Kinsley
High School
Kinsley, Kansas
Teacher: Dr. Galen Boehme
by Krystle Jacobs
Grade 12
The
merits of the MCA come by promoting realistic benchmarks, by fairly selecting
qualifying countries, and by cooperating with other foreign aid programs.
Realistic
benchmarks are vital for success because changes come gradually. An example of a
situation in which benchmarks would have to be small is in the fight against
AIDS. Although AIDS is a worldwide epidemic, most cases are found in Africa.
Africa is home to 29.4 million people who are infected. It would be impossible
to treat all of these cases in a short amount of time, and a cure has not yet
been discovered. Therefore, the MCA must work towards smaller goals, like
preventing more AIDS infections. The best way to go about this is to educate
people about AIDS or how to avoid becoming infected. The MCA should also work to
develop better and cheaper treatment medication. The only treatments that are
currently available are so expensive that only 5 percent of those people
infected can afford treatment. By working towards small goals, the MCA could
come closer to winning the fight against AIDS.
Another
example of realistic benchmarks comes from the re-building of Afghanistan. In
order to help the country after years of civil war, the U.S. government has
organized the program into small areas. These include strengthening the
governance, restoring the media, rehabilitating agriculture, restoring the
infrastructure, empowering women, enhancing education, improving health, and
enhancing the economy. More is accomplished by working in small steps, through
small groups.
When
the benchmarks are too large, complications arise. An example of this is the
building of warehouses in Africa. In 1976, AID to Africa paid for the building
of 18 warehouses. Rather than building a few at a time, all 18 were attempted at
once. Because of the large work load, five of the warehouses were not built,
three were never finished, three collapsed immediately, two had their roofs
blown off, and three more crumbled soon after due to “serious structural
deficiencies.” This left only two successful warehouses out of a possible 18.
This illustrates why realistic benchmarks are a must for the MCA to be
successful.
Success
will also come to the MCA if qualifying countries are selected fairly. Because
countries with high levels of corruption will not qualify for aid, a definition
of corruption must be set. After an agreeable definition is created, each
country must be surveyed, so that the correct level of corruption may be
assigned. Because countries are constantly growing and changing, the nations
considered for the MCA will have to be surveyed often. Those countries which did
not qualify the first time may be eligible during the next survey, or vice
versa. Re-evaluation will help to ensure that funds are going to worthy
countries.
In
addition to corruption, the MCA must also look at how much need each qualifying
country has for aid money. Supplying the least corrupt country with the most
funds would be a mistake. Although that particular country may be the most
worthy, it may not have the most need. The aid money should be divided according
to the financial states of the countries, and how much aid the countries are
already receiving from other sources. How each country plans to use the funds
should also be a factor in how much money a country receives. While some
countries need the money to feed the people, others want the money to construct
weapons or build up their armies. The money must be used for a beneficial and
practical purpose if the MCA intends to make a difference.
Cooperation
is imperative for the MCA to be successful. This cooperation is necessary on two
levels. The first of these is cooperation between donors and recipients. One way
that those giving the money and those receiving the money can work together is
by setting goals. The developing country knows what it wants; the developed
country knows how to reach the end. Therefore, the two parties should set goals
that will use the available funds wisely, while producing the best benefits for
the people. The donors and recipients must also physically work together.
Volunteers for any foreign aid program are limited, so the citizens of the
country should be willing to work. The local people will appreciate the changes
that have been made and the saved time and money.
Cooperation
must also exist between the MCA and other foreign aid programs. Cooperation is
essential because of limited funds, limited volunteers, and overlapping goals.
If the MCA forms partnerships with NGO’s, national and local governments, and
foundations, resources could be shared. The result of this combination would be
more money and more volunteers. If all the money and all the volunteers work
towards the same goal, the goals will be easier to accomplish.
So
long as the MCA provides realistic benchmarks, fairly selects eligible
countries, and cooperates with other foreign aid programs, merits are bound to
surface. For this reason, the United States can afford to expand its commitment
to foreign aid.
Selected
Bibliography
Bovard,
James. “Africa – Foreign Aid Wasteland.” The Continuing Failure of
Bush,
George W. “Millennium Challenge Account.” Paper in Singer packet, 2003.
