Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Americans may have voted to dismantle government, but they must not leave their children behind

Opinion

Americans may have voted to dismantle government, but they must not leave their children behind
Pallets of food, water and supplies staged to be delivered… | Flickr

A few weeks ago, in a windowless hotel ballroom in Washington, DC, I sat in a conference room full of school administrators from around the world as they received increasingly urgent messages about the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and began processing the devastating impact on the families they serve. Their stillness and silence made their shock, worry, and grief physically palpable: In the name of saving taxpayer dollars equal to less than the cost of a dozen bombers - and now in continued defiance of a court order - the Trump administration is intent on cuts that will strand thousands of American children in foreign countries, trigger international funding crises, and surrender diplomatic influence built through a program that has helped shape hearts and minds around the globe for decades.

A conference meant to be a gathering of colleagues planning for our students' future instead became a vigil of bewildered professionals trying to decode contradictory directives cascading from administration offices. The scene underlined how quickly "government efficiency" can shatter real lives.


The implications hit like aftershocks: roughly three thousand American children will suddenly be uprooted from their schools; their parents' legal status in foreign nations will evaporate; and many of these families who have no permanent homes in the U.S. or otherwise will be left adrift. A federal judge temporarily barred the agency from putting workers on leave as planned, agreeing that the move could create “irreparable harms” to USAID families, finances, and security overseas.

As a consultant who works with international schools serving American students abroad and the adult child of a family that served USAID for two decades, I understood their bewilderment. "There is no way that people in the U.S. can imagine what this means," one head of a school in western Europe told me, requesting anonymity. "For those of us who have lived abroad and educated the children of American diplomats, it's terrifying. This isn't just about USAID - it's about America's standing in the world and what happens when we abandon our posts."

It is also about the children.

USAID, a cornerstone of American diplomacy since 1961, currently has over 2,500 Americans on assignment in 60 countries. These public servants and their families carry America's promise across borders. In 2023 alone, they helped manage $40 billion in foreign assistance, pulling children from the depths of poverty, rushing aid to communities torn apart by disaster, and building the diplomatic bridges that make America safer and stronger. Since 2009, their maternal and child health programs have saved 4.6 million children and 200,000 women, protected 6 million lives through malaria prevention, and helped rebuild communities in crisis across the globe.

The children of USAID families belong to a unique tribe: those who choose to be citizens of the world rather than a single nation. Their lives abroad create a particular kind of vulnerability - frequent moves, distance from families, exposure to political violence - one that forges deep bonds across borders and cultures. I have seen how these school communities become more than classrooms - they are islands of stability in lives marked by constant change.

The educators’ panicked questions were existential: What happens to families whose right to stay in foreign countries depends on their USAID credentials? U.S. government employees assigned overseas are granted allowances intended to pay for an education equivalent to public schools in the United States. Many of these allowances are paid directly to schools, and many of those schools have not yet been paid their full tuition fees, leaving heads of schools wondering how they will pay their contracted teachers. What do they tell a teenager whose AP exams – and college dreams – might vanish overnight? How do they comfort a child watching their parents pack up their entire world with no opportunity to say goodbye to friends and cherished adults?

This administration believes it has a mandate for change. Forty-nine percent of Americans who cast a ballot in November 2024 – only 32 percent of Americans – voted for Donald Trump, whose explicit campaign promises to dismantle America’s administrative state are being implemented with efficient ferocity. But even if we accept this administration's insistence that USAID workers must be dismissed, indeed, we can protect these employees' children, mostly American citizens, who never voted for their displacement. Unlike natural disasters or global pandemics, this storm comes with an off switch if Congress or this administration chooses to use it.

Republicans and Democrats should act in the best interest of these students by ensuring that, regardless of what form the new American order ultimately takes, USAID families can complete the current academic year in their assigned countries and plan for where they will continue their schooling. This should include extending employees’ formal assignments to ensure they retain their visas.

While the shutdown of government offices and emails makes it hard to confirm the exact dollar amount, Congress must ensure that the current academic year’s funding for international schools serving approximately 2000 USAID families is disbursed as already authorized by Congress so schools do not bear the burden of funding shortfalls.

We must all call on America’s leaders to mitigate the human fallout of this administration's determination to dismantle our nation's administrative agencies and programs. Perhaps there are ways for America to be organized that do not rely on existing systems, which many of us recognize have shortcomings. However, within a complex infrastructure, it is hard to anticipate exactly what might happen when we change one piece.

While Americans struggle to find common ground, we can agree that our children should not pay the price of hasty change. We face a moment when doing right by our youngest citizens aligns perfectly with political wisdom, ideological integrity, and moral necessity. America must care for the families and the educators who choose to serve us, whether at home or abroad.

Ulcca Joshi Hansen, PhD, JD is a futurist, the author of the award-winning book The Future of Smart, and a Paul & Daisy Soros Public Voices Fellow of The OpEd Project. Her research and writing focus on the social impact on communities during periods of rapid social change.


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