Obama’s Global Tax Bill (S.2433)
NOTR at RofaSix brought to light a bill from Barack Obama which commits the US to paying a Global Tax to the United Nations Useless Nitwits.
AIM tells us about this bill and how it was rammed through the House and most recently the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (by Senator Joe Biden):
WASHINGTON, February 13, 2008 — Accuracy in Media editor Cliff Kincaid disclosed today that a hugely expensive bill called the “Global Poverty Act,” sponsored by Democratic Senator Barack Obama, was quickly passed by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday and could result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States. Kincaid said that the major media’s cover-up of the bill, which makes levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations, demonstrates the media’s desire to see Senator Obama elected to the presidency.In a column posted on the AIM web site, Kincaid noted that Senator Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was trying to rush Obama’s “Global Poverty Act” (S. 2433) through his committee without hearings. The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends. It was scheduled for a Thursday vote but was moved up a day, to Wednesday, and rushed through by voice vote. Kincaid learned, however, that conservative Senators have now put a “hold” on the legislation, in order to prevent it from being rushed to the floor for a full Senate vote.
The House version (H.R. 1302) was suddenly brought up on the House floor last September 25 and was passed by voice vote. House Republicans were caught off-guard, unaware that the pro-U.N. measure committed the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars. Kincaid’s column notes that the official in charge of making nations comply with the U.N. Millennium Goals, which are prominently highlighted in the Obama bill, says a global tax will be necessary to force American taxpayers to provide the money.
Not only does this commit the US to a global tax, but that global tax would go to an organization that is plagued by corruption and graft. The US would have no say in how these dollars would be spent. This also gives people a clue into the mindset of Barack Obama and his Socialist agenda.
Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433)
Some additional information (Feb. 16th): Obama’s bill commits the US to comply with the UN Millennium goals. It is these goals which establish the global tax.
From GOPUSA:
A release from the Obama Senate office about the bill declares, “In 2000, the U.S. joined more than 180 countries at the United Nations Millennium Summit and vowed to reduce global poverty by 2015. We are halfway towards this deadline, and it is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day.”The legislation itself requires the President “to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.”
The bill defines the term “Millennium Development Goals” as the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).
The U.N. says that “The commitment to provide 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as official development assistance was first made 35 years ago in a General Assembly resolution, but it has been reaffirmed repeatedly over the years, including at the 2002 global Financing for Development conference in Monterrey, Mexico. However, in 2004, total aid from the industrialized countries totaled just $78.6 billion - or about 0.25% of their collective GNP.”
Technorati Tags: Global Poverty Act, S.2433, United Nation, Barack Obama, 2008 Election, Socialism, global tax
[…] Cross posted by Toni at Bear Creek LedgerNOTR at RofaSix brought to light a bill from Barack Obama which commits the US to paying a Global Tax to the United Nations Useless Nitwits. […]
Pingback by The Tennessee ConserVOLiance — February 14, 2008 @ 7:29 am
Did you know that mentioning a S or HR bill in your title gets the post picked up by OpenCongress.org? It is a very useful website I did not know about until today. I had always used Thomas.gov before.
I was curious why this post got picked up by OpenCongress.org — it was because of your insightful way you did the title!
Thanks! As Cartman often sez, “I learned something today!”
Comment by NOTR — February 14, 2008 @ 11:38 am
I am not an Obama supporter nor a Hillary supporter! Registered Republican in Massachusetts and fighting to remain so! I have pulled down from the Congressional web-site the full text of the bill and there is no such requirement stated anywhere in the bill. It appears that you have chosen to some how interpolate your numbers from the snese that you read?
Comment by Richard Kolb — February 16, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
Richard - I’ve added an update which explains the tax is included with the UN Millennium Declaration which Obama’s bill commits the US to comply. It’s what would be called a stealth tax with huge consequences.
Comment by Toni — February 16, 2008 @ 10:34 pm
Why don’t you address the second amendment dissemination involved in this travesty?
Comment by Karen — February 21, 2008 @ 12:11 pm
Thank you Richard Kolb. Just when I had given up hope that there were three or four people in the nation who could read, you came along and made my day.
Cliff Kincaid is flat out lying and there in nothing in the bill that mandates spending a dime but he knows his audience is too dumb to read it. The bill isn’t even ‘new’ news and is simply the introduction in the Senate of a bill that passed unanimously in the House nearly a year ago. All his breathless talk about “rushing the bill” and catching Republicans off guard is bull to paint Obama as a “socialist.” Another word that his audience diesn’t understand.
We do have a commitment to assist with the Millenium Development Goals (like 183 other nations?) and tht is great. Our Prez agreed to it in 2000 (before Obama came to the Senate) and has been implementing it. I believe he is in Africa as I type…
Kincaid’s mention of the $845 billion cost is another outright out lie. Our total aid to Africa (pop 1 billion) has been tripled since bush took office and I think it’s about — ready — $27 billion or a fraction of what we’ve routinely given Israel (pop 6 million…). Most of those “aid” dollars will never leave the states but will go into deep corporate products who will furnish goods/services to “worthy” African nations who will be given credits to buy stuff from us.
BTW, there is no way, shape or form in which the UN or any other organization external to the US can tax us, take our guns, or kick our puppies. Your Congress will decide who pays what to whom. Wise up folks.
Thanks again Richard.
Comment by Mike G — February 22, 2008 @ 4:16 pm
I`m surprised that anyone has the guts to mention S.2433 even tho no one will mention the 50 billion dollars , in the bill, slated to go to the world bank to pay off their loans to under developed countries that could not repay their obligations to the world bank. I think everyone knows that the world bank is owned by the Rockerfellers. Why doesn`t Hillery tell everyone, that will listen, about this bill or if it is a good bill why doesn`t Obamma tell his listeners about it, since everyone says he has never sponsored a bill. I recently asked my Senator about this bill because he was a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, and he said it would go no where…Why would he say this when it passed the house on a voice vote and has now passed the committee…..Why is this bill so secretive ????????
Comment by E LAURANZANO — April 22, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
Dear Richard and Mike,
The bill does state that it would commit us to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal, and says the definition of that is:
(4) MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS- The term `Millennium Development Goals’ means the goals set out in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, General Assembly Resolution 55/2 (2000).
If you read that declaration, to clarify what is being stated by this bill, some of the things it states are:
9. We resolve therefore:
• To strengthen respect for the rule of law in international as in national affairs and, in particular, to ensure compliance by Member States with the decisions of the International Court of Justice, in compliance with the Charter of the United Nations, in cases to which they are parties.
• To make the United Nations more effective in maintaining peace and security by giving it the resources and tools it needs for conflict prevention, peaceful resolution of disputes, peacekeeping, post-conflict peace-building and reconstruction. In this context, we take note of the report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations and request the General Assembly to consider its recommendations expeditiously.
• To ensure the implementation, by States Parties, of treaties in areas such as arms control and disarmament and of international humanitarian law and human rights law, and call upon all States to consider signing and ratifying the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
• To take concerted action to end illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, especially by making arms transfers more transparent and supporting regional disarmament measures, taking account of all the recommendations of the forthcoming United Nations Conference on Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons.
• To stop the unsustainable exploitation of water resources by developing water management strategies at the regional, national and local levels, which promote both equitable access and adequate supplies.
• To ensure free access to information on the human genome sequence.
• To make every effort to ensure the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol, preferably by the tenth anniversary of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 2002, and to embark on the required reduction in emissions of greenhouse gases.
NOTE: If you research the Kyoto Protocol, you will find that the financial commitment is this: The Protocol also reaffirms the principle that developed countries have to pay billions of dollars, and supply technology to other countries for climate-related studies and projects. This was originally agreed in the UNFCCC.
These are just a few of the things you will find, if you research more thoroughly. Even though many of us can read, some will not take the time to actually do it before giving their opinion, even when wrong.
Comment by Chris S — May 9, 2008 @ 12:55 am
[…] See Obama’s Global Tax Bill (S.2433) […]
Pingback by Obama Backs U.N. Bill to Disarm Americans | Exodus Times — May 9, 2008 @ 6:15 pm
Thank you very much Chris S.
