Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed the "Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act" on a vote of 288 to 133.
What this nobly titled bill does is force American taxpayers to pay reparations to Guam residents who suffered at the hands of Imperial Japan during World War II:
Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act – Recognizes the suffering and the loyalty of the people of Guam during the Japanese occupation of Guam in World War II.
Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to make specified payments to: (1) living Guam residents who were killed, injured, interned, or subjected to forced labor or marches resulting from, or incident to, such occupation and subsequent liberation; and (2) survivors of compensable residents who died in war or survivors of compensable injured residents (such payments to be made after payments have been made to surviving Guam residents).
66 Republican Congressmen voted for this morally obtuse bill, including:
- Dana Rohrabacher
- David Dreier
- Darrell Issa
- Dan Lungren
- Elton Gallegly
- Kevin McCarthy
3,000 Americans were killed and more than 7,000 wounded liberating Guam in July-August, 1944. Was that not enough? Do the above Republican Congressmen believe Americans now have the responsibility of paying Japan’s bloody debt, in addition to the price already paid for Guam’s liberation in American blood and treasure?
I would expect Democrats to vote for legislation like this. Not only does it redistribute income, but it makes them feel good while making American morally responsible for Imperial Japan’s depredations.
Reparations imply responsibility. They are restitution payments made by the offender to the victim. In this case, the offender was Japan — not the United States. I’m not surprise House Democrats were unable to make that distinction, but I am surprised that 66 House Republicans — including the above six California congressmen — suffered similar myopia.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I think there is a point being missed. Residents of Guam are US Citizens (It is a self governing territory) and in World War II it’s finances and defenses were controlled by the US Government and whatever military power Guam had was commanded by the United States. Because of this, the Japanese treated them as conquered enemies and I think to many of the people who supported this bill, they view it as supporting soldiers that were essentially Americans (Everything they did was controlled by our military) but who didn’t get the benefits most American soldiers received. I think that’s a different situation from say the South Viet Namese who might have been just as courageous (or even more so) but were not under our direct command and were fighting for themselves. The people of Guam were fighting as Americans.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I just wanted to add to my earlier post that after doing a quick search on the Internet, I found a comment by Scott Moxley that said the United States has an implied agreement to reimburse US territories for their suffering under Japanese occupation when we waived reparations from Japan after World War II. Since the people of Guam had no say in waiving reparations, this certainly doesn’t seem inappropriate to me.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:00 am
There’s no implied agreement.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I agree with Moxley on this. The people of Guam had no say in whether or not reparations should have been waived. That was decided by our government for geopolitical reasons and was to our benefit as a country. However, the people of Guam who fought the Japanese not only had no say in the agreement, they also don’t receive the benefits our soldiers did, even though they were American citizens. This bill still seems like the simplest way to compensate American soldiers.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:00 am
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/blotter/screw-wwii-veterans-who-served-in-the-pacific/
This is what Moxley has to say.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:00 am
And Guamians didn’t become American citizens until 1950.
May 9th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Why was this bill even brought up in the first place?
The offender is the Japanese.
Send the bill to the Japanese Government and leave the taxpayers of the United States alone!
What lousy bill will come out next in this 110th ‘Do Nothing’ Congress?
May 10th, 2007 at 12:00 am
You are correct about citizenship, however, we already controlled the island and made decisions about alliances, military spending, etc. for them. As for the offender being the Japanese, that goes to the heart of the problem. Under International law, Guam is bound by the treaty signed by the United States, they can’t get anything from the Japanese for that reason.
May 10th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I should also apologize because Moxley’s quote in this article goes in a completely different direction from what I saw on another blog and I certainly didn’t want to mislead anyone.
May 11th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Seems if we pursue this logic, we should reimburse our Philippino WWII allies who endured even worse hardships and attrocities under Japanese occupation. Remember, at the time they were under our protection, very similar to Guam.
Boy, THAT reparations bill would be a whopper!
It’s a bad idea for U.S. taxpayers to pay reparations for Japanese attrocities. PERIOD.