U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

29–388PDF WASHINGTON : 2018

THE FY 2019 FOREIGN ASSISTANCE BUDGET

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MARCH 21, 2018

Serial No. 115–131

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://docs.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 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL M. DONOVAN, JR., New York 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

ANN WAGNER, Missouri 

BRIAN J. MAST, Florida 

FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida 

BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania 

THOMAS A. GARRETT, JR., Virginia 

JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah 

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 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

AMI BERA, California 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

NORMA J. TORRES, California 

BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois 

THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York 

ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York 

TED LIEU, California

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESS 

The Honorable Mark Green, Administrator, U.S. Agency for International 

Development ......................................................................................................... 4

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Mark Green, Administrator, U.S. Agency for International 

Development: Prepared statement ..................................................................... 8

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 62

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 63

Material submitted for the record by the Honorable Bradley S. Schneider, 

a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois: 

151 Retired Three and Four-Star Generals and Admirals Oppose Cuts 

to the International Affairs Budget ................................................................ 65

1,215 Veterans from Every Branch of the Military and All 50 States Oppose 

Cuts to the International Affairs Budget ....................................................... 73

The Honorable Adriano Espaillat, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of New York: Material submitted for the record ..................................... 81

The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress from the 

Commonwealth of Virginia: Prepared statement .............................................. 84

Written responses from the Honorable Mark Green to questions submitted 

for the record by: 

The Honorable Edward R. Royce, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California, and chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs .............. 86

The Honorable Eliot L. Engel, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of New York ...................................................................................................... 103

The Honorable Dana Rohrabacher, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California ............................................................................................ 115

The Honorable Brad Sherman, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California ...................................................................................................... 116

The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly ..................................................................... 120

The Honorable David Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Rhode Island ....................................................................................... 124

The Honorable Ami Bera, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California ...................................................................................................... 128

The Honorable Bradley S. Schneider ................................................................. 135

(1)

THE FY 2019 FOREIGN ASSISTANCE BUDGET 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 21, 2018

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in room 

2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward Royce (chairman of the committee) presiding. 

Chairman ROYCE. All right. The committee will come to order, 

and this is on the fiscal year 2019 foreign assistance budget, and 

I think all of us on this committee certainly agree that the U.S. has 

to be engaged throughout the world. We have security, trade, humanitarian, and many, many other interests worldwide. U.S. development and diplomacy activities abroad protect and advance those 

U.S. interests. 

And today we are going to hear from Ambassador Mark Green. 

He’s a former member of this committee, as you know. Many of you 

worked with him. Africa was a particular interest of his when he 

was here. He subsequently shepherded PEPFAR into implementation, and he’s here with us to review the administration’s fiscal 

year 2019 budget request for the U.S. Agency for International Development. 

This is the premier development agency worldwide, and it’s your 

first appearance, Mark, in front of the committee. Welcome, Ambassador. 

And, regrettably, the administration has proposed cutting 

USAID’s funding by 33 percent, despite the fact that foreign aid accounts for less than 1 percent of the budget. As Secretary Mattis 

has said, undercutting diplomacy and development only increases 

the likelihood that U.S. forces will need to deploy in the first place. 

Indeed, these proposed cuts would impact a number of U.S. priorities including efforts to combat terrorists, combat poachers, and 

human traffickers. U.S. leadership was key to stopping Ebola in 

West Africa and continued engagement is needed to address future 

health threats before those health threats could hit our shores. The 

U.S. also has a proud legacy of supporting electoral processes and 

democratic institutions, providing a lifeline to people fighting for 

freedom and suffering under authoritarian regimes worldwide. 

These efforts shouldn’t be shorted, and we see proposed cuts to humanitarian assistance at a time when more than 65 million people 

have been displaced by conflict and famine looms in at least four 

countries. 

2

Now, everyone agrees that these overseas programs can be improved. Both USAID and the Department of State need to better 

align U.S. assistance with our most pressing national security objectives. They also need to eliminate duplication and waste, and 

promote a capable workforce that’s adaptable. However, I worry 

that this budget request will hamstring USAID’s efforts on these 

fronts. 

That said, there are some bright spots in this budget request. It 

supports the creation of a Development Finance Institution that 

could unleash the power of private sector-led growth and it would 

expand opportunities for U.S. investment and trade. It is a proposal with bipartisan, bicameral support that this committee will 

soon consider. 

The budget prioritizes funding for programs that promote greater 

self-reliance, including helping countries mobilize their own resources for development. It emphasizes transparency as well as accountability and programming for results. The budget also gives us 

a glimpse into some of the much-needed organizational changes at 

USAID. Already, Ambassador Green has improved coordination 

with the Department of Defense, helping to ensure that development interests are on a level playing field with diplomacy and defense. 

Just as aid can’t be an entitlement for those overseas, it 

shouldn’t be an entitlement here at home, and this includes food 

aid, which for too long has been treated as an entitlement for a 

handful of shipping companies rather than as a humanitarian program meant to save lives. I look forward to working with the administrator to ensure that Food for Peace programs are fully reformed so we can stretch our aid dollars further and so that we can 

save more lives. 

U.S. foreign aid is a needed tool to advance vital U.S. economic 

interests, humanitarian ones, and security interests as well. Ambassador Green, I look forward to working with you and I look forward to working together with my committee colleagues to see that 

USAID remains a world-class, cutting-edge development agency. 

And with that, I turn to our ranking member, Mr. Engel of New 

York. 

Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Chairman, thank you for calling this hearing. 

Ambassador Green, welcome to the Foreign Affairs Committee. 

Thank you for your leadership and service. I have no shortage of 

disagreements with this administration but I’ll give credit where 

credit is due. You are a great choice to lead the U.S. Agency for 

International Development. 

When you briefed our committee members a few weeks ago, I got 

a clear sense that you understand why development is so important—that the investments we make in these efforts pay huge dividends—that USAID’s work advances American values, promotes 

economic prosperity, and improves lives around the globe. 

These aren’t just nice things to do, they are integral to promoting 

out security. Healthy and more productive societies, governments 

that respect the rule of law and transparency, countries that are 

strong fair leaders in their regions—all these help us to advance 

our interests around the world. 

3

They deny our enemies the opportunities to exploit vulnerable 

people and find safe havens in lawless areas, because poverty and 

lack of opportunity create hotbeds for instability and violence. 

Ambassador Green, you’ve been a member of this congressional 

body as a Member of Congress. You’ve been our Ambassador to 

Tanzania, president of the International Republican Institute, director and the United States Global Leadership Coalition, board 

member of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, and now you’re 

our top official dealing with development. 

You’ve seen up close what a difference development assistance 

makes. You’ve seen how development initiatives help countries lift 

themselves up, how they prevent crises and conflicts before they 

start, how they put within touch ends to global health pandemics 

like HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. 

As I said, I think you’re a great pick for this job, Ambassador 

Green. But with a 33 percent cut to USAID’s budget there is no 

one, I believe, who could do your job effectively. 

This budget would undermine everything I mentioned earlier 

that contributes to our country’s security and, frankly, it’s just 

heartless. 

Food for Peace zeroed out, development assistance cut by 42 percent. Humanitarian programs down by 34 percent. Basic education 

53 percent—more than half. And democracy and governance programs a 41 percent cut from last year’s mark. 

And beyond the numbers, dangerous policies like the global gag 

rule are doing real harm. This medieval approach to women’s 

health is causing clinics to close, blocking access to HIV tests, and 

denying women and girls basic health care from doctors and nurses 

they trust. 

It just isn’t possible to keep making progress on our international 

development priorities if we slash the budget by a third. This proposal represents another step in America’s withdrawal from the 

world at a time when our leadership is needed more than ever. 

Fortunately, it’s been clear since the administration submitted 

its budget last year that there is bipartisan opposition to these 

drastic cuts which would undermine our role in the global stage. 

There are simply too many challenges where America can make 

a difference—the four famines, the Rohingya crisis in Burma and 

Bangladesh, Venezuelan refugees fleeing to Colombia and Brazil, 

the ongoing horror in Syria. 

These are areas where USAID’s expertise is desperately needed 

and where this budget would hamper our ability to provide desperately needed assistance. 

And as a reminder, USAID accounts for roughly 1⁄2 of 1 percent 

of the total Federal budget. So arguments that we cannot afford it 

just don’t fly with me, especially after the President signed the tax 

bill that blows a $1.5 trillion hole in the budget. 

And finally, Ambassador, I know as well that you are proposing 

a lot of reforms at USAID. I just want to ensure that any changes 

are done to modernize American development and make it work 

better, not simply starting with a budget number and downsizing 

to fit it. 

I thank you very much for consulting with our committee and I 

encourage you to continue the dialogue so that we can be part of 

4

this process and I thank you again for your service and your time 

and the times we have met I really have a good feeling with you 

at the helm. 

So thank you again for your service and your time today, and I 

yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Engel. 

So this morning we are pleased to welcome Ambassador Mark 

Green. He’s a good friend. He is a former colleague of this committee. 

As a matter of fact, when he served on this committee he was 

probably the member most engaged in the issues that we are discussing today. 

This is his first appearance before our committee in his official 

capacity as administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. 

He has had the opportunity to meet with us previously on these 

issues as a committee. Mark brings to the table decades of development experience. I have great confidence in his ability to bring renewed vigor to USAID’s critical work. 

Prior to his appointment or just prior, Mark was the president 

of the International Republican Institute. He also served as U.S. 

Ambassador to Tanzania and he, of course, represented Wisconsin’s 

8th District when he served here on the committee with us. 

We appreciate him being here with us today and without any objection the witness’s full prepared statement will be made part of 

the record and members here are going to have 5 calendar days to 

submit any statements, questions, or any extraneous material they 

might have for the record. 

So if you would, Mark, please summarize your remarks. 

Ambassador. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MARK GREEN, ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Royce, 

Ranking Member Engel, members of the committee. I appreciate 

this opportunity to discuss USAID’s fiscal year 2019 budget request. 

It is wonderful to be back in this room. As a couple of you have 

already noted, I served on this committee during my time in the 

House. Of course, back then it was called the House International 

Relations Committee and we were, shall we say, more of a ragtag 

bunch than the distinguished ladies and gentlemen that I see here 

before me. 

But even so, today feels like I am coming home. 

I’d like to begin my remarks by expressing my gratitude to Secretary Tillerson for his leadership over the past year and for his 

service to the nation. 

I also welcome the nomination of Director Pompeo. While he and 

I have not have an opportunity to speak since his nomination, I 

very much look forward to our future in-depth discussions on how 

development and diplomacy can go hand in hand in advancing 

America’s interests around the world. 

In the meantime, at USAID we have urgent work to do. From 

the unprecedented humanitarian challenges in places like Syria 

5

and Somalia to exciting development opportunity through expanded private sector engagement and the extension of programs 

like Feed the Future. 

The work of our agency has never been more important. I’ve just 

returned from New York where I briefed the United Nations Security Council on the humanitarian crisis that is growing in the 

Democratic Republic of the Congo. 

That country is facing escalating violence, particularly against 

women and girls, that could soon spill over into surrounding nations if not adequately addressed. 

I urge the Government of the DRC to hold credible and inclusive 

elections by the end of the year. I demanded that it protect humanitarian workers and end the crackdown on freedom of speech and 

assembly. 

Just to its north, South Sudan is facing extreme levels of food insecurity and near-famines continue to rage in Nigeria, Yemen, 

Syria, Somalia, and Ethiopia. 

In Yemen, 17.8 million people—the largest number in the 

world—are facing severe food insecurity. Since October 2016, the 

U.S. has provided nearly $768 million in humanitarian assistance 

to help the Yemeni people. 

We have urged all parties to continue to allow all humanitarian 

and commercial goods including fuel to enter Yemen through 

Hodeidah and all other points of access. 

We have pushed hard for protections for civilians and aid workers who put themselves at great personal risk to assist people in 

need. 

During my first trip as administrator, I traveled to Ethiopia, 

Sudan, and South Sudan where I saw how USAID is leading the 

world response to these complex humanitarian crises. 

That trip helped shape our plans to strengthen, integrate, and 

streamline our humanitarian assistance, and to ensure that we 

leave behind a capacity to mitigate and respond. 

This is reflected in the budget request before you and it’s guided 

my conversations with fellow donors as we have encouraged them 

all to do more in helping to mobilize resources as well. 

During my visit I saw just how much these tragedies are rooted 

in poor governance and, frankly, authoritarianism and corruption, 

which so often go hand in hand. 

Last month, we announced USAID’s new mission statement. It 

includes an explicit commitment to strengthening democratic governance abroad, a priority that I know from our conversations that 

all of you share. 

This commitment has informed USAID’s work from our creation, 

and under my leadership it will continue to do so. In South Sudan, 

I demanded the government stop obstructing humanitarian access 

and further ensure the safety of all humanitarian staff so that assistance can reach those who need it most when they need it most. 

I urged them to truly live up to the democratic ideals that they 

espouse. 

Members of the committee, I’ve had a chance to discuss with 

many of you the rising negative influence of Russia and China in 

so many regions and the disturbing trend toward repressive values. 

6

In response, our fiscal year 2019 request includes targeted investments in Europe and Eurasia that will support strong democratic institutions and vibrant civil society while countering the 

Kremlin’s influence in the region. 

In Venezuela, we will support those who are working for a free 

and prosperous future. We have requested robust funding for our 

democracy in governance programs in Venezuela that support civil 

society, the democratically-elected legislature, and the free flow of 

information there. 

And in fiscal year 2019 we have requested funds to employ and 

implement more effective approaches to promote an ethnic and religious tolerance in Burma, including in Rakhine and Kachin States. 

I am deeply concerned, as I know you are, about the lack of humanitarian access in northern Rakhine and deep interethnic tensions along with reports of horrific human rights abuses and an 

overall lack of real progress in dealing with the Rohingya crisis. 

I’ll soon be traveling to Burma and Bangladesh to see this situation first hand. 

In total, the fiscal year 2019 request for USAID fully and partially managed accounts is approximately $16.8 billion. It represents $1.3 billion more than requested last year including $1 billion for humanitarian assistance. 

Now, we acknowledge that this budget request will not provide 

enough resources to meet every humanitarian need or for us to 

seize every international development opportunity. 

In truth, no budget in recent memory would be large enough to 

do so. This budget request aims to balance fiscal needs here at 

home with our leadership role on the world stage. 

We are committed to taking every prudent step to extend the 

reach and effectiveness of taxpayer resources, both of the strategic 

allocations of those resources and the redesign process. 

This includes strengthening domestic resource mobilization programs so the partners can more effectively finance their own development future. 

It includes taking steps to ensure that our programs and procedures are more private enterprise friendly so we can better leverage our resources, bring new ideas and partners to our work, and 

increase opportunity for American business. 

It includes procurement reform, which we hope will make us 

more flexible and responsive to our implementing partners so they 

can extend and improve the reach of USAID-supported initiatives. 

It means strengthening our ties with other agencies. For example, we are right now in the process of drafting a new global MOU 

with Mashav to guide our development cooperation with the Government of Israel. 

We are also striving to more closely align our resources with our 

strategic needs and are focused on measurement and evaluation to 

support that alignment. 

Earlier this month, Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan 

wrote to us that USAID ‘‘should initiate its own hiring procedures 

to accommodate the agency staffing needs.’’

In line with that guidance, the hiring freeze has been officially 

lifted. Moving forward, we will use our hiring and reassignment reVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:33 Jun 13, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\WORK\_FULL\032118\29388 SHIRL
7

view board to seek to align workforce planning with the priorities 

and the plans that are outlined in this budget request. 

Finally, I would like to say a word about reported incidences of 

sexual abuse and misconduct by aid workers that we have all read 

about. I’ve been deeply troubled by the allegations. 

USAID works across the globe to protect vulnerable populations 

and to advance human dignity. This is a serious endeavor and it’s 

one that comes with great responsibility. Sexual exploitation is contrary to the very core of our mission. It is abhorrent. 

On March 9th, I met with representatives from InterAction, the 

Professional Services Council, and United Nations agencies to 

make clear to our partners that USAID will not tolerate sexual 

harassment or misconduct of any kind. 

I also formed a new action alliance for preventing sexual misconduct, which is being chaired by General Counsel David Moore. 

It will undertake a thorough review of our existing policies and 

procedures to identify and close any potential gaps while strengthening accountability and compliance in consultation with our external partners. 

I assure you this is an issue I am tracking personally. Sexual 

abuse is a cancer that I have resolved to root out and eliminate in 

the development sector. 

In closing, I believe that we are shaping an agency that is capable of leveraging our influence, authority, and available resources 

to literally transform the way that humanitarian and development 

assistance are provided. 

Alongside the rest of the world it will help us better meet the 

dawning challenges that we see today. With your support and guidance we will ensure that USAID remains the world’s premier international development agency and continues the important work we 

do each day to protect America’s future, security, and prosperity. 

Thank you for allowing me to speak with you and I welcome your 

questions, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Ambassador Green follows:]

8


29388a-1.eps

"The FY2019 Foreign Assistance Budget" 

Written Statement of Administrator Mark Green, U.S. Agency for International 

Development 

Before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs 

March 21, 2018 

Introduction 

Mr. Chainnan, Ranking Member, Members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity to 

discuss USAID's FY 2019 Budget Request. 

The Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 request for US AID fully and partially managed accounts is 

approximately $16.8 billion. This represents $1.3 billion more than requested last year. It 

requests $6.7 billion for global health and $5.1 billion for economic support and development. 

In terms of USAID's humanitarian assistance, it requests over $1 billion more than last fiscal 

year's request. ln total, it requests approximately $3.6 billion for International Disaster 

Assistance. 

Meeting Priorities 

Since I arrived at US AID six months ago, I had a chance to meet with many of you. We 

discussed many of the challenges in the world today, and you shared with me your priorities. 

Since then, we've been hard at work at US AID to try to our shared those priorities and position 

the Agency for its crucial role in US foreign policy. 

Our work has been informed by many of the travels I have undertaken, meeting our teams and 

partners around the world. I have traveled to Ethiopia, Sudan, and South Sudan, where I saw 

USAID leading the world's response to the continuing humanitarian need in East Africa. In 

Ethiopia, T also saw our efforts to foster resilience to help that country withstand the future crises 

that very likely will come. 

I have traveled to Mexico and India, where I met with our partners from both the public and 

private sectors. It was there that I saw glimpses of an exciting future for international 

development, where programs are more private-enterprise driven and our role is increasingly to 

use our skills, experience, and innovative know-how to help countries chart their own journeys to 

self-reliance and prosperity. 

In Iraq and Syria, I met with some of our military leaders. Together, we toured Raqqa, and I 

learned more about USAID's joint effort with the State Department and Defense Department to 

restore essential services to communities newly liberated from ISIS. In Switzerland, the United 
9


29388a-2.eps

Kingdom, and Germany, I met with international partners, including a senior leader from Israel's 

Foreign Ministry, to share some of the new innovations in programing and policy we are 

applying to our work in development and humanitarian assistance, and to discuss areas of future 

cooperation. I also took the opportunity to encourage our fellow donors to take on a greater role 

in helping to meet the world's growing needs. 

In Germany, I met with our Mission Directors from the Middle East and Africa-- as well as their 

counterparts from the State Department and DOD --to discuss how we can strengthen 

interagency cooperation. At the Munich Security Conference, I heard Vitali Klitschko, the 

Mayor of Kiev, speak about Ukraine's fight for freedom and democracy. I was reminded that 

we, too, were once a young nation inspired by the hope of a democratic future, but also 

confronted by numerous challenges as we strived to build our republic. As I listened to 

Klitschko, I was immensely proud of the work that USAID does to support people, all around the 

world, like him and the heads of the Euromaidan movement who aspire to freedom and citizenresponsive governance. 

Last month, we announced USAID's new Mission Statement. It includes an explicit 

commitment to strengthening democratic governance abroad-- a primity that I know from our 

discussions you share. This commitment has informed USA !D's work from our creation; and 

under my leadership, it will continue to do so. Our FY 2019 Request includes targeted 

investments in Europe and Eurasia that will support strong, democratic institutions and vibrant 

civil society, while counte1ing the Kremlin's influence in the region. Tn Venezuela, we will 

support those who are working for a free and prosperous future. We have requested robust 

funding for our democracy and governance programs in Venezuela that support civil society, the 

democratically elected legislature, and a free flow of information there. And in FY 20I9, we 

have requested funds to explore and implement more effective approaches to promoting ethnic 

and religious tolerance in Burma, including in Rakhine and Kachin States, and to help meet the 

needs of minorities in Iraq ravaged by !SIS, including those targeted because of their faith. 

I have also met with people from across these United States. In these first months, I have been to 

New York, Texas, Delaware, Iowa, and even my home state of Wisconsin. I have met with the 

Chamber of Commerce Foundation and spoken with business leaders, CEOs of American firms. 

A11 of them are eager to find ways to align with and enhance USA !D's work, as we11 as invest in 

the rapidly growing markets that are most often the targets of our programing. l have met with 

researchers from American universities who are helping us tackle devastating challenges like the 

Fa11 Armyworm in Africa. I have also met with American implementing partners-- contractors 

and grantees, faith-based organizations and for-profits-- to explore ways we can improve our 

operations. 

2 
10


29388a-3.eps

On top of all that, I have been "traveling" internally, leading a broad agency Redesign effort 

through which we are re-examining nearly every aspect of our operations and structures in order 

to mal<e sure we are as effective, efficient, and accountable to American taxpayers as possible. 

Overview: A Fiscally Responsible Budget for Challenging Times 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members, this is the first time l have had the honor of 

presenting the President's Budget. However, it is not the first time we have met with your otlices 

to review the needs we see in the humanitarian and development sectors. We have also reached 

out to you and your staff to discuss our growing work in conflict, post-conflict, and otherwise 

fragile zones. 1 note that this Request would fund important efforts, such as the urgent work we 

are undertaking to help communities newly-liberated from ISIS's evil reign by restoring essential 

services to places like Raqqa. 

We acknowledge that this Budget Request will not provide enough resources for us to meet 

every humanitarian need or seize every international development opportunity. ln truth, no 

federal budget in recent memory would be large enough to do so, and we would not suggest it 

wise to try to do so. We come to you with a Budget Request that aims to balance fiscal 

responsibility here at home with our leadership role and national security imperatives on the 

world stage. 

Optimizing Resources and Results 

Mr Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members, we are committed to taking every prudent step 

to extend the reach and effectiveness of our taxpayer resources. We are working closely with the 

Department of State to encourage other donor nations and recipient countries themselves to 

increase their own contributions to the overall humanitarian and development effort. This 

includes efforts at strengthening domestic resource mobilization programs so that partners can 

more effectively finance their own development in the future. We are rethinking and 

streamlining our humanitarian assistance. We are taking steps to ensure our programs and 

procedures are more private enterprise-friendly so we can better leverage our resources, bring 

new ideas and partners to our work, and increase opportunities for American businesses. 

Through procurement reform, we are striving to become more flexible, and responsive and 

innovative in meeting humanitarian and development objectives, so our implementing partners 

can extend and improve the reach ofUSATD-supported initiatives. We arc also striving to more 

closely align our resources with USG strategic needs, and are focused on measurement and 

evaluation to support that alignment. Finally, we are using the opportunity of our Redesign to 

ensure that our programs are of the highest quality and fl!lly reflective of America's key foreign 

policy priorities. 
11


29388a-4.eps

Encouraging Others to Do More 

As the President has said, "America first does not mean America alone." We can and do 

embrace opportunities to partner with others and we expect others to do their part in tackling 

challenges that affect us all. Working with the State Department, we are using every opportunity 

to push our donor partners to do more in helping to mobilize resources-- including increasing 

their financial contributions. 

To put things in context, in 2016, the U.S. provided nearly $34.5 billion in Official Development 

Assistance (ODA), almost one quarter of all ODA. In terms of humanitarian assistance, the U.S. 

continues to be the largest single donor. Our leadership role as a donor is a point of pride. It is 

part of our national character-- our readiness to stand with other countries and peoples when 

crisis strikes. But leadership also means leading others to do more and setting the expectation 

that other donors will do their fair share to advance shared priorities, while also expecting 

improved performance by implementing partners, including the U.N., to maximize the benefit for 

recipients of assistance. 

We've recently seen a number of key allies increase their ODA contributions. For example, the 

Republic of Korea has contributed significant amounts to shared priorities like Power Africa, 

global health security, and humanitarian assistance to Syria. It has increased its aid budget by 30 

percent, a feat recently matched by the United Kingdom. Germany has become one of the 

world's leading humanitarian assistance donors, providing a record $2 billion in 2017 to assist 

people from places like Syria, Yemen, the Sahel, and Burma. And India, which not so long ago 

was itself a major recipient of traditional assistance like food aid, is boosting its contributions to 

key initiatives. Under Prime Minister Modi, India has become the fifth-largest donor to 

development and reconstruction in Afghanistan. 

Domestic Resource-Mobilization 

Another way in which we are working to make our resources go further is through our support 

for domestic resource-mobilization ("DR.cvf'') projects. Through DRM, we help strengthen the 

capacity of our partner nations to finance and lead their own development programs. The Budget 

requests $75 million for strategically-managed DRM assistance. From the date of my 

nomination hearing, and nearly every day since, I have said I believe the purpose of foreign 

assistance must be ending its need to exist. Our assistance should be designed to empower 

people, communities, and government leaders on their journey to self-reliance and prosperity. 

These initiatives can help our partners to cut down on fraud, corruption, and abuse. They will 

also ensure that our investments produce sustainable results; they will ensure that our partners' 

ability to respond to the needs of their citizens will not fade away as our formal government 

support recedes gradually. 

4 
12


29388a-5.eps

Our DRM assistance in the nation of Georgia is a good example of what can be achieved. 

USAID provided DRM assistance of$12 million to Georgia over five years. The result was an 

additional $4 billion in tax revenue from 2005 to 2011. By 2017, revenue had increased by 800 

percent. As part of this effort, we helped streamline Georgia's customs process and make it 

easier for new businesses to register. We supported efforts that created an electronic tax-filing 

system and fixed crippling flaws in the Georgian tax refund process. We also took steps to help 

them cut down on corruption -- encouraging "zero tolerance" policies, harsher punishments for 

violators, and new training programs. 

Georgia's investment in their own development also grew. Pension and social-welfare spending 

increased by 700 percent. Education investment grew by 1,700 percent. Their government even 

introduced a crop-insurance program. In other words, through our DRM assistance, we helped 

an important partner accelerate its own journey to self-reliance and prosperity. 

Strengthening Humanitarian Assistance 

In Yemen, 17.8 million people-- the largest number in the world-- are facing severe food 

insecurity. In January alone, USAID's partner the World Food Programme provided critical 

food assistance to more than 6.8 million people. Last month, after sustained high-level 

diplomatic engagement by the Department of State, USAID-funded mobile cranes became 

operational in Yemen's biggest and most critical port. These cranes are cutting the average time 

it takes to unload ships by as much as half, allowing food, medicine, and other necessities to 

reach people in need more quickly. 

Providing humanitarian assistance in places like Yemen is central to our Agency's Mission, and 

a clear display of American generosity. It is also dangerous work, as witnessed by the January 

terrorist attack on Save the Children's offices in Afghanistan, in which four of our partners were 

brutally murdered, or the 28 aid workers who were killed in South Sudan during 2017. Our 

commitment to this work is reflected by the inclusion of our international disaster assistance to 

help alleviate humanitarian crises in our new Mission Statement. For years, the responsibilities 

of the two offices leading the bulk of US AID's humanitarian assistance-- Food for Peace and the 

Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) --have sharply increased. While they have 

often coordinated, they have worked in parallel, with separate budgets, separate oversight, and 

different strategies. When you would visit a camp in the field, they would be together on the 

ground, serving the same community shoulder-to-shoulder-- one providing food, and the other 

tarps and blankets. often using the same partners. 

Before I arrived at USAID, the Agency commissioned an assessment of our humanitarian 

programming, conducted by an outside firm, but led by career stafi~ which concluded, not 

5 
13


29388a-6.eps

surprisingly, there were better ways to ensure the nimble, etiective, and efficient delivery of our 

humanitarian assistance. The Request before you proposes to fund all ofUSAID's humanitarian 

assistance from one account, and imagines a day when USAlD's humanitarian food and nonfood functions are consolidated into a single entity within the Agency. This will ensure a 

seamless blend offood and non-food humanitarian USAID assistance, better serving our foreignpolicy interests and people in need. In the end, we will have a shared strategy, integrated 

programs, and joint monitoring-and-evaluation systems that will provide greater efficiency and 

accountability for the American people. As part of our etiort to consolidate US AID's 

humanitarian functions, we will also consolidate our whole-of-Agency efforts to strengthen 

partner resilience for improved food security. This will help break the cycle of recurrent and 

protracted crises, and reduce our own future humanitarian liabilities. 

Strengthening Our Private-Sector Engagement 

Fulfilling our responsibility to taxpayers is about much more than asking other donors to increase 

their contributions, helping countries to finance their own development, or streamlining our 

humanitarian assistance. ln our case, it also means strengthening private-sector engagement 

through true collaborations. At USA!D, we are reaching beyond contracting and grant-making. 

We are exploring the possibilities for co-creating and co-financing programs, tools, and 

initiatives with private-sector partners. We're embracing the ingenuity and the entrepreneurship 

that private-enterprise offers, and harnessing the efficiencies and effectiveness that private-sector 

competition and market forces can unlock. And this is something private-enterprise is eager to 

do alongside us. Additionally, we will partner closely with the proposed new U.S. Development 

Finance Institution, which will only succeed through strong institutional linkages with USAID, 

to further these efforts with financing tools, and have a whole of government approach to private 

sector engagement. 

For example, last month, I met with the CEO of a large multinational company, and he expressed 

his eagerness to work with us in countries like South Aftica, which, in pa11 because of our work, 

arc becoming more suitable for American companies to invest. This firm and others are eager to 

invest corporate funds in USAID-Ied initiatives, as well as apply entrepreneurship and 

enterprise-driven techniques, such as impact investing and blended-finance mechanisms, to 

development challenges. 

Another example is the new "Smart Communities Coalition" that we helped create alongside 

MasterCard to modernize assistance to refugees and internally displaced persons. Traditionally, 

when a displaced family first arrives at a camp or settlement, humanitarian workers do their best 

to see that they are immediately registered and provided modest food, water, and medical 

attention. Residents receive services from twenty or more different humanitarian aid groups, 

6 
14


29388a-7.eps

each of which uses their own unique method of tracking who received what service when. As 

you can imagine, this is a recipe for potential corruption and abuse. 

Our partnership with the Smart Communities Coalition will transfonn this process for more than 

600,000 people. Our implementing partners at the camps will harness the Internet and smartcard technology to do their jobs more efficiently, and at a lower cost. Displaced families will 

have better access to essential services, such as power. Just as important, in these "smart 

communities," we will be better able to track our assistance, decrease fraud and abuse, and 

provide services more quickly and cheaply. This is the power of private-enterprise mal<ing us 

better at meeting our core mission. 

Procurement Reform: Encouraging New Partners and New Partnerships 

Yet another way in which we aim to make our precious funding go further is by using innovative 

procurement tools to increase competition among potential partners. In FY 2017, around 60 

percent of USAID funding went to just 25 organizations. We are exploring new ways to harness 

new partners and ideas, and lower the "cost'' and barriers to entry for potential partners as they 

come forward. We are encouraging entrepreneurship and ingenuity in program design, building 

out technical expertise in areas such as small grants, and embracing approaches that allow us to 

move more quickly in crafting initiatives and considering submissions. 

For example, last Fall, when the Vice President announced the U.S. government's intent to 

support persecuted religious minorities and other communities in Iraq, USATD was able to move 

from "ideas to action'' by using a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA)-- a tool you have 

supported that can reduce lead times, allowing us to launch a competitive and collaborative 

research and development process rapidly to solve a specific challenge. We immediately invited 

the public to submit their ideas for pilot projects that would support the resettlement of ethnic 

and religious minorities in their ancestral homes. Within 10 weeks, we reviewed more than 100 

submissions, and invited those 1vith the best ideas to join us at a co-creation workshop. in 

Baghdad earlier this month Coming out of the workshop, we will fund the most promising ideas, 

and, if the pilots are successful, we lvill consider ways in which they can be scaled up. 

As another example, last Fall, l announced the world's first Development Impact Bond (DIB) for 

maternal and child health-- USAID's second overall DIB, and one ofthe world's largest. Under 

this new model, private capital funds the initial investment, and USATD pays if, and only if, the 

carefully defined development goal is achieved. 

In this case, we are working to strengthen maternal and newborn health care facilities in 

Northern India. Our partners at the UBS Optimus Foundation are raising capital from private 

investors to tinance improvements to over 400 private health facilities. Teams at these 400 

7 
15


29388a-8.eps

facilities will help appropriately train stail and make life-saving equipment and medicines 

available. Each facility will then undergo a rigorous review process to ensure it has met the 

appropriate accreditation standards. lfthe facilities meet those standards, USAID and our 

matching partner, Merck for Mothers, will pay the UBS Optimus Foundation. The DlB allows 

us to incentivize results, and lessen taxpayer risk. 

1 am also working to ensure that our partners operate with the highest level of integrity and 

accountability. On March 9, I met with representatives from InterAction, the Professional 

Services Council, and United Nations agencies to make clear to our partners that USAID will not 

tolerate sexual harassment or misconduct of any kind. ln addition, our Executive Diversity 

Council recent! y met to talce up this important topic. Coming out of that meeting, 1 directed the 

Agency's senior leadership team to take mandatory sexual harassment training, and asked them 

to communicate to our partners the seriousness with which we take this issue. I also formed a 

new Action Alliance for Preventing Sexual Misconduct, chaired by General Counsel David 

Moore, which will undertake a thorough review of our existing policies and procedures to 

identify and close any potential gaps, while strengthening accountability and compliance, in 

consultation with our external partners. 

Redesign: Building Tomorrow's USAID 

Being good stewards of taxpayer resources cannot be a one-time thing, or merely a set of steps 

aimed at a single budget. We need to undertake experience-informed, innovation-driven reforms 

to optimize our structures and procedures and maximize our effectiveness. 

In the coming months, we will be working to roll out Agency-wide projects through the 

Redesign that will help to institutionalize some of these ideas. This effort began in response to 

an Executive Order from the President, but, even if that had never happened, I would still have 

argued for the reforms we are planning. Over the last six months, I and others at US AID have 

met with Congressional Committees and personal offices more than 30 times to discuss our 

plans. Your input, and that of your staff, has been invaluable to our process, and Tam deeply 

appreciative of your engagement and support. 

The Redesign includes many of the proposals T have shared today, including procurement 

reform, as well as streamlining our humanitarian assistance programing. Tt also includes 

working with the Administration on cross-cutting government reorganization proposals, such as 

the new U.S. Development Finance Institution and the consolidation of small grants functions 

and expertise into USAID. 

To prepare for our work on Redesign, on March 9, Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan 

wrote to inform me that US AID "should initiate its own hiring processes to accommodate the 

Agency's staffing needs." In line with that directive, we have officially lifted our hiring freeze. 

8 
16


29388a-9.eps

Moving forward, we will use our Hiring and Reassignment Review Board to seek to align our 

workforce-planning with the Administration's priorities and our plans under the Redesign. 

Another example of efforts we are undertaking through the Redesign are the metrics that we are 

developing. If the goal of our development assistance is to help partner countries create the 

commitment and capacity needed to take on their own development journey, we should focus our 

assistance on interventions that will best help them get there. We are working on metrics that 

will serve as mileposts to help us understand where our partners are going, and what role we 

might play in their journey. 

These metrics are still a work in progress, and we will continue to consult with you as we 

develop them, but, if we are successful, they will make our programing more effective, and our 

foreign policy priorities better informed. The same is true for all of the work that is taking place 

through the Redesign effort. All of this is in service of helping our partners help themselves. All 

of it is to provide the proverbial "hand-up." And all of it points towards a world where foreign 

assistance is no longer needed -- a world where people are self-reliant, prosperous, and capable 

of crafting their own bright future. 

Conclusion 

Mr. Chainnan, Ranking Member, and Members of the Committee, I believe we are shaping an 

Agency that is capable of leveraging our influence, authority, and available resources to advance 

U.S. interests, transfonn the way we provide humanitarian and development assistance, and, 

alongside the rest of the world, help meet the daunting challenges we all see today. With your 

support and guidance, we will ensure USAID remains the world's premier international 

development Agency and continues the important work we do, each day, to protect America's 

future security and prosperity. Thank you for allowing me to speak with you today, and I 

welcome your questions. 

9 
17

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you very much, Ambassador. 

