-Caveat Lector-
MEDIUM RARE - By Jim Rarey - August 5, 1999
PAUL FORCES VOTE ON CORPORATE WELFARE
Follow up to NTR Vote for China
Many conservatives, including this writer, were shocked and dismayed
last week when
Representative Ron Paul (Rep. of Texas) voted last week to keep Normal
Trade Relations
(NTR) for Communist China. This author wrote an article that was highly
critical of that
vote. At the time, Paul had not explained his vote.
The situation was clarified this week as the House debated and voted on
an amendment
Representative Paul introduced to the Foreign Operations Appropriations
bill. The
amendment would have prohibited any new obligation, guarantee, or
agreement by; the
Export-Import Bank, The Oversees Private Investment Corporation (OPIC)
or the Trade
Development Agency.
During the debate, Paul explained his vote on the China NTR. He said he
believed in
trading with any country unless we were at war with them. However, he
said that trade
should not include taxpayer subsidies for corporations hence his
amendment to stop any
new subsidies. The Foreign Operations bill was obviously the proper
vehicle for that effort
as opposed to the NTR vote.
Representative Paul is to be commended for his strategy to force an up
or down vote on
the corporate welfare issue. Too many politicians have pretended to be
opposed to the
corporate welfare aspects of granting NTR to various countries but have
claimed that
other trade considerations (jobs, jobs, jobs) override that aspect. They
can no longer make
that claim because their votes on Paul’s amendment makes it very clear
how they stand on
the subsidy issue.
Paul’s amendment went down to a thundering defeat by a 58-360 vote with
fifteen
representatives not voting. Seven Democrats and one Independent
(socialist Bernie
Sanders of Vermont) joined fifty Republicans in voting to end the
corporate subsidies. As a
result, 165 Republicans and 195 Democrats can no longer escape the fact
that welfare for
the fat cats of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is one of their
top priorities. It would
also be interesting to find out why fifteen representatives failed to
vote on the amendment.
Did they not want to be on the record on the issue? (See the attached
listing of those voting
for the amendment and those not voting.)
The vote of the Democrats in the House is particularly ironic for a
party that claims to be
for "the little man" as opposed to "big business". Only seven out of two
hundred eleven
(3.3%) matched their rhetoric with their votes.
All representatives who failed to support the Paul amendment should be
required to explain
their votes. The argument that subsidies for foreign operations of U.S.
companies creates
jobs for Americans will no longer fly. The experience with NAFTA puts
the lie to that claim.
The subsidies do create jobs (along with risk-free investments for
mega-corporations) but
not in the U.S.
If your representative did not vote for the Paul amendment, demand an
explanation. Let
them know that we are watching their votes, not listening to the
rhetoric.
Permission is granted to reproduce in its entirety or call Jim Rarey at
(734) 942-7667
VOTES ON PAUL AMENDMENT ON CORPORATE SUBSIDIES Democrats and the
lone Independent are in italics
VOTING FOR THE AMENDMENT
NAME STATE NAME STATE
Armey Texas Kingston Georgia
Barr Georgia Linder Georgia
Bartlett Maryland McInnis Colorado
Bono Calif. McIntosh Indiana
Burton Indiana McIntyre N. Carolina
Campbell Calif. McKinney Georgia
Cannon Utah Miller (Gary) Calif.
Chabot Ohio Myrick N. Caroloina
Chenoweth Idaho Paul Texas
Coble N. Carolina Pease Indiana
Coburn Oklahoma Pombo Calif.
Collins Georgia Radanovich Calif.
Condit Calif. Rogan Calif.
Cox Calif. Rohrabacher Calif.
DeFazio Oregon Royce Calif.
DeMint S. Carolina Ryun Kansas
Doolittle Calif. Sanders Vermont
Duncan Tennessee Sanford S. Carolina
Goode Virginia Scarborough Florida
Hayes N. Carolina Schaffer Colorado
Hayworth Arizona Sessions Texas
Hefley Colorado Shadegg Arizona
Hilleary Tennessee Smith New Jersey
Hoekstra Michigan Stupak Michigan
Hostettler Indiana Tancredo Colorado
Hunter Calif. Terry Nebraska
Istook Oklahoma Thune S. Dakota
Jones N. Carolina Visclosky Indiana
Kasich Ohio Wamp Tennessee
NOT VOTING
NAME STATE NAME STATE
Bilbray Calif. Owens New York
Frank Mass. Peterson Minnesota
Hingchey New York Pickering Mississippi
Johnson Texas Pryce N. Carolina
Klink Pennsylvania Serrano New York
Lantos Calif. Thompson Mississippi
McDermott Washington Young Alaska
Mollohan W. Virginia
Kathleen
This country with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit
it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they
can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their
revolutionary right to dismember it or overthrow it. -Abraham Lincoln, April 4, 1861
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
