News & Politics

Rand Paul Calls for Ending Foreign Aid to Countries That Threaten Us

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., speaks to reporters as he leaves a Republican Senate luncheon attended by President Donald Trump on Capitol Hill, Tuesday, Oct. 24, 2017, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Foreign aid eats up a surprising amount of our federal budget. While our nation slides deeper and deeper into debt, we continue to hand out cash to other nations.

Often it’s in our best interests, like when we give money and defensive weapons to Ukraine, which is under constant threat from Vladimir Putin. We can understand that. We may actually need that military beefed up, after all.

But all too often we give money to nations that would love to see us burn. That’s why Rand Paul’s recent call to end that practice seems to make just too much sense.

“I would take the money that we send to a lot of countries that aren’t necessarily our friends like Pakistan, I would redirect that money into building roads and bridges here,” Paul argued on Fox and Friends. He added, “I have a bill that I will introduce next week that will take the about $2 billion we spend in Pakistan, let’s spend it in the United States. … Let’s don’t give it to people who hate us and burn our flag and chant: ‘Death to America.'”

It’s a radical idea, right?

For far too long, the United States has handed money to countries that despise us. I can’t help but feel like the big kid in school who is letting himself be pushed around by a shrimp of a bully just because he doesn’t want to fight. Only instead of handing over our lunch money, we’re handing over billions to the little psychopath.

Paul isn’t calling for an end to all ties with Pakistan, though. “We can still have military arraignments with them, but I’d like to see somebody who actually has money to buy our stuff, rather than give it to them. We give everything to Pakistan,” he argues.

Honestly, how is this not already a widely known policy, just like “the United States government does not negotiate with terrorists”?

Why can’t the whole world also quote “the United States government does not aid those who threaten to harm us”?

I do disagree with Paul’s idea to redirect that money. The U.S. government should not have had that cash in the first place — it must either use it to pay down debt, or return it to the taxpayer. But handing over billions in taxpayer cash or taxpayer-purchased equipment to governments that threaten to murder the taxpayer is morally wrong.

Look at Pakistan. We gave them aid in return for the expectation that Pakistan would behave as an ally. They aren’t behaving as an ally, so Paul’s bill is pretty much common sense. Of course, in the swamp, common sense is often the death of an idea.

“The United States government does not aid those who threaten to harm us.” Let’s see if Trump establishes Paul’s principle.