To the Editor:
In a recent Letter to the Editor the author shared their concern about the cuts in funding for the USAID (Agency for International Development) and the effects these cuts may have on adults and children across our world. The letter included a reference to Dr. Brooke Nichols, an infectious disease mathematical modeler, who suggested that 332,553 people died as of June 26, 2025 because of cuts in USAID since January 2025.
It is valuable for our community to have media outlets such as MercerMe to provide opportunities for civil discourse on complex and thorny issues such as how to deal with climate issues, election integrity, immigration reform and foreign assistance programs. These issues involve people and concepts, and both are important. No one should die because of a lack of compassion.
In examining public policy programs such as USAID, people with different views can try to reach productive conclusions by analyzing the facts and evidence. This strengthens our civil discourse capabilities, celebrates tolerance of disagreement, fosters viewpoint diversity and reinforces our commitment to the unfettered pursuit of truth so as a community we can build mutual understanding.
A recent article in Reason.com presents an alternate view about the validity of the study cited by Dr. Brooke Nichols and promoted by various other media outlets (NPR, The Lancet, BBC, AP). As Thomas Sowell, respected economist and author of over 45 books, has said: “Some things are believed because they are demonstrably true. But many things are believed simply because they have been asserted repeatedly-and repetition has been accepted as a substitute for evidence.”
Is the study cited by Dr. Brooke Nichols valid? Did USAID really save 90 million lives from 2001-2021? Did 332,553 men, women and children die in 6 months solely due to cuts in USAID? Critical analysis of the study requires a general knowledge about concepts in statistics: regression analysis, control variables and projections. It is complex. The author’s analysis in Reason.com of the methodology and predictions suggests that the study referenced by Dr. Nichols is neither valid nor factual.
President John F. Kennedy created USAID by executive order in 1961 and it became an independent agency in 1998. The current administration has prioritized lifesaving health humanitarian assistance with USAID funds while at the same time addressing problems such as waste, fraud, lack of accountability, inefficiency and fostering an unhealthy dependence on foreign money. Another article on Reason.com explains some of these examples.
James Macinko, health policy researcher at UCLA and coauthor of the study cited by Dr. Nichols, said “the average taxpayer (US) has contributed about 18 cents per day to USAID”. That “small amount”, Macinko estimated, had prevented “up to 90 million deaths around the world.” As Aaron Brown, author of the Reason article states,
“This suggests that anyone who supports the current administration values 18 cents over 90 million lives. Note the trick of making the cost look small by dividing it among 150 million taxpayers and 365 days per year while making the benefit look large by totaling it over the entire globe for 21 years.”
Let’s continue to discuss whether the U.S. Agency for International Development promoted a good use of taxpayer resources because there is a” long history of USAID projects supporting bad actors, fostering anti-American resentment, building an unhealthy dependence on foreign money and doing more harm than good”. We also need confidence in the scientific research that attempts to calculate the consequences, both positive and negative, of programs supported by taxpayer dollars.
Sincerely,
Sylvia Kocses
Pennington
