The World Bank and International Economics

Floor Speech

THE WORLD BANK AND INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS -- (House of Representatives - May 21, 2007)

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address two issues involving international economics. The first is the World Bank.

The entire world has been fixated on whether Mr. Wolfowitz arranged $195,000 for his paramour, which shows how little attention we pay to things at the World Bank that really matter. Because while we were focused on that, no one focused in the media on the fact that the World Bank is sending over $1.3 billion, roughly a quarter of it our tax dollars, to the government of Iran.

Now we are told that this is for wonderful projects in Iran having nothing to do with the government. We here in the House understand something about politics. One of the ways you get reelected, one of the ways the Iranian government holds on to power is to bring home the bacon. I know it's not kosher, I know it is not halal, but that's what that government does, and the World Bank helps them do it.

Now, we saw how did the United States use its clout inside the World Bank? Not to stop these loans to Iran and not to stop their disbursements, over $200 million being disbursed by Mr. Wolfowitz himself, but for only two goals. One was to try to prevent the World Bank from being involved in family planning; and the other was to protect Mr. Wolfowitz's career, notwithstanding his errors of judgment.

Where is this administration when it comes to prioritizing and representing the national security interests of this country? Iran is developing nuclear weapons, and all we can do with our clout in the World Bank is try to protect one individual of flawed judgment.

Second, I would like to address the idea of granting Fast Track to this administration. I am sure that when the President seeks an extension of Fast Track, he will offer those of us on the Democratic side all kinds of wonderful promises. But keep one thing in mind: Any trade deal that requires on this President for enforcement will be enforced only to the extent this President wants it enforced.

Look at the Iran Sanctions Act. This President refuses to acknowledge that any facts exist that require him to even decide what to do with regard to investments in Iran.

I assure you that if we sign a deal with the best possible labor standards but Presidential enforcement and something were to come to pass, perhaps a coup in Peru and all of a sudden every labor leader in the country is shot in cold blood, this President will not act to enforce those labor standards. He may express some concerns, but any agreement involving our trade which requires this President to acknowledge facts occurring on the ground is a nullity except to the extent that the President chooses to. Because we could have a circumstance where there is no enforcement of corporate interests without Presidential action, and he will act; and we could have a circumstance where there is no enforcement of labor standards without Presidential action, and you can be sure he will not.

So I look forward to changing the policies of this administration. Let us hope that at the World Bank we focus on preventing loans to Iran, rather than irrelevancies involving one particular paramour; and let us hope that this House takes responsibility, its responsibilities under article I of the Constitution to deal with international trade issues in regular order and not to put American jobs on the Fast Track abroad.

Source