One year ago, the disbanding of the U.S. Agency for International Development had a profound impact on global programs. Many vital initiatives, including essential humanitarian aid, were halted. This event is part of a broader pattern among donor nations, such as the U.S., Canada, the U.K., France, and Germany. These countries collectively reduced aid budgets by 23 percent, which amounts to $40 billion. Such reductions threaten to cause over 9.4 million preventable deaths by 2030.
We regard foreign aid as an indispensable tool of U.S. foreign policy. Through our roles in the World Food Program and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, we witnessed how effective U.S. foreign assistance can prevent disease outbreaks, alleviate hunger, and aid those in conflict or disasters. Additionally, it safeguards Americans, enhances global leadership, generates employment, and develops new trade partnerships, potentially saving taxpayer money.
Yet, reductions in aid budgets and the dissolution of USAID illustrate shortcomings in foreign assistance. To preserve this essential tool, decisions must be made regarding the allocation of funds. Prioritizing U.S. interests, efficient delivery, and public support is crucial. Innovative methods should be explored to enhance aid delivery and sustainability. Furthermore, renewing bipartisanship in foreign assistance will measure success alongside effectiveness and accountability.
The current polarized political climate contrasts with the American public’s perspective on foreign assistance. Americans from different political parties agree on its fundamental role in global leadership. Research by Echelon Insights and the Rockefeller Foundation indicates that 54 percent of Americans support foreign aid, and a significant majority favors reformation over elimination.
Support grows when people consider specific aid programs rather than the broad term “foreign aid.” Programs like humanitarian relief and disease prevention garner 90 percent support, while global health and economic development receive 84 and 81 percent support, respectively. This enduring commitment to global aid inspires us to lead a bipartisan Commission on the Future of Foreign Assistance.
The commission will consist of former Congress members and senior officials. Backing from think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute and the Brookings Institution will ensure diverse perspectives. We aim to engage Americans and international leaders to discuss and reshape foreign aid strategies.
The commission will critically evaluate past program failures and reasons for foreign aid’s vulnerability to cuts. It is crucial to integrate foreign aid with national interests for improved support. Developing effective aid models to support millions worldwide is crucial in maintaining national security.
We recognize the difficulty of these tasks, but inactivity is a significant risk in an increasingly unstable world. As General James Mattis emphasized to Congress, inadequate funding for diplomacy increases defense requirements. Creativity, transparency, broad support, and political resolve will be essential resources for the commission.
Our experience assures us that American innovation and optimism will contribute to our success. David Beasley is a former South Carolina governor and executive director of the World Food Program. Ben Cardin is a former Maryland senator and chaired the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.