Another so-called war on poverty in the United States

Ken Concannon
Published: May 15, 2008

Did you know that the United States is once again poised to use the enormous power of the federal government and the deep pockets of American taxpayers to fight the social ill that has never been beaten — poverty. 

The last time we took on the monster was in the 1960s. In his 1964 State of the Union address President Lyndon Johnson declared an “all-out war on human poverty and unemployment in these United States.”

That war on poverty gave us the welfare state, Head Start, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, lots of jobs for bureaucrats, higher taxes, a permanent underclass dependent on the government for survival, out-of-control illegitimacy rates and the near extinction of the black family. The new war on poverty is more ambitious.  This time the war on poverty will be global. 

Introduced in the Senate in December, 2007, the Global Poverty Act of 2007 (S.2433) will “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.”

The Millennium Development Goal cited in the legislation is one of eight goals set by the United Nations and agreed to by its member nations in 2000. According to a February 26, 2008 article in the “Investor’s Business Daily” entitled “Obama’s 0.7% Solution For Poverty Gets Pass From Senate Republicans” the goal was set by the United Nations Millennium Assembly and Summit eight years ago. 

The summit called for the “eradication of poverty” by “redistribution (of) wealth and land,” cancellation of “the debts of developing countries” and “a fair distribution of the earth’s resources,” which for the United States means a $30 billion per year increase in global anti-poverty aid payable to the United Nations. Right now we contribute only $16.5 billion yearly.

If this bill passes the Senate, it will set an unfortunate precedent.  We will have allowed the United Nations to levy a tax on us. So who do we blame for this unfortunate piece of legislation?

There are several culprits.  Number one is the soon-to-be-officially-anointed Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.  Although the man has accomplished virtually nothing in his brief Senate career, he has managed to author this bill — which prompts one to wonder. 

When he’s talking about “change,” is this what he’s talking about? Does Obama believe that the United Nations, or any other foreign entity, should have the power to tax American citizens? I hope not!

Number two is the Democratic leadership in Congress, who apparently don’t want this legislation to attract too much attention outside of Congress. The House version of this bill called for and was passed by a voice vote, meaning there was no record as to which representative voted for or against the bill. In the Senate, the bill was assigned to the Foreign Relations Committee, which held no public hearings, and which, by voice vote again, approved the bill for consideration by the full Senate.

Number three is the media, both liberal and conservative. Although this bill says tons about Obama’s worldview, I don’t think any of the Democratic debates touched on this issue. 

At the same time, conservative television pundits appear to be forever stuck on the embarrassing Reverend Wright and
Michelle Obama’s opinion of the United States.

There is an issue here that nobody is talking about, and everybody should be — American sovereignty. 
It’s an issue that underlies trade policy, treaty issues, taxation, even Supreme Court decisions. It’s an issue that demands public review.

Ken Concannon is a resident of Prince William County. E-mail him at .