A major element of the deepening global crisis of democracy has been the erosion of the will and capacity of established democracies—most of all the United States—to support and defend democracy and human rights around the world.
Since taking office in January, the Trump Administration has declared war on the entire U.S. architecture to promote democratic information, values, and institutions. It quickly dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which administered the largest source of U.S. funds for “democracy and governance” assistance abroad. Later, a federal judge ruled that the action “likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways.” It has sought to shut down the Voice of America (VOA) and fire its leadership and staff—which another federal court recently found to be unlawful. At the State Department, it has gutted the office of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and ordered the termination of virtually all of its grants (exceeding $1 billion). It rewrote and shrunk the annual State Department Report on human rights practices around the world, eliminating whole categories of abuse and whitewashing friendly authoritarian regimes. And it has sought to impound Congressionally appropriated funds for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-governmental organization that prevailed in court recently when a third federal judge ruled that the Administration’s action had been taken “for impermissible policy reasons.” Trump’s 2026 budget intensifies these assaults with massive continuing cuts.
All this comes at a historical moment when democratic backsliding is accelerating, authoritarianism is deepening, and autocracies are increasing their power and ambition to rewrite the rules of the global order. We are nearing a tipping point, as the U.S. risks losing the battle for liberal values and global hearts and minds to China. What can be done?
U.S. efforts to support democracy and human rights are often traced back to President Jimmy Carter. But the initial impetus came from the Congress, with House Foreign Affairs Committee hearings on human rights in 1973 and rising Congressional pressure to weigh democracy and human rights more heavily in American foreign policy. Congress mandated that the State Department issue an annual report on countries’ human rights practices, and it created and funded USAID, VOA, NED, among other instruments of our democratic soft power.
Now the Congress must act again. Many of its members strongly support democracy promotion, but they have been troubled by USAID’s ponderous bureaucracy and heavy reliance on outside contractors to implement grants. It is time to build back better. First, Congress can increase the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, which now stands at something over $300 million. Even doubling that budget could not make up for the demise of USAID, which spent $1.82 billion on democracy, human rights, and governance programs in the 2024 fiscal year. But NED funding goes much further and faster, because it is much leaner administratively, can disperse grants more quickly, and responds to needs and proposals from the field rather than imposing frameworks. A sensible strategic approach would be to gradually increase the NED budget by two or three times its current level over a period of several years.
Second, Congress should give some other agencies, such as VOA, more explicit statutory autonomy so that they cannot be bullied, misused, or terminated for political ends. VOA is one of our most “effective means of promoting accurate information and critical analysis to the world” and thereby countering Chinese and other authoritarian propaganda. U.S. foreign policy also needs more robust means of waging the battle of information, values, and ideas. Congress and the Clinton Administration acted unwisely in closing the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) in 1998, crippling our capacity for public diplomacy around democratic values and consigning it to marginal status within the State Department. As we face again a profound global contest between democratic and authoritarian values, USIA should be re-established as a nimble and rapidly responsive actor for the digital age. We cannot win the global struggle for democracy if we lose the war over information and ideas.
Much of what must be done to reconfigure U.S. democracy promotion must await a president who cares about democracy. But Congress can begin to reverse the damage, if the members can muster the resolve to act.
A major element of the deepening global crisis of democracy has been the erosion of the will and capacity of established democracies—most of all the United States—to support and defend democracy and human rights around the world.
Since taking office in January, the Trump Administration has declared war on the entire U.S. architecture to promote democratic information, values, and institutions. It quickly dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which administered the largest source of U.S. funds for “democracy and governance” assistance abroad. Later, a federal judge ruled that the action “likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways.” It has sought to shut down the Voice of America (VOA) and fire its leadership and staff—which another federal court recently found to be unlawful. At the State Department, it has gutted the office of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and ordered the termination of virtually all of its grants (exceeding $1 billion). It rewrote and shrunk the annual State Department Report on human rights practices around the world, eliminating whole categories of abuse and whitewashing friendly authoritarian regimes. And it has sought to impound Congressionally appropriated funds for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-governmental organization that prevailed in court recently when a third federal judge ruled that the Administration’s action had been taken “for impermissible policy reasons.” Trump’s 2026 budget intensifies these assaults with massive continuing cuts.
