In a rare display of bipartisan dismay, two former presidents and a rock icon have banded together to lament the Trump administration’s shutdown of a decades-old foreign aid agency.
Fox News reported that the closure of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), absorbed by the State Department on July 1, 2025, has sparked sharp criticism from George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and U2 singer Bono, who joined a videoconference to support departing employees just a day prior.
USAID, established under the Kennedy administration, has long been a cornerstone of U.S. foreign economic assistance, channeling aid to nations worldwide.
While its mission was noble, the Trump administration, through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), launched an investigation in early February 2025, uncovering what they claim is rampant mismanagement and waste.
Let’s be honest—government programs often bloat beyond their purpose, but shuttering an entire agency feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.
During the June 30, 2025, videoconference, which was closed to media but later reported on by The Associated Press, Obama didn’t hold back, calling the closure “a colossal mistake.”
Such dramatic language from a usually reserved ex-president raises eyebrows, though one wonders if it’s more about legacy than logic—after all, government efficiency isn’t exactly a progressive rallying cry.
Bush, meanwhile, highlighted USAID’s impact, noting, “Is it in our national interests that 25 million people who would have died now live?” He’s referencing his administration’s AIDS and HIV program, credited with saving countless lives, and it’s hard to argue that such results don’t reflect American values at their best. Still, nostalgia for past successes shouldn’t blind us to present-day fiscal realities.
Bono, ever the poet, added a theatrical touch, saying, “They called you crooks. When you were the best of us.” While his flair for drama is undeniable, painting USAID staff as saints ignores the serious allegations of corruption that prompted DOGE’s scrutiny in the first place.
The Trump administration’s rationale for the closure centers on eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse, a key pillar of DOGE’s mission since its inception in 2025.
In a March address to Congress, Trump cited $22 billion in government waste, with USAID among the culprits, tossing out eyebrow-raising examples like “eight million for making mice transgender.” Hyperbole or not, such claims fuel a narrative of misplaced priorities that resonates with taxpayers tired of funding questionable initiatives.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, acting as USAID’s administrator during the transition, echoed this sentiment, declaring, “This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end.”
Rubio’s vision of a streamlined foreign aid system under the State Department, prioritizing American interests, sounds promising on paper. But will it deliver, or is this just another reshuffle of deck chairs?
Rubio also critiqued USAID’s track record, stating, “Development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened.” It’s a harsh but not unfounded jab—decades of aid haven’t always translated to stability or goodwill toward America. Still, scrapping the agency entirely risks throwing out the good with the bad.
Leftist heavyweights didn't waste time predicting doom in the wake of Trump's decision to gut USAID and its corrupt programs. Bono, who in 2016 predicted catastrophic outcomes from USAID cuts, recited a poem during the videoconference, suggesting millions could die without the agency’s work. While his passion is clear, such dire forecasts feel more like emotional appeals than hard data.
Obama, too, emphasized the agency’s importance, saying, “Because it’s some of the most important work happening anywhere in the world.” One wonders if he’s glossed over the inefficiencies DOGE uncovered. Idealism shouldn’t trump accountability.
Even Hillary Clinton weighed in via a post on X on July 1, 2025, praising foreign service officers as “among the most dedicated public servants.” She added, “Their work saves lives and makes the world safer.” Her comments sidestep the core issue of whether USAID’s structure was sustainable in its final form.
Elon Musk, then-leader of DOGE, didn’t mince words, labeling USAID a “viper’s nest of radical-left Marxists.” It’s a fiery soundbite, but such rhetoric risks alienating those who see value in foreign aid, even if they agree reform was needed. A more measured critique might have fostered broader support for the overhaul.
The absorption of USAID’s programs by the State Department, as Rubio announced on July 1, 2025, promises more accountability and alignment with national interests.
Trump’s examples of wasteful spending—like “forty-five million dollars for diversity scholarships in Burma”—highlight why many conservatives cheer this move. Yet, one can’t help but wonder if vital humanitarian efforts will get lost in the shuffle.