Elon Musk recently called the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) “a ball of worms beyond repair” that should be eliminated. Indeed, Musk celebrated “feeding USAID into the woodchipper” rather than going to parties. Clearly the head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has a very different definition of entertainment.

As a Foreign Service officer, I witnessed firsthand the benefits of USAID support for overseas development and how these programs advance our broader national security objectives.

In Uruguay and in Argentina, USAID supported judicial education programs to help strengthen the rule of law in those countries. While not the usual image of poverty reduction or basic health care, USAID’s work in those countries was no less important nor less relevant to our national security.

Countries that demonstrate a strong commitment to the rule of law where judges are trained to make decisions based on law are safer and more predictable. This makes migration less likely since its citizens are confident in the ability to receive a fair trial. Strong rule of law also tends to reduce crime and violence.

Further, a predictable judicial system is conducive to U.S. investment and to the sale of U.S. products. But more importantly, USAID projects allow the United States to share and model our values, which creates a positive relationship between our societies through the exercise of “soft power.”

Foreign recipients of U.S. assistance view our country favorably and often seek to emulate our structures and values. Put another way, demonstrating goodwill helps make and strengthen friendships while also creating markets for our goods and services. This is a win-win situation.

It is important to note that annual U.S. foreign assistance represents roughly 1% of the federal budget in light of Elon Musk’s stated aim to reduce federal spending by 30%. A recent poll conducted by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation found that 89% of respondents believe the United States should spend at least 1% of the federal budget on foreign aid. And support for foreign assistance is not “woke” or novel. As far back as 18th century, the U.S. recognized the strategic importance of foreign aid to America’s national security. In 1792, George Washington sent foreign aid to Haiti, to prevent a migration influx following unrest in the country.

Uruguay (and most other USAID-funded programs) are a long way from Maine, no doubt. But Musk’s effort to eliminate USAID will have direct ramifications for Maine businesses and families. Maine stands to lose almost $16 million in funding if the USAID elimination stands (ranking Maine 36th among the 50 states for USAID expenditures).

Take for example, MCD Global Health, a Maine-based USAID partner organization that for the past 55 years has provided “strategic global and public health interventions and programs in Maine, the U.S. and around the world.” MCD’s Maine roots are spread around the globe helping to research and treat chronic and infectious diseases while increasing awareness about Maine and its people.

Careful and thoughtful review of USAID programming might identify projects or programs that are not fully aligned with U.S. objectives and should be eliminated. Such exercises have been conducted in the past; many analysts have suggested the use of a scalpel and not a wrecking ball now.

Indeed, even the authors of Project 2025 did not advocate for the elimination of USAID. Foreign assistance has many tangible and intangible benefits for the recipients, for our country, and for our state. Let’s not allow one man’s desire for entertainment to shred decades of goodwill around the globe and noble work at home.