Email this page to a friend!

The Recent US Election Results and Foreign Policy

 

 

Now that the polls have closed and the election results are in, one question is on all of our minds here at Global Poverty Project: What do the election results mean for United States’ foreign policy?

The switch in the House from a Democratic majority to a Republican majority does not look promising for the United States global engagement. In a New York Times Article, Gordan Adams, a professor in the US Foreign Policy Program at the School of International Service at American University, hypothesizes that both the Berman agenda* and President Obama’s plan to double the amount of money spent on foreign aid while in office will be thrown out of the window.

Additionally, Marc Ginsberg, former United States ambassador and senior vice president of APCO worldwide, wrote in an article published in the Huffington Post that Congress’ focus will be on eliminating the U.S. deficit. This will drastically lessen the amount of money spent by the U.S. on foreign aid and assistance.

While this news can be discouraging, it is vitally important that we remain hopeful. The newly elected Congress is not sworn into office until January, but we are already taking action. You can, too, in the form of writing to your newly elected representatives and senators and voicing your opinions about U.S. foreign policy and foreign aid. If enough people write to Congress about the importance of foreign aid, we can see results—results that could increase U.S. foreign aid and help to take a step towards the elimination of extreme poverty and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.

Foreign aid and policy are bipartisan issues, and always will be. During George W. Bush's administration, PEPFAR (the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for Aid Relief) was put into effect, guaranteeing $15 billion over a 5 years to combat HIV/AIDS worldwide. It was the largest sum of money given to this epidemic by any government or governmental institution, sponsoring several programs and educational initiatives that are benefiting the achievement of the fourth (reduce child mortality), fifth (improve maternal health), and sixth (combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases) Millennium Development Goal. As we can see, both parties have taken initiative in trying to eliminate extreme poverty. Let us make sure that they continue to do so. 

 

To learn more about who your newly elected representatives and senators are and their politics, go to http://aol.it/clk6bn

On this website, you can also search, by state, who your new representatives and senators are and methods of contact.

*A comprehensive foreign aid reform bill that would replace the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, proposed by Representative Howard Berman (D-CA).

 

 

Posted by Sarah Damsky - GPP Intern in Poverty for column GPP - United States on Nov 8th 2010, 12:33

Comments

+ 13/11/10 3:58am - Posted By Upset Republican - Reply to this comment
Well I WAS very interested in what you're doing here at the Global Poverty Project. Then I saw you bash Republicans for no good reason. We don't want the orphans of the world to remain without families. We don't want to see starving people go hungry. We don't want AIDS to take over the world. And we don't like poverty. Your over simplification of foreign policy is offensive and because of your naivety you just lost at least one potential supporter.

My family, all Republicans, have adopted several orphans (to the tune of eight), been to Africa several times on humanitarian aid missions, spent time at refugee centers, served the homeless, have worked for NGOs in Africa, have hosted all kinds of people doing mission work/humanitarian aid work and have donated thousands of dollars to organizations.

You know what's discouraging? A potentially great organization getting political when there is no need. Quoting the Huff Post is like quoting Fox News, a practice I'm sure you would frown upon. Reducing our deficit and creating a flourishing economy here in the US will up your donations. What's the first thing people quit doing when their pocketbooks start to thin out? That's right, they stop donating money to organizations. I'm sure you've noticed that over the recession.

Not to mention that Republicans give more than Democrats. Be careful not to bite the hand that feeds.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/conservatives_more_liberal_giv.html
17/11/10 2:45pm - Posted By I Agree - Reply to this comment
I couldn't agree with you more, Upset Republican. While I consider myself independent, the thoughtless action of bashing a political group is appalling. I was heavily intrigued by the articles on this website, but this one article left a severe distaste. I believe, you should appeal to the individual rather than government. Removing the moral obligation from the individual will result in frivolous waste on government programs that are aimed at supporting global corporatist agendas. Furthermore, a change in policy regarding our military is necessary in order to alleviate the poverty that is created by these global conflicts. Hopefully, this will be the silver lining in our current financial crisis. Even in Afghanistan, the people see hunger as a bigger problem than the Taliban. We need to focus on these issues rather than losing ourselves in politics.
20/11/10 8:44am - Posted By I Disagree - Reply to this comment
I disagree with you 'Upset Republican.' I am an Independent and have seen how the Global Poverty Project has posted many articles that independently comment on the major political parties policies.

I am from the UK and have seen the GPP report on both Labour and Conservative Party policy positively and negatively.

Just because GPP notes the difference between major party policies in the US doesn't make it partisan! It is the GPP's job to note the difference between the parties and ask the hard questions.

Get real!
20/11/10 5:22pm - Posted By Sarah Damsky - Reply to this comment
Hello, "Upset Republican" and "I Agree." Global Poverty Project is a non-partisan organization and supports the efforts of all major political parties that seek to adopt policies that serve to alleviate poverty. I would like to point out that I did not only use material from the Huffington Post, but also the New York Times, a very reputable source. I did not mean to be bias; in actuality, I searched for counterarguments and differing opinions on the issues yet was unable to find such. I welcome additional information and research that you may have on these important issues. As I said before, GPP is not associated with either party but believes that the importance of ending extreme poverty should be a bipartisan issue in order to bring about the desired change we hope to see. GPP does support conservative parties that adopt these policies, as seen in the following articles: http://www.globalpovertyproject.com/blog/view/255 and http://www.globalpovertyproject.com/blogs/view/236.
Thank you, Sarah Damsky--GPP Intern

Add Comment

Your Name:

Your Email (Not Displayed):

Please enter the code in the image into the box

Code:


Can't read the image? Reload