Defunding USAID Is a bad idea

[Swede]

Yesterday the Republican Study Committee released a plan for cutting government spending more geared towards pleasing its base than actually governing, targeting the minimal government funding for NPR, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and, of course, the United States Agency for International Development. The cuts don't touch Medicare, Social Security, or the defense budget, but they do defund the Affordable Care Act and cut so much aid to the states and infrastructure spending that, as Steve Benen wrote, "if lawmakers were to get together to plot how Congress could deliberately increase unemployment their plan would look an awful lot like this one."



The other problem is that politicians, eager to out-hawk one another, have gradually helped push the U.S. towards greater militarization at the expense of the civilian tools of foreign policy. The reason why Republicans want to entirely defund USAID but avoid touching a hair on the defense budget is that they see every single matter of foreign affairs as a nail, and so they don't understand why we should be spending money on anything other than hammers.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/

[leveymg]

1. Yes, it is.

[EFerrari]

2. USAID is used to fund the destabiization of democratic governments.

It can go any time as far as I'm concerned. It is part of the defense budget in diplomatic drag.

[naaman fletcher]

3. that's one angle of it.

The vast majority of USaid personnel are hard working and dedicated people doing a lot of good. Of course, the CIA has its people in it and cant help but to use it sometimes for political ends, which is a shame.

I am mixed on the issue as a result. I can tell you that where I am in Africa there is a large USaid presence that is viewed very favorably, of course this country is a long time US ally so they are not messing with the government.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. +1