Fuller,
Terry. Presentation on the Millennium Challenge Account – American
King,
Neil. “Policy and Legislative Advocacy.” InterAction.org homepage. April
“Millennium
Challenge Account Update.” USAID homepage.
Natisos,
Andrew. “Rebuilding Afghanistan.” USAID: Afghanistan Project. April 15,
Radelet,
Steve. “Initial Reactions to the Announcement on the MCA.” Singer
Smith,
Michael. “Understanding AIDS/HIV – the Basics.” MSN health homepage.
Townley,
Ben. “People infected with AIDS hits 42 million.” Sustainable
Question
#1: President Bush claims that most funds for development do not
come from international aid. He
mentions three things that do fund development.
What are they?
Money
is essential for successful development. The funds used for development come
from three areas: domestic capital, foreign investments, and trade. Domestic
capital is money that already belongs to the country. Sometimes the banks loan
citizens money, but this causes debt. It would be wiser for the banks to give
grants since grants do not need to be paid back. Foreign investment refers to
committing money to another country in order to gain a financial return. A
common way to do this in through stocks and bonds. President Bush considers the
final area, trade, the most important. Developed countries purchase and import
billions of dollars in products from developing countries every year. Boosting
trade helps the developing countries make more money so that they may cater to
their internal needs.
Question
#2: President Bush reminded his audience that successful
development in a third world country requires more than funds. What two items did he mention in this regard?
Successful
development requires literate citizens. In order for any business to survive,
literate and educated personnel must be employed. In order for any business or
country to survive, literate and educated personnel must be employed. It is not
enough for the citizens to be able to read and write. They must also be willing
to put the skills that they as people have to use. Help from developed countries
will only go so far. After that, the citizens from the developing countries must
be ready to step in and take over. Another factor that Bush mentions is health.
The citizens must be healthy to allow for advancement. If people are sick all of
the time with a disease, then they cannot work. That is why one of the goals of
the Millennium Challenge Account is to stop the spread of diseases.
Question
3: When is money sometimes counterproductive, according to
President Bush?
When
a developed country gives a developing country “outright” cash, the result
can hinder rather than help the cause. Bad policies can be subsidized, or
supported with cash. Bush is saying that if we simply give money to the
developing countries and do not oversee how they are using it, the money could
be used for negative courses of action. Giving cash to a developing country can
also delay reform. This means that the money can prevent the country from making
changes. If the country can keep with the current ways of life and receive
financial support from other countries, then no need exists for any change. The
final way that “outright” cash can be counterproductive is by crowding out
private investments. This means that a private business would have a hard time
surviving. Thus, if a developed country wants to support undeveloped countries
with cash, it would be wise to regulate the way that the money is spent.
Question #4: Describe the Millennium Challenge Account and include in your
description what is anticipated from
donors and recipients.
President
Bush proposed the Millennium Challenge Account in March of 2002. The plan is
worth approximately $5 billion that will be raised by the United States, other
developed nations, and the developing countries themselves. The main focus of
the account is to provide better education, health care, and economic
opportunities for developing nations. The idea of enhancement for these
countries, most of which are in poverty, includes advancing trade, democracy,
and rule of law. Under the Millennium Challenge Account, President Bush
challenges the countries to fight diseases like AIDS, teach illiterate people
skills, assist new businesses in trading abroad, and increase yearly harvests to
feed the people. The goal is to help these nations to help themselves. By doing
this, the developed and developing nations combine in an effort to rid the world
of poverty, hunger, and illiteracy.
Question
#5: What are the three broad standards that President Bush
expects the leaders of the developing nations to adopt?
President
Bush is asking for all developing countries receiving aid to adopt a growth
agenda, increase support for private enterprises, and focus more on education.
First is the growth agenda. This could include a list of goals that the country
hopes to reach and deadlines that the people set to reach these goals. The
countries will be awarded with personal satisfaction by reaching many small
goals and eventually developing to full potential. Next is increased support for
private business. In some developing countries, the government runs and controls
all business. If the countries push for privately owned and operated businesses,
the economy will most likely flourish and trade will likely increase, improving
the quality of the country. The final area is a focus on education. Educated
citizens are a necessity for any country that hopes to grow. These three areas,
a growth agenda, private businesses, and education, in the long run will help
the developing countries to help themselves.
