Perhaps, ladies and gentlemen, we’ve predicted the future. More specifically, Professor Pitney’s observation that the common citizen would call for a decrease in foreign aid as a means of decreasing the national debt seems to have proven prophetic. As this recent New York Times article points out, members of both the House of Representatives and the Senate have proposed significant cuts to foreign aid.
The Obama Administration has proposed $59 billion in spending on international affairs (a category that includes foreign aid and the budget of the State Department) during this fiscal year. The House has proposed cutting $12 billion from this expenditure, while the Senate has proposed cuts of $6 billion, both with a strong focus on the foreign aid portion of this budget. Both plans call for the largest decrease in foreign aid since the 1990’s.
However, as the article points out, many worry that the unexpected consequences from such an act could cost the US. In addition, it reflects changing priorities within the government’s agenda over the past decade. Whereas President Bush significantly increased foreign aid after 2001, at a time when international relations sat at the front of the national agenda, recent concerns about the deficit have redirected the priorities of the country's leaders towards cutting spending, even at the cost of America’s international image.
No comments:
Post a Comment