Will USAID really be permanently shut down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree-I am not as upset at USAID losing some funding and going under state department. I’m not upset at Education, losing money, federally, and going to the states. I’m also not upset that it will go back under HHS.

I do feel that it could have rolled out in a far better way.

What makes you think they wanted to be in a 'better way'? I still can't get over you people with these 'intellectual arguments' when it's obvious this is a grab for resources, money and power. You think this is just an ideological and approach difference? JFC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It will be permanently subsumed by State and no longer a separate agency. This was the goal by budget cutters 25 or 30 years ago too, but it never happened.

What will happen to all of those on administrative leave?

IMO a rescission bill will be proposed soon, and how that shakes out will determine the outcome. Probably a government shutdown in March as part of the mess. IMO, these are all hardcore negotiating tactics by Trump. Lots of people RIFed but many brought back.

[Anonymous]

I think it will probably come back in some form or another. This is probably another publicity stunt. Probably the long term employees at USAID will be fine- the newbies may not be coming back though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m disgusted by the level of grift. Who is the auditor of USAID?

Democrats want to keep as much as possible secret, like who all was on the USAID board besides Samantha Powers??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m disgusted by the level of grift. Who is the auditor of USAID?

This.

[Anonymous]

State has always envied USAID's fat budget.

In 2024, the combined State and USAID budget was $56B. But USAID controlled $40B of that.

Follow the money...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree-I am not as upset at USAID losing some funding and going under state department. I’m not upset at Education, losing money, federally, and going to the states. I’m also not upset that it will go back under HHS.

I do feel that it could have rolled out in a far better way.

What makes you think they wanted to be in a 'better way'? I still can't get over you people with these 'intellectual arguments' when it's obvious this is a grab for resources, money and power. You think this is just an ideological and approach difference? JFC

The real reason that Trump is doing these things by fiat + nerd squad is because he doesn't actually have the power to do it through legislation (Republican control of congress too slim and tenuous).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Putting USAID under state has been thrown around by lots of administrations. Congress has always wanted to keep it separate so they can have more budget oversight. There are pros and cons. Moving USAID under State is not the worst idea. The problem is the way it is being done.

100% agree. This is the case for a lot of what they are doing, actually. Let's go to the office more - yes. Let's cut wasteful spending and programs - yes. Get rid of federal employees who are habitual low performers - yes. But the way they are going about it is not going to work for a so many reasons. So all the things that need to happen, won't end up happening. And we're back to the drawing board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It will depend on Congress.

Unfortunately, Congress has evolved into an empty and useless branch of government. They hold meaningless hearings to no effect. They no can pass meaningful legislation or really anything at all. Investigations that lead to anything? Nah.

My high school civics teacher would be turning over in her grave to hear how our famous "checks and balances" have collapsed.

Maybe the Supreme Court will ride to our rescue. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Putting USAID under state has been thrown around by lots of administrations. Congress has always wanted to keep it separate so they can have more budget oversight. There are pros and cons. Moving USAID under State is not the worst idea. The problem is the way it is being done.

100% agree. This is the case for a lot of what they are doing, actually. Let's go to the office more - yes. Let's cut wasteful spending and programs - yes. Get rid of federal employees who are habitual low performers - yes. But the way they are going about it is not going to work for a so many reasons. So all the things that need to happen, won't end up happening. And we're back to the drawing board.

It would have always been rough. Let’s just rip off the band aid and get it over with.

[Anonymous]

What will happen to the employees?

[Anonymous]

yes i hope so. no more freebees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m disgusted by the level of grift. Who is the auditor of USAID?

That would be Congress. Take it up with them if you think USAID or any other govt agency has an unacceptable level of grift rather than taking the word of an unelected South African billionaire with a drug problem whose intention is to distract the sheeple from what he's really doing with his DOGE team's access to trillions of dollars of payments via the US Treasury.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:yes i hope so. no more freebees

No one was getting freebies from USAID. Are you one of those crazy people who thinks they were sending bribes to Politico?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m disgusted by the level of grift. Who is the auditor of USAID?

That would be Congress. Take it up with them if you think USAID or any other govt agency has an unacceptable level of grift rather than taking the word of an unelected South African billionaire with a drug problem whose intention is to distract the sheeple from what he's really doing with his DOGE team's access to trillions of dollars of payments via the US Treasury.

And first we need transparency to see what has been going on over there, which Elon is providing. Dems hate transparency…they hate for the “sheeple” to be aware of their grift and games. Wake up, party’s over.