|
David Perdue on Free Trade
|
|
|
My company exported American-made products into Asia
[Rep. Phil Gingrey asked Perdue]: "Most recently you and your cousin create an import-export business called Perdue Partners, which just happened to be created after your cousin--the former governor--appointed you to the Georgia Ports Authority.
That sounds like a conflict of interest to me."Perdue's response: "I'm insulted personally about Perdue Partners. I'm one of three partners there. We export American-made products into Asia. I know full well the difficulties of dealing with
this federal government. And that's why I want to go to Washington and try to bring some common sense and create a level playing field so we can get our manufacturers to competing again around the world."
In response to the now-familiar attack on Perdue by Rep. Jack Kingston for being on a board of a company that took stimulus money, Perdue pulled out a new jab: Kingston requested stimulus money for Georgia after voting against the stimulus law.
Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution on 2014 Georgia Senate race
, May 17, 2014
Best opportunity for growth is to boost our exports
An estimated 70% of our economy is based on domestic consumption. The best opportunity for growth is to boost our exports to emerging economies worldwide. They have an increasing demand for American goods, both quality manufactured products as well as
other needs such as agriculture products. Increasing exports requires elected leaders who understand global trends and how to remove barriers to growth. If so, we can create a new age of American prosperity.
Source: 2014 Senate campaign website, perduesenate.com, "Issues"
, Jul 25, 2013
Voted YES to kill reauthorization of Ex-Im Bank.
Perdue voted YEA Export-Import Bank Reform and Reauthorization Act
Heritage Action summary of vote# S206: The Senate voted to table (kill) an amendment by Sen. Kirk to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank. Sen. Kirk recommends voting NO. Heritage Foundation recommends voting YES because the "Ex-Im Bank is little more than a $140 billion slush fund for corporate welfare."
OnTheIssues explanation: Voting NO would allow a vote on reauthorization of the Ex-Im Bank. Voting YES would kill the bill for reauthorizing the Ex-Im Bank.
Congressional Summary from previous Ex-Im bill S.824; the Ex-Im Bank shall:- Provide technical assistance to small businesses on how to apply for financial assistance;
- Establish programs under which private financial institutions may share risk in loans & guarantees.
- The Bank may enter into up to $25 billion worth of contracts of reinsurance or co-finance.
Sierra Club reason for conditionally voting NO (from previous bill S.819):Sen. Shaheen's bill S.824
reauthorizes the Ex-Im Bank without undermining Obama's Climate Action Plan. The Sierra Club supports the bill because it makes both financial and environmental sense for the US and all of its taxpayer-backed financial institutions--including Ex-Im--to stop investing in dirty and dangerous fossil fuels like coal.Cato Institute reason for voting YES to kill the bill:The Ex-Im Bank's reauthorization buffs contend that Ex-Im fills a void left by private sector lenders unwilling to provide financing for certain transactions. Ex-Im's critics [say that] by effectively superseding risk-based decision-making with the choices of a handful of bureaucrats pursuing political objectives, Ex-Im risks taxpayer dollars. It turns out that for nearly every Ex-Im financing authorization that might advance the fortunes of a single US company, there is at least one US industry whose firms are put at a competitive disadvantage. These are the unseen consequences of Ex-Im's mission.
Source: Supreme Court case 15-S0995 argued on Oct 19, 2015
Page last updated: Aug 25, 2017