Humanitarian aid 'stolen' from U.S. taxpayers should be spent on domestic health issues

In this New American opinion piece, Beverly Eakman, an author and former editor-in-chief of NASA's newspaper in Houston, writes of humanitarian aid, "With the U.S. debt having surpassed 100 percent of gross domestic product August 3, to $14.58 trillion, it's crudely entertaining to see how multimillionaire lawmakers in Congress and administrations both past and present find 'compassionate' ways to spend ever-more of taxpayers' money," asserting that "such expenditure is not specifically sanctioned by American taxpayers, and therefore constitutes theft by the U.S. government for what the State Department probably hopes will buy international good will."

She writes that while foreign aid programs such as PEPFAR spend money to detect and treat cancers among women in the developing world, middle class cancer patients in the U.S. are unable to attain financial assistance to treat cancer, "while those who pay little or no taxes and subsist on welfare as a way of life, are eligible for financial aid." She asks, "So, why exactly are we spending our 'compassionate' tax dollars in the service of fighting women's cancers in developing countries? Doesn't compassion begin at home?" Eakman concludes, "Given that there is no mandate requiring that the source of this largesse include any identifying insignia, such as a depiction of the American flag placed upon, or among, the various screening technologies, medications and treatments, by the time it gets to the targeted recipients, it's a good bet the developing world's needy, ailing women won't even be aware that their aid comes to them 'thanks to an effort by the American people'" (9/26).