Posted By Josh Rogin
Thursday, March 31, 2011 - 1:50 PM
Share
As Congress struggles to negotiate a budget deal to keep the government running, the head of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) told lawmakers Wednesday that the GOP version of the budget bill would result in the deaths of at least 70,000 children who depend on American food and health assistance around the world.
"We estimate, and I believe these are very conservative estimates, that H.R. 1 would lead to 70,000 kids dying," USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah testified before the House Appropriations State and Foreign Ops subcommittee.
"Of that 70,000, 30,000 would come from malaria control programs that would have to be scaled back specifically. The other 40,000 is broken out as 24,000 would die because of a lack of support for immunizations and other investments and 16,000 would be because of a lack of skilled attendants at birth," he said.
The Republican bill, known as H.R.1, was passed by the House, and would fund the government for the rest of fiscal 2011. It would effectively cut 16 percent from the Obama administration's original fiscal 2011 request for the international affairs account.
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) pointed out that H.R. 1 would provide $430 million for the International Disaster Assistance (IDA) account, which is 50 percent below the president's fiscal 2011 request and 67 percent below fiscal 2010 levels.
Shah said that such a cut "would be, really, the most dramatic stepping back away from our humanitarian responsibilities around the world in decades." The IDA account supports 1.6 million people in Darfur, so halving the account would place 800,000 people at risk, he said.
"[T]his would lead to a significant amount of reduction in feeding programs, medical programs and food and water programs for people who are incredibly vulnerable," he added.
Shah was also testifying in defense of the administration's fiscal 2012 budget request, which also faces the axe on Capitol Hill. Subcommittee Chairwoman Kay Granger (R-TX) opened the hearing by announcing that the administration's fiscal 2012 request was dead on arrival.
"While I understand the value of many of these important programs, the funding request for next year is -- is truly unrealistic in today's budget environment," she said. "We simply cannot fund everything that has been funded in the past. And we certainly cannot continue to fund programs that are duplicative and wasteful."
Granger said she would support USAID programs that have national security implications or contribute to the ongoing missions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Her Democratic counterpart, Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), said that national security is threatened by instability in other parts of the world as well.
"Drastic cuts to USAID would risk a great deal in stability and security around the world which could spawn the kinds of threats that cost this country the lives of men and women in uniform and billions in treasure," she said.
Shah argued that foreign assistance is crucial to the long term economic recovery because it helps develop markets for American goods.
"USAID's work also strengthens America's economic security. By establishing links to consumers at the bottom of the pyramid, we effectively position American countries to enter more markets and sell more goods in the economies of the future, promoting exports and creating American jobs," he said.
AFP/Getty Images
EXPLORE:DEMOCRACY, DEVELOPMENT, DIPLOMACY, FOREIGN AID, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, STATE DEPARTMENT, U.S. CONGRESS, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY 
"OK, using this twisted logic, how many children is Obama killing because he didn't request twice as much as is in his budget?"
Good point. USAID is less than 1% of the budget, so it stand to reason that Obama has already killed at least 100 times that number by not spending the ENTIRE budget on USAID.
Obama has ruthlessly murdered 7 million innocent children through his greedy, parsimonious cost-cutting! He's a monster! Hitler didn't kill that many children!
The true SIN is that we pay the wages of this idiot elite wannabe. He sucks up wages and produces NOTHING OF VALUE.
How many millions of Africans have died due to the liberal's ban on DDT or the legalisation of abortions? This article is a perfect example of poor journalism. Sorry, calling it journalism is a slap in the face to real journalists. What a joke!
The left is just lower than lower than low....like that crud that gets under your toenails or that you have to have the vet cut off your dog's azzz in their crap filled butt fur....Scum.
The only people who would believe this are the 2 million Charlie Sheen followers on Twitter and other similar crack addicted societal rejects, broken machines, land of the misfit toys and general lowlifes.
Reading through the comments I don't see a single substantive objection to the content of this article, just a lot of moaning about abortion, or other unrelated issues and statements that imply or outright state that our budget deficit is of higher priority than human life (despite that foreign aid makes up less than 1% of the budget).
If someone actually has a reason to doubt the accuracy of these estimates, I'd love to hear it. Otherwise, I can think of dozens of other things to cut from the budget that would have considerably less severe consequences for the relatively insignificant amount of savings here.
