last week, the Treasury Department announced that it planned to use $3 billion from the exchange stabilization fund for a bailout of Indonesia. This fund was established in the 1930's to protect the U.S. dollar. It was not designed to be the personal piggy bank of the Secretary of the Treasury to bail out other countries whenever he desires. The legislation I am introducing would require that, when this fund is used to be part of an international bailout in excess of $250 million, such use would require congressional approval. Using this fund for Indonesia is the same procedure that was used to bypass the Congress for the bailout of Mexico. At the time we were told that the emergency bailout of Mexico was needed because they were our neighbor, friend, and that economic instability would spill thousands of immigrants into the United States. I find no such rationale for Indonesia. In fact, what is occurring is that we are seeing a tidal wave of bailouts coming our way from Asia. Apparently, the need for the bailouts is greater than the resources of the IMF. This is the reason the United States has had to resort to taking money from our own reserves to bail out Indonesia. In fact, the tidal wave has already started. The Philippines in July for $1 billion. Thailand for $16 billion in September. Now comes Indonesia for $23 billion in November. The price tag keeps getting bigger and we don't know where it is going to stop.
Duncan Faircloth: “last week, the Treasury Department announced that it planned to use $3 billion from the exchange stabilization fund for…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the use of U.S. funds for international bailouts, specifically Indonesia.
Share
More from Duncan Faircloth
this is the wrong time for a debate on tobacco taxes. No one is opposed to food safety, but I'm not so enthusiastic about a plan that raises taxes on already cash-strapped tobacco farmers to pay for new USDA bureaucrats. Farmers all over…
this amendment directs the General Accounting Office to take a close look at the health care benefit that we provide to our military dependents, retirees, and their survivors. Enough time has passed since we replaced CHAMPUS with the…
There is great conversation that we are going into these attorney settlements with tobacco companies; that that is wrong; that we shouldn't do that; we are interfering in a private contract. Yet, we are telling the tobacco companies…
Now read the bottom, line 10. It clearly includes the attorneys for the tobacco companies.





