Ron Paul Dear Colleague for Paul Amendment to Cut Export Promotion
July 29, 1997
(J. Bradley Jansen was Ron Paul’s legislative staffer for these issues at this time)
Cut Government Waste
Vote for the Paul Amendment
July 29, 1997
Corporate welfare is government waste–both bad politics and bad economics.
The Export Promotion schemes in the Foreign Appropriations bill take money from the taxpayers–from the productive sectors of the economy–to give to companies that contributed to political candidates, lay off American workers (often shipping U.S. jobs abroad), and feed at the government trough. This misdirection of investment capital causes inefficiencies that raise unemployment rates and lower economic growth rates.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, OPIC’s clients donated a total of $27.4 million in PAC and soft money contributions to federal candidates and parties in the 1996 election cycle–a great return on their investment, even as pandering politicians claim there is no connection.
OPIC wants $80 million in new taxpayer money,
Export-Import Bank wants $632 million in new taxpayer money,
Trade Development Agency wants $43 million more.
This money goes to politically well-connected companies with poor records of creating jobs. Many of its recipients have in fact downsized their workforce and shipped U.S. jobs abroad:
Boeing Inc., the top recipient of corporate welfare from the Ex-Im Bank, slashed its U.S. workforce from 155,900 to only 103,600 employees in the past six years. Now Boeing wants the U.S. taxpayer to reward them for laying off 1/3 of their American workforce!
General Electric, the second largest recipient of Ex-Im welfare, slashed its American workforce from 667,000 in 1975 to only 398,000 twenty years later–cutting 269,000 wage earners from employment in the U.S. yet GE maintains its reputation for shipping jobs abroad.
“Corporate welfare does not work anywhere in the world. It does not work because it penalizes a country’s winners with excess taxes in order to fund that country’s losers with inefficiently run government programs,” testified Dr. T.J. Rodgers, President and C.E.O. of Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, before Congress in 1995. “ ‘They’ve got subsidies; we need subsidies,’ is exactly wrong. America will be much more competitive on a relative basis if we allow the nations with whom we compete to squander their taxpayers’ money, while we encourage our companies to win without subsidies. It’s like the Olympics: there comes the day when an athlete must walk alone into the arena of competition. The government cannot lift the weights and run the miles that are required to be a champion–only an individual can.”
According to the Congressional Research Service, “In essence, by subsidizing exports directly, or indirectly by subsidizing overseas direct investment, domestic producers transfer income to foreign consumers who pay less for the goods they buy because of the subsidy”. When other nations subsidize our imports and other nations’ imports, it frees up money to purchase more net U.S. goods (CRS memo July 28, 1997, Price and Income Effects of Export Subsidies).
Our trading partners are taxing their citizens to boost the U.S. economy!
Let’s not tax our citizens to boost their economies! Vote for the Paul amendment!