Defend foreign aid

The prospect of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee being led by foreign aid's most vehement foe is bad enough. But the incoming committee chairman, Jesse Helms, is not the most serious problem confronting the Agency for International Development (AID). In January, foreign assistance must navigate a congressional gauntlet consisting of a House and Senate firmly in the grip of a skeptical, conservative Republican majority. That is the real challenge to the U.S. foreign aid program.

There is a strong case for continuing to help the developing world, if the Clinton administration wants to spend the political chits to make it. Despite stories of waste and fraud, foreign aid is not an irresponsible giveaway program. On balance it has made sense on economic, humanitarian, security and fiscal grounds. Contrary to popular belief, only one-half of the total U.S. budget is spent by AID. In fact, the administration is currently operating on the lowest budget in the history of foreign aid.

Since its inception, foreign aid has managed to survive despite unrelenting attacks from the isolationist wings in both parties. That is because the basic argument for bipartisan aid support is as sound today as it was when the effort was launched almost 50 years ago by Harry Truman. Presidents from John Kennedy to Ronald Reagan, regardless of their views upon entering office, have ended up convinced that foreign aid, even on a limited scale, is an indispensable tool of foreign policy.

-- The Washington Post