logo
Fact Check: Debunking Vance, Rubio claim that only 12 cents per dollar of humanitarian assistance reaches beneficiaries

Fact Check: Debunking Vance, Rubio claim that only 12 cents per dollar of humanitarian assistance reaches beneficiaries

Yahoo11-06-2025

Claim:
People in need have received only 12 cents for every dollar the U.S. government has spent on humanitarian aid.
Rating:
On June 7, 2025, U.S. Vice President JD Vance claimed that for every dollar the U.S. government spent on humanitarian aid, only 12 cents reached people in need.
"Marco Rubio, who's secretary of state — he's a very good friend — what he told me is that his best estimate after he had his team look at it is that 88 cents of every dollar was actually being collected by middlemen," Vance said on "This Past Weekend w/ Theo Von," a podcast with the American comedian (at 28:57). "So every dollar we were spending on humanitarian assistance, 12 cents was actually making it to people who needed it."
Rubio, as Vance said, has repeatedly cited a similar data point. For example, he said in a Feb. 4, 2025, news conference, that in "some cases with USAID, 10, 12, 13%, maybe less, of the money was actually reaching the recipient, and the rest was going into the overhead and the bureaucracy" (see 23:18). On May 20, 2025, Rubio claimed in a Senate committee hearing that "at USAID, 12 cents of every dollar was reaching the recipient" (see 5:09).
Rubio was referring to the U.S. Agency for International Development, which distributes humanitarian aid around the world. U.S. President Donald Trump's administration attempted to dismantle USAID in the first few months of his second term; globally, former beneficiaries continue to feel the effects of the White House's cuts to USAID, per reporting from reputable outlets. Similar claims, with numbers ranging from less than 10% to 30%, have spread online for months, including via tech billionaire Elon Musk and Republican lawmakers.
Rubio and Vance appear to be citing a January 2024 report from USAID, which determined that about 12.1% of USAID funding went directly to "local non-governmental, private sector and government partners." However, that does not mean the remaining 88% was spent on "middlemen" who did not channel USAID funding to people in need, as Vance claimed. Therefore, we rate this claim false.
Snopes reached out to Rubio and Vance to confirm that their source is the January 2024 report and await responses.
It is also worth noting that USAID did not oversee all of the United States' foreign aid; according to the government's foreign assistance database, about two-thirds of nonmilitary foreign aid in budget year 2023 flowed through USAID. Thus, Vance's claim that 12% of "humanitarian assistance" was reaching the intended recipient also misrepresented Rubio's initial claim, because Rubio was referencing USAID's funding specifically, not all of the government's humanitarian aid.
According to a 2024 analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, most USAID money was funneled through what are called "implementing partners" — third parties that include "private contractors, nonprofit organizations, foreign governments, international organizations, and other U.S. government agencies."
That included groups like the United Nations Children's Fund, the Red Cross and the Catholic Relief Services; in other words, USAID often works with organizations not based in the locality the project may be based in and therefore not part of the 12.1% statistic. A good chunk of the money — more than $1 billion in fiscal year 2024 — also went to American small businesses who deliver resources and services to foreign countries.
"A key reason USAID relies on American and multilateral intermediaries is to protect against fraud and corruption. The agency demands that its partners provide a detailed paper trail to account for every dollar spent—creating administrative hurdles that few local organizations can clear," wrote Rachel Bonnifield and Justin Sandefur of the Center for Global Development, a think-tank based in Washington, D.C., focused on international economic research.
The 2024 CRS analysis determined that from fiscal year 2013 to 2022, only 7.7% of USAID's funds were spent on "administrative costs," defined as the salaries and benefits of USAID direct hires and "all costs not related to a specific project," including costs that are "inherently governmental or part of the cost of doing business." But that percentage, per the analysis, does not include the administrative costs of USAID's partners (see "Administrative Costs").
It is difficult to determine how much money these intermediaries spend on administrative and operating costs, compared to direct assistance. However, it is possible to look at case studies to definitively show that at least for some of USAID's largest partners, the bulk of spending made its way to people in need.
For example, in fiscal year 2023, at least $290 million went to Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance — which has provided vaccines to more than 1.1 billion children in 78 countries as of the end of 2023 — and another approximately $811 million went to The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which, among other efforts, treated 171 million malaria cases in 2022.
In turn, as first reported on by Bonnifield and Sandefur, Gavi and The Global Fund both spent less than 10% of their overall funding on operating and overhead expenses in 2023, meaning more than 90% went directly to delivering supplies and health services. (See Page 14 of Gavi's financial report and Page 10 of the Global Fund's report.)
To summarize, claims made by prominent lawmakers like Vance and Rubio that suggest approximately 12% of USAID spending reached the intended recipient are simply not true and based on a misrepresentation of data collected by USAID on the percentage of local groups it sends funding to. USAID may have channeled much of its money through intermediaries, but that does not mean the majority of USAID's money was spent on overhead and operating costs.
"Annual Progress Report." Www.gavi.org, www.gavi.org/progress-report. Accessed 11 June 2025.
Bonnifield, Rachel, and Justin Sandefur. "No, 90 Percent of Aid Is Not Skimmed off before Reaching Target Communities." Center for Global Development, 3 Feb. 2025, www.cgdev.org/blog/no-90-percent-aid-not-skimmed-reaching-target-communities. Accessed 11 June 2025.
Congressional Research Service. "Foreign Assistance: Where Does the Money Go?" Congress.gov, 8 Aug. 2024, www.congress.gov/crs-product/R48150. Accessed 11 June 2025.
"ForeignAssistance.gov." Foreignassistance.gov, foreignassistance.gov/. Accessed 11 June 2025.
Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. GAVI, the VACCINE ALLIANCE 2023 ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT. www.gavi.org/sites/default/files/2024-06/Gavi-Alliance-2023-Annual-Financial-Report.pdf. Accessed 11 June 2025.
Sherman, Amy. "Fact-Checking a Mischaracterized Figure about USAID." Politifact, 5 Feb. 2025, www.politifact.com/factchecks/2025/feb/05/brian-mast/why-the-republican-claim-about-the-majority-of-usa/. Accessed 11 June 2025.
The Global Fund. The Global Fund Annual Financial Report 2023 Contents. archive.theglobalfund.org/media/jc3dsdx1/archive_2023-annual-financial_report_en.pdf. Accessed 11 June 2025.
---. "The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria." Theglobalfund.org, www.theglobalfund.org/en/. Accessed 11 June 2025.
USAID. "December 11, 2024 - Business Forecast and Partner Update Script." Archive.org, 11 Dec. 2024, web.archive.org/web/20250201070016/www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/December%2011%2C%202024%20-%20Business%20Forecast%20and%20Partner%20Update%20Script.pdf. Accessed 11 June 2025.
---. Growing Momentum: USAID Localization Progress Report. Jan. 2024, web.archive.org/web/20250118170457/https:/www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/2025-01/FY2024%20Localization%20Progress%20Report_Final_508_2.pdf. Accessed 11 June 2025.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US Senate push to pass Trump's $3.3 trillion bill extends into second day
US Senate push to pass Trump's $3.3 trillion bill extends into second day

