The Issues: Foreign Policy and International Trade

Foreign aid is little more than welfare for nations -- with the same disastrous effects as domestic welfare programs. The U.S. currently spends approximately $14 billion per year on foreign aid -- far less than most people believe, but still a substantial sum. Since the end of World War II, the United States has spent more than $400 billion on aid to other countries. But there is little evidence that any of these programs has significantly improved the lives of the people in countries receiving this aid. Instead, foreign aid has typically slowed economic development and created dependence.

Indeed, the U.S. Agency for International Development itself admits, "Only a handful of countries that started receiving U.S. assistance in the 1950s and 1960s has ever graduated from dependent status." In fact, despite massive amounts of international aid, the average annual increase in per capita GNP has declined steadily in developing nations since the 1960s, with many of the Third World's heaviest aid recipients actually suffering negative economic growth.

A recent study by Peter Boone of the London School of Economics and the Center for Economic Performance confirmed that U.S. economic aid does not promote economic development. Studying more than 100 countries, Boone concluded that "Long-term aid is not a means to create [economic] growth."

There are many reasons for the failure of foreign aid. First, foreign aid has a widespread record of waste, fraud, and abuse. U.S. aid programs have built tennis courts in Rwanda, sent sewing machines to areas without electricity, and constructed hospitals in cities where a dozen similar facilities already sat half empty.

Frequently, the aid is stolen by corrupt foreign leaders. The Agency for International Development admitted in 1993 that "much of the investment financed by AID between 1960 and 1980 has disappeared without a trace."

Even when aid reaches its intended beneficiaries, the results are often counterproductive. Just as domestic welfare prevents Americans from becoming self-sufficient, foreign aid keeps entire nations dependent. According to one internal AID audit, "Long-term feeding programs . . . have great potential for creating disincentives for food production."

Specific examples of counterproductive aid policies are easy to come by. For example, following a devastating earthquake in Guatemala, farmers trying to sell their surplus grain found the market flooded by the U.S. Food for Peace program. As a result, according to the Institute for Food and Development Policy, "food aid stood in the way of development." According to journalist Michael Maren, a long-time volunteer with such groups as the Peace Corps, Catholic Relief Services, and AID, aid to Somalia aggravated the country's famine, disrupted local agriculture, and turned nomadic tribesmen into "relief junkies." Similar results have been documented in countries as diverse as Colombia, Haiti, and India.

Moreover, foreign aid has often been used to prop up failing Socialist economies, preventing countries from moving to free-market economic policies. Yet, an examination of world economies clearly shows that those countries with free markets experience the greatest economic prosperity.

As a result, Alex de Waal, president of the human rights group, Africa Rights, concludes that foreign aid is "structurally bad because it undermines the incentive to take responsibility. The more aid a country receives, the less the government of that country has to answer to the people."

If Americans truly want to help other countries, they can best do so not through failed foreign aid programs, but by improving the U.S. economy, so that U.S. businesses have funds to invest abroad, and pursuing free trade policies. As the Congressional Budget Office recently admitted, "Critics rightly argue that the broad policies of the major Western countries -- trade policies, budget deficits, growth rates, and the like -- generally exert greater [positive] influence on the economies of developing countries than does aid."

- Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute
http://www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy

Guiding Principles to Foreign Policy and International Trade

As Michael Tanner outlined above, one of the essential steps to improving not only our own well-being as a nation, but also that of foreign aid recipients, is to end welfare for foreign nations. Further, our foreign policy must be founded on a few other key concepts:

Maintaining American Sovereignty. The United States is a free and sovereign republic.

Recognizing Sovereignty of Other Nations. Just as we insist others respect our sovereignty, we should not intervene in the internal affairs of other nations.

Respecting the Constitution. All treaties must be subordinate to the Constitution as this empowers and limits the the federal government.

Resistance to Empire Building. We should strive to live in peace with all nations.

Freeing the US Military from Duty as the World's Police Force. Since World War II, the United States has increasingly played the undesirable role of an international policeman. Through our involvements abroad, our freedoms are being sacrificed on an altar of international involvement. The United States is now committed, by treaty, to defend foreign nations in all parts of the world. Therefore, I support the systematic withdrawal from most of these treaties and agreements, each of which holds the potential to plunge America into war in some far-flung corner of the earth. Further, I oppose US participation in UN-led Peacekeeping missions.

Reform of the US State Department. The State Department has, for more than 60 years, been actively engaged in the promotion of internationalism contrary to the best interests of the United States. Now it acts as a consistent tool of international banking interests and multi-national corporations. I support taking all necessary legislative and administrative actions be taken to assure that every person serving in the State Department adheres to the objectives set forth in this policy; expenditures by the Department be reduced sufficiently to limit its activities; all non-conforming functions, such as the Peace Corps and the U.S. Information Agency, be eliminated; and, that our Government be prohibited from conducting secret negotiations or entering into secret treaties or agreements in any way binding on the United States.

Ensuring proper trade and relationship agreements. So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites. The ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals. Both the WTO and CAFTA could force Americans to get a doctor’s prescription simply to take herbs and vitamins. Alternative treatments could be banned. The WTO has forced Congress to change our laws, yet we still face trade wars. If anything, the WTO makes trade relations worse by giving foreign competitors a new way to attack U.S. jobs. NAFTA’s proposed superhighway is just one step in erasing the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, called the North American Union. NAFTA would effectively create a single nation out of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, with a new unelected bureaucracy and money system. Forget about controlling immigration under this scheme. And a free America with a limited constitutional government would be gone forever. Let’s not forget the UN. It wants to impose a direct tax on us. We must withdraw from any organizations and trade deals that infringe upon the freedom and independence of the United States of America.

Reducing Foreign Military Aid. Military expenses are hundreds of billions of dollars per year. A large percentage of this is spent overseas to defend wealthy countries like Germany and Japan -- who then profit from us in international trade. Let's take them off military welfare. We can defend America better and save billions of dollars annually.

On the Issues:

I oppose the current government policy of foreign 'intervention' including military and economic aid, guarantees, and diplomatic meddling. I also oppose 'isolationism' as trade among nations and international cooperation are essential.
I support ending all limitations of private foreign aid; this will better empower concerned citizens and organizations to grant charitable aid.
I support the dramatic reduction in foreign aid; these welfare programs drain resources that could be put to better use by citizens and for the benefit of Americans in need. Cuts should start with those nations with documented human rights abuse and those nations not aligned with our goals.
Emergency governmental loans and limited aid may be provided to assist countries when extraordinary circumstances that cause disaster and threaten civilian lives or when necessary to protect the US from imminent military threat.
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations." Congress may not abdicate or transfer to others that constitutional power. Therefore, I oppose the unconstitutional transfer of authority over U.S. trade policy from Congress to agencies, domestic or foreign, which improperly exercise policy-setting functions with respect to U.S. trade policy.
I support the withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and all other agreements wherein agencies other than the Congress of the United States improperly assume responsibility for establishing American trade policies. I oppose approval of free trade agreements such as the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).
Tariffs are not only a constitutional source of revenue, but, wisely administered, are an aid to preservation of the national economy. I support the use of tariffs as proposed by the Founding Fathers particularly when the the other nation imposes tariffs to discourage purchase of US goods in favor of their domestic products.
I reject the trade concept of Most Favored Nation status which has been used to curry favor with regimes whose domestic and international policies in fundamental conflict with the vital interests of the United States of America.
I oppose the proposed unconstitutional Trade Promotion Authority which transfers the establishment of trade policy from Congress to the executive branch of government. In the name of free trade, multi-national corporations have been given tax breaks by the U.S. government which are not available to American businesses and money extracted from U.S. taxpayers has been used by the government to subsidize exports and encourage businesses to move abroad.
I support a a firm policy under which U.S. or multinational businesses investing abroad does so at its own risk. There is no obligation by our government to protect those businesses with the lives of our service personnel or the taxes of our citizens.
The United States should continue to provide leadership in peace negotiation process.
I support the rights of states to establish stricter standards for health, safety and for the environment than those of our federal government , and to protect themselves against substandard, imported goods.
I oppose continued US involvement in the United Nations and the funding thereof; this organization is heavily-US funded by the United States but works against US interests and seeks to establish a one-world government. I do, however, support the creation of a new international program that serves to promote international dialogue but has no power, in itself, to issue mandates or impose the will of member nations. Further, this organization may serve as an arbitration board for those countries desiring to settle international disputes in this fashion.
I support the use of a Tobin tax to fund all international assistance and the proposed international organization to promote peaceful dialogue between nations. A Tobin tax is a tax on all trade of currency across borders. Daily, $1 trillion circles the globe in currency trading; a minimal tax will reduce most negative impacts of currency speculation and assist in funding international activities.
I support an end to all government subsidies, tax preferences, and investment guarantees to encourage exports and or U.S. businesses to invest in foreign lands.
I support the collection of all debts owed to the United States by foreign countries or foreign entities.
I support holding foreign states accountable for terrorists who operate in their country without interference by the 'hosting' nation.
I support the doctrine of 'unilateralism' that is opposed strongly by the Democratic Party - this doctrine acknowledges the right of the United States, as a sovereign nation, to use military force without any approval or assistance from other nations whenever it believes there is a threat to its security or welfare. While conflict should be the last option in resolving a difference, we must not rely on foreign nations to grant us permission to defend our interests.
I oppose U.S. participation in all so-called U.N. peace keeping operations.
I support barring the United Nations, and its subsidiaries, from further operations on United States territory.
I support the practice of having American service men and women serve only under American commanders and not those of the United Nations or foreign countries. An exception would be for those missions which are conducted under a temporary, joint command such as NATO.
I oppose any participation in any form of world government including any World Court.

