Export-Import Bank: Let it Die!

Export-Import Bank: Let it Die!
by JBS President John F. McManus

Congressman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) is leading the campaign to let the Export-Import Bank expire. If Congress doesn’t formally reauthorize its existence by June 30, it will no longer be providing loans to foreign firms and governments who buy products from Boeing, General Electric, John Deere, and numerous other establishment-favored U.S. firms. Hensarling chairs the House Financial Services Committee where he has become a determined foe of the Bank.

Watch House Financial Services Committee Chairman Hensarling deliver the opening statement on whether or not the Export-Import Bank is necessary (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROpfJuQg-Ss).

The Ex-Im Bank began courtesy of an executive order signed by President Roosevelt in 1934. (Unconstitutionally making law with the stroke of a pen isn’t something new!) Originally, its chief beneficiary was the murderous cabal running the Soviet Union. During the emergence of Communist China as an economic powerhouse in the 1980s, the Bank provided millions to the Beijing regime. Example: In September 1982, the Reagan administration approved a loan of $68.4 million to finance the building of a steel mill in the People’s Republic. Mr. Reagan approved the deal by signing a document stating that the transaction was “in the national interest of the United States.”

Similar deals had already been approved by the Nixon administration for Communist Russia, by the Ford administration for Communist Yugoslavia, Romania, and Poland, and by the Reagan administration for these same Communist tyrannies. Simply put, the Ex-Im Bank has been one of communism’s best friends.

Supporters of the Bank claim that it actually earns money for the U.S. Treasury when loans are repaid with interest. If these deals are profitable, why is a government-run bank needed? Wouldn’t private megabanks be willing to provide the cash if a profit were available?

Three years ago, Congressman Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) made good sense when he opposed reauthorization of the Banks: “The Export-Import Bank dragoons American taxpayers into subsidizing loans to foreign companies making it cheaper for them to buy products from politically favored American companies.” He noted that past beneficiaries included “such upstanding enterprises as Solyndra and Enron,” both of which turned out to be expensive failures paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

Beyond the benefits reaped by U.S. mega corporations, Ex-Im has helped to fuel the transfer of numerous industrial enterprises from the United States to foreign nations. The jobs of many Americans have been lost and American manufacturing leadership has continued to fade away, partly due to the work of the Ex-Im Bank.

Hardly anyone wants to ask where in the U.S. Constitution an entity such as the Ex-Im Bank derives its authorization. As is the case with so many other federal agencies and departments, there is none. This year may see the end of Ex-Im making new loans as it winds down existing outstanding business and soon closes its doors. No congressional action is needed. It should be allowed to die.

Are you receiving our free weekly e-newsletter? Keep up with our latest news and sign up at JBS.org or on our Facebook page.

Mr. McManus served in the U.S. Marine Corps in the late 1950s and joined the staff of The John Birch Society in August 1966. He has served various roles for the organization including Field Coordinator, Director of Public Affairs, and now President. He remains the Society’s chief media representative throughout the nation and has appeared on hundreds of radio and television programs. Mr. McManus is also Publisher of The New American magazine and author of a number of educational DVDs and books.

Let the Export-Import Bank Fade Away

Let the Export-Import Bank Fade Away
by JBS President John F. McManus

The U.S. Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im) came to life in 1934 when, via the executive order route increasingly favored by recent presidents, Franklin Delano Roosevelt created it with his pen. He did so after he had legitimized the murderous USSR a year earlier with formal diplomatic recognition. Having taken that incredible step, Mr. Roosevelt needed a way to send millions to keep Josef Stalin’s tyranny afloat. Not only did Ex-Im money flow to Moscow, after World War II the bank started sending loans and loan guarantees to numerous other communist-led regimes in Europe (Romania, Yugoslavia, Poland) and even to the blood-drenched tyrants running China. It also sends funding to governments and companies considered friendly, but these become competitors of American firms that aren’t subsidized. As Professor Donald Boudreaux of George Mason University summarized, “… at best the Ex-Im Bank creates jobs in export industries by destroying jobs in non-export industries.”

Ex-Im leaders and its partisans claim the bank earns money for the U.S. government when the loans and interest are paid back. And, they add, jobs are created when foreign entities purchase U.S. products. Texas GOP Congressman Jeb Hensarling disputes these supposed benefits and says that using fair-value accounting, as recommended by the Congressional Budget Office, Ex-Im would likely “show a $200 million loss.” But even if money is not being lost, where in the Constitution does anyone find authorization for supplying financial assistance to companies here and abroad?

The chief U.S. beneficiaries of this unique form of subsidization turn out to be General Electric, Ford, and Boeing. They are among the 10 large corporations receiving 60 percent of Ex-Im’s financing. Hensarling says that we should never forget that “Fannie and Freddie made money until they didn’t; the National Flood Insurance Program made money until it didn’t; and Social Security used to make money until it didn’t.” Obviously, he sees potential for Ex-Im to follow the same pattern.

The Export-Import Bank must gain congressional reauthorization every two years. In 2008, candidate Barack Obama stated during a Green Bay, Wis., campaign stop that the Ex-Im Bank was “little more than a fund for corporate welfare.” As a candidate, he was its opponent and now, as President he supports the scheme saying, “As long as our global competitors are providing for their exports, we’ve got to do the same.”

California Republican Tom McClintock has claimed in the past that the bank “dragoons American taxpayers into subsidizing loans to foreign companies making it cheaper for them to buy products from politically favored American companies.” He noted that past beneficiaries “include such upstanding enterprises as Solyndra and Enron,” both of which failed completely at great cost to taxpayers.

Ex-Im’s funding runs out in September. One of its chief backers, Virginia Republican Eric Cantor, the GOP‘s Majority Leader, lost in a 2014 primary race and consequently has lost much of the clout he previously possessed. And Hensarling, as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee where legislation to keep Ex-Im functioning would have to emerge, seems dead set against such a move. If Congress simply does nothing, this form of “crony capitalism” will cease because positive reauthorization is required.

Hensarling (202-225-3484) should receive messages from many Americans encouraging him to allow the Export-Import Bank to go out of business.

Visit Hensarling’s Freedom Index rating, a congressional scorecard rating congressmen on their adherence to Constitutional principles of limited government, fiscal policy, national sovereignty, and a traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements.