DOGE Cuts Millions in Foreign Grants, Faces Criticism Over Access and Authority
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a temporary organization established within the White House via executive order earlier this year, has announced the cancelation of $4.5 million in foreign grants. The move, part of DOGE’s broader mandate to optimize the federal government and slash spending, has sparked controversy and reignited debates over the organization’s authority and access to federal systems.
DOGE, led by Elon Musk, was tasked by President Donald Trump with streamlining operations and cutting costs across the government within an 18-month timeframe. The recent grant cancellations target projects funded through the Inter-American Foundation, an agency that, until recently, operated with a $60 million budget to issue foreign grants. As a result of DOGE’s actions, the Inter-American Foundation has been reduced to its statutory minimum – maintaining only one active employee.
The cancelled grants span a range of development and social initiatives in Latin America. Among the largest affected projects is a $903,811 grant intended to support alpaca farming in Peru. Another significant cancellation is a $364,500 grant designed to reduce social discrimination against recyclers in Bolivia. Additionally, a $323,633 grant aimed at promoting cultural understanding of Venezuelan migrants in Brazil has been terminated.
Other notable grant cuts include $813,210 allocated for vegetable gardens in El Salvador, $731,105 aimed at improving the marketability of mushrooms and peas in Guatemala, $677,342 intended to expand fruit and jam sales in Honduras, $483,345 earmarked to improve artisanal salt production in Ecuador, and $39,250 designated for beekeeping in Brazil.
These grant cancellations represent a fraction of DOGE’s reported savings. As of March 4, the organization’s website claims to have terminated 2,334 contracts, resulting in $8 billion in savings; terminated 3,489 grants, yielding approximately $10 billion in savings; and terminated 748 leases, resulting in about $660 million in lease savings. DOGE further asserts it has saved roughly $105 billion through a combination of fraud detection and deletion, contract and lease cancellations, contract and lease renegotiations, asset sales, grant cancellations, workforce reductions, programmatic changes, and regulatory savings.
DOGE’s sweeping actions have drawn considerable criticism. Opponents of the organization argue that it has been granted excessive access to sensitive federal systems and should not be permitted to unilaterally cancel federal contracts or make cuts across various agencies. The Inter-American Foundation’s rapid reduction and the termination of numerous development projects in Latin America have been criticized as short-sighted, potentially undermining long-term development goals and international relations.
Beyond foreign grants, DOGE has also targeted domestic initiatives. It has reportedly canceled numerous diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives at federal agencies, terminated consulting contracts, canceled leases for underused federal buildings, and consolidated duplicate agencies and programs. These actions align with the organization’s mandate to streamline government operations and eliminate perceived inefficiencies.
The scope of DOGE’s authority and the methods it employs to achieve its goals have prompted concerns among some lawmakers and advocacy groups. Critics argue that the organization’s rapid pace of change and its centralized control over spending decisions could lead to unintended consequences and potentially harm vital government services. They also question the transparency of DOGE’s decision-making process and the metrics used to measure its success.
Supporters of DOGE, on the other hand, contend that the organization is fulfilling its mandate to identify and eliminate wasteful spending, improve government efficiency, and reduce the burden on taxpayers. They argue that the savings generated by DOGE can be reinvested in other important areas of government or used to reduce the national debt. They also emphasize the need for accountability and oversight in government spending.
The controversy surrounding DOGE highlights the broader debate over the role of government and the balance between efficiency and effectiveness. While streamlining operations and cutting costs are important goals, critics argue that these efforts should not come at the expense of essential services, programs, and international commitments.
The Inter-American Foundation did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The absence of a response further complicates the situation, leaving stakeholders and the public without the agency’s perspective on the grant cancellations and the organization’s future. The lack of communication fuels further scrutiny and speculation regarding the long-term impact of DOGE’s actions on international development efforts.
