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

An illustration of the U.S. flag on the shape of the U.S. with blue and red figures of people across it.

Every state has its own constitution.

How State Constitutions Became the Battleground for American Rights and Liberties – on Both the Left and Right

Beyond picking governors, state legislators, local officials and representatives to serve in Congress, voters in almost every state this year will have the opportunity to amend the language of their state constitution. In one state, they could potentially rewrite the constitution altogether.

Though the U.S. Constitution is rarely amended, voters frequently amend their state constitutions. In every election cycle, voters are asked to ratify constitutional amendments.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's annual policy conference at the Washington Convention Center March 6, 2018 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC

After AIPAC failed to defeat El-Sayed in the Michigan Democratic Senate primary—after spending $32 million—it said that it remains committed to defeating El-Sayed and his "radical, anti-Israel" agenda in the general election. Which means it is poised to sink tens of millions of dollars in supporting Republican Mike Rogers. It also said that Haley Stevens, his opponent, had presented "an authentic Democratic agenda." Meaning that El-Sayed did not? And they think that Mike Rogers, a MAGA Trump supporter, does compared with El-Sayed?

How can AIPAC say that El-Sayed does not present an authentic Democratic agenda when his socialist stance is much more in line with the principles stated in the Declaration of Independence than most centrist Democrats'? And making it sound like AIPAC cares about an authentic Democratic agenda is deceitful, when in the same breath they make clear that they will support Mike Rogers, a Trump lackey, in the general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research
silhouette of person using microscope

Scientists Warn of Deepening Federal Attacks on Research

Scientists and the federal government have been close partners since World War II. A landmark report by President Truman’s chief science advisor laid out a vision for government research that shaped eight decades of federally funded science. That vision is now at risk. In principle, the Trump administration has supported scientific research with its own vision for a new “golden age of science.” But in practice, the administration has upended the relationship between the government, researchers, and their institutions. The changes have alarmed working scientists and their allies, who have protested in record numbers.

In July, I moderated a webinar on “Rewriting the Rules: What’s happening to public science?” (read the transcript here). The webinar was co-sponsored by NAPA, CODE, and the Bridge Alliance, with Dr. Aaron Carroll of AcademyHealth, Dr. Chris Marcum of the Federation of American Scientists, Dr. Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Dr. Maryam Zaringhalam of the Center for Open Science. I also interviewed Cole Donovan of the Stand Up for Science Foundation by email.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democratic Party Suicide
a piece of paper cut out of the shape of a donkey
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Democratic Party Suicide

A recent New York Times article, "Moderate Democrats Prepare for 'War' Against an Ascendant Left," describes a disturbing perspective among mainstream, moderate, centrist Democrats. It is disturbing for many reasons.

First, there is the practical impact. If indeed mainstream Democrats attack socialist Democrats in a sustained, organized manner, there is only one possible result: the defeat of the Party in 2026 and the renewed vigor of Trump and his MAGA allies. Especially when combined with the all-out effort that AIPAC will mostly take to support Republican candidates running against Democratic candidates who are socialists. (See my article, "The Unscrupulousness of AIPAC.")

Keep ReadingShow less