The USAID crackdown
Should USAID be shut down? Viewpoints from multiple sides.
Enjoying Framechange? Forward to a friend to help spread the word!
New to Framechange? Sign up for free to see multiple sides in your inbox.
Learn more about our mission to reduce polarization and how we represent different viewpoints here.
What’s happening
Since taking office, President Trump has been clamping down on the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the federal agency primarily responsible for non-military foreign aid. This week, he put the majority of USAID’s 10,000+ employees on administrative leave, effective today, while the administration reviews which USAID programs it wants to keep in place. At least 611 employees focused on mission-critical work were reportedly kept active, and a federal judge this afternoon temporarily blocked the order from furloughing a specific group of 2,200 employees.
Trump’s order is the latest disruption to USAID’s operations that began when he issued a 90-day pause on all foreign development assistance (with some exceptions) the day he took office. Other disruptions include the closing of the USAID headquarters in Washington DC, putting the USAID website offline, and laying off contractors.
What is USAID: USAID was established in 1961 through executive order by President John F Kennedy as an agency explicitly focused on providing nonmilitary aid abroad. It was later solidified as an independent agency – reporting to the Department of State – through the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act (1998).
USAID had a $42.5B budget in 2023 out of a total $68B spent by the US on foreign aid. It provides aid to roughly 130 countries.
Role of the State Department: Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced this week he was now the acting administrator of USAID and told Congress he would review it “with an eye toward potential reorganization." Rubio’s public stance runs counter to statements made by Elon Musk that he and Trump had decided to shut it down. The administration is also reportedly exploring the possibility of folding USAID into Rubio’s Department of State.
Exempt aid: Rubio issued an emergency humanitarian waiver deeming “existing life-saving humanitarian assistance programs” exempt from Trump’s 90-day foreign development assistance pause, though it was not immediately clear which USAID programs would be exempt. He issued a separate exemption for the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), one of the largest and most notable programs that USAID helps implement.
The activity swirling around USAID has triggered fierce debate over the value and effectiveness of the agency. This week, we bring you the viewpoints from multiple sides. Let us know what you think in the comments.
Notable viewpoints
More opposed to Trump’s USAID crackdown:
USAID conducts critical and lifesaving work.
US foreign aid provides life-saving and life-changing support to communities in need globally at a relatively low cost to the American taxpayer. Examples include removing landmines from warzones, purifying drinking water, fighting human trafficking, and combatting AIDS through PEPFAR, which reports having saved 25M+ lives since 2003.
USAID funds critical disease-monitoring projects that prevent outbreaks of deadly diseases such as Ebola and the Marburg virus in higher-risk regions like Africa. Disease prevention also prevents global spread which helps protect Americans.
Suspending USAID work even temporarily creates unnecessary risk for potential beneficiaries. The President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) program, for example, provided 37M bednets and 48M doses of malaria prevention pills to people in malaria-prone areas in 2023. Using nonprofit impact measurement service GiveWell’s conversion estimates for the impact of those efforts, PMI saved an estimated 50,000+ lives in 2023, demonstrating how a temporary shutdown could be dire.
USAID’s $42.5B budget in 2023 is only 0.7% of the total federal budget, making it a bargain for the level of impact it provides.
USAID advances US national security.
“All in all, foreign aid is an extraordinarily effective policy tool. Helping eradicate poverty and promote democracy generates goodwill that makes the United States stronger. Combating life-threatening pathogens and removing the causes of economic and social instability make the world safer. Expanding global prosperity creates new markets for American products.” (Washington Post Editorial Board.)
Trump’s efforts to crack down on USAID and potentially halt much of its efforts will damage the country’s reputation as a reliable ally and may reduce the willingness of other nations to work with the US.
Defense, diplomacy, and development (the category under which USAID falls) are distinct but complementary efforts that advance US security interests, and combining them under one umbrella would undermine their effectiveness. Foreign aid administered by USAID, for instance, has a medium-to-long-term time horizon compared to the shorter, more transactional aspects of diplomacy. Folding all foreign aid efforts under the Department of State (focused more on diplomacy) would drive conflicts of interest and overly politicize it.
Shutting down USAID without congressional involvement is illegal.
The executive branch does not have authority to dissolve USAID unilaterally. USAID was established as an agency of the executive branch by congressional law in 1998 with distinct functions from the Department of State and requires participation from Congress in any attempt to dissolve it or combine it with the Department of State.
The 2024 Foreign Operations Appropriations Act recently established and reaffirmed that any reorganization or redesign of USAID requires prior consultation with Congress.
More supportive of Trump’s USAID crackdown:
USAID initiatives don’t align with the national interest.
“One of the most common complaints you will get if you go to embassies around the world from State Department officials and ambassadors and the like is USAID is not only not cooperative; they undermine the work that we’re doing in that country; they are supporting programs that upset the host government for whom we’re trying to work with.” (Secretary Marco Rubio, in an interview with Fox News.)
USAID has been focused too much on spreading a progressive agenda abroad that doesn’t represent the majority of American people. Examples include $2M in spending on “trans-led organizations in Guatemala” and $45M in spending on the Diversity and Inclusion Scholarship Program (DISP) for students in Myanmar. Also, roughly 97% of political donations from USAID employees in 2024 went to the Democratic party.
Prior to the pandemic, funding from USAID flowed to Wuhan University, which was affiliated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a lab in China that has been associated with the “lab leak” theory of COVID-19’s origins. Such a funding flow underscores the misalignment between USAID funding and the national interest.
