USAID chief: GOP’s budget will cost 70,000 children’s lives abroad

posted at 6:43 pm on March 31, 2011 by Allahpundit

Coming soon to a Chuck Schumer press conference near you.

“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…

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…

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.

File this away in your “Because of the Children” folder for when Democrats start screaming about how we can’t cut funding for Planned Parenthood either. A few questions. One: Am I hallucinating or is H.R. 1 only on the table right now because Democrats failed to pass their own budget last year when they had the chance — in part because vulnerable Blue Dogs were nervous about voting for another bank-breaker before the midterms? What happened there? They could have saved 70,000 children! Two: Since we’re on the subject of national security, haven’t we been warned recently by both Hillary Clinton and Mike Mullen that the national debt is a national security threat? In fact, according to Mullen, it’s the national security threat, the “most significant” one we face. That being so, if Nita Lowey’s such a security-minded patriot, will she and her liberal pals decide to embrace the GOP’s Balanced Budget Amendment? Or is she prepared to see American interests abroad crumble because, hey, we don’t touch Social Security here at home and that’s just the way it is? Three: Time magazine is precisely right that foreign aid is virtually the only component of federal spending that majorities support cutting, in part because they wrongly believe we spend way, way more on it than we really do. In which case, why don’t we deal forthrightly with what’s really driving the debt by reforming entitlements? That’ll disabuse the public of their misconceptions about foreign aid, thereby restoring some support for it, while freeing up loads of money for anti-malaria programs as far as the eye can see. Bipartisan support for USAID via revamping Medicare! Who’s with me?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Oh stop the starving the kids CRAP! I’m sooooo tired of this!!!

How long are the Reps going to put up with this crap and call the lefties out for this SH!!!!!T ?

katy on March 31, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Republicans hate Children!

sandee on March 31, 2011 at 6:46 PM

For the love of God, what about the childrennnnnnn!!!!

Cicero43 on March 31, 2011 at 6:47 PM

What about our own damn kids?

Years from now nobody’s kids will have food at this rate!

katy on March 31, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Excellent post allahpundit!..:)

Dire Straits on March 31, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Shah is an embarrassment.

When we save millions of lives, we don’t get credit. When we cut spending, then it is all our fault.

Additionally, the numbers are grossly exaggerated…but that is beside the point, isn’t it?

neoavatara on March 31, 2011 at 6:47 PM

Oh, and they hate puppies to!

sandee on March 31, 2011 at 6:48 PM

But if we cut abortion clinic’s tax dollars…How many children would we save?…Millions?

rich801 on March 31, 2011 at 6:48 PM

if only they had a cheap supply of DDT…….

clement on March 31, 2011 at 6:48 PM

Just for fun, what was the level of spending on these programs in 2008?

karenhasfreedom on March 31, 2011 at 6:49 PM

All the potentates in the U.N. can support the world’s children, easily, added to the freedom doves, the Europeans’ ‘good’ hearts.

They hardly give in blood; let them give in treasure.

Look around and ask yourself how much good all the do-gooderism has done around the world, and for that matter in NYC, Detroit and Chicago.

More recently, check out the ‘progress’ in Haiti.

Oh, yes, the Rs make the old folks eat dog food too.

Schadenfreude on March 31, 2011 at 6:49 PM

How many children have died because of the DDT ban…?

Seven Percent Solution on March 31, 2011 at 6:49 PM

The Congressional Information Office told Jesse Jackson Jr. that the body count will be 100,000 if Wisconsin public employee unions are deprived of their right to collective bargaining.

Cicero43 on March 31, 2011 at 6:49 PM

So, we must continue to fund your programs for your citizens even though we’re going broke – are broke – and either way you hate us anyway?

Sorry, but my government here in the good ‘ol USA is robbing me to pay for my neighbors mortgage, cay payment and health care.

I’m tapped.

catmman on March 31, 2011 at 6:50 PM

if only they had a cheap supply of DDT…….

clement on March 31, 2011 at 6:48 PM

Rachel Carson, mass killer.

