Trump Uses Meat Cleaver To Chop Programs Vital For Much Of The World
Trump is acting just like trump, shortsighted, simplistic, disingenuous and dangerous when he bellows about cutting trillions of dollars from the budget, firing thousands of employees and dismantling the “deep state” with no plan for how to replace the many critical programs he will destroy.
Trump did not invent the strategy. It is central to Project 2025, the far right Heritage Foundation’s appalling blueprint for creating a truly imperial presidency by slashing and burning federal programs over the next four years. During his presidential campaign, trump claimed to know nothing about Project 2025.
Trump is dissimulating as he follows the Project 2025 template to cut billions in federal programs, as he uses a sledgehammer to weed out supposed abuse and trimming away allegedly wasteful programs and wasteful employees. In fact, his goal is not saving money but eliminating thousands of employees he believes are part of a disloyal “deep state” and replacing them with local acolytes.
Trump also is gutting social programs that have been a traditional bugaboo of Republicans while his promises to emasculate the government appeal to his MAGA base. He plans to kill programs that are deemed to be heavily involved in Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), LGBTQ support and other programs that violate the views of his most radical supporters.
Trump has named Elon Musk to lead a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), in identifying how to smash the deep state. DOGE remains an unofficial department. Musk, the richest man on Earth, known as the virtual president, won the appointment after donating $281 million to trump’s 2024 election campaign.
If there was ever any doubt about the real power in Washington, D.C., Musk held a news conference in the Oval Office, while trump sat subserviently and watched. What was even more astounding was that Musk out-spoke trump, 3,666 words to trump’s 2,487.
Both offered not a single piece of evidence with their claim that they have uncovered billions of dollars of government waste and fraud.
DOGE is a temporary organization under the U.S. DOGE Service, formerly known as the U.S. Digital Service. DOGE is not a Cabinet-level department of the government but was created by an executive order by trump. It is scheduled to end on July 4, 2026.
Musk wants to slash $2 trillion from federal spending. The DOGE task force, meanwhile, has not been a model of frugality as its budget already has been ballooned by $14.4 million.
Nobody likes waste and abuse but the way to uncover and remove it is by a careful examination of programs and by wielding a scalpel and not a sledgehammer. A sledgehammer will not cull the fat from the bone; it will destroy the bone and deprive needy people and nations around the world of critical assistance.
Trump is using the same perverse strategy to deport immigrants. He said his plan is to banish undocumented immigrants and immigrants with criminal records. But thus far, his sweeping net has been totally indiscriminate, catching many legal citizens and immigrants who either have no criminal record or have committed petty crimes like failing to pay parking tickets. But it appeals to his base who crave immediate results, whatever the cost.
The introduction to Project 2025 says it all.
“Project 2025 is a historic movement, brought together by over 100 respected organizations from across the conservative movement, to take down the Deep State and return the government to the people.”
A key to trump’s plan is to layoff or terminate thousands of federal employees by offering them a buyout. A federal judge has ordered the buyout plan to be temporarily delayed while court challenges are heard. Trump has not addressed how individuals and families would deal with the loss of thousands of jobs in the U.S. and abroad.
Trump plans to order federal agencies to prepare for widespread firings of government workers in the coming months. The executive order will force agencies to work with DOGE to identify large-scale reductions in force and determine which agency components may be eliminated outright.
There are about 2.3 million U.S. civilian employees, excluding the Postal Service. Security-related agencies account for most of the federal workforce, but hundreds of thousands work in jobs overseeing veterans’ healthcare, inspecting agriculture and paying the government’s bills, among other jobs.
Trump supporters have said the president has simply “learned from the master” in attempts to cut government jobs. They refer to 377,000 federal jobs eliminated in the 1990s during Bill Clinton’s presidency.
Clinton reduced the workforce by more than 377,000 employees as part of an initiative called the National Partnership for Reinventing Government. After just two months as president, in March 1993, Clinton announced the creation of the National Performance Review, led by Vice President Al Gore. The goal was not to eliminate any amorphous, bogus deep state but “to make the entire Federal Government both less expensive and more efficient, and to change the culture of our national bureaucracy away from complacency and entitlement toward initiative and empowerment.”
