Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. 727

Should the U.S. Develop a 10-Year Plan to Address Fragility & Prevent Violence in at Least Five Priority Countries?

Argument in favor

Addressing the human and economic costs of global violence requires an interagency approach by U.S. federal agencies and cooperation with international partners. This bill would improve that coordination by developing an integrated strategy to reduce global violence.

jimK's Opinion
···
07/19/2019
OOPS, I tried to add this comment and it seems that it replaced the prior one; sorry! In general, I believe that our government needs to embrace and be guided by long term strategic thinking. Too much legislation and too many actions are reactive to a particular current event or a vote pandering ‘feels right’ action- all without considering long term and often quite negative consequences. Having a strategic plan framework against which such actions can be guided can only help. The legislation proposed here is a good step forward in that direction. I propose that Congress take on the task of developing a kind of a ‘bill of rights’ declaration for today’s world that codifies what principals guide our country, what we stand for and what we hope to become – and then use that document as a litmus test for developing ‘category’ delineated high level strategic plans that fully consider the impact on today, tomorrow and years into the future. Then for each ‘category’ do the same - only in more specific detail. This would be and should be a difficult task and would require periodic updating, more frequently at deeper and deeper levels. Why do this? Well, there are several reasons. First, it would help prevent entrusted governmental leaders at any level from taking actions that run counter to long term strategies which are grounded in guiding principals. Many government programs require long term commitment that persist beyond political term limits and it is very inefficient to turn these off and on again every time an administration or Congress changes direction. International alliances get confused and are threatened by sudden changes- which may be necessary but should only happen within the context on an overriding commitment to a long-term guiding principal or strategy. Top down, successively more detailed strategic principals and plans tell us and the world that we have long term goals and commitments, that both near and far term consequences of our actions are fully thought-through to minimize disastrous unintended consequences we have frequently encountered, that the character and commitment of our country won’t quickly change every four years, and that the many disparate government agencies will not work at cross-purposes which is both wasteful and confusing. Finally, this kind of framework should enable Congress to focus on higher level legislative issues and not have to pass detailed legislation every time an agency needs to buy toilet paper or soap (like we had to for the immigration detention centers). There are many long-term challenging issues that will affect us and our country. We need long-term, careful planning to meet these challenges, a steadfast commitment to ourselves and our allies and an efficient allocation of resources to meet our goals.
Like (72)
Follow
Share
davidf's Opinion
···
10/19/2019
Chris Coons almost invariably sees to the core of problems. While not perfect this bill ultimately will be good not just for the nations involved but also for the United States. One caveat - Trump cannot be the President to select the countries.
Like (20)
Follow
Share
Martha's Opinion
···
10/19/2019
It could probably be very helpful, but what country would trust us given Trump's idiotic moves?
Like (10)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

USAID, the State Department, and DOD engage on very different issues in each country they’re present in, so interagency coordination of violence reduction efforts may not be fruitful. In areas where coordination is beneficial, agencies should already be cooperating.

