The Koch brothers have put out a web video praising Bernie Sanders

[pnwmom]

Last edited Sat Apr 2, 2016, 01:07 AM - Edit history (3)

for opposing the Export-Import ban. The Koch brothers are posing as populists, and they are using their common ground with Bernie on this issue to draw support for their cause.

The bank gives out many loans to US exporters, including to Seattle-based Boeing to help it compete for airplane sales with European Airbus, which gets similar financing from Europe. AND the Export Import bank returns a PROFIT to the US treasury.

The Koch brothers want to help Airbus, which is now building planes in Alabama -- so they want to make it harder for Airbus's American competitor, Boeing to compete. That's why they're attacking the Export Import bank.

The mystery is why Bernie is. What does he have against Boeing Commercial Airplane company selling planes all over the world and producing tens of thousands of good jobs here?

The Export Import Bank isn't "corporate welfare" -- it gives out loans, not charity. Elizabeth Warren, unlike Bernie, supports the Export Import bank -- which, I repeat, lends out to money to major exporters and makes a PROFIT on its loans.

AND GUESS WHO STARTED THE EXPORT-IMPORT BANK: FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-dem-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/koch-brothers-bernie-sanders-220498

The group at the center of the Koch brothers' vast political network is praising Bernie Sanders for opposing the Export-Import Bank and for his attacks on corporate welfare.

Freedom Partners put out the web video highlighting its common ground with the Vermont senator ahead of Wednesday night's Democratic debate.

The video features a clip of Sanders responding to a question from the previous debate about why he opposed the Export-Import bank, a favorite punching bag of the Koch brothers. Sanders' stance has put him at odds with many of his fellow Senate Democrats, including Elizabeth Warren.

"I don't want to break the bad news, but Democrats are not always right," Sanders says in the clip. "Democrats have often supported corporate welfare."

SNIP

ABOUT THE EXPORT IMPORT BANK

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/5-things-know-controversial-export-import-bank/

Conservatives say the Export-Import Bank amounts to corporate welfare, pointing out that the companies that benefit include major corporations like Boeing, Caterpillar and GE which they say can support themselves without taxpayers’ help.

But supporters of the bank, including groups like the Chamber of Commerce and National Association of Manufacturers, point out that most other countries have export credit agencies, in some cases more generous than the U.S. version. Supporters say it will be harder for U.S. companies to compete overseas if their competitors are supported by the government and they aren’t.

The bank says that last year it authorized $20 billion worth of transactions which supported $27.5 billion of U.S. exports and 164,000 U.S. jobs. And it says it has a default rate of less than 1 percent.
Opponents argue that the bank mostly helps big businesses. Of the $20.5 billion in financing and insurance authorized by the bank in 2014, just over $5 billion of that was for small business exporters, according to bank officials. But if the transactions themselves are counted up, more small businesses are helped than big ones. It’s just that the amounts spent on them are smaller.



4. The bank wasn’t a political target until the Tea Party came to power.

In past years the bank was renewed with little or no controversy and sometimes without so much as a roll-call vote. But after a tea party-infused GOP majority retook the House in 2010, conservatives began seizing on the bank as crony capitalism and a federal agency ripe for elimination, making a 2012 reauthorization vote a struggle for the first time.

Outside groups like Club for Growth and Heritage Action for America made it an issue, and this year, with Republicans in control of the Senate and a presidential campaign underway, conservatives have targeted the Export-Import Bank even more assertively.

[revbones]

1. The Kochs want Hillary on other issues

and fear Bernie on most. They know their name is mud in the Democratic circles, so just putting out there that they agree with him is meant to affect how Democrats see him.

[pnwmom]

2. No, they're trying to encourage Independents to vote for him. And you didn't

even attempt to justify why Bernie opposes Elizabeth Warren and all the other Democrats who support the Import Export bank and its loans to Boeing.

[JonLeibowitz]

3. Leaders don't always toe the party line. They do what they think is right. like Iraq, or the TPP.

As for whether the ImEx bank ends up as a positive or negative in the history books, well, I can only let the zen master comment:

[Gwhittey]

6. Because People are sick of corporate welfare.

Boeing pays crap and is shipping jobs overseas as we speak. The also do not pay any taxes and in fact get money back while still making billions in profit.

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-has-big-tax-refund-coming-from-uncle-sam-mdash-again/

[pnwmom]

9. Bank loans are not welfare. They are loans paid back with interest. Franklin Delano

Roosevelt started the bank to get the country out of the Depression and every Democratic President since then has supported it.

The only others who agree with Bernie's position are Ted Cruz and the Tea Party. That should tell people something. He's on the wrong side of this issue, and the question is why.

[Hortensis]

85. Bernie, Cruz and Koch oppose Elizabeth Warren

on the EIB issue?

I hadn't thought of it that way, just wondered why Bernie wants to destroy the EIB instead of making any needed improvements. After all, it performs a very, even critically, important function for our economy.

Bernie, if your cakes aren't coming out well, you don't take a stand against cakes, you kick Charles Koch out of the kitchen and improve your baking.

[NWCorona]

14. I found it quite curious that Boeing announced major layoffs

Right after the caucuses wrapped up. Bernie would have locked Hillary out of delegates if they announced any time before we voted.

[pnwmom]

33. Check your calendar. This is the time of year they often make these announcements

so that there is time for attrition to occur so they can make fewer involuntary layoffs by the end of the year.

[NWCorona]

35. I live in Seattle and worked for Boeing

The layoffs weren't a surprise as there were rumblings for a while now. It's the volume of cuts.

[pnwmom]

37. Then you know this is when it often happens. Nobody at Boeing can ever count

on there not being layoffs, so I don't think this being definite would have changed the vote at all. Ever since we came here 30 years ago, it's been constant cycling between growth and layoffs.

[NWCorona]

53. That's all fine and I'll give you that point

But you are missing mine.

It's the psychological effects. Having layoffs just before the caucuse would totally play into Bernie's hand and it would have been effective.

[pnwmom]

56. It would have demoralized some people but we only had less than 6% participation.

I doubt it would have made any difference in actual attendance, but obviously that's just an opinion.

[NWCorona]

57. You have a point

But I think it really depends on when the announcement was made.

Are you in Washington as well?

[pnwmom]

61. Yes, and I went to a caucus. Ugh.

Nothing like having to stand outside for an hour before they'll let you into the building . . . even though I arrived exactly when they told me to come.

And it wasn't because of any problem processing people's paperwork. They kept us outside for no good reason that I could see. All of a sudden they opened the doors and everyone just swarmed in. It was only after we'd found our precinct tables that they collected our forms and checked them and tallied them.

[NWCorona]

69. It seems that the experience wasn't very uniform at all

Mine went smoothly for the most part. Almost a little to laxed tho. I have friends in West Seattle that said it was a nightmare!

I really did like talking to the other participants and pleading your case. I can also see the advantages of a regular primary. We would have had more than 6% for sure!

[revbones]

12. Well I agree with Bernie on the ExIm bank

Why should I have to detail why Warren doesn't oppose it?

And I don't think the Kochs are extreme idiots. They know they are not respected in democratic circles.

[Gwhittey]

4. OH come on no one is dumb enough to buy into something like Kochs ploy.

You actually think someone would think that Kochs really support Sanders? People are just not that gullible.

[pnwmom]

7. The Koch brothers are strongly against the Export Import bank

so they are using Bernie to try to brainwash Bernie's supporters to oppose it, too.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt began the bank and every Democratic President has supported it, and every Democratic Senator does, including Elizabeth Warren.

[Gwhittey]

8. Ok I guess I was wrong

There seems at least one person who fell for Koch scam.

[pnwmom]

11. Why would Bernie oppose an important part of the FDR legacy

and call loans paid back with interest "corporate welfare'?

[Gwhittey]

15. Because it has been corrupted by people like Clinton

Who took legal bribes from Boeing and now Boeing uses it to make billions in profit while not paying any taxes and even getting money from the government. If try to trick us it is silly to think you are going to Bullshit us into buying your bullshit. Why do you even waste your time with these stupid easily disproved facts? At least make up something that a simple google search does not make one think you are a GOPer trying to hard.

