-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