Correction, please!

Profiting from AIDS Funding

ITEM: Former President Bill Clinton "applauded the Bush administration's proposal for a five-year $15 billion program to fight the global AIDS crisis...." But, said Clinton, as reported in Newsday for May 12th, "the administration should direct a large portion of the money to the Global Fund to CombatAIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. While a House bill allows for up to $1 billion of the $3 billion in 2004 to go to the public-private fund, the Bush administration -- concerned about the efficiency and management practices of the international fund -- has proposed $200 million a year for the fund over five years."

CORRECTION: There's no doubt that AIDS in Africa is a dreadful problem. Nevertheless, it doesn't follow that U.S. tax dollars should be thrown at the situation. Private and religious organizations are willing and able to help. For example, the care for one in four people being treated for AIDS worldwide comes from the Catholic Church. Such groups are surely better stewards than the Global AIDS Fund, yet another arm of the United Nations.

Launched in January 2002, the UN body is already proving particularly promiscuous with its spending. One study reveals that the 63 staff members in the secretariat--the fund's administration arm -- pull down an average salary of over $174,000!

"The Global AIDS Fund is not accountable to the U.S. government or the taxpayer," comments Breakpoint Online. "Any funds we provide to the Global AIDS Fund are not subject to U.S. federal laws and could be used to pay for injection drug equipment for addicts, abortions, political advocacy, and other objectionable activities." Of course, to Bill Clinton and company, these negatives are plusses.

Fuelish Regulations

ITEM: "Time is running out for state lawmakers to decide whether the additive MTBE will be eliminated from Connecticut gas pumps on Oct. 1," reported the Associated Press on May 4th. "Once banned, MTBE would be replaced with ethanol, an alternative fuel additive needed to burn gasoline more cleanly."

ITEM: "Consumers nationwide could end up with a $29 billion cleanup bill if Congress gives oil companies protection from lawsuits involving drinking water fouled by a noxious gasoline additive [MTBE], water utility officials said," as reported by the May 13th Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

CORRECTION: There will also be an additional cost if methyl tertiary-butyl ether is banned widely. These changes are not spontaneously generated, and the above accounts are hardly in context. Some history: MTBE was added to gasoline to improve combustion and reduce carbon monoxide emissions -- with the goal of meeting standards mandated by the EPA and Clean Air Act. It was first blended in gasoline in 1979 to replace lead, and its use has increased rapidly in recent years, particularly on the East and West Coasts.

However, activists have now switched tracks and lobbyists for ethanol have gained an upper hand outside the Midwest. Multimillion-dollar settlements have been extracted from MTBE manufacturers, alleging water contamination, prompting companies to seek legislative protection. As a spokesman for the additive makers contends: "These companies should not be punished for doing what they were commanded to do under the Clear Air Act."

The law of unintended consequences carries a price tag too. California's EPA says ethanol use has added up to 3 cents a gallon to the cost of gasoline there -- though studies predict such a change will raise prices up to 25 cents a gallon elsewhere. The Connecticut Petroleum Council says some areas, including Chicago and Milwaukee, had price spikes of 30 cents when switching to ethanol. Yet another study, undertaken by Energy Security Analysis for the National Taxpayers Union, found that hikes caused by banning MTBE could reach 80 cents a gallon during peak-demand periods; a year-round increase of 40 cents per gallon might well cost $550 million annually in Connecticut alone.

The activists, politicians, and bureaucrats who exacerbated the situation will no doubt jump out of the way and happily drive the cost to consumers.