Washington D.C. – A recent tweet by author Stephen Pimentel, which hypothetically questioned the material impact of a USAID shutdown on Americans, suggesting it would affect "well under 1%, closer to 0%" of the population, comes amidst significant real-world actions taken against the U.S. Agency for International Development. In early 2025, the Trump administration initiated drastic measures to reduce the agency's workforce, placing thousands of employees on administrative leave and sparking widespread concern. USAID, established in 1961, serves as the primary U.S. agency for civilian foreign aid, disaster relief, and economic development, operating in over 100 countries. Its mission extends beyond humanitarian efforts to include advancing U.S. national security, economic prosperity, and soft power interests globally. The agency's work encompasses diverse areas such as global health, food security, democratic governance, and conflict prevention. Prior to the recent cuts, USAID employed over 10,000 individuals worldwide, with approximately two-thirds of its staff stationed overseas. Reports from February 2025 indicated plans to reduce this workforce to as few as 290 to 600 essential personnel, leading to thousands of U.S. and international employees being placed on administrative leave or laid off. This move directly impacts the employees and their immediate families, as acknowledged in Pimentel's tweet. However, the broader implications of such a drastic reduction are widely contested by experts and former officials, who argue against the notion of minimal impact on the wider American populace. Many view USAID as a critical tool for U.S. diplomacy and a vital component of national security. Analysts have warned that diminishing USAID's capacity could undermine U.S. credibility, create vacuums for rival powers like China, and jeopardize ongoing humanitarian and development programs that serve U.S. strategic interests. The attempted dismantling of USAID has also faced legal challenges and protests from within the agency and from unions like the American Foreign Service Association. These groups argue that the actions are unconstitutional and illegal, leading to a "global humanitarian crisis" by abruptly halting crucial work. While Stephen Pimentel's tweet presented a hypothetical scenario, the actual events of early 2025 have brought the debate over USAID's value and impact to the forefront, highlighting the significant consequences of such large-scale governmental restructuring.