As we debate the issue of increasing the American share in reserve funds of the International Monetary Fund, I think we should first consider the following two questions: Would it make sense for U.S. companies and employees to pay taxes to bail out foreign competitors of American business? Should Americans pay taxes to bail out foreign countries that have engaged in unfair business practices that previously made it difficult for American companies to sell their goods at home and abroad? The resounding answer to these questions is no. These would, however, be the precise ramifications were Congress to approve IMF funding legislation that does not require all countries who receive IMF loans to engage in just and fair business practices that do not threaten the American companies whose very tax dollars make these IMF contributions possible. I would like to touch on the recent IMF loan to South Korea, which I believe is a compelling example for why the IMF must be reformed.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of U.S. funding for the International Monetary Fund and the need for reform.
Share
More from Dirk Kempthorne
I recently created the Department of the Interior Task Force to study climate change, because of its possible effects on our ability to be good stewards of wildlife, national parks and other landscapes, as well as our responsibility to…
It is just for a question. Would the Senator from Montana agree with me that as we are provided the data, although the idea was that these projects were not necessary, were not needed, yet we find they are in the President's own budget for…
I agree with the Chairman. Of course, we understand that funding for this project cannot be guaranteed, given the many competing priorities faced by the Indian Health Service.
Secretary Salazar has challenged the services and bureaus of the Department that are getting dollars to have their projects also reflect an emphasis on renewable energy.





