```

[Senate Hearing 118-501]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                        S. Hrg. 118-501

                     MODERNIZATION AND MANAGEMENT:
                    BUILDING A DEPARTMENT TO ADDRESS
                        21ST CENTURY CHALLENGES

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                     COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                              MAY 16, 2024

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
       
 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]      

                  Available via http://www.govinfo.gov
                  
                               __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
57-478 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                       

                 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS        

             BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland, Chairman        
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey            JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire          MARCO RUBIO, Florida
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware         MITT ROMNEY, Utah
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut        PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
TIM KAINE, Virginia                    RAND PAUL, Kentucky
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                   TODD YOUNG, Indiana
CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey             JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii                   TED CRUZ, Texas
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland             BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois              TIM SCOTT, South Carolina
                Damian Murphy, Staff Director          
       Christopher M. Socha, Republican Staff Director          
                   John Dutton, Chief Clerk          

                              (ii)      

 
                       C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator From Maryland.............     1

Risch, Hon. James E., U.S. Senator From Idaho....................     3

Verma, Hon. Richard R., Deputy Secretary of State, Management and 
  Resources, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC............     6
    Prepared Statement...........................................     8

              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions Submitted by 
  Senator Benjamin L. Cardin.....................................    25

Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions Submitted by 
  Senator James E. Risch.........................................    30

Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions Submitted by 
  Senator Robert Menendez........................................    32

Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions Submitted by 
  Senator Marco Rubio............................................    34

Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions Submitted by 
  Senator John Barrasso..........................................    38

                                 (iii)

 .
 
  MODERNIZATION AND MANAGEMENT: BUILDING A DEPARTMENT TO ADDRESS 21ST 
                           CENTURY CHALLENGES

                              ----------                              

                         THURSDAY, MAY 16, 2024

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:38 a.m., in 
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Benjamin L. 
Cardin presiding.
    Present: Senators Cardin [presiding], Shaheen, Murphy, 
Kaine, Van Hollen, Risch, Ricketts, and Young.

         OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

    The Chairman. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will 
come to order.
    We welcome Deputy Secretary, Verma, to our committee.
    It is nice to have you here.
    This hearing will focus on the State Department and the 
modernization efforts at the State Department. A hundred years 
ago, Congress passed the Rogers Act laying the foundation for 
today's Foreign Service.
    As we commemorate this anniversary, we should also reflect 
that as to how much has changed over the years. In 1924, 
American diplomats communicating with Washington did not have 
cell phones. Traveling to embassies in Europe took days, and 
the Department only had 1,300 employees.
    Well, today's work force includes over 75,000 dedicated 
employees worldwide. It is a far more diverse work force. 
Emails and smartphones have replaced telegrams and typewriters. 
And when crisis erupts, our diplomats can adapt and make 
decisions using real time information, whether it is AI or the 
spread of infectious diseases, climate change, or strategic 
competition with our adversaries.
    In the 21st century, diplomacy has never been more 
important. Our diplomats are on the front lines of advancing 
the values of our foreign policy. They work with indigenous 
communities defending the environment in Brazil. They partner 
with African leaders on democracy and good governance. They 
battle corruption and stand up for human rights.
    To succeed, we need them working in state of the art 
buildings, both at home and abroad. We need to support their 
Foreign Service careers and also have to be concerned about 
their families, their spouses, their partners, and children. 
And we need leadership that can make trade offs to match our 
resources with our policy priorities.
    I applaud the Administration's recent guidance on merit 
system principles that protect our Civil Service.
    Secretary Verma, I want to welcome you today, and thank you 
for your work in the Department, including your travel to 
support our work force in key posts in China, Brazil, India, 
and Ethiopia.
    As you know, I supported an ambitious modernization effort 
of the State Department. When I was active as the chair of the 
Subcommittee on State Department Management, working with 
Senator Hagerty, we held hearings and made many 
recommendations, many of which were incorporated in legislation 
that was passed by the Congress.
    I am pleased to see initiatives we supported in recent 
State authorizations bills realized like the establishment of 
the Provost and Board of Visitors at the Foreign Service 
Institute. I look forward to hearing about where we are on the 
Reserve Corps. We need to support training and professional 
development for our diplomats, so they have the tools they need 
to tackle the complex challenges of the 21st century.
    I am also pleased to hear you are developing the training 
courses on multilateral institutions so the United States is 
leading on these critical fronts, and that you are launching 
applications for the mid-career mentorship program.
    But I believe there is more progress that needs to be made. 
We need to invest in our diplomats' skill sets from digital 
diplomacy, and economic statecraft, to crisis management, to 
language proficiency, and cultural understandings. Our 
diplomats need the knowledge and expertise to succeed in their 
mission.
    We also need to address the staff shortages that have a 
particularly large impact at hardship posts and mid-level 
positions. When our diplomatic missions are not adequately 
staffed, it hurts the mission and morale. That is why I 
supported the President's budget request to continue hiring at 
an increased rate and incentivizing service in hardship posts.
    We also need to offer career advancement opportunities to 
attract and retain top talent. I look forward to the results of 
the Department's new lateral entry program for mid-level 
employees. I applaud the Administration's efforts to advance 
diversity and equity, including the appointment of the 
Department's second Chief Diversity Officer and implementing 
equity action plans.
    Whether our diplomats come from Baltimore or Boise, our 
diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility policies mean 
they will serve with integrity and authenticity abroad. Our 
diplomats must reflect the diversity of our nation, and they 
must understand the global community, and have a better root in 
the needs that we have around the world. That means a more 
diverse work force.
    As Congress did a century ago with the Rogers Act, today we 
also have an essential role to play in the Department's 
modernization efforts. For the last 3 years now, we have passed 
into law the State Department Authorization bills. I want to 
thank Senator Risch for his cooperation as we have developed, 
in a bipartisan way, the reauthorization bills now in three 
Congresses.
    We look forward to doing the same again this year, which 
gives us an opportunity to advance the priorities of this 
committee to help you in regards to those modernization 
efforts.
    Coming back to this hearing, we hope this hearing will help 
us in sorting out what we can do to help you in your efforts to 
modernize the State Department.
    With that, let me yield to the distinguished Ranking 
Member, Senator Risch.

               STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES E. RISCH, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO

    Senator Risch. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Verma, one of the primary roles of the Deputy Secretary 
for Management and Resources is to keep track and keep the 
Department moving forward while it is staying on track. From 
here, it does not appear things are going well. I hope you can 
shed some light today on why things seem to be going so badly 
for an organization this committee has tried so hard to steer 
in the right direction.
    As I have spent time as both the chairman and ranking 
member of this committee over the past 5 years, I have pushed 
the Department to rebalance its risk tolerance and be more 
forward leading in its overseas engagements. You have heard me 
say over and over again, we are not going to outcompete China 
with our personnel sitting behind Embassy walls. They need to 
get out.
    As part of this effort, I wrote and got enacted the 
Security Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act to help 
the Department open new diplomatic spaces quicker, and cheaper, 
and to advance our diplomatic interest. More than 2 years 
later, SECCA has not been implemented because the Department 
has not issued final guidance.
    That failure to issue final guidance is in violation of 
law. This means the Department cannot deliver on its ambitious 
agenda to open new embassies in places where we are directly 
contending with China, like the Pacific Islands. If the 
Department is going to take the threat from Beijing seriously, 
SECCA guidance needs to go out tomorrow.
    I am tired of the Department slow walking key reforms that 
would improve its efficiency and effectiveness. This 
Administration constantly talks about its modernization agenda, 
but it is focusing on the wrong things if it cannot get this 
right. It appears to many of us that the Department under 
President Biden is more concerned with pursuing its own 
arbitrary DEI goals than results focused efforts to modernize 
its operations and work force.
    Similarly, bureaucrats at Main State are micromanaging the 
U.S. embassy in Kyiv. Washington has put our ambassador there 
in a straitjacket by limiting the number of diplomats we can 
have on the ground and placing nonsensical travel restrictions 
on our own people there.
    Our experts on the ground should make these decisions, not 
folks sitting 5,000 miles away in Washington. These 
restrictions limit our effectiveness while also greatly 
reducing oversight of the assistance we send to the freedom 
fighters in Ukraine. This is not how you win a war.
    Most egregiously, the Rob Malley saga has been wildly out 
of control. I have learned that Mr. Malley illegally 
transferred classified documents to his personal email, an 
exceptionally troubling allegation, and one that I found out 
aside from the State Department who we have been asking these 
questions to for months. Your Department has failed to respond 
for months to repeat it in formal requests for information.
    We cannot help but conclude there is an orchestrated effort 
to obscure the facts from Congress. It is not just me, some 
radical Republican. The chairman and I have done this side by 
side, and we have been incredibly frustrated with the response 
that we have gotten.
    In fact, it was embarrassing, really, the hearing that we 
had. A closed hearing. Well, we tried to extricate the 
information, and these people, I think, could have withstood a 
torture session before they would release the information. It 
was disgusting.
    We deserve to know whether Mr. Malley's crimes impacted 
U.S. Iran policy, influenced nuclear discussions, or swayed the 
President's decisions to unfreeze cash for wrongfully detained 
Americans, or importantly, misinformed us as we try to 
formulate foreign policy. We want answers to our questions 
about what he did when he did it, and how much damage he has 
caused U.S. national security. We also deserve to know why he 
has not been prosecuted for mishandling classified documents.
    Finally, I want to underscore my disagreement with the 
Department continually rewarding unqualified people with 
promotions and ambassadorial nominations. In November 2023, I 
sent a letter stating that I would not support moving any 
nominees complicit in the horrific treatment of U.S. diplomats 
in China during COVID-19.
    You have heard me preach about this over and over again on 
this committee about how badly China treated our diplomats 
during Covid, and how the Department did not protect our 
employees there. So, I sent this letter on November 2023 saying 
I am not going to support anybody that was complicit. Well, lo 
and behold, somebody did not read the letter, or maybe nobody 
read the letter, because Embassy Beijing Charge and DCM David 
Meale was named in that letter. Last week, the President 
nominated him to be U.S. Ambassador to Bangladesh.
    Now, I am going to get beat up by my good friend here 
saying, now how come you will not let us have a hearing? Why 
will you not? I told you in November 2023, find somebody else 
for these positions. Mr. Meale presided over some of the worst 
abuses of our diplomats. In summer of 2021, the Chinese 
government stepped up its unlawful detention of American 
diplomats, unlawful detention of American diplomats, and put 
diplomats not in hospitals, but in container units with barred 
windows in overgrown fields outside major cities.
    The embassy did not try to get these people out, and they 
told U.S. diplomats to comply. No one who allowed a foreign 
adversary to treat U.S. diplomats this way should be a U.S. 
ambassador. In short, it seems like the Department currently 
cannot get out of its own way and focus on what really matters, 
which is advancing U.S. national security and keeping Americans 
safe.
    There are more than 75,000 State Department employees, good 
people, hard working people. The vast, vast majority are who 
are doing very well. They are spread out across the globe, 
giving their blood, sweat, and tears to support this country. 
They deserve our best.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Well, let me just comment before introducing 
our deputy secretary. I certainly agree for your last two lines 
of your opening statement. On the Malley issue, it is been 
frustrating. I agree with you. I wanted to underscore a point 
that I agree that additional information should be made 
available in a classified setting.
    But I want to make it clear, I do not think the State 
Department has the opportunity to make that decision under 
investigation by a different agency, and the State Department 
is not the custodian of the information that the ranking member 
and I sought.
    Senator Risch. But they do have the information.
    The Chairman. It is an active investigation in which they 
are required to follow the lead agency that has the 
information. That is my understanding of it. And they are not 
at liberty to be able to accommodate us without the lead agency 
giving the sign off and the lead agency will not give the sign 
off.
    Senator Risch. I respectfully disagree. They have got it, 
they are in front of this committee----
    The Chairman. I am not even sure they have all the 
information.
    Senator Risch. They admitted they have.
    The Chairman. It is compartmentalized.
    Anyway, I just really wanted to make that clear. I do not 
hold the State Department responsible for the failure to 
provide the information.
    Senator Risch. I do.
    The Chairman. And I know we disagree on that.
    And the second one I want to just bring up about your 
concern about how diplomats were handled during Covid by the 
Chinese government. As we have been able to discover, that 
policy was set at State Department, not at Mission Beijing, and 
it was set by the political leadership at the State Department 
under the Trump administration. So, I am a little bit puzzled 
as to why you are taking this out on the appointments by the 
Biden administration.
    With that, let me introduce our witness for today. Richard 
Verma serves as the Deputy Secretary of State for Management 
and Resources. In this role, he acts as the Chief Operating 
Officer of the Department and leads the Department's effort on 
modernization, foreign assistance, and a wide range of work 
force and strategic issues.
    Deputy Secretary Verma previously served as a U.S. 
Ambassador to India, where he led one of the largest diplomatic 
missions and championed historic progress in bilateral ties. He 
is also a former Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative 
Affairs, and the former National Security Advisor to the Senate 
Majority Leader.
    Secretary Verma, it is a pleasure to have you here. You may 
proceed. Your full testimony will be made part of our record. 
We ask that you try to summarize your comments in about 5 
minutes so we can get engaged in the discussion.

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD R. VERMA, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE, 
MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, 
                               DC

    Mr. Verma. Thank you.
    Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Risch, and 
distinguished members of the committee. I am really grateful 
for the opportunity to testify before you today regarding our 
management of the State Department and the significant progress 
we have made on key reforms.
    I want to thank the committee for the strong support of the 
Department and our nearly 80,000 people spread across every 
corner of the world, serving in nearly every conflict zone. We 
are proud that our work force hails from every State in the 
country, with an estimated 20 percent who are also military 
veterans. It has been an enormous honor to return to the 
Department as Deputy Secretary, after serving as Assistant 
Secretary for Legislative Affairs and as U.S. Ambassador to 
India.
    In my first year, I have been to more than 45 of our 
embassies and consulates around the world. From the war in 
Ukraine, to the attacks of October 7 and the resulting broader 
escalation across the Middle East, to the intense global 
competition with the People's Republic of China, the 
conventional geopolitical landscape is as challenging as it has 
ever been.
    Add to that, the transnational threats of terrorism, 
pandemics, climate change, migration, and cybersecurity, and 
you have a rising set of challenges that require even greater 
international coordination, cooperation, and leadership from 
the United States.
