Hours after the African Development Foundation’s chief financial officer admitted to bribery, the U.S. Senate had an opportunity to deliver what many observers believed would be an obvious corrective: abolish a little-known federal aid agency already engulfed in scandal.
The vote required only a simple majority. It failed anyway, 42–58, after 11 Republicans joined every Democrat to table the amendment, effectively shielding the agency from immediate defunding despite mounting evidence of systemic corruption.
The amendment’s sponsor, Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, did not mince words afterward. Republicans, acting alone, could have ended the agency’s funding, and Lee argued they should have done so—particularly given that USADF’s own acting chairman and CEO had called for defunding, citing a culture of chronic fraud, waste, and abuse. Lee said he looked forward to hearing explanations from his colleagues. None of the 11 Republicans who crossed over responded to inquiries, leaving their votes unexplained as the controversy intensified.
When USADF blocked DOGE from accessing their building last year, Democrats applauded.
Now we know it is because USADF was hiding bribes, kickbacks, and fraud.
I have filed the Terminate Unaccountable Spending, Abuse, Deception, and Fraud (USADF) Act to defund these crooks. https://t.co/UoQ0qW1OYc
— Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) January 30, 2026
The timing of the vote only sharpened scrutiny. The African Development Foundation had recently become a political flashpoint after its staff physically locked out Department of Government Efficiency auditors, a move that transformed the agency into a cause célèbre on the Left.
That posture collapsed almost immediately when CFO Mathieu Zahui agreed to plead guilty to taking bribes and lying to law enforcement. Prosecutors detailed how grant money was funneled to African groups connected to Zahui’s personal associates, with portions wired back to his own bank account in exchange for contracts involving little or no work.
Investigative reporting revealed that Zahui’s case was not an isolated breach but part of a broader pattern. The agency routinely issued grants that appeared compliant with its mission, then required recipients to redirect funds back to Washington bureaucrats. In one case, a Kenyan journalism organization was instructed to pay salaries of agency staff in D.C. Other examples pointed to conflicts of interest involving senior leadership, including undisclosed affiliations with organizations that conveniently received agency funding.
Internal investigations and sworn statements painted a picture of an organization that not only tolerated misconduct but retaliated aggressively against those who tried to stop it. The agency’s general counsel, Mateo Dunne, reported being sidelined after flagging potential illegality, while senior officials openly described placing him on leave for damaging the agency’s reputation by cooperating with the inspector general. That investigation ultimately led to Zahui’s guilty plea.
Former and current employees described a deeply dysfunctional workplace, complete with abuse, ethical violations, and attempts to suppress negative public reviews. Allegations of discriminatory hiring practices and ideological favoritism further complicated the agency’s defense.