From: aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com (Allan Schaffer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Global Marshall Plan
Date: 15 Oct 1992 15:37:52 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: holodeck.csd.sgi.com

cdpert01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu said..
>
>Pg. 304:  As a result, the responsibility for taking the initiative,
>for innovating, catalyzing, and leading such an effort, falls 
>disproportionately on the United States.

Probably the most misleading thing here is your implication that
Quayle was correct -- that Gore proposes that "the taxpayers of 
America spend $100 billion a year on environmental projects in 
foreign countries".  Not true at all.  Gore -does- suggest that 
America take a role leading the world in environmental cleanup.  
But with regards to what to _do_ now:

	[p305] It seems to make sense, therefore, to put in place
	a policy framework that will be ready to accomodate the
	worldwide demands for action when the magnitude of the 
	threat becomes clear.  And it also essential to offer
	strong measures that are politically feasible now -- even
	before the expected large shift in public opinion about the
	global environment -- and that can be quickly scaled up as
	awareness of the crisis grows and even stronger action 
	becomes possible.

Perhaps you should have posted that [p304] paragraph in context.

	Still, a number of serious obstacles face cooperation among
	even the great powers -- the United States, Japan, and Europe --
	before a Global marshall Plan could be considered.  Japan, in
	spite of its enormous economic strength, has been reluctant to
	share the responsiblity for world political leadership and
	thus far seems blind to the need for it to play such a role.
	And Europe will be absorbed for many years in the intricacies
	of becoming a unified entity -- a challenge further complicated
	by the entreaties of the suddenly free nations in Eastern Europe
	that now want to join the EEC.

        As a result, the responsibility for taking the initiative, 
        for innovating, catalyzing, and leading such an effort, 
        falls disproportionately on the United States.  Yet in the 
        early 1990s our instinct for world leadership often seems 
        not nearly so bold as it was in the late 1940s.  The bitter 
        experience of the Vietnam War is partly responsible, and 
        the sheer weariness of carrying the burden of world leadership 
        has taken a toll.  Furthermore, we are not nearly as dominant 
        in the world economy as we were then, and that necessarily 
        has implications for our willingness to shoulder large burdens.  
        And our budget deficits are now so largeas to stifle our 
        willingness to consider even the most urgent of tasks.  

	Charles Maier points out that the annual U.S. expenditures for the 
        Marshall Plan between 1948 and 1951 were close to 2 percent of
        our GNP.  A similar percentage today would be almost $100 billion
        a year (compared to our total nomilitary foreign aid budget of
        about $15 billion a year)

Allan
-- 
Allan Schaffer   x2160                    "Things have been tough, but 
aschaffe@holodeck.csd.sgi.com              they haven't been that tough."
aschaffe@netcom.com                                   - George Bush   10/4/92
For a free copy of Bill Clinton's economic recovery plan, call (501) 372-1992
Xref: sparky alt.politics.clinton:9981 talk.politics.misc:51258 alt.politics.bush:8819