Bono in U.S. politics?
Bono’s The One Campaign has jumped into the 2008 election.
WASHINGTON - The anti-poverty campaign founded by U2 rocker Bono and others is investing $30 million to pressure the presidential candidates to focus on the oft-forgotten issue, with its leaders arguing on Monday that helping the poor is a national security issue.
Dubbed ONE Vote ‘08, the bipartisan political push aims to get President Bush’s successor to commit to taking concrete steps to combat hunger and disease while improving access to education and water across the globe.
“People do not go to war with people who have saved their children’s lives,” former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., told reporters at a church in the nation’s capital.
Two questions: First, what is Frist doing politicking in church? Don’t worry, I’ve not been under a 6000 year old rock, so I understand the Republican Party and (some) churches are two appendages controlled by the same twisted brain. Second, how is this One Campaign initiative any different from a K Street lobbyist? I’ll tell you that it’s not. This organization is investing $30 million to tell government how to spend your money. That they do it under the flag of a noble cause is no better.
The stated purpose of this campaign is to:
_Fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria._Improve child and maternal health.
_Increase access to basic education, particularly for girls.
_Provide access to clean water and sanitation.
_Reduce by half the number of people worldwide who suffer from hunger.
Nevermind that the people this group wants to help have begged us not to.
SPIEGEL:
Mr. Shikwati, the G8 summit at Gleneagles is about to beef up the development aid for Africa…Shikwati: … for God’s sake, please just stop.
SPIEGEL: Stop? The industrialized nations of the West want to eliminate hunger and poverty.
Shikwati: Such intentions have been damaging our continent for the past 40 years. If the industrial nations really want to help the Africans, they should finally terminate this awful aid. The countries that have collected the most development aid are also the ones that are in the worst shape. Despite the billions that have poured in to Africa, the continent remains poor.
Many of my visitors are libertarian and understand Shikwati’s concerns. Government aid packages do not reach their intended recipients. For those of you who are new to the libertarian viewpoint, our position on foreign affairs is:
American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and the defense — against attack from abroad — of the lives, liberty, and property of the American people on American soil. Provision of such defense must respect the individual rights of people everywhere.
The principle of non-intervention should guide relationships between governments. The United States government should return to the historic libertarian tradition of avoiding entangling alliances, abstaining totally from foreign quarrels and imperialist adventures, and recognizing the right to unrestricted trade, travel, and immigration.
The One Vote ‘08 initiative claims itself bipartisan and indeed has been at campaign events for Clinton (D), Obama (D), other Democrats, McCain (R) and Romney (R). They plan to step up activity with a bus tour and TV commercials but are focused, at this time, on Iowa, Nevada, NH and SC. The group’s stated goals make their involvement in our political process seem benign, even worthy. But, make no mistake; their true purpose is not so pretty. They are involved to influence U.S. policy.
Whether groups like One help end poverty or AIDS is not an issue. As a private charity, they can help whatever groups they wish; I have the ability to donate my money to them or a charity that I deem worthier. In the fight against HIV/AIDS, I think that condoms are more valuable than an abstinence program and would give my money to a group that promotes that line of thinking. A Southern Baptist may think abstinence only programs deserve their money. By keeping government out of the policy making, both methods could be pursued in a voluntary manner and neither of us would have supported a policy we found immoral or flawed.
When you remove the feel good idea of ending poverty, this group is really no different than Exxon, Wal-Mart or a mega-church playing at politics. If you would be angry about any of those groups attempting to pressure candidates in early primary states, you should get angry about this. $30 million is not chump change.
30 million would buy a lot of DDT & mosquito nets. Might even be something left over for seed money to start some self-sufficient farming operations. Nah, let’s spend the money lobbying politicians instead.