JS Online Excerpt:
... as the result of a decision by the U.S. Export-Import Bank, funded by Congress, to deny several hundred million dollars in loan guarantees to a coal-fired power plant and mine in India.
BizTimes Excerpt:
The U.S. Export-Import Bank is funded by Congress and serves to promote exports of U.S. manufactured products.
WEAU Excerpt:
...says a Congress-funded bank has reversed itself, agreeing to approve $600 million in loan guarantees for U.S.-made mining equipment.
620WTMJ Excerpt:
...hopes President Barack Obama will intervene to save a $600 million international power plant deal put in jeopardy by a Congress-funded bank.
HotAir Excerpt:Funded by Congress? Run by Congress? From all the news reports and information I skimmed over during the Bucyrus dilemma, the Ex-Im Bank appears to be run by the executive branch since they (White House Administration) set the qualifying guidelines on the loan guarantees for the bank to follow. And, funded by Congress? Is this where all the Senators and House Reps each throw in $20 apiece to create the Ex-Im Bank slush fund? Look, I realize Congress controls the purse strings, but isn't it obvious that just about everything in government, debt and all, is funded by or expected to be repaid by U.S. taxpayers?
... invited to reapply for the loan guarantees doesn’t necessarily mean that the bank, which is run by Congress, will approve them the second time, either.
Except for this blog and comments posted at news outlets, you'd be hard pressed to find Bucyrus, Export-Import Bank and "funded by U.S. taxpayers" in the same article. Why was it so hard for the media to acknowledge the obvious? When is it okay to use the "U.S. taxpayer funded" descriptor for the source of government funds petitioned for and captured by private interests?
In today's corporate-owned spin cycle, probably never. Unless of course it's about ACORN or your unemployment extension.
No comments:
Post a Comment