Why Rubio Should Oversee U.S. Foreign Aid

1. 87

   Sharlee01posted 7 weeks ago

   
   
   Just My View---
   
   Why U.S. Aid Would Be Better Handled by the State Department Under Rubio---
   Foreign aid has long been a contentious issue, with billions of taxpayer dollars sent abroad under the justification of humanitarian assistance, economic support, and geopolitical strategy. However, the efficiency and oversight of these funds have often been called into question, especially when aid is funneled through agencies with minimal accountability. If Senator Marco Rubio were to oversee U.S. foreign aid through the State Department, the process would likely be more strategic, ensuring that funds serve American interests rather than becoming a blank check for corruption and mismanagement.
   
   I believe Rubio would take a more disciplined approach, prioritizing U.S. national security, economic interests, and the promotion of democracy over reckless aid spending. Under his leadership, the State Department could better coordinate aid distribution by tying it to measurable outcomes, such as stronger diplomatic ties and economic reforms in recipient nations. Unlike broad, unchecked aid programs, Rubio’s approach would likely demand greater transparency from both U.S. agencies and foreign governments receiving aid, reducing waste and ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used effectively.
   
   Additionally, shifting more oversight of U.S. aid to the State Department would align assistance with broader diplomatic goals rather than allowing separate agencies with differing priorities to dictate spending. Rubio has expressed concerns over aid being used to prop up regimes that do not align with American values or interests. With the State Department at the helm, aid could be leveraged as a tool of negotiation, ensuring that financial support leads to tangible diplomatic benefits rather than simply being given away with little return. In a time when global instability is rising, a more results-oriented approach to U.S. foreign aid is not just preferable—it is necessary.
   
   There is no shortage of examples of foreign aid misuse, much of it tied to USAID. A 2022 inspector general report found that over $136 million in U.S. aid to Afghanistan was wasted due to corruption and lack of oversight. One glaring example was a USAID-funded power plant in Kabul that cost millions but sat largely unused because Afghanistan couldn’t afford the fuel. In Haiti, after the 2010 earthquake, USAID oversaw nearly $13 billion in aid, yet a ProPublica investigation found that despite $500 million allocated for housing, only six homes were built. The agency has also been caught in covert operations disguised as aid, such as the failed “ZunZuneo” project in Cuba, where USAID secretly funded a social media platform aimed at encouraging anti-government activism. Millions of taxpayer dollars were wasted on an operation that ultimately collapsed when exposed.
   
   Beyond USAID’s mismanagement, U.S. aid programs have long been used as tools for intelligence work, particularly during the Cold War. The CIA funneled money through aid organizations to fund anti-communist efforts, supporting media outlets, student groups, and even foreign elections under the pretext of development aid. Agencies like the National Endowment for Democracy and the United States Information Agency played roles in quietly steering global politics in directions that served U.S. interests. While some may argue that such efforts were necessary in the fight against communism, it’s hard to justify using taxpayer money in ways that lack transparency and accountability.
   
   This is exactly why I believe foreign aid should be better handled under the State Department, where a leader like Rubio could ensure it serves clear diplomatic and national security objectives rather than being squandered on corruption, failed projects, or covert operations with no oversight. Taxpayers deserve to know where their money is going and that it is being used effectively, not lost to incompetence or hidden agendas.
   
   A few Questions that I hope my article may have elicited.
   
   Should American taxpayers be funding foreign aid programs with little transparency or accountability?
   
   How much of U.S. foreign aid truly benefits the people it’s intended to help, and how much is lost to corruption and mismanagement?
   
   Would foreign aid be more effective if it were tied to measurable diplomatic and economic outcomes rather than simply handed out?
   
   Do you trust agencies like USAID to properly manage billions in taxpayer dollars, given their history of waste and covert activities?
   
   Should foreign aid be used as a strategic tool to advance U.S. interests, or should it remain a purely humanitarian effort, regardless of the outcome?
   
   Would greater oversight from the State Department under a leader like Rubio ensure that aid serves America’s priorities rather than becoming a blank check for failed projects?

   replyreport
2. 59

   Willowarborposted 6 weeks ago

   You know, Marco is starting to grow on me.  I'm finding that I align with quite a few of his positions...
   
   https://x.com/donwinslow/status/1887677323249602724

   replyreport