On Monday, Ivanka Trump published an op-ed in the Financial Times calling for economic empowerment for women as a vehicle for overall economic growth.
Trump co-authored the op-ed with World Bank President Jim Yong Kim, and heavily touts the World Bank’s work and research on female empowerment.
“Groups like the W20, the World Economic Forum, World Bank, and the UN Secretary-General’s high-level panel on women’s economic empowerment have been instrumental in reinforcing the case for investing in women, identifying effective solutions,” Trump and Kim write.
But while Ivanka praises the World Bank as “instrumental” to her favored cause of empowering women and girls, her father is proposing to slash millions from the World Bank’s budget.
Trump’s budget proposal, which is a statement of priorities and the starting point for congressional negotiations, “reduces funding for multilateral development banks, including the World Bank, by approximately $650 million over three years compared to commitments made by the previous administration.”
Trump’s proposal to cut funding is in direct contrast to the World Bank’s current goals — which include convincing all of its member countries to approve a general capital increase and bolster the bank’s main fund. President Kim says that such an increase is necessary to increase lending and support to middle-income countries.
Trump’s budget notes that even with the decrease, the U.S. would still be the World Bank’s biggest contributor. By decreasing funding, however, the Trump administration sends a signal to other countries — and might have a chilling impact on the World Bank’s ambitions.
“They’re facing a huge amount of uncertainty,” Scott Morris, a senior fellow at the center for Global Development in Washington told Bloomberg. That uncertainty, he told Bloomberg, could lead the world bank to curbing its ambitions.
This isn’t the first time Ivanka’s public statements have clashed with the actual policies of the administration she supports.
Throughout her father’s campaign, Ivanka received praise from pundits for her “moderating” presence on her abrasive father. And since his inauguration, the news has been peppered with anonymously-sourced stories citing Ivanka and her husband Jared as behind-the-scenes influencers, reigning in the President’s tone and policies.
Yet there has been little evidence of actual policy to go along with that narrative.
In late March, Ivanka and Trump Education Secretary Betsy DeVos visited the National Air and Space Museum and screened the film Hidden Figures, promoting the Trump administration’s support of increasing women and people of color in science fields. Meanwhile, President Trump has proposed eliminating NASA’s office of education — which is critical to helping underrepresented groups get involved in scientific fields.
In another recent example, Politico reported that Ivanka Trump had reached out to Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards, and met for an off-the-record meeting. Eliminating federal funding for Planned Parenthood was a central tenet of President Trump’s health care plan.
The irony is that the Freedom Caucus, which is very pro-life and against Planned Parenthood, allows P.P. to continue if they stop this plan!
— President Trump (@POTUS) March 24, 2017
As a last-ditch effort to get Trumpcare passed, he argued on Twitter that defunding the women’s health was a reason to vote for his plan (which, overall, would have been particularly disastrous for women’s health).
And when it comes to climate change, Ivanka has repeatedly been cited as a moderating force on Trump’s policies, and an advocate for the reality of climate change — but while reports of her influence have been many, evidence of actual policy change it has been all-but nonexistent. Trump installed a climate denier as the head of the EPA. He signed an executive order rolling back the Obama-era Clean Water rule. And he’s been mum on his plans for the Paris Climate agreement, which he promised to pull out of during his campaign.