House Oversight subcommittee grills witnesses on USAID spending, food aid blockages and alleged ties to extremist groups

The House Oversight Committee's Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency convened a hearing on U.S. foreign aid that produced sharply partisan exchanges, competing assessments of USAID's record, and urgent appeals over blocked food deliveries.

Chairwoman Marjorie Taylor Greene opened the hearing by saying the panel met “at a time where all of us are witnessing billions of dollars in taxpayer waste, fraud, and abuse being exposed across every agency of our federal government.” The hearing featured four outside witnesses and more than a dozen members of Congress who questioned whether taxpayer dollars have been properly vetted and whether recent agency changes have harmed U.S. interests.

The hearing brought three recurring themes into focus: allegations that U.S. foreign assistance has been misdirected or inadequately overseen; concerns that recent decisions to pause or change USAID operations are causing immediate humanitarian harm; and calls from some members to tighten transparency and vetting of grantees.

Witnesses aligned with the panel majority argued that large sums of U.S. aid have been spent on projects outside core national security or humanitarian aims and, in some cases, have reached actors linked to extremist groups. Max Primerack, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, said, “Foreign aid should be a tool to advance our national security interests. In the past, it did. Today, it does not.” Greg Roman, executive director of the Middle East Forum, told the committee, “This is a problem that began under the Obama administration and was exacerbated under the Biden administration,” and presented examples he said show weak vetting and instances where funds moved indirectly to groups tied to violence.

Witnesses on the other side cautioned against dismantling longstanding assistance tools and stressed strategic consequences. Noam Unger, director of the Sustainable Development and Resilience Initiative at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said, “Throwing away our toolbox does not make us safer or well positioned to influence the world,” and warned that abrupt changes risk ceding influence to geopolitical competitors.

Several members pressed the panel on immediate humanitarian effects. Representative Greg Casar said staff and aid programs in the field have been stranded and appealed directly: “Get the food out of the warehouse. Save these kids' lives.” Committee staff later entered a World Food Programme post into the hearing record saying a recent pause on in‑kind food assistance purchased from U.S. farmers had been rescinded, allowing purchases and deliveries to resume under existing agreements.

Committee members and witnesses proposed overlapping fixes: restore or clarify life‑saving waivers for emergency food and medical assistance, require more exhaustive public reporting on awards and subawards, tighten vetting (including counterterrorism database checks for high‑risk contexts), increase OIG auditing authority, and eliminate “miscellaneous” award categories that obscure grantee identities. Panelists and members disagreed over whether those steps would be sufficient or whether deeper structural changes — including major personnel changes at USAID or even abolition of the agency — were warranted.

The hearing produced no formal votes or committee actions. Instead it concluded with the chair saying the subcommittee may recommend investigations and criminal referrals based on testimony, and with members on both sides urging additional oversight or, alternatively, restraint to avoid interrupting essential programs.

The hearing underscored a stark split: some members prioritized aggressive oversight and transparency as remedies for alleged misuse; others emphasized the humanitarian and geopolitical risks of halting or dismantling established programs. The committee record will include written statements from witnesses and additional materials submitted for the record.