The objections are to the ideological idiocies of spending our kids' money on areas that do nothing more than fill the pockets of third world despots. What do you offer other than being an oxygen thief?
Where is your reading comprehension?
My point was we should be cutting things that have less drastic consequences before foreign aid. And where is your evidence a significant portion of USAID money ends up in the hands of third world dictators?
http://www.usaid.gov/performance/budget-spending/
You have run out of spending other people's money
Yes, our budget deficit is more important than meddling in the affairs of another country or their culture. Zimbabwe went from food exporter to starving food importer under Mugabe. That is their culture. Nothing we can do about it.
North Koreans are dying from hunger. That is their culture. Nothing we can do about it.
One billion people in the world don't have clean drinking water. You want to bankrupt the US to fix this?
But I agree the budget for Planned Parenthood could be cut that would save the lives of 70,000 aborted fetuses each year.
You going to doubt that estimate?
I couldn't find anything on the USAID budget site that said how much of their money is lost due to corruption (which is hardly surprising).
My point, AGAIN, is that we should be cutting from other areas of the budget BEFORE cutting the parts that we know will screw over tens of thousands of people (that is, unless someone has a legitimate objection to those estimates). I've not yet seen a counterargument to that point.
I did NOT suggest we expand foreign aid.
As for planned parenthood, their main function is to provide contraception and sex education (the lack of which would increase unwanted pregnancies and possibly increase the number of abortions) so I doubt the numbers are as clear as you would like to believe. It's also already illegal for them to use federal funds to pay for abortions, if you didn't already know.
Echoes264, you seem to be a reasonable person. And 1% for foreign aid seems to be insignificant. It probably amounts to less than just the fraud in Medicare.
However, foreigners are not American citizens. And American citizens pay taxes in America for American citizens to be taken care of first.
Right now there is no more money to fund anything. The US is racking up $1 TRILLION in debt EACH YEAR. It doesn't matter if the # of children saved is 70,000 or 7 million, the US just doesn't have the money.
And one last tidbit of data about Planned Parenthood:
"America’s largest abortion provider performed 62 abortions for every adoption referral it made in 2007, according to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America’s 2007–2008 annual report released earlier this month. In 2007, Planned Parenthood clinics performed over 300,000 abortion procedures, compared to 4,910 referrals to adoption agencies."
If Planned Parenthood had a ratio of 4 abortions to every adoption referral, I'd cut them some slack and say they were making a bona fide effort to give women a choice. But 1 in 62? Forget it. They don't every try.
there would be if they were serious about the budget
Ok, let me get more specific. Before we start cutting foreign aid, we should look at cutting pork, cracking down on medicare/welfare fraud, start closing corporate tax loopholes (the GE story recently was outrageous), cut subsidies to industries that don't need them, deal with cost overruns in the defense budget, etc. etc. etc. Once we're through doing all the things we should have been doing anyway, should we start looking at the cuts that actually hurt people. This is not what's happening in DC however, and I find it a very hard to believe the average American benefits more from increasing tax breaks for rich corporations that pay no US taxes, than, say, the worldwide elimination of smallpox.
As for planned parenthood, that's...disturbing, but it doesn't change that defunding them may do more harm than good in terms of number of abortions performed due to their role in pushing contraceptives. According to their report last year, 3% of the medical services they provided were abortions, compared to 35% for contraceptives. They may prevent as many as 11 times more unwanted pregnancies than they terminate.
I'll bet you believed in the Global Warming Hoax "data", the Porkulus bill "data" (that said all kinds of jobs would be created), and the government-reported unemployment rate "data". You probably buy into the "we're in a recovery!" lie, right?
So if you need a reason for doubting anything coming from this Regime, I only have to point at one idiot sitting in the Oval office. No, he's probably taking a vacation somewhere.
Yes, I can think of a whole lot more to cut from the budget, too. 10 billion isn't enough, when we're talking about over a trillion for the annual deficit.
Now drink your Kool Aid and cry in it with all your other Lib friends.
You enjoy attacking people who disagree with you? Does it help you stomach their dissent by labeling them as faux-intellectuals who have their head up their ass? Is it really so difficult for you to actually have a conversation before telling the person who's opinion differs from yours that you are incapable of respecting their intelligence? Even if they back up their opinions with facts?
