4 ms·

I said `generally` not `exclusively` and you are selecting one very specific application of funding to generalize against all federal funding. I literally anal

I said `generally` not `exclusively` and you are selecting one very specific application of funding to generalize against all federal funding. I literally analyze this stuff for work, there is barely a 3-5% contraction in spending. This is such an insane rumor too because it takes 10 seconds to disprove it: https://www.usaspending.gov/search/?hash=8980ee6820c47f96a19c23f6b77262ec https://www.usaspending.gov/search/?hash=8980ee6820c47f96a19...

FireBeyond 2y ago
Given that education funding dwarfs foreign aid and is affected, it would seem inaccurate to label it as "generally foreign aid". The other point is just because a contract or award is on usaspending.gov doesn't mean the funds are flowing - that was my point, my partner's school has many awards that previously they could draw from at will, and receive money overnight. They've attempted to draw from many of them now, and the funds just ... aren't being transferred. That was part of the furore, "we have agreements and obligations in place and you're just refusing to fund them", it's not about the existence of the awards in the first place.