I would begin with a question on food aid reform. The Trump administration is now the third successive administration to seek dramatic reforms in U.S. international food aid programming, in this 

case going so far as to propose eliminating funding for the inflexible Food for Peace program altogether and replacing that with a 

completely flexible disaster assistance program. 

And I applaud their boldness in this. This isn’t just about saving 

money if we can get the permanent fixes through this program that 

we are seeking. It’s about saving lives, and after the super typhoon 

hit the Philippines, many of us on this committee, myself and Mr. 

Brad Sherman, Joe Wilson went with us. Steve Chabot was with 

us, along with three or four other members. 

When we went into the Philippines immediately after that devastation and saw—in the village we were in there was only one home 

left standing but it took 4 weeks for U.S. food to arrive, even 

though it was prepositioned in Sri Lanka. 

If it had not been for the alternative programs this committee 

had pushed for that allowed the immediate purchase of that food 

aid there, obviously, you would have had people without any capability for weeks of being fed. 

It took 6 weeks for prepositioned U.S. food to arrive in Nepal 

after the earthquake in 2015. It took 16 weeks to arrive in Yemen 

after the food emergency started there. We just returned less than 

a month ago from the Arabian Peninsula up on the border with 

Yemen to look at the challenges there. 

But fortunately, in each of these instances it was USAID that 

acted quickly. You tapped into other disaster assistance accounts so 

that you could get locally-purchased food to people in desperate 

need within hours instead of weeks. 

And while we are fortunate to have had those disaster assistance 

funds available in a pinch, it is sad and it’s unacceptable that our 

food aid could not provide food when and where it was needed most 

and this is why we must reform. 

So we have introduced legislation to fix Food for Peace by recognizing the important contributions of American farmers with a 25 

percent floor on the purchase of U.S. commodities but also adding 

much more flexibility to purchase local food when and where that’s 

more efficient and these small changes would save an estimated 

$300 million that could be used to reach an additional 10 million 

starving people. 

So I understand you may not be able to comment on this legislation specifically. But is the concept consistent with what the administration is trying to achieve in its assistance programming? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First off, thank you for your kind words about the USAID team. 

We view ourselves as being operational and as nimble as we can 

be. 

With respect to food assistance, we obviously support goals to 

flexibility. In terms of the particular legislation, I have not had a 

chance to review it and, to my knowledge, the administration has 

not taken a formal position on it. But we always support efforts to 

make our dollars go as far as they can. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you very much, Administrator. 

18

The other question I wanted to ask was on wildlife trafficking. 

This committee had prioritized efforts to counter wildlife trafficking, and this has become a source of financing not just for 

criminal networks but for terrorist organizations, especially across 

Africa. 

And it threatens our national security—it threatens the national 

security of states there. So combating this crime is as much about 

security as it is about saving majestic species like elephant and 

rhino. 

But I’ll give you a real-world example. For Al-Shabaab, the militants there traffic in ivory. Each one of those ivory tusks get better 

than 20 boxes of ammunition. 

A real-world example—they went into the forest, massacred 

many of these elephants, trekked the ivory out, got additional ammunition, and then went into Garissa University in 2015, if you recall, when they slaughtered so many of those students. One hundred and forty of those students died but many, many were also 

left grievously injured from those attacks. 

Now in Gabon officials busted a wildlife trafficking ring a little 

over a month ago. That ring was tied to Boko Haram. 

So, Ambassador Green, how can we continue to address the clear 

national security threats posed by wildlife trafficking? We have got 

budgetary constraints here. Your ideas about how to move forward? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and your own 

work on this regard, obviously, is well known and has made a huge 

difference and helped provide us with some of the tools. 

So as you rightly point out, this is not simply about biodiversity, 

as important as that is to all of us. It is about preventing the fuel 

for organized crime and other nefarious elements. 

Wildlife trafficking has grown into the fourth most lucrative form 

of transnational organized crime, and so it is a high priority for us 

for a number of reasons. 

So as much as anything, it is enhancing the capacity of law enforcement and game park security enforcement. I think that’s the 

first and most important thing we can do, and working with other 

agencies we are heavily engaged in that, trying to help build their 

own capacity. 

Also, secondly, it’s to reduce demand and build the kinds of global partnerships that your legislation has promoted, but building 

partnerships to restrict the demand as well. 

But I am greatly appreciative that you’ve raised the profile of 

this, in particular its linkages to crime. 

Chairman ROYCE. Yes. Well——

Ambassador GREEN. It’s something I don’t think is well understood. 

Chairman ROYCE. We have passed legislation here to shut down 

the ivory trade, which is going to help in terms of the demand. 

But we are going to have to reverse some of the cuts in these 

programs because if we are going to stop Al-Shabaab, if we are 

going to prevent Boko Haram, which both have pledged fealty to 

ISIS, from continuing to build their operation, we have got to reverse engines here and make sure that the programs go forward to 

shut that down. 

19

Ambassador GREEN. Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working 

with you on this. 

Chairman ROYCE. Yes. Thank you. 

Mr. Engel. 

Mr. ENGEL. Well, Ambassador Green, as you heard me before, I 

mentioned how pleased I was that you’ve reached out to us and 

have worked with us. So I want to say that again. 

I want to acknowledge a veteran staffer from this committee sitting behind you, Eddy Acevedo, and I know he’ll do you well. So 

I am happy to see him here as well. 

As I’ve mentioned before, I’ve been extremely disappointed by the 

administration’s draconian 33 percent cut to USAID and also to the 

entire international affairs budget. 

I’ve heard the argument that we cannot solve all the world’s 

problems and that we have to set priorities. The problem is that 

I think this proposed budget makes it impossible to achieve even 

our core priorities. 

The real-world impact of those cuts would be absolutely devastating. Tens of thousands of people will lose access to lifesaving 

medicines and potentially starve to death, and we are talking about 

a relatively small amount of funding here. 

The USAID budget, as I mentioned before, is only 1⁄2 of 1 percent 

of the total Federal budget. 

So, Ambassador, I know you understand that development, along 

with diplomacy and defense, is critical for meeting U.S. national security objectives. 

How can you function with these draconian cuts? And what bothers me is that they were submitted last year. This Congress rejected it—bipartisan rejected it and we improved the amount and 

then the administration the second year, which is now, sends us 

another proposal for the same draconian cuts that we rejected as 

a Congress last year. 

So it just doesn’t make any sense to me. I know you well enough 

to know that you would always want to function better with more 

money and be well funded but how can you function with these 

draconian cuts? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you, Ranking Member Engel. 

Well, first off, I readily admit that this budget will not allow us 

to do everything we might want to do in a perfect world and it 

doesn’t allow us to take on every opportunity that we might see. 

I recognize that the President in this budget is attempting to balance the needs that he sees in security of citizens, advancing American leadership, and commit them to efficiency and effectiveness. 

What I can say as administrator I believe my job is to get the 

resources that are generously provided to us and do the best I can 

to make them go as far as I can. 

We are working very hard to encourage our partners around the 

world to do more, and I think many of them are. We are seeing increased contributions from Germany, France, in particular South 

Korea, and Japan. 

Also, mobilizing domestic resource mobilization programs to help 

those countries where we are working better capture their own revenues and resources. 

20

I think we are doing more with the private sector and engaging 

with private sector from the word go to make sure that our programs leverage not only their financial resources but also the partnerships that they can bring. 

So my commitment to you is to go as far as I can with every single dollar that’s provided. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. 

I want to ask you a question about Venezuela. A recent Washington Post article stated that the mass exodus of Venezuelans into 

Colombia and other places is one of the biggest migration crises in 

Latin American history and compared it to the flow of Syrians into 

western Europe in 2015. 

I introduced the Venezuelan Humanitarian Assistance and Defense of Democratic Governance Act with my good friend, Ileana 

Ros-Lehtinen, which passed the House in December. 

I was pleased to see USAID get to work on some of the items in 

this bill by announcing $2.5 million in new assistance for Venezuelan refugees in Colombia yesterday. 

That’s, obviously, a good start but much needs to be done. So 

what can you tell us about what you’re attempting to do in Venezuela and why has USAID not yet provided direct humanitarian 

aid to the Venezuelan people through credible NGOs and if you’re 

going to do it when would you expect to do it? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Engel. First off—and 

thanks for the legislation—you’re right. Yesterday, we announced 

$2.5 million in humanitarian assistance for the people of Venezuela 

who have left the country for Colombia and this will provide muchneeded food assistance and medical support to this population, and 

as we all know, this is an entirely manmade humanitarian crisis. 

I condemn the snap elections by Maduro. These elections will not 

be free, fair, and transparent, and all they will do is cause more 

of a migration and force more and more people. 

We will continue to support human rights and civil society 

groups in Venezuela. The money that was announced yesterday is 

but a down payment and we look forward to working with you to 

make sure that we continue to provide the humanitarian resources 

that are necessary to begin to address this terrible crisis. 

And as you point out, this is a crisis that’s largely gone under 

the radar in terms of the humanitarian fallout and the forced migration and it’s something that really hasn’t received enough attention. 

My commitment is to work with you to make sure that it does, 

to provide the resources we can and take every step and look at 

every measure we can to push this forward. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, and before I go, I want to just mention 

Syria again. It’s just—particularly what’s happening in Ghouta 

now and elsewhere, and it’s just horrifying. So I hope that you can 

increase whatever aid we can give to the civilian population in 

Syria. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Engel. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. We go now to our chairman emeritus, Ileana 

Ros-Lehtinen of Florida. 

21

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

Ranking Member. 

I first want to point out in the back row of the audience is 12 

just outstanding individuals there. They are part of the Florida Gubernatorial Fellows Program. They are at various stages in their 

educational career. Some are already lawyers. 

Some are applying to law school, Ph.D. candidates. Some are 

undergrad, and they have been assigned to different agencies in 

Tallahassee. But they are spending a week here so I am glad that 

it snowed for them. 

Welcome to DC, Floridians. 

But thank you, Administrator Green. It’s been such a pleasure 

for all of us in our committee to have been working with you and 

many of us old timers who had the delightful experience of being 

a member on this committee with you and you’re so accessible to 

Congress and we appreciate that greatly, as you know. 

And the opportunities that we have had, all of the members 

have, to reach you, to find out what USAID is doing in every corner 

of the world. So thank you so much for looking out for all of us and 

looking out for all the vulnerable members of the world. 

I don’t know about the wise decisions you have made in giving 

important jobs in your administration. We look at Eddy Acevedo 

there and we think maybe your judgment is clouded at times. 

But——[laughter]—but you can be forgiven for a few mistakes. 

Thank you for providing this humanitarian aid that you just an- nounced yesterday—$2.5 million for Venezuelans and Colombian 

communities that are hosting them. What an important and welcomed step and thank you for calling these elections that are coming up in Venezuela. 

Sham elections are next month. The situation is just going to get 

worse, if that is possible. So thank you very much for that. 

On Nicaragua, I was disappointed to see the President’s budget 

zero out our assistance to Nicaragua. So Ranking Member Engel, 

Albio Sires, and I sent a letter to you yesterday urging you to work 

within the administration to reverse that decision. 

As you know and all of us know, Nicaragua’s Ortega has taken 

the country down the same path as Castro and Maduro, and that 

can’t be good. So now is not the time to be retreating. 

If we leave, we find ourselves in a similar situation that we are 

currently facing in Venezuela. Soon you’ll have to announce humanitarian assistance to Nicaraguans. Oh, boy. So we hope that 

you can use your voice and your power within the administration 

to straighten that out. 

And lastly, I was encouraged as you pointed out in your statement, Ambassador Green, to see USAID signed this memorandum 

of understanding with Israel on Power Africa. And Congressman 

Ted Deutch and I authored H.R. 5141. 

That’s the U.S.-Israel Security Assistance Act and it includes a 

section on USAID and Israel. We think it’s sound policy that many 

other areas in which USAID and Israel can work together to advance mutual interests. So this is the beginning of a wonderful 

friendship. 

So our bill calls for more agreements like Power Africa and so 

I wanted to ask you where else is USAID looking to work with 

22

Israel and sign similar MOUs and leverage our cooperation with 

this critical strategic ally to advance their interests, our interests, 

everybody’s interests as well. 

Thank you, Ambassador. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. 

First off, thank you for legislation and what it stands for. I had 

a very positive meeting recently with Ambassador Dermer and we 

are looking for all kinds of ways to increase our cooperation including negotiating a global MOU which will enshrine and institutionalize that cooperation. 

As you know, Mashav, which is our Israeli counterpart, as they 

pointed out, our older brother—they are actually older than USAID 

is—they said that they are the older poorer brother to USAID. 

But they have a particular expertise in water security and a 

number of particular technical skills and capacities that we’d like 

to tap into. It’ll help us achieve our development goals I think more 

effectively and efficiently, also build the relationship and help them 

achieve some of their goals. 

So I am very excited about what the possibilities are and looking 

forward to finalizing that MOU as soon as we can. So I think it’s 

a great opportunity and, as you know, I think people sometimes assume it would mean it’s confined in the Middle East and, of course, 

that’s simply not true. 

The work we are doing together in Africa through Power Africa, 

the work we’d like to do together in places like Latin America, I 

really see as the sky being the limit here. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Ambassador. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the time. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Ileana. 

We are going to go to Greg Meeks of New York. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Eddy, you do look out of place back there. [Laughter.] 

Thank you, Ambassador, for being here today and I want to 

join—I think that one of the programs that I know we all have 

talked and raved about and fought for was Power Africa, and so 

the continued commitment from USAID in regards to Power Africa 

is extremely important. 

And I know you’ve had a position of talking about private investments to help support economic development in sectors in the country. 

So I want to bring to your attention another one that was established about 18 months ago between USAID and the U.S. National 

Association of Security Professionals called MEDA, and MEDA is 

a program where it exposes U.S. investors to co-investments with 

African counterparts in African infrastructure. It connects African 

investors to investment opportunities in the United States. 

And so I just want to make sure that it’s something that 18 

months but with your limited budget, I am just hoping that we can 

continue to support it and if it’s not on your radar please put it on 

your radar because it’s extremely important and I think that it will 

help both ways. It’ll help our relationship with some African countries and help here. So if it’s not on, please put it on your radar. 

I am the ranking member on the Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging 

Threats Subcommittee and I am encouraged by the substantial atVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:33 Jun 13, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\WORK\_FULL\032118\29388 SHIRL
23

tention that USAID gives to countries striving to enter the EU 

family, especially when we are talking about Georgia and the 

Ukraine, and the future of these countries are defined by their 

pathway to the EU and I believe that by the deep comprehensive 

free trade agreements that we are working on. 

So, in fact, I believe that that’s the correct policy for our European allies and NATO and the EU, and it’s the best Russia policy. 

Now, the EU, they are one of the largest if not the largest donor 

of aid in the world, along with the United States. 

So I was wondering whether or not USAID has a way to coordinate what the EU is doing with what the United States is doing 

so that we can make sure now we are maximizing the buck that’s 

going into some of the areas that best need the kind of aid that 

USAID provides. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. 

First off, with respect to MEDA, I will learn more about it. I’d 

love to follow up with you. Working with the private sector on coinvestment and co-design is particularly important. Really, we 

want that to be the hallmark of our relationship with private enterprise. 

Moving beyond traditionally simply contracting and granting, 

which we will continue to do, but really coming together to get 

some of the ideas, the new partnerships, and the new opportunities. So very important to us. 

With respect to Europe and Eurasia, it’s an area of particular interest to me. The work that I used to do at IRI a lot of it was in 

that part of the world. Countering Kremlin influence is extremely 

important to us and I think the best way to counter Kremlin influence is to have success in the areas around Russia. 

So reinforcing good governance, fighting corruption, economic 

growth, diversification of energy I think is very, very important. 

In terms of our coordination, I recently held a strategic dialog 

with my counterparts at DFID and we are looking for ways to 

align. I have good relationships with the EU but want to make 

sure that we beef that up even more. 

We meet with our EU counterparts fairly often. But I think we 

are entering into a chapter in which the world’s major aid agencies 

and sources really do need to be working to share knowledge, to 

look for partnerships, to co-design, to co-invest. 

So you have my commitment to keep building on that. I think 

it’s very important and it really is a great way of reinforcing the 

Euro-Atlantic alliance, which is the pivot point around which the 

world turns. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you. 

And let me just ask this last question as my time is about to run 

out. I am concerned about, especially with the cuts, and when you 

look at the storms that have happened, I would note there is no 

assistance for the post-Hurricane reconstruction in the Caribbean. 

And so I am wondering whether or not there will be—and I believe that was shortsighted because we need those as allies also—

but will you use existing funding to make the Caribbean countries 

more resilient to future natural disasters? 

Ambassador GREEN. A great question. 

24

So in response to the terrible storms—as you know, it was a convergence of storms in so many ways. We responded immediately 

with DOD in providing humanitarian assistance including substantial food aid that we provided. 

So we did that almost immediately. In terms of longer-term reconstruction, that’s something that we are working with the World 

Bank on, not so much that we are doing ourselves. We don’t have 

resources for that. 

But we are looking for ways to build resilience of these countries. 

My view has always been that as important as humanitarian assistance is, the real compassion comes with helping to build resilience of those countries and those governments to withstand future 

shock and to be in a position to help themselves. 

It’s good for them and it’s certainly good for us. So we will look 

for ways to do what we can to build resilience in those areas. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. 

We go to Mr. Steve Chabot of Ohio. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again, welcome, Administrator Green. 

You had mentioned I think early on that you were here—we 

were sort of ragtag. I was one of those who was with you back in 

that time. I can assure you that we are still pretty ragtag and so 

things haven’t changed that much. 

But we appreciate you being in your position and people have 

commented on Eddy, and we wish you the best, Eddy. We know 

you’re going to do a great job there as well, and all those things 

that were said kind of in jest is because we all——

Ambassador GREEN. How much has he paid you guys? [Laughter.] 

Mr. CHABOT. That’s right. Not enough. But in any event, also 

there was some—early on in this hearing it has been off and on, 

you know, some criticism of the President and the administration, 

even the tax bill, saying how can we cut taxes and cut this, too, 

et cetera? 

And I would just remind folks that the tax cut bill will reinvigorate—already is—the economy, creating jobs. People that are now 

working can pay taxes back in. 

So it isn’t dollar for dollar, but a lot of that tax cut is ultimately 

paid for by a reinvigorated economy, job creation, and the revenues 

that come back into the government. And so I just want to make 

that point. 

Mr. Connolly or anybody else that—I hear some grumbling over 

there. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. We have heard that story before. [Laughter.] 

Mr. CHABOT. Well, it just happens to be true. It was true under 

President Kennedy, a Democrat, President Reagan, President 

Bush, and now President Trump. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Would my friend yield for 1 second? 

Mr. CHABOT. I am debating whether I should or not. I will——

Mr. CONNOLLY. President Reagan had to raise taxes five times 

to make up for the red ink. 

[Crosstalk.] 

25

Chairman ROYCE. The committee hasn’t changed that much. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. CONNOLLY. But believe it or not—believe it or not, we are 

friends. 

Mr. CHABOT. So reclaiming my time. We are—we are still 

friends. 

Chairman ROYCE. I’ll give the gentleman an additional minute. 

But occasionally we are still ragtag around the edges a little bit, 

Administrator Green. 

Thank you. 

Mr. CHABOT. All true. But reclaiming my time. Thank you very 

much. 

And so—and then relative to the actual cuts here, I think we 

ought to be also clear about this that we have a $20 trillion debt. 

Now, I think, it’s went up to $21 trillion. And so it is appropriate. 

I would give the administration credit for at least attempting to 

look at all parts of the budget and see where we can save money. 

Now, they are a separate branch of government. A lot of times 

that budget that they send over here is referred to as dead on arrival and it is appropriate that the legislative branch—a separate 

branch—look at that budget and make changes and modifications, 

which is has here. 

Now, oftentimes what we spend is CRs and omnibuses and 

things. 

I would note that I think last time, in essence, those cuts didn’t 

occur, at least to any considerable degree. So the funding did go out 

to those important programs and in all likelihood will this time as 

well. 

So even though it’s appropriate for all those that are trying to 

positively impact people around the world who really need the help 

to bring it to our attention, the reality is is that I think our Government will continue to help folks who really do need it around 

the world. 

And I just, in my remaining time, Mark, I wanted to talk about 

a program. I know your staff is aware of it and I just want to elevate it in your mind. 

Our colleague—my Democratic colleague, Robin Kelly, and I were 

the principal sponsors of legislation that was passed in the House 

back in October. 

It’s called the Protecting Girls’ Access to Education Act, and in 

essence what it does is it allows your agency, USAID, and the 

State Department to prioritize access to education for the most vulnerable displaced populations around the world, especially girls 

who are particularly vulnerable in these conflict zones. 

Places like South Sudan, Syria are modern examples right now 

but it happens all over there, depending on where the instability 

is. 

And they are really vulnerable to a whole range of things if they 

don’t get a proper education and it’s unstable and they don’t have 

any kind of skills to support themselves, they are subject to exploitation, to human trafficking, to forced child marriage, and a whole 

range of other things. 

26

So I would just urge you to discuss that with your folks, make 

sure that you’re fully up on that, and we are awaiting, as we are 

on so many things, Senate action. 

We understand the votes are there. It’s just a matter of them ultimately passing this legislation. I don’t know if you have any comment that you’d like to make there. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you, Congressman Chabot. 

As you know, I began my career in development as a teacher in 

east Africa and so I certainly recognize what you’re saying. 

In so many ways a focus on women and girls is at the heart of 

what we do. Not only is it a matter of gender equity but it’s smart 

development. 

What we see by investing in girls and creating opportunities—

economic opportunities for girls—90 percent of that money that 

they earn gets reinvested into communities and so there is a multiplier effect. 

But also in so many ways it’s smart global health. So, we have 

always realized that the number-one way of preventing the spread 

of, for example, HIV is an educated mom. I mean, it really is. So 

this is a high priority for us. 

And then, finally, as we have discussed, what I think is the great 

challenge of our time is how we provide education and basic services to the displaced communities in the world. 

There are 70 million people displaced in the world right now, and 

you have children being born in camps and settlements, growing up 

in camps and settlements, and someday, God willing, the gates 

open, the fence comes down, and they are out in the world, and 

how do we help them not be vulnerable to the worst kinds of exploitative forces? And education is a key part of it. 

So we are looking at a wide range of ways to enhance how we 

are able to do that. Technology is an ally here but not a panacea. 

But it really is, I think, the great challenge of our time. More than 

any one group, I think it’s that. 

Mr. CHABOT. Thank you very much. 

My time has expired, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. We go to Karen Bass of California. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. 

Let me welcome you, Ambassador Green, to this hearing and I 

want to associate myself with the ranking member’s comments to 

give credit where credit is due regarding your appointment. 

I appreciated working with you while you were at IRI and especially, I have always appreciated your commitment to Africa. 

So I wanted to ask you about that, the concerns in the budget 

cuts—but in addition to that, the appointment of the Assistant Secretary. 

The assistant administrator, I heard, has been withdrawn, so I 

don’t know if a new person will be nominated, if that nomination 

is imminent. I am not exactly sure why they were withdrawn. 

But as you can imagine, I struggle often with African Ambassadors who are confused by what our message is, what our policy 

is, and most notably, the situation with Tillerson last week really 

sends a confusing message to African countries. 

The fact that he essentially gets notified right after returning 

from the continent of Africa—then what does that say to his trip? 

27

So, you could comment about that. Also, I read your presentation 

to the Security Council on the DRC and really appreciated everything there. 

But I’d like to ask you what exactly our position is. I know our 

position is that elections should be held by December. But what I 

haven’t heard from us is, what about a commitment from Kabila 

that he not run? Because if our position is just that elections be 

held by December, number one, he’s postponed them a number of 

times—number two, that doesn’t say that he won’t run. 

And then number three, I am wondering if you think it’s time for 

more, even perhaps sanctions, because there is legislation that we 

have pending in the subcommittee. But as I read about the escalating crisis daily in the DRC, I am just really concerned that it 

seems like we need to step up. 

Ambassador GREEN. With respect to the DRC and my appearing 

before the U.N. Security Council, first, I am careful to stay in my 

lane as the USAID Administrator and not——

Ms. BASS. Oh, okay. That’s true. 

Ambassador GREEN. But I will say this. You saw my comments 

and, yes, they were pointed. What strikes me—actually, we were 

talking about this morning the similarities of Venezuela and DRC 

in the sense that you have two nations which should be contributors and donors in the world——

Ms. BASS. Right. Right. 

Ambassador GREEN [continuing]. And look where they are, and 

they are entirely manmade—corruption, authoritarianism. In the 

DRC, the gender-based violence is—it’s almost unimaginable what 

we are seeing. 

At the same time, we have a regime which, according to a number of outside observers, Mr. Kabila—his family has 450 miles 

worth of diamond concessions and 80 of the largest companies in 

the country he owns, in whole or in part, which kids can’t go to 

school, while we are seeing the violence against humanitarian 

workers. We lost an American last year. 

Ms. BASS. Right. 

Ambassador GREEN. It’s as dire a situation as can possibly be. 

Part of what my message was to the Security Council is the humanitarian catastrophe is clear and we should all do our part. But 

we should not think that simply providing humanitarian assistance 

is either a solution——

Ms. BASS. Exactly. 

Ambassador GREEN [continuing]. Or is truly compassionate. A lot 

more needs to go with it. And so I look forward to working with 

you further on this. 

It is an area of great interest and concern to me and I am also 

worried, as we see things playing out—the violence, especially leading up to the election—we are going to continue to see Congolese 

fleeing and potentially destabilizing the region. 

So this is an international crisis. It’s not simply a matter of a bilateral crisis. 

Ms. BASS. Let me get one more question in. 

You mentioned gender equity and I was wondering if the programs like AWEP that was a USAID program—if that program is 

28

still in place and if some of the other gender-specific programs in 

USAID are still in place or have they been cut or eliminated? 

Ambassador GREEN. So I can’t answer your question and will follow up with you. What I can tell you is that our gender-focused and 

gender equity programs will continue if not get ramped up. 

We are looking to have the gender lens being one through which 

basically every program flows. Again, it’s sound development logic 

in addition to being a core value—American value. It’s awfully important for achieving any of the goals we are hoping to achieve. 

Ms. BASS. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. We will go now to Joe Wilson of South Carolina. 

Mr. WILSON. And thank you, Chairman Ed Royce and Ranking 

Member Eliot Engel, for your leadership. 

And welcome back, Ambassador, Congressman, President, Director—all the titles that you have so well deserved. 

Ambassador GREEN. Usually when someone says that there is 

something coming after. 

Mr. WILSON. Right. Right. Hey, with Joe Wilson, it’s just going 

to be positive, okay, and so because I know Mark Green. But congratulations on your success and, truly, an indication of that is 

Eddy Acevedo. 

We are so used to him sitting behind us and making sure that 

we do it semi-correctly. So we just appreciate his service and he, 

of course, is a key aid to Chairman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen—truly 

helped her become one of the most effective chairmen we have ever 

had for Foreign Affairs. 

Now the question, and I want to thank you for your leadership 

here in Congress for the Millennium Challenge. What an extraordinary success story that’s been. 

The administration has correctly provided strong support for the 

people of Ukraine, most recently by agreeing to sell Ukraine Javelin missiles to defend its people and territory from the Putin aggression. 

Ukraine’s reform efforts are underway in many areas, especially 

combating corruption. What are your plans to use the extensive 

U.S. assistance program in Ukraine to ensure that the government 

fully implements the reforms its agreed to, especially concerning 

corruption? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you, Congressman. 

So in terms of our work with Ukraine, I think there is tremendous good will both sides of the aisle, multiple administrations, toward Ukraine and Ukraine’s success. 

On the other hand, I think it’s also true that the window is not 

open forever for Ukraine. They must take on corruption, and it’s 

a core challenge for them and something that in many ways influences their politics and citizens’ perception of the government. 

So it is a principal part of the work that we do. Transparency, 

accountability, giving them the tools, reinforcing the ability of civil 

society to hold people to account—all vitally important. 

The people of Ukraine want to move toward the West. They look 

to the West for inspiration, guidance, and leadership, and a core 

part of that is tackling corruption. 

29

A few weeks ago at the Munich Security Conference I had a 

chance to meet with Mayor Klitschko of Kiev, who I’ve met with 

before, and he talked about the priorities he has in battling corruption and that it’s a slow heavy slog. 

And so we have pledged to meet with him and continue to work 

with him to enhance those tools. So I am right with you in terms 

of its importance and it really is central to all of our plans in the 

region. 

Mr. WILSON. And it’s exciting that you mention the mayor. I had 

an opportunity to meet with him at the Munich Security Conference and also members of the Parliament of Ukraine, and it’s 

just encouraging to see such extraordinary people and a beautiful 

country. 

While the administration has made impressive gains to help retake territory under ISIS control, we now face significant humanitarian and stabilization challenges. 

How does this request enable the United States to continue to 

meet the objectives of defeating, degrading, and disrupting ISIS? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you for the question. 

So in places like Raqqa, Syria that I visited some weeks back—

there is a couple of parts. First off, humanitarian assistance, which 

we provide, but more importantly in many ways is the restoration 

of essential services. 

I had a chance to go with General Votel of CENTCOM to Raqqa 

and, first off, I have to tell you the devastation I saw was almost 

incomprehensible. 

I’ve never seen the extensive devastation like that anywhere in 

the world. As far as you can see to the horizon, buildings are leveled. 

And yet, when you go to the IDP camp, which I did, Raqqans told 

me over and over again they want to go home. They want to move 

back to Raqqa. 

They are home bound, and so I would ask them, what will it take 

for you to move back home? Water, electricity, access to meds, some 

basic food, some semblance of education. 

And so USAID’s work there—we have a very small footprint—is 

designed on that limited mission. Restoration of essential services 

so that Raqqans can go back home—that we don’t leave an open 

space, a void. We don’t cede the territory to the bad guys who will 

come back. 

Challenges are great. I found the Raqqans inspirational. 

Mr. WILSON. Well, and we find your service inspirational and 

what USAID does for persons in displacement camps, to see schools 

built in Afghanistan—I wish the American people could see more. 

Thank you very much. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. Ami Bera of California. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ambassador Green, for your service to our country as well as the important work that you’re doing at USAID. 

This morning we had breakfast—a few of us had breakfast with 

the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the topic was around the 

agricultural economy and the number of youth that are out there, 

particularly in Africa and sub-Saharan Africa and the potential criVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:33 Jun 13, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\WORK\_FULL\032118\29388 SHIRL
30

sis if we don’t find solutions for both the food insecurity there but 

then also this—the growing number of young people who may not 

have any economic opportunities. 

One of the remarkable successes, and we talked about this in the 

past, is Feed the Future and capacity building, an interest that I 

think many of us on the committee share, along with yourself, is 

obviously we will respond to global crises with aid and so forth. 

But the focus on capacity building and how we help those countries go from recipient countries to countries that actually can address their own needs. 

Would you talk about some of the success of Feed the Future, the 

places where we can be most helpful in shifting toward capacity 

building and then an area where there is a large amount of moneys 

that the diasporas send back around the world and how we could 

better effectively partner with the various diaspora to utilize those 

funds again in a capacity-building effort? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. 

First off, and I think I’ve mentioned it to some of you before, 

when I served as an Ambassador in Tanzania, so this is 2007, 

2008, and 2009, there was no Feed the Future, and I had a country 

that was 83 percent rural agriculture and I have no tools whatsoever to deal with it. 

So I am a big fan of Feed the Future and I think it was a great 

contribution by the Obama administration to our progression of developing tools—a very important part of our work. 

One of the things that I think makes it particularly interesting 

and dynamic is the fact that it is built around private sector engagement. 

So this is not simply a traditional program like other good programs but a traditional program where we are doing things, solely 

government grants. This is really stimulating the private sector, 

private investment. 

We, in the U.S., of course, have a number of wonderful companies engaged in this space but also helping them to stimulate their 

own capacity in those countries, which have the additional benefit 

of creating opportunities for people in the countries themselves. 

And when it comes to youth, if the greatest challenge in the 

world right now from a development perspective are displaced communities. Number two is the rising youth bulge, if we fail to help 

provide those opportunities. 

The average age of a Ugandan is about 16. In Tanzania, it’s 17 

and going down. And so I really worry about a rising generation 

of underemployed, if employed, and also disconnected in the sense 

of not reinforcing their investment in civic institutions. 

I think working on the food sector, which is the natural backbone 

of every economy, particularly in the developing world, it really is 

a way to tackle a number of these problems at the same time. 

They are not going to go away anytime soon. This is a long-term 

generational challenge but worth every dollar that we put into it. 

The Chicago Council is near and dear to my heart. Before I got 

this job, I actually helped develop that report that they unveiled 

and I thought some of their ideas are really worth looking at and 

trying to integrate into our work. 

Mr. BERA. Excellent. 

31

And in the brief time I have left, the second question was moneys 

from the diasporas that are here—that are flown back, how we 

could better partner with diasporas to address some of these——

Ambassador GREEN. You know, it’s an area that we have simply 

not done as well as we need to do. I know working with my British 

counterparts, DFID, they actually—diaspora communities are a 

bigger part of the work they do and maybe because of the commonwealth. We simply have not done this as well as we need to. 

So it’s something that we are actively looking at, particularly 

Western Hemisphere the diaspora is a little closer in some ways. 

But I think there are all kinds of technology transfer opportunities—you know, really ways of helping everyone gain. 

Our neighbors need to succeed, obviously. It’s important for our 

security and our economy. 

Mr. BERA. Great. Thank you. I’ll yield. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. We go to Ted Poe of Texas. 

Mr. POE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ambassador Green, it’s good to see you. I want to reiterate what 

many of the members have said about your work in this entire 

area. 

It is not a job for you. It is a calling, a cause, a passion, and you 

are intense about it and I think that is why members on both sides 

admire what you do for so long. So thank you for that. 

I want to make three comments. One, it seems to me that many 

of the world’s issues, primarily in the developing countries, centers 

specifically on one word and that is water, and the lack of clean 

water affects everything. 

It affects health. It affects development. It affects crops. It affects 

everything, and I want to commend you on the WASH program and 

all of the NGOs that are working to get clean water throughout the 

world. And I think it’s also a security issue as well. 

As we know, women in Africa many times have to walk miles to 

get water. Those water wells are guarded by criminals and to get 

the water they are abused and then they have to repeat that in a 

couple of days as well. That’s awful that we live in a society, in a 

world, where that happens. 

The other item that I wanted to mention to you—then I have a 

question—I recently met with the three speakers of Parliament of 

Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova. All three of those countries have 

portions of their nation occupied by Russian troops. 

They have many things in common. They are, I believe, very concerned about which direction each of those three countries, but the 

three of them together, are going to move—are they going to go 

move back to the Russian bear or are they going to move to the 

West. 

And I think it is not only a humanitarian issue but a political 

issue that the United States show support for those three countries, getting rid of the corruption and developing their nations to 

have more pro-democracy corrupt-free institutions. Still, as we 

know, they are occupied by Russian troops and probably will be for 

a long time. 

One issue that I want to talk about, though, is Pakistan. The 

United States has been sending lots of money to Pakistan forever. 

32

We do military aid. We do military sales and then we do foreign 

assistance. 

There is $335 million in the proposed budget for Pakistan supposedly for countering violent extremism in Pakistan. Two comments and then a question, actually. 

A recent general said that the United States will probably be in 

Afghanistan indefinitely. That’s another issue but it’s troubling to 

me that that seems to be our policy. 

The Afghan President recently said before the United Nations—

and you might have been there when he said this—that the center 

of Taliban terrorism in Afghanistan is from Pakistan, and the problem in Pakistan is not going to be solved on terrorism until we—

the world deals with the issue of Pakistan playing both sides. 

Pakistan, I think, funds the Taliban that goes into Afghanistan, 

puts our troops in harm’s way, then trots back over into Pakistan 

and hides. It may be true that the Pakistan nation fights the 

Taliban in Pakistan. 

But they support the Taliban in Afghanistan. I think they are 

playing us, they are playing the Chinese, and yet we continue to 

give money. 

I don’t think we ought to give them a dime of foreign assistance. 

I even think we ought to remove them from the major non-NATO 

ally status that they have. But we are all concerned about their 

ability to have nuclear weapons, et cetera. 

So if you could candidly weigh in on money that goes to Pakistan 

that I think is being used against American interests and Americans in Afghanistan. There would be my question. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. 

So very quickly, I agree with the priority you place upon clean 

water and water security. In fact, if not for the weather, I would 

be speaking at a clean water event tonight at the National Geographic with Procter & Gamble in celebration of some of the work 

that we are doing together. Again, I think weather is going to disrupt that. 

