Current conditions
Fair
Complete forecast sponsored by
Your letters Nov. 20, 2009
Friday, November 20, 2009 at midnight
Just say no
to more foreign aid
Sen. Claire McCaskill introduced S1624, the Foreign Assistance Revitalization and Accountability Act last month. The bill is supposed to solve international poverty and global instability. Americans with good intentions have supported sending foreign aid to those in need in Third World countries for years. The U.S. government has sent billions and billions of dollars overseas. Foreign aid has been described as "a transfer of money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries." Sadly, we now know that most of that money and food never reached the people it was intended to help. Instead it made foreign politicians richer.
Foreign aid becomes an object of temptation to our politicians and to foreign politicians. Our government gives foreign aid to the governments of other countries with strings attached - essentially a Chicago-style bribe. Foreign leaders often use the aid for their own personal gain such as building palaces or buying expensive toys such as Escalades and jets.
U.S. government foreign aid is immoral. This is a clear area of distinction between liberals and conservatives. Sen. McCaskill wants to take my money and give it to those whom she and President Obama choose. I want to make my own choice of a private charity where I can keep tabs on how they spend their money. Forced "charity" is not charity at all, but theft. If a thief steals your identity, drains your bank account and gives some of your money to a homeless person, it is still stealing and still wrong.
In a nutshell, that is the federal government plan - take money from us taxpayers (by threat of force) and then give it to foreign governments to distribute. Why should a liberal bureaucrat decide who will receive my charitable giving?
Senator, where in the U.S. Constitution is foreign aid authorized? How can you justify borrowing money from China to give to other countries? In case no one in Congress has looked lately, the U.S. checkbook is overdrawn. All foreign aid given this year and next year is borrowed money.
Insanity is described as continuing to do the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Senator, attempting to reform foreign aid from the U.S. government is insanity. We don't need reform of foreign aid, we need to stop.
Fortunately, there is a better alternative for those who truly want to help families in need - private charities that see the gifts directly to the end users. An example that I personally support is Heifer Project International, which provides seed livestock to Third World families. Their Web site is www.heifer.org
Government will never end poverty. Empowering individuals by promoting unregulated free markets that create small businesses will.
Paul Hamby
Maysville, Mo.
Share Your Thoughts
Expand
Policy
Comments are the responsibility of the person posting them. Comments will be removed if they: threaten someone or degrade them on the basis of gender, race, class, national origin religion or disability; ...
... contain abusive, vulgar or sexually oriented language; spread rumors or lies; or are written in all caps. Please stay on topic. Brief quotes are OK as long as the source is given. Comments must be 250 words or fewer. Newspressnow.com moderators also reserve the right to remove comments for any reason they deem worthy.
pops says...
"U.S. government foreign aid is immoral."
Really? Are you serious, Mr. Hamby? Helping other nations not as fortunate as ours is immoral? Do you feel giving money to the Salvation Army, United Way or your church is immoral? It's the EXACT SAME CONCEPT....helping others with the largess we possess.
November 20, 2009 at 7:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalearch says...
I worked as a navigator on oil exploration ships for nearly five years. Two years of this was spent in various countries in West Africa.
When the ship's engineer would order rags to be used in the engine room, we would receive boxes of clothing with CARE on the side.
The cities all had many of what we call flea markets scattered around town. The vendors that sold clothing were taking the clothing out of boxes that also had CARE printed on the sides. The governments were taking the clothing we were donating and selling it to the vendors to sell to the public.
While sitting in port in Accra, Ghana we were docked directly behind a ship loaded with corn from America. I was told by our ship's agent that it was part of a food for the poor donation.
The shipyards were fenced off and had locals lined all along them waiting for day work. The management of the shipyard would bring in some of the locals to unload the ships by hand.
I sat and watched this ship being unloaded. The locals were paid in grain. They would take off the shirt or pants, tie off the sleeves or legs, and a supervisor would scoop grain into their clothing. At the end of the dock there were two armed Ghanaian army men standing there with a large tarp spread out on the ground. As each worker left he was required to "donate" a large amount of his grain to the military. One worker was beaten when he tried to by-pass the "donation" spot.
My point here is to know where your donations are going.
November 20, 2009 at 7:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
10377586 says...
I don't think Mr. Hamby feels charity is a bad thing, in fact he mentions one he participates in that benefits third world countries. His point is he wishes there were some way to better police where the foreign aid dollars are actually going, which I agree with.
