A quick tip:
The recent freeze on USAID funding is a disaster that threatens the lives of countless individuals who rely on essential services like food and healthcare.
While USAID has faced many controversies and there's a pressing need for systemic change, ending its support in this abrupt manner results in tremendous unnecessary suffering, deaths and money wasted.
Even though there have been legal victories against Trump’s orders, it is unclear if the Trump administration will comply with those rulings and even if, it is unclear how much of the urgently needed money will flow again. (see https://www.devex.com/news/devex-newswire-judge-insists-trump-lift-the-aid-freeze-after-failing-to-do-so-109457)
Donate now to effective local organizations that were previously funded by USAID. By doing so, we can help mitigate the worst immediate consequences of the aid freeze. An initiative has emerged to facilitate this: The Rapid Response Fund: https://www.founderspledge.com/funds/rapid-response-fund.
The fund is run by the EA organization Founders Pledge. They offer you the opportunity to donate to impactful organizations that need financing due to the aid freeze (see their site for their selection criteria and process).
Donations to these organizations can have an extraordinary impact due to this special situation, so please donate now! Also, share and spread the word so that we can collectively alleviate the worst immediate consequences of the aid freeze and achieve structural changes.
Another option to help in this situation is to donate to the Foreign Aid Bridge Fund https://www.foreignaidbridgefund.org/ run by Unlock Aid (https://www.unlockaid.org/), a coalition of social enterprises, universities, multinationals, and philanthropies.
What do you think about the funds and other possible interventions to mitigate immediate effects? Do you see any?
Further Reading:
@Sanjay@Dorothy M. @Yelnats T.J. @Arturo Macias @Mihkel Viires 🔹 @Frank_R@Guy Raveh @Ian Turner @Xing Shi Cai @Matrice Jacobine @SiebeRozendal @Flo @TomDrake@River@ScienceMon🔸
Why on earth are people downvoting this post?
Figuring out how to respond to the USAID freeze (and then doing it) is probably the most important question in global health and development right now. That there has been virtually no discussion on the forum so far has frankly been quite shocking to me.
Have a fat upvote, wishing you the best of luck
I have neither upvoted nor downvoted this post.
I suspect that the downvoting is because the post assumes this is a good donation target rather than making the argument for it (even a paragraph or two would likely make a difference). Some folks may feel that it's bad for the community for posts like this to be at +100, even if they agree with the concrete message, as it undermines the norm of EA forum posts containing high-quality reasoning, as opposed to other appeals.
Unfortunately there's just not so much of a global health vibe here at the moment, things seem to have swung heavily towards animal welfare and AI. I made a few comments on various threads about the USAID freeze but got very little engagement so gave up.
I disagree with the implication that those focused on other cause areas would actively downvote a post, rather than just not engage. I haven't seen evidence of people downvoting posts for focusing on other cause areas and I worry it spreads undue animosity to imply otherwise.
I won't claim it is sufficient to the urgency of the current funding cuts, but there have been many posts, quick takes, and comments in the past few weeks about this issue, including one four days ago already announcing The Rapid Response Fund with 90 upvotes at time of writing.
Oh my apologies I don't mean downvoting sorry just engagement in general. The raid response fund has 90 upvotes yes but zero replies.
That makes sense! My best guess is that this is an evolving situation many in the community are paying attention to but that those more in the weeds are part of larger, non-EA-specific discussion channels, given the scope of the entities involved and the larger global response. But I could be off the mark here. I base this largely on my own experience following this closely but not particularly having anything to say on e.g. the Forum about it.
I agree in this USAID case there are probably larger non EA specific discussion channels, although it would be nice if they're was more public discourse here too - I suspect if this had happened 18 months ago there would have been more of a buzz on the forum about it.
I'm not sure there is another big forum outside of here in general though which hosts high quality active global health EA bent discussions, unless I'm missing something.
Assuming there's effective political stuff to be done with respect to the USAID situation (which is uncertain to me), it's plausible that any hint of EA involvement would be affirmatively counterproductive. Better to have more politically popular entities -- and entities not predominately funded by a guy who gave megabucks to the current officeholder's rivals -- in the lead for this one. If, for instance, EAs wanted to funnel money to any such entities, I suspect it would be savvy to do so quietly rather than talking about it on-Forum. It's possible that is playing a role in the lack of discussion here, although I too suspect this would have gotten more attention ~18 months ago.
Do you have any reason to think, or evidence, that the claimed downvoting occurred?
that when I wrote the comment, the post was at -4 upvotes!
Mathias can you make comments on all of my posts? Hahaha
I assume they saw it at low karma. The first internet archive snapshot of this page had it at -4 karma.