Jeff's Opinion
···
10/19/2019
Not until they start here with the damage done by Trump.
Like (30)
Follow
Share
TheDarkSide's Opinion
···
10/19/2019
As of right now the President, Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense cannot not be trusted to make the right choices on any proposed initiatives!
Like (21)
Follow
Share
ManfromNebraska's Opinion
···
10/19/2019
Worry about our issues and not interfere in other countries affairs.
Like (13)
Follow
Share
    OOPS, I tried to add this comment and it seems that it replaced the prior one; sorry! In general, I believe that our government needs to embrace and be guided by long term strategic thinking. Too much legislation and too many actions are reactive to a particular current event or a vote pandering ‘feels right’ action- all without considering long term and often quite negative consequences. Having a strategic plan framework against which such actions can be guided can only help. The legislation proposed here is a good step forward in that direction. I propose that Congress take on the task of developing a kind of a ‘bill of rights’ declaration for today’s world that codifies what principals guide our country, what we stand for and what we hope to become – and then use that document as a litmus test for developing ‘category’ delineated high level strategic plans that fully consider the impact on today, tomorrow and years into the future. Then for each ‘category’ do the same - only in more specific detail. This would be and should be a difficult task and would require periodic updating, more frequently at deeper and deeper levels. Why do this? Well, there are several reasons. First, it would help prevent entrusted governmental leaders at any level from taking actions that run counter to long term strategies which are grounded in guiding principals. Many government programs require long term commitment that persist beyond political term limits and it is very inefficient to turn these off and on again every time an administration or Congress changes direction. International alliances get confused and are threatened by sudden changes- which may be necessary but should only happen within the context on an overriding commitment to a long-term guiding principal or strategy. Top down, successively more detailed strategic principals and plans tell us and the world that we have long term goals and commitments, that both near and far term consequences of our actions are fully thought-through to minimize disastrous unintended consequences we have frequently encountered, that the character and commitment of our country won’t quickly change every four years, and that the many disparate government agencies will not work at cross-purposes which is both wasteful and confusing. Finally, this kind of framework should enable Congress to focus on higher level legislative issues and not have to pass detailed legislation every time an agency needs to buy toilet paper or soap (like we had to for the immigration detention centers). There are many long-term challenging issues that will affect us and our country. We need long-term, careful planning to meet these challenges, a steadfast commitment to ourselves and our allies and an efficient allocation of resources to meet our goals.
    Like (72)
    Follow
    Share
    Not until they start here with the damage done by Trump.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    As of right now the President, Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense cannot not be trusted to make the right choices on any proposed initiatives!
    Like (21)
    Follow
    Share
    Chris Coons almost invariably sees to the core of problems. While not perfect this bill ultimately will be good not just for the nations involved but also for the United States. One caveat - Trump cannot be the President to select the countries.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Worry about our issues and not interfere in other countries affairs.
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    It could probably be very helpful, but what country would trust us given Trump's idiotic moves?
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    As the leader of the Free World the United States must take the lead. The Marshall Plan, Nato and the many other efforts this Country has taken the lead in will be for naught if we turn our backs on the world at this dangerous time.
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    A great idea if we can ever lead with compassion, wisdom and forward thinking again. 🤔
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    We are 22 trillion in debt, stop wasting our money on other countries. No more foreign aid period.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    It’s called foreign policy.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    The Democrats continue to support other countries over the US. We need to focus our efforts and resources and make our priorities solving our problems. Once that is at an acceptable level, then and only then, we can aide others.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    I am all for an ounce of prevention, that is a great, forward thinking strategy. However, considering our current administration's ineptitude, lack of empathy, and clear corruption, I think it an unwise time to be molding the world in our image.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to become Global Leaders again. You have all let America fall from it’s standing as a global leader by supporting trump. We need to promote stability and peace and we need to start by removing trump from office.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Representatives, strongly oppose this bill without in-depth information, selection criteria, and answered questions. Even with the supposed bi-partisan support, this bill seems ridiculously vague! As many others point out, we certainly don’t want a corrupt Administration selecting the countries based on Quid Pro Quo’s. May be we wouldn’t want any future president making the selection. The selection of countries needs clearly defined criteria with agreement by Congress. In the fragile recipient countries, who gets the aid? The CIA? Puppet leaders? Heroes of the people? Heroes of the corporations? As someone pointed out, how and when do we stop sending aid without causing problems, pain and suffering? What is the criteria of success? So far no one has questioned the number of countries. Why five? Why not three? Why not thirty? There are serious problems to be addressed on every continent! Why only help the most fragile? It might be much, much better to build up the stronger countries in regions of concern. At this point we should continue the same half baked ad hoc foreign policy until we have clearer legislation, better leadership, a better economy and a better political climate here, at home in the USA.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    S 727 VOTE NO. This is a great humanist idea! They think that their beliefs are better so they can dictate to other nations what they should do. Arrogant and egotistical to the max! Nation building does not work. Hate is a core human action that originates from the heart. Thus, it can only be change by a spiritual revitalization from our Creator. That requires a relationship with Jesus Christ.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    If your goal is to minimize immigration, improve safety and security on at-risk countries. I support efforts to reduce violence everywhere.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    This planet has limited space and resources. Our neighbors problems quickly become our problems. It’s not like we can just focus on ourselves and everything else will take care of itself, that’s just wishful thinking. On top of that, if we don’t work to help resolve problems world wide, we leave a power vacuum that will be filled by the Chinese and the Russians, and I promise you won’t like their solutions. Even if the Chinese and the Russians don’t step in, countries collapsing leads to tons of refugees or disastrous events such as genocides or mass starvation. Do you really want a huge mass of desperate people with no country to call home milling around? You think we have a crisis at the border now, just let a few South American countries collapse completely. And don’t think it won’t affect us if it happens in Africa... that’s a lot of people, and if they overrun Europe, where do you think they’ll go next? You really think an ocean is gonna stop that wave? Even if it did, who do you think buys American products outside of America? Countries failing are bad for business. You create safe harbors for exactly the kind of international criminals and pirates that we absolutely don’t need, and then we have to spend even more on our military in order to protect our interests. So do I favor a little bit of prevention to help stabilize those countries for which failure could cause a chain reaction that spills over on a massive scale? Oh, you bet I do. Maybe we could even spend a little to help restore order to places where order has already failed, like Somalia.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    As a global superpower, we should definitely stand up for world peace and prevent violence. But with Trump in office, I doubt it would really be possible to accomplish this. It’s worth a try.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    First we must recognize the impact that climate change will have on every country and the violence that will ensue as people fight to survive. By all means work to decrease violence in every country but let us not forget the brakes that have been applied in taking action to decrease gun violence in our own. I love how this government is so pro human rights and anti violence in other countries yet does nothing to protect those rights and prevent violence in our own. Hypocritical at the very least.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Who are we to tell other countries anything anymore? We no longer have the moral high ground. We’re literally imprisoning children and refusing them medical care. The president not just condones but encourages violence. Perhaps we should start with impeachment then see if we can get back to decency and humanity in America.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE