Governing As a Conservative
“Briefly, the Ex-Im Bank is, as then-Senator Obama said, ‘little more than a fund for corporate welfare.’ The Heritage Foundation has dubbed it the ‘Fannie Mae for exporters.’ Even the Washington Post was skeptical, calling the Bank ‘inherently risky’ and dismissing many arguments made by the Bank’s proponents.
“At the end of May, the Bank’s legal charter expires, and its reauthorization is subject to fierce debate within the Republican Party. The Bank was last reauthorized in 2006 by unanimous consent, so the debate alone is noteworthy and a byproduct of the tea party wave that crashed into Washington in 2010.
“The Wall Street Journal accurately put forth the stakes: ‘If the GOP wants to have a principled battle about fiscal waste and market distortions, this is a good one.’
“Indeed, despite controlling ‘one-half of one-third of the federal government’ House Republicans have an opportunity to eliminate an ‘inherently risky’ agency that is ‘little more than a fund for corporate welfare.’ By refusing to reauthorize the $100 billion Bank, House Republicans could secure a principled policy victory that would also play well politically with the American people.”
You can read the full article here.