Cicero43 on March 31, 2011 at 6:50 PM

How many children die every time Obama plays golf? What about a Hawaiian vacation? How many children died when we sent Air Force one to buzz NYC way back when? All those dollars could go to USAID.

Can we now get a body count for every dumbass thing the Dems do?

trubble on March 31, 2011 at 6:50 PM

We may hate the children but they kill ‘em.

txag92 on March 31, 2011 at 6:51 PM

Just chuck them some DDT, it’s cheap.

Emily M. on March 31, 2011 at 6:51 PM

Another impossible-to-assess, assessment. How gauche.

BKeyser on March 31, 2011 at 6:51 PM

How many children have died because of the DDT ban…?

Seven Percent Solution on March 31, 2011 at 6:49 PM

Mosquito nets that don’t work are better for Gaia.

catmman on March 31, 2011 at 6:52 PM

Sorry, but we’re tapped out paying for the children of unwed mothers in our own country… welfare, entitlements, Medicaid, ADC, housing, food stamps, school lunches, free needles, and prisons. And as Ann Coulter points out, our problems would be much worse, were it not for Roe v. Wade.

VastRightWingConspirator on March 31, 2011 at 6:52 PM

Ok. Let’s take PP funding away and give it to this outfit. ALL the kids win!

hoosiermama on March 31, 2011 at 6:53 PM

Disgusting political play.

I’d like to know how many kids in this country will be affected when their parents can’t buy food because they will be taxed to death paying down this deficit.

gophergirl on March 31, 2011 at 6:58 PM

I once worked in child care. If I had to hear the phrase ..”for the children” one more time, I was gonna punch a kid.

thebrokenrattle on March 31, 2011 at 6:58 PM

How many abortions last year in the US?
More than 300,000?
Yeah, Dems – cry me a river…..

TeresainFortWorth on March 31, 2011 at 6:58 PM

Ok. Let’s take PP funding away and give it to this outfit. ALL the kids win!

hoosiermama on March 31, 2011 at 6:53 PM

…and toss good old Rajiv Shah’s salary in as well.

BigWyo on March 31, 2011 at 6:59 PM

OMG! “It’s for the children!”

Where have we heard that before?

Barry wants the rest of the world to fight dictators, why doesn’t he insist they also pick up part of the tab in foregin aid?

Charity begins at home.

GarandFan on March 31, 2011 at 7:00 PM

Didn’t Obutthead make a bunch of cuts to foreign aid from holding back funding for aids medicines? I seem to remember something like that.

Where the he!! was the outcry from this dude then?

capejasmine on March 31, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Meanwhile……Speaking of Demonization Dem Tactics!

Revealed! Democrats’ Playbook for Blocking Spending Cuts Needed to Boost the Economy

Posted by Don Seymour on March 30, 2011
*****************************************

For those of you following along with the budget negotiations in Washington, here’s a handy look at the playbook Democrats are using to block spending cuts needed to end the uncertainty facing job creators:

STEP 1: Refuse to pass a bill that cuts spending and funds the government for the rest of this fiscal year. This step is right out of 2010 when Democrats didn’t even propose a budget (the reason we’re in this mess to begin with), leaving the government spending binge on auto-pilot. The House took a step toward fixing this nearly 40 days ago when it passed H.R. 1 – but again, to date, the Senate still hasn’t passed a bill of its own. If you think back to elementary school, both houses of Congress have to pass a bill in order for it to become a law. So every time you see Democratic leaders on TV talking about a government shutdown (step 2) or labeling spending cuts as “extreme” (step 3), remember, Senate Democrats haven’t even passed a bill.
——

STEP 2: Root for a government shutdown. Call it the “Howard Dean Rule.” The former chairman of the DNC and “a de facto head of his party’s left wing“ told National Journal that Democrats should be “quietly rooting” for a government shutdown. Well, they’re listening. Washington Democrats have been ignoring Americans who want spending cuts and cheering for a shutdown for months. Aides to Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) called a shutdown “more likely than not.” And by failing to actually pass a bill to fund the government through September (step 1), Washington Democrats are the ones making their shutdown all the more likely.
——–

