When politicians look for ways to trim federal spending, foreign aid is usually at the top of the chopping block. That is the case with the Trump administration’s new federal budget proposal. It funds an increase in defense spending by making cuts to other government programs, including a 37 percent cut to the State Department.
Politicians, humanitarians, and defense experts are concerned by the plan to reduce the diplomatic and development arm of the government by over a third. When an 19 percent cut was proposed in 2011, then-USAID head Raj Shah said 70,000 more children would die as a result. Less money meant cuts to vaccines, malaria control, and maternal health support.
The Trump administration’s budget cuts twice as deep.
The fact that foreign aid benefits the U.S. is championed by both Republicans and Democrats. An open letter signed by 121 retired military leaders warned that the proposed cuts could do more harm than good for national security. They pointed to a statement by now-Defense Secretary James Mattis in 2013: “If you don’t fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition.”
The average American thinks foreign aid accounts for a quarter of the federal budget. But in fact, the $43 billion spent on foreign assistance — including food aid, the Peace Corps, financing for foreign militaries, and refugee assistance — makes up less than one percent of the budget. That misconception may fuel the constant calls for cuts.
Like any government program, U.S. foreign aid is not perfect. Some programs fail, and there are cases of financial mismanagement. However, the budget does a lot of good. And it is in the self-interest of the United States to leave it be. Here are four reasons why.
1. It makes America healthier.
Saving lives in other parts of the world makes Americans healthier. Drug resistant bacteria, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS pose a threat to people everywhere. These are problems that do not respect borders.
A higher number of cases of extensively drug resistant TB in Southeast Asia pose a direct risk to people in the region — as well as travelers between there and the United States. The money that provides TB care to someone in India is helping develop new ways to test and treat it. Those new tools prevent the spread of the airborne infection in India, reduce its likelihood of reaching the U.S., and help cure anyone infected.
Beating diseases elsewhere prevents them from becoming a problem here. The U.S. accelerated efforts to roll out an Ebola vaccine and conduct research on Zika. These investments improve the health of people around the world — and also protected Americans when the diseases found their way to our shores. This research may also lead to breakthroughs that advance other disease research.
Global health investments have accomplished a lot. The internationally-backed effort to eradicate polio led cases to fall from 350,000 in 1988 to 74 reported in 2015. It will soon join smallpox as a once-devastating disease eradicated from the world. The distribution of bed nets are the leading reason why 6.8 million malaria deaths were averted since 2001. And AIDS has reached what some call the tipping point — the number of people on lifesaving treatment exceeds new cases.
2. It makes America safer.
As the generals said in their letter, foreign aid makes the world safer. The Iraqi military forces that are retaking Mosul from the Islamic State were trained and supported by the U.S. That may weaken their hold in the country, but is not likely to end the Islamic State.
A Rand Corporation study found that development, not military force, was the leading reason terrorist groups disappear. A separate report by Rand showed that social and economic development can weaken local support to terrorists and discourage people from joining.
In Nigeria, the Islamist terror group Boko Haram is filling in the gaps left by the government. Specifically, they offer informal loans and protection to Nigerians, which help attract young men to join the terrorist organization — not out of allegiance with the mission, but because of unemployment and financial practicality.
Even if the Nigerian government succeeds in defeating Boko Haram, the underlying reasons that led people to support or work with the group remain. Aid money can temporarily help fill those gaps by supporting governments and providing direct assistance to people living in poverty.
3. It helps American companies.
Somewhat ironically, a leading criticism of international aid is that the money helps out the donor countries more than the recipients.
There is some truth to that sentiment. U.S. food aid must be produced and delivered by U.S. companies, thereby helping people in need as well as the American economy. Power Africa improves electricity access to 8.6 million people in Africa — and also creates a market opportunity for General Electric. And pharmaceutical companies like Merck regularly partner with USAID to deliver drugs and support maternal health programs.
4. It helps America’s future generations.
The effects of climate change hit the world’s poorest the hardest. The $500 million the Obama Administration gave to the U.N. Green Climate Fund helps developing countries adapt to a shifting climate. The renewable technologies they develop may be useful in the U.S. as well, while spurring economic development in low-income countries.
In the short term, foreign aid cuts will harm people in other parts of the world. In the long term, cuts will harm Americans. It will diminish advances in energy, national security, climate science, and disease control.
And if none of this convinces you: one could always argue that foreign aid is just the right thing to do. It shows American moral leadership, doesn’t cost us much, and improves hundreds of thousands of lives around the world.
