During a House Judiciary Committee hearing on Tuesday, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) fiercely defended taxpayer funding for an overseas version of Sesame Street, arguing that the program plays a critical role in preventing anti-American radicalization.
Her comments come amid broader scrutiny of U.S. foreign aid spending following the February dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
Crockett’s argument focused on Ahlan Simsim, an Arabic-language adaptation of Sesame Street co-produced by USAID and Sesame Workshop. The program, she claimed, is necessary to combat negative perceptions of the United States in foreign countries.
“We’re talking about making sure that we don’t end up allowing people to be radicalized against us because they have a terrible vision of us,” she stated, suggesting that educational programming could serve as a counterbalance to anti-American propaganda in regions such as the Middle East.
However, critics pointed out that Crockett failed to explain how a children's television show would meaningfully deter extremist ideology or dismantle government-led disinformation campaigns. The core of the opposition centers on the use of U.S. taxpayer funds for international media and social projects—particularly in countries with limited ties to American domestic interests.
The broader backlash stems from USAID’s recent financial track record. In 2023, the agency distributed approximately $68 billion in foreign aid, a significant portion of which was directed to Ukraine.
In fiscal year 2022, USAID distributed tens of millions of contraceptive products abroad and allocated $2 million to Guatemalan groups that perform gender transition procedures—another flashpoint for critics of the agency.
DOGE, under the temporary leadership of Elon Musk, moved to dismantle USAID in early 2025, citing inefficiency, lack of transparency, and ideologically driven spending.
The move was met with resistance from many Democrats, including Crockett, who argued the cuts could have severe geopolitical consequences. In a separate podcast appearance, Crockett claimed—without presenting evidence—that cutting USAID might increase the likelihood of another 9/11-style terror attack.