The World Bank and American Taxpayers
By Marion Edwyn Harrison (05/11/07)
Not much, if anything, beats sex to garner attention. Thus, we have the current media frenzy over the President of what commonly is called the World Bank and the lady said to be his girlfriend. Let others argue the merits, if any, of her promotion, her salary increase, his compliance with internal procedures, so forth.
The media has said little about revenue sources of the World Bank. The institution’s structure is complicated. Suffice it to say that there are five entities which, somewhat loosely speaking, comprise the World Bank Group. Probably most of the time people are referring to the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development when they refer to the World Bank. However organized, the entity supposedly exists for the principal purpose of assisting certain types of development in poor countries - or, as they sometimes optimistically (and more politically correctly) are termed, “developing” countries. It formally came to life in December 1945, shortly after World War II, following the Bretton Woods Agreements. Its ten Presidents all have been Americans. Its staff and contractors are of widely divergent nationalities but, not surprisingly, American influence is substantial.
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, rather seldom factually erring (and especially seldom by media standards), reports that 1,396 of about 10,000 World Bank employees are paid more than the salary of the Secretary of State of the United States. Part of this apparent disparity may stem from massive overpayment of World Bank personnel. Part of it also may stem from the fact that top United States Government jobs are poorly paid in relation to business, industry and the professions. It is no wonder that many - far too many - competent people refrain from accepting top Federal jobs, do not continue very long in those jobs, use them to gain contacts or to be able to do better in the private sector, or some combination of the foregoing.
The fact mostly overlooked by the media (but not by THE WALL STREET JOURNAL) and by Congress is that about 17% of World Bank revenue comes from American taxpayers by way of Congressional appropriations. The current figure is in the $ 7 billion range.
Would it not be wise were the (Republican) Presidential Administration and the (Democratic majority) 110th Congress both seriously to evaluate two considerations: (1) Should American taxpayers be helping the poorer world, if at all, and if so, through a more or less international banking operation as distinguished from direct and directly accountable and publicized foreign assistance - that is, appropriations of taxpayers’ dollars? (2) If the World Bank route is to continue, should both the authorizing laws and the appropriations acts require a reasonable level of accountability as to what the World Bank is doing, how it is doing it and at what operational, personnel and other costs?
The foregoing considerations may not have anything to do with the World Bank President and his girlfriend but maybe the much ballyhooed sex scandal, as it appears to be, can highlight something more serious - namely, some serious consideration of the foregoing two questions.
Marion Edwyn Harrison is President of, and Counsel for, the Free Congress Foundation.
(Printer friendly version) 
Send Feedback
