Need Help with Argument. How much of the 15 million we

[MaryH]

promised for AIDS have we actually paid? Remember when Bush made that promise while at conference in Africa. Does anyone know where I can find that info?

[trotsky]

1. He promised $15 Billion with a B.

I think he's only allocated $100 million, and of that I couldn't tell you how much has actually been given.

[mcscajun]

2. Actually, it was $5 Billion (corrected on Edit)

that he announced in his State of the Union. I don't recall the conference you mention.

But this quote comes from today's editorial in the NY Times:
"Bush announced his Millennium Challenge account to give African countries development assistance of up to $5 billion a year, but the account has yet to disperse a single dollar."

On edit: maybe I'm confusing this amount with the AIDS amount. There are so many pledges that Bush hasn't honored, it's hard to keep up, ya' know.

Aha! Further research turned up the following link: http://www.avert.org/pepfar.htm

[MaryH]

3. 15 billion? Whoa!

I am wondering if part of the reason a lot hasn't been paid is this government's reluctance to give aid to anyone who mentions the words condom, birth control or abortion. Only people who say "abstinence" over and over can have money.

[euler]

6. It was 15 Billion n/t

[NMDemDist2]

4. this may help.....

Earlier, at the beginning of the assembly in Geneva, the U.S. announced an "expedited" procedure under which generic as well as patented fixed dose combinations could be approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in "as little as two or six weeks" (http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2004pres/20040516.html). The new move followed intense pressure for the U.S. to adopt international best practice and allow purchase of generic drugs under President Bush's AIDS plan. It was cautiously welcomed by international agencies for its potential to allow such purchase, but fell far short of activist demands that the U.S. join in supporting international standards without further delay. It is unclear when and if generic companies will be able to satisfy the FDA requirements (http://www.fda.gov/oc/initiatives/hiv).

There will still be more delay, therefore, in the use of U.S. funds for the least expensive and most effective anti-HIV drugs. Funding for international initiatives still falls far short of what will be needed. However, the WHO framework is now in place, and funding streams are available for such treatment from the Global Fund, the World Bank, the Clinton Foundation, and others. Bureaucratic and practical obstacles to implementation, at national as well as international levels, are now probably even more important than policy issues in determining how many people will actually get treatment.

http://www.africafocus.org/docs04/acc0405.php

[justa]

5. I found where * was trying to limit US donations to $200 million.

This is a July 2003 article but it shows the dedication the Shrub had after he received all the political mileage he could.

http://www.africaaction.org/docs03/gf0307.htm

[Robbien]

11. Yes, that is the Global Fund for Aids

Last year Bush demanded we only put into the fund $200 million, but the Congress passed $547 million. This year Bush again wants to only put in $200 million. Wonder if the Congress will have any luck in increasing the amount again this year.

The Global Fund for Aids is close to going bankrupt by all this "support".

[Robbien]

7. The $15 Billion was pledged over a five year term, or $3 Billion a year

There are a ton of caveats which go along with this "gift". Znet has the best description of what the problems are.

here:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=13&ItemID=2964

[nascarblue]

8. ZERO!! Heres the link

Making things worse, we often pledge more money than we actually deliver. Victims of the earthquake in Bam, Iran, a year ago are still living in tents because aid, including ours, has not materialized in the amounts pledged. And back in 2002, Mr. Bush announced his Millennium Challenge account to give African countries development assistance of up to $5 billion a year, but the account has yet to disperse a single dollar.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/30/opinion/30thu2.html?oref=login&oref=login

[K-W]

9. We as a nation will have less than zero credibility

by the time this administration is over.

[nascarblue]

10. Zero to Africa and we only have 6 RED CROSS people in tsunami land!

That's right, I just watched an interview with the American Red Cross rep on MSNBC about half an hour ago. And Ive heard two interviews out of Sri Lanka and Indonesia and both said no US aid workers are there yet. They said there's an army of reporters, but NO AID WORKErs yet! What is this, the 5th day?

Here's the rest of that NY Times Editorial...

President Bush finally roused himself yesterday from his vacation in Crawford, Tex., to telephone his sympathy to the leaders of India, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia, and to speak publicly about the devastation of Sunday's tsunamis in Asia. He also hurried to put as much distance as possible between himself and America's initial measly aid offer of $15 million, and he took issue with an earlier statement by the United Nations' emergency relief coordinator, Jan Egeland, who had called the overall aid efforts by rich Western nations "stingy." "The person who made that statement was very misguided and ill informed," the president said.

We beg to differ. Mr. Egeland was right on target. We hope Secretary of State Colin Powell was privately embarrassed when, two days into a catastrophic disaster that hit 12 of the world's poorer countries and will cost billions of dollars to meliorate, he held a press conference to say that America, the world's richest nation, would contribute $15 million. That's less than half of what Republicans plan to spend on the Bush inaugural festivities.

The American aid figure for the current disaster is now $35 million, and we applaud Mr. Bush's turnaround. But $35 million remains a miserly drop in the bucket, and is in keeping with the pitiful amount of the United States budget that we allocate for nonmilitary foreign aid. According to a poll, most Americans believe the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries; it actually spends well under a quarter of 1 percent.

Bush administration officials help create that perception gap. Fuming at the charge of stinginess, Mr. Powell pointed to disaster relief and said the United States "has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world." But for development aid, America gave $16.2 billion in 2003; the European Union gave $37.1 billion. In 2002, those numbers were $13.2 billion for America, and $29.9 billion for Europe.

Making things worse, we often pledge more money than we actually deliver. Victims of the earthquake in Bam, Iran, a year ago are still living in tents because aid, including ours, has not materialized in the amounts pledged. And back in 2002, Mr. Bush announced his Millennium Challenge account to give African countries development assistance of up to $5 billion a year, but the account has yet to disperse a single dollar.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/30/opinion/30thu2.html?oref=login&oref=login

[MaryH]

13. THANKS

I have found some information now. I will go out and print the NY Times article.

