Spring Break
12/8 Column: International aid: revision and education before expansion
Erin Sherman '11
Issue date: 11/3/08 Section: Opinion
On Tuesday, December 2nd, an event organized by the Student Global AIDS Campaign and the Princeton AIDS Initiative brought together four voices on "American Obligations to Finance Poverty Relief and Global Health in Economic Hard Times." The opening words of the discussion, spoken by panelist Jeff Hammer, dismissed the latter part of this topic. The state of the economy, Hammer stated, is irrelevant to the obligation of the United States of America to provide relief to developing nations. One by one, the remaining three panelists - Peter Singer, Charles Beitz, and Jim Luce - agreed with him, and the recession was not discussed further.
Hammer observed that, while poll data indicates that Americans believe the government spends 24% of the budget on foreign aid, the actual figure is a mere 0.56%, a miniscule figure of which the panelists were ashamed and appalled. The discussion's first point was crucial: To seek a cut to foreign aid is to seek economic relief in the wrong place.
Hammer explained the complex dynamics of aid. In some cases, internationally donated funds make up such a large portion of developing nations' budgets that the government becomes accountable to donors rather than to citizens. When citizens do not own their government through taxation, corruption takes hold, and the public sector ceases to serve the public. Similarly, an illegitimate government cannot effectively tax, especially when citizens are very poor. Some aid may fuel this vicious circle and ultimately harm struggling countries.
Peter Singer, the next panelist to speak, stressed the obligation of individuals to give to worthy causes independent of their government. Singer suggested that donors should rigorously investigate NGOs before giving to ensure that their money would actually help save lives; he recommended www.givewell.net as an assistant to this research.
Charles Beitz countered that governmental giving capacity is so great - the United States President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief's $48 billion as compared to the Gates Foundation's $3 billion, for example - that no moral actor can overlook government's role as charitable proxy. Beitz addressed the self-orientation of American voters; Americans view themselves as having few duties to strangers, only an obligation to allow them their rights. This viewpoint has led America to spend the smallest percentage of its GDP on international aid of any industrialized nation.
Hammer observed that, while poll data indicates that Americans believe the government spends 24% of the budget on foreign aid, the actual figure is a mere 0.56%, a miniscule figure of which the panelists were ashamed and appalled. The discussion's first point was crucial: To seek a cut to foreign aid is to seek economic relief in the wrong place.
Hammer explained the complex dynamics of aid. In some cases, internationally donated funds make up such a large portion of developing nations' budgets that the government becomes accountable to donors rather than to citizens. When citizens do not own their government through taxation, corruption takes hold, and the public sector ceases to serve the public. Similarly, an illegitimate government cannot effectively tax, especially when citizens are very poor. Some aid may fuel this vicious circle and ultimately harm struggling countries.
Peter Singer, the next panelist to speak, stressed the obligation of individuals to give to worthy causes independent of their government. Singer suggested that donors should rigorously investigate NGOs before giving to ensure that their money would actually help save lives; he recommended www.givewell.net as an assistant to this research.
Charles Beitz countered that governmental giving capacity is so great - the United States President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief's $48 billion as compared to the Gates Foundation's $3 billion, for example - that no moral actor can overlook government's role as charitable proxy. Beitz addressed the self-orientation of American voters; Americans view themselves as having few duties to strangers, only an obligation to allow them their rights. This viewpoint has led America to spend the smallest percentage of its GDP on international aid of any industrialized nation.
Be the first to comment on this story