Marco Rubio cuts billions from foreign aid

In early 2017, the Trump administration under Secretary of State Marco Rubio initiated significant reforms aimed at reducing foreign aid expenditures, identifying nearly $60 billion in savings primarily through cuts to the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Rubio utilized a 90-day pause on foreign aid to assess and eliminate grants and programs that were misaligned with the administration's priorities. This review led to the suspension of over 9,100 grants worth approximately $15.9 billion, with 4,100 grants totaling around $4.4 billion marked for elimination at the State Department alone. While USAID saw even steeper reductions with cuts of about 92%, affecting nearly 5,800 awards valued at $54 billion, humanitarian assistance, including food aid and treatments for diseases like HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria, was exempted from these cuts. The underlying intention of the administration's reform efforts was to align foreign assistance more closely with American interests, with a focus on promoting safety, strength, and prosperity for the United States. Secretary Rubio established a strict evaluation framework for determining the effectiveness and necessity of assistance programs, focusing on whether they contributed to these core goals. Despite facing legal challenges, including court battles over the suspension of nearly $2 billion in foreign aid payments, the administration pressed forward with its agenda, hoping to implement lasting changes in how grants are administered. Rubio's reforms coincided with diplomatic successes, such as the release of American detainees abroad. The administration aimed not only to streamline funding but also to restore a degree of sovereignty to American foreign policy, pushing back against broader interpretations of international humanitarian obligations that often conflicted with domestic policy priorities. Responses to these budget cuts generated considerable debate, raising concerns among critics about the potential impacts on global humanitarian efforts. As the Trump administration pursued changes, Congress was engaged in discussions about the future of foreign assistance, with a particular emphasis on how those allocations could be better managed to prevent drift away from their intended missions. Continuing opposition from various sectors suggested that the cuts might negatively impact programs seen as vital for international development and stability, highlighting the tensions between fiscal responsibility and humanitarian commitments.