Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 264

Should UN Funding be Cut Off Until the Feds Tell Taxpayers How Much They’re Contributing?

Argument in favor

The lack of transparency into U.S. contributions to the United Nations is astonishing, and until the federal government tells taxpayers how much it spends at the UN the funding should be cut off.

Loraki's Opinion
···
01/19/2017
First of all, Congress SHOULD be transparent about how much money we contribute to the United Nations! And secondly, I really feel that we should cut funding from that organization. Like with NATO, it looks like we usually pay more than our share. So cut funding until you BALANCE THE BUDGET!
Like (65)
Follow
Share
01/19/2017
The reality is that the UN today is less prestigious and influential than it was in the 1940s and 1950s. There used to be a time when General Assembly votes actually meant something. Newspapers used to report its resolutions on the front page. And the Security Council, on those rare occasions during the Cold War when it could actually agree on something, was seen as laying down the basic principles along which an issue would be resolved. But now, arriving UN ceasefire monitors in Syria are greeted with artillery barrages. Iran continues to ignore resolutions on opening its nuclear facilities to inspectors. And North Korea merrily flouts UN resolutions as it fires rockets and tests nukes pretty much at will. The UN is no longer the institution it once was and we see this more and more. The question then, isn't so much should UN funding be cut off until the Feds tell taxpayers how much they're contributing, as what it should be just how quickly we can abolish this old relic.
Like (50)
Follow
Share
operaman's Opinion
···
01/19/2017
It's a beginning. Frankly, I'm sick of my tax money supporting dictators or despots as they poke their fingers in our eyes.
Like (32)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

About 20 to 28 percent of the UN’s budget comes from America. Cutting funding would cause a financial crisis at the UN, and that shouldn’t be used as leverage to improve federal reporting.

Liz's Opinion
···
01/19/2017
I think accountability is very important but UN funding is incredibly important and should not be used as a leverage tool.
Like (264)
Follow
Share
Eddie's Opinion
···
01/21/2017
I call bullshit. The Obama administration has voluntarily put info graphics on their website that showed where our tax dollars go. Too bad the Trump administration isn't so transparent.
Like (208)
Follow
Share
Idan's Opinion
···
01/19/2017
The UN is one of the the few reasons the world has avoided descending into another global war. This bill is a stunt, we can and should be able to report how much money is being spent but I believe we can certainly accomplish that without threats. This is just another example of the incoming administrations thinking. Bullying tactics and harsh language to force cooperation. This thinking and approach to government does not end well.
Like (149)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on Foreign Affairs
    IntroducedJanuary 4th, 2017

What is House Bill H.R. 264?

This bill would prohibit the federal government from paying assessed or voluntary contributions to the United Nations (UN) until reports regarding U.S. contributions to the UN are produced and published. Under current law, there is no mandatory reporting of how much taxpayer money the U.S. gives to the UN, and as a result no summaries have been produced since the requirement to compile them ended in 2011.

Impact

The United Nations; Congress; and the federal government.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 264

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: While the U.N.’s 193 member nations are all responsible for paying dues, the U.S. has been its single largest financial contributor since its creation in 1945 and has historically provided about 22 percent of the funding for most U.N. agencies. Precisely how much funding America provides is difficult to determine, because as of 2011 the federal government no longer provides summary reports of mandatory and voluntary contributions to the U.N.

The U.N.’s operating budget is about $2.7 billion annually, and in 2016 the U.S. provided 22 percent of that, or $594 million. It also contributed $2.363 billion to the U.N.’s $8.27 billion peacekeeping budget, more than 28 percent of that total. But aside from contributing to the operating and peacekeeping budgets, the U.S. also makes voluntary contributions to U.N. programs like UNICEF (a fund for children in poverty) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In fiscal year 2013, President Obama’s budget request called for about $417 million in voluntary contributions to a variety of U.N. programs.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: Spiff / Creative Commons)

AKA

United Nations Review and Accounting Act

Official Title

To prohibit the use of funds for assessed or voluntary contributions to the United Nations until the submission of certain reports on such funding, and for other purposes.

