Op-Ed: The Fight for USAID

“I do not see how anyone who is concerned – as we all are – about the growing threats to freedom around the globe – and who is asking what more we can do as a people – can weaken or oppose the single most important program available for building the frontiers of freedom.”

–President John F. Kennedy on May 21, 1961 in his message to Congress establishing USAID

I am honored to have served with USAID from 1984-2010. From 1991-2010, I directed a special fund created by Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy that provided assistance for children and other civilian victims of armed conflict and torture, including special assistance for civilian victims of landmines.

Over the course of my career, I worked on two major global initiatives, which in many respects were the equivalent of “social revolutions.” One was the Green Revolution in the 1960s and 1970s, which saved millions of lives with the development and dissemination of high-yield rice varieties. The other was the Child Survival Campaign of the 1980s and ‘90s, which saw tremendous gains worldwide in the reduction of infant and child morbidity and mortality rates affecting millions of children through improved public health interventions, including the global acceptance of Oral Rehydration Therapy to prevent death from cholera and other diarrheal diseases. USAID had a major role in leading both of these incredibly successful, life-saving campaigns.

This said, I will concede that working at USAID can be difficult. Decisions are made by committee, many of which are often overruled by political considerations and/or interference. It changes direction every four to eight years, and important strategic directions usually swing 180 degrees every time there is a change of party in power. 

While USAID was created by Presidential executive order in 1961, in 1998, Congress formalized USAID’s role as an independent agency and all of its structures, procedures, authorities, and requirements are the result of decades of Congressional guidance and direction.

It is important to recognize that no good deed comes without cost. Program quality requires attention and accountability. And accountability requires time and effort.

Most of USAID’s work is provided through grants with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and public international organizations (PIOs) and contracts with for-profit organizations. Requests for proposals and applications for grants contain a multitude of demands for accountability and scrutiny that are expensive and time consuming for awardees to address. In addition, they often require awardees a-thousand-and-one cultural, political, religious, or scientific concerns that may or may not have any direct impact on the intended objectives of the specific projects or programs.

In fact, when I worked at USAID, my first advice for any small organization looking for funds was to look at USAID as an absolute last resort. There are few donors/funders, private or public, whose grants requirements are more onerous, expensive, or time-demanding for applicants than USAID.

USAID is a recognized leader in global humanitarian assistance and economic development.  But it’s not perfect and absolutely needs sound, constructive, and, most importantly, technically informed examination and reform. But the SS USAID does not need to be sunk and scuttled! It needs thoughtful changes in design and direction that are based on perspectives provided by a wide range of experienced experts.

To cut off the nose to spite the face is never wise. To cut off the best expression of American interest and concern for the developing world to spite Democrats is just plain stupid, cruel, un-American, and self-defeating – especially during this most perilous period in the history of our nation.

USAID needs overhaul and re-design, but not for the reasons Messers, Trump, and Musk cite,  and certainly not with the nuclear option he has embarked on. In fact, his accusations and concerns are maliciously false, and his reactions wrong. They totally miss the boat!