Home
Main Menu Home About Will The Issues The 2nd District News and Events Contact Us Get Involved Contribute Links and Resources MySpace Page Facebook Profile Candidate Profile Team Liberty Content Management	Foreign Policy and International Trade On The Issues Government Reform Election Reform Energy Independence Foreign Policy Taxation National Defense Rights and Liberties Nanny Government Freedom of Religion Freedom of Speech Right to Bear Arms Right to Life Right to Privacy Social and Domestic Issues Agriculture Crime and Violence Drug Issues Education and School Choice Environment Family Budget Healthcare Housing Immigration & Border Security Marriage and Family Poverty and Welfare Social Security and Retirement Technology & Infrastructure Communications Internet Other Technologies Ron Paul on our Foreign Policy Ending Welfare for Nations -- Foreign Aid Foreign aid is little more than welfare for nations -- with the same disastrous effects as domestic welfare programs. The U.S. currently spends approximately $14 billion per year on foreign aid -- far less than most people believe, but still a substantial sum. Since the end of World War II, the United States has spent more than $400 billion on aid to other countries. But there is little evidence that any of these programs has significantly improved the lives of the people in countries receiving this aid. Instead, foreign aid has typically slowed economic development and created dependence. Indeed, the U.S. Agency for International Development itself admits, "Only a handful of countries that started receiving U.S. assistance in the 1950s and 1960s has ever graduated from dependent status." In fact, despite massive amounts of international aid, the average annual increase in per capita GNP has declined steadily in developing nations since the 1960s, with many of the Third World's heaviest aid recipients actually suffering negative economic growth. A recent study by Peter Boone of the London School of Economics and the Center for Economic Performance confirmed that U.S. economic aid does not promote economic development. Studying more than 100 countries, Boone concluded that "Long-term aid is not a means to create [economic] growth." There are many reasons for the failure of foreign aid. First, foreign aid has a widespread record of waste, fraud, and abuse. U.S. aid programs have built tennis courts in Rwanda, sent sewing machines to areas without electricity, and constructed hospitals in cities where a dozen similar facilities already sat half empty. Frequently, the aid is stolen by corrupt foreign leaders. The Agency for International Development admitted in 1993 that "much of the investment financed by AID between 1960 and 1980 has disappeared without a trace." Even when aid reaches its intended beneficiaries, the results are often counterproductive. Just as domestic welfare prevents Americans from becoming self-sufficient, foreign aid keeps entire nations dependent. According to one internal AID audit, "Long-term feeding programs . . . have great potential for creating disincentives for food production." Specific examples of counterproductive aid policies are easy to come by. For example, following a devastating earthquake in Guatemala, farmers trying to sell their surplus grain found the market flooded by the U.S. Food for Peace program. As a result, according to the Institute for Food and Development Policy, "food aid stood in the way of development." According to journalist Michael Maren, a long-time volunteer with such groups as the Peace Corps, Catholic Relief Services, and AID, aid to Somalia aggravated the country's famine, disrupted local agriculture, and turned nomadic tribesmen into "relief junkies." Similar results have been documented in countries as diverse as Colombia, Haiti, and India. Moreover, foreign aid has often been used to prop up failing Socialist economies, preventing countries from moving to free-market economic policies. Yet, an examination of world economies clearly shows that those countries with free markets experience the greatest economic prosperity. As a result, Alex de Waal, president of the human rights group, Africa Rights, concludes that foreign aid is "structurally bad because it undermines the incentive to take responsibility. The more aid a country receives, the less the government of that country has to answer to the people." If Americans truly want to help other countries, they can best do so not through failed foreign aid programs, but by improving the U.S. economy, so that U.S. businesses have funds to invest abroad, and pursuing free trade policies. As the Congressional Budget Office recently admitted, "Critics rightly argue that the broad policies of the major Western countries -- trade policies, budget deficits, growth rates, and the like -- generally exert greater [positive] influence on the economies of developing countries than does aid." - Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute http://www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy Guiding Principles to Foreign Policy and International Trade As Michael Tanner outlined above, one of the essential steps to improving not only our own well-being as a nation, but also that of foreign aid recipients, is to end welfare for foreign nations. Further, our foreign policy must be founded on a few other key concepts: *Maintaining American Sovereignty. The United States is a free and sovereign republic. Recognizing Sovereignty of Other Nations.