If USAID is part of the executive branch, the President can set priorities and meddle in the details of any aid provided. 10,000 employees are way more than necessary to administer $40 billion in aid grants. The agency should consist of a few analysts and a few auditors to ensure the money is well spent in accordance with priorities set by the Administration. There are less than 200 nations and many of them are prohibited from receiving aid. Some national leaders do not even want the aid because it often is administered by NGOs whose goals run contrary to national culture.
USAID sets up an office in Country X to accomplish a particular goal, say preventing spread of STIs like HIV. This also helps engender good will towards the US, and builds soft power.
The CIA now has an office where they can use it as cover for being in Country X, and developing further assets/taking actions/etc...
It doesn't mean there's any money laundering, or that the purpose of the expenditures is falsified. If anything, the enablement for the CIA (assuming there is some) is ancillary to the primary objectives of helping people and building soft power - which brings long-term benefits for the US.
That depends if Congress passes laws that state "X amount shall be provided for Y reason through USAID" then POTUS must do so, and has no say otherwise. So: the text of the funding bills matter greatly to the discussion.
USAID is present in 130 countries: that's ~77 personnel per country. Without knowing exactly how they assign personnel, it's hard to criticize whether that is appropriate or not. Are USAID personnel actually on-site (e.g. doctors/nurses/administrative staff/security personnel), both taking part in direct aid as well as indirect aid (e.g. working with foreign NGOs)?
Also worth noting is that people really have no idea how much we spend on foreign aid: most people estimate we spend 25% of our budget on aid and should only spend 10% - when it's really =<1%.
I believe it is highly unlikely that Congress would pass spending bills and override almost certain vetoes that prescribe spending for any of the items Senator Ernst and conservative news media have pointed out.
"UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Funds Appropriated To The President
Operating Expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $1,214,808,000 (increased by $5,000,000) (reduced by $5,000,000), of which up to $182,221,000 may remain available until September 30, 2026: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated under this heading and under the heading “Capital Investment Fund” in this title may be made available to finance the construction (including architect and engineering services), purchase, or long-term lease of offices for use by the United States Agency for International Development, unless the USAID Administrator has identified such proposed use of funds in a report submitted to the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to the obligation of funds for such purposes: Provided further, That contracts or agreements entered into with funds appropriated under this heading may entail commitments for the expenditure of such funds through the following fiscal year: Provided further, That the authority of sections 610 and 109 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be exercised by the Secretary of State to transfer funds appropriated to carry out chapter 1 of part I of such Act to “Operating Expenses” in accordance with the provisions of those sections: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated or made available under this heading, not to exceed $250,000 may be available for representation and entertainment expenses, of which not to exceed $5,000 may be available for entertainment expenses, and not to exceed $100,500 shall be for official residence expenses, for USAID during the current fiscal year: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading, up to $20,000,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title II of this Act under the heading “Capital Investment Fund”, subject to prior consultation with, and the regular notification procedures of, the Committees on Appropriations.
Capital Investment Fund
For necessary expenses for overseas construction and related costs, and for the procurement and enhancement of information technology and related capital investments, pursuant to section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $259,100,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That this amount is in addition to funds otherwise available for such purposes: Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading shall be available subject to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
Office of Inspector General
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $90,000,000, of which up to $19,500,000 may remain available until September 30, 2026, for the Office of Inspector General of the United States Agency for International Development."
Just an example that Congress can specify the amounts appropriated and what they are appropriated for: that's more addressing that Congress can write these things how they want to.
I remember being caught off guard when vacationing in Fiji back in 2016 by the blatant pro china signs on the roads pointing out the power boxes/power lines linking communities was paid for by China. I though to myself that's going to seep into the populace in the long term... they can't be that bad they gave us $ or built power lines to serve distant villages.
It also made me realize we should be doing the same thing... don't know much history of USAID... but that kind of softcore propaganda got to have a ROI for the money man!
