Shortchanging World Health

The United States owes the World Health Organization $118 million, and, despite the best of intentions, nobody seems ready to settle the account. As a result, Congress, with the connivance of the State Department’s Office for International Organizations Affairs, is crippling WHO’s ability to fight disease and advance public health.

A 1985 amendment to an authorization bill sponsored by Sen. Nancy Landon Kassebaum (R-Kan.) reduces U.S. payments to the United Nations and its specialized agencies until these organizations streamline their operations. The strictures of this amendment have prevented an already hesitant Congress from fulfilling its financial obligations to WHO. And, unless otherwise specified by Congress, international organizations are funded at the State Department’s discretion. Congress is unwilling to earmark money, and nobody is taking up the health organizations’ cause at the State Department.

In April of this year Kassebaum said that the World Health Organization had satisfied the intent of her amendment. The long-awaited modification of the Kassebaum amendment is finally forthcoming, and congressional sympathy seems to be back behind WHO. But these moves are little more than symbolic. Congress will likely restrict WHO appropriations under a number of provisions, including the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings amendment. In the continued absence of full funding, money for international organizations will be hostage to political currents. Congress will not go out on a limb for WHO unless the President asks it, and such a request is unlikely.

This behavior is all the more vexing in the face of the AIDS epidemic. The U.S. contribution to the World Health Organization’s AIDS fund, although modest, is encouraging. In time, however, Congress’ inattention to WHO’s needs will completely undermine the organization’s ability to administer AIDS money. President Reagan, at the summit meeting in Venice, said that the United States should join WHO in assuming a leading role in the struggle against AIDS. It is puzzling and frustrating that the President is so reluctant to provide for his partners in this struggle.

In the successful World Health Organization campaign to eradicate smallpox, the U.S. investment in WHO was generously rewarded. The emasculation of WHO’s ability to wage war against AIDS, on the other hand, is enormously to our detriment as a nation. The United States is obligated to provide 25% of WHO’s operating expenses. The absence of $118 million is almost completely debilitating. It is time for Congress to return WHO to its full strength.