All this comes at a historical moment when democratic backsliding is accelerating, authoritarianism is deepening, and autocracies are increasing their power and ambition to rewrite the rules of the global order. We are nearing a tipping point, as the U.S. risks losing the battle for liberal values and global hearts and minds to China. What can be done?
U.S. efforts to support democracy and human rights are often traced back to President Jimmy Carter. But the initial impetus came from the Congress, with House Foreign Affairs Committee hearings on human rights in 1973 and rising Congressional pressure to weigh democracy and human rights more heavily in American foreign policy. Congress mandated that the State Department issue an annual report on countries’ human rights practices, and it created and funded USAID, VOA, NED, among other instruments of our democratic soft power.
Now the Congress must act again. Many of its members strongly support democracy promotion, but they have been troubled by USAID’s ponderous bureaucracy and heavy reliance on outside contractors to implement grants. It is time to build back better. First, Congress can increase the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, which now stands at something over $300 million. Even doubling that budget could not make up for the demise of USAID, which spent $1.82 billion on democracy, human rights, and governance programs in the 2024 fiscal year. But NED funding goes much further and faster, because it is much leaner administratively, can disperse grants more quickly, and responds to needs and proposals from the field rather than imposing frameworks. A sensible strategic approach would be to gradually increase the NED budget by two or three times its current level over a period of several years.
Second, Congress should give some other agencies, such as VOA, more explicit statutory autonomy so that they cannot be bullied, misused, or terminated for political ends. VOA is one of our most “effective means of promoting accurate information and critical analysis to the world” and thereby countering Chinese and other authoritarian propaganda. U.S. foreign policy also needs more robust means of waging the battle of information, values, and ideas. Congress and the Clinton Administration acted unwisely in closing the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) in 1998, crippling our capacity for public diplomacy around democratic values and consigning it to marginal status within the State Department. As we face again a profound global contest between democratic and authoritarian values, USIA should be re-established as a nimble and rapidly responsive actor for the digital age. We cannot win the global struggle for democracy if we lose the war over information and ideas.
Much of what must be done to reconfigure U.S. democracy promotion must await a president who cares about democracy. But Congress can begin to reverse the damage, if the members can muster the resolve to act.
A major element of the deepening global crisis of democracy has been the erosion of the will and capacity of established democracies—most of all the United States—to support and defend democracy and human rights around the world.
Since taking office in January, the Trump Administration has declared war on the entire U.S. architecture to promote democratic information, values, and institutions. It quickly dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which administered the largest source of U.S. funds for “democracy and governance” assistance abroad. Later, a federal judge ruled that the action “likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways.” It has sought to shut down the Voice of America (VOA) and fire its leadership and staff—which another federal court recently found to be unlawful. At the State Department, it has gutted the office of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and ordered the termination of virtually all of its grants (exceeding $1 billion). It rewrote and shrunk the annual State Department Report on human rights practices around the world, eliminating whole categories of abuse and whitewashing friendly authoritarian regimes. And it has sought to impound Congressionally appropriated funds for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-governmental organization that prevailed in court recently when a third federal judge ruled that the Administration’s action had been taken “for impermissible policy reasons.” Trump’s 2026 budget intensifies these assaults with massive continuing cuts.
All this comes at a historical moment when democratic backsliding is accelerating, authoritarianism is deepening, and autocracies are increasing their power and ambition to rewrite the rules of the global order. We are nearing a tipping point, as the U.S. risks losing the battle for liberal values and global hearts and minds to China. What can be done?
U.S. efforts to support democracy and human rights are often traced back to President Jimmy Carter. But the initial impetus came from the Congress, with House Foreign Affairs Committee hearings on human rights in 1973 and rising Congressional pressure to weigh democracy and human rights more heavily in American foreign policy. Congress mandated that the State Department issue an annual report on countries’ human rights practices, and it created and funded USAID, VOA, NED, among other instruments of our democratic soft power.
Now the Congress must act again. Many of its members strongly support democracy promotion, but they have been troubled by USAID’s ponderous bureaucracy and heavy reliance on outside contractors to implement grants. It is time to build back better. First, Congress can increase the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, which now stands at something over $300 million. Even doubling that budget could not make up for the demise of USAID, which spent $1.82 billion on democracy, human rights, and governance programs in the 2024 fiscal year. But NED funding goes much further and faster, because it is much leaner administratively, can disperse grants more quickly, and responds to needs and proposals from the field rather than imposing frameworks. A sensible strategic approach would be to gradually increase the NED budget by two or three times its current level over a period of several years.
Second, Congress should give some other agencies, such as VOA, more explicit statutory autonomy so that they cannot be bullied, misused, or terminated for political ends. VOA is one of our most “effective means of promoting accurate information and critical analysis to the world” and thereby countering Chinese and other authoritarian propaganda. U.S. foreign policy also needs more robust means of waging the battle of information, values, and ideas. Congress and the Clinton Administration acted unwisely in closing the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) in 1998, crippling our capacity for public diplomacy around democratic values and consigning it to marginal status within the State Department. As we face again a profound global contest between democratic and authoritarian values, USIA should be re-established as a nimble and rapidly responsive actor for the digital age. We cannot win the global struggle for democracy if we lose the war over information and ideas.
Much of what must be done to reconfigure U.S. democracy promotion must await a president who cares about democracy. But Congress can begin to reverse the damage, if the members can muster the resolve to act.
A major element of the deepening global crisis of democracy has been the erosion of the will and capacity of established democracies—most of all the United States—to support and defend democracy and human rights around the world.
Since taking office in January, the Trump Administration has declared war on the entire U.S. architecture to promote democratic information, values, and institutions. It quickly dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which administered the largest source of U.S. funds for “democracy and governance” assistance abroad. Later, a federal judge ruled that the action “likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways.” It has sought to shut down the Voice of America (VOA) and fire its leadership and staff—which another federal court recently found to be unlawful. At the State Department, it has gutted the office of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and ordered the termination of virtually all of its grants (exceeding $1 billion). It rewrote and shrunk the annual State Department Report on human rights practices around the world, eliminating whole categories of abuse and whitewashing friendly authoritarian regimes. And it has sought to impound Congressionally appropriated funds for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-governmental organization that prevailed in court recently when a third federal judge ruled that the Administration’s action had been taken “for impermissible policy reasons.” Trump’s 2026 budget intensifies these assaults with massive continuing cuts.
All this comes at a historical moment when democratic backsliding is accelerating, authoritarianism is deepening, and autocracies are increasing their power and ambition to rewrite the rules of the global order. We are nearing a tipping point, as the U.S. risks losing the battle for liberal values and global hearts and minds to China. What can be done?
U.S. efforts to support democracy and human rights are often traced back to President Jimmy Carter. But the initial impetus came from the Congress, with House Foreign Affairs Committee hearings on human rights in 1973 and rising Congressional pressure to weigh democracy and human rights more heavily in American foreign policy. Congress mandated that the State Department issue an annual report on countries’ human rights practices, and it created and funded USAID, VOA, NED, among other instruments of our democratic soft power.
Now the Congress must act again. Many of its members strongly support democracy promotion, but they have been troubled by USAID’s ponderous bureaucracy and heavy reliance on outside contractors to implement grants. It is time to build back better. First, Congress can increase the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, which now stands at something over $300 million. Even doubling that budget could not make up for the demise of USAID, which spent $1.82 billion on democracy, human rights, and governance programs in the 2024 fiscal year. But NED funding goes much further and faster, because it is much leaner administratively, can disperse grants more quickly, and responds to needs and proposals from the field rather than imposing frameworks. A sensible strategic approach would be to gradually increase the NED budget by two or three times its current level over a period of several years.
Second, Congress should give some other agencies, such as VOA, more explicit statutory autonomy so that they cannot be bullied, misused, or terminated for political ends. VOA is one of our most “effective means of promoting accurate information and critical analysis to the world” and thereby countering Chinese and other authoritarian propaganda. U.S. foreign policy also needs more robust means of waging the battle of information, values, and ideas. Congress and the Clinton Administration acted unwisely in closing the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) in 1998, crippling our capacity for public diplomacy around democratic values and consigning it to marginal status within the State Department. As we face again a profound global contest between democratic and authoritarian values, USIA should be re-established as a nimble and rapidly responsive actor for the digital age. We cannot win the global struggle for democracy if we lose the war over information and ideas.
Much of what must be done to reconfigure U.S. democracy promotion must await a president who cares about democracy. But Congress can begin to reverse the damage, if the members can muster the resolve to act.
A major element of the deepening global crisis of democracy has been the erosion of the will and capacity of established democracies—most of all the United States—to support and defend democracy and human rights around the world.
Since taking office in January, the Trump Administration has declared war on the entire U.S. architecture to promote democratic information, values, and institutions. It quickly dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which administered the largest source of U.S. funds for “democracy and governance” assistance abroad. Later, a federal judge ruled that the action “likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways.” It has sought to shut down the Voice of America (VOA) and fire its leadership and staff—which another federal court recently found to be unlawful. At the State Department, it has gutted the office of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and ordered the termination of virtually all of its grants (exceeding $1 billion). It rewrote and shrunk the annual State Department Report on human rights practices around the world, eliminating whole categories of abuse and whitewashing friendly authoritarian regimes. And it has sought to impound Congressionally appropriated funds for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-governmental organization that prevailed in court recently when a third federal judge ruled that the Administration’s action had been taken “for impermissible policy reasons.” Trump’s 2026 budget intensifies these assaults with massive continuing cuts.
All this comes at a historical moment when democratic backsliding is accelerating, authoritarianism is deepening, and autocracies are increasing their power and ambition to rewrite the rules of the global order. We are nearing a tipping point, as the U.S. risks losing the battle for liberal values and global hearts and minds to China. What can be done?
U.S. efforts to support democracy and human rights are often traced back to President Jimmy Carter. But the initial impetus came from the Congress, with House Foreign Affairs Committee hearings on human rights in 1973 and rising Congressional pressure to weigh democracy and human rights more heavily in American foreign policy. Congress mandated that the State Department issue an annual report on countries’ human rights practices, and it created and funded USAID, VOA, NED, among other instruments of our democratic soft power.
Now the Congress must act again. Many of its members strongly support democracy promotion, but they have been troubled by USAID’s ponderous bureaucracy and heavy reliance on outside contractors to implement grants. It is time to build back better. First, Congress can increase the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, which now stands at something over $300 million. Even doubling that budget could not make up for the demise of USAID, which spent $1.82 billion on democracy, human rights, and governance programs in the 2024 fiscal year. But NED funding goes much further and faster, because it is much leaner administratively, can disperse grants more quickly, and responds to needs and proposals from the field rather than imposing frameworks. A sensible strategic approach would be to gradually increase the NED budget by two or three times its current level over a period of several years.
Second, Congress should give some other agencies, such as VOA, more explicit statutory autonomy so that they cannot be bullied, misused, or terminated for political ends. VOA is one of our most “effective means of promoting accurate information and critical analysis to the world” and thereby countering Chinese and other authoritarian propaganda. U.S. foreign policy also needs more robust means of waging the battle of information, values, and ideas. Congress and the Clinton Administration acted unwisely in closing the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) in 1998, crippling our capacity for public diplomacy around democratic values and consigning it to marginal status within the State Department. As we face again a profound global contest between democratic and authoritarian values, USIA should be re-established as a nimble and rapidly responsive actor for the digital age. We cannot win the global struggle for democracy if we lose the war over information and ideas.
Much of what must be done to reconfigure U.S. democracy promotion must await a president who cares about democracy. But Congress can begin to reverse the damage, if the members can muster the resolve to act.
A major element of the deepening global crisis of democracy has been the erosion of the will and capacity of established democracies—most of all the United States—to support and defend democracy and human rights around the world.
Since taking office in January, the Trump Administration has declared war on the entire U.S. architecture to promote democratic information, values, and institutions. It quickly dismantled the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which administered the largest source of U.S. funds for “democracy and governance” assistance abroad. Later, a federal judge ruled that the action “likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways.” It has sought to shut down the Voice of America (VOA) and fire its leadership and staff—which another federal court recently found to be unlawful. At the State Department, it has gutted the office of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor and ordered the termination of virtually all of its grants (exceeding $1 billion). It rewrote and shrunk the annual State Department Report on human rights practices around the world, eliminating whole categories of abuse and whitewashing friendly authoritarian regimes. And it has sought to impound Congressionally appropriated funds for the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-governmental organization that prevailed in court recently when a third federal judge ruled that the Administration’s action had been taken “for impermissible policy reasons.” Trump’s 2026 budget intensifies these assaults with massive continuing cuts.
All this comes at a historical moment when democratic backsliding is accelerating, authoritarianism is deepening, and autocracies are increasing their power and ambition to rewrite the rules of the global order. We are nearing a tipping point, as the U.S. risks losing the battle for liberal values and global hearts and minds to China. What can be done?
U.S. efforts to support democracy and human rights are often traced back to President Jimmy Carter. But the initial impetus came from the Congress, with House Foreign Affairs Committee hearings on human rights in 1973 and rising Congressional pressure to weigh democracy and human rights more heavily in American foreign policy. Congress mandated that the State Department issue an annual report on countries’ human rights practices, and it created and funded USAID, VOA, NED, among other instruments of our democratic soft power.
Now the Congress must act again. Many of its members strongly support democracy promotion, but they have been troubled by USAID’s ponderous bureaucracy and heavy reliance on outside contractors to implement grants. It is time to build back better. First, Congress can increase the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy, which now stands at something over $300 million. Even doubling that budget could not make up for the demise of USAID, which spent $1.82 billion on democracy, human rights, and governance programs in the 2024 fiscal year. But NED funding goes much further and faster, because it is much leaner administratively, can disperse grants more quickly, and responds to needs and proposals from the field rather than imposing frameworks. A sensible strategic approach would be to gradually increase the NED budget by two or three times its current level over a period of several years.
Second, Congress should give some other agencies, such as VOA, more explicit statutory autonomy so that they cannot be bullied, misused, or terminated for political ends. VOA is one of our most “effective means of promoting accurate information and critical analysis to the world” and thereby countering Chinese and other authoritarian propaganda. U.S. foreign policy also needs more robust means of waging the battle of information, values, and ideas. Congress and the Clinton Administration acted unwisely in closing the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) in 1998, crippling our capacity for public diplomacy around democratic values and consigning it to marginal status within the State Department. As we face again a profound global contest between democratic and authoritarian values, USIA should be re-established as a nimble and rapidly responsive actor for the digital age. We cannot win the global struggle for democracy if we lose the war over information and ideas.
Much of what must be done to reconfigure U.S. democracy promotion must await a president who cares about democracy. But Congress can begin to reverse the damage, if the members can muster the resolve to act.
About the Author
Larry Diamond
Diamond is the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education at Stanford University. He co-leads the Project on Taiwan at Hoover, as well as the Israel Studies Program and the Global Digital Policy Incubator at FSI. Diamond previously directed the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at FSI and served as Faculty Co-Director of the Haas Center for Public Service at Stanford. He also served for 32 years as founding co-editor of the Journal of Democracy.
About the Author
Larry Diamond
Diamond is the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education at Stanford University. He co-leads the Project on Taiwan at Hoover, as well as the Israel Studies Program and the Global Digital Policy Incubator at FSI. Diamond previously directed the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at FSI and served as Faculty Co-Director of the Haas Center for Public Service at Stanford. He also served for 32 years as founding co-editor of the Journal of Democracy.
About the Author
Larry Diamond
Diamond is the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education at Stanford University. He co-leads the Project on Taiwan at Hoover, as well as the Israel Studies Program and the Global Digital Policy Incubator at FSI. Diamond previously directed the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at FSI and served as Faculty Co-Director of the Haas Center for Public Service at Stanford. He also served for 32 years as founding co-editor of the Journal of Democracy.
About the Author
Larry Diamond
Diamond is the William L. Clayton Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI), and a Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education at Stanford University. He co-leads the Project on Taiwan at Hoover, as well as the Israel Studies Program and the Global Digital Policy Incubator at FSI. Diamond previously directed the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at FSI and served as Faculty Co-Director of the Haas Center for Public Service at Stanford. He also served for 32 years as founding co-editor of the Journal of Democracy.
More viewpoints
Sep 16, 2025
Reviving Democracy Promotion
Larry Diamond
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 16, 2025
Reviving Democracy Promotion
Larry Diamond
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 16, 2025
Reviving Democracy Promotion
Larry Diamond
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 12, 2025
In the Framers We Trust
Thomas Griffith
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 12, 2025
In the Framers We Trust
Thomas Griffith
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 12, 2025
In the Framers We Trust
Thomas Griffith
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 9, 2025
Introducing the NYU Law Democracy Project
Faculty Directors
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 9, 2025
Introducing the NYU Law Democracy Project
Faculty Directors
Congress, The President & The Courts
Sep 9, 2025
Introducing the NYU Law Democracy Project
Faculty Directors
Congress, The President & The Courts