SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
us department of state
'Abhorrent. Evil. Indefensible.' Trump Cutting Vaccine Alliance Funds Could Kill 1.2 Million Children Worldwide
"This isn't fiscal responsibility. It's a political decision to let preventable diseases spread—to ignore science, lend legitimacy to anti-vaccine extremism, and dismantle the infrastructure that protects us all."
Mar 26, 2025
Public health experts and other critics on Wednesday condemned the Trump administration's decision to cut off funding to the global vaccine alliance Gavi, which the organization estimates could result in the deaths of over 1 million children.
"Abhorrent. Evil. Indefensible," Atlantic staff writer Clint Smith said on social media in response to exclusive reporting from The New York Times, which obtained documents including a 281-page spreadsheet that "the skeletal remains" of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) sent to Congress on Monday.
The leaked materials detail 898 awards that the Trump administration plans to continue and 5,341 it intends to end. A spokesperson for the U.S. State Department, which runs the gutted USAID, confirmed the list is accurate and said that "each award terminated was reviewed individually for alignment with agency and administration priorities."
The United States contributes 13% of Gavi's budget and the terminated grant was worth $2.6 billion through 2030, according to the Times. Citing the alliance, the newspaper noted that cutting off U.S. funds "may mean 75 million children do not receive routine vaccinations in the next five years, with more than 1.2 million children dying as a result."
"The administration's attempt to unilaterally walk away from its Gavi commitment raises serious legal questions and should be challenged."
Responding to the Trump administration's move in a social media thread on Wednesday, Gavi said that U.S. support for the alliance "is vital" and with it, "we can save over 8 million lives over the next five years and give millions of children a better chance at a healthy, prosperous future."
"But investing in Gavi brings other benefits for our world and the American people. Here's why: By maintaining global stockpiles of vaccines against deadly diseases like Ebola, mpox, and yellow fever, we help keep America safe. These diseases do not respect borders, they can cross continents in hours and cost billions of dollars," Gavi continued.
The alliance explained that "aside from national security, investing in Gavi means smart economics too. Every dollar we invest in lower income countries generates a return of $54. This helps countries develop and communities thrive, taking away pressure to migrate in search of a better life elsewhere."
"The countries Gavi supports, too, see the benefit in our model: Every year they pay more towards the cost of their own immunisation program, bringing forward the day when they transition from our support completely," the group noted. "Our goal is to ultimately put ourselves out of business."
"For 25 years, the USA and Gavi have had the strongest of partnerships," the alliance concluded. "Without its help, we could not have halved child mortality, saved 18 million lives or helped 19 countries transition from our support (some becoming donors themselves). We hope this partnership can continue."
Many other opponents of the decision also weighed in on social media. Eric Reinhart, a political anthropologist, social psychiatrist, and psychoanalytic clinician in the United States, said, "A sick country insists on a sick world."
Dr. Heather Berlin, an American neuroscientist and clinical psychologist, sarcastically said: "Oh yes, this will surely end well. Good thing the U.S. has an invisible shield around it to protect us from 'foreign' diseases."
Some Times readers also praised the reporting. Dr. Jonathan Marro—a pediatric oncologist, bioethicist, health services researcher, and educator in Massachusetts—called the article "excellent but appalling," while Patrick Gaspard, a distinguished senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and its action fund, said that it was "crushing to read this important story."
The newspaper noted that "the memo to Congress presents the plan for foreign assistance as a unilateral decision. However because spending on individual health programs such as HIV or vaccination is congressionally allocated, it is not clear that the administration has legal power to end those programs. This issue is currently being litigated in multiple court challenges."
Liza Barrie, Public Citizen's campaign director for global vaccines access, also highlighted that point in a Wednesday statement. She said that "the Trump administration's decision to end U.S. funding for Gavi will cost more than a million children's lives, make America less secure. It abandons 25 years of bipartisan commitment to global immunization and undermines the very systems that help prevent deadly outbreaks from reaching our own doorsteps."
"Vaccines are the most cost-effective public health tool ever developed," Barrie continued. "This isn't fiscal responsibility. It's a political decision to let preventable diseases spread—to ignore science, lend legitimacy to anti-vaccine extremism, and dismantle the infrastructure that protects us all. In their shocking incompetence, the Trump administration will do it all without saving more than a rounding error in the budget, if that."
"Congress has authority over foreign assistance funding," she stressed. "The administration's attempt to unilaterally walk away from its Gavi commitment raises serious legal questions and should be challenged. Lawmakers must stand up for the rule of law, and for the belief that the value of a child’s life is not determined by geography."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Morally Bankrupt' Biden Blasted for $8 Billion More in Arms to Israel Amid Gaza Genocide
"The Biden administration is ending its tenure as it has acted throughout it," said A New Policy co-founder Josh Paul, "with a complete disregard for Palestinian humanity, American laws, and American interests."
Jan 06, 2025
Human rights advocates in the United States and around the world on Monday condemned outgoing U.S. President Joe Biden for continuing to fuel Israel's genocidal assault on the Gaza Strip with a pending $8 billion weapons package.
Since
Axoisrevealed late Friday that his administration had notified Congress of the deal, Biden has faced a fresh flood of outrage, with critics calling the president "morally bankrupt" and his decision to keep arming Israel "willful madness."
"Too many kids still alive in Gaza for Joe Biden's liking," Yousef Munayyer, a Palestinian American political analyst,
said on social media. "This is an administration of cowards and criminals and will go down as a historic worst."
Two men who resigned from the Biden administration over U.S. support for Israel's assault on Gaza—which has
killed at least 45,854 Palestinians and led to a genocide case at the International Court of Justice—shared sharp critiques on Monday.
"The Biden administration is ending its tenure as it has acted throughout it," said ex-U.S. State Department official Josh Paul, "with a complete disregard for Palestinian humanity, American laws, and American interests."
"The precedent set by the Biden administration will surely haunt our nation for many years to come."
Paul and former Education Department official Tariq Habash launched the lobbying group A New Policy in October. Habash also took aim at Biden's new effort to arm Israel with missiles for fighter jets and attack helicopters, 155 mm artillery shells, small-diameter bombs, 50-pound warheads, bomb fuzes, and kits used to convert "dumb bombs" into precision-guided munitions.
"Americans continue to struggle here at home, so the notion that the Biden administration would push another $8 billion in weapons to Israel on the backs of American [taxpayers] demonstrates how unmoored this administration has become from its values and its commitments to the American people," said Habash. "The precedent set by the Biden administration will surely haunt our nation for many years to come."
Win Without War executive director Sara Haghdoosti also denounced the effort, saying in a Monday statement that "these weapon sales won't bring hostages home and don't get us closer to a viable long-term solution that ensures Israelis and Palestinians can live with dignity without the threat of violence."
"Many of the types of weapons reported to be part of this $8 billion package have been used—or are likely to be used—to kill and wound Palestinian civilians in Gaza, in a war that drags on because the president and his advisers refused to exercise real leverage to end it," she noted. "This new tranche of weapons will surely be used to the same horrific ends."
Haghdoosti highlighted that "President Biden and his senior advisers continue skirting U.S. laws that should prohibit the sale of deadly weapons while Israeli officials restrict humanitarian aid and seek to make Gaza uninhabitable."
Despite attempts by progressives in Congress such as U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to block some arms to Israel, Democratic and Republican lawmakers have repeatedly voted to send more—including with the $895 billion National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2025 that they sent to Biden's desk last month.
News of the $8 billion package comes just two weeks away from the inauguration of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump.
Paul said that "there is no need to rush these sales to completion, but it is clear President Biden and his appointees at the State Department do not have confidence in the Trump administration to follow through on their decision to rush arms to Israel with no questions asked, which is why they are pushing through these sales now."
While the current administration is clearly aiming to push the package through ahead of the looming transition of power in the United States, Trump is widely expected to serve as an ally to Israel, as he did in his first term. Haghdoosti sounded the alarm about the Republican's return to the White House with a GOP-controlled Congress.
"These latest sales mark a bleak handoff to the incoming Trump administration, whose senior nominees openly ally with far-right Israeli government ministers who plan to settle Gaza and annex the West Bank, all but guaranteeing another generation of displacement and deprivation that will undermine security for Palestinians and Israelis alike," she said.
Trump and far-right leaders in Israel—including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir—"will use these sales to advance that violent project," Haghdoosti added. "It is an utter shame that President Biden has chosen to abet it during his final days in office."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Pick for State Dept Post 'Espoused White Nationalist and Islamophobic Views'
In a 2016 anti-immigrant essay, Michael Anton wrote that "the burden is forced on Americans to prove that Muhammed is a terrorist or Jose is a criminal, and if we can't, we must let them in."
Dec 23, 2024
Further fueling fears of what the incoming Trump administration will mean for immigrants and people of color, a watchdog group on Monday highlighted various essays by Michael Anton, who is slated to take on a key role at the U.S. Department of State.
U.S. President-elect Donald Trump announced earlier this month that Anton would become director of policy planning at the State Department. Trump said that he previously "served me loyally and effectively" as a National Security Council spokesperson during the Republican's first term and "spent the last eight years explaining what an America First foreign policy truly means."
In a Monday publication first reported on by USA Today, the watchdog Accountable.US detailed how "Anton has espoused white
nationalistic and Islamophobic views and has written numerous conspiracy theory-laden articles about Democratic 'coup' attempts and supposed widespread voter fraud."
The group spotlighted "Toward a Sensible, Coherent Trumpism," a nearly 6,000-word essay that Anton published under the Latin pseudonym Publius Decius Mus at The Unz Review on March 10, 2016, eight months before Trump was elected to his first term. Anton's use of the pen name was first revealed in early 2017 by The Weekly Standard, a now-defunct neoconservative magazine.