(Note to jury not calling any one a GOPer but warning what some might think...)

[RiverLover]

17. Thank you.

Seriously, how can people be this naive?

It can't be for real.

[pnwmom]

19. The naive people are the ones adopting the tea party view against the bank.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/27/elizabeth-warren-club-for-growth_n_5723536.html

WASHINGTON — The Club For Growth is targeting Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) with a web video attacking her support for the Export-Import Bank, intensifying the conservative effort to take the populist economic mantle away from the Democratic Party.

Warren is tremendously popular among Democrats, and has built her political career by taking on big Wall Street banks and their supporters in both political parties. But the Club’s three-minute video argues that her backing of the Export-Import Bank is inconsistent with that effort.


Ex-Im, as it’s known inside the Beltway, backs cheap loans for American companies trying to sell their products abroad. By lowering the cost of doing business, Ex-Im’s loans effectively function as tariffs protecting U.S. goods. The bank finances about 2 percent of U.S. exports.

SNIP

[pnwmom]

18. Then you are saying Elizabeth Warren and everyone but Bernie-so-pure

supports corruption, because all the Democratic Senators support the Export Import bank. It is the tea party that doesn't, because the Koch brothers have invested in the Airbus facility in Alabama (which gets funding from Europe) and they want to make it harder for Boeing to compete.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/27/elizabeth-warren-club-for-growth_n_5723536.html

[azmom]

21. +10000000000000000000000

[beam me up scottie]

44. ^^^THIS^^^

[fun n serious]

74. You didn't read the article. nt

[beam me up scottie]

5. WHY DOES BERNIE HATE AMERICA???

The mystery is why Bernie is. What does he have against Boeing Commercial Airplane company selling planes all over the world and producing tens of thousands of good jobs here?

[neverforget]

24. Because he's a socialist/communist/fellow traveller

[beam me up scottie]

45. I hear he likes turtles though.

[oldandhappy]

10. more k-bro manipulation

[revbones]

13. Hillary bro-gressives... nt

[pat_k]

16. EXIM is a legitimate issue to debate.

One question -- whether or not it constitutes a form of corporate welfare -- has a very straightforward answer.

Yes. It constitutes corporate welfare.

It is "self-sustaining" only so long as nothing goes wrong.

When you make a loan, you take on risk. (Think mortgage meltdown.)

EXIM guarantees loans. The risk to the taxpayer is significant.

The loans made are not available through the private sector because, apparently, the private sector is unwilling to take on that risk.

Now, that said, whether or not it EXIM serves the public interest sufficiently to justify putting our tax dollars at risk is debatable. But as part of that debate, don't let anyone kid you that EXIM isn't supported by our tax dollars. It is. We the American people are serving as guarantors.

[pnwmom]

20. It is not corporate welfare because it is not charity. They make loans to be repaid with interest.

And the default rate is tiny -- less than 1%.


http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/5-things-know-controversial-export-import-bank/

Conservatives say the Export-Import Bank amounts to corporate welfare, pointing out that the companies that benefit include major corporations like Boeing, Caterpillar and GE which they say can support themselves without taxpayers’ help.

But supporters of the bank, including groups like the Chamber of Commerce and National Association of Manufacturers, point out that most other countries have export credit agencies, in some cases more generous than the U.S. version. Supporters say it will be harder for U.S. companies to compete overseas if their competitors are supported by the government and they aren’t.

The bank says that last year it authorized $20 billion worth of transactions which supported $27.5 billion of U.S. exports and 164,000 U.S. jobs. And it says it has a default rate of less than 1 percent.
Opponents argue that the bank mostly helps big businesses. Of the $20.5 billion in financing and insurance authorized by the bank in 2014, just over $5 billion of that was for small business exporters, according to bank officials. But if the transactions themselves are counted up, more small businesses are helped than big ones. It’s just that the amounts spent on them are smaller.

[pat_k]

78. I'm not arguing pro or con, but past default rates do not predict the future.

And if there was no risk, the loans would be available through the private sector.

[delrem]

22. Absolutely: Sanders = Koch bros.

Way to go, pnwmom!
Way to get down and dirty on the issues.

You own this board.