It'd not surprise me if USAID is used by the CIA here and there as a cover for being in a region.
The biggest benefits (besides saving people's lives around the world) is the good will and soft power it builds for the US. It makes other countries more willing to work with the US rather than our rivals.
The *other* conspiracy we could discuss is that USAID is being dismantled to diminish the US and help our rivals - China specifically stands to fill the vacuum as an outgrowth of their Belt and Road initiatives.
I'm starting to wonder another thing, which is - is the goal to get into these systems and just erase or otherwise heavily modify them to make any attempts to reverse the damage in the future relatively impossible to do? I am reasonably sure there are backups, but if these guys are getting into places they shouldn't with unsecured devices and doing who knows what I wouldn't put my past them.
Yes that is also a big worry of mine. DOGE employees are “special government employees” and likely have clearances. Trump can fast track TS/SCI for any DOGE employee needing access, so it’s at least “legal” under the color of law. But agencies get to decide what’s “need to know” and what isn’t. Unless those agencies are eviscerated at the top.
Well, if they're really classified as special government employees then there's an expiration date on how long they're allowed to be so (~130 days IIRC). And regardless, they need to use government-cleared systems and not whatever private servers/laptops/USB drives/etc... they're using to do whatever the heck they're doing - like taking down USAID's publicly-accessible database of programs or the US Census statistics databases or the code behind Social Security payments.
At some point one wonders: if they were taking action to benefit our rivals, would it look different than what they're doing now?
Elon Musk’s War on USAID: A Power Play to Silence Investigators and Protect Starlink’s Russian Ties?
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
The richest man on earth, Elon Musk, is trying to kill a department, USAID, that helps the poorest people on earth because USAID has been investigating Musk and his Starlink company, and their ties to Vladimir Putin and Russia.
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Is this why Musk is attacking USAID?
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
It certainly looks that way. Elon Musk’s push to dismantle USAID aligns suspiciously well with the agency’s investigation into Starlink’s alleged ties to Russian interests. While Musk and the Trump administration justify USAID’s elimination under the banner of “government efficiency” and “cutting wasteful spending,” critics argue that this move conveniently shields Starlink from scrutiny.
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
If USAID’s investigation uncovered any wrongdoing, such as Starlink facilitating Russian communication despite sanctions, it could pose serious legal and reputational risks for Musk. His role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) gives him the perfect platform to undermine the agency investigating him, raising obvious concerns about conflicts of interest.
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
So, is Musk trying to kill USAID because it’s investigating him?
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
The timing and motivations are highly suspect, and many believe this is a case of the richest man on Earth using his influence to protect his business, even if it comes at the cost of humanitarian aid for the world’s poorest people.
The Trump-Musk attack on USAID is the height of odium.
USAID represents the very best of the U.S,
Trump and Musk remind me of a deadly dowager from the 1920's, Mrs. Frothingham. She went to the US Supreme Court to end of fed program which gave food to starving, pregnant women. I wrote a comic poem about that female Scrooge. I hope you enjoy:
If USAID is part of the executive branch, the President can set priorities and meddle in the details of any aid provided. 10,000 employees are way more than necessary to administer $40 billion in aid grants. The agency should consist of a few analysts and a few auditors to ensure the money is well spent in accordance with priorities set by the Administration. There are less than 200 nations and many of them are prohibited from receiving aid. Some national leaders do not even want the aid because it often is administered by NGOs whose goals run contrary to national culture.
This is why I’m convinced it’s a hive of spies.
Could be but I have trouble seeing how some of the grants could be a cover operation based on their description. Maybe it's money laundering to hide the real purpose of the expenditures. RedState has their own commercial pilot author. Bonchie provided a good story about Joni Ernst's findings. https://redstate.com/bonchie/2025/02/04/joni-ernst-drops-devestating-usaid-thread-and-you-wont-believe-where-your-money-has-been-going-n2185190
USAID sets up an office in Country X to accomplish a particular goal, say preventing spread of STIs like HIV. This also helps engender good will towards the US, and builds soft power.