STEP 3: Paint the spending cuts the American people want as “extreme.” Stanford economist John B. Taylor said the funding bill passed by the House has spending cuts that “will increase economic growth and employment,” and “encourage job-producing private sector investment.” But Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Democrats have their marching orders: to label spending cuts needed to boost our economy as “extreme.” “I always use the word extreme,” said Senator Schumer. No word on whether they think a spending-driven $14 trillion debt crisis is too “extreme.” And remember, since they still haven’t passed a long-term funding bill (step 1), it’s hard to know which spending cuts Democrats don’t think are “extreme.”

In a great op-ed for the Washington Times, Charles Hurt says Democrats are “blaming House Republicans and the ‘extreme’ voters they represent for a crisis” Democrats have been instrumental in creating. Hurt says this “strategy is exactly the opposite of the open and honest manner in which House Speaker John A. Boehner conducted last month’s spending debate in the House.”

The evidence is clear: the Republican-led House has taken action to keep the government running and cut spending. It’s time for the Democrat-led Senate to do its job and pass a bill too.

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?postid=232080

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:02 PM

Where were these people when DDT was banned, causing far more deaths? Where will they be when they’ve bankrupt the country and can’t provide anything to those in need, including the people inside our own border? Where will they be when my grandchildren need medicine and can’t get it because we have union pensions to pay for instead?
 
Stop with the politics and balance the budget already. Get the government off the backs of hard working americans. Free Americans to rebuild the economy. Then let’s talk about giving to others in need out of our excess.

ClanDerson on March 31, 2011 at 7:02 PM

LIER LIER PANTS ON FIRE. If a Socialist ever told the truth their head would explode.

old war horse on March 31, 2011 at 7:03 PM

Excellent way to distract from cowboy poetry festivals.

slickwillie2001 on March 31, 2011 at 7:03 PM

When the dollar is hyper-inflated to a value of zero,
how many lives will that cost.
-
If we get the oil, we can grow lots of food to feed the world.

esblowfeld on March 31, 2011 at 7:07 PM

This country is not responsible for all the world’s ills. Get funds from private donations and other countries. We cannot afford to support the programs of USAID. The world’s rich uncle is broke and can no longer afford their expensive demands.

rplat on March 31, 2011 at 7:07 PM

HAS the over population crowd endorsed this plan?

Mother Earth can’t support all of us now so reducing the population by 70,000 sounds like a win to me.

F15Mech on March 31, 2011 at 7:08 PM

It takes a Village
-HilRod!

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:11 PM

Or put another way, 100 children will die because we fund Cowboy poetry festivals, no?

WitchDoctor on March 31, 2011 at 7:12 PM

Meh. AID director is a political appointment, and AID pushes policy-based assistance. No surprise that this guy is an Obama administration hack trying to defend his boss. The guy got an MD but decided to be a career bureaucrat, which is pretty sad.

Christien on March 31, 2011 at 7:13 PM

I guess then, we can say they are saving 70,000 lives? The budget was cut in half, so they would of saved 140,000 lives. So when is saving 70,000 lives bad?

My comments are censored

WoosterOh on March 31, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Funding Planned Parenthood for 6 more months will cost 190,000 lives.

Key West Reader on March 31, 2011 at 7:13 PM

Not to be an ass, or anything, but the leftist driven ban on DDT is killing about one million people per year, worldwide. Most of those fatalities are poor, and children, who rely on the USAID approved bed nets to keep mosquitoes at bay. Putting up bed nets is just not a very effective way of combating Malaria. DDT is. If they were serious about dead children, they’d be fighting tooth and nail to get DDT approved for mosquito control.

But they’re not. It’s almost like they’re more interested in money, than saved lives.

DngrMse on March 31, 2011 at 7:16 PM

These scumbags environazis are responsible for MILLIONS of deaths due to their insane banning of DDT. He needs to STFU!