November 20, 2009 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jambajuice says...
Too bad the biggest reason for giving money to poorer nations is to help infrastructure and open up new markets for US manufacturers, thus adding to our exports, and redistributing wealth back in the US. Or it can also be used to develope infrastructure, manufacture US products there cheaper, for the US and other countries to buy. Either way its business, little of what the US has done or ever does abroad is good will based. Usually there is a bottom line to make.
November 20, 2009 at 10:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pops says...
My point was that I feel Mr. Hamby's characterization that foreign aid is "immoral" was a terribly ignorant statement. I agree with dalearch....be conscious of what you're donating to, but Mr. Hamby's letter was just "out there". I'd also point out that when the US finds the situations dalearch outlines, we should take steps to stop such things, and prevent them. Foreign aid should include a certain amount of oversight.
November 20, 2009 at 12:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ladynurse says...
@pops:
"...but Mr. Hamby's letter was just 'out there.'"
I think the reason you feel this way is because you don't really understand the concept of charity, and don't comprehend the difference between individualism and statism.
You believe that foreign aid is charity, and that it is moral and good.
I believe Mr. Hamby stated that he believes that, since he currently participates in a charity that gives aid to foreign countries. So you can see that you both agree on WHAT charity is.
The disagreement appears to lie in HOW that 'charity' is collected. Mr. Hamby seems to think that he has a right to the money that he works for, and doesn't think that our Fed Govt should be able to take it away from him, and give it to someone else--regardless of what country they are in. Maybe Mr. Hamby would like to donate his money to someone locally, like taking care of a friend or family member that is unemployed or ill (potentially lowering states costs of unemployment, welfare, disability, or medicaid); or maybe Mr. Hamby wants to donate a different amount because he's paying off student loans with incredibly high interest rates, or maybe Mr. Hamby just had a new baby and his wife is going to be staying home instead of working, etc. Would you feel differently if you were the person that had to collect this money from him yourself? Would it be different if you walked into his home with a badge and a gun, and threatened him with fines or imprisonment if he didn't contribute to this 'charity?' I'm pretty sure that guns and badges, fines and imprisonment aren't words that are used when defining charity.
Mr. Hamby clearly stated that foreign aid is immoral because it's NOT charity! It's stealing from him to give to someone else, period, end of story. Until you understand that concept, you will not understand the concept of personal liberty.
Our founding fathers wanted peace, commerce and free trade with all nations, entangling alliances with none. Foreign aid, whether you're for or against, is unConstitutional.
One should always remember the adage that "charity starts at home." Once America has successfully taken care of America, we should halt ALL foreign aid and clean up our own backyard.
America needs to lead by example--promoting personal freedom and liberty, and the personal responsibilities that go along with them. That is the best gift we could give to the world.
November 20, 2009 at 1:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ufc08 says...
ladynurse great comment you hit the nail on the head.
November 20, 2009 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lbc says...
Foreign aid should come from those who can afford it....
The United States has a deficit problem. It is an on-going problem. it is a accumulated deficit from past mistakes (overspending) and a current problem...from more overspending. So, Mr Hamby is without reservation, absolutely correct.
There is no justification for our Congress...Ms McCaskill in this instance, borrowing more money from China to give to anyone, for any purpose or any possible reason. That is not why we elected a congress.
Helping others with the "largess we possess" is a commendable thought. The problem is that we do not happen to possess any largess and our Congress doesn't have the right to borrow any "largess" from China to make our Congress appear to be generous when in fact they are simply STUPID.
It's time for a dose of REALITY.
I know how unlikely it is.....but I sure wish Senator McCaskill's staff scanned these newspaper blogs to find out what her taxpaying constituents were thinking and saying
November 20, 2009 at 2:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lbc says...
dalearch also hits on an appropriate note........
pointing out (in effect) that they US Government handles it's "largess" much like everything else it does.....very badly. Another reason it shouldn't be doing it.
There are many charities (private) in the United States that provide all the "foreign aid" that we need to provide. It's a mistake for the US Government to be involved in this activity at all, as dalearch so clearly demonstrates.
I am a believer in the 10th ammendment.
November 20, 2009 at 3:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pops says...
I totally disagree with you all. I feel, as Americans, we owe the world a helping hand. Do we ever get one BACK? Nope...
