The Conversation: How Trump’s global health budget endangers Americans
Gerald W. Parker, Andrew Natsios, and Christine Crudo Blackburn, all with the Scowcroft Institute for International Affairs at the Bush School of Government and Public Service and Texas A&M University

“…The … reduction in [global health] funds that President Donald Trump seeks would … devastate our already underequipped pandemic prevention and response system. In turn, that would undercut our ability to respond to future outbreaks. We recommended … that the U.S. centralize its leadership on biodefense — that is, its response to biological threats from naturally occurring emerging and reemerging infectious diseases, accidental releases, or attacks. In addition, local authorities and community leaders should do more to counter the anti-vaccine movement, and the federal government should redouble its efforts to strengthen public health institutions in developing countries. … [T]he U.S. should spend more — not less — on global health security and basic public health in low-income countries. … To be sure, Trump’s proposed budget, does call for a new, emergency response fund to battle disease outbreaks. While necessary, that innovation would not bridge the gap created by the lack of a national biodefense strategy. … Shortchanging efforts to prevent pandemics will increase their threat worldwide. It will also make Americans less safe no matter where those outbreaks start” (6/6).