Talk:United States Agency for International Development

International development Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International development, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of international development, including such areas as appropriate technology, microfinance and social issues, on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International developmentWikipedia:WikiProject International developmentTemplate:WikiProject International developmentInternational development
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

International relations High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Government Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as High-importance).

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Jsryanjr (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. (disclosure, 2013, no longer applies)
Lermurbaby (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. (disclosure)
12.183.71.3 (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. (IP registered to USAID)
12.183.71.67 (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. (IP registered to USAID)

Archives

Archive 1

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Syracuse University supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 15:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 January 2024 and 20 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): MandevillaSherlockii (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Musk/DOGE

Nothing about this, yet? Maybe add to section "Second Trump administration".

Knickmeyer, Ellen (February 2, 2025), "USAID security leaders on leave after trying to keep Musk's DOGE from classified info, officials say", AP News

▶ I am Grorp ◀ 23:00, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Musk now saying he fed USAID "into the wood chipper."

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1886307316804263979 QINGCHARLES (talk) 11:17, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Links in the article to usaid.gov are now non-functional because of ongoing political turmoil 68.47.12.189 (talk) 12:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[1] works for me. Doug Weller talk 13:04, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is in need of a serious rewrite.

So, the callout info box lists November 3, 1961 as the date the agency was formed but in the article there is mention of events from 1915, World War II and other events well before the agency was even created. This makes it seem as if the agency was active before ’61 but it wasn’t and it should be made clear that the relief efforts mentioned were executed before the agency was even created. I don’t know if that means adding some kind of timeline to the article but as an IP ‘editor’ I no longer have an interest in working on anything on the project having seen the behavior of editors with active agendas working to shape articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.137.82 (talk) 14:55, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"As of Feb. 3 it was still available"

What does "still available" mean? 2601:642:4F84:1590:FDD3:A31B:19A8:2C30 (talk) 15:07, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Working. Doug Weller talk 15:13, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But is it really? Several news organizations have noted the opposite. Norbillian (talk) 16:35, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Norbillian Have you tried the link? That's the only way to know. Although ., hm, it is a Google thing! Doug Weller talk 17:10, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That hardly makes sense. USAID is an organization, not a refrigerator. 2A00:79E1:2E00:9601:A445:6108:8AFA:E42D (talk) 18:20, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the article is moving fast. “It” and “working” referred to the website with the url USAid.gov

The material isn’t in the article anymore. This thread is obsolete. Mikewem (talk) 19:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

At the end of the summary is the sentence: "As of February 3, 2025 it was working." Which, to me, seems totally superfluous. What was working? Working in what way? It should be cut IMO. GSV Kakistocrat (talk) 16:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Has been removed Mikewem (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2025 (2)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "With a budget of over $50 billion" to "With an annual budget of about $40 billion" to reflect actual budget information. Please add a citation; you could use ForeignAssistance.gov as the source. Hancock48 (talk) 20:51, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done: The reference previously only appeared in info box. I deleted that and moved it to the lead per MOS:INFOBOXREF. 50 appears to be the correct number per RS. The nuance of language is that 50 is the allocated budget, and 40ish is the amount actually spent. Mikewem (talk) 22:41, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can the president shut down USAID permanently? And why does Elon Musk have a say?

Here's a sentence currently in the lede: "On February 3, 2025, Elon Musk announced in an X Spaces conversation that he and Trump were in the process of shutting down USAID permanently."

This article should clearly state (1) whether or not Donald Trump has that authority and (2) what exactly Elon Musk's role is.

There's only one other reference to Musk in this article; it's noted at that point that Musk has said USAID is a "criminal organization." That is of course bonkers, but it's not challenged in this article. Shouldn't it be? NME Frigate (talk) 21:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the word "permanently" from that sentence in the lede because 1) The citations don't quote him as using that word and 2) To me, his phrasing begs the question: "What does 'shutting down' USAID actually mean? Reining it in, reforming it, actually getting rid of it?") Until it's completely clear as to what Trump's policy is, whether Congress will oppose his agenda (if his agenda is one that requires congressional approval), or if it faces judicial challenges, I don't think it's necessary to put in legal opinions on what can or can't be done.

Musk calling USAID a "criminal organization" should of course only be listed as his opinion if it's really going to be on here at all, but the criticisms and controversies section has a section on "Financial conflicts of interest" that shows that he isn't nearly the only one to ever accuse it of being unduly influenced. Cookieo131 (talk) 22:32, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Of possible interest (perhaps depending on what happens) is this article by Tess Bridgeman at Just Security:

Can the President Dissolve USAID by Executive Order? (Feb. 1)

Bridgeman quotes from The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, which does not seem to be explicitly mentioned in this Wikipedia article, to argue, among other things, that (1) USAID, although established by an executive order in 1961 pursuant to a law passed that year, was codified into law by Congress in 1998; and (2) at this time, a President does not have the legal authority to close USAID entirely:

"Also in the 1998 Act, Congress gave the president a near-term, time-limited opportunity to reorganize these departments (22 USC 6601). Specifically, the Act provides, among other things, that within '60 days after October 21, 1998,' the president may, in a “reorganization plan and report” to be provided to Congress" (emphasis Bridgeman's).

