Among its many painful lessons, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted that America’s defenses against a devastating health crisis were far weaker than most had reason to expect. , the most of any country. It’s puzzling and frightening to observe the Trump Administration dismantling initiatives aimed at safeguarding us from another pandemic.

And let’s be clear; another pandemic is evolutionarily inevitable. We cannot predict when it will strike or if it will surpass COVID in severity. (Deadly as it was, COVID proved to be significantly less fatal than others we’ve seen recently, like , , and .) But there is about a 50 percent chance another COVID-like magnitude of a pandemic (>25 million global deaths) will impact us within the next 20 to 25 years.

These are not favorable odds, particularly for something as critically important as a pandemic. However, according to , U.S. funding for global health is set to decline by a staggering 67 percent this year alone, or more than $9 billion.

That constitutes a potentially seismic shift when considering that, , the U.S. has been the biggest financial contributor to global health and has played a central role in creating and implementing virtually every consequential global health initiative since the end of World War II.

The U.S. has historically assisted lower- and middle-income countries in building and maintaining health systems that monitor newly emerging infectious diseases and eradicate them. In addition to funding, U.S. government expertise—much of it lost in the and the —provided a valuable strategic and coordinating role that ensured the success of global health programs. National Institutes of Health funding, now , has supported research in other parts of the world, leading to new, life-saving interventions.

These programs save lives and improve the health of millions of people worldwide, something that most Americans across the ideological spectrum say they’re proud of and . And the billions of dollars the U.S. annually spends on preventing a pandemic is a bargain compared to the tens of to extinguish a full-blown crisis. Public health programs keep Americans safe by eliminating or isolating health threats before they ever reach our shores.

That’s the mission, for example, of the . For years, the GHC has maintained a presence in , spearheading efforts to combat diseases like polio, measles, HIV, tuberculosis, and neglected tropical diseases. It has helped those countries establish stronger health systems and train experts to monitor, identify, and respond to disease outbreaks. And it coordinates with many other countries to respond to potential crises before they spread across the globe.

In spite of this, The White House, in its funding request to Congress for Fiscal Year 2026, has called for the elimination , among other steep reductions in funding for essential U.S. global health efforts. This is in addition to a decision to withdraw and cease funding from the World Health Organization, which also provides coordination and technical assistance for global health efforts.

All this is part of a broader plan to , which Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ironically terms the “Make America Healthy Again” agenda.

Vaccines are, of course, the foundation of a strong health system. Vaccines are the most widely distributed health intervention, with routine systems reaching approximately 90 percent of children globally. Again, the U.S. has, for decades, been among the biggest contributors to global immunization programs—most notably, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, which significantly boosted a of essential vaccine coverage in the poorest countries over the last 25 years.

That has contributed to saving tens of millions of lives, a reduction by half of of children under five, placing developing countries on a better economic trajectory, and substantially diminishing the chances that infectious diseases emerge and spread. Gavi also maintains global stockpiles of cholera, Ebola, meningitis, and yellow fever vaccines, which are available to contain new outbreaks wherever they may occur.

So it was both bewildering and concerning that in June that the U.S. will not fulfill its previous $1.5 billion, five-year pledge to Gavi. While only providing 13% of Gavi’s core funding, the U.S. has provided global leadership, setting the stage for other countries to follow and participate in this soft power initiative. Unless other donors replace this funding, an estimated .

Amidst otherwise discouraging trends, there’s a small bit of good news: Congress is currently showing reluctance to dismantle global health programs. The Senate has already , in some cases even increasing funding. The House of Representatives’ , but they are to State Department initiatives like Gavi.

This resistance isn’t surprising, as many members of Congress privately support these long-standing investments. During the first Trump Administration, they repeatedly rejected similar requests to cut funding.

However, there’s reason for concern. The political climate is different now, and final budget bills are always subject to change. Even if Congress approves the funding, the Administration may not actually spend it. This could leave the U.S. and the world with weaker health systems and unprepared for the next pandemic, a catastrophe potentially worse than COVID-19.