Jewish World Review March 20, 2002 / 7 Nisan, 5762
Bush gives aid but seeks results
The problem with grant money is that it is like any other money: good for a lot of things. Hand development dollars to a dictator and he is as likely to use them to buy his niece two bedrooms overlooking the Seine as he is to train the teachers he promised his subjects. He may also use them to prop up his creepy, undemocratic regime. And it is hard to stop him, notwithstanding a thousand sit-downs and all the paper promises in the world.
This fungibility engenders another kind of waste: the waste of process. Hand development dollars to a multilateral agency and some of that money ends up subsidising not better roads in poor countries but new laptops and membership in the 100,000 Mile Club for international civil servants. No matter if the agency is true blue, cleanest of its kind: the waste still occurs, because it has a monopoly on its kind of business. Exactly how many children could be vaccinated, you have to wonder, for the price of the meeting of 54 heads of state, 300 of their cabinet members and countless tag-alongs at this week's poverty summit in balmy Monterrey?
Now along comes President George W.Bush with a proposal to give $5bn (£3.5bn) in aid to the developing world, a category of nation that, alas, is all too often led by dictators or near-despots, not to mention firebreathing fundamentalists.
America's giving mood is certainly understandable. The US wants to acknowledge that it knows you cannot bomb your way to global stability. But the challenge remains: how do you ensure that the aid does not end up in the same old pockets?
Here the White House plan has a number of promising aspects. The first is that the president has demanded accountability. He wants to monitor recipients in three areas. The first is good governance. To get money, governments have to prove they are rooting out corruption. The second is health and education. Erecting school buildings alone is insufficient; nations must show they really have taught boys and girls to read. The third is stronger free markets. Nations must prove they are honouring contracts and allowing private sector businesses to grow. All these help ensure that dollars keep their earmarks and achieve, more or less, what they are supposed to.
Even more valuable is the format the president is using to deliver aid. He would create Millennium Challenge Accounts, giving more money to countries that do better at delivering improvements - and less or none to those that waste and fail to reform. So this is a financial incentive for the dictator to democratise and go capitalist, as well as to deliver those roads, reading scores and measles vaccinations.
Another aspect of the Bush plan that offers hope is the president's decision to deliver aid through grants, not the traditional loans. This is valuable first because of the "process" problem: loans to desperately poor nations are often a fiction, since many nations are unable to pay back money lent at zero interest. Replacing loans with grants gets rid of the waste of the unending loan process. Or, as a plaintive respondent from a poor country put it on a World Bank questionnaire: "It becomes worse when the aid is a debt. The time the country is fighting to pay back the debt affects every citizen including the majority that did not benefit from the corrupt acts."
But the fungibility problem will not go away, as long as aid money still flows to heads of state. And, after all, it is quite possible for a leader to deliver on some scores (war against bribery) while failing horrendously on others (human rights). Look at Nigeria, where President Olusegun Obasanjo came to power on an anti-corruption platform that received kudos from international observers. Today the anti-corruption effort is stalling. And Nigeria plans to execute - by stoning to death - a mother, Sufiyatu Huseini, for the crime of adultery. Who is to say some of the new cash will not come into the hands of the stoners?
It is welcome news, therefore, that the Bush administration is considering a proposal put forward two years ago by the Meltzer commission, a group chartered by Congress and led by Professor Allan Meltzer of Carnegie Mellon university, to review international lending by the big multilateral organisations. When it comes to the poorest countries, the report concluded, it is better to bypass governments. In these cases, poverty grants should go direct to outside suppliers "upon independently verified delivery of service". In other words, a group such as Medecins sans Frontie`res may do contract work vaccinating in Africa.
Not only that; such a group would compete against others to deliver the service at the lowest cost. At issue here would be the conversion of International Development Association loans to the poorest nations to grants.
This sort of direct aid would fit in very well with the overall Bush campaign for aid accountability (not to mention his domestic programme of involving not-for-profits in social service). And it would give the campaign teeth. It is certainly better than the double-the-aid plan put forward recently by James Wolfensohn, head of the World Bank.
Neither the World Bank nor the International Monetary Fund complained about Mr Bush's presentation. But behind the scenes there has been plenty of griping about his direct approach. Officers of the Bretton Woods institutions generally tend to complain about what they call "additionality": a surfeit of offices all delivering the same services and, heaven forfend, bidding against one another for business. Here the answer should be: and why not? After all, since you cannot entirely overcome one economic law - fungibility - you may as well take advantage of another -
JWR contributor Amity Shlaes is a columnist for Financial Times
. Her latest book is
The Greedy Hand: How Taxes Drive Americans Crazy and What to Do About It. Send your comments by clicking here.
03/13/02 The Danger in policy by numbers
02/26/02 :States' smokescreen for tax hypocrisy
02/20/02: Echoes of leadership against a global threat
02/13/02: Jackson Vanik May be a Useful Analogy When Thinking About the Middle East
02/07/02: Budgeting for victory: Requiem for a peace dividend
02/05/02: The detectives of 1930s pulp fiction had a nose for clients bearing gifts. Sadly, those consulted by Enron did not
01/22/02: Allow all American children a decent chance
01/15/02: Do not disturb the profit-sharing revolution
01/09/02: It is dangerous to elevate a currency as a political emblem if the need for other economic reforms is obscured
01/03/02: There is only one way for a free thinker to bring up children
12/20/01: Why America's economy always bounces back
12/18/01: When it comes to taxes, Washington lawmakers can learn a thing or two from The Honeymooners
12/13/01: Bush opens a new era
12/12/01: A flamboyant reversal for the Democratic party
12/06/01: Threat of an oil embargo on the U.S. is a bluff
11/29/01: Which is more important--the war or diplomatic comity?