You, my good man, are a douche. You're the sort of person who stymies constructive debate in this country because once a person shares an opinion that you disagree with, your first reaction is to attack their very character and intelligence.
So how about we judge you a little bit. Make some presumptions. You're a person of relatively good economic means, making you unsympathetic to a person of low income but still capable of bitching about not being rich. You have a limited acceptance of others, finding homosexuals repugnant and therefore not deserving of the right to marry. You care deeply about preventing abortion, feeling so strongly about the subject that you are inflexible and completely unable to empathize with young mothers who are incapable or have no means of raising a child, or even a mother who due to complications of her pregnancy will die if she gives birth. You believe that George W. Bush was a good president whose image was sabotaged by the liberal media, regardless of the facts that under his presidency, America engaged in an unnecessary and hugely costly war (accounting for a sizable chunk of the current national debt), education systems became less efficient, the huge debacle that was the handling of Katrina occurred, and the country was plunged into its biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. You think Sarah Palin is a competent voice of reason and viable presidential candidate despite the fact that she is a failed governor who still had the gall to present herself as someone to take seriously after opting to be a celebrity rather than a person of governance. You think Fox News is the only unbiased news network despite the fact that it is a hugely twisted propaganda machine that harbors gents like Glenn Beck.
Does that sound at all accurate? Possibly not. In fact, I admit to having no idea what your beliefs are and wouldn't ever have the arrogance to dismiss you like that. However, my faux accusations were exactly what you just did to the guy above you. And for that all I can say is fuck you.
Well aren't you a cute little troll, KIPNOXZEMA. Explain how the government is faking the melting ice caps and glaciers around the world, with the accompanying flooding, and I'll consider believing global warming isn't happening.
The deficit for 2010 was indeed a trillion, which is equal to THE ENTIRE DISCRETIONARY SPENDING BUDGET which includes defense. Even if we had cut funding to ZERO for every department other than defense we still would've been half a trillion in debt. We have a revenue problem as well a spending problem. Hey, you know what might've helped with revenue? Making GE (and other huge corporations) pay taxes, and NOT giving them billions in refunds (GE alone got $3.2 billion).
Since we're talking about reality here, think about this: We're in a serious recession, so obviously tax revenue is going to be down (2011 revenues are projected to be down $530 billion from '08 in fact). Meanwhile, claims to the non-discretionary entitlement programs are going to go up significantly ($300 billion difference between '08 and '10 budgets). So that right there accounts for $830 billion of the deficit, and has nothing to do with any recent overspending. I think the remainder should be dealt with as I proscribed - by dealing with known existing problems before making cuts to programs that do a lot of good for people.
Unfortunately your sources gave me 404s. Checking the Darfur Information Center website for the pop figures redirects to World Gazeteer which lists pop levels of Sudan's cities. These would only give a good sense of regional population if Darfur was urbanized - it is not, unless one counts refugee camps as cities (which they don't).
The present government of Sudan website lists North Darfur's population as 1.6 million, West Darfur's at 2.08 million, and South Darfur's as 2.15 million, as of the 1993 census. These are the most recent reliable numbers I am aware of. 2004 was already during the war, I find it very unlikely an accurate census could be taken during that period. Perhaps more relevant to the article itself, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre gives the current number of internally displaced people in Darfur as 2.6 million:
http://www.internal-displacement.org/idmc/website/countries.nsf/(httpEnvelopes)/0026B2F86813855FC1257570006185A0?OpenDocument
Mubarak is worth 80 billion dollars, that is the amount of foreign aid he received from the U. S. since he came to power. Egypt has a peasant class that makes less than a dollar a day. And the corruption is well documented from the rest of the countries America supports. The aid does not get to the people who need it. It's just another way for the modern-liberal to try and relieve their guilt of being so evil. The modern-liberal has not come to terms with their sins, so they try and put on these sheep clothes and fool the world. Well a conservative is just a liberal who has been mugged and he can see through the facade. It's just the dolts with their hands out for entitlements who don't mind the modern-liberal.
The modern-liberal really wants these children to die because they know their ways don't work, but to admit it would be worse because they might not "PROGRESS". And besides, de-population is a favorite of the left as in Marx, Lenin, Rouseau. When you can't feed people because you are against agri-business and they aren't getting the message, you need to eliminate mouths, as in the French Revolution.
