President Obama has a historic opportunity to help reform the World Bank, by nominating development expert Jeffrey Sachs to be the World Bank's next president. Sachs has said that as president he would sharpen the focus of the Bank on achieving the Millennium Development Goals for reducing poverty and extending access to health care and education. Coming from Sachs, this pledge is change you can believe in because, for years, Sachs has been a leading international advocate of efforts to achieve the world's poverty reduction goals, currently serving as an adviser to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.
Now members of Congress are starting to speak up.
Michigan Rep. John Conyers is circulating a letter to President Obama, urging him to nominate Sachs. Signers of the letter so far include Reps. Hansen Clarke, Jesse Jackson Jr., Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren, Jim McGovern, Lynn Woolsey, Raul Grijalva and Eleanor Holmes Norton.
Many members of Congress have worked closely with Sachs for years on initiatives to cancel the crushing external debt burden of poor countries; end the World Bank's imposition of user fees that block access to primary health care and education; compel the World Bank to make grants, rather than loans, in the poorest countries; compel the World Bank to support efforts to make essential medicines available in poor countries; and other pressing development challenges. It is natural that these members of Congress should support Sachs' candidacy.
Sachs' public and worldwide campaign to lead the World Bank is unprecedented, but is entirely appropriate to our time. Until now, the leadership of the World Bank has been determined behind closed doors by the US Treasury Department and European finance ministries.
But Sachs has taken his case to the public, announcing his candidacy with an op-ed in The Washington Post and with an interview on CNN. His candidacy is supported by Kenya, East Timor, Malaysia and Jordan.
Since the World Bank was founded, no one has ever tried to “campaign” for the position of president by trying to get support from the public and from developing countries. That already creates a different dynamic, suggesting that public opinion matters, and that the opinions of developing countries matter.
But Sachs is also trying to get the support of the Obama administration, and that's why Conyers' letter is so important. The default case – in the absence of public and Congressional engagement – would likely be that the administration choice would be largely determined by the interests of Wall Street. The two names most cited in press speculation have been Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner. Both Summers and Geithner can be expected to prioritize Wall Street interests – that's why their names dominate press speculation. Of course, implementing the Millennium Development Goals isn't at the top of Wall Street's agenda.
If Congress and the public want something different, the time to speak up is now, before the Obama administration announces its choice. This is the time of maximum influence. You can ask your representative to sign Conyers letter in support of Sachs' nomination here.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.