76-18-B8

- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1977

<< Previous Broadcast

Next Broadcast >>

Foreign Aid

Transcript Representative Bill Young, a Congressman from Florida, successfully amended the Foreign Aid appropriation bill and now finds himself up against the whole administration, which didn't care for his amendment even a little bit. In spite of the fact that poll after poll shows the American people increasingly disenchanted with Foreign Aid, this year's appropriation was almost double last year's. And the Secretary of State says he wants it increased even more in the years ahead. Congressman Young's amendment blocked aid from going to Uganda, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. The White House complained that this hampered efforts to promote American interests around the world. But, the part of the amendment that really touched a nerve was language prohibiting indirect aid through international financial institutions over which we have no control. It seems that the Administration wants to increase our commitments to these multi-lateral organizations. Of the $6.7 billion approved by the House, about one-third ($2.1 billion) will be plowed into six international funds or banks. Young hasn't been able to get any answers to his questions about where this money goes after it leaves our hands. Executives of the banks refuse to testify before Congress and Robert McNamara refused to allow the Congressman to sit in on a board meeting of the World Bank. We, of course, are the largest contributor to all of these banks. And part of our money underwrites the payroll of all these banks -- whose employees, by the way, in many categories are paid as much as 57 percent more than comparable workers in U. S. civil service jobs; besides which they pay no income tax on these handsome salaries. Congressman Bill Young is calling for a national debate on the whole subject of Foreign Aid. He points out that Americans are unaware of the extent to which foreign aid is being placed in the hands of international organizations. If the purpose of foreign aid is to further our national interests, by what rhyme or reason do we entrust it to international banks answerable to no one but their international charters? And what did our Secretary of State mean when he to_ld the Conference on International Economic Cooperation in Paris last May 30th that we must have a "new international economic system"? In that same week in May, the under secretary of Economic Affairs told a gathering in the State Department that the international banks should be an "umbrella -- a catalyst" for all international finance. Congressman Young asks what kind of scheme is being proposed for America and shouldn't the American people be told about it? One thing we do know -- or should know -- is that some of the "international" or perhaps we should call them "multi-national" banks we help finance make what are called "soft loans" to developing countries. Soft loans are 50 year loans at no interest -- only a slight service charge. But since we ourselves are operating on a deficit basis this means we are lending money at no interest, which we have to borrow first and upon which we pay the going rate of interest. Calling for a national debate on the subject of foreign aid, how it is distributed and what we get in return for it can hardly be called a radical proposal. Who knows, the world might even learn how much some nations are in arrears on their dues and contributions to the United Nations and affiliated organizations. This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening.		Details Batch Number 76-18-B8 Production Date 08/15/1977 Book/Page RihoH-168 Audio Youtube? No
		Added Notes