    This mix of old and new threats puts even greater weight on 
the important work done by diplomats and development experts 
across the world. And I am pleased to say that the Department 
is proactively adapting to new mission sets and is laser 
focused on building and supporting our work force to be better 
equipped to tackle today's global challenges.
    Under our modernization agenda, we are focused on building 
new capacity and fostering expertise across emerging critical 
mission areas. We are hiring, and training, and retaining a 
diverse, and dynamic, and entrepreneurial team, and leveraging 
innovative new technologies and platforms.
    We launched, for example, several new offices and bureaus 
designed to centralize expertise. For example, the new Bureau 
of Cyberspace and Digital Policy, the Office of Critical and 
Emerging Technology, a Consolidated China House, and a new 
Bureau of Global Health Security and Diplomacy. We are also 
equipping our work force for new missions, and we are 
attracting, and training, and retaining the right talent.
    Let me just mention a few of the reforms. We have greatly 
increased our training opportunities, expanding our training 
float. We have a new mid-level training program at the Foreign 
Service Institute. We have a new learning policy, and we are 
creating new opportunities for civil servants and Foreign 
Service professionals to fill essential assignments. We are 
reaching out and recruiting in new and innovative ways, 
expanding the pool of qualified applicants.
    Small but impactful changes such as how and when the 
Foreign Service exam is administered helps break down 
geographic and other barriers. We also now have paid 
internships for all our interns thanks to the support of 
Congress and this committee, in particular, which is a game 
changer for so many young Americans.
    We have a new employee retention unit, which collects data 
from across the employee experience, and we use it in exit 
interviews to better understand why people leave. And this team 
is developing the first ever wide Department retention plan.
    I also want to note the gratitude of the Department and our 
50,000 locally employed staff for the efforts of this committee 
to preserve the availability of special immigrant visas through 
the GRATEFUL Act. Our local staff now remain able to move their 
families to the United States at the conclusion of a career of 
long and faithful service to the U.S. Government.
    An empowered and educated work force also needs modern 
tools and technology, and we have a new, our enterprise-wide 
artificial intelligence strategy. We are using data analytics 
like we have never done before. We have a new cyber strategy.
    In terms of American citizen services, today, more 
Americans have passports than at any time in our history, with 
more than 160 million valid U.S. passports in circulation. We 
issued 24 million passports in 2023. Similarly, more people can 
travel to the U.S. than ever before. We issued more than 10.4 
million non-immigrant visas last year, 563,000 immigrant visas, 
resulting in nearly $240 billion economic impact to the United 
States, contributing to more than 9.5 million American jobs. 
And we are bringing down the visa wait times considerably.
    The safety of American citizens overseas remains our 
highest priorities. Last year, we assisted nearly 70,000 
Americans in some sort of crisis or emergency somewhere around 
the world.
    Finally, I want to note, in closing, our gratitude for the 
passage of the National Security Supplemental, which will 
greatly aid our efforts to support Ukraine and Israel, counter 
China in the Indo-Pacific, and provide urgent humanitarian 
support in key regions.
    So, while the range and complexity of the challenges 
confronting the U.S. and our allies and partners around the 
world can seem daunting, I am heartened and encouraged by our 
incredible work force and the missions they take on each day. 
And while the vast majority of their work goes unreported or 
unseen by the media, or even known by most Americans, the work 
they do, with your support, helps make the world a more secure, 
and more safe, and more prosperous place.
    And I am so grateful to our entire State Department team, 
and I know the Secretary and our leadership team will continue 
to support them in every possible way.
    I appreciate this opportunity to testify before you, and I 
look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Verma follows:]

               Prepared Statement of Mr. Richard R. Verma

    Chairman Cardin, Ranking Member Risch, and distinguished Members of 
the Committee, I am grateful for the opportunity to testify before you 
today regarding our management of the State Department and the 
significant progress we have made on key reforms.
    I want to thank the Committee for the strong support of the 
Department and our nearly 80,000 people spread across every corner of 
the world, serving in nearly every conflict zone. We are proud that our 
workforce hails from every State in the country, with an estimated 20 
percent who are also military veterans.
    It's been an enormous honor to return to the Department as Deputy 
Secretary for Management and Resources, after serving as Assistant 
Secretary of Legislative Affairs and as U.S. Ambassador to India. In my 
first year, I've been to more than 45 of our embassies and consulates 
around the world.
    From the war in Ukraine, to the attacks of October 7th, and the 
resulting broader escalation across the Middle East, to the intense 
global competition with the People's Republic of China, the 
conventional geopolitical landscape is as challenging as ever. Add the 
transitional threats of terrorism, pandemics, climate change, 
migration, and cyber security, and you have a rising set of challenges 
that require even greater international coordination, cooperation, and 
leadership from the United States. This mix of old and new threats puts 
even greater weight on the important work done by diplomats and 
development experts across the world.
    I'm pleased to say that the Department is proactively adapting to 
new mission sets and is laser-focused on building and supporting our 
workforce to be better equipped to tackle today's global challenges. 
Under Secretary Blinken's leadership, we have advanced an ambitious 
Modernization Agenda focused on building new capacity and fostering 
expertise across emerging critical mission areas; hiring, training and 
retaining a diverse, dynamic and entrepreneurial team; and leveraging 
innovative new technologies and platforms in a risk aware way to work 
more effectively and efficiently around the world.
    We launched, for example, several new offices and bureaus designed 
to centralize expertise in these areas and support our colleagues 
around the world, including the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital 
Policy, the Office of Critical and Emerging Technology, a consolidated 
China House, and the Bureau of Global Health Security and Diplomacy.

     As we equip a worldwide workforce for new missions, it 
becomes even more important that we are attracting, training and 
retaining the right talent. Let me name just a few of the reforms we 
are pursuing to ensure a model workplace: We've greatly increased our 
training opportunities, especially in critical mission areas--we have 
dramatically expanded our training float, we have new mid-level 
training programs at the Foreign Service Institute, we've rolled out a 
new learning policy and we are creating new opportunities and 
incentives for civil servants and foreign service professionals to fill 
essential assignments.

     We are reaching out and recruiting in new and innovative 
ways, expanding the pool of highly qualified applicants. Small but 
impactful changes such as how and where the foreign service exam is 
administered helps break down geographic and other barriers. We also 
now have paid internships for all our interns, thanks to the support of 
Congress, and this committee in particular. This is a gamechanger for 
so many young Americans of diverse backgrounds hoping to start a career 
in foreign affairs.

     We have established an employee Retention Unit, which 
collates data from across the employee experience and uses exit 
interviews to provide insights into why people stay and why they leave. 
This team is developing the first Department-wide retention plan.

     I also want to note the gratitude of the Department of 
State, and our 50,000 Locally Employed staff around the world, for the 
efforts of this committee, to preserve the availability of Special 
Immigrant Visas through the GRATEFUL Act. Our local staff remain able 
to move their families to the United States at the conclusion of a 
career of long and faithful service to the U.S. Government.

    An empowered and educated workforce also needs modern tools and 
technology infrastructure. Our new Enterprise Artificial Intelligence 
Strategy outlines how we are leaning forward responsibly on AI, 
building the secure infrastructure we need to lessen rote or repetitive 
tasks and enable our diplomats to spend less time face-to-screen and 
more time engaging face-to-face.
    In terms of American citizen services, today, more Americans have 
passports than at any time in our history with more than 160 million 
valid U.S. passports in circulation. We issued 24 million passports in 
2023, shattering our record while also getting wait times back to pre-
pandemic levels.
    Similarly, more people can travel to the United States now than 
ever before. In Fiscal Year 2023, we issued more than 10.4 million 
nonimmigrant visas and 563,000 immigrant visas. In recent years, 
international visitors have contributed as much as $239 billion in 
annual spending to the U.S. economy and have supported an estimated 9.5 
million American jobs. Though there are still places where visa 
interview wait times remain stubbornly high, the global median wait 
time is now under 40 days. We continue to focus on those few posts 
where wait times remain high.
    The safety of American citizens overseas remains our highest 
priority. Since rolling out a new crisis management communications 
system in 2021, we have communicated with and assisted more than 70,000 
individuals through 15 different crises around the world. In recent 
months, we have helped evacuate over 1,300 U.S. citizens and family 
members from Haiti and 1,800 U.S. citizens from Gaza.
    Finally, I want to note in closing our gratitude for the passage of 
the national security supplemental, which will greatly aid our efforts 
to support Ukraine and Israel, counter China's malign influence in the 
Indo-Pacific region and provide urgent humanitarian support in key 
regions.
    While the range and complexity of challenges confronting the United 
States and our allies and partners around the world can seem daunting, 
I am heartened and encouraged by our incredible workforce and the 
missions they take on each day. While the vast majority of their work 
goes unreported or unseen by the media or even known by most Americans, 
the work they do, with your support, helps make the world a more secure 
and more prosperous place. I am so grateful to our entire State 
Department team, and I know the Secretary and our leadership team will 
continue to support them in every possible way.
    Thank you again for inviting me to testify. I look forward to your 
questions.

    The Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony.
    We will now have the first round.
    I just want to make an observation. During the height of 
coming out of Covid, the number of requests we got in our 
office concerning passport applications and the concerns about 
visa being issued, et cetera, required us almost to have 
additional staff people just to handle the calls to our office.
    I can tell now by the volume, that that issue has been on 
the right path of being resolved. The economic impact of visas 
and tourism here in the United States, I am glad you mentioned 
that, we hear that frequently, that the United States is a much 
more challenging destination for non-Americans to come to than 
other parts of the world.
    So, I am glad that you are focusing on that because it is 
not only an economic interest to make sure that that is handled 
efficiently, it is also to bring a better understanding of 
America and the people to people contact. So, I just really 
want to make that observation, and I thank you for the progress 
you are making, but we still need to make more.
    As you know, last December, following intense discussions 
with the State Department, we were able to pass the Combating 
Global Corruption Act and the National Defense Authorization 
Act. I thank Senator Young of this committee, my co-sponsor of 
that legislation, that requires the State Department to put a 
higher focus on anti-corruption activities in our mission 
consistent with President Biden's statement as to the need of 
this as a core national security concern.
    Can you tell us how the budget that you have requested will 
allow you to implement this law, and how we are progressing to 
carry out the legislation that was passed?
    Mr. Verma. Yes. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and thank you for 
your leadership on that issue. We have been progressing well. 
We have been working closely with your staff.
    The report that is required is underway and being drafted. 
And so, this continues to be a very high priority for the 
Department. And I think you will be satisfied with the report 
and the mechanisms, and we have the resources to do this, and 
appreciate what the team has done.
    I will say I was able to be the senior U.S. official at the 
Anti-Corruption Conference sponsored by the United Nations in 
December, in Atlanta of last year, which brought together over 
100 countries from around the world. And this legislation 
actually featured in some of what we were talking about.
    But the role that the U.S. plays in combating corruption 
continues to be essential. And again, your leadership, and I 
think this legislation will be another important tool.
    The Chairman. I want to give you a little bit more an 
opportunity to tell us how the China House is proceeding. It is 
a real effort to put an attention as to the challenges we have 
with China that allow so many of our diplomats to spend time 
understanding the challenges of China by actually being in a 
setting that gives them the background rather than being just 
in one country. Can you just tell us how the China House is 
proceeding?
    Mr. Verma. Yes.
    Mr. Chairman, when we talk about modernizing the 
Department, we talk about making sure we are doing those 
missions that matter most to the American people and to our 
strategic interests. And obviously, our competition with China 
is top among them.
    And what we felt like is we needed not just a bilateral 
look at how we were doing in our competition, but we needed a 
global look and a global understanding of how we were competing 
with China, from Africa to Latin America, on trade, on 
security, people to people ties, you name it.
    And the China House is that consolidated effort. And so, 
that is actually up and running, and it is working well. We are 
going to continue to build that out, not only build it out, but 
also build out people's expertise with regard to what is 
actually happening in China, with a deeper understanding.
    And so, when we talk about training, and we talk about 
critical missions, it is essential that we connect up the 
training that people have to give them the skill sets in these 
critical mission areas. So, we are incentivizing people to--
actually, both Foreign Service and Civil Service--to have a 
deeper understanding on China.
    So, it is the China House effort, it is the additional 
training, and it is the resources that the Congress has given 
us to put into this competition. So, it is a full court press.
    The Chairman. If it was up to most of us on this committee, 
we would give you a larger share of the pie of this nation's 
resources to carry out your mission. We think you are 
underfunded, generally, so I am not going to be too tough as to 
how the resources are being allocated and you being able to 
meet your mission.
    But we talk about the float so that our diplomats can get 
the training they need, whether they are spending time at the 
China House or whether they are taking a course at the 
facilities that are available. Training is essential not only 
before they become diplomats, but when they are diplomats. 
Cannot do that unless you have the personnel that can fill in 
during the training missions.
    We have been trying to create this float. What progress 
have we made, and where are the challenges still in giving you 
adequate resources so that we can take advantage of the 
training opportunities that are there?
    Mr. Verma. Right.
    I think we have actually made a lot of progress on the 
training float. So, at any given time, we have about 1,400 
people undergoing some sort of training. The vast majority of 
those have been in language training.
    For the first time, we have added about 250 positions 
dedicated to training, but in the critical missions area, and 
about 150 of those are going to be Foreign Service specialists 
and generalists. And about a hundred of those are going to be 
Civil Service specialists.
    We have also made it possible for Civil Service employees 
to get the kind of mobility they have asked for by backfilling 
those Civil Service professionals that have gone into the 
training float. Colin Powell talked about establishing a 
training float 23 years ago. We are up and running on the 
training float. We are doing a lot more than language.
    You mentioned our budget constraints and our staffing 
shortages. It is hard when you have a 13 percent staffing gap 
on the Foreign Service and Civil Service to take people out and 
put them into training, but it is also essential. We have to be 
able to do it while we reduce this staffing gap.
    You know, fiscal year 2024 ended up with about a 6 percent 
budget cut, which also has a real impact in our ability to 
fully roll out the training float we want, but we are moving 
forward with it. The Secretary and I, and others believe it is 
very, very important.
    The Chairman. Senator Risch.
    Senator Risch. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Secretary Verma, you heard my criticism of the Department 
regarding the implementation of SECCA. SECCA was drafted and 
passed so that we could get things moving quicker. You are the 
person in charge of that, I gather. Is that right?
