Let’s Be Honest About U.S. Aid

In just a few weeks, U.S. foreign assistance has been turned upside down. If you’re reading this, you’re almost certainly aware of what’s happened. But to recap in one sentence: the Trump administration paused new commitments and disbursements of foreign aid; Secretary of State (and now acting administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development) Marco Rubio put an immediate stop to ongoing aid programs and then put almost the entire staff of USAID on leave; the administration made clear that it intends to cut all but 290 of USAID’s more than 10,000 positions worldwide; and now the courts have begun stepping in to block some of these actions–including a ruling last night that the administration must reverse its stop-work order and restart existing aid programs.

It’s confusing. It’s chaotic. And it’s far from clear what happens next. But we do know a few things.

The takedown of USAID is predicated on disinformation and the dehumanization of federal workers — for a reason

There are plenty of real policy debates we should have about foreign assistance — but that’s not what’s happening here. Elon Musk has labeled the agency a ‘criminal organization’ and a ‘viper’s nest of Marxist America haters’, using his platform to amplify and mainstream long-standing conspiracy theories. President Trump echoes that language, telling reporters the agency “turned out to be radical left lunatics.”

Why such aggressive, dehumanizing language? Their goal is to shift the debate outside the realm of policy. In their narrative, this is not about what’s a smart investment and what’s not. It’s about lefty federal bureaucrats running amok, spending taxpayer dollars without oversight in pursuit of a radical un-American agenda. If you accept that premise, there is nothing of value — and nothing that can be salvaged — in the wake of the chaos they have unleashed. They want the people inside USAID to feel so demoralized and vilified that they choose to leave. And they want to make it politically impossible for congressional Republicans to stand up in the agency’s defense.

Full disclosure: I spent six years at USAID, two under President Obama and four under President Trump. It was (hands down) one of the most formative and rewarding professional chapters of my life. I helped lead Power Africa, working to spur private investment in energy solutions. Now, I work at a non-profit research organization (the Energy for Growth Hub) working to end global energy poverty. And I live in Washington, DC. I know I’m not unbiased here: my entire social and professional network feels like it’s in free fall. But I do know that the rhetoric being used is a complete (and very dangerous) farce: the people inside USAID are patriots (and parents), just trying to do their jobs. They uproot their families to live in foreign — sometimes deeply dangerous — places. They forgo the higher salaries they could easily earn elsewhere to serve their country. And they’ve proudly worked for Presidents of both parties.

I believe in the importance of US engagement in a messy, dangerous, and deeply unequal world. That’s why I think two things:

1. The Trump Administration needs foreign assistance. The administration either already knows (or will ultimately recognize) that even if they succeed in dismantling USAID, the services it traditionally provides are crucial to the goals it claims it wants to achieve. By now, it’s clear that ‘America First’ doesn’t actually mean disengaging from the world — and will require the tools, capabilities, and expertise inside currently USAID and the other U.S. agencies that do development work. (Already there are people inside the administration scrambling to figure out what can be saved, reorganized, or relocated).

2. The status quo (obviously) isn’t perfect. Those of us committed to U.S. development assistance need to be honest about the radical changes needed—and commit to making them happen.

Three hard truths we need to face about U.S. foreign assistance

1. The American people aren’t coming to save it–and neither are congressional Republicans.

In a political moment dominated by inflation, immigration, and other domestic challenges, it’s hard to convince normal Americans that we should devote taxpayer resources to people beyond our borders. And we’ve known forever that Americans consistently believe the U.S. spends far more than it actually does on foreign aid. The lack of a powerful constituency in favor of U.S. foreign assistance makes it much less likely Republican lawmakers will risk their jobs speaking up for it. (See Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s recent remarks to USAID staff in Guatemala). As someone who’s worked over the years with lifelong Republican supporters of USAID, I’ve been shocked and deeply depressed by their failure to take a public stand. But we have to get over that shock… they are not coming.