[pnwmom]

27. No. Sanders position on the ExIm bank is just as wrong as Ted Cruz's is,

and the Koch brothers, and all the other tea party people who oppose it.

[delrem]

32. Bernie Sanders stated his reason:

“At a time when almost every major corporation in this country has shut down plants and outsourced millions of American jobs, we should not be providing corporate welfare to multi-national corporations through the Export-Import Bank.

“Instead of providing low-interest loans to multi-national companies that are shipping jobs to China and other low-wage countries, we should be investing in small businesses and worker-owned enterprises that want to create jobs in the United States of America. If the Export-Import Bank cannot be reformed to become a vehicle for real job creation in the United States, it should be eliminated.”

[pnwmom]

34. He's wrong. Boeing is producing its planes right here. It IS a vehicle for job creation

in the US, which was why Franklin Delano Roosevelt began it and every Democratic President since then has supported it.

Elizabeth Warren and President Obama and every other Democratic President has supported it. Bernie's put himself on the tea party side of this issue. The wrong side.

This is what Obama said in 2015:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/06/26/candidate-obama-echoing-tea-party-called-ex-im-bank-little-more-than-a-fund-for-corporate-welfare/

Ex-Im has provided support to businesses and boosted exports in all fifty states, as a state-by-state analysis my administration put out yesterday shows. Over the last six years, Ex-Im supported $3 billion of exports from 134 businesses in Massachusetts. But because Congress has failed to act, the bank’s mandate is running out. That means it’ll lose the authority to finance new exports in the future. Starting Wednesday, businesses that need additional help shipping their Made-in-America products around the globe will lose that help. And that means lost sales, lost customers, and lost opportunities.

Other countries aren’t going to just stop competing when Ex-Im lapses. There are 85 export credit agencies just like the Ex-Im Bank around the world. They’re all fighting for sales and export-backed jobs. They’re doing everything they can to help their businesses compete and win. Why wouldn’t we do the same?

Here’s why this matters. Over the past five years, we’ve worked hard to open new markets for our businesses, and as a result, more American goods are being sold around the world than ever before. Last year, we had record exports for the fifth straight year. And exports support nearly 11.7 million American jobs — 1.8 million more than when I took office — so by increasing exports, we’re helping put more Americans to work. Plus, export-supported jobs are good jobs. They pay, on average, up to 18 percent more. That’s more money in people’s pockets, more breathing room for families, and more customers for American businesses.

These numbers speak for themselves. We should be doing everything we can to create more opportunities for American businesses to sell to the world. That’s what high-standard trade agreements – like the ones I am negotiating in the Asia-Pacific region – will do. And that’s what the Ex-Im Bank does every day.

[delrem]

39. How are Boeing operations internal to the US dependent on an Ex-Im Bank?

Wouldn't they be dependent on the value of the actual product?

I mean c'mon. Boeing. Check out Boeing sales to Saudi Arabia, for example. Check out your candidate's role in guaranteeing those sales.

You figure they need subsidies?

[pnwmom]

41. They need to borrow money to build the very expensive planes that will

be sold all over the world. They borrow that money from the ExIm bank because of the sheer scale of the loans involved.

[delrem]

46. They can borrow money the same way every corporation does.

They don't need to borrow at a lower rate from an institution that turns a blind eye to the export of US jobs to countries where labor and environmental costs are cheapest, even while they lend out to companies selling military hardware to despots.

[pnwmom]

48. The large majority of jobs produced are right here. And the scale of the loans

makes it too large a risk for many banks -- especially since the aim is not to let banks grow to be "too large to fail.'

You can't have it both ways -- insisting on not having too large banks and then pretending that these loans can be handled by commercial banks.

[delrem]

51. Oh c'mon, you're suggesting that there aren't already banks "too large to fail".

And that's fucking well ridiculous after the big Bush/Obama bank bailout is the story of that decade.

Jeez Louise.

Look, if a loan is too big to fucking well fail, it shouldn't have a government guaranteed providence!
If a bank is imprudent it ought not exist. That's all Sanders is saying.

[pnwmom]

84. But Bernie wants to break them up, so it's nuts to ALSO want to disband

the ExIm bank.

[choie]

88. Oh that's right-

Bernie =tea party...more desperation

[fun n serious]

79. It is what is being reported nt

[azmom]

23. Obama campaigned against it in 2008 and won.

[pnwmom]

28. The bank was reformed in 2012. This was President Obama in 2015:

Why America Needs the Export Import Bank

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/06/30/president-obama-why-america-needs-export-import-bank/tiUXVEzaUOGAWz7p1asLzM/story.html

Ex-Im has provided support to businesses and boosted exports in all fifty states, as a state-by-state analysis my administration put out yesterday shows. Over the last six years, Ex-Im supported $3 billion of exports from 134 businesses in Massachusetts. But because Congress has failed to act, the bank’s mandate is running out. That means it’ll lose the authority to finance new exports in the future. Starting Wednesday, businesses that need additional help shipping their Made-in-America products around the globe will lose that help. And that means lost sales, lost customers, and lost opportunities.

Other countries aren’t going to just stop competing when Ex-Im lapses. There are 85 export credit agencies just like the Ex-Im Bank around the world. They’re all fighting for sales and export-backed jobs. They’re doing everything they can to help their businesses compete and win. Why wouldn’t we do the same?

Here’s why this matters. Over the past five years, we’ve worked hard to open new markets for our businesses, and as a result, more American goods are being sold around the world than ever before. Last year, we had record exports for the fifth straight year. And exports support nearly 11.7 million American jobs — 1.8 million more than when I took office — so by increasing exports, we’re helping put more Americans to work. Plus, export-supported jobs are good jobs. They pay, on average, up to 18 percent more. That’s more money in people’s pockets, more breathing room for families, and more customers for American businesses.

These numbers speak for themselves. We should be doing everything we can to create more opportunities for American businesses to sell to the world. That’s what high-standard trade agreements – like the ones I am negotiating in the Asia-Pacific region – will do. And that’s what the Ex-Im Bank does every day.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/06/26/candidate-obama-echoing-tea-party-called-ex-im-bank-little-more-than-a-fund-for-corporate-welfare/

The administration now is strongly supporting reauthorization of the bank. I asked the White House how it reconciles its current position with Obama's remarks as a candidate. A spokesman, Eric Schultz, sent over this statement:

Since the President took office, the Ex-Im bank has served an important role in helping firms access financing when private sources of finance dried up as a result of the recession in the beginning of the administration. Since then, the Ex-Im bank has been a vital source for these firms, and is key to helping us achieve our export goals and supporting thousands of businesses across the country large and small. We urge Congress to act to reauthorize the bank

Pressed further on how Obama explains the change in his views since 2008, the White House added that Congress directed reforms to Ex-Im in 2012 that required, among other things, submitting quarterly reports to Congress about its default rate and submitting Federal Register notice for each transaction over $100 million.

[azmom]

30. Reagan was also a big supporter.

[pnwmom]

31. So? Franklin Delano Roosevelt began it and every President since then

has supported it.

And the bank was reformed in 2012, and Obama strongly supported the changes.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/06/26/candidate-obama-echoing-tea-party-called-ex-im-bank-little-more-than-a-fund-for-corporate-welfare/

The administration now is strongly supporting reauthorization of the bank. I asked the White House how it reconciles its current position with Obama's remarks as a candidate. A spokesman, Eric Schultz, sent over this statement:

Since the President took office, the Ex-Im bank has served an important role in helping firms access financing when private sources of finance dried up as a result of the recession in the beginning of the administration. Since then, the Ex-Im bank has been a vital source for these firms, and is key to helping us achieve our export goals and supporting thousands of businesses across the country large and small. We urge Congress to act to reauthorize the bank

Pressed further on how Obama explains the change in his views since 2008, the White House added that Congress directed reforms to Ex-Im in 2012 that required, among other things, submitting quarterly reports to Congress about its default rate and submitting Federal Register notice for each transaction over $100 million.

[azmom]

36. So, it's not a republicans oppose the import export bank

Issue as your title suggests, is it?

[pnwmom]

38. I don't understand your question. The tea party opposes the bank and so does Bernie.

Traditional Republicans and Democratic Presidents and even Elizabeth Warren support it.

Just not Bernie, for some inexplicable reason. I know why Koch is trying to advantage Airbus. I don't know why Bernie would.

[azmom]

47. Read your own thread, it was asked and answered.

[pnwmom]

49. No, it wasn't. Bernie's answer was just his usual spiel about corporate welfare,

even though the bank isn't about charity. The bank makes loans that are repaid with interest, at a PROFIT to the US Treasury.

[azmom]

52. Do you really think these companies should qualify

For government loans?

[pnwmom]

59. Yes, and so does Elizabeth Warren. And so does every Democratic President

since FDR began the ExIm bank, including President Obama.

We are competing around the world with other countries that have these banks. This just puts our companies on a level playing field.

[azmom]

63. Don't forget, Including republican presidents.

I can see why Hillary is a big supporter.

As weapons transfers were being approved, both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Boeing made donations to the Clinton Foundation. The Washington Post revealed that a Boeing lobbyist helped with fundraising in the early stages of Hillary Clinton’s current presidential campaign.

https://theintercept.com/2016/02/22/saudi-christmas-present/

[pnwmom]

65. Every President since FDR began it. The tea party opposes it though -- and Bernie.

Very strange bedfellows there.

[azmom]

70. As I understand it, the tea party

Opposes corporate welfare too, so I don't see it as strange.

[pnwmom]

73. The tea party pretends to. But they support lots of other things

that would actually be corporate welfare -- like paying corporate farms not to produce crops.

And the ExIm bank isn't engaged in welfare -- they make loans that are paid back and earn a profit for the Treasury.

The ExIm Bank was a key part of FDR's New Deal.. That's why the tea party hates it. They hate social security, too, and they call that welfare.

The tea party is wrong about the ExIm bank and they're wrong about Social Security.

And Bernie is wrong about the bank, too.

[azmom]

80. I agree with Bernie. When a single company

Is the beneficiary of 40% of all the loans. There is something seriously wrong.

[pnwmom]

83. Boeing and Lockheed's European competitor, Airbus, has the advantage

of the same kind of financing. They get the large share of the loans because their product -- airplanes -- is much more expensive to build than most exports, and beyond the ability of most banks to finance.

FDR recognized how important it was for the US to trade exports on a level playing field and every President since then has recognized this.

The Democratic party was united in fighting for the renewal of the bank. But Bernie's never been a Dem, and on this issue he's solidly lined up with Ted Cruz and the rest of the tea party.

[jillan]

29. It's hillaryous.

[beam me up scottie]

43. She's gish galloping her own thread!

[okasha]

40. Boeing also competes with Lockheed-Martin.

[pnwmom]

42. Which also can use the Ex-Im bank. Airbus, OTOH, can use the comparable

European banks.

The Export Import bank was an important part of FDR's New Deal that has been supported by every Democratic President since then. That is why it makes sense that the Tea Party is trying to get rid of it. It doesn't make sense that Bernie agrees with them.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/export-import-bank

Introduction

When President Franklin Delano Roosevelt took office in March 1933, he immediately focused his attention on the domestic economic situation created by the Great Depression. Believing that recovery would come from measures taken at home rather than abroad, he secured Congressional passage of a series of far-reaching domestic economic reforms that would come to be known as the first New Deal. His doubts about the ability of foreign economic policy to contribute to domestic recovery were reflected in his approach to the London Economic Conference. In June 1933, representatives from 66 countries gathered in London to try to find a way out of the Depression through cooperation in areas such as the reduction of trade barriers and the stabilization of exchange rates. Countries that remained on the gold standard, such as France, sought to convince countries that had left the gold standard, particularly the United Kingdom (in September 1931) and the United States (in April 1933), to agree to stabilize the par values of their currencies. The chances for success were already slim when, on July 3, Roosevelt rejected such an agreement as “a purely artificial and temporary experiment,” asserting that a “sound internal economic situation” was more important to a country’s prosperity than the external value of its currency. The conference ended less than a month later with little to show for its efforts.