Question
#6: Describe President Bush’s challenge to development banks
and explain why or why not you favor it?
President
Bush is challenging the development banks to help stop debt. By providing funds
in the form of grants, which do not need to be paid back, rather than loans, the
debt would decrease. The banks should hold a growth agenda. The agenda would
measure the improvements made in the lives of the people. Also, the agenda would
increase the support of private businesses and focus more on education. I favor
this thinking. If the banks were to offer more grants, the countries could feel
free to build and expand without the lingering fear of paying the banks back.
Question
#7: What percentage of our national income (GNP) do you think the
United States government committed to foreign aid in 2002?
First answer this question and then use the Internet to find the answer.
My
guess would be that the U.S. spent less than 1 percent of our national income on
foreign aid. I am estimating this percent because the U.S. spends money on many
different things and foreign aid is probably not a top priority. When I looked
on the Internet, I found that my estimation was too high. According to the USAID
Environment Information Clearinghouse, the U.S. spends .1 percent of GPN on
foreign aid per year. The United Nations suggested target rate is .07 percent.
Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands are the only three countries on the list
who are at, or above the projected level with .7 percent, .8 percent, and 1
percent, respectively.
Question
#8: Describe and defend a “Me First” attitude.
Since
the amount of money in the Millennium Challenge Account is limited, many
countries fear that they will not receive aid. Therefore, each country wants to
get the money first. Perhaps developing countries have the idea that the
Millennium Challenge Account is a first-come, first-serve project. These
countries may not be looking at the subject properly. President Bush wants all
qualifying countries to benefit and will split up the funds accordingly. Each
country will receive the amount of aid that it deserves, possibly based on
population, but more on need. This way, all developing countries which qualify
for the program have the chance to advance and do not need a “me first”
attitude.
Question
#9: Describe and defend a “Mutual Benefit” attitude.
Developing
as well as developed countries will benefit from the Millennium Challenge
Account. If developing countries begin to trade regularly with other countries,
the developed countries can purchase goods at cheaper prices. If all countries
work together to eliminate diseases, new cures can be discovered. Increased food
production will eliminate hunger and malnutrition around the world, preventing
many deaths. New jobs will be created by the new businesses, and unemployment
rates will decrease. New schools will begin and education levels will advance
around the world. Literacy rates will rise. Many countries can benefit by
assisting a few.
Question
#10: Describe three unsuccessful foreign aid programs operated by
the United States government or private American citizens.
Failed
foreign aid programs are those that only help a few people or offer money for
reason other than to help the country.
The first unsuccessful foreign aid program is World Vision. World Vision does help children, but only those who are chosen by a sponsor. The program works like this: A sponsor chooses a child from a collection of pictures and short descriptions. For the next 10-15 years, the sponsor sends money to the organization. The money pays for food, clothing, dental care, medical care, and education for the child that the sponsor has chosen. If a child has not been chosen by a sponsor, he or she does not receive a portion of the money. This is why World Vision is unsuccessful. The program only helps a small group of people. The “unlucky” children, who have not yet been selected by a sponsor, must sit by and watch as the “lucky” children receive food and new clothes. World Vision should work to help all children, not just a certain group of them.
Overseas
Enterprise Funds are the second form of unsuccessful foreign aid. This program
begins with the government establishing enterprise funds. Fund managers use U.S.
taxpayer dollars to operate funds and invest capital. In 10 years, over 2
billion dollars of taxpayer money have gone to enterprise funds. Of all U.S.
foreign assistance, 28 percent goes through one of four regional enterprise
funds. The purpose of these funds is to generate private investments in
developing countries. No evidence exists that these funds have done this. Part
of the reason is that the funds are too complex and confusing for developing
nations to understand. The funds are more costly to run than the benefits are
worth. Overseas Enterprise Funds are too expensive and complex to produce
benefits.
The third type of unsuccessful U.S. foreign aid is known as ‘bargained’ aid. The purpose of this program is not to help developing countries, but rather to bribe countries for cooperation during war with Iraq. The U.S. is currently making negotiations with Israel, Jordan, and Turkey. If these countries agree to cooperate with the U.S. during war, they will receive extra aid and benefits in return. Each country produces a “wish list” that the U.S. analyzes. Most of these requests include economic, business, and agricultural programs. If the U.S. agrees that the requests are reasonable, and after the country has agreed to support the U.S., a guarantee is granted. Over $10 billion has been granted so far. The problem with this is that the grants will cause a slump effect on the U.S. economy. Another problem is that the countries that are bargaining with the U.S. are also bargaining with Iraq for oil trade. Bargained aid may help temporarily help developing countries, but the problems it will cause the U.S. are not worth it.
Question
#11: Describe three successful foreign aid programs operated by
the United States government or private American citizens.
Successful
foreign aid programs not only provide developing countries with money; they also
promote community awareness and train the developing countries to grow and
flourish on their own.
Another successful foreign aid program is the International Society for
Individual Liberty (ISIL).
An American, Thomas Paine formed this program, in 1989 because of growing
concerns about foreign policy and civil liberties. A belief that ISIL holds is
that liberties must be understood before political changes can occur. In order
to help developing countries understand the liberties they possess, “world
conferences” are hosted. At these conferences, liberty movements begin. With
the ultimate goal of expanding freedom around the world, ISIL is considered
today’s fastest growing philosophical/political movement. By working to
establish an open and competitive economic system based on voluntary exchange
and free trade, ISIL works to make a difference in the world.
The third successful program is Doctors of the World. The Doctors of the
World programs leads the fight to bring health education, health care, and
social services to street children in America and abroad. American physicians
and mental health professionals currently offer medical assistance to more than
20 nations. Refugees, torture victims, AIDS victims, and homeless children are
relieved through services of this program. The Doctors of the World program
provides tuberculosis immunization for high-risk countries such as South Africa
and is also involved in the AIDS fight. The program fights AIDS through
prevention, treatment, awareness, and care programs. A film, book, music disk,
and exhibits have been produced to raise awareness. Because the Doctors of the
World program strives to educate developing countries and prevent problems from
beginning, this is a successful foreign aid program.
Question
#12: Steve Radelet, Senior Fellow at the Center for Global
Development, believes we can both take care of our own people and lend a helping
hand to citizens of less developed countries. Explain why you think we can or cannot offer aid to both.
I
agree with Radelet’s thinking. The USA can help its own people and those from
developing countries, but the USA should focus on its own people first. Radelet
has formed a plan for deciding which countries are eligible for aid and which
ones have been disqualified by corruption. If the USA were added to this list,
it would rank highly as a possible qualifying country. The USA does not need
nearly as much help as developing countries do, but there are millions of
homeless and uneducated people here. If the Millennium Challenge Account were
thought about from this approach, we could help ourselves in order to better
help others. The more educated people we have, the more help we have for other
countries.
Question
#13: What do you think about Mr. Radelet’s assertion that “the
administration is leaning towards a system in which eligible countries would
write proposals describing their objective and strategy, how they would use the
money, the benchmarks used for evaluation.
Giving recipient countries this responsibility is a revolutionary change
in U.S. foreign assistance.”?
Radelet
is thinking correctly with this statement. One purpose of the Millennium
Challenge Account is to help developing countries to help themselves. If
developed countries simply give the countries in need money, the developing
countries will spend it for the current needs and not give thought to the
future. By asking the qualifying countries to provide business plans for
development, we are asking them to look into the future. We are also asking the
current government of the developing countries to work with the citizens to
draft a plan for development. This approach is “a revolutionary change in US
foreign assistance.” Until the MCA was developed, the USA was aiding other
countries by money alone, not asking them to plan for the future. The MCA and
asking eligible countries to draft business plans provide a step towards
improvement for financial assistance.
Question #14: Which of Mr.
Radelet’s three concerns regarding the Millennium Challenge Account concerns
you and why?
1.
as more countries in this income range become eligible, there will be
fewer MCA funds available for the poorest countries that are implementing sound
development strategies.
2.
the make-or-break requirement may unnecessarily eliminate some countries.
The
separation of the United States foreign assistance into two agencies could lead
to a lack of coordination and overlapping functions.