2. It’s deeply flawed.

We need big changes to the way the aid industry — and it is an industry — does business. It’s far too dominated by a small group of powerful DC-based contracting companies that crowd out more local organizations. It’s paralyzed by bureaucratic red tape that makes it incredibly difficult to promote good people, adjust on the fly, or move quickly to support the private sector or deliver what partners want and need. Some of our potentially most powerful tools are handicapped by stupid accounting or administrative rules. And yes — I’m sure that some of the projects funded over the decades have been frivolous, ineffective, or even counterproductive.

3. It can have negative effects in the countries we’re trying to help.

Significant and consistent foreign aid flow into a country can create dangerous dependencies that hinder domestic business, innovation, and policy reform. (See this provocative piece from Ken Opalo).

In the face of these truths, we shouldn’t defend institutions for their own sake, or assume that the structures and approaches that existed two weeks ago were perfect — or even all that great. U.S. foreign assistance needs massive change.

But this administration’s approach to ‘reforming’ US foreign assistance is downright dangerous

President Trump’s executive order claimed to be pausing disbursements for an “assessment of programmatic efficiencies and consistency”. Every incoming administration should review what exists — and has the right (and responsibility) to align programs under the Executive Branch with its policy goals. But this approach — halting ongoing aid programs, attacking staff, and creating maximum uncertainty — is not reform. It’s blowing up the entire thing with a stick of dynamite. Lots of people have spoken out about the dangerous, far-reaching implications — but to summarize a few:

• In the immediate term, people will suffer (and die). The U.S. historically accounts for over 40% of all donor government assistance to global health — most of it through USAID, which provid(ed) food, vaccines, and other lifesaving assistance to people in more than 80 countries. The unplanned and immediate stop to this work — even if it is all ultimately resumed — has already hurt children and families and created horrifying situations.

• Longer-term, it threatens US credibility — and business interests. The current situation is straight-up chaos — which means enormous financial risks for the many American businesses that receive support from the US government to invest around the world and dangerous uncertainty for our allies. There is no clarity on how or by whom programs are being ‘reviewed’--or when they might (potentially) resume. Why would any country or company trust this government to follow through on its commitments? This will have major implications, which I wrote about here.

• This is a constitutional crisis that goes far beyond USAID. The coming weeks will determine how the courts act—and how the administration responds. But USAID isn’t the only agency being targeted for massive and potentially illegal changes. Even if you hate the concept of foreign aid, what’s happening to USAID will set precedents that affect other government services you like and value.

So… where do we go from here?

First, we absolutely don’t give up the fight. If you need to get energized and restore some hope, check out this thread from Jeremy Konyndyk, president of Refugees International and former USAID-er.

It’s hard to think long-term when the world around you is on fire. But we also need to plan for what comes next. In many ways, whatever existed last week is already gone, and it’s not coming back. No matter how exactly this plays out, U.S. foreign assistance will be very different moving forward, and this is an opportunity — however painful — to transform it.

This Substack is a place to write about what’s going on inside U.S. foreign assistance — especially related to global energy investment and innovation. I’m thinking about three big questions: What’s happening now? What are the short- and long-term implications? And where do we go from here?

I won’t shy away from criticizing USAID or any other agency. Again, this can’t be about protecting (or rebuilding) any specific institution or program exactly as it exists today. It’s about fighting for the U.S. to remain an engaged, effective force for good, prosperity, and safety. That means we have a chance to fix the problems that have hobbled us for far too long. We’ll need to take a hard look at the work we do and figure out ways to make it more effective. We’ll need to learn to talk differently about its value — and show American voters why they should care. It’s going to be painful, and we have many years of hard work ahead. But this is not the end of the story.

Marco Rubio recently assured USAID staff in Guatemala that “the United States is not walking away from foreign aid…but it has to be programs that we can defend. It has to be programs that we can explain. It has to be programs that we can justify.” To say I’ve been disappointed with Rubio’s response to all this is… a *massive* understatement. But there’s a hard truth to what he’s saying here — and a mandate for all of us. It may take a long time to recover from the current chaos. But let’s build a foreign assistance structure that Americans defend, explain, justify — and are deeply proud of.

---