Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A while back I posted about a visit by Pres. Obama to Seattle to proudly annouce his expansion of a cornerstone of crony capitalism, the US Exim bank. This is a gov't sponsored bank that loans money to customers of US companies, with the taxpayer on the hook if the loan goes bad.
Sen Mike Lee of Utah recently tried unsuccessfully to end the program. In an interview he said that it was a bi-partisan effort to get rid of this corp. welfare. He said that many Republicans opposed him, while a few Dems supported him.
Years ago I noticed while listening to Ralph Nader on corp. welfare, that there was a potential coalition on this issue between honest progressives like Nader, and limited-gov't types on the right. Perhaps finally somebody, namely Mike Lee, is looking to turn that into reality.
I read an article about this Export-Import Bank the other day. One businessman, who often depends on the bank, gave an example of what the bank does.
He said (paraphrase): Suppose I get an order from a Chinese business for a huge shipment of my product, to be fulfilled in the next week. The Export-Imiport bank allows me to get an immediate (two or three days), low cost loan, for the cost of the order. If I had to rely on a traditional bank it could take weeks or months, and I would lose the order.
Anyway, the article, as the one you linked to, notes that US businesses are in favor of keeping this Export-Import bank going; it also notes that no tax dollars are at stake.
I realize that there is some opposition to keeping this bank going, although I am not clear why. Apparently Boeing is a big reason. I had never heard of this bank until very recently.
Note that the vote in the House vote was 330-93, with all no votes coming from R's. Perhaps this provides a good index of where Congress stands on corp. welfare and crony capitalism. Less than half of republicans oppose corporate welfare, and 100% of Democrats favor it. In the Senate, it was 78-20, w/ 19 R's and Bernie Sanders (VT) opposed, so the proportions were fairly similar.
Note that the vote in the House vote was 330-93, with all no votes coming from R's. Perhaps this provides a good index of where Congress stands on corp. welfare and crony capitalism. Less than half of republicans oppose corporate welfare, and 100% of Democrats favor it. In the Senate, it was 78-20, w/ 19 R's and Bernie Sanders (VT) opposed, so the proportions were fairly similar.
I take it that Kucinich didn't vote, since in the past he's criticized the Eximbank. He's leaving Congress when his term is up, so perhaps he feels less bound to show up.
BTW he would be a good example of the potential for an alignment between progressives and limited gov't conservatives to oppose corporate welfare. Politics makes strange bedfellows.
A very loud quite from the usual suspect lefty posters on this. I suppose that either they are a) pro-corporate welfare; or b) just don't see any immediate name-calling opportunities on this thread.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.