"US foreign aid programmes takes immediate cuts and bigger cuts are in train for next year"

Pakistani flood victims show their identity cards as they register to get food relief last year funded by USAid and the World Food Programme. USAid is set for a $39m cut in its funding from the government. foto: Arshad Arbab

As Americans gear up for a long-running battle over how to reduce the $14 trillion US deficit, federal agencies – including those that provide foreign aid – are preparing to cut their programs by billions of dollars over the next six months.
According to the US Global Leadership Coalition (USGLC), the US is to slash funding for foreign aid and international affairs programmes by $6.5bn as part of the last-minute compromise agreed in Congress last Friday. This is not quite the 19% reduction sought by congressional Republicans, but the deal drops spending below 2009 levels and affects nearly all of the programme areas covered by the international affairs budget, including those related to health and economic assistance.
Among the cuts counted by the USGLC are: $377m from US contributions to the UN and other international organisations, $160m from migration and refugee assistance, $140m from climate adaptation initiatives, and $80m from development assistance programmes.
A further $40m will be cut from the Peace Corps, which marks its 50th anniversary this year. And federal support for the US Agency for International Development (USAid) is set to decrease by $39m. Support for the UN Population Fund will be cut to 2008 levels, and contributions to the Global Fund to fight Aids, TB and malaria will remain at 2010 levels.
While the spending deal reduces support for voluntary family planning programmes by $73m, it does not reinstate the Global Gag rule, which would have blocked funding to organisations in developing countries that give help or advice on abortions.

Dan Pfeiffer, the White House senior adviser, said on Monday: "These significant cuts to the state department and foreign assistance will mean we will not meet some of the ambitious goals set for the nation in the president's budget."
Joseph Nye Jr, Harvard professor and former assistant secretary of defence, said cuts to the state department and the US foreign aid budget would fail to make any real contribution to deficit reduction, but would do serious damage to America's global influence.
"Polls consistently show a popular misconception that aid is a significant part of the US federal budget, when in fact it amounts to less than 1%," he said. "Thus, congressional cuts to aid in the name of deficit reduction are an easy vote, but a cheap shot."
Paul O'Brien, vice-president of policy and campaigns for Oxfam America, called on Congress not to target US development programmes for further cuts as debate now turns to the 2012 budget. "These cuts undermine our ability to assist developing countries in building resilience for extreme weather events and a changing climate. Programmes that save lives, reduce the threat of disease, help to open new markets for US goods and services, and protect our nation's borders at a lower cost to the US taxpayer than using the military in disaster response," he said in a statement.

2012 budget debate begins

The fight over the 2012 budget is already under way. Proposals put forward by Paul Ryan, the Republican chairman of the House budget committee, would reduce federal spending by $6tr over the next decade. This includes a 29% cut to international affairs and foreign assistance next year and a 44% cut by 2016. Over the same period, defence spending would rise by 14%.
Ryan's budget proposal would further concentrate US aid on activities in strategic conflict zones, said Emily Cadei in Congressional Quarterly.
In a testimony on the 2012 federal budget, Rajiv Shah, the head of USAid, told the Senate appropriations committee on Tuesday that further reductions to foreign aid programmes would jeopardise the US aid agency's reforms and would put at risk initiatives such as Feed the Future, which is creating partnerships with the private sector to boost investment in food security projects.
"The things that are most at risk are the initiatives that have been started over the past three to five years," said Shah. "The programmes that would be the most vulnerable are unfortunately the most efficient."
Oxfam America's Paul O'Brien said: "Cutting Feed the Future's legs before it gets really started will only hamstring these successful programmes … Cutting the Millennium Challenge Corporation's budget to less than $1bn will render the MCC's goals of rewarding good governance, economic freedom and investments in people meaningless."
The MCC, set up in 2004 under President George Bush, is a separate aid agency that provides bilateral support and grants to countries that show commitment to good governance and policies that promote open economies. Under the 2011 spending bill, the MCC's funding will be cut by $205m.
The USGLC called on Congress to avoid deep and disproportionate cuts to the international affairs budget as the debate on the 2012 budget begins. "Our hope is just as Congress reduced the dangerous cuts in this year's House proposal, they will remember what a good return on investment it is for the American taxpayer in 2012," said the USGLC's Richard Parker.

publicado no The Guardian