Clarion-Ledger: Foreign aid saves lives; cutting it would be disastrous
Crickett Nicovich, senior adviser of global policy and government affairs at RESULTS and RESULTS Educational Fund

“…A lot of Mississippians may look at foreign assistance as a waste of our tax dollars. That could not be more untrue. U.S. support for PEPFAR and the Global Fund — both programs started under President George W. Bush — have turned the tide against AIDS. … Additionally, since 1990, U.S. investments have helped to slash the global ‘under-5’ mortality rate by more than half — which means more than 100 million children are alive today who otherwise would not be. … If saving lives and creating opportunity isn’t a good investment, I don’t know what is. … Reach out to our U.S. senators, Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), and thank them for maintaining funding for foreign aid and global health this year. Tell them that they should continue to lead with action, that they should continue to work with their colleagues to reject the shameful cuts that the Trump administration has proposed making to these global anti-poverty programs. Don’t be frozen with inaction. Do something” (5/14).

Seattle Times: Americans lose when funds for global health research are cut
Jennifer Slyker, assistant professor of global health at the University of Washington Schools of Medicine & Public Health and co-director of the Global WACh HIV Core

“We in the global health community are greatly encouraged by the work of Congress to increase funding to the National Institutes of Health and continue the Fogarty International Center’s mission to improve health around the world, as well as grow our next generation of researchers. While the 2017 fiscal appropriations preserved the Fogarty International Center through the end of September, Congress will soon begin debating funding for 2018. And Fogarty may be on the chopping block again. … There is a perception that global health programs take taxpayer dollars out of the U.S. and helps other countries but not us. This perception is incorrect. … Why should money to fund global health research come from federal sources rather than private companies? Because taxpayer-supported research helps guarantee that this work focuses on priorities aligned with improving our health and safety, rather than on profit margins. … Who really loses if we turn our back on global health? We, the American people lose. We lose out on the innovative new medical interventions that could someday save our lives. We lose critical opportunities to grow the next generation of scientific leaders. And we make our country more vulnerable to devastating epidemics” (5/14).