In the 2016 essay, Anton wrote that "Trump's two slogans—'Make America Great Again' and 'Take Our Country Back'—point to the heart of Trumpism: 'America First,'" and "the Constitution and the social compact it enshrines are for us—the American people—and not for foreigners, immigrants (except those we choose to welcome), or anyone else."
Anton praised Trump for "his willingness—eagerness—gleefulness!—to mock the ridiculous lies we've been incessantly force-fed for the past 15 years (at least)," writing in part:
"Diversity" is not "our strength"; it's a source of weakness, tension, and disunion. America is not a "nation of immigrants"; we are originally a nation of settlers, who later chose to admit immigrants, and later still not to, and who may justly open or close our doors solely at our own discretion, without deference to forced pieties. Immigration today is not "good for the economy"; it undercuts American wages, costs Americans jobs, and reduces Americans' standard of living. Islam is not a "religion of peace"; it's a militant faith that exalts conversion by the sword and inspires thousands to acts of terror—and millions more to support and sympathize with terror.
As Common Dreams has reported since Trump's latest White House victory last month, numerous analyses have warned that the Republican's promised mass deportations will not only have devastating impacts on people but be "catastrophic" for the economy.
Anton's essays have repeatedly referenced the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In March 2016, he suggested that it was "insane" to allow Muslims to immigrate after that, writing: "Yes, of course, not all Muslims are terrorists, blah, blah, blah, etc. Even so, what good has Muslim immigration done for the United States and the American people? If we truly needed more labor—a claim that is manifestly false—what made it necessary to import any of that labor from the Muslim world?"
"From a region and a faith that is at best ambivalent about the societies that welcome them and at worst murderously hostile? This question has, until now, been ruled wholly out of bounds—illegitimate even to raise," he continued. "Immigration to the United States—by Muslims or anyone else—is presented as a civil right for foreigners: the burden is forced on Americans to prove that Muhammed is a terrorist or Jose is a criminal, and if we can't, we must let them in. Trump alone among major political figures has stood up to say this is nonsense."
Another infamous essay noted by Accountable.US cites 9/11: Using the same pen name, Anton wrote "The Flight 93 Election," published by the Claremont Review of Books on September 5, 2016, referencing the United Airlines flight that ended with a plane crash in Pennsylvania, after passengers fought the hijackers.
"2016 is the Flight 93 election: Charge the cockpit or you die," Anton argued, taking aim at Trump's Democratic challenger that year. "If you don't try, death is certain. To compound the metaphor: a Hillary Clinton presidency is Russian Roulette with a semi-auto. With Trump, at least you can spin the cylinder and take your chances."
Accountable.US also pointed to a pair of essays from 2020 and 2021 in which Anton accused Democrats of plotting a coup, peddled voter fraud conspiracy theories, and—in one of them—downplayed the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Both of those publications appeared with Anton's real name.
After his time in the first Trump administration, Anton went on to work as a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute and a lecturer and research fellow at Hillsdale College. Previously, he was a speechwriter for former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, ex-Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, and Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch.
Anton did not respond to USA Today's request for comment, but Trump transition spokesperson Dan Holler framed him as an asset to Trump's nominee for secretary of state—Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), the son of Cuban immigrants—in a statement to the newspaper.
"President Trump and Sen. Rubio are building out an all-star team to deliver on the America First agenda the country demanded," Holler said. "As director of policy planning, Michael Anton will play an important role in implementing an America First foreign policy."
Meanwhile, Accountable.US executive director Tony Carrk on Monday released a statement putting pressure on Rubio—who would typically select the candidate for that post, which does not require Senate confirmation, according to USA Today.
"Michael Anton hid behind a pseudonym to spread hate and deride diversity as a source of American weakness. But he'd surely wear his extremism on his sleeve if appointed to a top State Department post," said Carrk. "Anton's rhetoric against people he deems culturally undesirable may be music to the ears of President-elect Trump, father of the kids-in-cages policy who threatens to end birthright citizenship. But is Marco Rubio willing to stand by Anton's extremist views if he's confirmed secretary of state?"
The president-elect's other selections who have sparked alarm on the immigration front include Stephen Miller—an architect of the family separation policy from Trump's first term—for deputy chief of staff for policy and Tom Homan as "border czar."
Trump has also chosen anti-immigrant, dog-killing Republican South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem for secretary of homeland security and former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard—who has a history of being "extremely sympathetic" to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and Russian President Vladimir Putin—for director of national intelligence.
Both of those roles generally require Senate confirmation, as does the defense secretary. Trump's pick to lead the Pentagon is "Fox & Friends" co-host Pete Hegseth, a "lobbyist for war criminals" who, in his own words, "was deemed an extremist" because of his Jerusalem Cross tattoo, which led to him not joining his National Guard unit for President Joe Biden's inauguration.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular