Posted on 06/15/2005 5:29:13 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration told Congress on Wednesday it opposes a bill to overhaul the way the United Nations works, citing a requirement the U.S. withhold dues if the organization fails to make changes.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Henry Hyde (news, bio, voting record), chairman of the House International Relations Committee, was to be debated by the House on Thursday.
"We specifically cannot agree to the withholding provisions," Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said. "We are the founder, host country and leading contributor to the U.N."
Withholding one-half of the U.S. dues "would deal a great blow to our credibility in the U.N. system, and it would have ramifications for the reliability of the United States as a friend and partner to the countries that comprise the U.N," Burns said.
Hyde, R-Ill., said he was not surprised by the opposition, but promised to push back.
"The Constitution gives to Congress the power of the purse," he said in a statement. "We intend to exercise it in pursuit of meaningful U.N. reform."
Hyde's bill would require the U.S. to withhold up to 50 percent of U.S. dues if the United Nations failed to put in place specific changes.
Hyde argues that the threat of losing dues would be the only way to get the changes. President Bush already had indicated he did not want the dues provision to be include in final legislation.
The largest financial contributor to the United Nations, the U.S. pays about 22 percent of the annual $2 billion general budget.
"We believe that it's possible to make progress and reform the U.N. without withdrawing financial support," Burns said.
"We are interested in supporting congressional efforts to argue for reform in the United Nations," Burns said. "But we object to and oppose those provisions that would mandate the withholding of 50 percent of our contribution and to the other provisions of the bill that would restrict the president's ability and flexibility to instruct his ambassador to the United Nations."
Hyde said that "every administration reflexively resists congressional involvement in foreign policy and opposes any limits on its freedom of action."
Rep. Tom Lantos (news, bio, voting record), senior Democrat on House committee, hoped the administration's notification would have an effect.
"A better alternative would be to give the administration the option to decide whether and when U.S. financial support ... should be withdrawn, and by how much," Lantos, D-calif., said in a statement. "Democrats have offered such an alternative."
Lantos has offered a bill that would give the president a waiver over withholding of the dues.
The government fell millions of dollars into arrears in the late 1990s because an earlier fight between White House and Congress. As a result, the U.S. almost lost its voting rights in the U.N. General Assembly.
Hyde's bill followed reports of numerous problems within the U.N. organization in recent years. Chief among the was the oil-for-food program in Iraq. It was designed to minimize the effect on civilians of continuing penalties against then-President Saddam Hussein's government.
Hyde must have an old copy of the Constitution.
You honestly think a president who would support getting rid of the UN would win election in the United States?
lol
Look, Bush is center-right, and that qualifies him as conservative. There are degrees of conservatism, but that doesn't make him any less of a true conservative just because he disagrees with you on something.
Hey, I support Hyde on this one instead of Bush as well.
But, to say that Bush isn't a conservative because of his position on this......which he holds ***because he believes withholding dues would *hamper* efforts at reform, not because he is opposed to reform of the UN*** is silly and well, lacking in intellect.
I get disgusted with idiots more and more each day who think that a president of all Americans will push for their ideas all the time instead of supporting another idea sometimes.
Yeah, I am talking about you.
I think Hyde is right here. But, Bush's motives aren't anti-UN reform. He believes withholding dues would have the opposite effect of what we believe it would do...instead of helping reform, it would hurt it.
I think he is wrong on this one. But, that doesn't make him a RINO.
I note your complete disrespect or our president with your shrub language.
First, you are a dormant troll, because only a troll calls President Bush a socialist and calls him George instead of President Bush.
Second, President Bush did not say anything yet about withholding or not withholding the US dues to the UN. If the "undersecreatry" of State in the State department expressed his opinion it does not mean at all that this is the offical or final position of President Bush on this issue.
I agree with you about trade but I am just stating political reality.
I think I did too.
The man I voted for is not the same man I got.
The Republicans I voted for are not the Repubulicans I got.
Congressman McCrery and Senator Vitter, of Louisiana, are still great Republicans. Senator Landrieu is full of surprises lately, she's a dimocrap, but she's voting for some of what I want.
I voted for President Bush. I believe he is a good man trying to do a good job. I do not agree with his stance on immigration and other issues.
Quite frankly, I am looking more closely at candidates than I used to.
This clown Burns says it like it's something to be proud of.
How utterly disgusting.
My only hope (I'm probably dreaming) is that the White House makes ridiculous statements like this one with a winking eye. In any event, GO, CONGRESS!
"We believe that it's possible to make progress and reform the U.N. without withdrawing financial support," Burns said.
"We are interested in supporting congressional efforts to argue for reform in the United Nations," Burns said. "But we object to and oppose those provisions that would mandate the withholding of 50 percent of our contribution and to the other provisions of the bill that would restrict the president's ability and flexibility to instruct his ambassador to the United Nations."
The President and Congress are tag-teaming against the Democrats. Bottom line: Either Bolton gets confirmed ("reform the U.N. without withdrawing financial support") or financial support gets cut in half.
Good strategery. I get it now. I especially like that the House is getting involved.
This is just the latest of a long string of unconservative actions - including his very first priority when he was first elected - not just a single action. And he's not running for office anymore.
There's hope for the GOP...his name is Mike Pence. Other good guys are Inhofe and Coburn.
---
Yep, but there's not much hope for the bloated mainstream republican party. That's why I'm such a CFG fan.
btw, it is worth mentioning that I would be a fan of the UN if it stood for liberty and properity. If Kofi Annan was berating Bush for his out of control spending, drug laws, and high taxes - hey I'd join!
The Bush administration told Congress on Wednesday it opposes a bill to overhaul the way the United Nations works,
was probably me.
sorry.
he's pretty good at defending Iraq's borders against syria... but the homefront borders ain't his specialty.
3.5 years he has left as president.
Maybe he needs a good scandal to spice things up a bit.
What do you expect from a president whose father was our ambassador to the UN? The Bushes are globalists. It's in their blue blood.
Troll this. Stop being such a sycophant and see how much the government has grown under the Bush administration.
I also like CFG and donate to them BTW.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.