Issue: H.R. 2012 Export-Import Bank Reauthorization Act of 2012. Question: On passage (3/5 required).
Result: Passed 78 to 20, 2 not voting. Became Public Law No: 112-122 (signed by the President 5-30-12). GOP and Democrat selected vote.
Freedom First Society: Since 1934 the Ex-Im Bank has played a significant part in internationalist plans to redistribute the world’s wealth and build up America’s enemies. The current charter for the bank, which ostensibly helps finance U.S. exports of goods and services, was set to expire May 31.
Bill Summary: Reauthorizes the Export-Import Bank until September 30, 2014. Raises the Bank’s lending limit from $100 billion to $140 billion over that period.Analysis: The current charter for the bank, which ostensibly helps finance U.S. exports of goods and services, was set to expire May 31.
In March of 2011, Washington observers were forecasting a looming “battle” in Congress over the Export-Import Bank. The Bank was nearing its $100 billion lending limit, and the administration was pushing lawmakers to raise the cap and reauthorize the agency. That “battle” confirmed that political “leadership” won’t solve America’s problems.
A deeper look at the battle also puts the lie to many popular political images. According to a CQ [Congressional Quarterly] Today article:
“Senate Democrats are turning up the heat on Republicans to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank, as House Majority Leader Eric Cantor seeks to satisfy the credit financing agency’s business advocates and the more ideological, free-market elements in his caucus.” — “Ex-Im Bank Puts House GOP in a Tight Spot,” CQ Today 3-14-12
But opposition to the Ex-Im Bank should be based on much more than its violation of free-market economics. Indeed, any principled program to enforce the Constitution, protect freedom, or create prosperity must call for the “Bank’s” abolition.
Since 1934 the Ex-Im Bank has played a significant part in internationalist plans to redistribute the world’s wealth and build up America’s enemies. And since Council on Foreign Relation (CFR) Insiders have dominated every presidential administration since World War II, presidential support for the Bank has not been an option. The Obama administration’s claim that reauthorizing the Bank will ensure a level playing field for U.S. businesses, at no cost to American taxpayers, does not reflect historical experience.
The network of CFR influence on behalf of the Ex-Im Bank has not been limited to the presidency. An overwhelmingly bi-partisan majority in both chambers of Congress approved the reauthorization.
Indeed, H.R. 2072 was introduced in the House by Republican Representative Gary Miller of California. Democrats supported the measure unanimously (with 7 not voting). In the Senate, Miller’s measure also received unanimous Democratic support (with the exception of 1 Democrat who did not vote).
We have assigned (good vote) to the Nays and (bad vote) to the Yeas. (P = voted present; ? = not voting; blank = not listed on roll call.)
In 1934, President Franklin Roosevelt created the Ex-Im Bank by executive order to underwrite trade with Joseph Stalin’s troubled regime. (In 1945 Congress established the Ex-Im Bank as an independent agency of the Executive branch.)
But it was not until 1972 that President Nixon opened the Ex-Im Bank’s financing spigot with the Soviets. Exposed Soviet spy-ring leader Victor Perlo, a former high official on the War Production Board, commented approvingly that the federal government was finally using the Export-Import Bank “for its original purpose of financing trade with socialist countries.”
Under President Nixon, the Ex-Im Bank became a cornerstone of Insider strategy for the deindustrialization of America, the international redistribution of wealth, and the development of Communist power. The Soviets would use Ex-Im bank credits to purchase equipment for their Kama River truck factory, designed to produce 150,000 heavy trucks per year (subsequently used to support the invasion of Afghanistan).
A division of the Pullman Company built the $2 billion plant. The Soviets supplied 10 percent of the financing. The other 90 percent was divided equally between the Export-Import Bank and David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan.
The importance of the Ex-Im Bank to Insider plans can be seen in Nixon’s appointment of William J. Casey (CFR) in 1974 to head up the Bank. CFR heavyweight Henry Kissinger, Nixon’s Secretary of State at the time, had recommended Casey for the job.
The previous year, Kissinger had also arranged Casey’s appointment as Under Secretary of State. National security expert Frank Capell slammed the assignment:
“Under State Department security of the [Otto] Otepka era, it is very doubtful that William Casey would have been granted clearance. His past known associations with Communists in Europe, his questionable financial dealings, and his pro-Soviet outlook would have raised many questions about the propriety of his holding a position as Undersecretary of State.”
Nevertheless, in 1980 Ronald Reagan tapped Casey to manage his successful campaign for the presidency, and, as president, Reagan appointed Casey to the post of Director of the CIA (see Chapter 11 in Masters of Deception). Further bringing the Reagan image into question, in 1966 Casey had run unsuccessfully for a New York congressional seat as a “Javits Republican.” (Senator Jacob Javits represented the far left-wing of the GOP.)
The programs of the Ex-Im Bank are ostensibly designed to encourage the foreign purchase of American goods. However, in the December 1997 issue of The Freeman, syndicated columnist Doug Bandow exposed the hype by demonstrating that the Ex-Im Bank “redistributes rather than creates jobs — after extracting an administrative charge.”
But aside from the economic tampering, Bandow noted that the Bank “has never found a government too brutal to subsidize.” Indeed, as The New American magazine reported in 2005:
“Since 1985, Communist China has become the largest Asian beneficiary of Ex-Im Bank loans and loan guarantees. Additional billions have been provided by the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, all of which draw on U.S. taxpayer subsidies.”
So what was the House Majority Leader’s response to the opportunity to remove this cornerstone of Insider plans? According to CQ:
“Cantor is proposing, among other things, that before any increase in the lending cap, the bank be required to submit a plan justifying the [proposed] $40 billion increase and assessing the risks it could pose. The Government Accountability Office would audit the plan.
“Cantor also would require the bank to notify Congress if it reaches certain default thresholds, and to put in place plans to reduce defaults by beneficiaries.”
Which confirms that political “defense” merely paves the way for our continued demise.