Del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Reddit
Newsvine
co.mments
Global Poverty Act of 2007
A bill 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.
Other Bill Titles (3 more)4/24/2008--Reported to Senate amended. Global Poverty Act of 2007 - Directs the President, through the Secretary of State, to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme... moreSee Full Bill Text
Committees
Amendments
This bill has no amendments.
Bill Status
| Introduced |  | Voted on by Senate | | Voted on by House | | Considered By President | | Bill Becomes Law |
| December 07, 2007 |
Users tracking S.2433 (143) are also tracking:
| People | Bills | Issues |
|---|---|---|
|
In the News
July 07, 2008 S. 2433 hysteria
Based on information from the State Department, CBO estimates that implementing S. 2433 would cost less than $1 million per year, assuming the availability ...
July 06, 2008 A Tax by Any Other Name
The bill, S.2433, which is now in the Senate, commits the US, to spend .7 percent of its gross national product, which according to estimates could scale as ...
June 27, 2008 PROUD PAGAN WITCH BACKS OBAMA'S POVERTY BILL
We want Congress to pass the Global Poverty Act. Please cosponsor S. 2433. Thank you.â The childâs name and age were supposed to be filled in. ...
Blog Coverage
July 08, 2008 Obamaâs $845 billion United Nations-inspired give away
Senator Barack Obamaâs $845 billion United Nations-inspired give away of your hard-earned money may be coming up for a vote SOON: âThe Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433) is coming up for a Senate vote sometime after the July 4 recess, ...
Source: Politics and more
July 07, 2008 Alert: Obamaâs $845 Billion Global Poverty Act Could Be Passed ...
âThe Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433) is coming up for a Senate vote sometime after the July 4 recess, according the office of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. Once Harry Reid and the Democrat leadership put it on the calendar, ...
Source: American Conservative Daily
July 06, 2008 Here's "The Meat" of Obama's Global Poverty Act, S.2433
Originally posted by Maggie at Maggie's Notebook I received a comment on my Obama's U.N ... Obama's S.2433 cannot be separated from the U.N. Millennium Development Goal and here's why: Ms ... Poverty Act,
Source: Faultline USA
448 more posts...
See most useful blog posts
Information made available by:
Rating Filter: 5
(Close help)
Comments
(Close help)
Displaying 1-30 of 99 total comments.
Moderated Comment
Moderated Comment
Filtered Comment [show]
Filtered Comment [show]
Filtered Comment [show]
By the way, I agree with ABNU; stop trying to pass bills designed to dip into the American citizens' pocket. Further, if those in Congress (both branches)feel the need to give the world money, why not take it our of YOUR private reserves of money. Maybe even use some of your contributing lobbyists' funds to cover the mega-billions this would take.
Filtered Comment [show]
Filtered Comment [show]
Filtered Comment [show]
(aside: I just found opencongress today....I LOVE IT!)
We should care about the poor...yes. But not before we fix our own house.
Filtered Comment [show]
Our house will always be in disrepair. I just wish we could decide what America's economic policy should be and stick with it. Are we Capitalist, Communist, Facists, or the rich uncle who gives out free cars. This indecisiveness over where our money should go is strangling middle america. We cannot be all of the above.
In this bill I learned there is a ban on small arms which leaves the general public defenseless and enforcement would be enforced by UN troops, commits us to annual taxation of 7% of US gross national product. Many other items within this bill will be terrible for the average American and the American economy. I do not believe the average American knows Obama does not fly our American Flag. The middle American can barely feed his own, how does anyone in there right mind think they can feed a starving world? Are Americans being sold out?
Anonymous
Filtered Comment [show]
I think that it is a shame that we can not fix the problems here in America but we seem to think that America has enough money to supply the world it's cures. I don't think our economy is reflecting that.
We need to take care of our own country. There are plenty of hungry people living here that the government seems to ignore. Black, white, red and yellow and any variations there-of living here should be our priority; NOT THE REST OF THE WORLD!!!!!!! Bob
Filtered Comment [show]
Live 8/G8. It's not the British so we're supposed to agree to having a percentage of our country's GDP/GNP income tax taken and sent overseas without a vote in Congress? This is taxation of out country's income for foreign governments. If it's not their goevernments, it's NGOs. The money taken out of our GDP/GNP income tax will be used by the governments and NGOs for their own people and the dollar getting to the guy on the street will be, maybe 15 cents and it won't be cash. No one is getting the US GDP/GNP tax money, but friends of the administration.
