[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 13358-13359]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               THE WORLD BANK AND INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address two issues involving 
international economics. The first is the World Bank.
  The entire world has been fixated on whether Mr. Wolfowitz arranged 
$195,000 for his paramour, which shows how little attention we pay to 
things at the World Bank that really matter. Because while we were 
focused on that, no one focused in the media on the fact that the World 
Bank is sending over $1.3 billion, roughly a quarter of it our tax 
dollars, to the government of Iran.
  Now we are told that this is for wonderful projects in Iran having 
nothing to do with the government. We here in the House understand 
something about politics. One of the ways you get reelected, one of the 
ways the Iranian government holds on to power is to bring home the 
bacon. I know it's not kosher, I know it is not halal, but that's what 
that government does, and the World Bank helps them do it.

[[Page 13359]]

  Now, we saw how did the United States use its clout inside the World 
Bank? Not to stop these loans to Iran and not to stop their 
disbursements, over $200 million being disbursed by Mr. Wolfowitz 
himself, but for only two goals. One was to try to prevent the World 
Bank from being involved in family planning; and the other was to 
protect Mr. Wolfowitz's career, notwithstanding his errors of judgment.
  Where is this administration when it comes to prioritizing and 
representing the national security interests of this country? Iran is 
developing nuclear weapons, and all we can do with our clout in the 
World Bank is try to protect one individual of flawed judgment.
  Second, I would like to address the idea of granting Fast Track to 
this administration. I am sure that when the President seeks an 
extension of Fast Track, he will offer those of us on the Democratic 
side all kinds of wonderful promises. But keep one thing in mind: Any 
trade deal that requires on this President for enforcement will be 
enforced only to the extent this President wants it enforced.
  Look at the Iran Sanctions Act. This President refuses to acknowledge 
that any facts exist that require him to even decide what to do with 
regard to investments in Iran.
  I assure you that if we sign a deal with the best possible labor 
standards but Presidential enforcement and something were to come to 
pass, perhaps a coup in Peru and all of a sudden every labor leader in 
the country is shot in cold blood, this President will not act to 
enforce those labor standards. He may express some concerns, but any 
agreement involving our trade which requires this President to 
acknowledge facts occurring on the ground is a nullity except to the 
extent that the President chooses to. Because we could have a 
circumstance where there is no enforcement of corporate interests 
without Presidential action, and he will act; and we could have a 
circumstance where there is no enforcement of labor standards without 
Presidential action, and you can be sure he will not.
  So I look forward to changing the policies of this administration. 
Let us hope that at the World Bank we focus on preventing loans to 
Iran, rather than irrelevancies involving one particular paramour; and 
let us hope that this House takes responsibility, its responsibilities 
under article I of the Constitution to deal with international trade 
issues in regular order and not to put American jobs on the Fast Track 
abroad.

                          ____________________