    First of all, Congress SHOULD be transparent about how much money we contribute to the United Nations! And secondly, I really feel that we should cut funding from that organization. Like with NATO, it looks like we usually pay more than our share. So cut funding until you BALANCE THE BUDGET!
    Like (65)
    Follow
    Share
    I think accountability is very important but UN funding is incredibly important and should not be used as a leverage tool.
    Like (264)
    Follow
    Share
    I call bullshit. The Obama administration has voluntarily put info graphics on their website that showed where our tax dollars go. Too bad the Trump administration isn't so transparent.
    Like (208)
    Follow
    Share
    The UN is one of the the few reasons the world has avoided descending into another global war. This bill is a stunt, we can and should be able to report how much money is being spent but I believe we can certainly accomplish that without threats. This is just another example of the incoming administrations thinking. Bullying tactics and harsh language to force cooperation. This thinking and approach to government does not end well.
    Like (149)
    Follow
    Share
    The reality is that the UN today is less prestigious and influential than it was in the 1940s and 1950s. There used to be a time when General Assembly votes actually meant something. Newspapers used to report its resolutions on the front page. And the Security Council, on those rare occasions during the Cold War when it could actually agree on something, was seen as laying down the basic principles along which an issue would be resolved. But now, arriving UN ceasefire monitors in Syria are greeted with artillery barrages. Iran continues to ignore resolutions on opening its nuclear facilities to inspectors. And North Korea merrily flouts UN resolutions as it fires rockets and tests nukes pretty much at will. The UN is no longer the institution it once was and we see this more and more. The question then, isn't so much should UN funding be cut off until the Feds tell taxpayers how much they're contributing, as what it should be just how quickly we can abolish this old relic.
    Like (50)
    Follow
    Share
    Being transparent does not mean cutting funds! Sure, we would like to know how much they are being paid. We would like to know how much lobbyists pay our legislators and how much corporations get not including paying no taxes. It is pretty easy to release information.
    Like (39)
    Follow
    Share
    It's a beginning. Frankly, I'm sick of my tax money supporting dictators or despots as they poke their fingers in our eyes.
    Like (32)
    Follow
    Share
    Propose a law that requires transparency, don't try to destabilize the body that helps to maintain peace and keep us out of World War 3. Isolationism is not the answer.
    Like (24)
    Follow
    Share
    This is not America against the world. We must participate globally. There are better ways for the government to be more transparent.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    UN funding should be cut off. Period. No "...unless..." or "...until...".They're a global bureaucracy. They're unnecessary. We don't need to be part of the UN (and we certainly don't need to be doing the bulk of the funding as we are now) in order to get along with others. Government should be as small and as local as possible. The UN is the opposite of that.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    US OUT OF THE UN AND THE UN OUT OF THE US!
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Absolutely. We are not the bank for the world and our citizens should be able to see how much money we give to any assembly or country. Transparency is not something we have been high on and funding UN programs and handout is not our responsibility.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Although accountability is extremely important, so is the UN. We should continue to fund while being transparent on funding totals.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    We have an obligation and plenty to gain from maintaining ties with the rest of the world. The US can only be hurt by avoiding our responsibilities.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    We should not be funding 25+% of the United Nations. When it first began maybe but not now. The UN is filled with unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from Nations from all over the world with the majority of them totally against the United States and all it stands for. To them all we are good for is being dumb enough to continue to pour money into a black hole. We never, repeat never, get anything out of it except grief. If we do continue to give money to it we should be able to get a detailed report, on a yearly basis, as to where it goes and how it is spent. In addition, the world is a much different place that when the UN began. There are many countries that can pony up significantly more than they currently are so we can reduce our gift.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Not a big fan of the UN and it's globalist agenda. Let's get our house in order first. To be fiscally responsible requires us to look at all spending; to know how much and where it's going. We Must critique it.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Burning bridges is expensive- especially if you later decide it was in your best interest to keep the bridge intact. This whole, act first, think later mentality of the Republican congress is dangerous.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    This will destroy international relations with many of our closest allies. It would be a huge blow to the respect we have for the relationship between our nations. Please think carefully before inviting global pressure. Trump may be wanting to put "America First" but we are not the only nation in this world.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Withdraw from the UN and defund them them throw them out of the USA
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes! It's time to slow down the train towards political globalism and move back towards individualism!
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE