What we are talking about, for folks at home who may be confused about this debate, is an insurance program run by the Federal Government for corporations who want to invest in risky political situations. They want to invest in risky political situations. We are running an insurance program for major corporations. Now, the argument you will hear from supporters of this program is if we did not run OPIC, there would not be any U.S. exports and American companies would not invest overseas without OPIC's insurance program. The fact of the matter is, that is not true. Of the $612 billion currently invested in developing countries, a third of them are insured by private companies who provide private insurance. You do not have to have the Government run it, they provide private insurance. Of the 10 leading countries that the United States does export programs with, OPIC is not involved whatsoever. There is not a single OPIC dollar involved. So there are going to be export jobs out there whether or not OPIC exists, whether or not OPIC invests this money. Listen to the irony. Here is what we are doing with OPIC. We are investing money in Eastern Europe that involves risky business deals.
Scott Klug: “What we are talking about, for folks at home who may be confused about this debate, is an insurance program run by the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the role of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) in U.S. exports and investments.
Share
More from Scott Klug
What we have just heard is the fundamental argument we always get on any science program, that we cannot cancel it because they just started it and there might be potential, or we cannot cancel it because they have invested so much money…
Unfortunately in this case, my colleague from Wisconsin, Mr. Barrett, is wrong. Actually, in one fairly significant fight with the Clinton administration, Wisconsin originally asked, under the work not welfare waiver request, that every…
If there is no subsidy involved in this program, why are they fighting so hard to preserve it? And if there is no implication whatsoever if we eliminate it, then they should not be fighting to eliminate it. That is the bottom line in this…
the rule we have before us this afternoon and soon the bill itself that will follow has to do with changing law, and changing law that has affected the communications industry since the 1930's, but it is not just about changing law. It is…