Yahoo

time10 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

US Senate push to pass Trump's $3.3 trillion bill extends into second day

By David Morgan, Richard Cowan and Bo Erickson WASHINGTON(Reuters) -U.S. Senate Republicans were still trying to pass President Donald Trump's sweeping tax-cut and spending bill early on Tuesday morning, despite divisions within the party about its expected $3.3 trillion hit to the nation's debt pile. Senators voted in a marathon session known as a "vote-a-rama," featuring a series of amendments by Republicans and the minority Democrats, part of the arcane process Republicans are using to bypass Senate rules that normally require 60 of the chamber's 100 members to agree on legislation. Beginning early on Monday and running for roughly 18 hours, it was still unclear how long the voting would last. Lawmakers said the process had been held up partly by the need to determine whether amendments complied with special budgetary rules. Shortly after midnight, Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters the vote-a-rama was "hopefully on the home stretch and then we'll see where the votes are." But hours later, there was no sign of the lawmakers moving to a vote on passage. Republicans can afford to lose no more than three votes in either chamber to pass a bill the Democrats are united in opposition to. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released its assessment on Sunday of the bill's hit to the $36.2 trillion U.S. debt pile. The Senate version is estimated to cost $3.3 trillion, $800 billion more than the version passed last month in the House of Representatives. Many Republicans dispute that claim, contending that extending existing policy will not add to the debt. Nonetheless, international bond investors see incentives to diversify out of the U.S. Treasury market. Democrats, meanwhile, hope the latest, eye-widening figure could stoke enough anxiety among fiscally minded conservatives to get them to buck their party, which controls both chambers of Congress. "This bill, as we have said for months, steals people's healthcare, jacks up their electricity bill to pay for tax breaks for billionaires," Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a speech to the Senate. Thune countered that the tax cuts will help families and small businesses, as he defended spending reductions to social safety net programs. He said Medicaid was growing at an unsustainable rate and there were some improvements and reforms to make it more efficient. The Senate narrowly advanced the tax-cut, immigration, border and military spending bill in a procedural vote late on Saturday, voting 51-49 to open debate on the 940-page megabill. Trump wants the bill passed before the July 4 Independence Day holiday. BILL POLITICS Amendments proposed by Democratic senators such as the proposed limiting cuts to Medicaid were rejected by the Republican majority. Embedded in the Senate Republicans' bill are several hot-button political issues, like a prohibition of Medicaid funding for a list of almost 30 medical procedures related to gender transition, as well as an increase of immigration-related funding for criminal and gang checks for unaccompanied migrant children, including examinations of "gang-related tattoos" for children as young as 12 years old. Early on Tuesday, Democrats and Republicans voted down an attempt by Republican Senator Susan Collins to cushion the impact of Medicaid cuts on rural health facilities by doubling federal support to $50 billion over five years and paying for the increase by raising the top federal tax rate. The measure still drew support from 18 Republicans. Elon Musk, formerly appointed by Trump to spearhead his government cost-cutting plan before the pair had a public falling-out in June over the budget bill, threatened on Monday to target Republicans ahead of the 2026 mid-term election. "Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!," Musk posted on X. He also reiterated his interest in a new political party and accused lawmakers in both parties of belonging to the "porky pig party," a dig at government spending levels. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which says the majority of its members are small businesses, backs the bill. However, John Arensmeyer, who represents more than 85,000 small enterprises at the Small Business Majority, cautioned that the business tax relief is currently skewed to the wealthiest, top 5% of small businesses. DEBT CEILING DEADLINE The Republican measure contains a $5 trillion debt ceiling increase - $1 trillion more than the House's bill - but failure to pass some version would present lawmakers with a serious deadline later this summer, when the Treasury Department could come close to exhausting its borrowing authority and thus risk a devastating default. The debt limit increase has caused Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky to come out in opposition to the bill, joining fellow Republican Thom Tillis, who decried its cuts to Medicaid and clean energy initiatives. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Senate bill would result in about 11.8 million additional uninsured people, surpassing estimates for the House's version. If the Senate succeeds in passing the bill, it will then go to the House, where members are also divided, with some angry about its cost and others worried about cuts to the Medicaid program. The megabill would extend the 2017 tax cuts that were Trump's main legislative achievement during his first term as president, cut other taxes and boost spending on the military and border security. Senate Republicans, who reject the budget office's estimates on the cost of the legislation, are set on using an alternative calculation method that does not factor in costs from extending the 2017 tax cuts. Outside tax experts, like Andrew Lautz from the nonpartisan think tank Bipartisan Policy Center, call it a "magic trick." Using this calculation method, the Senate Republicans' budget bill appears to cost substantially less and seems to save $500 billion, according to the BPC analysis. (Writing by Richard Cowan and Costas Pitas; Editing by Michael Perry)