Opposite Day on March 31, 2011 at 7:17 PM

Let me emphasize this: De-Funding Planned Parenthood will save 139,000 African American lives.

Funding Planned Parenthood will result in the the premature deaths and the taxpaying citizenry’s open funding of the murder and taxpayer funded genocide of 139,000 future African American citizens.

Progressive math. It’s. Hard.

Key West Reader on March 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM

Let me emphasize this: De-Funding Planned Parenthood will save 139,000 African American lives.

Key West Reader on March 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM

Straight up WINNER!

GOP, are you listening?

petefrt on March 31, 2011 at 7:22 PM

Progressive math. It’s. Hard.

Key West Reader on March 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM

Key West Reader:That be true,hey what happened,last night on QOTD,I’m curious,wee bit concerned—-:)

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:23 PM

And:

800,000 old people
24,609 sea kittens
!!!!

SouthernGent on March 31, 2011 at 7:24 PM

Key West Reader on March 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM
======================
Straight up WINNER!

GOP, are you listening?

petefrt on March 31, 2011 at 7:22 PM

petefrt:Yup,the Truth Shall Set Ya Free!!:)

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:24 PM

Just for fun, what was the level of spending on these programs in 2008?

karenhasfreedom on March 31, 2011 at 6:49 PM

+ 14 trillion

ladyingray on March 31, 2011 at 7:25 PM

so some how the USA is responsible for feeding other people that AREN’T US citizens. TO FRIGGEN BAD.

ColdWarrior57 on March 31, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Let’s give the Democrats a choice — save children by defunding Planned Parenthood and moving that money over to the USAID program. Let them make the choice — kill 3 million, or save 70 thousand.

unclesmrgol on March 31, 2011 at 7:26 PM

This creates a problem for Democrats. The more of this kind of spending that the Republicans cut off, the less the Democrats can complain about cowboy poetry. Heck, they can’t complain about any cuts without looking petty after cutting off the starving children.

Republicans should put this on the Democrats’ shoulders by offering to reinstate one dollar to the starving foreign kids fund for every 100 dollars of new non-military cuts the Democrats come up with. Let’s see how many kids the Democrats decide to rescue.

Buddahpundit on March 31, 2011 at 7:26 PM

The GOP is taking strong action to save Gaia by reducing carbon footprints of the human population. This is nothing more than euthanasia and retroactive abortion. The cost benefit ratio does not add up in the favor of the condemned. Only those with chronic diseases and deformities will be affected and they will have had their ’7′ already, or maybe it will be ’5′ or ’2′. It doesn’t matter. A zillion-bizillion-gazillion tons of CO2 will not be put into the atmosphere as a result./sarc

JimP on March 31, 2011 at 7:27 PM

But….but…*Hyperventilates*,what about the
children,who come from the,

Extremely Filthy Dirty Rotten Stink’n Rich!!!!!
(snark).

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:27 PM

All this is is a “divide and conquer” strategy.

They’re going to go at it line by line until there is nothing left to cut.

It’s all part of the “new baseline” they want people to think about – the one starting in 2009 rather than 2008.

JeffWeimer on March 31, 2011 at 7:28 PM

Wiat a tic………….,I thought the Global Warming Cultist Progressives,say,that bringing in children to the planet,
would be a death-sentence to Mother Earth,

……I’m sooooo confused!(sarc).

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Even if it were true, who cares? Are they American children? No? Then let their own countries worry about them.

KSgop on March 31, 2011 at 7:30 PM

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:24 PM

And as SouthernGent on March 31, 2011 at 7:24 PM suggests, defunding Øbamacare will add an additional several millions lives saved.

petefrt on March 31, 2011 at 7:32 PM

Did Boehner start to cry when he heard this?

Naturally Curly on March 31, 2011 at 7:32 PM

Key West Reader on March 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM

Don’t say that hear. Email that to GOP members of Congress!!

ladyingray on March 31, 2011 at 7:34 PM

They’ve had years of U.S. aid to work out their problems, so I don’t have much sympathy. How long are we suppose to take on their responsibilities?

