RESOLVED: The United States federal government should substantially increase its public health assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa

The topic of foreign aid is always controversial. The public divides over whether it thinks the U.S. government gives too much or too little aid to under-developed nations. At a time when massive U.S. funding must go toward its number one priority – the war on terror – considerable attention and money is still devoted to the needs of developing countries. The discussion becomes even more convoluted when concerns over unstable foreign governments, and criticisms of U.S. efforts by the international community, are raised.

One of the least developed regions in the world is Sub-Saharan Africa. The area has been hit hardest by health concerns such as malaria and the AIDS epidemic. Nearly 60% of all persons infected with HIV/AIDS live in Sub-Saharan Africa and the number of children orphaned as a result of AIDS is expected to reach 20 million by 2010. There can be no doubt that Sub-Saharan Africa needs the help of the international community to help combat long-term health and welfare problems, poverty and malnutrition. The debate about foreign aid consists of what role should the United States play, how much it should help, and what can and should be done to assist nations in need?

As one of the most economically developed countries in the world, the United States – in both government and privately-financed aid -- shoulders much of the burden of financial support given to under-developed countries. Whether you are positioned for or against increased U.S. aid to Sub-Saharan Africa, this compilation of articles will give you a foundation of resources to formulate your arguments.