Creation of Export-Import Bank

In 1934, the Roosevelt Administration undertook two initiatives that signaled a desire to reengage economically with the rest of the world. The first was the creation of the Export-Import Bank. In February 1934, Roosevelt established the bank as an institution designed to finance U.S. trade with the newly-recognized Soviet Union. He created a second Export-Import Bank the following month, this one intended to finance trade with Cuba; in July 1934, the second bank’s field of operations was expanded to include all countries save the Soviet Union. In 1935, the two banks were combined and Congress passed legislation granting the newly unified bank more powers and more capital. In the years before the start of the Second World War, while it did extend credits to countries outside the Western Hemisphere such as Italy and China, the Export-Import Bank concentrated its efforts in Latin America, where it proved an important component of the Good Neighbor policy.

[Recursion]

60. Of all the demagoguery this cycle I find the Ex-Im the most irritating

It's a program that costs zero taxpayer money and supports US exports. Every European country has one.

"Progressives" who oppose it are showing their true colors.

[pnwmom]

62. Yup. I understand why the tea party opposes it. I just don't get it with Bernie.

It was part of the New Deal. Why is he opposing one of the key programs of the New Deal, that every Dem supports?

Sometimes his thinking seems so shallow . . .

[fun n serious]

75. Bernie is the one who accepts $$ from Koch inc not Hillary nt

[ContinentalOp]

50. So the guys who helped fund the Nader campaign also support Bernie.

What a huge shock that is.

[RandySF]

55. Theyre are also Scott Walker's biggest patrons

[CajunBlazer]

54. K&R

[SusanCalvin]

58. From what I currently know,

Or think I do, this is a point where I disagree with Bernie.

[pnwmom]

66. Most people here think they support the New Deal and FDR.

Well, the ExIm Bank was a key part of FDR's New Deal.

And yet Bernie and the tea party think we should just toss it out.

[cherokeeprogressive]

64. Smart bet.

No... NO republican stands a chance of being elected in 7 months. Not even one who's just emerged from the shadows in an attempt to save the election.

[ucrdem]

67. Mr. Rove's SuperPAC has also expressed its admiration:

Conservative SuperPAC's Ads Take Aim At Hillary Clinton
February 26, 20163:08 PM

The conservative group American Crossroads has a simple mission, raise millions of dollars and help Republicans win elections. This, of course, has been no ordinary election season, and that's made life unpredictable for a group cofounded by Karl Rove that has been so important to the conservative movement. For one thing, American Crossroads raised some eyebrows when it got involved in the Democratic caucuses in Nevada. The group ran ads branding Bernie Sanders as the only true progressive in the race.

http://www.npr.org/2016/02/26/468216156/conservative-superpacs-ads-take-aim-at-hillary-clinton

Isn't it wonderful?

[cosmicone]

68. No surprise. Republicans have been propping Bernie up since the beginning. n/t

[HooptieWagon]

71. The Kochs funded the DLC HRC co-founded.

I'm sure that like Lloyd Blankfeld, they'd be equally happy if Clinton or another establishment Republican won.

[ucrdem]

72. I guess they didn't get the quid pro quo they were hoping for.

Hillary has mentioned that.

[cherokeeprogressive]

77. Yet.

[ucrdem]

81. Evidently they got tired of waiting. nt

[fun n serious]

76. Bernie accepted money from t hem for his Campaign nt

[workinclasszero]

82. Bernie is the koch bros favorite revolutionary!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

86. Well, it was a good run until you exposed Sanders as the secret 4th Koch Brother.

Jesus wept. Then wept again.

[pnwmom]

87. Bernie chose the wrong side on this issue. He picked the tea party side,

instead of Elizabeth Warren's.

And President Obama's.

And Franklin Delano Roosevelt's, who got the bank set up as part of the New Deal.

I know why the tea party opposes a key New Deal program but no Democrat should be doing this.

Bernie just wants to be different, I guess. Like with his anti Brady bill positions.

And he doesn't view himself as a Democrat -- even if he is using the party for his run now.

[kstewart33]

89. The Koch Bros want Sanders to win.

As does the Republican party. Pro-Bernie ads and anti-Hillary ads.

The message cannot be more obvious: they want Bernie to be their GE opponent. They've seen his biography, pored through all his speeches and personal history, and they're ready to go to war.