|
Now, however, both the White House and Republicans in the U.S. Congress are arguing that the Bush bureaucracy is not ready to deliver the highly publicized promise of funds. Because the bureaucracy "is not ready, dying patients must wait," complains the Times editorial. "The Senate is scheduled to vote soon on an appropriations bill that contains $2 billion for the AIDS initiative - only $500 million more than this year's spending. The House has approved even less. This is the White House's doing. It is twisting arms to get Congress to cut its own program. The House and Senate had authorized $3 billion for next year," says the editorial. Editorialists at the Times characterize George W. Bush's undercutting of his much "trumpeted compassion" as "a habit with the president because of his devotion to tax cuts for the wealthy." The office of the AIDS coordinator, the White House argues, can't be expected to spend any money wisely as long as it remains unready. The Times editorial calls this excuse "nonsense." It says: "The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is besieged with excellent vetted proposals from African nations desperate to fight AIDS. Multiple billions could effectively be spent on AIDS prevention and treatment and help for orphans." The Global Fund, unfortunately, is lacking the needed funds to help. The Times advises the Bush Administration, if it finds it so difficult to overcome its distaste for the Fund, to provide direct financing for well-thought out proposals from the African nations. Calling into question motives behind the highly publicized visits to Africa by U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tennessee) and of George W. Bush-visits in which they hugged orphans and called upon the dying -the Times cautions: "If they break America's promise on AIDS, they will be cynically using suffering Africans as nothing more than a photo opportunity." |
|
George W. Bush touts his AIDS assistance program for Africa, but the New York Times criticized the program's structure