Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

USAID Bears the American Identity

Opinion

USAID flag outside a building
A USAID flag outside a building.
J. David Ake/Getty Images

What an agency, organization, or even an idea becomes will always resemble to some degree—though it fluctuates across time—the inspiration at its inception.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was born from the US Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and it enshrined for the first time in the short history of international development assistance the concept of people’s “participation” in their own change and growth. Now, generations later, based on evaluations world-wide across cultures, we know that the local beneficiaries need to be integral to the design, management, and evaluation processes in order for initiatives to provide continued gain for the people.


Development today, beyond any doubt, has revealed that the longevity of initiatives is primarily determined by the measure of participation. USAID was spawned on this idea, majorly pioneering the principle that beneficiary decision-making on the projects that impact their lives drives sustainability.

USAID was also founded on a corollary, indelible concept: poverty alleviation that addresses the economic, social, and environmental conditions that oppress people and deny them livelihood and peace is, in and of itself, the high purpose. Geopolitics is not the single or even primary factor for gaining assistance through USAID. Rather, uplifting humanity from the tortures of extreme poverty, disease, and catastrophes is its calling.

USAID delinked assistance being only provided to contain the Soviet Union. Human suffering, wherever it may emanate, is worthy of our attention and eradication. How these central concepts of USAID unfold in those nations of the world where it is invited is particular to the situations in which host nations find themselves.

For example, the experience of the High Atlas Foundation in implementing USAID’s Dakira cultural preservation program in Morocco (concluded at the end of 2024) ensured that today’s young people sincerely internalize their nation’s indelible heritage of Muslim, Jewish and Christian solidarity, integration, and shared experience and partnership for survival and growth. This is a priority held by the government and the people of this North African, Islamic country, and USAID provided the support for it.

In a world where religious-based strife, misunderstanding, separation, and even violence is ever present, worrisome, and unsustainable, the governments of Morocco and the United States together recognized that the kingdom’s experience and its domestic and global knowledge-sharing provide an inspiring model for young people and policymakers. In fact, interfaith collaboration is not only essential for peace, but our best development and growth depends upon it.

Morocco stands for intercultural dialogue and connectivity leading to livelihood, health, and education. It is not only a necessary, most viable pathway for itself but is an emblem for the world. USAID not only saves lives through the provision of essential medicine, food, and support in the face of overwhelming disaster, but it also is a critical partner in advancing American ideals with nations who also strive for a more perfect union and inspire others through their journey.

To be sure, there is an undeniable phenomenon among organizations and agencies as they grow and naturally change over decades. In time, it becomes increasingly difficult for any entity—including religions or institutions, be they public, civil, academic, or private—to remain absolutely true to the original vision that launched them.

How recognizable would nations of the world be to their founders? How recognizable are conglomerates to their original creators or religions to the prophecies that begot them? There may be no greater challenge for any collective body than to remain consistently true to the original mission over time.

Certainly, the High Atlas Foundation, dedicated to change driven by the people, finds it increasingly difficult to launch every action in every location with empowerment and building self-belief and confidence as the essential beginning. It is very difficult.

So, too, USAID needed to return to its community participation roots. With its necessary, admirable commitment to implementers’ financial, programmatic, and reporting compliance, USAID began to heavily rely upon larger organizations to administer local actions around the world. Those organizations in turn partnered with national organizations working at the local level. USAID re-emphasized that localization enacted alongside indigenous civil and private groups is critical for effective development.

The lessons in international development generated by USAID have profound implications for the United States’ internal growth. For example, cultural preservation efforts in Morocco, financed by USAID, underscore the centrality of interfaith partnership for achieving sustainable benefits. That vital lesson should be a guide for the White House Faith-Based Office, which stretches across federal agencies.

Community managed economic projects point to how decentralized administrative systems emerge from carrying out such actions. This points to ways the U.S. federal government can strengthen the enduring core of the country, which is its federalist system.

Yes, USAID promotes a more stable and prosperous world and helps to alleviate immediate suffering, but it also brings home vital lessons to promote the U.S.’ own best growth. The Farmer-to-Farmer Program, for example, enabled U.S. agricultural experts to devote millions of hours to share their vast knowledge with nations of the world. What they have learned during their volunteering with communities abroad has enhanced their own work, productivity, efficiency, and opportunities at home.

USAID is a reflection or extension of the American ideal and may be retrenched for a time, but no doubt, one day, it will continue. It must, lest its expression, which rings from every true American anthem, will grow silent. It is therefore bound to the destiny of the United States, whatever its iteration.

Yossef Ben-Meir is the President of the High Atlas Foundation.

Read More

Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

Donald Trump Jr.' s plane landed in Nuuk, Greenland, where he made a short private visit, weeks after his father, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, suggested Washington annex the autonomous Danish territory.

(Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images)

Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

In early 2025, before Donald Trump was even sworn into office, he sent a plane with his name in giant letters on it to Nuuk, Greenland, where his son, Don Jr., and other MAGA allies preened for cameras and stomped around the mineral-rich Danish territory that Trump had been casually threatening to invade or somehow acquire like stereotypical American tourists — like they owned it already.

“Don Jr. and my Reps landing in Greenland,” Trump wrote. “The reception has been great. They and the Free World need safety, security, strength, and PEACE! This is a deal that must happen. MAGA. MAKE GREENLAND GREAT AGAIN!”

Keep ReadingShow less
The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

Political Midterm Election Redistricting

Getty images

The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

“Gerrymander” was one of seven runners-up for Merriam-Webster’s 2025 word of the year, which was “slop,” although “gerrymandering” is often used. Both words are closely related and frequently used interchangeably, with the main difference being their function as nouns versus verbs or processes. Throughout 2025, as Republicans and Democrats used redistricting to boost their electoral advantages, “gerrymander” and “gerrymandering” surged in popularity as search terms, highlighting their ongoing relevance in current politics and public awareness. However, as an old Capitol Hill dog, I realized that 2025 made me less inclined to explain the definitions of these words to anyone who asked for more detail.

“Did the Democrats or Republicans Start the Gerrymandering Fight?” is the obvious question many people are asking: Who started it?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. and Puerto Rico flags
Puerto Rico: America's oldest democratic crisis
TexPhoto/Getty Image

Puerto Rico’s New Transparency Law Attacks a Right Forged in Struggle

At a time when public debate in the United States is consumed by questions of secrecy, accountability and the selective release of government records, Puerto Rico has quietly taken a dangerous step in the opposite direction.

In December 2025, Gov. Jenniffer González signed Senate Bill 63 into law, introducing sweeping amendments to Puerto Rico’s transparency statute, known as the Transparency and Expedited Procedure for Access to Public Information Act. Framed as administrative reform, the new law (Act 156 of 2025) instead restricts access to public information and weakens one of the archipelago’s most important accountability and democratic tools.

Keep ReadingShow less