The CIA now has an office where they can use it as cover for being in Country X, and developing further assets/taking actions/etc...
It doesn't mean there's any money laundering, or that the purpose of the expenditures is falsified. If anything, the enablement for the CIA (assuming there is some) is ancillary to the primary objectives of helping people and building soft power - which brings long-term benefits for the US.
That depends if Congress passes laws that state "X amount shall be provided for Y reason through USAID" then POTUS must do so, and has no say otherwise. So: the text of the funding bills matter greatly to the discussion.
USAID is present in 130 countries: that's ~77 personnel per country. Without knowing exactly how they assign personnel, it's hard to criticize whether that is appropriate or not. Are USAID personnel actually on-site (e.g. doctors/nurses/administrative staff/security personnel), both taking part in direct aid as well as indirect aid (e.g. working with foreign NGOs)?
Also worth noting is that people really have no idea how much we spend on foreign aid: most people estimate we spend 25% of our budget on aid and should only spend 10% - when it's really =<1%.
I believe it is highly unlikely that Congress would pass spending bills and override almost certain vetoes that prescribe spending for any of the items Senator Ernst and conservative news media have pointed out.
An example from 2024, https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8771/text:
"UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Funds Appropriated To The President
Operating Expenses
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $1,214,808,000 (increased by $5,000,000) (reduced by $5,000,000), of which up to $182,221,000 may remain available until September 30, 2026: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated under this heading and under the heading “Capital Investment Fund” in this title may be made available to finance the construction (including architect and engineering services), purchase, or long-term lease of offices for use by the United States Agency for International Development, unless the USAID Administrator has identified such proposed use of funds in a report submitted to the Committees on Appropriations at least 15 days prior to the obligation of funds for such purposes: Provided further, That contracts or agreements entered into with funds appropriated under this heading may entail commitments for the expenditure of such funds through the following fiscal year: Provided further, That the authority of sections 610 and 109 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 may be exercised by the Secretary of State to transfer funds appropriated to carry out chapter 1 of part I of such Act to “Operating Expenses” in accordance with the provisions of those sections: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated or made available under this heading, not to exceed $250,000 may be available for representation and entertainment expenses, of which not to exceed $5,000 may be available for entertainment expenses, and not to exceed $100,500 shall be for official residence expenses, for USAID during the current fiscal year: Provided further, That of the funds appropriated under this heading, up to $20,000,000 may be transferred to, and merged with, funds appropriated or otherwise made available in title II of this Act under the heading “Capital Investment Fund”, subject to prior consultation with, and the regular notification procedures of, the Committees on Appropriations.
Capital Investment Fund
For necessary expenses for overseas construction and related costs, and for the procurement and enhancement of information technology and related capital investments, pursuant to section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $259,100,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That this amount is in addition to funds otherwise available for such purposes: Provided further, That funds appropriated under this heading shall be available subject to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations.
Office of Inspector General
For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of section 667 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, $90,000,000, of which up to $19,500,000 may remain available until September 30, 2026, for the Office of Inspector General of the United States Agency for International Development."
???? The only specifics I see are the limitations on capital investment and an outrageous amount for the IG.
Just an example that Congress can specify the amounts appropriated and what they are appropriated for: that's more addressing that Congress can write these things how they want to.
We agree on that point. I just don't see Congress passing the egregious examples and overriding a veto.
Well, sometimes the US has priorities that are not in the interest of the leaders of countries where USAID takes action - like Syria.
That's not necessarily our concern.
The plain language of the law would bar USAID grants to most Muslim countries.
I remember being caught off guard when vacationing in Fiji back in 2016 by the blatant pro china signs on the roads pointing out the power boxes/power lines linking communities was paid for by China. I though to myself that's going to seep into the populace in the long term... they can't be that bad they gave us $ or built power lines to serve distant villages.