Obama wants to play with Hollywood and Singers. Please. 'yes we can.' A new dem tax on our country's income, so the President can pay off friends is ridiculous.
Check out detailed bill information on SB2433 <a href="http://www.statesurge.com/bills/26563" >HERE: </> http://www.statesurge.com/bills/26563
I've read the actual proposed legislation and this article is an extreme spin of what the actual bill says.
Read it for yourself.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:s2433:
The article below focuses on one paragraph and one sentence in particular:
(a) Strategy- The President, acting through the Secretary of State, and in consultation with the heads of other appropriate departments and agencies of the United States Government, international organizations, international financial institutions, the governments of developing and developed countries, United States and international nongovernmental organizations, civil society organizations, and other appropriate entities, shall 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.
Somehow they extrapolate that sentence to mean the the U.S. would somehow be mandated to follow everything in the Millennium Development Goals. Read the bill. It says NOTHING like that. The only thing it mentions is that the US would try to meet that one goal of helping global poverty. The bill does not say how the US will do this and it certainly does not place any tax or other mandate on the Gov't. That would be unconstitutional as Senator Obama knows as he was a Constitutional Lawyer at Univ of Chicago Law School for ten years. In fact it says, as you can see above, "The President shall shall develop and implement a comprehensive strategy......", this means the President has DISCRETION on how he will develop and implement such a strategy. There is NOTHING is this bill that suggest and certainly nothing that mandates how this gets done.
So "Shall" means that if you want a wall painted red you Shall let the Painter decided the best strategy of getting the paint applied to the wall and in your mind that is somehow being misconstrued by us "common folk".
I think you miss everyones point in the that America doesn't want the red paint on the wall.
Or maybe that Obama has a Job in which HE is supposed to set goals for america NOW as a Senator not make us reach other countries Goals ahead of our own.
Creating equality by bringing the wealthy down to the poverty line is not something even the poor of America want.
Taxing my employer to the point he has no profit doesn't exactly make my job secure. Sure you will lower my taxes only because I will be unemployed and have to pay less taxes.
I mix the tax debate into this because these Senators just happen to be the ones who want to tax companies into a "balanced budget" situation with an extra 3/4 trillion dollars of spending in just this one bill.
Ooops did we forget to mention that in our television ad or youtube spots.
We already pay over 50 cents for every dollar we earn for our own country's taxes. We will have them raised again after the next election. I do give to help the poor here and in other countries. But it is my choice. I would rather give freely then to "give" by force. This bill is frightening to our country's autonomy. We are drowning economically due to our Senators/Representatives thinking our money is theirs to take.
Filtered Comment [show]
Response to:
"The bill does not say how the US will do this and it certainly does not place any tax or other mandate on the Gov't."
unless the president is going to work on his own time, in a donated office using donated funds, it's tax money. the government is not a charity, it takes your money and spends it on whatever it does. It owns nothing but debt, which is always passed along to us and ours.
So again, if you want to help people in other countries, go there and "fix" them. Be their leader, boil their water, show them how to find food and build shoe factories, bring condoms. Keep a list of all the poor souls you've helped and you may be able to get it deducted from your taxes, or it may get you into heaven--either way you won't know til you try. Lead by example.
ABNU (anonymous but not unknown)
PS The only people who should even think about supporting this are people who have already spent years as an "in-country" volunteer for a foreign aid charity. To support it otherwise makes you a lazy hypocrite IMHO.
Response to:
"That would be unconstitutional as Senator Obama knows as he was a Constitutional Lawyer at Univ of Chicago Law School for ten years."
obama, as far as I can tell, is a socialist. our constitution is somewhat of a non-sequitur if not a antithesis to a socialist point of view. it certainly has no effect nor meaning should a president (with the support of the other 2 branches of government) choose to ignore it; that is to say, there is no law that says 'government' cannot pass laws that may (later) be found to be unconstitutional. We will suffer years under an unconstitutional law, yet no one will go to jail, and no fines will be levied; the constitution it is said, "has no teeth".
