Historic Pocket Rescission Package Eliminates Woke, Weaponized, and Wasteful Spending

8/29/2025

Briefings & Statements

View Original

Action Summary

Objective: Use pocket rescission authority to cancel $5 billion in foreign aid and international organization funding deemed “woke, weaponized, and wasteful,” aligning fiscal policy with an “America First” agenda.
USAID – Development Assistance: Rescind $3.2 billion allocated for programs criticized for funding radical priorities such as climate change initiatives, diversity, equity, inclusion, and non-essential projects that are perceived as contrary to American values.
USAID & State – Democracy Fund: Eliminate $322 million used for “democracy promotion activities” including gender responsive governance and LGBTQI+ projects, which are viewed as undermining U.S. interests and interfering with other countries’ sovereignty.
State – Contributions to International Organizations (CIO): Cancel $521 million in funding for organizations like UNESCO, PAHO, WTO, and ILO that are seen as advancing globalist agendas and counter to U.S. priorities.
State – Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA): Terminate $393 million in UN peacekeeping funds amid concerns over waste, abuse, and a lack of clear, measurable outcomes in peacekeeping missions.
IAP – Peacekeeping Operations: Cut $445 million allocated for programs outside core security objectives, eliminating support for initiatives such as the Global Peace Operations Initiative and other non-critical regional projects.

Risks & Considerations

The rescission of $5 billion in foreign aid and international organization funding could impact Vanderbilt University’s international collaborations and research initiatives, particularly those related to climate change, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), and democracy promotion.
Programs funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Department of State’s Democracy Fund, which are being cut, may have previously supported research and educational initiatives at Vanderbilt, especially in areas like global health, climate resilience, and democratic governance.
The reduction in funding for international organizations, such as the United Nations and its affiliates, could affect Vanderbilt’s partnerships and projects that rely on these organizations for support and collaboration.
The elimination of peacekeeping operations funding may impact Vanderbilt’s research and educational programs related to international security, peace studies, and conflict resolution.
Vanderbilt may need to reassess its funding strategies and seek alternative sources of support for international research and collaboration, potentially increasing reliance on private grants and partnerships.

Impacted Programs

Vanderbilt’s Global Education Office may face challenges in maintaining international partnerships and study abroad programs due to reduced funding for international initiatives.
The Climate Change Research Network at Vanderbilt could be affected by the cuts to climate-related funding, necessitating a shift in focus or funding sources.
The Center for Latin American Studies may need to adjust its research and outreach activities in response to reduced support for democracy and development programs in the region.
The Peabody College of Education and Human Development might experience changes in its research and policy initiatives related to global education and development.

Financial Impact

The rescission of funding could lead to a decrease in federal grants and contracts available to Vanderbilt, impacting research budgets and project scopes.
Vanderbilt may need to increase efforts to secure private funding and partnerships to compensate for the loss of federal support for international and climate-related initiatives.
The university might face increased competition for remaining federal funds, necessitating strategic adjustments in grant application processes and priorities.
There could be a potential impact on tuition revenue if international student enrollment is affected by changes in global partnerships and funding availability.

Relevance Score: 4 (The rescission presents high risks involving major transformations of international programs and funding strategies.)

Key Actions

Vanderbilt’s Office of Federal Relations should closely monitor changes in federal funding priorities, particularly those affecting international aid and development programs. This will be crucial in understanding how these changes might impact Vanderbilt’s international collaborations and research initiatives.
The Vanderbilt Project on Unity & American Democracy should evaluate the implications of reduced funding for democracy promotion activities. By identifying potential areas of impact, the project can adjust its focus to align with national priorities and secure alternative funding sources.
Vanderbilt’s Center for International Studies should assess the potential impact of rescinded funding on international partnerships and student exchange programs. Understanding these shifts will be essential for adapting strategies to maintain and enhance global engagement.
The Department of Political Science should conduct research on the broader societal impacts of reduced international aid and peacekeeping funding. This research can provide valuable insights into how these policies affect global stability and U.S. foreign relations.
Vanderbilt’s Financial Aid Office should evaluate the potential impact of changes in international funding on student demographics and financial aid needs, particularly for international students. Adapting financial aid strategies will be essential to support a diverse student body.

Opportunities

The executive order presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Peabody College to expand its research on the effectiveness of international aid programs. By leveraging its expertise in policy analysis, Peabody can contribute to the design and evaluation of aid programs that align with American values and priorities.
Vanderbilt can capitalize on the increased focus on domestic priorities by developing new programs and partnerships that address national issues such as education, health, and economic development. This could include joint research initiatives and collaborative projects with government agencies and private organizations.
The emphasis on reducing wasteful spending offers an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Center for Effective Lawmaking to engage in policy analysis and advocacy. By providing evidence-based recommendations, the center can influence how government funds are allocated and used to support effective governance.
By engaging with the broader academic and policy community, Vanderbilt can position itself as a leader in the national conversation on fiscal responsibility and government efficiency. Hosting conferences, workshops, and public forums on these topics can further establish Vanderbilt as a hub for innovative policy thought and practice.

Relevance Score: 4 (The order presents the potential for major process changes required for Vanderbilt’s programs due to funding impacts and shifts in international collaboration priorities.)

Average Relevance Score: 3.2

Timeline for Implementation

N/A: There is no explicit deadline or timeline mentioned for implementing this rescission directive.

Relevance Score: 1

Impacted Government Organizations

United States Agency for International Development (USAID): This agency is affected by the targeted rescission of the Development Assistance account and its programs promoting initiatives that the Administration deems contrary to American interests.
Department of State: The Department is impacted via several accounts, including the Democracy Fund, Contributions to International Organizations (CIO), and Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities (CIPA), all of which are being eliminated under this rescission package.
International Affairs Program (IAP) – Peacekeeping Operations: This account, which supports various peacekeeping and related initiatives, is also canceled, thereby affecting U.S. engagement in international security and diplomatic missions.

Relevance Score: 2 (Three to five Federal Agencies are impacted by the directive.)

Responsible Officials

President of the United States – As the principal decision-maker using authority under the Impoundment Control Act, he is directing the cancellation of these funding accounts.
Head of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) – Responsible for implementing the termination of the Development Assistance (DA) programs and addressing any related administrative changes.
Secretary of State – Charged with executing cuts and revisions within associated State-led programs, including the Democracy Fund, Contributions to International Organizations, and Peacekeeping Activities.

Relevance Score: 5 (Directives affect White House/Cabinet officials and have wide-ranging strategic implications.)