it is a terrible thing that this central question of foreign policy comes before us under a closed rule with only 1 hour. I think the concept of NATO expansion is a reasonable one, but it is not reasonable to go to the American taxpayer, in the light of a budget deal, which will severely constrain spending both in the defense and nondefense areas, and tell the American taxpayer that they will continue to bear a disproportionate share of the cost of defending Europe. Everyone acknowledges that the expansion of NATO will cost money. The more countries involved, the more money it will cost. That is not a disqualification. But that cost should not be borne by the current formula, which has the U.S. taxpayer subsidizing the nations of Western Europe. We talked about welfare reform last year. We did not go after the real welfare. The real welfare is the United States taxpayer, 52 years after the end of World War II, years after the Marshall plan succeeded, continuing to subsidize Germany and England and France and Denmark and Belgium. This bill assumes the status quo. It is shocking that we were not allowed a chance to offer an amendment to this bill that would say that, whether one is for or against NATO expansion, we in the House do not want a continuation of this subsidy by the American taxpayer of our wealthy allies in Western Europe.
Editor's note · Context
Addressing concerns about NATO expansion and U.S. taxpayer subsidies during a House debate.
Share
More from Barney Frank
I urge staff to pay close attention to the differences in products offered by nonbank institutions and to be mindful of Congress's intent in financial reform that State consumer protection laws be preserved to the extent possible.
For example, there are key differences in product characteristics between payday, car title, and other high-cost secured loans and more traditional closed-end unsecured lending and related products, and the products are often regulated…
Protection and advocacy Agencies, which are Federally funded entities charged with enforcing the rights of persons with disabilities.
If you're going to dip your fingers in the Federal till, don't complain if a little democracy rubs off on them.