Does everyone who gets aid use it properly? Again....nope
Should that keep us from trying to help those who need it? Absolutely not!
I view foreign aid as helping those who can't help themselves. Call it what you want. I don't need a civics lesson to know how to read. I also don't need anyone trying to interpret Mr. Hamby's poorly written letter.
November 20, 2009 at 4:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
2ndone says...
I disagree that America OWES the world a helping hand. Americans (specifically CONSERVATIVE Americans - and before anyone gets upset with that comment - check the facts on WHO is the most charitable) are the most freehearted bunch of people on the planet. We do it because it is in our heart and has been taught through our religious history. I prefer to give on a local level - as there are plenty here in our country that are in need. With unemployment reaching as high as 18% (yes, that is the TRUE percentage in MANY states), NOW is NOT the time for Sen. Claire McCaskill to try to push a BILL giving aid to foreign countries. I will remember this and many other moves by politicians when they are up for re-election.
The points made as to our indebtedness to China and borrowing money to give as charity to other countries - is just a piece of the insanity that has gripped this country. I think that last November when many voted for CHANGE and thought that the redistribution of wealth was a good thing - they had NO idea that the wealth of the USA was going to be transferred to foreign countries. The poor in this country actually thought that THEY were going to be the beneficiaries.
Remember that woman that was so excited that the President would be paying for her mortgage - is she still waiting . . .
People - please get over "Party Mentality" and actually ask yourself if the policies being pushed contain ANY common sense? Is this the way you would run your household?
November 21, 2009 at 12:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalearch says...
I have to agree with 2ndone. We don't owe anyone in the world squat.
I also disagree that people have a "right" to healthcare. Healthcare is a service a trained professional performs much like a plumber or carpenter. If they choose to donate their services - so be it.
November 21, 2009 at 7:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sweetcharity says...
Mr. Hamby's letter is right on. Over time, our country has developed many social programs that appeal to good-hearted people - but are really beyond the role that government was intended to play under our constitution. These programs create a sense of entitlement in their recipients, and cost taxpayers massive amounts of money. A good portion of the costs of these programs is the ever-expanding bureaucracy that administers them.
If you want to look at our government with new eyes, read Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged." (Unless you have a lot of time, read the abridged version. :)) Amazing how many parallels there are with what's going on today. And Glenn
Beck's "Arguing With Idiots" presents a lot of well-backed informative material about the Constitution and "progress" with an enjoyable, zany attitude.
So, no, Mr. Hamby's letter is not poorly written. I'm not anti-foreign aid, but the existing programs should be reviewed for affordability, and prioritizd below America's need to get its own house in order. I salute those of you who grasp his meaning and have expanded upon it so eloquently.
November 21, 2009 at 10:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lbc says...
When China cancels it's "foreign debt", I'll be ready to listen to "we owe the world a helping hand".
In the meantime it's time to get our house in order. We have given away so much it is beyond comprehension. We don't even figure the value of the education we have given the world. Look at our top Universities....full of foreigners....keeping local citizens out. Ughhhhhh.
November 21, 2009 at 3:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
schnell says...
I would like to share a few words in response to Paul Hamby's letter on Senate Bill 1524 (not 1624 as stated in the letter).
I am proud to be an American, but I readily acknowledge that we can do a much better job as a responsible world leader in providing a well-organized blended economic development plan. That, in fact, is the very reason that I enthusiastically support S-1524 as a first step in making foreign assistance more effective and efficient.
Please understnad clearly! This bill is not about charity or giveaways. As Senator Bond so wisely has stated, it is all about "Smart Power".
It encompasses a strategic integration of our military might, diplomacy, education and economic development.
After many years of ignoring the expansion of uncontrolled bureaucracy, Congress is now intentionally trying to carve out the redundancy and increase the transparancy, evaluation and accountability.
With continued bipartisan support, the bill has now passed the foreign relations committee by a 14-3 vote.
So, for any who are going to speak to S-1524, please understand what the provision of the bill is intended to do. No, Congress is not perfect, but this bill is trying to make them much more effective. Please support their efforts and give them this chance.
(Want to learn more? Go to www.bread.org) KAS
November 21, 2009 at 11:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Liberty says...