What remains is a question of Obama's intellectual honesty and existential dedication to the spirit of the constitution. And again I disagree that Obama 'cares' about the constitution. For example, he wants more gun laws but promises that they won't impinge on the rights of 'hunters' (that old saw). The truth is, the right to own a gun is was specified as a tacit agreement that the government should fear the citizenry; the citizenry would remain armed such that they could fend off an 'out of control government'. When people mention that, the "true" reason for the 2nd amendment, 'we' call them crazy. I agree that the practicality of a violent revolution in the US, small arms and semi-automatic weapons vs. the modern might of the US military is in fact, absurd.
However, the principle is very sound and necessary, and a constitution expert would certainly know it has nothing to do with hunting. Only a demagogue or one of their idiot followers would believe that even the concept of self defense against government is futile and counterproductive because a (US) socialist government is benevolent and fair (now who sounds crazy?). Yet that belief is the guiding principle of (US) socialism, which explains why in spite of Obama's years as a constitutionalist, the principal purport of most if not all of his legislation is unconstitutional (or at least contrary to its philosophy) and socialist in nature. Obama and Hillary agree, only government can bring good things; the constitution often gets in their way. Yes, he 'knows' the constitution, but only because he needs to be able to circumnavigate it, not because he wants to abide by it.
ABNU (anonymous but not unknown)
PS Sorry this is so long, I'm trying to get a blog at
http://www.electronicfreedomfoundation.org.
but they don't seem to be able to get off the ground. See? I'm trying to volunteer and lead by example!
Our government has no business in taking care of the world. Let's repair and restore our own country before we investigate solutions for such an unfeasible notion.
Short and simple! We have enough governmental financial issues in our country now. With our homeowners being foreclosed on, corporations moving to the countries this bill is going to give money to; should I keep going? Let's fix our financial, business and job status in this country FIRST. We don't need to dabble in other countries economies any more than we already are. This bill/law will just muck things up more and make us go further into a financial abyss.
Just when I thought this nation couldn't be dumbed down any more...
Did anyone click the links and actually read the bills? There is nothing -- repeat nothing -- in that bill that calls for spending of a dime. Our foreign aid is budgeted and appropriated every year and very littel goes to Africa. There is also nothing in the bill that directs the suspension of the 2nd amendment, kicking puppies, drowning helpless kittens, killing the "unborn" or (unfortunately) believing everything a paid propagandist tells you.
The US agreed to the Millennium Development Goals before Obama came to the senate and your President has been implementing our end of **what we agreed to** in 2000. Are we doing it for altruistic reasons? Hardly, and most of our foreign *aid* never leaves this country. It goes into deep corporate pockets, but that's another story. Your prez knows Africa is about 50% Muslim and that poverty breeds nasty people who kill us. He has said that repeatedly and has tripled aid to Africa since taking office. He did it without help from Obama... Go figure.
BTW, we're halfway to the Millennium target of 2015 and how much *aid* have we given Africa, the 2nd largest continent with a population of 1 billion? I think we're up to about $27 billion or a fraction of what we've given to Israel... Whoooo hooo! That's about 27 bux per person (or 1/6th of what we hand out in corporate welfare every years) so that will sure stop poverty in its tracks. Do some homework people.
As for Obama driving the "socialist" (???) "Global Tax" train, the bill was introduced by Rep Adam Smith in the HR *almost a year ago* and passed unanimously (because it doesn't mandate spending a dime and it makes us feel good). Obama (and Hagel and Cantwell who aren't mentioned in news for dummies) is simply introducing the bill in the Senate.
If you'll notice, this isn't new news at all and has been in the works for some time. Mr Cliff Kincaid is behind the endless carp you're reading and if you Google him you'll find that he is a right wing hack funded by R.M. Scaife, another POS. He targets the tinfoil hat crowd. :/
We are NOT the saviors of the world. Save America from the globalist regime and one world order! NO! We are tired of being taxed to death. We are tired of paying the wages of a government who does not listen to us.
have you morons even read the bill? it doesn't allocate any more or less funds for foreign aid - that is and always has been set separately.
Add A Comment