    Mr. Verma. I am happy to be----
    Senator Risch. That is a yes or no.
    Mr. Verma. Yes. I am happy to be that person.
    Senator Risch. So, can you give me just a--I do not want a 
blah, blah, blah, answer. Give one sentence, why you have 
failed to comply with the law's requirement that was passed 2 
years ago, that you had 6 months to issue final guidance, and 
why 2 years later, that final guidance has not been issued.
    Mr. Verma. So, Senator Risch, let me say up front, I agree 
with you. Our people want to be out engaging with the public. 
They do not want to be behind big walls. And so, we have 
actually been aggressively opening, frankly, new embassies in 
the Pacific Islands. We have a new embassy in Solomon Island, 
Seychelles in Indian Ocean, Tonga. We are opening in Vanuatu 
and Maldives. We have actually used the authority that you have 
given us to exercise the waiver on setback in a number of 
embassies around the world in new construction.
    The guidance that you are asking for is coming out shortly. 
I promise you of that. We are in absolute agreement. Let me 
tell you why it is hard. Because you have to have that rigorous 
debate between the security professionals, between the people 
who are building, and we want to do this right.
    Because if you just say, well reduce the setback and co-
locate in all of these places in the world, which is what the 
authority gives us, which is what we want, and you do not do it 
carefully, you do run into security challenges. We are doing it 
carefully. I think you will appreciate the guidance when it 
comes out. It is coming out soon.
    Senator Risch. You said soon, and shortly. Those words mean 
something to me, but maybe not the same as what they mean to 
you. So, tell me what soon and shortly mean.
    And by the way, I think that is a good explanation of what 
you have given. It still does not respond to the fact that 
there is specific, final guidance that was required and did not 
come out. So, let us get that behind us and talk about when 
that will happen shortly or soon.
    Mr. Verma. Look, we are working on it as we speak, and so 
this has been an intensive conversation, again, in the 
Department. And we want to do this, and we want to do it right, 
and we want to be able to roll this out in a way that, I think, 
lives up to the spirit. Frankly, we want to----
    Senator Risch. I know you.
    Mr. Verma [continuing]. Do more.
    Senator Risch. And that is why I had the law drawn, and 
passed, and got through.
    Mr. Verma. Right.
    Senator Risch. Will it be less than 6 months?
    Mr. Verma. Yes, absolutely.
    Senator Risch. Will it be less than 90 days?
    Mr. Verma. I am hoping it is in the next few weeks.
    Senator Risch. Hope is not a strategy. All right. Well, 
thank you for what you are doing in that regard. I am glad you 
are paying attention to it. It is the right thing to do. And 
believe me, we worked with the Department, as you know, when we 
drew SECCA, and when we passed SECCA, and so we know the 
Department wants to do this.
    Mr. Verma. I will say, there is a reason why I have been to 
45 embassies and consulates. It is not just for the frequent 
flyer miles. It is to really see firsthand the challenges in 
building in urban areas and the real security issues we have. 
But we want the flexibility, and I think you will be pleased 
with how we actually implement it.
    Senator Risch. OK.
    I am going to ask these questions not expecting an answer, 
but I am going to ask you anyway. Can you confirm that the 
Bureau of Diplomatic Security suspended Mr. Malley's clearance 
because he improperly transferred classified U.S. Government 
information to his personal email account and/or device that is 
not authorized to store such information?
    Mr. Verma. Yes. Senator, I think you know that we are 
limited on what we can say, and Rob Malley has been on leave 
since last summer. It has been publicly reported that this is 
because of his--that his security clearance was suspended. 
There are security professionals that review this matter.
    I will just say it is consistent with longstanding 
executive branch and Department of State policies and practice 
that we cannot comment, or provide documents or information in 
a public setting related to personnel, security, law 
enforcement, or investigations pertaining to any individual.
    So, unfortunately, I do not have much I can share with you 
in this public setting.
    Senator Risch. Can you confirm that a malign cyber actor 
actually gained access to Mr. Malley's personal email and/or 
phone?
    Mr. Verma. Senator, I am not in a position to speak to the 
status of the investigation or anything related to it.
    Senator Risch. Well, my time is up, and I did not get what 
I wanted out of that, and probably will not until we agreed to 
issue a subpoena for that information. Thank you.
    Mr. Verma. Senator, could I--Mr. Chairman, if it is OK. 
Senator, you raised our China situation, and I just wanted to, 
having just been in China last week, I just wanted to respond 
to that directly. And I know you raised it with me multiple 
times in the past, and I greatly appreciate you speaking out on 
behalf of the work force, especially those who had to go 
through a terrible situation in China.
    Senator Risch. And you above all understand the work force 
disillusionment with the way they were treated by China, and 
the fact that they believed that the government did not stand 
up for them.
    Mr. Verma. Well, Senator, I would say no one was happy with 
the situation. I will say we had to waive privileges and 
immunities in 50 countries in order to continue to show up in 
places, including in China.
    Senator Risch. But they did not all treat them like China 
treated our work force.
    Mr. Verma. Well, some were pretty bad. What our work force 
went through was not acceptable. And the 16 people, plus kids 
that were separated, again, not something that any of our work 
force should ever go through. I will say, as I said a year ago, 
to you over a year ago, in my own hearing, we had a choice to 
make about being present or not being present.
    Secretary Pompeo, the Under Secretary for Management, 
Governor Branstad, Ambassador Branstad, made a policy decision. 
I do not question that decision sitting before you today. They 
made a policy decision that it was in the interest of the 
United States to be there, and it was going to be really 
painful for the work force to get back to China.
    Now, the people who had to implement that, Rob Ford, David 
Mille, the people you were talking about, actually were the 
ones there on the ground trying to work through an 
exceptionally difficult situation, trying to arrange medevac 
for our people, trying to fight with the Chinese government 
every day on behalf of those people, and to hold them 
accountable, responsible, to punish them.
    I just feel is the wrong direction. Hold me accountable, 
honestly. I am the policy person. I am the senior official for 
management. But they were implementing a policy taken by 
leaders in Washington and by the ambassador, again, who I am 
not faulting them. I am just saying it does send a chilling 
effect to senior officials around the world when they have to 
do difficult things.
    No one is accepting, or endorsing, or thinking what the 
Chinese did was acceptable. It was not. But these officials had 
to implement a very, very difficult situation, and frankly 
recovered from it, and brought us to a place of normalcy with 
Ambassador Burns' leadership and others.
    So that is the only thing I wanted to say. I spent a lot of 
time on this, and I do not think we see it in the same way. And 
these are people you might vote against, but to block their 
consideration from future advancement is just--I just ask you 
to think about that.
    Senator Risch. I can tell you, and you know, that the scars 
are long, and deep, and long lasting from what happened there.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. I just want to comment. We are talking about, 
in most cases, career diplomats, and we expect our career 
diplomats to carry out the instructions of the senior 
management, from the President of the United States to the 
Secretary of State.
    And I just really want to agree completely with Secretary 
Verma. There is a morale issue when we question their 
dedication when they are basically carrying out a policy.
    Senator Shaheen.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Deputy Secretary Verma for 
being here. And despite our questions, we very much appreciate 
the work that you do every day.
    Last month, I wrote a letter to President Biden. Senator 
Collins co-signed that with me, as did a number of our 
colleagues, including the chair and ranking member of this 
committee. We were concerned about evidence that has surfaced 
on the 60 Minutes program about the GRU's involvement in 
directed energy attacks against our American government 
officials and their families.
    And we have not gotten a response to that letter, but I do 
remain concerned that this Administration seems reluctant to 
cite attribution for what is happening there, and to go back 
and reexamine the evidence that has surfaced, and reconsider 
the assessments of what went on there.
    So, can I ask for your help in working with the interagency 
to get a response to that letter?
    Mr. Verma. Absolutely.
    Senator Shaheen. And I appreciated our conversation 
yesterday where I raised the concern about families who were 
affected by those attacks. I have a constituent whose young 
children were affected, and there is concern that once they 
turn 18, they will no longer be eligible for coverage for 
treatment. And we do not really know what the long term impacts 
are. So again, I hope the Department will work with our office 
to make necessary changes to ensure that families who have had 
children affected are going to have some reassurance that those 
kids are going to get the protection they need.
    Mr. Verma. Senator, absolutely. Thank you for your 
leadership on this. Thank you for looking out for, again, our 
work force that has been impacted. The attribution question is 
one that continues to be researched. As you know, the community 
has not been able to point to a specific actor or country, but 
that work continues.
    In the meantime, what the Secretary has said and what we 
are committed to is making sure people are taken care of. These 
are real symptoms with real impacts, and real pain, and real 
suffering, and they deserve to be cared for. And that is what 
we are doing.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. We look forward to 
continuing to work on this to ensure that people are protected.
    I think one of the biggest threats to the United States and 
to democracies around the world is disinformation and 
misinformation. Now, the Global Engagement Center was set up to 
help address this issue. Their authorization is going to expire 
in December, and I think there are still too many in Congress 
who do not have an appreciation for what the Global Engagement 
Center was designed to do and how effective they are in 
carrying out that mission.
    So, can you talk for the benefit of anybody who may be 
listening about why they have a critical role to play in, not 
just in the State Department, but in our national security?
    Mr. Verma. No, I appreciate you raising it.
    The Global Engagement Center has been doing an incredible 
job of shining a light on the misinformation and disinformation 
that is being used around the world to impact our partners and 
our allies. Frankly, to impact our own strategic interests.
    It is a very intense competition in that space, and we 
cannot cede the field to Russia, to China, to others. And we 
finally have a group of experts who are doing this and doing 
this exactly the right way. They do not operate in the United 
States in any way. I know there has been concerns about, ``Are 
they funding that kind of research or programmatic activity in 
the United States?'' They absolutely do not and will not.
    But to have their mandate expire at the end of the year 
would be a devastating blow to our effort to be able to compete 
in one of the new critical domains which we have to show up, 
and compete, and document, and show to people what our 
adversaries are doing. And this is the wrong time to cede the 
ground.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, I totally agree with that.
    Do you have any specific examples of what the GEC has done 
that we can point to that show their effectiveness?
    Mr. Verma. Absolutely. I mean, they have put out a number 
of reports that actually attribute a lot of misinformation and 
disinformation to the Russian and Chinese governments, and the 
intent that that information was put out to do harm either to 
one of our partners or to our ourselves.
    So, it is shining a light on that. That is so important. 
And again, we can get you a--their work has been very, very 
impressive, and I think it should continue.
    Senator Shaheen. Again, I agree with that, and I hope that 
you will give some thought to how we better do outreach to the 
American public and to Members of Congress about the 
effectiveness of the GEC, and about why that is so important.
    As I said, I think one of the biggest threats to our 
country and our national security is disinformation, and there 
is not, I believe, enough of an appreciation on the part of the 
public for the extent to which certain issues are manipulated.
    Mr. Verma. Yes. I appreciate you raising it, Senator.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Senator Ricketts.
    Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, Deputy Secretary Verma, for being here today.
    On April 19, the Jewish Insider published an article tied 
entitled, ``Inside the State Department's Anti-Israel Listening 
Sessions.'' And I just want to read you a few quotes from State 
Department personnel who attended some of these listening 
sessions.
    ``It was overwhelmingly calls, including from people I 
respect, that we need to do more to sanction Israel. We need to 
do more to punish Israel. We need to be more serious concerning 
ways in which we can sanction them; condition aid, cut off aid, 
reduce weapons flow,'' said one Foreign Service officer with 
two decades of Middle East experience.
    ``There were people whose issues do not have anything to do 
with the conflict, who are making the case for why we need to 
do more to bash Israel.'' The article goes on to say that what 
stood out to some of the Department folks was that these recent 
listening sessions, senior leaders were unwilling to defend our 
support for Israel's security, particularly in response to the 
chorus of employees seeking a harsher stance against the Jewish 
state there.
    As a result, lower level folks who support Israel do not 
feel empowered to speak up in these sessions, and to me, this 
sounds like it is a management problem. It is a leadership 
problem. It could be creating a toxic work environment here. We 
certainly do not want the State Department to become like 
Columbia University.
    Deputy Secretary Verma, as a senior leader in the 
Department, have you led or attended any of these listening 
sessions?
    Mr. Verma. Yes. Look, Senator, I do not know about that 
listening session that is described, but in terms of outreach 
to our work force, I have probably--I do not know, done 10, or 
11, or 12 outreach. I have done town halls with embassies 
across the Middle East. I have done meetings with our Jewish 
American employees. I have done meetings with Arab American 
employees. I have done as much outreach as I possibly can, 
because this is a very difficult issue.
    I will tell you, in none of the meetings that I presided 
over or attended, was there anything that is being described in 
that article. So, I am not familiar with what that article is 
referencing.
    But boy, if we are not engaging with our work force during 
one of the most challenging situations, one of the most 
significant threats to Israel, and its people, one of the most 
horrific terrorist attacks, but also one of the most 
significant humanitarian difficult situations we have had in 
Gaza.
    These are issues that really weigh on people. I am proud of 
the work that the team continues to do to support Israel and 
its defense needs while we are also trying to make sure 
humanitarian goods are flowing. So, this engagement with the 
work force that I have been part of has nothing to do with what 
is described in that article.
    Senator Ricketts. So, obviously, you know, you have had 
experience there before. So, these listening sessions were not 
set up specifically to talk about Israel, or were they?
    Mr. Verma. Again, I can only speak to what I have done. The 
outreach that I have done has been to hear what has been on 
people's minds about the situation in the Middle East, both the 
impact that it has had on work force in terms of stress and 
workload. I mean----
    Senator Ricketts. So, but yes, they were about Israel. Were 
these things also, kind of, these listening sessions then done 
for Iraq and Afghanistan and other----
    Mr. Verma. Well, look, it was about the situation in the 
broader Middle East. It was not about Israel, specifically. It 
was about listening to the views of the work force itself, 
about what was happening. Both the--again, the terrible and 
horrific terrorist attack, and the impact that it is had on the 
work force in addition to how we now respond both militarily 
and from a humanitarian perspective.
    Senator Ricketts. So were similar sessions done for 
different situations, like, again, Iraq, or Afghanistan, or 
something like that?
