U.S. foreign aid goals have evolved since the creation of the U.S. Agency for International Development in 1961, but investments have historically focused on three things: health, humanitarian aid and global hunger. As the Trump administration continues its assault on foreign aid, allies on both sides of the aisle have raced forward to defend America’s investments in global health and humanitarian assistance, with some success. But our decades-long legacy of fighting global hunger is receiving no such defense, left to wither in the field – and Americans will suffer as a result.
To be clear, no part of the U.S. foreign aid budget emerged unscathed from DOGE’s woodchipper. But global agriculture assistance took an outsized hit, losing 81% of a $1.4 billion budget. These cuts primarily hurt the nearly 735 million people in the world suffering from chronic hunger, but their impact will also be felt on American fields and store shelves.
Around $150 million of our foreign agriculture budget was devoted to agricultural research every year – efforts that created heartier seeds, more nutritious crops, and new ways to fight diseases and pests. That work has massive spillover benefits for America’s farmers and consumers. For instance, some 60% of the wheat grown in this country can be traced back to improved varieties developed in labs funded by USAID, saving farmers billions in losses, while keeping food prices low. USAID research investments working to fight pests and diseases overseas have time and again protected our harvests when those scourges inevitably threaten our shores, from cattle disease to swine fever to new varieties of crop-destroying aphids.
Investing in global agriculture protects Americans in other ways, too. Global hunger is one of the best-studied precursors of violence and global instability. High food prices have consistently led to riots and mass uprisings, and researchers studying droughts in sub-Saharan Africa find they significantly increased the likelihood of civil war. Failed harvests are also a key driver of cross-border migration, fueling displacement in Central America and beyond.
But perhaps the most compelling reason to maintain our investment in global agriculture is: it works. Economic growth from agriculture has proved to be two-to-four times more effective in cutting poverty in low income countries than growth from other sectors like services or industry – driving down food prices for everyone and fueling ag-related jobs in the process.
In fact, the U.S. has a spectacular track record of helping countries grow their way out of hunger. In the 1960s and ’70s, USAID and the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations invested in improved varieties of wheat, rice and corn that transformed nations like Mexico and India, ending their need for food aid. What became known as the Green Revolution helped avert an age of perpetual famine, while creating new export markets for U.S. goods. Not only did it safeguard our national interests, it served as a powerful demonstration of American values, saving an estimated 1 billion lives.
In 2009, the U.S. carried that legacy forward by launching Feed the Future, a bipartisan global hunger initiative intended to drive similar agricultural transformations. All of that effort – all of that potential – is now in peril.
But it’s not too late for the world’s harvests. Recently before Congress, Secretary of State Marco Rubio showered praise on the United States’ efforts to fight global hunger, arguing that the know-how of America’s farmers, agribusinesses and crop researchers was “an amazing thing to provide as part of our toolbox.” He can save this essential work by resuming our existing contracts for agricultural development. Barring that, lawmakers must reassert their intent and protect such investments in current and future budgets.
Sen. Susan Collins, the powerful chair of the Appropriations Committee, has already said she won’t support rescissions impacting global health programs. Vice Chair Sen. Patty Murray criticized the administration’s plan to “rip away lifesaving humanitarian aid.” Efforts to fight global hunger deserve the same vigorous defense.
Dina Esposito is a part-time resident of Durango and 20-year veteran of USAID. She was most recently the assistant administrator of the Bureau for Resilience, Environment, and Food Security and deputy coordinator of Feed the Future, the U.S. global hunger initiative. Maany Peyvan worked at USAID during the Obama and Biden administrations and served as a senior adviser to Administrator Samantha Power covering food security from 2022-24.