DFCtomm on March 31, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Would it be too much to get Saudi Arabia to cover the cost?

Hummer53 on March 31, 2011 at 7:45 PM

I`m sorry, I don`t believe we are responsible for every other country out there. By the way you idiots, when we are flat broke and busted, how many children will die then?

bluemarlin on March 31, 2011 at 7:46 PM

USAID: But… but… its for da CHILLERIN!!!

Ok, here’s the clue: if you were running a true humanitarian enterprise you would have helped the folks to build an infrastructure so they didn’t need handouts and could BUY THEIR OWN SUPPLIES.

DDT was pretty cheap to make, back in the day. And seeds are damned cheap. If the fool bureaucracy didn’t believe in giving handouts and instead giving a hand-up, the aid could be decreased over time. Teach people about their liberty with that meal… shame them into learning how to fend for themselves. Let them know that a free man is not begging for handouts… and if you aren’t free, then here is a copy of Common Sense. Figure it out for yourself if your government is the problem.

Uncle Sam is broke. Tapped out. In hock once over. And we need to take care of our own people FIRST. Or, more correctly, his people will be taking care of him, and taking the checkbook away. Setting a good example will do wonders when people see what needs to be done with a spendthrift, corrupt government. Give them some ideas of what needs to be done to get themselves out of the sorry state they are in.

ajacksonian on March 31, 2011 at 7:54 PM

ajacksonian on March 31, 2011 at 7:54 PM

Yep…make ‘em dependent on gub’mint just like here in the States.

USAID is an overseas banking system…making oligarchs rich for decades.

The chidren?

Not all that important in the larger scheme. Just too damn many of ‘em. /

coldwarrior on March 31, 2011 at 7:57 PM

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 7:24 PM
=========
And as SouthernGent on March 31, 2011 at 7:24 PM suggests, defunding Øbamacare will add an additional several millions lives saved.

petefrt on March 31, 2011 at 7:32 PM

fetefrt:Hehe…yup:)

canopfor on March 31, 2011 at 8:09 PM

coldwarrior on March 31, 2011 at 7:57 PM

Well, that NATO kill them all solution in Libya might be the next form of ‘humanitarian aid’ that is seen by some of these people… really, I don’t think I would want to be anywhere near a ‘humanitarian mission’ at this point. These things get lethal way too fast these days.

ajacksonian on March 31, 2011 at 8:10 PM

Republicans hate Children!

sandee on March 31, 2011 at 6:46 PM

I stopped by Kos the other day and they actually said point blank that Republicans hate families and children.
They murder their own children in the womb and they have the gall to judge!

The left is absolutely delusional.

I understand having a hissy fit over cuts to people in our own country… but foreign aid? It seems that one of the first places you can afford to cut is foreign aid!

By this logic if you ever once give money to charity and then you stop because you run out of money you have killed people. It was not enough to give and help in the first place.

Why would we ever help anyone if once we help, we are then commited forever?

petunia on March 31, 2011 at 8:12 PM

I wonder. How many lives does USAID think might be saved if we re-introduced DDT? After all, Malaria claims a million lives a year.

It’s a crying shame isn’t it? That the GOP is blamed for seventy thousand possible deaths, while the Environmentalists who pushed for a ban on DDT are not blamed for the more than forty million deaths that resulted, all which were preventable.

Stalin and Mao were piddling amateurs by comparison to the genocide of poor brown, and black children who were killed by a preventable disease.

Snake307 on March 31, 2011 at 8:18 PM

Let them die…world needs less people, just ask PETA.

Karmi on March 31, 2011 at 8:28 PM

Mosquito nets that don’t work are better for Gaia.

catmman on March 31, 2011 at 6:52 PM

Mosquito nets are made from petroleum products. Bad for Gaia

darwin-t on March 31, 2011 at 8:32 PM

We are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend from the Chi-coms, to send it to third-world countries that hate us so their corrupt leaders can line their pockets with it while their people (womemn, men and chidren) starve to death.