(Why do you think trial lawyers vote over-whelmingly for Democrats? They need the business. Relativist Democrats don't respect the law, so their constituents are mostly law-breakers and immoral)
America once tried to depose depots and really help the poor, but they got accused of imperialism or some such nonsense. Since the liberals began running things in the U. S., Europe, and the U.N. they believe pouring money on a problem will fix it. Well now the pendulum is swinging back. If they want our money they will take it on our terms.
Yes, because we were totally giving Mubarak that money to help his people. We weren't at all buying him off as we have done with many other dictators in strategically important countries. I'm certainly not going to deny corruption exists (including in our own government), but as I pointed out, unless a significant portion of the aid money is lost to it I don't see why it's much more than an annoyance. And some liberals are former conservatives who started doing their research.
What's happening with food prices has nothing to do with whether or not leftists support agribusiness. It has everything to do with ethanol, harvests being ruined and overexploitation of natural resources. Check your facts: http://www.earth-policy.org/plan_b_updates/2011/update91
If one wants to help the poor countries one has to do more than change their government. The people there have to get education, get jobs, and have sustainable sources of the basic necessities. And guess what? It's been demonstrated that educating people, women in particular, reduces the birth rate. More to the point of the article, reducing the child mortality rate also decreases the birth rate (as women in poor countries choose to have many kids because they want some of them to survive to adulthood). So all of this throwing money actually helps people AND controls overpopulation (which anyone right or left should realize is going to be a problem in the future) if it's done intelligently. The trouble is funding it.
"Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-IL) pointed out that H.R. 1 would provide $430 million for the International Disaster Assistance (IDA) account, which is 50 percent below the president's fiscal 2011 request and 67 percent below fiscal 2010 levels. "
You know what this amount would be if I were president? These third worlder's would perish if they didn't learn to be self sufficient and that's that. I'm sick of carrying the minority world on our backs everywhere around this globe.
Too bad it isn't flat, we could just use bulldozers to push all this dead weight right over the side, including everyone in Liberal Washington and the Race Baiting Brigades first on the list.
Obummer makes up numbers as he goes along.
I wish he would go back to Kenya or Iran where he belongs. It is pathetic that we have to put up with this crap every day. We have become the laughing stock of the world. How intelligent can a country be which elects a community organizer who votes present all the time as president???
Oh, so killing babies is no longer OK?
Just askin'
Obama is in this middle east war that will kill millions...he is counting on destroying Israel and American.......so 70,000 kids won't make any difference, even if this were true and its not.
What part of "We are broke" don't they get! That's why the Dems have no business being in charge. They don't understand the concept of living within you means. We are borrowing billions of dollars to give it to countries who hate us and won't appreciate the gift anyway. We need to start taking care of number one for awhile. We have numerous problems that need fixing right here in the USA. We need a leader and a congress who will establish a list of priorities and spend our resources accordingly.
So if they cut $430mil and it costs 70,000 lives, then we're spending $6,142 per year per life saved. Don't many of the private aid agencies claim they can save a 3rd world child or life for a dollar a day. Where is the other $5,777 being wasted?
Then I suppose those parent need to get a job! I work everyday!
They have jobs - I guess it's their fault that they only get about $2.00/wk/month. But, of course you wouldn't want to admit that they can be industrious but held down by the economy of the country. I guess this is all you can expect from people who want to stop WIC, Headstart, Food Stamps, Planned Parenthood and Unemployment. All you can expect from people who cry about illegals but want to decrease funding of border control and Home Security. People who claim to be christians but do not follow Jesus' words, He wanted children taken care of. He said, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Early christians sold all they had to send to other christians in need. The apostles advocated helping widows and children. True, they said that a man who did not work should not eat - but the context was as in "those who would not work", not "those who could not work".
Typical. Democrats exploiting children once again for political gain.
The budget as proposed will kill 70,000 kids?
So cut it some more!
And?
Zimbabwe went from "bread basket of the Africa" to abject poverty and importing food under Mugabe.
Tell your latest sob story to China. If they don't want to fund it, it didn't matter in the first place.
Oh, oh ... and how many of these kids will grow up to hate America? All of them?
Count on that.
