A DBUNK subscriber submitted a request to fact-check claims made in the recent AP News article titled “The USAID shutdown is upending livelihoods for nonprofit workers, farmers and other Americans.” The article, published on February 18, 2025, reports significant domestic fallout from President Donald Trump’s executive order freezing foreign assistance. We examined its claims for accuracy and missing context.
Misinformation and Missing Context
The article asserts, “President Donald Trump stopped payment nearly overnight in a Jan. 20 executive order freezing foreign assistance.” While it is true that an executive order was issued, multiple sources, including the Congressional Research Service, indicate that USAID’s budgeting process involves congressional oversight. Cutting funds immediately is not procedurally feasible without congressional involvement, making this claim misleading.
Another claim states that the shutdown “severed 60% of HIAS’s funding overnight,” leading to severe disruptions. However, HIAS’s own financial disclosure reports from previous years indicate that while a substantial portion of funding comes from USAID grants, the organization also has diversified donor support. While impacts were significant, the framing that virtually all operations collapsed overnight lacks the full picture.
The piece claims, “USAID Stop-Work, a group tracking the impact, says USAID contractors have reported that they laid off nearly 13,000 American workers. The group estimates that the actual total is more than four times that.” The original source for this 52,000 figure is unclear, and federal employment data does not support layoffs of that scale within such a short period. This number appears speculative or exaggerated.
Political Bias and Narrative Framing
While the article emphasizes negative impacts on American workers and businesses, it omits conservative viewpoints that may support the funding freeze. By attributing the decision to an intent to stop “wasteful spending” and “promoting a liberal agenda,” it portrays the decision in a partisan light but does not provide actual data on whether USAID programs were ineffective or wasteful.
Additionally, the article features numerous anecdotal cases of hardship without balancing perspectives from those who may have seen inefficiencies within USAID or believe the freeze was justified. Opinions on global aid spending vary widely, and a more balanced view would acknowledge both support and criticism.
Reader Question: If This Is So Damaging, Why Isn’t There More Pushback?
Many Americans may not be pushing back on the USAID funding freeze for several reasons. First, foreign assistance is not a broadly publicized budgetary issue, making it lower on the priority list for voters. Additionally, while certain industries and organizations are greatly affected, the political landscape suggests that Trump’s voter base has historically been skeptical of foreign aid spending. Instead of widespread protests, many affected groups are pursuing lawsuits or congressional pressure, less visible forms of resistance.
Final Verdict
The AP News article includes real concerns about the USAID funding freeze; however, it overstates certain claims, lacks context on government budgeting constraints, and presents a one-sided perspective. Readers should be cautious about accepting the full narrative without considering broader government financial oversight and diverse opinions on the necessity of foreign aid.
Find more fact-checked stories on the DBUNK app. Together, we can fight misinformation.