But the Clinton plan was very different than the DOGE plan.
The Clinton review had widespread, bi-partisan support in Congress. Democrats are completely opposed to the trump plan and support among Republicans is showing cracks. The Clinton plan took six months of study and made 384 recommendations to improve the federal bureaucracy. Musk is the leading force behind the trump plan which is being implemented with no extensive reviews.
Under Clinton, implementation of the proposed policies took many months and some required Congressional legislation. The trump plan for early retirements and forced resignations went into effect with no review process and no Congressional backing.
Federal employee labor unions have sued the trump administration over the legality of the buyout, and a federal judge has temporarily blocked the offer in order to review the lawsuits.
USAID
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which spent $32.5 billion in 2024 on worldwide health and humanitarian aid, would be essentially wiped out. Trump and Musk both attacked the agency for being wasteful and backing liberal causes like DEI, with Musk calling it a “criminal organization” on X.
The USAID workforce of more than 5,000 foreign service officers, civil servants and personal service contractors would be cut to about 290 workers. The status of the approximately 5,000 foreign service nationals serving around the world is not yet clear.
For example, the entire region of sub-Saharan Africa will have just 12 staff members or less. Only a dozen employees would be dedicated to the entire continent of Africa and eight people for all of Asia. Europe, which had about 600 dedicated employees between both the field and the Washington, D.C., offices last year, will be served by just 10 people.
Humanitarian aid ranges from anti-malaria and anti-tuberculosis programs to fighting AIDS. Much of the 2024 USAID went to Africa and the Middle East. Proposed cuts could reduce assistance to Ukraine, Jordan, and Ethiopia. In 2024, the US donated more than $5.4 billion in aid to Ukraine through USAID.
The agency gave more than $1.23 billion to Jordan last year, mostly in exchange for the country cooperating with US interests, such as providing intelligence support and housing Syrian refugees.
USAID also gave slightly more than $1.2 billion to Ethiopia and nearly that amount to Congo amid continued conflict, climate shocks and food shortages.
Other countries that received hundreds of millions of dollars from the agency included South Sudan, Somalia, Nigeria, Sudan, and Yemen.
The agency devoted more than $2.3 billion to fighting AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria globally; about $290 million to making vaccines and immunization more widespread; and nearly $188 million to international development and capital investment.
USAID, founded in 1961 during the Cold War, had three top partners in 2024: the World Bank Group, which received $4 billion; the World Food Program, which received $3.4 billion; and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which received $2.3 billion. About one-quarter of USAID funding came from the Economic Support Fund, while $7.4 billion came from the State Department and global health programs.
The non-profit, Center for Global Development examined which countries are most exposed to USAID cuts and where the aid is so critically needed.
The center reported that about 7 percent of USAID funds went to Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, which was created in 2000 to provide vaccines to the poorest countries. The alliance has helped vaccinate more than 1.1 billion children in 78 lower-income countries, preventing more than 18.8 million future deaths.
Gavi’s core partners include the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the World Bank and the Gates Foundation. Gavi also works with sovereign governments, private sector foundations and corporate partners.
About 7 percent of USAID assistance went to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria. The Global Fund is a worldwide partnership that raises and invests more than $5 billion a year to fight deadly infectious diseases, and strengthen health systems and pandemic preparedness in more than 100 of the hardest hit countries. Since 2002, the partnership has saved 65 million lives.
Contributions to Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria are specifically earmarked and authorized by Congress. The two organizations, in turn, spend about 93 percent and 92 percent, respectively, directly on delivering supplies and health services directly to countries.
Another 6 percent goes to bilateral malaria, HIV and TB programs. The funds account for most of PEPFAR and the President’s Malaria Initiative, and includes procurement contracts that purchase and distribute bed nets, AIDS drugs, and other essential medicines for use in partner countries.
PEPFAR, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, has invested more than $110 billion in the global HIV/AIDS response, the largest commitment by any nation to address a single disease in history. The program has saved 26 million lives, prevented millions of HIV infections, and accelerated progress toward controlling the global HIV/AIDS pandemic in more than 50 countries.