And " 16,000 would be because of a lack of skilled attendants at birth,"
How pray tell did these women give birth BEFORE the US paid for "skilled attendants at birth"?
I mean, what part of THERE IS NO MORE MONEY do these folks not understand? The "N" or the "O"?
no mention of the 50 million killed by malaria over the last 50 years by banning DDT? yeah, I thought I heard the crickets.
well with this reasoning, Obama is a super mass murderer
Whenever Obummer goes on vacation in India it cost 200M$.
Since we are talking budgets, if Obama had taken 1 day shorter, it would have saved 200M$ that we could have used for this program and no need to slash it.
so 1 vacation day of his holiness cost the lives of 30.000 children according to this.
But when it really gets interesting when we look at all the cost to those labor unions if they would have settled with a tiny less money. mass murderers in that case is an understatement.
"be careful when you make rediculous statements..."
we could stop funding Planned (Abortionhood) Parenthood and save sever hundred thousand American children every year.
Foreign Aid trumps American aid?
This is the problem with the Democrats. We need to help other countries to secure our place in the world, at the expense of our own people.
Let's be real here: U.S. continues helping with International Aid it's been giving countries for decades, and they should be self-sufficient by now, but the problems get worse. U.S. image is already blemished. Continue helping at the expense of the American people and America falls. Who helps America? If we die, the world dies.
Charity begins at home. We need to fix our national problems, feed our own people, vaccinate our own sick, house our own homeless, adopt our own children before we can help the rest of the world. That is nothing new. It is a concept that has been around for years. If we do not sustain ourselves, we will die and will not be able to help anyone, then they all die.
These cuts to these programs should be swift and deep. Redundancy and foreign aid costs US way too much. How long do you keep helping, with no positive results before you say you can't help anymore? You have to say NO at some point and the time is now for the U.S. to say no.
Foreign Aid is less than 1% of the budget. Contrast Social Security, Medicare and other safety net programs at a combined 55% of the budget. The notion foreign aid is what's bankrupting us is flat wrong. It should also be no surprise given this information that we are nowhere near making the rest of the world self sufficient - we haven't put the effort into doing so.
Charity is the responsibility of charities, not government. The people should be able to donate to the charities of OUR choice. The government has no right to make that decision for us. The American people are the most giving people in the world. Give our freedom back!! Taxes have become so high in order to support such a huge federal budget, that it infringes on our freedom of choice to choose which charities we prefer to support.
If the government wants this particular program for the sake of the children, then get the charities to support it. But STOP spending the people's money!! Our government is NOT a charity. We have private charities for that!!
CUT an the CUT some more.
more Dem BS
Herman Cain in 2012
Are these 70,000 children who will die the ones who evaded the aggressive pro-abortion practices endorsed by the Democratic Party and RiNOs and funded with taxpayer dollars to PPoA, or is America going to begin importing infants to starve?
Maybe we can reduce our growing debt to the PRC by taking care of its problem with population.
Jesus weeps.
OMG. Give me a break. And these people call Republicans fearmongers? The GOP will also eat your babies!!!!
Since the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives in January they have created or saved 100,000 children's lives, so they are up 30,000 for the year. That's not too bad.
They pit rich against poor, black against white, gay against straight. When will Americans realize that it should have been ALL of US against the Government, and that 'Free Bread for All!' ends up being 'No Bread, Anywhere, for Anyone'? As has been repeated in these comments, they outlaw DDT and allow Millions to die from malaria, they preach to the elderly that they have a duty to die, and they promote abortion that kills millions. Then they have the audacity to squawk about 70,000 lives lost. America is on to you and there will come a day when we won't buy into your lies.
It's always the Children, Minorities, or the Elderly
Obama didn't care about the children when he ended the school voucher system for poor children in Washington, DC. Don't fall for it. These people care nothing about children. They care about their own power.
http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/politics/2009/September/DC-Parents-Protest-End-to-School-Vouchers/
Please quit using the children for your own political gain. It is not the Federal Governments job to provide all of this. The main job of the Federal Government is to protect the nation and you aren't doing a very good job of that.
This sounds so stupid. Just like a JACKASS that know NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING, SO S.T.F.U D.A. ALL THE WAY!! OH! SO BLOW ME ALL THE WAY, WOULDJA!
Typical big government Marxist, they can't stand to cut their over-bloated government programs. How much good has the U.N, done for Nigeria, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan? The entire organization is criminally insane. Despots, thugs, and villians trying to organize anything is like letting a blind person fly an airplane.
Dismantle the U.N. and send them to prison for malfeasance and fraud.
RAJIV SHAH SELLS PHONY BALONEY
The American peole in their private charitable giving give more money than people anywhere else in the world --- and probably they would give even more were it not for the fact that our criminal government hijacks so much money from the incomes of the privately-employed taxpayers of America. Observe that the recipeints of our tax money and the foodstuffs and medicines that our tax money pats for --- and enemies of the capitalistic system. They want the fruits of capitalism --- without having capitalism. The parents and other relatives of these children are responsible for them. The enemies of capitalism in their own country are killing these children. Rajiv Shah is trying to put the American taxpayers and their representaives on a guilt trip. Deport him.
Here's an idea. Cut the spending for both the foreign aide to those 70,000 kids AND cut the spending on Government Assistance for Abortions - that way, the 70,000 dead kids will be offset by the 70,000 kids that weren't aborted stateside.
Isn't that the same thing as Carbon Credits?? Look Mr. Shavi Mbongo Fayed Ravijissimo, we can't afford to heal the world. We are NOT a Socialist world.
At any point did any Democrat stop and consider what the effect of a $1.65 trillion annual deficit would be? Was there any voice from the ranks of the party that questioned whether we could afford to expand the government to double its size? Now the ultimate day of reckoning is here. The Republicans arent going to be able to make any meaningful cuts, the Fed will keep, or has kept, interest rates too low for too long and the stark picture of a president who is totally unfit for his job will cause a panic out of the dollar. When gasoline is ten dollars a gallon and rising twenty cents every day nobody is going to care whether people in Africa have pre-natal care or malaria abatement. The compassion bus has lost all its wheels through the sheer incompetence of the Democrats. So you can blame the tiny, timid cuts of the Republicans if you like but you guys killed the Golden Goose with your greed and stupidity.
Wow, I'm completely appalled by the comments here
As a centrist I'm pretty appalled by the bullshit everyone here is peddling. First off, Ethanol has nothing to do with this. And for a party that uses the abortion issue as the base of its social agenda, the Republican party ought to be a little more than conflicted about this. It seems that there reaction is pretty flippant, which is nothing short of unforgivable to my estimation.
A minimum of 70,000 deaths we could prevent isn't our problem?! What the hell do we stand for? That everyone deserves a helping hand as long as they are American? I just can't agree with this.
And people do realize that Shah would be a guy who knows what he's talking about? He's a hugely qualified humanitarian (having had big responsibilities in the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation - look it up) and while he does have Democratic ties, it is his GODDAMN JOB to let politicians know about these statistics. It's not that he's be a liberal pony - estimating the casualties as a result from cuts to the USAID. So don't tell me that he's lying.
And furthermore, regardless of where you stand on the abortion issue how can anyone stand for this? "liberals kill babies with abortions" is not only a hugely ignorant statement (seriously, you don't know what the hell you are talking about when you say that), it also is totally missing the point. Do you only care about the well-being of thousands of children if they are still in the womb, living within the United States, and that it is convenient for the Republican agenda? I'm seriously appalled. You can bemoan the hypocrisies of the Democratic party, but that shouldn't distract from the issue at hand. What's more important? The agenda of your political affiliation or tens of thousands of lives? If you have to think hard about that, then I don't care to hear what you think.
Centrists are people too stupid or too timid to make decisions.
There are probably 4 trillion people in the world that have less access to food, shelter and healthcare than the average dirt poor American. How much of your and my children's and grand-children's future are you willing steal in order to feel good? How about you stop being so stupid? Any one with half a brain knows that Government is the most inefficient method of helping people in need ever devised. One quarter of the money is eaten by the politicians and bureaucrats. Another half is eaten by the Government on the other end. Maybe one quarter gets to the needy. How about finding a charity with low overhead that meets real needs and you start giving to it. My money has helped feed poor people, dug wells and provided free medical care around the world and none of it has required any government borrowed money or government force. If anything, government officials had to be bribed before the needed help was allowed to be given.
John Hudson reports on national security and foreign policy from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, the White House to Embassy Row, for The Cable.
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(129)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE