How USAID Alienated Republican Supporters
President John F. Kennedy assumed office in 1961 with a hopeful vision that resonated throughout the nation. His inaugural address encouraged Americans to engage in a noble mission to enhance human welfare. “And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country,” Kennedy proclaimed. “My fellow citizens of the world, ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.” Within months, this vision gave rise to the Peace Corps, the Apollo moon mission, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
USAID was the first government agency entirely devoted to assisting other nations in establishing the economic, political, and social systems that would enhance the quality of life for their citizens. That was 64 years ago. Today, USAID is on the verge of closure, having lost the trust of the president and members of Congress, particularly among Republicans.
Advocates for USAID view the Trump administration’s attempts to shut down or reorganize the agency as a disagreement over budget priorities or, worse, a move to eliminate foreign aid altogether. Republicans argue that the goal is not to eradicate international development or humanitarian assistance, but to realign them to serve U.S. foreign policy better.
Founding Vision
USAID was established to execute the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which asserts that aiding developing nations in becoming stable and economically sound is paramount to safeguarding “the individual liberties, economic prosperity, and security of the people of the United States.” An archived version of the USAID website outlines various strategies employed to achieve this aim. Initially offering technical and capital assistance in the 1960s, the agency transitioned to food, health, education, and population planning initiatives in the 1970s.
President John F. Kennedy speaks to USAID directors and deputy directors at the White House on June 8, 1962. Robert Knudsen
The focus then moved to fostering free markets in the 1980s and later shifted towards sustainable development in the 1990s, with foreign aid packages tailored to specific country needs. In the 2000s, USAID concentrated on rebuilding nations affected by war and increasingly outsourced much of its operations to contractors, initially using private voluntary organizations and later involving nongovernmental organizations, private sector actors, and foundations.
Expanding Role
In 1998, at President Bill Clinton’s request, Congress restructured foreign policy agencies, and USAID became an independent entity, no longer under the Department of State. The agency’s budget surged from $7 billion in 2001 to nearly $18 billion by 2010. By 2023, USAID’s expenditures topped $42 billion. During the same time frame, total federal spending rose from $1.8 trillion with a surplus of $184 billion to $6.1 trillion with a $1.7 trillion deficit.
In the early 2000s, supporters of USAID pushed for greater integration of foreign development into U.S. foreign policy and advocated for an elevated role for the agency. “The USAID administrator should be included as a member of the National Security Council and other high-level interagency deliberative bodies,” Andrew S. Natsios, a former USAID administrator, argued in a 2009 Senate hearing. This would have placed the USAID administrator alongside the president, vice president, Cabinet-level officers, and the national security adviser during national security discussions.
Questions About Management
Despite its successes, including the widely-praised President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) initiated in 2003, USAID faced scrutiny regarding management and accountability issues. Since its inception, PEPFAR has provided over $110 billion toward the global HIV/AIDS response, credited with saving approximately 26 million lives, according to the State Department.
However, concerns regarding management efficiency arose. In 2003, Jess T. Ford, then-director of international affairs and trade for the GAO, cautioned that “the combination of continued attrition of experienced foreign service officers, increased program funding, and emerging foreign policy priorities raises concerns regarding USAID’s ability to maintain effective oversight of its foreign assistance programs.”
President Barack Obama raised alarms in 2009 about federal agencies’ reliance on contractors, which he noted were “plagued by massive cost overruns, outright fraud, and the absence of oversight and accountability.” Also in 2009, Senator Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) called for “increased accountability of programs, and clear and tangible results” from USAID, stating there had been progress but that more urgency was needed.
Concerns were found to be justified, as audits from the GAO and the Office of Inspector General revealed substantial issues with the agency’s funding distribution. The GAO reported that nearly $1 million was allocated to the Wuhan Institute of Virology through other agencies, identified by the CIA as the likely source of the virus causing COVID-19. Furthermore, a fraudulent contractor diverted $9 million intended for civilian relief in Syria to armed groups between 2015 and 2018, with some funds reaching the Al-Nusrah Front, a U.S.-designated terrorist group connected to al-Qaeda.
Senator James Risch (R-Idaho) directly challenged USAID officials in 2023 about funding decisions in Gaza. “Palestinians are identifying with terror groups to promote their interests more,” Risch stated. “Why is the administration asking for an additional $250 million? Whose interests will be advanced by this money?” Representative Michael McCaul (R-Texas), then-chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, expressed concerns after USAID Administrator Samantha Power could not assure that taxpayer dollars were not funding the Taliban, calling it troubling.
Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) voiced his skepticism in a letter to Power in 2024: “When American aid flows to Israel’s enemies—who are also our enemies—USAID is guilty of moral failure, strategic catastrophe, and betrayal of the American taxpayer.”
Elon Musk, head of the new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), claimed on Feb. 11 that DOGE had discovered “massive amounts of fraud” within USAID, although without specifics. “I think we probably caught way over a lot of billions of dollars already in what, two weeks, and it’s going to go to numbers that you’re not going to believe,” Musk asserted. “Much is incompetence, and much is dishonesty.” CNN’s Anderson Cooper inquired why the agency has faced significant criticism during a Feb. 6 interview. Power attributed this to “misinformation” and “so many falsehoods now circulating about USAID.”
