Open Left

Who would be applying the pressure? (4.00 / 2)

Gray,

Once the money is appropriated by congress, I suspect the ability of congress to influence how that money is used is quite limited.  I could be wrong, but I'm under the impression that the U.S. treasury department basically dictates IMF policy for the United States.  And we all know who's in control of that institution- a neoliberal, Washington-consensus, corporate supremacist hack.  A neoliberal hack who would not have been appointed by Obama, by the way, if our esteemed leader did not agree with his views on economic policy.

For that reason, I have to agree with Chris here.  A few hours ago, when Congress was still debating the War-IMF appropriations bill, was a rare moment when progressives actually had some say over IMF policy and how our tax dollars are used by the folks who inhabit that fancy building on 19th street.  Now that the money has been appropriated, I fear we've already lost any influence we might have had over how it would be used.  

As for undermining U.S. credibility, failure to appropriate money to the IMF after Obama promised he'd do so would certainly undermine the credibility of the U.S. among the European elite, who agree with imposing neoliberal policies on poor nations and were gonna use the money to bail out their banks anyway.  However, I think it would only enhance the credibility of the U.S. in the eyes of the untold billions of Latin Americans, Asians, Africans, and Eastern Europeans who've born the brunt of the IMF's wrath.  Heck, folks in the third world might stark to think that some people in the U.S. actually care about them.  They might even get the crazy idea that the U.S. is a functioning democracy!

Like I said, I hope I'm wrong.  I hope progressives can still have some influence over IMF policy now that it's once again flush with taxpayer dollars, but I sincerely doubt it.  

On to the fight for single payer, I suppose.      

---

by: jimboz22 @ Tue Jun 16, 2009 at 23:12:38 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

Good points. However, trying this unilaterally is still doomed. (0.00 / 0)

No argument about that the IMF could use an overhaul. But it's an organisation of 185 countries now,all of which have a say in the IMF's Board of Governors. And even it's more powerful Executive Board consists of 24 members. Of course, the creditors sure have a lot kore weight than others, but the US isn't the only one. At the recent G20 meeting, the IMF was a topic, and there have been agreements on financing it in order to effectively fight global recession. And then, some reforms are already under way since 2006 and 2007.

But here you are, the US progressives, boldly pursuiting a plan to UNILATERALLY reform an organisation belonging to 185 nations! Excuse me pls, doesn't this smell like failed Bush policy to you, too? Isn't this another try of the tail wagging the dog? And is this initiative, which will be very difficult to implement regarding all those other nations who have a say, and whose impact on the US economy will be miniscule, really the most urgent topic now? D'oh.

Really, I'm flabbergasted. What about president Obama's plan to overhaul the US financial regulation agencies? That's all over the headlines in international media right now, even in Germany it's the #1 story on Der Spiegel! It's THE big showdown between Wallstreet and White House. Now, where's that story here? Instead, we have that lot of brouhaha about the IMF! Goddamit, fuck the IMF, who cares!

Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested, we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back, nor did we falter

---

by: Gray @ Wed Jun 17, 2009 at 04:35:19 AM CDT

[ Parent | ]