11/20/01: Unbalanced by a wealth of oil and diamonds
10/17/01: Afghanistan Needs a General MacArthur
09/27/01: The US has gained an understanding of the costs of war for which its European allies have hitherto wished in vain
09/13/01: War against terrorism will rise from the ashes
08/15/01: Geography is no excuse for the state's economic stagnation. Its policymakers should take a leaf from Ireland's book
08/07/01: Teamsters may pay a heavy price for winning its batle in Congress
07/25/01: Towards a patent-free nirvana?
07/17/01: History proves the lasting value of tax cuts
07/10/01: Stem cell research has awakened a bitter debate in Washington but voters care more about other electoral issues
07/03/01: America foots the bill for Europe's largesse
06/26/01: America the litigious, land of the lawyer's fee
06/20/01: Five reasons for gloom about global growth
06/18/01: Show pity for Alice in Tax Wonderland
06/13/01: America must take a French lesson in trade
06/11/01: Time to dream the impossible dream for Iraq
06/07/01: Whatever happened to simple?
06/04/01: When the relationship between companies becomes as close as a marriage, the eventual break-up is often very painful
06/01/01: Loving and hating the Bush tax bill
05/30/01: Will Grisham soon be unemployed? In America's courts these days, there's no room left over for legal fiction
05/22/01: Republicans sample the rhetoric of confidence
05/16/01: Boeing has been promised $60m to site its headquarters in Illinois. The deal looks a poor one for taxpayers
05/14/01: Adam Smith in love
05/09/01: Those rotten Russian capitalists
05/07/01: Why tax havens provide shelter for everyone
05/04/01: Middle classes pay for get-the-rich folly
05/01/01: Money can't buy happiness? Think again.
04/26/01: Calling America's rogues and entrepreneurs
04/19/01: High earners right to feel lonely at the top
04/11/01: The right must learn the comfort of strangers
04/04/01: When domestic law arrives by the back door
03/30/01: A Lexus tax cut suits the jalopy driver
03/27/01: The unchallenged dominance of King Dollar
03/20/01: Natural selection of an intellectual aristocracy
03/16/01: The hidden danger of a regulatory recession
03/14/01: Is the American condition that boring? Why so many Oscar nominated movies aren't set in America
03/07/01: Trampling on the theory of path dependence
03/05/01: Fighting the good fight
03/01/01: It is time for Fannie and Freddie to grow up
02/27/01: IT's important
02/22/01: The guilty conscience of America's millionaires
02/14/01: The benefits of helping the 'rich'
02/09/01: The Danger and Promise of the Bush Schools Plan
02/05/01: Crack and Compassion
01/31/01: Debt is good
01/24/01: A gloomy end for a half-hearted undertaking
01/17/01: The challenge of an ally with its own mind
01/15/01: An unexpected American family portrait
01/10/01: A fitting legacy for America's beloved dictator
01/08/01: The trick of tax 'convenience'
01/03/01: Time to stop blaming Greenspan over taxes
12/11/00: So smart they're dumb
12/06/00: How economic bad news came good for Bush
12/04/00: The Boies factor
11/30/00: "The inevitable demands for recounts erupted like acne…"
11/28/00: Fair play and the rules of the electoral game
11/23/00: The shining prospect beyond a cloudy election
11/21/00: Try the Cleveland model
11/16/00: A surprising winner emerges in the US election
11/09/00: Those powerful expats
What's right for America versus what works
11/02/00: Time to turn off big government's autopilot
10/30/00: Canada beating America in financial sensibility
10/26/00: When progressiveness leads to backwardness
10/24/00: The most accurate poll
10/19/00: The Middle East tells us the hawks were right
10/17/00: The split personalities of America's super rich
10/10/00: 'Equity Rights' or Wake up and Smell the Starbucks
10/04/00: Trapped in the basement of global capitalism
09/21/00: The final act of a grand presidential tragedy
09/21/00: Europeans strike back at the fuel tax monster. Should Americans follow?
09/18/00: First steps to success
09/13/00: America rejects the human rights transplant
09/07/00: Minimum wage, maximum cost
09/05/00: Prudent Al Gore plans some serious spending
08/31/00: A revolution fails to bring power to the people
08/28/00: A reali$tic poll
08/21/00: "I Goofed"
08/16/00: Part of the union, but not part of the party
08/09/00: Silicon Alley Secrets
08/02/00: Radical Republicans warm up for Philadelphia
07/31/00: I'll Cry if I Want To
07/27/00: Cold warrior of the new world
07/25/00: The Estate Tax will drop dead
07/18/00: Shooting down the anti-missile defence myths
07/14/00: A convenient punchbag for America's leaders
07/07/00: How to destroy the pharmaceutical industry
07/05/00: Patriots and bleeding hearts
06/30/00: Candidates beware: New Washington consensus on robust growth stands the old wisdom on its head
06/28/00: White America's flight to educational quality
06/26/00: How Hillary inspired the feminist infobabes
© 2001, Financial Times