    Mr. Verma. I can only speak to--I am sure they were during 
previous periods. I was not there to participate in those. But 
I will say, Senator, from a management perspective, I think 
these have been exceptionally important, and they have not been 
stilted or kind of preconceived to elicit one opinion over 
another. It is meant to, really, give folks a chance to express 
themselves and to frankly share information.
    Senator Ricketts. So, there is other ways that people can 
voice their concerns, right, like dissent cables, which are 
supposed to remain silent. Do you worry that, at least in the 
perspective of some of the folks here who were quoted, that you 
are creating a chill?
    You talked about chilling effect earlier. You are creating 
a chilling effect here with the folks who support Israel that 
are not, at least in this case, did not feel supported by 
senior leadership to articulate the views of why we are doing 
what we are doing to allow Israel to defend themselves.
    Mr. Verma. Look, I have not from the Secretary, from 
others, I have not seen that. And we have made it very clear 
that we will not stand for antisemitism in the Department. We 
will not stand for its viewpoints. We will not stand for people 
that speak or express opinions of antisemitism in that way. So, 
no, I do not see a chilling effect.
    Senator Ricketts. Have you seen anybody resign with regard 
to feeling like Israel is not being supported enough, and do 
you worry that you are not----
    Mr. Verma. I have not seen that.
    Senator Ricketts. You have not seen anybody resign with 
regard to that?
    Mr. Verma. I have seen people resign because they think we 
are providing too much assistance, but I have not seen people 
resign because they think we are not doing enough to support 
Israel.
    Senator Ricketts. OK. Great.
    Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Senator Van Hollen.
    Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Welcome, Secretary Verma. It is good to see you. It was 
good to talk with you yesterday in my office.
    I just wanted to pick up on a couple things that I asked 
you during your confirmation hearing. I think Senator Cardin 
raised them as well, but just to get an update because you made 
progress since confirmation on the passport backlog and the 
visa backlog.
    If you could just very briefly speak to what challenges 
remain mostly on both those fronts, and I know that there is 
still visa backlogs with respect to a number of countries. 
Could you just talk about where you are in your plan to get it 
to where we would like to be?
    Mr. Verma. Sure.
    So, I am actually very happy to report that the passport 
processing times are back to pre-pandemic levels. So, 6 to 8 
weeks for a routine request, 2 to 3 weeks for expedited. 48 
percent of Americans have a passport. We have 160 million 
passports in circulation. 2023, 24 million passports were 
issued. We are talking about a pilot to roll out on online 
renewal.
    So, there is actually a lot of innovation happening in the 
passport space, and feel really good about the progress that we 
have made. We have now got to keep up with the peak demand and 
travel season. And again, so far, we have gotten through that 
for this year.
    And all the credit goes to the consular team. Again, visa 
wait times, we are back to pre-pandemic levels except for one 
category, which is the visitor visa category. We have reduced 
the wait times by 70 percent in 18 months. So, the global 
median is about 40 days for visitor visas. That is the one 
category.
    There are a number of countries where we still have wait 
times that are too long; Mexico, Colombia, India, a few others, 
but even these are coming down. We are doing that by, frankly, 
hiring more people as much as we can, and the team does have a 
pathway to get these back to a normal wait time.
    I mentioned the huge economic impact that this has. The 
number of students coming, foreign students, that this 
contributes to American universities. So, this is really, 
really important to us, and I think there has been significant 
progress over the last year.
    Senator Van Hollen. Well, congratulations on the progress, 
and look forward to working with you on making sure we 
ultimately get where we want to go.
    Thank you for referencing the GRATEFUL Act in your 
comments. I was proud to author that legislation to make good 
on our promises to foreign nationals who are working at our 
embassies and consulates around the world, and also to author 
the Foreign Service Families Act.
    So, if you could please just provide a brief update on 
implementation of the GRATEFUL Act and implementation of the 
Foreign Service Families Act. The Foreign Service Families Act 
specifically with respect to helping the spouses of our Foreign 
Service officers or other State Department employees find 
productive work in overseas posts.
    Mr. Verma. Thank you for both of those. Both of those 
pieces of legislation were essential. I am told we have issued 
something like 1,500 visas already under the GRATEFUL Act, 
under the special immigrant visa category. So incredible uptake 
on that already, and I am also told that the wait times by this 
fall will again be back to a bit of a normal wait time instead 
of the multi-year period that people were facing. Hugely 
impactful already.
    On spousal employment or partner employment, eligible 
family member employment is a huge plus for the Department. We 
have people with incredible skills up to around 6,000 eligible 
family members that are being deployed around the world. And 
you will see them on consular lines, you will see them in 
political and economic sections.
    So, we are trying to do even better when it comes to 
security clearance process to make sure they are onboarded more 
quickly. But this is a really key component of making sure 
families are able to stay together, and frankly, that families 
can work, and that we want this incredible talent to contribute 
to the embassy mission.
    Senator Van Hollen. I appreciate that, and thank you for 
your implementation of that.
    Last question. As you know, there are a number of doctors 
and other medical workers, including some Americans, who are 
right now trapped in Gaza, trying to get out. I have been in 
touch with Ambassador Lew about this. Could you explain, give 
me an update on where we are in making sure that they can 
safely leave?
    Mr. Verma. Yes, Senator, again, thank you for raising it. 
We are aware of the case. We have been in touch with the 
government of Israel. We have been in touch with, again, our 
counterparts in Egypt and in the region to make sure we can get 
certain emergency cases, especially ones like these, the 
clearance that they need to get out safely. And the team is 
working on it as we speak.
    Senator Van Hollen. All right. I appreciate the updates 
from Ambassador Lew. If you could keep me posted from the home 
front here----
    Mr. Verma. Sure.
    Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. I would appreciate it.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Secretary Verma, I was pleased to see the 
budget request for fiscal year 2025 includes the creation of 
three new Foreign Service positions overseas for democracy and 
human rights. I must say three does not seem to be an adequate 
number. The human rights issues are extremely challenging, and 
we need to be aggressive in promoting human rights.
    Just tell me briefly how you anticipate these three 
positions aiding our assistance of advancing American values of 
human rights globally.
    Mr. Verma. Well Senator, I agree with you; three is 
probably not sufficient. And we are in a situation where we are 
facing democratic backsliding and retrenchment in key parts of 
the world. So, we are going to have to continue to work on 
this. Let me come back to you with specifics about how these 
three positions are, where they are actually going to be 
implemented.
    But I will just say the team working on democracy, human 
rights, and labor continues to be so essential on their voice. 
And just showing up the American voice and American leadership 
in these difficult areas is really--without us as advocates, 
people fighting for democracy in different parts of the world 
would be on their own.
    And so, the grants that we administer, the programs that we 
administer, really are a lifeline for so many different groups 
and so many different individuals in parts of the world, and I 
really credit the DRL team for what they do.
    The Chairman. So, let me ask you a specific question about 
the flexibility on staffing. We recognize that you have 
missions that have to be staffed, but there are urgent issues 
that develop. Sudan being a prime example. The RSF right now 
and the atrocities in Darfur is something that needs to be 
responded to. We now have a special envoy.
    How do you get the resources necessary to meet that type of 
challenge quickly as the manager of the State Department 
resources?
    Mr. Verma. Yes, it is a great question, and it is also why 
the creation of a Reserve Corps is something that we want to 
stand up, with your support. So, what we try to do is we, 
again, we try to incentivize people to come into to critical 
missions. But we also do have a kind of rapid reserve group 
ready to respond to different crises. They have the background 
and expertise, they have worked on other crises in the past, 
and those are people we can sometimes pull into the critical 
missions as well.
    But at, this is actually, probably, a 2 year planning 
process where we actually look at what are the key priorities, 
what resources are needed, and then we allocate that over the 
course of the debate internally on our budget. And then we look 
at it again to make sure we have the right number of people 
working on the issue sets that matter.
    This is going to change as different crises pop up in the 
world. And you mentioned Sudan, for example. And so, the bureau 
will then have to shift resources over if they have it. They 
will come to the senior leaders if they need help from across 
the Department, and then we try to make that available.
    So, we try to be flexible and meet the need that the 
different bureaus have when there is an emergency or a crisis.
    The Chairman. And Sudan might be a good example for us to 
follow. It is extremely challenging right now, Sudan and Chad, 
and the complications by other countries offering support that 
is counterproductive to peace in the region. We need U.S. 
presence there. So, are we moving in regards to Sudan to make 
sure that we have adequate State Department resources to try to 
deal with this crisis?
    Mr. Verma. So, one of the things about the Supplemental is 
that it did provide a significant amount of assistance for 
humanitarian relief. That was a big piece of the Supplemental 
that was essential to the Department. And so that gets deployed 
through our Population, Refugees, and Migration Bureau. It will 
get deployed through USAID.
    So yes, we are trying to put as much as we can into 
responding to the refugee situation that we have, which is 
massive, probably the largest in the world today, the exodus 
from Sudan. And it is a top priority for the Department.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Verma. Mr. Chairman, if I could, I just want to 
respond. Senator Ricketts asked if there had been other 
listening sessions, and I am told that we have had other 
listening sessions on Afghanistan recently in the last couple 
years. And I know there were listening sessions on Iraq 
previously as well. So, it is not an uncommon practice.
    The Chairman. Senator Kaine.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thanks, Secretary Verma.
    We have been working, you know, recently, and I certainly, 
have been working very hard on Americas in particular to move 
more nominations through the committee. But the fact remains 
that the Senate holds on ambassadorial nominees are harming our 
national interest.
    If you look at a chart of where we have people, and where 
we do not, and where the PRC and Russia have people, they have 
people everywhere. And often, you are looking at a big goose 
egg for us in critical parts of the world.
    Just some recent examples when there was the coup in Niger. 
We have a lot of U.S. service members in Niger, and we have 
lost U.S. service members in Niger in counterterrorism 
activities. We had no ambassador in country. That coup has led 
to a government that now wants to kick the U.S. out, and they 
have moved in a pro-Russia direction. But we had no ambassador.
    When the security situation in Haiti spiraled downward, we 
had no ambassador in place. When Hamas attacked Israel on 
October 7, we did not have an ambassador in Egypt, we did not 
have a confirmed counterterrorism coordinator.
    When the Houthis started to fire at U.S. and other ships in 
the Red Sea, we did not have an ambassador in Djibouti. And 
China not only had an ambassador, but it was building a massive 
port there.
    Now, after these emergencies, I think there was a little 
bit of a guilt trip, ``I guess we better have an ambassador,'' 
and so those positions that I mentioned have now been filled, 
but after the fact. You know, the doors have opened, and the 
horses have escaped, and the coup has happened, and the U.S. 
relationship with the previous government is now kind of in the 
past tense. And we did not have an ambassador in place.
    Tell us how these holds affect State's ability to advance 
U.S. interest and protect our national security.
    Mr. Verma. Senator, thank you. Thank you for the question.
    We spent a lot of time on this, and I am concerned about 
the trend lines. When we go back and look 20 years ago in the 
Bush administration, it took about 75 days to go from 
nomination to confirmation. Today, that number is about 250 
days from nomination to confirmation.
    Senator Kaine. And can I just interrupt you there? And that 
is not just for the political appointees. The thing that is a 
little bit unusual about this is you see the holds of these 
career appointees who served under Presidents of both parties, 
who had to pass one of the toughest exams in the country to 
become an FSO, and then have patriotically served all over the 
world.
    You see the hold of the careers that in many instances are 
equally as deleterious and damaging as the holds on the 
politicals. And yet, when we get the careers on the floor, they 
end up passing like by a 90 to 10 vote. So, what was the hold 
all about?
    Mr. Verma. Right. No, you are exactly right.
    So, it has a ripple effect. You mentioned we are not 
present where we need to be. Our deputy chief of mission and 
charge is doing an incredible job, but when this Senate gives 
the stamp of approval to a President's nominee to show up in 
capital, it is very different.
    Senator Kaine. Tell me that a little bit. So maybe there is 
an attitude up here like, ``Well, we got some great DCMs, so 
why does it matter?'' And we do have great DCMs, so tell us why 
it matters.
    Mr. Verma. Your confirmation gives those candidates a 
different level of standing. They show up with a letter from 
the President that they present to the head of state, gives 
them a different level of understanding. They have chief 
admission authority over everyone. That means many times U.S. 
military personnel, aid experts. And so, they are there as the 
senior U.S. official to deal with crises that may happen, to 
take care of American citizens. That may happen. I think----
    Senator Kaine. Is there not also kind of an informal power 
that comes in the reverse if you do not have a confirmed 
nominee? The country believes, wow, we must not be that 
important in the United States.
    Mr. Verma. 100 percent.
    Senator Kaine. If we were important, they would have 
bothered to do what Russia, and China, and every other nation 
does, and have an ambassador occupying the embassy.
    Mr. Verma. I was in Ethiopia 3 weeks ago. I met with the 
African Union leadership. They cannot understand why we do not 
have a U.S. Ambassador to the African Union, career person, 
given everything that has happened in Sudan and all across the 
region, and the huge implications it has not to have a U.S. 
official sitting at the table. That is one example.
    Senator Kaine. And there is nothing you can say to them 
that disabuses them from the notion of, if we mattered to you, 
you would have someone here, right?
    Mr. Verma. Correct.
    Senator Kaine. I mean, you could give them every 
explanation, oh, the Senate, it is a complicated place, and 
there is procedural holds, whatever, but the message that they 
are going to take no matter what you say, is if it mattered to 
you, you would have someone here.
    Mr. Verma. Exactly. There is nothing we can say to make 
them feel better. Also, I would just say for the candidates, 
and their families, partners, whatever their situation is, it 
is an enormous devastating morale issue as well, and it is just 
personally incredibly difficult.
    If you have children, for example, and you do not know if 
your kids are going to attend seventh grade in a foreign 
capital, or maybe eighth grade, or sixth grade. You cannot 
plan. You do not know what is going to happen. Let us say you 
are coming from the private sector, or civil society, or 
academia. You cannot plan. I know this does not seem like a big 
issue, but for families it really is.
    Senator Kaine. It seems like a big issue to me. It would 
seem like it would create a significant retention challenge 
with mid-career people if they felt like their future was not 
based on the merits of their service, but you know, somebody is 
going to hold them up for something unrelated to anything that 
they did.
