Jonathan Rockoff

That without that government funding, we might not see a lot of the basic research that has led to advances against cancer, against high cholesterol, against other diseases, because there needs to be sort of a minimum level of government funding of basic research before industry and philanthropy is willing to step in.

That without that government funding, we might not see a lot of the basic research that has led to advances against cancer, against high cholesterol, against other diseases, because there needs to be sort of a minimum level of government funding of basic research before industry and philanthropy is willing to step in.

USAID was sort of the epitome of the United States' exercise of soft power internationally. It didn't have direct benefit to the United States. It didn't help us erase trade deficits or ink trade deals or have any sort of direct benefit. And the Trump administration has completely rethought that approach.

USAID was sort of the epitome of the United States' exercise of soft power internationally. It didn't have direct benefit to the United States. It didn't help us erase trade deficits or ink trade deals or have any sort of direct benefit. And the Trump administration has completely rethought that approach.

We've grown comfortable with a United States where measles hasn't run rampant, where there isn't polio, where we're not dealing with tuberculosis outbreaks all over, where children are drinking fluoridated water and avoiding a lot of cavities and tooth decay.

We've grown comfortable with a United States where measles hasn't run rampant, where there isn't polio, where we're not dealing with tuberculosis outbreaks all over, where children are drinking fluoridated water and avoiding a lot of cavities and tooth decay.

There are, as we've discussed, reasons why we would want to take a look at how we've done all these infectious disease and other public health efforts in the United States and whether the mix of federal and state funding for those efforts needs to change and whether philanthropies and industry needs to step up more.

There are, as we've discussed, reasons why we would want to take a look at how we've done all these infectious disease and other public health efforts in the United States and whether the mix of federal and state funding for those efforts needs to change and whether philanthropies and industry needs to step up more.

But what public health folks argue we don't want to do is to go back to a place where the threat of polio was prevalent, where we are dealing with measles outbreaks spreading around the country, where we are seeing more and more people developing HIV-AIDS. And so the worry that they have is...

But what public health folks argue we don't want to do is to go back to a place where the threat of polio was prevalent, where we are dealing with measles outbreaks spreading around the country, where we are seeing more and more people developing HIV-AIDS. And so the worry that they have is...

While we take a look at how we've done public health for a generation, are we going to go back to the place that we thought we had left behind?

While we take a look at how we've done public health for a generation, are we going to go back to the place that we thought we had left behind?