Here's a thing about how Washington works: the executive branch proposes, but Congress disposes. Or at least, it tries to. A new analysis from the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) shows that in the recent fiscal year 2026 foreign aid package, Congress did a fair bit of disposing—specifically, it pushed back against some of the more dramatic cuts proposed by the Trump administration.

The $50 billion budget, approved earlier this month, is a bit of a mixed bag. On one hand, it's a decline from fiscal 2025 funding. On the other, it's well above what the administration wanted to spend. The policy advocacy group's take is that the final number reflects a congressional desire to keep the U.S. engaged in the Western Hemisphere, particularly on issues like democracy, migration, and fighting corruption.

Democracy And Civil Society Funding Maintained

So what did Congress protect? According to WOLA's breakdown, lawmakers made sure money for democracy and human rights initiatives stayed in the budget. This includes support for civil society organizations in places like Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua.

U.S. aid to these countries has traditionally gone toward things like election monitoring, independent media, and rule-of-law programs. It's a classic Washington dance: administrations often propose shifting foreign aid priorities, but Congress holds the power of the purse. And frequently, during the appropriations negotiations, Congress restores funding for these democracy-promotion efforts. It's one way the legislative branch flexes its muscles.

"By passing a foreign aid budget that pushes back on some of the administration's most radical proposed changes, Congress—in a bipartisan way—asserted the legislative branch's independence," the group highlighted.

Migration And Regional Stability In Focus

The analysis also points out that funding for migration management, refugee assistance, and humanitarian support across Latin America continues. This isn't surprising—migration has become a central, and contentious, policy issue in Washington, especially with increased crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border.

In recent years, lawmakers have increasingly tied foreign assistance to efforts aimed at tackling the root causes of migration. Think economic instability, governance problems, and violence in Central America. The idea is that by investing in stability abroad, you might eventually see less pressure at the border.

Aid Conditions Tied To Human Rights Benchmarks

Here's another lever of control: according to WOLA, parts of the FY2026 funding are still conditioned on anti-corruption reforms and human rights standards in the countries receiving the money. This is a common feature in appropriations bills—it's a way for Congress to try to ensure some oversight and accountability for how U.S. taxpayer dollars are used overseas.

The WOLA analysis offers a note of caution, though. "While the FY2026 foreign aid bill's rollback of some of the Trump administration's most draconian cuts is a welcome development, over the past year, the Trump administration has shown its willingness to disregard congressional funding directives and restrict funding," the analysis noted.

So, the story here is about checks and balances. Congress used its power of the purse to maintain certain priorities, even as the overall pot for international affairs got a bit smaller. Whether the executive branch follows through on those congressional directives is the next chapter.