Some USAID spending may directly undermine American interests. A Middle East Forum report found that $164M has been spent by USAID over its lifetime in support of what the Middle East Forum deemed “radical organizations” globally, with at least $122M to groups “aligned with designated terrorists and their supporters,” flows that are likely due in part to failures to effectively vet partners.
Cutting the USAID budget will help free up resources to invest in more important issues domestically such as veteran homelessness and financial instability for lower income Americans, who could benefit from lower tax rates driven by government savings.
Funding from USAID does not make its intended level of impact.
A 2019 report by the federal government’s Inspector General for USAID estimated that 43% of awards did not achieve their expected results between 2014 and 2016 but were mostly paid in full to the respective NGO or services organization anyway.
“What is not in dispute among most experts is that the majority of USAID funds go to contracts with large international agencies, which have high overhead that consume a lot of the dollars.” (Fred de Sam Lazaro, reporter covering USAID for PBS.)
USAID has been used as a front for intelligence operations.
There is evidence that USAID has been used as a front for CIA operations in other countries, such as the the promotion of regime change and the training of local police forces globally on tactics alleged to include torture, contributing to reasonable doubts about the focus of the agency’s activities.
USAID was found in 2014 to be covertly funding the travel and operations of young Latin Americans sent to Cuba to sow rebellion against the incumbent government, serving as a modern example of some of its covert international operations disguised as aid.
Other viewpoints:
Elon Musk and other influencers have taken out of context a quote from director of Unlock Aid Walter Kerr’s statement that less than 10% of USAID funding goes directly to “local communities.” Musk and others have used it to imply that less than 10% of funding has an impact or that the rest is wasted. Kerr’s statement was referring to 10% of USAID funds going directly to local partners and organizations as opposed to other actors and international organizations that also execute aid operations. (Summarized from statement by Unlock Aid, the source of the number cited by Musk and others.)
“Mr. Trump is raising fundamental questions about the extent to which international economic assistance serves US national interests. He has every right to do so, and the debate he’s sparked could lead to more clarity on the goals that overseas economic aid should promote.” (William Galston, Wall Street Journal.)
Funding from Western resources like USAID has driven the growth of NGOs operating under the guise of fighting poverty, exploitation, and oppression in Latin America. But these organizations have actually helped perpetuate such struggles by subtly keeping unrest at bay and keeping incumbent regimes favorable to the US in power.
Local nonprofits are more likely to be impactful than the large international organizations that USAID tends to contract with because of their proximity to the ground and intimate familiarity with the problems. (Summarized from statements by Justin Richmond, founder of nonprofit IMPL Project, to PBS News Hour.)
From the source
Read more from select primary sources:
Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on legality of recent actions toward USAID: USAID Under the Trump Administration (Feb 3 2025)
Breakdown of US Foreign Assistance by agency in FY23
Breakdown of US Federal Budget in FY23
Be heard
We want to hear from you! Comment below with your perspective on USAID and we may feature it in our socials or future newsletters. Below are topic ideas to consider.
Do you support or oppose Trump’s crackdown on USAID?
What are some arguments or supporting points you appreciate about a viewpoint you disagree with?
Snippets
President Trump issued an executive order restricting trans women from competing in women’s sports. The NCAA quickly adopted a new policy in-line with the order that prohibits trans women from participating in women’s sports competition but allows them to continue practicing and receiving benefits like healthcare. (See our previous coverage of arguments around the participation of trans women in college sports.)
Wreckage from a commuter plane in Alaska that had gone missing after takeoff was found by authorities on an ice sheet. Authorities reported there were no survivors among the 10 people onboard.
A second federal judge blocked the Trump administration’s executive order to end birthright citizenship, citing citizenship protections under the 14th Amendment. The ruling prevents Trump’s order from taking effect until a judge has ruled on appeal. (See our previous coverage of the arguments around Trump’s order to end birthright citizenship.)
President Trump said he is revoking former President Joe Biden’s security clearance, citing Biden’s move to revoke Trump’s clearance 4 years ago. The move will end Biden’s access to classified daily intelligence briefings.
The CIA offered a buyout to all of its employees as part of an effort to align the agency to President Trump’s agenda. It is also pausing the hiring of existing offerees and may revoke offers to candidates that don’t align to Trump’s priorities.
Give us your feedback! Please let us know how we can improve.
Music on the bottom
A throwback to the eerie and soulful groove of Radiohead’s “Reckoner,” from their critically-acclaimed album, In Rainbows.
Listen on Spotify, Apple Music, or Amazon Music.
I oppose the destruction of USAID. It is less than 1% of the budget, promotes goodwill, provides lifesaving AID!
In addition to employment to the workers administering the aid - 10,000 before trump, yesterday 300, today 2,000. Temporarily while it’s hashed out.
From the other side, I appreciated the comment that some assistance does not make it to those who need it.
I am all in on eliminating waste in government spending. The same goes for using foreign aid to serve the interests of our country as it serves the well being of the people of other countries, within reason and within morally acceptable standards. I am certainly disturbed by the notion that USAID may, in some cases, be directing aid to some programs or organizations whose goals or activities might be counterproductive to those of diplomacy. However, it seems to me, after reviewing this Framchange edition and some of the included linked articles, that the Trump Administration is, first and foremost, intent on eliminating any vestige of promoting a progressive agenda within USAID, as it has been with regard to all Executive Branch agencies, and garnering support and justfication by spouting out exaggerated or unsupported claims of malfeasance and even more nefarious behavior of agency staff; and whether or not one agrees with the intended outcomes, the fact remains that the President does not have the legal authority to eliminate an agency established by Congress or reorganize it without consulting Congress or hold up funds appropriated by Congress.