It appears that we finally have some dissent in the blogosphere regarding the $20 billion reconstruction loan vs. grant issue, and Spoons, Dean Esmay, and the Discountblogger all seem to be either on the fence or in favor of the loans.
First, I will briefly address Spoons and Dean, because both of them seem to be waffling. I am not sure what kind of argument I can create that will push them over the edge in favor of grants only at this point in time. I could redirect them to yesterday’s post, where Max Sawicky and Matt Stinton wrote rather clearly why loans were a hideous idea. I could point to this Morton Kondracke article, or to this piece in the NY Times by David Brooks:
For the roster of the Pelosi Democrats, look at those who voted against the Bremer plan. Some names are obvious: Dennis Kucinich, Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer. But there are some names you wouldn’t expect to see on that list: John Kerry and John Edwards. France, Russia and Syria don’t oppose the Bremer plan, but the Pelosi Democrats are to the left of Bashar al-Assad.
Next we come to the Evan Bayh Democrats, named after the Indiana senator. These Democrats can see past their dislike of the president. They would appropriate some money for Iraqi reconstruction. But siding with the anti-foreign-aid Republicans, they’d turn the rest of the aid into loans. The Iraqi people have been raped, tortured and left bloodied on the floor. The Bayh Democrats say to them: Here’s a credit card. Go buy yourself some treatment, and you can pay us back later.
The Bayh Democrats are centrist but not visionary, and they seem to worry more about adding an extra $10 billion to the deficit than about the future of the Middle East. They may have read memos from the Democratic pollsters on the unpopularity of the $87 billion plan, but they don’t seem to have read about the Versailles Treaty and what happens when strong nations impose punitive burdens on proud ones.
Finally we come to the Cantwell Democrats. This group could be named after Joe Biden, Joe Lieberman or Dick Gephardt, but Maria Cantwell, the Washington senator, sits at Scoop Jackson’s old desk on the Senate floor. The Cantwell Democrats are dismayed with how the Bush administration has handled the postwar period. They’d like to see the rich pay a bigger share of the reconstruction cost. But they knew yesterday’s vote wasn’t about George Bush. It was about doing what’s right for the Iraqi people and what’s right, over the long term, for the American people. These Democrats supported the aid package, and were willing to pay a price to give the Iraqis their best shot at a decent future. This week, Gephardt, who has to win over Iowa liberals to have any shot at the White House, is the bravest man in Washington.
Those are the three Democratic visions
Spoons
Let me take on one of your analogies:
A madman breaks into your house and holds you at gunpoint. While there, he murders your children, rapes your wife, and cuts off your fingers. He also announces that he’s thinking of shooting up the houses on either side of yours. The police come and attack the madman, chasing him a way. A couple of cops die trying to help you. In the process, your house is damaged by the cops, and the madman sets fire to it. In the end, you are rescued and taken to the hospital. Your house gets rebuilt. The authorities also repair the mining equipment that you use to get at the gold deposit in the backyard.
The hospital, the contractor who repaired your house, and the company that fixed your mining equipment all present you with bills (the police do not charge you for their services). All of these say, “Hey, no hurry in paying us. We can wait until you get that goldmine working again. And because we’re feeling really bad for you, how about you just pay us back half?
Are you gonna say, “You inhuman monsters!”?
John Cole
I would say your analogy doesn’t fit.
Spoons
In what way? I thought it was pretty damn spot on.
Noel
It is in our vital national interest that Iraq succeed. We are not so much the world’s policemen as the world’s grown-ups, dragging the Arab world into the modern era because no one else has the balls to do it…and it must be done.
Kerry & Edwards are merely putting personal ambition ahead of the national interest. Disgusting, yet typical.
It’s indeed a bargain at half the price.
Noel
Or twice the price!
scott h.
Spoons, for your analogy to be more exact, the madman would have to use the guy’s credit cards to buy stuff on the internet. He racks up a debt equal to about 10 years of the income from the gold mine. After the ordeal, American Express says, “Don’t worry, we know you didn’t authorize those charges. Just pay us back about 9 months worth of income, and we’ll call it even.”
Spoons
Scott,
Ahh, but we are expecting Iraq to pay back the debts racked up by the madman.
Applying that to the madman, what we’re saying to the homeowner is, “Don’t bother repaying us for your hospital bills, home construction, and mining equipment. After all, we know you’re going to be pretty strapped paying for the stereo equipment and velvelt Elvis paintings that that the madman ordered off e-bay… but you better not try to weasel out of those charges!
Kimmitt
Take up the white man’s burden, Noel!
Andrew | BYTE BACK
We spend $20B in Iraq. Whoever runs this site (who I just saw was John Cole who I’ve seen comment many places, mostly with reasoned comments).
Cole believes, it seems, that this will make the Middle East love us Or at least Iraqis.
I like to think of it this way – money can’t buy you love. Are they going to be more thankful if we get the hell out ASARP (Reasonably) and ask to be paid back some dollars or that we stay there interfering in their business and, so far, not doing anything they couldn’t do at an eighth of the cost?
There is a way for America to bow out gracefully. Being the parent isn’t working here. I don’t advocate leavng now, but we shoudl be trying to shape a way to do it as quickly as possible, not timing it for November 2004.
Ralph Gizzip
I would put it this way. By the US proffering this aid package as a loan only reinforces the opinion of the rest of the world that we’re only interested in the oil. Giving the money to Iraq as a grant tells the world, “It’s really NOT about the oil.”
There was one opinion I read that makes some sense. Let’s deduct it from our UN bill. If the UN really wants to help it would be a way for them to put money where their mouth is.
Andrew Lazarus
I suspect some of the Dems opposed to the $87 Bn are just looking for some accountability for our pre-war errors (“We know where the WMD are.”) and for serious fiscal control over the reconstruction money. (How much of it is going straight to Halliburton and Bechtel after a very brief stop in Baghdad?) I’m not sure how they can get these views heard without using whatever hammer comes to hand.
That’s certainly my view. I think the loan idea is capricious, I think we are going to have to pay to reconstruct Iraq, but I also think Bush will f— up everything he touches, including the reconstruction.
Aakash
I will be doing a blog entry soon on the issue of the liberal, statist spending and nation-building policies of Washington with regard to Iraq. The fact that so many conservatives are supporting these un-American, anti-republican, unconstitutional policies is very, very troubling. I will definitely have to blog about this soon.
CleverNameHere
But Spoons, the madman is out of power. It’s the credit card companies, the ones that knew they were actually dealing with the madman instead of the homeowner, who are demanding repayment.
And I would propose to you that we AREN’T expecting Iraq to have to pay their debts. At least not all of them, not as many as we can get forgiven. But we can’t afford to surrender any amount of leverage we have. We certainly shouldn’t do so simply to make a statement for $10bn we’re never going to see in any event.
Andrew Lazarus
Yeah, except according to Googling, total US contributions to the UN are about $2.5Bn per annum. Our general assessment is less than $300 million.
It took me less than a minute to get these numbers. What idiot pundit thinks we can cut $20Bn out of our UN bill without going minus?
Ralph Gizzip
Andy, baby, who said it all has to be deducted in one year?
Andrew Lazarus
Hey Ralph, who said the $20Bn was the lifetime total as opposed to just one year’s budget? (Ooops.)
Cut your losses. You had no idea how much we give to the UN (including really worthy groups like the Sinai peacekeepers, UNICEF, etc. that we probably don’t want to cut off under any circumstances) and shot your mouth off. We would have to stiff the UN for 10-20 years to make back ONE year’s reconstruction in Iraq.
Next time do some research.