Comment author: MichaelPlant 05 March 2017 08:04:21PM 2 points [-]

This doesn't apply to me because I'm not a US citizen, but if I were able to do this I'd first want to know more about where the money is likely to head currently without my intervention.

Comment author: JoanGass 06 March 2017 04:49:28AM 0 points [-]

Hi Michael,

Thanks for your comments.

Representatives actually are responsive to resident, not just citizens. If you don't live in the US, you're right that US representatives won't be responsive. However, if you do live in the US, even if you're not a US citizen, your voice does matter.

In terms of the counterfactual use of funds, our assessment is based on the belief that funding for vaccines, AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria (through GAVI and the Global Fund) is one of the most cost effective - if not the most cost effective - use of funds. It's the same internal logic that Givewell uses when assessing Against Malaria Foundation vs. other development organizations. The causes that GAVI and the Global Fund work on are tractable, have a strong evidence base, and have room for more funding. Additionally, GAVI and the Global Fund have demonstrated results in making sustainable progress in these areas.These factors make us confident, on balance, that more money towards these organizations is a more optimal use of funding.



Time sensitive actions to move billions in global health funding [Effective Altruism Lobbying]

Thanks to Scott Weathers and Julia Wise for their contributions to this post. All errors are my own. On March 16 th, several billion dollars in global health funding are up for allocation in the annual Congressional appropriations (budgeting) process. In effective altruism, we often talk about using our talents... Read More