Accordingly, I'd like to suggest a small change to this sentence in the History > Evolving organization linkages section: "Although the law authorized the president to abolish USAID, President Clinton did not exercise this option."

My suggestion is to change that to: "Although the law authorized the president to abolish USAID at that time, President Clinton did not exercise this option before an October 1998 deadline."

The sentence as currently given in this article might be read to imply that a later president could avail himself of an option not exercised by Clinton. NME Frigate (talk) 23:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do think that it's time to note in this article that many critics have said that shutting down USAID, as apparently has effectively happened, it is an illegal or even unconstitutional act (not to mention a move that will benefit China to the United States' detriment). Here are two examples:

Lawmakers, legal experts warn shuttering USAID is unconstitutional (The Hill)

As Epidemics Spread, Abolishing USAID Is an Illegal Disaster (Foreign Policy) NME Frigate (talk) 05:39, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the intro, for the last paragraph, where it mentions Elon Musk, please add "Department of Government Efficiency head". 2600:100C:A20C:1A22:199D:F42F:A60C:A9F (talk) 01:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done! fgnievinski (talk) 03:01, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead relative emphasis

The lead ideally should summarize each major section of the article:

Purposes
Modes of assistance
Organization
Field missions
Assistance projects
History
Budget
Activities by region
Controversies and criticism

Currently it fails MOS:LEADREL. fgnievinski (talk) 02:53, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Put the website usaid.gov recorded by the Wayback Machine

Please put usaid.gov under the Website section instead of state.gov Hieuchipt (talk) 16:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you are referring to the link in the Infobox. Why do you want this change to be made? In my view it is appropriate at this time to use state.gov link since it would appear that this is the official webpage for USAID, now that the usaid.gov site has gone dark. Note that both the state.gov and an archived link to usaid.gov can be found in the External links section. FFM784 (talk) 17:51, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder that this is CTop

Obviously news is moving fast, obviously we can all anticipate some edits to this page, but remember not to get ahead of the news and RS.

@PaPiker please reconsider whether you want to edit war over is/was. And your edits to the short description are premature. Unless you can provide a ref, would you please self-revert for now? Just until there is official word about the agency’s status. Mikewem (talk) 18:57, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Field offices shut down?

Is it verified that all USAID field offices have been shut down and employees ordered to return to the US by 8 Feb? 152.130.15.107 (talk) 01:35, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reason for being shut down?

All this talk about the history, and all the things it has done, but I couldn't find a word about the justification for taking it down. If this site is neutral, as it claims (though I doubt), it will give a fair shake to DOGE's contention against it and clarify their side for why USAID needs to be dismantled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:480:40B0:D8E9:A5A6:3B2F:C967 (talk) 06:11, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a coalition of leftists who declared all the leftists sources as reliable and all right wing (and most centrist) sources as unreliable source.

@DividedFrame can tell you more about it 188.142.192.183 (talk) 11:32, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What, specifically, would you like added? Please provide a reliable source. – Anne drew (talk · contribs) 15:04, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for proving my point lmao 188.142.192.183 (talk) 17:35, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found several reliable sources explaining his motivations, but go off bud. Good luck finding someone else to help you. – Anne drew (talk · contribs) 00:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia loves creating sections called "Accusations". Dispassionate intelligence and neutral unbiased perspective demand that this article include an "accusations" section that discuss the arguments against USAID especially since objective empirical evidence has now been presented as to where some of its funding has gone, rendering the original article verifiably false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:480:40B0:D8E9:A5A6:3B2F:C967 (talk) 19:07, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific as to what's been presented? And please don't say condoms to Hamas for making bombs. _signed,Willondon (talk) 21:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there's no information regarding the funding of trans issues in foreign countries. 2603:8080:BE00:31F:21D1:FEA9:2B8:1D42 (talk) 02:00, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Elon Musk, the head of DOGE"

As far as I know, Musk hasn't been confirmed to the post. This should read "nominee to the"... Generationthirteen (talk) 20:29, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tried on the DOGE talk page, but didn't get much interest. Explanation for the current version is at the bottom of my thread.

But he is not a nominee anymore [2]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/white-house-says-elon-musk-serving-special-government-employee-rcna190520 Mikewem (talk) 22:11, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is it even a position that requires Senate confirmation? The Trump administration has been deliberately slippery about Musk's role. At first, he was said to be leading an extra-governmental advisory committee, but then they renamed another department, and a few days ago they said he was indeed an employee. NME Frigate (talk) 22:20, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"was" in lede

The agency continues to exist and the past tense is very premature. It's being brutally assaulted by certain actors, sure, but only the Congress has the authority to permanently shut it down. Which hasn't happened as of now. Amberkitten (talk) 04:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the lead section but there might be stuff like this in the body too, unfortunately I can't check it right now Amberkitten (talk) 04:59, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]