    Mr. Verma. Unrelated. And I will tell you a lot of the 
holds are not public. They are secret. So, we do not even know 
who to turn to try to get the hold----
    Senator Kaine. So because they are secret, again, I know 
what this means, but just for the public, if somebody on the 
Senate is holding you up, and it is secret, you do not even 
have the ability to, like, go to the person and say, ``Hey, 
tell me all your concerns, and let me try to reassure you, and 
maybe I can, or maybe I cannot. But at least honor me for the 
years that I have devoted to this country, and give me an 
opportunity to just answer your questions and explain myself.''
    Mr. Verma. And again, we need to solve this for our 
diplomats, regardless of what Administration you are in. I am 
proud to be here on behalf of the Secretary and the Biden 
administration, but I do not want the next Administration and 
the future ones to face similar challenges.
    We need our diplomats out and development experts out in 
the field showing up, actively engaged, representing the United 
States. And today, we are not doing that the way we could be 
and should be.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. Well, thanks Senator Kaine for raising that 
issue. It has been one of the most challenging aspects of being 
chairman of this committee, is trying to move nominations.
    We have, I guess, four hurdles. First, we have to make sure 
we have all the adequate information concerning the nominee, 
and sometimes that takes some time. But then, we have to 
schedule hearings, then we have to schedule a business meeting, 
then we have to get it through the floor. And all those are 
obstacles to the process.
    I wanted to acknowledge--Senator Ricketts came up with a 
good suggestion. We talked the other day on how we might be 
able to move the career nominees a lot faster. So, I think 
there is a hope, a bipartisan interest, to try to get the 
career nominees done as quickly as possible. And I could not 
agree more with the Deputy Secretary that holding up a nominee, 
particularly a career nominee for reasons unrelated to that 
individual's qualifications is something that needs to end.
    Senator Ricketts, anything further?
    Senator Ricketts. Yes. Actually, if I could just real 
quick.
    We talked mentioned about the PRC and the issue with the 
global footprint here. According to Lowy Institute for 2024 
global diplomacy, the People's Republic of China has the most 
expansive diploma network in the world, followed by the United 
States.
    But the PRC has a larger footprint in Africa. 60 posts to 
our 56. East Asia, 44 to our 27. Pacific Island countries, 9 to 
8, catching up. Central Asia, 76 after we withdraw Afghanistan. 
Obviously, we have talked about some of the diplomats and 
stuff. And I know that we are hitting up on the time here, so I 
will get to it.
    How are we doing versus the PRC, versus the competition? 
You know, we have made some progress, right? We have opened up 
some new embassies in the Pacific, but how are we doing?
    Mr. Verma. Yes. Senator, thank you. It is a question we 
spend a lot of time working on, and I--look, I think we are 
doing well. When our diplomats are engaged, the tradecraft they 
bring to the table, the tools, and the skill sets they bring 
are at the top in terms of capabilities. The challenge that we 
are facing, again, is one, showing up. Getting our people out.
    Second, it is a budgetary challenge as well. I really 
appreciate now that we have new tools like Development Finance 
Corporation. We have old tools like Millennium Challenge 
Corporation. But you know, again, look at our State Department 
funding for this year is going to be cut by 6 percent. We have 
this staffing gap. We have the confirmation challenges.
    So, there is a lot we can do. Frankly, we are a national 
security agency. I think we ought to be funded and treated like 
a national security agency, and I think that would actually 
help us compete a lot better. So just like you are doing with 
State authorization and we have a bill now, thanks to your 
leadership and the chairman's leadership, it is going to the 
defense bill.
    We need to think of our budget like a national security 
budget, too, and not kind of pick winners and losers in the 
national security game. We need to look at the landscape that 
we are confronting.
    So, I would like to have a bigger global footprint. I would 
love to show up in more places. We are also constrained by the 
reality of what we are up against, but when we compete 
directly, we do quite well.
    Senator Ricketts. OK.
    Just briefly to follow up on that in. I know there was 
discussions about opening up embassies in Vanuatu, Kiribati, 
the Caribbean, maybe even embassy in Libya. Can you bring us up 
to date on any of those?
    Mr. Verma. Yes, thank you, Senator.
    The Pacific Islands progress has been good. So new posts in 
Solomon Islands, Tonga. We are planning Vanuatu, Kiribati. So 
those are all coming up. And these will not look like typical 
embassies, and they are kind of embassies of the future. We are 
going to have people--I was at our embassy in the Seychelles. 
It is very different than what one might think of with a 
typical embassy, but it is important that we are there and have 
a presence.
    These will be challenging assignments for people, but also 
super important, and we have a lot of interest in them. So, on 
that front, we are doing well. I think our Indo-Pacific 
strategy is a holistic strategy. I look at our new 
partnerships, whether it is the Quad or whether it is AUKUS. 
So, we are showing up in different ways, different alignments, 
and different partnerships.
    And you mentioned our new embassies in the Caribbean, which 
we hope to open up here, too. Again, funding challenges. We 
have to work within, but yes, we would love to be in more 
places. We have got to show up in the places that we are trying 
to staff as well, which again, have some posts that are hard to 
fill. So, we are trying to work on both at the same time.
    Senator Ricketts. Great.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, Deputy Secretary.
    The Chairman. Senator Kaine, anything further?
    Well, Deputy Secretary Verma, thank you very much for your 
testimony. Thank you very much for your service.
    The committee record will remain open until close of 
business tomorrow for members who may have questions that we 
would ask that you respond to for the record. And there being 
no further business, the committee will stand adjourned. Thank 
you.
    Mr. Verma. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    [Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
                              ----------                              

              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

            Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions 
                Submitted by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question. Combatting Global Corruption Act: Last December, 
following intensive discussions with key officials in the Department of 
State, Congress enacted (as part of the NDAA), and the President later 
signed, the Combatting Global Corruption Act that Senator Young and I 
had introduced. This new law will oblige the Administration to publish 
a public report detailing which countries around the world are 
``sustaining or making good progress in anti-corruption efforts'' and 
explaining why those governments belong on this so-called ``white 
list.'' There will also be a classified report presented to Congress 
that will enumerate those governments that are ``making limited or no 
efforts to comply with minimum standards . . . and are not achieving 
meaningful efforts on combating corruption.'' The report will also 
describe ``key obstacles to combating corruption and present near-term 
and long-term strategies.'' The law also requires that the 
Administration present to Congress ``a proposed budget for preparing 
the first set of lists'' in the years ahead. Does the budget you have 
presented to us for fiscal year 2025 include adequate resources for the 
implementation of these new requirements? Or would you ask that we 
appropriate additional sums to accomplish what this new law requires, 
or fence off funding to enable it to happen?

    Answer. The Department of State is determined to implement the 
Combating Global Corruption Act and to support it with the necessary 
resources. We are currently considering the resourcing needs that will 
be required to implement the law, including developing reports, 
providing training, and targeting capacity to assess Global Magnitsky 
sanctions. The reports may also implicate the need to use Section 
7031(c) visa restrictions. We are developing the methodology and budget 
report and expect to incorporate any resourcing requests via future 
budget formulation processes.

    Question. Modernization Agenda/State Authorization Act: In 2021, I 
led a series of subcommittee hearings focused on modernizing the 
Department, and was pleased to see Secretary Blinken's Modernization 
Agenda has included many of the recommendations from those hearings, as 
well as legislation I and others from this committee included in State 
Department Authorization bills codifying new bureaus, supporting 
stronger recruitment, retention, and training efforts, diversity 
initiatives, and improving quality of life for our Foreign and Civil 
servants, among other initiatives. With complex global challenges 
mounting around the world from conflicts to climate change, modernizing 
the Department has taken on greater urgency--from finally completing 
renovations at main state and our embassies abroad to sustaining the 
Department's diverse workforce. As we consider legislative priorities 
for this year's State Authorization Act, it is important to understand 
the Department's current legislative needs. What additional resources 
or hiring authorities is the State Department prioritizing in requests 
for this year's bill and how would this legislation help expedite 
modernization efforts and support U.S. critical foreign policy 
missions?

    Answer. Among my top legislative priorities to modernize the 
workforce are authorities to support the establishment of a State 
Department Reserve Corps (SDRC) to enable a first-class rapid-response 
surge capability. State is requesting authorities for: expanded Non-
Competitive Eligibility to support employment for Eligible Family 
Members of U.S. Direct Hire employees overseas; administrative leave 
for employees serving at high risk, high threat posts and for rest and 
recuperation and locally observed holidays; and Special Hiring 
Authority for critical skills including passport and visa examining 
positions, Data Science, Information Technology Management, and Human 
Resource Management. These authorities will enable the Department to 
advance ongoing efforts to attract, retain, and deploy talent, and to 
create an agile workforce capable of meeting emerging challenges.

    Question. Modernization Agenda/State Authorization Act: The fiscal 
year 2025 budget request calls for $20 million to pilot a new 
Diplomatic Reserve Corps, that would be capable of surging contingency 
response efforts. If Congress were to provide funding for a new 
Diplomatic Reserve Corps, would the State Department require any new 
legal authorities from Congress at the pilot stage or subsequent phases 
of development?

    Answer. To implement the State Department Reserve Corps (SDRC), the 
Department would use the recall and reappointment authorities provided 
under 22 U.S.C. Sec.  3948 to hire retired and former Foreign Service 
Officers. The Department also seeks additional statutory hiring 
authority and reemployment rights specific to the SDRC to support the 
long-term success of the program, including the removal of dual 
compensation restrictions for annuitants registered with the SDRC. This 
SDRC would enhance the nation's diplomatic capabilities by providing 
rapid and cost-effective response capabilities for emerging diplomatic 
challenges and crises.

    Question. Reorienting for Strategic Competition: A critical piece 
of modernizing the Department is ensuring it is equipped and resourced 
to pace with strategic competitors like Russia and China. That includes 
ensuring that the Department maintains a strategic posture in bilateral 
missions across the globe, but also in the United Nations, OSCE, and 
other multilateral spaces that are key to promoting democratic values 
globally such as the Organization for American States. The State 
Department Authorization Acts have included support for U.S. interns, 
details, secondees and other roles that would increase engagement at 
international organizations (IOs). What is your assessment of the 
Department's efforts to realign both personnel and resources to counter 
China, Russia, and other adversaries, and cultivate like-minded 
countries in the U.N. system and other IOs? How is training being 
revamped to ensure diplomats are well-prepared for the complexities of 
multilateral diplomacy?

    Answer. I am committed to leading the Secretary's Modernization 
Agenda to ensure that we are staffed, equipped, and resourced to 
compete with the People's Republic of China and Russia. We are working 
hard to increase U.S. citizen employment in key U.N. roles, including 
within the junior professional officers' ranks, and are creating new 
opportunities using the Secretary's expanded training float for Foreign 
Service and Civil Service Officers that will help develop a cadre of 
diplomatic professionals with multilateral expertise. We continue to 
realign both personnel and resources to achieve this goal.

    Question. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: I am a strong supporter 
of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility efforts in the 
Department. I have been heartened to see positive progress on this 
issue under Secretary Blinken's tenure from efforts to address 
assignment restriction polices to accommodations for persons with 
disabilities. However, when we look at the highest levels of the 
Department less than 20 percent of our Ambassadors and senior officers 
are of color, and recent climate survey results suggest higher 
attrition rates among LGBTQ+ and African-Americans. How is the 
Department working to retain employees, particularly those from 
underrepresented groups at the mid-levels who would advance to 
Ambassadorships and other senior levels in the coming years?

    Answer. Healthy retention rates at all levels, including through 
the mid-levels, are critical to ensuring diverse representation 
throughout our ranks. Importantly, the Department of State has seen 
significant growth in diversity in both the Senior Foreign Service and 
Senior Executive Service over the last decade, though we still have 
work to do. In 2022, the Secretary created a Retention Unit in the 
Bureau of Global Talent Management, which works in close partnership 
with the Office of Diversity and Inclusion. As part of the Secretary's 
Modernization Agenda, the Department is implementing its first-ever 
Talent Retention Plan, which focuses on policies and tools to reduce 
attrition across target demographic groups, complementing the 
Department's DEIA Strategic Plan.

    Question. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: What is the Department 
doing to create intentional and transparent pathways to career 
advancement for civil service employees and ensure equitable pay and 
growth opportunities where possible for locally employed staff?

    Answer. I recognize the critical importance of providing clear 
pathways for career advancement. The Department established its first-
ever Civil Service Mobility float program in 2023 and is launching a 
Career Pathing Tool in summer 2024 that will allow employees to explore 
different types of positions across all occupational series and create 
a more transparent and desired career path based on their own skills. I 
am also focused on winning the competition for talent and retaining the 
teams that power diplomacy. Our diplomats rely on our Locally Employed 
Staff and remain committed to dedicating resources necessary to improve 
compensation and benefits and make them more predictable, equitable, 
and transparent to the extent permitted by law.

    Question. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: News reports suggest 
some staff have left or are considering leaving the Department related 
to some of the Administration's policy positions in recent years. How 
is the Department addressing concerns being expressed through dissent 
cables and other means?

    Answer. Overall, our attrition rates at the Department are among 
the lowest across Federal agencies. We offer voluntary, confidential 
exit interviews to departing employees and catalog resulting data to 
inform our understanding of key drivers of employee attrition. Out of 
more than 470 exit interviews over the past 2 years, only three 
interviewees discussed disagreement with policy as a factor in their 
decision to leave the Department. I firmly believe that debate and 
dissent make our policies and institution better. That is why I 
encouraged use of our internal dissent channel and expanded the use of 
listening sessions and other forums where employees can freely voice 
their opinions to leadership to understand all points of view.

    Question. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: Now that the 
Department's Equity Action Plan includes efforts to address 
antisemitism, racism, islamophobia, LGBTQI, disability, women's and 
other human rights issues in addition to procurement and grants issues, 
and harmonizing equity strategies across the Department, will the 
Department create a central coordinating office and budget to support 
implementation of the Equity Action Plans as well as a budget that 
outlines planned spending per our Committee's inquiry last year to 
ensure the success of such a monumental undertaking?

    Answer. The Department is committed to advancing equity, including 
in furtherance of its Equity Action Plan, and will continue to identify 
resources to support these efforts. Equity efforts are part of existing 
funding streams and lines of effort to further strengthen aspects of 
programmatic and operational integration. The seven Equity Principals 
noted in the Plan provide technical leadership to the Department in 
advancing their respective strategies. The Department's Bureau of 
Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor coordinates equity efforts through 
the Department Equity Council.