Secondly, Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova, of course, I agree, and I 

agree on their importance and I agree that they are countries that, 

first off, want to move our way and, secondly, are countries that 

we need to succeed and we need to help with the tools, particularly 

take on corruption and to reinforce democratic governance there. 

With respect to Pakistan, our work is in line with the President’s 

South Asia strategy. So as you might know, all of our approaches 

are under review right now and I am not quite sure where it’s all 

going to end up, however. 

I think we all recognize that a stable peaceful Pakistan that contributes to stability and good neighbor relations would definitely be 

in our interests. And so we are looking for ways that we might be 

able to reinforce that, particularly helping to tackle some of the 

problems in the FATA regions. 

But, again, it’s under in review in line with the President’s directive on the South Asia strategy and we are watching and we will 

take part in that and we will see where it ends up and we will 

work with your office and let you know how that strategy is going. 

Chairman ROYCE. Lois Frankel of Florida. 

Ms. FRANKEL. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for this. 

33

Thank you, Ambassador Green, for your being here, for your 

service. I agree with the generals and our chairman, who say we 

cannot bomb our way into peace. So I appreciate what you do. 

I want to start by thanking you for addressing the sexual abuse 

at OXFAM, the USAID partner. Just to let you know, coincidentally, our bipartisan Women’s Caucus had a hearing this week on 

sexual harassment, talking about our country where we have plenty of it. 

The testimony was absolutely shocking how pervasive it is. I do 

want to tell you this. All the experts agreed that you must have 

leadership at the top to stop it. It’s an imperative, so thank you 

and keep that up. 

I think you have intimated and others have intimated that when 

women succeed the world succeeds, and, sadly, women are being 

abused and exploited in all parts of the world. Rape is a tool of 

war—child marriage, genital mutilation, human trafficking, child 

marriage. 

I thank you for your wise comments on education. I want to 

stress that access to health care is also a necessity and I am in a 

distraught—how do I say? 

I am distraught by what I see as our President’s misogynist policy and back-stepping policy on women’s health, which I believe is 

a looming disaster for women not only in this country but for all 

over the world—slashing international family planning assistance 

by half, cutting maternal health programs, expanding the inhumane global gag rule that forces health care providers to cut services for women, cutting off funding to the U.N. Population Fund. 

With the global gag rule, this administration has gone further 

than ever, and we know that past versions have resulted in the rise 

in maternal deaths and unwanted pregnancy. 

And so expanding this policy to all U.S. global health assistance, 

I mean, to—from millions to billions is going to be particularly 

hurtful to women and their participation in communities. 

I have a couple of questions for you along these lines. We talked 

to Secretary Tillerson. He was in front of our committee some time 

ago, and we asked him to share an analysis of this new global gag 

policy. 

We got a report. Basically, the report talked about implementation but did not get into at all the impact. And so we are looking 

to understand what will the impact be on terms of maternal mortality, HIV, nutrition services, with the expansion of this gag rule. 

In terms of the U.N. FPA works in 150 countries to provide critical services to women including maternal care to treating survivors of sexual violence and combating harmful practices like female genital mutilation. 

For example, in Jordan’s largest refugee camp we have seen 

more than 7,500 babies have been born without a single maternal 

death because—in a large part because of their work. 

And so my question to you on that front is are you or how are 

you redirecting USAID funding to make up for cutting back on the 

U.N. FPA? 

All right. That was a mouthful. I know you can answer it. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. Thanks for the questions. 

34

Let me begin, very briefly, by, again, reassuring you that sexual 

harassment and sexual misconduct will be something that I pay 

personal attention to and we are going to continue to make sure 

that our approach is unmistakable. 

Shortly after I arrived as administrator, we sent out an executive 

order globally to make that clear and I spoke a couple of weeks ago 

to all of our mission directors and a phone call made it clear, and 

also called on them to bring in our implementing partners in the 

field mission by mission to reinforce this message. So there is no 

doubt or uncertainty whatsoever. 

Ms. FRANKEL. And you’re going to have to keep that up. 

Ambassador GREEN. Absolutely. This is an ongoing process. This 

is not a one-off and we are going to—and we will be happy to brief 

you on some of the steps that are coming out of our new alliance 

that we are putting into place. 

Secondly, you’ve been very passionate and were in our private 

discussions on the topic of family planning, and as I assured you 

then and reassure you today the report that you have seen was a 

6-month report—the data we had as grants came up for renewal 

or supplementation, and the plan is for the end of this year when 

we will have much more information that we will, working closely 

with the State Department—they are the lead on this—have a 

more in-depth report and we will be happy to come and brief you, 

as we did with the first report. 

Then, finally, with respect to this budget, this budget—the fiscal 

year 2019 request has in it $302 million for family planning, which 

it did not request in the previous—in the fiscal year 2018 budget. 

So with protecting global life and global health in place, the new 

moneys have been provided. 

Ms. FRANKEL. What about the work of the U.N. Population 

Fund? 

Ambassador GREEN. Well, as you know, while we are not participating, other donors can and are. 

Ms. FRANKEL. I don’t think that’s a satisfactory answer, but 

thank you for it. 

Chairman ROYCE. Mr. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania. 

Mr. PERRY. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Ambassador, we are honored by your presence today. I come at 

this from the sense that democracy or Western-style democracies at 

some level decided by the host nation is the best circumstance for 

long-term and sustainable development and that those type of institutions provide best for citizens’ needs, decided in their countries, crucial for development. 

And through the aid that we provide the United States has an 

opportunity to promote those effective accountable and responsible 

democratic institutions and that in doing so also reduces the countries’ need for dependence on foreign and particularly U.S. foreign 

aid. 

With that, and the importance of democracy and good governance, I think we both recognize the appropriate level of oversight 

that’s necessary and promoting those things. 

I want to give you two examples. One is Macedonia, or some people say Makadonia. Over the past couple of years, USAID, the mission in Macedonia, has selected the Open Society Foundation as a 

35

major implementer and has awarded in February of last year the 

Open Society Foundation a $2.54 million contract for training in 

civic activism, mobilization, and civic engagement. 

Now, this raised concerns not only for me but members of this 

committee and others because there is a perceived strong belief 

that the Open Society Foundation has a strong political bias to the 

left. 

And while on the surface this might be benign, it doesn’t seem 

to me to be—should be the United States’ position to choose which 

political party in a country governs but that they have a strong 

democratic institution that works for their citizens. 

And at the time that they received this contract, Macedonia was 

facing a fairly contentious parliamentary election and our Ambassador came under scrutiny for displaying a strong leftist political 

bias against a legitimate party, the VMRO, and facilitated coalition 

negotiations between the main leftist party and the ethnic Albanian parties. 

The second one is Cambodia. When Hun Sen’s CPP narrowly won 

its victory in 2013 and then instituted a crackdown on opposition 

journalists and generally civic society organizations, to which on 

February of this year the administration was compelled to review 

assistance to Cambodia to ensure that taxpayer funds were not 

being used to support anti-democratic behavior. 

Based on this view and this review, the White House announced 

the suspension of several Treasury, USAID, and military assistance 

programs which were linked directly to the crackdown on democracy. 

And as you have said, and I would contend you are correct, foreign assistance dollars are precious. The people of the 4th District, 

which I am privileged to represent, in Pennsylvania and all across 

the country are due strong oversight and to make sure that their 

dollars are being spent wisely for the things that we believe in will 

help these countries do better for themselves and reduce the need 

for foreign assistance and, in turn, enhance our national security 

right here at home. 

So the questions, with all that backdrop, are can you speak to 

the steps your agency is taking to ensure that our aid regarding 

democracy and good governance is promoting Western democratic 

values? 

And to that, is there a process of selecting implementers for aid 

programs that has come under scrutiny under your tenureship, 

under your leadership? 

Do you foresee any substantive changes to the metrics or considerations to select implementers in your redesign? That would be 

one, and then during your tenure as administrator and beyond regarding the mission in Cambodia, have there been any instances 

where USAID has stopped or paused aid because it immediately 

and adversely contradicted Western democratic values? 

Ambassador GREEN. Great. Thank you. 

So a couple of responses. First off, with respect to Macedonia, the 

contract that you’re referring to was prior to my tenure. 

As you may know, I am an old democracy hand and so I believe 

fundamentally in democratic governance and the work around 

democratic governance and I don’t believe that sound democratic 

36

governance means picking winners and losers and getting involved 

in the process. 

Mr. PERRY. Sure. We are complaining about it in this country 

right now about foreign actors engaging in picking winners and losers in our country. 

Ambassador GREEN. So it is something that I know real well. I 

can tell you that our new Assistant Administrator for Europe and 

Eurasia. Brock Bierman was just there in Macedonia, reaching out, 

having meetings with the government, all the political parties and 

partners to ensure that there is parity in our approach. 

Secondly, with respect to Cambodia, first off, there are places 

where we have cut aid because of decisions that have been made. 

In the case of Cambodia, we did cut funding for certain things. 

We cut moneys to the National Election Commission. Obviously, 

with the type of election they had, that was inappropriate. 

Secondly, we cut funding to local officials who were chosen illegitimately by the policy decisions that were made. 

Third, we also shifted funding to reinforce civil society and to 

strengthen the role of civil society to have that voice of opposition, 

in light of the decisions. 

And so those are ways that I think it’s very clear what we stand 

for and how we strengthen the democratic ethos. 

It’s very important here, I think, as, you know, we believe in 

democratic governance, not just governance. Authoritarians are 

really good at governance. Not much else, but they may be good at 

governance. 

We all share the value of democratic citizen responsive governance and that’s what we reinforce. 

Mr. PERRY. Can you clarify the implementers and your metrics 

for choosing them? Will——

Chairman ROYCE. And maybe do that in writing. 

Ambassador GREEN. Okay. 

Mr. PERRY. That’ll be fine. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. That would be fine. 

Mr. PERRY. I yield, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. Okay. Thank you. We go to Mr. Joaquin Castro of Texas. 

Mr. CASTRO. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Ambassador 

Green, for your testimony today. 

Over the last few decades the character of foreign assistance has 

fundamentally transformed through innovation. So do you support 

innovation as a part of your redesign efforts at USAID? 

And let me ask you specifically about the Global Development 

Lab within USAID tasked with driving innovation, which has generated wonderful new ideas about approaching development challenges. 

Do you support the Global Development Lab and its efforts in 

driving innovation in foreign assistance? 

Ambassador GREEN. Yes, absolutely. Innovation is one of the 

driving parts of our redesign effort. With respect to the Global Development Lab, again, we are not done with our redesign. We are 

still getting approvals and will continue to brief your staff. 

We are essentially going to take the Global Development Lab in 

the way that it goes about its work, so investigating, testing, and 

37

then scaling up innovations, and we hope to institutionalize that 

throughout much of the agency. 

So that’s one of the things I’ve learned a great deal about. Innovation has to be at the heart of what we do. 

Mr. CASTRO. No, well, thank you for that. 

I guess a big part of my concern is that the President’s budget for fiscal year 2019 requested only $12.5 million for the Global Development Lab in comparison to its typical funding levels at above 

$100 million. Obviously, a very drastic cut in funding. 

So how would this significant decrease hinder USAID’s intention 

of driving innovation in foreign assistance? 

Ambassador GREEN. Well, first off, funding for the Global Development Lab has actually gone up and down since its creation. But 

what we are trying to do, again, as we go through this redesign 

process is make sure that we capture its lessons and use it more 

broadly. 

Secondly, the Global Development Lab is at the heart of our new 

approach to private sector engagement and a big part of how we 

are going about our business in that sense. 

So, traditionally, it’s the public-private partnership model which 

basically you craft a program and then you try to get the private 

sector to buy in or help. 

What we are doing, largely with the help and through the Global 

Development Lab, is reaching out to the private sector and saying, 

here’s a challenge we see—an opportunity that we see—we’d love 

your ideas. 

We made it easier for them to participate and share those ideas 

and then with the Global Development Lab—and, again, will be expanding its work—we are able to test those ideas and put together 

the best ideas forward and make the funding more nimble. 

So we are doing our best to take all that you’re pointing to in 

the Global Development Lab and raise it and extend it. 

Mr. CASTRO. So you’re basically crowd sourcing—putting out a 

challenge and crowd sourcing the best ideas to solve these development——

Ambassador GREEN. I have learned so much in my travels, seeing some of the inspirational innovations in places like India. It 

really is quite exciting and we have talked about how do you transition in the future. 

In other words, as countries advance in their development journey, at some point, like India, they don’t want food aid. They are 

not looking for money. They are looking for help, technical assistance around these innovations and that’s great. 

I mean, that’s a wonderful place for us to be, and using some of 

the lessons that we have learned here is at the core of it. 

Mr. CASTRO. And the chairman and the ranking member both 

mentioned our concern about any kind of decrease in foreign aid at 

this point, particularly as China is growing more ambitious in its 

alliances around the world and its own development work around 

the world. 

So what are your thoughts on American foreign assistance with 

a rising China out there? 

Ambassador GREEN. Well, twofold. One, we recognize we will 

never have enough money to take on every challenge——

38

Mr. CASTRO. Sure. 

Ambassador GREEN [continuing]. Humanitarian development. We 

all recognize that. But number two, what you’re pointing to is very 

real. The rise of China, of how they do development, of the way 

that they tie to development long-term indebtedness that we are 

seeing in a number of places, lines on extractives and natural resources. 

One thing that we have not, I think, as a government and, quite 

frankly, as a nation done well enough is making clear to the world 

the choices that they have. 

There is the China choice, which is the sweetener money up front 

and then the fine print and indebtedness. What we are trying to 

do with our assistance is to help countries build the ability to lead 

themselves. 

So what we want is self-reliance. We want countries to move 

from being recipients to partners to, hopefully, donors. That’s a 

clear choice. That’s how we are trying to orient all of our tools in 

our programs. 

Mr. CASTRO. Thank you. 

And then one last question that I’ll take in writing. The situation 

in Venezuela has grown more dire and there are about 1.5 million 

people who have basically fled their homes. 

In writing, the answer to the question what are we doing to assist in that situation. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Mr. Castro. 

We go to Dan Donovan of New York. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ambassador, I just have two questions. I’ll give them both to you 

because they may intertwine. Realizing there is always going to be 

disasters that are going to require our assistance throughout the 

globe, some of the things that we have addressed in the past in 

your experience, and I know you’ve only been there for 6 months 

but through your entire career, are there any of these areas that 

need our help have we found a solution for the people? 

Are there anything that we use our efforts so that we don’t have 

to go back and help people again because they are able to help 

themselves? 

And the other thing I wanted to ask you, and again, this might 

intertwine—I know this is a hearing concerning your budget for the 

next fiscal year. But since we are a legislative body, is there any 

legislation—is there anything that you would need from this committee to help you perform your duties more expediently, more efficiently, less costly? Anything that we can help you with? 

Ambassador GREEN. First off, with respect to the second question 

that you’ve asked, I will come and see you. I am sure that we will 

have many such suggestions and requests, and I really do seriously 

appreciate the offer. 

First, with respect to—I guess it’s progress—results. You know, 

where we have seen things—problems addressed, perhaps the best 

example I can give you from my tenure is my first visit overseas, 

which was to Ethiopia. 

Ethiopia is a country that’s going into its fourth consecutive year 

of drought and yet it has not fallen into full-scale famine, and part 

of the reason for that—we think a big part of it—is the fact that 

39

we have worked with local business leaders and governments to 

strengthen their resilience to withstand future shock. 

So we have livelihood programs, water technology that we share, 

and that’s a great story. So it’s the famine that hasn’t occurred—

knock on wood, hasn’t occurred yet. We made a real difference. 

Second, I take a look at the extraordinary advances that have 

been made in fighting malaria. The progress—the reduced mortality in Africa is incredible. 

I am a malaria survivor myself and when I lived in Kenya years 

ago malaria was a fact of life and someone died, it seemed, every 

other day from malaria. And yet, through in large part the generosity of the United States, but the technical assistance and the 

proven technologies make enormous strides. 

And so that has unleashed economic strength in many of the 

countries that have been afflicted by malaria for so long and given 

them real hope. So it’s the class time that you don’t lose. It’s the 

workdays and the business setting that you don’t lose because of 

the investments that have been made. 

So there are a number of great success stories. The challenge is 

that the humanitarian needs that we all see right now are so 

daunting that I think it sometimes overwhelms in the public’s 

mind the successes that we have seen and the progress that we 

have made. 

But I do appreciate your offer, by the way, and we will come to 

you. 

Mr. DONOVAN. As a follow-up, your success that you just described in Ethiopia, other successes, could they be applied elsewhere so that we help other countries, other nations from having 

to suffer through what they’ve suffered during their disasters? 

Ambassador GREEN. Absolutely. Among other things, when I was 

Ambassador in Tanzania, when I would meet with groups in the 

country I would almost always begin the same way. 

I’d say, look, I am not saying we have got all the answers. I am 

saying maybe we have made all the mistakes and you don’t have 

to make the mistakes that we have made along the way, and share 

our technology and including the tough lessons we have learned 

the hard way. 

USAID is built around learning. We are constantly learning. We 

are constantly doing after actions. We are constantly auditing ourselves. 

We partner closely with our OIG to make sure that we are doing 

things the most effective efficient way we can. We take the lessons 

to heart and we apply them. And more broadly, as we are pulling 

together our new metrics to measure how countries are proceeding 

in their own development journey a lot of that is based upon lesson 

sharing from other countries. 

So we are able to show a country the challenges that were taken 

on perhaps by a neighbor, and while it doesn’t necessarily mean an 

absolute, just simply replicate, they are important lessons and 

when they are lessons from a neighbor countries are very interested. When they don’t think it’s simply wealthy America coming 

in but other similar countries that have faced tough challenges, 

people are willing to learn. 

40

Everyone wants to be able to lead themselves. They believe in 

self-dignity and the sovereignty of leadership and that’s at the core 

of our approach. 

Mr. DONOVAN. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for your insight and 

for your service to our nation. 

I yield the remainder of my time, Mr. Chairman. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you. 

We go now to Mr. Ted Deutch of Florida. 

Mr. DEUTCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank you and 

Ranking Member Engel for your commitment to ensuring this committee provides appropriate oversight over the President’s budget. 

Thank you, Administrator Green, for being here, for the engagement you have with our committee. I know that you’ve spent your 

career committed to international development and you spoke so 

powerfully to your own personal experiences here today. 

That is why it’s so perplexing to see an international affairs 

budged coming from this administration that once again includes 

a 30 percent cut with a 33 percent cut to USAID’s budget. 

I can’t imagine that you believe that this is helpful to our interests around the world, and I understand that our dollars are not 

unlimited and that we need to prioritize. 

But this budget does not seem the prioritize some of the most important assistance and development projects that the U.S. has invested in for years, not because it helps people in countries around 

the world but because it’s in our own national security interests. 

A 37 percent cut to global health means programs to reduce the 

spread of dangerous diseases. A 34 percent cut to the humanitarian 

account used to address the dire humanitarian crises caused by 

war, famine, weather-related catastrophes. 

A 40 percent cut to the Middle East where economic development, education, and governance programs are critical to stability 

in a volatile region and preventing those affected from turning to 

terror groups who can offer a paycheck and food. 

We need to invest in soft power and we need to do it to complement our military power, and while we can defeat immediate 

threats on the battlefield, addressing the underlying concerns of 

terrorism is the way that we will combat terrorism in the longer 

term. 

I am deeply concerned that these cuts won’t just cause us to reduce current programming but will actually set back significant 

progress made over the past several decades. 

I know this administration wants to emphasize burden sharing. 

I absolutely believe that other countries must step up to address 

complex crises around the world. 

But given the administration’s disjointed foreign policy and 

distancing from traditional allies combined with dramatic cuts to 

our own assistance budget, I am concerned that we are losing our 

leverage and influence to ask other countries to support our national security priorities. 

I have one question for you about leverage but I want to start 

by going back to something you talked about earlier. 

You spoke about countering the Kremlin’s influence. Can you 

talk about your role in doing that? 

41

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you for the question. 

So my view has always been that one of the best ways to counter 

Kremlin influence is to build and broaden democratic governance 

in the surrounding region. 

The best way to push back on Vladimir Putin is success in 

Ukraine and helping the people of Ukraine achieve the democracy 

and freedoms to which they aspire as a model for the region. 

So that’s something that’s very important to me. So that’s our 

biggest approach in what we do. Secondly, working with state and 

others we work on building journalist capacity and take a look at 

ways to counter some of the misinformation that is part of the 

propaganda effort that comes out of the Kremlin. 

And then third, a big piece of it is energy independence. A lot 

of the nations in that region are held hostage in some ways by 

their energy dependence upon Moscow, and if we can strengthen 

energy independence and diversity of sources, that, I think is another way of countering the influence. 

Mr. DEUTCH. So, Administrator Green, I want to thank you for 

those answers. I want to thank you for your testimony today, and 

I agree with you. 

One sure way for us to lose leverage and influence with other 

countries is what we are discussing and what we saw here just this 

week. 

When the President of the United States calls Vladimir Putin to 

congratulate him on his victory and fails in that conversation to 

condemn the use of nerve agents used on British soil and refuses 

in that conversation to talk about Russia’s meddling in our own 

elections, it makes it harder—it reduces our leverage with our allies. 

And when asked about that last November and the President 

said, you’re not going to get in an argument—you’re going to start 

talking about Syria and Ukraine, which he didn’t do in this conversation, and then for the White House to say yesterday from the 

podium, we don’t get to dictate how other countries operate, Administrator Green, you are a model for how we can help dictate the 

way other countries operate. 

When you speak about targeting and responding to propaganda, 

when you talk about democratic governance and pushing back on 

Putin and Ukraine, when you talk very specifically about what we 

are telling South Sudan, what we are telling Venezuela, what we 

are telling Burma, the vitally important role that we have to play 

in advancing our values around the world and the White House 

press secretary said we don’t get to dictate how other countries operate, we have to stand for our values, Administrator Green, and 

I wish that the White House paid closer attention to the way that 

you are standing up for those values and advocating our position 

in the world and used your efforts as a model for the way that they 

and the President, in particular, might choose to behave. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. I’ll remind members also we have a meeting 

afterwards at 12:30. We have a lunch. The lunch is with UNHCR 

High Commissioner Grandi from Italy, and he’d like to discuss 

Bangladesh, South Sudan, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela with the membership here. 

42

So just a reminder at 12:30. 

We go now to Ann Wagner of Missouri. 

Ms. WAGNER. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for hosting this hearing and thank you, Ambassador Green, for taking the time to be 

here today and certainly for your outstanding service. 

My constituents and I care deeply about America’s leadership in 

humanitarian assistance and conflict prevention and USAID’s mission is very important to advancing human rights and democracy 

around the globe. 

Ambassador, last year I introduced H.R. 3030, the Elie Wiesel 

Genocide and Atrocities Prevention Act. This bill would authorize 

the Complex Crises Fund, which is currently managed by USAID’s 

Office of Program, Policy, and Management. 

I believe the fund has been useful in helping Embassies swiftly 

respond to conflict situations. Can you tell me how the Complex 

Crises dollars have been deployed in the past couple of years here? 

Ambassador GREEN. Well, first off, part of what you’re pointing 

to is that the greatest humanitarian challenges we seem to be facing today are manmade. 

Ms. WAGNER. Correct. 

Ambassador GREEN. And so we need to be able to respond to address those conditions that are leading to dislocation and to displacement. 

So I am looking here and it says that we are estimating that the 

money that—for fiscal year 2018, this year’s money, half of our 

funding will go toward six major emergencies, all conflict driven. 

In terms of your specific legislation, quite frankly, I haven’t had 

a chance to review it. I’ll get back to you on it to explore further. 

But I really appreciate your particular attention to this because it’s 

something that I think does go under the radar—does slide under 

the radar. 

So what I’ve got here is that currently it’s CAR—Central African 

Republic—Burkina Faso, and Burma——

Ms. WAGNER. Okay. 

Ambassador GREEN [continuing]. Are the three places where it is 

going. But, I mean, it could certainly be used more broadly. 

Ms. WAGNER. To that point, I will say that Burma is perpetuating ethnic cleansing, as we know—likely genocide of Rohingya 

Muslims in Rakhine State and is refusing entry to aid workers. 

How has USAID been navigating its mass atrocity response in 

Burma, sir? 

Ambassador GREEN. So to this point, a lot of it’s been humanitarian assistance for those who were displaced. Our portion of the 

work is internally displaced. 

Refugees are led by the State Department but we are working 

closely with them to make sure that there is assistance going to 

those in greatest need, and taking a look at some of the technological challenges to providing that assistance. 

I was planning on going myself to see firsthand. The trip was 

postponed because I was not able to get to some of the areas that 

I would need to get to in order to have a good sense of it. 

You know, obviously, at a minimum, we are calling upon Burma 

to provide unfettered access to the Rohingya communities so that 

we can take a look at the plight and see what can be done to lift 

43

some of the suffering, and also, quite frankly, it’s to begin to investigate the atrocities. 

I worry about what we are seeing, as you’ve pointed to, and it’s 

happening on our watch and the suffering——

Ms. WAGNER. It is, and I do believe it is—we are talking about 

genocide here. 

Ambassador GREEN. The suffering is enormous. 

Ms. WAGNER. And the suffering is enormous and aid workers are 

not being allowed entry. 

Ambassador GREEN. Right, and that’s the biggest and most important thing that we are calling upon. I mean, there is more that 

we need to do but unfettered immediate access is, obviously, crucial. 

Ms. WAGNER. Okay. Well, shifting gears here, in January USAID 

announced a 5-year program to help Thailand counter human trafficking, an issue I care very deeply about. 

We know that certain industries have been particularly egregious 

in this regard. How does USAID plan to work with Thailand to address forced labor in, specifically, the fishing and construction industries, Ambassador? 

Ambassador GREEN. Well, first off is you’re pointing to human 

trafficking is a global human rights tragedy. It’s also a fundamental development challenge. And so we look at it from both perspectives. 

You know, it is protection of victims, it is prosecution of perpetrators, it is prevention through awareness building, and it’s also services in terms of counseling and the tremendous suffering that these 

individuals go through and helping them to recover. 

So those are the most important steps that we do in our antitrafficking work. 

Ms. WAGNER. I have additional questions but I believe my time 

has expired, Mr. Chairman. 

I thank you very, very much, Ambassador, for your service and 

attention to these issues. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. And I am going to have to hold everybody to 

5 minutes now because Administrator Green has to leave at 12 

o’clock. 

Norma Torres of California. 

Ms. TORRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing. 

Ambassador Green, it’s really great to see you. Thank you for 

making yourself available to come before our committee. 

I truly enjoyed our meeting last week and, particularly, I really 

appreciate your comments and your commitment to ensuring that 

we continue to address and prioritize corruption in Central America and continue to work to support the work of CISG and the attorneys general in all three of the Northern Triangle countries. 

A lot of great things have been said here today. Many of them—

I took some notes so let me just try to go through this. 

You stated simply providing humanitarian assistance is not 

enough. I wholeheartedly agree with you on that. DRC and Venezuela area manmade issues, right—problems. 

Gender programs—I am for you, that gender programs also need 

to include reproductive health for the women, especially right now 

44

when the favorite weapon of war for terrorist groups across the 

world is rape. So this has to be a priority, moving forward. 

I am glad to hear that USAID is going to provide food and medical assistance in Colombia for the refugees there. I also want to 

encourage you to be focused on the TB outbreak in Venezuela, and 

as refugees begin to move into Colombia and Peru and some of the 

bordering—other bordering countries that we follow that and we 

continue to focus our work and ensuring that children in Venezuela 

are vaccinated and also children and people in these neighboring 

countries are also vaccinated. 

We can all agree—focusing back on Central America we can all 

agree that a secure and prosperous Central America is in our national interest. The rule of law in these countries is essential if we 

are going to reduce illegal immigration and keep drugs from entering our border. 

Addressing these problems at the root of the problem is a lot 

cheaper than dealing with the issues once it comes to our border, 

correct? 

So that’s why I just don’t understand why the budget calls for 

a 35 percent cut to foreign assistance in Central America. I want 

to talk to you a little bit about Honduras. 

I disagree—strongly disagree with the State Department’s decision to certify Honduras right after the election and to undermine 

the OAS secretary general’s call for new elections by recognizing 

Hernandez’s victory. 

Moving forward, I think it’s important to ensure that this doesn’t 

happen again, and I want to make sure that we focus or we put 

a greater focus on electoral reform. 

You have the capacity of helping to bring about those types of reforms. I don’t want you to leave here today without sending a clear 

message that your employees at USAID I highly regard them and 

I think that they are some of our best workers in public service at 

the Federal Government level. 

So I put a lot of credibility behind the work that you do abroad. 

This is an important issue if we want to prevent another Venezuela, another Nicaragua from happening in our hemisphere. 

I believe that we have many good partners in Central America 

with CICIH, MACCIH and the current attorneys general. The corruption in these governments is currently at its highest level and 

it has reached the highest points in their governments. 

The last two Presidents, for example, of Guatemala are in prison 

and prosecutors have asked to remove the current President’s immunity. 

The vice minister of foreign affairs in El Salvador is involved in 

financing of the FARC and the associated press recently reported 

that there is evidence that the head of the Honduran national police may have been caught up in drug trafficking. 

This is someone that went through U.S. background—U.S. background check but yet, again, he’s involved in drug trafficking. 

My time is up. 

Chairman ROYCE. Your time is up. But we will have it put by 

way of a question——

Ms. TORRES. Please. Thank you. 

45

Chairman ROYCE [continuing]. And we will go now to Tom Garrett of Virginia. 

Mr. GARRETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ambassador Green. I want to try to go relatively quickly. 

I think I’ve been as outspoken as anybody but I would certainly 

recognize the leadership of the chair and ranking member as it relates to a health foreign affairs budget that allows us to develop 

good relationships in the world and avert extremism and humanitarian crisis in advance. 

Having said that, I also want to be a good steward of the working American’s dollar. Can you speak to what you’re doing to ensure that the moneys that we allocate for things like school feeding 

are getting to the intended recipients and do so as quickly and concisely as you can because of time? Sorry, sir. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. So as concisely as I can, when 

it comes to the delivery of assistance, we look at digital tools to 

make sure that we have digital oversight. 

Secondly, we work closely with our Office of Inspector General to 

make sure that the money and mechanisms are appropriate. 

Third, we often use third party auditors in the programs that we 

have and the money that we spend, and we conduct constant oversight. 

The best way, I think, is as we pull our metrics together toward 

capacity building, it’s monitoring the metrics and the submetrics 

each step of the way. That, in some ways, will be the best measure 

to make sure the dollars are effectively spent and make sure that 

we are doing things in the way that produces results. 

Mr. GARRETT. Thank you, and I would hope that you would also 

continue to pursue innovative ways to ensure that accountability 

because it’s tough, and I really like what you’re doing and think 

that you’re well suited for the mission and admire your work and 

your wife’s work prior to even serving here in Congress and your 

work with anti-malarial efforts. 

But, again, we should always be striving to make sure that the 

dollars get where they are intended. 

It’s very interesting to me the paradigms for foreign aid. Obviously, there is no doubt that the Russians intermeddle all over the 

world. 

I would argue, and I’ve certainly gotten sort of confirmation of 

this from folks like the foreign ministers of the Baltic States who 

would know, that the Russian model is to undermine democracy, 

to make the world safe for oligarchs and dictators, right? 

And the Chinese model is to shower largesse on the ruling class 

and the moneyed elite as well as some infrastructure money that 

usually benefits China in the long term. 

The U.S. model, I think, is superior insofar as we try to inspire 

positive visions of the United States by virtue of helping working 

women and men across the world and creating hope because, generally, where there is hope we find a lack of extremism. 

Having said that, I’ve articulated before that I believe the U.S. 

model fails when we send money to those women and men on the 

ground who are in autocratic and dictatorial regimes because what 

we do is, unintentionally, perpetuate the bad—that is, that autocratic and dictatorial regime who is more inclined to align itself 

46

with China or Russia, by virtue of helping people on the ground, 

right? 

And so how can we focus on getting aid to the people in the most 

need and building good will toward the United States and our 

Western allies and creating and sustaining nations who wish to be 

reliable partners in the global community whilst facing a paradigm 

of Russian intermeddling to undermine the very confidence in the 

sorts of governments that we work best with and a Chinese model 

that essentially greases the palms of those who are in power? 

How do we do what we try to do and make sure that we are not 

essentially propping up these regimes by helping the most vulnerable and their populations, thus removing any potential pressure 

that might exist for change? 

Ambassador GREEN. More than I’ll be able to answer in the brief 

time. 

Mr. GARRETT. You’ve got 1 minute and 9 seconds. [Laughter.] 

Ambassador GREEN. So first off, we work through most every 

place through NGOs and civil society to make sure that the money 

doesn’t simply go to governments and through agencies but instead 

goes—and that’s a good way of helping the target. 

Secondly, I think part of our ability to counter the other models 

that are out there is better branding and describing of what we do 

do. 

And third, I think simply reaching out to the people, making 

clear that we want to help them help themselves. It’s the old American ethic that we have to constantly reinforce that sometimes I 

think we take for granted and don’t talk about nearly enough. 

Mr. GARRETT. I am going to interrupt because we have 20 seconds. 

So there is a marketing component in here, right? 

Ambassador GREEN. Absolutely. 

Mr. GARRETT. And we will do a great job with putting USAID 

and product—or from the people of the United States on the food 

bags, et cetera. 

Are we working on sort of trying to expand that concept because 

it’s really and truly—I hate this term because from whence it 

arises—hearts and minds game? 

Ambassador GREEN. Yes, absolutely. That is a big goal of ours. 

Mr. GARRETT. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROYCE. And that was a very effective way to communicate that concept in 5 minutes. 

We go to Brad Schneider of Illinois. 

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Thank you, and Mr. Green—Ambassador Green, 

thank you for being here and thank you for taking the leadership 

in the work you’re doing. 

U.S. foreign assistance programs are critical to advancing stability and growing the economies of developing countries which are 

vital to U.S. national interests and can help avoid costlier conflicts. 

As former Defense Secretary Robert Gates noted, development 

contributes to stability. It contributes to better governance, and if 

you are able to do these things and you’re able to do them in a focused and sustainable way then it may be unnecessary for us to 

send soldiers. 

47

One hundred and fifty one retired generals and admirals recently 

sent a letter to Congress reinforcing their strong conviction that 

elevating and strengthening diplomacy and development alongside 

defense is critical to keeping America safe. 

They were followed by over 1,200 veterans from all branches of 

the military in all 50 states who wrote to Congress calling for 

strong resources for diplomacy and development and to ensure that 

‘‘We only send our brothers and sisters in uniform into harm’s way 

as a last resort.’’

I’d like to insert these two letters for the record. 

Thank you. 

I’ve always said that the national security of the United States 

relies on what I refer to as a three-legged stool—diplomacy, development, and defense. 

If you take away one leg of the stool you destabilize the others 

and our national security. 

My first question for you is how do you view the roles of diplomacy and development in ensuring the national security of the 

United States? 

Ambassador GREEN. A number of ways. 

First off, we are a large part of the national security strategy 

that’s been published. We help to take on the conditions that can 

easily be exploited by extremists—part of our work in preventing 

violent extremism. 

Secondly, we tackle conditions that could lead to global 

pandemics and then try to attack them at their source. 

Third, in places where we have seen success on the battlefield—

places like northern Iraq and in Syria, we work very closely hand 

in glove with DOD to help stabilize those regions, restore essential 

services so that they can begin to do the hard work of repairing 

their communities and their leadership. 

We have 26 USAID staff who are at the Pentagon, the combatant 

commands, to make sure that we are all pulling closely, that we 

are each tapping each other’s capacity. 

Mr. SCHNEIDER. And just because of time—so the next question 

is do you share Secretary Gates’ view and other leaders that investing in diplomacy and development is critical and necessary to advance our security interests? 

Ambassador GREEN. I do, and it’s part of the national security 

strategy. 

Mr. SCHNEIDER. Great. Thank you. 

Secretary Mattis recently said that America has two fundamental powers—the power of intimidation and the power of inspiration. 

Yet, the steep budget cuts proposed for USAID, which plays such 

a critical role in carrying out the power of inspiration, I believe 

failed to recognize this philosophy. 

Two thoughts here—do you agree that the best way to fight extremism and defend America’s national security is through a combination of both hard and soft power? 

And does this administration’s fiscal year 2019 budget request 

provide adequate funding to address the challenges we face around 

the globe? 

48

Ambassador GREEN. So the answer to the first part of that is yes, 

and to the second piece of it, it is as I’ve said. We will never have 

enough resources to take on every challenge. We will never have 

enough resources to exploit every opportunity. 

But we think that we can stretch these dollars as far as they can 

go and I do think that we can continue to pursue this mission that 

you’ve laid out through a combination of working with the security 

community, working with the private sector, making sure that we 

are prioritizing the right way. 

So those are the measures we are trying to take to make these 

dollars go as far as they can. 

Mr. SCHNEIDER. I hear what you’re saying, but how do we turn 

to other countries and say, you need to do more while, by all appearances, we are sending the message that at the same time we 

are trying to do less? 

Ambassador GREEN. Well, I will say we are still by far the 

world’s leader when it comes to humanitarian assistance and, secondly, the good news is, through, I think, our example and our diplomacy we are seeing other countries do more. 

Germany is doing more. Japan is doing more. South Korea has 

recently ramped up and said that it will double its ODA level—I 

think they are currently 12th—by 2020. Again, I don’t want to pretend as though this is going to take care of all the needs that are 

out there. 

But I think you are seeing more and more of our allies and 

friends contributing to the cause. 

Mr. SCHNEIDER. And I think that’s important to continue to push 

them to do more. But I think at the same time we need to continue 

our leadership. 

And I have just a little time and I’ll submit this last question for 

an answer in writing. But I do want to touch on our American aid 

workers serving our nation throughout the globe. 

They are at the front lines. I had the pleasure this year of having 

a USAID Foreign Service officer in my office as a fellow. It was extraordinary. 

They are putting themselves out on behalf of our nation, oftentimes in places far afield and close to harm, and we need to make 

sure we give them the support they need. 

And I’ll submit a question for the record. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. And we go to Mr. Ted Yoho of Florida. 

Mr. YOHO. Ambassador Green, thank you for being here and sitting here all this time. And I too want to commend you and ditto 

everything everybody else said and for taking Eddy under your tutelage, and don’t let him corrupt you on these things called pokey 

sticks. [Laughter.] 

It’s a private joke between he and I, but he’ll get you on those. 

I want to talk to you about foreign aid. You know, we all look 

at it differently. It’s in the eye of the beholder, and I came up here 

one of those ones wanting to get rid of it. 

But I was ignorant then. I’ve become more learned now and we 

look at it from a humanitarian, hunger, health care, human rights, 

educating people—we look at it differently and we realize that we 

49

may not like all of it but there are parts of it that are essential 

that we can’t do without. 

It’s kind of like the wildlife trafficking. You know, some people 

want to save the animals. Other people want to prevent the trafficking and using that money for ISIS and other bad things. 

And so with that, the President’s budget calls for a creation of 

a new development finance institution that helps use more modern 

tools. 

How will the new development finance institution support the 

goal of transitioning donor countries off U.S. assistance, and our 

whole goal is to move from aid to trade is what we want to do and 

get countries on that. 

What’s your thoughts on a new development finance institution? 

Ambassador GREEN. Great. Thank you, Congressman, and 

thanks for championing this cause. 

You know, I have called for a new DFI, whatever name we’d use, 

for about 10 years. I think it’s an important tool in the toolbox and 

we have certainly seen it in other countries. 

I know the administration has not yet taken a formal position on 

the legislation. We are in the interagency process. But I certainly 

support the goals, the concept. 

We want to move toward private enterprise-driven development. 

We recognize that countries are in different places in their journey 

to self-reliance. 

There are some that are ready for a transition. They are ready 

for a conversation. They want to be self-reliant. We want them to 

be self-reliant. 

In most cases, what they are looking for is technical assistance 

to help them catalyze private investments. There are other countries that are a long way off and we recognize that it’ll be a while 

before they get there. 

But helping each country on their journey, which means talking 

about steps that, in our experience, need to be taken and also helping them by looking at metrics to prioritize those capacities that we 

need to help them build is all part of it. 

But I think the tools of a DFI are important. I think it can help 

stimulate growth. 

Mr. YOHO. I do too, and I think that’s something that’s been lacking for that transition. And as you talked in your opening statement here, U.S. development finance institutions will only succeed 

through strong institutional linkages with USAID. 

What kind of linkages are you talking or referring to? Can you 

be more specific? 

Ambassador GREEN. Well, as I’ve looked at the models that are 

out there, most recently what China announced, they have different models for integrating development and pulling it together. 

To me, the important part of this is integration as close to the 

ground as you can get it because that’s, obviously, where development work is done. 

So it’s looking at conditions on the ground, opportunities on the 

ground, and making sure that’s integrated into, again, the DFI 

process in crafting investable bankable deals and transactions. 

50

So that’s where I think the linkages are probably best put. 

Again, there are different models to it. But as we have been I look 

forward to working with you on this. 

Mr. YOHO. I do too, and I look forward to working with you, and 

the name of the act is the BUILD Act, which is Better Utilization 

of Investments Leading to Development. 

Bipartisan legislation has been introduced which would make 

you in your current position—I don’t want to put you on the spot—

as the vice chairman of the board. Would this help ensure closer 

ties between DFI and USAID to accomplish our nation’s goals? 

Ambassador GREEN. Again, the position—the administration has 

not yet taken a formal position. But as I’ve said, I believe in a DFI 

and I think integration is a good thing and will help us all be more 

effective. 

Mr. YOHO. Okay. And the last thing—and you brought this up 

and it’s been talked about, the number of refugees in the world we 

have not seen I don’t think ever. 

Seventy million refugees displaced—that’s 1 percent of our world 

population of 7 billion, and we have got to be able to get in there 

and, like you said, most of these people want to go back to Raqqa—

the ones you talked to. 

If we don’t intervene in a positive way, they are a breeding 

ground for ISIS. It’s like one cell of a tumor left can be detrimental. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Brad Sherman of California. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Administrator Green, you’re engaged in what I 

think is the most important work our Government does. You help 

the poorest in the world. 

You create conditions that will hopefully lead to democracy for 

some of the most unfree in the world, and I think dollar for dollar 

you do more for American national security than any other element 

of our foreign policy. 

We spend, roughly, 1⁄5 of 1 percent of our GDP on development 

aid. When you poll Americans, sometimes they think we spend 25, 

50 percent of the Federal budget. 

I would propose that we go to the people and say, let’s spend only 1⁄4 of 1 percent of America’s GDP and that, of course, would be 

viewed as a limitation by most and an increase by those of us in 

this room. 

Now, you’re urging other countries to do more. You should urge 

America to do more and, of course, when the administration urges 

a one-third cut in our development budget that does not help us. 

But you should urge Americans to do more because we are doing 

far less than other developed democracies. Sweden does 1.4 percent 

of their GDP, Norway 1 percent, Great Britain .7 percent. We are 

doing .2 percent of our GDP. 

But then you should also urge those other countries to do more 

because they are not burdened by the national security and defense 

expenditures. So they can spend another 4 percent of their GDP on 

foreign aid. Or push it both ways. 

And looking at our national security budget, we spend, roughly, 

5 percent, if you factor in the cost of pensions, veterans assistance, 

the other things we do to reward those who put their lives on the 

line. 

51

Compare that to our aid budget and, of course, as others have 

mentioned, you have the letter from 120 flag officers urging a robust expenditure on foreign aid. 

That’s just three- and four-star flag officers. If they had included 

two-star and one-star, it would have been a much longer signature 

page. 

And of course, we are all familiar with what the Secretary of Defense said about the importance of spending money on your work 

so that we don’t have to buy him more bullets. 

As to particular expenditures, I think you might have been in 

this room up here when I’ve urged your predecessors to buy textbooks for elementary school, first, because where parents have to 

pay for those textbooks either the kids may not go to school, they 

may not have textbooks, or they may be sent to madrassas where 

the books are free. 

Second, because that gives us some control over content—I am 

not saying that’s to meet the San Francisco politically correct 

standards for us to print the textbook. 

And finally, because in a society where we are providing free 

textbooks, who’s going to steal the textbooks? It’s a lot easier to 

steal other things. 

As to particular regions I know you’re aware that Armenia is 

blockaded by Turkey and Azerbaijan and deserves our aid. That 

Nagorno-Karabakh, now the Republic of Artsakh is beleaguered 

and surrounded. And that the southern part of the Republic of 

Georgia, the region of—and I am going to mispronounce this—

Samtskhe-Javakheti, and I believe you’ve visited Georgia so you 

probably pronounce it better than I can—is an area that deserves 

a substantial portion of our assistance and I believe many of our 

colleagues have signed a letter to that effect. 

I hope you would focus on Sindh in Pakistan, and the Rohingya 

in Burma and Bangladesh. And I do have one question, believe it 

or not, and that is your budget provides for a 50 percent cut in 

international family planning. 

That’s expected to lead to 3.7 million unintended pregnancies, 1.6 

million additional abortions, and over 7,000 additional maternal 

deaths. 

The budget mentions only one kind of family planning, which is 

fertility awareness, which the CDC has identified as the least effective method. 

Can you assure us that USAID will support a robust family planning effort, which will make available to women the modern contraceptive methods that they rely on? 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you for the question. I’ll respond to 

you in writing because I want to make sure that I am precise in 

what we are currently doing and what we are able to do. 

Chairman ROYCE. And the time has expired. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I look forward to your answer in writing and 

hopefully you’ll also address some of the other elements that I mentioned as well. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. We go to Adriano Espaillat from New York. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

52

Thank you, Administrator Green, for being here. Much has been 

said about the international affairs budget and that is just 1 percent of the total budget and for the USAID it’s 1⁄2 of 1 percent of 

the Federal budget. 

I would like to enter, Mr. Chairman, into the record the comments made by retired Army Chief of Staff General George W. 

Casey, Jr. He commented that the 30 percent proposed cut to the 

State Department and the USAID budget reflects a strategic and 

budget mismatch. 

If we take our eye off the ball, China and Russia will fill that 

void. In fact, China is already investing, building bridges and tunnels and dams and they have a very vigorous presence in Central 

and South America, outflanking Taiwan and, of course, making 

their presence there really strong. 

We have already seen them expand both their humanitarian aid 

and financial investment in the region, further strengthening economic relationships including with Caribbean governments. 

Now, in fact, I’d like to submit to the belief that it has been our 

negligence in Central, South America, and the Caribbean that has 

created the leadership vacuum allowing governments like the 

Maduro regime to emerge and trample over democracy and human 

rights. 

We, frankly, have turned our face and that has festered and it 

has dramatically impacted the region. The Caribbean is one of our 

closest allies in terms of trade and proximity. We call it a third border. 

Now, while currently immigrants send back to their countries of 

origin over 700—I am sorry, $574 billion in remittances. 

I propose that perhaps we can take a portion of the fees and 

taxes that they pay on those remittances to dramatically help increase your budget at USAID because we just won’t be able to compete with China and Russian, and that is, unfortunately, while addressing Caribbean diplomats in early March 2018, the director of 

the Pan-American Health Organization, Dr. Carissa Etienne, identified key health priorities for the Caribbean nations with respect 

to communicable diseases. 

She stated that malaria—and you have identified—you have testified personal experience with that—tuberculosis and HIV present 

a significant threat to citizens in Caribbean nations. 

Yet, you tell us that you don’t have the tools—you don’t have the 

moneys to really invest in Central America, South America, and 

the Caribbean—our neighbors, the third border—while other countries like China and Russia are making a full court press to fill 

that leadership vacuum. 

Health experts in the region contend that Caribbean nations are 

ill equipped to treat public health crises that have been compounded by a historically devastating hurricane season. 

We have seen how that impacted the Caribbean recently, and 

today—today, as we sit here, Vice President Pence will be testifying before the OAS, basically pointing his finger at Venezuela for 

their lack of democracy—their rogue government, while yesterday 

the President commended Putin in his so-called reelection. 

53

In addition to not having moneys to help out this region, we are 

sending mixed messages to the region, and I think that is unfortunate. 

Lasting damage to both local and regional medical infrastructure 

has debilitated medical professionals as they attempt to resolve 

health concerns. 

Let me ask one question because I know my time is running out. 

You mentioned yesterday that you wanted to help rebuild the Caribbean countries in a more resilient way. 

Can you elaborate what you meant with this and how do you 

propose—were you going to increase substantially USAID’s budget? 

If you don’t have—we don’t have a penny to go on and we want 

to be the leaders of this hemisphere and we are just getting our 

candy eaten by other countries. It’s really sad that it has come to 

this state of affairs. 

Ambassador GREEN. Congressman, thank you, and quite frankly, 

thanks for your passion, and the fact that you are, I think, raising 

the profile of the challenge and the opportunity that is there in the 

Caribbean. 

In the devastation, the wake of the terrible hurricanes, we did 

respond immediately. We mobilized immediately a disaster assistance response team, provided 185 metric tons of relief supplies, $22 

million in humanitarian assistance together with DOD. 

And in fact, right now in Dominica we have a USAID-based disaster expert who is working to help enhance the capacity of the 

emergency operations center. 

We are also working with other donors, the private sector, and 

the World Bank to assess the long-term reconstruction needs. 

But beyond that, PAHO is a good partner of ours and we partner 

with them in a number of places, a number of ways. But you’re exactly right. I think it’s an area that I don’t think receives enough 

attention and I would love to sit down with you, get some of your 

ideas——

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Thank you. 

Ambassador GREEN [continuing]. See what we can do. It’s an important area. 

[Crosstalk.] 

Chairman ROYCE. Mr. David Cicilline from Rhode Island——

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE [continuing]. Is next in the queue. 

Mr. ESPAILLAT. Thank you. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Administrator. I want to associate myself with all of the remarks made by 

my colleagues about the importance of a robust development and 

assistance budget. 

And I’ll just say to you very directly that I see your role as not 

only executing a budget but being a forceful and passionate and effective voice for development and humanitarian assistance. 

You are appointed by the President but you serve the American 

people and I hope, although I’ve been a little disappointed you 

haven’t been public in your criticism of these proposed cuts. 

I am hoping that within the administration you are screaming 

loudly about the impact that these kinds of cuts would have on our 

54

national security and our leadership in the world, and I hope if 

you’re not you will continue to scream loudly. 

You mentioned, in response to Mr. Schneider’s question, that 

there were commitments being made to fill in some of the gaps in 

funding that the administration is proposing to cut. Can you tell 

me what commitments you received to date from other governments to fill in funding gaps? 

Ambassador GREEN. We receive, the world receives commitments 

at the pledging conferences around humanitarian challenges. There 

is one coming up. A $1.7 billion plan has been put forward. 

Mr. CICILLINE. No, I am talking about—I think you were suggesting that some of the cuts that are being proposed that somehow 

those programs were going to be replaced by funding from other 

governments. 

Ambassador GREEN. Oh, if I did I am—I didn’t mean to create 

that impression. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Okay. Thank you. I——

Ambassador GREEN. We work closely with them but not quite 

that close. 

Mr. CICILLINE. It has been reported this week that Turkey has 

captured the city of Afrin in northern Syria after carrying out a 2-

month attack against Kurdish forces and civilians. 

I am really concerned about the situation. I am attempting to get 

a briefing by the State Department but they apparently have other 

priorities and have not been able to do that or been willing to do 

it. 

So I’d be interested from the USAID perspective, can you tell us 

what’s happening on the ground there? Is USAID or any of our 

partners providing assistance? Do civilians have access to shelter 

and basic necessities? 

This is a very, very disturbing set of events. 

Ambassador GREEN. Thank you for the question. 

Obviously, I share your concern. With respect to what’s happening in Syria, we are limited in where we were able to work. We 

do not work—except for humanitarian assistance, which, as you 

know, we provide without reference to—solely based on need. 

In terms of our development assistance and stabilization work, 

we are not working in Assad-held areas. 

Mr. CICILLINE. So is there any humanitarian assistance going 

into Afrin at all or our allies or partners being allowed access into 

that area? 

Ambassador GREEN. I’ll have to get back to you on that because 

I am not quite sure about the security situation and our ability to 

be in these——

Mr. CICILLINE. I would very much appreciate that detailed briefing on this. I am attempting to raise this in every venue that I can. 

Ambassador GREEN. Raqqa is where we are working currently. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Next, Mr. Administrator, you spoke during your 

confirmation hearing last year that you renewed your commitment 

to LGBTI human rights work of USAID. 

And given the very high levels of discrimination and violence and 

continued criminalization that LGBTI people face in many parts of 

the world, could you tell us a little bit about what—how USAID is 

implementing these commitments on the ground day to day? 

55

Ambassador GREEN. Sure. I’ll give you two levels of it. 

First off, internally, obviously, our own workforce—inclusion and 

respect are core values of USAID. Made it clear the first week I 

was on the job and we continue to. 

Secondly, marginalized communities work including, obviously, 

marginalized LGBTI is part of our programming, ensuring that we 

are inclusive in all the programming that we do. 

Particularly on the democratic governance side, as I have said on 

many occasions, no country is a representative democracy if it isn’t 

listening to all of its people or tapping into all of its people for the 

answers and solutions that it needs. 

So it’s a core part of our work and will continue to be. 

Mr. CICILLINE. And finally, I was in Myanmar in November visiting the Rohingya population in the refugee camps in Bangladesh 

and then in Myanmar, and this is, as some of my colleagues have 

already referenced, a huge crisis. 

It’s a genocide. It’s been described as an ethnic cleansing. This 

is unspeakable violence. What are we doing to help the 

Bangladeshis with the refugee community that has—is in their 

country and assist in a safe dignified return, when appropriate, 

back to Myanmar? 

Ambassador GREEN. Sure. So first off, we have issued calls for 

immediate and unconditional access—humanitarian access to areas 

where the Rohingya currently are, whether it be on the 

Bangladeshi side of the border or in Burma, and that access has 

not been unconditional or open. 

So that’s the first and most important thing. We are providing 

humanitarian assistance. But, quite frankly, we need more information. We need to be able to get to these areas. 

I’ll be traveling there myself. I was supposed to go a couple of 

weeks ago but it was unclear because of conditions on the ground 

that I’d be able to and if you can’t it really isn’t of much good and 

much value. 

So it’s something that we are talking about every day. We are 

providing humanitarian assistance but we need to do much, much 

more than that and I share your deep, deep concerns about what 

is, obviously, happening—that which we can see and that which we 

cannot see. 

Mr. CICILLINE. Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Okay. We go to Tom Suozzi of New York. 

Mr. SUOZZI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Administrator for you and your team’s great work. You have such an incredible portfolio that you’re responsible for and it’s really remarkable the work that you do. I am excited about much of your testimony here today. 

I was especially excited about your efforts to go after the hybrid 

warfare of the Russians by building up energy companies in the 

Ukraine. I mean, it’s just such an important thing that we need to 

be doing. 

My question is specific to Afghanistan and Pakistan. But it really 

points to a general problem that we face throughout the whole of 

government and dealing with the rest of the world as we try and 

address these different problems. 

56

The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction 

has pointed out that we are still continuing to lose ground as far 

as the number of districts and as far as the population in Afghanistan and there is a clear military plan. There is a five-point plan 

the military has as far as clearing and holding different ground 

and they are succeeding in clearing and holding ground. 

But then comes the job of reconstruction and transition and it’s 

difficult to do in these environments because of the danger, obviously, and the terms of service and the money and the corruption 

and everything else that you have to deal with. 

I met recently with your assistant administrator for Pakistan 

and Afghanistan, Mr. Huger. Is it Huger or—Huger, and it really 

was a fantastic meeting and I am so impressed by him and he’s a 

very talented person—a great person to have on your team—and 

talked about the need to develop a comprehensive plan that is clear 

as to these are the limited goals that we have as far as the civilian 

side. 

Not only for USAID, because I see that you’re doing that in 

USAID and Mr. Huger started to talk about that plan that’ll be 

forthcoming for us to all hear about, but also coordinating with the 

many other government agencies in the United States Government 

as well as the U.N. or our other government partners—India, for 

example. I saw in your testimony that India was $3 billion and they are 

only the fifth largest contributor to Afghanistan and Pakistan. I’d 

like you to—in your answer to my question tell me who those other 

partners are that are above India and contributing to Afghanistan 

and Pakistan, if you know. 

But what are we doing—what can we do and how can we help 

you in helping to develop a comprehensive plan so that when India’s putting in money, when the U.N. is putting in money, when 

our other government partners are putting in money, when the 

DOJ is putting in money, the DEA is putting in money, the Pentagon’s putting in money, that we are all on the same page on the 

civilian side. 

I feel that we have a very clear game plan on the military side 

but the civilian side is more like a list instead of a plan because 

we are doing all these many wonderful things but they are not in 

a comprehensive plan. 

What can we do to encourage that comprehensive planning, certainly, for Afghanistan and Pakistan but for the rest of your agencies as well? 

Ambassador GREEN. Great question. 

So I could tell you first that John Huger is involved in the interagency with all of the other agencies as the South Asia strategy is 

fully developed and implemented so we are working very closely together, because you’re right, you can’t simply touch one piece of it. 

You’ll never get the results that you need to see—and working with 

numerous partners. 

I will get you a precise list. I want to make sure I get it right 

in terms of who those top contributors are. What I——

Mr. SUOZZI. You know, what I’d really love to see is a complete 

list of everybody who’s putting in money outside of Afghanistan 

into Afghanistan. 

57

That would be very—you know, our Government agencies as well 

as the other governments that are doing it—a comprehensive list. 

It must be hundreds of groups that are putting in money into Afghanistan. 

But they are all being put in little pieces instead of into one comprehensive plan. This is our five-point plan of the things we need 

to encourage and this one fits into that one and this one fits into 

that one. 

So a list of all the government agencies that are—if you can do 

that kind of thing. Does that list, do you think, exist? 

Ambassador GREEN. We will—we will perhaps create it. We will 

endeavor to provide that list for you. 

The work of the Indian Government in NGOs is also quite inspiring and I’ve seen some of it—the work that Indian cooperatives are 

doing to foster women’s entrepreneurship in Afghanistan where 

they actually bring Afghan business women out, do training, experience, teach them business planning, and then bring them back in. 

So there are a lot of—we will pull them together——

Mr. SUOZZI. I just want to say, I know there is so many great 

things that USAID is doing and so many great things even the 

Pentagon’s doing and DOJ and DEA and everybody’s doing all 

these little things that are great or big things that are great. 

It’s the idea of putting them all into a comprehensive plan so 

that we say okay, our 5-year goal is we want to have this many 

power plants up and running—we are going to have this many 

teachers—we are going to have this many judges trained, this 

many prosecutors, this many poppy seeds—poppy plants eradicated, this many—so we need to have a comprehensive plan. This 

is from my experience as a mayor and a county executive. I just 

want to see it in more of a plan overall. 

You’re doing great work and I want to encourage you in the great 

work that you and your team do. Thank you. 

Chairman ROYCE. We go now to Dina Titus of Nevada. 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Administrator, for giving us a few more minutes. 

I have great respect for USAID. I think the work you do is amazing. I’ve seen some of it as a member of the House Democracy Partnership, working with our—the Democratic equivalent of that. 

And that’s why it distresses me so much to see these cuts. I 

mean, you mentioned that this year’s request is $1.3 billion more 

but that’s really disingenuous because it still represents a drastic 

33 percent cut. 

In addition to some of the cuts that have been mentioned, I’d also 

like to point out 11 percent cut to the HIV program, 31 percent cut 

to the Global Fund contribution, 50 percent cut to international 

family planning, 51 percent cut to basic education, 72 percent cut 

to biodiversity programs. I think it’s a travesty. 

I agree with a lot of the comments that have been made about 

individual places but I’d like to talk about groups that could be 

found in all of these places that are especially vulnerable. 

Mr. Cicilline mentioned the LGBT community. I’d like to follow 

up on that. Your answer was kind of a general some of my best 

friends are gay kind of answer. I’d like if you could give us some 

more specifics about just what you’re doing, especially in light of 

58

the fact that the State Department is now going to scale back its 

reporting, according to some things that we have heard on the—

about the abuse of rights of LGBT individuals so in that human 

rights report how does that inform your policymaking and what 

specifically are you doing. You can send me that in writing. 

But the other group I want to ask about are the disabled. The 

United States does an amazing job for the disabled. I think our 

Disability Act is just the best in the world. 

But you have even recognized yourself and USAID’s disability 

policy says that we are more effective when over 1 billion—that’s 

about 15 percent of the world’s population—who are living with 

some form of disability are included in our programming. 

Unfortunately, this budget eliminates all the funding once again 

for the special protection and assistance needs of survivors program—the SPANS program. 

That’s the wheelchair program that we have tried to encourage 

the use of wheelchairs and access for wheelchairs. It’s the Leahy 

War Victims Fund which helps with survivors of land mines and 

other war tragedies. It’s the vaccination program that comes in the 

wake of war that’s been eliminated because of upheaval. 

Tell me what you’re going to do to help the disabled and how you 

deal with just eliminating that program. 

Ambassador GREEN. We will get you a complete list, Congresswoman. We have programs all around the world that work in this 

area and will continue to. 

We will be happy to bring you the results in some of the programs we are doing and the places where we are doing it. It’s a 

big part of our work. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, I hope so. But I don’t know how it can continue 

if you’re going to just eliminate that program. I’ll look forward to 

getting that list and I’ll be back in touch with you because I think 

eliminating programs in both of these two areas for both of these 

population groups is a mistake. 

Ambassador GREEN. I don’t believe that’s what we are doing. 

Ms. TITUS. Okay. 

Ambassador GREEN. Again, these continue to be vitally important programs to us and we have been working for years in these 

programs and will continue to. 

Ms. TITUS. And you can do that with this kind of drastic cut in 

the funding? 

Ambassador GREEN. My job is to make this money go as far as 

it possibly can. My job is to make sure that our investments are 

effective, looking at the metrics that we have to help countries 

build their capacity, take on these challenges as well, which is 

what they want, obviously, what we want. 

Yes, these are important programs to us—important areas. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, thank you, and I look forward to getting that 

information. 

I yield back. 

Chairman ROYCE. Thank you, Congresswoman Titus. 

Well, I wanted to just say the Office of Personnel Management 

had announced today that most government buildings were closed. 

59

So I especially wanted and—because of the snowstorm that started this morning—I just wanted to thank Administrator Green for 

braving that snowstorm and coming here to be with us today. 

This committee takes very seriously its responsibility of oversight. And so Ambassador, your commitment to transparency and 

accountability is especially appreciated by us. 

And let me also say that from your early work spearheading 

PEPFAR while you were in Congress to championing democracy 

while you were with IRI to your efforts serving as Ambassador in 

Tanzania as well as your work on the Millennium Challenge, there 

is no question that you are the right person to lead USAID and assure that our assistance advances our values and our interests, a 

point that my colleague across the aisle made as well. 

And so I thank you again, and this meeting stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:22 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(61)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

62

f


29388n.eps

FlJLL COMMITTEE HEARING NOTICE 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENT A TTVES 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6128 

Edward R. Royce (R-CA), Chairman 

March 21,2018 

TO: MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

You are respectfully requested to attend an OPEN hearing of the Committee on Foreign 

Affairs to be held in Room 2172 of the Rayburn House Office Building (and available live on the 

Committee website at http//www.ForeignAfTairs.house.gov): 

DATE: 

TIME: 

SUBJECT: 

WITNESS: 

Wednesday, March 21, 2018 

9:30a.m. 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

The Honorable Mark Green 

Administrator 

U.S. Agency for International Development 

By Direction of the Chairman 
63


29388m-1.eps

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

MINUTES OF FULL COMMITTEE HEARlNG 

Day Wednesday Date, __ __::_0::::312=1:..::12:.::0c:l.::8 ___ Room ___ :::.2.:..l:..:72=----

Starting Time 9:30 Ail![ _Ending Time 12:22 Pllf 

Rece.~ses L_to __ ) L_to __ ) L_to__) ( __ to __ ) L_to __ ) L_lo __ ) 

Presiding Member(s) 

Chab·man Edward R. Royce 

Clteck all ~ftlte.foliowinf? tlrat apply: 

Open Session fZl Executive (closed) Session D Televised fZl 

TITLE OF HEARING: 

The FY 2019 Foreig11 A.•si.vtance Budget 

COMlVUTTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: 

See attached. 

NON-COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: 

NIA 

Elcctronieally Recorded (taped) 0 

Stenographic Record 0 

HEARING WITNESSES: Same as meeting nolice atiaclted? Yes !!J NoD 

(lj "no", please list below and include tille, agency, department, or organization.) 

STATEMENTS FOR THE RECORD: (List any statements suhmitledfor the record.) 

JP'R - Represmtatives Brad Schneider and Adriano Espaillat 

SFR- Representative Gerry Connolly 

QFR- Chairman Edward R. Royce, Ranking lffember Eliot Engel and Representatives Dana Rohrabacher, 

Brad Sherman, Gerry Connolly, David Cicilline, Ami Bera, and Brad Schneider 

TIME SCHEDULED TO RECONVENE ___ _ 

or 

TIME AD.JOURN:ED 12:22 PM 
64

f


29388m-2.eps

PRESEc'vT 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

Fuu COMMIITHF H~_AJIING 

]\,[EMBER PRESENT MEMBER 

Edward R. Royce, CA X EliotL EngeL NY 

Christopher H. Smith. NJ X Brad Sherman. CA 

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, FL X Gregory W. Meeks, NY 

Dana Rohmbacher. CA Albia Sires. NJ 

Steve Chabot. OH X Gerald E. Connolly, VA 

Joe Wilson. SC X Theodore E. Deutch. FL 

Michael T. McCaul, TX X Karen Bass, CA 

Ted Poe, TX X William Keating, MA 

Darrell Issa, CA X David Cicillinc. RJ 

Tom Marino, PA X Ami Bem.CA 

Mo Brooks. AL X Lois F rankcL FL 

Paul Cook. CA T ulsi Gabbard, HI 

Scott Perry. PA X Joaquin Castro, TX 

Ron DeSantis. FL Robin Kelly. TL 

Mark Meadows, NC Brendan Boyle. P A 

Ted Yoho. FL X Dina Titus. NV 

Adan1 Kinzinger,TL X Nonna Torres, CA 

Lee Zeldin. NY X Brad Schneider, IL 

Dan Donovan, NY X Tom Suozzi. NY 

James F. Sensenbrem1er. Jr., WI X Adriano Espaillat. NY 

Ann Wagner, MO X Ted Lieu, CA 

Brian J. Mast. FL 

Brian K. Fitzpatrick, PA 

Francis Rooney, FL 

Thomas A. Garrett. Jr.. VA 

John Curtis. UT 
65

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, 

A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS


29388b-1.eps
66


29388b-2.eps

Admiral Thad W. Allen, USCG (Ret.) 

Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard ('06-'JO) 

Vice Admiral Michael L. Bowman. USN (Ret.) 

Commander, Naval Air Force. U.S. Pacific Fleet ('98-'00) 

Admiral FrankL. Bowman. USN (Ret.) 

Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion ('96-'04) 

Admiral Gregory G. Johnson, USN (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe 

Commander in Chief Allied Forces Southern Europe ('01-'04) 

Admiral Jerome L. Johnson, USN (Ret) 

Vice ChiefofNaval Operations ('90-'92) 

General Keith B. Alexander, USA (Ret.) 

Director, National Security Agency ('05-'14) 

Commander. U.S. Cyber Command(' 10-'14) 

Ll. General EdV\ard G. Anderson Ill. USA (Ret.) 

Vice Commander, U.S. Element, North American Aerospace Defense Command 

Deputy Commander. U.S. Northern Command ('02-'04) 

Lt. General Thomas L. Baptiste, USAF (Ret.) 

Deputy Chairman, NATO Military Committee ('04-'07) 

Lt. General Michael D. Barbero. USA (Ret.) 

Director, Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization(' II-· 13) 

Ll General Jared L. Bates, USA (Ret.) 

Inspector General, U.S. Army ('95--97) 

Ll General John M. (Mick) Bednarek, USA (Ret) 

Chief, Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq ('13-'15) 

Ll. General Ronald R. Blanck. USA (Ret.) 

Surgeon General of the United States Army ('96-'00) 

Ll. General Harold Blot, USMC (Ret) 

Deputy Chief of Staff for Aviation ('94-'96) 

Lt. General H. Steven Blum, USA (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander, U.S. Northern Command 

Vice Commander, U.S. Element, U.S. North American Aerospace Defense Command ('09-' 10) 

Lt. General Steven W. Boutelle, USA (Ret.) 

Chieflnformation Officer and G6, United States Army ('03-'07) 

General Charles G. Boyd, USAF (Ret) 

Deputy Commander in Chief, U.S. European Command ('92-'95) 
67


29388b-3.eps

General Bryan Doug Brown, USA (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Special Operations Command C03-'07) 

General Arthur E. Brown, Jr., USA (Ret.) 

Vice Chief ofStalT of the United Stales Army ('87--89) 

Lt. General John H. Campbell, USAF (Ret.) 

Associate Director of Centrallntclligcncc for Military Support. Centrallntclligcncc Agency ('00-'03) 

General Bruce Carlson, USAF (Ret.) 

Director, National Reconnaissance 0±1lcc ('09-'12) 

General George W. Casey. Jr., USA (Ret.) 

Chief ofSta!I of the United States Army ('07--11) 

Lt. General John G. Castellaw, USMC (Ret.) 

Deputy Commandant for Programs and Resources ('07-'08) 

Lt. General Dennis D. Cavin. USA (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Army Accessions Command ('02-'04) 

General Peter W. Chiarelli, USA (Ret.) 

Vice Chief of Staff. U.S. Anny ('08--12) 

Lt. General Daniel W. Christman, USA (Ret.) 

Superintendent, United States Military Academy ('96-'01) 

Lt. General George R. Christmas. USMC (Ret.) 

Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower and Reserve Affairs ('94-'96) 

General Wesley K. Clark, USA (Ret.) 

Supreme Allied Commander, Europe ('97-'00) 

Admiral Vern Clark. USN (Ret.) 

ChiefofNaval Operations ('00-'05) 

Ll. General Charles T. Cleveland. USA (Ret.) 

Commanding General, U.S. Army Special Operations Command C 12-- 15) 

General Richard A. "'Dick"' Cody, USA (Ret.) 

Vice Chief of Staff, United States Anny ('04-'08) 

General James T. Conway, USMC (Ret.) 

Commandant, U.S Marine Corps ('06-' I 0) 

General Donald G. Coole USAF (Ret.) 

Commander, Air Education and Training Command, CO 1-'05) 

General Jolm D.W. Corley. USAF (Ret.) 

Commander, Air Combat Command ('07-'09) 
68


29388b-4.eps

General Bantz J. Craddock, USA (Ret) 

Commander, U.S. European Command 

NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe COG-'09) 

Vice Admiral Lewis W. Crenshaw, Jr., USN (Ret.) 

Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Resources, Requirements, and Assessments C04-'07) 

Lt. General John ''Mark'' M. Curran_ USA (Ret.) 

Deputy Commanding General Futures, U.S. Anny Training and Doctrine Command C03-'07) 

Lt. General Robert R Dierker, USAF (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander, U.S. Pacific Command C02- '04) 

Admiral Kirkland H. Donald, USN (Ret.) 

Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion C04-'12) 

Lt General James M. Dubik, USA (Ret) 

Commander, Multi National Security Transition Command and NATO Training Mission-Iraq ('07-'08) 

Lt General Kenneth E. Eickmann, USAF (Ret) 

Commander_ Aeronautical Systems Center, U.S. Air Force C96-'98) 

Admiral James 0. Ellis_ Jr., USN (Ret) 

Commander_ U.S. Strategic Connnand ('02-'04) 

Vice Admiral Malcolm L Fages, USN (Ret.) 

Deputy Chairman, NATO Military Committee ('01-'04) 

Admiral William J. Fallon, USN (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Central Command ('07-'08) 

Admiral Thomas B. Fargo, USN (Ret) 

Commander, U.S. Pacillc Command ('02-'05) 

Admiral Mark P. Fitzgerald, USN (Ret) 

Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe ('07-'10) and U.S. Naval Forces Africa ('09-'10) 

General Ronald R. Fogleman, USAF (Ret) 

ChicfofSta!Tofthe United States Air Force ('94-'97) 

General Douglas M. Fraser_ USAF (Ret) 

Commander, U.S. Southern Command ('09--12) 

Lt General Benjamin C. Freakley, USA (Ret) 

Commander, U.S. Army Accessions Command ('07-'12) 

General Carlton W Fulford, Jr.. USMC (Ret) 

Deputy Commander in Chief, United States European Command ('00-'02) 

Lt. General Robert G. Gard, Jr., USA (Ret.) 

President, National Defense University, ('77-'81) 
69


29388b-5.eps

Lt. General William B. Garrett TIT, USA (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander, U.S. European Command C 14-'16) 

Admiral Edmund P. Giambastiani. Jr.. USN (Ret.) 

Vice Chainnan of the Joint Chiefs of Staff ('05-'07) 

Lt. General Jerome Granrud. USA (Ret.) 

Commanding GeneraL U.S. Army Japan/IX Corps ('92-'94) 

Admiral Jonathan W. Greener!. USN (Ret.) 

Chief of Naval Operations ('11-'15) 

Lt. General Arthur J. Gregg, USA (Ret.) 

Army Deputy Chief ofStati ('79-'81) 

Lt. General Wallace C. Gregson, USMC (Ret.) 

Commanding General, Marine Corps Forces Pacific & Marine Corps Forces Central Command ('03-'05) 

Vice Admiral Lee F. Gunn, USN (Ret.) 

Inspector General, U.S. Navy ('97-'00) 

General Michael W. Hagee, USMC (Ret.) 

Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps ('03-'0G) 

Lt. General Franklin L. Hagenbeck. USA (Ret.) 

Superintendent, United States Military Academy ('06-·1 0) 

Lt. General Michael A. HameL USAF (Ret.) 

Commander, Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center ('05-'08) 

General John W. Hand}, USAF (Ret) 

Commander, U.S. Transportation Command 

Commander, Air Mobility Command ('01-·05) 

General Richard E. Hawley, USAF (Ret.) 

Commander, Air Combat Command ('96-'99) 

General Michael V. Hayden. USAF (Ret.) 

Director, Central Intelligence Agency ('06-'09) 

Lt. General Frank G. Helmick, USA (Ret.) 

Commanding General, XV Ill Airborne Corps ('09-'12) 

Lt. General Rhett A. Hernandez. USA (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Army Cyber Command C 10-'13) 

Lt General Mark P. Hertling, USA (Ret.) 

Commanding General, U.S. Army Europe C 11-'12) 
70


29388b-6.eps

General Paul V. Hester, USAF (Ret.) 

Commander. Pacific Air Forces_ 

Air Component Commander for the U.S. Pacific Command Commander ('04-'07) 

General James T. Hill, USA (Ret.) 

Commander. U.S. Southem Command ("02-'04) 

Admiral James R. Hogg, USN (Ret.) 

U.S. Military Representative, NATO Military Committee ('88-'91) 

Lt. General WalterS. Hogle Jr., USAF (Ret.) 

Commander. 15th Air Force ('00-'01) 

Lt. General Russel Honore, USA (Ret.) 

Commanding GeneraL U.S. FirstAnny ('04--08) 

Lt. General Patrick M. Hughes, USA (Ret.) 

Director, Defense Intelligence Agency ( '96-'99) 

Lt. General Steven A. Hummer, USMC (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander for Military Operations_ U.S. Africa Command ('13-'15) 

Lt. General David H. Huntoon. Jr., USA (Ret.) 

Superintendent United States Military Academy ('10--13) 

Lt. General Kenneth W. Hunzeker, USA (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Army V Corps ('07-'09) 

Lt. General William E. Ingram, Jr., USA (Ret.) 

Director, U.S. Army National Guard ('11--14) 

Lt. General Ronald W. Iverson, USAF (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander, US Forces Korea ('94-'97) 

General James L. Jamerson, USAF (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander in Chief. U.S. European Command ('95-'98) 

Lt. General Arlen D. Jameson, USAF (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander in Chief. U.S. Strategic Command ('93-'96) 

General John P. Jumper. USAF (Ret.) 

ChicfofSta!I, U.S. Air Force ('01-'05) 

Lt. General Francis H. Keamey ITT_ USA (Ret.) 

Deputy Director for Strategic Operational Planning, National Counter-Terrorism Center('! 0-'12) 

Admiral Timothy l Keating_ USN (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Pacific Command ('07-'09) 

LL. General P. K. ·'Ken" Keen, USA (Ret.) 

Chief, Office of the U.S. Defense Representative to Pakistan(' II-'13) 
71


29388b-7.eps

Lt. General Richard L. Kelly, USMC (Ret.) 

Deputy Commandant, lnslallalions and Logistics ('02-.05) 

Lt. General Claudia J. Kennedy. USA (Ret.) 

Deputy Chief of Stafffor Army lntelligcncc ('97-'00) 

General Paul J. Kern. USA (Ret.) 

Commanding GeneraL U.S. Army Materiel Command ('01-'04) 

General William F. Kernan, USA (Ret.) 

Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic 

Commander in Chief. U.S. Joint Forces Command ('00-'02) 

Lt. General Donald L. Kerrick, USA (Ret.) 

Deputy National Security Advisor lo The President oflhe United Stales ('00-'01) 

General Ronald E. Keys, USAF (Ret.) 

Commander, Air Combat Command ('05-'07) 

Lt. General Timothy A. Kinnan, USAF (Ret.) 

U.S. Military Rcprcscnlalive, NATO Military Committee ('01-'04) 

Lt. General Bruce B. Knutson, USMC (Ret.) 

Commanding GeneraL Marine Corp Combat Command ('00--01) 

Vice Admiral Albert H. Konetzni, Jr., USN (Ret.) 

Deputy Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command and U.S. Atlantic Fleet ('01--04) 

General Charles Chandler Krulak, USMC (Ret.) 

Commandant of the Marine Corps ('95-'99) 

Lt. General William J. Lennox, Jr, USA (Ret.) 

Superintendent. United Slates Mililnry Academy ('01-.06) 

Vice Admiral Stephen F. Loftus, USN (Ret.) 

Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Logistics ('90-'94) 

General Lance W. Lord. USAF (Ret.) 

Commander, U.S. Air Force Space Command ('02-'06) 

Admiral James M. Loy, USCG (Ret.) 

Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard ('98-'02) 

Lt. General Douglas E. Lute. USA (Ret.) 

Special Assistant to the President 

Senior Coordinator for Afghanistan and Pakistan, National Security CmmciL The While House ('09-·13) 

General Robert Magnus, USMC (Ret.) 

Assistant Commandant, U.S. Marine Corps ('05-'08) 
72

NOTE: The preceding document has not been printed here in full but may be found 

at http://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=108063

f


29388b-8.eps

Vice Admiral Joseph Maguire, USN (Ret) 

Deputy Director for Strategic Operational Planning, National Cmmtcrtcrrorism Center ('07-' 10) 

Lt General Raymond V. Mason, USA (Ret) 

Deputy Chief of Staff. G-4, US Anny ('11-'14) 

Admiral Henry H. Mauz. Jr., USN (Ret) 

Commander in Chief, U.S. Atlantic Fleet ('92-'94) 

Lt General Dennis McCarthy, USMC (Ret) 

Commander, Marine Forces Reserve ('01-'05) 

Vice Admiral Justin D. McCarthy. SC, USN (Ret) 

Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Fleet Readiness, and Logistics ( '04-' 07) 

General Stanlev A. McChrvstal, USA (Ret) 

Commander, I~ternational.Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan ('09-· 10) 

Lt General Frederick McCorkle, USMC (Ret) 

Deputy Commandant for Aviation, Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps ('98-'01) 

General David D. McKiernan, USA (Ret) 

Commander, International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan ('08-'09) 

General DanK. McNeill. USA, (Ret) 

Commander, International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan ('07-'08) 

Lt General Paul T. Mikolashek, USA (Ret) 

Inspector General, U.S. Army 

Commanding General, Third U.S. Army ("00-'02) 

Vice Admiral JosephS. Mobley, USN (Ret) 

Commander, Naval Air Force. U.S. Atlantic Fleet ('98-'01) 

General Thomas R. Morgan, USMC (Ret) 

Assistant Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps ('86-'88) 

General Thomas R. Morgan, USMC (Ret) 

Assistant Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps ('86-'88) 

Vice Admiral John G. Morgan, Jr. USN (Ret) 

Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Information, Plans, and Strategy ('04--08) 

Admiral Robert J. Natter, USN (Ret) 

Commander, Fleet Forces Command 

Commander, U.S. Atlantic Fleet('00-'03) 

Lt. General Richard Y Newton Ill, USAF (Ret) 

Assistant Vice Chief of Staff and Director, Air Staff. Headquarters U.S. Air Force(' 10--12) 
73

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER, 

A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS


29388c-1.eps
74


29388c-2.eps

Charles Abell, South Dakota 

U.S. Air Force 

Forrest Abemethy. Arkansas 

U.S. Nayy 

Leonard Abner, \Vest Virginia 

US. Army 

Joe Abodeel:-, Ari;~.ona 

U.S. Ann) 

Jolm Adair. Arkansas 

U.S. Ann) 

John Admns. Florida 

US. Army 

Mann) Addo. Virginia 

US. Army 

Richard Adkins, Michigan 

US.Anny 

Tracy Adkison, Georgia 

U.S. Air Force 

George Akins. Arkansas 

US. Ann) 

Lazaro Alaniz, Michigan 

U.S. Ann) 

Joseph Albert, Pennsylvania 

US. Ann) 

Alvin Albert. Louisiana 

U.S. Air Force 

Nicholas Albicocco. Maryland 

U.S. Nav) 

Luis Alcalde. Ohio 

U.S. Army 

Tom Allee. Colorado 

U.S. Air Force 

Samuel Altman. Florida 

U.S. Ann) 

Russ Ames. Ne\:v Mexico 

U.S. Am1y 

Ralph Amis, Oklahoma 

U.S. Air Force 

Pat Amodio, Connecticut 

U.S. Am1y 

Roma Amundson, Nebraska 

U.S. Army 

Gary Anchustegui. Idaho 

US Army 

Albert Anctil. Rhode Island 

U.S.Aml) 

Victor Anderson. California 

U.S. Anny 

Mark Anderson_ Oregon 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Kent Anderson. Indiana 

U.S. Army 

Joel Anderson. Kansas 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Edgar Ashley. Michigan 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Will Atldns. Maryland 

U.S. Air Force 

Roy Atl.;:inson. Idaho 

U.S. Army 

Alex Augustine. District of Columbia 

U.S. Army 

Duncan Aukland. Ohio 

U.S. Army 

Emesl Austin Jr.. Delaware 

U.S. Air Force 

Frances Ave0, Delaware 

US Army 

Juan A) ala, Texas 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Eugene A~ers, Ne\v York 

U.S. Army 

Rod Azama. Marv land 

U.S.Armv 

David Anderson. District or Columbia Kathryn Baarson, Arizona 

U.s. Marine Corps U.S. Marine Corps 

Lou Annacone. Texas 

U.S. Air Force 

Alfredo Anthonv. Florida 

U.S. Anny 

Bill Aquino. Florida 

U.S. Am1y 

I erry Araman, Arizona 

U.S. Army 

Sanrord Artman_ Missouri 

U.S Army 

Stuart Ashby. Missouri 

U.S.Nm·) 

Edward Babyak. Rhode Island 

U.S. Navv 

Richard Bacon. New Jerse~ 

US Navy 

John Badal, Ne\\ Mexico 

U.S. Army 

Richard J. Bailey. Jr.. New Mexico 

U.S. Air Force 

John Bak:er. West Virginia 

U.S. Army 

Todd Baker. Oregon 

U.S. Navv 
75


29388c-3.eps

Dennis BaL Michigan 

US. Army 

George Bald. New Hampshire 

U.S. Nayy 

Mike BaiL Alabama 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Jonathan Banasihan. District or 

Columbia 

US. Nm> 

Paul Barbarin, California 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Rye Barco~ North Carolina 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Roger Barczi. Michigan 

U.S. Ann~ 

Brent Barker. \Vashington 

U.S. Army 

Rocco Barleua. Ne\:v York 

US. Army 

Joseph Eames. Virginia 

US.Anny 

Ahcia Barnes, Maine 

US. Nav> 

Joseph Barone. N e\\ York 

US. Ann) 

Oliver Barrett, District of Columbia 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Brittany Bartges. Colorado 

US.Anny 

Julio Bartl1son. Texas 

U.S. Ann~ 

Fergus Barton_ Michigan 

US. Ann) 

Richard Bar\\ ick, Montana 

U.S. Air Force 

Richard Basiliere_ Vennont 

U.S Navy 

Pat Beekman. North Carolina 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Matthe\v Basista. District of Cohunbia Charles Bccls. California 

U.S. Anny 

Johnny Bass. North Carolina 

U.S Navy 

Nick Bassitt Texas 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Dick Batchelor. Florida 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Larry Baucom_ Virginia 

U.S. Nm-~ 

James Bauerle. Indiana 

U.S. Anny 

Dwight Baxter. Delmvare 

U.S. Navy 

Jon Bayless, Florida 

U.S. Navy 

Olan Beams. Delaware 

U.S. Air Force 

Katlu~n Beasley. Maryland 

U.S. Navy 

Eric Beason_ Kentuck~ 

U.S.Anny 

DaYid Bebeau, Michigan 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Ronald Bechthold!, Wyoming 

U.S Navy 

Brent Beck. Vermont 

U.S. Navy 

George Bedard, Vermont 

US Army 

Roaldn Beecroft. Oregon 

U.S.Am1~ 

U.S. Army 

Robert Begey. Connecticut 

U.S. Army 

Robert Behrenwald. Michigan 

U.S. Air Force 

DaYid Belanger, Massachusetts 

U.S. Army 

Da\ e Belole, Virginia 

U.S. Air Force 

Robert Bender, Pennsy]yania 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Patrick Benjamin. Delaware 

U.S. Army 

Craig Bennett Illinois 

U.S. Army 

Bob Bennett Missouri 

U.S. Armv 

Bruce Bennett, Connecticut 

U.S. Army 

Jeffery Benoit. Georgia 

U.S. Armv 

James Bentley_ Rhode Island 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Doug Bereuter_ Nebraska 

U.S. Army 

Allan Berg, florida 

U.S. Army 

Willie Berges. Florida 

U.S. Air Force 

DaYid Berry_ Oregon 

U.S. Army 
76


29388c-4.eps

Girard Besancene\', Ohio 

US.Army . 

Michael Bessler. Wyoming 

U.S. Nayy 

Charles Bierbauer. South Carolina 

US. Army 

Raymond Biersner. Idaho 

US. Nm• 

Robert Biles. Arkansas 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Armand Bilotti, Rhode Island 

US. Army 

Gary Birdsall, Utah 

US. Army 

Franklin Blackburn. Wyoming 

US. Navy 

Eli/abeth Blackney. Virginia 

US. Nm• 

Gerald Bland, VVesL Virginia 

US. Arm) 

Larry Blankenship. West Virginia 

U.S. Ann~ 

Timothy Blavm, Delaware 

U.S. Nav~ 

David Bockel, Georgia 

U.S. Army 

John Bonalli, Connecticut 

US. Arm) 

John Bone. Virginia 

U.S. Army 

Mark Bonica, Nevi' Hampshire 

US. Army 

George Boniface, South Carolina 

U.S. Ann~ 

Samuel Boone. South Carolina 

U.S. Am1y 

Lester Boots. Idaho 

U.S. Air Force 

Andrew Borcne. Virginia 

U.S. Marine Corps 

James Boston, Oregon 

U.S. Navy 

Anthon~ Bourlet, Louisiana 

US Army 

Michael Boyle. Ne·w Hampshire 

U.S. Nm-~ 

George Boyson, California 

U.S. Anny 

Butch Bracknell, Virginia 

U.S. Marine Corps 

John Brackney. Colorado 

U.S. Army 

Ernest Bradkv. Delaware 

U.S. Air Fore~ 

Robert Bradle~, Vennont 

U.S. Navy 

Donald Bradshaw. Oregon 

U.S.Anny 

fernando Braga, Ne\Y York 

U.S. Anny 

Terrance Brand, Nevi' Hampshire 

U.S Navy 

Hershel Branson. Arkansas 

U.S. Army 

Mike Brassaw. Florida 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Sam Brick. South Carolina 

U.S. Anny Resene 

Rita Brack-Perini. Ari./.ona 

U.S. Air Force 

Matthew Brodycz, lllinois 

U.S. Army 

Bernie Brogan. Ohio 

U.S. Army 

Ron Brosius. Iowa 

U.S. Army 

Jim Broussard, Pennsylvania 

U.S. Army 

Edvoiard Brown. Florida 

U.S. Army 

Ron Brmvn. New Mexico 

US Army 

Harvey Brmvn. Oklahoma 

U.S. Air Force 

Ralph Brmvn. Maryland 

US Marine Corps 

Sean Brown, Dela\vare 

U.S. Navv 

Bill Brmvnc, lllinois 

U.S. Air Force 

Darrell Browning. Alabama 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Michael Brundage, Colorado 

US Army 

Donald Brunelle. Vennont 

U.S. Army 

DaYid Bruns, Minnesota 

US. Na\Y 

Tony Bryan. Missouri 

U.S. Army 

Edv,'ard Brynn, North Carolina 

U.S. Air Force 
77


29388c-5.eps

Danny Bubp, Ohio 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Dave Bullamore. North Carolina 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Dv.,ight Bullard, Virginia 

US. Army 

Michael Burch. Ne\:v York 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Peter Burdette. N C\Y Hampshire 

U.S. Nav~ 

Marshall Burgess, South Dakota 

US. Army 

Josh Burgess, Virginia 

U.S. Air Force 

Eldon Burgess. Massachusetts 

US. Navy 

James Bums, New Jersey 

U.S. Ann~ 

Rick Bums, Iov .. a 

US. Arm) 

Patrick Bush, Oregon 

US. Navv 

Otto A. Busher Ill, New Hampshire 

US. Arm) 

Luis Bustillos, Tcmicsscc 

U.S. Army 

Preston Butcher, Oregon 

US. Arm) 

Scott Butterfield. Massachusetts 

U.S. Army 

Darold Btvard. 'V~oming 

US. Nm·y 

Frederick Byers, Dela\vare 

U.S. Ann) 

Michael Cadice, Virginia 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Jason Cain. North Carolina 

U.S. Anny 

John CaldwelL Virginia 

U.S. Am1y 

Vincent Calitri. Rhode Island 

U.S. Army 

Luis Cardenas Camacho. Ari/.ona 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Michael Campagna, New York 

U.S.Aml) 

James CampbelL Alabama 

U.S. Anny 

Ralph Campbell, Wyoming 

U.S. Army 

Hugh CampbelL Florida 

U.S. Air force 

Christopher CampbelL Virginia 

U.S. Air Force 

Lindon Campbell, Florida 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Christopher Cano_ Florida 

U.S. Air Force 

Peter Canonico. Virginia 

U.S. Anny 

Richard Cantwell, North Carolina 

U.S. Am1y 

Christopher Carey. Ohio 

U.S. Army 

Robert Carey, Louisiana 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Bob Carey. Maryland 

U.S.Nm·) 

Gary Carpenter. Nev.· Hampshire 

U.S. Air Force 

Robert Carr. California 

U.S. Army 

Matthevi' Can·er. Iowa 

U.S. Army 

Steven Cash. Idaho 

U.S. Navv 

Jeff Cathey, Florida 

US Nav0 

Dan Chaison. District of Columbia 

U.S. Army 

Barry Chandler. Oregon 

US Army 

w·ellon Chang. PennS) l\ ania 

U.S. Army 

Munroe Chapin_ Vem10nt 

U.S. Nav) 

Calvin Chapman, Mississippi 

U.S. Armv 

Tim ChappelL North Carolina 

U.S. Army 

Julian Chesnutt North Carolina 

U.S. Air Force 

Linnes Chesler. Nevada 

U.S. Air Force 

Paul Chevalier. Nevv Hampshire 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Allan Childers. Florida 

U.S. Air Force 

Quentin Childs. Iowa 

U.S. Army 

Joseph Chimenti, Delaware 

U.S. Army 
78


29388c-6.eps

Lewis Chipola, N C\Y Hampshire 

US. Army 

Gil Cisneros, Colorado 

U.S. Navy 

Kenneth Clark, Ne\v Hampshire 

U.S. Air Force 

Chad Clark, Vermont 

U.S. Air Force 

Sandra Clcarv. Ohio 

U.S. Ann~ 

Ross Clemons, Florida 

US. Army 

Alden Cle;eland. Idaho 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Leonard Clough. V crmont 

US. Marine Corps 

T}rus Cobb. Ne,ada 

U.S. Ann~ 

Bobby Cockrum, Arkansas 

U.S. Air Force 

Je!I Coggin, Alabama 

U.S. Air Force 

Arthur Cohen, Nc\Y Jersey 

US. Ann} 

Paul Cohen, Nebraska 

U.S. Air Force 

Jacob Cole Montana 

US. Ann} 

C. Murrill Colburn, Michigan 

U.S. Army 

Richard Collier, Vennont 

U.S. Air Force 

Perry Collins, Oregon 

U.S. Marine Corps 

James Collins, \Vashington 

U.SAm1 

CoL J. Quincv Collins, Jr.. North 

Carolina 

U.S. Air Force 

Martin Conatser_ Illinois 

U.S. Am1y 

Michael Conley, West Virginia 

U.S. Army 

Todd Connor, Illinois 

U.S Na;y 

Nonnan Contois, Michigan 

U.S. Army 

Barry Cmm a~ Nevi Hampshire 

U.S. Air Force 

Scott Cooper, District of Columbia 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Margaret Cope, Virginia 

U.S. Air Force 

Antoinette Correia, Hawaii 

U.S. Army 

Richard Corrigan, Florida 

U.S. Air Force 

Donny Cossey, Arkansas 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Marc Collie, Utah 

U.S. Anny 

Lan:- Coughlin, Utah 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Rod Cox, Kansas 

U.S. Anny 

Mike Crader. Colorado 

U.S. Air Force 

I ro~ CraiL Florida 

U.S. Air Force 

Jim Craig, Missouri 

U.S. Army 

Emmett Craig, Michigan 

U.S. Army 

Lew Cramer. Utah 

U.S. Army 

John Crmvford, Michigan 

U.S. Army 

William Crocker. Arkansas 

U.S. Army 

Da\ id Crofl. Oklahoma 

U.S. Navv 

Francis Crompton_ Montana 

U.S. Marine Corps 

John Cronin, Nev .. York 

U.S. Amw 

Charles Cross, Michigan 

U.S. Air Force 

Raymond Crouse, Arkansas 

U.S. Armv 

Leo Cruz, Virginia 

U.S Na,, 

\Vayne Culbreth, Tennessee 

U.S. Armv 

Tim Cullison, Ari/ona 

U.S Army 

Don Culpepper_ Arkansas 

U.S. Am1y 

Craig Currey, South Carolina 

U.S. Amw 

Ramond Curtis. N e\v York 

U.S Anny 

Andre\\" Cutlip, West Virginia 

U.S. Air Force 
79


29388c-7.eps

Joseph Dablcwski. NC\v York 

U.S. Air Force 

Louis Daigle. Louisiana 

U.S. Navy 

Michael Dalby. Florida 

U.S. Air Force 

Louis Dahse. Rhode Island 

U.S. Nmv 

Roger Damato. N C\Y Jersey 

U.S. Ann~ 

Andrew Daniels. Idaho 

US. Navv 

Robert Darling. Virginia 

US. Navv 

Frank Darlington, Idaho 

U.S. Anny 

Donald Dame!!, Kenluck~ 

U.S. Navv 

Christopher Davis. Vermont 

U.S. Ann) 

Louis Davis, Arl-cansas 

U.S. Ann~ 

S. Ryan Davis. Ohio 

U.S. Marine Corps 

J. Davisson, Indiana 

U.S. Army 

Dave Day. South Carolina 

US. Ann) 

James Deak, New Jersey 

U.S. Army 

Peter Debrino. Connecticut 

U.S. Nm·y 

John Dehn, Illinois 

U.S. Ann~ 

Garland Delaney. Oregon 

U.S. Am1y 

Mathew Demers. Ohio 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Mike Denning. Kansas 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Eugene Dentino. Arkansas 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Edv\'ard Depamphilis, Delaware 

U.S Army 

John DeReu. 111inois 

U.S.Am1~ 

Robert Deshaies. Rhode Island 

U.S. Anny 

Lance DeSpain. North Carolina 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Keith Dewey. Colorado 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Mike Dhunjishah, South Carolina 

U.S. Air Force 

Fred~ Dia.r.. Mar~ land 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Donald Dicicco, Connecticut 

U.S.Anny 

Mike Dickerson. Florida 

U.S. Anny 

Tim DiehL Pennsyh·ania 

U.S. Air Force 

Dennis Dietz. Iowa 

U.S. Army 

James Dignan. Ohio 

U.S. Air Force 

Brian Dinsdale. Massachusetts 

U.S. Air Force 

Melvin Dison. Arkansas 

U.S. Air Force 

Rollin Dix. Illinois 

U.S. Army 

Tony Dixon. California 

U.S. Army 

Todd Dixon. Indiana 

U.S. Air Force 

John Dodson, Nevi' Jersey 

U.S. Army 

Ke\ in Doiron. Louisiana 

U.S. Navv 

Hal Donahue. Penns~ h ani a 

U.S. Air Force 

Robert Donohue. Delaware 

U.S. Air Force 

Kirk Doole~, Tndiana 

U.S Marine Corps 

Crista! Dorsev. Oklahoma 

U.S. Armv 

James Dorsey. Minnesota 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Dwight Dotterer, Michigan 

U.S. Air Force 

George Doty, Arkansas 

U.S. Air Force 

'Villi am Downes. Colorado 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Kiersten Downs, Florida 

U.S. Air Force 

Darrell Dragcsct Wyoming 

U.S. Nav~ 

Gary Drobnack, Washington 

U.S. Army 
80

NOTE: The preceding document has not been printed here in full but may be found 

at http://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/ByEvent.aspx?EventID=108063

f


29388c-8.eps

Alex Dubovik. Utah 

U.S. Air Force 

Michael I. Duerr. Mim1esota 

U.S. Army 

Jim Duffie_ Georgia 

US.Nm·y 

Dave Dun~- South Carolina 

U.S. Ann) 

Eugene Dufrene. Louisiana 

U.S. Ann) 

Jerry Dunagm1. Arkansas 

U.S. Air Force 

Forrest Dunbar, Alaska 

US. Army 

Isaac Eagan, Virginia 

US.Anny 

Brian Easle\·. KentucJ...,, U.S. Ann) -. ~ 

Marjorie Eastman. Tennessee 

US. Ann) 

Paul Eaton. Washington 

U.S. Ann) 

Theresa Eckard, lllinois 

U.S. Air Force 

Bobby Edmon. Oklahoma 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Mike Edwards. Arkansas 

US. Ann) 

Frank Ed·wards, Florida 

U.S. Marine Corps 

David Eichhorn_ New Mexico 

U.S. Air Force 

Steve Eisenhart. Colorado 

U.S. Ann) 

Mark EisLer, Georgia 

U.S. Arn1y 

Matthc\v Elias. Texas 

U.S. Nav) 

Joseph Elkins, Wyoming 

U.S. Air Force 

Roger Ellifritz. West Virginia 

U.S. Army 

Kenneth Ellison. 'V~oming 

U.S. Navy 

Tim Embree. District of Columbia 

U.S. Marine Corps 

James Emerson. Arkansas 

U.S. Ann~ 

John EngeL Michigan 

U.S. Air Force 

Rick Erickson. Arizona 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Michael Erin. Illinois 

U.S.Anny 

Aaron Estabrook. Kansas 

U.S Army 

Phillip Ethridge. Califomia 

U.S. Air Force 

Megan Everett lllinois 

U.S. Nav) 

Ed\Yin Exum. lllinois 

U.S Navy 

Fred Fairbanks, Alaska 

U.S. Navy 

John Fairbanks, Maryland 

U.S. Navy 

Douglas Fairlield, Pem1sylvania 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Randall F amS\\ orth. VennonL 

U.S. Arm~ 

Tim FarrelL Texas 

U.S. Air Force 

Robert Farris. Oregon 

U.S. Arm~ 

DaYid Farris. Oklahoma 

U.S. Army 

James Fan1zzi. Ohio 

U.S. Army Resene 

Aurelia Fedenisn. North Carolina 

U.S. Army 

Arthur FederspilL Maryland 

US Army 

Artegus Felder. Alabama 

U.S. Arm~ 

Robert Felderman. TO\va 

U.S. Arm~ 

Donald Penn, Oregon 

U.S. Navv 

Thomas Fenney, Maryland 

U.S. Marine Corps 

Marlon Ferguson. Pennsylvania 

U.S. Navv 

Charles Ferillo. South Carolina 

US Army 

Matthev'· Fetterman, Florida 

U.S. Nav; 

Mark F cttcrman, Florida 

U.S. Na\\ 

Robert Fields. West Virginia 

U.S. Air Force 

Walter Filipowski Jr. Idaho 

U.S. Army 
81

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, A

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK


29388d-1.eps
82


29388d-2.eps

4/5/2018 Defense spending rises to $686 billion for 2019- Washington Times 

Analysts say the White House spending blueprint represents down payment on the 

National Defense Strategy the administration outlined last month. The president 

wants to shift the U.S. military's focus from protracted wars against extremist groups 

like ai-Qaida and Islamic State toward threats posed by Russia, China and North 

Korea. 

The Pentagon has sought a combined $10 billion justto finance the F-35 and B-21 -

next generation warplanes designed to penetrate the most advance anti-aircraft 

systems fielded by "near-peer" countries like China and Russia. Officials say an 

additional $7.4 billion for Virginia-class attack subs will bolster the Navy's underwater 

fleet, which is facing threats from a resurgent Russian submarine force. 

Missile defense weapons like the AEGIS, Ground-based Midcourse Defense system 

and the THAAD ballistic missile defense weapon- touted as critical in deterring 

intercontinental missile threats from North Korea- received a total of $4.9 million in 

the administration's proposed spending increase. 

Defense Department Comptroller David L. Norquist said Monday the Trump plan 

represents a course correction from low military spending under previous 

administrations. While spending by Beijing and Moscow has skyrocketed in rerPnt 

years, Mr. Norquist said that in 2016, the U.S. military "was the smallest it had 15 people typing 

since before World War II." 

Should Congress agree with the Trump plan, he said, defense outlays will still "remain 

near historical lows as a share of the U.S. economy." 

"It is important to understand the hole we are climbing out of," Mr. Norquist said. 

Less money for diplomacy 

Amid talk of increased military spending, officials at the State Department and USAID 

are wary of possible cuts, as well as the prospect of an American diplomatic core 

shrinking from attrition, resignations and dismissals. 

The Trump budget caps State Department spending at $39.3 billion- down from the 

roughly $55 billion spent by the department in 2017. But it's unclear exactly where 

the department's cumulative spending will stand over the three-year period from 

2017 through 2019 because of uncertainty around congressional budget 

negotiations. 

Deputy Secretary of State john j. Sullivan told reporters Monday that the budget deal 

reached on Capitol Hill last week would increase overall discretionary spending by 

some $300 billion over two years. 

https I lwww .wa sh~ngto nt1me s.co m/news/20 1 8/fe b/1 2/d efe nse-spe nd1ng-n ses-to -686-billlon-for -2019/ 214 
83

f


29388d-3.eps

4/5/2018 Defense spending rises to $686 billion for 2019- Washington Times 

"As part of this deal, budget caps on non-defense discretionary spending, which 

includes spending for State and USAID, would be increased by $63 billion this year 

and $68 billion next year," Mr. Sullivan said. 'This reflects an additional $1.5 billion for 

State and USAID provided specifically for humanitarian assistance and global health 

programs, as well as contributions to international organizations." 

Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, however, has defended the administration's 

proposed cuts in both the State and USAID budgets. 

The cuts, if enacted, would severely erode American "soft power" projection around 

the world, diplomats and defense officials warn. 

Several former top military officers criticized at the notion of possible State 

Department cuts Monday, saying Washington risks losing its recent military gains in 

Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. 

"Near-term cuts is not just a near-term cut, its enduring. You will always be catching 

up," Gen. Charles F. Wald, former deputy commander for U.S. European Command, 

said on a conference call with reporters. 

The Pentagon's increasing dependence on allies and proxy forces to battle extremists 

will require a robust U.S. diplomatic presence, said retired Army Chief of Staff Gen. 

George W. Casey Jr. on the call. "We have a strategy and budget mismatch." 

Copyright© 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission. 

The Washington Times Comment Policy 

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to 

Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your 

Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please 

read our Comment Policy before commenting. 

Popular In the Community 

https I lwww .wa sh~ngto nt1me s.co m/news/20 1 8/fe b/1 2/d efe nse-spe nd1ng-n ses-to -686-billlon-for -2019/ 314 
84


29388e-1.eps

Statement for the Record 

Submitted by Mr. Connolly ofVirginiu 

President Trump's FY 2019 international affairs budget continues the Trump Administration's 

unilateral retreat from U.S. global leadership through a reckless disinvestment in U.S. diplomacy and 

development operations. As threats to U.S national security grow around the world, the Trump 

Administration's response is to retreat from our international commitments, eviscerate assistance to 

vulnerable populations, and cut the tlnancial and human resources of our diplomatic corps and the 

federal workforce that supports U.S. foreign policy. Instead of funding an ounce of prevention for a 

pound of cure, President Trump boasts of fire and fury and demonstrates an almost reflexive 

preference for kinetic solutions to the world's most intractable problems. 

The Trump Administration has failed to invest in the financial and human resources that we need to 

effectively implement U.S. development programs. The President's FY 2019 budget proposes to gut 

USAID's budget by 33 percent from FY 2017 enacted levels. This request ignores that Congress, 

civilian and military leadership, and the American people summarily rejected similar draconian cuts 

in the Administration's FY 2018 budget 

More than a year into President Trump's tenn, critical vacancies still plague the implementation of 

U.S. foreign assistance, especially at USA !D. Administrator Green and Assistant Administrator for 

Europe and Eurasia Brock Bierman are the only Senate-confirmed appointees at the agency. No one 

has been nominated to fill the Deputy Administrator vacancy or seven out of nine remaining bureau 

leadership posts. Last year, President Trump said that his administration is not even planning to fill 

all the vacant positions. 

Under Administrator Green's leadership, USAID has launched an internal redesign e!Iort that seeks 

to end the need for foreign assistance. One of the pillars of this reform effort is moving partner 

countries toward "strategic transitions," or self-reliance. Working with a partner country to reduce 

and eventually eliminate reliance on U.S. foreign assistance should always be the goal of development 

programs. However, it is clear this Administration has already concluded that our investments abroad 

need to be gutted. Congress must ensure that Administrator Green's redesign effort is not coopted to 

serve this Administration· s slash and bum approach to the international affairs budget. I encourage 

Administrator Green to consult with Members of Congress and other stakeholders to ensure that his 

reform efforts advance development goals and do not help justify further cuts to our foreign assistance 

programs. 

This Committee can do its part in protecting the international affairs budget by putting forward robust 

reauthorization bills for the State Department and USAID. Congress has not enacted a State 

Department authorization bill since 2002. As a stan· member on the Senate Foreign Relations 

Committee, 1 worked on the last comprehensive reauthorization of the Foreign Assistance Act of 

1961. That was in 1985. Regular enactment of these authorizing bills is a long-neglected priority, and 

the clarity of our mission has suffered as a result. 
85

f


29388e-2.eps

That is why I intend to reintroduce the Global Partnerships Act, which I began working on with former 

Chairman Howard Berman several years ago. This legislation strengthens the role of the USAID 

Administrator, codities some of the successful reforms ofUSAID Forward, and empowers USAID 

as an independent development agency. Folding USAID into the State Department, as the 

Administration has reportedly considered, would be detrimental to the achievement of distinct U.S. 

diplomacy and development objectives. 

We need an empowered, premier development agency safeguarding U.S. interests abroad. 

Unprecedented humanitarian crises and threats to global stability require dedicated American 

leadership and engagement. One does not make America great again by withdrawing from the world. 

2 
86


29388f-1.eps

Questions for the Record from Chairman Edward R. Royce 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

For the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21, 2018 

Development Finance Institution. The FY 2019 budget request proposes a consolidation of various 

U.S. development finance functions, such as the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) 

and USAID's Development Credit Authority (DCA), to create a new, standalone Development 

Finance Institution (DFI) with more modem and effective tools and reforms. In February, the 

bipartisan Better Utilization oflnvestments Leading to Development Act (BUILD Act), HR. 5105, 

was introduced to implement the President's budget proposal and create the U.S. lntemational 

Development Finance Corporation. 

How would the new development finance institution support the goal of transitioning donor 

countries off U.S. assistance? 

The more countries can mobilize their own domestic resources, catalyze private-sector investment, 

and hamess the power of private enterprise for development outcomes, the better positioned they are 

to transition away from traditional donor assistance. The tools of the proposed Development Finance 

Institution (DFT) are uniquely designed to help countries do all three. Loans, loan guarantees, equity 

investments, and political risk insurance, when used properly to "crowd in" private commercial 

capital into underserved markets, reduce the need for donor grant funding while deepening local 

capital and financial markets, which has a multiplier effect on attracting and retaining additional 

private financing. These transactional tools, coupled with technical-assistance programs funded by 

the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to target macroeconomic, regulatory and 

market reforms, can accelerate the transition of countries away tram donor assistance, while moving 

others much further down the continuum than would have been possible solely through traditional 

grant funding. 

What are additional ways in which linkages between the new DFI and USAID can be strengthened, 

while ensuring that the new entity has the appropriate flexibility and independence, given its unique 

mission? 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has been working closely within the 

interagency to plan for close institutional and programmatic linkages between the new Development 

Finance Institution (DFI) The goal is to ensure that the consolidation of USAID's Development 

Credit Authority (DCA) program into the proposed DFI provides greater opportunities for the new 

organization to link directly with USAID programs and Missions. 

The DFI should be able to continue DCA's demand-driven approach to transactions if USAID 
87


29388f-2.eps

Missions continue to have direct access to the transactional tools of the DFI, and can support deals 

with on-going technical-assistance programs on the ground. This approach would be critical to 

ensuring that transactions developed with DFI tools serve the U.S. Government's development 

strategies. While creating these critical linkages would closely align the DFI with USAID Missions, 

fonnal institutional linkages at headquarters would also be crucial, from the Board of Directors 

through to the staff that would be making investment decisions. Rather than constraining the DFI, 

the linkages would enable the DFI to access and support USAID programs and expertise in the field 

more easily than the Overseas Private Investment Corporation has been able to do in the past The 

OFT should also have the independence and flexibility to pursue transactions outside of USATD 

programs with other interagency partners, or on its own. 

Hunumitarian Acce,,s: Humanitarian access is crucial where civilians need assistance and 

protection, such as in armed conflicts and during responses to natural disasters. However, this access 

is routinely denied or hampered by parties to a conflict for security or political reasons. 

• What is the U.S. Government doing to increase access to humanitarian assistance, particularly 

in places like South Sudan, Yemen, and Syria? 

What is the U.S. doing to int1uence those who are denying or granting access? 

Does it matter what activities access is negotiated for (protection, food distributions, water 

and vaccines projects, etc.)? 

At the highest levels and through our diplomatic missions, the U.S. Government continues to press 

for full, consistent, and unfettered humanitarian access to populations in need, including in South 

Sudan, Burma, Yemen and Syria. Depending on the situation, key Administration leaders in 

Washington, D.C., U.S. Ambassadors and staff at U.S. Embassies; or the U.S. Pennanent 

Representatives to the United Nations (UN) at our multilateral missions in New York, Geneva, and 

other locations, will lead the U.S. Government's engagement directed toward governments that are 

restricting access, or with other influential governments or groups that can join us in applying 

pressure. 

The context of each humanitarian situation is unique, so the U.S. Government's engagement on 

humanitarian issues depends on accurate situational awareness. The Administration consults 

regularly with implementing partners, including UN humanitarian agencies and international and 

local non-governmental organizations (NGOs), to understand what is happening with their relief 

operations, especially the constraints to access they are facing Depending on the context, the 

deterioration of roads and other infrastructure, armed actors, or bureaucratic impediments could be 

the cause ofrestrictions on access. 

Depending on the context, the U.S. Government will evaluate who is blocking access, and 

consider the right diplomatic tool to use: direct engagement with those who are restricting 

access, or working indirectly through influential third-party actors. 

The U.S. Government regularly leverages the UN Security Council and other diplomatic as 

well as tlnancial support to the International Committee of the Red Cross - to hold 
88


29388f-3.eps

governments and non-state actors accountable for restricting access to those in need, and for 

committing violations ofinternational Humanitarian Law. Sanctions regimes can be a usetul 

tool as well, as in the case of South Sudan. 

To give you a specific, recent example, in mid-May I traveled to Bangladesh and Burma to 

gain a first-hand understanding of the plight of the Rohingya. While in Bunna, I pressed State 

Counsellor Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other Government officials at the Union and State 

levels to remove the barriers to access that are preventing US AID partners, other humanitarian 

actors, and journalists from reaching parts of Rakhi ne State. 

• Each approach to seeking greater humanitarian access is different, depending on the posture 

and interests of national governments and other armed actors. This means that organizations 

like the World Food Program, which negotiates access for food assistance hundreds of times 

each week, must refine their access strategy by country, region and group. There is no 

universal approach to access based on sector, though it is possible certain groups that 

negotiate access might change their strategy based on what they are delivering (i e., food, 

water or vaccines). In the case of Syria, for example, the Assad regime has repeatedly blocked 

deliveries of essential medical supplies to besieged cities. In other countries, like South 

Sudan, multiple armed groups and the national government implement their own restrictions 

along fluid lines of control. 

Question: 

Iraq: The conflict with ISIS forced over 5 million Iraqis from their homes, more than half of whom 

have now returned. Nationwide reconstruction needs are estimated to be over $80 billion. While the 

Administration has made impressive gains in helping to retake territory under ISIS control, we now 

face significant humanitarian and stabilization challenges. What specific examples can you cite where 

stabilization programs have met their objective and have been or are expected to be turned over to 

the Government of Iraq? 

Answer: 

The United States and our partners in the Global Coalition to Defeat the Islamic State in Iraq and 

Syria (ISIS) have provided assistance, through the Funding Facility for Stabilization (FFS) managed 

by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), which, according to the International 

Office of Migration (10M), has enabled 3.6 million Iraqis to return home safely and voluntarily as of 

March 2018. However, 2.2 million Iraqis remain displaced, including hundreds of thousands of ethnic 

and religious minorities. 

UNDP-FFS works closely with Iraqi national, Provincial and local leaders to restore essential services 

like electricity and water; bolster livelihoods like local businesses and markets to revive the local 

economy; promote reconciliation within local communities directly affected by ISIS; and build local 

capacity to improve local leaders' responsiveness to immediate needs. 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) contributed $75 million to the UNDP-FFS 

in Fiscal Year 2017, of which we directed almost $55 million to communities composed largely of 

oppressed ethnic and religious minorities in the Ninewa Plains and Western Ninewa Province. Some 
89


29388f-4.eps

examples of U.S.-funded activities implemented through UNDP-FFS include the following: 

Restoration of the water network and improved access to potable water for an estimated 1.2 

million residents in Mosul and the surrounding communities; 

Rehabilitation of83 schools in Anbar Province, which employ over 2,000 personnel and have 

allow 18,000 students to return to class; 

• Installation of a power substation at Tikrit University that allows an estimated 20,000 students 

to resume their classes; 

Rehabilitation of the public health center in Bartel a in the Ninewa Plain, which provides an 

estimated 30,000 residents with health care; and 

Rehabilitation of the Khwj a Kahil water-treatment plant in the Ninewa Plain, which gives an 

estimated 500,000 residents improved access to potable water. 

Security permitting, how frequently does your statfhave the chance to interact with Iraqi counterparts 

outside Embassy walls? 

The ability ofU S Government staff to visit project sites in Iraq is severely limited because of security 

concerns. For the most part, site visits by U.S. otlicials are restricted to meetings or events held in 

Baghdad, Basrah, and Erbil; the only permitted locations outside of the U.S. Embassy and Consulates 

General are generally the offices of Ministries and other units of the Government of Iraq, or those of 

multilateral or bilateral donors. Some exceptional recent field trips by the Ambassador and visiting 

senior officials from Washington have included site visits, such as the February 2018 trip for U.S. 

Ambassador Douglas Silliman and the Deputy Special Representative of the United Nations (UN) 

Secretary-General, Lise Grande, to re-open Hamdaniya Hospital near Mosul; the December 2017 trip 

by the Counselor of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USATD), Tom Staal, to meet 

with Christian religious leaders and Yazidi representatives in the Ninewa Plain and Erbil; and the 

May 2017 trip by Ambassador Silliman and Special Presidential Envoy Brett McGurk to re-open the 

AI Salami yah Water- Treatment Plant near Mosul. 

USATD contracts with in-country third-party experts in monitoring and evaluation to provide added 

oversight for our activities in Iraq. With greater freedom of movement than direct-hire Americans, 

the Iraqi field monitors are able to assess projects at the site level to ensure each achieves its goals 

and objectives. Evaluations and assessments help U.S. managers of assistance programs identify 

implementation constraints, adjust programming to achieve better results, and benefit trom lessons 

learned. In particular, USAID-funded Iraqi field monitors collect evidence to validate independently 

that the rehabilitation of water and electrical infrastructure, schools, and health clinics undertalcen by 

the UN Development Programme (LlNDP) are completed and benefitting returnees. 

How are reconciliation programs ensuring Sunni tribes contribute to stability rather than increased 

tension7 
90


29388f-5.eps

One of the conditions that made Sunni Arabs in Iraq vulnerable to recruitment by the Islamic State in 

Iraq and Syria (ISIS) was their political marginalization and exclusion from the federal government. 

Stabilization and governance assistance funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development 

(USAID) can enhance the credibility of local authorities, and link humanitarian investments to the 

broader strategy of helping Iraqis to get back on a sustainable governance and fiscal trajectory and 

prevent the rise of''ISIS 2.0"- a critical element of the Coalition's strategy to defeat ISIS. 

The Fund for Stabilization (FFS) managed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 

has used contributions from USAID to work in Salah ad-Din, Anbar, and Ninewa Provinces, 

including the in cities of Tikrit, Ramadi, Fallujah and Mosul, which have large Sunni Arab 

populations. Our local-governance activities are also helping to implement Prime Minister Abadi' s 

vision for reconciliation through decentralization, which gives Iraq's Provincial Governors and 

Councils direct budgets, greater control over local public-sector hiring, and a formal say over projects 

undertaken by Federal Ministries within their Provinces. The Iraqi Prime Minister strongly supports 

decentralization as a way to improve governance and stabilize the country by making certain 

government decisions closer, and therefore more accountable, to the Iraqi people, such as Sunni 

tribes. He has highlighted USAID's decentralization assistance as critical to this initiative. 

How is U.S. assistance being used to mend ties between the Iraqi Federal Government and the Kurds" 

In Fiscal Year 2017, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) provided $29 million 

in economic technical assistance to the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in addition to the 

humanitarian assistance Kurdish areas already receive. This technical assistance helps the KRG to 

identify and implement reforms, such as improving the execution of budgets and the management of 

payrolL 

One of the most contentious issues between the KRG and the Government oflraq (GOI) is the GOI's 

requirement of a proper accounting of eligible recipients before paying the salaries, pension and social 

benefits of KRG employees. USAID's technical assistance helped the KRGto introduce an IdentityManagement System (TMS) to modernize the distribution of payments to individuals, while 

eliminating duplicate records and transfers. So far, the KRG's use of the TMS has enabled it to remove 

5,000 "ghost" employees, which has saved roughly $3.5 million per month. Since 86 percent of the 

KRG's budget goes to salaries, establishing a centralized payroll linked to the IMS is the KRG's top 

priority. To date, an estimated 1,197,580 recipients have registered; of these, 481,307 KRG civil 

servants have had their registration reviewed and verified. Progress on this activity has enabled the 

KRG to fulfill portions of the GOT's requirements, and has led to the release of a significant amount 

of GOT funding for KRG salaries, pensions and social benetits. 

On January 17, the Department of State laid out the Administration's policy for U.S involvement in 

Syria, including stabilization initiatives in liberated areas and "targeted reconstruction." 
91


29388f-6.eps

Can the U.S. and its partners realistically hope to destroy ISIS and support stability in the region 

without addressing the issue of Assad and his regime? 

What benchmarks are you using to evaluate progress against the Administration's Syria Strategy' 

ln Syria, how much U.S. assistance is implemented through the UN versus directly programmed? 

Can the U.S. and its partners realistically hope to destroy ISIS and support stability in the region 

without addressing the issue of Assad and his regime? 

The U S. Agency for International Development (USAID) works closely with the Departments of 

State and Defense on planning and implementation of the Administration's campaign plan to defeat 

the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (D-ISIS). The U.S. Government (USG) is committed to a peaceful 

resolution to the conflict in Syria through the Geneva Process led by the United Nations (UN). The 

USG calls upon the Assad Regime, Russi~ and Iran to fulfill UN Security Council Resolution 2254 

to convene parties to engage in formal negotiations. 

In areas liberated from ISIS, we have been working to restore essential services to allow for the 

voluntary return of internally displaced persons and refugees. The USG tracks activities undertaken, 

but impact will depend in the long-term by the numbers of returnees. lt is important to note that 

stabilization programming alone-while a necessary and important component of the D-lSlS 

strategy-is not sufficient to address the broader governance challenges that exist in Syria and 

allowed ISIS to emerge in the first place. A lasting solution will ultimately require a political 

settlement that addresses the grievances that allowed ISIS and other extremists to flourish there. 

At the program level, USAID actively monitors and evaluates the impact of our projects on an ongoing basis. USAID humanitarian assistance effectively relieves suffering of the Syria people, and 

our stabilization work actively engages local governing structures and communities who are taking 

part in their own recovery. 

USAID is not currently implementing any stabilization assistance in Syria through the UN. 

For humanitarian assistance, USAID provided approximately $185 million (out of a total of $522 

million) through UN agencies for emergency food, nutrition, health, water, sanitation and other lifesaving interventions in Syria in Fiscal Year 2017. This represented roughly 35 percent ofUSATD's 

humanitarian funding for Syria during the period. The Agency invested the rest through partner 

organizations. 

What is the Administration's strategy to address banking system problems in Yemen? 

The breakdown in Yemen's economic processes and systems has significantly worsened the alreadysevere humanitarian crisis facing the country. The Central Bank of Yemen (CBY) has a limited ability 
92


29388f-7.eps

to perfonn its basic functions and address larger monetary-policy challenges. Preventing the collapse 

of this institution - which has served critical tiscal and budgetary ti.mctions for the Yemeni 

Government- is necessary to addressing the wider crisis. 

With assistance from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USATD), the CBY recently 

completed the first step in a diagnostic assessment of its operational and technical capacity, led by 

the International Monetary Fund (lMF). If the assessment results in recommendations for how the 

international community can help restart the operational capability of the CBY, USATD will then 

work with the Bank's leadership, the TMF, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and other key 

partners on an agreement for the provision of effectively targeted technical and training support. 

What is the United States doing to ensure the Saudi blockade on Yemen's Hodeidah and Saleefports 

is permanently lifted for humanitarian and commercial goods? 

The Coalition has allowed commercial and humanitarian supplies into Hodeidah and Saleef ports 

since early December 2017, after temporarily closing Yemen's air, sea, and land points of entry on 

November 6, 2017. While the ports are now open, the uncertainty around the closure and continued 

delays have created a chilling effect on commercial shipping, which has not yet returned to preclosure levels. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USATD) continues to fund the 

United Nations (UN) Veritication and Inspection Mechanism (UNVTM), which provides a neutral, 

transparent process for clearing and inspecting vessels that arrive in ports not controlled by the 

legitimate Yemeni Government, and helps facilitate the flow of essential commercial goods while 

restricting the flow of illicit goods. In FY17, USATD provided $7 million towards these efforts. 

The Administration continues to urge the Coalition to allow the unfettered access of food, fuel, and 

medicine into Yemen. Deputy Secretary of State John Sullivan and I just met for the fourth time with 

UN agencies and international humanitarian organizations to reinforce our commitment to delivering 

these messages. Relief supplies and aid workers must be allowed to move freely through all entry 

points, and throughout the country. Given that commercial imports account for 90 percent of 

Yemen's food supply, it is critical that both humanitarian and commercial goods flow into and 

throughout the country without restriction. While the United States remains committed to relieving 

the suffering of the Yemeni people, humanitarian assistance alone cannot provide a solution to this 

contlict, which must come through a comprehensive political agreement. We fully support the work 

of our colleagues at the State Department and the UN Special Envoy to Yemen toward that end. 

What steps need to be taken to improve the flow of humanitarian aid to the areas of greatest need 

once that aid has entered Yemen? 

Even after humanitarian aid has entered Yemen, it often faces unnecessary delays before reaching its 

intended beneficiaries. The primary obstacles that delay aid from reaching populations of greatest 
93


29388f-8.eps

need are weak governance, physical bottlenecks, delivery of assistance across conflict lines, and the 

intervention oflocal authorities along transport routes and at aid- distribution points. All parties must 

allow relief supplies and aid workers to move freely through all entry points, and throughout the 

country. 

Coordination with the U.S. Department '~f Dt;{ense: After more than a decade of contlict in 

Afghanistan and the Middle East, the US has turned to foreign militaries and police to tight threats 

before they reach America's borders. Critics allege, however, that the management system and 

organizational structures that oversee U.S. engagement with allied and partner forces remain 

uncoordinated and ill-suited for current challenges. 

Ts there a security assistance sector lead within US AID~ Tf not, who is charged with coordinating 

those policy issues with the State Department, DoD, and the NSC staff7 

The Center of Excellence on Democracy, Human Rights and Governance (the DRG Center) in the 

Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance within the U.S. Agency for 

International Development (USAlD) serves as the Agency's lead on issues concerning security-sector 

assistance (SSA) and reform (SSR). The DRG Center and other offices in USAID have staff who are 

dedicated to working on the SSR portfolio, and who represent the Agency in interagency fora, 

including meetings convened by the National Security Council (NSC) USATD's Office of CivilianMilitary Cooperation (CMC) supports the DRG Center's engagement with the U.S. Department of 

Defense (DoD), by connecting both organizations on technical issues, fostering enduring 

relationships, and ensuring the synchronization of efforts The Bureau for Policy, Planning and 

Learning (PPL) and CMC work in close collaboration with other USAID stakeholders to ensure 

consistency of content and messaging, including on issues around SSA.USATD's team of Senior and 

Deputy Development Advisors (S/DDAs) embedded at t1ve of the six DoD Geographic Combatant 

Commands (GCCs), U S Special Operations Command, and the Pentagon, provide strategic 

guidance on both SSA and SSR to senior civilian and military leaders, in line with the DRG Center's 

technical guidance. Six months ago, T asked each Mission to appoint a Mission Civil-Military 

Coordinator (MC2) to advise and collaborate with DoD counterparts on developing and 

implementing our country strategies, also in line with the DRG Center's guidance on both SSA and 

SSR 

What USAID otllce provides guidance to DoD and the State Department on monitoring and 

evaluation and program design for high priority, long-term security assistance recipients" 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USATD) is not charged with providing guidance to 

the Departments of Defense (DoD) and State on monitoring and evaluation (M&E) or program 

design. Nonetheless, USAID does provide support to the interagency in developing policies and 

capabilities when requested, and we frequently collaborate and share tools with colleagues. In 
94


29388f-9.eps

Afghanistan, USAID has developed a comprehensive, multi-tiered monitoring system in part because 

U.S. Government civilian personnel are highly restricted in their movements, and their access to 

projects in the t!eld is severely constrained. In past years, during the combined civilian-military surge 

effort in Afghanistan, the U.S. military helped facilitate transportation to project sites, which played 

an integral role in supporting USATD's oversight. 

Information from DoD on the operating environment, when combined with program data, aids in 

verifying the effectiveness and validity of USATD programming in non-permissive and conflictaffected environments. 

USAID's Office of Civilian-Military Cooperation (CMC), as the Agency lead for coordination with 

DoD, embeds Senior and Deputy Development Advisors (S/DDAs) at the Pentagon, in tlve of the six 

Geographic Combatant Commands (GCCs), and U.S. Special Operations Command, to ensure 

planning initiatives, which include M&E, are aligned. At the country level, the USATD Mission 

Civil-Military Coordinators (MC2s) facilitate communication, coordination and collaboration 

between USAID and DoD. Through the Country Development Cooperation Strategy and Integrated 

Country Strategy processes, as well as DoD's Country Campaign Plans, USAID and DoD collaborate 

closely on foreign-policy and national-security objectives. M&E is part of these efforts, as USAID 

relies heavily on data, assessments, and reports from DoD, the United Nations, the World Bank, 

partner countries and others. 

Ukraine: The Administration has provided strong support for Ukraine, most recently by agreeing to 

sell Ukraine Javelin missiles to defend its people and territory from Russian aggression. However, 

Ukraine's reform efforts are falling short in many areas, especially combating corruption, with the 

TMF and other donors threatening to withhold additional funding unless repeatedly promised reforms 

in this crucial area are carried out. 

What are your plans to use the extensive U.S. assistance program in Ukraine to ensure that the 

government tully implements the reforms it has agreed to, especially those concerning corruption? 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has a robust program to support refonns 

in key sectors in Ukraine (e.g., justice, energy, health), and counter malign Kremlin influence and 

aggression. For example, in FY 17, US AID continued its support for regional investigative journalism 

through the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) which exposed over $20 

billion of Russian money that was laundered through Moldovan banks. 

ln an effort to promote greater transparency, the U.S. Government has worked to add greater 

conditionality to our assistance in Ukraine, terminate such assistance when it is not achieving 

expected results, and shift funding to areas in which the Government of Ukraine (GoU) has 

demonstrated legitimate commitment. Examples include the following· 

• The cancellation of the USAID Customs-Refonn Activity in September 2016, and the 

interagency U.S. Government decision not to pursue dedicated customs assistance; 
95


29388f-10.eps

• The discontinuation of assistance in energy-sector privatization in August 2017; and, 

• The withdrawal of support to the National Agency for the Prevention of Corruption (NAPC). 

As a result, USAID is moving away from smaller, more discrete activities in Ukraine toward larger, 

more-flexible activities so that, if we see a lack of political will or stalling on a certain issue, we can 

quickly shift to another area with greater potential for moving forward. USAID also seeks to reduce 

opportunities for corruption in Ukraine to improve the country's prospects for economic growth, 

improved governance, and integration with Europe. USAID's portfolio encompasses targeted anticorruption projects, and we maintain anti-corruption as a cross-cutting theme throughout all of our 

work in the country. 

USAID also regularly collaborates with other donors to consistently convey common messaging to 

GoU officials on adherence to conditionalities set by the International Monetary Fund (TMF) and G7 priorities, and to coordinate interventions. For example, on April 18, 2018, 1 met with the new 

Governor of the Central Bank of Ukraine, Yaldv Smolii, to reinforce the importance we place on 

combating corruption and fulfilling commitments to international standards for transparency and 

economic governance. 

What are you doing to ensure a complete and effective refonn of Naftogaz and the creation of a 

genuine energy market? 

The Ukranian gas-market law of 2015 required the unbundling of the operations of gas- transmission 

systems (TSO) from the supply and production of gas, and a new TSO should become operational 

shortly. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) continues to support the 

integration of Ukrainian natural-gas, electricity, and District heating markets into European Union 

(EU) energy markets, and to help increase the technical capacity of Ukraine's independent energy 

regulator. USAID is also providing funding to ensure the new TSO has a credible, independent 

supervisory board. 

USAID has launched a new $90 million energy-security activity in Ukraine to promote broader 

energy reforrn and the creation of a genuine national energy market. This program will provide 

comprehensive support to establish competitive gas markets with regulated transmission and 

distribution systems, and open competition in the production and supply of natural gas. The resulting 

etliciencies trom the establishment of competitive energy markets and generation and supply sectors, 

as well as regulated transmission and distribution under an independent and competent energy 

regulator, will make Ukraine less-dependent on energy imports from Russia. 

What is US AID doing to ensure that these microcredit programs help people move out of poverty 

and promote broader economic goals, while also ensuring that women are included in these efforts? 
96


29388f-11.eps

The U.S Agency for International Development (USAID) has supported the microt!nance industry 

for nearly 40 years, but our efforts have evolved to an approach that places greater emphasis on 

financial inclusion. We are now designing our work to engage a wider set of institutions in providing 

financial services and products, and to increase the use of digital financial services, such as mobile 

banking, to reach greater numbers of customers at lower cost, especially women, the extreme poor, 

and the most vulnerable. US AID also incorporates microenterprise-development into its activities in 

a number of sectors, including agriculture and health 

USAID also has been addressing financial inclusion across programming in many sectors-- from 

disaster assistance to food security, health, and counter-narcotics-- by supporting small savings-andloan cooperatives for populations the multilateral financial institutions (MFls) do not yet reach. Like 

our microcredit programs of the past, these financial-inclusion investments have a significant focus 

on women. They also emphasize access to technology, which otfers a lifeline to tinancing, critical 

healthcare, opportunities for education, civic- participation, and entrepreneurship that were once out 

of reach for many people. 

USAID also helps women enter the formal banking system by working to establish and improve 

credit bureaus, land tenure, movable-asset collateral systems, and digital platforms, as well as the use 

of tinancial technology with the greatest development potential. Such so-called "tinancial 

deepening" is a critical factor to achieving both financial inclusion and economic growth. On March 

8, 2018, together with Advisor to the President lvanka Trump, 1 launched the WomenConnect 

Challenge, a global call for solutions to improve women's participation in everyday life by 

meaningfully changing the ways women and girls access and use technology, including for financing. 

Should USAID have the authority to support SMEs in addition to microenterprises? 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) currently has the authority to support small 

and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and we have increased our engagement in this area as our 

understanding of financial inclusion has evolved over the years. Programs for both 

microfinance/microenterprises and SMEs serve separate, but important, functions within the bigger 

agenda of providing pathways out of poverty through economic empowerment. Finance for povertyalleviation requires economic growth and job-creation -- best achieved by working with SMEs in 

addition to microenterprises. Evidence shows SMEs are the key economic actors that drive jobcreation, which is the primary pathway out of poverty for most of the population. By working with 

SMEs along the value chain, USAID can have impact at greater scale. 

For instance, using standard business motivations (e.g., higher protits), USATD fosters the 

development of the business and agronomy knowledge of agro-dealers so they can effectively pass 

that knowledge to their clients -- and grow their businesses. By working through market systems in 

such ways, USATD can reach more smallholder farmers than we could by training individual farmers 

on how to use supplies they might not be even able to obtain consistently. Smallholder farmer 

microenterprises not only see higher yields and increased incomes, but have higher-quality products 
97


29388f-12.eps

that open up new sales channels. The best fanners will have access to the right products at the right 

time, and be able to hire their neighbors who would prefer not to be farmers to do value-added work 

such as packaging. 

Women, Peace and Security Strategy: Last year Congress passed the Women, Peace and Security 

Act, which requires the Administration to produce an interagency strategy to increase the 

representation of women in negotiations to end and recover from conflict overseas. 

What steps has USAID taken to strengthen efforts to include the voices of women in preventing and 

ending contlict? 

What role has USATD played in drafting the Women, Peace, and Security Strategy? 

The Women, Peace of Security Act of 2017 (WPS) affirms that women are integral to achieving 

lasting peace and national security. The U S. Agency for International Development (USAID) invests 

in programming to empower and protect women and girls in countries affected by crisis, contlict, and 

violent extremism to improve prospects for durable peace and support countries on a path to self~ 

reliance ln the past two years, USAID's WPS programming has supported the substantive 

participation of more than 70,000 women in critical peace-building processes aimed at preventing 

conflict or securing lasting peace following the end of violent conflict at local, national, and regional 

levels. ln South Sudan, for example, US AID assistance is strengthening the ability of citizens and 

civil society to engage government constructively in key consensus-building, peace, and 

reconciliation processes. USATD funding to South Sudanese civil society supports the Women's 

Monthly Forum and the participation of women's groups in the peace process sponsored by the 

Intergovernmental Authority on Development. ln Burma, USAID-financed activities are working to 

enhance women's voice and representation in the country's historic national dialogue processes 

aimed at establishing a lasting basis for peace 

This programming includes a rapid-response mechanism to provide resources -- including 

transportation and child care -- to support the participation of women leaders in peace dialogues and 

related trainings, as well as small grant funds to increase women's capacity to engage on issues 

discussed in the peace negotiations, such as security-sector reform; federalism; and the safe, 

voluntary, and dignified return of internally displaced persons. 

What impact would the proposed decrease in Democracy and Governance funding have on the U.S. 

ability to promote democracy amid political crises in Ethiopia, Kenya, the Democratic Republic of 

Congo, and Burundi, as well as political transitions in Zimbabwe and South Africa? What programs 

and countries will remain key priorities for democracy and governance funding? How will this request 

prioritize election support and observation missions? 
98


29388f-13.eps

The U.S Agency for International Development (USAID) shares the Committee's commitment to 

promoting democracy, human rights and governance. Democratic backsliding and political crises are 

concerning trends in many African countries where USAID works. We remain committed to 

supporting legitimate, democratic transitions across the continent, and to taking action to support new 

opportunities to open political and civic space. 

US AID continues to work with our partners to leverage U.S. investment and ensure continued support 

for democracy, human rights, and governance, including through the promotion of good governance 

across development sectors to help guarantee progress in economic growth, health and education. 

Our Missions have developed close working relationships with other donors on election programs, 

which has led to more coordinated, co-funded activities. We will continue to seek out these 

opportunities and build new partnerships with international and domestic organizations to support 

Atiican countries on their journey to self-reliance. We will prioritize countries and programs for 

democracy and governance funds that reflect U.S national-security interests and also address local 

needs and the potential for programmatic impact. 

For example, the leadership transition in the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia presents the 

best opportunity in decades for possible policy change to address the grievances that are driving social 

unrest in the country. Tf conditions allow, USA TO will support democratic reforms to enhance 

citizen-responsive governance and respect for human rights. We have consistently and vocally 

advocated for space for local civil-society organizations (CSOs) to operate freely, despite the current 

legal restrictions on them and charitable organizations We support legal aid services for Ethiopian 

CSOs and others, and also build the capacity of some local NGOs that are still able to operate. In FY 

2017, US AID provided a bilateral allocation of $4.5M to democracy, human rights, and governance 

(DRG) programs in Ethiopia through implementing partners such as Pact, Inc. and Justice For AllPrison Fellowship Ethiopia. 

The Republic of Kenya risks democratic backsliding as the Government has sought to curtail the 

powers of the judiciary, media and civil society while the opposition has pursued extra- constitutional 

means to address its grievances following the prolonged and disputed 2017 presidential election. The 

recent political reconciliation between President Kenyatta and opposition leader Raila Odinga is a 

positive step toward healing Kenya's ethnic and political divisions, but both parties need to follow it 

with concrete actions. US AID programs continue to fund civil society, an independent judiciary, and 

a national dialogue to resolve long-standing political and economic issues. USA TO will focus on 

strengthening Kenya's nascent devolution processes to increase the government's accountability to 

its citizens and address local grievances often manipulated to undermine national cohesion. In FY 

2017, USAID provided $17 million to DRG programs in Kenya through partners such as the State 

University of New Y ark's Center for International Development and Act Change Transform (Act I), 

a Kenyan NGO. 

The elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) scheduled for December 2018 would be 

the country's first-ever peaceful and democratic transition of power, but this goal requires the Kabila 

Government to !alee concrete steps to advance the electoral process. U SAID has provided democracy, 

human rights, and governance funding in the DRC since 2013 to build the foundation for this 

transition of power, including assistance to the National Electoral Commission, civic and voter 

education, and political-party strengthening. In FY 2017, USAID provided $23 million to DRG 
99


29388f-14.eps

programs in DRC through partners such as Counterpart International. 

In the Republic of Burundi, where space for civil society and media is extremely limited, USAID 

continues to make small-scale investments in promoting the civic, political, and economic rights of 

Burundian citizens; advancing freedom of speech and access to information; and building consensus 

and social cohesion. In FY 2017, USAID provided $3 million to DRG programs in Burundi. 

The unexpected end of Robert Mugabe's 37-year tenure as President of the Republic of Zimbabwe 

presents an opening for Zimbabweans to realize the democratic and economic reforms they deserve. 

President Mnangagwa needs to produce concrete change, not merely promising statements. Thanks 

to advanced planning and a scenario-based strategy, USAID hasquickly and successfully pivoted its 

programming to capitalize on new opportunities. To leverage the current opening, USAID has 

expanded its funding to help civil society and democratic activists promote the education and 

mobilization of voters and oversight of the overall electoral process. In FY 2017, USAID provided 

a bilateral allocation of $14.8 million to DRG programs in Zimbabwe through partners such as the 

International Foundation for Electoral Systems and the Southern African Parliamentary Support 

Trust 

Despite its economic position, the Republic of South Mrica is increasingly politically fragile, because 

of concerns over "state capture" by influential business interests that led to the ouster of President 

Jacob Zuma in 2017. South Africa's governing party, the African National Congress (ANC), recently 

elected new leadership, which will need to address the issues of corruption that plague the current 

administration. USAID strengthens democracy in South Africa through programs that use new 

technologies, as well as traditional platforms, to provide constructive avenues for citizens to connect 

with government and elected officials, while promoting social cohesion and helping to reduce 

violence. In FY 2017, USAID provided a $3 million to DRG programs in South Mrica. 

Power Atrica. The Electrify Africa Act was enacted into law in 2016, establishing the policy of the 

United States to promote tlrst-time access to power and power services for at least 50,000,000 people 

in sub-Saharan Africa and encourage the installation of at least 20,000 additional megawatts of 

electrical power in sub-Saharan Africa by 2020 using a broad mix of energy options to help reduce 

poverty, promote sustainable development, and drive inclusive economic growth. USAID has been 

at the forefront of implementing the law, through its Power Africa initiative. ln March, the 

Administration announced a strategy for "Power Africa 2.0", which includes plans to expand beyond 

previous targets for increased energy generation, access, distribution, and transmission. 

Could you please elaborate on the expansion of targets for energy generation and access? 

Please describe the economic impact of Power Mrica on the continent What have been the biggest 

challenges to the Power Africa initiative and how can they be overcome? 

Power Athca 2.0 will emphasize increasing access and facilitating enabling environments to unleash 

the potential of the 800 generation projects Power Atrica is currently tracking, and ensure the gains 

achieved under the Electrify Africa Act are sustainable over the long-term. New generation projects 
100


29388f-15.eps

will not be able to deliver power, or have a development impact, unless transmission and distribution 

infrastructure are in place to provide customers with electricity. 

Policy environments must enable continued private investment over the long-term. 

While maintaining its transaction-driven approach, under 2.0, Power Africa will pivot to accomplish 

the following: 

• Increase the focus on government reforms and strengthening electric utilities to improve 

service-delivery and mitigate investment risk; 

Strengthen advocacy for policy reforms by building coalitions with like-minded bilateral and 

multilateral partners; 

Identify and use new risk-mitigation tools to facilitate increased private-sector investment in 

the power sector; 

• Expand planning support to help the private sector anticipate and respond to opportunities; 

and 

Increase U.S. private-sector competitiveness through targeted activities in viable markets. 

The US. Agency for International Development (USAID) will continue to fund Power Africa's 

transaction advisors, and increase the program's focus on strengthening technical and managerial 

capacity within electric utilities. Power Africa will also work to strengthen power- procurement 

processes, and ensure a more-transparent, level playing field for the private sector. 

Power Africa's economic impact on the African continent includes the facilitation of an increased 

power supply for commercial and industrial activities, improved livelihoods through the first-time 

provision of electricity, and the growth oflocal entrepreneurship and small businesses. For example, 

the 27 South African renewable Independent Power Projects (IPPs) signed in March 2018 with 

support from Power Africa are expected to generate nearly 60,000 local jobs, and over US$ 4 billion 

of new investment The Ghana Early Power gas project, which Power Africa backs through technical 

assistance and a loan guarantee, involves several 

US. companies, and is expected to provide 19 percent of Ghana's electricity and generate at least 

$90 million in U.S exports. Power Africa's work in Nigeria to help distribution companies reduce 

their losses has helped them collectively generate US$ 83 million in new revenues. 

Question: 

China Foreign Assistance: On March 13, 2018 China announced a new Agency to coordinate foreign 

assistance, draft policies, make grants, and supervise projects. Tn creating the Agency, a senior 

Chinese official said the move is designed "to give full play to foreign aid as a key means of majorcountry diplomacy," enhance its coordination and "better serve the nation's diplomatic strategy." 

China gives aid mainly to Athca but commercial interests are more geographically dispersed, and 

according to AidData, between 2000 and 2014, Chinese official finance was at $354.3 billion. During 

the same period, U.S. official finance was at $394.6 billion. Official finance includes grants, 

concessionalloans, and non-concessional commercial loans. 

Where is engagement between USAID and China headed? 
101


29388f-16.eps

Answer: 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is reviewing our strategy for engaging 

with the People's Republic of China to ensure alignment with the President's National Security 

Strategy and the National Security Council's Indo-Pacific strategic framework. 

Part ofUSATD's approach is to highlight the clear choice between how the United States approaches 

development-- local capacity-building aimed at increasing selt~reliance, and building the privatesector foundations for trade, investment and equitable and socially responsible growth--with how 

China has implemented foreign assistance to date. China tends to push illusory deals that result in 

untenable debt burdens and the loss of control over productive resources by host countries. As we 

assess and refine our strategy, we are maintaining our engagement with China on efforts that help 

protect the United States from national-security threats, such as pandemics. 

Does China participate in international coordination meetings in foreign assistance? 

While the People's Republic of China (PRC) participates in higher-level pledging conferences 

convened by the United Nations, it is rare for representatives of the PRC to be present in the regular 

donor-coordination discussions that occur in aid-recipient countries. 

What are the goals of China's assistance in Africa? 

Answer: 

An extension of the "One Belt, One Road Initiative," Chinese foreign assistance in Africa is a part of 

a global, multi-pronged strategy to advance Beijing's national-security posture, meet economic 

needs, and mitigate domestic challenges. High-interest, opaque lending has led to a Chinese military 

presence in strategic locations, such as Djibouti. At the same time, swaps of Chinese foreign 

assistance for extractive resources provide raw materials for China's growing manufacturing 

industries. Chinese infrastructure projects provide jobs for imported Chinese labor, and build a 

growing market for Chinese goods and services, underwritten by government export credits and risk 

insurance. 

Question: 

Do you have evidence that China is adopting internationally agreed standards for providing foreign 

assistance? 

The People's Republic of China is one of the largest borrowers from multilateral development banks, 

such as the World Bank, the International Finance Corporation, and the Asian Development Bank, 
102

f


29388f-17.eps

and therefore is compelled to adopt internationally agreed standards to continue to have access to 

these resources (used for domestic projects). However, information on China's foreign assistance is 

not publicly available, and no reliable otl'icial sources exist to ascertain its compliance with 

internationally agreed standards, nor its effectiveness or sustainability. Various stalceholders in China 

have expressed interest in learning from AidData's approach to collecting and analyzing Chinese 

Official Development Assistance. 

Question: 

What countries are we calling on China to contribute to, just as we do with key allies" 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USATD) is not asking the People's Republic of 

China (PRC) to contribute to any particular country, but we are asking the PRC to assume greater 

financial responsibility, enhance transparency, and increase its share of the burden in funding 

multilateral institutions. 
103


29388g-1.eps

Questions for the Record from Ranking Member Eliot Engel 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

Fur the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21, 2018 

I am concerned that the FY2019 budget says that HIV/AIDS funding will be sufficient for 

"maintaining all current patients on antiretroviral treatment" Unfortunately, this budget says 

nothing about people who live with HIV, but do not know their status and, as such, are not yet on 

treatment Will you commit that the United States will continue working to identify and treat all 

people living with HIV in every country served by those programs? 

The US. Global AIDS Coordinator at the US Department of State, Ambassador Deborah Birx, 

M.D., leads the US. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief(PEPF AR). The US. Agency for 

International Development (USAID) serves as a key implementer of PEPFAR in more than 50 

countries through direct bilateral and regional programs, and as part of the interagency team that 

manages the US Government's relationship with the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, 

and Malaria. 

The President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 will allow PEPFAR to implement its 

new 2017-2020 Strategy for working toward sustained epidemic control in 13 priority countries 

with the highest burden ofHIV I AIDS. Furthennore, as Ambassador Birx has indicated, the Request 

will allow PEPFAR to ensure that patients who are currently on anti- retroviral therapy (ART) 

continue to receive it, by identifying efficiencies in the prevention, treatment and care of 

HIV/AIDS, including by making use oflower-cost drugs. 

Last month, the Administration released its review of the expanded Mexico City Policy. The report 

claims that there have been no service disruptions due to the policy, but that is not what we've heard 

from the tield and seen in the media. For example, in Mozambique, the provider AMODEFA has 

closed 18 youth-friendly clinics and 72 mobile clinics. In Swaziland, the provider FLAS has 

reduced geographic coverage from 14 towns to 4. In Botswana, BOFWA has closed one clinic and 

scaled back services at 7 others. What actions are USAID taking to address these gaps in services 

and to mitigate the negative impacts of your Mexico City Policy? How will the next Policy review 

evaluate these types of service disruptions? 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) takes compliance with the Protecting 

Life in Global Health Assistance (PLGHA) policy very seriously, and continues to monitor 

implementation of the policy in its global health programs. As in the past, U.S. Government (USG) 

Departments and Agencies continue to reprogram to other organizations any USG global health 
104


29388g-2.eps

assistance funding they would have awarded to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that do 

not agree to the conditions set on the acceptance of U.S. funding under the PLGHA policy, while 

minimizing disruption of services. 

The Department of State (State) is the lead agency in reviewing the PLGHA policy, and recognizes 

that the initial evaluation took place early in the policy's implementation. As a result, State will 

lead an additional interagency review of the implementation of the PLGHA policy in late 2018, in 

which USAID will participate. This further review of the policy is expected to be a more-thorough 

examination of the benetits, challenges, and potential impact of the policy on the ground, based on 

more extensive experience in implementing it. 

The Administration has proposed cutting international family planning by more than 50 percent. A 

cut this large is expected to result in 3. 76 million more unintended pregnancies, 1.59 million more 

abortions- most of which are provided in unsafe conditions- and 7,637 more maternal deaths. Can 

you explain why you are putting so many women and families at risk and how you plan to address 

the potential lives lost by these cuts? 

With the implementation plan for the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy in place, 

the President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 proposes $302 million in new funding 

for voluntary family planning and reproductive-health investments. 

Consistent with the Administration's support for international programs to empower women, United 

States remains the largest donor of bilateral assistance in voluntary family planning. Other donors 

and the governments of host countries are assuming more of the funding responsibility for family 

planning and reproductive health, however, which is a welcome trend. For example, at the 2017 

London Summit on Family Planning, 14 donor governments pledged $2.6 billion toward 

international family-planning assistance, of which $1.25 billion is estimated to be new funding. 

Seventeen developing-country governments made domestic financing commitments, for a total of 

approximately $3.8 billion, which marks a growing commitment by partner countries to fund their 

own programs. 

The review of the expanded Mexico City Policy that was published last month focused on the 

implementation of the policy and challenges to its implementation. Will you commit to conducting 

an annual study on the impact of the expanded Mexico City Policy - specifically, the impact on 

service provision and the individuals who rely on these services? 

The Department of State (State) is the lead agency in reviewing the Protecting Life in Global Health 

Assistance (PLGHA) policy, and recognizes that the initial evaluation took place early in the 
105


29388g-3.eps

policy's implementation. As a result, State will lead an additional interagency review of the 

implementation of the PLGHA policy in late 2018, in which the US. Agency for International 

Development (USAID) will participate. This turther review of the policy is expected to be a morethorough examination of the benefits, challenges, and potential impact on the ground, based on 

more-extensive experience in implementing the policy. 

Specifically, how has USAID reallocated FY 17 funds that were appropriated for UNFPA ($32 5 

million)? Can you assure us that any transferred funds will be going to our existing international 

family planning and reproductive health programs that support access to contraceptives and work 

to combat child marriage, gender-based violence, and female genital mutilation? 

The Department of State has transferred $32.5 million in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 funds originally 

allocated to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) from the International Organizations 

and Programs account to the Global Health Programs-US. Agency for International Development 

(USAID) account, as a required by Section 7082(b) of the FY 2017 Department of State, Foreign 

Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act (2017 SFOAA). USAID will make the FY 

2017 funds available for voluntary family planning and maternal and women's health activities, 

subject to the ret,'lllar notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations. 

Tuberculosis is now the leading global infectious disease killer, killing I. 7 million people a year, 

and drug resistance is growing. How can USAID continue its vital work in building capacity to 

t!nally end this disease with the cuts proposed in the budget? 

The Administration continues to prioritize combating infectious-disease threats, including 

tuberculosis (TB ), under the Global Health Security Agenda. The President's Budget Request for 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 proposes the same level of tunding for efforts to eliminate TB around the 

world as the FY 2018 request US. Government leadership is engaged in planning for the HighLevel Meeting on TB at the United Nations General Assembly in September, and we will continue 

to encourage the governments of countries with high burdens ofTB and the ability to pay to increase 

their political and financial commitments to tlghting the disease, as well as to seek opportunities to 

raise matching private capital. 

This September, the United Nations will hold the tlrst ever higb-level meeting on tuberculosis. How 

will the US. ensure that the tlnal declaration by the Heads of State goes beyond rhetoric and 

includes a means of objectively tracking progress towards key milestones in the effort to end this 

disease? 
106


29388g-4.eps

Controlling tuberculosis (TB) is an important milestone on a country's journey to self- reliance, and 

key to advancing the health and prosperity of its population. Since many of the countries with the 

highest burden ofTB have the ability to increase their domestic financial investments to combat the 

disease, the US Agency for International Development (USAID) recognizes this year's HighLevel Meeting of the United Nations General Assembly as a rare opportunity to encourage Heads 

of State to make bold public commitments, and as a call to action for more bilateral and multilateral 

donors, the private sector, and affected countries to do their part to end TB. In the lead-up to the 

meeting, South Africa's Ministry of Health and the Prime Minister of India have already made 

ambitious statements on eliminating TB in their countries, with concrete deliverables. USAID is in 

dialogue with other countries and leaders to secure more such commitments from governments, as 

well as from the private sector. We are also working with the World Health Organization and other 

partners to develop a multi -sectoral accountability framework to measure progress towards meeting 

the TB 2030 goals. 

I understand that there is a review of FY18 assistance to the Palestinians and perhaps Palestinian 

assistance more generally. What is the status of this review? What is the timeline for the completion 

of the review? What are the issues that are being considered in this review? In the context of 

Palestinian assistance, is it appropriate to condition humanitarian assistance on political progress? 

US. Government assistance to the Palestinians remains under review, and no decision has yet been 

reached. The Administration seeks to identify how to leverage all our foreign assistance to achieve 

our policy objectives in the region. 

We have long voiced the need to seek out new voluntary funding streams and increase burdensharing among donors, and the President is committed to ensuring that American foreign assistance 

serves American interests. 

Hurricanes Irma and Maria devastated the Caribbean this falL They tlattened the islands of 

Dominica and Barbud~ and wreaked havoc through much of the region. Why was there no 

assistance for post-hurricane reconstruction in the Caribbean in your FY20 19 budget? Will you use 

existing funding for reconstruction efforts and to make Caribbean countries more resilient to future 

natural disasters? Please provide a breakdown of how you will do so. 

In response to the devastation of Hurricanes Irma and Maria, the Offices of U.S. Foreign Disaster 

Assistance (OFDA) and Food for Peace (FFP) within the US. Agency for International 
107


29388g-5.eps

Development (USAID) and the US Department of Defense (DoD) provided nearly $22 million in 

humanitarian assistance to respond to the hurricanes that affected Antigua and Barbuda, The 

Bahamas, Dominica, St. Kitts and Nevis, Saint-Martin, and Sint Maarten. Within that total, US AID 

provided more than $6.3 million in direct assistance to Dominica, and $100,000 to Antigua and 

Barbuda. USAID also airlifted critical relief supplies to both countries as soon as conditions 

allowed. 

As part of our disaster-preparedness mandate, US AID's experts are continuing to work throughout 

the year to prepare for the next hurricane season by collaborating closely with governments in the 

Latin America and Caribbean region to make sure they have emergency and evacuation plans in 

place. We are also training and providing technical assistance to national disaster organizations 

and first responders to help build local capacity. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2017, USAID/OFDA provided 

nearly $35 million in tunding for disaster-risk-reduction activities throughout the Hemisphere, 

including in the Caribbean. USAID/OFDA will continue to work with governments and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in the region to build their ability to prepare for, and respond 

to, disasters in the coming years. 

At this time, the US. Government has not committed or redirected previously appropriated funds 

for reconstruction in the Caribbean, nor does the President's Budget Request for FY 2019 propose 

explicitly designating tunds for post-hurricane reconstruction. USAID continues to work with other 

donors, the private sector, and the World Bank to assess the long- tenn reconstruction needs in the 

region. The international community is conducting assessments, and could contribute tuture 

tunding for reconstruction etiorts based on the findings of these analyses. 

However, the President's Budget Request for FY 2019 does include funds for the Caribbean Basin 

Security Initiative, which addresses crime, violence, and other illegal activities that threaten the 

United States by strengthening maritime border controls, countering illegal trafficking, and 

combating the root causes of participation in crime and violence. 

In addition, USAID programs in the region are currently investing prior-year funds to advance the 

Caribbean 2020 Strategy, including through programs that strengthen regional resilience to 

emergencies and disasters in the Caribbean and serve US. national security and economic interests. 

Question: 

The US. Strategy for Central America has had broad, bipartisan support in Congress, and I am 

pleased that it is tinally up and running. Unfortunately, the President's immigration policies run 

counter to everything that US AID is doing in the subregion. On one hand, US AID is addressing the 

root causes of child migration in Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. On the other hand, the 

President is planning to send TPS holders back to El Salvador and DACA recipients back to all 

three countries. If the President is able to move fonvard with his deportation policies, how would 

that impact your work in Central America? How, if at all, are you planning for this possibility? 
108


29388g-6.eps

The work of the US. Agency for International Development (USAID) in the Northern Triangle 

advances the US. Strategy for Central America, and focuses on addressing the drivers of irregular 

migration and disrupting the pathways of transnational crime and illicit activity. 

Since 2015, USAID has funded the International Organization for Migration in all three Northern 

Triangle countries to support the safe and dignified return of illegal migrants from the United States 

and Mexico. The total estimated cost from 2015-2023 is $36.9 million, with $8.5 million planned 

from FY 2017 funds. The majority this work has focused on addressing the immediate needs of 

returnees, while at the same time supporting the longer-term repatriation efforts of the host 

governments. 

Together with host-country governments, fellow donors, and interagency partners, USAID is 

assessing opportunities to assist an increasing number of returnees in Central America through 

existing as well as expanded programming. Since December 2017, each USAID Mission in the 

Northern Triangle has conducted a bilateral meeting on migration planning, and 

the three Missions will meet in San Salvador in early May to continue the review of ongoing 

programs, and assess new information on the rates of returnees to the region. 

USAID is in ret,>ular contact with counterpart agencies, including the Departments of State and 

Homeland Security, to coordinate regarding potential programs and approaches to accommodate 

increased levels of repatriations in Central America, with a focus on preventing recidivism. 

There have been dramatic changes in several key African countries in recent months, including the 

departure ofRobertMugabe in Zimbabwe, release ofhundreds of political prisoners and resignation 

of Prime Minister Hailemariam in Ethiopia, and the 'selt: inaut,>uration' of Raila Odinga, followed 

by a heavy-handed government response, in Kenya. Each change presents both threats to 

democratic governance and, possibly, opportunities to open political space. At the same time, the 

Administration is requesting $124 million for democracy and governance programming in Atnca 

to be managed by USAID, a 59% decrease compared to FY20 17. What impact would the proposed 

decrease in democracy and governance funding for Atnca have on the US. ability to promote 

democracy amid political crises? What is USAID doing in these three countries to support domestic 

champions of democratic governance and promote sustainable governance reforms? 

The stall' of the US. Agency for International Development (US AID) and I share the Committee's 

commitment to promoting democracy, human rights and governance. Democratic backsliding is a 

concerning trend in many African countries where USAID works, but supporting legitimate 

democratic transitions across the continent is part of our core mission, as is taking action to provide 

new opportunities to open political and civic space. USAID continues to work with partners to 

leverage US. investment and ensure support for democracy and citizen- responsive governance, 
109


29388g-7.eps

including the promotion of good governance to help improve progress in economic growth, health 

and education. 

USAID plans to provide funding for the upcoming political processes in countries across Africa, 

including in Mali, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and Nigeria, all of which arefacing 

pivotal transitions. USAID programs work to improve the transparency and accountability of 

electoral institutions, and engage all stakeholders - parties, candidates, civil society, and voters- to 

participate in political processes and use appropriate channels to resolve disputes peacefully. 

Zimbabwe 

The unexpected end of Robert Mugabe's 37-year rule presents an opening for Zimbabweans to 

realize the democratic and economic reforms they deserve. President Mnangagwa needs to produce 

concrete reforms, not merely issue promising statements. Thanks to advanced planning and the 

scenario-based strategy developed by our Mission in Harare, USAID has quickly and successfully 

pivoted its programming to capitalize on new opportunities presented by the change in leadership. 

USAID promotes more-accountable, democratic governance by supporting active engagement by 

citizens that serves the interests of all Zimbabweans. Specifically, US AID has expanded its funding 

to civil-society and democratic activists to promote increased education and mobilization of voters, 

and oversight of the overall electoral process. USAID assistance also promotes an improved legal 

environment for a credible electoral process through locally driven advocacy and strategic 

litigation. In FY 2016 and FY 2017, US AID provided central and bilateral allocations of$ 28.4M 

to democracy, human rights, and governance (DRG) programs in Zimbabwe. 

Ethiopia 

The recent leadership transition in Ethiopia presents the best opportunity in decades for possible 

democratic reforms to address the grievances that have been driving social unrest in the country. If 

conditions allow, USAID will support democratic refonns to enhance citizen- responsive 

governance and respect for human rights. USAID has consistently and vocally advocated for space 

for civil-society organizations (CSOs) to operate freely in Ethiopia, given the current government 

restrictions on CSOs and charitable organizations. USAID continues to fund legal aid services for 

Ethiopian CSOs and others, and, where possible, also builds the capacity of some local nongovernmental organizations that are still able to operate. In FY 2016 and FY 2017, USAID 

provided a bilateral allocation of $6.0M for DRG programming in Ethiopia. 

Kenya 

Kenya risks democratic backsliding, as the Kenyatta Government has sought to curtail the powers 

of the judiciary, media and civil society, while the opposition has pursued extra- constitutional 

means to address its grievances following the prolonged and disputed 2017 presidential election 

process. The recent political reconciliation between President Kenyatta and opposition leader Raila 

Odinga is a positive step toward healing Kenya's ethnic and political divisions, but both parties 

need to follow up with concrete actions. USAID's programs in Kenya support civil society, an 

independent judiciary, and a national dialogue to resolve long-standing political and economic 

issues. US AID will continue its focus on strengthening Kenya's nascent devolution processes, to 
110


29388g-8.eps

increase the Government's accountability to its citizens and address local grievances often 

manipulated to undermine national cohesion. USAID will also leverage local development 

opportunities to bring together county-level branches of Kenya's opposing political parties in an 

attempt to bridge the political divide that remains from the contentious 2017 election cycle. In FY 

2016 and FY 2017, USAID provided central and bilateral allocations of $29.1M for DRG 

programming in Kenya. 

The US. is contributing significant amounts of security assistance to Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, 

Chad, and Mauritania in support of etiorts to counter terrorism and illicit trafficking in the Sahel. 

However, these countries are fragile-their democracies are not consolidated; many of their people 

live in poverty; their militaries have capacity challenges and sometimes commit human rights 

abuses. What are your thoughts on how development and stabilization work by USAID could better 

support counterterrorism etiorts in the Sahel? How is USAID contributing to building community 

resilience and promoting good governance to ensure that these countries are stable, democratic 

allies? 

West Africa continues to be prone to acute shocks and chronic vulnerabilities, with varied causes: 

scarcity of water, extreme weather, high levels of poverty, minimal access to healthcare, poor 

governance, and increased conflict and violent extremism. Violent extremist organizations (VEOs), 

such as Boko Haram and Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), have displaced millions from 

their homes and communities, and reversed economic and social progress in vast swathes of the 

Sahel and the Lake Chad Basin. Programs funded by the US. Agency for International 

Development (USAID) address these challenges, by facilitating growth, contributing to improved 

health, and helping countries in West Africa break out of chronic poverty. These etiorts assist 

households and communities become more resilient and less- vulnerable to shocks and stresses, as 

well as less-susceptible to the influence of VEOs. 

Programming to Counter Violent Extremism (CVE): USAID's CVE investments in West Africa 

focus on supporting national governments to prevent and thwart violence and instability, and 

promote resilient, functioning societies. For example, USAID's Partnerships for Peace program 

collaborates with West African regional institutions - such as the Economic Community of West 

African States (ECOW AS) and the Group of Five Sahel neighbors (GS) -- to improve security, 

develop CVE strategies, and reduce vulnerability to conflict of at-risk communities. The project 

also supports networks of West African advocacy and practitioner groups to improve CVE 

coordination. USAID's Voices for Peace program promotes moderate figures to advance peace 

and tolerance in high-risk areas of the Sahel by producing and broadcasting radio and video 

programs in local languages on the themes of peace, tolerance, good governance, and human rights. 

In addition, USAID's Office of Transition Initiatives has expanded programming in the Lake Chad 

Basin to respond to the challenges ofBoko Haram and the Islamic State-West Africa. This work 

addresses key drivers of extremism, including marginalization and exclusion in at-risk 

communities, by supporting local governments' responsiveness to their constituents, and enhancing 

activities by civil society to promote peace and encourage government-citizen collaboration. 
111


29388g-9.eps

Resilience Programming: USAID's resilience investments in West Africa seek to address the 

underlying causes of vulnerability and risk that lead to a cycle of humanitarian crisis and response 

whenever a climatic or other shock occurs. For example, USAID's Resilience in the Sahel 

Enhanced (RISE) initiative in Burkina Faso and Niger targets chronically vulnerable people through 

a combination of humanitarian and development programming. The project's activities in 

agriculture, access to micro-finance, the management of natural resources and health focus on 

resilience-enhancing practices that have benefitted over two million people since 20 13.EarlyWarning of and Response to Conflict: To get ahead of crises, US AID funds ECOW ARN, a project 

in early-warning and response that aims to improve the ability of West Athcans to anticipate and 

mitigate conflict of all types. In addition, USAID's Mitigating Election Violence through National 

Early-Warning Systems project hopes to diminish electoral violence in West Atrican countries, by 

expanding and strengthening national networks that provide early warning of conflict. 

Question: 

The turmoil in South Sudan, which started in late 2013, has clearly required USAID to change its 

approach to the country, focusing more on humanitarian assistance than development. However, 

there are several states in South Sudan that are less atiected by the conflict. What types of 

development programs is USAID able to continue doing in the country and how has your approach 

to development changed given the circumstances~ 

Since South Sudan's conflict began in December 2013, the U.S. Agency for International 

Development (USAID) has shifted its development assistance from traditional programs focused 

on improving government capacity and institution-building to meeting the basic needs of the people 

of South Sudan. The horrors of the conflict are now so catastrophic and widespread- nearly half 

the South Sudanese population needs food assistance, and atrocities, including rampant sexual 

violence, are occurring with total impunity- that they have gravely affected nearly all the country's 

citizens. 

Despite the U.S. Government's sustained pressure on the Govermnent of South Sudan to use public 

resources responsibly and provide for its people, most South Sudanese are not receiving any 

services tram the Kiir Administration. To maximize access to basic health care, phannaceuticals 

and health commodities for South Sudanese citizens, US AID works with other donors to contribute 

to the Health Pooled Fund, which provides essential health care in eight of South Sudan's I 0 legacy 

states through an agreement with the United Kingdom Department for International Development. 

USAID-funded programs are also increasing access to safe drinking water, providing basic 

sanitation services, promoting good hygiene practices, and helping prevent and respond to genderbased violence, through an agreement with the International Organization for Migration. 

South Sudan has the world's highest proportion of out-of-school children-72 percent of primary 

schoolers -and the lowest literacy rate, at 27 percent. After the conflict began, USAID shifted 

from traditional education assistance to emergency education programming to reach children and 

youth displaced by conflict. USAID-funded programs provide safe spaces for students to learn not 

only basic literacy and numeracy, but also life skills, such as preventing gender-based violence and 
112


29388g-10.eps

practicing good hygiene to avoid illness, through UNICEF. Without this assistance, decades of 

development potential could be lost 

To help address widespread food insecurity and livelihoods ruined by displacement and violence, 

USAID is investing with the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization to prevent 

households in targeted areas from slipping into more-dire levels of food insecurity by helping them 

rebuild agriculture, fisheries, and livestock-production. 

The flexibility of USAID's conflict-mitigation program in South Sudan (contract with AECOM, 

$11.5 million in FY 2017) enables the Agency to help prevent local-level disputes from feeding 

into the larger national conflict by funding a broad array of grassroots and nascent local 

organizations involved in peace-building. These efforts include strengthening relationships 

between conflict-atl'ected communities by supporting trade and other locally driven economic 

activities, so that community interdependence reinforces peace. 

The US. has invested both time and money in promoting a democratic transition in the Democratic 

Republic of Congo, where President Joseph Kabila has overstayed his term in office However, 

strengthening Congo's institutions and democratic traditions doesn't end with Kabila stepping 

down or an election this year. What more can USAID do to promote democracy, support political 

party trainings, and strengthen civil society in the years ahead~ 

The electoral-support program in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) funded by the US. 

Agency for International Development (USAID) increases the participation by informed citizens in 

the DRC's electoral and political processes. Activities include civic and voter education, domestic 

observation of elections; training for political parties; and targeted technical assistance for the 

National Electoral Commission, La Commission Electorale Nationale lndependante, known by its 

French acronym "CENL" USAID has provided $37 million in support of these activities. 

Key achievements of the program to date include the following: 

Financing DRC's leading domestic observer group to deploy over 300 long-tenn observers to 

monitor the registration of voters and provide timely recommendations to CENl to improve this 

process; Providing quality civic and voter education to an estimated 11 million Congolese through 

a nationwide media program, and to 1.9 million Congolese through face-to-face community 

campaigns led by civil-society organizations; Helping ten political parties refonn their internal 

management processes, develop policies more responsive to Congolese citizens, and expand the 

roles of women and youth within their structures; and Establishing protection networks for humanrights defenders in North Kivu, South Kivu, Kinshasa, Haut Katanga, and Kasai Oriental 

Provinces: 173 CSOs joined the five protection networks, and received training in how to report 

human-rights violations by using a secure, on-line reporting mechanism. 

The networks responded to a total of 49 threats to human-rights defenders in Fiscal Year 2017, and 

referred victims to legal aid and emergency service- providers when appropriate. 
113


29388g-11.eps

USAID also has other democracy and governance programming in DRC, because we recognize that 

elections are critical, but not the only factor in fostering peace, creating an inclusive society, 

promoting a citizen-responsive government, and protecting human rights in DRC. Increased 

transparency and accountability of government are at the heart of USAID's 2015-2019 Country 

Development Cooperation Strategy for the DRC. All our activities work in concert to promote 

participation, inclusion, transparency, and accountability in national and local institutions to support 

the long-term transition in the DRC to self-reliance. While continuing to support our civil-society 

and media partners, we also look forv\iard to forging a more-productive relationship with 

counterparts in a democratically elected Government of the DRC following the elections. 

Question: 

The FY20 19 budget proposal states that an unspecified portion of $71 million in requested USAIDAtfica Regional tunds will support the Power Atfica initiative and targets identified under the 

Electrify Atrica Act of2015 (P.L 114-121) This is the only mention of Power Atfica in the aid 

budget request Please clarify the Trump Administration's approach to implementing Power Atfica 

and what changes, if any, you are seeking to the program. 

In implementing the bipartisan Electrify Africa Act, Power Atrica has helped provide tlrst-time 

electricity access to over 50 million people through 12 million new connections (on- grid and otTgrid). Coordinated by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Power Africa 

remains an important Administration e±Jort, as universal enere,'Y access is a priority in the recently 

released National Security Strategy. 

In February 2018, I launched the Power Africa 2.0 Strategy, which maintains a transaction-driven 

approach to advance the goals of the Electrify Atfica Act, while placing a renewed emphasis on 

improving enabling environments, to move from assistance towards prosperous partnership. To do 

this, Power Atfica will place greater emphasis on promoting critical reforms to national power 

utilities and regulators, encouraging investment in more-robust transmission and distribution 

networks, and improving the business climate needed to attract or sustain private-sector engagement 

over the long-term. Power Africa will continue to leverage leadership, innovation and partnerships 

to open up opportunities for U.S. products and technology. 

The President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 includes a planned level of $45 5 million 

at USAID for Power Mrica to support these reforms and partnerships critical to the development 

and sustainability of the power sector on the continent The $45.5 million would be spread among 

multiple USAID Missions and Operating Units, including Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, 

Uganda, and regional platfonns. 

The USAID Rule of Law (ROL) Project in Serbia is a four-year, $9.8 million project supporting 

justice sector reforms to enhance the timely delivery of justice for Serbian citizens. While I support 

this e±Jort, it does not address the continued need to deal with the vast post-con±lict justice issues 
114

f


29388g-12.eps

still confronting Serbia. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) 

prosecuted people who perpetrated crimes during the wars in Bosnia and Croatia. However, Serbian 

government otJicials, military personnel, and private citizens who committed crimes in the Kosovo 

War have not been brought to justice- now almost 20 years since the end of the war. How is the 

US. assistance program helping Serbia address the serious post-conflict justice issues which still 

overlay the troubled relations between Kosovo and Serbia? If our program does not address these 

issues, how will you adjust or expand it to help Serbia bring to justice those who committed war 

crimes and crimes against humanity during the Kosovo War~ 

The US. Government has provided assistance through various mechanisms to support reform in 

Serbia's judiciary and criminal code. With assistance tram the Department of Justice, Serbia 

adopted a new Criminal Procedural Code (CPC), which enables prosecutors to pursue any criminal 

activity--including war crimes. 

Assistance tram the US. Agency for International Development (USAID) on the rule of law in 

Serbia focuses on improving the etJiciency, effectiveness, and professionalism of the country's 

judiciary. This includes developing the justice sector's ability to enforce judgments, helping 

develop a judicial-reform strategy, supporting efforts to meet rule-of-law requirements for 

accession to the European Union, and streamlining the operations of courts. The resulting enhanced 

professionalism will help Serbia's judicial system to assert greater independence over the long term 

in addressing issues related to crimes committed during the conflict with Kosovo. 
115

f


29388h.eps

Question for the Record from Representative Dana Rohrabacher 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

Fur the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21, 2018 

Good nutrition, especially during the 1,000 days between a woman's pregnancy and her child's 

second birthday, builds the foundation for health and well-being. USAID nutrition programs 

save lives and contribute to early brain development, which is vital to future economic success. 

Between 2009 and 2016, stunting within USAID's nutrition priority countries decreased from 40 

percent to 34 percent More than 27 million children under age 5 were reached by nutrition 

interventions in 2016 alone. Despite the obvious success of these programs, the Administration 

has once again proposed a roughly 40 percent cut to nutrition funding within the Global Health 

Programs account (GHP-USAID) for FY19. This level of cut would result in II million children 

not being reached with vital nutrition interventions. 

Given the tremendous potential of nutrition to improve human capital, how can we expect to 

expand economic opportunities and transform communities on their journeys toward selfreliance? 

The US. Agency for International Development (USAID) will continue to implement etTective 

nutrition programs to prevent the long-term effects of malnutrition, such as stunting. Funds will 

support evidence-based approaches to nutrition, and innovations to improve outcomes for the 

most-vulnerable populations. Our activities currently focus on the prevention of undernutrition 

through nutrition education to pregnant and breast-feeding mothers, and improving the quality 

and diversification of families' diets, including through fortified or bio- fortified staple foods, 

specialized food products, and community gardens. USAID is addressing malnutrition crises 

through its emergency food assistance and disaster-response activities, by using specialized foods 

to treat malnourished children and prevent vulnerable children and pregnant and lactating women 

from deteriorating further 

As USAID works to achieve our global nutrition goals, we will continue to engage our 

development and host-country partners, as well as the private sector, to share the burden of this 

immense investment In addition, we will continue to strengthen the capacity of local 

organizations and leverage their investments in nutrition, with the goal of one day transitioning 

these countries from development assistance to selt~reliance. 
116


29388i-1.eps

Questions for the Record from Representative Brad Sherman 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

Fur the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21, 2018 

A key tool for improving our image in the world is making sure people who receive American 

aid know that the aid is coming from the United States. Will you commit to supporting "±1ag on 

the bag" to the maximum extent practicable? 

Branding and marking is a critical tool for the US. Agency for International Development 

(USAID) to communicate the generosity of the American people. Studies have confirmed that 

increased visibility of foreign aid results in a more-positive opinion of the United States by the 

public in other countries. 

USAID supports visible branding to the maximum extent possible, and makes exceptions only 

in rare cases when it might pose a political, safety, or security risk to our implementing partners 

or our beneficiaries. In cont1ict-affected environments, such as Syria, Iraq, Somalia, or Yemen, 

USAID must carefully consider if branding would have any unintended negative reactions or 

consequences in the host country, especially to those whose lives we are working to save. 

I have asked our Acting Deputy Administrator, David Moore, to lead an internal working group 

to review our branding policies and recommend any adjustments needed so we can enforce them 

more consistently. 

Last year, the United States provided hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to Pakistan, but 

Sindh did not get anywhere near 23% of this aid, which is its share of Pakistan's population. 

Would you support greater aid for the Sindh region of Pakistan? 

US. assistance programming and budget priorities in Pal<istan consider a combination offactors. 

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) typically directs our assistance to 

areas where humanitarian, development, and US. national-security needs are greatest, and 

where opportunities exist for making progress on a country's journey to self- reliance. USAID 

also takes into account the amount ofPakistan' s own domestic resources made available to each 

Province. 

USAID has a robust development-assistance portfolio in Sindh Province, which in Fiscal Year 

(FY) 2017 totalled $36.872 million in disbursements. Our current activities in Sindh focus on 

constructing transmission lines for clean-energy projects; a workforce program that targets 
117


29388i-2.eps

disadvantaged youth from some of Karachi's most-challenging neighborhoods; municipal 

services inN orthern Sindh; community-level activities to counter violent extremism in Karachi; 

increasing enrollment in schools; and improving infrastructure and technical capacity for the 

delivery of quality health care. 

USAID works closely with the Government of Sindh (GoS) to coordinate our assistance 

resources etl'ectively, and to increase local t!nancing for projects For example, the GoS 

hascommitted additional funds to build schools in Northern Sindh to match USAID's 

contribution. The GoS is funding Education Management Organizations (EMOs) to run 23 

schools that US AID has constructed, and is expanding the EMO model to 25 schools built with 

other funding sources. The GoS has budgeted $45 million to support EMOs, train teachers, and 

make upgrades to schools. Similarly, in the health sector USAID is collaborating with the GoS 

to combine funding to enhance the health care of millions of mothers and children throughout 

the Province. 

Additionally, USAID's nationwide programs in Pakistan facilitate development gains in key 

sectors, such as health and basic education, that also benet!t Sindh Province. 

Given the cutback in USAID programs, will the Administration continue to support USAID's 

American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA) and their programs in Armenia? 

The grant recipients of the American Schools and Hospitals Abroad (ASHA) program of the 

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) model the best of American values, and 

demonstrate the latest technologies, pedagogies, and management approaches of American 

partners. 

USAID/ASHA receives more than 200 applications each year to its Annual Program Statement, 

and all competitively reviewed. USAID/ASHA has a long history of supporting projects in 

Armenia through this process. In the last decade, we have provided $7,000,000 in funds to 

support Armenian universities and healthcare institutions. 

The economic cost to Armenia of the blockades by Turkey and Azerbaijan is substantial. How 

does the work ofUSAID help to otl'set this? 

Because Annenia's small domestic market is further compromised by two closed borders, the 

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) supports the Government of Armenia in 

its efforts to advance refonns to liberalize civil aviation to make the country a more-desirable 

tourism destination. USAID's cultural and rural tourism activities seek to create new 
118


29388i-3.eps

opportunities for Armenia's small and medium-sized businesses to grow and generate income 

while furthering rural economic resiliency. 

USAID further provides Armenia with assistance to develop its human-capital endowment and 

its ability to advance in one of the world's most-advantageous sectors- information technology. 

As a direct result ofUSAID's engagement, large multinational corporations, such as Microsoft, 

National Instruments, and International Business Machines, have made substantial investments 

in Armenia through public-private partnerships. In the energy sector, USAID supports marketliberalization and regional integration, which are fundamental to improving Armenia's 

investment climate, by providing investors more regulatory certainty through market rules and 

economies of scale consistent with Western approaches. 

USAID investments in agribusiness and hospitality-management continue to bolster rural 

development across the country, reaching some of Armenia's most marginalized communities, 

through efforts to improve the financial-management and business-planning capacity and 

awareness of different tinancing and investment options among local small and medium -sized 

enterprises. 

USAID also supports inclusive growth in Armenia through activities that develop new and 

sustainable value-chains, champion competitive industries with the potential to create jobs, 

increase access to markets and resources, and improve the playing tield for innovation, 

investments, and businesses. With a focus on improving the business skills and trade capacity 

of local tinns, USAID promotes Armenian competitiveness in regional and international 

markets, which leads to increased trade, sales, and employment 

As you know, the House passed an amendment to include de-mining tunding to Nagorno 

Karabakh in the FY 2018 appropriations bill. What are USAID's spending plans for FY 2019 

and beyond, and will you commit to tully completing de-mining in and around Nagorno 

Karabakh as quickly as possible? 

The United States provides demining assistance to Nagorno-Karabakh (N-K) through a project 

funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and implemented by HALO 

Trust As of September 2017, with only 27 known active minetields remaining, HALO Trust 

has cleared 97.6 percent of the mined areas within the traditional N-K Autonomous Oblast Our 

ultimate goal is to be able to declare traditional N-K mine-clear. More than 125,000 people have 

benetited from these interventions, which save lives, prevent injuries, generate local jobs, and 

promote economic rehabilitation. In October 2017, USAID reprogrammed approximately $2.8 

million for N-K demining, which will extend demining activities until September 2019, when 

USAID assistance for de-mining underthe current award and partnership with HALO Trust will 

be complete. We remain focused on completing demining as quickly, and as thoroughly, as 

possible. 
119

f


29388i-4.eps

International family planning is an important part ofUSAID's mission. Can you ensure USAID 

will support robust family planning efforts, including efforts to provide access to modern 

contraceptive methods? 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) continues to invest in robust familyplanning efforts, guided by the principles of voluntarism and informed choice. With the 

implementation plan for the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy in place, the 

President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 restores $302 million in tunding for 

voluntary family planning and reproductive health investments, consistent with the 

Administration's support for programs to empower women. US AID works to ensure individuals 

and couples have a broad range of choices available to them to decide freely whether and when 

to have children, and receive comprehensible information on the metbod of their choice. USAID 

also supports the introduction and expansion of new and improved contraceptive technologies 

that meet the diverse needs of women and couples through their reproductive lives. 

USAID procures, and will continue to procure and make available, a broad range of modern 

contraceptive methods -from methods based on fertility-awareness to short- and long- acting 

reversible methods to voluntary, permanent methods. 
120


29388j-1.eps

Questions for the Record from Representative Gerald Connolly 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

Fur the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21, 2018 

One of the pillars of US AID's redesign effort is moving partner countries toward "strategic 

transitions," or self-reliance. Working with a partner country to reduce and eventually eliminate 

reliance on U.S. foreign assistance should always be the goal of development programs. 

However, it is clear this Administration has already concluded that our investments abroad need 

to be gutted. How will you ensure that this reform etiort advances development goals and does 

not justify turther cuts to our foreign assistance programs? Which specific metrics will US AID 

use to measure a partner country's progress toward self-reliance? 

"Self-reliance" is the ability of countries to manage and finance their own development journeys. 

For countries that exhibit a high-degree of self-reliance, this simply means examining, with the 

rest of the U.S. Government, Congress, and the host government, how to take our partnership to 

the next level, and foster a strategic transition beyond the traditional donor- recipient paradigm. 

A strategically transitioned partnership can take a wide variety of forms, is necessarily multistakeholder (i.e., involves more than just the investments of one U.S. Government Department or 

Agency), will take place in accordance with each country's particular context, and should leave 

behind a binational legacy. Ultimately, this process is about identifying the right form of 

relationship to support a country to advance, wherever it is on its development journey. 

To aid in this process, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is currently 

developing a set of primary metrics that will fonn an important part of our assessment of a 

country's relative level of self-reliance. On one side, the indicators will examine a country's level 

of open and accountable govermnent, commitment to inclusive development, and economic 

policy choices, and, on the other, its overall level of capacity across government, civil society, the 

citizenry, and the economy. The specific metrics are still under development, but will all come 

from respected, independent, third-party, publicly available sources. It is also important to 

underscore that the metrics will only be one part of assessing self-reliance; they will augment the 

range of country-level analyses and related tools the Agency already uses to examine and assess 

its partner countries, including (for example) analyses of constraints to growth. Unlike the metrics 

used by the Millennium Challenge Corporation, our metrics will not determine eligibility for 

assistance; rather, they will provide a snapshot of a country's progress, and help us identify areas 

for investment in which USATD programs would be well-positioned to help accelerate local 

capacity and self-reliance. 

The Burmese military has carried out a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Rohingya in 

Rakhine State, spurring nearly 700,000 Rohingya refugees to flee across the border into 
121


29388j-2.eps

Bangladesh since Au~;ust 2017. As the impending cyclone and monsoon seasons approach, more 

than 100,000 refugees in Bangladesh are living in makeshift camps in areas prone to flooding and 

landslides. How is the United States helping to prepare the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh for 

the upcoming cyclone and monsoon seasons and the increased risk of water-borne diseases? 

The upcoming cyclone and monsoon seasons-April through October-pose a serious risk to the 

Rohingya refugee population in Bangladesh. Much of the land on which the refugee camps and 

settlements in Cox's Bazar District sit is steep or low-lying, and denuded of trees and vegetation, 

a combination that makes the area prone to both flooding and landslides. At least 210,000 

individuals are living in flood- and landslide-prone areas and are at risk ofloss oflife, shelter, and 

access to life-saving services. At-risk households are in critical need of relocation to safer areas 

immediately. 

Since I testified before your Committee, to I have met with Ambassador William Swing, the 

Director-General of the International Organization for Migration (IOM), and Filippo Grandi, the 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and my staff has met with Governor 

David Beasley, the Executive Director of the World Food Programme (WFP), to discuss our joint 

preparations for the upcoming cyclone and monsoon season in Bangladesh. Their assessments 

were stark, but I can tell you that the the Government of Bangladesh and the international 

humanitarian community, including the US Government (USG), are working day and night to 

prepare to mitigate this impending crisis. 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has been providing robust support 

alongside the US. Department of State's Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration 

(State/PRM) to respond to the re±ugee crisis in Bangladesh. To date in FY18, the USG has 

provided more than $101 million towards the response, including more than $26 million in food 

assistance through USAID's Oftice of Food for Peace. Anticipating the upcoming seasonal 

hazards, which will limit access to the Rohingya refugees, USAID and State/PRM partners are 

developing preparedness plans for the monsoon and cyclone seasons alongside the host 

government and other counterparts. USG sta±Jhave been active at various levels to help with this 

e±Jort. 

For example, USAID partner WFP has be~;un prepositioning food stocks and cooking materials 

in Bangladesh, mobilizing porters to carry food assistance to vulnerable and weather- a±Tected 

populations in hard-to-reach areas, and planning to improve roads to distribution points. In 

addition, WFP procured 20 shipping containers that humanitarian organizations will use to store 

critical commodities in and around the camps during the cyclone and monsoon seasons. General 

emergency food distributions will continue throughout the upcoming months.Similarly, 

humanitarian actors have beb'l!n reinforcing, decommissioning or relocating essential nutrition 

facilities, child friendly spaces and latrines at risk of flooding and landslides in the camps in 

Bangladesh. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) is also reinforcing its contingency 

stocks with additional hygiene and dignity kits, chlorine, soap and buckets, and has mobilized 

community volunteers to engage the Rohingya refugee community on cyclone- awareness, 

disaster-preparedness and hygiene-promotion. 
122


29388j-3.eps

USG partners are in the process of relocating vulnerable Rohingya families who living in floodprone areas in the camps to sites deemed safe from flooding and landslides, including more than 

380 families between February 20 and March 19. Given the limited land available in the 

settlements, UNHCR, IOM and others are coordinating with the Government of Bangladesh to 

identify additional safe areas for the relocation of at-risk households. USG partners are providing 

households with materials to strene,>then and tie-down shelters, as well as working with the 

Bangladeshi authorities to identify more-durable shelter solutions. We are also funding efforts to 

map health facilities, including where trauma-care services are available to respond in the event 

of serious injuries. Health actors are prepositioning critical medical supplies, and training 

community health workers, including to deliver psychological tirst aid. In addition, they are 

preparing to adapt early-warning and response systems for infectious disease to maintain 

functionality through the possible loss of communication systems, as well as establishing a 

management system for the missing and dead if casualties occur. 

In terms of education, humanitarian organizations have identified at least 244 temporary learning 

centers (TLCs), which serve 10,000 children, that are at high risk of damage or destruction during 

the monsoons. Our partners are working to close high-risk TLCs, and establish new centers in 

relocation areas, as well as exploring alternative ways to deliver education, such as the shared use 

of other community spaces, mobile learning, and radio-based teaching. 

I plan to travel to Bangladesh in May to see the situation mysel( inspect the preparations for the 

cyclone and monsoon season, and hear tirst-hand the stories of the Rohingya refugees. 

I would be pleased to brief you and your colleagues upon my return. 

In the President's FY 2019 budget request, the Trump Administration proposed moving US AID's 

Development Credit Authority (DCA) into a new development tinance institution (DFI), to be 

built around the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). How would the establishment 

of a new U.S. development tinance institution atl'ect USAID's ability to stimulate growth in the 

private sector? 

The U.S Agency for International Development (USAID) has been working closely within the 

interagency to plan for close institutional and programmatic linkages with the new Development 

Finance Institution (DFI) Assuming the USAID and the new DFI are successful in building 

sufficient linkages between the two institutions, the Agency would have access to a broader range 

oftinancing tools available through the DFI than currently available through just the Development 

Credit Authority (DCA) program. That would enable USAID Missions and the DFI to tie the 

tinancing tools more closely with USAID technical-assistance programs to stimulate growth in 

the private sector more effectively. 
123

f


29388j-4.eps

How will you ensure cooperation between this new DFI and USAID's programs and functions 

that support private sector growth, including DCA and enterprise funds? 

The goal is to ensure that the consolidation of the Development Credit Authority (DCA) program 

of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) into the proposed Development 

Finance Institution (DFI) provides greater opportunities for the new organization to link directly 

with USAID programs and Missions. This approach would be critical to ensuring transactions 

developed with DFI tools serve the U.S. Government's development strategies within targeted 

countries, supported by ongoing technical assistance programs on the ground funded by USAID. 

While creating these critical linkages would closely align the DFI with USAID Missions, formal 

institutional linkages at headquarters would also be crucial, from the Board of Directors through 

to the staff that would be making investment decisions. 
124


29388k-1.eps

Questions for the Record from Representative David Cicilline 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

For the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21,2018 

Is humanitarian assistance reaching populations who need it within the city of Afrin, or the 

surrounding areas, which have been captured by Turkish forces and Turkish-supported militias? 

Can you please give us and update as to any discussions USAID is having with Turkey and other 

aid partners about getting relief to civilians within this area? 

Aid agencies have limited visibility about conditions for the 50,000-70,000 people still in Afrin town. 

The United Nations (UN) reports that humanitarian assistance is reaching the estimated 137,000 

people displaced from Afrin District, and that there are no large-scale unmet needs, despite the 

ongoing access challenges. The situation is fluid, however, and the U S. Agency for International 

Development (USAID) remains concerned about the lack of regular and sustained humanitarian 

access to Afrin. 

On March 25, with U.S. Government (USG) support, a UN and Syrian Arab Red Crescent 

interagency convoy delivered emergency assistance to people who fled Afrin District for Tell Refaat 

The convoy included medical supplies for approximately 14,480 treatments; relief commodities for 

10,000 people; and emergency food assistance for 75,000 people. A l)N shipment was planned to 

go from Turkey into Afrin between April 2 and 6, and will also contain USG-funded relief 

commodities and food items. 

As of March 29, the UN World Food Programme (WFP), a USAID partner, had provided food 

assistance to approximately 150,000 internally displaced people (IDPs) from Afrin and hostcommunity members in Tell Refaat, Nabul, Zahra, and A'zaz towns. The WFP is also prepared to 

pmvide food assistance through its cross-border operation in Turkey, should security conditions 

permit 

In addition to the U.S. Government-financed aid, the UN reports that a number of Turkish 

organizations and Syrian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are providing emergency 

assistance, including food, hygiene kits, relief commodities, and health supplies, to both those who 

have fled Afrin and the population that remains 

USA TO, the State Department, and other donors have met with the President of Turkey's Disaster and 

Emergency Management Authority to press for unfettered aid access, and protection and freedom of 

movement for IDPs. The UN also continues to negotiate with Turkish authorities for improved access 

to Afiin and surrounding areas in Northern Syria, and USAID supports these efforts. 

Recently, the Administration has withheld partial funding for UNWRA, the UN agency which 

provides education, healthcare and other essential services to Palestinian refugees. Ambassador 
125


29388k-2.eps

Nikki Haley has made statements suggesting that future funding for UNWRA should be dependent 

upon the Palestinian Authority sitting down for negotiations with Israel. In your opinion should 

humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people-including USATD projects- be linked to 

political progress on the peace process0 More generally, should humanitarian assistance be 

conditioned upon political developments? Could this lead to further instability? 

The Administration seeks to identify how to leverage all U.S. Government assistance to achieve its 

policy objectives in the region. The President is committed to ensuring that American foreign 

assistance serves American interests. 

We will continue to work for peace, through a process we hope will offer the best outcome for both 

the Israeli and Palestinian peoples. 

This budget requests $75 million in economic assistance for Egypt, which includes funding for 

democracy and development Egyptian President el-Sisi recently ratified Egypt's NGO law, which 

continues policies making it virtually impossible for independent civil society to operate in Egypt 

as a result of restrictive registration and funding processes. With this new law in place, what kind 

of economic, development, or democracy programming is even possible for U.S. assistance to 

support in Egypt? Do you believe that repeal of this NGO law should be a pre- requirement to the 

U.S. providing continued economic aid to Egypt? 

My colleagues and I at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USATD) remain concerned 

about the implementation of the Egyptian law on non-governmental organizations (NGOs), which 

has the potential to neutralize civil society and complicate ongoing and future 

U.S. assistance in Egypt We meet regularly with our Egyptian and international civil-society 

implementing partners to understand how the NGO law will affect their work. We are awaiting the 

issuance of regulations that will determine how the Egyptian Government will implement the NGO 

law. 

I have repeatedly underscored our concerns to Egyptian officials regarding the new NGO law, most 

recently in a meeting with Minister of International Cooperation Dr. Sahar Nasr in April 2018. 

USAID will continue to advocate for the key roles NGOs play in social and economic development, 

and insist the Government of Egypt (GOE) maintain its commitments made under international 

agreements to exempt foreign assistance from taxes and certain fees, as well as facilitate the eftlcient 

implementation ofUSAID-funded activities. 

We use a wide range of foreign-policy tools, including development assistance and diplomatic 

engagement, to advance U.S. interests with Egypt Implementing partners are working successfully 

in Egypt across a number of sectors, including democracy and governance, economic growth, 

education, and health. Our programs give future generations the tools to succeed and provide 

opportunities for Egypt's large youth population as it enters higher education and the workforce. 

We also improve the productivity of agriculture and water systems, and enhance livelihoods in rural 
126


29388k-3.eps

zones where poverty and the lack of jobs, especially for youth and women, are too common. 

What do you believe are the three highest priority areas that we are trying to target through our 

assistance in Afghanistan? If you were to do a lessons learned from our decades of assistance to 

Afghanistan, what would be your top three takeaways about aid delivery in a conflict environment? 

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is developing a new, five-year strategy for 

Afghanistan within the context of President Trump's South Asia Strategy. At its core, the new US AID 

Afghan development strategy will help achieve US. national-security interests by working with the 

Departments of Defense and State to strengthen the ability of the Government of Afghanistan (GoA) 

to be an etiective counterterrorism partner for the United States. Our Afghan development strategy 

will focus on increasing the GoA's revenue base by enabling economic growth led by the private 

sector, and on strengthening service-delivery in Government-controlled areas. The objective is to 

reduce the GoA's reliance on donor assistance, improve the country's stability, and enhance 

accountability for our assistance. Our key approaches and objectives include the following: 

Driving Afghanistan's economic growth by promoting private-sector etiorts, with a focus on a 

market- and population-centered strategy, concentrated in five urban areas. 

This will include promoting market linkages domestically, regionally and internationally; supporting 

a climate for transparent, legitimate investment in businesses to generate greater revenue for the GoA; 

improving trade policy; expanding export-processing; and creating jobs in 

targeted value chains and urban areas. 

Increasing citizens' confidence in their government and incentivize the GoA's reform agenda through 

a performance-based conditionality model. Our strategy will support Afghan elections (including the 

2019 presidential election), as well as promote channels for increasing citizens' engagement We will 

also employ a more-mature, direct bilateral approach by deploying experts from various US. 

Government Departments and Agencies, such as the Department of Commerce and the U.S. 

Geological Survey within the Department of the Interior, to engage directly with GoA otlicials. 

Maintain social-sector gains made over the past 16 years, by helping advance the GoA's priorities in 

health and education. In all our assistance efforts, we will strengthen our accountability systems, 

especially by using third-party monitors. 

As part of formulating this new approach, USAID sought to identify key lessons learned from our 

engagement in Afghanistan to date. These takeaways include the following: 

A complex and frequently changing operating environment like Afghanistan requires a flexible 

strategy with "pause and reflect" points to assess its validity and core assumptions, and adapt to 

uncertainty. 

Given the USAID Mission's decreasing resources and the country's declining security, focusing 
127

f


29388k-4.eps

programming in urban and peri-urban areas within the GoA's control could be more efficacious, and 

enable a strategic overlap of projects and investments. 

The private sector plays a pivotal role in addressing a number of trends in Afghanistan, including the 

country's rapid population growth, increasing unemployment, low economic growth, and continued 

dependence on international donors. Improving the business environment to facilitate growth and 

expansion will help generate revenue for the GoA and help increase the formation of businesses and 

the creation of jobs. Working with and empowering the private sector will continue to be a key US. 

Government focus across all 

Afghan industry sectors. However, the policy and regulatory environment in Afghanistan is 

challenging, and any significant improvement in the business operating environment will require 

continuous and dedicated commitment from GoA otlicials. Furthermore, a key factor in establishing 

this partnership is the eventnal political settlement of the civil conflict in the country. 

The U.S. and Europe, traditionally, have been the world heavyweights of global development 

assistance. This Administration has proposed to slash the budgets of State and USAID. What is the 

USAID's strategy to coordinate efforts, where appropriate, with the European Union? The President 

has yet to name an Ambassador to the European Union. How has this impacted your efforts in Europe? 

The European Union is a key strategic partner of the United States, and the US. Agency for 

International Development (USAID) coordinates very closely with its counterpart agencies of the 

European Commission: The Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development 

(DG-DEVCO), the Directorate-General for Neighborhood and Enlargement Negotiations (DGNEAR), and the Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations 

(DG-ECHO). USAID holds an annual Development Dialogue with the leadership of the three 

Directorates-General, in addition to frequent meetings, both between leadership and at the working 

leveL In addition, USAID Missions in the field are in close contact with the European Union (EU) 

Delegations in their respective countries. USAID's Europe and Eurasia Bureau has worked 

intensively during the last twelve months with DG- NEAR to co-create new programs that advance 

both American and EU strategic interests, and senior officials from the Bureau traveled to Brussels 

for a planning session earlier this year. Because the relationship is so broad and deep, US AID has 

been able to advance our work. 
128


29388l-1.eps

Questions for the Record from Representative Ami Bera 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

Fur the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21, 2018 

My understanding is that State and US AID have 28 sub projects as part of the current redesign 

etiorts. What are these 28 projects and what are their timelines? 

The projects the US Agency for International Development (USAID) is working on under the 

redesign ("Transformation") process are at ditierent stages, and will proceed along different time 

frames to full implementation. Some projects will have recommendations we can put into effect 

within the next few months, while others include proposed structural changes that could take two 

years to implement fully. We are currently consulting with Congress, our partner community, 

and US AID staff on the first tranche of proposed projects approved by the Otlice of Management 

and Budget (OMB), as indicated below, and will meet all legislative requirements, including the 

submission of Congressional notifications. The list of projects is as follows: 

Outcome 1 (Journey to Self-Reliance): 

• Redefining our Relationship with Partner Countries; 

• Metrics; 

• Financing Self-Reliance; 

• Private-Sector Engagement; 

• Strategic Transitions and Post-Transition Engagement; and 

• Initial Transition Countries. 

Outcome 2 (Strefib>then Core Capabilities) 

• Elevate Humanitarian Assistance; 

• Strengthen Resilience and Food Security; 

• Elevate Prevention and Response to Cont1ict and Crises; 

• Align Policy, Resources, and Evidence-Based Programming; and 

• Strengthen Support for the Field. 

Outcome 3 (Advance National Security) 

• Improving Coordination with the Department of Defense; 

• Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE); and 

• Working in Non-Permissive Environments (NPE). 

Outcome 4 (Empower People to Lead): 

• Managing Human-Capital Talent; 

• Streamline Coordinators; 

• Workforce Flexibility and Mobility; 

• Culture of Leadership and Accountability; 
129


29388l-2.eps

• Knowledge-Management; and 

• Exploring Delivery of Human-Resource Operations; 

Outcome 5 (Respect Taxpayer Investments): 

• Optimizing Operational Platforms; 

• Effective Partnering and Procurement Reform; and 

• Resolving the Agency Audit Backlog. 

Cross-cutting Agency Proposals: 

• Creating a Development Finance Institution; and 

• Increasing USAID's Small-Grant Capacity 

After almost a decade of transparency from bipartisan administrations detailing country-by-country 

allocations for foreign assistance, there will be no such information submitted by the administration 

as part of its FY 19 budget request 

The Administration has put forth a 43% cut to development programs (both DA and ESF 

combined) but failed to share how various development sectors and priorities will be impacted by 

this and other cuts. As the administration targets specific countries to be strategically transitioned 

away from foreign assistance this information is absolutely critical to congressional oversight 

When will Congress have access to this information? We hope that the Administration can continue 

to operate in a transparent and open manner. 

Are the State Department and USAID capable of submitting country-by-country allocations for 

topline development and security assistance accounts for the record? 

If yes, we formally request that be submitted for the record. 

A country-level breakout of the President's Budget Request for foreign assistance in Fiscal Year 

(FY) 2019 is available online, at http:/'www.stale.gov/documentsiorganizationi2795l7 pdf 

Additional charts, also available online, cover program objectives and program areas; operating 

expenses of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID); global health elements; and 

several other key sectors, including agriculture, biodiversity, combating wildlife trafficking, 

countering violent extremism, democracy, basic education, higher education, and gender. These 

budget tables are available on the following USAID website, which also includes budget 

information on security assistance managed by the State Department: https://www.usaid.gov/nev;sinf<;mnmiQJ_Jj.fuQl-sh_<;.~1~.Ltl scnJ_:ys;.EiL::f:L-2 o n.~®_y "'l.QJm.K!H::r1llii:.hP_i1lllil\1~0Jill.::f!~:i.lli.i.nJJ<::c£-b us,lgs;! 

Beginning in 2014, US AID was a key implementer in responding to the Ebola crisis and ensuring 
130


29388l-3.eps

that an outbreak of that size would never happen again. We appropriated over $300M to USAID 

to strengthen these global health security efforts. That funding enabled USAID to expand their 

etiorts to prevent the next outbreak trom Atrica, and into Asia and the Middle East, etl'ectively 

enabling US AID to double its activities. 

While the President's budget calls for the transfer of the remaining Emergency Reserve Fund 

money to US AID's Emerging Pandemic Threats account to continue some of these activities, 

according to global health groups, that will not be enough, and USAID will be forced to curtail 

its activities around the world. I'm worried about the real-world etl'ects here. That means 

defunding global disease surveillance networks, fewer professionals trained in biosafety and lab 

diagnostics, and less capacity building. 

What will the impact of that funding cut be? 

And how will you ensure that globally, health security and pandemic preparedness efforts will be 

continued? 

The President's Budget Request for Fiscal Year 2019 proposes to redirect $72.5 million in 

previously appropriated Ebola Response and Preparedness Emergency funds to Global Health 

Security programming to help prevent, detect, and respond to infectious-disease outbreaks and 

threats in countries at high risk of such events. The US. Agency for International Development's 

programs under the Global Health Security Agenda will enable the US. Government, in 

partnership with other nations, international organizations, and public and private stakeholders, 

to increase compliance with the International Health Reb'lllations (2005) to detect infectiousdisease threats early and prevent their spread to the United States. 

USAID has a track record of helping countries like South Korea and Panama transition trom 

development aid to deeper forms of strategic and economic partnership with the United States. 

These transitions worked well because the partner country was able to increasingly mobilize their 

own resources for development The FYI9 budget requests $75 million for domestic resource 

mobilization (DRM) assistance. 

Please describe this approach to scaling up development finance in greater detaiL 

Specifically, how do you intend to implement this request and what are the desired near 

and long-term outcomes? 

• Like many in Congress, T'm particularly interested in the establishment of a new 

Development Finance Institution. What, if any, mechanisms will be put in place to 

ensure that development is a driving factor in the decision-making process for the new 

DFI? 

Domestic resource-mobilization (DRM) is a top priority for me and for the US. Agency for 
131


29388l-4.eps

International Development (USAID), and is an important component of our mission to end the 

need for foreign assistance. The ability of a country to finance and pay for its own development 

is a critical part of its journey to self-reliance. 

USAID works with partner countries to harness public-and-private resources for development 

Our objective is to strenb>then tax systems, and, at the same time, ensure etJective and etllcient 

public-financial management, as well as to leverage private-sector resources to strengthen partner 

countries' ability to finance more of their development priorities. 

Under this approach towards DRM, the Agency will encourage private-sector investments by 

reducing risk. The Agency hopes to steer partner countries on a continuum tomobilize more of 

the countries' own finances to trigger a new relationship towards their self- reliance, with a focus 

on transparency. 

For example, the Agency will go deeper with partner countries on DRM in the Addis Tax 

Initiative countries (e.g., Liberia, Uganda, Ghana), and with countries where we have already 

initiated DRM activities, including under the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief 

Simultaneously, we will expand our DRM footprint to those countries that are poised to embrace 

our support and shoulder an increasing share of their financing needs. This will allow the Agency 

to build the evidence base for DRM through analysis and synthesis of country experiences and 

rigorous monitoring and evaluation. 

USAID is working closely within the interagency to plan for close institutional and programmatic 

linkages between the proposed new Development Finance Institution (DFl) and USAID in the 

BUILD Act. 

This approach is critical to ensure that transactions developed with DFI tools serve U.S. 

Government development strategies within targeted countries, supported by ongoing technicalassistance programs on the ground provided by USAID. 

Administrator Green, could you lay out what USAID is doing to engage different diasporas in a 

comprehensive way to advance development goals" 

In 2016, the U.S. Global Development Lab (the Lab) within the U.S. Agency for International 

Development (US AID) conducted an assessment on how and where the Agency and the broader 

development community engage diasporas, with the ultimate aim of expanding USAID's 

connections with them. The Lab reviewed a wide range of both USAID and external initiatives 

that target diasporas, and sought input through more than 50 interviews with our staff and 

partners. 
132


29388l-5.eps

In response to the review's findings, US AID created a suite of services to support increased 

diaspora-engagement activities across the Agency, with a focus on helping our overseas Missions 

increase their ability to work effectively with diaspora communities in their programming. These 

services included the following 1) A Diaspora-Partnership Toolkit, an online resource for 

diaspora organizations that want to work with USAID; 2) An improved mechanism and 

methodology to analyze diaspora demographics, resources, and preferred ways to collaborate 

with USAID around shared interests, for USAID Missions and Bureaus that wish to engage 

diasporas in their programming; and 3) An All-Agency Diaspora Working Group, which supports 

the sharing of best and promising diaspora-engagement practices. 

What specific projects are underway at USAID that include diasporas in development? 

Recent and ongoing projects at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USA !D) with a 

focus on diasporas in development include the following: 

• The DiaGive Bangladesh project, a Global Development Alliance co-funded by Chevron 

and implemented by the Charities Aid Foundation, aims to catalyze philanthropic capital 

from members of the Bangladeshi diaspora back to their country of origin to strenb>then 

civil society and support social enterprise. 

The USAID Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) Center for International 

Disaster information also recognizes diasporas as critical to the success of international 

relief operations. Before a disaster response, OFDA focuses on donation-management 

education, which help diasporas understand how disaster responses work, become betterequipped stakeholders in disaster assistance, and plug into the international system 

appropriately. During a response, USAID engages diaspora communities by promoting 

"Cash is Best" messaging, which encourages diasporas to donate cash to vetted 

organizations, rather than making in-kind donations, which streamlines and simplifies 

relief efforts on the ground. 

USAID collaborates with the US Department of State to support the International 

Diaspora Engagement Alliance (IdEA), which seeks to harness the global connections of 

diaspora communities to promote sustainable development in their countries of heritage. 

By promoting partnerships around entrepreneurship, volunteerism, philanthropy, and 

innovation, the Alliance provides a platform for capacity-building, and a forum for 

collaboration across sectors. 

Diaspora Landscape Analyses conducted by the USAID Bureaus for Africa and Latin 

America and the Caribbean, together with US AID Missions in Nigeria, Nicaragua, and 

Pakistan, identify ways to engage the diaspora of these countries more deeply in our 

programming. 

• The Diaspora Invest Activity advocates for an improved enabling environment for 

investment in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and engages Bosnian expatriate entrepreneurs to 
133


29388l-6.eps

increase their investment in the country as a means to stimulate economic development. 

In addition, USAID continues to engage proactively in global and regional conversations to 

educate diaspora communities on how to collaborate with USAID and make an impact in 

development, such as hosting the Diasporas in Development forum, a one-day event on 

engagement with entrepreneurs, in collaboration with academia, partners, and the Department of 

State, and working with the African Diaspora Network to support the African Diaspora 

Investment Symposium, an event hosted annually in Silicon Valley. 

You noted in your response to my question during the hearing that this is an area that you think 

USAID should do more in. ls USAID limited by any statutory or regulatory authorities in 

expanding its outreach and use of diasporas to advance development goals? Please state those 

specific limiting statutory and regulatory authorities. 

To the best of our knowledge, the U.S. Agency for International Development faces no specific 

statutory or regulatory limitations to expanding our outreach and engagement with diaspora 

communities to advance development goals. 

The review of the expanded Mexico City Policy that was published last month focused on the 

implementation ofthe policy and challenges to its implementation. I'm concerned that this review 

didn't adequately look at the human impact the policy has. 

Will you commit to conducting a study on the impact of the expanded Mexico City Policy -

specifically, the impact on service provision and the individuals who rely on these services? 

Will you also commit to conducting this study on an annual basis? 

We cannot afford to wait for national Demographic and Health Surveys, which for many countries 

aren't scheduled to be conducted for several more years. 

The Department of State is the lead for reviewing the Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance 

(PLGHA) policy, and recognizes that the initial evaluation took place early in the policy's 

implementation. Former Secretary of State Tillerson announced that the Department will lead an 

additional interagency review of the implementation ofthe PLGHA policy in late 2018, in which 

the U.S Agency for International Development will participate. This further review is expected 
134

f


29388l-7.eps

to be a more-thorough examination of the benefits, challenges, and potential impact of the 

PLGHA policy on the ground, based on more-extensive experience in implementing it. 

UNFPA is often one of the only organizations providing quality reproductive and maternal health 

care in crisis settings like Yemen, Syria, or Bangladesh/Myanmar where women represent a 

majority of those displaced or at risk 

What is the United States doing to prevent gaps in service due to the defunding ofUNFPA? 

Is money previously appropriated for UNFPA going to organizations that will be able to provide 

the same services as UNFPA? 

Can you provide me a record of where previously appropriated UNFPA funds are being 

disbursed? 

The U.S. Government continues to prioritize health care in emergencies, and has worked to 

identify other humanitarian partners and donors to take over the work the United Nations 

Population Fund (UNFPA) would have supported with U.S. Government funding. 

Tn terms of Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 humanitarian funding, the U.S. Agency for International 

Development (USAID) and the Department of State worked with other United Nations (UN) 

agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that were able to expand their 

programming to provide maternal and neonatal health care, including emergency obstetric care, 

and services for survivors of gender-based violence in emergency settings. USATD was able to 

reprogram all funding intended for UNFPA in Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, and South 

Sudan. The ongoing conflict inside Syria has created access constraints that made it difficult to 

find alternative NGO partners to implement all of the health programs inside that country 

previously delivered by UNFPA Nevertheless, USAID was able to re-program some of the 

humanitarian funds originally intended for UNFPA in Syria to the UN Children's Fund 

(UNICEF) and an NGO partner to support protection-focused services. 
135


29388o-1.eps

Questions for the Record from Representative Brad Schneider 

The FY 2019 Foreign Assistance Budget 

Fur the Honorable Mark Green 

March 21, 2018 

Does this budget provide enough resources for our development professionals? If not, what else 

is needed? 

The US Agency for International Development (USAID) strategically leverages its resources to 

support our development professionals. As part of the Agency's Transformation, we have 

consistently sought to increase the quality of support for our talent across the world. For example, 

we have made significant strides in building our capability to undertake strategic and 

comprehensive workforce-planning, and strengthened our Foreign Service assignments process so 

we can place the right talent in the right place, at the right time. We are also in the process of 

significantly reforming our performance-management systems to keep the focus on developing 

our talent, rewarding excellence, and dealing with poor performance. This April, we rolled out 

the new perfonnance-management system for the Foreign Service, and plan to roll out a similarly 

reformed system for the Civil Service next year. We also seek to ensure that we provide the 

necessary professional development and learning opportunities, including foreign- language 

training, as well as possible. In addition, given the challenges faced by our colleagues who are 

dedicating their lives to improving the lives of others around the world, often in dangerous 

situations, we have focused on improving our Staff Care program that provides well- being support 

for all sta±I 

What is USAID doing to protect American aid workers who are serving in remote areas and areas 

of conflict? 

As is the case for all US Government civilian staft: employees of the US Agency for International 

Development (USAID) who are serving overseas are under the primary protection of the Chief of 

Mission at the relevant US Embassy and his or her Regional Security Officer USAID collaborates 

closely every day with both US. Embassies and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security at the State 

Department in Washington to ensure our staff receive the proper training to live and work safely in 

high-threat environments, including to understand the specific security context of the country in 

which they will operate. USAID staff deploy prepared to participate actively in maintaining their 

own security, by identifying threats, assessing team vulnerabilities, and communicating frequently 

with the security professionals who are responsible for keeping them safe. 
136

Æ


29388o-2.eps

Under the State Department's "No Double Standard" Policy, security alerts, advisories, and 

warnings provided to US. Embassy staff also go to all American Citizens registered with that 

Embassy. We encourage all Americans, as well as citizens of other nationalities, to register with 

their Embassies while living or traveling abroad. While USAID cannot dictate security standards 

and practices to the humanitarian community, we do require every one of our non-governmental 

partners (NGOs) to submit a comprehensive safety and security plan with each proposal for funding. 

These plans must demonstrate an in-depth analysis of the range of threats the organization and its 

staff could face, identify the organization's specific vulnerabilities, and outline a mitigation strategy 

and contingency plans to keep its staff as safe as possible. 

USAID also funds a number of international organizations dedicated to the improvement ofNGOs' 

security standards and the dissemination of professional training for NGO security officers and 

executives. These efforts collect global data on security incidents that affect aid workers, identify 

vulnerabilities and gaps across the industry, share best practices, and design and implement training 

to improve the security capacity of member organizations. 

How are you working to ensure USAID can attract and retain the best and brightest individuals who 

are willing to dedicate their lives to improving the lives of others? 

The US. Agency for International Development (US AID) seeks to recruit and retain the best and 

brightest in both the Foreign Service and Civil Service as part of our efforts to ensure our workforce 

reflects the diversity, skills, and dedication of the American public. Overall, we also consistently 

adapt our recruitment strategies to attract candidates with the skill sets required for deployment in 

challenging environments, and to meet the Agency's goal of working with countries to place them 

on a path to ending their need for foreign assistance. We also seek to provide a clear career path 

for both candidates and employees to understand how to create the career they desire, which 

increases the likelihood of retention. The annual increases over the past four years in our results in 

the "Best Places to Work Index" category in the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey are indicative 

of the success we have achieved in these areas. 

Increasing the diversity of our workforce continues to be a priority for the Agency. For example, 

we are committed to recruiting new Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) through the Donald M. Payne 

International Development Fellowship Program. As part of our outreach e±Iorts, the Agency has 

assigned two SFOs to serve as "Development Diplomats in Residence" at universities in Georgia 

and California to recruit and encourage minority students in those regions of the country to consider 

careers in international development. The Agency continues to strenb>then its human-capital 

capabilities as part of our Transfonnation. We have reinstated the Agency's Student-Loan 

Repayment Program as an important tool for recruitment and retention. Furthermore, recognizing 

that our FSOs (and often their families) move frequently, we have also redesigned our Foreign 

Service Assignment process to be more effective and efficient for the Agency and its mission, our 

FSOs, and their families. We expect to make more progress in improving our hwnan-resources 

policies, processes, and systems as our Transformation moves