Information on the President’s Malaria Initiative was not available. The website had no information and a note said that “To be consistent with the President’s Executive Orders, this website is currently undergoing maintenance as we expeditiously and thoroughly review all of the content.”
Another 14 percent of USAID funds support humanitarian and emergency relief, with 6 percent going to US-based organizations as the prime implementing partners and 8 percent channeled through the World Food Programme. Cumulatively, the US Emergency Food Security Program provided essential support to 77 million people across 56 countries in 2023.
USAID oversees programs in 65 countries focusing on medical assistance, food and nutrition, HIV treatment, and aid to people in conflict zones. Most of the 2024 USAID was sent to Ukraine, Jordan, and Ethiopia. Half of the funding went to either humanitarian or health and population purposes, while another $7 billion was spent on governance.
The center found that a one-year pause in USAID funding would cut 1 percent of the gross national income (GNI) in 23 economies. GNI is the total amount of money earned by a nation’s people and businesses. Eight economies would experience a devastating hit of 3 percent or more. Eight low-income countries and eight lower-middle income countries face losing over a fifth of the total foreign assistance they receive.
“Should the U.S. fully turn away from the world’s poorest countries, the effect on extremely poor people will be devastating,” the center noted. “For governments prepared to commit a modest share of taxpayer revenue to saving lives, averting malnutrition, and maintaining stability, this is a moment to step up. Aid budgets must be reoriented towards the poorest countries — before the cost of inaction becomes irreversible.”
Since the 1960s, the US has been the world’s largest aid donor in absolute terms. A major feature of US support is that it has tended to focus on the poorest countries.
Of the 26 poorest countries in the world, the center identified eight where more than a fifth of their assistance comes from USAID, South Sudan, Somalia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Uganda and Ethiopia.
In all but two of the countries USAID’s focus is categorized as “emergency response.” In Liberia, basic health is the main sector while in Uganda it is population and reproductive health.
Many lower income countries that receive US support are all already relatively under-aided. Those countries received $71 of assistance per person on average in 2023. With potential USAID reductions, several other poorly supported countries would see support under $60 per person, including Madagascar, Burundi, Niger, Mali and Chad.
Among lower-middle income countries, eight rely on USAID for a fifth of their support, including Haiti, Lesotho, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Honduras, Angola, Jordan and Eswatini.
A loss of State Department funding would have dire effects on Mozambique, Malawi, Niger, Lebanon, Zambia, Micronesia, Pakistan and Nigeria who could each lose a fifth of their overseas support.
The countries receiving aid have different needs. Haiti, for example, faces major humanitarian needs. In Jordan and Honduras, it is “general government and civil society” support, while Angola receives basic health support.
“President Trump appears prepared to turn the US inward, while using its power to force concessions from others,” the report said, adding that “Leaders have already capitulated and appear increasingly wary of criticizing the US approach.”
The center said other countries should not follow the US lead but should respond by re-targeting aid where it is needed most.
The Center for Global Development also rejected Musk’s false claim that only 10 percent of USAID money reaches the intended beneficiaries.
Musk was misleading because he was referring to the 10 percent of USAID payments made directly to organizations in the developing world. The remaining 90 percent is used by contractors for all the goods and services that USAID, American companies, and faith-based organizations deliver, from HIV drugs to emergency food aid, malaria bed nets, and treatment for acute malnutrition.
Over the weekend, Musk used his “X” platform to attack USAID. He quoted a PBS segment with Walter Kerr, co-executive director of Unlock Aid, a DC-based non-profit that aims to improve American aid effectiveness. Kerr said that “less than 10 percent of our foreign assistance dollars flowing through USAID is actually reaching those communities.” The claim went viral in various far right avenues.
“The good news for the US taxpayer — and the beneficiaries of US foreign assistance — is that this figure is very, very wrong,” the center said in a statement. “The 90 percent of the aid budget that Musk and others claim is wasted is, in fact, helping to feed, house, and provide basic health care to some of the most vulnerable people on earth. There is no valid pretext to burn USAID to the ground over clear misinformation.”