Do I have that right?

Naturally Curly on March 31, 2011 at 8:32 PM

Naturally Curly on March 31, 2011 at 8:32 PM

BINGO!

Plus its for debt that our ‘grandchildren’ will have to pay, save that we are ending up having to pay it now, so we have become our own grandchildren. Perhaps we should stop the borrowing and spending… just a thought!

ajacksonian on March 31, 2011 at 8:44 PM

So, if we just keep the funding the same and not, say, double, it, we won’t save an additional 70,000 children abroad? How about quadrupling it? That would save 280,000 more children abroad? How much would it take to save all the children?

NNtrancer on March 31, 2011 at 9:00 PM

How about we get rid of USAID and make all charitable contributions of any sort fully and completely a write-off against gross income? That way it isn’t taxed and it doesn’t count against income.

And that should go for the UN dues and upkeep, IMF, and every other foreign policy expenditure the US government shells out. Let the American people figure it out… we used to build hospitals, universities and religious missions to the poor overseas without one, single red cent from Uncle Sam. Often those would be the FIRST hospitals, universities, etc. that would be seen in places. That is what happens when we trust our citizens to carry the message of liberty on their own: they do it.

ajacksonian on March 31, 2011 at 9:05 PM

So, we prevent 70,000 future America haters AND cut the budget? Cool, a twofer.

Alden Pyle on March 31, 2011 at 9:07 PM

We are saddling our children with a crushing debt burden in their own interest you see. That all clear now? Oh btw we have to allow the Wisconsin Teachers’ Union to overcharge for their Union Provided Health insurance in order to ensure quality education for Wisconsin children. Surely you now understand how wrong you were to think school boards should be allowed to choose insurers based on mere value.

KW64 on March 31, 2011 at 9:15 PM

If every cut can’t be done for this reason or that then what happens when there is nothing left. It’s time the rich oil countries start feeding and helping the poor and needy around the world, which according to the current administrations plans will include us real soon. Stop the bullsheet.

New Patriot on March 31, 2011 at 9:30 PM

It’s a shame no one brought up such talk in Illinois when the Dems here pulled the rug out from under social services.

Hearings left Illinois leadership in no doubt of actual consequences for teens with serious issues (suicidal, etc.). Residential programs for such kids lost funding and had no choice but to let kids go. Scores of other programs tanked.

I’ve had a chance to support (IT/MIS) the bright young caseworkers who do this tough work day in and day out. I’ve watched them lose their jobs in droves. They’ll be fine. But their charges…

Dems are great at cutting meat and saving fat. Meanwhile, our governor raised taxes, destroyed all Amazon affiliates in the state, and is surely plotting further nefarious civilization-destroying exploits.

The media will never highlight threats to “the children” when they come from the left. If they did, they’d be excoriating public education night and day, with constant editorials advocating 100% funded vouchers for all.

That’ll be the day.

rasqual on March 31, 2011 at 9:35 PM

Dear Scott:

You still are yummy in my book! Please ask your minions to stop calling me and asking for hundreds of dollars in “seed money” to stop the Harry Reid.

Scotty, it’s one thing to make a donation, but it’s entirely another thing to have your fund raisers down here in Florida land coming around twisting arms and insisting on NOT hanging up or leaving my doorstep until you have a minimum of $200.

Beejus, you’re in liberaland; leave us alone down here. We’re a quiet and peaceful bunch and can live without the arm twistah’s. K?

Key West Reader on March 31, 2011 at 9:37 PM

That’s 70,000 that alar in apples didn’t kill…

Mr. Grump on April 1, 2011 at 9:22 AM

Our foreign aid budget is a pittance. With a few notable exceptions (AED’s work in Pakistan, for example) it is money well spent, and the health expenditures do save lives.

This is not the hill to die on, folks. Leaning too hard on items like this makes us look like Dickensian villains and removes valuable degrees of freedom we’ll need to reform entitlements.

DrSteve on April 1, 2011 at 10:33 AM