    Question. Human Rights in Africa: In February, I wrote a letter to 
the Secretary of State expressing my strong concern about the 
Department's surprising reversal of a decision made during the Obama 
Administration to elevate the importance of democracy and human rights 
in Africa by having one Deputy Assistant Secretary (DAS) of State cover 
Africa as his or her only regional area of responsibility in the Bureau 
of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL). Currently one DAS covers 
Africa and Latin America--more than 80 countries in total. This is not 
sustainable, and sends a troubling signal about our commitment to human 
rights, democracy, and governance, especially following the Africa 
Leadership Summit. Will you commit to look into providing another DAS 
position in DRL to cover Africa and reporting back to my staff as soon 
as possible?

    Answer. The Department continues to prioritize promoting democratic 
governance and respect for human rights across Sub-Saharan Africa. In 
the Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, the 
Deputy Assistant Secretary who covers Sub-Saharan Africa frequently 
engages at high levels on issues related to democratic transitions, 
government accountability and transparency, including travel in recent 
months to Nigeria twice, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and 
South Sudan to address concerns around ongoing human rights and 
democracy issues. I am committed to ensuring the bureau has the 
resources needed to continue this important work and look forward to 
keeping you apprised.

    Question. Cyber and Tech Talent at State: Last week, the Department 
unveiled its International Cyberspace and Digital Policy Strategy, 
which lays out a framework for the Department's international 
engagement on cyber-related matters. In order to implement this 
strategy properly, it is vital that the Department build its own 
capacity and expertise in cyber and emerging technology issues as part 
of its broader efforts to modernize diplomacy. What has the Department 
done, and what is the Department currently doing, to modernize its 
diplomatic workforce in order to tackle cyber and technology issues?

    Answer. The Department is building institutional capacity across 
the spectrum of technology topics and will have more than 200 diplomats 
trained with the skills, expertise, and tools to advance U.S. cyber and 
tech policy by the end of 2024. This will enable placement of a trained 
cyber/digital officer at every mission engaged on these topics. The 
Department also launched 15 tech-focused training details with external 
partners; built tech literacy into Chief of Mission selection criteria; 
and created an awards program to recognize excellence in tech 
diplomacy.

    Question. Cyber and Tech Talent at State: What is State doing to 
incentivize those with the necessary skillsets to come and stay at the 
Department?

    Answer. In fiscal year 2023, the Department approved recruitment 
incentives for newly appointed Civil Service and Foreign Service IT 
employees, to include employees with targeted cybersecurity skills and 
experience working in select mission-critical cyber-coded positions.
    The Department also has both an IT Skills Incentive Program (IT 
SIP) and Cyber Skills Incentive Program (Cyber SIP) that offer 
retention incentives after 1 year of service to eligible employees who 
obtain specific IT or cyber certifications and occupy specific IT or 
cyber positions. In fiscal year 2023, more than 600 eligible employees 
received either IT or Cyber SIP incentives.

    Question. Elevating Data Analytics for Diplomacy: I commend the 
Department for its efforts thus far to elevate data analytics in 
diplomacy and decisionmaking, particularly through the Center for 
Analytics--and more can be done. I believe this should be a core focus 
of the Department's broader modernization efforts. As I stated during 
our hearing last fall on the Department's adoption of AI tools, the 
Department sits on an incredible trove of valuable data just waiting to 
be unlocked by those with the necessary skills and resources. What is 
the Department doing to support its data analytics capabilities? How is 
data analytics being elevated within Department decisionmaking?

    Answer. Secretary Blinken and I prioritize data-driven 
decisionmaking in our diplomatic operations. The Center for Analytics 
(CfA) harnesses data for policy and operational decisions and released 
an Enterprise Data Strategy to enhance data management, accessibility, 
and use. We are leveraging advanced data analytics tools to extract 
meaningful insights from large datasets. We are fostering partnerships 
to share analytical methodologies and are embedding Chief Data Officers 
and analytics teams in bureaus to provide real-time data insights.

    Question. Elevating Data Analytics for Diplomacy: How is the 
Department prioritizing data science hiring and training?

    Answer. The Department is leading interagency efforts to attract 
top-tier data science talent through skills-based hiring. We have 
increased initiatives to recruit data scientists and bureau-level Chief 
Data Officers across the Department. Our embassy data program provides 
tools, resources, and expertise directly to diplomats overseas. We are 
committed to upskilling our existing workforce by offering data science 
and emerging technology trainings at the Foreign Service Institute. In 
addition, we have Department-wide events focused on data, artificial 
intelligence, and technology-driven modernization.

    Question. Online Passports Renewal: After the conclusion in March 
2023 of the online passport renewal pilot program, the State Department 
decided to hold off on continuing the roll out based off consumer 
feedback and congressional concern over the IT infrastructure. Despite 
the Department's intention to launch the program at the end of 2023, it 
was delayed yet again. What is behind the delay? What progress has been 
made and what challenges remain? When does the Department expect to 
launch this program?

    Answer. The Department analyzed the lessons of our 2022 online 
passport renewal (OPR) pilot to ensure the next iteration meets demand 
and produces a streamlined, scalable process. We moved OPR to a new 
platform and partnered with the U.S. Digital Service to refine our 
launch strategy ahead of a public beta release by mid-June 2024. During 
this public beta, we will accept a small number of online applications 
each day--ramping up over time--so we can track and quickly address any 
issues that arise and continuously improve the experience for the 
American people.

    Question. Online Passports Renewal: What has the Department done to 
engage the private sector on commercially available technology for the 
online renewal program?

    Answer. The Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) supports the use of 
commercially available technology to enhance the Department's goals of 
digital transformation. CA engaged with the private sector to leverage 
a commercially available platform for Online Passport Renewal that will 
be part of its next release, and it will continue to look for similar 
opportunities in other modernization efforts.

    Question. Consular Fees: Since the pandemic, Congress has 
authorized the State Department to temporarily retain and expend the 
consular fees it collects. This year's budget request includes a 
request to make this authority permanent as it once again expires at 
the end of the fiscal year. Congress has expressed concern over the 
lack of transparency in using consular fees to fund other State 
Department programs. Why should Congress permanently authorize this 
authority for the Department?

    Answer. The requested expenditure authorities are to use certain 
fees collected for consular services only to maintain consular 
operations, to include overhead services provided by the Department's 
management platform. The authority addresses the structural imbalance 
of the fully fee-funded Consular and Border Security Programs (CBSP) 
account to support otherwise unfunded services to U.S. citizens and 
provides flexibility to maintain consular operations.

    Question. Consular Fees: How does the Department intend to use 
consular fees to improve consular services? What steps will the 
Department take to improve its transparency in reporting on fee 
collections and expenditures from this authority?

    Answer. The Department is using consular fees to hire additional 
civil and foreign service personnel and locally employed staff, as well 
as to improve its technological capabilities, enhance service delivery, 
and improve national security screening. The Department's Bureau of 
Consular Affairs has a Customer Experience office and started a 
Passport Services modernization initiative to further these efforts. 
All consular revenue and spending, including cost-share toward 
Department programs, are included in the fiscal year 2025 Congressional 
Budget Justification.

    Question. Sudan: Human Rights Watch issued a report last week 
detailing horrific abuses by the RSF in Darfur. Many of us are 
concerned about a looming attack on El Fasher by the RSF which could 
result in additional atrocities. It is imperative that we support 
Special Envoy Perriello's diplomatic efforts to bring about a ceasefire 
if we are to have any hope of averting another tragedy. I am concerned 
that he is not properly staffed, and the vague answers given to date 
about who reports to him are unsatisfactory. I understand USAID has 
detailed a few officers to more directly support the Special Envoy's 
efforts. How many state direct hire positions has the Special Envoy 
been given to fill?

    Answer. We share your concern on recent abuses in Darfur and the 
dire situation in El Fasher and are committed to making sure the 
Special Envoy has the resources needed to continue efforts to press for 
a ceasefire. In the Department's Bureau of African Affairs, the Office 
of Sudan and South Sudan (AF/SSS) is directly supporting the envoy, in 
addition to staff detailed from other agencies and bureaus. The AF/SSS 
team includes a director, deputy director, and three Sudan desk 
officers. His team also includes two office management specialists, 
four detailees from other agencies, and an expert detailed from the 
Negotiations Support Unit of the Department's Bureau of Conflict and 
Stabilization Operations.

    Question. Sudan: How many State Department Foreign Service Officers 
of Special Envoy Perriello's choosing have been re-assigned to report 
directly to him? Was he given the opportunity to select staff from the 
specialized unit from within the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization 
Operations that has individuals with technical negotiation skills? It 
would seem to me to be a critical gap if not.

    Answer. The Special Envoy's office has one detailee from the Bureau 
of Conflict and Stabilization Operations' Negotiation Support Unit who 
was selected by the Special Envoy. In addition, he selected three 
detailees from the U.S. Agency for International Development and one 
from the Department of Homeland Security for his team.
                                 ______
                                 

            Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions 
                  Submitted by Senator James E. Risch

    Question. Pacific Island Expansion: Expanding the U.S. diplomatic 
presence overseas is critical to counter malign PRC influence and 
advance our diplomatic objectives, especially in the Pacific Islands. 
But too often, the Department can't get out of its own way. As a 
result, it takes years to get an embassy up and running. I introduced 
``Embassy in a Box'' legislation to help the Department hit the ground 
running when embassy doors open by cutting through the bureaucracy. Why 
does it take so long to get an embassy up and running, as it has in the 
Solomon Islands and Tonga?

    Answer. The Department fully supports initiatives that can enable 
our staff to begin work at new posts quickly and safely to accomplish 
top U.S. foreign policy goals. In the Pacific Islands, the geographic 
isolation, inadequate infrastructure, insufficient local medical care, 
small local hiring pool, and resource limitations create a complex 
logistical environment for establishing and maintaining diplomatic 
operations. However, we have utilized key regional support centers in 
Manila to ensure that both present and future posts in the region have 
adequate supplies and minimal logistical gaps.

    Question. Pacific Island Expansion: Can you explain how the 
Department could use expedited procedures and pre-approved resources to 
more efficiently and effectively stand up new small embassies?

    Answer. The Department is currently exploring expedited post 
opening procedures, to more efficiently and effectively open new small 
embassies. To promote a shorter timeline to establish these small 
embassy facilities, the Department can leverage legislative 
flexibilities and use standardized space requirement plans to 
capitalize on landlord-executed commercial space fit-outs. Regarding 
operations, the Department will devote resources during the pre-opening 
phase to best ensure that the initial permanent personnel have what 
they need in place to conduct diplomacy effectively.

    Question. Bix Aliu: As you know, this committee recently considered 
the nomination of Bix Aliu as Ambassador to Montenegro. At his hearing, 
I raised serious concerns about Mr. Aliu's poor leadership and the 
toxic workplace culture he fostered, concerns that the Majority now 
also seems to share given that Mr. Aliu's nomination did not advance. 
Remarkably, I now understand that Mr. Aliu has been appointed to chair 
the upcoming FS02-01 promotion panels for foreign service officers, 
putting him a position to potentially retaliate against whistleblowers. 
Secretary Blinken has claimed that one of his key priorities is 
addressing toxic leadership and improving leadership accountability at 
the Department. How is appointing an individual who has engaged in 
exactly this type of behavior consistent with that priority?

    Answer. The Department is committed to creating and maintaining a 
diverse and inclusive workplace free from harassment, toxic workplace 
behaviors, and retaliation. The Secretary has been consistent and clear 
on this, and the Department published new anti-bullying guidance for 
all personnel. We take allegations of such behavior seriously and have 
established procedures for pursuing accountability as appropriate. 
Employees selected to serve on promotion panels are vetted prior to 
being considered for service, take an oath of office, and are closely 
monitored throughout the process for adherence to all policies and 
procedures that govern the panels. All Foreign Service employees also 
have the right to submit a request for recusal of a board member who 
they believe will be unable to apply the precepts fairly and without 
bias in assessing their performance. The Secretary and I have every 
confidence that Mr. Aliu will continue to exhibit the range of good 
leadership qualities we demand of our senior leaders.

    Question. Bix Aliu: What message does it send to your workforce, 
particularly to those officers who may now be subject to illegal 
retaliation from Mr. Aliu?

    Answer. The Department is committed to protecting all personnel 
against retaliation, and employees found to have engaged in retaliation 
will be held accountable, including through disciplinary action up to 
and including separation where appropriate. Department employees and 
their managers have access to information on how to report allegations 
of retaliation. All Foreign Service employees also have the right to 
submit a request for recusal of a board member who they believe will be 
unable to apply the precepts fairly and without bias in assessing their 
performance.

    Question. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion: During the most recent 
promotion cycle, the Department used its new ``diversity, equity, 
inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA),'' promotion precept for the first 
time. Unlike the other promotion precepts, this one is not actually 
tied to how good you are at your job; it's linked to the degree to 
which you are a missionary for progressive social causes. As bad as 
that is, what's even worse is that we understand the Department is 
applying this precept retroactively. The Department's new DEIA precept 
is not just a recap of principles previously listed under other 
precepts. It establishes new goals on how employees should understand 
and promote these concepts. Can you confirm that the Department is 
retroactively evaluating candidates for promotion based on a new, 
ideological test?

    Answer. A distinct DEIA core precept focused on both internally 
focused DEIA workplace goals and externally focused equity goals 
started with the 2022-2023 Foreign Service rating cycle. However, 
fostering diversity and inclusion within the workplace was a 
requirement in precepts from 2018 forward. Creating an inclusive 
workplace environment is a recognized best practice for creating top 
performing teams. When the people making decisions on behalf of the 
American people do not reflect the full diversity of our nation, we all 
lose, and our national security is weaker. Inclusion of different 
views, perspectives, and abilities strengthens our foreign policy.

    Question. Congressional Travel: Congressional Delegations (CODELs) 
and Staff Delegations (STAFFDELs) serve a critical oversight mission. 
Do you believe that embassies should support fully CODELs and STAFFDELs 
that seek to travel to post?

    Answer. The Department of State strongly supports and encourages 
congressional travel abroad. I understand the importance of meeting 
with your foreign counterparts and gaining on the ground insights and 
cross-cultural perspectives. More importantly, I understand that 
Congress has a critical role in conducting constitutionally mandated 
oversight of the executive branch to ensure taxpayer dollars are being 
spent wisely and in furtherance of advancing American's foreign policy 
goals. These visits are critically important as Members of Congress 
serve as strong advocates for American values and can convey or echo 
Mission messages to senior foreign counterparts. In 2023 alone, the 
Department supported more than 594 congressional and staff delegations, 
including in war zones and other high-risk areas.

