In the wake of President Trump's USAID freeze, the left has been armed with all the pain that is happening overseas as a result of cutting funds. There have even been complaints about the impact on US farms that send food abroad.
“We've seen more noise on left-wing Twitter and Instagram about Trump's moves against USAID actually hit small farms and crashed into mid-range farms and American businesses,” he said. says Christopher Bedford, senior political editor at Blaze News and Washington correspondent.
Is it true that American farms and recipients of the food they produce suffer as a result of Trump's USAID freeze?
To answer this question, Christopher speaks to his wife, Sarah Bedford. This is an expert in USAID history.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouklckmgjka
According to Sarah, on paper, these food programs such as food for peace are “[addressing] Food insecurity in poor countries. “This said it burns the leftist narrative that “Trump's move against USAID hurts this hungry people who really need this help.”
But the reality is that “these programs won't work if they intend to provide food aid to those who need it the most in the most efficient way possible,” she says. .
“They actually say that if USAID enters these local economies, buys local food aid from local producers and stimulates the economy they are trying to help, then they should not be. You're going to sacrifice a lot of money,” she explains. This localized aid also exempts the US from “shipping” and “expensive American crops” property.
Sarah points to the 2010 earthquake in Haiti as an example of USAID.[suppresses] Local market. ”
“Haiti's economic recovery was even more difficult,” she says, as USAID “threw away surplus American crops.”
However, when it comes to natural disasters, this is not just a case. Many USAID programs actually hinder general economic development. The goal is to remove American crops. do not have It helps stimulate and grow the economy of poor countries.
In fact, “since the US began dumping surplus produce overseas, food insecurity in some parts of the world has been worsening,” says Sarah. He “is completely undercut by free American rice.”
Moreover, instead of donating surplus crops, the US government is currently purchasing them “at a price that is arbitrary and useful for special benefits in the agricultural sector.”
The fact of the matter is that “economic development in some of these critical agricultural economies is not these goals.” [USAID] Programme,” says Sarah.
Sarah says that's true when it comes to claims that Trump's USAID Freeze is hurting America's big agriculture.
“The USAID program is excellent price support for these companies, many of which already enjoy USDA subsidies. Therefore, if this USAID program is intended to serve as an agricultural subsidy, That's great, but it's not. It's supposed to be efficient in providing food aid,” she says.
In addition to that, USAID states that “software to increase the US influence where Russia or China, or other hostile countries, can influence these developing countries, should the US withdraw from its existence. There is also a way to pedal power, Sarah adds, pointing out that “is that an effective use of the US taxpayer dollar?” is controversial.
“Donald Trump ran and won his promise to stop spending taxpayer money and chase this kind of ambiguous foreign policy goal. [with USAID] It coincides with that promise and the promise to cut government spending,” she says.
See the clip above for more information.
Want more from “Blaze News Tonight”?
To enjoy more provocative opinions, expert analysis, and breaking stories you won't see anywhere else. Subscribe to BlazetV – A network of voices of the largest multi-platform network that loves America, defends the Constitution and lives America's dreams.
