[Peace-discuss] Wall Street Bailout Threatens World's Poor

[Robert Naiman]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Just Foreign Policy <info at justforeignpolicy.org>
Date: Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Subject: Wall Street Bailout Threatens World's Poor: Who Wins and Who Loses?
To: Robert Naiman <naiman at justforeignpolicy.org>


Wall Street Bailout Threatens World's Poor: Who Wins and Who Loses?
Dear Robert,

On Monday the House voted down the Bush Administration's request that
Congress authorize $700 billion for purchasing Wall Street's "toxic
assets" linked to the collapse of the housing bubble, after being
deluged by phone calls and emails in opposition. The Senate approved
basically the same package Wednesday, and the House may vote again
Friday.

Largely missing from debate has been the impact of this plan on U.S.
government spending on human needs in the next Administration. What
will be the toll exacted on human needs for all Americans in the next
budget, and who will win and lose in the latest bailout plan? And
there has been almost no mention at all of the impact on our global
commitments to help eradicate poverty, reduce illiteracy, address
easily preventable disease, provide food and shelter to the world's
neediest at home and abroad.

Can you ask Congress to consider the cost to the world, as well as to
the United States, of enacting the Bush Administration's plan, and to
consider alternatives?

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/globalbailout.html

Last week, world leaders met at the United Nations. UN Secretary
General Ban Ki-moon is asking for the world's wealthy countries to
contribute $72 billion per year to help the world meet the modest UN
goal of reducing extreme poverty. [1] According to the advocacy group
Health Gap, the US share of this would be about 1/3, or $24 billion,
based on the US share of the donor countries' wealth. Over the four
years of the next Administration, that would be about $100 billion. As
Inter Press Service reported, delegates to the UN meeting expressed
concern that donor country commitments to reducing global poverty
would now be even weaker than before.

If the Bush Administration's Wall Street bailout is enacted, we will
be told that there is no money for additional spending on human needs,
nationally and globally, in the next Administration - regardless of
whether this is true. Already, in the first Presidential debate,
moderator Jim Lehrer pressed the candidates to say what priorities
they were going to give up, in light of the expected Wall Street
bailout.

There are alternatives to the Bush Administration's plan that would
cost the US taxpayers less, have greater chance of addressing problems
in the credit market, and not politically threaten the next
Administration's ability to increase spending on human needs. Congress
should consider these alternatives before approving the Bush
Administration's plan.

Representative Peter DeFazio has introduced a plan which would
strengthen regulations to bolster the banking sector. The plan is
based on a proposal made by William Isaac, head of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation under the Reagan Administration. Isaac notes
that in the 1980s Congress enacted a program which shored up the
capital of banks to give them more time to resolve their problems, and
the FDIC resolved a $100 billion insolvency in savings banks for a
total cost of less than $2 billion.

Please ask Congress to consider the cost to the world, as well as to
the United States, of enacting the Bush Administration's plan, and to
consider alternatives.

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/involved/globalbailout.html

Thanks for all you do for a just foreign policy,

Robert Naiman, Sarah Burns, and Chelsea Mozen
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org

Support our work. We're funded by people like you. Our small staff
ensures that small contributions go a long way. You can contribute
here.

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/donate.html

References:

[1] "No 'Bailout' for the World's Poorest," Thalif Deen, Inter Press
Service, September 29, 2008.

[2] "The 'No BAILOUTS Act,'" John Nichols, The Nation, September 30, 2008.



-- 
Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

Ambassador Pickering on Iran Talks and Multinational Enrichment
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kGZFrFxVg8A