President Bush’s request to spend more than $20 billion to rebuild Iraq’s sewers, power lines and other domestic facilities is meeting resistance from an unexpected source — Republicans in Congress, who have been among the staunchest allies of the administration’s foreign policy. The GOP lawmakers are demanding that some of the money be repaid by Iraq or be provided by allies who also stand to gain from stabilizing the region.
| To me, that sounds like a logical request. We can lay out the money up front, but I'd expect to get it back down the road... |
With prospects for allied contributions dwindling, some of the lawmakers say the United States should lay claim to a share of future revenue from Iraq’s oil fields. "It’s only fair and right that a small portion of Iraqi oil revenues over the next 10 to 15 years be devoted to paying these costs," said Rep. Charles H. Taylor (R-N.C.), a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee. Although Bush administration officials have repeatedly said that they expect Iraq to pay the bills over the long run, they have rejected the idea of making the initial aid, in essence, a loan rather than a grant. That would make it harder, they say, to deliver the money quickly or to round up international support for the rebuilding effort. "The president decided to have the money provided as a grant because that is the best way to achieve the immediate and short-term objectives in Iraq — stabilization, security and getting Iraq to the point it can pay for its own reconstruction," said Trent Duffy, spokesman for the White House’s Office of Management and Budget.
| Okay. That makes sense, I guess. It's his call. I'da done it differently, but nobody voted for me... |
Said an aide to the House GOP leaders, "It is hard for members of Congress to go home and say we’re rebuilding Iraqi roads and schools, while constituents are asking, ’Why don’t you get my road built and school fixed?’"
| I'd like to know why the Little Woman didn't stop longer at that stop sign last night. But she was doing the driving... |
Republicans who support the requirement that Iraq repay the U.S. for reconstruction aid include Sens. Don Nickles of Oklahoma, who chairs the chamber’s budget committee, Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas and George Voinovich of Ohio. They and others argue that, especially at a time when the U.S. budget deficit is growing, oil-rich Iraq should be expected to eventually pay back something for its own reconstruction. "Iraq is not Afghanistan," said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). "This is a country with considerable natural resources." Nickles has raised his concerns about the reconstruction funding in meetings with Vice President Dick Cheney and Joshua Bolton, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. Nickles believes that it is better foreign policy to give Iraq more financial responsibility, said his spokeswoman, Gayle Osterberg. A senior aide to Senate GOP leader Bill Frist of Tennessee said Republicans are proposing payback mechanisms as a way to help make the aid request more palatable to a reluctant public.
| Even as loans, I still don't find them too tasty. But I regard the money as being spent on the war on terror. Pay me now or pay me later, it's going to cost money. Cheaping out at this point may have a bad effect later — though if the coin had landed the other way I'd have said we should conserve resources now so we have them to spend later... |
Administration officials including Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told Congress earlier this year that they expected Iraq to be able to finance much of its own reconstruction through oil revenue, frozen assets and other resources. They still say they expect that to happen in the long run.
It is legitimate to question the cost of reconstruction. Building Iraq is not the responsibility of the U.S. This should be done by the Iraqis. They should pay for the construction of hospitals, prisons, postal service, firefighters etc. Giving someone $20 billion will cause a "moral hazard" problem: (1) Other nations will not contribute leaving the U.S. alone in reconstruction process (this is one of the reasons Iraq Donor Conference is a failure - even Japan is not cooperating - so far they spent only $86 million and are considering for $1 billion next year. A similar meeting for Afghanistan held in Tokyo last year raised pledges of $4.5 billion). (2) Iraqis are taking for granted the American assistance and expect Americans to build their country for free. I can understand the money spent for security of the borders, new Iraqi army, police force, etc., but mobile phones, post office, firefighters, marshlands, infrastructure are their responsibility. The money spent on those should be in the form of loans not grants. |