It also made me realize we should be doing the same thing... don't know much history of USAID... but that kind of softcore propaganda got to have a ROI for the money man!
We did do the same thing, and it did provide a huge ROI.
And we're trashing it all.
It'd not surprise me if USAID is used by the CIA here and there as a cover for being in a region.
The biggest benefits (besides saving people's lives around the world) is the good will and soft power it builds for the US. It makes other countries more willing to work with the US rather than our rivals.
The *other* conspiracy we could discuss is that USAID is being dismantled to diminish the US and help our rivals - China specifically stands to fill the vacuum as an outgrowth of their Belt and Road initiatives.
I'm starting to wonder another thing, which is - is the goal to get into these systems and just erase or otherwise heavily modify them to make any attempts to reverse the damage in the future relatively impossible to do? I am reasonably sure there are backups, but if these guys are getting into places they shouldn't with unsecured devices and doing who knows what I wouldn't put my past them.
Yes that is also a big worry of mine. DOGE employees are “special government employees” and likely have clearances. Trump can fast track TS/SCI for any DOGE employee needing access, so it’s at least “legal” under the color of law. But agencies get to decide what’s “need to know” and what isn’t. Unless those agencies are eviscerated at the top.
"Unless those agencies are eviscerated at the top."
Like what happened at the Treasury?
Well, if they're really classified as special government employees then there's an expiration date on how long they're allowed to be so (~130 days IIRC). And regardless, they need to use government-cleared systems and not whatever private servers/laptops/USB drives/etc... they're using to do whatever the heck they're doing - like taking down USAID's publicly-accessible database of programs or the US Census statistics databases or the code behind Social Security payments.
At some point one wonders: if they were taking action to benefit our rivals, would it look different than what they're doing now?
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Elon Musk’s War on USAID: A Power Play to Silence Investigators and Protect Starlink’s Russian Ties?
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
The richest man on earth, Elon Musk, is trying to kill a department, USAID, that helps the poorest people on earth because USAID has been investigating Musk and his Starlink company, and their ties to Vladimir Putin and Russia.
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
Is this why Musk is attacking USAID?
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
It certainly looks that way. Elon Musk’s push to dismantle USAID aligns suspiciously well with the agency’s investigation into Starlink’s alleged ties to Russian interests. While Musk and the Trump administration justify USAID’s elimination under the banner of “government efficiency” and “cutting wasteful spending,” critics argue that this move conveniently shields Starlink from scrutiny.
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
If USAID’s investigation uncovered any wrongdoing, such as Starlink facilitating Russian communication despite sanctions, it could pose serious legal and reputational risks for Musk. His role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) gives him the perfect platform to undermine the agency investigating him, raising obvious concerns about conflicts of interest.
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
So, is Musk trying to kill USAID because it’s investigating him?
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
The timing and motivations are highly suspect, and many believe this is a case of the richest man on Earth using his influence to protect his business, even if it comes at the cost of humanitarian aid for the world’s poorest people.
☆☆☆☆☆☆☆
https://www.foxbusiness.com/fox-news-world/russian-occupiers-using-elon-musks-starlink-ukraine-officials-say.amp
https://www.voanews.com/amp/russia-uses-thousands-of-spacex-starlink-terminals-in-ukraine-report-says-/7489557.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-02-11/ukraine-claims-russia-uses-musk-s-starlink-terminals-near-front
https://thedefensepost.com/2024/02/12/russian-military-starlink-battlefield/amp/
https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2024/02/russia-using-spacexs-starlink-satellite-devices-ukraine-sources-say/394080/
The Trump-Musk attack on USAID is the height of odium.
USAID represents the very best of the U.S,
Trump and Musk remind me of a deadly dowager from the 1920's, Mrs. Frothingham. She went to the US Supreme Court to end of fed program which gave food to starving, pregnant women. I wrote a comic poem about that female Scrooge. I hope you enjoy:
https://davidgottfried.substack.com/p/donald-trump-the-latest-iteration