Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Just the Facts: Foreign Aid

News

USAID flag outside a building

A USAID flag outside a building.

J. David Ake/Getty Images

Our ongoing series, “Just the Facts,” strives to approach news stories with both an open mind and skepticism, so we may present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we look to remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces.

How much and what percentage of total foreign aid has been cut since President Trump's inauguration?


Since President Trump's inauguration, the U.S. has significantly reduced its foreign aid budget. The Trump administration cut over 90% of USAID's foreign aid contracts, amounting to approximately $60 billion. This dramatic reduction aligns with the administration's "America First" agenda, which prioritizes domestic interests over international aid.

What percentage of the total budget is the $60 billion dollars cut from foreign aid?

The U.S. federal budget for the fiscal year 2024 was approximately $6.75 trillion. If we compare $60 billion to this total, it represents about 0.89% of the entire budget.

Are there any legal challenges to the foreign aid the Trump administration has cut?

There have been legal challenges to the Trump administration's foreign aid cuts. One notable case involved a freeze on nearly $2 billion in foreign aid funding. A federal judge ruled that the freeze was unlawful, stating that it violated the separation of powers by overriding Congress's authority to allocate funds. The Supreme Court later declined to block this ruling, effectively requiring the administration to release the funds.

These legal battles highlight the tension between executive authority and congressional control over budgetary decisions.

Have the funds been released since the court ruling?

Following the court ruling, the Trump administration was ordered to release nearly $2 billion in frozen foreign aid payments. The funds were gradually disbursed to comply with the court's decision, although the process faced delays and logistical challenges. Some payments were released immediately, while others required additional reviews before being distributed.

Which department of the government is in charge of foreign aid, how many federal foreign aid workers have been fired, and how much money has been saved?

The U.S. Department of State and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) are primarily responsible for managing foreign aid. The Office of Foreign Assistance within the State Department oversees the strategic direction and coordination of foreign aid programs.

Under the Trump administration, significant workforce reductions occurred at USAID. Reports indicate that nearly 1,600 USAID employees were laid off globally. Additionally, broader federal workforce cuts affected tens of thousands of employees across various departments.

As for savings, the Trump administration claimed that terminating foreign aid programs and reducing the workforce saved tens of billions of dollars. However, the exact financial impact of these workforce reductions alone isn't clearly documented.

Are there any legal challenges to the firing of government workers in departments that deal with foreign aid?

There have been legal challenges related to the firing of government workers in foreign aid departments. For instance, a recent court ruling issued a preliminary injunction against the suspension and termination of certain foreign aid contracts. This decision emphasized that the government must adhere to Congress's constitutional spending authority and process payments for completed work. However, the ruling did not fully block broader workforce reductions or terminations.

What are the 10 countries that have lost the most foreign aid?

The countries most affected by U.S. foreign aid cuts under the Trump administration include nations that heavily relied on USAID funding. Some of the hardest-hit countries are:

  1. Afghanistan
  2. Yemen
  3. South Sudan
  4. Syria
  5. Somalia
  6. Haiti
  7. Ethiopia
  8. Sudan
  9. Democratic Republic of the Congo
  10. The West Bank and Gaza Strip

These reductions have had significant impacts on humanitarian aid, development projects, and stability in these regions.

All data and information were obtained from Copilot, an AI-powered chatbot owned and operated by Microsoft Corporation.

David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.


Read More

US America and China flags on chess king on a chessboard.

USA and China trade relations, cooperation strategy. US America and China flags on chess king on a chessboard.

Getty Images

America’s Gridlock Is Beijing’s Best Argument

Americans tend to treat democracy’s superiority as settled, and the long-run evidence backs them up. A major study by MIT economist Daron Acemoglu and colleagues found that countries that democratize end up about 20 percent richer per person within a generation. But most of the world does not grade governments on long-run studies. For billions of people outside the wealthy West, the test is simpler: does the power stay on, are food prices steady, is there work, and do the roads get built? When the stomach is empty, a ballot can feel like a luxury.

China understands this and sells its model on exactly those terms. Its GDP per capita has climbed from about $300 in 1980 to nearly $15,000 today, by IMF figures, and the World Bank credits it with lifting some 800 million people out of extreme poverty. India, the world’s largest democracy, started from a similar place and sits near $2,800. Beijing’s centralized system, paired with Deng Xiaoping’s market reforms, built power plants, factories and rail lines at a pace India’s more deliberative politics has not matched. Anyone who values liberty will find little to admire in that model. It does explain why the model sells.

Keep ReadingShow less
American soldier in headquarter control center

American soldier in headquarter control center

Getty Images

Why America Must Rethink Its Counterterrorism Strategy in Nigeria

When American forces conducted airstrikes against suspected Islamic State militants in northwest Nigeria on Christmas Day 2025, the operation signaled a renewal of security cooperation between Washington and Abuja. Yet for Nigerians living in communities plagued by terrorism, kidnapping, and armed attacks, a critical question remained: Will these strikes make their daily lives any safer?

That question demands serious consideration in Washington. The United States has spent decades helping Nigeria combat terrorism through military equipment, intelligence sharing, and tactical training. Yet, armed violence continues to disrupt daily life across northern Nigeria, raising doubts about how the effectiveness of American counterterrorism assistance should be measured.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pete Hegseth

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on October 28, 2026.

(Photo by Ezra Acayan/Getty Images)

Pete Hegseth and the High Price of Compromised Governance

Just days after a historic midterm election in which everyday Americans sent a clear, undeniable demand for political accountability and transparency, the halls of Congress have devolved into a new theater of crisis. Republican Representative Thomas Massie’s introduction of eight articles of impeachment against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has thrown the Department—and the nation’s fragile democratic norms—into uncharted territory.

Massie, a longtime Trump critic who plans to retire from Congress at the end of the year, accuses Hegseth of bypassing Congress and violating constitutional limits on war powers.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close up of pharmacist hand taking meds from drawer

New federal law already targets PBM pricing and rebate practices. An opinion on why state pharmacy ownership bans go too far, and the freight-rail lesson.

Cris Cantón/Getty Images

State Healthcare Reforms Have Gone Off the Rails

Government generally has two ways to address problems in a marketplace. It can establish clear rules, target harmful conduct and let competition produce better outcomes. Or it can design the market itself by controlling business decisions and dictating how companies must operate. That is the decision facing lawmakers in healthcare today.

America's freight-rail experience shows what is at stake. For decades, the Interstate Commerce Commission controlled railroad rates, restricted routes and made it hard for carriers to shed unprofitable lines. Intended to stabilize an essential industry, the rules instead contributed to bankruptcies and lagging investment.

Keep ReadingShow less