Trump’s Plans to Cancel Billions in Foreign Aid
In a significant move, President Trump intends to cancel nearly $5 billion in foreign aid and peacekeeping funds that Congress had previously approved. This decision reportedly relies on legal arguments that have remained untested for decades.
On Thursday evening, Trump informed Congress of his intention to rescind funds that had been entangled in litigation until just hours earlier.
This request aims to end by September 30, irrespective of whether Congress takes action.
The proposed cuts include a staggering $3.2 billion from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), $322 million from the State Democracy Fund, and $522 million earmarked for international organizations. Additionally, $393 million for peacekeeping operations and $445 million for separately budgeted peacekeeping aid are also on the chopping block.
The funds, originally allocated to various nonprofits and foreign governments, had been suspended earlier this year by the Office of Management and Budget due to a lawsuit from the Global Health Council.
A recent ruling from the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit lifted an injunction, clearing the path for Trump to initiate this withdrawal, the first such move since 1977.
Critics of the Trump administration have highlighted controversial expenditures, including significant funds aimed at promoting “climate resilience” in Honduras and supporting democracy in the West Balkans, among other outlays.
Other eye-catching allocations point to $1.5 million intended for the sale of paintings depicting Ukrainian women and support for peace agreements in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Among the peacekeeping funds, there are payments to bolster international peacekeeping forces, including $11 million for armored vehicles for Uruguay and training facilities in Zambia.
Interestingly, the planned cuts will not impact U.S. support for peacekeeping missions along the Egyptian-Israeli border.
The legality surrounding this “pocket rescission” is contentious, with few legal precedents to guide the discussion. While some authorities argue it may be illegal, the Trump administration contends otherwise.
The 1974 Water Storage Management Act limits presidential spending and outlines a 45-day deadline for Congress to act on rescission proposals. In the past, former Presidents Ford and Carter made similar moves in the 1970s, although the outcomes varied.
OMB officials referenced historical instances where funding proposals were successfully pulled back without objections, although the current circumstances could differ significantly.
There’s uncertainty surrounding whether the Government Accountability Office will challenge this decision. The reasoning hinges on the interpretation of constitutional validity, which remains a heated topic of discussion.
