Here is a compilation of reported instances where the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) under Biden's administration has been criticized for wasteful spending or abuse of funds, based on recent discussions and reports:
$1.5 million to "advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in Serbia's workplaces and business communities."
$70,000 for the production of a "DEI musical" in Ireland.
$2.5 million for electric vehicles for Vietnam.
$47,000 for a "transgender opera" in Colombia.
$32,000 for a "transgender comic book" in Peru.
$2 million for sex changes and "LGBT activism" in Guatemala.
$6 million to fund tourism in Egypt.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars for a non-profit linked to designated terrorist organizations, even after an investigation was launched by an inspector general.
Millions to EcoHealth Alliance, which was involved in research at the Wuhan lab.
Hundreds of thousands of meals that went to al Qaeda-affiliated fighters in Syria.
Funding for personalized contraceptives birth control devices in developing countries.
Hundreds of millions of dollars to fund irrigation canals, farming equipment, and fertilizer used to support poppy cultivation and heroin production in Afghanistan, benefiting the Taliban.
$1.14 billion in Haiti post-2010 earthquake for a port and power plant project that never materialized.
$74 million in Cuba for "democracy promotion" funds that vanished without trace according to a 2006 audit.
$1.5 million on a Kenyan soap opera to promote HIV/AIDS awareness and tackle social issues.
$27 million for Moroccan pottery classes to teach artisans design skills and marketing.
$45 million for DEI scholarships in Burma.
$520 million for consultant-driven ESG investments in Africa.
$1.2 billion in awards to undisclosed recipients.
These examples have been sourced from various reports, including those from the White House, news articles, and posts on X, highlighting concerns over the accountability and effectiveness of USAID's spending. Critics argue these expenditures represent waste or misalignment with core U.S. foreign policy objectives, while supporters might argue some of these initiatives serve broader goals like cultural diplomacy or health education. However, the debate around these expenditures often centers on the transparency, oversight, and direct benefits to U.S. interests or the intended recipients of aid.
