current event
Current Event
Summary:
Senate Democrats drop reforms from an aid package set for Ukraine on Tuesday. The funds would have increased the Ukraine loan package while ratifying changes that only the United States has opposed. President Obama proposed those changes to European allies whom have agreed, but won’t be providing as much money as he proposed to the cause. “The governance changes would raise the borrowing limit of countries like Ukraine at the multilateral lending institution, while giving more authority to emerging economic heavyweights like China, Brazil — and Russia. The Obama administration painted them as vital to a Ukraine aid package, but Republicans were never convinced.” “But Republican leaders saw them more as a bargaining chip and were pressing to swap the changes for an agreement from the administration to delay final Internal Revenue Service regulations on political groups that conceal the name of their donors by incorporating as tax-exempt “social welfare” organizations.” Both these quotes represent two different viewpoints on this issue, one being other countries will take it for granted and emerge China, Brazil and Russia; but others view it as a distraction from taxes and the IRS.
Analysis:
This has to do with what we are talking about in class because it has to deal with the differences between political parties and how Democrats and Republicans both have differing views on the issues at hand.
Reflection:
I believe that the United States should aid Ukraine in another way then giving them money. The US is already in $17.5 trillion of debt so why should it be leaning money to a country for support. The United States could help by trying to figure out another way to solve the issue instead of just paying them off.
Bibliography:
Weisman, Jonathan. "Senate Democrats Drop I.M.F. Reforms From Ukraine Aid." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 Mar. 2014. Web. 28 Mar. 2014. .
Summary:
Senate Democrats drop reforms from an aid package set for Ukraine on Tuesday. The funds would have increased the Ukraine loan package while ratifying changes that only the United States has opposed. President Obama proposed those changes to European allies whom have agreed, but won’t be providing as much money as he proposed to the cause. “The governance changes would raise the borrowing limit of countries like Ukraine at the multilateral lending institution, while giving more authority to emerging economic heavyweights like China, Brazil — and Russia. The Obama administration painted them as vital to a Ukraine aid package, but Republicans were never convinced.” “But Republican leaders saw them more as a bargaining chip and were pressing to swap the changes for an agreement from the administration to delay final Internal Revenue Service regulations on political groups that conceal the name of their donors by incorporating as tax-exempt “social welfare” organizations.” Both these quotes represent two different viewpoints on this issue, one being other countries will take it for granted and emerge China, Brazil and Russia; but others view it as a distraction from taxes and the IRS.
Analysis:
This has to do with what we are talking about in class because it has to deal with the differences between political parties and how Democrats and Republicans both have differing views on the issues at hand.
Reflection:
I believe that the United States should aid Ukraine in another way then giving them money. The US is already in $17.5 trillion of debt so why should it be leaning money to a country for support. The United States could help by trying to figure out another way to solve the issue instead of just paying them off.
Bibliography:
Weisman, Jonathan. "Senate Democrats Drop I.M.F. Reforms From Ukraine Aid." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 Mar. 2014. Web. 28 Mar. 2014. .
Bibliography: Weisman, Jonathan. "Senate Democrats Drop I.M.F. Reforms From Ukraine Aid." The New York Times. The New York Times, 25 Mar. 2014. Web. 28 Mar. 2014. .