Obama's $845 Billion 'GLOBAL POVERTY ACT' U.N. Plan Forwarded to U.S. Senate Floor!

Submitted by SadInAmerica on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 10:42pm.

'Global Poverty Act' to cost EACH citizen $2,500 or more! (Folks we're heading down the highway to hell!  Obama is just getting started!  If he becomes our next president, we're  going to get 'change' alright... his Berlin speech says it all... he's calling for a NEW WORLD ORDER! ~ SadInAmerica)

The U.S. Senate soon could debate whether you, your spouse and each of your children - as well as your in-laws, parents, grandparents, neighbors and everyone else in America - EACH will spend $2,500 or more to reduce poverty around the world.

The plan sponsored by Sen. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, is estimated to cost the U.S. some $845 billion over the coming few years in an effort to raise the standard of living around the globe.

S.2433 already has been approved in one form by the U.S. House of Representatives and now has been placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar for pending debate.

WND previously reported the proposal demands the president develop "and implement" a policy to "cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief" and other programs.

Cliff Kincaid at Accuracy in Media has published a critique asserting that while the Global Poverty Act sounds nice, the adoption could "result in the imposition of a global tax on the United States" and would make levels of U.S. foreign aid spending "subservient to the dictates of the United Nations."

He said the legislation, if approved, dedicates 0.7 percent of the U.S. gross national product to foreign aid, which over 13 years, he said, would amount to $845 billion "over and above what the U.S. already spends."

The plan passed the House in 2007 "because most members didn't realize what was in it," Kincaid reported.  "Congressional sponsors have been careful not to calculate the amount of foreign aid spending that it would require."

A recent statement from Obama's office noted the support offered by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world, global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the international community faces," Obama said. "It must be a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter, and clean drinking water. As we strive to rebuild America's standing in the world, this important bill will demonstrate our promise and commitment to those in the developing world.

"Our commitment to the global economy must extend beyond trade agreements that are more about increasing profits than about helping workers and small farmers everywhere," he continued.

Another critic, however, has been commentator Glenn Beck, see this YouTube video .

"Not one dime would go to fixing America," the commentary said.

Obama has continued to lobby for such massive expenditures on his campaign stops. During an address as recently as last week, he said, "I'll double our foreign assistance to $50 billion by 2012, and use it to support a stable future in failing states, and sustainable growth in Africa; to halve global poverty and to roll back disease."

Beck and Kincaid pointed out that the plan not only commits the U.S. to the anti-poverty spending proposal, it also adopts for the U.S. the United Nations  Millennium Development Goal, which includes a variety of treaties and protocols advocated by the U.N.

Objections have remained strong. Duane Lester, writing at the All American blogger, warned that the U.S. has yet to be able to win its own war on poverty.

"On January 8, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson declared "all-out war on human poverty and unemployment in these United States." This "all-out war" would last through the presidencies of Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, H.W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush. We have spent billions of dollars fighting this war, and what have we achieved?"

He continued, "Very little. In 1964, there were 36 million Americans living in poverty, or about 19 percent of the population. In the 40 years between 1964 and 2004: ... poverty never measured less than 11 percent of the population. In 1983, under President Regan, poverty registered 15.2 percent; in 1993, at the beginning of Bill Clinton's presidency, poverty was measured at 13.7 percent of the population. In 2004, under George W. Bush, a president often accused by the political Left as not caring about the poor, the poverty rate declined to 12.7 percent. Still, some 37 million Americans remain poor."

Despite that performance, "Obama is ready to take the fight global," said Lester.

"In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning 'small arms and light weapons' and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child," he wrote.

Tom DeWeese at NewsWithViews said the plan "is very telling" about what Obama would do as president.

DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center, warned the over-arching plan includes the ideals of consolidating all international agencies under the U.N., regulation by the U.N. of all corporate environmental issues, license fees charged by the U.N. to use air, water and natural resources, a restructuring that would give hand-picked non-governmental organizations huge influence, authorize a standing U.N. army and require registration of all arms.

Bob Unruh - July 25, 2008 - source WorldNetDaily

Obama and McCain supporters... be careful, very careful who you vote for... after one of these NWO criminals are in the White House, only then will you figure out what all of their double talk means... it's not what you think.  Vote for your dog if you don't like any of the third party candidates, vote for 'none of the above', just don't vote for your own demise! ~ SadInAmerica

Tag this page!
Submitted by SadInAmerica on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 10:42pm.


Polaris (not verified) | Wed, 08/06/2008 - 11:51am

You guys really are nuts. I think it's time to stop believing your own propaganda and get out more. The total amount is $845 billion over 13 years — from industrialized nations across the globe. The Congressional Budget Office did a cost-estimate analysis of Obama's legislation, and found that U.S. responsibilities "would cost less than $1 million per year." The RNC spread as many lies as they can and depend on you people taking it all in as gospel. Looks like they're not going to be disappointed.

Anonymous (not verified) | Sat, 07/26/2008 - 5:10pm

Please get your facts right. There is no part of a debate on the Global Poverty Act about taxing each individual $2,500 a year. The Congressional Budget Office has marked up the bill as costing less than 1 million dollars. The bill adds no money to foreign aid (of which we currently spend less than 1/2 of 1% of our federal budget on anyway - around 14 billion of a 3 trillion dollar budget) This bill does not connect the U.S. with the U.N. in any way. It uses an IDEA that the UN put forth.... that countries should do all they can to cut extreme poverty in half by 2015. The Global Poverty Act to me is about ending government waste. All the bill calls for is that the different departments that administer the aid we currently give, coordinate, making the money we ALREADY spend more efficient. There is a transparency issue as well in that those administers must provide congress reports on how they are spending the money. Sec. of Defense Gates and 84% of military officers polled recently said that the best way to increase security in the world is to increase poverty aid. Hungry people are unstable and over 30 countries have had some form of protest recently because of skyrocketing food prices. Although the GPA doesn't not add any money for aid as these officers are suggesting, it would make aid more efficient and therefore the bounce-back for America is a safer global world. Please look at bigger pictures.

Anonymous (not verified) | Fri, 07/25/2008 - 11:19pm

U.S.already spend $200B a year for 5 years just to stole Iraq oil.Why not give $65B a year to fight povrety and be the good guys for a change. 5000 childrens died everydays from simple diarya in poor country and a lot more just starve to death. What sealfish you are. Jack Day.