Comment by Debbie — May 9, 2008 @ 10:37 pm
Mike G wrote:…”Our Prez agreed to it in 2000 (before Obama came to the Senate) and has been implementing it. I believe he is in Africa as I type…”
In 2000 Slick Willy was the “Prez”. Our “Prez” now, George W. Bush was sworn into office on January 2001!!
Mike G Wrote: “BTW, there is no way, shape or form in which the UN or any other organization external to the US can tax us, take our guns, or kick our puppies. Your Congress will decide who pays what to whom. Wise up folks.”
You obviously have not read this Mike. This Bill gives the President full power of the money to disperse to the UN, those idiots who are against us. The President would then report back to Congress to explain how the money was being spent. The Congress has no control!
Comment by Sheri — May 18, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
Re: Comment by Sheri — May 18, 2008: “This Bill [S-2433] gives the President full power of the money to disperse to the UN, those idiots who are against us. The President would then report back to Congress to explain how the money was being spent. The Congress has no control!”
…And who planned (hoped) to be that President? Why the sponsor, (of course)none other than - TA DA !!! - Barack Hussein Obama, the future Tax King of America!
Comment by Carl Reasor — May 21, 2008 @ 1:15 pm
Thank you for including the link to the actual bill online. I read the language myself and it state : ” To require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.”
So, according to the language in the bill, we would only be developing and implementing a strategy to further the US policy and it would at the same time, further the one goal of the reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day. Where in this bill does it commit us to any of these other goals listed in the above posting? I wrote to my Senator - George Voinovich from Ohio.
My Senator denies these claims you are making and my own investigation using the links you provided confirm his denials are correct. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee ordered a cost analysis in March of 2008. You can read for yourself the result at this link: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/90xx/doc9082/s2433.pdf
They found that it would be less than a million per year. Also, in a letter of response that I got from Senator Voinovich, he stated that this is not new spending, but monies already in an exisiting budget.
Comment by Dottie — June 2, 2008 @ 10:24 pm
Also some folks better review the Constitution of the US. The Congress appropriates the money - no bill can change that as it is part of the division of powers provided for in the US Constitution. This bill does no such thing as giving the President the power as mentioned in one of these posts.
Mike G Wrote: “BTW, there is no way, shape or form in which the UN or any other organization external to the US can tax us, take our guns, or kick our puppies. Your Congress will decide who pays what to whom.
Mike is right!
Comment by Dottie — June 4, 2008 @ 9:41 pm
As for the defintions — the simple addiion of the s after the word Goals matters. This bill involves one GOAL which is a subset of the list of all of the Goals. In my opinion it is clear that is the only stated goal in the bill. Tacking on all of the other goals as if they were a part of this bill is not correct.
Comment by Dottie — June 4, 2008 @ 9:54 pm
To both Dottie and Mike, think what you want but in my “opinion” you are both naive. But then Dottie, as you, that’s in my opinion. Besides which, you think Congress wouldn’t approve a global tax initiated through the UN? Can you say Kyoto Treaty? How about LOST? How about the Lieberman/Warner Climate bill. These bills are nothing more than stealth taxes which will cripple US industry and the US economy. If it weren’t for a few Conservatives in the Senate we’d be strapped with Kyoto and many other stupid UN initiatives intended to gain control over taxing Americans. Because Democrats (and a few Republocrats) think this is a good thing, the efforts to socialize the country through any means will continue.
Comment by Toni — June 5, 2008 @ 6:10 am
Since my first posting here on S2433, I have researched more about this and have also written two more times to my Republican - Senator Voinovich from OH, who is on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - the committee that just past this with a favorable recommendation. After reading more about the Millennium Development Goals and the 35 year committment of the US to them, I have decided that this bill is in fact a set up to put “President Obama” in a position to get this funding from Congress. It sets the benchmark of expectation for the funding at the .7% amount at the very least.
Congress does strange things though….for instance NCLB mandated and was supposed to fund all kinds of “change” in education. They never have fully funded the No Child Left Behind law.
One thing is clear to me though- with other countries on track to meet the 2015 deadline for the .7% of the GNP to these UN Goals, the pressure is on US to do the same and I believe if Obama is elected, it will be a priority.
Comment by Dottie — June 6, 2008 @ 10:22 pm