Schnell: Thank you for the clarification of the SB number. I do hope that readers will investigate your organization. Bread.org, located in Washington DC, is a lobbying organization. The 2008 report shows a budget of nearly 4.5 million dollars with almost all of that money going to Lobbying efforts, staff salary & expenses. Nice photos of poor hungry people on your website while you appeal to churches and donors to raise money to support lobbying efforts to bilk taxpayer money for foreign aid. Feel Good Charity. Designed to make the donor feel good and do virtually nothing to help those in need. Your organization is just the type that I will NEVER support.
Pops: You might want to support bread.org. Just like U.S foreign aid, it will make YOU feel better while helping no starving children.
Great Comments and discussion. Please call Senator Bond and McCaskill and tell them NO MORE U.S. FOREIGN AID - Paul Hamby
November 22, 2009 at 12:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lflinch says...
I would suggest that everyone read John Perkins book, "Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man."
There are usually two agendas involved in foreign aid. The public agenda is for the American tax payer to help a poor distressed country feed their starving people, build billion dollar infrastructures like dams, water purification plants, etc so they can be self sufficient. This is a very noble endeavor.
However, the secret agenda is to loan them huge amounts of money that they can never pay back. Many times, when they can't repay the loan, our government will excuse the loan if that country agrees to support the United States position in the United Nations or allows the U.S. to take over their natural resources, or they allow us to build a military base in their country.
All of this transfer of power from a poor undeveloped nation to the all powerful United States without firing a single shot. (Much more efficient and cost effective than going to war) The rulers in the poor developing country and the companies like Halliburton and the bankers make billions of dollars in profit and the American tax payer gets fleeced with the poor peasants in the developing country worse off than before.
This is described more fully in my book, "Secrets of Our Hidden Controllers Revealed" which is availble at Borders. www.larryflinchpaugh.com
November 22, 2009 at 9:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lbc says...
When it's all said and done there is no reason or logic from an individual taxpayer's view for the Government to be speweing money all over the world.
We need a strong movement to enforce the 10th ammendment and allow the government to do nothing they do not absolutely have to do. Private charity is just fine and will more than satisfy any moral obligation anyone may feel.
November 23, 2009 at 2:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BreadMedia says...
Thanks to Paul Hamby for stirring up a healthy discussion about the effectiveness of foreign assistance. The more people paying attention to the one billion people on the planet going hungry, the more hope there is for all of us.
Bread for the World is a collective Christian voice urging our nation's decision makers to end hunger at home and abroad. Many Bread members are active volunteers at their local food pantries and give to private organizations that directly serve people in developing countries.
At the same time, we believe that our government must do its part, both here at home and in faraway places. We believe it's not only the right thing for our nation to do, it's the smart thing to do in this increasingly interconnected world.
Bread members' advocacy has helped get 29 million more African children into school through debt relief, immunize over 100 million people (annually) in the developing world through the Child Survival Act, and strengthen WIC (which provides healthy food for almost 9 million children under five and pregnant women each year in the United States.)
U.S. foreign assistance that focuses on poverty reduction saves lives. By improving the system, people who need help the most will get it faster and more effectively in the long term. That's what motivates Bread members to advocate for bipartisan legislation in the House (H.R. 2139) and Senate (S. 1524).
Keep up the fruitful discussion! Senator McCaskill and other elected leaders need to know that people in Missouri want to provide help and opportunity far beyond your own communities.
Bread for the World Media Relations
November 25, 2009 at 1:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ZDouglas says...
Dear Mr. Hamby,
You oppose U.S. foreign aid, and I understand and respect your perspective here. You also mentioned you support Heifer International and the work they do. I encourage you to check out a letter to President Obama on the importance of global development and foreign assistance reform, signed by representatives of many non-profit organizations. Jo Luck, President & CEO of Heifer, is among the signatories, as is the CEO of Habitat for Humanity International. The letter can be found at http://www.modernizingforeignassistan...
S. 1524, of which Sen. McCaskill and eighteen other senators (including three Republicans) are cosponsors, would implement some of the reforms that this letter calls for. S. 1524 is about efficiency, accountability, transparency and effectiveness.
I think at this point, the question of, "To provide foreign aid, or not to provide foreign aid," is largely fodder for intellectual debate. The pressing issue at hand is how to be the most effective in what we're already doing. Because I don't think foreign aid is going to end anytime soon. It was, in fact, increased under President Bush.
I support S. 1524 and hope that Sen. Bond signs on as a cosponsor, also.
Respectfully,
ZDouglas
December 1, 2009 at 11:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )