U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

99–947PDF 2016

EXAMINING FY 2017 FUNDING PRIORITIES IN

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 27, 2016

Serial No. 114–179

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. Francisco Palmieri, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of 

Western Hemisphere Affairs, U.S. Department of State .................................. 4

Luis Arreaga, Ph.D., Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S. Department of State 10

Ms. Elizabeth Hogan, Acting Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Latin 

America and the Caribbean, U.S. Agency for International Development ..... 20

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. Francisco Palmieri: Prepared statement ........................................................ 6

Luis Arreaga, Ph.D.: Prepared statement ............................................................. 12

Ms. Elizabeth Hogan: Prepared statement ............................................................ 22

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 48

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 49

The Honorable Alan S. Lowenthal, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California: Prepared statement ............................................................ 50

Questions for the record submitted by the Honorable Jeff Duncan, a Representative in Congress from the State of South Carolina, and chairman, 

Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere ....................................................... 52

Questions for the record submitted by the Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, 

a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida .................................. 55

(1)

EXAMINING FY 2017 FUNDING PRIORITIES IN 

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 27, 2016

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:04 p.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jeff Duncan (chairman 

of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Okay. We will go ahead and get started. A quorum 

being present, the subcommittee will come to order. 

I would like to now recognize myself for an opening statement. 

We meet today to conduct oversight of the Obama administration’s Fiscal Year 2017 budget request for the Western Hemisphere, which aims to provide nearly $2 billion to countries in the 

region with an increase over what the U.S. gave in Fiscal Year 

2015. The administration has a plethora of initiatives in the region, 

all aiming to address economic, citizen security, and clean energy 

objectives. However, some have criticized the U.S. approach to 

Latin America and the Caribbean as improvised and lacking a 

sense of strategic direction. 

Today, when our Nation stands at over $19 trillion in debt, we 

have no business giving any foreign assistance, unless the administration can show a compelling vision and a clear strategy for how 

that aid will advance U.S. national interest in the region, tangible 

objectives that have measurable benchmarks for success, and evident political will from our partners to tackle the hard issues of 

corruption and impunity that threaten the effectiveness of U.S. assistance and the very economic growth of the hemisphere that we 

all hope to see. 

As Representatives of the American people, the U.S. Congress 

has the responsibility to ensure that every single taxpayer dollar 

spent on foreign assistance furthers U.S. national interest, not 

those of foreign governments or international organizations. We 

must further work together to root out waste, fraud, abuse, and inefficiencies within the U.S. programs to prevent duplication and 

overlap and, instead, achieve success by outcomes. So with that in 

mind, I want to take a moment to highlight a few oversight areas 

that I believe require attention and adjustments. 

According to congressional watchdogs, the Government Accountability Office, or GAO, they currently have six reports with open 

recommendations that the U.S. State Department or the U.S. 

2

Agency for International Development, USAID, have not fully implemented. Moreover, according to USAID’s Office of Inspector 

General, as of April 25, USAID had 157 open and unimplemented 

recommendations relating to programs in the Western Hemisphere. 

These include 59 recommendations that have a potential cost savings of almost $11 million. 

When we see such clear low-hanging fruit for achieving efficiency 

and cost savings, I do not understand why these recommendations 

remain unimplemented. Thus, I urge State and USAID to act immediately to address the GAO and OIG recommendations in a satisfactory manner. Of the nearly $2 billion requested for the Western Hemisphere 

in the Fiscal Year 2017 budget request, the administration has 

prioritized more than $628 million for development assistance programs and over $15 million for global climate change initiatives 

within the region. While I am encouraged to see the administration 

reverse its cuts in security displayed in last year’s budget request, 

the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law 

Enforcement chose to request less for Mexico in order to first address the outstanding pipeline issues by spending what they still 

have from previous years before asking for more money. And that 

is a good thing. That is a good sign showing smarter financial management decisions and stewarding of American taxpayer dollars. 

But I am concerned with the heavy emphasis on development assistance rather than economic support funds. Thus, I want to hear 

the administration’s rationale for shifting the emphasis of U.S. assistance and the administration’s plan on how to prevent country 

dependency on those funds. Nearly $744 million of the budget request would go to Central 

America. I believe it is critical for the American people to see tangible proof of U.S. assistance in the region and achieving our objectives before we provide another large tranche of money. However, 

I understand that State and USAID have not yet spent the $750 

million appropriated by the U.S. Congress last year. 

While I am supportive of the need to address the root causes to 

address the migration issues to the U.S., I want to ensure that we 

are not simply throwing more money at the problem. What analysis 

has the administration done to determine if previous U.S. funding 

is yielding results? What commitments have Central American governments made to provide matching funds and to tackle the massive corruption problems plaguing the region? And what safeguards 

does the U.S. have in place to protect American investment in the 

region from abuse? 

The administration has also requested a major increase in funding for Colombia, the single largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance in the hemisphere. Colombia is an important U.S. ally in the 

Western Hemisphere, and during the past 15 years, it has transformed into a respected leader in the region. Given U.S. long-term 

support for Colombia, the U.S. maintains a considerable stake in 

the outcome of the ongoing peace negotiations. 

I am supportive of Colombia’s efforts to achieve peace. However, 

I want to know that the U.S. is supporting a peace deal that is 

good for the Colombian people, the jointly hard-won security gains 

of U.S.-Colombian forces, and the U.S. interests in the region. 

3

Given the request for $391 million for Colombia, I would like to 

hear about how these funds will support the Colombian Government’s efforts to verify the demobilization and disarmament of the 

FARC terrorist members and address the growing drug eradication 

and interdiction challenges. 

In addition, for most years since Fiscal Year 2009, the U.S. Congress has given $20 million annually to support democracy and 

human rights in Cuba. However, the administration’s budget request proposes cuts to U.S. efforts in these areas. At a time when 

the Castro government is demolishing churches, arresting pastors, 

imprisoning human rights dissidents at record numbers, I can’t 

comprehend why the administration would seek to reduce U.S. support for human rights and democracy by 25 percent. 

I would also like to understand the rationale for the administration’s request for $218 million for Haiti, given GAO’s reporting of 

multiple cases of cost overruns and delays for reconstruction 

projects. Similarly, I am concerned to see the administration’s request of an additional increase of funding for countries like Nicaragua, while cutting U.S. assistance to our friends like Argentina, 

Chile, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay. 

Having recently led a congressional delegation to the region with 

the express intent of showing our partners in the region that the 

U.S. is a reliable friend, I believe these cuts and assistance send 

the wrong message about the U.S. interests in the region. At a time 

when Iran, Russia, and China continue to increase their activities 

in the Western Hemisphere, the U.S. needs to continue to convince 

our friends to make the U.S. their partner of choice. 

Finally, I want to ensure that U.S. assistance to Inter-American 

organizations support U.S. interests. I am concerned about the outsized share of U.S. support for these organizations, the limited 

numbers of U.S. personnel working in these organizations to support United States objectives, and seemingly low level of influence 

the United States has, given the amount of money that the American people provide. 

So I will look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on all 

these issues. 

And with that, I will turn to the ranking member for his opening 

statement. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. 

And thank you to our witnesses from the State Department and 

USAID for being here to talk about the administration’s Fiscal 

Year 2017 funding priorities in the Western Hemisphere. 

Today’s hearing occurs at a time of complex foreign policy challenges in the region. Yet U.S. assistance to Latin America and the 

Caribbean has declined over the last several years. Without U.S. 

leadership, regional challenges, such as the flow of unaccompanied 

children from the Northern Triangle countries to the U.S., political 

violence in Haiti, the Zika outbreak, corruption scandals in Brazil, 

and the polarized political situation in Venezuela, could reach dangerous levels of instability. 

I am pleased that the administration’s Fiscal Year 2017 budget 

requests include more than $1.7 billion in aid for the region, representing a 10 percent increase in funding. It is critical that we asVerDate 0ct 09 2002 11:13 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\042716\99947 SHIRL
4

sist our regional neighbors in their efforts to achieve peace and security, good governance, and economic prosperity. 

In Cuba, we continue to see the Castro regime brutalize its people and forcefully stomp out any attempt at free speech, a free 

economy, and free expression. Drug trafficking and transnational 

criminal organizations plague Central America and wreak havoc in 

the region, posing a direct security threat to the United States. 

Every year hundreds die trying to reach our southern border in a 

desperate attempt to escape the violence. Poverty and corruption 

run rampant in several Latin American countries. 

In Colombia, the Santos government is seeking to end its 52-year 

internal conflict and implement a sustainable and inclusive peace. 

Working together in a bipartisan fashion, we can ensure that this 

proposed Fiscal Year 2017 budget is used efficiently and with proper oversight. 

I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses as they lay out 

U.S. priorities and the importance of American engagement in the 

Western Hemisphere. Thank you. 

Mr. DUNCAN. It was almost like you had a missing page there, 

wasn’t it? 

Mr. SIRES. Yeah, well——

Mr. DUNCAN. It happens. 

You all have testified before. I am not going to have to explain 

the lights. You get 5 minutes to testify. I will look forward to hearing the testimony. 

Mr. Palmieri, you are recognized. I enjoyed our meeting the other 

day, very insightful and very informative. And thanks for being 

here today. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MR. FRANCISCO PALMIERI, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF WESTERN HEMISPHERE AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. PALMIERI. Thank you, Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member 

Sires, and other members of the subcommittee. Thank you for this 

opportunity to testify on the Fiscal Year 2017 foreign assistance request for the Western Hemisphere, and thank you for your ongoing 

support of our diplomatic assistance efforts in this hemisphere. 

The administration’s approach to the region seeks to improve security, strengthen the rule of law, promote democracy and human 

rights, advance partnerships, and promote prosperity and inclusive 

growth for all citizens. U.S. assistance is a critical tool that supports these goals. 

In our request for Central America and Mexico, we seek to address the underlying conditions driving migration from Central 

America through Mexico and to the United States. The request also 

includes increases to support Colombia’s implementation of an expected peace agreement, marking the end of the hemisphere’s longest running conflict. The request maintains support for key U.S. 

partnerships with Peru, Haiti, and the Caribbean. 

The Fiscal Year 2017 foreign assistance request for our strategy 

in Central America continues support for prosperity, governance, 

and security, particularly for Central America’s Northern Triangle 

in recognition of the acute challenges these countries face. The U.S. 

assistance through the strategy complements the investments 

5

Northern Triangle governments are making through their own development plan, the Alliance For Prosperity. 

The countries themselves plan to spend $2.6 billion of their own 

money this year to support their own plan. Continued U.S. support 

will be vital to Colombia’s success as it seeks to implement a peace 

accord. 

Our partnership with Mexico remains an important priority for 

the United States and includes a range of issues that benefit both 

countries, including trade and investment, energy and security. 

The Merida Initiative continues to provide the framework for our 

bilateral security cooperation at both Federal and State levels. 

Our request includes essential democracy assistance for Cuba 

and Venezuela where the United States will continue to provide assistance that advances universal human rights and supports vibrant civil societies. Promotion of democratic principles and human 

rights remains at the core of U.S. assistance to Cuba. 

Our request for Haiti continues investments in infrastructure, 

agriculture, economic growth, basic education and health, expanded 

governance, democracy activities, and security. A sustained U.S. 

commitment in Haiti is essential to build on the past gains of U.S. 

efforts in Haiti and to build its capacity to respond to citizens’ 

needs. 

Improving security and development in the Caribbean directly 

benefits U.S. interests. The Caribbean Basin Security Initiative 

complements the Caribbean’s own efforts to reduce crime and violence, strengthen the rule of law, and address the factors that put 

youth and marginalized communities at risk of insecurity. 

U.S. counternarcotics assistance complements investments made 

by the Government of Peru and maintains our strong partnership 

in eradication and alternative development to coca cultivation. 

I urge the U.S. Congress to fully fund this request for the Western Hemisphere, as it advances our national security interests and 

wisely invests our limited resources where they can have the most 

significant impact. I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Palmieri follows:]

6


99947a-1.eps
7


99947a-2.eps
8


99947a-3.eps
9


99947a-4.eps
10

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. 

And, Dr. Arreaga, is that how you pronounce that? 

Mr. ARREAGA. Arreaga. Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF LUIS ARREAGA, PH.D., PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Mr. ARREAGA. Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member Sires, and 

members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to discuss our Fiscal Year 2017 budget request for 

the Western Hemisphere. With your permission, I have a formal 

statement which I would like to submit for the record. 

In 2017, the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, or INL, is requesting $489 million to support some 

of America’s most effective and important foreign assistance and 

partnership programs. This includes the Central American Regional Security Initiative, the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, 

the Merida Initiative, and programs in Colombia, Haiti, and Peru. 

As this committee knows, our Nation’s prosperity is closely tied 

with our neighbors in the region. From the Rio Grande to the 

Andes Mountains, the hemisphere is in the midst of major change. 

Countries are changing governments peacefully. People are standing up and fighting corruption, and their voices are being heard. 

Some of the most notorious narcotrafficking bosses have been captured, and in Colombia, peace talks hold the promise of expanding 

the rule of law and marginalizing the drug trade. 

However, some changes have not been positive. Despite a recent 

fall in homicide rates, Central America’s Northern Triangle still 

has one of the highest murder rates in the world. While Peru eradicated record-breaking amounts of coca last year, cultivation remains high. Colombia has witnessed a nearly 100 percent increase 

in coca cultivation in the last couple of years. And while Mexico 

has achieved many notable successes in fighting drug cartels, the 

amount of poppy being grown has increased 65 percent since 2014. 

INL programs are particularly important at this juncture because they are agents of change. They tackle the threats and leverage the positive changes I just described. The investments we are 

making will benefit our country and the people of the region. 

In Central America, we are partnering with USAID and others 

to leverage our model police precinct programs. We are adding prevention and comprehensive assistance components, which together 

compromise a place-based strategy that targets the areas most affected by violence. This approach is already reducing homicides and 

increasing the public trust in law enforcement institutions. 

Many INL initiatives rely on sister Federal agencies, as well as 

many local, State, and international partners. Among the most effective of these is our partnership with Colombia, which has gone 

from being a consumer to being a supplier of security assistance in 

the region. Today, this includes joint U.S.-Colombian training and 

advising in many areas like border security, special operations, police reform, and drug investigations. 

11

INL’s programs cover the entire range of the justice sector. In 

Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, and South America we 

are strengthening justice systems and expanding their reach. 

Many nations in Latin America are moving toward an accusatory 

criminal justice system, which is broadly similar to our own. We 

are training prosecutors and judges to function in this new environment and helping them make their judicial process more efficient 

and fair. Equipment and training provided by INL also helps us by 

helping our neighbors secure their borders and by strengthening 

relationships with U.S. border agencies. 

A more democratic and prosperous region is in the interest of our 

country, and with your support for our programs, we can achieve 

the outcomes that we desire, which is nothing less than strengthening the security of our hemisphere and our country. 

Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member Sires, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Arreaga follows:]

12


99947b-1.eps
13


99947b-2.eps
14


99947b-3.eps
15


99947b-4.eps
16


99947b-5.eps
17


99947b-6.eps
18


99947b-7.eps
19


99947b-8.eps
20

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you so much for that testimony. 

Ms. Hogan, welcome back. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MS. ELIZABETH HOGAN, ACTING ASSISTANT 

ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR LATIN AMERICA AND THE 

CARIBBEAN, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

Ms. HOGAN. Thank you very much. 

Chairman Duncan, Ranking Member Sires, and distinguished 

members of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to testify today. 

I am pleased to present the plans for USAID’s work in Latin 

America and the Caribbean for Fiscal Year 2017. Our request of 

approximately $970 million will promote the interests of the United 

States, while also significantly improving the quality of life for 

those we help. 

We have identified five priorities for our assistance. These are: 

Prosperity, good governance, and security in Central America; promoting a sustainable and equitable peace in Colombia; long-term 

development in Haiti; advancing democracy and human rights 

across the Americas; and addressing environmental threats to livelihoods. 

One of the highest priorities is Central America, particularly the 

countries of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. We see prosperity, improved governance, and security, the objectives of our 

Central America strategy, as interdependent. We know that providing opportunity for marginalized citizens, especially youth at 

risk of gang recruitment or migration, will bolster our efforts in security and lead to freer, more prosperous societies. 

Our efforts to grow prosperity are only sustainable in an environment where democratic values and institutions flourish, human 

rights are respected, and civil society and the media can play their 

rightful roles. And ultimately, it will be difficult for our prosperity 

and governance efforts to take root in societies that are plagued by 

insecurity. That is why our work in Central America addresses all 

three interrelated challenges. 

Our programs include efforts to create jobs, reform institutions 

to root out corruption, strengthen civil society’s ability to hold governments accountable, foster a culture of respect for human rights, 

and create safe community spaces. With sustained commitment on 

part of the United States and host government institutions, we will 

help the Northern Triangle develop into a safer, more prosperous 

region for all those who live there. Sustained commitment and strategic patience yield results, as we have seen with the notable 

strides made in Colombia. 

For Fiscal Year 2017, USAID is requesting $187 million to expand upon current programming to help the Colombian Government establish a stronger presence in former conflict zones, provide 

post-conflict reconciliation and justice, promote inclusive rural economic growth, and sustainably manage the country’s vast natural 

resources. These programs will build upon current successes, especially for marginalized populations, including Afro-Colombians and 

indigenous peoples. 

21

Along with Central America and Colombia, Haiti remains a high 

priority for USAID. Our Fiscal Year 2017 request will continue our 

efforts to help Haiti grow into a stable, economically viable country. 

We remain focused on promoting economic growth, job creation, 

and sustainable agriculture, providing holistic basic health care 

and education services, and improving the transparency of government institutions. While much remains to be done, we are committed to supporting the Haitian people as they build a more prosperous and secure future. 

Throughout the region, our democracy and human rights programs address fundamental issues, including anticorruption, promotion of press freedoms and the rule of law, and support for civil 

society. USAID works to assure that government institutions are 

open, accountable, use public funds responsibly and effectively, and 

deliver critical services to citizens. Underpinning all of these efforts 

is support and protection of a strong and vibrant civil society that 

can hold governments accountable. 

Another challenge facing the region is the negative impact of extreme weather events. Our mitigation and adaptation efforts help 

reduce devastation to life, property, and economic activity. We are 

also speeding the development and deployment of advanced clean 

energy technologies and helping to create a favorable legal and regulatory environment to reduce the cost of energy. 

We have one goal in mind with everything that we do: To empower countries to assume responsibility for their own development 

and grow beyond the need for international assistance. We use 

science, technology, innovation, and private sector partnerships to 

find new solutions and scale up what works. For every dollar we 

spent in this region in 2014, we mobilized five times that in private 

sector resources. 

In conclusion, I want to assure this committee that USAID is 

committed to being good stewards of the funds you entrust to us. 

We take our responsibility to the United States taxpayer seriously, 

and we are committed to accountability, transparency, and oversight of our programs. 

I thank this subcommittee for its interest and support of 

USAID’s programs, and I look forward to collaborating with you as 

we address longstanding challenges and new opportunities for reform. I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Hogan follows:]

22


99947c-1.eps
23


99947c-2.eps
24


99947c-3.eps
25


99947c-4.eps
26


99947c-5.eps
27


99947c-6.eps
28


99947c-7.eps
29


99947c-8.eps
30


99947c-9.eps
31

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. 

I thank all the panelists for their testimony. 

I will take a page out of Rob Bishop’s playbook as chairman and 

defer till the end. 

And I will go first to Ron DeSantis for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Palmieri, in Fiscal Year 2009, Congress appropriated $20 

million in ESF annually to support democracy and human rights 

in Cuba. The Fiscal Year 2017 request, $3.8 million for the Embassy in Havana, but cuts U.S. efforts to support human rights to 

$15 million, and yet Cuba remains the only country in the Americas ranked as not free by Freedom House. Of course, we have 

seen, since the administration changed policy in December 2014, 

political repression has increased. 

So what is the administration’s rationale for the 25 percent reduction in Cuba democracy and human rights funding? 

Mr. PALMIERI. We remain very concerned about the human 

rights conditions inside Cuba, and in our most recent human rights 

report signalled that the arbitrary detentions have increased, that 

the Cuban people do not have the ability to elect their own leaders——

Mr. DESANTIS. So why are you cutting the funds? 

Mr. PALMIERI. And we take that issue and that concern very seriously. However, as we are working toward a more normalized relationship in Cuba and expanding our engagement in the region, we 

have other tools that are available to us. We have more authorized 

travel to Cuba by American citizens who are engaging directly with 

the Cuban people. We have exchanges that are publicly——

Mr. DESANTIS. Wait. Let me ask you that, though. When you say 

‘‘engaging,’’ so say there are Americans that go to Cuba, they stay 

in hotels, they pay. I mean, is that direct engagement with Cubans 

on an economic basis, or is that a direct engagement with the regime in Cuba who controls the core sectors of the economy? 

Mr. PALMIERI. The 50 percent increase in authorized travel over 

the last year has enabled Americans to more directly engage in 

people-to-people activities with the Cuban people, which is the goal 

of our policy. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DESANTIS. I think by that answer, you acknowledge, though, 

that the economic transactions are transactions with, effectively, 

the Cuban Government, the military, the intelligence services? 

Mr. PALMIERI. The travelers have to follow strict accountability 

measures in pursuing their authorized travel. They may be staying 

at different types of accommodations, including Airbnb activities 

that we think promote entrepreneurial activity inside Cuba as well, 

sir. 

Mr. DESANTIS. So the human rights situation, you spoke to it initially in your answer, but you acknowledge that the human rights 

situation is still very poor in Cuba. Correct? 

Mr. PALMIERI. President Obama said so on his trip. Secretary 

Kerry has said so, and our human rights report did not pull any 

punches, sir. 

Mr. DESANTIS. I wonder, because they have been very honest, 

the Castro dictatorship, about we are not changing. I don’t know 

what you guys—we are going to take any concessions we can get. 

32

We need credit. We are going to get the credit and whatnot. But 

they have been very insistent that they are not changing. 

So I just wonder. We are reducing the request to try to promote 

democracy. We are doing much more engagement now with the regime. I wonder whether we are going to see fruits of that, because 

I think, right now, most of us who were skeptical of this predicted 

that the regime would be pocketing these concessions, and I think, 

unfortunately, that is what happened. 

Let me ask you this. The regime has been harboring JoAnne 

Chesimard, who is on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted Terrorists List. 

What is the status of that? 

Mr. PALMIERI. In November of last year, we had our first round 

of a bilateral law enforcement working group where we did raise, 

as we have consistently raised, our desire for the return of fugitives 

from U.S. justice. We will continue to raise that case and other 

cases of fugitives, and we hope to have another round of talks with 

the Cuban Government in the months to come, sir. 

Mr. DESANTIS. The results of those talks, has it just been for 

Cuba to deny releasing anybody, though, correct? 

Mr. PALMIERI. I am sorry. I didn’t——

Mr. DESANTIS. The results of those talks, while you guys may 

have been well-intentioned, the result of those talks has been that 

Cuba has simply denied releasing anybody. Correct? No fugitives 

have been released up to this point. Right? 

Mr. PALMIERI. No, sir. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Okay. What about confiscated property? Because 

we have had a number of people come before this committee, some 

of the other committees, who had property confiscated illegally by 

the Castro dictatorship in the early 1960s, and they have certified 

claims. We say that we are going to be changing these relationships, and you would think that that would be one obvious way 

where the Castro regime could show, hey, you know, we are going 

to change by providing some recompense. 

But to my knowledge, I have not seen any information come out 

that there has been anything done in that respect. So let me ask 

you, has the Cuban Government made good on any claims that are 

existing out there regarding illegally confiscated property? 

Mr. PALMIERI. In December, as part of the process of the normalization of the relationship, we had a team that went down and engaged in direct discussions about these claims, and we continue to 

pursue another round of talks related to making progress on claims 

resolutions. 

Mr. DESANTIS. But no claims have been resolved favorably for 

American citizens or Cuban exiles in America, correct, at this 

point? 

Mr. PALMIERI. At this point, I am not aware, sir. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Mr. Chairman, thank you for doing this. You 

know, we have been in a situation where, you know, the Castro—

change policy, then change it to help the Cuban people, but don’t 

give an inch to the dictatorship. And I just fear that these changes 

have helped the Castro brothers solidify their power, and I don’t 

think we have seen it yet with freedom for the Cuban people. 

Mr. DUNCAN. No argument with me there. 

Mr. Sires, 5 minutes. 

33

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

What type of assistance does the U.S. Government provide to the 

Venezuelan people to promote democracy? 

Ms. HOGAN. USAID has a $6.5 million program in Venezuela, 

and the purpose of the program is to help document human rights 

abuses, to strengthen civil society organizations, and to promote 

the free flow of information within the country and between the 

country and the outside world. And so this year we have also 

helped with the training of domestic election observations that took 

place in the last legislative elections, which as you know, brought 

a new opposition to the majority in the Parliament. We are poised 

to assist this new Parliament, if and as asked, but for right now, 

we are assessing those needs because we know that there are other 

donors that are also interested in that space and we don’t want to 

duplicate efforts. 

Mr. SIRES. And in terms of our efforts to release some of the political prisoners, what are we doing with that? 

Mr. PALMIERI. The Department continues to call for the immediate release of political prisoners in Venezuela. Just earlier this 

month, Assistant Secretary Jacobson met with Liliana Tintori, the 

wife of Leopoldo Lopez. The Department also renewed a statement 

calling on the government to enact the bill that was passed by the 

national assembly calling for the release of political prisoners. We 

will continue to push for that as a critical element of improving the 

internal political situation. 

Mr. SIRES. And, Dr. Arreaga, what is the reason that there seems 

to be more production of drugs in places like Colombia and some 

of the other places? How did this spike up? 

Mr. ARREAGA. There are a number of reasons, sir. First of all, I 

think a lot of the farmers and the narcotraffickers got smarter and 

realized that if they concentrate a lot of their cultivation in large 

areas, it would be more susceptible to aerial eradication. So you see 

a dispersion of cultivation in areas where airplanes have more difficulty arriving and spraying. And, of course, the end of aerial 

eradication also played a role. So those are some of the major factors. 

And we understand from the Colombian Government that the 

FARC actually encouraged farmers to plant more coca in preparation for the peace plan, but we have no confirmation of that. 

Mr. SIRES. And are some of the other countries, the same reason? 

Mr. ARREAGA. Well, I think you have seen in Peru, the areas 

where coca cultivation has increased are areas where it is very difficult to access by the government, the VRAEM area in the south. 

So the government is planning very much to eradicate, but it is a 

bit of a catch-up for them because they need the resources and they 

need the mobilization, which they do not yet have. 

Mr. SIRES. And, Mr. Palmieri, I know one of the reasons that we 

are engaging in Cuba is because we always have problems with all 

the other countries in the region. What are we doing for those 

countries to speak up about the abuses in Cuba? 

Because there hasn’t been one country that has said anything 

about the conditions in Cuba and how they have become worsened, 

how they have imprisoned more people, and how they have cracked 

down. And I would think that by now, some of these countries that 

34

were so pushy on us to have some sort of relationship with Cuba, 

they just clamped up and don’t say anything. 

Mr. PALMIERI. I think we continue to encourage our partners in 

the hemisphere to engage on the human rights situation and conditions within Cuba. And we urge them to speak out and to take a 

more definitive, proactive stance to encourage the Cuban Government to address these problems of arbitrary detention and the lack 

of freedom of association and assembly. And we will continue to 

push those governments to be a more authoritative voice. 

Mr. SIRES. You know, the chairman and I took a trip through 

five countries. We raised that very issue, and quite frankly, we 

didn’t get a reaction that any time soon they were going to say anything about what is going on. Some of these countries, one of the 

more vocal countries in terms of the United States reaching some 

sort of an accord with Cuba. So we didn’t get any kind of a response, basically, that they are going to do anything in the future. 

Mr. PALMIERI. I can assure you, Mr. Sires, that as part of our ongoing diplomacy in this hemisphere, we do engage countries from 

throughout South America, Central America, and North America to 

speak more forcefully and more definitively about the abominable 

human rights conditions inside of Cuba. 

Mr. SIRES. The only country that spoke up about human rights 

abuses, in Venezuela, was Macri, just recently elected. But nobody 

else has said a word. 

Thank you. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I thank the ranking member. 

And I am going to go now to Mr. Yoho from Florida. 

Mr. YOHO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I appreciate you three being here. 

I too was on that trip to South America, and I did find it interesting that everybody said that we need to normalize relationships 

with Cuba; it was the right thing to do, you know, close Guantanamo because it was a mark on America and it wasn’t a good sign. 

And my member—my friend, Albio Sires, brought that up over and 

over again. You know, what about what is going on in Cuba? How 

come you are not denouncing it? And I just found it hypocritical. 

And it just didn’t bode well that here we are trying to help the 

Cuban people out, and you were talking—I think it was you, Dr. 

Arreaga—you were talking about the entrepreneurs in Cuba, that 

this was going to allow them to expand businesses. Can you explain what an entrepreneur in Cuba is compared to America? 

Mr. PALMIERI. There are a number of activities underway that, 

through some regulatory changes the administration has made, 

that allows us to help Cuban entrepreneurs, whether they are——

Mr. YOHO. What administration? This one or the Cuban administration? 

Mr. PALMIERI. President Obama’s regulatory actions that have 

enabled Americans to more directly support Cuban entrepreneurs, 

whether they are small restaurant owners. We now allow Americans to provide remittances to these entrepreneurs to help their 

private sector activities. We now permit microfinance, training activities, and we also allow for the export of certain materials to the 

small but growing Cuban entrepreneurial class. 

35

Mr. YOHO. Okay. So now, if I am a Cuban business owner and 

I am getting these microloans from an American counterpart and 

I am going into business in the country of Cuba, what freedom do 

I have with these regulations and executive privileges that President Obama has extended to the people of Cuba? What privileges 

do I have as a Cuban business owner that I don’t have to worry 

about the Cuban Government come and confiscating? Are they 

going to limit how much I can make? 

Mr. PALMIERI. There has been over the last 5, 6 years a growing 

number of licenses issued by the Cuban Government to individual 

Cubans to pursue exactly these kind of private activities that we 

think our regulatory actions will allow Americans to more directly 

support. They range from activities in restaurants, as I mentioned, 

Airbnb activities, private transportation activities. The sector has 

grown over the last 6 or 7 years. 

Mr. YOHO. Does the Cuban Government dictate how much they 

are going to make a day or an hour, on the employees? 

Mr. PALMIERI. I believe that—my understanding is that Cuban 

private sector entrepreneurs earned far, far above or much more, 

I should say, than the average public sector wage, sir. 

Mr. YOHO. All right. We will follow that. The reports I have say 

it is not true. You know, the Cuban Government is there. They 

have a heavy hand, and they confiscate whatever they want because everything belongs to the Cuban Government. 

Moving to Haiti real quick here, Ms. Hogan, how many homes 

have been built down there since the earthquake, through USAID? 

Ms. HOGAN. USAID built 750 homes. However, we have turned 

our strategy toward housing finance rather than construction. And 

so as a result we are able to link residents with low-income properties to microfinance institutions that will allow them to——

Mr. YOHO. Are we financing that through the American Government and the American taxpayers? 

Ms. HOGAN. We are. We are helping. 

Mr. YOHO. What is their failure rate? 

Ms. HOGAN. The failure rate of what, sir? 

Mr. YOHO. Of the loans. 

Ms. HOGAN. Zero, thus far. 

Mr. YOHO. Zero. What is the average size of the house that they 

are building down there, square foot? 

Ms. HOGAN. Well, again, we are not building houses anymore. 

Mr. YOHO. But we were previously. 

Ms. HOGAN. But we were building houses. 

Mr. YOHO. What was that size? 

Ms. HOGAN. I believe they are about 500 square feet. 

Mr. YOHO. 400 was what I have. 

What was the average cost of those homes? 

Ms. HOGAN. The average cost——

Mr. YOHO. Construction, construction cost. 

Ms. HOGAN. Right. The average cost of those homes was about $15,000, I believe. I have to double-check those numbers. 

Mr. YOHO. That is a pretty high cost of construction, I would say. 

Ms. HOGAN. Which is why we——

Mr. YOHO. About $300 per square foot. They must have used the 

CFPB for their remodeling. 

36

Ms. HOGAN. Well, that is the——

Mr. YOHO. I yield back. Thank you. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Meeks is recognized. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am listening and I would think that from what I am hearing, 

we must have regressed in Central and South America. But from 

what I understand, for the last 10, there has been vast improvement in Central and South America, and our investments and our 

commitments, especially post—you know, Cold War is over—has 

tremendously helped the entire region, the entire hemisphere, that 

when you look at what has taken place as far as democracy 

throughout the Central and South America is definitely going in a 

positive direction. 

When you look at still far too much poverty, but poverty reduction in the area, it is going in the right direction. When I look at 

the number of individuals or people who are—you know, as far as 

democratic institutions, not where we want to be yet, but we are 

moving in the right direction. Would you all agree with that statement? Much better than it was 15, 20 years ago, for sure. Now, 

things don’t change overnight, but we are doing much better than 

we had been doing. 

And before I ask my question, the other piece is because we all 

want to make sure we do right by the Cuban people, I know that, 

but we have had one policy for 57 years, and none of the things 

that I am hearing has changed in 57 years. So for 57 years with 

one single policy that we have continued to have and nothing has 

changed, it would seem to me reasonable that we should have some 

kind of change to see if something else might work, because we 

know for 57 years it has not worked. 

And I think, Mr. Palmieri, what you are telling me is that—and 

I have had the opportunity, I was very happy to be with the President on his historic trip to Cuba where I heard him, with Raul Castro present, being very critical about human rights, et cetera, and 

said the United States will continue to insist that we move forward. But I think that you were trying to articulate the interaction 

of American citizens so that when people, when business folks get 

to moving, that they can determine for themselves, those that live 

there, how to make sure they move and change this government. 

Is that the policy that you were intimating? 

Mr. PALMIERI. Yes, sir. I think we believe that by expanding people-to-people ties and business opportunities and access to information, we can more effectively support the Cuban people. In addition, 

I think we believe that American citizens are some of the best Ambassadors we have for our values and ideals, and that level of people-to-people contact will also help us make progress. 

Our enduring objective in Cuba remains that it be peaceful, prosperous, and democratic, and that the Cuban people have the ability 

to choose their leaders and their own future. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you. 

I need to jump to Ms. Hogan for a second because you mentioned 

in your opening statement something that is very important to me. 

You talked about Peace Colombia and the effects of African-Colombians, which is really important as we get to peace because many 

37

of the folks will return back. I know the President is there. Will 

you tell us a little bit more about that, how that will work? 

Ms. HOGAN. Thank you very much for that question. In fact, 

Afro-Colombians is a very important target group for us. In fact, 

we have invested in the workforce development of over 9,000 African-Colombians who are now working in modern economy jobs. 

More than 8,000 of them who have come through our training program have been hired for well-paying jobs in a variety of sectors. 

We continue to invest in Peace Colombia, which is a rebranding 

of Plan Colombia, in order to help the government extend its presence into these ex-conflicted zones. We are currently working in 40 

municipalities. With the peace agreement and with Fiscal Year 

2017 funds, we will be able to move out into another 20 communities to help the government establish its presence, but more than 

anything, in addition to help incentivize economic development and 

investment in those areas to create jobs for the people who are 

going back there. 

We have a great example of a partnership we have with 

Starbucks Coffee, which is working in these ex-conflicted zones to 

help these indigenous populations and others who are coffee growers increase the quality of their coffee and attract additional investment from other companies that see that those investments are 

having a good return on the money. There are about 25,000 coffee 

growers who are benefiting from that one partnership. And, of 

course, we are also helping reconciliation and justice for victims of 

the conflict. And finally, looking to licit value chains like coffee for 

people who had been growing coca and try to get them into the 

other profitable areas of coffee, cacao, dairy, and rubber. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you. I am out of time. 

Mr. DUNCAN. And Raul Castro said, you can’t ask me about political dissidents. It is wrong, improper for you to ask me about political dissidents. 

So anyway, the Chair will now recognize the gentlewoman from 

Florida, the former chairman of the committee and now chairwoman of the Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. 

And dovetailing on the direction of Latin America, I wanted to 

ask you how you see the direction of some countries in Latin America. Is it really going the right way as we would like? When it 

comes to the rule of law, when it comes to press freedom, when it 

comes to individual freedom of expression, when it comes to separation of powers, leaders who get elected and then change the Constitution to stay in power, would you say that Ecuador under 

Rafael Correa is moving in the right direction? Simple question. 

Rather simple. 

Ms. Hogan? 

Ms. HOGAN. We have a program in Ecuador——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Would you say that it is moving in that direction toward greater freedom? 

Ms. HOGAN. I think people are feeling the suppression of human 

rights. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Yes. Thank you. 

How about Bolivia under Evo Morales, moving more toward 

press freedom, freedom of expression, a separation of powers, rule 

38

of law, would that be a direction that we think should be emulated 

and that we herald? 

Mr. PALMIERI. The referendum in February was a clear expression of how the Bolivian people feel about the situation. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I am talking about the Evo Morales government. Would you say that they are moving toward, you know, the 

arc, the famous arc, is it moving toward what we would consider 

democratic, fundamental principles of democracy? 

Mr. PALMIERI. I would like to let the Bolivian people speak for 

themselves. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Okay. Thank you. 

How about Venezuela under Nicolas Maduro, would you say that 

that government is more toward the rule of law, freedom of expression, press freedom? 

Mr. PALMIERI. Those are all areas that we remain deeply concerned about. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Deeply concerned. How about Nicaragua 

under Daniel Ortega? How about Cuba under Raul Castro? I mean, 

we could put on our rose-colored classes and say everything is 

peachy keen in Latin America, or we could look at it as the way 

it really is. And it is a problem. It is a fixer-upper. A fixer-upper. 

And talking about Cuba, you know, we talk about 55-plus years of 

a policy that does not work. How about the changes in Cuba in 

these 55 years? In those years, have the Cuban people been able 

to vote once in a free, fair, and internationally supervised election 

that would pass any criteria by any human rights organization? 

One? 

Mr. PALMIERI. No. They have not. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. No. How about have they been able to form 

political parties? By any stretch of the imagination, have they been 

able, in these 55 years of a policy that hasn’t worked in the United 

States, I know we have a blame-America-first crowd, but how 

about, let’s look otherwise. Have they been able to form political 

parties? 

Mr. PALMIERI. I would never blame America first. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. No. I am not saying you——

Mr. PALMIERI. But what——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. But let me ask you, how many political parties are allowed to operate in Cuba? How many political parties? 

Mr. PALMIERI. There is only one political party. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Okay. Thank you. And how about freedom of 

the press? Would you be able to start your own newspaper, your 

own TV network, your own—you know, what press freedoms are 

there in these 55 years? 

Mr. PALMIERI. Press freedom is a significant——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. A fixer upper. Yeah. And by any stretch of 

the imagination, this policy that hasn’t worked from the U.S. side, 

gee, when you look at the Cuba aspect of it, it hasn’t gotten a 

whole lot better for the people of Cuba what Castro has been doing 

to them. Now, what have we seen since the President’s change in 

diplomatic relations? Has there been, or has there not been a massive exodus of Cubans fleeing the island, not getting the memo that 

everything is great there? Have there—because I know, I represent 

South Florida, so I know what is going on there. Has there been 

39

what you would call an exodus? We just got back from Guantanamo yesterday. 

Mr. PALMIERI. President Obama has said that the change in the 

relationship will not come overnight and that normalization——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. But has there been an increase? Because if 

not, we have other U.S. agencies like the Coast Guard, and like the 

Red Cross, who tell us that there has been an 80 percent increase 

in this past year since the President’s diplomatic relations to now. 

Has there been an exodus of Cubans fleeing the island? 

Mr. PALMIERI. We believe that the people-to-people exchanges 

that we are pursuing in the policy——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I don’t know. So the answer is yes. For the 

people who count the bodies, they know that there has been a massive exodus of people. And when I look around and I see, gosh, 

what has really changed in Cuba since all of this has happened, 

one-way concessions, pleasing the dictator, getting very little out of 

it. 

But let me just ask you one question about Venezuela. Since we 

passed the bill, I had the bill here with all of my colleagues. Marco 

Rubio had it in the Senate. How many individuals has the Obama 

administration sanctioned in Venezuela for human rights violations? That means that they can’t come to the United States; we 

freeze their accounts; you know, they can’t do any commercial dealings, buy property. There have been massive human rights abuses 

in Venezuela. There were originally seven or eight. How many have 

been since cited on that list? 

Mr. PALMIERI. We did sanction individuals last year after the legislation was implemented. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Last year. So since that time, when there 

have been such massive human rights abuses, Leopoldo Lopez, the 

mayor of Caracas, who is on house arrest. I mean, I can’t even list 

how many political prisoners there have been. Has any of those 

people involved in the persecutions and the prosecution of these 

human rights activists, have they been sanctioned? 

Mr. PALMIERI. We did sanction people when the legislation was 

first implemented. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Anyone related to the Leopoldo Lopez trial? 

Anybody sanctioned? 

Mr. PALMIERI. I would have to get back to you with——

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. The answer is no. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. Excellent line of questioning. 

We will now go to the gentleman from California, Mr. Lowenthal. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I want to thank the 

witnesses for being here, and for your testimony. 

I want to follow up on some of these issues about—I am kind of 

interested in the relationship between our aid and our budget and 

human rights and rule of law. I want to focus on Mexico. Recently, 

a number of us submitted a letter to the Secretary of State regarding the disappearance of the 43 Mexican students and the investigation, and now, just recently, the Inter-American Commission on 

Human Rights, this group of experts, has just returned and issued 

a report. And that report, in part, I think in large part, said that 

there was no cooperation between the Commission and—there was 

40

a problem in the relationship between the Commission and getting 

cooperation from the Mexican Government. How does that impact 

our aid? When we are seeing kind of this Commission report talking about the lack—you know, the lack of cooperation, does that 

impact at all the amount of aid that we give to Mexico? Or do we 

condition aid on at least cooperation? 

Mr. PALMIERI. We did take note of the April 24 Inter-American 

Commission human rights report of the expert—of the independent 

expert. We commended the Commission’s work and—which was 

initially requested by the Government of Mexico. Mexico should 

consider the report’s recommendations and fully evaluate the suggested actions to address forced disappearances, to provide more 

support to the victims, and to begin to bring the perpetrators of 

that tragedy to justice. 

In the broader sense, we work closely with Mexico on a wide 

range of human rights issues, and encourage it to improve its 

human rights performance. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Do you think, following up on the Congresswoman from Florida, do you think human rights are improving in 

Mexico? 

Mr. PALMIERI. The human rights situation in Mexico is a very 

complex issue. In some respects, as Mexico moves to implement the 

constitutional reforms to reform its justice sector, they are making 

progress in improving the human rights conditions in the country. 

But, at the same time, when you see a report like this that details 

with specific recommendations on how they could do better, it is 

clear that Mexico should review those recommendations. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Should it have any impact upon our foreign 

aid? Our aid? I would like to hear from any of the witnesses. Ms. 

Hogan? 

Ms. HOGAN. Right. The assistance that we are providing Mexico 

is intended to help them develop a very strong human rights regime and response. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. But I am not seeing that happen, and we have 

been giving this assistance. I am seeing a report that just came out 

this week that really details the lack of cooperation between the investigators. How does that impact our aid? 

Ms. HOGAN. Well, one of the things that USAID is investing in 

is the human rights protection mechanism in Mexico, which has allowed the Mexican Government to establish a rapid response capability to protect human rights of those who are threatened, an 

emergency response capability to support victims of human rights, 

and to create networks of human right defenders, and particularly 

journalists. And I can say that 2 years ago, we had 40 people who 

used the system. Last year, we had 400 people who have used the 

system. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Are you not appalled by the investigation and 

the loss of those 43 students who have never been identified where 

they are? 

Ms. HOGAN. Terrible. Terrible series of events there. And yes, absolutely. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Anybody else want to comment on——

Mr. ARREAGA. Yes, sir. We, of course, recognize that there are 

challenges in Mexico, and that is the reason we are there, and we 

41

are pouring quite a bit of resources in strengthening the justice 

sector system. They are moving toward the accusatory system. You 

are moving the entire—not only the Federal system, but as well as 

the States. And it is a huge challenge. It is a huge challenge that 

is going to take very many years. But we have our best and brightest working with the Mexicans to build that system, and it is going 

to take some time. But we are there because they asked for our 

help and we are happy to give it to them. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. I just also wonder how—I want to—how do we 

help these—an independent investigation like the Inter-American 

Commission, who is having difficulty? How do we help them with 

the Mexican Government, or do we, in terms of their getting cooperation and being able to have the Mexican Government actually 

assist in this investigation rather than seem to stonewall the investigation by pointing their fingers at everyone else who has done it, 

but not really providing the support to the investigative team? I 

mean, how do we help them? We are giving them a lot of money. 

Mr. PALMIERI. Through the Merit Initiative, we have expanded 

broadly U.S. law enforcement cooperation. We have helped professionalize their police and security forces——

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Do what? 

Mr. PALMIERI. We have an ongoing bilateral human rights dialogue with them where we raise cases like this case. 

Mr. LOWENTHAL. Well, I am just saying I hear you, all that you 

are doing, but I am terribly disappointed in this, in what is taking 

place and our lack of response to what is going on. I yield back. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, Mr. Lowenthal. 

We will go down now to Mr. Donovan from New York. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I thank the witnesses for appearing today before us. 

Approximately—and I will be short, Mr. Chairman, because I 

know the vote could be called any moment. A couple of weeks ago, 

I had the pleasure of visiting the CDC, and because of the attention now to Zika, and coming from South America, particularly 

Brazil and the Olympics being performed there this summer, I was 

shocked about the amount of cases we have of malaria in the 

United States. There is over 1,200. I think it is the highest number 

last year that we have had since—in 40 years. 

So I was just wondering about some of the efforts to combat mosquito-borne viruses in South America, particularly malaria. The 

World Health Organization had said that they could probably 

eradicate malaria in about 20 countries in the world by 2020. I 

think eight of those countries are in South and Central America. 

So I was just wondering if you could talk a little bit about the efforts that—down there to eradicate the malaria and to control the 

Zika virus. 

Ms. HOGAN. Certainly. Well, thank you for the question. In fact, 

we have graduated all of our countries in South America now from 

health assistance because we have—over the years, investing in 

those systems, they are now standing up and able to take care of 

their own basic health needs. 

However, we continue to help on infectious diseases, and malaria. We currently have a cooperative agreement with the Pan 

American Health Foundation to—excuse me. PAHO. Pan American 

42

Health Organization, right, to help countries develop systems to 

combat malaria. We are also working now on Zika, thanks to the 

approval of USAID’s CN that will allow us to stand up behavior 

change communication programs, so that people will become aware 

of how they get the Zika virus and how to respond to it. 

We are investing vector control methodologies. We just issued a grand challenge last week for $30 million to try to incite innovative 

ways in which we could do more research and development and the 

development of diagnostic tools for Zika. And, of course, we are prepared to help governments design programs that would provide the 

care and treatment for women, pregnant women, and infants who 

may be affected by the disease. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Any other—is there—all right. Thank you very 

much. I yield back. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I thank the gentleman. 

I now recognize myself for 5 minutes. 

You all have answered a lot of the questions that I had about 

Cuba and about Venezuela, and some of the money there. So I 

want to shift gears a little bit. 

We were in Paraguay, and we had a conversation about—give 

you an example. Rio de Paraguay is a huge shipping channel from 

Bolivia all the way to where it runs into Rio de Uruguay, and then 

on to the Atlantic Ocean for barges, shipping containers that make 

their way all around the world. 

But in the capital city of Paraguay, they need to do some dredging. It will cost about—the way we heard, about $10 million estimated. You know, if you think about what a shot in the arm that 

would be, U.S. assistance to a country like Paraguay, to help with 

that sort of thing, that really, I think, is something that we ought 

to be considering when we talk about Western Hemisphere State 

Department budget and working with our friends and allies. We 

hear a lot about USAID programs, micro loans and that sort of 

thing, micro financing. Just give you one example where you get 

a lot of bang for the buck, I think. Maybe more so than $10 million 

dropped in Nicaragua over the years and that sort of thing. So just 

throw that out there. 

Do we give any assistance to Uruguay because they are handling 

the—or took the GTMO prisoners, their Uruguay 6? Do they receive any additional funding from us for that? That is a question 

I don’t know the answer to. 

Mr. PALMIERI. I will have to talk to the coordinator’s office. I believe there was some re-settlement funding provided. I don’t know 

if it is being done on an ongoing basis. 

Mr. DUNCAN. All right. You know, they are a strong human 

rights defender. And there is another country that I consider we 

would get a lot of bang for the buck if we considered helping them 

in that area. And they did take those prisoners. 

So I had a meeting last week in the office with members from 

the Dominican Republic, and they shared with me in some ongoing 

efforts between Haiti and the Dominican Republic along the border. 

One is an economic zone, one is an energy zone, and one a shipping 

zone. Does the United States play any part of that? Because I do 

see a lot of benefit, at least for the Haitians as well as the 

Dominicans, on those projects. All right? Is that included—is that 

43

USAID involvement? Is there any State Department dollars or U.S. 

dollars going to help Dominican and Haiti with those type programs or projects? 

Ms. HOGAN. USAID is helping Haiti rehabilitate a port in CapHaitien that would allow for the import of container ships. So it 

will ultimately be an economic incentive in Haiti because it will increase the amount of trade that they are able to do along their 

northern border. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Okay. And I appreciate that. I do—when they were 

speaking last week, a light bulb went off. What a great way to impact so many lives with consistent jobs, economic improvement, 

and it is bilateral. Is the U.S.—my question is the U.S., and should 

the U.S. be partners in that in some way because giving a lot of 

money to Haiti to rebuild, and there is hints of corruption and 

hints of money not getting to where the rubber meets the road. But 

I can point to these projects going, hey, that is a pretty good idea. 

Wasteful spending in the Fiscal Year 2017 budget. So Fiscal Year 

2017 request is for $324,000, 57.6 percent of the Pan American Institute of Geography and History budget priorities listed in the Fiscal Year 2016 budget request for the same amount of money included spending taxpayer dollars on creating an atlas of climate 

change in the Americas, and publishing the history of America to 

further the concept of Americas as an interconnected unit. This 

seemed to be a waste of U.S. taxpayer dollars when we are over 

$19 trillion in debt. And when the region struggles with having 

such high rates of crime, violence, tepid economic growth, and the 

list goes on because the questions have already been asked. So was 

U.S. taxpayer assistance used last year to create this atlas and this 

history? Mr. Palmieri. 

Mr. PALMIERI. I will have to take that question back, sir. I am 

not familiar with that specific appropriation and that program, but 

we will get you a full answer on how that money was used. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Okay. Because I personally think that money could 

be better spent fighting crime and narco trafficking, helping Colombia and the things we talked about instead of spending our taxpayer dollars creating a history that may or may not be accurate 

of the Americas and a climate change atlas. I don’t believe my constituents would want to see their dollars going to that when we 

have drug running coming out of Central America and Latin America to the U.S. We have got issues of judicial graft and corruption 

in a lot of countries. You see what I am saying? We could better 

spend these dollars. And it kind of reminds me of National Institutes of Health putting shrimp on a treadmill. Don’t spend our tax 

dollars putting shrimp on a treadmill for whatever your trumpedup reason is. Spend them where they are effective. Okay? 

You wanted to say something? 

Mr. PALMIERI. Yeah, I do, sir. I agree that we need to maintain 

our investments in the security sector. But we also are seeing an 

enormous drought that is affecting Central America right now. And 

to the extent that we can better understand the patterns of that 

drought, we might be able to direct more effectively agricultural assistance and other forms of development assistance so that the conditions of people who are at increased food security risk can be 

44

more quickly addressed, thereby removing a push factor for them 

to leave the region and their home communities. 

So there could be a reason why a better understanding of the impact of climate change in Central America could help us protect 

U.S. interests and prevent undocumented irregular migration by 

more effectively directing our aid. 

Mr. DUNCAN. So what you are saying is an atlas of climate 

change would have predicted the El Nino effect that caused the 

drought in Central America that led to the migration crisis. By 

having that atlas, we would have been able to foresee this climate 

change that is driving people north. 

Mr. PALMIERI. As I said, sir, I am not familiar with the particulars of the atlas. But I do think more effective understanding of climate change in Central America could help us better direct assistance——

Mr. DUNCAN. I think taking that money to help with drought assistance by USAID, going in after when the drought does impact 

the region and helping, is a better use of taxpayer dollars than trying to predict the climate. The weatherman can’t tell you what the 

climate is going to be tomorrow. And we are trying to predict climate in a region. Nobody saw the drought coming. The climate scientists didn’t see the drought coming. So, anyway, my time is up. 

Gentlemen and Ms. Hogan, I do appreciate you all coming today. 

This is insightful. This is part of the oversight that is necessary. 

Members may have additional questions. 

Well, I am going to defer to the former chairwoman who has a 

follow-up question. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Just a question on democracy. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Votes have been called, so quickly. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I know 

we have votes. 

Ms. Hogan, has USAID fallen back to its—to the paths when 

USAID was not committed to democracy funds in Cuba? And I ask 

this because we know the history of it. In 2013, USAID decided to 

cut itself out of the democracy funds. And then in 2014, Congress 

followed by zeroing out USAID for Cuba as well. So now USAID 

has been allowed to access the Cuba funds for Fiscal Year 2015. 

And in October 2015, USAID sent their Congressional notifications 

to the Hill for $6.25 million for Cuba, and the notification was for 

two programs, humanitarian and human rights. 

In November 2015, the notification cleared Congress. In January, 

USAID issued publicly a request for proposals for the humanitarian assistance portion, and we are almost at May already, and 

yet, this money has not been obligated. If you could give us a picture of what is going to be happening, and do you still have to request proposals for the human rights portion of the notification? Is 

that correct? And I wanted to know why there is a holdup in humanitarian and human rights program when they are so desperately needed in Cuba right now. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I thank the chairwoman for her continued leadership on the Cuban issue. And, again, I thank you guys for coming. 

Everyone has been—very valuable insight, and the questions have 

been, I think, robust and spot on today. 

45

Members may have additional questions. We will submit those 

and ask that you provide answers within a timely manner. And 

any member that has statements they would like to submit for the 

record, we will leave that open for 10 days. 

Without objection, we will stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:14 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(47)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

48

f


99947n.eps
49

f


99947m.eps
50


99947d-1.eps
51

f


99947d-2.eps
52


99947e-1.eps
53


99947e-2.eps
54

[NOTE: Responses to the previous questions were not received prior to printing.]

f


99947e-3.eps
55


99947f-1.eps
56

[NOTE: Responses to the previous questions were not received prior to printing.]

Æ


99947f-2.eps