Resistance to Oversight
As concerns regarding fund allocation mounted, lawmakers expressed frustration over USAID’s reluctance to provide answers. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who served in the Senate from 2011 to 2025, noted on Feb. 4: “It’s been 20 or 30 years where people have tried to reform it, and it refuses to reform, it refuses to cooperate. When we were in Congress we couldn’t even get answers to basic questions about programs.”
Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) detailed instances in a letter to Rubio, outlining USAID’s obstructionist behaviors in congressional oversight, including falsely classifying documents and asserting that sharing federal contract information would breach federal law.
The Epoch Times reached out to USAID for comments; however, a State Department spokesperson responded, “As a general matter, we do not comment on congressional correspondence.” Mark Moyar, who directed the Office of Civilian-Military Cooperation at USAID from 2018 to 2019, described an agency where “bureaucrats have devised very crafty ways to hide money.” In a Feb. 6 interview with Fox News, Moyar noted that political appointees were still discovering programs they hadn’t previously known existed even over two years into the first Trump administration.
Moyar, who was terminated from USAID for allegedly leaking classified information, claims his dismissal was retaliation for exposing corruption. Other lawmakers have criticized USAID for being tone-deaf to the cultural issues in the countries it serves. Rubio stated the agency often undermines the efforts of the State Department. “They are supporting programs that upset the host government for whom we’re trying to work with on a broader scale,” he remarked during a Feb. 3 interview with Fox News.
Representative Michael McCaul (R-Texas) cited funding for “LGBTQIA programs” in more conservative nations, legal actions against Catholic governments, and the promotion of atheism in Nepal—home to Tibetan Buddhism—as actions leading to USAID’s tarnished reputation.
Even as the agency nears closure, Trump administration officials reported encountering “noncompliance” and “insubordination” from USAID staff, according to Peter Marocco, deputy administrator of USAID. The Epoch Times requested comments from USAID but received no response by the publication time.
Reaction From Supporters
Some criticism against USAID stems from differing opinions on foreign aid strategies, as noted by Henry E. Brady, a political science and public policy professor at the University of California–Berkeley. “The new administration has different cultural presumptions about what USAID should be doing and how it should do it,” Brady explained to The Epoch Times. “Consequently, USAID has lost trust among Republicans.” Regarding oversight, he noted that politics often supersedes fact-finding in today’s environment, making agencies skittish about providing information in such a partisan landscape.
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) condemned DOGE’s influence for the shutdown of USAID’s Washington offices, calling it illegal. “Before our very eyes, an unelected shadow government is conducting a hostile takeover of the federal government,” Schumer declared on the Senate floor on Feb. 3. He also warned that this closure poses risks to U.S. security by weakening initiatives aimed at combating terrorism in Asia and Africa through international aid.
Power commented on Feb. 6, stating, “It’s a disaster for U.S. national interests and national security,” referencing a statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry celebrating the suspension of American foreign aid.
Senator Andy Kim (D-N.J.), a former USAID employee, characterized the Trump administration’s actions as “an American retreat” from the global stage. “China doesn’t even need to fight for their influence around the world now because of our own effort. We’re doing China’s work for them,” Kim stated during a “Meet the Press” segment on Feb. 10.
(Left) Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk delivers remarks as he joins President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on Feb. 11, 2025. (Right) Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) speaks at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 28, 2025. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images, Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) introduced legislation on Feb. 7 requiring Senate confirmation for the State Department’s director of foreign assistance and mandating that all funds allocated for foreign aid be “used as directed” within 90 days of congressional approval. “This legislation makes it abundantly clear that neither Presidents—nor unelected billionaire megadonors—can ignore the legal duty to implement the laws duly enacted by the Congress,” Van Hollen stated.
Back on Mission
Republicans maintain that the ultimate aim of the administration’s measures is to realign foreign aid to bolster U.S. interests. “I personally believe that USAID has a national security mission,” McCaul stated. “If you go back to its inception in the ’60s under President Kennedy and the Cold War, it was to counter the Soviet Union. We need to return to the core mission principles.”
While Ernst has criticized USAID, she has not suggested its closure, instead calling for an independent evaluation of USAID’s grant recipients. Rubio has consistently supported foreign aid despite the growing national debt, asserting, “In every region of the world, we should always search for ways to use U.S. aid and humanitarian assistance to strengthen our influence, the effectiveness of our leadership, and the service of our interests and ideals,” during a Brookings Institution panel in 2012.
Rubio indicated on Feb. 3 that no decision had been reached regarding whether USAID would be closed or simply reorganized with certain functions transferred to the State Department. In her CNN interview, Power argued that shifting international development back under the State Department would result in a loss of expertise among USAID staff working on crucial projects, including malaria control, disaster-resilient infrastructure development, and community de-radicalization initiatives.
Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) remarked during a roundtable discussion on Feb. 12 that Republicans seem divided on the future of the agency, questioning whether there remains time to restore valuable foreign aid programs and rebuild credibility with international partners. Cindy Dyer, a former USAID official, cautioned, “I think we have a narrow but very closing window to save the institution and, more important, the capacities that protect U.S. national interest.”
Trump’s executive orders to suspend foreign aid awards and to place the majority of USAID employees on administrative leave have faced legal challenges and been temporarily halted by federal judges. A House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on USAID is scheduled for Feb. 13.
