Democratic members hold shadow hearing as former USAID staff and contractors describe halted lifesaving programs and mass layoffs

At a shadow hearing convened by Democratic members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, career USAID employees and contractors testified that an executive order and subsequent agency actions effectively halted most life‑saving foreign assistance programs and left thousands of U.S. and partner staff without pay or program authority.

The witnesses told committee members they had documented widespread program terminations, contract stoppages and a dramatic reduction in technical staff available to run global health and humanitarian responses — developments they said would lead to preventable deaths, destabilize partner countries and undermine U.S. national security interests.

Nicholas Enrich, who identified himself as the acting assistant administrator for Global Health at USAID before he was placed on administrative leave, said the bureau implements roughly $10,000,000,000 appropriated annually by Congress for global health and that, by March 2, “all or nearly all” of the awards needed to implement lifesaving activities had been terminated. Enrich said a presidential executive order issued Jan. 20, 2025, described as a “pause on foreign assistance,” and a Jan. 28 blanket waiver from Secretary of State Marco Rubio for lifesaving humanitarian assistance were insufficient in practice because political leadership at USAID and at State blocked approvals and payments.

“The waiver could have been the only avenue we had to avoid irreversible harm,” Enrich said, adding that the Global Health workforce fell “from nearly 800 staff to just over 60” and that most global health programming beyond HIV had been excluded from the agency’s definition of lifesaving.

Cole Manfried, who said he spent about six years working for USAID’s Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance and served on response teams for Gaza and other crises, described a rapid unraveling of the Gaza response when staff were sent home and major contracts were cut. “When I left, there were only three Americans left back in Israel managing all of USAID’s Gaza humanitarian response, trying to do the work of 15 people,” he said.

Amy Uccello, a global health technical expert who said she was fired while on maternity leave on Jan. 28, testified about personal and programmatic impacts: she said roughly 94–88 percent of reproductive‑health and maternal‑child programs were terminated in the wake of the pause and projected substantial near‑term increases in unintended pregnancies and maternal deaths. She described losing health insurance and recalled colleagues clearing out desks and removing program material.

Witnesses and committee Democrats cited multiple projections and impact estimates they said resulted from terminated programming. Enrich gave several figures he said were based on internal analysis and public health modeling, including a 39 percent increase in malaria cases in some scenarios and as many as 3,000,000 people living with HIV losing access to treatment; he also described projected increases in deaths from tuberculosis, viral hemorrhagic fevers and polio if programs remain halted. Uccello testified to projected increases in unintended pregnancies and maternal deaths in the first 90 days after program terminations.

Members on the dais repeatedly sought details about where authority and decisions to stop approvals and payments originated. Enrich named several political appointees he said played a role in blocking approvals and payments, and he described repeated written pleas and memos he sent to document attempts to avert service interruptions. Committee members also referenced a recent federal court finding — reported during the hearing by a Democratic member — that the manner of USAID’s dismantling was likely unconstitutional.

Witnesses described operational examples of disruption: airport screening and Ebola response activities that could not be funded because contracts were terminated or because payments were not approved; life‑saving nutrition contracts that were halted; and food and commodity shipments that committees and witnesses said were at risk in ports or warehouses. Enrich said a partner holding PPE in a WHO warehouse in Kenya could not move that equipment to Uganda because USAID was not permitted to work with WHO under the new constraints.

Committee Democrats framed the testimony as an accountability and oversight issue. A number of members urged that Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other administration officials be called to testify; witnesses said they had submitted written statements and memos to the record documenting their concerns and called for inspector general reports and additional oversight.

The hearing produced no formal committee action. Witnesses requested that their memos and written testimony be entered into the record; several members said they would continue to press for public testimony and court review. Democrats on the panel said they would use the hearing to inform legislative responses to restore program authority and funding flows.

The hearing included sustained back‑and‑forth over how to measure near‑term deaths and long‑term damage. Witnesses cautioned that some deaths and program impacts are hard to quantify in real time, that partners may be reluctant to report for fear of retribution, and that certain global health risks (for example, outbreaks that cross borders) pose direct risks to the United States.

The session concluded with committee members thanking the witnesses for their service and pledging further oversight and public attention. Witnesses said they remain engaged in documenting program damage and in advocating for restoration of funding and program authorities.