All
of Radelet’s concerns have merit, but the one that I am the most concerned
about is number two. This refers to countries that may possibly be eliminated by
the qualification requirements. All countries, experiencing corruption or not,
deserve the opportunity to develop and grow. My real concern is this: Who is to
judge how much corruption a country has and how do we define corruption? When
compared to the US, many countries would be considered corrupted, and therefore
not eligible for aid. However, when compared to other developing countries,
these same countries that are compared against the US may not be considered
corrupted. The purpose of the MCA is to help developing nations, not judge on
the corruption levels of other countries.
Question
#15: There is evidence of an increase in negative world opinion
towards United States foreign policy, not necessarily the American people.
To counter this negative perception of the United States some people want
the United States to concentrate more on weapons of mass assistance and less on
weapons of mass destruction. Please
comment.
The
increase in negative world opinion towards U.S. foreign policy is caused by a
lack of knowledge. Those who do not favor the U.S. focusing on weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) do not realize that they are a threat to the whole world.
These weapons are especially dangerous to volunteers who travel to developing
countries to help. My suggestion is that the U.S., in cooperation with the MCA,
works out a compromise with those countries that possess WMD. The compromise
could offer weapons of mass assistance (WMA) in exchange for WMD. These WMA’s
could include money, volunteers, training programs, education, and health care.
WMA’s would benefit everyone more than WMD’s could.
Question
#16: What does the World Bank recommend as the United State’s
“just and appropriate share” to reach the Millennium Development Goals by
2015? Do you think our citizens can
afford that kind of increase? Defend
your views.
Because
the U.S. economy is larger than that of most countries, the World Bank is
recommending that the U.S. pay for a large share of the $40-$60 billion yearly
costs. The World Bank recommends that the U.S. pay $10-$15 billion per year.
Raising this money would mean raising taxes for U.S. citizens. The American
people may oppose sending money abroad when there are homeless and hungry people
right here on our home soil. Therefore, the real question may not be “can we
afford the increases?”, but “are our priorities in the right places?” Most
American’s can afford to pay the increases, but they would rather help the
local homeless than those thousands of miles away.
Question
#17: What do you think about the request of Faith Action for
People Centered Development Policy’s request that tax dollars be used to fund,
not only government-sponsored foreign aid programs, but “that funds also go to
NGOs and grassroots organizations.”?
Although
funds should support all organizations, not just government organizations, this
may cause a conflict or over-lapping of interests. If the government were to
handle all the money, it would be more organized. One central agency would be
more accurate about spreading out the spending to all eligible countries. A
central agency would also be beneficial in deciding what kind of programs to
fund. If there were more stability with the programs, there would be fewer that
fail. It would be to the benefit of everyone to establish one central government
agency to handle all the money for foreign aid.
Question
#18: How many countries would be affected positively by
health-related investments according to the Commission on Macroeconomics and
Health?
Many
countries would be positively affected by health-related investments. In order
to estimate the number of countries that would benefit, the Commission on
Macroeconomics and Health (CMH) analyzed the impact of health on development.
The CMH estimates that 83 countries will benefit. The benefit will come through
a growth in the economy, due to better health care. Better health care would
include fighting diseases, especially the AIDS pandemic.
Question
#19: According to the Commission on Macroeconomics, how much would
be gained annually between 2015-2020 due to saved lives and increased economic
growth, if an increased investment were made in global AIDS and other health
services?
Studies
by the CMH show that by that year 2010, over 8 million lives could be saved
annually. This would be possible by investing in AIDS programs and other
worldwide health services. Also, by 2015, $360 billion could be gained every
year. This would be due to the lives that were saved and the growth of the
economy. The purpose of this study is to prove that by investing in education,
AIDS programs, poverty, and other financial aid programs, the money that
countries donate will eventually pay for itself.
Question
#20: Use the Internet for your research and name the two
congressmen who introduced H.R. 4524. Give
a 2-line synopsis of that bill.
H.R.
4524 is known as the Debt Relief Enhancement Act of 2002. Senator Smith of New
Jersey and Senator LaFalce of New York introduced the bill. This bill would use
United States influence in the World Bank to provide $1 billion in annual debt
service relief. The bill also recommends that nations with epidemic-like AIDS
rates should receive greater debt relief. Although this bill sounds beneficial,
it was never passed. The bill died in a committee and never made it to the floor
for debate.
Back