[EC]

12. It was 15 billion

which was withdrawn because of lack of absinance programs in force...it's to be reviewed

on edit: here's some links and articles:

10 Reasons why the U.S. should commit $15 billion to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa NOW
February 27, 2004

by Africa Action & TransAfrica Forum

Africa Action and TransAfrica Forum believe that current debates among U.S. policy-makers and advocacy groups about “appropriate” funding levels to fight AIDS in Africa are misplaced, and fail to represent the urgency of the crisis.

In his 2003 State of the Union address, President Bush promised $15 billion to meet the “severe and urgent crisis” of HIV/AIDS in Africa & the Caribbean. But instead of making this “emergency” money available immediately, the President proposed to wait one year and then spread it out over another five years (2004 – 2008), starting with minor increases in funding and projecting gradual increases in out years. In 2003, while the U.S. stalled, some two and a half million Africans died of AIDS.

The release of the “U.S. Five-Year Global HIV/AIDS Strategy” on February 23, 2003 comes 13 months after the President’s promise, and nearly half a year after the new U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator took office. It aspires to turn the tide of the global pandemic, but offers such low funding levels as to make this impossible. It also centers on the creation of a new bureaucracy that competes with and undermines the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis & Malaria.

We believe that the U.S. should provide at least $15 billion NOW to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa. The need is clear, as more than 6,000 Africans are dying of AIDS every day. And there are many ways in which this money can effectively be put to use immediately to save lives and prevent the further spread of the pandemic. We are concerned that the U.S.’ failure to provide the resources needed to support African efforts to defeat HIV/AIDS is evidence that racism is a determinant in U.S. foreign policy, and that a double standard exists that devalues Black lives. As Peter Piot, head of UNAIDS, has said of the AIDS pandemic’s concentration in Africa, “If this would have happened…with white people, the reaction would be different.”

http://www.africaaction.org/newsroom/index.php?op=read&documentid=451&type=14



France Accuses Bush of Blackmailing Poverty-Stricken, AIDS-Ridden Nations
13-Jul-04
AIDS
USA Today: "France accused the United States on Tuesday of pressuring developing countries to give up their right to make cheap generic HIV drugs in return for free-trade agreements -- with President Jacques Chirac calling the tactic 'tantamount to blackmail.' A U.S. official dismissed the French allegation as 'nonsense,' while delegates to the International AIDS Conference lamented figures showing only about 7% of the 6 million people in poor countries who need antiretroviral treatment are getting it. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said 'We hear a lot about weapons of mass destruction, we hear a lot about terrorism. And we are worried about weapons of mass destruction because of the potential to kill thousands. Here we have an epidemic that is killing millions. What is the response?' "


Bush's Abstinence Only AIDS Scheme Endangers the Lives of Millions
11-Jul-04
AIDS
The AIDS epidemic is intensifying, threatening a future global nightmare of epic proportions. So what is the Idiot Bush's solution? A policy based predominantly on abstinence only! How is abstinence supposed to help women in Africa and other countries whose husbands are infected? These women, once infected, may then transmit the disease to their unfborn children. It is sheer murderous insanity. Members of the international community attending this week's AIDS conference have nothing good to say about Bush's scheme. Says Poul Nielson, the EU's outspoken Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, Bush is 'preaching one line only and denying people's rights by trying to push them into abstinence. It will weaken the battle against Aids, and the unfortunate reality is that it will directly endanger the lives of millions of women."




Bush Promised $15 Billion to Fight Aids, But Instead Has Used AIDS Crisis to Help Drug Barons
28-Mar-04
AIDS
Donald G. McNeil, Jr. writes: "Three years after the United Nations declared a worldwide offensive against AIDS and 14 months after Bush promised $15 billion for AIDS treatment in poor countries, shortages of money and battles over patents have kept anti-retroviral drugs from reaching more than 90 percent of the poor people who need them." Out of 6 million people in need of treatment, only 300,000 are receiving it, "While Bush promised in his 2003 State of the Union address to spend $15 billion over five years on AIDS in Africa and the Caribbean, his budget requests have fallen far short of that goal. For the most recent donation to the Global Fund, he requested only $200 million, although Congress authorized $550 million." Just as reprehensible: "Advocates of cheap drugs say the Bush administration has yielded to pressure from the pharmaceutical lobby to find ways to reject the generics."




American Medical Students Mobilize Against Bush's Worthless AIDS Program
15-Mar-04
AIDS
The American Medical Students Assoc. says, "On a global scale, HIV/AIDS has infected 42 million, killed 25 million and orphaned 14 million children and the number of infected increases by 2 every 30 seconds. In the face of this crisis, Bush has decided to respond with broken promises and harmful trade policies. 'The current Administration has underfunded important multilateral initiatives such as the global fund and is pushing trade agreements which will dramatically restrict access to life-saving generic medications for people living with HIV in developing nations. In the U.S., Bush has flat- funded programs such as the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), resulting in patients on waiting lists - and dying on waiting lists,' states Lauren Oshman, M.D., M.P.H., AMSA National President."



:cry:
As with Reagan, Bush is ignoring the real problem, because in his mind I believe he believes these people deserve to die, since they have "sinned" and are being punished. They close their eyes to the real problem and really doesn't see how it relates to terrorism and poverty.

Here's the whole ball of wax, his promises and misleads:

http://archive.democrats.com/preview.cfm?term=AIDS

[nascarblue]

14. SO? What kind of BS is that?

Bush stole 30 billion in money and gold from Iraq and Iraq accounts... I could make a list that would take an hour. The bottom line is Africa hasn't gotten a single dollar.