reauthorization Act, for economic,
constitutional, and moral reasons. The Export-Import Bank (Eximbank)
takes money from American taxpayers to subsidize exports by American
companies. Of course, it is not just any company that receives
Eximbank support; the majority of Eximbank funding benefit large,
politically powerful corporations.
Enron provides a perfect example of how
Eximbank provides politically-powerful corporations competitive
advantages they could not obtain in the free market. According
to journalist Robert Novak, Enron has received over $640 million
in taxpayer-funded ``assistance'' from Eximbank. This taxpayer-provided
largesse no doubt helped postpone Enron's inevitable day of reckoning.
Eximbank's use of taxpayer funds to support
Enron is outrageous, but hardly surprising. The the vast majority
of Eximbank funds benefit Enron-like outfits that must rely on
political connections and government subsidies to survive and/or
multinational corporations who can afford to support their own
exports without relying on the American taxpayer.
It is not only bad economics to force
working Americans, small business, and entrepreneurs to subsidize
the export of the large corporations: it is also immoral. In
fact, this redistribution from the poor and middle class to the
wealthy is the most indefensible aspect of the welfare state,
yet it is the most accepted form of welfare. Mr. Speaker, it
never ceases to amaze me how members who criticize welfare for
the poor on moral and constitutional grounds see no problem with
the even more objectionable programs that provide welfare for
the rich.
The moral case against Eximbank is strengthened
when one considers that the government which benefits most from
Eximbank funds is communist China. In fact, Eximbank actually
underwrites joint ventures with firms owned by the Chinese government!
Whatever one's position on trading with China, I would hope all
of us would agree that it is wrong to force taxpayers to subsidize
in any way this brutal regime. Unfortunately, China is not an
isolated case: Colombia and Sudan benefit from taxpayer-subsidized
trade, courtesy of the Eximbank!
At a time when the Federal budget is
going back into deficit and Congress is once again preparing
to raid the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, does it
really make sense to use taxpayer funds to benefit future Enrons,
Fortune 500 companies, and communist China?
Proponents of continued American support
for the Eximbank claim that the bank creates jobs and promotes
economic growth. However, this claim rests on a version of what
the great economist Henry Hazlitt called, the ``broken window''
fallacy. When a hoodlum throws a rock through a store window,
it can be said he has contributed to the economy, as the store
owner will have to spend money having the window fixed. The benefits
to those who repaired the window are visible for all to see,
therefore it is easy to see the broken window as economically
beneficial. However, the ``benefits'' of the broken window are
revealed as an illusion when one takes into account what is not
seen: the businesses and workers who would have benefited had
the store owner not spent money repairing a window, but rather
had been free to spend his money as he chose. Similarly, the
beneficiaries of Eximbank are visible to all. What is not seen
is the products that would have been built, the businesses that
would have been started, and the jobs that would have been created
had the funds used for the Eximbank been left in the hands of
consumers.
Some supporters of this bill equate supporting
Eximbank with supporting ``free trade,'' and claim that opponents
are ``protectionists'' and ``isolationists.'' Mr. Chairman, this
is nonsense, Eximbank has nothing to do with free trade. True
free trade involves the peaceful, voluntary exchange of goods
across borders, not forcing taxpayers to subsidize the exports
of politically powerful companies. Eximbank is not free trade,
but rather managed trade, where winners and losers are determined
by how well they please government bureacrats instead of how
well they please consumers.
Expenditures on the Eximbank distort
the market by diverting resources from the private sector, where
they could be put to the use most highly valued by individual
consumers, into the public sector, where their use will be determined
by bureaucrats and politically powerful special interests. By
distorting the market and preventing resources from achieving
their highest valued use, Eximbank actually costs Americans jobs
and reduces America's standard of living!
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to
remind my colleagues that there is simply no constitutional justification
for the expenditure of funds on programs such as Eximbank. In
fact, the drafters of the Constitution would be horrified to
think the Federal Government was taking hard-earned money from
the American people in order to benefit the politically powerful.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, Eximbank
distorts the market by allowing government bureaucrats to make
economic decisions in place of individual consumers. Eximbank
also violates basic principles of morality, by forcing working
Americans to subsidize the trade of wealthy companies that could
easily afford to subsidize their own trade, as well as subsidizing
brutal governments like China and the Sudan. Eximbank also violates
the limitations on congressional power to take the property of
individual citizens and use it to benefit powerful special interests.
It is for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to reject H.R.
2871, the Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act.
Ron Paul
is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.
|