[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 4]
[House]
[Page 5230]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                EMERGENCY PLAN FOR AIDS RELIEF IN AFRICA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. McCotter). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, AIDS activists and interesting, caring 
legislators and others have been working on this AIDS issue for the 
past 20 years. President Bush did not get active on this issue over the 
past 2 years, but he has come to the table now to talk about emergency 
plan for AIDS relief in Africa. And according to the administration, 
this proposal will provide $15 billion for global HIV/AIDS programs 
over the next 5 years, including $10 billion in brand new money.
  Now, we have to take a very close look at this here proposal. A 
closer look at the President's budget for fiscal year 2004 indicates 
that it may not be a pure $15 billion that will be spent over the next 
5 years.
  One would think that $15 billion over 5 years would amount to $3 
billion per year. However, the administration's budget for global AIDS 
programs for fiscal year 2004 is only $2 billion. An increase of just 
half a billion over the fiscal year 2003 level. Administration 
officials have indicated that they plan to phase in the proposed 
funding over the next 5 years. Phasing in funds is particularly 
troublesome in the case of the AIDS epidemic. Every year, another 3 
million people die of AIDS, another 5 million become infected with HIV. 
How many people will we have to have die before we have an emergency 
plan, a real emergency plan that is triggered immediately?
  The President promised that his proposed emergency plan for AIDS 
relief would provide $10 billion in new money for global AIDS programs. 
When we look at this and upon close attention, it becomes very clear 
that the administration is transferring money from other development 
assistance accounts in order to fund this new proposal. The President's 
budget for fiscal year 2004 severely underfunds one of the Federal 
government's most important development assistance accounts, the Child 
Survival and Health Account.
  Funding for this account was cut by $470 million, relative to the 
fiscal year 2003 level. Indeed, when you combine the President's 
proposed increase of half a billion dollars for global AIDS programs 
with his proposed cuts of almost half a billion dollars in the Child 
Survival and Health Account, the total funding for the two programs is 
virtually identical to fiscal year 2000 funding. Cutting funds for 
Child Survival and Health in order to fund AIDS relief is no way to 
improve global health.
  Another problem with the proposal in this plan for AIDS relief is 
that it virtually eliminates funding for the global fund to fight AIDS, 
tuberculosis and malaria. The global fund encourages developing 
countries to combine the efforts of government agencies, 
nongovernmental organizations and civil society into a comprehensive 
strategy to fight epidemics in a manner appropriate for local needs and 
conditions. The global fund also allows donors to pool their resources 
so that developing countries do not have to deal with as many funding 
agencies.
  Now, the President's proposal of $15 billion over 5 years for global 
AIDS program includes only $1 billion for the Global Fund. The 
President's budget provides only $200 million for the global fund in 
fiscal year 2004 and presumably $200 million per year over the next 5 
years.
  This will drastically reduce the Global Fund's activities which 
received $400 million from the United States this year alone. The 
President is apparently determined to ensure that his $15 billion 
emergency plan for AIDS relief will be implemented almost exclusively 
by the United States government agencies, Jeffrey Sacks, the Chairman 
of the World Health Organization's Commission on Macroeconomics and 
Health evaluated the President's proposal and concluded, ``The U.S., as 
it is wont these days, has decided to go it alone.'' AIDS is a global 
epidemic. It deserves a global response, not a unilateral one.
  The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton) just 
mentioned the global gag rule and the President is complicating AIDS 
treatments and prevention even further by attempting to apply the 
Mexico City policy to global AIDS programs. The Mexico City policy 
known as the Global Gag Rule prohibits U.S. funding of international 
organizations that perform abortions or provide abortion referrals or 
counseling with their own money.
  In the past the Mexico City policy has been used to restrict the use 
of family planning funds. It has never ever been applied to HIV funds 
and it is unwise for the President to politicize this. Under the 
administration's new proposed policy, only organizations that do not 
offer abortion-related services or those that offer abortion-related 
services, separate from HIV/AIDS services, would be eligible for AIDS 
funds.
  This would be an inefficient and unrealistic expectation for most 
clinics, organizations operating in developing countries.
  I will quickly say it is time for our President to really understand 
all of the work that all of us have put into this issue and get with 
the strategy and the plan that is developed by activists and people 
worldwide and do some real work in helping to deal with this pandemic.

                          ____________________