18 GOP senators vote to raise taxes on the rich to pay for rural hospital fund
18 GOP senators vote to raise taxes on the rich to pay for rural hospital fund

The Hill

time11 minutes ago

  • The Hill

18 GOP senators vote to raise taxes on the rich to pay for rural hospital fund

Eighteen Republican senators, including former Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), voted to advance an amendment sponsored by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) to raise taxes on ultra wealthy income earners to help rural hospitals facing steep Medicaid cuts. The GOP senators voted for a motion to waive a budget point-of-order against Collins's amendment to establish a new $39.6 percent tax bracket for individuals who earn more than $25 million in annual income and married couples who earn more than $50 million annually. The proposal would be used to double the size of the rural hospital relief fund in the GOP megabill from $25 million to $50 million. The procedural motion failed on a lopsided vote of 22 to 78, but the result surprised some Senate insiders. One senior Republican aide expressed shock that so many Republicans voted to raise taxes, even if on the nation's very richest income earners. 'There was a time when Republicans used to have discipline on tax increases. Grover must be pulling his hair out,' the aide said, referring to Grover Norquist, the president of Americans for Tax Reform, an anti-tax advocacy group that asks members of Congress to pledge not to raise taxes. 'I guess it's Trump's Republican Party,' the source observed, referring to President Trump's more populist view of economic policy. Trump wrote on social media last month that he would be 'OK' with raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans. Trump broached the subject again in the Oval Office last month when asked about raising taxes on the very richest individuals to offset tax cuts for middle- and working-class families. 'I would love to do that, frankly,' Trump told reporters. Republican Sens. Shelley Moore Capito ( Bill Cassidy (La.), John Curtis (Utah), Deb Fischer (Neb.), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), Jon Husted (Ohio), Cindy Hyde-Smith (Miss.), John Kennedy (La.), Roger Marshall (Kan.), McConnell, Jerry Moran (Kan.), Bernie Moreno (Ohio), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Dan Sullivan (Alaska), Roger Wicker (Miss.) and Todd Young (Ind.) voted to support the measure. Collins also voted to waive the point-of-order objection against her proposal.

California Housing to Change Under New Law: What to Know
California Housing to Change Under New Law: What to Know

Newsweek

time16 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

California Housing to Change Under New Law: What to Know

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed two bills on Monday which scaled back the state's environmental restrictions to allow for more homebuilding and combat the ongoing housing shortage. The new housing legislation effectively weakens the California Environmental Quality Act, known as CEQA, allowing for some housing projects to sidestep the landmark law which critics said allowed neighbors to block building projects in their community they did not like. The law, passed in 1970 and signed into law by then-Governor Ronald Reagan, has attracted criticism in recent years and has been blamed for contributing to the Golden State's housing shortage. CEQA, according to critics, has been abused by groups with no track record of environmental activism to block or delay projects that would actually have a positive impact on the state. Despite recent backlash against the law, many lawmakers were conflicted about passing the two bills, especially among Democrats. Newsom blocked a standstill in the state Senate by threatening to reject the state budget unless it included the new housing reform. On Monday the Democratic governor, who is rumored to be considering a 2028 presidential run, called the two bills the "most consequential housing reform that we've seen in modern history in the state of California." California Governor Gavin Newsom (R) speaks as California Attorney general Rob Bonta looks on during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard on April 16, 2025, in Ceres, California. California Governor Gavin Newsom (R) speaks as California Attorney general Rob Bonta looks on during a news conference at Gemperle Orchard on April 16, 2025, in Ceres, is a breaking news story and will be later updated.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store