Trump Slashes USAID by 90%: Aids in Drift or Deficit Reduction?

The Trump administration has attributed the planned cuts of over 90% of USAID foreign aid contracts to "institutional drift," a move that has sparked controversy and concern among international aid organizations and lawmakers.

The proposed cuts, which were first reported by the Washington Post, would significantly reduce the U.S. Agency for International Development's (USAID) budget and impact its ability to provide assistance to countries in need. The administration has argued that the cuts are necessary to address inefficiencies and mismanagement within the agency, but critics have accused the administration of using the "institutional drift" argument as a cover for its broader efforts to reduce foreign aid spending.

USAID, which was established in 1961, has a long history of providing humanitarian and development assistance to countries around the world. The agency's work includes responding to natural disasters, promoting economic growth, and supporting democratic institutions. The proposed cuts, if implemented, would have a significant impact on the agency's ability to carry out its mission.

The administration's plan to cut over 90% of USAID foreign aid contracts has been met with strong opposition from lawmakers and international aid organizations. In February 2025, demonstrators gathered outside the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill to protest the proposed cuts, arguing that they would undermine U.S. efforts to promote stability and prosperity around the world.

Some lawmakers have also expressed concern about the potential impact of the cuts on U.S. national security interests. In a letter to the administration, a group of bipartisan lawmakers argued that the proposed cuts would "undermine our ability to address global challenges, including poverty, disease, and instability." The lawmakers also warned that the cuts could have a negative impact on U.S. relations with other countries, particularly those that rely on U.S. aid for their own development efforts.

The administration has defended its plan to cut over 90% of USAID foreign aid contracts, arguing that the cuts are necessary to address inefficiencies and mismanagement within the agency. The administration has also pointed to the need to reduce the federal deficit and prioritize domestic spending as a justification for the proposed cuts.

However, critics have accused the administration of using the "institutional drift" argument as a cover for its broader efforts to reduce foreign aid spending. Some have argued that the proposed cuts are part of a broader effort to roll