John Oliver: Trump Admin’s USAID Cuts Linked to Hundreds of Thousands of Deaths

The gutting of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) under the Trump administration, and the subsequent impact on global health and humanitarian efforts, was the subject of a recent deep dive by John Oliver on his HBO present, Last Week Tonight. Oliver’s segment highlighted not only the scale of the cuts, but also the ideological motivations behind them, and the devastating consequences already being felt worldwide. He described the administration’s actions as “beyond cruel,” pointing to estimates that over half a million deaths in 2025 alone can be linked to the dismantling of the agency.

A History of Bipartisan Support Undermined

Established in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy, USAID was conceived as a tool for both humanitarian assistance and the projection of American influence abroad. For decades, it enjoyed broad bipartisan support, largely due to its visible role in disaster relief and development projects. However, the Trump administration fundamentally altered USAID’s trajectory. While the first term saw a shift in focus – prioritizing emergency responses and digital infrastructure while deprioritizing areas like maternal health and family planning – the second term witnessed a systematic dismantling of the agency. By February 2025, USAID’s website was taken offline, and within a month, 83% of its programs had been terminated. Nearly 10,000 employees were placed on leave, effectively bringing the agency to its knees.

The Role of Elon Musk and Right-Wing Activism

Oliver’s report detailed the involvement of Elon Musk, who, through his self-proclaimed “department of government efficiency” (dubbed “Doge”), spearheaded many of the cuts. Musk publicly announced his intention to “feed USAID into the wood chipper,” a statement that foreshadowed the drastic reductions in funding, and personnel. However, the report also pointed to the influence of Mike Benz, a right-wing activist who criticized USAID on Joe Rogan’s podcast in late 2024. Musk subsequently amplified Benz’s claims, labeling USAID a “viper’s nest of radical-left Marxists who hate America.” This rhetoric, Oliver argued, fueled the administration’s determination to dismantle the agency, despite its proven track record of success.

Beyond the Budget: The Human Cost of the Cuts

Despite representing less than 1% of the federal budget, USAID’s impact was far-reaching. The cuts led to the termination of vital programs related to nutrition assistance, global supply chains for essential medicines and food, and the closure of over 2,000 health clinics in crisis zones. Oliver highlighted the particularly devastating consequences in the Congo, where 29 children died of malnutrition and illness just one month after a USAID-supported clinic was forced to close. Researchers estimate that more than 282,000 adults and 518,000 children died in 2025 as a direct result of the cuts, a figure complicated by the fact that the cuts also halted data monitoring efforts. Harvard researchers have linked the agency’s dismantling to a significant increase in preventable deaths globally.

Dissecting the Justifications for Defunding

Oliver challenged the justifications offered by the Trump administration for defunding USAID, particularly the claim that the agency was rife with waste and abuse. He pointed out that 94% of USAID’s spending had been audited, with only 0.3% identified as problematic. He also noted the irony of these accusations coming from an administration led by Donald Trump, whose own business ventures, like Trump University, had faced allegations of fraud. The “Doge” team, tasked with identifying programs for elimination, appeared to lack a clear understanding of the agency’s work, often targeting programs deemed “life-saving” while eliminating others without justification.

A Fresh “America First” Strategy and Lingering Concerns

In September 2025, the Trump administration announced a new “America First global health strategy,” intended to restart some forms of international aid, albeit in a limited capacity and focused on select countries. The State Department report outlining this strategy has been met with skepticism, given the damage already inflicted on USAID’s infrastructure and expertise. Oliver expressed concern that even with renewed funding, it would be difficult to rebuild the decades of goodwill and institutional knowledge that had been lost. The agency’s ability to effectively deliver aid has been severely compromised, raising questions about the long-term impact of these cuts.

What Comes Next: Rebuilding Trust and Capacity

The future of USAID remains uncertain. While the new “America First” strategy represents a potential step towards restoring some level of international aid, significant challenges lie ahead. Rebuilding trust with partner countries and organizations, restoring USAID’s internal capacity, and ensuring effective oversight will be crucial. The agency will need to demonstrate its value and accountability to regain the bipartisan support it once enjoyed. Continued monitoring of the health and humanitarian consequences of the cuts will also be essential, as will a thorough assessment of the lessons learned from this period of disruption. The situation underscores the fragility of international aid programs and the importance of sustained commitment to global health and development.

As Oliver concluded, USAID was not a perfect agency, but it was demonstrably saving lives. The deliberate dismantling of this vital institution, he argued, represents a “man-made disaster” with far-reaching and devastating consequences. The Guardian provides further coverage of Oliver’s report and the broader context of the Trump administration’s foreign policy decisions.