We’ve all heard the term American exceptionalism. Ever since John Winthrop described Boston as a “city upon a hill” in 1630, Americans have largely held onto the idea that we are fundamentally superior to other nations because of their prosperous economy and culture. That belief has led to varying results throughout history. In the 19th century, the United States government embarked on a horrific expansion across North America, which was rationalized at the time by the racist belief that Americans were spreading our greater ideals for the betterment of society. Then, in the second half of the 20th century, this concept was channeled into endeavors, channeled into the space race and the promotion of democracy and freedom through American soft power. Now, in the 21st century, our belief of American exceptionalism has been reoriented towards a self-centric perspective. With President Trump working to shut down the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and further isolate America from our democratic allies around the world, particularly Ukraine, the United States is on a path toward heartless isolationism.
USAID was established through the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to extend development assistance, which includes financial and administrative support, to countries around the world, according to the USAID website. Since its creation, it has been a cornerstone of America’s global engagement, advancing our national interests in numerous ways. USAID plays a critical role in addressing public health crises, providing disaster relief and supporting individuals in conflict zones. Since then, the agency has intervened globally, fighting Malaria and HIV/AIDS, supporting the removal of unexploded ordinance, cleaning Agent Orange-contaminated soil in Vietnam and targeting global hunger and food security across 20 focus countries in Africa. USAID fosters long-term human rights progress in addition to its immediate benefits. By prioritizing foreign aid, we strengthen America’s trust and influence in the global community.
Recent reports indicate that the Trump administration plans to cancel 83% of USAID programs, according to AP News. USAID takes up less than 1% of the federal budget, according to the CATO Institute. However, a recent study has shown that, on average, the general public believes that foreign aid spending comprises 31 percent of the federal budget, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. In his State of the Union Address, President Trump claimed that USAID was an “appalling waste,” according to PolitiFact. The belief that American resources should be spent solely in America has been growing in recent years, and many political monoliths and media influencers, such as Elon Musk and Joe Rogan, have seized on isolated incidents of waste or inefficiency to villainize the agency, fueling public resentment. President Trump’s decision to cease foreign aid financial support for ninety days capitalizes on that resentment.
Like any large government agency, USAID is not without its inefficiencies. Critics argue that some of its funding is misallocated or wasteful, citing examples such as the $446,700 to promote the expansion of atheism in Nepal through the State Department or the $3,315,446 spent on “Being LGBTQ in the Caribbean.” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast has been vocal about what he describes as “radical, far-left grants” issued under the Biden administration, pointing to programs such as a $20,600 drag show in Ecuador and a $15 million condom distribution effort in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, according to the House Committee of Foreign Affairs.
While USAID is far from perfect, dissolving it entirely would be a reckless abandonment of America’s global position. Rather than dismantling the agency, efforts should focus on restructuring it to enhance transparency and efficiency, ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used effectively. The American people must also regain their understanding of soft power—the ability to influence global affairs through diplomacy, development and humanitarian aid rather than military force or a policy of neutrality. Foreign aid is not a zero-sum game; when the United States invests in stability abroad, it ultimately strengthens its own security, economy and global standing.
