One of President Trump’s first moves in the White House was to pause all federal funding for USAID. This brought operations abroad to a halt and sent employees into disarray. Although the courts have since ruled the move illegal, it reflects a broader pattern of haphazard policymaking. The country has seen many changes that point to minimal regard for how implementation will affect current programs and their personnel. The Trump administration needs to do better to protect its workers and ensure that in the future research is done before positions and departments are terminated.
USAID History
USAID was created in 1961 and receives policy direction from the State Department. The agency had approximately 10,000 employees working overseas but the number has since dwindled to 300 following layoffs. USAID provides grants and contracts to foreign humanitarian and government agencies and other organizations. In turn, these organizations deliver services using funds provided by the agency.
From Critics and Supporters
From the Trump administration’s perspective, money was mishandled during Biden’s administration. The U.S. Agency for International Development isn’t working to advance the U.S. and it is wasting precious funding on others. Kevin Hassett’s National Economic Council Direction says that this administration Kevin Hassett, who served as Director of the National Economic Council, stated that the new administration would be spending significantly less, implying that the Biden administration engaged in “willy-nilly spending.”
Critics of the USAID funding freeze point to the organization’s ongoing humanitarian work at the time it was halted. The funds have been used for starvation and disease prevention. They also point to national security ties and believe that they serve as a credential and play a role in fighting terrorists and projecting soft power. Ending it would provide a foothold for adversaries to step in and fill the need in turn giving space for other countries such as Russia and China to build dependency alliances.
Freeze Impact
In February, the USAID office inspector General stated that 8.2 billion in humanitarian assistance funds are at risk due to the State Department pause on foreign assistance programs. A waiver temporarily allowed aid to be distributed; however, confusion regarding what exactly was allowed made the process difficult. The aid consisted of material goods and perishable food, much of which risked spoilage while both sides debated how to proceed.
In 2023, USAID had projects in 130 countries so the freeze has had a global impact, and the outcomes of undistributed goods are disturbing. Yet, to put the situation into perspective, today the funding only makes up 1.2% of the U.S.’s Federal Budget. Distributing these resources doesn’t put excessive strain on the federal budget.
The judge’s recent ruling has required the administration to pay owed funding to waiting organizations, however, it does not require the administration to restart in-progress contracts that were awarded funding but were then canceled.
Worker Impact
Outside of the soft power argument, the shutdown has negatively impacted USAID workers. The government considered them as an afterthought, putting them in an uncomfortable position that in some countries could have turned volatile. The administration easily uprooted their lives without warning. For anyone considering a future in the foreign service, this raises serious concerns for those considering a career in the foreign service. Families overseas have had no option but to pull their kids from schools and await funding to return home. For those without jobs to return to, this is a traumatic experience.
Conclusion
The Trump administration has implemented changes and many of them have been controversial in one way or another. But at the end of the day, the country is partisan. Controversial ideas from both sides of the political spectrum often drive change in our country. Someone is always going to be unhappy, that’s the unfortunate reality of the situation. However, in implementing policy, Policymakers should always consider the human impact of their decisions — especially when American lives are at stake.
