Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
[flagged]
The United States withdraws from UNESCO
981–989 of 989 posts
Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#982Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#983Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#984Obama withdrew all US funds from UNESCO in 2011 as well, due to Palestine being admitted in. This isn't anything particularly noteworthy, just more capitulating to Israel, which is annoying.
Well, as long as Israel is fighting Iran's terrorist proxies, the U.S. must stand by her.
Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#985Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#986Earlier quoted context omitted.
Predictably, if/when China becomes the premier funder of UN organizations, there will be a lot of grousing about it by US politicians. The amount of soft-power being trashed is astounding
We’re the ones seeking to cap our contributions. The formula currently doesn’t allow for any one country to pay more than 22% with America the only one actually paying that much, save for the institutions we’ve cut off. For UN peacekeeping we’re actually assessed at 27% but Congress capped that to 25% back in 1993. https://betterworldcampaign.org/us-funding-for-the-un/un-bud... If any other country wants to step in a…
> If any other country wants to step in and fill the gap, I don’t think Congress will care
"Countering the PRC Malign Influence Fund Authorization Act of 2023[1]" says otherwise.
1. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1157...
Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#987Earlier quoted context omitted.
AIPAC is the most powerful lobby in Washington. And money get's you anything in politics.
I’ve heard this for decades now. But how do they rank in importance compared to other juggernauts like the teachers unions, NRA, or United Auto Workers, Planned Parenthood? Not to mention individual lobbyists for massive companies? because the latter dominate discourse during elections.
[deleted]
Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#988Earlier quoted context omitted.
AIPAC is the most powerful lobby in Washington. And money get's you anything in politics.
I’ve heard this for decades now. But how do they rank in importance compared to other juggernauts like the teachers unions, NRA, or United Auto Workers, Planned Parenthood? Not to mention individual lobbyists for massive companies? because the latter dominate discourse during elections.
Here’s a simple summary of the main lobbying and campaign spending numbers discussed:
- AIPAC: Gave $17 million to 365 candidates in one recent year.
- Teachers Unions (NEA and AFT): Campaign donations grew from $4.3 million (2004) to over $32 million (2016).
- NRA: Spent ~$10 million/yr on candidates since 2010; $30 million for Trump in 2016.
- United Auto Workers (UAW): Spent ~$8/yr million on politics and lobbying since 2010.
- Planned Parenthood: About $1 million on federal lobbying in 2024.
- Corporate/Industry Lobbyists: Often spend many millions each quarter—generally exceeding any of the above groups.
Corporate and industry groups lead in total money spent, followed by the NRA, teachers unions, AIPAC, UAW, and then Planned Parenthood.
Re: The United States withdraws from UNESCO
#989Earlier quoted context omitted.
We’re the ones seeking to cap our contributions. The formula currently doesn’t allow for any one country to pay more than 22% with America the only one actually paying that much, save for the institutions we’ve cut off. For UN peacekeeping we’re actually assessed at 27% but Congress capped that to 25% back in 1993. https://betterworldcampaign.org/us-funding-for-the-un/un-bud... If any other country wants to step in a…
> If any other country wants to step in and fill the gap, I don’t think Congress will care "Countering the PRC Malign Influence Fund Authorization Act of 2023[1]" says otherwise. 1. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1157...
All of our foreign policy prior to January 20th 2025 is in a state of flux. Officially, Congress cares, but the first 7 or so months of this year have been enlightening in a strange way, and with our President taking the lead, there is a strong possibility that Congress will not care if the possibility of the PRC paying more comes up in any policy discussions.