* Just as we insist others respect our sovereignty, we should not intervene in the internal affairs of other nations. Respecting the Constitution. All treaties must be subordinate to the Constitution as this empowers and limits the the federal government. Resistance to Empire Building. We should strive to live in peace with all nations. *Freeing the US Military from Duty as the World's Police Force.* Since World War II, the United States has increasingly played the undesirable role of an international policeman. Through our involvements abroad, our freedoms are being sacrificed on an altar of international involvement. The United States is now committed, by treaty, to defend foreign nations in all parts of the world. Therefore, I support the systematic withdrawal from most of these treaties and agreements, each of which holds the potential to plunge America into war in some far-flung corner of the earth. Further, I oppose US participation in UN-led Peacekeeping missions. Reform of the US State Department. The State Department has, for more than 60 years, been actively engaged in the promotion of internationalism contrary to the best interests of the United States. Now it acts as a consistent tool of international banking interests and multi-national corporations. I support taking all necessary legislative and administrative actions be taken to assure that every person serving in the State Department adheres to the objectives set forth in this policy; expenditures by the Department be reduced sufficiently to limit its activities; all non-conforming functions, such as the Peace Corps and the U.S. Information Agency, be eliminated; and, that our Government be prohibited from conducting secret negotiations or entering into secret treaties or agreements in any way binding on the United States. *Ensuring proper trade and relationship agreements. So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites. The ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals. Both the WTO and CAFTA could force Americans to get a doctor’s prescription simply to take herbs and vitamins. Alternative treatments could be banned. The WTO has forced Congress to change our laws, yet we still face trade wars. If anything, the WTO makes trade relations worse by giving foreign competitors a new way to attack U.S. jobs. NAFTA’s proposed superhighway is just one step in erasing the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, called the North American Union. NAFTA would effectively create a single nation out of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, with a new unelected bureaucracy and money system. Forget about controlling immigration under this scheme. And a free America with a limited constitutional government would be gone forever. Let’s not forget the UN. It wants to impose a direct tax on us. We must withdraw from any organizations and trade deals that infringe upon the freedom and independence of the United States of America. Reducing Foreign Military Aid.* Military expenses are hundreds of billions of dollars per year. A large percentage of this is spent overseas to defend wealthy countries like Germany and Japan -- who then profit from us in international trade. Let's take them off military welfare. We can defend America better and save billions of dollars annually. On the Issues: I oppose the current government policy of foreign 'intervention' including military and economic aid, guarantees, and diplomatic meddling. I also oppose 'isolationism' as trade among nations and international cooperation are essential. I support ending all limitations of private foreign aid; this will better empower concerned citizens and organizations to grant charitable aid. I support the dramatic reduction in foreign aid; these welfare programs drain resources that could be put to better use by citizens and for the benefit of Americans in need. Cuts should start with those nations with documented human rights abuse and those nations not aligned with our goals. Emergency governmental loans and limited aid may be provided to assist countries when extraordinary circumstances that cause disaster and threaten civilian lives or when necessary to protect the US from imminent military threat. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations." Congress may not abdicate or transfer to others that constitutional power. Therefore, I oppose the unconstitutional transfer of authority over U.S. trade policy from Congress to agencies, domestic or foreign, which improperly exercise policy-setting functions with respect to U.S. trade policy. I support the withdrawal of the United States from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and all other agreements wherein agencies other than the Congress of the United States improperly assume responsibility for establishing American trade policies. I oppose approval of free trade agreements such as the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). Tariffs are not only a constitutional source of revenue, but, wisely administered, are an aid to preservation of the national economy. I support the use of tariffs as proposed by the Founding Fathers particularly when the the other nation imposes tariffs to discourage purchase of US goods in favor of their domestic products. I reject the trade concept of Most Favored Nation status which has been used to curry favor with regimes whose domestic and international policies in fundamental conflict with the vital interests of the United States of America. I oppose the proposed unconstitutional Trade Promotion Authority which transfers the establishment of trade policy from Congress to the executive branch of government. In the name of free trade, multi-national corporations have been given tax breaks by the U.S. government which are not available to American businesses and money extracted from U.S. taxpayers has been used by the government to subsidize exports and encourage businesses to move abroad. I support a a firm policy under which U.S. or multinational businesses investing abroad does so at its own risk. There is no obligation by our government to protect those businesses with the lives of our service personnel or the taxes of our citizens. The United States should continue to provide leadership in peace negotiation process. I support the rights of states to establish stricter standards for health, safety and for the environment than those of our federal government , and to protect themselves against substandard, imported goods. I oppose continued US involvement in the United Nations and the funding thereof; this organization is heavily-US funded by the United States but works against US interests and seeks to establish a one-world government. I do, however, support the creation of a new international program that serves to promote international dialogue but has no power, in itself, to issue mandates or impose the will of member nations. Further, this organization may serve as an arbitration board for those countries desiring to settle international disputes in this fashion. I support the use of a Tobin tax to fund all international assistance and the proposed international organization to promote peaceful dialogue between nations. A Tobin tax is a tax on all trade of currency across borders. Daily, $1 trillion circles the globe in currency trading; a minimal tax will reduce most negative impacts of currency speculation and assist in funding international activities. I support an end to all government subsidies, tax preferences, and investment guarantees to encourage exports and or U.S. businesses to invest in foreign lands. I support the collection of all debts owed to the United States by foreign countries or foreign entities. I support holding foreign states accountable for terrorists who operate in their country without interference by the 'hosting' nation. I support the doctrine of 'unilateralism' that is opposed strongly by the Democratic Party - this doctrine acknowledges the right of the United States, as a sovereign nation, to use military force without any approval or assistance from other nations whenever it believes there is a threat to its security or welfare. While conflict should be the last option in resolving a difference, we must not rely on foreign nations to grant us permission to defend our interests. I oppose U.S. participation in all so-called U.N. peace keeping operations. I support barring the United Nations, and its subsidiaries, from further operations on United States territory. I support the practice of having American service men and women serve only under American commanders and not those of the United Nations or foreign countries. An exception would be for those missions which are conducted under a temporary, joint command such as NATO. I oppose any participation in any form of world government including any World Court.
Paid for by the Adkins For Congress Committee. Copyright © 2012, Adkins For Congress Committee. SummitCMS Web Platform © 2001-2012, First Summit Group, LLC. Last Updated: September 16, 2008