    Question. Congressional Travel: Do you believe that the only 
acceptable reason for an embassy to deny or push back on congressional 
travel involves simultaneous or overlapping visits by the President or 
First Lady of the United States, the Vice President, or the Secretaries 
of State or Defense?

    Answer. Each of our missions around the world are unique. Some of 
our larger posts are well equipped to handle multiple visits at the 
same time. On the other hand, some of our smaller missions simply do 
not have the resources or staffing to support simultaneous 
congressional visits. Congressional travel to certain regions may also 
be limited due to safety or security considerations; however, our goal 
is always to facilitate official foreign travel. Nevertheless, there 
may be rare instances where we need to ask congressional delegations 
for their flexibility in working with our posts to select alternate 
travel dates. Our foremost goal is to help congressional delegations 
meet the mission objectives of their trip and obtain important 
engagements with key officials, and sometimes the best way to 
accomplish this goal is to suggest slightly alternate travel dates.

    Question. Nominations: During your hearing, you had an exchange 
with Sen. Kaine regarding important posts that do not have a confirmed 
US Ambassador. One of the posts mentioned was Haiti. The US Senate did 
not receive the nomination for now Ambassador Dennis Hankins until May 
30, 2023. For how many days did the Biden Administration fail to 
nominate someone to be US Ambassador to Haiti?

    Answer. The Department of State tracks vacancies at embassies 
overseas with the utmost seriousness. As I mentioned in the hearing, 
our Charge d'Affaires a.i. represented the United States and led the 
embassy until the Senate confirmed a U.S. Ambassador to Haiti. In the 
instance with Haiti, the nomination process took slightly longer than 
usual. Nevertheless, Senate confirmed leadership speaks volumes to our 
partners abroad, particularly in circumstances similar to those we have 
seen recently in Haiti.
    We were delighted to see Ambassador Hankins' confirmation by the 
Senate on March 14, 2024. I fully support a speedy selection, vetting, 
and nominations process, and I appreciate the committee's diligence in 
moving his nomination forward in a timely fashion.

    Question. Nominations: Do you believe having a confirmed US 
Ambassador to Haiti is critical to the US national security interest? 
If yes, why did the Biden Administration take so long to submit a 
nomination to the US Senate?

    Answer. Yes, I believe a confirmed U.S. Ambassador to Haiti is in 
our national interest. Senate confirmed leadership speaks volumes to 
our foreign partners, particularly in circumstances similar to those we 
have seen recently in Haiti. Ambassador Hankins, who was confirmed by 
the Senate on March 14, 2024, is an experienced and capable diplomat to 
lead our mission in Haiti, and we welcome his confirmation.

                                 ______
                                 

            Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions 
                  Submitted by Senator Robert Menendez

    Question. The Department of State maintains that although increased 
Foreign Service hiring since fiscal year 2020 has strengthened its 
overseas presence, ``chronic vacancies affecting core policy and 
management responsibilities'' endure. Please provide specific detail as 
to where the State Department would prioritize filling vacancies should 
Congress provide the requisite funding for fiscal year 2025.

    Answer. This is one of my main priorities. At present, the largest 
staffing gaps are among Foreign Service Officers, Diplomatic Security 
Special Agents, Diplomatic Technology, and Office Management 
Specialists. The Fiscal Year 2025 Request would enable the Department 
to fill 200 Foreign Service vacancies and establish approximately 200 
new positions across the Foreign Service and Civil Service to help 
address these gaps.
    In the meantime, in order to ensure the highest priority 
assignments are filled, the Department has developed a data-driven 
approach to strategically and equitably set limits for bureaus on the 
number of positions that may be advertised. Addressing staffing gaps 
would enable the Department to ease these limits.

    Question. How does the State Department determine which overseas 
vacancies to prioritize?

    Answer. For the 2025 assignment cycles, the Department is focused 
on its highest policy priorities and locations where chronic 
understaffing has impacted our ability to execute our mission. Priority 
criteria include:

      Policy priorities;

      Special Incentive Posts (SIPs);

      High hardship posts with the highest vacancy rates;

      Overseas consular positions;

      Overseas positions in small sections;

      Operations Center positions; and

      Out-year language designated positions in Arabic, 
Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Russian.

    Question. Would the State Department priorities include filling 
vacancies at overseas posts in Africa, which have been a subject of 
congressional concern for over a year?

    Answer. With our current limited staffing, there will continue to 
be unfilled positions at posts in all bureaus, around the world. To 
mitigate this in Africa and other challenging locations, I have 
directed the Department to focus its efforts on filling all positions 
at our highest priority and hardest to fill posts, focusing on the 
recent vacancy rates in those posts to allocate recruitment incentives. 
The majority of posts in Africa benefit from these measures.

    Question. Some Members of Congress and other observers have 
criticized the State Department's DEIA programming, with one member 
stating that the Office of Diversity and Inclusion ``does the opposite 
of what America has always stood for, which is very simply the best 
man, the best woman for the job.'' Others have criticized the State 
Department for what they view as elevating DEIA matters amid major 
national security challenges that require significant resources and 
attention in other critical regions. Please share your view of such 
criticism.

    Answer. Merit principles are the basis for all employment actions 
at the Department of State. We achieve DEIA values through, among other 
things, broad recruitment, mentoring, and training. When the people 
making decisions on behalf of the American people don't reflect the 
full diversity of our Nation, we all lose, and our national security is 
weaker. Hiring and retaining a diverse workforce enables and 
strengthens our ability to handle strategic national security 
interests. Diversity makes us stronger and more creative. It is how we 
bring to bear people's many ideas, experiences, expertise, and 
contributions for the benefit of our organization and our country.

    Question. How will the Office of Diversity and Inclusion continue 
to work with Congress to properly address institutional challenges that 
prevent efficient recruitment, retention, and promotion of people of 
diverse backgrounds?

    Answer. The Department of State's Office of Diversity and Inclusion 
will continue working with Congress through the Department's Bureau of 
Legislative Affairs. The Department consistently seeks to recruit, 
promote, and retain a diplomatic workforce that reflects America's 
diversity. Recruiting and retaining a diverse workforce enables and 
strengthens our ability to handle strategic national security 
interests.

    Question. Over the past 5 years, some U.S. policymakers have 
expressed concern about the People's Republic of China's (PRC) apparent 
efforts to increase its role and influence in international 
organizations (IOs). Both the Trump and Biden Administrations created 
offices within the State Department to counter the influence of China 
and other countries in multilateral fora, including the United Nations 
system. The Congress has since enacted legislation aiming to directly 
or indirectly counter China's influence in U.N. fora. What is your 
assessment of China's current role and priorities in the U.N. system 
and other IOs?

    Answer. The People's Republic of China (PRC) seeks to reshape 
international institutions, standards, and values to align with its 
world view and national agenda. It aims to use the United Nations to 
promote and extend its foreign policy initiatives. The PRC prioritizes 
economic development over human rights and rule of law, and it 
introduces rules and technical standards in standards-setting bodies to 
legitimize its approach. The PRC seeks to deny Taiwan's meaningful 
participation in the United Nations and international organizations.

    Question. How is the United States working to counter these 
efforts?

    Answer. The United States' multilateral strategy engages U.N. 
membership to strengthen the United Nations and rules-based 
international system in line with its founding values and principles. 
U.S. leadership promotes transparency and accountability to resist the 
PRC's attempts to undermine U.N. governance and operations and promote 
its ideology. This includes highlighting U.S. contributions to address 
global challenges and supporting qualified candidates for U.N. 
positions. The United States also advocates for Taiwan's meaningful 
participation at the United Nations and other international 
organizations.

    Question. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
estimate there were nearly 110,000 drug overdose deaths in the United 
States between December 2022 and November 2023. Nearly 70 percent of 
those deaths were attributable to fentanyl and other synthetic opioids, 
primarily sourced from Mexico, and 28 percent were attributable to 
cocaine, primarily sourced from Colombia. How, if at all, has the State 
Department adjusted its security assistance programming in the Western 
Hemisphere over the past 5 years--and in the fiscal year 2025 budget 
request--to respond to the changing nature of the drug threat to the 
United States?

    Answer. The Department works to disempower criminal organizations 
responsible for producing and trafficking illicit drugs, including 
through precursor disruption, interdiction, prosecution, and asset 
seizure. We expanded our work with Mexico to increase illegal synthetic 
opioid detection, interdiction, and prosecution. In Colombia, we are 
advancing a more comprehensive counternarcotics approach, including 
through rural security and anti-money laundering. The $584.9 million in 
INCLE funding for the Western Hemisphere within the Department's fiscal 
year 2025 budget request includes support for these efforts.

    Question. Please share how the State Department is currently 
addressing the role of foreign adversaries like China in the production 
and distribution of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids across Latin 
America and the Caribbean.

    Answer. Following months of intensive diplomacy, the President 
secured a commitment from People's Republic of China (PRC) President Xi 
at the Woodside Summit to resume bilateral counternarcotics cooperation 
with a focus on reducing the flow of precursor chemicals fueling 
illicit fentanyl and synthetic drug trafficking. Immediately following 
the Summit, the PRC started to take actions including issuing a public 
notice to the PRC chemical industry, taking law enforcement action 
against PRC suppliers, submitting information to a global narcotics 
data base, and launching the U.S. PRC Counternarcotics Working Group. 
The Department is pressing the PRC to take continued and sustained 
action, in particular law enforcement actions, to regulate all 
precursors controlled by the U.N. Commission on Narcotic Drugs and to 
disrupt illicit financing networks.

    Question. Many Latin American and Caribbean migrants, including an 
estimated 6.5 million Venezuelans, are residing in other Latin American 
and Caribbean countries. How would the fiscal year 2025 budget request 
seek to support the resettlement and integration of these migrants?

    Answer. The fiscal year 2025 budget request for $1.215 billion 
includes $475 million for humanitarian assistance in the region to 
significantly contribute to regularization and integration programs in 
Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Mexico, and throughout the region, providing 
capacity building and staffing for asylum authorities and documentation 
support for vulnerable people. It also funds our ongoing efforts to 
resettle individuals from the Western Hemisphere to partner countries 
and the United States via the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, 
including $300 million for the Safe Mobility initiative.

    Question. To what extent have such activities proven effective in 
preventing migrants from leaving their initial places of resettlement 
to seek entry into the United States?

    Answer. In the Western Hemisphere, regularization and integration 
enable people to find protection closer to home. Of the 6.5 million 
displaced Venezuelans in Latin America, up to 90 percent remain in the 
region largely because of regularization and integration initiatives. 
Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru strengthened their integration and asylum 
systems with U.S. funding. For example, 2.5 million Venezuelans now 
have Temporary Protected Status in Colombia.

    Question. How can the State Department and the Congress work 
together to improve the interagency coordinated response to the 
migration crisis?

    Answer. We can work together to support integration, strengthen 
asylum and regularization, and deliver humanitarian assistance. This 
funding helps vulnerable people integrate in countries closer to home 
and rebuild their lives, and when needed, access lawful pathways for 
safe and orderly migration. Congressional support for the President's 
Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Request will advance these important lines of 
effort through the support of the Department's Bureau of Population, 
Refugees, and Migration to partners that bolster registration, 
regularization, and integration in the region and provide protection, 
including through access to housing, medical care, education, and 
employment.

                                 ______
                                 

            Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions 
                    Submitted by Senator Marco Rubio

    Question. The State Department's Modernization Agenda includes 
efforts to reexamine State's policies and safeguards on risk, including 
with respect to technology, innovation, and emerging technologies. We 
have seen a significant uptick in the use of Unmanned Aerial Systems 
(UAS) as weapons of war and surveillance. Many of the physical security 
measures the Department utilizes are based upon threats of the past 
when UAS technology did not exist or was not as accessible. Does the 
Department have the required resources to counter UAS when protecting 
our diplomats overseas or for its domestic protection missions?

    Answer. The Department of State's Bureau of Diplomatic Security 
(DS) continually reviews and evaluates its global security platform for 
efficiencies and effectiveness to ensure the organization is optimizing 
its resources to meet the global mission of protecting life, property, 
and information. Despite increases over the last several years, the DS 
budget has not kept pace with the cost of the Department's global 
security platform. As a result, DS conducted a global review of 
security resources to assess where reductions could be made, paring 
back those security programs that have been operating above standards 
established by the Overseas Security Policy Board (OSPB) while ensuring 
essential security services continue. While the global review will help 
contain costs, it will not solve the overall budget challenges that DS 
will continue to face in the future.
    Current market forces are increasing annual contractual costs 
across DS' global security platform, as reflected by disrupted global 
supply chains, rapidly changing technology, increases to lifecycle 
replacement timelines, increasing global threats, and quickly changing 
operational environments that drive the sustained loss of purchasing 
power at current funding levels. Providing physical and technical 
security support, DS was appropriated $34.9 million for overseas 
Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems threat mitigation support. 
Additionally, the straight-line fiscal year 2024 appropriation has 
necessitated cuts across our global platform, which will continue into 
fiscal year 2025. Capability requirements and appropriate resource 
levels to mitigate specific threats are a part of a deliberate dialogue 
within the Department. DS is happy to discuss further in a classified 
briefing.

    Question. How much current resource allocation goes toward Unmanned 
Aerial Systems (UAS) threat mitigation?

    Answer. In fiscal year 2023, the Department of State's Bureau of 
Diplomatic Security (DS) was appropriated $34.9 million for overseas 
Counter-Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-UAS) threat mitigation support. 
Additionally, the straight-line fiscal year 2024 appropriation has 
necessitated cuts across our global platform, which will continue into 
fiscal year 2025. As a result, DS continues to make strategic 
reductions to its global security operations in fiscal year 2024 and 
through fiscal year 2025 in line with funding levels prescribed in the 
Fiscal Responsibility Act. DS collaborates closely with our partner 
bureaus, and interagency partners to ensure we are meeting our security 
mission. Our partners are critical to our success. C-UAS capability 
requirements and appropriate resource levels to mitigate specific 
threats in a dynamic threat environment are a part of a deliberate 
dialogue within the Department. DS is happy to discuss further in a 
classified briefing.

    Question. The unfortunate trend of U.S. diplomats who have spied on 
their country continues, highlighted by the revelations that Manuel 
Rocha spied for over 40 years for Cuba. How does the Department 
currently resource the Counterintelligence (CI) office in order to 
mitigate these types of threats?

    Answer. The Diplomatic Security Service's (DSS) Office of 
Counterintelligence (CI) is responsible for the Department's global CI 
programs and receives $1.95 million in operational DP funding, which is 
sub-allocated to Worldwide Security Program funds. This does not 
include the American Salaries for Full-Time Exempt personnel. This 
funding supports all investigations, vetting, analysis, and defensive 
programs covering a workforce of more than 100,000 employees across 
300-plus embassies, consulates, and domestic facilities. Roughly 85 
percent is allocated to contract staffing costs.

    Question. How will the Department's fiscal year 2025 Worldwide 
Security Protection (WSP) account request properly resource the 
Counterintelligence (CI) office?

    Answer. The Department's Diplomatic Security Service's global 
security platform continues to face challenges due to rising costs, 
disrupted supply chains, evolving technology, longer replacement 
timelines, and increasing threats, leading to a continued loss of 
purchasing power. As a result, DS has adjusted service levels 
commensurate with appropriated funding to match the Department's 
strategy and DS' base budget. At this time, fiscal year 2025 will be 
resourced at the same levels as fiscal year 2024.

    Question. How much of the fiscal year 2025 Worldwide Security 
Protection (WSP) funding requested will utilize emerging technology, 
such as AI, to assist in discovery of these insider threats?

    Answer. In the Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS), the 
Insider Threat Office has forecasted approximately $5 million in fiscal 
year 2025 Worldwide Security Program funding for emerging technology to 
counter insider threats. With the requirement of user activity 
monitoring on all classified systems as designated in E.O. 13587, user 
behavioral analytics will enhance the current system. With appropriate 
resourcing and partnership with the Bureau of Diplomatic Technology, DS 
intends to incorporate artificial intelligence in the analysis of all 
user activity on the enterprise network in future fiscal years.

    Question. Do you agree that State's Counterintelligence (CI) 
program will be relied upon more in the era of great power competition 
to mitigate threats and protect employees from threats posed by the 
Chinese Communist Party, Russia, Cuba, and other malign actors?

    Answer. I acknowledge that in an era of great power competition, 
counterintelligence programs are crucial for mitigating threats and 
protecting employees, information, and activities from adversaries such 
as the People's Republic of China (PRC), Russia, Cuba, and other malign 
actors. Our adversaries, including a rising PRC, an overtly aggressive 
Russia, an antagonistic Iran, and an ideologically driven Cuba, are 
employing increasingly advanced and far-reaching tactics that threaten 
U.S. national security and global diplomatic engagement.

    Question. As you noted in your testimony, the escalation of global 
conflict is evident, specifically across the Middle East, Ukraine, and 
in Africa. This is occurring against the backdrop of the intense global 
competition with the Chinese Communist Party. The geopolitical 
landscape has changed and requires State, and you, to adjust finite 
resources accordingly based upon national security and advancing 
American prosperity. During your nomination hearing, I asked if you 
would ``commit to an evaluation of the personnel numbers in each region 
and adjust accordingly?''. Has the Department concluded the review of 
domestic and overseas positions for realignment based upon critical 
national security objectives, such as confronting China? If so, what 
adjustments have taken place, or will take place and when?

    Answer. The Department regularly assesses and reviews current and 
emerging foreign policy goals to align resources where they will have 
the greatest impact on our strategic priorities. As it pertains to 
China and the broader Indo-Pacific, the Department added 44 new 
positions in support of the Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) in fiscal year 
2022. In fiscal year 2023, we added 55 positions. In fiscal year 2024, 
we added five new positions. The Department requested 58 new positions 
in support of the IPS in fiscal year 2025. These positions are being 
distributed across the Department to further the goals of the IPS. In 
addition, to further support efforts to confront China, the Department 
created the Office of Chinese Affairs (China House) to centralize the 
development and execution of China policy led by a newly established 
China Coordinator.?

    Question. What happens to overseas positions when an embassy closes 
or operations cease, such as in Sudan, Syria, or Afghanistan?

    Answer. As a result of the suspension of operation at posts, some 
of the associated Foreign Service positions became available for 
realignment to other critical areas, both overseas and domestic, to 
support high priorities including the impacted post externally. The 
Department closely assesses and reviews the positions and funding 
associated with these posts and the needs created by the suspension of 
operations to ensure the optimal realignment of resources.

    Question. How many of these overseas positions are converted to 
domestic positions?

    Answer. The Department regularly assesses and reviews current and 
future demands and needed resources to ensure the optimal alignment 
with current and emerging foreign policy goals. Resources are aligned 
where they will have the greatest impact on our strategic priorities 
while also meeting the needs of the service. To support high 
priorities, position realignments, both domestically and overseas, are 
made regularly.

    Question. How many of the hundreds of U.S. direct hire positions 
that were allocated for the U.S. Mission in Afghanistan shifted to 
other embassies or consulates in the Bureau of South and Central Asian 
Affairs (SCA) or shifted to other critical national security regions 
such as the Bureau of East Asia and Pacific (EAP)?

    Answer. As a result of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the 
associated Foreign Service positions became available for reassignment 
to other critical areas, both overseas and domestic, to support high 
priorities including Afghanistan externally. The Department closely 
assessed and reviewed the positions and funding associated with 
Afghanistan and the needs created by the withdrawal from Afghanistan to 
ensure the optimal realignment of resources.

    Question. The Department has requested funding to expand the State 
Department's workforce by 52 foreign service officers and 150 domestic 
civil service personnel. It appears that there are currently almost one 
hundred vacant overseas positions in the Indo-Pacific (SCA and EAP 
Bureaus). How are you expediting filling these vacant positions with 
our diplomats to meet the challenge of the Chinese Communist Party in 
that region?

    Answer. The Department continues to prioritize hiring and filling 
vacant positions. In fiscal year 2024, the Department expects to hire 
more than 1,000 Foreign Service (FS) personnel and remains committed to 
protecting and promoting U.S. interests, including the Info-Pacific, by 
ensuring the Department is adequately staffed to fulfil its mission to 
the American people.

    Question. How many of these positions will be focused on the Indo-
Pacific?

    Answer. In fiscal year 2025, the Department has requested an 
increase of 58 positions to increase strategic engagement and advance 
the Indo-Pacific Strategy and to compete with the regional influence of 
the People's Republic of China.

    Question. How many current positions are authorized in the 
Department's Office of Diversity and Inclusion? Are all of these 
positions filled?

    Answer. There are currently 13 positions authorized in the 
Department's Office of Diversity and Inclusion. Nine positions are 
filled.

    Question. Why is the Department focusing on advancing a divisive 
social agenda and at the expense of its core and stated mission of 
advancing American prosperity and national security, such as 
confronting the Chinese Communist Party in the Indo-Pacific?

    Answer. The Department works collaboratively with allies and 
partners to build an Indo-Pacific region that is free and open, 
connected, prosperous, secure, and resilient. The Department's 
diversity and breadth of language skills are critical to advancing U.S. 
national security interests in the area.

    Question. Will any of the requested increase of 150 domestic Civil 
Service positions be for the Office of Diversity and Inclusion?

    Answer. None of the requested domestic Civil Service positions are 
for the Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

    Question. Will any foreign or civil service positions be shifted 
from other existing areas into the Office of Diversity and Inclusion if 
fiscal year 2025 increases for overall department positions are 
authorized?

    Answer. The Department assesses and aligns resources where they 
will have the greatest impact on strategic priorities. Our success 
depends on our adherence to diversity, equity, inclusion, and 
accessibility principles to sustain operational excellence. Currently, 
there are no plans to transfer additional positions to the Office of 
Diversity and Inclusion.

    Question. In the recently passed national security supplemental 
appropriations bill, Congress appropriated $2 billion for Foreign 
Military Financing for the Indo-Pacific. How does State plan to utilize 
this funding in the region and which partners will receive the funding?

    Answer. The Department will use the supplemental Foreign Military 
Financing (FMF) to enhance self-defense capabilities, deepen our 
defense relationships, and outcompete strategic rivals. The Department 
will use FMF to support procurements of U.S. defense articles; ensure 
our Indo-Pacific partners have access to flexible, competitive 
financing through the expanded loan and loan guarantee authority; and 
open new co-production avenues to invigorate the efforts of Indo-
Pacific partners to modernize their defense industrial bases.

    Question. How much funding will go to support Taiwan's defense? 
Please be specific.

    Answer. I support providing supplemental Foreign Military Financing 
to Taiwan, and the United States remains committed to making available 
to Taiwan defense articles and services necessary to enable it to 
maintain a sufficient self-defense capability. I cannot provide 
specifics at this time, as internal discussions are ongoing regarding 
partner-specific funding allocations. However, we will submit the 
congressionally required spend plan to Congress soon that will lay out 
specific funding levels for Taiwan and other partners.

    Question. The Biden Administration has issued a President's 
Management Agenda which lists one of the priorities as improving the 
web design and customer-experience by reducing customer burden and 
streamlining processes for citizens interacting with the U.S. 
Government. Using the recent passport processing backlog and issuance 
timelines as an example--passport processing times were previously at 
an all-time high and private U.S. industry has developed technologies, 
processes, and procedures to ensure the efficient submission of 
passport applications to the Department of State. The Department of 
State piloted an online passport processing system from August 2022 to 
February 2023. The Department has not committed to a date when the 
ability to submit an online passport application or renewal will be 
available to U.S. taxpayers. Not all of my constituents can take time 
off work or have a passport acceptance facility in close proximity that 
has readily available appointment options. What is the status of the 
State Department's online passport application and renewal programs?

    Answer. The Department analyzed the lessons of our 2022 online 
passport renewal (OPR) pilot to ensure the next iteration meets demand 
and produces a streamlined, scalable process. We moved OPR to a new 
platform and partnered with the U.S. Digital Service to refine our 
launch strategy for release of a public beta of OPR by mid-June 2024. 
During this public beta, we will accept a small number of online 
applications each day--ramping up over time--so we can track and 
quickly address any issues that arise and continuously improve the 
experience for the American people.

    Question. I asked a similar question to Assistant Secretary Bitter 
of Consular Affairs in June 2023 regarding when this online capability 
would be implemented. It is 2024--when will the Department implement 
the option of submitting an online passport application or renewal?

    Answer. The Department analyzed the lessons of our 2022 online 
passport renewal (OPR) pilot to ensure the next iteration meets demand 
and produces a streamlined, scalable process. We moved OPR to a new 
platform and partnered with the U.S. Digital Service to refine our 
launch strategy ahead of a public beta release by mid-June 2024. During 
this public beta, we will accept a small number of online applications 
each day--ramping up over time--so we can track and quickly address any 
issues that arise and continuously improve the experience for the 
American people.

    Question. I can renew my driver's license online and have been able 
to for years. Is the $143 million the Department has asked for enough 
for it to join the 21st Century in this passport online application 
endeavor?

    Answer. The Department is committed to modernization efforts, and 
the fiscal year 2025 budget request of $143 million is part of the 
overall effort to establish online passport renewal (OPR). The 
Department analyzed the lessons of our 2022 OPR pilot to ensure the 
next iteration meets demand and produces a streamlined, scalable 
process. We moved OPR to a new platform and partnered with the U.S. 
Digital Service to refine our launch strategy ahead of a public beta 
release by mid-June 2024.

    Question. When will the online passport application or renewal 
functionality be open to U.S. citizens?

    Answer. The Department analyzed the lessons of our 2022 online 
passport renewal (OPR) pilot to ensure the next iteration meets demand 
and produces a streamlined, scalable process. We moved OPR to a new 
platform and partnered with the U.S. Digital Service to refine our 
launch strategy ahead of a public beta release by mid-June 2024. During 
this public beta, we will accept a small number of online applications 
each day--ramping up over time--so we can track and quickly address any 
issues that arise and continuously improve the experience for the 
American people.

                                 ______
                                 

            Responses of Mr. Richard R. Verma to Questions 
                   Submitted by Senator John Barrasso

    Question. On April 29, 2020, Secretary Pompeo announced that the 
U.S. Department of State will begin requiring a Clean Path for all 5G 
network traffic entering and exiting U.S. diplomatic facilities. The 5G 
Clean Path is an end-to-end communication path that does not use any 
transmission, control, computing, or storage equipment from 
telecommunications vendors that may pose a national security risk to 
U.S. communications. A list of such vendors is maintained by the 
Federal Communications Commission as directed by Section 2 of the 
Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019. What is the 
current status of the State Department's Clean Path plan announced in 
April 2020?

    Answer. This ongoing initiative stems from the 2019 John S. McCain 
National Defense Authorization Act's section 889, which bans Federal 
purchases and supplier use of products/services from five Chinese 
companies (Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Hikvision, and Dahua, including 
subsidiaries/affiliates). To comply with the intent of section 889 and 
other regulatory guidance, we enforce mandatory Federal Acquisition 
Regulations with contracts and educate/train our user community on the 
risks associated with using products and services from covered 
contractors.

    Question. Are there diplomatic facilities outside of the United 
States that currently rely on untrusted telecommunications vendors to 
conduct official duties?

    Answer. There are facilities that rely on untrusted 
telecommunication to perform their mission. As a result, the Department 
of State requested and received waivers to the requirements of NDAA 
2019 section 889, from the Office of the Director of National 
Intelligence. Due to national security, the waivers were granted on 
August 24, 2022. These waivers require the department to track usage 
and assist sites with building strategies to mitigate risks until the 
requirement is no longer needed.

    Question. Are there diplomatic personnel outside of the United 
States that currently rely on untrusted telecommunications vendors to 
conduct official duties?

    Answer. Some personnel depend on untrusted telecommunication 
systems to accomplish their objectives. Consequently, the Department of 
State seeks and obtains waivers for NDAA 2019 section 889 requirements 
from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence as needed. 
These waivers require the Department to monitor usage and help sites 
develop risk mitigation strategies until the requirement becomes 
obsolete.

                                 [all]
```